Add UNHCR docs 1-50

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_1/raw/doc_1_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,122 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "# **NEW ISSUES IN REFUGEE RESEARCH**\n\n**Research Paper No. 127**\n\n# **Land conflicts and their impact on refugee women\u2019s** **livelihoods in southwestern Uganda**\n\n**Kalyango Ronald Sebba**\n\nDepartment of Women and Gender Studies\nMakerere University\nUganda\n\nE-mail kalyango@infocom.co.ug\n\nJuly 2006\n\n\n**Policy Development and Evaluation Service**\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/25fc0094-24f1-3263-899c-cd26c916fb9d/0076AAD88CE65B2AC12571B900320D05-unhcr-uga-28jul.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**Policy Development and Evaluation Service**\n**United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees**\n**CP 2500, 1211 Geneva 2**\n**Switzerland**\n\n**E-mail: hqep00@unhcr.org**\n**Web Site: www.unhcr.org**\n\nThese papers provide a means for UNHCR staff, consultants, interns and associates, as well\nas external researchers, to publish the preliminary results of their research on refugee-related\nissues. The papers do not represent the official views of UNHCR. They are also available\nonline under \u2018publications\u2019 at <www.unhcr.org>.\n\nISSN 1020-7473\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/25fc0094-24f1-3263-899c-cd26c916fb9d/0076AAD88CE65B2AC12571B900320D05-unhcr-uga-28jul.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**Introduction**\n\n\nThis paper presents the preliminary findings of a study on land conflicts between\nrefugees and host communities in southwestern Uganda and their impact on refugee\nwomen\u2019s livelihoods. Uganda has a long history of hosting refugees that dates back to\nthe 1940s, when it hosted Polish refugees; Rwandese and Sudanese in the 1950s\n(Holborn 1975:1213-1225). Refugees were placed in gazetted areas in close proximity\nto the local populations such as in the settlements of Nakivale, Oruchinga, Kyaka 1\nand II in Southwestern Uganda; Rhino Camp, Imvepi and Ikafe in the West Nile\nregion; Achol Pii, Parolinya and Adjumani settlements in Northern Uganda; and\nKiryandongo and Kyangwali settlements in Central Uganda.\n\n\nOn the whole, placement in rural settlements was based on an assumption that the\nrefugee problem was temporal and would end as soon as the circumstances that led to\ntheir flight had ceased (Pincwya, 1998:8-25). However, this has not been the case and\nthe government was not prepared for a protracted refugee situation exacerbated by an\nincrease in the population of both refugees and nationals.\n\n\nLand conflicts between refugees and nationals are a result of government policy of\nsettling refugees in gazetted areas (Kalyango & Kirk, 2002). Placement in rural\nsettlements is based on the assumption that majority of refugees are of a rural\nbackground and can support themselves through agriculture until their repatriation\n(Kibreab, 1989; UNHCR, 2000, Jacobsen, 2001). Host populations first welcomed\nrefugees as those in need of protection and also as would-be beneficiaries of\ninfrastructure to be left behind on their repatriation (Harrell-Bond, 1986; 2002).\n\n\nHowever, as the refugee situation became protracted, hospitality gave way to a\ncompetition for resources such as agricultural and grazing land, water and forest\nresources (Pirouet, 1988; Bagenda et al, 2002; Jones, 2002). This has not been helped\nby persistent refugee flows from Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo,\nKenya, Somalia, Burundi and Ethiopia resulting in increased xenophobia against\nrefugees and a call for them to repatriate.\n\n\nLand is central to the sustainable livelihoods of rural households. For them it is not\njust land per se but arable and grazing land on which they depend for their livelihood.\nAs a result, any conflict over land impacts the households directly, and this impact is\ngender differentiated (Verma, 2001:3-4). The impact of land conflicts on refugee\nwomen\u2019s livelihoods has to be situated in the larger context of land problems in Sub\nSaharan Africa.\n\n\nThese include but are not limited to growing land concentration and scarcity;\ncompetition over land use and environmental and land degradation. Other problems\ninclude corruption in land markets, indeterminate boundaries of customarily held\nlands, a weak land administration system, and a lack of equity in land systems\n(Tshikaka, 2004). Women\u2019s interests in land were eroded by colonial policies and\nagrarian change that never addressed the core issues of gendered accessibility and\nequity. For instance, processes of differentiation and individualisation of land rights\nand land shortages have resulted in the concentration of land rights in men (Tshikaka,\n2004; Verma, 2001).\n\n\n1\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/25fc0094-24f1-3263-899c-cd26c916fb9d/0076AAD88CE65B2AC12571B900320D05-unhcr-uga-28jul.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        2
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**Research focus and aims**\n\n\nGender inequalities persist in refugee situations and limit the extent to which women\nand girls can attain sustainable livelihoods. According to the World Bank (2003),\ngender inequalities tend to lower productivity and intensify unequal distribution of\nresources. They also contribute to non-monetary aspects of poverty, such as lack of\nsecurity, opportunity and empowerment, which lower the quality of life for both men\nand women (Ibid.; Tinker 1990). Whereas refugee women and girls face the brunt of\nthese factors, protection and assistance has largely focused on men. This resonates\nthrough almost all refugee policies and practices, which focus on men as household\nheads (Kalyango, forthcoming).\n\n\nRefugee women have complained against the status quo because it discriminates them\nin asylum claims, acquisition of identity documents and food ration cards, limits their\nfreedom of movement and makes them dependent on men (UNHCR 2001). Despite\nseveral attempts to address this anomaly, such as in the Convention for the\nElimination of All forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) and in the\nUNHCR guidelines for refugee women and for Sex and Gender Based Violence, wide\ngender disparities between women and men in refugee situations remain common\n(UNHCR, 2000; 2003; UNIFEM, 2003; ).\n\n\nThe overall objective of the study was to establish the gendered impact of land\nconflicts on livelihoods of refugee women. Specifically, the paper takes a special\nfocus on the gender dimensions of the land conflicts and their impact on household\nlivelihoods. Gender is construed to refer to the socially constructed differences\nbetween men and women. Differences are embedded in social relations and therefore\ndiffer between cultures; they are constituted through and also help to constitute the\nexercise of other forms of social difference such as those of age, race or class (Kabeer,\n1994).\n\n\nIn identifying the gender impacts of the land conflicts, analysis was based on the\nconcepts of identity and agency. Identity concerns the social process whereby\nindividuals come to identify themselves with a particular configuration of social roles\nand relationships and agency describes the strategies used by individuals to create a\nviable and satisfying life for themselves in the context of or in spite of these identities\n(El Bushra, 2000). These concepts, as El-Bushra (Ibid.) noted, enable an\nunderstanding of the nature of violent conflicts and also an interrogation of the\nmotivations of different actors in a conflict.\n\n\n**Area of study**\n\n\nThe study was carried out in southwestern Uganda, Nakivale refugee settlement\nestablished in the early 1960s to cater for Rwandese refugees fleeing a bitter\nTutsi/Hutu ethnic conflict in 1959. It spreads over 21,756 hectares and is located in a\nsemi arid zone with limited arable land. The main economic activity is animal rearing\nand agriculture by both refugees and host populations. Nakivale is found in one of the\nremotest areas of Mbarara district with poor transport and social infrastructure which\nmake it not easily accessible.\n\n\n2\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/25fc0094-24f1-3263-899c-cd26c916fb9d/0076AAD88CE65B2AC12571B900320D05-unhcr-uga-28jul.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        3
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "Today, the settlement is home to over 15,000 refugees of different nationalities (see\ntable 1) and administered by a camp commandant under the government ministry of\nDisaster Preparedness and Refugees. UNHCR through its implementing partner the\nUganda Red Cross provides humanitarian assistance to the refugees. Unlike the host\npopulation, refugees have access to adequate social services provided by UNHCR.\nThis in itself has been a cause of xenophobia against refugees who are seen as more\nprivileged by the local population.\n\n\n**Table 1:** **Nakivale refugee population at 30 September 2004**\n\n|Age Group|0-4|Col3|5-17|Col5|18-59|Col7|60|Col9|Total|\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n|**Nationality**|M|F|M|F|M|F|M|F||\n|Rwandan|2596|2347|2009|1796|1967|1814|57|49|12,635|\n|Kenyan|0|0|0|1|1|1|0|0|3|\n|Somali|70|65|137|138|230|233|8|3|884|\n|Ethiopian|4|4|7|5|38|15|0|0|73|\n|Congolese|188|201|199|203|238|229|17|19|1,294|\n|Burundi|39|36|59|41|88|63|0|0|326|\n|Sudanese|6|6|15|25|19|18|0|0|89|\n|**Total**|2903|2659|2426|2209|2581|2373|82|71|15,304|\n\n\n\n_Source: Camp commandant\u2019s office, Nakivale_\n\nEver since its establishment, the settlement has been a centre of controversy as\nregards its size and original boundaries. Located in central Ankole [1], it has been prone\nto encroachment by the populace who saw it as an area for expansion of their grazing\nactivities. Encroachment was of two types: extension of national land holdings into\ngazetted land and land loans given to nationals by refugees. This was also precipitated\nby the fact that there was a shrink in land availability for settlement and grazing in\nsurrounding areas especially after gazetting of Lake Mburo National Park in 1983 and\nout migration from neighbouring districts of Bushenyi and Ntugamo.\n\n\nLand conflicts are fuelled by the fact that large expanses of settlement land are\nunutilised land since the refugee population is small. This has resulted in a limitation\non expansion of refugee agricultural activities especially women in other parts of the\nsettlements; limited access to natural resources such as fuel wood and water and\ngrazing land.\n\n\n**Land conflicts between refugees and host populations**\n\n\nGenerally, it is vital to place refugee - host population conflict over land in the context\nof Uganda\u2019s land tenure system. Land tenure is the mode of land holding, together\nwith terms and conditions of occupancy. It is about \u2018the bundle of rights\u2019 held and\nenjoyed in the land resource. The relative degree to which individuals can profit from\nland resources is influenced by three factors: utilisation, duration of occupancy and\nrelocation rights (Nuwagaba et al, 2002). It is important to note that ambiguities exist\nin land tenure systems in Uganda as a result of its colonial history. For instance, at\nindependence in 1962, there were three land tenure systems: Mailo tenure, a system\nthat was exclusive to the kingdom of Buganda and traced its origins in the Buganda\n\n1 The people of Ankole are both pastorists and agriculturalists.\n\n\n3\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/25fc0094-24f1-3263-899c-cd26c916fb9d/0076AAD88CE65B2AC12571B900320D05-unhcr-uga-28jul.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        4
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "agreement of 1900; Freehold tenure, a system created under the Crown Land\nOrdinance of 1903; the native freeholds, where the community control over land was\nwoven into a number of land rights (Nuwagaba et al, 2002).\n\n\nThe degree of enjoyment of the land resource has become a point of contention\nbetween host populations and refugees. At first, refugees were settled in sparsely\npopulated areas and enjoyed good relations with the host populations (Holborn,\n1975:1212). However, population increase and the advent of a cash economy\nincreased the value of land, leading to strained social relations between refugees and\nnationals (Kasfir, 1988:158). Moreover, refugees are regarded as non-citizens who\nshould not have any rights over land.\n\n\nLand conflicts between refugees and host population can be attributed to two main\nfactors, that is, exceeding of field or residential boundaries (encroachment) and\nacquisition by nationals (sometimes in the form of land loans). Land conflicts in the\nrefugee hosting areas are partly attributed to lack of clear refugee settlement\nboundaries (Mugerwa, 1992; Nuwagaba, 2002; Bagenda, 2003). According to the\nchairman of the district land board in Mbarara, there are no clear demarcations\nbetween refugees\u2019 and host population\u2019s land [2] .\n\n\nThe lack of clarity can be traced to reluctance of the Ankole kingdom [3] to favour\npermanent settlement of refugees in 1962 when they were first given land to settle\n(Holborn, 1974:1223). As a result there has been increased encroachment on refugee\nland by nationals, a practice exacerbated by weak administration systems. For\ninstance, some encroachers have even acquired land tittles on gazetted land, since the\nprocedure of acquiring a land title is very simple and open to abuse. All one needs is\nto fill out an application form from the district land board and take them to Local\nCouncil 1 (LC1) and have a \u2018neighbour\u2019 sign for confirmation.\n\n\nAfter the District Land Board has confirmed, land is surveyed and a land title issued.\nThe system has also been exploited by refugees, especially those of the 1959 caseload\nwho have acquired land tittles [4] on settlement land. For instance, there is a case of a\nRwandan refugee with a title for seven square kilometres of settlement land.\nInterestingly, it was also found out that the camp commandant of Nakivale refugee\nsettlement has had to appear in court on charges of distributing land to refugees in the\nsettlement [5] .\n\n\nFurthermore, there have also been disagreements between Mbarara district\nadministration officials and the government over land in refugee settlements. Part of\nthe disagreements are because the government has refused nationals to use refugee\nland. One district official interviewed said that government has not always agreed\nwith the district on matters pertaining to land conflicts in refugee settlement. The\nfindings of the study revealed that in fact, some of the district officials are themselves\nencroachers on settlement land. Institutional responses are further hindered by\nmigration of nationals from other areas, such as Nyabushozi and Bushenyi, because of\nland shortages. This migration is caused by anticipation that refugees will repatriate\n\n2 The settlement boundary was determined by ridges that surround it.\n3 These were the original owners of the land in Nakivale and Oruchinga before government gazetted\nthe settlement.\n4 Under the Ugandan law, refugees are not supposed to own land.\n5 Interviews camp commandant Nakivale and Refugee Desk officer Mbarara, October 2004.\n\n\n4\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/25fc0094-24f1-3263-899c-cd26c916fb9d/0076AAD88CE65B2AC12571B900320D05-unhcr-uga-28jul.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        5
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "especially to Rwanda and leave vacant land in the settlements. On the other hand,\nrefugees from Rwanda are coming to Uganda because there is land for settlement\n(Bagenda et al, 2002). In response, government is in the process of resurveying the\nland and cancelling all land titles acquired on refugee land.\n\n\nTo further analyze the land conflicts, one also needs to understand the land problem in\nRwanda. According to Hajabakiga (2004:1-3) Rwanda has a population of 8.1 million\nand a population density of 308 inhabitants per square kilometre. On a whole, this\nplaces pressure on land leading to landlessness. Limited access to land in Rwanda has\nalso had an influence on the repatriation of Rwandese in that they prefer to stay in\nareas where they have access to land for their own livelihoods. For instance, it is this\nlack of land in Rwanda that has partly led to secondary refugee movements from\nTanzania to Uganda.\n\n\nEven some of the refugees who had repatriated after the genocide in 1994 returned to\nUganda to repossess their land holdings in refugee settlements. When asked about\ntheir repatriation, Rwandan refugees indicated that they had no land to return to in\nRwanda [6] . Indeed, Hajabakiga (2004) observed that between the 1950s and 1980s\nmany people in Rwanda lost their land rights for politically and ethnically motivated\nreasons. This, according to her, caused a problem when Rwandese repatriated after\n1994 since they had no lands to repossess, and some of them ended up taking up the\nlands of those who had fled that same year.\n\n\nGenerally, conflicts over land in Nakivale can be perceived as \u2018livelihood clashes\u2019\nbetween refugees and nationals, since land is a critical resource for supporting\nlivelihoods (Mugerwa, 1992, Verma, 2001:79). Hence it is important to understand\nthe interplay of various factors that influence access to and utilisation of land by both\nhost communities and refugees. For instance, despite settlement size, each refugee\nhousehold is given 0.04 hectares (20m x 20m) of land for homestead establishment\nand 0.15 as agricultural plots. This leaves a large part of the land under\u2013utilized\nproviding room for encroachment by nationals in need of grazing land.\n\n\nQuite often, animals stray into refugees\u2019 agricultural plots leading to a conflict\nbetween refugees and local populations. Usually, conflicts arise when livelihoods are\nthreatened and this threat can be internal (within the households or communities) or\nexternal-from outside the households or communities (Mugerwa, 1992:23; Verma,\n2001:97). At the centre of land conflicts are questions of ownership, access to and\ncontrol over natural resources. Land is regarded by locals as belonging to Ugandans\nwith refugees having no rights whatsoever. Regarding their interests in land, locals\naccuse the government of placing refugees\u2019 above those of the national population [7] .\nFor refugees, access is determined by legislation, as land is allocated for a settlement.\nParadoxically, settlements are sometimes established in non-agricultural productive\nareas, limiting livelihood opportunities. Furthermore, the government confines the\nrefugees in the settlement, allowing them only limited freedom of movement.\nRefugees have had to devise survival strategies such as spontaneous movement out of\nsettlements with no permission to do so.\n\n\n6\nFc Group Discussion Kigali zone, Nakivale (July 2004).\n7 Refugee Desk Officer, Mbarara October 2004.\n\n\n5\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/25fc0094-24f1-3263-899c-cd26c916fb9d/0076AAD88CE65B2AC12571B900320D05-unhcr-uga-28jul.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        6
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "_Women\u2019s livelihood strategies_\n\n\nAccording to DFID (2001), a livelihood comprises the capabilities and assets (both\nmaterial and social resources) and activities required for a means of living. A\nlivelihood is said to be sustainable when it can recover from shocks, stresses and\ntrends and maintain and enhance its capabilities both now and in the future while not\nundermining the natural resource base for future generations (Ibid).\n\n\nAccess to and control of land to a greater extent determines refugee women\u2019s access\nto livelihood assets such as physical capital, natural capital, human capital, financial\ncapital and social capital. Unfortunately, as Wengi (1998) points out, access and\ncontrol are limited by their lack of resource rights. For instance, in most of Sub\nSaharan Africa, women do not own land and even what they produce on the land, is\ncontrolled by the men (World Bank, 2000; Verma, 2001). Paradoxically, women\nthrough their labour are the major contributors to household livelihoods especially in\nrefugee situations (Mulumba, 2002).\n\n\nWomen and men negotiate access and maintain control over land as a productive and\nmaterial resource differently and inequitably within local relations of power (Verma,\n2001:79).Land conflicts influence women\u2019s access to resources such as cultivable\nland, water and firewood. Given their domestic responsibilities, refugee women\nnegotiate access to natural resources such as land for cultivation, firewood and water\nvital for the survival of their families.\n\n\nBecause of land conflicts and depletion of resources such as trees and arable soils\nwomen have been forced to look beyond the settlement for other sources. For\ninstance, interviews with refugee women revealed that they collect firewood and\nwater five to seven kilometres away from the settlement. Travelling such long\ndistances makes them vulnerable to sexual exploitation and gender based violence\nfrom both refugees and host populations. The distances also take away their valuable\ntime to engage in income generating activities or to participate in skills training.\n\n\nIt was also established that women do not control proceeds from surplus food sold in\nthe markets nor independently use the surplus from other household income\ngenerating activities. As a result, they are dependent on men for their daily needs a\nfact that greatly disadvantages them. For instance, because of their low income,\nwomen are denied access to dispute settling mechanisms in the settlements. For\nexample in the case of land conflicts, Refugee Welfare Committees [8] demand fees\nbefore they can settle a dispute.\n\n\nAccording to the Refugee Welfare Committee chairman, this is to \u2018facilitate\u2019 their\nwork in settling cases in the form of stationary. This requirement has become a\nhindrance to women who wish to seek assistance and adjudication of their cases.\nFurther to that, at times, police posts in the settlements also demand money from\nrefugees to address their complaints. For instance in cases where women report cases\nof sexual and gender based violence (SGBV), the police request \u2018fees\u2019 to arrest\n\n\n8 Refugee Welfare Committees are not facilitated by the government or UNHCR to carry out their day\nto day activities.\n\n\n6\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/25fc0094-24f1-3263-899c-cd26c916fb9d/0076AAD88CE65B2AC12571B900320D05-unhcr-uga-28jul.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        7
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "perpetrators [9] . Since women often lack money to pay such fees, they at times fail to\nreport cases.\n\n\nRefuge women\u2019s vulnerability is also partly due to men who migrate out of the\nsettlements to seek for work opportunities in urban centres leaving their wives behind\nto maintain a presence in the settlement. As observed in a study of urban refugees in\nKampala (Kalyango, 1999) some refugees have ended up with a dual settlement, that\nis, some live in urban centres such as Mbarara and Kampala and only return to the\nsettlement when there is food distribution or a census.\n\n\nThe majority of refugee women respond to these hindrances in their attempts to\nestablish a livelihood by building up their social capital. For instance, they respond to\nthe lack of labour in the households as a consequence of the absence of men, by\nforming groups through which they harness their joint labour. Women for example\ncooperate in cultivating each other\u2019s gardens as a group. They also participate in\ncommunity activities such as women\u2019s groups, or as volunteers with humanitarian\nagencies operating in the settlement.\n\n\nSome refugee women work as social workers for the Uganda Red Cross Society or as\nCommunity Volunteers for the International Medial Corps (IMC). Social capital is\ndeveloped through vertical (patron/ client) or horizontal (between individuals with\nshared interests) networks that increase people\u2019s trust and ability to work together and\nexpand their access to wider institutions (DFID, 2001). Social capital helps to increase\nwomen\u2019s productivity, improves their access to income generating activities and\nfacilitates the sharing of knowledge (Ibid.).\n\n\nFurthermore, some women have devised survival strategies such as the use of sex and\nmarriage to achieve livelihood goals. For instance, they either exchange sex for\nservices they need or engage in outright prostitution. Joseph (not real name), who runs\na drug shop in the settlement, revealed that at times women request to exchange sex\nfor drugs in case they have no money.\n\n\nAnother livelihood strategy of women is that of marriage as agency to access\nlivelihood resources. Women seek marriage [10] to either nationals or refugee men. In\nthe absence of role models and evident benefits from formal education, marriage has\nremained as the only option for many. Girls are married off as early as 16 years to\nacquire income or dowry and or extra labour for the household. Refugees reported\nthat if a girl reaches puberty then she is ready for marriage as in the case of Esther:\n\n\nEsther lost her husband in 1994 in Rwanda while fleeing the genocide\nwith her under-aged daughter Doris. When she arrived in Nakivale\nrefugee settlement, she got involved with a Rwandan man in order to\nsecure social support and survival. She gave away Doris to another man\nto marry her. The man was later arrested for defilement which is illegal\nin Uganda after a marriage ceremony attended by the Refugee Welfare\nCommittee members. Doris\u2019s mother refused to give evidence against her\nson-in-law arguing that Doris was of age and that the man had been\nwrongly arrested.\n\n\n9 The request for fees arises out of the poor facilitation of the police units in the settlements.\n10 At times they cohabit with men with no formal marriage ceremonies.\n\n\n7\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/25fc0094-24f1-3263-899c-cd26c916fb9d/0076AAD88CE65B2AC12571B900320D05-unhcr-uga-28jul.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        8
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "Early marriages arise out of the communities\u2019 view that women\u2019s place in society is in\nthe home (Obbo, 1990:210). Early marriages however have a negative impact on\ngirls\u2019 access to education and building up their human capital. Human capital\nrepresents the skills, knowledge, ability, labour and good health that together enable\npeople to pursue different livelihood strategies and achieve their livelihood objectives\n(DFID, 2001).\n\n\nThe study concurs with the World Bank (2000:152) which observed that when girls\nreach adolescence, they are generally expected to spend more time on household\nactivities such as cooking, cleaning, collecting fuel and water and caring for children.\nMoreover, quite often men marry young girls not for companionship but as extra\nlabourers in households.\n\n\nSuch attitudes have partly led to high school drop out rate for girls in higher classes\n(secondary school level) despite high enrolment rates in lower classes (primary school\nlevel). Education policies have emphasised the enrolment of girls in both primary and\nsecondary school and not their retention in school. Whereas girls are encouraged to\nattend school, nothing much has been done to provide an enabling environment for\ntheir retention in school. According to the Government of Uganda\u2019s Development\nAssistance for Refugees (DAR) policy, refugees need more education facilities to\nensure that children are able to access primary education (GoU, 2004:12).\n\n\nA closer look at the government strategy shows that it does not address the quality of\neducation and the retention of the girl child in school. For instance, in one of the\nsecondary schools in the settlement, of the 300 students, 200 are boys and 100 are\ngirls. The head teacher said that girls have a high drop out rate because of early\nmarriages, pregnancy and neglect of parents. Mulumba (1998:35-40) noted that there\nis little motivation to educate daughters and further observed that in the refugee\nsettlements, it is not uncommon for girls as young as 13 and 14 years to marry.\n\n\nA limited number of women are involved in the informal sector within the settlement\ninstead of only relying on land resources. Some women operate kiosks that sell basic\nnecessities such as sugar, salt, paraffin; others provide services operating hair saloons\nand restaurants. This concurs with research by Deepa Narayan (2000:45), who\nobserved that poor people try to diversify their sources of income and food by\ncarrying out different income generating activities.\n\n\nDespite their hard work, it was found that women rarely participate in decisionmaking processes at both the household and community level. This is a result of\ncultural expectations that perceive women as belonging to the \u2018home\u2019 (Tinker,\n1990:17) and their preoccupation in care activities that limit their time to actively\nparticipate in decision-making.\n\n\nRefugee women with some form of formal education seek employment in the\nsettlements, although the opportunities are limited. A few semi-skilled women are\nemployed as social workers, community volunteers, teachers or midwives in the\nhealth units. In all these activities, they earn incentives that are not commensurate to\nthe work they do, as according to the government of Uganda, refugees are not\n\n\n8\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/25fc0094-24f1-3263-899c-cd26c916fb9d/0076AAD88CE65B2AC12571B900320D05-unhcr-uga-28jul.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        9
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "supposed to work. Hence, humanitarian agencies cannot sign a contract with them,\ngive them terms of reference and pay them a salary [11] .\n\n\nAnother livelihood strategy is that of engaging in Functional Adult Literacy (FAL)\nprograms. The majority of the refugees who attend these classes seek to learn English\nin order to improve their (economic and social) integration into the Ugandan\ncommunity.\n\n\nIt is also a strategy of those who hope to be resettled in other countries such as the\nUnited States of America, Australia and Canada. Enrolment in English language\nclasses reveals that refugee women have a long-term view of their livelihood beyond\nthe parameters of their households and domestic work. Whereas they thus search for\nopportunities that can get them and their families out of poverty, at the same time it is\nimportant to realize that they are constrained by having to juggle their studying with\ncare and livelihood activities in the households.\n\n\n**Conclusion**\n\n\nIn all, conflicts over land between refugees and host populations have had negative\nimpact on the way refugee women access livelihood goals. Land, for the majority of\nrefugee women is central to their survival. In order to overcome the predicaments of\nland conflicts and inequitable access to resources, refugee women have devised other\nlivelihood strategies to ensure their survival and that of their children. For instance\nmarriage, Functional Adult Literacy and building up of their social capital are seen as\nagency in this regard.\n\n\nThe extent to which refugee women can attain livelihood goals is however limited by\nrestrictions on their freedom of movement. As a result, refugees fail to fully utilize\nlivelihood opportunities even when they sneak out of the settlement. Ideally, for a way\nforward, refugees should be given an opportunity to build their livelihoods outside the\nframework of the settlement approach which is prone to conflicts with the local\npopulation and greatly limits achievement of sustainable livelihoods.\n\n\n11 Interview with program officer, Uganda Red Cross October 2004\n\n\n9\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/25fc0094-24f1-3263-899c-cd26c916fb9d/0076AAD88CE65B2AC12571B900320D05-unhcr-uga-28jul.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        10
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/25fc0094-24f1-3263-899c-cd26c916fb9d/0076AAD88CE65B2AC12571B900320D05-unhcr-uga-28jul.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        11
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_10/raw/doc_10_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,142 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "Diagn\u00f3stico Participativo 2014 2\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/200a6f95-f5ae-3041-b9bb-e7bc96f6206b/10073.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "# SER UNA PERSONA REFUGIADA EN PANAM\u00c1\n\nDiagn\u00f3stico Participativo 2014-2015\n\n\n\n**Ser una persona refugiada en Panam\u00e1**\n**Diagn\u00f3stico Participativo 2014-2015**\n\n\n**Producci\u00f3n de dise\u00f1o:**\nLegacy Comunicaci\u00f3n Educativa\n\n\n_Las fotos de este documento son de autor\u00eda_\n_del Alto Comisionado de las Naciones Unidas_\n_para los Refugiados (ACNUR)_\n\n\nAlto Comisionado de las Naciones Unidas\npara los Refugiados (ACNUR)\nRepresentaci\u00f3n Regional para\nAm\u00e9rica Central, Cuba y M\u00e9xico.\n\n\nCiudad del Saber, Clayton\nCiudad de Panam\u00e1\nTel.: +507 317-1723\nFax: +507 317-1715\nwww.acnur.org\nwww.unhcr.org\n\n\n\n**Alto Comisionado de las Naciones Unidas**\n**para los Refugiados**\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/200a6f95-f5ae-3041-b9bb-e7bc96f6206b/10073.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "Junio 2015\n\n\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/200a6f95-f5ae-3041-b9bb-e7bc96f6206b/10073.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        2
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "#### _Agradecimiento_\n\ns fundamental mencionar que esta consulta fue posible gracias a la valiosa colaboraci\u00f3n\n###### E\nde un gran n\u00famero de organismos y personas. La oficina del ACNUR en Panam\u00e1 expresa su\nagradecimiento especialmente a las personas refugiadas y solicitantes de asilo, los organismos\nde Estado: la Oficina Nacional para la Atenci\u00f3n a Refugiados (ONPAR) y el Instituto Nacional\nde la Mujer (INAMU), y las organizaciones no gubernamentales: Cruz Roja Paname\u00f1a, Consejo\nNoruego para Refugiados, HIAS, la Pastoral de Movilidad Humana, el Servicio Jesuita para\nRefugiados y Refugee Education Trust (RET), por participar en el desarrollo de este informe\nproporcionando su tiempo y sus enriquecedoras experiencias para orientar este trabajo. Su\nasistencia ha sido sumamente relevante para el desarrollo de este ejercicio.\n\n\nPor cuarta vez en Panam\u00e1, ACNUR realiza el proceso de consulta de la poblaci\u00f3n refugiada,\ndenominado Diagnostico Participativo. El diagnostico participativo consiste en un proceso de\ndialogo estructurado con grupos de mujeres, ni\u00f1as, ni\u00f1os, adolescentes y hombres con el fin de\nrecopilar informaci\u00f3n precisa sobre los problemas de protecci\u00f3n a los que se enfrenta la poblaci\u00f3n\nrefugiada y solicitante de asilo permitiendo la comprensi\u00f3n m\u00e1s profunda de los riesgos que\ncorren, los obst\u00e1culos que deben sobrepasar y las soluciones que proponen para su bienestar.\n\n\n**ACNUR 2015**\n\n\n#### PRESENTACI\u00d3N\n\nLa Oficina del Alto Comisionado de las Naciones Unidas para los Refugiados (ACNUR) actuando\nbajo la autoridad de la Asamblea General de las Naciones Unidas, tiene el mandato de proporcionar\nprotecci\u00f3n internacional a las personas refugiadas, as\u00ed como buscar soluciones duraderas a las\nsituaciones que enfrentan.\n\n\nEn Panam\u00e1, el ACNUR trabaja en estrecha coordinaci\u00f3n con el Estado y la sociedad civil para\ngarantizar la protecci\u00f3n internacional de todas las personas refugiadas que residen en el territorio\ndel pa\u00eds, as\u00ed como aquellas que solicitan el reconocimiento de su condici\u00f3n como refugiadas. La\noficina realiza acciones a fin de asegurar el acceso y el disfrute de los derechos de mujeres, hombres,\nni\u00f1os, ni\u00f1as y adolescentes del inter\u00e9s del ACNUR.\n\n\nEl ACNUR coordina esfuerzos con la Oficina Nacional para la Atenci\u00f3n a Refugiados (ONPAR),\nla instituci\u00f3n gubernamental que tiene un papel fundamental en el procedimiento de determinaci\u00f3n\nde la condici\u00f3n de refugiado, junto con la Comisi\u00f3n Nacional de Protecci\u00f3n para Refugiados. Con el\nmismo objetivo, el ACNUR coordina esfuerzos con instituciones nacionales incluyendo el Servicio\nNacional de Migraci\u00f3n, la Secretar\u00eda Nacional de Ni\u00f1ez, Adolescencia y Familia (SENNIAF), el\nServicio Nacional de Fronteras (SENAFRONT), el Instituto Nacional para la Mujer (INAMU) y la\nDefensor\u00eda del Pueblo. Adem\u00e1s el ACNUR trabaja en colaboraci\u00f3n con organizaciones de la sociedad\ncivil incluyendo a la Pastoral de Movilidad Humana, la Cruz Roja Paname\u00f1a y el Consejo Noruego\npara Refugiados, HIAS, Refugee Education Trust (RET) y Servicio Jesuita para Refugiados (SJR).\n\n\nDebido a la posici\u00f3n geogr\u00e1fica de Panam\u00e1, el pa\u00eds se constituye en un lugar de paso para\nmovimientos migratorios mixtos, entre los cuales se encuentran personas con necesidad de\nprotecci\u00f3n internacional. La mayor\u00eda de la poblaci\u00f3n refugiada en Panam\u00e1 viene de pa\u00edses de la\nregi\u00f3n, como Colombia, Cuba, Venezuela y, en menor escala, de pa\u00edses del Tri\u00e1ngulo Norte de\nCentroam\u00e9rica. Aproximadamente el 87% de la poblaci\u00f3n refugiada vive en \u00e1reas urbanas, como\nson el Distrito de Panama, San Miguelito, Arraij\u00e1n y la Chorrera. Debido a la perspectiva a trav\u00e9s de\nla cual se entiende la migraci\u00f3n en la regi\u00f3n, la integraci\u00f3n local de los refugiados y solicitantes de\nla condici\u00f3n de refugiado se dificulta debido al desconocimiento de la poblaci\u00f3n en general sobre\ntemas relacionados a los refugiados y a los motivos de salida de sus pa\u00edses de origen.\n\n\nEn este contexto, el trabajo del ACNUR en Panam\u00e1 se enfoca en dos \u00e1reas: el fortalecimiento\ndel sistema de asilo en un marco de respeto al debido proceso y el acceso a derechos por parte de\nla poblaci\u00f3n refugiada y solicitante de la condici\u00f3n de refugiado, que permite de esa manera su\nintegraci\u00f3n local.\n\n\nEl Diagn\u00f3stico Participativo del ACNUR, realizado con poblaci\u00f3n refugiada en \u00e1reas urbanas y\nrurales, tiene como objetivo entender mejor los retos, las dificultades, los desaf\u00edos y las oportunidades\ndesde su llegada al pa\u00eds hasta el momento en que se integran definitivamente a la sociedad paname\u00f1a\na trav\u00e9s de la naturalizaci\u00f3n. Para el ACNUR, el acceso a derechos es lo que permite que las personas\nque han salido de sus pa\u00edses por temor fundado de persecuci\u00f3n reciban protecci\u00f3n.\n\n\n\n6 Diagn\u00f3stico Participativo 2014-2015 Diagn\u00f3stico Participativo 2014-2015 7\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/200a6f95-f5ae-3041-b9bb-e7bc96f6206b/10073.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        3
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "Un tema de vital importancia en la protecci\u00f3n internacional, que es abordado en este documento,\nes el acceso al territorio y al procedimiento de la determinaci\u00f3n de la condici\u00f3n de refugiado. Es\nnecesario que las autoridades tomen las acciones necesarias para salvaguardar las garant\u00edas del debido\nproceso en todas las etapas incluyendo desde la llegada al territorio hasta la decisi\u00f3n final por la que se\nreconoce o no la condici\u00f3n de refugiado de las personas solicitantes.\n\n\nEn 2014, se celebr\u00f3 el trig\u00e9simo aniversario de la Declaraci\u00f3n de Cartagena donde los gobiernos, la\nsociedad civil y el ACNUR se reunieron para reflexionar y buscar respuestas concretas a la protecci\u00f3n\ninternacional de refugiados, solicitantes, ap\u00e1tridas y otras personas de inter\u00e9s del ACNUR. El proceso\nconmemorativo culmin\u00f3 con la adopci\u00f3n de la Declaraci\u00f3n de Brasil en diciembre 2014.\n\n\nEn esta Declaraci\u00f3n, se contempla el Programa \u201cAsilo de Calidad\u201d que es facilitado por el ACNUR\nen pa\u00edses de la regi\u00f3n, incluido Panam\u00e1, con el objetivo de mejorar los procedimientos de elegibilidad,\nfortalecer la capacidad y el conocimiento de las autoridades del asilo, e introducir conceptos eficientes\nde gesti\u00f3n y manejo de procedimientos. La implementaci\u00f3n del programa \u201cAsilo de Calidad\u201d permitir\u00e1\ngarantizar el acceso efectivo al procedimiento de la determinaci\u00f3n de la condici\u00f3n de refugiado, el\nrespeto al principio de no devoluci\u00f3n, el principio de confidencialidad y otros.\n\n\nLas soluciones duraderas para los refugiados en el acceso a sus derechos se constituyen en un\npaso importante para que logren integrarse efectivamente en la sociedad paname\u00f1a; sin embargo,\nrepresenta mayores retos. Los refugiados y solicitantes de la condici\u00f3n de refugiado en Panam\u00e1 se\nenfrentan a varias dificultades en el acceso a los derechos humanos m\u00e1s b\u00e1sicos, como el derecho al\ntrabajo, a la educaci\u00f3n, a la vivienda y a la salud. La falta de acceso a sus derechos conlleva una serie\nconsecuencias para la integraci\u00f3n de la poblaci\u00f3n refugiada y solicitante de la condici\u00f3n de refugiado\nen Panam\u00e1. Para que la integraci\u00f3n local sea efectiva es necesario contar con pol\u00edticas p\u00fablicas y con\nmarcos legales y econ\u00f3micos apropiados que promuevan esta soluci\u00f3n duradera.\n\n\nEl ACNUR reitera su compromiso en la protecci\u00f3n de refugiados y solicitantes de la condici\u00f3n de\nrefugiado en Panam\u00e1, as\u00ed como su compromiso en la b\u00fasqueda de soluciones duraderas que tengan en\ncuenta sus derechos y la diversidad que caracteriza a esta poblaci\u00f3n.\n\nEl ACNUR espera que este Diagn\u00f3stico Participativo sea un medio para generar conciencia sobre\nla realidad de los refugiados en Panam\u00e1 y en el mundo, as\u00ed como en la importancia de contribuir en\nla b\u00fasqueda de soluciones y respuestas integrales, coordinadas y efectivas con miras a asegurar que\naquellas personas que necesiten protecci\u00f3n puedan acceder a ella de forma efectiva y de acuerdo a los\nprincipios y est\u00e1ndares internacionales.\n\n\n**Fernando Protti Alvarado**\n_Representante Regional del Alto Comisionado de Naciones Unidas_\n_para los Refugiados en Am\u00e9rica Central, Cuba y M\u00e9xico_\nPanam\u00e1, junio 2015\n\n\n#### PREFACIO ONPAR\n\nLa Oficina Nacional para la Atenci\u00f3n de Refugiados (ONPAR), dependencia del Ministerio de\nGobierno dirigido por su Excelencia Milton Henr\u00edquez - Ministro de Gobierno, y su Excelencia\nMar\u00eda Luisa Romero \u2013 Viceministra de Gobierno, con el prop\u00f3sito de cumplir con las obligaciones\ninternacionales y con el Plan de Gobierno propuesto por su Excelencia Juan Carlos Varela \u2013\nPresidente de la Rep\u00fablica de Panam\u00e1, tiene dentro de sus objetivos espec\u00edficos el promover\nel respeto de los Derechos de los solicitantes, refugiados, y su n\u00facleo familiar; garantizarle un\nprocedimiento adecuado y eficaz, con el prop\u00f3sito de que puedan acceder a todos los servicios que\nbrinda actualmente ONPAR, y as\u00ed obtener una adecuada coordinaci\u00f3n, planificaci\u00f3n y ejecuci\u00f3n de\nlas decisiones que tome la Comisi\u00f3n Nacional para la Protecci\u00f3n de Refugiados, que es la entidad\nque en nuestro pa\u00eds decide acerca del otorgamiento del estatuto de refugiado.\n\n\nDesde el mes de julio del a\u00f1o 2014 cuando asum\u00ed la direcci\u00f3n de la Oficina Nacional para la\natenci\u00f3n de Refugiados (ONPAR), nos planteamos un plan de trabajo con metas a corto, mediano\ny largo plazo, algunas de las cuales ya hemos cumplido y se han traducido en cambios sustanciales\nen el funcionamiento de ONPAR, y en el mejoramiento del servicio que prestamos. Entre ellos\npodemos mencionar el fortalecimiento del procedimiento para la determinaci\u00f3n del estatuto de\nrefugiado, implementando de manera inmediata las recomendaciones, proyecto que llevamos a\ncabo en conjunto con ACNUR, un mejor control en las entradas de las solicitudes, estad\u00edsticas,\nseguimientos, digitalizaci\u00f3n, entre otros, implementando la Base de Datos donada, la incorporaci\u00f3n\nde investigaciones de contexto en el an\u00e1lisis de las solicitudes y el mejoramiento en la estructura y\nan\u00e1lisis de los informes presentados a la Comisi\u00f3n, capacitaciones para los colaboradores con el\napoyo de organizaciones de la sociedad civil y de ACNUR, la incorporaci\u00f3n de los ni\u00f1os, ni\u00f1as y\nadolescentes al proceso de determinaci\u00f3n del estatuto de refugiados con la asistencia de un equipo\ninterdisciplinario (Trabajadora Social, Psic\u00f3logo, y Abogado). Adem\u00e1s, nuestro pa\u00eds particip\u00f3 en la\nadopci\u00f3n del \u201cPlan de Acci\u00f3n de Brasil\u201d, el cual fija una ruta com\u00fan para la regi\u00f3n con el prop\u00f3sito de\nfortalecer la Protecci\u00f3n y Promover soluciones sostenibles para las personas refugiadas, desplazadas\ny personas que carecen de nacionalidad denominados Ap\u00e1tridas. Sin embargo, a\u00fan tenemos algunas\nmetas pendientes, dentro de las cuales podemos mencionar: coordinar la adopci\u00f3n de medidas para\nfacilitar la integraci\u00f3n de las personas solicitantes de refugio y refugiadas a la sociedad paname\u00f1a,\nlo que implica que entre otras cosas estas tengan acceso al trabajo, la educaci\u00f3n, entre otros, mejorar\nla calidad de la metodolog\u00eda de entrevista, as\u00ed como las condiciones de privacidad en las que estas\nson realizadas, coordinar la elaboraci\u00f3n de un Protocolo de Atenci\u00f3n para los Ni\u00f1os, Ni\u00f1as y\nAdolescentes Refugiados, evaluar el borrador de la Ley de Apatridia, con el fin de que nuestro pa\u00eds\nadopte un procedimiento para la determinaci\u00f3n de la apatridia, y presentar las modificaciones del\nDecreto Ejecutivo N\u00b0 23, entre otros. Sin embargo, s\u00f3lo ser\u00e1 posible cumplir estas metas que nos\nhemos trazado contando con la colaboraci\u00f3n de las instituciones estatales responsables de algunos\nde los temas mencionados, pero tambi\u00e9n de ACNUR y las organizaciones de la sociedad civil.\n\n\n**Yaribeth de Calvo**\nDirectora Nacional\nOficina Nacional para la Atenci\u00f3n de Refugiados\nMinisterio de Gobierno\n\n\n\n8 Diagn\u00f3stico Participativo 2014-2015 Diagn\u00f3stico Participativo 2014-2015 9\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/200a6f95-f5ae-3041-b9bb-e7bc96f6206b/10073.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        4
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "REFUGIADO(A)\nUn refugiado es una persona\nque, debido a fundados temores de\nser perseguida por motivos de raza,\nreligi\u00f3n, nacionalidad, pertenencia a un\ndeterminado grupo social u opiniones\npol\u00edticas, se encuentra fuera de su pa\u00eds\nde nacionalidad y no puede o, a causa\nde dichos temores, no quiere acogerse a\nla protecci\u00f3n de tal pa\u00eds. _Convenci\u00f3n_\n_de las Naciones Unidas sobre el Estatuto_\n_de los Refugiados (1951), Art\u00edculo 1._\nSOLICITANTES DE LA CONDICI\u00d3N\nDE REFUGIADO (SOLICITANTES DE ASILO)\nSolicitante de asilo es quien solicita\nel reconocimiento de la condici\u00f3n de\nrefugiado y cuya solicitud todav\u00eda no ha\nsido evaluada en forma definitiva.\n\n\n\nESTATUTO HUMANITARIO PROVISIONAL\nDE PROTECCI\u00d3N (PTH)\nEs un estatuto de protecci\u00f3n\nconcedido de forma temporal por\nel Gobierno de Panam\u00e1 en caso de\nafluencia a gran escala de personas que\nbuscan protecci\u00f3n dentro del territorio.\nLos beneficiarios del Estatuto\nHumanitario Provisional de Protecci\u00f3n,\ntambi\u00e9n conocido como PTH, no gozan\nde los mismos derechos y beneficios\nlegales y sociales de aquellas personas\nreconocidas formalmente como\nRefugiados entre ellas la libertad\nde movimiento y el derecho a un\npermiso de trabajo.\n_Decreto Ejecutivo N\u00b023 de febrero_\n_de 1998, Titulo II._\n\n\n\nSOCIOS IMPLEMENTADORES\nY OPERACIONALES\nLos socios implementadores son\naquellas organizaciones a las cuales el\nACNUR conf\u00eda la ejecuci\u00f3n\nde proyectos y recursos dirigidos\na la asistencia humanitaria\nde refugiados y solicitantes de asilo\nen el pa\u00eds siguiendo un documento\ncontractual que formaliza la relaci\u00f3n\nentre ambas organizaciones. Mientras\nque un socio operacional es aquella\norganizaci\u00f3n que dirige proyectos\npropios y complementa la asistencia\ndirigida a personas refugiadas y\nsolicitante de asilo sin manejar\nde manera directa recursos\nproporcionados por el ACNUR.\n\n\n\nLA OFICINA NACIONAL PARA LA ATENCI\u00d3N\nDE REFUGIADOS (ONPAR)\nONPAR, una oficina adscrita al\nMinisterio de Gobierno, fue creada\na trav\u00e9s del Decreto Ejecutivo N\u00b023 del\n10 de febrero de 1998 con el fin\nde coordinar y ejecutar los\nprogramas de atenci\u00f3n y protecci\u00f3n a\nlos Refugiados en Panam\u00e1, adem\u00e1s\nde las decisiones adoptadas por\nla Comisi\u00f3n de Elegibilidad.\nEn Panam\u00e1, ONPAR es la oficina\nencargada de procesar las solicitudes\nde la condici\u00f3n de refugiado\ny dem\u00e1s tr\u00e1mites administrativos\nrelacionados al proceso, por ejemplo\nla renovaci\u00f3n de los documentos\nde identidad.\n\n\n\nCOMISI\u00d3N NACIONAL DE PROTECCI\u00d3N PARA\nREFUGIADOS (COMISI\u00d3N DE ELEGIBILIDAD)\nLa Comisi\u00f3n de Elegibilidad,\nestablecida seg\u00fan el Decreto Ejecutivo\nN\u00b0 23 de 1998, tiene como mandato\naplicar las disposiciones\nde la Convenci\u00f3n de 1951 sobre\nel Estatuto de los Refugiados\ny su Protocolo de 1967, as\u00ed como\ncualquier otra norma, acuerdo o\ndisposici\u00f3n de legislaci\u00f3n interna,\nrelativa al reconocimiento, protecci\u00f3n y\nasistencia de los refugiados.\nLa funci\u00f3n principal de la Comisi\u00f3n de\nElegibilidad es la evaluaci\u00f3n\nde las solicitudes presentadas ante\nONPAR para el reconocimiento\nde la condici\u00f3n de refugiado.\n\n\n\nAUTORIDADES RECEPTORAS PRIMARIAS\nLa autoridad receptora primaria\nes un t\u00e9rmino utilizado para identificar\na cualquier funcionario que reciba en\nprimera instancia al solicitante de asilo.\nEsta autoridad u oficina de gobierno tiene\nla responsabilidad, seg\u00fan el articulo 28 del\nDecreto Ejecutivo N\u00b0 23 de 1998,\nde notificar a la ONPAR la llegada de un\nsolicitante de asilo refiriendo a la persona\npara el inicio de su tr\u00e1mite. A nivel pr\u00e1ctico\nlas autoridades receptoras en Panam\u00e1\nincluyen al Servicio Nacional de Migraci\u00f3n\n(SNM), el Servicio Nacional de Fronteras\n(SENAFRONT), el Servicio Aero Naval\n(SENAN) y la Polic\u00eda Nacional, aunque\ncualquier otra autoridad que identifique\nun caso tiene la misma responsabilidad\nde referir, en un t\u00e9rmino no mayor de 24\nhoras, el caso a la ONPAR.\n\n\n\n10 Diagn\u00f3stico Participativo 2014-2015 Diagn\u00f3stico Participativo 2014-2015 11\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/200a6f95-f5ae-3041-b9bb-e7bc96f6206b/10073.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        5
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/200a6f95-f5ae-3041-b9bb-e7bc96f6206b/10073.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        6
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "#### Sistema de determinaci\u00f3n de la condici\u00f3n de refugiado, documentaci\u00f3n y cambio de condici\u00f3n migratorio\n\nINTRODUCCI\u00d3N\n\n\n\n\n\nLa Oficina del ACNUR en Panam\u00e1 contin\u00faa brindando el\napoyo t\u00e9cnico al Estado paname\u00f1o para fortalecer el sistema\nde reconocimiento de la condici\u00f3n de refugiado, esto apunta\na un mejoramiento continuo desde el acceso al territorio de\nun solicitantes de asilo hasta garantizar un recurso efectivo\nde apelaci\u00f3n, de acuerdo a los est\u00e1ndares de protecci\u00f3n de\ninstrumentos de derecho internacional y regional.\n\n\nPROCEDIMIENTO PARA EL RECONOCIMIENTO DE LA CONDICI\u00d3N DE REFUGIADO\n\n\nSeg\u00fan cifras de ONPAR 1,184 personas solicitaron la\ncondici\u00f3n de refugiado o asilo durante el 2014. Asimismo,\nestad\u00edsticas brindadas por la ONPAR indican que 297\nsolicitudes fueron analizadas por esta instituci\u00f3n durante el\na\u00f1o 2014. De \u00e9stas, 76 resoluciones de admisibilidad y 226\nresoluciones de no admisibilidad. Con base a estas cifras, se\npuede inferir que solo un 26% de las solicitudes analizadas\ndurante el pasado a\u00f1o, fueron puestas en conocimiento de\nla Comisi\u00f3n de elegibilidad, en adelante Comisi\u00f3n, para su\nreconocimiento o no como refugiado. Asi mismo, ACNUR\ncalcula que s\u00f3lo un 12% de los solicitantes son reconocidos\ncomo refugiados.\n\n\nDe acuerdo a registros del ACNUR, existen\naproximadamente 2,000 solicitudes pendientes de an\u00e1lisis\ntanto de la ONPAR como de la Comisi\u00f3n. \u00c9sta cifra\nacumulada de solicitudes puede responder a varios factores\ncomo por ejemplo: (1) el contraste entre el n\u00famero de\npersonas encargadas de analizar las solicitudes en ONPAR\nversus el n\u00famero de solicitantes de asilo; (2) el n\u00famero de\ninstancias en que la Comisi\u00f3n se re\u00fane durante el a\u00f1o.\n\n\nEstad\u00edsticas que apoyan la informaci\u00f3n brindada por\nsolicitantes de asilo durante los diversos diagn\u00f3sticos\nparticipativos identificando un proceso complejo y largo que\npuede durar hasta dos a\u00f1os.\n\nRespecto a la informaci\u00f3n disponible para los\nsolicitantes de la condici\u00f3n de refugiado, \u00e9stos manifestaron\nque desear\u00edan que hubiera m\u00e1s informaci\u00f3n sobre el\nprocedimiento administrativo para reconocer su condici\u00f3n,\nen especial sobre sus deberes y derechos. En zonas rurales,\nla informaci\u00f3n sobre el procedimiento es a\u00fan m\u00e1s escasa,\nincluso para las propias autoridades receptoras. Asimismo,\nlos solicitantes cuyo idioma es distinto al espa\u00f1ol se\u00f1alaron\n\n\n\nEn el siguiente cap\u00edtulo esperamos enumerar los\ndiferentes riesgos de protecci\u00f3n identificados por la\npoblaci\u00f3n refugiada y solicitante de asilo en relaci\u00f3n a este\nprocedimiento, al igual que los importantes avances que se\nlograron en los \u00faltimos a\u00f1os en relaci\u00f3n a la regularizaci\u00f3n\nde la poblaci\u00f3n PTH y el establecimiento de un proceso\npermanente que permite la integraci\u00f3n legal en el pa\u00eds.\n\n\nla importancia de contar con informaci\u00f3n en otros idiomas\nadem\u00e1s del espa\u00f1ol.\n\nEn cuanto al acceso al territorio y al procedimiento, la\nmayor\u00eda de las solicitudes de la condici\u00f3n de refugiado son\npresentadas directamente ante la ONPAR. Sin embargo, el\nacceso al territorio y al procedimiento de asilo puede no siempre\nocurrir en contextos donde los solicitantes tienen la posibilidad\nde aproximarse a las oficinas de la ONPAR. En ocasiones \u00e9stos\ningresan en contextos rurales como la Provincia de Dari\u00e9n\ndonde no hay presencia de la ONPAR de manera permanente\nincrementando el riesgo de rechazo o prohibici\u00f3n de ingreso\nen frontera.\n\nDe igual manera pueden solicitar la condici\u00f3n de refugiado\nestando en el albergue de migraci\u00f3n situaci\u00f3n que los pone en\nriesgo de no poder trasmitir su solicitud ante ONPAR. Estas\nsituaciones pueden agravarse para aquellas personas que son\nde otros continentes y que no hablan el idioma espa\u00f1ol.\n\n\nPara efectos de garantizar el acceso al territorio y al\nprocedimiento, se destaca la necesidad de crear un protocolo\npara la referencia de casos de solicitantes ante la ONPAR para\nreducir el riesgo de devoluci\u00f3n.\n\n\nPara tal fin, es preciso la participaci\u00f3n del Servicio\nNacional de Migraci\u00f3n y el Servicio Nacional de Fronteras.\n\n\nDurante los \u00faltimos meses, se destaca un progreso en las\nresoluciones que emite la ONPAR, particularmente en la\nmotivaci\u00f3n, an\u00e1lisis y fundamentaci\u00f3n de sus decisiones de\nadmisibilidad al procedimiento. De esta manera, aquellos\nsolicitantes que no son admitidos a tr\u00e1mite pueden presentar\nun recurso de reconsideraci\u00f3n con mayor conocimiento de\nlas razones por las que fueron negadas sus solicitudes.\n\n\n\nDOCUMENTACI\u00d3N\n\n\nLa documentaci\u00f3n apropiada de los refugiados y solicitantes\ndisminuye el riesgo de detenci\u00f3n, protege de la devoluci\u00f3n y\nfacilita el acceso a servicios y derechos.\n\nEn los \u00faltimos a\u00f1os Panam\u00e1 ha tomado la iniciativa de\nexpedir carn\u00e9s de identidad a solicitantes de asilo en espera de\nsu admisi\u00f3n a tr\u00e1mite respondiendo a uno de los riesgos m\u00e1s\nsignificativos de pasados Diagn\u00f3sticos Participativos. En este\nsentido la poblaci\u00f3n solicitante ha calificado la medida como\nuna iniciativa justa, pero con necesidad de ser fortalecida\nidentific\u00e1ndose como problemas:\n\n\na) La vigencia temporal de los carn\u00e9s que no se ajusta a la\nrealidad del proceso, ya que la gesti\u00f3n para renovar el carn\u00e9\nde solicitante puede demorar meses y muchas veces son\naprehendidos por autoridades por estar indocumentados o\npor tener documentaci\u00f3n expirada,\n\n\nb) la falta de conocimiento de las autoridades (entidades de\nseguridad) sobre el estatuto de refugiado y la ONPAR, conducen\na una situaci\u00f3n que aumenta los riesgos de detenci\u00f3n o abuso al\nno reconocerse como documentos v\u00e1lidos. Las certificaciones\nprovisorias entregadas por ONPAR, de atrasarse el proceso de\nrenovaci\u00f3n o debido a problemas t\u00e9cnicos que no permitan\nla expedici\u00f3n de los carn\u00e9s tampoco protegen a las personas.\n\n\nLos atrasos en los procesos de renovaci\u00f3n de los\ndocumentos de identidad tambi\u00e9n afectan a los solicitantes\nde la condici\u00f3n de refugiado admitidos a tr\u00e1mite y a los\nrefugiados reconocidos, identific\u00e1ndose casos donde son\nsancionados por el Servicio Nacional de Migraci\u00f3n con multas\npor no renovar sus carn\u00e9s a tiempo a pesar de haber solicitado\nante la ONPAR la renovaci\u00f3n con d\u00edas de anticipaci\u00f3n. En esta\nl\u00ednea la poblaci\u00f3n consultada ha reconocido las limitaciones\nde la ONPAR relacionadas a la falta de personal y al aumento\nde las solicitudes de la condici\u00f3n de refugiado, situaci\u00f3n que\n\n\n\nreconocen puede dificultar el procesamiento efectivo de\notras solicitudes administrativas como son: la renovaci\u00f3n\nde documentos de identidad, permisos de trabajo y\ncertificaciones. En este caso la poblaci\u00f3n refugiada y solicitante\nde asilo ha identificado como una de las posibles soluciones\nla elaboraci\u00f3n de manuales internos, en ONPAR, donde se\nestablezca de manera clara los procedimientos y t\u00e9rminos\nde renovaci\u00f3n de los documentos buscando de esta manera\nel procesamiento ordenado, r\u00e1pido y justo de las solicitudes\nde renovaci\u00f3n.\n\nUna de las mayores inquietudes tanto de los solicitantes\ncomo de los refugiados, es el uso del t\u00e9rmino de \u201crefugiado\u201d en\ntodas las documentaciones que les son entregadas durante el\nprocedimiento, ya que creen que esta origina discriminaci\u00f3n\nal encontrarse con autoridades de polic\u00eda o incluso en la\nb\u00fasqueda de un trabajo.\n\n\nEn el caso de Dari\u00e9n, los refugiados reconocidos afrontan\nde igual manera dificultades al momento de renovar su\nidentificaci\u00f3n siendo la causa principal la falta de presencia de\nlas instituciones encargadas de la renovaci\u00f3n de documentos,\nespecialmente ONPAR, y la centralizaci\u00f3n del proceso\nde renovaci\u00f3n en Ciudad de Panam\u00e1. De forma que todo\ninteresado en tramitar un documento debe obligatoriamente\napersonarse a las oficinas centrales de ONPAR y el Servicio\nNacional de Migraci\u00f3n, respectivamente.\n\n\nA esto se le suma los altos costos de transporte para\nmovilizarse hasta la ciudad de Panam\u00e1, costos que por lo\ngeneral la poblaci\u00f3n refugiada en la provincia de Dari\u00e9n no\npuede cubrir.\n\n\nEn temas de documentaci\u00f3n, el \u201cdocumento de viaje\u201d se\nmantiene como un pendiente, limitando las opciones de viaje\na refugiados que por raz\u00f3n de su temor no puedan obtener un\npasaporte de su pa\u00eds de origen.\n\n\n\n\n\n16 Diagn\u00f3stico Participativo 2014-2015 Diagn\u00f3stico Participativo 2014-2015 17\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/200a6f95-f5ae-3041-b9bb-e7bc96f6206b/10073.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        7
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "LA NATURALIZACI\u00d3N COMO \u00daNICA FORMA DE CULMINAR LA PROTECCI\u00d3N COMO PERSONA REFUGIADA\n\n\n\nPanam\u00e1 dio un gran paso en materia legislativa con la\naprobaci\u00f3n de la Ley 74 de 2013 que brinda la oportunidad\na los refugiados, previo cumplimiento de requisitos, de\nsolicitar la residencia permanente y obtener un permiso de\ntrabajo indefinido. Las personas refugiadas mencionaron\nque la residencia permanente abre las puertas a muchas\nm\u00e1s oportunidades de empleo y autosuficiencia en general.\nPrincipalmente, el permiso de trabajo indefinido les brinda\nmayor estabilidad laboral en sus respectivos oficios.\n\n\nNo obstante, es importante reconocer que la obtenci\u00f3n\nde la residencia permanente \u2013 en el caso de la Ley 74 - no\nculmina la protecci\u00f3n como persona refugiada. En este\nsentido, las personas refugiadas se\u00f1alaron que ciertas autoridades\nconsideran que ellos pierden la condici\u00f3n de refugiado una vez\nobtienen la residencia permanente. A este respecto, la legislaci\u00f3n\nde Panam\u00e1 es clara en confirmar que las personas que aplican a\nla ley 74 siguen siendo refugiados a pesar de contar con un carn\u00e9\nde residente permanente, aunque persiste la \u201cdesinformaci\u00f3n\u201d de\nacuerdo a los refugiados.\n\n\nAdicionalmente, la poblaci\u00f3n refugiada manifest\u00f3 que le\ngustar\u00eda tener un mensaje uniforme de las autoridades sobre\nsi necesitan solicitar un permiso de salida para salir del pa\u00eds\ny regresar continuando con la protecci\u00f3n como persona\nrefugiada. En este caso la poblaci\u00f3n manifest\u00f3 su temor de\nviajar y perder su condici\u00f3n de refugiado(a).\n\n\nEn cuanto al procedimiento, para adquirir la residencia\npermanente, segun la Ley 74 de 2013, la poblaci\u00f3n consultada\nse\u00f1ala que el costo es exorbitante para un refugiado,\nprincipalmente en aquellos casos en d\u00f3nde hay m\u00e1s de un\nadulto en el grupo familiar. A manera de ejemplo, una familia\n\n\n\ncompuesta por dos adultos, estar\u00eda sujeta a pagar USD 65.00\nd\u00f3lares cada uno por el carn\u00e9 de residente permanente que\notorga el Tribunal Electoral de Panam\u00e1, m\u00e1s USD 100.00 d\u00f3lares\ncada uno por el permiso de trabajo indefinido lo que lleva a que\nsolo un adulto del grupo familiar, normalmente el esposo, inicie\nel tr\u00e1mite de residencia. Con una mirada al futuro, podr\u00eda ser\nnecesaria una adecuaci\u00f3n de los procesos de naturalizaci\u00f3n\npara la situaci\u00f3n de las personas refugiadas.\n\n\nEn general, la provincia del Dari\u00e9n alberga a dos perfiles de\nrefugiados: refugiados reconocidos y poblaci\u00f3n ex-PTH.\n\n\nEn el caso de los refugiados reconocidos que pueden aplicar\na la Ley 74 de 2013, la situaci\u00f3n de renovaci\u00f3n y entrega de la\ndocumentaci\u00f3n es m\u00e1s complicada para aquellos refugiados que\nviven en comunidades aleda\u00f1as al Rio Tuira debido a la lejan\u00eda de\nlas comunidades, las dificultades y costos del transporte a Ciudad\nde Panam\u00e1 donde solo se puede hacer los tramites.\n\n\nDe acuerdo a estad\u00edsticas del ACNUR, existen 139 personas\nrefugiadas en Dari\u00e9n, que en principio podr\u00edan aplicar a la\nresidencia permanente pero a las que se le dificulta iniciar su\ntr\u00e1mite ya se por la lejan\u00eda de las comunidades, los altos costos de\ntransporte y gastos administrativos (costos de los carn\u00e9s) que no\npueden de forma realista cubrir.\n\n\nImplementar una coordinaci\u00f3n interinstitucional similar a\nla Ley 81 de 2011, cuando se organiz\u00f3 conjuntamente con todas\nlas organizaciones involucradas un plan de trabajos con fases\ny t\u00e9rminos de implementaci\u00f3n, facilitar\u00eda a los refugiados en\ncomunidades rurales aplicar a la residencia permanente poniendo\nfin a una de sus principales preocupaciones: la renovaci\u00f3n constante\nde sus documentos como refugiados (renovaci\u00f3n anual.)\n\n\n###### **Acceso a oportunidades de empleo,**\n#### servicios bancarios y educaci\u00f3n como v\u00edas de autosuficiencia\n\nINTRODUCCI\u00d3N\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nen la actualidad son varios los actores \u2013tanto de Estado como de\nsociedad civil \u2013 que sugieren emular buenas pr\u00e1cticas legislativas\nde pa\u00edses de la regi\u00f3n que brindan un permiso de trabajo\nprovisional a los solicitantes. Desde el enfoque de integraci\u00f3n\nlocal, el proceso de integraci\u00f3n econ\u00f3mico ser\u00eda m\u00e1s efectivo si la\npersonas comenzar\u00e1 a trabajar desde el inicio de su proceso ante la\nONPAR. Tomando en cuenta que el 87% de la poblaci\u00f3n refugiada\nvive en zonas urbanas (Panam\u00e1, San Miguelito y Panam\u00e1 Oeste)\nsu integraci\u00f3n tiene mayores esperanzas en comparaci\u00f3n con la\npoblaci\u00f3n refugiada en comunidades fronterizas de la Provincia\nde Dari\u00e9n.\n\n\n\n\n\nLa Convenci\u00f3n de 1951 establece las cl\u00e1usulas correspondientes\na un empleo remunerado, trabajo por cuenta propia y profesiones\nliberales que deben ser aplicadas a las personas refugiadas. De\nigual manera, establece art\u00edculos relacionados al derecho de\nlas personas refugiada a acceder a la educaci\u00f3n. M\u00e1s all\u00e1 de la\nConvenci\u00f3n de 1951, existe un cuerpo de instrumentos de\nderecho internacional y regional que pueden ser aplicados a la\nprotecci\u00f3n de poblaci\u00f3n refugiada y que garantizan derechos.\n\n\nEn cuanto a las oportunidades de empleo, s\u00f3lo los refugiados\nreconocidos tienen derecho a un permiso de trabajo, renovable\ncada a\u00f1o de acuerdo a la legislaci\u00f3n de refugiados. Sin embargo,\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDiagn\u00f3stico Participativo 2014-2015\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/200a6f95-f5ae-3041-b9bb-e7bc96f6206b/10073.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        8
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "ACCESO AL TRABAJO\n\n\nEl permiso de trabajo tiene dos aspectos que preocupan a\nlas personas refugiadas. Primero, el largo periodo que toma\nla renovaci\u00f3n del documento (hasta seis meses). Durante\neste tiempo de espera, ellos est\u00e1n expuestos a explotaci\u00f3n\nlaboral o pueden ser despedidos o hasta multados por no\ncontar con documentaci\u00f3n vigente.\n\n\nSegundo, el t\u00e9rmino \u201crefugiado\u201d impreso en los carn\u00e9s\npuede ser visto de manera negativa por algunos empleadores,\nya que desconocen sobre la condici\u00f3n de refugiado. Una\nsituaci\u00f3n que tambi\u00e9n afecta a los refugiados reconocidos\nque han iniciado su tr\u00e1mite de residencia permanente\na trav\u00e9s de la Ley 74 del 2013 y es que los permisos de\ntrabajo expedidos a trav\u00e9s de esta Ley especial tambi\u00e9n son\nexpedidos con el t\u00e9rmino \u201crefugiado\u201d.\n\n\nPor otro lado, los solicitantes pueden permanecer\nun promedio de uno a dos a\u00f1os en espera de su\nreconocimiento, y en ese lapso no cuentan con permiso\nde trabajo. En este sentido, los solicitantes se\u00f1alan que\nno pueden quedarse de manos cruzadas y buscan trabajos\ninformales en los cuales pueden ser v\u00edctimas de abuso y\nexplotaci\u00f3n laboral (jornadas de 12 horas, bajos salarios,\netc.) alejados de las prestaciones de seguridad social, sin\nacceso a cr\u00e9dito o expuestos a extorsiones y/o decomiso de\nmercader\u00edas, herramientas o implementos necesarios para\nsus actividades productivas.\n\n\n\ny solicitantes tienen acceso limitado o nulo a programas de\ncapacitaci\u00f3n t\u00e9cnica o desarrollo empresarial, como aquellos\nque ofrece la AMPYME o el INADEH dificult\u00e1ndose el acceso\na oportunidades educativas que podr\u00edan facilitar el desarrollo\nde proyectos productivos o la b\u00fasqueda de un medio\nde vida estable.\n\n\nEn Darien, en cambio las dificultades para acceder al\ntrabajo est\u00e1n relacionadas con las limitaciones propias del\ncontexto rural en el que viven entendi\u00e9ndose que la mayor\u00eda de\nla poblaci\u00f3n se dedica a la agricultura de supervivencia. Sin\nembargo, es importante mencionar que existe una serie de\nobst\u00e1culos que dificultan a\u00fan m\u00e1s la generaci\u00f3n de ingresos\nprincipalmente: a) los obst\u00e1culos para formalizar la propiedad\nde tierras, b) los altos costos de los permisos de pesca y\nlicencias mar\u00edtimas con precios exorbitantes para la poblaci\u00f3n\nde Dari\u00e9n, c) en ocasiones la falta de documentos de identidad\nque les limita su movimiento en la provincia, d) y hasta cierto\npunto los estrictos controles de seguridad en la Provincia\nlo que ha afectado el comercio binacional entre Colombia y\nPanam\u00e1 y el mercado local limitando a\u00fan m\u00e1s las opciones\nde trabajo.\n\n\nRefugiados con necesidades especiales, enfermedades\ncr\u00f3nicas o adultos mayores, tampoco cuentan con opciones\nrealistas para la generaci\u00f3n de ingresos en Dari\u00e9n, ya que\nestas se limitan a la agricultura y la pesca por lo que terminan\ndependiendo de la generosidad del resto de la comunidad,\nespecialmente si no cuentan con familiares. Una situaci\u00f3n que\nafecta tanto a poblaci\u00f3n refugiada como paname\u00f1a.\n\n\n###### **Acceso a vivienda, educaci\u00f3n,**\n## percepci\u00f3n de discriminaci\u00f3n y bienestar\n\nINTRODUCCI\u00d3N\n\n\n\ncamino largo donde se espera obtener protecci\u00f3n y poner fin\nal ciclo de desplazamiento al que se ve expuesta la\npersona siendo una de las \u201csoluciones duraderas\u201d lograr la\nintegraci\u00f3n local del refugiado en el pa\u00eds de asilo donde se le\nha reconocido. Para el ACNUR esta integraci\u00f3n debe ser un\nproceso integral que abarque la integraci\u00f3n legal, econ\u00f3mica\ny socialcultural.\n\n\nEn esta l\u00ednea, el presente cap\u00edtulo pretende mostrar la\nsituaci\u00f3n de los refugiados en relaci\u00f3n a su integraci\u00f3n\nsociocultural en Panam\u00e1, abarcando temas como su acceso a\nla vivienda, a derechos como la educaci\u00f3n, seguridad y justicia.\n\n\nparamilitares y en el caso de las mujeres como trabajadoras sexuales.\n\n\nEn el contexto laboral la discriminaci\u00f3n tambi\u00e9n\npuede afectar sus oportunidades de empleo debido al\ndesconocimiento generalizado sobre la condici\u00f3n de refugiado\ny la creencia de que \u201cel extranjero quita el trabajo a los\nnacionales\u201d. La b\u00fasqueda de soluciones duraderas mediante la\nsuperaci\u00f3n de las dificultades de integraci\u00f3n y la lucha contra\nla discriminaci\u00f3n de las personas refugiadas sigue siendo uno\nde los principales retos para el ACNUR y sus socios.\n\n\n\n\n\nque son pocos los bancos que tienen conocimiento sobre el\nestatuto legal de refugiado, circunstancia que afecta de manera\nnegativa la posibilidad de abrir una cuenta bancaria o solicitar\nun pr\u00e9stamo necesario para acceder a vivienda propia o a otro\ntipo de bienes. Incluso, en el d\u00eda a d\u00eda, los refugiados indican\nque su identificaci\u00f3n como refugiado no  les facilita ni siquiera\nel cambiar un cheque.\n\n\nAdem\u00e1s se\u00f1alan que la posibilidad de abrir una cuenta\nqueda en muchas ocasiones a discreci\u00f3n de la persona que los\nrecibe en el Banco o de la posibilidad de aportar la numerosa\ndocumentaci\u00f3n que le exigen, mucha de ella del pa\u00eds de origen\n\n\n\nProducto de coordinaciones de la ONPAR, durante el 2014 la\nSuperintendencia de Bancos de Panam\u00e1 emiti\u00f3 una resoluci\u00f3n\ndonde reconoce la legitimidad de la documentaci\u00f3n de los\nrefugiados reconocidos y coloca a la ONPAR como agente de\nreferencia bancaria para ellos. No obstante, esta resoluci\u00f3n no\nes ampliamente conocida por los bancos, ni por los usuarios,\nd\u00e1ndose constantemente situaciones de discrecionalidad que\nlimitan la apertura de cuentas bancarias.\n\n\nM\u00e1s precaria a\u00fan es la situaci\u00f3n de los solicitantes de la\ncondici\u00f3n de refugiado que durante el tiempo de espera no\nlogran abrir una cuenta.\n\n\n\nCuando una persona huye de su pa\u00eds de origen a causa de\npersecuci\u00f3n y cruza una frontera internacional esperando\nencontrar protecci\u00f3n, inicia un largo y dif\u00edcil camino\nen b\u00fasqueda de una vida de paz y dignidad. La falta de\nconocimiento sobre la condici\u00f3n de refugiado y lo que \u00e9sta\nimplica, afecta negativamente la vida de estas personas en\ntodas las etapas del ciclo de protecci\u00f3n, es decir, desde el\nmomento en que ingresan a un pa\u00eds y solicitan la protecci\u00f3n,\na lo largo del proceso de reconocimiento por parte del Estado\ny aun cuando finalmente obtienen el estatus formal como\nrefugiado reconocido.\n\n\nEl reconocimiento como refugiado es el primer paso de un\n\n\nDISCRIMINACI\u00d3N Y ESTIGMATIZACI\u00d3N\n\n\nEn la consulta hecha las personas refugiadas y solicitantes\nde asilo en Ciudad de Panam\u00e1 destacaron un alto nivel de\ndiscriminaci\u00f3n que se manifiesta en diferentes contextos\ncomo las escuelas, los centros de salud y los centros de polic\u00eda,\nentre otros.\n\n\nEn general, los prejuicios relacionados con la nacionalidad\ncolombiana hacen que muchos refugiados sufran una doble\nestigmatizaci\u00f3n no solo por ser refugiados sino tambi\u00e9n por ser\ncolombianos y ser tildados como narcotraficantes, guerrilleros,\n\n\n\n20 Diagn\u00f3stico Participativo 2014-2015 Diagn\u00f3stico Participativo 2014-2015 21\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/200a6f95-f5ae-3041-b9bb-e7bc96f6206b/10073.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        9
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "dirigida a su persona, su familia o su comunidad.\n\nDe igual manera los j\u00f3venes manifestaron la necesidad de\ncontar con mayor informaci\u00f3n sobre los centros especializados\nen planificaci\u00f3n familiar, salud sexual y salud reproductiva\nconsiderando que hay poca informaci\u00f3n al respecto.\n\n\nSeg\u00fan la poblaci\u00f3n consultada, los altos costos de los\nmedicamentos y las dificultades para acceder a servicios\nespecializados de salud, especialmente para personas con\nenfermedades cr\u00f3nicas, han llevado a algunos refugiados a\nsolicitar permisos especiales para regresar a sus pa\u00edses de\norigen con el objetivo de atenderse medicamente en estos, una\nsituaci\u00f3n que podr\u00eda significar un riesgo para su seguridad.\n\n\nEn Dari\u00e9n, la situaci\u00f3n es a\u00fan m\u00e1s complicada, debido a\nlos problemas estructurales que enfrentan las comunidades.\nSiendo algunas de las dificultades reportadas por la poblaci\u00f3n:\nla falta de acceso a servicios de salud especializados, la\nfalta de personal en los centros de salud comunitarios y el\n\n\n\n\n\nSALUD Y SEGURIDAD SOCIAL\n\n\nEl general, la poblaci\u00f3n refugiada y solicitante de la\ncondici\u00f3n de refugiado en Ciudad de Panam\u00e1 report\u00f3 tener\nacceso al sistema nacional de salud, sobre todo en los centros\nde salud comunitarios para la obtenci\u00f3n de servicios de primer\nnivel. Mientras que para consultas especializadas, reportaron\nrecibir atenci\u00f3n en el Hospital Santo Tomas, y en la Caja del\nSeguro Social, en el caso de ser cotizantes.\n\n\nAunque la poblaci\u00f3n no report\u00f3 tener dificultades para\nacceder a los servicios de salud estatales, si mencionaron\nsentirse discriminados a la hora de recibir la atenci\u00f3n. La falta\nde conocimiento y el estigma ligado al estatus de refugiado\npuede, en ocasiones, afectar el acceso efectivo a servicios\nb\u00e1sicos incluyendo la salud, donde la calidad del servicio o la\ncalidez de \u00e9ste se ve afectada por el desconocimiento sobre la\ncondici\u00f3n y, en algunos casos, por la nacionalidad del paciente.\n\n\nLa poblaci\u00f3n refugiada y solicitante de asilo tambi\u00e9n report\u00f3\ntener dificultades para acceder a servicios especializados,\nespecialmente los relacionados a salud mental. Este servicio\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/200a6f95-f5ae-3041-b9bb-e7bc96f6206b/10073.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        10
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "ACCESO A LA VIVIENDA Y A LA TIERRA\n\n\nLa falta de acceso al sistema bancario y las dificultades\npara obtener y mantener un trabajo estable, conlleva una serie\nconsecuencias para la integraci\u00f3n de la poblaci\u00f3n refugiada y\nsolicitante de la condici\u00f3n de refugiado en Panam\u00e1, afectando\nentre otras cosas, su acceso a una vivienda digna, estable y con\ngarant\u00edas legales que los protejan de desalojos abusivos.\n\n\nLa dificultad de los refugiados y solicitantes de la condici\u00f3n\nde refugiado para acceder a una vivienda var\u00eda dependiendo\nde la condici\u00f3n o la etapa en el proceso en el que se encuentre,\nrecordando que un solicitante, a diferencia de un refugiado\nreconocido, no tiene derecho a un permiso de trabajo\nobstaculizando su generaci\u00f3n de ingresos.\n\n\nOtros estudios como el realizado por el Consejo Noruego\npara Refugiados llamado \u201cDerecho a vivienda, tierra y\npropiedad de mujeres desplazadas: Caso Panam\u00e1\u201d identifican\notras dificultades al momento de buscar una vivienda siendo\nla discriminaci\u00f3n uno de los principales problemas a los que\nse expone la poblaci\u00f3n refugiada y solicitante, d\u00e1ndose casos\ndonde se niega el arriendo de un cuarto o una casa porque son\nextranjeros, especialmente si son colombianos.\n\n\nTodos estos aspectos hacen que muchos, especialmente los\nsolicitantes, tengan que optar por viviendas\n\n\n\nen barriadas lejanas a la Ciudad de Panam\u00e1, con problemas\nde inseguridad y con acceso limitado a servicios p\u00fablicos.\nCon frecuencia las personas solicitantes que arriendan se ven\nexpuestas ante el incumplimiento de los contratos por parte\nde sus arrendatarios, as\u00ed como a desalojos arbitrarios en los\nque suele mediar la intimidaci\u00f3n dado su \u201cestatus migratorio\u201d.\n\n\nLa poblaci\u00f3n refugiada en la Provincia de Dari\u00e9n tambi\u00e9n\nidentific\u00f3 el acceso a tierras como una de sus principales\npreocupaciones ya que afecta de manera directa la generaci\u00f3n\nde ingresos y su seguridad alimentaria al ser una poblaci\u00f3n,\nen su mayor\u00eda, dedicada a la agricultura de supervivencia.\n\n\nEn este sentido la poblaci\u00f3n expuso no tener acceso al\nderecho posesorio o a la propiedad directa de parcelas, ya que\nse encuentran dentro de tierras comarcales o desconocen los\nprocedimientos para formalizar la propiedad de estas tierras,\nsiendo su \u00fanica opci\u00f3n el alquiler de parcelas peque\u00f1as para\nel cultivo.\n\n\nEsta situaci\u00f3n los expone a casos de abuso por parte de los\npropietarios de las tierras, los cuales en algunas ocasiones se\nhan aprovechado de su poder qued\u00e1ndose con parte o toda\nla cosecha.\n\n\n\nSEGURIDAD CIUDADANA Y ACCESO A LA JUSTICIA\n\n\nLa seguridad, en particular en relaci\u00f3n con las autoridades,\nha sido identificada por los refugiados y solicitantes como uno\nde los retos principales. El desconocimiento de las autoridades\nsobre los derechos de las personas refugiadas y solicitantes,\naunado al desconocimiento generalizado sobre documentos\nde identidad expedidos por el Servicio Nacional de Migraci\u00f3n\ny la ONPAR respectivamente, conduce a episodios de abuso\npor parte de las distintas entidades de seguridad.\n\n\nEl temor a la deportaci\u00f3n o la interrupci\u00f3n del proceso\nde solicitud de asilo en Panam\u00e1 hace que las personas se\nsientan d\u00e9biles y se abstengan de denunciar los casos de\nabuso, aumentando los riesgos de detenci\u00f3n arbitraria en los\nalbergues migratorios y, en algunas situaciones, los casos de\nextorsi\u00f3n para evitar la detenci\u00f3n.\n\n\nEL PROCESO DE PAZ EN COLOMBIA Y LA LEY DE V\u00cdCTIMAS Y RESTITUCI\u00d3N DE TIERRAS\n\n\nEn el 2011 el Gobierno de Colombia promulgo la Ley 1448\npor la cual se dictan medidas de atenci\u00f3n, asistencia y reparaci\u00f3n integral a las v\u00edctimas del conflicto armado interno de\nColombia. Dicha Ley reconoce la posibilidad de obtener cierta\nreparaci\u00f3n material y en algunos casos la restituci\u00f3n de sus\ntierras perdidas a raz\u00f3n del conflicto, de los nacionales colombianos que sufrieron violaciones y da\u00f1os como consecuencia\ndel conflicto armado. Esta reparaci\u00f3n podr\u00e1 ser solicitada tanto por las v\u00edctimas del conflicto que se quedaron en Colombia,\ncomo por los colombianos que residan en otros pa\u00edses, siempre y cuando cumplan con los requisitos establecidos por la\nLey 1448.\n\nLa remuneraci\u00f3n obtenida a trav\u00e9s de esta Ley, es un\nderecho de las v\u00edctimas del conflicto a los que podr\u00eda\nacceder poblaci\u00f3n solicitante y refugiada en Panam\u00e1. No\nobstante, la poblaci\u00f3n refugiada y solicitante manifest\u00f3 en\n\n\n\n\n\nEn las comunidades de Dari\u00e9n, en cambio, las personas\nidentificaron el uso de estupefacientes y el consumo del\nalcohol como una de las principales causas de violencia en las\ncomunidades, aunado a la falta de programas de prevenci\u00f3n\ndirigidos a j\u00f3venes.\n\n\nA esto tambi\u00e9n se le suma la situaci\u00f3n de seguridad que\nvive la regi\u00f3n de Dari\u00e9n y la comunidad de Puerto Obald\u00eda,\ndonde el control fronterizo y de movilizaci\u00f3n interna entre las\ncomunidades es muy estricto, produci\u00e9ndose enfrentamientos\nentre las entidades de seguridad y la poblaci\u00f3n. No obstante, a\npesar de que se han reportado casos de abusos, gran parte de la\npoblaci\u00f3n ex-PTH, ahora residente permanente, considera que la\nrelaci\u00f3n con las autoridades ha mejorado de manera considerable\ndespu\u00e9s de su regularizaci\u00f3n como residentes permanente.\n\n\nlas convocatorias del diagn\u00f3stico un gran desconcierto y\ndesinformaci\u00f3n sobre la Ley 1448 y el procedimiento para\nacceder a \u00e9sta, particularmente en Dari\u00e9n donde no hay\noficinas consulares de Colombia.\n\n\nPor otra parte, en comunidades rurales donde si hay\npresencia consular colombiana, como Puerto Obald\u00eda, el\nregistro ha sido lento debido al desconocimiento del proceso,\nel perfil de las personas que pueden ser reparadas y por\ntemor a que el proceso pueda exponerles a ser identificados y\nlocalizados por sus agentes persecutores.\n\n\nLa falta de acceso a servicios bancarios en Panam\u00e1 tambi\u00e9n\ndificulta el proceso de indemnizaci\u00f3n llevado a cabo por Colombia ya que solo se procede con la indemnizaci\u00f3n a trav\u00e9s\nde transferencias bancarias.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/200a6f95-f5ae-3041-b9bb-e7bc96f6206b/10073.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        11
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "4. Fortalecimiento institucional de ONPAR y capacitaci\u00f3n t\u00e9cnica a\nmiembros de la Comisi\u00f3n de Elegibilidad y personal de\nONPAR.\n\n\n_El actual panorama de asilo y las tendencias de la regi\u00f3n_\n_sugieren que la ONPAR debe ser fortalecida a nivel de recursos,_\n_particularmente el personal jur\u00eddico encargado de analizar_\n_las solicitudes de asilo. Una versi\u00f3n robustecida de ONPAR_\n_agilizar\u00eda la implementaci\u00f3n de medidas para la gesti\u00f3n de casos_\n_y distintas intervenciones de los solicitantes o refugiados ante la_\n_instituci\u00f3n. El fortalecimiento institucional de ONPAR incluye_\n_la elaboraci\u00f3n de protocolos internos que respondan a los vac\u00edos_\n_de protecci\u00f3n y obst\u00e1culos que dificultan la atenci\u00f3n eficaz_\n_de la poblaci\u00f3n ya sea en el inicio del procedimiento de asilo_\n\n_o consecuentes tr\u00e1mites administrativos como la renovaci\u00f3n_\n_de documentos, elaboraci\u00f3n de certificaciones, entre otros. La_\n_adecuaci\u00f3n de estos procedimientos tambi\u00e9n debe tomar en_\n_cuenta las necesidades especiales de la poblaci\u00f3n basados en un_\n_enfoque diferencial de g\u00e9nero, edad y diversidad._\n\n\n5. Elaboraci\u00f3n de procesos legales que permitan la expedici\u00f3n de\npermisos de trabajo provisionales para solicitantes de la\ncondici\u00f3n de refugiado y adecuaci\u00f3n de los actuales permisos\npara refugiados reconocidos con el fin de disminuir los\ncasos de discriminaci\u00f3n y abuso relacionados a su condici\u00f3n\nde refugiado.\n\n\n_El uso de c\u00f3digos para identificar los documentos de identidad_\n_de los refugiados es considerado una buena pr\u00e1ctica a nivel_\n_mundial que podr\u00eda ser adoptada en Panam\u00e1 con el fin de_\n_disminuir los casos de discriminaci\u00f3n generados por el uso_\n_del t\u00e9rmino \u201crefugiado\u201d en los documentos de identidad y_\n_permisos de trabajo. No obstante, es importante fortalecer estas_\n_medidas a trav\u00e9s de programas de sensibilizaci\u00f3n dirigidos_\n_al p\u00fablico general._\n\n\n6. Procurar la inserci\u00f3n de las personas refugiadas en las pol\u00edticas p\u00fablicas,\nprogramas y planes sociales del Estado, sin distinci\u00f3n a su\ncondici\u00f3n de refugiados reconociendo sus vulnerabilidades y\nnecesidades de protecci\u00f3n especiales.\n\n\n_Panam\u00e1 dio un importante paso al incluir un eje tem\u00e1tico_\n_sobre mujeres refugiadas en la \u201cPol\u00edtica P\u00fablica de Igualdad_\n_de Oportunidades para las Mujeres (PPIOM)\u201d, impulsado_\n_por el INAMU en el 2012, involucrando de esta manera_\n\n\n\n\n\nSITUACI\u00d3N ESPECIAL DE LAS MUJERES Y NI\u00d1AS REFUGIADAS Y SOLICITANTES DE LA CONDICI\u00d3N DE REFUGIADA\n\n\n\nLas mujeres refugiadas, como los hombres, est\u00e1n expuestas\na los distintos riesgos de protecci\u00f3n descritos a lo largo del\ndiagn\u00f3stico. No obstante, estas pueden sufrir de manera\ndiferente dichos riesgos, adem\u00e1s de sufrir otros muy espec\u00edficos\na su g\u00e9nero.\n\n\nLas mujeres refugiadas y solicitantes, principalmente en\nCiudad de Panam\u00e1, identificaron la discriminaci\u00f3n como el\nprincipal riesgo de protecci\u00f3n al que se enfrentan, en especial\nsi son mujeres colombianas. Esta discriminaci\u00f3n se manifiesta\nde distintas maneras, afectando tanto la b\u00fasqueda de trabajo,\ncomo el trato que pueden recibir a la hora de acceder a\nservicios p\u00fablicos.\n\n\nDurante la b\u00fasqueda de empleo, las mujeres est\u00e1n expuestas\na falsas promesas de trabajo que se convierten en situaciones\npeligrosas, sobre todo cuando buscan trabajo en internet para\npuestos laborales relacionados a la hoteler\u00eda y el servicio dom\u00e9stico.\n\n\nSon v\u00edctimas de violencia f\u00edsica y verbal, incluyendo\nsituaciones de abuso, donde se ven involucrados entidades\nde seguridad que las etiquetan inmediatamente como\ntrabajadoras sexuales y las exponen a situaciones de extorsi\u00f3n,\npago de \u201ccoimas\u201d o incluso insinuaciones sexuales. En general,\nlas mujeres reportaron no sentirse protegidas cuando son\ndetenidas por los agentes policiales y sienten temor de ser\nabordadas por la polic\u00eda en la calle.\n\n\nLas solicitantes de asilo y refugiadas tambi\u00e9n est\u00e1n expuestas\na violencia verbal y emocional durante sus jornadas de trabajo,\ny a situaciones de violencia de g\u00e9nero incluyendo violencia\nintrafamiliar y violencia sexual. Frente a estos tipos de abusos,\nlas mujeres reportaron no sentirse apoyadas, identificando\nla falta de protocolos de atenci\u00f3n para v\u00edctimas de violencia\nsexual como uno de los grandes vac\u00edos de protecci\u00f3n en\nCiudad de Panam\u00e1.\n\n\n\u00c9stas no cuentan con los conocimientos o los medios para\nresponder a estos tipos de violencia y destacan dificultades\n\n\n\na la hora de presentar las denuncias correspondiente,\nsiendo una de las m\u00e1s relevantes la falta de sensibilizaci\u00f3n\nde las autoridades, que no toman en serio las denuncias,\nle atribuyen la culpa a la v\u00edctima o no saben c\u00f3mo\nresponder a estos casos, re victimizando a la v\u00edctima.\n\n\nLa falta de medios econ\u00f3micos y de programas de asistencia\nlegal tambi\u00e9n significa que los casos, por lo general, queden\ninconclusos sin condenas.\n\n\nEn el caso de Dari\u00e9n las mujeres refugiadas y ex-PTH\nidentificaron la violencia intrafamiliar como uno de los\nproblemas m\u00e1s comunes en las comunidades. La respuesta\nbrindada a estos casos var\u00eda seg\u00fan la comunidad, report\u00e1ndose\ncasos donde las autoridades locales, como SENAFRONT y la\ncorregidur\u00eda, respond\u00edan correctamente y en otras desconoc\u00edan\nlos procedimientos legales y medidas de protecci\u00f3n relevantes.\n\n\nEn todas las comunidades se report\u00f3 una falta de acci\u00f3n de\nlas autoridades judiciales y el Ministerio Publico, considerando\nque la gran mayor\u00eda de estos casos se quedan sin respuestas\njudiciales debido a la falta de presencia de estas instituciones, la\nlejan\u00eda de las comunidades y los altos costos que representar\u00eda\npara la victima/sobreviviente dar seguimiento a su caso en las\nrepresentaciones locales del Ministerio Publico y juzgados.\n\n\nA esto se le suma la falta de conocimiento que tiene la\npoblaci\u00f3n en Dari\u00e9n, tanto refugiados como paname\u00f1os,\nsobre sus opciones de protecci\u00f3n fuera de la comunidad:\ncomo podr\u00edan ser los albergues para victimas/sobrevivientes\nde violencia domestica que maneja el Instituto Nacional de la\nMujer (INAMU) o las opciones de protecci\u00f3n que brinda la\nSecretaria Nacional de la Ni\u00f1ez, la Adolescencia y la Familia\n(SENNIAF) para los casos en que son v\u00edctimas ni\u00f1os, ni\u00f1as y\nadolescentes.\n\n\nLas mujeres entrevistadas identificaron el machismo y el\nalto consumo de alcohol como las principales causas de los\naltos niveles de violencia intrafamiliar en las comunidades\nde Dari\u00e9n.\n\n\n###### **Conclusiones**\n### y recomendaciones\n\nPara promover un proceso de dise\u00f1o de programas que\nresponda a los vac\u00edos de protecci\u00f3n y riesgos identificados\npor los refugiados y solicitantes de asilo, se recomiendan\nuna serie de medidas para mejorar el proceso legal (1-4), la\nintegraci\u00f3n local (5-8) y acciones para visibilizar la situaci\u00f3n\nde la poblaci\u00f3n refugiada como respuesta directa a la\ndiscriminaci\u00f3n y xenofobia sufrida (9-10).\n\n\n1. Garantizar el acceso al derecho de asilo y el respeto a los principios\nde protecci\u00f3n.\n\n\n_Se sugiere la elaboraci\u00f3n de protocolos de referencia de casos_\n_entre las autoridades receptoras primarias y la ONPAR para_\n_asegurar el acceso al territorio y al procedimiento, reducir_\n_el riesgo de devoluci\u00f3n al pa\u00eds de origen (refoulement) y la_\n_adecuada atenci\u00f3n a casos con necesidades especiales as\u00ed como_\n_tambi\u00e9n la protecci\u00f3n internacional de ni\u00f1os no acompa\u00f1ados_\n\n_o separados solicitantes. Esto incluye la implementaci\u00f3n de_\n_los acuerdos alcanzados en la Conferencia Regional sobre_\n_Migraci\u00f3n (CRM) relativos a la identificaci\u00f3n y referencia de_\n_perfiles dentro de los movimientos migratorios mixtos._\n\n\n_En el 2014 ONPAR inicio un proceso para fortalecer esta_\n_coordinaci\u00f3n desarrollando un Acuerdo de entendimiento entre_\n_la ONPAR, SENAFRONT, el Servicio Nacional de Migraci\u00f3n_\n_y la SENNIAF. No obstante este acuerdo debe ser fortalecido_\n_con la elaboraci\u00f3n de protocolos que definan claramente_\n_los procedimientos de identificaci\u00f3n, respuesta y referencia_\n_a estos casos._\n\n\n2. Reforma legal para adecuar las normas aplicables al\nprocedimiento de asilo nacional con los est\u00e1ndares\ninternacionales.\n\n\n_Entre otras cosas, esto incluye la adecuaci\u00f3n de la definici\u00f3n de_\n_refugiado tomando en cuenta la Declaraci\u00f3n y Plan de Acci\u00f3n_\n_de Brasilia para continuar avanzando en la aplicaci\u00f3n de la_\n_definici\u00f3n regional ampliada de refugiado, respondiendo as\u00ed a_\n_las necesidades de protecci\u00f3n internacional en la Regi\u00f3n._\n\n\n3. Garantizar un procedimiento de asilo justo y eficiente, que incorpore\nel debido proceso y tome en cuenta factores como la edad, el\ng\u00e9nero y la diversidad, incluyendo la utilizaci\u00f3n de int\u00e9rpretes\ncalificados y la adecuaci\u00f3n de procedimientos especiales para\nni\u00f1os, ni\u00f1as y adolescentes.\n\n\n\n26 Diagn\u00f3stico Participativo 2014-2015 Diagn\u00f3stico Participativo 2014-2015 27\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/200a6f95-f5ae-3041-b9bb-e7bc96f6206b/10073.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        12
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "_otras instituciones estatales en la protecci\u00f3n y b\u00fasqueda de_\n_integraci\u00f3n de la poblaci\u00f3n refugiada en el Pa\u00eds. La inclusi\u00f3n_\n_del tema \u201cRefugiados\u201d en Pol\u00edticas Publicas, planes, estudios_\n_y programas estatales ayuda a visibilizar la tem\u00e1tica frente_\n_a otras instituciones estatales que com\u00fanmente no se ven tan_\n_involucradas en la protecci\u00f3n legal de los refugiados, como_\n_si est\u00e1n la ONPAR, el Servicio Nacional de Migraci\u00f3n y_\n_SENAFRONT, lo que podr\u00eda facilitar el acceso de la poblaci\u00f3n_\n_refugiada y solicitante a otros servicios estatales a la vez que_\n_reconoce de manera expl\u00edcita las vulnerabilidades asociadas_\n_a esta condici\u00f3n._\n\n\n_De igual manera es importante promover el acceso de los_\n_refugiados y solicitantes a los programas de asistencia estatales a_\n_trav\u00e9s de la creaci\u00f3n de conciencia y promoci\u00f3n, incluyendo los_\n_programas de protecci\u00f3n desarrollados por el Instituto Nacional_\n_de la Mujer (INAMU), la Secretaria Nacional de la Ni\u00f1ez, la_\n_Familia y la Adolescencia (SENNIAF), entre otros programas_\n_sociales como los desarrollados por el Ministerio de Vivienda_\n_para el acceso a una vivienda digna._\n\n\n7. Garantizar medidas de recuperaci\u00f3n psicosocial como proceso de\nacompa\u00f1amiento a las personas que han sido v\u00edctimas\nde violencia.\n\n\n8. Desarrollo de procedimientos operativos est\u00e1ndar para la prevenci\u00f3n\ny respuesta interinstitucional de casos de violencia de g\u00e9nero,\nviolencia sexual y violencia dom\u00e9stica.\n\n\n_El desarrollo de programas de atenci\u00f3n para personas con_\n_necesidades especiales en ONPAR al igual que la coordinaci\u00f3n_\n_y referencia de casos a otros programas estatales especializados_\n_en el trabajo psicosocial podr\u00eda ayudar a mejor la atenci\u00f3n de_\n_refugiados y solicitantes victimas/sobrevivientes de situaciones de_\n_violencia extrema y tortura. La reorientaci\u00f3n del Departamento_\n_de Trabajo Social y Psicolog\u00eda de la ONPAR es fundamental_\n_para lograr el desarrollo de estos espacios de coordinaci\u00f3n y_\n_atenci\u00f3n integral para la poblaci\u00f3n refugiada en Panam\u00e1._\n\n\n9. Desarrollo de una campa\u00f1a nacional de sensibilizaci\u00f3n y concienciaci\u00f3n\nsobre los derechos y deberes de los refugiados, dirigida a\ninstituciones p\u00fablicas, privadas, medios de comunicaci\u00f3n y\np\u00fablico general.\n\n\n28 Diagn\u00f3stico Participativo 2014-2015\n\n\n\n10. Elaborar programas de sensibilizaci\u00f3n permanentes a trav\u00e9s de la\ninclusi\u00f3n del tema dentro de los programas de capacitaci\u00f3n\ndirigidos a autoridades receptoras primarias como el Servicio\nNacional de Migraci\u00f3n (SNM), el Servicio Nacional de\nFronteras (SENAFRONT) y la Polic\u00eda Nacional.\n\n\n_Mucho de los riesgos identificados en losl Diagn\u00f3sticos_\n_Participativos, tanto los anteriores como el actual, est\u00e1n_\n_relacionados a la falta de conocimiento por parte de las_\n_autoridades y del p\u00fablico en general sobre la condici\u00f3n de_\n_refugiado y la discriminaci\u00f3n relacionada a su nacionalidad,_\n_una situaci\u00f3n que puede afectar el trato que reciben los refugiados_\n_y solicitantes en instituciones p\u00fablicas, empresas privadas o_\n_del p\u00fablico en general, con impacto directo en la integraci\u00f3n_\n_de estas personas. Aunque en pasados a\u00f1os se han realizado_\n_programas de sensibilizaci\u00f3n dirigidos a instituciones p\u00fablicas_\n_como el Servicio Nacional de Migraci\u00f3n y SENAFRONT estas_\n_son actividades puntuales que necesitan ser fortalecidas con_\n_campa\u00f1as nacionales. La falta de campa\u00f1as y un programa_\n_nacional de sensibilizaci\u00f3n se mantienen como respuestas_\n_pendientes de otros diagn\u00f3sticos participativos._\n\n\n_La necesidad de contar con campa\u00f1as de sensibilizaci\u00f3n_\n_tambi\u00e9n ha sido reconocida en documentos estatales como_\n_la \u201cPol\u00edtica P\u00fablica de Igualdad de Oportunidades para_\n_las Mujeres (PPIOM)\u201d la cual establece en su Eje Tem\u00e1tico:_\n_Migraci\u00f3n, trata, refugiadas y privadas de libertad la necesidad_\n_de desarrollar campa\u00f1as de sensibilizaci\u00f3n e informaci\u00f3n a_\n_p\u00fablico general e implementar programas de sensibilizaci\u00f3n_\n_y supervisi\u00f3n dirigidos al funcionariado p\u00fablico relacionado_\n_a sus tr\u00e1mites._\n\n\n_La \u201cPol\u00edtica P\u00fablica de Igualdad de Oportunidades para las_\n_Mujeres (PPIOM)\u201d tambi\u00e9n reconoce la necesidad impulsar_\n_acciones de sensibilizaci\u00f3n y cambio de actitudes mis\u00f3ginas y_\n_discriminatorias para evitar la estigmatizaci\u00f3n y rechazo de las_\n_mujeres refugiadas y reconoce tambi\u00e9n la necesidad de establecer_\n_programas para la integraci\u00f3n socioecon\u00f3mica de \u00e9stas,_\n_entre otros. No obstante, esta herramienta de pol\u00edtica p\u00fablica_\n_requiere para su implementaci\u00f3n efectiva una coordinaci\u00f3n_\n_interinstitucional que garantice la inclusi\u00f3n del tema de manera_\n_transversal en todas las instituciones del estado._\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/200a6f95-f5ae-3041-b9bb-e7bc96f6206b/10073.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        13
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_11/raw/doc_11_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,990 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "**FRAGILITY AND POPULATION MOVEMENT IN AFGHANISTAN**\n# FRAGILITY AND POPULATION MOVEMENT IN AFGHANISTAN\n\n\n_Afghans have been enduring the adverse consequences of forced displacement for decades, way before_\n_the current \u201crefugee crisis\u201d gained the international spotlight with the surge of asylum seekers trying_\n_to escape conflict in Syria. Afghanistan is not only the country with the largest number of refugees_\n_in protracted exile, but it is also facing a sharp increase in displacement trends due to the escalation_\n_of internal conflict. It is estimated that 2.5 million registered Afghan refugees remain in neighboring_\n_countries, with a possibly equal number of undocumented migrants with similar protection needs in_\n_Iran and Pakistan_ _[1]_ _. Internal displacement is no less of a problem, with an estimated 1.2 million IDPs\u2019_\n_population potentially in need of humanitarian assistance._\n\n\n_Despite the continuous deterioration of the security situation within Afghanistan, a shrinking asylum_\n_space within the international community and changes in the geopolitical equilibrium at the regional_\n_level have recently spurred the return (mostly involuntary) of thousands of refugees and asylum from_\n_Pakistan and, in lower numbers, from Iran and Europe. As of September 7th, returns from Pakistan_\n_alone account for 98,000 registered and 135,000 undocumented Afghans; additional 400,000 are_\n_expected to return by the end of the year joining the growing stock of IDPs._\n\n\n_The need for managing and protecting displaced populations is taking place in a country lacking a_\n_system of safety nets and suffering from a severe economic crisis that has pushed at least 1.3 million_\n_additional Afghans into poverty, and triggered a three-fold increase in unemployment between 2012_\n_and 2014. Can Afghanistan manage the ongoing displacement challenge? Can the country absorb and_\n_successfully reintegrate displaced populations under the current security and economic circumstances?_\n_What priorities should the government and the international community address?_\n\n\n_To answer these questions it is necessary to assess Afghanistan\u2019s past experience with conflict and_\n_displacement, as well as the main structural challenges that shape the country\u2019s future._\n\n## **LEARNING FROM THE PAST**\n\n\n\n**Afghanistan has a long history of protracted international displacement.** Afghans\nfled by the millions\u2014mostly towards Iran and Pakistan\u2014in the aftermath of the Soviet\ninvasion of 1979; some returned to Afghanistan in the early 1990s following tightening\nof asylum conditions in receiving countries, while Afghanistan\u2019s civil war and the\nadvent of the Taliban reignited a new exodus to neighboring countries. The toppling\nof the Taliban regime in 2001 marked the beginning of a massive wave of returning\nAfghans. Between 2001 and 2015, UNHCR assisted the return of 4.8 million Afghans,\nand many more returned without official assistance. An estimated 20 percent of the\ntotal population currently residing in Afghanistan is made up of returnees.\n\n\n### Afghanistan has a long history of displacement.\n\n\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/64f35fee-a97c-32da-bd8d-46c676fc52a2/108733-REVISED-PUBLIC-WB-UNHCR-policy-brief-FINAL.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**FRAGILITY AND POPULATION MOVEMENT IN AFGHANISTAN**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n**Returns were concentrated in time and space,** thus posing a disproportionately large challenge to\nthe absorption capacity of some districts and provinces (Figure 1 and 2) [2] . While the local impact of a\nmassive influx of refugees, and the capacity to reintegrate, depends on a range of factors [3], one thing is\nclear: **local absorption capacity certainly has a limit.** Once the limit\u2014which could vary by time and area\ndepending on local circumstances\u2014is reached, competition over resources could trigger or reinforce\n\n\n### Local absorption capacity has a limit.\n\n\n\npre-existing causes of conflict, especially since institutions are weak. In 2007, districts\nthat had received the largest influx of returnees relative to the local population were\nmore likely to suffer higher insecurity (Figure 3) [4] . Over time, intensification of conflict\nand saturation of local absorption capacity have also determined the **progressive**\n**increase in secondary displacement among returnees.** Tellingly, the incidence of\ninternal displacement among the returnees who came back in 2013 is twice as high\ncompared to those who returned in 2002, despite the fact that returnees in 2002\nwere almost 50 times more than in 2013 (Figure 4).\n\n\n\n**Figure 3** **\u0007Incidence of returns and severity of**\n\n**conflict at the district level, 2007**\n\n\n\n**Figure 4** **\u0007Share of secondary displacement,**\n\n**by year of return**\n\n\n\n30\n\n\n25\n\n\n20\n\n\n15\n\n\n10\n\n\n5\n\n\n0\n\n\n\nLow Medium\n\n\n\n2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013\n\n\n\nMedium Medium\n\n\n\nHigh\n\n\n\nHigh\n\n\n\n25\n\n\n20\n\n\n15\n\n\n10\n\n\n5\n\n\n0\n\n\n\nLow\n\n\n\nYEAR OF RETURN\nCONFLICT SEVERITY\n\n\n\nSource: Authors\u2019 calculation based on UNHCR and SIOCC-UNDSS data\n\n\n2\n\n\n\nSource: Authors\u2019 calculation based on ALCS 2013\u201314\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Returns",
+          "confidence": 0.7257170081138611,
+          "start": 12,
+          "end": 13
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "AFGHANISTAN",
+          "confidence": 0.7930294275283813,
+          "start": 7,
+          "end": 8
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2007",
+          "confidence": 0.8623246550559998,
+          "start": 139,
+          "end": 140
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "returnees",
+          "confidence": 0.7943277955055237,
+          "start": 149,
+          "end": 150
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "UNHCR",
+          "confidence": 0.556352972984314,
+          "start": 339,
+          "end": 340
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2013",
+          "confidence": 0.5363711714744568,
+          "start": 315,
+          "end": 316
+        },
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "ALCS",
+          "confidence": 0.7894460558891296,
+          "start": 351,
+          "end": 352
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2013",
+          "confidence": 0.549712598323822,
+          "start": 315,
+          "end": 316
+        },
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/64f35fee-a97c-32da-bd8d-46c676fc52a2/108733-REVISED-PUBLIC-WB-UNHCR-policy-brief-FINAL.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**FRAGILITY AND POPULATION MOVEMENT IN AFGHANISTAN**\n\n\nThe increase in secondary displacement among returnees is a strong sign that the country\u2019s capacity\nto absorb and reintegrate additional inflows of returnees was already overstretched before the\nsurge of recent months\u2019 returns. While no data are currently available on the incidence of secondary\ndisplacement among post-2013 returns, there is no reason to believe trends will be reversed: **a higher**\n**number of returns from abroad will likely result in an increase of internal displacement.** In particular,\nthe continued deterioration of the security situation and the economic crisis in Afghanistan are likely\nto further challenge the reintegration of more recent returns. Moreover, the increased competition for\nhumanitarian assistance at the global level, together with a shrinking space for asylum internationally\nare likely to further complicate the management of Afghanistan\u2019s current displacement crisis.\n\n## **RECOGNIZING STRUCTURAL AND PRESENT** **CHALLENGES**\n\n\n\nAfghanistan\u2019s capacity to manage displacement has to be appraised in relation to\nthe country\u2019s structural and present challenges.\n\n\n**Fragility and conflict** are Afghanistan\u2019s first structural challenge. If peace and\nstability are pre-requisite for development to take place, Afghanistan is (still)\nmissing both. According to the Global Peace Index, in 2016 the country ranks the\nfourth less peaceful after Syria, South Sudan and Iraq. Moreover, decades of conflict\nhave had a destabilizing effect on the social cohesion of the country, exacerbating\nethnic divisions and weakening government institutions and rule of law. Similarly,\ndecades of conflict have depleted Afghanistan\u2019s physical and human capital which,\ndespite the progress achieved since 2001, will constrain its growth prospects for\ndecades to come.\n\n\n### A higher number of returns from abroad will likely result in an increase of internal displacement.\n\n\n\nSecond among its structural challenges is **Afghanistan\u2019s demographic profile.** With a total fertility rate\nof about 5.3 children per woman in 2014, [5] and a population growth rate of approximately 3 percent per\nyear between 2010 and 2015, Afghanistan has the youngest population in South Asia: **48 percent of**\n**Afghans are below the age of 15.** Equally, Afghanistan has the highest youth bulge [6] of any country in\nthe region, and the third highest youth bulge worldwide after Uganda and Chad: **more than one fifth**\n**of the adult population in Afghanistan is aged between 15 and 24.** A young and growing population\ncan be both a challenge and an opportunity, depending on a country\u2019s ability to invest in human capital\nand productively employ its growing labor force.\n\n\n\n50\n\n\n40\n\n\n30\n\n\n20\n\n\n10\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n0\n\n|re 5 Youth Dependency ratio and youth bulge in Central and South Asian Countries n (0\u201315)/(Total Pop.)  n (15\u201324)/(15+) 47.5|Col2|Col3|Col4|Col5|Col6|Col7|Col8|Col9|Col10|Col11|Col12|Col13|Col14|Col15|Col16|Col17|Col18|Col19|Col20|Col21|Col22|Col23|Col24|Col25|Col26|Col27|Col28|Col29|\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|\n|47.5<br>|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n|||37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|\n|||37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n|||37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n|||37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n|||||||||||||||25.9||||||<br>20.4<br>24.6<br>23.6<br>20.0<br>20.8|<br>20.4<br>24.6<br>23.6<br>20.0<br>20.8|<br>20.4<br>24.6<br>23.6<br>20.0<br>20.8|<br>20.4<br>24.6<br>23.6<br>20.0<br>20.8|<br>20.4<br>24.6<br>23.6<br>20.0<br>20.8|<br>20.4<br>24.6<br>23.6<br>20.0<br>20.8|<br>20.4<br>24.6<br>23.6<br>20.0<br>20.8|<br>20.4<br>24.6<br>23.6<br>20.0<br>20.8|<br>20.4<br>24.6<br>23.6<br>20.0<br>20.8|\n|||||||||||||||25.9||||||<br>20.4<br>24.6<br>23.6<br>20.0<br>20.8|<br>20.4<br>24.6<br>23.6<br>20.0<br>20.8|<br>20.4<br>24.6<br>23.6<br>20.0<br>20.8|<br>20.4<br>24.6<br>23.6<br>20.0<br>20.8|<br>20.4<br>24.6<br>23.6<br>20.0<br>20.8|||||\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n\n\nAfghanistan Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan India Turkmenistan Bhutan Sri Lanka\nPakistan Nepal Bangladesh Uzbekistan Maldives Kazakhstan Iran\n\n\nSources: ALCS 2013\u201314 and UNDESA (2015)\n\n\n\n3\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Global Peace Index",
+          "confidence": 0.9965128302574158,
+          "start": 239,
+          "end": 242
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Afghanistan",
+          "confidence": 0.9545104503631592,
+          "start": 156,
+          "end": 157
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2016",
+          "confidence": 0.778923511505127,
+          "start": 244,
+          "end": 245
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2016",
+          "confidence": 0.977360188961029,
+          "start": 244,
+          "end": 245
+        },
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Youth Dependency ratio",
+          "confidence": 0.8154852986335754,
+          "start": 520,
+          "end": 523
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Central and South Asian Countries",
+          "confidence": 0.9464062452316284,
+          "start": 527,
+          "end": 532
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "adult population",
+          "confidence": 0.5674074292182922,
+          "start": 464,
+          "end": 466
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "ALCS",
+          "confidence": 0.8603557348251343,
+          "start": 4415,
+          "end": 4416
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "UNDESA",
+          "confidence": 0.6498435139656067,
+          "start": 4420,
+          "end": 4421
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2015",
+          "confidence": 0.8039511442184448,
+          "start": 4422,
+          "end": 4423
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2013\u201314",
+          "confidence": 0.9488633871078491,
+          "start": 4416,
+          "end": 4419
+        },
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/64f35fee-a97c-32da-bd8d-46c676fc52a2/108733-REVISED-PUBLIC-WB-UNHCR-policy-brief-FINAL.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        2
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**FRAGILITY AND POPULATION MOVEMENT IN AFGHANISTAN**\n\n\nIn the case of Afghanistan, a young and growing population poses tremendous challenges to its public\nfinances, already stretched by limited revenues potential and massive security spending needs. Fiscal\nanalysis shows that, with the current population growth, Afghanistan will need to increase human\ncapital investments by 12 percent every year just to maintain current (inadequate) education outcomes.\nSimilarly, a growing labor force requires the labor market to absorb approximately 400 thousands\nnew entrants per year. Labor demand strong enough to be able to accommodate this many workers\nrequires sustained economic growth, which, at the moment, is beyond the country\u2019s capacity given its\nfragility and security constraints [7] .\n\n\n### Afghanistan is currently facing a deteriorating conflict and a severe economic crisis.\n\n\n\n**Afghanistan is currently facing a deteriorating conflict and a severe economic**\n**crisis** which further limits the fiscal space for development spending and targeted\nsocial assistance. Violence increased to a post-2001 high of 18,414 incidents and\n6,791 civilian casualties in 2015, while an increasing proportion of Afghanistan\u2019s\nterritory either fell under control of the anti-government elements or is currently\naffected by conflict. Decline in international spending due to the drawdown of\ninternational military forces, together with the deterioration of the security\nsituation, led to severe contraction in growth. GDP growth rate was 1.3 percent in\n2014 and 0.8 percent in 2015 compared to an average of 9.8 percent per year from\n2003 to 2012.\n\n\n\n**Figure 6** **\u0007Evolution of conflict and real per**\n\n**capita GDP growth**\n\n\n\nn [ Incident   ] n [ Civilian casualties]\n\n**\u2014** [ GDP growth   ] [Linear (GDP growth)]\n\n\n\n**Figure 7** **\u0007Youth unemployment**\n\n\n\n\n\n1,600\n\n\n1,200\n\n\n800\n\n\n400\n\n\n200\n\n\n\n2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015\n\n\n\n20\n\n\n\n60\n\n\n50\n\n\n40\n\n\n\n\n\n1,000\n\n\n900\n\n\n800\n\n\n700\n\n\n600\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n30\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n400\n\n\n300\n\n\n200\n\n\n100\n\n\n\n10\n\n\n5\n\n\n\n20\n\n\n10\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n0\n\n\n\n|n Rate  \u2014 Number 56.3|Col2|Col3|Col4|Col5|Col6|Col7|Col8|Col9|Col10|Col11|Col12|Col13|Col14|Col15|\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n|56.3|56.3|56.3|56.3|56.3|56.3|56.3|56.3|56.3|56.3|56.3|56.3|56.3|56.3|56.3|\n|56.3|56.3|56.3|56.3|56.3|56.3|56.3|56.3|56.3|||||||\n|41.0|41.0|41.0|41.0|41.0|41.0|41.0|41.0|41.0|||||||\n||||||34.3|34.3|34.3|34.3||37.1|37.1|37.1|37.1|37.1|\n||||||34.3|34.3|34.3|34.3||37.1|37.1|37.1|37.1||\n||||||||||||||||\n|27.9<br>22.5|27.9<br>22.5|27.9<br>22.5|27.9<br>22.5|||26.4|26.4|26.4||26.0<br>21.3|26.0<br>21.3|26.0<br>21.3|26.0<br>21.3||\n||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||\n|Total<br>Male<br>National<br>Female|Total<br>Male<br>National<br>Female|Total<br>Male<br>National<br>Female|Total<br>Male<br>National<br>Female|Total<br>Male<br>National<br>Female|Total<br>Male<br>Urban<br>Female|Total<br>Male<br>Urban<br>Female|Total<br>Male<br>Urban<br>Female|Total<br>Male<br>Urban<br>Female|Total<br>Male<br>Urban<br>Female|Total<br>Male<br>Rural<br>Female|Total<br>Male<br>Rural<br>Female|Total<br>Male<br>Rural<br>Female|Total<br>Male<br>Rural<br>Female|Total<br>Male<br>Rural<br>Female|\n\n\nSource: Authors\u2019 calculation based on UNHCR and SIOCC-UNDSS data Sources: Authors\u2019 calculation based on ALCS 2013\u201314\n\n\n**A sharp increase in poverty has accompanied the slowdown in growth.** Lacking any safety net system\nable to help households manage the economic downturn, the poverty rate increased from 36 percent in\n2011\u201312 to 39 percent in 2013\u201314. Similarly, labor market indicators deteriorated markedly, with a threefold increase in the unemployment rate over the same period. In 2013\u201314, the national unemployment\nrate was 22.6 percent and youth unemployment was 28 percent, representing one-half million male\nyouth unemployed, two-thirds of which were living in poor rural areas. **High male-youth unemployment**\n**is a concern because of its potential to increase poverty and conflict.** A growing body of literature\nrecognizes the direct correlation between youth bulges, lack of socio-economic inclusion and conflict.\nAn in-depth analysis of the effects of youth bulges on a variety of conflicts between 1950 and 2000\nshows that youth bulges can cause conflict. Further, the risk of domestic armed conflict from a youth\nbulge becomes more severe when combined with economic stagnation and institutional fragility [8] .\n\n\n4\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/64f35fee-a97c-32da-bd8d-46c676fc52a2/108733-REVISED-PUBLIC-WB-UNHCR-policy-brief-FINAL.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        3
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**FRAGILITY AND POPULATION MOVEMENT IN AFGHANISTAN**\n\n## **BROADEN THE PERSPECTIVE**\n\n\n\n**Conflict and narrow economic opportunities are familiar to Afghans.** For decades,\nAfghans have coped with shocks from protracted conflict, insecurity, and the inherent\nuncertainty associated with agricultural livelihoods [9] . Faced with frequent shocks\nand uncertainty, Afghan households have developed a set of risk management\nstrategies and risk coping mechanisms. **Traditionally, migration is at the core of**\n**the risk management strategies adopted by Afghan households.** Approximately\ntwo in three Afghans have changed residences during their lifetimes [10] . Over the past\ndecades, millions of households have moved internationally to seek shelter from\nconflict. In the process, they established a complex network of socio-economic\nties with neighboring countries, notably within Iran and Pakistan. Whole Afghan\nhouseholds have also abandoned rural areas in favor or urban areas in search of\ngreater security, better employment opportunities, and access to services. This\nhas contributed to exponential growth of major urban centers, especially Kabul,\nAfghanistan\u2019s capital city. Young, productive men have also migrated on their own\u2014\neither within Afghanistan or internationally\u2014to diversify income sources and support\ntheir households through remittances.\n\n\nGiven the complex and intertwined set of challenges faced by the Afghan\npopulation, motives of migration are hardly univocal. **Migration is part of a**\n**broader livelihood strategy at the household level aimed at counterbalancing**\n**insecurity and the lack of local employment opportunities.** Analysis shows [11] that\nhouseholds who feel more insecure in their district of residence are more likely to\nhave economic migrants abroad; but increase in real violence actually decreases\nthe likelihood to have a single member migrate, possibly due to increased need\nfor protection, or due to the fact that the entire households decides to move.\nHouseholds with better economic outcomes are less likely to rely on economic\nmigration; on the other hand, households with higher labor market vulnerability\nor with excess labor are more likely to diversify income sources through the\nmigration of a male household member.\n\n\n### Migration is at the core of the risk management strategies adopted by Afghan households. Afghan households rely on migration to counterbalance insecurity and lack of local employment opportunities.\n\n\n\nResults of the analysis also confirm that **economic migration is a strategy more easily accessible to**\n**households who can \u201cafford its costs\u201d.** In particular, having access to migration networks\u2014which is\nlikely for returnee households or households who have directly experienced economic migration\u2014\nreduces the costs of migration and increases the probability of household members working abroad.\nSimilarly, relatively richer households are more likely to have individual migrants as they are more\nlikely to have resources to support the costs of sending migrants abroad.\n\n\nThese findings suggest that, despite overall benefits, **migration might have less positive outcomes**\n**for the poorest and most vulnerable segments of the population.** International evidence shows that\nwhile migration reduces poverty, the poor tend to migrate less or to migrate to low-return destinations\nbecause they lack opportunities or resources (monetary or human capital) to take advantage of\nbetter paying jobs [12] . Moreover, **migration outcomes are likely to differ depending on the forced**\n**versus voluntary nature of the decision to move.**\n\n\nPoverty and protection needs are widespread and largely unmet in Afghanistan. With 39 percent\nof the population unable to satisfy basic food and non-food needs (that is, are \u201cpoor\u201d), and in the\nabsence of formal safety nets to help households cope with shocks, migration is seldom the result of\nvoluntary choice. Rather, migration is primarily the result of \u201c _push factors_ \u201d related to insecurity and\nlack of socio-economic opportunities. In this context, mobile households are not the only vulnerable\nsegments of the population, and the structural factors that cause poverty in the general population\noverlap with those afflicting migrants.\n\n\n5\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/64f35fee-a97c-32da-bd8d-46c676fc52a2/108733-REVISED-PUBLIC-WB-UNHCR-policy-brief-FINAL.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        4
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**FRAGILITY AND POPULATION MOVEMENT IN AFGHANISTAN**\n\n## **TAKE STOCK OF THE EVIDENCE**\n### Displaced populations\n\n\nForced displacement has been a tragic consequence of past decades of conflict in Afghanistan and it is\nlikely to connote its immediate future due to deteriorating security and regional equilibrium. Assessing\nthe welfare and integration of displaced households that are currently living in Afghanistan provides\nimportant insights on the challenges that future IDPs and prospective returnees might face.\n\n\n### Household mobility\u2014 irrespective of its forced and/ or economic motives\u2014is associated with urbanization.\n\n\n\n**Household mobility\u2014irrespective of its forced and/or economic motives\u2014**\n**is associated with urbanization** (Figure 8). IDP and returnee households\npredominantly settle in urban centers, joining a throng of economic migrants\nescaping rural areas in search for jobs and better access to health and education.\nIDP and returnee households are also more likely to have a literate household\nhead compared to households who did not move and to households who have\nmoved for economic reasons, reflecting better access to education returnees\nmight have had in asylum [13] . However, **IDPs\u2014similar to non-mobile households\u2014**\n**have very limited labor market outcomes.** Heads in IDP households are in fact\nmore likely to be either engaged in vulnerable forms of employment or to\nbe unemployed and/or underemployed. Returnee households are more likely\nto have a member working abroad and sending remittances, possibly taking\nadvantage of networks established while in asylum.\n\n\n\n**Figure 8** **\u0007Urbanization rate by households\u2019**\n\n**migration status**\n\n\n\n**Figure 9** **\u0007Poverty rate by households\u2019**\n\n**migration status**\n\n\n\n45\n\n\n\n50\n\n\n40\n\n\n30\n\n\n20\n\n\n\n40\n\n\n35\n\n\n30\n\n\n25\n\n\n20\n\n\n15\n\n\n\n10\n10\n\n5\n\n\n\n\n\nNo Move Returnee IDP Economic No Move Returnee IDP\n\n\n\nEconomic\n\nMigrant\n\n\n\nMigrant\n\n\n\nNotes: Vertical bar indicates the 95% confidence interval\nSources: Authors\u2019 calculation based on ALCS 2013\u201314 Sources: Authors\u2019 calculation based on ALCS 2013\u201314\n\n\nPoverty and vulnerability are widespread in Afghanistan. **Mobility\u2014irrespective of its forced and/or**\n**economic motives\u2014is associated with a lower risk of poverty** (Figure 9); returnee households have\na significantly lower poverty risk compared to non-mobile households [14] . The poverty rate among\nreturnee households is 29.4 percent compared to 40.5 percent among non-mobile households. This\nlower poverty risk, however, is entirely explained by differences in literacy and in urbanization, with\nrefugee households being more likely to have a literate household head and to live in an urban area\ncompared to non-mobile households.\n\n\n6\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "status*",
+          "confidence": 0.6741371154785156,
+          "start": 309,
+          "end": 311
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "Authors",
+          "confidence": 0.503505289554596,
+          "start": 372,
+          "end": 373
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Afghanistan",
+          "confidence": 0.9099381566047668,
+          "start": 398,
+          "end": 399
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2013\u201314",
+          "confidence": 0.7862109541893005,
+          "start": 378,
+          "end": 381
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2013\u201314",
+          "confidence": 0.6696279644966125,
+          "start": 378,
+          "end": 381
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "returnee households",
+          "confidence": 0.8406595587730408,
+          "start": 433,
+          "end": 435
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "ALCS",
+          "confidence": 0.7248950004577637,
+          "start": 377,
+          "end": 378
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "Authors",
+          "confidence": 0.6363537311553955,
+          "start": 372,
+          "end": 373
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Afghanistan",
+          "confidence": 0.6796689629554749,
+          "start": 398,
+          "end": 399
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2013\u201314",
+          "confidence": 0.6618226170539856,
+          "start": 378,
+          "end": 381
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2013\u201314",
+          "confidence": 0.8721612095832825,
+          "start": 378,
+          "end": 381
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "returnee households",
+          "confidence": 0.8418574929237366,
+          "start": 433,
+          "end": 435
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "poverty rate",
+          "confidence": 0.5454302430152893,
+          "start": 450,
+          "end": 452
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/64f35fee-a97c-32da-bd8d-46c676fc52a2/108733-REVISED-PUBLIC-WB-UNHCR-policy-brief-FINAL.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        5
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**FRAGILITY AND POPULATION MOVEMENT IN AFGHANISTAN**\n\n\n\nEvidence suggests that **literacy and human capital of mobile households are the**\n**main determinants of their socio-economic inclusion.** Further, the risk of poverty\nfor mobile households\u2014irrespective of the motives for migration\u2014depends on the\nsame factors that affect the risk of poverty in the Afghan population as a whole. As\na matter of fact, nearly 70 percent of the working age population in Afghanistan\nis illiterate, with illiteracy being widespread among the poorest segments of the\npopulation. Abysmally low literacy and overall poor human capital of the adult\npopulation are impediments to poverty reduction in Afghanistan. With conflict and\ndisplacement likely to continue in the near future, the relevant policy question is:\n**how does mobility, and forced displacement in particular, affect human capital**\n**accumulation?**\n\n\n### The risk of poverty for Afghan households - irrespective of their mobility status - depends on literacy and human capital.\n\n\n\nThere is no a priori answer to this question, as the effects depend on balance\nbetween improved access to services as mobile households settle in urban areas [15]\nand the _migration\u2019s costs_ (economic, social, psychological among them) that\ndecrease investment in human capital. Available evidence from the study of former refugees residing\nin Afghanistan in 2013\u201314 shows that **mobility during the decades before the fall of the Taliban**\n**had a positive effect on returnee literacy.** Despite progress during the last decade, Afghanistan\u2019s\neducation supply and quality lag\u2014that of neighboring countries. As a result, Afghans who were born\nabroad had better access to education than same-aged Afghans who did not move, particularly for\nolder returning Afghans.\n\n\n\n**Figure 10** **Afghans\u2019 literacy rate, by age and country of birth**\n\n~~n~~ [ Iran  ] ~~n~~ [ Pakistan  ] ~~n~~ [Afghanistan]\n\n90\n\n\n80\n\n\n70\n\n\n60\n\n\n\n50\n\n\n40\n\n\n30\n\n\n20\n\n\n10\n\n\n0\n\n\n\n\n[0\u20134] [5\u201319] [10\u201314] [15\u201319] [20\u201324] [25\u201329] [30\u201334] [35\u201339] [40\u201344] [45\u201349] [50\u201354] [55\u201359] [60\u201364] [65+]\n\n\n\nSources: Authors\u2019 calculation based on ALCS 2013\u201314\n\n\n**On the other hand, internal displacement has a negative impact on children\u2019s**\n**human capital accumulation.** In particular, regression analysis shows that children\naged six to 15 in IDP households are 8.5 percent less likely to be enrolled in school,\nand that such disadvantage is particularly severe for the first two years of residence\nin a new destination [16] . Such result is in line with findings of previous analysis [17]\nshowing that poorest and most vulnerable households in Afghanistan are more likely\nto adopt harmful coping strategies, such as selling their productive assets or taking\nchildren out of school, when hit by a shock. In this sense, displaced households\nmight be more vulnerable to the risk of engaging in harmful coping strategies in\nthe years immediately following displacement while adjusting their livelihoods to\nthe new destination.\n\n\n### Internal displacement has a negative impact on children\u2019s human capital accumulation.\n\n7\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "study of former refugees residing\nin Afghanistan",
+          "confidence": 0.579574465751648,
+          "start": 246,
+          "end": 253
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Afghanistan",
+          "confidence": 0.9992380142211914,
+          "start": 252,
+          "end": 253
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2013\u201314",
+          "confidence": 0.9981923699378967,
+          "start": 254,
+          "end": 257
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "former refugees",
+          "confidence": 0.7308467030525208,
+          "start": 248,
+          "end": 250
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "ALCS",
+          "confidence": 0.9657414555549622,
+          "start": 465,
+          "end": 466
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Afghanistan",
+          "confidence": 0.8501251935958862,
+          "start": 567,
+          "end": 568
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2013\u201314",
+          "confidence": 0.941964864730835,
+          "start": 466,
+          "end": 469
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "IDP households",
+          "confidence": 0.754716157913208,
+          "start": 509,
+          "end": 511
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/64f35fee-a97c-32da-bd8d-46c676fc52a2/108733-REVISED-PUBLIC-WB-UNHCR-policy-brief-FINAL.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        6
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**FRAGILITY AND POPULATION MOVEMENT IN AFGHANISTAN**\n\n### Individual economic migration\n\n\nThere is a paucity of data to study the importance of individual economic migration as a livelihood\nstrategy [18] . In line with anecdotal evidence and prevailing cultural norms, **economic migration is an**\n**exclusively male, and mostly youth, phenomenon.** The incidence of economic migration has varied\nover time, in line with the overall performance of the Afghan economy and its labor market (Figure 11).\nInterestingly, while migration has been increasing in recent years, the number of economic migrants in\n2013\u201314 was 40 percent less than that in 2007\u201308. This may be due to increased difficulty in accessing\nresources for leaving the country, or due to deterioration of economic opportunities in Iran [19], which\nnevertheless remains the most likely destination for Afghans seeking work abroad (Figure 12).\n\n\n\n**Figure 11** **\u0007Trends in individual economic**\n\n**migration**\n\n\nn [ # Migrant workers TOTAL ]\nn [ # Migrant workers ABROAD    ]\n~~n~~ [ Unemployment rate, male [25\u201350]]\n\n\n250,000\n\n15\n\n200,000\n\n\n\n**Figure 12** **\u0007Destination of migrant workers,**\n\n**by survey year**\n\n\n\nn [ Afghanistan   ] n [ Pakistan   ] n [ Iran]\n\nn [ Arabian Peninsula   ] n [ Other]\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n100\n\n\n90\n\n\n80\n\n\n70\n\n\n60\n\n\n50\n\n\n40\n\n\n30\n\n\n20\n\n\n10\n\n\n\n150,000\n\n\n100,000\n\n\n50,000\n\n\n0\n\n\n\n2007\u201308 2011\u201312 2013\u201314 2007 2011 2013\n\n\n\n10\n\n\n5\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n0\n\n\n\n0\n\n\n\n\n\nSource: Authors\u2019 calculation based on ALCS 2013\u201314, ALCS 2011\u201312 and\nNRVA 2007\u201308\n\n\n\nSource: Authors\u2019 calculation based on ALCS 2013\u201314, ALCS 2011\u201312 and\nNRVA 2007\u201308\n\n\n\nThe number of migrants choosing to migrate to \u201cOther\u201d farther away destinations (mainly Europe\nand Australia) is much higher in 2013 than it was in 2007, increasing from ten to almost 19 thousand,\nreflecting the deteriorating economic and political environment in neighboring countries and\npossibly the availability of new migration routes spurred by the Syrian refugee crisis. **Afghans**\n**choosing to seek employment opportunities abroad come predominantly from rural areas,** a\ntendency that has been strengthening along with deterioration of economic and security conditions\noutside urban centers.\n\n\n### Economic migration is a male-youth phenomenon.\n\n8\n\n\n\n**The education profile of migrants reflects the predominance of \u201cpush factors\u201d**\n**in migration choices, with no evidence of positive self-selection** [20] . In particular,\nusing the male population aged 15\u201335 as a reference, migrants have less education\nwhether they come from rural or urban areas. Such findings could also suggest\nthat migration options and networks are more broadly available for low-skilled\noccupations [21], particularly in neighboring Iran and Gulf Countries. **Migrants choosing**\n**farther destinations are more likely to be educated.** Sorting into destinations based\non migrants\u2019 education is likely to reflect higher costs associated with the journey\n(transport, smugglers, time\u2026) as well as the skills and connections necessary to obtain\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "ALCS",
+          "confidence": 0.6738075613975525,
+          "start": 318,
+          "end": 319
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "survey",
+          "confidence": 0.5412333607673645,
+          "start": 250,
+          "end": 251
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "Authors",
+          "confidence": 0.6409329175949097,
+          "start": 313,
+          "end": 314
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Afghanistan",
+          "confidence": 0.5859713554382324,
+          "start": 256,
+          "end": 257
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2013\u201314",
+          "confidence": 0.5033194422721863,
+          "start": 301,
+          "end": 304
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2011\u201312",
+          "confidence": 0.5664069652557373,
+          "start": 298,
+          "end": 301
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "workers TOTAL",
+          "confidence": 0.8326883316040039,
+          "start": 198,
+          "end": 200
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "ALCS",
+          "confidence": 0.5685502290725708,
+          "start": 323,
+          "end": 324
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "Authors",
+          "confidence": 0.6042183637619019,
+          "start": 313,
+          "end": 314
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2007\u201308",
+          "confidence": 0.5664543509483337,
+          "start": 295,
+          "end": 298
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "workers TOTAL",
+          "confidence": 0.8400651216506958,
+          "start": 198,
+          "end": 200
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/64f35fee-a97c-32da-bd8d-46c676fc52a2/108733-REVISED-PUBLIC-WB-UNHCR-policy-brief-FINAL.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        7
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**FRAGILITY AND POPULATION MOVEMENT IN AFGHANISTAN**\n\n\nthe information needed to complete the journey and settle/find employment once the destination is\nreached. In 2007\u201308, 44 percent of migrants choosing destinations other than Iran, Pakistan, or the\nArabian Peninsula had secondary or tertiary education. Such results are in line with data collected in the\nrecent _Joint IDP Profiling Services_ initiative, according to which male Afghans arriving in Greece in early\n2016 were mostly single youth possessing higher education.\n\n\n\n**Table 1** **\u0007Monthly labor income in Afghanistan**\n\n**and remittances from abroad**\n\n\n**MEAN** **MEDIAN**\n\n\n**Agriculture** 5930 4800\n\n\n**Manufacturing** 7496 7000\n\n\n**Construction** 6516 5600\n\n\n**Services** 9927 8000\n\n\n**Public sector** 14368 12000\n\n\n**Health and Education** 9402 7000\n\n\n**Remittances** 8581 5833\n\n\n**Total (excl. remittances)** **8529** **7000**\n\n\nNotes: labor income has been computed for male workers aged [14,35]\nSource: Authors\u2019 calculation based on ALCS 2013\u201314\n\n\n\n**Figure 13** **\u0007Distribution of remittances,**\n\n**by sending country**\n\n\n\nAfghanistan\n\n\nPakistan\n\n\nIran\n\n\nUAE\n\n\nOther Gulf\n\n\nEurope\n\n\nAustralia\n\n\nOther\n\n\n0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000\n\nMONTHLY REMITTANCES, AFS\n\n\nNote: The figure shows a box and whiskers plot. The box ranges from\nthe 25th percentile to the 75th percentile. The line in the middle of the\nbox shows the median. The two lines on either side of the box extend to\nminimum and maximum values, excluding outliers. The dots indicate outliers.\nSource: Authors\u2019 calculation based on ALCS 2013\u201314\n\n\n\nThe importance of individual economic migration in Afghan households\u2019 livelihood\nstrategy is confirmed by data on remittances. **The vast majority of economic**\n**migrants send remittances.** In 2013\u201314, 80 percent of Afghans who left the\nhousehold seeking employment opportunities abroad had sent remittances,\ncontributing on average about 70 percent of total labor income to their household.\nSuch numbers are striking, especially when considering that the information on\nremittances is collected on household members who left just during the year\npreceding the survey. This implies that over a very short period of time the vast\nmajority of migrants were able to find employment and contribute to the welfare\nof their households in Afghanistan. **Remittances\u2019 amounts vary by destination**\n**country,** reflecting differences in the education profile of migrants and in local\nwages. On average, remittances are approximately 8600 Afs per month, in line with\nthe average monthly income of a male worker below the age of 35 in Afghanistan.\nHowever, the median value of remittances is 20 percent lower, confirming the\nprevalence of low-skilled workers among migrants.\n\n\n### The vast majority of economic migrants send remittances. Remittances\u2019 amounts vary by destination country.\n\n9\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "2013",
+          "confidence": 0.8961203098297119,
+          "start": 221,
+          "end": 222
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "\u2019",
+          "confidence": 0.7102039456367493,
+          "start": 216,
+          "end": 217
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Afghanistan",
+          "confidence": 0.7937172055244446,
+          "start": 246,
+          "end": 247
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "\u201314\n\n\n\n*",
+          "confidence": 0.8743844032287598,
+          "start": 222,
+          "end": 225
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "\u201314\n\n\n\n*",
+          "confidence": 0.6906347870826721,
+          "start": 222,
+          "end": 225
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "workers aged",
+          "confidence": 0.6776162981987,
+          "start": 206,
+          "end": 208
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "ALCS",
+          "confidence": 0.6564828753471375,
+          "start": 338,
+          "end": 339
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "Authors",
+          "confidence": 0.787973165512085,
+          "start": 333,
+          "end": 334
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Afghanistan",
+          "confidence": 0.9919359683990479,
+          "start": 470,
+          "end": 471
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2013\u201314",
+          "confidence": 0.9387698769569397,
+          "start": 339,
+          "end": 342
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2013\u201314",
+          "confidence": 0.882445752620697,
+          "start": 339,
+          "end": 342
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "Afghan households",
+          "confidence": 0.6156575679779053,
+          "start": 349,
+          "end": 351
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/64f35fee-a97c-32da-bd8d-46c676fc52a2/108733-REVISED-PUBLIC-WB-UNHCR-policy-brief-FINAL.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        8
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**FRAGILITY AND POPULATION MOVEMENT IN AFGHANISTAN**\n\n## **MAIN MESSAGES AND RECOMMENDATIONS**\n\n\nAfghanistan is facing a severe security and economic crisis. This crisis is taking place in a context\nalready complicated by an explosive mix of population growth, excess labor supply, widespread\npoverty, poor governance and lack of government capacity and financial resources to respond to\nthe needs of its citizens. While Afghans have traditionally relied on migration to navigate times of\ndistress, their options are shrinking at a time when needed the most; Iran is slowly recovering from\nan economic crisis, Pakistan is imposing strict border controls, and Europe is struggling with a\npolitical backlash resulting from the large mixed-migratory flows from Syria, Afghanistan and SubSaharan Africa.\n\n\nThe available evidence suggests that \u201cpush factors\u201d are the primary motivators for migration both\nwithin and outside Afghanistan. While migrants might choose where to go depending on available\nopportunities, leaving is more of a necessity, rather than a choice. With rampant unemployment and\nescalating conflict, security and economic motives are two sides of the same coin. Can these flows\nbe contained or reversed? The past history of displacement and returns to Afghanistan indicates the\npotential destabilizing effects of increasing population pressure on limited local resources. Given the\nincrease in secondary displacement among more recent waves of returnees, local absorption capacity\nappears already overtaxed. Additional returns from Pakistan, Iran, or Europe are likely to result in\nfurther secondary displacement, unemployment, and instability. _In such context, the_ _**international**_\n_**community should increase its advocacy to ensure voluntary, safe, dignified, and phased returns**_\n_as further population shocks could undermine civilian and military aid efforts and further escalate_\n_conflict. Peace and stability in Afghanistan are not only a pre-requisite for its development but also_\n_a global public good. If no country or institution alone has the capacity to help Afghanistan manage_\n_its displacement issues,_ _**the international community as a whole should mobilize resources to assist**_\n_**those countries such as Pakistan and Iran who have shared the burden for decades, conditioned**_\n_**on continued willingness to host refugee populations.**_ _Similarly, the international community as a_\n_whole should support the development of_ _**legal channels for temporary economic migration and**_\n_**more effective management of asylum requests**_ _which could help Afghanistan overcome its current_\n_crisis and ease its structural challenges._\n\n\nSecond, evidence suggests that factors affecting poverty risks among mobile households are the\nsame as the one observed in the general population. As Afghanistan\u2019s context is characterized by\nwidespread poverty and the degree of destitution among mobile households is not dissimilar from\nthe rest of the population, _**targeting needs should be preferred to targeting categories,**_ _not to_\n_create perceptions of unequal treatment that may exacerbate social fragmentation._ Such approach\nmight be particularly important as the government and international community move towards\na developmental approach in the management of displacement issues. As the fiscal space for\nsocial spending shrinks, _**consolidation of interventions should contribute to the development of a**_\n_**nationwide safety net system**_ aimed at helping household cope with risk and, possibly, at reducing\nsome of the causes of displacement.\n\n\n10\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/64f35fee-a97c-32da-bd8d-46c676fc52a2/108733-REVISED-PUBLIC-WB-UNHCR-policy-brief-FINAL.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        9
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**FRAGILITY AND POPULATION MOVEMENT IN AFGHANISTAN**\n\n\nThird, _**particular attention should be devoted to minimizing any possible negative impact of**_\n_**displacement on human capital investments for future generations.**_ Evidence suggests that the\nlack human capital is the main determinants of the risk of poverty and that households are likely\nto respond to negative shocks by pulling children out of school. While a comprehensive safety net\nsystem could help mitigating such negative consequences, bureaucratic barriers such as residency\nstatus and transferability of school records could negatively impact displaced or, more generally,\nmobile populations. Moreover, given the prevalence of mobility and displacement in Afghanistan,\ngreater focus should be devoted to investing in functional literacy and skill-development programs\nthat display greater portability and provide displaced individuals with greater access to economic\nopportunities, wherever they end up being.\n\n\nLastly, evidence suggests that migrants will likely continue to converge towards Afghanistan\u2019s urban\ncenters as they seek better security, jobs, and services. _Urbanization trends require immediate_\n_intervention by local authorities to increase shelter capacity and access to services. National and_\n_provincial authorities should further recognize that, in the medium and long term,_ _**local integration in**_\n_**urban and semi-urban areas is inevitable and it requires adequate planning**_ _to maximize the returns_\n_from urban agglomeration, for example by investing in connectivity and accessibility, while ensuring_\n_access to basic services and a minimum standard of living._\n\n## **ENDNOTES**\n\n\n1. UN Population Movement Bulletin, Issue 5, 7 Sept, 2016.\n\n\n2. Based on UNHCR assisted returns data, 78 percent of returns occurred between 2002 and 2006. Districts with\n\u201chigh\u201d intensity of returns in 2007 had an average share of returnees over the population of 70 percent.\n\n\n3. Returnee households are considered to have \u201creintegrated\u201d successfully if they were able to return to the place\nwhere they used to live before displacement, and if they were able to achieve\u2014on average\u2014socio-economic\noutcomes and legal protection in line with those of the local/host population. Household ability to reintegrate\nsuccessfully might depend on several factors related to the social, economic and institutional conditions prevailing\nin the host community, as well as on the physical, human and social capital accumulated by returnee households\nwhile in asylum, and on their returns \u201con arrival\u201d.\n\n\n4. According to NRVA 2007\u201308 data, approximately 85 percent of Afghan households reported to have been\nnegatively affected by a \u201clarge influx of returnees\u201d during the 12 months preceding the survey.\n\n\n5. Demographic and Health Survey (2014).\n\n\n6. The youth bulge is defined as the share of youth aged 15\u201324 to the adult population aged 15+.\n\n\n7. Growth is expected to remain slow over coming years, reflecting weak demand, increasing output gap and the\nlack of fiscal space for increasing social transfers in order to boost short-term economic growth (World Bank,\n2016; _Navigating Risk and Uncertainty in Afghanistan_ ).\n\n\n8. Urdal, Henrik. 2004. _The devil in the demographics: The effect of youth bulges on domestic armed conflict,_\n1950\u20132000. Social Development Papers: Conflict and Reconstruction Paper 14.\n\n\n9. Low-technology, rain-fed agriculture remains the country\u2019s primary sector of employment, especially for its\npoorest and more vulnerable people.\n\n\n10. ALCS 2013\u201314.\n\n\n11. Probability of having a household member abroad was estimated using a Linear Probability model and ALCS\n2013\u201314 data. Controls include a dummy indicating whether the household feels insecure in the district of\nresidence; the number of security incidents per thousand inhabitants in the district of residence; composition and\nemployment outcomes at the household level; dummy variables identifying returnee households, IDP households\nand households migrating for economic reasons; a dummy indicating urban residence and quintiles of a wealth\nindex to proxy for household welfare.\n\n\n11\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "UNHCR assisted returns data",
+          "confidence": 0.9968850016593933,
+          "start": 305,
+          "end": 309
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "UNHCR",
+          "confidence": 0.6330993175506592,
+          "start": 305,
+          "end": 306
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "Returnee households",
+          "confidence": 0.9711676239967346,
+          "start": 345,
+          "end": 347
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "NRVA 2007\u201308 data",
+          "confidence": 0.6182636022567749,
+          "start": 456,
+          "end": 461
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "NRVA",
+          "confidence": 0.6275922060012817,
+          "start": 456,
+          "end": 457
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2007\u201308",
+          "confidence": 0.8600698709487915,
+          "start": 457,
+          "end": 460
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "Afghan households",
+          "confidence": 0.9013358354568481,
+          "start": 466,
+          "end": 468
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Demographic and Health Survey",
+          "confidence": 0.9119037389755249,
+          "start": 492,
+          "end": 496
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "survey",
+          "confidence": 0.6606869697570801,
+          "start": 488,
+          "end": 489
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2014",
+          "confidence": 0.8464213013648987,
+          "start": 497,
+          "end": 498
+        },
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "Afghan households",
+          "confidence": 0.6707085371017456,
+          "start": 466,
+          "end": 468
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "ALCS",
+          "confidence": 0.5324335098266602,
+          "start": 640,
+          "end": 641
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "district of\nresidence",
+          "confidence": 0.8293467164039612,
+          "start": 680,
+          "end": 683
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2013\u201314",
+          "confidence": 0.8630182147026062,
+          "start": 641,
+          "end": 644
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2013\u201314",
+          "confidence": 0.8996961116790771,
+          "start": 641,
+          "end": 644
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "returnee households",
+          "confidence": 0.6634578108787537,
+          "start": 710,
+          "end": 712
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "primary"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/64f35fee-a97c-32da-bd8d-46c676fc52a2/108733-REVISED-PUBLIC-WB-UNHCR-policy-brief-FINAL.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        10
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**FRAGILITY AND POPULATION MOVEMENT IN AFGHANISTAN**\n\n\n12. The World Bank, 2011. _Migration and poverty. Towards better opportunities for the poor._\n\nWashington DC.\n\n\n13. The share of literate household heads in IDP households decreases to 43 percent when excluding secondary\n\ndisplacement, i.e. returnees who have been internally displaced upon return and that were IDPs at the time of the\nsurvey.\n\n\n14. Due to a relatively small sample size, the poverty rates of IDP and economic migrant households are estimated\n\nwith lower precision, and therefore the difference in poverty rate compared to non-mobile households is not\nstatistically significant.\n\n\n15. Afghanistan is characterized by sizeable differences in access to education between rural (low) and urban areas\n\n(high). As detailed in the 2015 _Poverty Status Update_ report, urban/rural differences account for approximately\none-third of differences in education opportunities for Afghan children.\n\n\n16. Probability of being in school was estimated using a Probit model and ALCS 2013\u201314 data. Controls include sex\n\nand age of the child; composition and employment outcomes at the household level; dummy variables identifying\nreturnee households and IDP households; whether the household has migrants and receives remittances; quintiles\nof a wealth index; urban residence and quintiles of an index indicating the severity of conflict in the district of\nresidence.\n\n\n17. Ministry of Economy, World Bank (2015): _Afghanistan Poverty Status_ Update.\n\n\n18. Some useful information can be obtained from the three available and comparable rounds of the Afghanistan\n\nLiving Conditions Survey (ALCS) conducted in 2013\u201314, 2011\u201312 and 2007\u201308 which collect information about\nhousehold members who have left the household in the 12 months preceding the survey and about their reason\nfor migrating.\n\n\n19. The collapse in oil prices had a strong impact on Iran\u2019s economy, further magnified by international sanctions\n\nimposed in 2011. Limited employment opportunities, a weaker exchange rate, and progressive reduction in\nuniversal subsidies (notably electricity) might have affected the returns of economic migrants choosing Iran as a\ndestination, and possibly the choice of trying to reach Europe.\n\n\n20. Unfortunately, information on the education and employment outcomes of individual migrants was only collected\n\nin 2007\u201308, so it is not possible to assess any changes in migrants\u2019 profiles.\n\n\n21. In 2007\u201308, migrants abroad were mostly employed as day laborers (82 percent) and salaried employees in the\n\nprivate sector (12 percent).\n\n\n12\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "survey",
+          "confidence": 0.509604811668396,
+          "start": 74,
+          "end": 75
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "survey",
+          "confidence": 0.6235514879226685,
+          "start": 74,
+          "end": 75
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "AFGHANISTAN",
+          "confidence": 0.9808158278465271,
+          "start": 7,
+          "end": 8
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2015",
+          "confidence": 0.9103357195854187,
+          "start": 145,
+          "end": 146
+        },
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "IDP households",
+          "confidence": 0.7808371782302856,
+          "start": 42,
+          "end": 44
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "2015 _Poverty Status Update_ report",
+          "confidence": 0.5051984786987305,
+          "start": 145,
+          "end": 150
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "report",
+          "confidence": 0.5116549730300903,
+          "start": 149,
+          "end": 150
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "AFGHANISTAN",
+          "confidence": 0.8481816649436951,
+          "start": 7,
+          "end": 8
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2015",
+          "confidence": 0.8890922665596008,
+          "start": 145,
+          "end": 146
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2013\u201314",
+          "confidence": 0.7959499955177307,
+          "start": 183,
+          "end": 186
+        },
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "ALCS 2013\u201314 data",
+          "confidence": 0.578078031539917,
+          "start": 182,
+          "end": 187
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "Survey",
+          "confidence": 0.8061382174491882,
+          "start": 285,
+          "end": 286
+        },
+        "acronym": {
+          "text": "ALCS",
+          "confidence": 0.5900102257728577,
+          "start": 182,
+          "end": 183
+        },
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Afghanistan",
+          "confidence": 0.8773321509361267,
+          "start": 282,
+          "end": 283
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2013\u201314",
+          "confidence": 0.6400142312049866,
+          "start": 183,
+          "end": 186
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2013\u201314",
+          "confidence": 0.9718841314315796,
+          "start": 183,
+          "end": 186
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "returnee households",
+          "confidence": 0.6744822263717651,
+          "start": 209,
+          "end": 211
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Afghanistan\n\nLiving Conditions Survey",
+          "confidence": 0.9376978278160095,
+          "start": 282,
+          "end": 286
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "Survey",
+          "confidence": 0.8660212159156799,
+          "start": 285,
+          "end": 286
+        },
+        "acronym": {
+          "text": "ALCS",
+          "confidence": 0.6013534069061279,
+          "start": 182,
+          "end": 183
+        },
+        "author": {
+          "text": "Ministry of Economy, World Bank",
+          "confidence": 0.5048984289169312,
+          "start": 250,
+          "end": 256
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Afghanistan",
+          "confidence": 0.9671674370765686,
+          "start": 282,
+          "end": 283
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2013\u201314",
+          "confidence": 0.8396807312965393,
+          "start": 183,
+          "end": 186
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "household members",
+          "confidence": 0.6598542332649231,
+          "start": 306,
+          "end": 308
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/64f35fee-a97c-32da-bd8d-46c676fc52a2/108733-REVISED-PUBLIC-WB-UNHCR-policy-brief-FINAL.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        11
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_12/raw/doc_12_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,224 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "# **ADVOCACY NOTE** A CRUCIAL NEED TO REINFORCE ACTIONS AGAINST THE GROWING THREAT OF EXPLOSIVE DEVICES (ED) IN NIGER\n\n\u2018\u2018Access to populations in need in Niger is more than necessary for all actors to relieve the suffering of\nthese populations. However, the use of explosive devices is increasing day by day, making access to\npopulations difficult and continues to increase the number of dead and injured. Particular attention\nshould be paid to incidents related to explosive devices.\u2019\u2019\n\n\n_July 2023_\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1613bd92-5065-4c7e-9263-f115ffea540f/1.%20Advocacy%20note%20MineAction%20-%20Niger_Eng.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**I.** **Background**\nNiger is marked by a humanitarian situation characterized by attacks by non-state armed groups\n(NSAG) in Liptako Gourma and in the Lake Chad basin, which have caused forced displacement of\naround 700,000 people [1] including 400,000 internally displaced people (IDP) [2], 251,760 refugees and\n50,377 returnees. Despite efforts made by the State and its partners, the security situation remains\nworrying in certain localities in the regions of Tillabery, Tahoua, Diffa and Maradi. In 2022,\napproximately 3,821 protection incidents were recorded in these 4 regions and affected 18,408\npeople. During the first half of 2023, the protection situation did not improve despite a lull observed\nin some regions. More than 1,800 protection incidents were recorded from January to June 2023 (on\naverage 955 incidents per quarter in 2022 against 934 during 2023). It is deploring to see the continued\nabuses by the NSAGs including theft and extortion of property, physical assaults, kidnappings, murders,\nsexual violence but also incidents related to explosive devices (ED). The security situation and military\noperations in neighboring countries (Mali, Burkina Faso, Nigeria), the continuation of NSAG incursions\ninto Niger, the intensification of operations by the Defense and Security Forces (DFS) are all factors\nthat predict the persistence of ED threats in Niger.\n\nIndeed, since 2022, the threat of ED has continued to rage in the regions of Tillabery and Diffa. The\nProtection Cluster recorded approximately 55 ED-related incidents in 2022 (a 34% increase compared\nto 2021). From January to June 2023, 32 ED incidents were reported, representing more than half of\nthe total number of incidents reported in 2022. It is also worth highlighting the problem of food\ninsecurity which affects several departments, including those affected by ED threats. In fact, faced with\nthe effects of food insecurity, communities could resort to negative coping strategies, in particular that\nof venturing into areas affected by ED in search of means of subsistence or even collecting scrap metal\nfound on explosive remnants of war for resale.\nIn the face of a growing threat from ED, mine action capacities remain limited in Niger. Considerable\nchallenges exist both in programmatic actions and in the coordination of interventions. No mine action\ncoordination mechanism is functional either at the national level or in the regions affected by ED. This\nmakes it difficult to strategically harmonize, target and prioritize mine action interventions. The\nobjective of this note is to strengthen advocacy with state authorities, the various technical and donor\npartners in order to support mine action in Niger, protect communities and humanitarian actors\nagainst the risks associated with ED and enable them to enjoy their fundamental rights and freedoms.\n\n\n## **II. Analysis of the evolution of ED incidents and their impact**\n\nFrom the last quarter of 2022 to the 2nd\n\nreported mainly in the regions of Tillabery\n\n**2023, which indicates a worrying increase**\n**in the threat of ED in Niger.** This threat\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n1 UNHCR Niger montlhy PoC statistics, Juin 2023\n2 Population displacement statistics, Ministry of Humanitarian Action and Disaster Management, july 2023\n3 Source : National Commission for the Collection and Control of Illicit Weapons (CNCCAI in french)\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1613bd92-5065-4c7e-9263-f115ffea540f/1.%20Advocacy%20note%20MineAction%20-%20Niger_Eng.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "affects civilians more than the military, especially\nin the 2nd quarter of 2023 **(Ref graph3).** In fact,\nthe reported ED incidents resulted in a total of\n132 victims [4] and survivors, most of whom (52%)\nwere civilians (killed or injured). **The percentage**\n**of civilians killed is almost double that of military**\n**killed,** which puts the threat on civilians more\nthan militaries and reflects the need to\nstrengthen mine action within affected\ncommunities.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nThe affected regions are those of Tillabery (areas of the 3 borders in the Sahel) and Diffa (region of the\nLake Chad basin). **The Tillabery region has 7 affected** departments [5] **, and the Diffa region has 4** . A\nminimal number of ED incidents have also been reported in 3 other regions: Agadez, Dosso and Niamey\n( **Ref graph2** ). This situation puts more than 200,000 people at risk of ED incidents in the affected areas.\n\n\nThe prevalence of ED incidents\nrelated also leads to\nrestrictions on the mobility of\ncivilian populations on the\nroads to weekly markets, and\nthe main cities of\ncommunities/departments.\nAbout 36% of those\ninterviewed [6] say they\nencounter mobility constraints\ndue to the activities of the\nNSAGs and military operations.\nThis indicator varies from one\nregion to another. In the\nregions of Diffa and Tillabery,\n56% of respondents say they\nencounter mobility\nconstraints, one of the main\nreasons being the presence of\nED. This considerably limits the periodic supply of households with means of subsistence and\nnecessities in addition to the fear and psychological distress that the unpredictable presence of ED\ninflicts on communities. It is also important to highlight that of the 11 affected departments in the\n\nDiffa and Tillab\u00e9ry regions, 9 (82%) are also affected by the food insecurity [7] . This could exacerbate\n\n\n4 CNCCAI: The disaggregation by sex and age of the 2023 data for victims is not yet available. However, according\nto the Child Protection Sub-cluster, the Child Protection Working Group of the Diffa region recorded 18 child\nvictims of ED in 2022, the majority of whom (74%) are girls who went to look for firewood.\n5 Departments of: Torodi, Say,T\u00e9ra, Tillab\u00e9ry, Gotheye, Bankilar\u00e9 et, Ouallam (r\u00e9gion de Tillab\u00e9ry) et Diffa,\nBosso, Main\u00e9 et N'Guingmi (region de Diffa)\n6 According to protection monitoring data (P21) 1st semester 2023.\n7 [Food security situation, june 2023](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1FVzLNdVSeHdrZ0iNx0YUf2LNiWuO5gBS/view?usp=sharing)\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "ED incidents",
+          "confidence": 0.8726436495780945,
+          "start": 28,
+          "end": 30
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Tillabery",
+          "confidence": 0.7032327055931091,
+          "start": 110,
+          "end": 111
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.7063620090484619,
+          "start": 13,
+          "end": 14
+        },
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "civilians",
+          "confidence": 0.6191365718841553,
+          "start": 1,
+          "end": 2
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "2023 data for victims",
+          "confidence": 0.7146441340446472,
+          "start": 382,
+          "end": 386
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": {
+          "text": "disaggregation by sex and age",
+          "confidence": 0.8502408266067505,
+          "start": 375,
+          "end": 380
+        },
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.9895362854003906,
+          "start": 382,
+          "end": 383
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2022",
+          "confidence": 0.7770628333091736,
+          "start": 416,
+          "end": 417
+        },
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "protection monitoring data",
+          "confidence": 0.9276497960090637,
+          "start": 476,
+          "end": 479
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Diffa region",
+          "confidence": 0.6392384171485901,
+          "start": 407,
+          "end": 409
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.8096809387207031,
+          "start": 382,
+          "end": 383
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2022",
+          "confidence": 0.9220906496047974,
+          "start": 416,
+          "end": 417
+        },
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1613bd92-5065-4c7e-9263-f115ffea540f/1.%20Advocacy%20note%20MineAction%20-%20Niger_Eng.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        2
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "the needs of communities to intensify their coping strategies including livelihood-seeking activities that\nmay expose them to ED risks.\n\n\nThe application of the [sanctions in progress following the coup in Niger could increase the cost of living](https://ecowas.int/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/COMMUNIQUE-FINAL-CINQUANTE-ET-UNIEME-SOMMET-EXTRAORDINAIRE-DE-LA-CONFERENCE-DES-CHEFS-DETAT-ET-DE-GOUVERNEMENT-DE-LA-CEDEAO-SUR-LA-SITUATION-POLITIQUE-AU-NIGER.pdf)\nand increase the vital needs of already vulnerable populations. This new situation would expose them\nto the risk of enrolment in NSAG for a salary and therefore increase the capacity of NSAG in the\ninstallation of ED. In addition, the population could intensify their survival strategies by engaging in\nseveral types of activities to adapt to the high cost of living, including the search for subsistence in\nareas potentially affected by ED. Consequently, an upsurge in ED incidents is very likely.\n\n## **III. Major challenges in mine action interventions (MA)**\n\n\n\nGraph4. Mapping of MA activities, 30 juin 2023\n\n\n\nIn January 2023, the\nProtection Cluster\nlaunched a joint initiative\nof mapping protection\ninterventions including\nmine action. The analysis\nof the data resulting from\nthis mapping combined\nwith the analysis of the\nprotection response\nmonitoring data brought\nout the observation\nbelow:\n\n\n\n\n                                  - Only two protection\nactors have interventions\nin MA which cover only a\nfew localities of the 7 out\nof 11 departments affected by ED **(Ref Graph4 & Gaph2).** 4 out of 11 departments most\naffected by EE remain without any LAM intervention.\n\n  - There is a **major gap in Explosive Device Risk Education** (EDRE) interventions in several regions\naffected by ED (Diffa, Tillabery, Dosso, Agadez and Niamey).\n\n  - A critical lack of victim assistance is observed in all 11 affected departments ( **Ref Graph5)** .\n\n  - Existing capacities have only made it possible to reach about 3,000 people [8] with EDRE\n[activities, representing only 2% of target set in the Humanitarian Response Plan (HRP).](https://reliefweb.int/report/niger/niger-plan-de-reponse-humanitaire-mars-2023)\n\n  - 98% of the HRP LAM target is therefore not reached. In addition, 77% of the funding\nrequirement MA interventions is not met.\n\n  - There is also a **lack of human resources dedicated to coordination at national and regional**\n**level, prevention, and assistance to victims** . The MA Sub-Cluster has not been functional since\nthe withdrawal of UNMAS in early November 2022, despite joint coordination efforts between\nCNCCAI and MA actors including Mines Advisory Group (MAG) and Humanity and Inclusion (HI)\n\n\n8 Dashboard des r\u00e9alisations de protection, cluster Protection, Avril 2023\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "protection response\nmonitoring data",
+          "confidence": 0.9943178296089172,
+          "start": 191,
+          "end": 195
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": {
+          "text": "mapping protection\ninterventions including\nmine action",
+          "confidence": 0.6086829304695129,
+          "start": 169,
+          "end": 175
+        },
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "MA",
+          "confidence": 0.5096026659011841,
+          "start": 151,
+          "end": 152
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.6564216613769531,
+          "start": 156,
+          "end": 157
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.5682000517845154,
+          "start": 159,
+          "end": 160
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "protection\nactors",
+          "confidence": 0.6036807298660278,
+          "start": 204,
+          "end": 206
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1613bd92-5065-4c7e-9263-f115ffea540f/1.%20Advocacy%20note%20MineAction%20-%20Niger_Eng.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        3
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "  - **A** **considerable** **need** **for**\n**capacity building in MA** for\nthe various actors including\nfrontline humanitarian actors,\nMA committees is urgently\nneeded.\n\n## **IV. Key recommandations**\n\n\nWith the growing threat of ED, low geographic coverage, and low diversity of MA interventions, more\nthan 200,000 people living in ED affected areas remain unassisted and at increased risk of becoming\nvictims of ED. It is crucial to invest more in mine action to ensure communities receive gender and ageappropriate ED risk education. It would also enable communities to adopt safe behavior and access\ninclusive care services for victims and survivors of ED. Therefore, it is essential to strengthen the\nfollowing aspects:\n\n\n1. Advocacy: Strengthen advocacy with the various decision-makers (state authorities, technical\n\nand donor partners) for the return of UNMAS to Niger\n\n\n2. Coordination: Identify additional technical partners who can support MA coordination at\n\nnational and regional level (particularly in Tillabery and Diffa regions)\n\n\n3. Resource mobilization: In 2023 approximately 77% of MA funding requirement is not met. It is\n\nessential to mobilize an amount of USD [9] 2,000,000 to scale up MA coordination, data collection\nby the CNCCAI, ED risks education (EDRE), assistance to victims, demining and MA capacity\nbuilding.\n\n\n4. Collaboration: Strengthen collaboration with the various actors to have a map of the areas\n\naffected by ED in order to intensify training sessions, awareness-raising with both communities\nand frontline humanitarian actors\n\n\n9 [plan de reponse humanitaire/HRP 2023-2025, Niger](https://reliefweb.int/report/niger/niger-plan-de-reponse-humanitaire-mars-2023)\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1613bd92-5065-4c7e-9263-f115ffea540f/1.%20Advocacy%20note%20MineAction%20-%20Niger_Eng.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        4
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**Annexe 1 :** Some examples of ED incidents _(Sources : Protection Monitoring, CNCCAI, INSO)_\n\n\n      - _**20/03/23:**_ _around 8 a.m. the vehicle of a local authority jumped on an improvised_\n_explosive device at Bougoum, Torodi-Niamey axis (Tillabery region)_\n\n\n      - _**25/05/23 :**_ _ED in Ngouba at the passage of shepherds. 3 dead and cows killed (Diffa region)_\n\n\n      - _**16/06/23**_ _: EE against a DFS vehicle in Chetima Wango. 7 dead / 4 injured (Diffa region)_\n\n\n      - _**6/06/23 :**_ _an explosive remnant of war (ERW) exploded against 03 children in the village of_\n_Agali (department/municipality of Dosso). The victims who were looking for scrap metal_\n_probably confused the device with a piece of iron that they hit with a hammer. The explosion_\n_caused the death of a child and 02 injured. It should be noted that the CNCCAI Regional Branch,_\n_which is supposed to coordinate EDRE activities at the regional level, does not exist in Dosso_\n_due to a lack of resources._\n\n\n      - _**4/07/2023 :**_ _around 9 a.m., an Improvised Explosive Device (IED) allegedly exploded at the_\n_passage of vehicle of the DFS Niyya operation, who were patrolling on the Torodi-Makalondi_\n_axis, not far from the village of Niaktir\u00e9 (Tillab\u00e9ry region)._\n\n\n**Annex 2:** Testimonials from a Victim of EE Incidents\n\n\n**Story of a 45-year-old man, victim of explosive devices, Toumour commune/Diffa region**\n\n\n_I remember that Sunday, 7_ _[th ]_ _May 2023, Toumour market day. We had agreed with the late Mr. XX to go and get some_\n_food. Early in the morning we took the road. Mr. XX was in front with a cow in his possession that he intended to sell._\n_He was in front of me since the beast kept running. Between us there was about 20 meters. Approximately 2 kilometers_\n_from the community of Toumour we heard a loud unbearable detonation. I fainted waking up only a few hours later at_\n_the Toumour health center. I didn't even know how I had been transported there. I was half deaf. It was then that I was_\n_told that Mr. XX died as well as the cow. I learned that he was the one who stepped on the explosive device. It was truly_\n_terrifying. There was blood running all over my body from the explosion. I was scared, but the nurses made me_\n_understand that it was not that serious._\n\n\n_I was taken care of at the Toumour health center. But later I heard that my family paid money for my treatment. I_\n_overcame my trauma on my own. However, I recognize that, the health workers treated me well and tried to cheer me_\n_up. From the beginning until today, I have made efforts to forget this disaster. But it's not easy. I can't stop thinking_\n_about the late Mr. XX. In addition, today, I am half deaf because I only have one functional ear. I need a consultation to_\n_regain full hearing._\n\n\n_My neighbors come regularly to try to encourage me and help me to hold on. And today thank God, everything is back_\n_to normal except for the slight hearing impairment that bothers me. We have not received awareness raising about ED._\n_Perhaps, this is due to the fact that we lived a little away from Toumour. Currently I am afraid because in such situations_\n_neither my family nor our herd is safe. Everyone is exposed. Especially us nomads who are constantly on the move._\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1613bd92-5065-4c7e-9263-f115ffea540f/1.%20Advocacy%20note%20MineAction%20-%20Niger_Eng.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        5
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "This advocacy note was developed with the contribution of several actors including:\n\n\n**PROCAP Niger**,\n\n\n**Regional Protection**\n\n**Cluster (WCARO)**\n\n### **FOR MORE INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT**\n\n\n**Aliou MAIGA,** Protection Cluster Coordinator in Niger\n\n\n**Email :** [maiga@unhcr.org](mailto:maiga@unhcr.org)\n\n\n**Zabeirou Alfazazi**, Protection Cluster Co Coordinator in Niger\n\n\nEmail : alfazazizabeirou@gmail.com\n\n\n**Daniel Thiombiano**, Protection Cluster Co facilitator in Niger\n\n\n**Email** :daniel.thiombiano@drc.ngo\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1613bd92-5065-4c7e-9263-f115ffea540f/1.%20Advocacy%20note%20MineAction%20-%20Niger_Eng.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        6
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_13/raw/doc_13_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,72 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "# **NOTE DE PLAIDOYER** UN BESOIN CRUCIAL DE RENFORCEMENT DES ACTIONS CONTRE LA MENACE CROISSANTE DES ENGINS EXPLOSIFS (EE) AU NIGER\n\n\u2018\u2018L\u2019acc\u00e8s aux populations dans le besoin au Niger s\u2019av\u00e8re plus que n\u00e9cessaire pour l\u2019ensemble des\nacteurs afin de soulager les souffrances de ces populations. Cependant, l\u2019utilisation de plus en plus\nnombreuse des engins explosifs s\u2019amplifie de jour en jour, rendent difficile l\u2019acc\u00e8s aux populations et\ncontinue de grossir le nombre de morts et de bless\u00e9s. Une attention particuli\u00e8re doit \u00eatre port\u00e9e\nvers les incidents li\u00e9s aux engins explosifs \u2019\u2019\n\n\n_Juillet 2023_\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/246cc207-af41-430c-9600-6cdbb5448cbf/1.%20Note%20plaidoyer%20Lutte%20AntiMines%20-%20Niger_FR.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**I.** **Contexte**\nLe Niger est marqu\u00e9 par une situation humanitaire caract\u00e9ris\u00e9e par les attaques des groupes arm\u00e9s\nnon \u00e9tatiques (GANE) dans le Liptako Gourma et dans le bassin du lac Tchad ayant provoqu\u00e9 le\nd\u00e9placement forc\u00e9 d\u2019environ 700 000 personnes [1] dont 400,000 personnes d\u00e9plac\u00e9es internes (PDI) [2],\n251 760 r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s et 50,377 retourn\u00e9s. Malgr\u00e9 les efforts d\u00e9ploy\u00e9s par l\u2019Etat et ses partenaires, la\nsituation s\u00e9curitaire reste pr\u00e9occupante dans certaines localit\u00e9s des r\u00e9gions de Tillab\u00e9ry, Tahoua, Diffa\net Maradi. En 2022, environ de 3,821 incidents de protection ont \u00e9t\u00e9 enregistr\u00e9s dans ces 4 r\u00e9gions et\nont affect\u00e9es 18,408 personnes. Au cours du 1 [er] semestre de 2023, la situation de protection ne s\u2019est\npas am\u00e9lior\u00e9e en d\u00e9pit d\u2019une accalmie constat\u00e9e dans certaines r\u00e9gions. Plus de 1,800 incidents de\nprotection ont \u00e9t\u00e9 enregistr\u00e9s de janvier \u00e0 juin 2023 (en moyenne 955 incidents par trimestre en 2022\ncontre 934 courant 2023). Il est \u00e0 d\u00e9plorer la poursuite des exactions par les GANE y compris les vols\net extorsion de biens, les agressions physiques, les enl\u00e8vements de personnes, les assassinats, les\nviolences sexuelles mais \u00e9galement des incidents li\u00e9s aux engins explosifs (EE). La situation s\u00e9curitaire\net les op\u00e9rations militaires dans les pays voisins (Mali, Burkina Faso, Nigeria), la poursuite des\nincursions des GANE au Niger, l\u2019intensification des interventions des Forces de d\u00e9fense et de s\u00e9curit\u00e9\n(FDS) sont autant des facteurs qui laissent pr\u00e9sager la persistance des menaces des EE au Niger.\n\nEn effet, depuis 2022, la menace des engins explosifs n\u2019a cess\u00e9 de s\u00e9vir dans les r\u00e9gions de Tillab\u00e9ry et\nDiffa. Le Cluster Protection a enregistr\u00e9 environ 55 incidents li\u00e9s aux EE en 2022 (soit une\naugmentation de 34% compar\u00e9 \u00e0 2021). De janvier \u00e0 juin 2023, 32 incidents EE ont \u00e9t\u00e9 rapport\u00e9s\nrepr\u00e9sentant plus de la moiti\u00e9 du nombre total des incidents rapport\u00e9s en 2022. Il convient aussi de\nsouligner la probl\u00e9matique de l\u2019ins\u00e9curit\u00e9 alimentaire qui affecte plusieurs d\u00e9partements y compris\nceux touch\u00e9s par les menaces des EE. En effet, face aux effets de l\u2019ins\u00e9curit\u00e9 alimentaire les\ncommunaut\u00e9s pourraient recourir \u00e0 des strat\u00e9gies de survie n\u00e9gative notamment celle de s\u2019aventurer\ndans des zones affect\u00e9es par les EE \u00e0 la recherche de moyens de subsistance voire de r\u00e9colter de la\nferraille trouvable sur des restes explosifs de guerre pour la revendre.\nFace \u00e0 cette menace croissante des EE, les capacit\u00e9s d\u2019actions de lutte anti-mines restent limit\u00e9es au\nNiger. Des d\u00e9fis consid\u00e9rables existent tant dans les actions programmatiques que dans la coordination\ndes interventions. Aucun m\u00e9canisme de coordination de lutte anti-mines n\u2019est fonctionnel ni au niveau\nnational ni dans les r\u00e9gions affect\u00e9es par les EE. Cela rend difficile l\u2019harmonisation, le ciblage et la\npriorisation strat\u00e9giques des interventions LAM. L\u2019objectif de cette note est de renforcer le plaidoyer\naupr\u00e8s des autorit\u00e9s \u00e9tatiques, les diff\u00e9rents partenaires techniques et financiers afin de soutenir les\nactions de lutte anti-mines au Niger, prot\u00e9ger les communaut\u00e9s et les acteurs humanitaires contre les\nrisques li\u00e9s aux EE et leur permettre de jouir davantage de leurs droits et libert\u00e9s fondamentaux.\n\n## **II. Analyse de l\u2019\u00e9volution des incidents li\u00e9s aux EE et leur impact**\n\nDu dernier trimestre 2022 au 2eme trimestre de 2023, 56 incidents [3] EE ont \u00e9t\u00e9 rapport\u00e9s\nprincipalement dans les r\u00e9gions de Tillab\u00e9ry et Diffa [4] . Compar\u00e9 au 1er trimestre 2023, on peut noter\nque le nombre d\u2019incidents EE a doubl\u00e9 au 2eme trimestre de 2023, ce qui traduit une augmentation\npr\u00e9occupante de la menace des EE au Niger .\n\n\n1 UNHCR Niger montlhy PoC statistics, Juin 2023\n2 Statistiques de Mouvement de population, minist\u00e8re de l\u2019Action Humanitaire et Gestion de catastrophes,\njuillet 2023\n3 Source : Commission Nationale pour la Collecte et le Contr\u00f4le des Armes Illicites (CNCCAI)\n4 Voir aussi le Briefing INSO et Pr\u00e9sentation CM CMCOORD, juin 2023\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/246cc207-af41-430c-9600-6cdbb5448cbf/1.%20Note%20plaidoyer%20Lutte%20AntiMines%20-%20Niger_FR.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "Cette menace affecte davantage les civils que les\nmilitaires surtout au 2eme trimestre de 2023 ( **R\u00e9f**\n**fig3** ). En effet, les incidents EE rapport\u00e9s on fait au\ntotal 132 victimes [5] et survivants dont plus de la\nmajorit\u00e9 (52%) sont des personnes civiles (tu\u00e9s ou\n### bless\u00e9s). Le pourcentage des civils tu\u00e9s est presque le double de celui des militaires tu\u00e9s, ce qui fait peser la menace davantage sur les civiles que les militaires et traduit la n\u00e9cessit\u00e9 de\n\nrenforcer les actions de lutte anti-mines au sein des\ncommunaut\u00e9s.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nLes r\u00e9gions affect\u00e9es sont celles de Tillab\u00e9ry (zones\ndes 3 fronti\u00e8res dans le Sahel) et de Diffa (r\u00e9gion du\n\nd\u00e9partements [6] affect\u00e9s, et la r\u00e9gion de Diffa en\ncompte 4 . Un nombre minime d\u2019incident EE ont \u00e9t\u00e9\naussi rapport\u00e9e dans 3 autres r\u00e9gions : Agadez, Dosso\net Niamey (R **\u00e9f Fig2** ). Cette situation met \u00e0 risque plus\nde 200,000 personnes vivant dans les zones affect\u00e9es par les EE.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nLa pr\u00e9valence des incidents li\u00e9s aux EE entra\u00eene \u00e9galement des restrictions sur la mobilit\u00e9 des\npopulations civiles sur les axes routiers vers les march\u00e9s hebdomadaires, et les chefs-lieux des\n\n\n\n\n\ncommunes/d\u00e9partements.\nEnviron 36% des personnes\ninterview\u00e9es [7] disent rencontrer\ndes difficult\u00e9s de mobilit\u00e9 du fait\ndes activit\u00e9s des GANE et des\nop\u00e9rations militaires. Cet\nindicateur varie d\u2019une r\u00e9gion \u00e0 une\nautre. Dans les r\u00e9gions de Diffa et\nTillab\u00e9ry, 56% des personnes\ninterrog\u00e9es d\u00e9clarent rencontrer\ndes restrictions de mobilit\u00e9 dont\nl\u2019une des principales raisons \u00e9tant\nla pr\u00e9sence des EE **.** Cela limite\nconsid\u00e9rablement le ravitaillement\np\u00e9riodique des m\u00e9nages en\nmoyens de subsistances et biens\n\n\n\n5 Commission Nationale pour la Collecte et le Contr\u00f4le des Armes Illicites (CNCCAI). La d\u00e9sagr\u00e9gation par sexe\net \u00e2ge des donn\u00e9es 2023 pour les victimes n\u2019est pas encore disponible. Cependant selon le Sous cluster Protection\nde l\u2019Enfance, le Groupe de travail Protection de l\u2019Enfance de la r\u00e9gion de Diffa a consolid\u00e9 18 enfants victimes\ndes EE en 2022 dont la majorit\u00e9 (74%) sont des filles qui allaient chercher le bois de chauffe.\n6 Il s\u2019agit des d\u00e9partements de: Torodi, Say,T\u00e9ra, Tillab\u00e9ry, Gotheye, Bankilar\u00e9 et, Ouallam (r\u00e9gion de Tillab\u00e9ry)\net Diffa, Bosso, Main\u00e9 et N'Guingmi (region de Diffa)\n7 Selon les donn\u00e9es du monitoring de protection (P21) au premier semestre 2023\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/246cc207-af41-430c-9600-6cdbb5448cbf/1.%20Note%20plaidoyer%20Lutte%20AntiMines%20-%20Niger_FR.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        2
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "de premi\u00e8re n\u00e9cessit\u00e9 en plus de la peur et psychose que la pr\u00e9sence impr\u00e9visible des EE installe au\nsein des communaut\u00e9s.\n\n\nIl est important de noter aussi que sur les 11 d\u00e9partements affect\u00e9s dans les r\u00e9gions de Diffa et\n### Tillab\u00e9ry, 9 (82%) sont aussi touch\u00e9es par la crise de l\u2019ins\u00e9curit\u00e9 alimentaire [8] . Ceci pourrait\n\nexacerber les besoins des communaut\u00e9s \u00e0 intensifier leur strat\u00e9gie de survie y compris des activit\u00e9s \u00e0\nla recherche de moyens de subsistance pouvant les exposer aux risques d\u2019EE. L\u2019application des\n[sanctions](https://ecowas.int/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/COMMUNIQUE-FINAL-CINQUANTE-ET-UNIEME-SOMMET-EXTRAORDINAIRE-DE-LA-CONFERENCE-DES-CHEFS-DETAT-ET-DE-GOUVERNEMENT-DE-LA-CEDEAO-SUR-LA-SITUATION-POLITIQUE-AU-NIGER.pdf) en cours suite au coup d\u2019\u00e9tat au Niger pourrait augmenter le cout de la vie et accroitre les\nbesoins vitaux des populations d\u00e9j\u00e0 vuln\u00e9rables. Cette situation nouvelle les exposerait \u00e0 des risques\nd\u2019enr\u00f4lement aux GANE moyennant une solde et par cons\u00e9quent augmentera la capacite des GANE\ndans la pose des EE. De surcroit, la population pourrait intensifier leurs strat\u00e9gies de survie en\ns\u2019adonnant \u00e0 plusieurs types d\u2019activit\u00e9s pour s\u2019adapter \u00e0 la chert\u00e9 du cout de la vie y compris la\nrecherche de subsistance dans des zones potentiellement affect\u00e9es par les EE. On pourra ainsi assister\n\u00e0 une recrudescence des incidents des EE.\n\n## **III. D\u00e9fis majeurs dans les interventions en lutte anti-mines (LAM)**\n\n\n\nFig4. Cartographie des interventions LAM, 30 juin 2023\n\n\n\nEn janvier 2023, le\nCluster Protection a\nlanc\u00e9 une initiative\nconjointe de la\ncartographie des\ninterventions de\nprotection y compris les\nactions de lutte antimine. L\u2019analyse des\ndonn\u00e9es issues de cette\ncartographie coupl\u00e9e \u00e0\nl\u2019analyse des donn\u00e9es\ndes r\u00e9alisations des\nacteurs de protection\nont fait ressortir le\nconstat ci-dessous :\n\n\n\n\n                                       - Seuls deux acteurs de\nprotection ont des\ninterventions en LAM qui ne couvrent que quelques localit\u00e9s des 7 d\u00e9partements sur 11\nd\u00e9partements affect\u00e9es par les EE ( **R\u00e9f Fig4 & Fig2)** ). 4 sur 11 d\u00e9partements les plus touch\u00e9es\npar les EE restent sans aucune intervention LAM.\n\n  - On note un **gap majeur dans les interventions d\u2019Education aux risques d\u2019Engins Explosifs**\n(EREE) dans plusieurs r\u00e9gions affect\u00e9es par les EE (Diffa, Tillab\u00e9ry, Dosso, Agadez et Niamey).\n\n  - Un manque crucial des actions d\u2019assistance aux victimes est observ\u00e9 dans tous les 11\nd\u00e9partements affect\u00e9s ( **R\u00e9f Fig5** ).\n\n\n8 [Situation S\u00e9curit\u00e9 alimentaire, juin 2023](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1FVzLNdVSeHdrZ0iNx0YUf2LNiWuO5gBS/view?usp=sharing)\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/246cc207-af41-430c-9600-6cdbb5448cbf/1.%20Note%20plaidoyer%20Lutte%20AntiMines%20-%20Niger_FR.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        3
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "  - Les capacit\u00e9s\nexistantes n\u2019ont\npermis d\u2019atteindre\nqu\u2019environ 3,000\npersonnes [9] avec les\nactivit\u00e9s d\u2019EREE,\nrepr\u00e9sentant\nseulement 2% de la\n[cible du plan de reponse humanitaire/HRP.](https://reliefweb.int/report/niger/niger-plan-de-reponse-humanitaire-mars-2023) **98% de la cible HRP LAM n\u2019est donc pas atteinte** .\nPar ailleurs, 77% du financement requis pour les interventions LAM n\u2019est pas acquis.\n\n  - Il existe \u00e9galement **une absence de ressources humaines d\u00e9di\u00e9es \u00e0 la coordination au niveau**\n**national et r\u00e9gional**, la pr\u00e9vention et l\u2019assistance aux victimes. Le Sous-Cluster LAM ne\nfonctionne plus depuis le retrait de UNMAS d\u00e9but novembre 2022, malgr\u00e9 des efforts de\ncoordination conjointe entre la CNCCAI et les op\u00e9rateurs de LAM dont Mines Advisory Group\n(MAG) et Humanit\u00e9 et Inclusion (HI)\n\n  - **Un besoin consid\u00e9rable de renforcement de capacit\u00e9s en LAM** pour les diff\u00e9rents acteurs y\ncompris les acteurs humanitaires de premi\u00e8re ligne, les comit\u00e9s LAM est urgemment\nn\u00e9cessaire.\n\n## **IV. Recommandations majeures**\n\nAvec la menace croissante des EE, la faible couverture g\u00e9ographique et la faible diversit\u00e9 des\ninterventions LAM, plus de 200,000 personnes vivant dans les zones impact\u00e9es par les EE restent sans\nassistance et expos\u00e9es \u00e0 un risque accru d\u2019\u00eatre victimes des EE. Il est crucial d\u2019investir davantage dans\nles actions de lutte anti-mines afin de s\u2019assurer que les communaut\u00e9s b\u00e9n\u00e9ficient d\u2019une \u00e9ducation aux\nrisques li\u00e9s aux EE adapt\u00e9e au genre et \u00e0 l\u2019\u00e2ge. Cela permettrait \u00e9galement aux communaut\u00e9s\nd\u2019adopter un comportement s\u00fbr, et d\u2019acc\u00e9der aux services de prise en charge inclusifs pour les victimes\net survivants des EE. Par cons\u00e9quent, il est primordial de renforcer les aspects suivants :\n\n\n1. Plaidoyer : Renforcer le plaidoyer aupr\u00e8s des diff\u00e9rents d\u00e9cideurs (autorit\u00e9s \u00e9tatiques,\n\npartenaires techniques et financiers) pour le retour de UNMAS au Niger\n\n2. Coordination : Identifier des partenaires techniques additionnels pouvant appuyer la\n\ncoordination des interventions LAM au niveau national et r\u00e9gional (Tillab\u00e9ry et Diffa)\n\n3. Mobilisation de ressources : En 2023 environ 77% du financement requis pour les\n\ninterventions LAM n\u2019est pas acquis. Il est capital de mobiliser un montant de 2,000,000 USD [10]\npouvant permettre la mise \u00e0 \u00e9chelle de la coordination LAM, la collecte des donn\u00e9es par la\nCNCCAI d\u00e9sagr\u00e9g\u00e9es par genre et \u00e2ge, les interventions d\u2019Education aux risques des Engins\nExplosifs (EREE), l\u2019assistance aux victimes, le d\u00e9minage et le renforcement de capacit\u00e9s LAM.\n\n4. Collaboration : Renforcer la collaboration avec les diff\u00e9rents acteurs pour avoir une\n\ncartographie des zones affect\u00e9es par les EE afin d\u2019intensifier les s\u00e9ances de formation, la\nsensibilisation tant aupr\u00e8s des communaut\u00e9s que des acteurs humanitaires\n\n\n9 Dashboard des r\u00e9alisations de protection, cluster Protection, Avril 2023\n10 [plan de reponse humanitaire/HRP 2023-2025, Niger](https://reliefweb.int/report/niger/niger-plan-de-reponse-humanitaire-mars-2023)\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/246cc207-af41-430c-9600-6cdbb5448cbf/1.%20Note%20plaidoyer%20Lutte%20AntiMines%20-%20Niger_FR.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        4
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**Annexe 1 :** Quelques exemples d\u2019incidents li\u00e9s aux EE _(Sources : Monitoring de protection, CNCCAI,_\n_INSO)_\n\n\n      - _**20/03/23 :**_ _aux environs de 08h le v\u00e9hicule d\u2019une autorit\u00e9 aurait saut\u00e9 sur un engin explosif_\n_improvis\u00e9 au niveau de Bougoum, axe Torodi-Niamey (r\u00e9gion Tillab\u00e9ry)_\n\n\n      - _**25/05/23 :**_ _EE \u00e0 Ngouba au passage de bergers. 3 morts et des vaches tu\u00e9es (r\u00e9gion de Diffa)_\n\n\n      - _**16/06/23**_ _: EE contre un v\u00e9hicule FDS \u00e0 Chetima Wango. 7 morts / 4 bless\u00e9s (r\u00e9gion Diffa)_\n\n\n      - _**6/06/23 :**_ _un reste explosif de guerre (REG) a explos\u00e9 contre 03 enfants dans le village de Agali_\n_(d\u00e9partement/commune de Dosso). Les victimes qui \u00e9taient \u00e0 la recherche des ferrailles ont_\n_vraisemblablement confondu l\u2019engin \u00e0 un morceau de fer qu\u2019ils ont tap\u00e9 \u00e0 l\u2019aide d\u2019un marteau._\n_L\u2019explosion a occasionn\u00e9 la mort d\u2019un enfant et 02 bless\u00e9s. Il est \u00e0 noter que l'Antenne r\u00e9gionale_\n_de la CNCCAI cens\u00e9e coordonner les activit\u00e9s EREE au niveau r\u00e9gional n'existe pas \u00e0 Dosso_\n_faute des moyens_\n\n\n      - _**4/07/2023 :**_ _aux environs de 09h, un Engin Explosif Improvis\u00e9 (EEI) aurait explos\u00e9 au passage_\n_d\u2019un v\u00e9hicule des \u00e9l\u00e9ments des FDS de l\u2019op\u00e9ration Niyya, qui patrouillaient sur l\u2019axe Torodi-_\n_Makalondi, non-loin du village de Niaktir\u00e9 (r\u00e9gion Tillab\u00e9ry)_\n\n\n**Annexe 2 :** T\u00e9moignages d\u2019une victime des incidents li\u00e9s aux EE\n\n\n**Histoire d\u2019un homme \u00e2g\u00e9 de 45 ans, victime des engins explosifs, commune de Toumour/r\u00e9gion de Diffa**\n\n\n_Je me souviens de ce dimanche 7 mai 2023, jour du march\u00e9 de Toumour. On s\u2019\u00e9tait entendu avec le d\u00e9funt M. XX pour_\n_aller se ravitailler en vivre. Le matin de bonne heure nous avons emprunt\u00e9 la route. M. XX \u00e9tait devant avec en sa_\n_possession une vache qu\u2019il avait l\u2019intention de vendre. Il \u00e9tait devant moi vu que, la b\u00eate n\u2019arr\u00eatait pas de courir. Entre_\n_nous il y avait environ 20 m\u00e8tre. \u00c0 approximativement 2 kilom\u00e8tres de la commune de Toumour nous avons entendu une_\n_forte d\u00e9tonation insupportable. Je me suis \u00e9vanoui me r\u00e9veillant que quelques heures apr\u00e8s au centre de sante de_\n_Toumour. Je n\u2019avais m\u00eame pas connaissance de comment on m\u2019avait transport\u00e9 l\u00e0-bas. J\u2019\u00e9tais \u00e0 moiti\u00e9 sourd. C\u2019est \u00e0_\n_ce moment-l\u00e0 qu\u2019on m\u2019a racont\u00e9 que, M. XX est mort ainsi que la vache. J\u2019ai appris que c\u2019est lui qui a march\u00e9 sur_\n_l\u2019engin explosif. C\u2019\u00e9tait vraiment terrifiant. Il y\u2019avait du sang qui coulait un peu partout sur mon corps \u00e0 cause de_\n_l\u2019explosion. J\u2019ai eu peur, mais les infirmi\u00e8res m\u2019ont fait comprendre que, ce n\u2019\u00e9tait pas grave._\n\n\n_J\u2019ai \u00e9t\u00e9 pris en charge au CSI Toumour. Mais apr\u00e8s j\u2019ai appris que, ma famille a pay\u00e9 de l\u2019argent pour mon traitement._\n_J\u2019ai surmont\u00e9 mon traumatisme tout seul. Cependant, je reconnais que, les agents de sant\u00e9 m\u2019ont bien trait\u00e9 et ont essay\u00e9_\n_de me remonter le moral. Du d\u00e9but jusqu\u2019\u00e0 aujourd\u2019hui, j\u2019ai fait des efforts pour oublier ce d\u00e9sastre. Mais ce n\u2019est pas_\n_facile. Je ne peux pas cesser de penser au d\u00e9funt M. XX. En plus, aujourd\u2019hui, je suis \u00e0 moiti\u00e9 sourd car je n\u2019ai qu\u2019une_\n_seule oreille fonctionnelle. J\u2019ai besoin d\u2019une consultation pour retrouver l\u2019audition compl\u00e8te._\n\n\n_Mes voisins viennent r\u00e9guli\u00e8rement pour essayer de m\u2019encourager et m\u2019aider \u00e0 tenir le coup. Et aujourd\u2019hui_\n_alhamdulillah, tout est rentr\u00e9 dans l\u2019ordre \u00e0 part le handicap auditif l\u00e9ger qui me d\u00e9range. Nous n\u2019avons pas re\u00e7u des_\n_sensibilisations sur les EE. Peut-\u00eatre, cela est d\u00fb au fait qu\u2019on vivait un peu \u00e0 l\u2019\u00e9cart de Toumour. Actuellement j\u2019ai_\n_peur car dans des situations pareilles ni ma famille ni notre troupeau n\u2019est \u00e0 l\u2019abri. Tout le monde est expos\u00e9. Surtout_\n_nous les nomades qui sont en d\u00e9placement permanent._\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/246cc207-af41-430c-9600-6cdbb5448cbf/1.%20Note%20plaidoyer%20Lutte%20AntiMines%20-%20Niger_FR.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        5
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "Cette note de plaidoyer \u00e9t\u00e9 \u00e9labor\u00e9e avec la contribution de plusieurs acteurs y\n\ncompris :\n\n\n**PROCAP Niger**,\n\n\n**Regional Protection**\n\n**Cluster (WCARO)**\n\n### **POUR PLUS D\u2019INFORMATION, VEUILLEZ CONTACTER**\n\n\n**Aliou MAIGA,** Coordinateur Cluster Protection au Niger\n\n\n**Email :** [maiga@unhcr.org](mailto:maiga@unhcr.org)\n\n\n**Zabeirou Alfazazi**, Co Coordinateur du Cluster Protection au Niger\n\n\nEmail : alfazazizabeirou@gmail.com\n\n\n**Daniel Thiombiano**, Co facilitateur du Cluster Protection au Niger\n\n\n**Email** :daniel.thiombiano@drc.ngo\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/246cc207-af41-430c-9600-6cdbb5448cbf/1.%20Note%20plaidoyer%20Lutte%20AntiMines%20-%20Niger_FR.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        6
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_14/raw/doc_14_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,182 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/377bc627-07e6-3fc5-9e61-e57a3d19c662/1403-ZaatariSafetySecurityReport%282013-final%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/377bc627-07e6-3fc5-9e61-e57a3d19c662/1403-ZaatariSafetySecurityReport%282013-final%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/377bc627-07e6-3fc5-9e61-e57a3d19c662/1403-ZaatariSafetySecurityReport%282013-final%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        2
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/377bc627-07e6-3fc5-9e61-e57a3d19c662/1403-ZaatariSafetySecurityReport%282013-final%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        3
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/377bc627-07e6-3fc5-9e61-e57a3d19c662/1403-ZaatariSafetySecurityReport%282013-final%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        4
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/377bc627-07e6-3fc5-9e61-e57a3d19c662/1403-ZaatariSafetySecurityReport%282013-final%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        5
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/377bc627-07e6-3fc5-9e61-e57a3d19c662/1403-ZaatariSafetySecurityReport%282013-final%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        6
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/377bc627-07e6-3fc5-9e61-e57a3d19c662/1403-ZaatariSafetySecurityReport%282013-final%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        7
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/377bc627-07e6-3fc5-9e61-e57a3d19c662/1403-ZaatariSafetySecurityReport%282013-final%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        8
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/377bc627-07e6-3fc5-9e61-e57a3d19c662/1403-ZaatariSafetySecurityReport%282013-final%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        9
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/377bc627-07e6-3fc5-9e61-e57a3d19c662/1403-ZaatariSafetySecurityReport%282013-final%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        10
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/377bc627-07e6-3fc5-9e61-e57a3d19c662/1403-ZaatariSafetySecurityReport%282013-final%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        11
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/377bc627-07e6-3fc5-9e61-e57a3d19c662/1403-ZaatariSafetySecurityReport%282013-final%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        12
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/377bc627-07e6-3fc5-9e61-e57a3d19c662/1403-ZaatariSafetySecurityReport%282013-final%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        13
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/377bc627-07e6-3fc5-9e61-e57a3d19c662/1403-ZaatariSafetySecurityReport%282013-final%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        14
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "|Col1|Col2|Col3|Col4|Col5|Col6|Col7|Col8|Col9|\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n||||||||||\n||||||||||\n|40\"<br>50\"||||||||New\"Arrivals\"Recep;on/<br>Help\"Desk\"<br>Hiring\"Prac;ces\"|\n|40\"<br>50\"|||||||||\n|40\"<br>50\"|||||||||\n|40\"<br>50\"|||||||||\n|40\"<br>50\"|||||||||\n|40\"<br>50\"|||||||||\n|40\"<br>50\"|||||||||\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/377bc627-07e6-3fc5-9e61-e57a3d19c662/1403-ZaatariSafetySecurityReport%282013-final%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        15
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/377bc627-07e6-3fc5-9e61-e57a3d19c662/1403-ZaatariSafetySecurityReport%282013-final%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        16
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**Patrick \r Hanson**\n\nCountry \r FSA\nhanson@unhcr.org\n+962 \r (0)7 \r 9894 \r 1297\n\n\n**Alaeddin \r Alrashdan**\n\nAssistant \r FSA\nalrashda@unhcr.org\n+962 \r (0)7 \r 9644 \r 3784\n\n\n**Ramiz \r Habit**\nField \r Safety \r Associate\nhabit@unhcr.org\n+962 \r (0)7 \r 9720 \r 0271\n\n\n\n_**UNHCR \r Field \r Safety \r Unit \r Contacts**_\n\n\n**Ammar \r Samain**\n\nMafraq \r FSA\nsamain@unhcr.org\n\n\n\n**Phil \r Priestley**\nFSA \r (Reporting \r & \r Information)\npriestle@unhcr.org\n\n\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/377bc627-07e6-3fc5-9e61-e57a3d19c662/1403-ZaatariSafetySecurityReport%282013-final%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        17
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_15/raw/doc_15_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,315 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "# **NEW ISSUES IN REFUGEE RESEARCH**\n\n**Research Paper No. 143**\n\n# **Protracted displacement and remittances:** **The case of Somalis in Eastleigh, Nairobi**\n\n\n**Anna Lindley**\n\n\nESRC Postdoctoral Fellow\nCentre on Migration, Policy and Society\n\nUniversity of Oxford, United Kingdom\n\n\n[E-mail: anna.lindley@compas.ox.ac.uk](mailto:anna.lindley@compas.ox.ac.uk)\n\n\nAugust 2007\n\n\n**Policy Development and Evaluation Service**\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3869b553-cc16-3d9f-84f7-e8526e464b59/14803F869EBCCAD5C125735C00572018-unhcr-aug2007.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**Policy Development and Evaluation Service**\n**United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees**\n\n**P.O. Box 2500, 1211 Geneva 2**\n\n**Switzerland**\n\n\n**E-mail: hqpd00@unhcr.org**\n\n**Web Site: www.unhcr.org**\n\n\nThese papers provide a means for UNHCR staff, consultants, interns and associates, as well\nas external researchers, to publish the preliminary results of their research on refugee-related\nissues. The papers do not represent the official views of UNHCR. They are also available\nonline under \u2018publications\u2019 at <www.unhcr.org>.\n\n\nISSN 1020-7473\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3869b553-cc16-3d9f-84f7-e8526e464b59/14803F869EBCCAD5C125735C00572018-unhcr-aug2007.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**Introduction**\n\n\nThere are more than 5.5 million people around the world struggling in situations of\nprotracted and unresolved exile (UNHCR 2006). [1] These people are allowed to\nremain in the country where they have sought asylum, but lack basic rights. They\noften receive meagre - and dwindling \u2013 levels of international aid, and must therefore\nfind alternative and additional ways to provide for themselves and their households\n(Jacobsen 2006).\n\n\nRemittances from family members in other countries appear to be one way that some\npeople cope with protracted displacement: the money can alleviate poverty and can\nprovide possibilities for improving recipients\u2019 situations, within their considerable\nconstraints (Crisp 2003; Jacobsen 2006). On a global scale, remittances are a\nsignificant source of income for developing countries: officially recorded flows\ntotalled $160 billion in 2004, compared with $166 billion Foreign Direct Investment\nand $79 billion Official Development Assistance (World Bank 2006). Most research\nexplores the remittances of labour migrants and the effects in their countries of origin.\nIn contrast, very little is known about the dynamics and effects of remittances in\ndisplacement settings (relevant research includes Dick 2002; Horst 2006; Riak Akuei\n2005; Savage and Harvey 2007; Van Hear 2002).\n\n\nThis paper explores experiences of the remittance process among Somali refugees\nliving in Nairobi. Hundreds of thousands of people have fled to Kenya since 1991 as\na result of the civil war in Somalia. Many people still live in refugee camps, mainly\ndependent on international aid, but over time many others have defied the host\ngovernment\u2019s attempts to contain them in camps and sought a living in urban areas.\nThe paper focuses on Eastleigh, a bustling suburb of Nairobi with a large Somali\npopulation. Known in Swahili as _Mogadishu ndogo_ (little Mogadishu), Eastleigh has\na reputation for thriving business activity, dilapidated infrastructure and crime. Many\nSomali refugees in this district receive cash remittances from relatives overseas\nthrough the Somali money transfer system popularly known as _xawilaad_ . As we shall\nsee, this money has complex effects on their lives.\n\n\nThe research was conducted in January - April 2005, during which time the researcher\nlived in Eastleigh with a Somali host. The paper is based on informal conversations,\nobservations, and interviews (with residents of various socio-economic and\ndemographic characteristics and clans, conducted with the support of a local\nresearcher). [2] The paper also draws on consultations and interviews with people\nprofessionally knowledgeable about the politico-legal and socio-economic situation of\nSomalis in Kenya, including UNHCR. [3] While a comprehensive quantitative survey\n\n\n1 This estimate excludes Palestinian refugees under UNRWA\u2019s mandate, and is based on national\ngroups of refugees of 25,000 living for five years or more in the same country of asylum.\n2 Thanks go to the research participants for their time; Abdullahi Mohamed Qambi for his excellent\nresearch assistance; and Nafisa Nur Osman for her warm hospitality.\n3 A total of 24 interviews were conducted with recipients and others. All names have been changed and\nsome details have been altered to preserve interviewees\u2019 anonymity. The research was part of a\nbroader multi-sited project also involving research in Hargeisa and London (Lindley 2006, 2007a and\n2007b).\n\n\n1\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "recorded flows",
+          "confidence": 0.8679906725883484,
+          "start": 150,
+          "end": 152
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2006",
+          "confidence": 0.606991171836853,
+          "start": 177,
+          "end": 178
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2004",
+          "confidence": 0.9883202314376831,
+          "start": 157,
+          "end": 158
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "Somali refugees",
+          "confidence": 0.7195122241973877,
+          "start": 247,
+          "end": 249
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "quantitative survey",
+          "confidence": 0.9416965842247009,
+          "start": 485,
+          "end": 487
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "survey",
+          "confidence": 0.7583734393119812,
+          "start": 486,
+          "end": 487
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Kenya",
+          "confidence": 0.8703321814537048,
+          "start": 474,
+          "end": 475
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "national\ngroups of refugees",
+          "confidence": 0.7638431787490845,
+          "start": 503,
+          "end": 507
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3869b553-cc16-3d9f-84f7-e8526e464b59/14803F869EBCCAD5C125735C00572018-unhcr-aug2007.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        2
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "was not feasible, the data collected paint a broadly indicative picture of remittance\nexperiences among Somali refugees in Eastleigh.\n\n\nThe next section gives a brief account of the refugee situation, and the changes in the\nEastleigh district of Nairobi as it became a major hub for Somali people in Kenya.\nThe third section explores the patterns of remittances and roles in people\u2019s\nlivelihoods. The fourth section explores how remittances intertwine with regional and\nglobal mobility, and the final section outlines repercussions in the wider urban\neconomy. The paper concludes by summarising the findings and discussing their\npolicy implications.\n\n\n**Somalis in Kenya: from the northern frontier to Nairobi**\n\n\nKenya has a substantial indigenous Somali Kenyan population, particularly in the\nNorth Eastern Province (NEP, known as the Northern Frontier District under British\nrule). Somali pastoralists have long lived in this harsh, semi-arid area, with its\ntroubled history of political unrest and state repression. Other Somali Kenyans trace\ntheir families back to colonial employees or independent traders who settled in\nKenya\u2019s towns and cities (Anderson 2005; Turton 1972; Goldsmith 1997; Lewis\n2002).\n\n\nWhen civil war broke out in southern Somalia and the state collapsed in 1991,\nhundreds of thousands of Somali refugees sought safety in Kenya, initially mainly\nMarehan (the clan of the former president Siyad Barre) and other Darod clans, but as\nthe violence intensified, people of other clans joined them. They fled on foot or\ncrammed into vehicles over the border into the NEP; by _dhow_ from Somalia\u2019s coastal\ntowns to Mombasa; and by plane to Nairobi. After initial attempts to block arrivals,\nKenya allowed them in: around 400,000 refugees arrived from Somalia in 1991 and\n1992 (Milner 2005).\n\n\nLarge numbers of people were registered by UNHCR and sent to camps at Mombasa\non the coast, Thika near Nairobi, Liboi and Dadaab in the NEP, and Kakuma in the\nNorth West (Crisp 1999). Since the peak of the early nineties, the refugee population\ndecreased. Some refugees returned voluntarily to Somalia (although not always\npermanently) [4] and others travelled independently or were formally resettled overseas.\nSince 1999, the camp population has remained relatively stable in the region of\n150,000, although the numbers for 2007 may be higher as a result of developments in\nthe war in southern Somalia.\n\n\nKenya has signed and ratified the 1951 United Nations Convention relating to the\nStatus of Refugees and the 1969 Organisation of African Unity Refugee Convention.\nBut until late 2006, when the Refugee Act was passed, there was no national\nlegislation for refugees in Kenya. In contrast to the more open and accommodating\nrefugee policy of earlier years, Milner (2005) characterises Kenya\u2019s refugee policy\n\n\n4 Some of my interviewees in 2005, who were mainly of Darod and Hawiye clans and grew up in the\ncentral and southern Somali regions, had tried going back and had traumatic and discouraging\nexperiences. None of the interviewees were contemplating returning to live in southern Somalia while\nthere is still no effective government.\n\n\n2\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "data",
+          "confidence": 0.5445007681846619,
+          "start": 5,
+          "end": 6
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Eastleigh",
+          "confidence": 0.6011837124824524,
+          "start": 19,
+          "end": 20
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "Somali refugees",
+          "confidence": 0.9475511908531189,
+          "start": 16,
+          "end": 18
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3869b553-cc16-3d9f-84f7-e8526e464b59/14803F869EBCCAD5C125735C00572018-unhcr-aug2007.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        3
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "after 1990 as effectively one of \u2018abdication and containment\u2019. [5] First, the government\nabdicated to UNHCR the responsibility of determining the status of asylum seekers\nand ensuring their protection. Most refugees were designated _prima facie_ refugees as\noften occurs when refugees flee generalised insecurity and conflict in large numbers\nand it is not feasible to conduct individual status determinations. Second, the\ngovernment tried to contain the problem by only allowing Somali refugees to reside\nand work in these designated camps, restricting their movements and not giving them\nthe right to take up employment. UNHCR only gave UN Travel Letters for people to\ntravel to Nairobi for resettlement interviews, to university students, to people needing\nmedical treatment and people with particular security problems (Crisp 1999). [6]\n\n\nThe Refugees Act 2006 represents a step forward, translating the 1951 and the OAU\nConvention into national law for the first time. Yet, at this early stage it seems likely\nthat the freedom to work and the freedom of movement of refugees in Kenya will\nremain considerably restricted. Since the act came into force, further upheaval in\nSomalia has prompted more people to seek refuge in Kenya, and there have been\nborder closures and evidence of some forcible returns. [7] There is a clear risk now that\nthe will to deal with the problems of protracted displacement will be subsumed by the\nemergency response to recent arrivals.\n\n\nThe deep material deprivation and physical insecurity of life in the refugee camps is\nwell-documented (Crisp 1999; Horst 2006; Hyndman 2000; Milner 2005). Indeed,\nlife outside the camps in the NEP is also often difficult: considerable numbers of\nKenyan Somali pastoralists were so poor that they joined their co-ethnics in the\ncamps; others bought ration cards from refugees heading for the city (Hyndman\n2000).\n\n\nIt has been suggested, that given their size, population, permanence and other\nfeatures, camps like the Dadaab group (Ifo, Hagadera and Dagahaley) might better be\nthought of as cities than camps (P\u00e9rouse de Montclos and Kagwanja 2000). Of\nparticular relevance to this paper, Horst\u2019s (2006) critique of the common depiction of\nrefugee camps as isolated places highlights the connections between Somali refugees\nin Dadaab and relatives elsewhere in the Horn of Africa and beyond. She found that a\nminority \u2013 she estimates roughly 15 per cent \u2013 of refugees received regular\nremittances which, given the meagre international aid and limited local income\nopportunities, greatly affected their lives and the wider economy of the refugee\ncamps.\n\n\nHowever, despite the government\u2019s attempts to contain them in remote regions, many\nrefugees end up in Nairobi and other towns or cities. A minority of those Somalis\n\n\n5 Milner (2005) suggests that a combination of factors contributed to this shift in policy in the early\n1990s, including the large numbers and protracted nature of the Somali refugee situation; weakened\ngovernment capacity in Kenya due to the suspension of international aid in 1991 (based on donor\nconcerns regarding human rights and democracy); the failure of humanitarian aid to keep up with the\nneeds of the refugees; the history of _shifta_ wars and an attempted coup against President Moi in 1982;\nand security concerns over the alleged Somali involvement in small arms proliferation and the 1998 US\nNairobi Embassy attack.\n6 The latter two groups are eligible for assistance from UNHCR during their stay in the city.\n7 Jesuit Refugee Service briefing, Nairobi, 23 April 2007, _Kenya: border remains closed to asylum_\n_seekers_ . See also UNHCR press release, Geneva, 3 January 2007, _UNHCR calls on Kenya to halt_\n_Somali returns._\n\n\n3\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3869b553-cc16-3d9f-84f7-e8526e464b59/14803F869EBCCAD5C125735C00572018-unhcr-aug2007.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        4
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "arriving in the 1990s had the wherewithal to set up home in Nairobi or Mombasa, or\nstayed with relatives, and never declared themselves to UNHCR (Farah 1996;\nGoldsmith 1997). When the Mombasa camps closed in the mid-1990s, many refugees\ntook themselves to Nairobi instead, relocating to other camps or voluntarily\nrepatriating to Somalia. Some refugees from Dadaab and Kakuma also moved to\nNairobi. The numbers of displaced Somali people living informally in urban areas are\nobviously uncertain \u2013 estimates in the mid 1990s ranged up to 100,000 (Hyndman\n2000; Moret _et al._ 2005; USCR 1997). In general much less is known about the\nsituation of urban refugees, possibly because they can be harder to locate (compared\nwith the \u2018captive population\u2019 in the camps), and are generally not entitled to\nassistance, and also because the containment policy encouraged politicians to play\ndown the existence of refugees in urban areas (Campbell 2005).\n\n\nMost of these people have ended up in Nairobi\u2019s Eastleigh district. Located to the far\neast of the Central Business District, Eastleigh used to be a lower middle class suburb\n(Goldsmith 1997; Sirola 2001). Eastleigh was formerly a predominantly Asian\nresidential estate, with some shops and businesses, then over the years Kenyan\nKikuyu landlords began to buy up property there. There was a small Somali\ncommunity prior to the civil war - some of the Kenyan Somali shopkeepers in\nEastleigh grew up on the estate. The precise population size is unknown: some hazard\nguesses of 300,000-500,000. Some have suggested that there may be as many at\n60,000 displaced Somali people living informally in Nairobi, mainly in Eastleigh\n(African Population and Health Research Center 2002; Campbell 2005; Moret _et al._\n2005).\n\n\nSince 1990, Eastleigh has developed dramatically, shaped by its growing population \u2013\nrural Kenyans, Sudanese, Eritreans, Ethiopians, but above all, in the largest numbers,\nSomalis. Their presence is closely linked with four key areas of change during the\n1990s and since: business activity, housing and public infrastructure, crime, and social\nrelations.\n\n\nSince 1991, Eastleigh has become a major business and shopping district in Nairobi.\nBusinesspeople, including incoming refugees, invested in import and export\nbusinesses, retail outlets (from small-scale hawking and street stalls to large shopping\nmalls), chemists, property letting and real estate development, hotels, lodges, _miraa_\n(khat / _qaad_ ) outlets, caf\u00e9s and restaurants, long-distance transport companies and\ntaxi-drivers, phone and internet bureaux, and international money transfer and\nexchange services. The shopping area attracts customers from all over Nairobi and\nfurther afield. According to one commentator, \u201cEastleigh is \u2018openly informal\u2019,\nneither hidden from authorities nor entirely consistent with an official, public place of\nbusiness. At the same time it is integral to the service economy of Nairobi and its\n2.5+ million residents.\u201d (Little 2003: 164)\n\n\nA second key change in Eastleigh in the 1990s was the effect of the influx of refugees\nin the local property and housing market. Increased demand from Somalis, as\nEastleigh became known as a Somali enclave, raised the cost of accommodation: the\nrent for single rooms after the influx in the early 1990s was five or more times the\nprevious levels, pushing many Kenyans tenants out into other areas of Eastlands,\nwhile the refugees often lived in over-crowded conditions, sharing and sub-letting\n(Goldsmith 1997; Sirola 2001; Campbell 2005; Hyndman 2000).\n\n\n4\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3869b553-cc16-3d9f-84f7-e8526e464b59/14803F869EBCCAD5C125735C00572018-unhcr-aug2007.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        5
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "Commercial development, particularly in the district known as Section Two, also\naccelerated, pushing up the price of land for redevelopment as shopping malls. The\ncentrepieces of Eastleigh\u2019s commercial development are its large shopping malls,\nsuch as Garissa Lodge and Amal Plaza. The largely unregulated expansion of\nbusiness and the increasingly overcrowded population long outpaced repairs and\nimprovements to public infrastructure. Drains, sewers and rubbish collection are very\nvisibly inadequate. Roads are in a dilapidated condition, with deep mud during the\nrainy season and rising dust when it is dry.\n\n\nThird, Eastleigh became strongly associated with crime, which has been on the rise in\nthe wider area of Eastlands, and in Nairobi in general, often associated with the\nincreased hardship created by structural adjustment (Anderson 2002). Muggings and\nstreet thefts of mobile phones and cash are common, and _matatus_ (buses) to Eastleigh\nare held up and robbed fairly frequently, particularly at night. Refugees in particular\nhave suffered from police harassment. Some Somali refugees had obtained a Kenyan\nor Alien ID card through various means, but the majority just had their UNHCR letter\nsaying that they are a _prima facie_ refugee, which was of little use due to their\nambiguous politico-legal situation outside the camps (Hyndman 2000; Verdirame\n1999). Threatened with arrest for being in Kenya illegally, many Somalis would pay\nbribes to be released. According to the refugees, such extortion has varied over time,\nreportedly reaching particular heights of openness and impunity in 2001-2002. Many\npeople remain cautious, sticking to their area, not venturing into town or out at night. [8]\n\n\nThe last of the changes in Eastleigh explored here is the effect on social relations of\nthe arrival of the new Somalis. Somali Kenyan families were an important source of\nassistance for their close relatives and clanspeople (Goldsmith 1997; Horst 2006).\nAlthough there are some tensions between people of different clans, some more\ngeneralized solidarity is derived from being Somali and Muslim in Kenya.\n\n\nFor their part, Kenyans in Eastleigh generally appear to have come to terms with the\nobvious fact that \u2018Somalis are our neighbours\u2019. Kenyans, Somalis and other refugee\nnationalities share washing lines and cramped stairways, their children go to school\ntogether; they truck and barter (Goldsmith 1997; Campbell 2005). However, when\ntimes are tough, the history of rebel activities in the NEP, Somalia\u2019s present disarray\nand the large numbers of refugees in the capital, make Somali nationals a convenient\nideal scapegoat for urban ills (Gimode 2001; Verdirame 1999).\n\n\n**Remittance traffic and livelihood strategies in Eastleigh**\n\n\nLivelihoods are conventionally defined as the capabilities, assets (natural, physical,\nhuman, social and financial capital) and activities required for a means of living\n(DFID 1999; Jacobsen 2006). Several types of livelihoods were evident among\nSomali refugees in Eastleigh. The most obvious strategies were running small\nbusinesses or working in local businesses and homes. [9] _Prima facie_ refugees were\nconsidered irregular migrants in the city and were largely confined to working in the\n\n8 It is still early days to tell how much the new Refugee Act will affect this.\n9 Wages vary: in 2005 _matatu_ drivers were earning around KSh600 per day, and touts half this; cyber\ncaf\u00e9 assistants might earn KSh6,000 a month; shop assistants KSh4,000-5,000. Those working in\nSomali homes may be casual domestic workers, or younger female relatives who are given bed and\nboard but may not be paid for their work.\n\n\n5\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3869b553-cc16-3d9f-84f7-e8526e464b59/14803F869EBCCAD5C125735C00572018-unhcr-aug2007.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        6
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "informal economy, although some businesses already gradually began to move into\nthe formal economy, by registering with the relevant authorities and paying taxes.\n\n\nOutside the camps, a minority of refugees - only those in the city formally for health\nor security reasons - receive on-going assistance from UNHCR. Less obvious\nlivelihood strategies involved people mobilizing social capital to meet their needs.\nReceiving overseas remittances are a clear example of people using their social capital\nto obtain financial capital, but there are other examples of people drawing on social\ncapital, with some people being taken in or provided for by better-off families or\nassisted by the Mosque or other charitable contributions. Of course, some people use\nmore than one of these livelihood strategies at once, or use different strategies over\ntime.\n\n\nAlthough some people never received remittances, many of the refugees in Eastleigh\nhave had the experience at some point of receiving some money from relatives\noverseas. Recipients are demographically mixed and, like many refugees gravitating\ntowards urban areas in Africa, often lived relatively comfortable urban lives before\ntheir displacement (Jacobsen 2005). The assistance commonly came from husbands,\nsiblings and adult children \u2013 although other relatives also remit \u2013 living mainly in\nEurope and North America, and in some instances, the Middle East, South Africa or\nelsewhere. There were varying patterns of remittance traffic into Eastleigh. Some\nrecipients get a set sum of money on a regular, usually monthly basis, commonly\n$150-$250 per month. [10] Others receive variable amounts on an ad-hoc basis. It\nfollows that the role of remittances in recipients\u2019 livelihoods varies considerably. The\nexamples of Rhoda, Abdi, Abdiwali and Mahamoud help illustrate this. [11]\n\n\nRhoda is a mother of seven in her early forties. When the war broke out in the Central\nRegion, the family businesses and home were looted. The militia killed her father and\ntwo brothers. She fled with her husband, children, mother and three sisters to\nMogadishu, then Kismayo, then Liboye refugee camp in Kenya. In 1992, some\nrelatives overseas sent $1,000 and she and her husband, children and two sisters\nmoved to Nairobi. But after their money ran out, they went to Thika camp, then the\nMombasa camps, where their home was set on fire three times. They received little\ninternational aid, so she began selling charcoal and food stuffs.\n\n\nWhen the camps closed they were relocated to Kakuma, where life was really tough:\nthere were more fires, plus it was dangerous as there were armed men and killings,\nand there was less water. A relative there arranged for Rhoda\u2019s husband to go to\nCanada on a spouse\u2019s visa, as the relative\u2019s husband. As soon as he arrived in\nCanada, he and his relatives sent $500 to Rhoda to move the family to Nairobi - they\nwere worried about the risks in the refugee camp for a woman and children alone. He\nfound work immediately and now he sends to her $350 each month, $200 for living\nexpenses and school fees at the beginning of the month and $150 for the rent later on.\nIn addition to her seven, she looks after two of her sisters\u2019 children. Her husband\ncannot send more as his job does not pay very well, but according to Rhoda, \u2018he\u2019s\n\n\n10 Sometimes the money for one month is sent in two instalments, either to help the recipient to budget\nor because this suits the sender.\n11 Please note that all names have been changed and some details have been altered to preserve\ninterviewees\u2019 anonymity.\n\n\n6\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3869b553-cc16-3d9f-84f7-e8526e464b59/14803F869EBCCAD5C125735C00572018-unhcr-aug2007.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        7
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "very good, he\u2019s someone who is dedicated, he\u2019s stable, he\u2019s a father\u2026 Life could be\nmuch worse.\u2019 It remains uncertain how, indeed if, the family will be reunited.\n\n\nAbdi, who was born in Mogadishu is now a successful wholesaler. He was born in\nthe early 1980s, his father worked in the military and his mother used to sell groceries\nin a small shop. When the war broke out his father was killed and the fighting was\nvery violent so his mother sent him to Ethiopia with some friends. He went to Kenya\nin 1994 and made great efforts to locate his dispersed relatives, travelling to the\nvarious refugee camps, sending messages through personal contacts and the BBC\nSomali Service programme, _Baafin_ . He finally located, though a _xawilaad_ (money\ntransfer) agent, an uncle and sister in Norway and two cousins in the UK: \u2018I got the\ncontact telephone numbers\u2026 They were very shaken\u2026 it was a giant cry, when they\nfound me they were very happy and they sent me an express money of happiness.\u2019\nThat sum allowed him to leave Kakuma and go to Eastleigh, where he earned his\nliving by hawking dead stock that large stores needed to shift. He bought the stock at\ncost price and retained any profit.\n\n\nA year later, once he had proved that he was working hard, his uncle and sister\ndecided to send a substantial sum. He received around $2,400 in instalments over the\ncourse of two years. He developed a wholesale business, sourcing goods from the\nMiddle East, Asia and the Far East and supplying stores in Eastleigh. His relatives\nsometimes ask him for particular items, usually traditional crafts or gold, so he often\nsends goods when people he knows travel to Europe. His relatives there support his\nmother in Somalia, but he sometimes also helps out.\n\n\nAbdiwali, a former teacher, lived in the camps for many years before coming to\nNairobi. With his monthly income of KSh 8,000 (about $105) [12], he could not afford\nto bring his wife and six children to join him, so they remain in Dadaab. He tries to\nsend around $25 a month to his wife to supplement their rations and her KSh 3,000\nteacher\u2019s incentive. He also tries to bring money, clothes and other items that they\nneed when he goes back to the camps. Very occasionally, he or his wife receive some\nmoney from relatives overseas. He found that \u201cif I have a problem today, for example\nroad accident or maybe I\u2019m arrested, then people will contribute money to solve my\nproblems\u2026Not only in Nairobi. These people will communicate to those who are\noutside, they will say this person has that problem, he\u2019s admitted to hospital, he\u2019s [in]\na very serious condition. Then they collect money\u2026 The first people who will\nsupport me is my sub-clan in Nairobi. Then if they are not able to solve at home, then\nthey contribute outside\u2026\u201d\n\n\nMahamoud is a shopkeeper in Eastleigh with a young family. He was born in the late\n1970s in Beled Weyne. The family was comfortably off and after the war broke out\nhe ran a caf\u00e9 with his mother and brothers. His uncle was by that time living in\nNairobi, but maintained close contact with Mahamoud\u2019s mother, via the _taar._ She\ntold him how badly things were going in Somalia.\n\n\nThe uncle paid for Mahamoud and his younger brother to come to live with him in\nEastleigh. Mahamoud was happy to go, as he wanted to help his mother and \u2018take\nsome of the load\u2019. At that time his uncle was doing well; he had a retail business and\nwas receiving assistance from relatives abroad, but in the mid-1990s this assistance\n\n\n12 Exchange rate: 0.01322 US$ to 1 KSh (1 March 2005)\n\n\n7\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3869b553-cc16-3d9f-84f7-e8526e464b59/14803F869EBCCAD5C125735C00572018-unhcr-aug2007.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        8
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "dried up and the business was deteriorating. Mahamoud and his brother turned the\nbusiness around and he is now pretty comfortably off, although he does not receive\nany remittances. He is able to send $50-$100 to his mother and brothers in Beled\nWeyne whenever business is bad or a relative falls sick.\n\n\nThese cases exemplify four key points. First, for people like Rhoda, receiving\nremittances is their primary or only livelihood strategy. For example, Saad, a former\ncivil servant, received $250 from his sons and daughters in the United States each\nmonth to look after his wife and other children while he waited to be resettled in the\nUS. These were regular stipends to cover living expenses. Within family groups it is\nnot unexpected that some members rely on others to provide for them. Most regular\nstipends come from close relatives, reflecting a traditional relationship of support, for\nexample, husbands supporting wives and children, or adult children supporting elderly\nparents. Thus, often emigration and remitting can be seen as the main livelihood\nstrategy for the family unit in question. [13]\n\n\nSecond, for other recipients, remittances are combined with other livelihood\nstrategies. As Abdiwali\u2019s case illustrated, some refugees solicit remittances in\nresponse to particular crises, for example, to help pay living expenses when other\nlivelihood strategies collapsed, or to address health or legal crises. Other people have\njobs or ran their own business, but also received remittances, or another member of\nthe family did.\n\n\nFor example, Hussein, a father of ten, worked in the mornings in a friend\u2019s shop for\nKSh100-300 each day, but his family\u2019s main source of income was the $300 per\nmonth that they received in remittances. However, in general it was not common for\npeople with regular income to receive regular remittances as well: even if they had\nrelatives overseas, funds would be directed to more needy family members.\n\n\nHashi, a scholarship student in his twenties, had a sister in Canada, three aunts and\nthree uncles in the US, an uncle in the UK, and many cousins abroad, but explained\nthat he did not receive any regular support. \u201cIt\u2019s nonsense to support someone who\ncan support himself so I wasn\u2019t really getting regular money\u2026 But\u2026 if I ask them, if\nI tell them there is this or that issue, in that case they send\u2026 I said that I wanted to\nstart a course, in that case I asked. Such cases\u2026 You don\u2019t need from them\nregularly\u2026 So when you need support they will support you very happily.\u201d In other\ninstances remittances were not expected to fulfil any narrowly economic function, but\nrather were gifts, either sent on a special occasion (for example, Ramadan, a wedding\nor a birth), or as a spontaneous act of kindness.\n\n\nThird, remittances were also often triggered to finance a particular livelihood-related\nproject. The major example here was when people ask for money to establish a\nbusiness. Some of the more wealthy Somalis arrived in Eastleigh with cash in hand or\nsaved in foreign bank accounts and made investments. But most people lost assets in\nthe civil war \u2013 homes and their contents, land and crops, businesses, money in\naccounts (when the banking system collapsed), cash (robbed or used up in the course\nof displacement), and gold (sold by women to raise funds). Moreover, in the camps\nthey were deprived of gainful employment and in Eastleigh informal sector wages\n\n\n13 This is commonly the perspective brought to bear in labour migration contexts, although here too, the\nsedentarist bias of development studies can tend to obscure this (Bakewell 2007).\n\n\n8\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3869b553-cc16-3d9f-84f7-e8526e464b59/14803F869EBCCAD5C125735C00572018-unhcr-aug2007.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        9
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "were usually low. It was hard to save up money to invest. Thus loans or gifts from\nlocal and overseas relatives are a key part of the history of many of the businesses in\nEastleigh.\n\n\nAbdi\u2019s case illustrates several points regarding diaspora support for businesses in\nEastleigh. There is often more than one \u2018investor\u2019, and the group may include local as\nwell as overseas relatives. Remittances for investment are usually sent in instalments\nand distinguished from regular subsistence transfers. People do not usually \u2018save up\u2019\nremittances. A hard-working independent reputation helps to mobilize contributions\nas two businessmen explained:\n\n\nYou know\u2026 people [are] going out [to other countries], maybe I\u2019m\ngoing there and I meet his relative [points to his friend], and they say,\nwhat\u2019s he doing that guy, and I say, he\u2019s a good man, he\u2019s working,\nso they will be happy. Even the people outside is looking for\ninformation\u2026 so they trying to add some money to establish him\u2026.\nThey like the person who normally works, they don\u2019t like somebody\nthey are giving _biil_ [14] \u2026 _Friend:_ Endless _biil_ ! _Interviewee:_ Yeah,\nendless. So they like somebody who\u2019s working. So they normally\nlook in the family, who is very active. And they pick up the person\nwho is very active who can generate a business and then they give\nsome money.\n\n\nLike I tell them I want to start a business, I ask them for support\u2026\nNow, the relatives over there will consult each other and contribute\nsome money, each one some amount... Maybe you are sent about\n$2,000, $3,000, you start the business. If you are seen to be hardworking, they might even send you more.\n\n\nAs these speakers hint, starting a business is seen by those overseas as an alternative\nto sending regular remittances, a way to help people provide for themselves and, quite\npossibly, as time goes on, help out other family members too. Hashi explained:\n\n\nOne thing that is becoming quite common these days is that relatives\ninstead of sending you regular money decide to engage you in an\nactivity. They get together some resources and they ask if there is\nanything you can do, if you can do tailoring, anything, work in a\nshop. Once they see what you can do, they\u2019ll send you a good\namount to start that business\u2026 So we\u2019ve moving away from this\ndependency, it\u2019s not really going to be around much longer\u2026\n\n\nLast but not least, despite this expectation, many business attempts \u2013 diaspora-backed\nand otherwise - flounder, leading to relapsed reliance on remittances, other family\nassistance, or aid. Alternatively, the business may not be successful immediately, and\nthey may continue to call on support from overseas to supplement their earnings.\nMuch depends on the resources available to invest, the economic viability of the\nactivity, entrepreneurial skill and luck, and the personal and clan connections of the\nindividual.\n\n\n14 _Biil_ is a catch-all term for living expenses, which is often used as a term for a regular remittance.\n\n\n9\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3869b553-cc16-3d9f-84f7-e8526e464b59/14803F869EBCCAD5C125735C00572018-unhcr-aug2007.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        10
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "Thus, incoming remittances may be a primary or supplementary livelihood strategy,\nand they may be used to deal with particular crises or to fund specific projects. But\nthe fourth key point illustrated by the cases above is that there is also _outgoing_\nremittance traffic: a minority of Somalis in Eastleigh also send money to Somalia and\nto the refugee camps. While smaller than international flows, regional remittances are\nimportant, particularly for the turbulent southern Somali region, which still has a\nsubstantial regional refugee diaspora. Some people remit out of their wages, or\nbusiness income, like Mohamed, Abdiwali and Abdi. Other people receive money\nfrom relatives overseas or from other household members and send it on to relatives\nin the camps or in Somalia. For example, Saad, who relied on regular remittances\nfrom his children in the US, would send around $100 every two to four months to his\nparents and siblings who are nomads in Sanaag. Maryan, a housewife, explained that\nsometimes her husband, an import-export trader, gives her $50 to send to her mother\nin Kismayo and she tries to send perfume or clothes whenever someone she knows\ngoes there.\n\n\nBefore turning to the issue of mobility patterns, it is important to mention that some\ninterviewees felt that relying mainly on remittances was negative, for example: \u2018it\ntakes away the feeling of\u2026 the need to be self-sufficient. It takes away your pride to\nbe dependent on someone abroad for all your needs.\u2019 But it is also important to\nremember, as illustrated above, that in many cases remitting occurred between close\nfamily members where co-reliance was seen as entirely normal \u2013 and to bear in mind\nthat the strong Somali tradition of mutual support in extended families and clans\nmeans that a wider circle of relatives may be reasonably called on for assistance than\nin many other contexts.\n\n\nBesides, what constitutes \u2018normal\u2019 relationships and patterns of economic reliance is\naffected by protracted exile, the fluid and unpredictable patterns of refugee\nresettlement and the fact that many people working overseas are able quite easily to\nsend what are substantial amounts by Nairobi standards. Moreover, many recipients\nfound it hard to see alternatives, given the policy of containing refugees and giving\nthem such limited economic rights. Finally, people often saw their reliance as a\ntemporary phase, explaining that the remittances were to tide them over while finding\nwork; that they were being supporting while studying; or that they were waiting to\nemigrate.\n\n\n**Remittances and mobility patterns**\n\n\nBeyond shaping people\u2019s livelihoods in Eastleigh, remittances often intertwine with\nmobility to and from Nairobi, as the cases above illustrated. Interviewees\u2019 decisions\nto leave Somalia were commonly prompted by the killing of relatives, often parents or\nsiblings, in the early 1990s. During displacement, families were often split up, with\nparents allocating children to the care of relatives, particularly their siblings, aunts and\nuncles, where this seemed best for their security and welfare. This is quite common in\nSomali culture, but in the process of displacement the shuttling of people between\nhouseholds (in Somalia, in the refugee camps, and in urban areas) became a more\nurgent and frequent strategy for survival.\n\n\nThis regional mobility is often facilitated by someone sending money from abroad.\nPeople still leave Somalia, largely in response to the insecurity in the south. Leaving\n\n\n10\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3869b553-cc16-3d9f-84f7-e8526e464b59/14803F869EBCCAD5C125735C00572018-unhcr-aug2007.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        11
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "overland is hazardous and where possible people prefer to travel on _qaad_ or\ncommercial flights, in which case the flight and necessary documents have to be paid\nfor. People also have good reasons for wanting to leave the refugee camps for\nNairobi: to avoid the harsh conditions (heat, scarce rations, recurrent sickness among\ntheir children, risk of rape and violence); to access better educational opportunities\nand health facilities; to find work and build a different future for themselves and their\nfamilies; and to get in contact with relatives abroad with a view to resettlement.\nTravelling from the camps to Nairobi can be a costly and risky trip for those without\nproper documents. As there is the risk of ambush and attack by bandits, most\nrefugees prefer to travel by the main road, but are frequently subjected en route to\npolice detention and extortion or return to the camps, incurring extra costs that\nsometimes trigger requests to relatives overseas for assistance.\n\n\nOnce in Nairobi, it can take a while to start earning your living: in the interim,\nrelatives often help out \u2013 those overseas with cash and those locally by providing\nsomewhere to stay, food and sometimes work. There is a group of people whose\npresence in Eastleigh is contingent on receiving remittances, otherwise they could not\nafford to live there and would have to return to the camps. Thus, Rhoda moved to the\ncity with money from her husband overseas, motivated by a mixture of health and\nsecurity concerns. Conversely, some come to Nairobi intending to contact relatives\noverseas in order to secure assistance \u2013 as telephone, internet and money transfer\nservices are more widely available in the city, at competitive rates.\n\n\nMoreover, households receiving remittances are often less likely to fragment, with\nparents able to provide for all their children rather than sending them away to\nrelatives, and able to expand, by taking in relatives, from the camps, and from\nSomalia, particularly siblings or their children, and often subletting rooms to others.\nIn a fluid and sometimes hazardous economic setting, such solidarity is an important\ncultural and economic asset.\n\n\nThe second key point is that remittances also intertwine with mobility beyond the\nregion. Many people come to Nairobi to try to arrange resettlement in the West, often\nwith the heartfelt wish to be reunited with much-missed children, husbands and wives,\nand parents resettled overseas. The circumscribed legal and economic existence of\nSomali refugees in Kenya is another major motivation:\n\n\nMany people were supposed to make money here, but the\ngovernment\u2026 Even me myself, if I get a permit to stay in Nairobi\u2026\nthen I can make money, I can try to sustain my own life\u2026 [but] there\nis no way\u2026 my last incentive was $50 per month... When I was\n_teaching_ \u2026 Not enough for myself alone, not enough for the family.\n\n\nI would love to export myself! Otherwise, you know the suffering\nhere. You can\u2019t find jobs, you can\u2019t find any other opportunities\u2026\npersonally, the only thing I can do is\u2026 community service. But that\nwill not pay me much to take care of the family. It is difficult.\n\n\nWhile idealized images of the West certainly abound, the basic material inequalities\nare staggering and undeniable. Indeed, remittances seem to have a potent\n\u2018demonstration effect\u2019 for the benefits of migration:\n\n\n11\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3869b553-cc16-3d9f-84f7-e8526e464b59/14803F869EBCCAD5C125735C00572018-unhcr-aug2007.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        12
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "Once they are here, they are not very useful, they are not very\nproductive, they\u2019re just consumers, because there\u2019s no source of\nemployment, there\u2019s no way they can find money, so they have to ask\nfor money every time\u2026 So, it is better for us to go to the countries\nwhere there are opportunities, the greener grasses, so we eat that\ngrass and send some of it to our relatives back home!\n\n\nThere are three main channels of onward migration to the West. First, there is family\nreunion or sponsorship. Conditions for family reunion vary across countries, but it is\ngenerally an option for spouses and children under 21, but often requires a financial\nguarantee of some kind. The second channel is through official resettlement\nprogrammes aimed at resettling individuals or groups deemed to face particular\npersecution. There were around 4,000 refugees resettled through UNHCR in 2006\n(UNHCR 2007).\n\n\nThird, there are other channels often termed \u2018irregular\u2019, sometimes piggy-backing on\nelements of the two \u2018official\u2019 methods outlined above, sometimes involving brokers\n( _mukhalis_ ). Sperl (2001) points out that originally UNHCR used \u2018irregular\u2019 only to\ndescribe unlawful methods of entry, but the term \u2018irregular mover\u2019, carrying\npejorative overtones, is increasingly applied to all refugees leaving a first country of\nasylum. He challenges this: \u2018What is \u201cirregular\u201d about people who seek to leave an\noften de facto hopeless situation in a camp or a slum, in order to seek a better future\nthrough education, employment or resettlement?\u2019 (Sperl 2001: 26).\n\n\nAlthough viewed by governments as illegal, \u2018irregular\u2019 migration has a rather\neveryday quality when viewed from the streets of Eastleigh. Against the background\nof the constraints of life as refugees in Kenya, arranging to be smuggled to a richer\ncountry is seen by those involved as entirely acceptable behaviour. In contrast, going\nabroad and earning a good living but failing to help relatives back in Kenya or\nSomalia is seen as unacceptable behaviour. According to UNHCR, \u2018irregular\nsecondary movement\u2026 may\u2026 be a symptom of protracted hopelessness among longstanding refugee populations,\u2019 (UNHCR 2004: 5). Put another way, this onward\nmovement can be part of a quest for self-reliance and rights.\n\n\nThe diaspora often plays a key role in facilitating and financing resettlement in the\nWest. First, they provide information, are sometimes able to request reunion, and deal\nwith paperwork or other arrangements from abroad, and assist on arrival. Second,\nthey often meet the costs of emigration, which can range from nil \u2013 on some\nresettlement programmes - to around $5,000+ for alternative arrangements. In both\nofficial and informal emigration arrangements, Nairobi is a key location \u2013where\npeople can meet, make arrangements through social networks, access brokers, and\nattend interviews at the UNHCR and the Joint Voluntary Agency (JVA) which\nresettles refugees in the US. A third common element is to send money so that\nrelatives can come and stay in Nairobi while making their arrangements.\n\n\nYet while many people come to Eastleigh with _buufis_ (longing for resettlement,\nexplored in detail by Horst 2006), those doing successful business are less likely to be\naffected. Moreover, many people come to Nairobi to arrange resettlement, but\nmonths gradually turn into years.\n\n\n12\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3869b553-cc16-3d9f-84f7-e8526e464b59/14803F869EBCCAD5C125735C00572018-unhcr-aug2007.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        13
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "For example, Fadumo, a young woman originally from the north east of Somalia, now\nhas a business in a market in Eastleigh. When the civil war broke out and the\nrelatives she was living with fled, she was forced into a marriage at a young age for\nprotection. Later her husband subsequently left for Europe and cut off contact with\nher and her first child. An aunt helped her to come to Nairobi, so that she could be\nresettled in the US with the aunt\u2019s family. But she was rejected during the screening\nprocess and was left high and dry in Eastleigh with her daughter, with no resources\nand few contacts. She made friends with women working in the market and began\nselling clothes for them on credit to other women she knew, gradually building up the\nfunds for her own business. She keeps in touch with her parents, who are pastoralists,\nvia the _taar_ (radio operator), and every four months or so, when she is able, she sends\nthem $50 or $100. She is not a registered refugee and has no prospects of\nresettlement.\n\n\n**Repercussions in the wider urban economy**\n\n\nBeyond the direct effects on those receiving remittances and their immediate families,\nwhich was the main focus of the fieldwork, remittances have some indirect effects in\nthe wider urban economy, in terms of social differentiation and economic activity.\n\n\nFirst, remittances can affect relative socio-economic statuses. The task of assessing\nthe impact of remittances on social differentiation in Eastleigh is particularly complex\nboth because the Somali refugee presence is relatively new and transient, and for\nsome their presence in Eastleigh is entirely contingent on remittances. Moreover,\ntheir fortunes are likely to be particularly fluid compared with a more established\npopulation. The socio-economic status of individual refugees has anyway changed\ndramatically since 1991 as many were dispossessed of assets in Somalia, and, in the\nwords of one interviewee: \u2018Up till now, we have not regained the life we had in\nSomalia.\u2019 Thus, both the reference group and the baseline for comparison are unclear.\n\n\nHowever, on the whole, refugees in Nairobi are more likely to be from urban than\nrural backgrounds, and those benefiting from remittances mainly come from\noriginally comfortable families able to finance long-distance emigration of a close\nrelative to the West. People who receive regular remittances, although often living\nfrugally, are visibly more comfortable than those eking out a living at the harder end\nof the informal economy. According to one resident: \u201cYou see a difference between\nthose who receive remittances and those who do not \u2013 even in simple terms, those\nwho receive usually dress better. They can afford to send their children to good\nschools. Other people live in much more critical situations.\u201d\n\n\nWhile it is a place of both deprivation and entrepreneurial wealth, Eastleigh is a long\nway from being the poorest district in Nairobi, and there are other parts of Eastlands\nand the slum settlements where people live much harder lives. Remittances\nundoubtedly make a difference by providing for a number of families who might\notherwise be competing for low-wage jobs in the informal economy. Moreover, the\nbenefits of receiving remittances are to a degree re-circulated through local family and\nsocial family networks, building the social capital of recipients.\n\n\nA second wider repercussion of remittances involves the effects of the spending and\ninvestment of this money by recipients in the local economy. In contrast with the\n\n\n13\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3869b553-cc16-3d9f-84f7-e8526e464b59/14803F869EBCCAD5C125735C00572018-unhcr-aug2007.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        14
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "outward-bound traffic of remittances by Kenyan city residents to rural relatives and\ninvestment in their rural homes, Somali remittances are largely in-bound traffic.\nMoney transfer operators usually pay remittances and trade transfers out to recipients\nin hard currency, which is then converted into Kenyan Shillings. They are spent in\nthe city economy, indeed mainly in Eastleigh as many refugees tend to avoid going\ninto town, contributing to high levels of local demand for goods and services, fuelling\nbusiness expansion on a considerable scale.\n\n\nMany of the businesses meeting this demand are Somali businesses, initiated with the\nhelp of relatives overseas. By 2005, a total of 2,800 business people, mainly Somalis,\nwere registered with Eastleigh Business Community (EBC), which was established in\n1999. Eastleigh is increasingly attracting customers from all over Nairobi, and\nbecoming an important part of the wider city economy.\n\n\nMore specifically, there is a thriving business in providing services specifically of use\nto Somali and other refugees, including money transfer and exchange, travel agencies,\ntelephone and internet bureaux, language schools, many of which are meeting a\nprimarily remittance-driven demand. Money transfer is the most obvious example:\nthere are numerous money transfer operators, popularly known as _xawilaad_ in\nEastleigh.\n\n\nIn Kenya, officially only banks or money transfer operators in partnership with banks\nare licensed to transfer money. Western Union offices are everywhere, but it has\nmade little headway with the Somali refugees who tend to use Somali operators, some\nof whom have forex licences and others operate entirely in the informal market. [15]\nMoney exchange is also in great demand in Eastleigh, in part because many\nremittances are collected in dollars and may then be exchanged into Kenyan Shillings.\nThere is a large informal market with numerous small-scale operators.\n\n\nAnother example of making business out of recipients is language schools. For\nexample, Yusuf came to Kenya as a boy and grew up in the camps. He then came to\nEastleigh and borrowed money from relatives living locally to establish one of the\ndistrict\u2019s many one-room private schools for adults. By the third month he had 50\nstudents, learning English, Arabic, and Maths while trying to arrange onward\nmigration to the West or the Middle East. He had also begun to repay his relatives:\n\u2018So life\u2019s not now bad, it\u2019s moving. To me, I get no other help from like, UK or from\nAmerica, but I get indirectly because the students I have at school, they get assistance\nfrom their relatives in the UK, Europe or America or elsewhere.\u2019\n\n\n**Conclusions**\n\n\nMany people displaced from Somalia and living a protracted exile in Kenya have selfsettled in Nairobi\u2019s Eastleigh district, defying the Kenyan government\u2019s attempts to\ncontain the refugee population in remote areas, not content to wait for elusive durable\nsolutions. The newcomers have had a significant impact on the urban landscape and\nsocial and economic relations in Eastleigh.\n\n\n15 Consultations with businesspeople and international agencies (February 2005) and\n[www.centralbank.go.ke](http://www.centralbank.go.ke/)\n\n\n14\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3869b553-cc16-3d9f-84f7-e8526e464b59/14803F869EBCCAD5C125735C00572018-unhcr-aug2007.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        15
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "While Nairobi is a distant outpost from the regions of the Horn of Africa that they\nhave historically occupied, it has become a crossroads for displaced people from\nSomalia. It is an important hub in Somalis\u2019 increasingly global information, trade,\nfinance and family networks. For many, Eastleigh is a staging post to an uncertain\nfuture. It is a place where, by connecting into wider social networks, opportunities\nmight arise. A minority, it seems \u2013 and generally people with secure status in Kenya\nor business interests - actually make a conscious decision to settle there. For many,\nthough, a few months turn into a few years, passing the time working, strategizing, or\nsimply waiting.\n\n\nWhile many of the uses of remittances in this context were similar to those in the\ncountries of origin, remittances were also used by people to deal with the specific\nproblems of protracted and unresolved displacement. For example, people are\nmoving from Somalia and the camps to Nairobi, often with the help of funds from\nrelatives in the region or overseas. Women with children sometimes receive money\nfrom relatives overseas to relocate from the camps to the city because of fears for their\nsafety.\n\n\nOnce in Nairobi, some people\u2019s living expenses are covered by people overseas. By\ninvesting larger remittances in businesses, some refugees are able to provide for\nthemselves and often subsequently assist others locally, in the camps or in Somalia.\nBut interviewees\u2019 investment of remittances was limited to the informal sector and\nconstrained by their ambiguous politico-legal status in Nairobi. Sometimes people\nrequested money to secure release from police detention. Remittances and other\nforms of diaspora support are also intertwined with patterns of onward movement\nwhereby refugees seek a new life overseas.\n\n\nAll this has consequences in terms of reducing reliance on international aid in the\nrefugee camps. An unknown number of displaced people from Somalia never\nregistered with UNHCR sometimes because they received diaspora assistance and\nwere able to stay in the city. Receiving remittances allowed many people to leave the\ncamps. It is well-known that those leaving the camps routinely give their cards to\nanother family, so that they can benefit from the rations, before the card is eventually\ncancelled (Hyndman 2000; Kibreab 2004). It seems likely that a portion of\nEastleigh\u2019s refugee population would have to return to the camps if they did not\nreceive remittances to cover their living expenses. Thus, remittances in many cases\npartially or fully release refugees from the aid relationship.\n\n\nYet there is a strong sense of contingency about remittances as a livelihood strategy\namong recipients in Eastleigh. They tended to be incorporated into the remittance\nprocess in a secondary or supplementary role. A minority of Somali people in\nEastleigh - often those occupied in successful trading activities or those who\nthemselves receive remittances \u2013 send remittances to Somalia or to the refugee camps.\nBut they are less often able to completely cover the recipients\u2019 needs, and if there are\nrelatives _dibadaha_ (outside), these are usually the main port of call for assistance.\n\n\nTurning to recipients in Eastleigh, if there are other relatives in serious need in\nSomalia, then their needs may be prioritised. Most regular recipients in Eastleigh did\nnot expect to continue to receive remittances in the long term. Even people relying on\nremittances as a primary source of income, whose sender had a strong social\nresponsibility to support them, usually had a plan to emigrate, or find a job, or start a\n\n\n15\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "UNHCR",
+          "confidence": 0.7991580963134766,
+          "start": 351,
+          "end": 352
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Somalia",
+          "confidence": 0.7711986303329468,
+          "start": 347,
+          "end": 348
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "displaced people",
+          "confidence": 0.5890519022941589,
+          "start": 344,
+          "end": 346
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3869b553-cc16-3d9f-84f7-e8526e464b59/14803F869EBCCAD5C125735C00572018-unhcr-aug2007.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        16
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "business. Few people saw their current situation \u2013 in Eastleigh, relying on remittances\n\n- as a feasible long-term status quo.\n\n\nWhile undoubtedly greatly ameliorating the living conditions of many refugees, the\nextent to which remittances, in this context, are generating sustainable livelihoods is\nin doubt. The general view is that \u2018a livelihood is sustainable when it can cope with\nand recover from stresses and shocks and maintain or enhance its capability and assets\nboth now and in the future\u2019 (DFID 1999: 1). Although remittances clearly responded\nto crises experienced by recipients in many instances, often the transfers left people\nno more capable of dealing with future crises themselves than they were before. The\nmajor exception was when remittances were invested in providing an independent\nlivelihood, by establishing a business.\n\n\nThere is a growing recognition of the role played by resettled refugees and labour\nmigrants in the welfare of refugees affected by protracted displacement (Jacobsen\n2006; Sperl 2001; UNHCR 2006; Van Hear 2003). Van Hear asks whether\n\u2018\u2026transnationalism may in itself be a \u201cdurable solution\u201d for conditions of\ndisplacement \u2013 or at least an \u201cenduring\u201d solution. This might mean considering the\nencouragement or promotion of transnationalism,\u2019 (Van Hear 2003:15). According to\nUNHCR\u2019s 2006 report _The State of the World\u2019s Refugees_, UNHCR has been\nconsidering the possibility of encouraging migration for work as a means for refugees\nto provide for themselves.\n\n\nIt is important to underline, as Van Hear does, that refugees engaging in transnational\nactivities have not necessarily found a \u2018durable solution\u2019 to their original\ndisplacement. For example, a Somali man working in the Gulf, with a permit to work\nas a labourer may send money back to help maintain his family who are _prima facie_\nrefugees in Kenya.\n\n\nWhile this can certainly improve the welfare of the recipients, and the arrangement\nmay indeed be \u2018enduring\u2019, it is clear this is not a solution to their legal predicament in\nthe way that repatriation, local integration or resettlement in a third country can be.\nNeither party has regained in their countries of residence the rights denied them in\ntheir country of origin. Indeed, the remittance economy is in some respects\nmaintained by immigration and asylum restrictions that can separate close family\nmembers.\n\n\nMoreover, in contexts of protracted and unresolved displacement, it is hard for\nrefugees to maximize the potential value of any remittance funds that they receive.\nFurthermore, the capacity of resettled refugees and labour migrants to offer support to\nfamily back home may be greatly limited (Lindley 2007b; Riak Akuei 2005). In sum,\nwhile remittances are an important aspect of refugees\u2019 livelihoods, it is critical that we\ncontinue to campaign for better legal security and recognition of the rights of\ndisplaced people in Kenya and elsewhere.\n\n\n16\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3869b553-cc16-3d9f-84f7-e8526e464b59/14803F869EBCCAD5C125735C00572018-unhcr-aug2007.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        17
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_16/raw/doc_16_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,122 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/2ff208e5-ebc7-3712-b4da-4128308ffea2/170821-forum_conclusion_final.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/2ff208e5-ebc7-3712-b4da-4128308ffea2/170821-forum_conclusion_final.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/2ff208e5-ebc7-3712-b4da-4128308ffea2/170821-forum_conclusion_final.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        2
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/2ff208e5-ebc7-3712-b4da-4128308ffea2/170821-forum_conclusion_final.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        3
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/2ff208e5-ebc7-3712-b4da-4128308ffea2/170821-forum_conclusion_final.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        4
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/2ff208e5-ebc7-3712-b4da-4128308ffea2/170821-forum_conclusion_final.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        5
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/2ff208e5-ebc7-3712-b4da-4128308ffea2/170821-forum_conclusion_final.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        6
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/2ff208e5-ebc7-3712-b4da-4128308ffea2/170821-forum_conclusion_final.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        7
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/2ff208e5-ebc7-3712-b4da-4128308ffea2/170821-forum_conclusion_final.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        8
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/2ff208e5-ebc7-3712-b4da-4128308ffea2/170821-forum_conclusion_final.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        9
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/2ff208e5-ebc7-3712-b4da-4128308ffea2/170821-forum_conclusion_final.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        10
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/2ff208e5-ebc7-3712-b4da-4128308ffea2/170821-forum_conclusion_final.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        11
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_17/raw/doc_17_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,800 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "## Secondary Data Review\n# GENDER-BASED VIOLENCE \u2013 Mozambique: Cyclone Idai and Floods\n\nAPRIL 2019\n\n\n### CRISIS OVERVIEW\n\nTropical Cyclone Idai made landfall on 14 March, in Beira city (Sofala province), Central\nMozambique. As of 15 April, over 600 people are confirmed to have died in the cyclone\nand subsequent events. A total 1.5 million people are affected, and over 140,000\npeople are displaced in more than 120 accommodation centers, public buildings and\nschools in the affected provinces. Sofala province has the highest number of displaced\n[population, followed by Manica province (INGC, 4/2019).](https://cycloneidai.onalabs.org/)\n\n### CRISIS IMPACT\n\n\n_Source: OCHA_\n_SitRep No.6 (as of_\n_13 April 2019)_\n\n\n#### KEY TAKEAWAYS\n\nThis document consolidates information of the pre-crisis context and vulnerability of\nwomen and girls in Mozambique, and reviews all main post-disaster assessment results,\nfield reports and other sources available on the disaster impact, needs and risks of the\nvulnerable groups.\n\n\n**Key Priorities**\n\n\n - Past lessons as well as assessment reports both highlight that women and girls and\ntheir families have been adopting negative mechanisms to cope with basic needs\nand economic hardship, including being exposed to sexual exploitation, sex work,\nearly and forced marriage. Reviving livelihood and income generating activities\nare key to mitigate GBV risks.\n\n - The displaced population living in sites are under stressed conditions, overcrowding\nand lack of wash facilities increase the risk of GBV. With sporadic ongoing\nrelocation, women and girls are exposed to less safe and dignified environment.\n\n - Living conditions are more severe and needs are largely unfulfilled in the\ncommunities outside the camps, especially in areas that are hard to reach. In these\ncommunities, a lack of basic needs including food and shelter has been reported,\nwhich increases risks of vulnerable population.\n\n - The number of female-headed households as well as widowed women has\nincreased in the aftermath of the disaster. Accompanied by a high number of\npregnant women who are estimated to give birth, it is critical to ensure access to\nfunctional Sexual and Reproductive Health services and social care.\n\n - Community-based referral and psychosocial support by local partners have been\noperational prior to the cyclone. As they act as the main first contacts for vulnerable\ngroups in the communities, more resources and capacity building on GBV in\nemergencies are needed to scale up the existing community-based services.\n\n\n**Key Vulnerable Groups:**\n\n\nFemale-headed households; single women, adolescents\n\n\n1\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "post-disaster assessment results",
+          "confidence": 0.9937677383422852,
+          "start": 169,
+          "end": 172
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Mozambique",
+          "confidence": 0.9850366115570068,
+          "start": 163,
+          "end": 164
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "vulnerable groups",
+          "confidence": 0.5885091423988342,
+          "start": 189,
+          "end": 191
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "field reports",
+          "confidence": 0.9363706111907959,
+          "start": 173,
+          "end": 175
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1768724f-8804-35b0-8607-23d0920f063f/190415_GBV_Secondary-Data-Analysis_Cyclone-Idai_MOZ_Final.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "## Secondary Data Review\n# GENDER-BASED VIOLENCE \u2013 Mozambique: Cyclone Idai and Floods\n\nAPRIL 2019\n\n\n### Operating Environment - Contextual Review LEGAL SYSTEM AND JUSTICE\n\nSince independence in 1975, Mozambique has put in efforts to make strides in gender\nequality. Systems have been put in place, and achievements have been made, for\nexample in political representation. Since 1994 the ruling party implemented a quota on\nthe representation of women in the government. This has ensured that women have\napproximately one third of seats in the National Assembly. However, a lot of progress\nstill needs to happen to reach gender equality \u2013 not just in systems and institutions, but\n[also at a community level (Tvedten 2008).](https://www.cmi.no/publications/file/3326-)\n\n\n**Rule of law:** After the civil war (1984\u20131992), which had a large impact on the Central\n[Provinces, turnover in the government has been democratic (Tvedten 2008).](https://www.cmi.no/publications/file/3326-)\n\n\n**Women\u2019s rights:**\n\n\n  - The 2004 constitution upholds the principle of gender equality and prohibits\ndiscrimination based on sex.\n\n  - Mozambique has ratified CEDAW, as well as the Protocol to the African Charter\non Human and Peoples\u2019 Rights on the Rights of Women in Africa [(Government of](http://evaw-global-database.unwomen.org/-/media/files/un%20women/vaw/full%20text/africa/mozambique%20%20nap%20to%20combat%20and%20prevent%20vaw%2020082012.pdf?vs=5313)\n[Mozambique 2012).](http://evaw-global-database.unwomen.org/-/media/files/un%20women/vaw/full%20text/africa/mozambique%20%20nap%20to%20combat%20and%20prevent%20vaw%2020082012.pdf?vs=5313)\n\n  - Polygamy has been prohibited by the Family Law (2004), yet is commonly\npracticed. In effect, polygamous unions are not legally recognized, but there\nare no legal restrictions against the practice itself (CARE [29/03/2019).](https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/Regional-RGA-Cyclone-Idai-29032019.pdf)\n\n  - The Act on Domestic Violence Perpetrated Against Women was passed in 2009,\ncriminalizing domestic violence including physical abuse, sexual abuse,\nemotional and psychological abuse, stalking, harassment, intimidation, damage\n[to property, and other controlling or abusive behavior (UNWOMEN 2009).](http://evaw-global-database.unwomen.org/fr/countries/africa/mozambique/2009/law-on-domestic-violence-perpetrated-against-women--2009-)\n\n  - The Multisectoral Mechanism for Integrated Assistance to Women Victims of\nViolence (2012) outlines the roles of the Ministry of Health, Ministry of Justice,\nMinistry of Interior and the Ministry of Gender, Children, and Social Action [(USAID](https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Floriza_Gennari/publication/293491456_Lessons_from_the_Gender-Based_Violence_Initiative_in_Mozambique/links/56b9311908ae3b658a88c87e/Lessons-from-the-Gender-Based-Violence-Initiative-in-Mozambique.pdf)\n2016).\n\n  - The Land Laws of 1997 specifies that, although land belongs to the state, legal\nmeasures can help communities and individuals (men and women) to obtain land\nwithout requiring written proof of use. However, in reality the gender equality\n\n\n\nin land ownership is not reflected as patriarchal cultures still favor land\n[ownership for men (SIDA 2006).](https://www.sida.se/contentassets/80caaf7d1aaf48738b7b70386574b59e/towards-gender-equality-in-mozambique_693.pdf)\n\n\n**Access to justice:** Although the Mozambican government has put into place efforts to\ncombat violence against women, women have difficulty accessing courts for various\nreasons (details in below content \u201cGBV PROTECTION NEEDS\u201d). Instances of GBV including\nrape, are more often settled through informal local/community courts, or privately\n[through financial renumeration (Slegh 2010;](http://medanthrotheory.org/site/assets/files/3123/slegh.pdf) [US Department of State 2017).](https://www.state.gov/documents/organization/277271.pdf)\n\n#### SOCIODEMOGRAPHIC ENVIRONMENT\n\n**Female-headed households:** As of 2015 approximately 36% of households in\n[Mozambique are female-headed (DHS 2015).](https://dhsprogram.com/pubs/pdf/AIS12/AIS12.pdf)\n\n\n**Economy:** In 2008, a study found that approximately 79% of women were economically\nactive. Women are largely responsible for the household. This may also be included into\nthe high percentage for economic activity \u2013 although returns on this are low. Furthermore,\nemployed women mostly work in the agricultural sector (89%), a sector in which they\nform a large share of unskilled labor (59%). This shows that, though women may take up\na large part of economic activity, they may not take home a large amount of money.\nWomen active in agriculture work an estimated average of 14 hours per day, which also\n[leaves them little time for partaking in public participation or education (Tvedten 2008; SIDA](https://www.cmi.no/publications/file/3326-)\n2006).\n\n\nWhen employed, women are often performing unskilled jobs, which are low-paid. In\naddition, in 2008 only around 4% of women were employed in the government, public,\nor private sector. These jobs entail a fixed monthly salary with predictability and more\n[certainty (Tvedten 2008).](https://www.cmi.no/publications/file/3326-)\n\n\n**Education:** Literacy rates in Mozambique stand at 70.5% for the population aged 15\u2013\n24. When only looking at the population over 15, the literacy rate stands at only 56%.\nWomen are significantly less literate than their male counterparts. High discrepancies in\nliteracy rates among men and women can point to inequality, where girls tend to be the\nfirst who are denied access to education, or taken out of school as their education is not\nprioritized.\n\n\n2\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "study",
+          "confidence": 0.9642063975334167,
+          "start": 601,
+          "end": 602
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2006",
+          "confidence": 0.5095111131668091,
+          "start": 736,
+          "end": 737
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2008",
+          "confidence": 0.5033853054046631,
+          "start": 757,
+          "end": 758
+        },
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1768724f-8804-35b0-8607-23d0920f063f/190415_GBV_Secondary-Data-Analysis_Cyclone-Idai_MOZ_Final.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "## Secondary Data Review\n# GENDER-BASED VIOLENCE \u2013 Mozambique: Cyclone Idai and Floods\n\nAPRIL 2019\n\n\n\nLITERACY RATE (%) TOTAL MALE FEMALE\n**15\u201324 years** 70.5 79.1 62.3\n**15 years and older** 56.0 70.8 43.1\n**65 years and older** 26.0 46.3 8.8\nUNCESCO 2015\n\n\nThe DHS data from Mozambique further shows that improving access to education for\ngirls, particularly following the completion of primary school, can be an important\ndeterminant of the use of health facilities (or at least correlates with facility use). Higher\nlevels of education for mothers is associated with declining under-five mortality rates, i.e.\nthe higher the education level of the mother, the lower the mortality levels in under-five[year-olds (ODI, 6/2014).](https://www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi-assets/publications-opinion-files/9073.pdf)\n\n#### COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT\n\nDespite changes at an institutional level, Mozambique remains a highly patriarchal\nsociety where men dominate power positions in communities and the household.\n\n\n**GBV perception:** While more updated data is not available, in 2009 an estimated 70%\nof perpetrators of GBV against their partners never faced charges. The reasons for this\nincluded that the survivor has to deal with the case alone or through the family (47%),\nthe act was not deemed serious (15%), the act was considered a private issue (9%), or\nthe survivor feared retaliation and reprisal (11%) [(UNIFEM 2009).](https://www.un.org/ruleoflaw/files/violence_against_women_mozambique%5b1%5d.pdf) This indicates that in\nMozambique, GBV is being normalized, and a GBV case is considered a family or\nprivate affair without much institutional and systematic support. However, the\nMultisectoral Mechanism for Integrated Assistance to Women Victims of Violence was\nestablished in 2012 and strives to provide accessible and integrated services for\nvulnerable people and more systematic fighting against GBV.\n\n\nIn addition, an anthropological study found that generally in Mozambique, a \u2018good\nwoman\u2019 submits to her husband, other male relatives, and the husband\u2019s family. Male\ndominance in the household is seen as a given, and maltreatment of women is often seen\nas a result of their own behavior. These socio-cultural explanations about women\u2019s role\n[in society justify acts of gender-based violence as natural and private matters (Slegh 2009).](http://medanthrotheory.org/site/assets/files/3123/slegh.pdf)\n\n\n**Gender roles:** Generally, men are still seen as the power-holders and the culture in\nMozambique is patriarchal and male-dominated. This may be rooted in historical\ninfluences when political powerholders were men in charge of chieftainships. On top,\nCentral Mozambique knew a more patrilineal system, meaning a woman belongs to the\n\n\n\nhusband\u2019s family \u2013 which has been symbolized through dowry ( _lobolo)_ . Though at times\nwomen can be in influential positions (e.g. in clans) \u2013 these are usually not formalized\n[positions of power (Tvedten 2008).](https://www.cmi.no/publications/file/3326-)\n\n\n_Division of labor:_ Generally, men and boys are responsible for working outside the home\nwhile women and girls take care of domestic issues. These include taking care of children\nand older people, as well as cooking, fetching water, and cleaning [(CARE 29/03/2019).](https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/Regional-RGA-Cyclone-Idai-29032019.pdf)\nReduced accessibility and availability of water and other household items are likely to\nput women and girls more at risk when performing domestic tasks.\n\n\n_Household decision-making:_ Despite women\u2019s large participation in the household, their\n[decision-making is described as limited (FHI 360 2015). This is backed up by data from the](https://www.fhi360.org/sites/default/files/media/documents/resource-spt-cap-mozambique-gbv-integration.pdf)\nDemographic Health Survey [(2015), which shows that men generally tend to take the](https://dhsprogram.com/pubs/pdf/AIS12/AIS12.pdf)\ndecisions in the household regarding health expenditures and groceries. In Sofala, over\n80% of men solely took the decisions in these areas.\n\n\n_Political participation_ : Mozambique has the 14th highest level of women\u2019s participation in\n[parliament in the world (World Bank).](https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SG.GEN.PARL.ZS?view=chart)\n\n\n**Traditional marriage practices:** Dowry, or _lobolo_ still plays a large role in the central\n[provinces including Sofala (Tvedten 2008). Though polygamy is not legalized in the Family](https://www.cmi.no/publications/file/3326-)\nLaw (2004), it is still practiced. In these cases, the husband is only legally married to the\nfirst wife, but has multiple relationships outside the marriage. Polygyny is often\nrecommended when the first wife is infertile \u2013 but is generally common in the patrilineal\n[cultures (Arnaldo 2003). In the same Family Law, the age for marriage is set at 18.](http://www.bioline.org.br/pdf?ep04008)\n\n\n**Harmful practices:** In some instances, widowhood can be seen as needing \u2018purification\u2019.\nThis purification practice is common among the Sena ethnic group in Sofala. A woman,\nupon the death of her husband, needs to be purified by having sex with his male relative\nthree times a day for a week. This practice called _pita-kufa_ (or _khupita-_ khufa) increases\nthe risk of HIV and may cause unwanted pregnancy [(IRIN 2008; Vera Cruz 2018).](http://www.thenewhumanitarian.org/fr/node/243963)\n\n\n3\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "DHS data",
+          "confidence": 0.9235206842422485,
+          "start": 79,
+          "end": 81
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "ODI",
+          "confidence": 0.5136476755142212,
+          "start": 159,
+          "end": 160
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Mozambique",
+          "confidence": 0.9994331002235413,
+          "start": 9,
+          "end": 10
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2015",
+          "confidence": 0.61007159948349,
+          "start": 77,
+          "end": 78
+        },
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "year-olds",
+          "confidence": 0.5244571566581726,
+          "start": 157,
+          "end": 158
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "GBV perception",
+          "confidence": 0.7185739874839783,
+          "start": 201,
+          "end": 203
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "ODI",
+          "confidence": 0.8178934454917908,
+          "start": 159,
+          "end": 160
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Mozambique",
+          "confidence": 0.9353379011154175,
+          "start": 182,
+          "end": 183
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2009",
+          "confidence": 0.7544179558753967,
+          "start": 215,
+          "end": 216
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2009",
+          "confidence": 0.8435320854187012,
+          "start": 215,
+          "end": 216
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "year-olds",
+          "confidence": 0.6650838255882263,
+          "start": 157,
+          "end": 158
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Demographic Health Survey",
+          "confidence": 0.9379669427871704,
+          "start": 684,
+          "end": 687
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "FHI",
+          "confidence": 0.5188066363334656,
+          "start": 668,
+          "end": 669
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Mozambique",
+          "confidence": 0.8869554400444031,
+          "start": 733,
+          "end": 734
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2015",
+          "confidence": 0.9680606126785278,
+          "start": 670,
+          "end": 671
+        },
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1768724f-8804-35b0-8607-23d0920f063f/190415_GBV_Secondary-Data-Analysis_Cyclone-Idai_MOZ_Final.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        2
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "## Secondary Data Review\n# GENDER-BASED VIOLENCE \u2013 Mozambique: Cyclone Idai and Floods\n\nAPRIL 2019\n\n\n#### Crisis Impact and Pre-Crisis Baseline BASIC NEEDS\n\nGBV does not happen in a silo and is never a standalone incident. Disasters, conflicts,\npre-crisis vulnerabilities, stressed living conditions, and a lack of resources are all\nexacerbating factors for the manifestation of GBV and related negative coping\nmechanisms. Reduced availability and accessibility of basic services (source of income;\nhealth facilities, food, market etc.) as a result of the cyclone and floods increase the\nvulnerabilities of women and girls.\n\n**Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene:** According to the Demographic Health Survey [(2015),](https://dhsprogram.com/pubs/pdf/AIS12/AIS12.pdf)\napproximately 23.7% of people in Sofala did not have access to an improved water\nsource. A further 23.1% used a hand pump. In previous years, during periods of drought,\nit was noted that during the water collection activities, girls faced increased risk of\n[confrontations with wild animals and GBV (CARE, 2016).](https://www.humanitarianresponse.info/en/operations/southern-eastern-africa/document/ares-rapid-gender-analysis-commitment-addressing-gender)\n\n_Water_\n[Over 50% of displacement sites assessed have water sources on site (DTM R2, 4/2019). As](https://displacement.iom.int/reports/mo\u00e7ambique-\u2014-ciclone-tropical-idai-inqu\u00e9rito-dos-locais-de-deslocamento-beira-dondo-e)\nwomen and girls are responsible for fetching water, they are exposed to more GBV risks\nwhen looking for alternative water sources. The post-disaster multi-sectoral assessment\n(MRA) in six affected districts further noted that the availability of potable/drinking\nwater has decreased significantly, particularly in Nhamatanda (MRA, 4/2019).\n\n_Sanitation and hygiene_\nWash conditions are stretched and overcrowding is observed in sites in Beira. Wash\nfacilities cannot be installed or completed and prepared in time with sporadic and rapid\nongoing relocations (Protection cluster, 4/2019). In 20% of the sites assessed in DTM it is\nreported that nobody has access to bathing and shower facilities. Less than half of sites\nhave gender-segregated latrines and bathing facilities [(DTM R2, 4/2019).](https://displacement.iom.int/reports/mo\u00e7ambique-\u2014-ciclone-tropical-idai-inqu\u00e9rito-dos-locais-de-deslocamento-beira-dondo-e) At new\naccommodation sites women are reported to be showering inside the latrines (Protection\ncluster, 4/2019). Recent research also shows that over 40% of women do not use latrines\n[provided (CARE, 3/2019).](https://www.humanitarianresponse.info/en/operations/southern-eastern-africa/document/ares-rapid-gender-analysis-commitment-addressing-gender)\n\nThe MRA further noted that almost all assessed communities in Buzi, Gondola,\nNhamatanda and Sussundenga districts are facing a major deterioration in the quality\nof sanitation facilities. Whereas previously all communities mostly used household latrines,\nthey now have to resort to open defecation. It is reported that privacy for washing and\n\n\n\ndefecating is an issue for women and girls, especially in Dondo and Nhamatanda (MRA,\n4/2019).\n\nThe lack of safe and quality hygiene and sanitation facilities, latrines and bathing\nfacilities that are not safely lit all lead to worsened hygiene condition and higher the risk\nto GBV. In addition, women and girls who cannot access safe facilities might face\nadditional burdens as they may aim to limit their use of facilities, which can lead to\nreduced food and water intake.\n\n**Health:** According to the existing referral mechanism in place by the Ministry of Gender,\nChildren and Social Action (MGCAS), there are three entry points of services for any\nvulnerable groups and potential GBV survivors: health facilities, social action and the\npolice. Health facilities with trained staff and post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) kits for\nrape survivors to perform clinical management of rape (CMR), and specialized\npsychosocial intervention are only available at district or provincial hospital.\n\nAs social workers can be the first point of entry for many GBV survivors, they need to be\ntrained to deliver psychosocial support. Pre-crisis reports further point out that\nspecialized knowledge on treating survivors of GBV is often not sufficient in the health\nfacilities: women who seek help after physical violence are not always properly consulted\nprior to being sent back home [(Slegh 2010).](http://medanthrotheory.org/site/assets/files/3123/slegh.pdf) Therefore, there is also a need to train\npersonnel in health facilities.\n\nCyclone and floods have caused major damage to at least 93 health centers (Health cluster,\n4/2019). More complete assessment on health facilities are ongoing, however field visits\nsuggested that district level hospitals in Nhamatanda, Dondo, Buzi and Beira districts are\nfunctional, despite some structural damages. However information on the overall\navailability of stocks and supplies of PEP kits remains a gap [(HeRAM, 2019).](http://www.herams.org/) The\nadministration of PEP within 72 hours of a reported rape case is vital to save lives of\nsurvivors, especially considering the high prevalence rate of HIV in the population.\nPreliminary health facility assessments have showed that around 55% of assessed health\nfacilities in Sofala province do not have PEP kits available (FHI360, preliminary data on health\nfacility assessments, 4/2019).\n\nIn the majority of displacement sites people reportedly have no problem accessing health\nfacilities, and in more than 70% it is reported that health facilities have female staff.\n80% key informants reported that women are seeing health professionals during\npregnancy [(DTM R2, 4/2019). The MRA findings in six districts show that in more than half of](https://displacement.iom.int/reports/mo\u00e7ambique-\u2014-ciclone-tropical-idai-inqu\u00e9rito-dos-locais-de-deslocamento-beira-dondo-e)\ncommunities women have access to sexual and reproductive health care. In Gondola and\nSussendenga districts, the nearest health facilities in most locations are reportedly very\n\n\n4\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Demographic Health Survey",
+          "confidence": 0.9791873693466187,
+          "start": 124,
+          "end": 127
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": {
+          "text": "Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene",
+          "confidence": 0.9501475095748901,
+          "start": 112,
+          "end": 118
+        },
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "Survey",
+          "confidence": 0.6494597792625427,
+          "start": 126,
+          "end": 127
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Sofala",
+          "confidence": 0.7052931189537048,
+          "start": 143,
+          "end": 144
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2015",
+          "confidence": 0.9648514986038208,
+          "start": 129,
+          "end": 130
+        },
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "DTM",
+          "confidence": 0.6125908493995667,
+          "start": 220,
+          "end": 221
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "Protection cluster",
+          "confidence": 0.5889095664024353,
+          "start": 325,
+          "end": 327
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2019",
+          "confidence": 0.5090593099594116,
+          "start": 288,
+          "end": 289
+        },
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "displacement sites",
+          "confidence": 0.5499433279037476,
+          "start": 211,
+          "end": 213
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "DTM",
+          "confidence": 0.9540075063705444,
+          "start": 341,
+          "end": 342
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "Protection cluster",
+          "confidence": 0.669607400894165,
+          "start": 325,
+          "end": 327
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2019",
+          "confidence": 0.7234102487564087,
+          "start": 330,
+          "end": 331
+        },
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "health facility assessments",
+          "confidence": 0.502017617225647,
+          "start": 869,
+          "end": 872
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Sofala province",
+          "confidence": 0.8504071831703186,
+          "start": 883,
+          "end": 885
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2019",
+          "confidence": 0.86538165807724,
+          "start": 773,
+          "end": 774
+        },
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "health facilities",
+          "confidence": 0.7193732261657715,
+          "start": 751,
+          "end": 753
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1768724f-8804-35b0-8607-23d0920f063f/190415_GBV_Secondary-Data-Analysis_Cyclone-Idai_MOZ_Final.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        3
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "## Secondary Data Review\n# GENDER-BASED VIOLENCE \u2013 Mozambique: Cyclone Idai and Floods\n\nAPRIL 2019\n\n\n\ndifficult to access. As a result of the cyclone and floods, people in remote affected areas\nface challenges accessing district hospitals.\n\nTo ensure a private and protective environment, there is a need to refurbish the maternity\nwards, where the survivors are treated. Further, the administrative offices of the Women\nand Children\u2019s Protection desk need to be rehabilitated, so a private and protective\nenvironment can be restored for women and girls to report confidentially.\n\n**HIV:** It is estimated that almost 1.6 million people, including more than 90,000 children,\nare infected with HIV in Mozambique. More than half of those infected are women, and\n[15% of pregnant women aged 15\u201349 are HIV-positive (ODI, 2014). The prevalence rate](https://www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi-assets/publications-opinion-files/9073.pdf)\nof HIV in the population aged 15-49 is 13.2% (15.4% in women and 10.1% in men).\nSofala has a higher rate (16.3%) than other affected districts [(DHS, 2015). Furthermore,](https://www.dhsprogram.com/pubs/pdf/AIS12/AIS12_SP.pdf)\nwomen and girls are particularly affected by the epidemic because they usually lack the\n[power to refuse unsafe sex, choose their partners or influence sexual behavior (ODI 2014).](https://www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi-assets/publications-opinion-files/9073.pdf)\n\n**Sexual and Reproductive Health:** According to the latest estimation, about 438,000\nwomen affected by the cyclone are of reproductive age (15-49). Among those, 64,000\nwomen are estimated to be pregnant and more than 37,000 women in affected areas\nare estimated to give birth in the next three months. Among those giving birth, up to\n9,600 may be at risk of complications during their pregnancy in the next three months.\nThey will they will need access to functioning health facilities and care (UNFPA, 4/2019).\n\n**Shelter:** According to the Demographic Health Survey some 28% of people in Sofala did\nnot have electricity. A further 28.9% of people lived in a cement house, 36.9% in an\nearthen mud-house [(DHS, 2015).](https://www.dhsprogram.com/pubs/pdf/AIS12/AIS12_SP.pdf)\n\nAccording to the latest DTM there are currently over 13,600 people hosted in 24\n[displacement sites in Beira (DTM R2, 4/2019). This includes five planned sites, the remainder](https://displacement.iom.int/reports/mo\u00e7ambique-\u2014-ciclone-tropical-idai-inqu\u00e9rito-dos-locais-de-deslocamento-beira-dondo-e)\nare temporary transit sites including schools and public buildings. Site plans of the five\naccommodation centers suggest that currently up to 5\u20136 families are sharing one tent,\n[and averagely 12m\u00b2 space is available per person (calculated based on CCCM site plans](https://www.humanitarianresponse.info/en/operations/mozambique/infographic/temporary-relocation-sites-layout) and\n[DTM Round 2, 4/2019). The SPHERE standards prescribe a minimum of 30m\u00b2 for camp-like](https://displacement.iom.int/reports/mo\u00e7ambique-\u2014-ciclone-tropical-idai-inqu\u00e9rito-dos-locais-de-deslocamento-beira-dondo-e)\nsettlements. Overcrowding and inadequate privacy for women and girls are observed,\nwhich is a risk to GBV.\nWhile the site plans are designed to follow minimum standards and provide suitable\nliving conditions, many elements have contributed to increased vulnerabilities and\noverstretched capacity on site: ad-hoc relocation plans, lack of sensitization among\nsurrounding communities, lack of communication to the population, and a lack of\n\n\n\nsystematic allocation of tents (Protection Monitoring, 4/2019). It is also reported that more than\nhalf of the sites do not have adequate lighting in any common place; which is considered\na major risk to GBV and can hamper the freedom of movement of women and girls [(DTM](https://displacement.iom.int/reports/mo\u00e7ambique-\u2014-ciclone-tropical-idai-inqu\u00e9rito-dos-locais-de-deslocamento-beira-dondo-e)\n[R2, 4/2019). The MRA in Dondo district shows that in more than half surveyed locations,](https://displacement.iom.int/reports/mo\u00e7ambique-\u2014-ciclone-tropical-idai-inqu\u00e9rito-dos-locais-de-deslocamento-beira-dondo-e)\npeople have been sleeping in open areas. In Buzi all but one location there were\nsurveyed families who reported they were sleeping outside (MRA, 4/2019). Sleeping out in\nthe open is unsafe and can increase the risk of GBV to women and girls.\n\n**Documentation:** The affected population have lost most or all of their documents during\nthe cyclone. This include identity documentation and other vital certificates. An estimated\n19% of people in Sofala already did not have birth certificates or registration in 2015\n[(DHS 2015). The lack of mechanisms to facilitate attainment of these documents is likely to](https://dhsprogram.com/pubs/pdf/AIS12/AIS12.pdf)\nhinder access to services, including enrolment in schools and engagement in some\nlivelihood activities (Protection cluster, 4/2019). A lack of basic needs, or possibility to engage\nin livelihood activities, will lead to faster depletion of coping mechanisms of the affected\npopulation. This means that negative coping mechanisms including those that pose a\nhigher risk to GBV will be adopted faster. A lack of engagement in school for children\nalso increases the risk of child labor and exploitation.\n\n\n**Eviction** : Assessments in the displacement sites suggested that 11 (3 in Nhamatanga\n[district and 8 in Beira district) out of 41 sites reported there is an eviction threat (DTM R2,](https://displacement.iom.int/reports/mo\u00e7ambique-\u2014-ciclone-tropical-idai-inqu\u00e9rito-dos-locais-de-deslocamento-beira-dondo-e)\n[4/2019). However the answer is perception-based and it is likely to indicate the lack of](https://displacement.iom.int/reports/mo\u00e7ambique-\u2014-ciclone-tropical-idai-inqu\u00e9rito-dos-locais-de-deslocamento-beira-dondo-e)\ncommunication and sensitization to the displaced population. In multiple reports the\nimportance for communities to get timely and clear information on relocation processes is\nemphasized (Protection cluster, 4/2019).\n\n\n**Child Protection:** Over 28% of households in Mozambique have adopted children [(DHS](https://dhsprogram.com/pubs/pdf/AIS12/AIS12.pdf)\n[2015).](https://dhsprogram.com/pubs/pdf/AIS12/AIS12.pdf) Almost 50% of young Mozambican women aged 20-24 years were married\n[before the age of 18, while 14% were married before the age of 15 (CARE, 3/2019).](https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/Regional-RGA-Cyclone-Idai-29032019.pdf)\n\nAccording to MRA in Dondo, among children under 14 years old, a total of 22.3% were\norphan by father (13.2%), by mother (6%) or both parents (3%). The assessment further\nshowed that in six affected districts, helping out the family by doing chores and other\nwork are among the main reason children (both boys and girls) are not attending schools.\nIn about 10% of locations assessed, communities reported that they have noticed there\nare children disappearing (or being trafficked). In almost 40% of assessed locations\ncommunities reported having come across children who are forced to work to provide\n\n\n5\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Demographic Health Survey",
+          "confidence": 0.9945871829986572,
+          "start": 377,
+          "end": 380
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "Survey",
+          "confidence": 0.7614012956619263,
+          "start": 379,
+          "end": 380
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "DHS",
+          "confidence": 0.9163025617599487,
+          "start": 416,
+          "end": 417
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Sofala",
+          "confidence": 0.8742786049842834,
+          "start": 386,
+          "end": 387
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2015",
+          "confidence": 0.7774344682693481,
+          "start": 418,
+          "end": 419
+        },
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "DTM",
+          "confidence": 0.7720010280609131,
+          "start": 428,
+          "end": 429
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "DTM R2",
+          "confidence": 0.6508771181106567,
+          "start": 446,
+          "end": 448
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Beira",
+          "confidence": 0.6691179275512695,
+          "start": 444,
+          "end": 445
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2019",
+          "confidence": 0.5930290222167969,
+          "start": 365,
+          "end": 366
+        },
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1768724f-8804-35b0-8607-23d0920f063f/190415_GBV_Secondary-Data-Analysis_Cyclone-Idai_MOZ_Final.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        4
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "## Secondary Data Review\n# GENDER-BASED VIOLENCE \u2013 Mozambique: Cyclone Idai and Floods\n\nAPRIL 2019\n\n\n\nfood and other goods (MRA, 4/2019). Being out of school and engagement in other\nlivelihood activities increase the exposure to GBV risks.\n\n#### GBV PROTECTION NEEDS\n\nAffected population, displaced population and estimated affected women at\nreproductive age who could be at risk of GBV in all affected provinces\n\n\n\nAffected districts in Sofala Province \u2013 affected, displace population and\nestimated women at reproductive age\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|Affected<br>Province|Affected<br>Population<br>(INGC Ponto de<br>Situacao, 10<br>April)|Total Displaced<br>Population<br>(INGC Novo Centro<br>Update, 4 April)|Estimated affected women at<br>reproductive age (15 \u2013 49)<br>(*Calculated based on two<br>sources: Affected<br>population[INGC] * % of<br>women at reproductive age<br>[2017 census])|\n|---|---|---|---|\n|Zambezia|6,035|5,235|<br> 1,417|\n|Tete|54,721|2,655|<br> 12,021|\n|Manica|262,890|13,115|<br> 60,040|\n|Sofala|1,190,594|120,995|<br> 288,480|\n|Inhambane|422|-|<br> 103|\n|**Grant Total**|**1,514,662**|** 142,000**|<br>** 362,061**|\n\n\n*Note on different data sources:\n1. According to the latest DTM (round 2, 10 April) assessments in 41 displacement sites, there are\na total 13,616 people who are displaced in 24 sites in Beira. The table above uses the INGC\nsource for a more complete presentation of the displaced population across whole Safala province.\nHowever the INGC displacement data is dated 4 April for all provinces.\n\n2. The number of estimated women at reproductive age (WRA) is based on a calculation of the\naffected population [INGC] * % of WRA [2017 census]. The total number is different than the\nUNFPA estimated figures in above paragraph, because the methodology of calculation and sources\nare different (INGC figures are not used in the latter calculation).\n\n\n\n|Affected District|Affected<br>Population<br>(INGC Ponto de<br>Situacao, 10<br>April)|Total Displaced<br>Population<br>(INGC Novo Centro<br>Update, 4 April)|Estimated affected women at<br>reproductive age (15 \u2013 49)<br>(*Calculated based on two<br>sources: Affected population<br>[INGC] * % of women at<br>reproductive age [2017<br>census])|\n|---|---|---|---|\n|Beira|436,640|<br> 15,393|<br> 114,073|\n|Nhamatanda|273,676|<br> 56,342|<br> 61,766|\n|Dondo|166,511|<br> 19,737|<br> 39,880|\n|B\u00fazi <br>|154,332<br>|<br> 16,714<br> <br>|<br> 37,196<br> <br>|\n|Marromeu<br>|41,810<br>|<br> <br> <br>|<br> 9,344<br> <br>|\n|Muanza|36,525|<br> 7,635|<br> 7,869|\n|Gorongoza|28,460|<br> 550|<br> 6,338|\n|Mar\u00edngu\u00e8 <br>|26,900 <br>|<br> <br> <br>|<br> 6,085 <br> <br>|\n|Caia<br>|12,040<br>|<br> <br> <br>|<br> 2,751<br> <br>|\n|Cheringoma <br>|7,060 <br>|<br> 490<br> <br>|<br> 1,544 <br> <br>|\n|Chibabava|3,975|<br> 4,134|<br> 1,008|\n|Machanga|2,335|<br>|<br> 552|\n|Chemba|330|<br>|<br> 74|\n|**TOTAL**|** 1,190,594**|<br>** 120,995**|<br>**288,480**|\n\n\n**Gender based violence:** The post disaster multi-sectoral assessment (MRA) in Dondo and\nBuzi districts reported that families are resorting to negative coping strategies to meet\ntheir most basic needs and risks of GBV was reported (MRA, 4/2019). There were also\ncases of sexual exploitation and abuse by people in positions of power in the community\nand village chiefs when assigning relief items. This entailed forcing women and girls into\n[sex in exchange for food and other relief items (Jornal de Noticias, 4/2019).](https://observador.pt/2019/04/14/mocambique-mulheres-forcadas-a-ter-sexo-em-troca-de-ajuda-humanitaria/)\n\n\n6\n\n\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "DTM",
+          "confidence": 0.7688988447189331,
+          "start": 353,
+          "end": 354
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": {
+          "text": "assessments in 41 displacement sites",
+          "confidence": 0.8018024563789368,
+          "start": 361,
+          "end": 366
+        },
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Safala province",
+          "confidence": 0.6756207942962646,
+          "start": 402,
+          "end": 404
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2017",
+          "confidence": 0.5714796185493469,
+          "start": 448,
+          "end": 449
+        },
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "INGC",
+          "confidence": 0.6442621946334839,
+          "start": 389,
+          "end": 390
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Safala province",
+          "confidence": 0.830592930316925,
+          "start": 402,
+          "end": 404
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2017",
+          "confidence": 0.5887627601623535,
+          "start": 448,
+          "end": 449
+        },
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "affected population",
+          "confidence": 0.6122468113899231,
+          "start": 438,
+          "end": 440
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "INGC figures",
+          "confidence": 0.5813087821006775,
+          "start": 476,
+          "end": 478
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "post disaster multi-sectoral assessment",
+          "confidence": 0.9900408387184143,
+          "start": 995,
+          "end": 999
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": {
+          "text": "MRA",
+          "confidence": 0.9951258301734924,
+          "start": 1000,
+          "end": 1001
+        },
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Dondo and\nBuzi districts",
+          "confidence": 0.9180721640586853,
+          "start": 1003,
+          "end": 1007
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2019",
+          "confidence": 0.9598374962806702,
+          "start": 1033,
+          "end": 1034
+        },
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1768724f-8804-35b0-8607-23d0920f063f/190415_GBV_Secondary-Data-Analysis_Cyclone-Idai_MOZ_Final.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        5
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "## Secondary Data Review\n# GENDER-BASED VIOLENCE \u2013 Mozambique: Cyclone Idai and Floods\n\nAPRIL 2019\n\n\n\nIn times of disaster the prevalence of GBV increases and new forms of violence emerge.\nRape, trafficking, early marriage and other forms of violence against women tend to\n[increase in times of conflict and natural disasters (CARE, 3/2019). GBV happens everywhere](https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/Regional-RGA-Cyclone-Idai-29032019.pdf)\nin all contexts and is recognized as one of the most pervasive yet most under-reported\nforms of violence in the world. Any GBV prevalence data needs to be treated with\nextreme caution. Field visits to district hospitals suggest that the functional hospitals have\nreceived less cases in comparison to the pre-crisis situation, which can be an indication of\nincreased challenges in access to services or increased reporting barriers for the affected\npopulation.\n\n\nStressed living conditions and tensions in communal living spaces expose people to a\nhigher risk of GBV as people live in crowded and less safe environments. Economic\nhardship and loss of livelihood are likely to trigger negative coping strategies, like early\nand forced marriage, in the need to engage in survival sex or sex work for food and\nmoney etc.\n\n\nPrior to the cyclone, women and girls already faced GBV protection needs: According to\nthe latest Demographic Health Survey [(2015),](https://dhsprogram.com/pubs/pdf/AIS12/AIS12.pdf) 24% of women aged 18 \u2013 49 are estimated\nto have suffered physical violence since the age of 15. A further 6% of women aged\n18\u201349 are estimated to have experienced sexual violence. 12% of women report having\nbeen forced to have sex in their lives. Those who experience physical violence _only_ are\nmore likely to seek help than those who only experience sexual violence. Among those\nwho are survivors of physical violence within the marriage, an estimated 13% suffered\nfrom eye injuries, burns, or sprains. A further 23% is estimated to have suffered sexual\nviolence as well [(DHS 2015).](https://dhsprogram.com/pubs/pdf/AIS12/AIS12.pdf)\n\n\nIn Sofala, 6.5% of women aged 15\u201349 thought it was acceptable for a husband to beat\nhis wife. [1] When posed the same question, 13% of men in Sofala thought it was\nacceptable to beat their wife. In particular, arguing and refusing to have sex were seen\n[as legitimate reasons to beat a wife (DHS 2015). Within this environment, keeping silent is](https://dhsprogram.com/pubs/pdf/AIS12/AIS12.pdf)\nthe most adopted way for women to cope and is considered to increase their individual\n[chance to survive (Slegh, 2009).](http://medanthrotheory.org/site/assets/files/3123/slegh.pdf)\n\n\n1 Thought it was acceptable for a husband to beat his wife in one or more of the following instances: burning\nfood, arguing with husband, leaving the house without informing the husband, not taking care of the children,\nwhen hitting the children.\n\n\n\nThe challenges of survivors to seek help include but are not limited to access constraints\nto service providers, fear of stigmatization, and ostracization. With limited presence of\ndistrict level services, most GBV cases are settled through traditional courts by community\ncommittees. It is critical to take into account the power dynamics of the households in any\ncommunity engagement and programme design, survivors are not serviced properly when\n[they need to risk their family\u2019s protection in order to stand up for their rights (Slegh, 2009).](http://medanthrotheory.org/site/assets/files/3123/slegh.pdf)\n\n#### INFORMATION GAPS AND NEEDS\n\n\n  - Critical demographic data disaggregated by sex and age remains a gap for\nmost vulnerable population groups, e.g. female headed households.\n\n  - More complete data on damage and impact is still to be obtained with\nimprovement of humanitarian access.\n\n  - More granular level information needed at community level on GBV protection\nneeds\n\n  - Assessment/survey data using different data collection methods that are not\nlimited to key informants are needed. Surveys, FGD with women groups,\ncommunity committee are recommended.\n\n#### LESSONS LEARNED\n\n\n  - Adolescent girls are often at high risk of GBV, yet not always specifically\ntargeted for provision of reproductive healthcare. Specific attention should be\npaid to adolescent girls who often do not access healthcare due to their age,\n[lack of decision-making power, and limited access to care (UNFPA GBViE Minimum](https://www.unfpa.org/sites/default/files/pub-pdf/GBVIE.Minimum.Standards.Publication.FINAL_.ENG_.pdf)\n[Standards 2015)](https://www.unfpa.org/sites/default/files/pub-pdf/GBVIE.Minimum.Standards.Publication.FINAL_.ENG_.pdf)\n\n  - The GBV prevalence rate in Sofala province is high. Strong evidence exists\nregarding the risks GBV poses for HIV, specifically among women, and\nnumerous studies have highlighted the benefits of tackling GBV and HIV as twin\nepidemics [(WHO, 2004). GBV integration into HIV prevention programmes that](https://www.who.int/hac/techguidance/pht/InfoBulletinIntimatePartnerViolenceFinal.pdf)\naddress social and cultural norms that support inequalities in the family,\n\n\n7\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "GBV prevalence data",
+          "confidence": 0.9525222182273865,
+          "start": 94,
+          "end": 97
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "CARE",
+          "confidence": 0.6459741592407227,
+          "start": 58,
+          "end": 59
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Mozambique",
+          "confidence": 0.7765952348709106,
+          "start": 9,
+          "end": 10
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2019",
+          "confidence": 0.8714514970779419,
+          "start": 16,
+          "end": 17
+        },
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "affected\npopulation",
+          "confidence": 0.7996862530708313,
+          "start": 144,
+          "end": 146
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Demographic Health Survey",
+          "confidence": 0.998475968837738,
+          "start": 229,
+          "end": 232
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "Survey",
+          "confidence": 0.8815549612045288,
+          "start": 231,
+          "end": 232
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2015",
+          "confidence": 0.9955857992172241,
+          "start": 234,
+          "end": 235
+        },
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "women and girls",
+          "confidence": 0.5135170221328735,
+          "start": 216,
+          "end": 219
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "demographic data",
+          "confidence": 0.8237636089324951,
+          "start": 631,
+          "end": 633
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "vulnerable population groups",
+          "confidence": 0.868903398513794,
+          "start": 643,
+          "end": 646
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Assessment/survey data",
+          "confidence": 0.6084480285644531,
+          "start": 688,
+          "end": 692
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Sofala province",
+          "confidence": 0.561700165271759,
+          "start": 797,
+          "end": 799
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2015",
+          "confidence": 0.5221292972564697,
+          "start": 786,
+          "end": 787
+        },
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1768724f-8804-35b0-8607-23d0920f063f/190415_GBV_Secondary-Data-Analysis_Cyclone-Idai_MOZ_Final.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        6
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "## Secondary Data Review\n# GENDER-BASED VIOLENCE \u2013 Mozambique: Cyclone Idai and Floods\n\nAPRIL 2019\n\n\ncommunity and institutions [(FHI360, 2015)](https://www.fhi360.org/sites/default/files/media/documents/resource-spt-cap-mozambique-gbv-integration.pdf) should be included as a response\nstrategy in the medium and long term.\n\n\n  - With the onset of the drought in Mozambique (2016), many families have used\nchild marriage as a coping mechanism to raise income (through dowry) or to\nreduce the number of dependents per household [(CARE, 3/2019).](https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/Regional-RGA-Cyclone-Idai-29032019.pdf) Girls are at\nincreased risk of GBV as they are married off for dowry. As described above,\nmany families have lost documentation as a result of the cyclone and subsequent\nfloods. This makes it more difficult for children to attend school. In addition, many\ncommunities observed children who had to work. Being out of school exposes\nchildren to higher risks of GBV and may also contribute to more child marriage.\n\n#### LIMITATIONS\n\n\n  - Prevalence of GBV or number of GBV cases reported are never an indication\nof needs or risks. Numbers should be interpreted in close reference to the\ncontext and it should be considered that GBV is underreported in most contexts.\n\n\n\n8\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Prevalence of GBV",
+          "confidence": 0.6008219122886658,
+          "start": 177,
+          "end": 180
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1768724f-8804-35b0-8607-23d0920f063f/190415_GBV_Secondary-Data-Analysis_Cyclone-Idai_MOZ_Final.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        7
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "## Secondary Data Review\n# GENDER-BASED VIOLENCE \u2013 Mozambique: Cyclone Idai and Floods\n\nAPRIL 2019\n\n\n#### Response Capacity\n\nThe response capacity to protection needs of women and girls are threefold in the\naftermath of the emergency: government institutions which provide specialized health\ncare, psychosocial support, social care, legal and judicial assistance; community-based\norganization, who work closely with relevant line ministries, and perform communitybased case management and referral for vulnerable people in need; humanitarian\npartners (UN, INGOs etc.) who are providing support to disaster-affected population.\n\n\nHumanitarian partners\n\n  - Currently provide limited and scattered services on prevention and\nmainstreaming, not response.\n\n  - Service provision is concentrated in Beira cities and evolved around\naccommodation centers/displace sites, non-specialized psychosocial support,\npsychosocial first aid is the most common service provided in and near sites.\n\n  - Community engagement through NFI distribution (dignity kits) is the main\nintervention for risk mitigation and has highest number of locations and\nbeneficiaries reached, even still very limited in terms of quantity.\n\n  - Efforts are made towards strengthening and reinforcing the government-led\nintegrated GBV services, including bringing government social workers to\nmajor sites for referral and case management.\n\n  - There is a need to provide more psychosocial support, more training on\npsychosocial first aid for community activities/volunteers and more specialized\ncapacity in providing psychosocial intervention.\n\n  - With the unfold of the crisis and scale up of humanitarian response, more than\n180 organizations and agencies are providing humanitarian assistance. More\nconstant GBV mainstreaming and risk mitigation through all cluster response and\nhumanitarian partners is required, especially when carrying out distributions,\nthrough site planning and programme designs.\n\n  - Many humanitarian agencies\u2019 operations are time-bound and are subjected to\nfunding status, which poses challenges on continuity and consistency. More\ncapacity building of government counterparts and community-based\norganizations are needed for more sustainable and long term recovery.\n\n\nGovernment Response\n\n\n\nCommunity based organizations\n\n  - Based in communities, with networks of trained community volunteers /activists\nfor referral and case follow-up\n\n  - Depends on which line ministry CBOs are working with, some has focuses on\nSRH, some on GBV and others provide integrated services i.e. nutrition\nservices, health, legal counselling.\n\n  - These CBOs train and maintain the activists network covering whole Safala\nprovince, however the resources are limited, some have chosen to focus on\nbuilding capacity of government counterpart (health staff etc.)\n\n\n9\n\n\n\n\n- The Multisectoral Mechanism for Integrated Assistance to Women Victims of\nViolence in 2012 outlines the three pillars of services/points of entry for\nintegrated GBV response: specialized health services, social action and police.\nThe system also encompasses further legal assistance if required by the\nvictim/survivor.\n\n- Within this integrated mechanism, the victim/survivor can seek help by\ncontacting either of these services. Regardless of the service point of entry\n(health, social action or police), the respective service provider must ensure the\nvictim/survivor/vulnerable individuals is referred to all other pillars of the\nservice provision.\n\n\n\n_Specialized health_\n_service provider_\n\n\n\n_Social Action, GBV_\n_service provider_\n\n\n\n\n\n_Police_\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1768724f-8804-35b0-8607-23d0920f063f/190415_GBV_Secondary-Data-Analysis_Cyclone-Idai_MOZ_Final.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        8
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "## Secondary Data Review\n# GENDER-BASED VIOLENCE \u2013 Mozambique: Cyclone Idai and Floods\n\nAPRIL 2019\n\n\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1768724f-8804-35b0-8607-23d0920f063f/190415_GBV_Secondary-Data-Analysis_Cyclone-Idai_MOZ_Final.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        9
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_18/raw/doc_18_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,122 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "# **NEW ISSUES IN REFUGEE RESEARCH**\n\n**Research Paper No. 127**\n\n# **Land conflicts and their impact on refugee women\u2019s** **livelihoods in southwestern Uganda**\n\n**Kalyango Ronald Sebba**\n\nDepartment of Women and Gender Studies\nMakerere University\nUganda\n\nE-mail kalyango@infocom.co.ug\n\nJuly 2006\n\n\n**Policy Development and Evaluation Service**\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/facd2444-b767-350f-8cc6-ed67d5a60227/1C032BB75402B3D9C12571DA00377D44-UNHCR-Jul2006.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**Policy Development and Evaluation Service**\n**United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees**\n**CP 2500, 1211 Geneva 2**\n**Switzerland**\n\n**E-mail: hqep00@unhcr.org**\n**Web Site: www.unhcr.org**\n\nThese papers provide a means for UNHCR staff, consultants, interns and associates, as well\nas external researchers, to publish the preliminary results of their research on refugee-related\nissues. The papers do not represent the official views of UNHCR. They are also available\nonline under \u2018publications\u2019 at <www.unhcr.org>.\n\nISSN 1020-7473\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/facd2444-b767-350f-8cc6-ed67d5a60227/1C032BB75402B3D9C12571DA00377D44-UNHCR-Jul2006.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**Introduction**\n\n\nThis paper presents the preliminary findings of a study on land conflicts between\nrefugees and host communities in southwestern Uganda and their impact on refugee\nwomen\u2019s livelihoods. Uganda has a long history of hosting refugees that dates back to\nthe 1940s, when it hosted Polish refugees; Rwandese and Sudanese in the 1950s\n(Holborn 1975:1213-1225). Refugees were placed in gazetted areas in close proximity\nto the local populations such as in the settlements of Nakivale, Oruchinga, Kyaka 1\nand II in Southwestern Uganda; Rhino Camp, Imvepi and Ikafe in the West Nile\nregion; Achol Pii, Parolinya and Adjumani settlements in Northern Uganda; and\nKiryandongo and Kyangwali settlements in Central Uganda.\n\n\nOn the whole, placement in rural settlements was based on an assumption that the\nrefugee problem was temporal and would end as soon as the circumstances that led to\ntheir flight had ceased (Pincwya, 1998:8-25). However, this has not been the case and\nthe government was not prepared for a protracted refugee situation exacerbated by an\nincrease in the population of both refugees and nationals.\n\n\nLand conflicts between refugees and nationals are a result of government policy of\nsettling refugees in gazetted areas (Kalyango & Kirk, 2002). Placement in rural\nsettlements is based on the assumption that majority of refugees are of a rural\nbackground and can support themselves through agriculture until their repatriation\n(Kibreab, 1989; UNHCR, 2000, Jacobsen, 2001). Host populations first welcomed\nrefugees as those in need of protection and also as would-be beneficiaries of\ninfrastructure to be left behind on their repatriation (Harrell-Bond, 1986; 2002).\n\n\nHowever, as the refugee situation became protracted, hospitality gave way to a\ncompetition for resources such as agricultural and grazing land, water and forest\nresources (Pirouet, 1988; Bagenda et al, 2002; Jones, 2002). This has not been helped\nby persistent refugee flows from Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo,\nKenya, Somalia, Burundi and Ethiopia resulting in increased xenophobia against\nrefugees and a call for them to repatriate.\n\n\nLand is central to the sustainable livelihoods of rural households. For them it is not\njust land per se but arable and grazing land on which they depend for their livelihood.\nAs a result, any conflict over land impacts the households directly, and this impact is\ngender differentiated (Verma, 2001:3-4). The impact of land conflicts on refugee\nwomen\u2019s livelihoods has to be situated in the larger context of land problems in Sub\nSaharan Africa.\n\n\nThese include but are not limited to growing land concentration and scarcity;\ncompetition over land use and environmental and land degradation. Other problems\ninclude corruption in land markets, indeterminate boundaries of customarily held\nlands, a weak land administration system, and a lack of equity in land systems\n(Tshikaka, 2004). Women\u2019s interests in land were eroded by colonial policies and\nagrarian change that never addressed the core issues of gendered accessibility and\nequity. For instance, processes of differentiation and individualisation of land rights\nand land shortages have resulted in the concentration of land rights in men (Tshikaka,\n2004; Verma, 2001).\n\n\n1\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/facd2444-b767-350f-8cc6-ed67d5a60227/1C032BB75402B3D9C12571DA00377D44-UNHCR-Jul2006.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        2
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**Research focus and aims**\n\n\nGender inequalities persist in refugee situations and limit the extent to which women\nand girls can attain sustainable livelihoods. According to the World Bank (2003),\ngender inequalities tend to lower productivity and intensify unequal distribution of\nresources. They also contribute to non-monetary aspects of poverty, such as lack of\nsecurity, opportunity and empowerment, which lower the quality of life for both men\nand women (Ibid.; Tinker 1990). Whereas refugee women and girls face the brunt of\nthese factors, protection and assistance has largely focused on men. This resonates\nthrough almost all refugee policies and practices, which focus on men as household\nheads (Kalyango, forthcoming).\n\n\nRefugee women have complained against the status quo because it discriminates them\nin asylum claims, acquisition of identity documents and food ration cards, limits their\nfreedom of movement and makes them dependent on men (UNHCR 2001). Despite\nseveral attempts to address this anomaly, such as in the Convention for the\nElimination of All forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) and in the\nUNHCR guidelines for refugee women and for Sex and Gender Based Violence, wide\ngender disparities between women and men in refugee situations remain common\n(UNHCR, 2000; 2003; UNIFEM, 2003; ).\n\n\nThe overall objective of the study was to establish the gendered impact of land\nconflicts on livelihoods of refugee women. Specifically, the paper takes a special\nfocus on the gender dimensions of the land conflicts and their impact on household\nlivelihoods. Gender is construed to refer to the socially constructed differences\nbetween men and women. Differences are embedded in social relations and therefore\ndiffer between cultures; they are constituted through and also help to constitute the\nexercise of other forms of social difference such as those of age, race or class (Kabeer,\n1994).\n\n\nIn identifying the gender impacts of the land conflicts, analysis was based on the\nconcepts of identity and agency. Identity concerns the social process whereby\nindividuals come to identify themselves with a particular configuration of social roles\nand relationships and agency describes the strategies used by individuals to create a\nviable and satisfying life for themselves in the context of or in spite of these identities\n(El Bushra, 2000). These concepts, as El-Bushra (Ibid.) noted, enable an\nunderstanding of the nature of violent conflicts and also an interrogation of the\nmotivations of different actors in a conflict.\n\n\n**Area of study**\n\n\nThe study was carried out in southwestern Uganda, Nakivale refugee settlement\nestablished in the early 1960s to cater for Rwandese refugees fleeing a bitter\nTutsi/Hutu ethnic conflict in 1959. It spreads over 21,756 hectares and is located in a\nsemi arid zone with limited arable land. The main economic activity is animal rearing\nand agriculture by both refugees and host populations. Nakivale is found in one of the\nremotest areas of Mbarara district with poor transport and social infrastructure which\nmake it not easily accessible.\n\n\n2\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/facd2444-b767-350f-8cc6-ed67d5a60227/1C032BB75402B3D9C12571DA00377D44-UNHCR-Jul2006.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        3
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "Today, the settlement is home to over 15,000 refugees of different nationalities (see\ntable 1) and administered by a camp commandant under the government ministry of\nDisaster Preparedness and Refugees. UNHCR through its implementing partner the\nUganda Red Cross provides humanitarian assistance to the refugees. Unlike the host\npopulation, refugees have access to adequate social services provided by UNHCR.\nThis in itself has been a cause of xenophobia against refugees who are seen as more\nprivileged by the local population.\n\n\n**Table 1:** **Nakivale refugee population at 30 September 2004**\n\n|Age Group|0-4|Col3|5-17|Col5|18-59|Col7|60|Col9|Total|\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n|**Nationality**|M|F|M|F|M|F|M|F||\n|Rwandan|2596|2347|2009|1796|1967|1814|57|49|12,635|\n|Kenyan|0|0|0|1|1|1|0|0|3|\n|Somali|70|65|137|138|230|233|8|3|884|\n|Ethiopian|4|4|7|5|38|15|0|0|73|\n|Congolese|188|201|199|203|238|229|17|19|1,294|\n|Burundi|39|36|59|41|88|63|0|0|326|\n|Sudanese|6|6|15|25|19|18|0|0|89|\n|**Total**|2903|2659|2426|2209|2581|2373|82|71|15,304|\n\n\n\n_Source: Camp commandant\u2019s office, Nakivale_\n\nEver since its establishment, the settlement has been a centre of controversy as\nregards its size and original boundaries. Located in central Ankole [1], it has been prone\nto encroachment by the populace who saw it as an area for expansion of their grazing\nactivities. Encroachment was of two types: extension of national land holdings into\ngazetted land and land loans given to nationals by refugees. This was also precipitated\nby the fact that there was a shrink in land availability for settlement and grazing in\nsurrounding areas especially after gazetting of Lake Mburo National Park in 1983 and\nout migration from neighbouring districts of Bushenyi and Ntugamo.\n\n\nLand conflicts are fuelled by the fact that large expanses of settlement land are\nunutilised land since the refugee population is small. This has resulted in a limitation\non expansion of refugee agricultural activities especially women in other parts of the\nsettlements; limited access to natural resources such as fuel wood and water and\ngrazing land.\n\n\n**Land conflicts between refugees and host populations**\n\n\nGenerally, it is vital to place refugee - host population conflict over land in the context\nof Uganda\u2019s land tenure system. Land tenure is the mode of land holding, together\nwith terms and conditions of occupancy. It is about \u2018the bundle of rights\u2019 held and\nenjoyed in the land resource. The relative degree to which individuals can profit from\nland resources is influenced by three factors: utilisation, duration of occupancy and\nrelocation rights (Nuwagaba et al, 2002). It is important to note that ambiguities exist\nin land tenure systems in Uganda as a result of its colonial history. For instance, at\nindependence in 1962, there were three land tenure systems: Mailo tenure, a system\nthat was exclusive to the kingdom of Buganda and traced its origins in the Buganda\n\n1 The people of Ankole are both pastorists and agriculturalists.\n\n\n3\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/facd2444-b767-350f-8cc6-ed67d5a60227/1C032BB75402B3D9C12571DA00377D44-UNHCR-Jul2006.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        4
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "agreement of 1900; Freehold tenure, a system created under the Crown Land\nOrdinance of 1903; the native freeholds, where the community control over land was\nwoven into a number of land rights (Nuwagaba et al, 2002).\n\n\nThe degree of enjoyment of the land resource has become a point of contention\nbetween host populations and refugees. At first, refugees were settled in sparsely\npopulated areas and enjoyed good relations with the host populations (Holborn,\n1975:1212). However, population increase and the advent of a cash economy\nincreased the value of land, leading to strained social relations between refugees and\nnationals (Kasfir, 1988:158). Moreover, refugees are regarded as non-citizens who\nshould not have any rights over land.\n\n\nLand conflicts between refugees and host population can be attributed to two main\nfactors, that is, exceeding of field or residential boundaries (encroachment) and\nacquisition by nationals (sometimes in the form of land loans). Land conflicts in the\nrefugee hosting areas are partly attributed to lack of clear refugee settlement\nboundaries (Mugerwa, 1992; Nuwagaba, 2002; Bagenda, 2003). According to the\nchairman of the district land board in Mbarara, there are no clear demarcations\nbetween refugees\u2019 and host population\u2019s land [2] .\n\n\nThe lack of clarity can be traced to reluctance of the Ankole kingdom [3] to favour\npermanent settlement of refugees in 1962 when they were first given land to settle\n(Holborn, 1974:1223). As a result there has been increased encroachment on refugee\nland by nationals, a practice exacerbated by weak administration systems. For\ninstance, some encroachers have even acquired land tittles on gazetted land, since the\nprocedure of acquiring a land title is very simple and open to abuse. All one needs is\nto fill out an application form from the district land board and take them to Local\nCouncil 1 (LC1) and have a \u2018neighbour\u2019 sign for confirmation.\n\n\nAfter the District Land Board has confirmed, land is surveyed and a land title issued.\nThe system has also been exploited by refugees, especially those of the 1959 caseload\nwho have acquired land tittles [4] on settlement land. For instance, there is a case of a\nRwandan refugee with a title for seven square kilometres of settlement land.\nInterestingly, it was also found out that the camp commandant of Nakivale refugee\nsettlement has had to appear in court on charges of distributing land to refugees in the\nsettlement [5] .\n\n\nFurthermore, there have also been disagreements between Mbarara district\nadministration officials and the government over land in refugee settlements. Part of\nthe disagreements are because the government has refused nationals to use refugee\nland. One district official interviewed said that government has not always agreed\nwith the district on matters pertaining to land conflicts in refugee settlement. The\nfindings of the study revealed that in fact, some of the district officials are themselves\nencroachers on settlement land. Institutional responses are further hindered by\nmigration of nationals from other areas, such as Nyabushozi and Bushenyi, because of\nland shortages. This migration is caused by anticipation that refugees will repatriate\n\n2 The settlement boundary was determined by ridges that surround it.\n3 These were the original owners of the land in Nakivale and Oruchinga before government gazetted\nthe settlement.\n4 Under the Ugandan law, refugees are not supposed to own land.\n5 Interviews camp commandant Nakivale and Refugee Desk officer Mbarara, October 2004.\n\n\n4\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/facd2444-b767-350f-8cc6-ed67d5a60227/1C032BB75402B3D9C12571DA00377D44-UNHCR-Jul2006.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        5
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "especially to Rwanda and leave vacant land in the settlements. On the other hand,\nrefugees from Rwanda are coming to Uganda because there is land for settlement\n(Bagenda et al, 2002). In response, government is in the process of resurveying the\nland and cancelling all land titles acquired on refugee land.\n\n\nTo further analyze the land conflicts, one also needs to understand the land problem in\nRwanda. According to Hajabakiga (2004:1-3) Rwanda has a population of 8.1 million\nand a population density of 308 inhabitants per square kilometre. On a whole, this\nplaces pressure on land leading to landlessness. Limited access to land in Rwanda has\nalso had an influence on the repatriation of Rwandese in that they prefer to stay in\nareas where they have access to land for their own livelihoods. For instance, it is this\nlack of land in Rwanda that has partly led to secondary refugee movements from\nTanzania to Uganda.\n\n\nEven some of the refugees who had repatriated after the genocide in 1994 returned to\nUganda to repossess their land holdings in refugee settlements. When asked about\ntheir repatriation, Rwandan refugees indicated that they had no land to return to in\nRwanda [6] . Indeed, Hajabakiga (2004) observed that between the 1950s and 1980s\nmany people in Rwanda lost their land rights for politically and ethnically motivated\nreasons. This, according to her, caused a problem when Rwandese repatriated after\n1994 since they had no lands to repossess, and some of them ended up taking up the\nlands of those who had fled that same year.\n\n\nGenerally, conflicts over land in Nakivale can be perceived as \u2018livelihood clashes\u2019\nbetween refugees and nationals, since land is a critical resource for supporting\nlivelihoods (Mugerwa, 1992, Verma, 2001:79). Hence it is important to understand\nthe interplay of various factors that influence access to and utilisation of land by both\nhost communities and refugees. For instance, despite settlement size, each refugee\nhousehold is given 0.04 hectares (20m x 20m) of land for homestead establishment\nand 0.15 as agricultural plots. This leaves a large part of the land under\u2013utilized\nproviding room for encroachment by nationals in need of grazing land.\n\n\nQuite often, animals stray into refugees\u2019 agricultural plots leading to a conflict\nbetween refugees and local populations. Usually, conflicts arise when livelihoods are\nthreatened and this threat can be internal (within the households or communities) or\nexternal-from outside the households or communities (Mugerwa, 1992:23; Verma,\n2001:97). At the centre of land conflicts are questions of ownership, access to and\ncontrol over natural resources. Land is regarded by locals as belonging to Ugandans\nwith refugees having no rights whatsoever. Regarding their interests in land, locals\naccuse the government of placing refugees\u2019 above those of the national population [7] .\nFor refugees, access is determined by legislation, as land is allocated for a settlement.\nParadoxically, settlements are sometimes established in non-agricultural productive\nareas, limiting livelihood opportunities. Furthermore, the government confines the\nrefugees in the settlement, allowing them only limited freedom of movement.\nRefugees have had to devise survival strategies such as spontaneous movement out of\nsettlements with no permission to do so.\n\n\n6\nFc Group Discussion Kigali zone, Nakivale (July 2004).\n7 Refugee Desk Officer, Mbarara October 2004.\n\n\n5\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/facd2444-b767-350f-8cc6-ed67d5a60227/1C032BB75402B3D9C12571DA00377D44-UNHCR-Jul2006.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        6
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "_Women\u2019s livelihood strategies_\n\n\nAccording to DFID (2001), a livelihood comprises the capabilities and assets (both\nmaterial and social resources) and activities required for a means of living. A\nlivelihood is said to be sustainable when it can recover from shocks, stresses and\ntrends and maintain and enhance its capabilities both now and in the future while not\nundermining the natural resource base for future generations (Ibid).\n\n\nAccess to and control of land to a greater extent determines refugee women\u2019s access\nto livelihood assets such as physical capital, natural capital, human capital, financial\ncapital and social capital. Unfortunately, as Wengi (1998) points out, access and\ncontrol are limited by their lack of resource rights. For instance, in most of Sub\nSaharan Africa, women do not own land and even what they produce on the land, is\ncontrolled by the men (World Bank, 2000; Verma, 2001). Paradoxically, women\nthrough their labour are the major contributors to household livelihoods especially in\nrefugee situations (Mulumba, 2002).\n\n\nWomen and men negotiate access and maintain control over land as a productive and\nmaterial resource differently and inequitably within local relations of power (Verma,\n2001:79).Land conflicts influence women\u2019s access to resources such as cultivable\nland, water and firewood. Given their domestic responsibilities, refugee women\nnegotiate access to natural resources such as land for cultivation, firewood and water\nvital for the survival of their families.\n\n\nBecause of land conflicts and depletion of resources such as trees and arable soils\nwomen have been forced to look beyond the settlement for other sources. For\ninstance, interviews with refugee women revealed that they collect firewood and\nwater five to seven kilometres away from the settlement. Travelling such long\ndistances makes them vulnerable to sexual exploitation and gender based violence\nfrom both refugees and host populations. The distances also take away their valuable\ntime to engage in income generating activities or to participate in skills training.\n\n\nIt was also established that women do not control proceeds from surplus food sold in\nthe markets nor independently use the surplus from other household income\ngenerating activities. As a result, they are dependent on men for their daily needs a\nfact that greatly disadvantages them. For instance, because of their low income,\nwomen are denied access to dispute settling mechanisms in the settlements. For\nexample in the case of land conflicts, Refugee Welfare Committees [8] demand fees\nbefore they can settle a dispute.\n\n\nAccording to the Refugee Welfare Committee chairman, this is to \u2018facilitate\u2019 their\nwork in settling cases in the form of stationary. This requirement has become a\nhindrance to women who wish to seek assistance and adjudication of their cases.\nFurther to that, at times, police posts in the settlements also demand money from\nrefugees to address their complaints. For instance in cases where women report cases\nof sexual and gender based violence (SGBV), the police request \u2018fees\u2019 to arrest\n\n\n8 Refugee Welfare Committees are not facilitated by the government or UNHCR to carry out their day\nto day activities.\n\n\n6\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/facd2444-b767-350f-8cc6-ed67d5a60227/1C032BB75402B3D9C12571DA00377D44-UNHCR-Jul2006.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        7
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "perpetrators [9] . Since women often lack money to pay such fees, they at times fail to\nreport cases.\n\n\nRefuge women\u2019s vulnerability is also partly due to men who migrate out of the\nsettlements to seek for work opportunities in urban centres leaving their wives behind\nto maintain a presence in the settlement. As observed in a study of urban refugees in\nKampala (Kalyango, 1999) some refugees have ended up with a dual settlement, that\nis, some live in urban centres such as Mbarara and Kampala and only return to the\nsettlement when there is food distribution or a census.\n\n\nThe majority of refugee women respond to these hindrances in their attempts to\nestablish a livelihood by building up their social capital. For instance, they respond to\nthe lack of labour in the households as a consequence of the absence of men, by\nforming groups through which they harness their joint labour. Women for example\ncooperate in cultivating each other\u2019s gardens as a group. They also participate in\ncommunity activities such as women\u2019s groups, or as volunteers with humanitarian\nagencies operating in the settlement.\n\n\nSome refugee women work as social workers for the Uganda Red Cross Society or as\nCommunity Volunteers for the International Medial Corps (IMC). Social capital is\ndeveloped through vertical (patron/ client) or horizontal (between individuals with\nshared interests) networks that increase people\u2019s trust and ability to work together and\nexpand their access to wider institutions (DFID, 2001). Social capital helps to increase\nwomen\u2019s productivity, improves their access to income generating activities and\nfacilitates the sharing of knowledge (Ibid.).\n\n\nFurthermore, some women have devised survival strategies such as the use of sex and\nmarriage to achieve livelihood goals. For instance, they either exchange sex for\nservices they need or engage in outright prostitution. Joseph (not real name), who runs\na drug shop in the settlement, revealed that at times women request to exchange sex\nfor drugs in case they have no money.\n\n\nAnother livelihood strategy of women is that of marriage as agency to access\nlivelihood resources. Women seek marriage [10] to either nationals or refugee men. In\nthe absence of role models and evident benefits from formal education, marriage has\nremained as the only option for many. Girls are married off as early as 16 years to\nacquire income or dowry and or extra labour for the household. Refugees reported\nthat if a girl reaches puberty then she is ready for marriage as in the case of Esther:\n\n\nEsther lost her husband in 1994 in Rwanda while fleeing the genocide\nwith her under-aged daughter Doris. When she arrived in Nakivale\nrefugee settlement, she got involved with a Rwandan man in order to\nsecure social support and survival. She gave away Doris to another man\nto marry her. The man was later arrested for defilement which is illegal\nin Uganda after a marriage ceremony attended by the Refugee Welfare\nCommittee members. Doris\u2019s mother refused to give evidence against her\nson-in-law arguing that Doris was of age and that the man had been\nwrongly arrested.\n\n\n9 The request for fees arises out of the poor facilitation of the police units in the settlements.\n10 At times they cohabit with men with no formal marriage ceremonies.\n\n\n7\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/facd2444-b767-350f-8cc6-ed67d5a60227/1C032BB75402B3D9C12571DA00377D44-UNHCR-Jul2006.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        8
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "Early marriages arise out of the communities\u2019 view that women\u2019s place in society is in\nthe home (Obbo, 1990:210). Early marriages however have a negative impact on\ngirls\u2019 access to education and building up their human capital. Human capital\nrepresents the skills, knowledge, ability, labour and good health that together enable\npeople to pursue different livelihood strategies and achieve their livelihood objectives\n(DFID, 2001).\n\n\nThe study concurs with the World Bank (2000:152) which observed that when girls\nreach adolescence, they are generally expected to spend more time on household\nactivities such as cooking, cleaning, collecting fuel and water and caring for children.\nMoreover, quite often men marry young girls not for companionship but as extra\nlabourers in households.\n\n\nSuch attitudes have partly led to high school drop out rate for girls in higher classes\n(secondary school level) despite high enrolment rates in lower classes (primary school\nlevel). Education policies have emphasised the enrolment of girls in both primary and\nsecondary school and not their retention in school. Whereas girls are encouraged to\nattend school, nothing much has been done to provide an enabling environment for\ntheir retention in school. According to the Government of Uganda\u2019s Development\nAssistance for Refugees (DAR) policy, refugees need more education facilities to\nensure that children are able to access primary education (GoU, 2004:12).\n\n\nA closer look at the government strategy shows that it does not address the quality of\neducation and the retention of the girl child in school. For instance, in one of the\nsecondary schools in the settlement, of the 300 students, 200 are boys and 100 are\ngirls. The head teacher said that girls have a high drop out rate because of early\nmarriages, pregnancy and neglect of parents. Mulumba (1998:35-40) noted that there\nis little motivation to educate daughters and further observed that in the refugee\nsettlements, it is not uncommon for girls as young as 13 and 14 years to marry.\n\n\nA limited number of women are involved in the informal sector within the settlement\ninstead of only relying on land resources. Some women operate kiosks that sell basic\nnecessities such as sugar, salt, paraffin; others provide services operating hair saloons\nand restaurants. This concurs with research by Deepa Narayan (2000:45), who\nobserved that poor people try to diversify their sources of income and food by\ncarrying out different income generating activities.\n\n\nDespite their hard work, it was found that women rarely participate in decisionmaking processes at both the household and community level. This is a result of\ncultural expectations that perceive women as belonging to the \u2018home\u2019 (Tinker,\n1990:17) and their preoccupation in care activities that limit their time to actively\nparticipate in decision-making.\n\n\nRefugee women with some form of formal education seek employment in the\nsettlements, although the opportunities are limited. A few semi-skilled women are\nemployed as social workers, community volunteers, teachers or midwives in the\nhealth units. In all these activities, they earn incentives that are not commensurate to\nthe work they do, as according to the government of Uganda, refugees are not\n\n\n8\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/facd2444-b767-350f-8cc6-ed67d5a60227/1C032BB75402B3D9C12571DA00377D44-UNHCR-Jul2006.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        9
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "supposed to work. Hence, humanitarian agencies cannot sign a contract with them,\ngive them terms of reference and pay them a salary [11] .\n\n\nAnother livelihood strategy is that of engaging in Functional Adult Literacy (FAL)\nprograms. The majority of the refugees who attend these classes seek to learn English\nin order to improve their (economic and social) integration into the Ugandan\ncommunity.\n\n\nIt is also a strategy of those who hope to be resettled in other countries such as the\nUnited States of America, Australia and Canada. Enrolment in English language\nclasses reveals that refugee women have a long-term view of their livelihood beyond\nthe parameters of their households and domestic work. Whereas they thus search for\nopportunities that can get them and their families out of poverty, at the same time it is\nimportant to realize that they are constrained by having to juggle their studying with\ncare and livelihood activities in the households.\n\n\n**Conclusion**\n\n\nIn all, conflicts over land between refugees and host populations have had negative\nimpact on the way refugee women access livelihood goals. Land, for the majority of\nrefugee women is central to their survival. In order to overcome the predicaments of\nland conflicts and inequitable access to resources, refugee women have devised other\nlivelihood strategies to ensure their survival and that of their children. For instance\nmarriage, Functional Adult Literacy and building up of their social capital are seen as\nagency in this regard.\n\n\nThe extent to which refugee women can attain livelihood goals is however limited by\nrestrictions on their freedom of movement. As a result, refugees fail to fully utilize\nlivelihood opportunities even when they sneak out of the settlement. Ideally, for a way\nforward, refugees should be given an opportunity to build their livelihoods outside the\nframework of the settlement approach which is prone to conflicts with the local\npopulation and greatly limits achievement of sustainable livelihoods.\n\n\n11 Interview with program officer, Uganda Red Cross October 2004\n\n\n9\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/facd2444-b767-350f-8cc6-ed67d5a60227/1C032BB75402B3D9C12571DA00377D44-UNHCR-Jul2006.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        10
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/facd2444-b767-350f-8cc6-ed67d5a60227/1C032BB75402B3D9C12571DA00377D44-UNHCR-Jul2006.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        11
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_19/raw/doc_19_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,182 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a94ac84d-9fdd-389b-a38c-4acb4680c8be/2013-07-12_Manus_Island_Report_Final%281%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a94ac84d-9fdd-389b-a38c-4acb4680c8be/2013-07-12_Manus_Island_Report_Final%281%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a94ac84d-9fdd-389b-a38c-4acb4680c8be/2013-07-12_Manus_Island_Report_Final%281%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        2
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a94ac84d-9fdd-389b-a38c-4acb4680c8be/2013-07-12_Manus_Island_Report_Final%281%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        3
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a94ac84d-9fdd-389b-a38c-4acb4680c8be/2013-07-12_Manus_Island_Report_Final%281%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        4
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a94ac84d-9fdd-389b-a38c-4acb4680c8be/2013-07-12_Manus_Island_Report_Final%281%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        5
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a94ac84d-9fdd-389b-a38c-4acb4680c8be/2013-07-12_Manus_Island_Report_Final%281%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        6
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "methods and persons involved in irregular migration was evident. In light of this\nfocus, it was of concern that applicants were informed that details may be\nshared with law enforcement agencies as appropriate, but were not offered\naccess to legal advice or counselling.\n\n28. Asylum-seekers who met with UNHCR continued to express confusion over the\nprocessing arrangements that would apply to them in PNG. As during\nUNHCR\u2019s 15-17 January 2013 visit, many advised that the information they\nreceived on arrival about the process was limited and confusing. Many were\nsomewhat reassured by indications that processing would commence\nimminently, though most expressed severe anxiety and unhappiness about\nindications they continued to receive from RPC staff that the asylum-seekers\nwere likely to remain on Manus Island anywhere from two to five years.  Many\nexpressed a deep sense of injustice about why such a small number of them\nhad been selected for transfer to Manus Island out of the 20,000 or so who had\narrived by boat to Australia. This sense of injustice was compounded by the\nharsh conditions, their likely protracted stay, and uncertainty about their\neventual fate.\n\n29. UNHCR understands information fact sheets about the process have been\ndrafted but not yet finalized. UNHCR is keen to see these finalized and\ndeployed, especially in view of the uncertainty and confusion expressed by\nasylum-seekers.\n\n30. Some asylum-seekers expressed concern that they would be denied refugee\nstatus on the basis of having been charged with certain minor offences under\nPNG law. There are 18 asylum-seekers in this situation, all of whom remain on\nbail at the RPC, and regarding whom court cases are pending.\n\n31. While UNHCR acknowledges that all asylum-seekers are subject to the laws of\nthe country in which they find themselves, the 1951 Refugee Convention sets\nout exhaustive bases on which someone may be excluded from refugee status\nor expelled. The 1951 Refugee Convention does not allow for denial of status\non the basis of minor criminal offences and to do so would be disproportionate\nto the potential harm resulting. Such matters can and should be properly dealt\nwith under the ordinary criminal law of PNG, and not lead to the denial of\nrefugee status.\n\n32. UNHCR received positive indications from officials in PNG, including at the\ninternational Ministerial Meeting on 10 December 2011, that it would lift the\nseven reservations to the 1951 Refugee Convention. However, UNHCR notes\nthat despite the positive pledges made, 18 months has elapsed without any\napparent progress in having the reservations lifted.\n\n33. UNHCR welcomes progress made towards the establishment of an RSD\nsystem to allow for processing of asylum-seekers transferred from Australia to\nPNG. UNHCR also appreciates the efforts made by PNG, in cooperation with\nAustralia, to ensure there is sufficient capacity and expertise among officials to\nprocess all refugee claims fairly and expeditiously.\n\n34. UNHCR reiterates its concerns that procedural guarantees, including access to\nfair and efficient RSD procedures, were not in place at the time of transfer, and\nthat a significant period of time has elapsed between arrival of asylum-seekers\nin PNG and the establishment of an appropriate RSD process. Progress has\n\n\n\n8\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a94ac84d-9fdd-389b-a38c-4acb4680c8be/2013-07-12_Manus_Island_Report_Final%281%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        7
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a94ac84d-9fdd-389b-a38c-4acb4680c8be/2013-07-12_Manus_Island_Report_Final%281%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        8
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a94ac84d-9fdd-389b-a38c-4acb4680c8be/2013-07-12_Manus_Island_Report_Final%281%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        9
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a94ac84d-9fdd-389b-a38c-4acb4680c8be/2013-07-12_Manus_Island_Report_Final%281%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        10
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a94ac84d-9fdd-389b-a38c-4acb4680c8be/2013-07-12_Manus_Island_Report_Final%281%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        11
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a94ac84d-9fdd-389b-a38c-4acb4680c8be/2013-07-12_Manus_Island_Report_Final%281%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        12
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a94ac84d-9fdd-389b-a38c-4acb4680c8be/2013-07-12_Manus_Island_Report_Final%281%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        13
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a94ac84d-9fdd-389b-a38c-4acb4680c8be/2013-07-12_Manus_Island_Report_Final%281%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        14
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a94ac84d-9fdd-389b-a38c-4acb4680c8be/2013-07-12_Manus_Island_Report_Final%281%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        15
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a94ac84d-9fdd-389b-a38c-4acb4680c8be/2013-07-12_Manus_Island_Report_Final%281%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        16
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a94ac84d-9fdd-389b-a38c-4acb4680c8be/2013-07-12_Manus_Island_Report_Final%281%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        17
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_2/raw/doc_2_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,183 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "# participation in the programme\n\n### **CF \u2018Right to Protection\u2019** **2021**\n\n1\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1073c8c3-6dfb-3e41-af95-d70f590af840/01_2021_r2p_report_on_resolution_767_eng.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "## CONTENTS\n\n#### CONTENTS ................................................................................................................ 2 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................... 3 I. KEY FINDINGS ..................................................................................................... 4\n\n\n\n\n#### '\n\n\n#### II. CHALLENGES AND OBSTACLES FOR PARTICIPATION IN THE PROGRAMME ............................................................................................................ 9 CONCLUSION .......................................................................................................... 11\n\n2\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1073c8c3-6dfb-3e41-af95-d70f590af840/01_2021_r2p_report_on_resolution_767_eng.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "## INTRODUCTION\n#### This report is mainly based on the results of the survey about intentions, challenges and obstacles encountered during participation in the compensation programme for damaged/destroyed housing objects launched within CMU resolution \u2116767. In addition, a significant deal of information was gathered during our monitoring visits to plenty of settlements in Donetska and Luhanska oblasts in the period of October-December. Our outreach workers and legal team also took part in some of the commission assessment sessions either as observers or members, thus they had an opportunity to obtain firsthand experience on the implementation of the programme. By focusing on the perspective of claimants, this report complements a survey conducted by UNHCR in November 2020, which focuses on the functioning of the local assessment commissions, based on observations from R2P and other NGO members or observers in these commissions. R2P launched this survey primarily to find out whether this programme is relevant for its target audience, as well as to reveal the pitfalls of the programme from the perspective of participants. Therefore, we decided to survey our beneficiaries of IDP and conflict-affected background who reportedly had problems with damaged/destroyed housing objects and those potential beneficiaries whom our outreach workers already knew or got to know during field trips. The survey has been conducted in the period of October-November in Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts via phone and face-to-face interviews. Besides, upon the completion of the survey, some cases were directed to R2P legal team for further investigation. As a result, our team not only conducted research but also promptly provided assistance to those who were willing to participate in the programme but for some reason experienced difficulties with applying for monetary compensation/assistance.\n\n\n\n\n\n3\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "survey",
+          "confidence": 0.8851165771484375,
+          "start": 17,
+          "end": 18
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "survey",
+          "confidence": 0.8481342196464539,
+          "start": 17,
+          "end": 18
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "UNHCR",
+          "confidence": 0.8728767037391663,
+          "start": 126,
+          "end": 127
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2020",
+          "confidence": 0.9149536490440369,
+          "start": 129,
+          "end": 130
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "beneficiaries",
+          "confidence": 0.511384129524231,
+          "start": 198,
+          "end": 199
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "survey",
+          "confidence": 0.9126808047294617,
+          "start": 160,
+          "end": 161
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "survey",
+          "confidence": 0.8815321326255798,
+          "start": 160,
+          "end": 161
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts",
+          "confidence": 0.6753018498420715,
+          "start": 243,
+          "end": 247
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "primary"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1073c8c3-6dfb-3e41-af95-d70f590af840/01_2021_r2p_report_on_resolution_767_eng.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        2
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "## I. KEY FINDINGS\n\n### A. PROFILING OF THE HOUSING SITUATION\n\nOverall, our respondents were surveyed on 826 cases, including 325 on destroyed and\n\n501 on damaged housing objects. Some respondents had two housing objects damaged\n\nand/or destroyed, thus we decided to focus primarily on the number of cases since experience\n\nregarding each of them might vary.\n\n\nThe degree of damage indicated in the official certificates issued upon the\n\ncommission assessment did not always match respondents\u2019 own . Remarkably, in 12% (38)\n\ncases when people believed their housing to be destroyed they obtained a certificate on the\n\ndamaged housing whilst in 5% (23) cases it was the other way around. In turn, in 16% (134)\n\nout of all cases, no official assessment certificates were received. It should be noted that\n\nsometimes confusion arose when both participants and commissioners could not agree on\n\nthe character of housing damage since no clear instructions were found to be guided by.\n\n#### Condition of housing object according to official assessment certificates\n\n\nNo assessment certificate Damaged Destroyed\n\n\n\nDamaged\n\n\nDestroyed\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n0 100 200 300 400\n\n\nLevel of destruction according to assessment certificate\n\n\n4\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1073c8c3-6dfb-3e41-af95-d70f590af840/01_2021_r2p_report_on_resolution_767_eng.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        3
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "It is worth noticing that some of the housing was damaged several times. To be more\n\nprecise, 145 were damaged twice, 46 \u2013 three times, 29 \u2013 more than that. One housing object\n\neven suffered 10 times.\n\n#### Housing object was damaged...\n\n\n\n700\n\n\n600\n\n\n500\n\n\n400\n\n\n300\n\n\n200\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n100\n\n\n0\n\n1 time 2 times 3 times 4 times            - 4 times\n\n\nMany housing objects took damage during the escalation of the hostilities in 2014 \u2013\n\n2015. As time passes, the condition of the affected housing could change \u2013 either\n\ndeteriorate or be improved by restoration. That is why there was a question on the\n\ncondition as of the moment of the interview in 2020. Half of the objects was partially or fully\n\nrestored.\n#### Housing condition as of interview\n\n\n\nDestroyed\n\n\nDamaged\n\n\nPartially restored\n\n\nFully restored\n\n\nUnspecified\n\n\n\n0 100 200 300 400\n\n\n5\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1073c8c3-6dfb-3e41-af95-d70f590af840/01_2021_r2p_report_on_resolution_767_eng.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        4
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "Some potential applicants, who happened to move out of the settlement after the\n\ndamage of their house, became not eligible for obtaining financial assistance on damaged\n\nhousing. In our survey, people lost the grounds for receiving assistance in 22% of cases (34 of\n\nthose 155 cases when the housing remained damaged as of interview date).\n\n\n\n6\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1073c8c3-6dfb-3e41-af95-d70f590af840/01_2021_r2p_report_on_resolution_767_eng.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        5
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "#### **'**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nIn general, in 546 cases (66.1%) respondents considered participating in the existing\n\n\n\nmechanism of monetary compensation/assistance; in 243 (29.4%) \u2013 did not, whilst, for 37\n\ncases (4.5 percent), owners said that they did not meet the eligibility criteria, or were not\n\nready to comply with them. Given that different conditions apply for destroyed and\n\ndamaged housing units, it might be more useful to break down the aforementioned data.\n\nOut of 325 instances of allegedly destroyed housing, respondents contemplated taking part\n\nin the scheme in 76.3% of the cases and did not in 18.5%. Regarding the damaged objects,\n\n\n\nthe corresponding values were 59.5% and 36.5% respectively.\n\n\n\nThe major reason for not applying was unwillingness to abandon title deeds (161 or\n\n66%). Remarkably, the share of responses was quite alike regarding both damaged and\n\ndestroyed properties: 64.5% and 71.7% respectively. Taking into account that this requirement\n\nis not relevant for the former, it indicates low awareness on the programme conditions.\n\nUncertainty in the positive outcome of the time-consuming procedure and disbelief in the\n\nobjective nature of the assessment were more common in cases of damaged properties\n\n(nearly 15% each vs 5%). Lack of ownership documents and unsatisfactory amount of\n\ncompensation were quoted more often in regards to the destroyed dwellings (18% and almost\n\n17% vs nearly 9% and 6%). Unclear procedure was almost exclusively referred to by the owners\n\n\n7\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1073c8c3-6dfb-3e41-af95-d70f590af840/01_2021_r2p_report_on_resolution_767_eng.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        6
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "of damaged estate (16 or 8.7% vs 1 or 1.7%), also approximately 11% had already been\n\nrehabilitated properties.\n\n\n\nUnwillingness to abandon ownership\n\n\nToo much efforts and lack of certainty of the\npositive outcome\n\n\nDisbelief in the objectivity of assessment\n\n\nLack of ownership documents\n\n\nInsufficient amount of compensation/assistance\n\n\nComplicated and unclear procedure\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nOther reasons\n\n\n\n0\n\n\n\n20 40 60 80 100 120\n\n\n\nDestroyed Damaged\n\n\n\nHence, it may be noticed that the respondents were predominantly concerned about\n\n\n\ndocument-related issues, namely ownership matters. As we will see further, those issues will\n\n\n\nrepeatedly arise again during the implementation of the programme.\n\n\n\n8\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1073c8c3-6dfb-3e41-af95-d70f590af840/01_2021_r2p_report_on_resolution_767_eng.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        7
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "## II. CHALLENGES AND OBSTACLES FOR PARTICIPATION IN THE PROGRAMME\n\nAs mentioned above those people who compose the target audience of the\n\nprogramme often decided not to participate due to the lack of necessary documents\n\nconfirming their ownership status. In particular, some potential applicants did not apply to\n\nthe programme   (Pyshchevyk, Zaitseve), or had their applications withheld on initial\n\nstages (Pivdenne). Besides, some people willing to participate faced issues with the\n\npreparation of notarized copies of title deeds since the village councils are not eligible to\n\nnotarize copies of such documents and there was no notary in settlements (Travneve). The\n\nsituation was even worse in remote settlements with adverse public transport where people\n\nregularly face hardships with access to administrative and documentation services.\n\n\nAnother document-related issue was associated with lacking proofs of the conflict\nrelated damage/destruction of housing objects. In Shchastia (Luhanska oblast) some\n\napplicants did not have acts on destruction even in one copy and no such copies were\n\npreserved in the local Military Civil Administration (MCA). Besides, some of the acts formalized\n\nbetween 2014 and 2015 were issued by Housing and Public Utilities enterprise and might not\n\ncomply with current formal requirements.\n\n\nSome people were not eager to participate in the programme since they did not want\n\nto lose their ownership rights on housing (Pervomaiske, Zaitseve, Sukha Balka). Remarkably,\n\nthere were cases in Shchastia, Vrubivka (Luhanska oblast) and Myronivskyi\n\n(Donetska oblast) when people insisted on preserving their rights nonetheless after having\n\ntheir housing objects accessed by the commission. In Myronivskyi, a group of applicants\n\nwrote a collective letter to the local council, subsequently redirected to Bakhmut Raion State\n\nAdministration, informing that they would not renounce property. From our observations,\n\npeople were concerned that would not give up their property rights beforehand without\n\nbeing certain whether they obtain any compensation or whether the amount would be\n\nsufficient.\n\n\nIn Zaitseve, there was a case of two people who refrained from participation in the\n\nprogramme because of the distrust to the state. They were afraid of being deceived arguing\n\nthat once they abandon ownership rights, neither a compensation would be granted nor\n\ntheir property rights would be restored.\n\n\n9\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1073c8c3-6dfb-3e41-af95-d70f590af840/01_2021_r2p_report_on_resolution_767_eng.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        8
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "Some applicants, whose housing objects are located in settlements near to the contact\n\nline, could not get their properties accessed by the commission due to security reasons. In\n\nparticular, despite being requested, commissions did not visit some endangered parts of such\n\nsettlements as Pivdenne, Marinka, Krasnohorivka, Avdiivka, Opytne, Vodiane, Pisky, Berezove\n\n(Donetska oblast), and Zolote-4 (Luhanska oblast). In some cases, like in Marinka, JFO already\n\nconcluded there is no possibility to visit areas in the \u201cred zone\u201d, while in other cases, like in\n\nBerezove the decision of JFO was still being awaited.\n\n\n10\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1073c8c3-6dfb-3e41-af95-d70f590af840/01_2021_r2p_report_on_resolution_767_eng.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        9
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "## CONCLUSION\n\nIt has been revealed that a lot of potential applicants were not informed about the\n\ncompensation programme or had little knowledge about it. There was no massive information\n\ncampaign that tried to reach the target audience. As a result, people could not seize the\n\nopportunity to resolve their housing issues. Thus, state authorities should fill in the\n\ncommunication gap with IDPs and conflict-affected population since only civil society\n\norganizations remain key informants about any humanitarian initiatives.\n\n\nMany applicants perceived the procedure to be unclear and confusing. Hence, people\n\noften did not understand its logic and decided to give up. There is a need to improve the\n\nprocedure, especially regarding ownership rights. Currently people often remain\n\nhighly uncertain and insecure of a successful outcome.\n\n\nThe main obstacle for participation in the programme was the lack of ownership\n\ndocuments. It is noteworthy that people often purchased their housing bypassing formal\n\nrequirements and did not have a chance to formalize their property rights due to time or\n\nfinancial constraints. Consequently, they constitute the biggest risk group since they cannot\n\nclaim any compensation in case if their housing is damaged either by war-related or natural\n\nevents. It would be considerate to provide large-scope legal assistance for those people in\n\nadvance of implementation similar compensation programmes in future.\n\n\n11\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1073c8c3-6dfb-3e41-af95-d70f590af840/01_2021_r2p_report_on_resolution_767_eng.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        10
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_21/raw/doc_21_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,813 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "# **The 2014 Afghanistan Refugee and Returnee Overview**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n**Key objectives**\n\n   - Provide 30,000 refugee families with protection and essential services in Khost and Paktika;\n\n   - Facilitate informed, voluntary repatriation of refugees as a key humanitarian focus for Afghan\nrefugees from Pakistan, Iran and other non-neighbouring countries;\n\n   - Deliver humanitarian and return assistance to 45,000 vulnerable undocumented Afghan\nreturnees from Iran and Pakistan consisting of deportees and returnees including those\ndisplaced from North Waziristan Agency.\n\n\n\n\n\n|Chapter|Core Activities|\n|---|---|\n|Pakistani Refugees|\u0001 <br>Improve or maintain quality of registration and profiling<br>\u0001 <br>Ensure uniform treatment and standards of protection and services for all refugees<br>\u0001 <br>Foster security from violence and exploitation: protection of children strengthened, risk of SGBV is<br>reduced and quality of response improved<br>\u0001 <br>Provide food assistance to meet immediate food needs|\n|Afghan refugee returnees|\u0001<br>Respond to immediate protection needs on return, with particular focus on cash grants to facilitate<br>travel and short term integration needs, and referrals where appropriate<br>\u0001 <br>Identify persons with specific needs<br>\u0001 <br>Broaden scope of Returnee Monitoring to identify protection concerns in return areas and address<br>gaps<br>\u0001 <br>Promote peaceful coexistence between returnees and local communities by identifying tensions or<br>scarce resources and advocating for interventions with relevant actors to mitigate potential repeated<br>displacement|\n|Afghan undocumented<br>vulnerable returnees|\u0001<br>Provide immediate protection services including screening, identification of Persons with Specific<br>Needs and first hand humanitarian assistance.<br>\u0001 <br>Provide transportation to final destination<br>\u0001 <br>Support the most vulnerable groups with flexible short term reintegration support|\n\n\n1 |\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/da33aea6-d61c-31f9-abef-cf7c8c568871/2014%20Afghanistan%20Refugee%20and%20Returnee%20Overview.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**Humanitarian Needs Overview: District vulnerability ranking matrix for refugees**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|Province|District|District<br>ID|\n|---|---|---|\n|**Khost**<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br>|Gurbuz|2607|\n|**Khost**<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br>|Spera|2611|\n|**Khost**<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br>|Tere Zayi (Alishir)|2608|\n|**Khost**<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br>|Shamal-Lakan|2610|\n|**Khost**<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br>|Mando Zayi|2605|\n|**Khost**<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br>|Sabari|2602|\n|**Khost**<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br>|Tani|2606|\n|**Khost**<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br>|Khost (Matun)|2601|\n|**Khost**<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br>|Nadir Shah Kot|2604|\n|**Khost**<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br>|Jaji Maydan|2613|\n|**Khost**<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br>|Musa Khel|2603|\n|**Khost**<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br>|Qalandar|2609|\n|**Khost**<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br>|Bak|2612|\n|**Total Khost**|**Total Khost**|**Total Khost**|\n|**Paktika**<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br>|Barmal|2515|\n|**Paktika**<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br>|Urgoon|2510|\n|**Paktika**<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br>|Wazakhwah|2513|\n|**Paktika**<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br>|Surubi|2509|\n|**Paktika**<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br>|Paktika Center (Sharan)|2501|\n|**Paktika**<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br>|Mata Khan|2502|\n|**Paktika**<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br>|Yosuf Khel|2503|\n|**Paktika**<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br>|Yahya Khel|2506|\n|**Paktika**<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br>|Sar Rawza|2504|\n|**Paktika**<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br>|Omna|2507|\n|**Paktika**<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br>|Zarghun Shahr|2505|\n|**Paktika**<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br>|Gomal|2508|\n|**Paktika**<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br>|Jani Khel|2512|\n|**Paktika**<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br>|Ziruk|2517|\n|**Paktika**<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br>|Nika|2511|\n|**Paktika**<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br>|Giyan|2516|\n|**Paktika**<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br>|DilaWa Khushamand|2518|\n|**Paktika**<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br>|Wormamay|2514|\n|**Paktika**<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br>|Turwo|2519|\n|**Total Paktika**|**Total Paktika**|**Total Paktika**|\n\n\n**Calculation of Coefficients**\n\n     - Families in Need = Refugee Families - Families that Received NFIs\n\n     - Refugee Population Vulnerability = Refugee Population / Highest district Refugee Population;\n\n     - Absorption Capacity Vulnerability = Refugee Population / Local Population\n\n`o` (The coefficients thus obtained were normalized, so that they would all be in the range\nfrom 0 to 1)\n\n     - Unmet Needs Vulnerability = Refugee Families / Highest district Refugee Families\n\n     - Overall ranking = Unweighted average of specific rankings\n\n\n2 |\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "District vulnerability ranking matrix",
+          "confidence": 0.9643359780311584,
+          "start": 6,
+          "end": 10
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "District",
+          "confidence": 0.7717603445053101,
+          "start": 6,
+          "end": 7
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "refugees",
+          "confidence": 0.9775461554527283,
+          "start": 11,
+          "end": 12
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Khost",
+          "confidence": 0.5869166254997253,
+          "start": 41,
+          "end": 42
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Khost",
+          "confidence": 0.7383168339729309,
+          "start": 328,
+          "end": 329
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Khost",
+          "confidence": 0.8407095074653625,
+          "start": 474,
+          "end": 475
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": null,
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Khost",
+          "confidence": 0.5697208642959595,
+          "start": 617,
+          "end": 618
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Total Khost",
+          "confidence": 0.5498497486114502,
+          "start": 664,
+          "end": 666
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Paktika",
+          "confidence": 0.9491685032844543,
+          "start": 751,
+          "end": 752
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": null,
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Paktika",
+          "confidence": 0.9614636898040771,
+          "start": 946,
+          "end": 947
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Paktika",
+          "confidence": 0.9775965213775635,
+          "start": 1081,
+          "end": 1082
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "Mata Khan",
+          "confidence": 0.7296475768089294,
+          "start": 1073,
+          "end": 1075
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Paktika",
+          "confidence": 0.9894421100616455,
+          "start": 1213,
+          "end": 1214
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "Yahya Khel",
+          "confidence": 0.7880558371543884,
+          "start": 1205,
+          "end": 1207
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Paktika",
+          "confidence": 0.9327300786972046,
+          "start": 1410,
+          "end": 1411
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "Zarghun Shahr",
+          "confidence": 0.5540348291397095,
+          "start": 1402,
+          "end": 1404
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Paktika",
+          "confidence": 0.9013733863830566,
+          "start": 1541,
+          "end": 1542
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "Jani Khel",
+          "confidence": 0.6121668219566345,
+          "start": 1533,
+          "end": 1535
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Paktika",
+          "confidence": 0.8508822321891785,
+          "start": 1671,
+          "end": 1672
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Paktika",
+          "confidence": 0.907852292060852,
+          "start": 1802,
+          "end": 1803
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": {
+          "text": "Calculation of Coefficients",
+          "confidence": 0.5363795161247253,
+          "start": 1953,
+          "end": 1956
+        },
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "Wormamay",
+          "confidence": 0.7121176719665527,
+          "start": 1860,
+          "end": 1861
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "Refugee Families",
+          "confidence": 0.6789649724960327,
+          "start": 1963,
+          "end": 1965
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Paktika",
+          "confidence": 0.5157766938209534,
+          "start": 1867,
+          "end": 1868
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/da33aea6-d61c-31f9-abef-cf7c8c568871/2014%20Afghanistan%20Refugee%20and%20Returnee%20Overview.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**Humanitarian Needs Overview: Provincial vulnerability ranking matrix for all returnees**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|0.01|0.09|\n|---|---|\n|0.01|0.12|\n|0.25|0.66|\n|0.21|0.36|\n|0.02|0.14|\n|0.01|0.24|\n|0.06|0.70|\n|0.06|0.24|\n|0.05|0.15|\n|0.00|0.15|\n|0.17|0.36|\n|0.27|0.37|\n|0.10|0.37|\n|0.86|0.36|\n|0.29|0.39|\n|0.02|0.23|\n|0.05|0.12|\n|0.29|1.08|\n|0.53|1.15|\n|0.19|0.88|\n|0.16|0.72|\n|1.00|1.37|\n|0.01|6.80|\n|0.01|0.10|\n|0.01|0.05|\n|0.18|0.52|\n|0.01|0.13|\n|0.08|0.28|\n|0.02|0.14|\n|0.08|0.44|\n|0.08|0.31|\n|0.00|0.05|\n|0.03|0.17|\n|0.02|0.14|\n\n\n3 |\n\n\n|Province|Returnees from<br>Vulnerable Total returnee<br>Pakistan, Iran and<br>Undocumented population (refugee<br>other countries<br>Migrant Returnees and undocumented)<br>(Individuals)|Col3|Col4|\n|---|---|---|---|\n|**Province**|**Last 3 years**|**Last 3 years**|**Total**|\n|Badakhshan|279|1,409|1,688|\n|Badghis|180|972|1,152|\n|Baghlan|7,032|4,155|11,187|\n|Balkh|6,012|2,836|8,848|\n|Bamyan|513|670|1,183|\n|Daykundi|182|1,694|1,876|\n|Farah|1,835|4,853|6,688|\n|Faryab|1,636|2,799|4,435|\n|Ghazni|1,497|1,888|3,385|\n|Ghor|78|1,863|1,941|\n|Hilmand|4,762|1,532|6,294|\n|Hirat|7,599|5,356|12,955|\n|Jawzjan|2,718|1,014|3,732|\n|Kabul|24,397|4,971|29,368|\n|Kandahar|8,262|764|9,026|\n|Kapisa|655|1,224|1,879|\n|Khost|1,313|32|1,345|\n|Kunar|8,159|945|9,104|\n|Kunduz|15,024|6,703|21,727|\n|Laghman|5,357|1,967|7,324|\n|Logar|4,600|670|5,270|\n|Nangarhar|28,406|10,389|38,795|\n|Nimroz|180|20,842|21,022|\n|Nuristan|264|4|268|\n|Paktika|183|232|415|\n|Paktya|5,255|118|5,373|\n|Panjsher|276|98|374|\n|Parwan|2,241|1,205|3,446|\n|Samangan|645|378|1,023|\n|Sar-e-Pul|2,392|2,193|4,585|\n|Takhar|2,378|3,336|5,714|\n|Uruzgan|95|254|349|\n|Wardak|939|911|1,850|\n|Zabul|573|231|804|\n|**Total**|**            145,917**|**                  88,508**|**                 234,425**|\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/da33aea6-d61c-31f9-abef-cf7c8c568871/2014%20Afghanistan%20Refugee%20and%20Returnee%20Overview.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        2
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**PLANNING ASSUMPTIONS**\n**Refugees and undocumented vulnerable migrant returnees displaced to Khost and Paktika**\n\n**I. MOST LIKELY SCENARIO**\nKey assumptions:\n\n1) Military operations and fighting in Pakistan (North and South Waziristan agencies) may\ncease but the population will probably gradually return to Pakistan after March/April due to\ndestruction of infrastructure, winter and reduced opportunities for livelihood in the area of\norigin. If the fighting continues, it is expected that there will be limited population\nmovements towards Afghanistan as it will be difficult to travel during the winter months.\nThus, refugee population is expected to stabilize.\n2) Absorption capacity of the host families will decrease during winter and as resources are\nexhausted, thus, the population figure in the camp may increase.\n\nOperational Assumptions:\n\n1) Humanitarian access will continue to be limited, it is estimated that national and\ninternational organizations, including Government have 60% access in Khost and 20% access\nin Paktika.\n2) Humanitarian community and local authorities will continue to receive sufficient resources\nfrom donors.\n\nRefugee Response Plan\n\n1) Planning Figure: 30,000 families ( _planning figure is subject to verification_ *).\n2) Area of Operation: Khost and Paktika (limited reach/access in Paktika)\n\nOperational Priorities\n\n1) Registration and provision of international protection (*verification exercise is planned in\nthe course of the 2014/15)\n2) Provision of humanitarian assistance, with a focus on moving away from emergency towards\nstabilization, including sectors such as shelter, education and health/WASH\n3) Humanitarian assistance to focus on supporting host communities to continue providing\nassistance to the influx\n4) Assistance to the host communities is on a community-basis and not individual-basis, with a\nfocus on integrating development actors as early as possible\n5) Switch to durable solutions, with a focus on facilitation of voluntary return, in second half of\nthe year (May to October)\n6) Monitoring with specific focus on Protection issues\n\n**II. WORST CASE SCENARIO**\nKey Assumptions:\n\n1) Military Operations continue outside NW/SW and more refugees arrive in Afghanistan\n2) Host communities lose all absorption capacity and large numbers of refugees need to be\nhosted in additional camps\n\nOperational assumptions:\n\n1) Security worsens: No access to Paktika and more restricted access in Khost\n2) Lack of donor interest\n\nPopulation Figures:\n\n1) 40,000 families: 30,000 families in Khost and 10,000 in Paktika, of which 15,000 in camps in\nKhost.\n\n\n4 |\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/da33aea6-d61c-31f9-abef-cf7c8c568871/2014%20Afghanistan%20Refugee%20and%20Returnee%20Overview.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        3
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**Afghan refugee returnees**\nWhile there are fewer returnees as compared to the peak years (2002-2008), Afghanistan is still the\nlargest repatriation operation in the world. Refugees surveyed in Pakistan cited increased insecurity\nand economic concerns as the two biggest reasons for their continued stay in exile, in particular due\nto the uncertainty and heightened risk of tensions over the election period in 2014.\n\nFor 2015, and based on regional consultations, UNHCR anticipates that refugees will continue to\nreturn to Afghanistan from Pakistan, Iran and other countries, with a possible slight increase on 2014\nelection year figures. The validity of the Proof of Registration cards (PoR) for Afghans in Pakistan has\nbeen extended until December 2015 and it is unclear what status refugees in Pakistan will have after\nthis date.\n\nFor 2015 planning purposes, UNHCR will use the figure of 172,000 Afghan refugee returnees. While\nthere may be progress towards the planning figure of 172,000 returnees- during 2015, UNHCR\nAfghanistan shall channel prioritized operating level resources towards a more realistic figure of\n50,000 refugees returning. However, of those returning the vulnerability figures are expected to be\nhigher than previous years, with refugees repatriating who may be facing increasing intimidation,\ndeteriorating economic opportunities or the possibility of camp closure in countries of asylum.\nTherefore an increase of people with specific needs is anticipated, identified on their return.\n\nThe total number of refugee returnees receiving UNHCR reintegration assistance in 2015 is\nestimated at 245,600, including both those arrivals in 2015, and those having returned during 20122014.\n\n**Undocumented vulnerable returnees**\nAfghanistan is expected to continue through a series of transitions: political, economic and security.\nThe uncertainty associated with these transitions will continue to impact population movement in\nand surrounding Afghanistan. In addition, the flow of deportations and voluntary return is largely\ncontingent on a combination of regional political dynamics between Afghanistan and its\nneighbouring countries, which may impact their policies towards undocumented Afghans. As it is\nalmost unpredictable to ascertain what could affect the migration trend and what would be the\nresult, it is important to maintain the post-arrival assistance mechanism at the border points to be\nthe base of collective response for possible mass return from Iran or Pakistan. The sudden\ndisplacement from North Waziristan Agency following military operations in Pakistan since June\n2014 is a good example.\n\nSince 2007, there were 200,000-300,000 Afghans deported per year from Iran and Pakistan. Every\nyear since 2012, IOM has assisted between 30,000 and 40,000 identified vulnerable Afghan\nreturnees who crossed through Islam Qala in Herat, Milak in Nimroz and Torkham in Nangarhar\nprovince. Since May 2014, IOM has also assisted over 500 identified Afghan undocumented families\ndisplaced from North Waziristan Agency in Pakistan to Khost and Paktika province. In 2015, based on\nabove observations as well as previously assisted numbers, IOM predicts that the flow of movement\nfrom the three border crossing points with Iran and Pakistan will remain at a similar level as in 2014.\nRegarding the undocumented Afghan families from North Waziristan Agency arriving in\nKhost/Paktika, under the most likely scenario, the flow is expected to stabilize. However, in 2014\nundocumented Afghan families are still leaving Pakistan due to ongoing insecurity and will require\nassistance in 2015.\n\n\n5 |\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/da33aea6-d61c-31f9-abef-cf7c8c568871/2014%20Afghanistan%20Refugee%20and%20Returnee%20Overview.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        4
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**1.** **IDENTIFIED NEEDS**\n\n**Pakistani Refugees**\nBased on Focus Group Discussions conducted with both refugees and members of host communities,\nUNHCR has sought to identify the immediate needs and protection risks faced by Pakistani refugees,\nas well as the impact on host communities since the beginning of the displacement in June 2014. The\nmost urgent need that has emerged is shelter: while the host communities have been very\nwelcoming and have readily opened their homes to refugees, in some districts the number of\nrefugees is very close to the local population. Available accommodation (as well as other resources)\nis therefore very limited, particularly as winter approaches and sleeping in open air is no longer\npossible. Other priority needs emerging from the focus group discussions included NFIs, health care,\nand water. Refugees also cited poverty, lack of job opportunities, and limited resources in\nAfghanistan as increasing existing vulnerabilities.\n\nWhile the displaced population tends to share close family, tribal, and friendship ties amongst\nthemselves and with the host community, there have nonetheless been identified cases of women,\nelderly, and children without support, though these are limited in number. UNHCR plans to conduct\ninterventions for these and other vulnerable categories through the persons with specific needs\n(PSN) programming. Other planned protection interventions include camp management, mine\nclearance and mine risk education, emergency education, identifying and addressing gender based\nviolence issues, identification and necessary interventions on behalf of unaccompanied and\nseparated children, family tracing, and protection monitoring. It is also anticipated that the lack of\nresources and livelihood opportunities will make it difficult for refugees to return to Pakistan when\nthe security situation stabilizes sufficiently to allow for voluntary repatriation. Therefore, it is\nanticipated that UNHCR will provide assistance when refugees decide that conditions have improved\nsufficiently to allow them to return home.\n\n**Returnees**\nThe prioritised focus of UNHCR\u2019s operations in Afghanistan will remain the implementation of the\nSolutions Strategy for Afghan Refugees in cooperation with the Government. UNHCR will continue to\nprovide assistance to refugee returnees at all stages of the return process, including providing\ninformation in the countries of asylum and facilitation of joint \u2018go-and-see\u2019 visits, as specified in the\nquadripartite agreement. UNHCR will work to ensure that return is informed, voluntary, and\nsustainable.\n\nThe absorption capacity in Afghanistan remains challenging. Despite some progress in the health,\neducation, construction, trade and agriculture sectors since 2001, Afghanistan remains one of the\npoorest countries in the world. The deteriorating security situation and withdrawal of international\nsecurity forces, high levels of unemployment, landlessness, limited access to basic services\n(particularly in areas of high return and disputes over property rights will continue to present\nimpediments to return and reintegration.\n\nReintegration of refugee returnees cannot be viewed as being facilitated solely by humanitarian\ninterventions. Humanitarian assistance must be complemented with development interventions to\nensure sustainability of interventions. Therefore building partnerships with development actors is a\nkey priority for the operation, which must be closely monitored. In large urban settings and\nprovincial capitals, development actors have been reluctant to engage despite the obvious need. The\nlack of development contributes to growing insecurity and the presence of insurgents. This cycle of\npoverty and insecurity in turn results in continuously increasing displacement both inside and\noutside these provinces. Returnees are particularly vulnerable to forced internal displacement.\n\n\n6 |\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/da33aea6-d61c-31f9-abef-cf7c8c568871/2014%20Afghanistan%20Refugee%20and%20Returnee%20Overview.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        5
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "The primary focus of all UNHCR interventions, both immediate humanitarian assistance and longerterm integration, is to advance protection principles. In some cases, this will involve addressing\nprotection concerns directly, for instance, through SGBV support projects, or legal assistance\nprogrammes. In others, it may involve undertaking activities that will lead to a future protection\ndividend, for instance, livelihood projects that result in a reduced risk of secondary displacement.\nAssistance that is able to bring about a protection dividend shall be prioritized: for example, building\na well in a location where it is likely to create a more harmonious relationship between IDPs and the\nhost community. UNHCR will strengthen the capacity of communities to integrate and protect\nreturnees and IDPs, as well as increase the incentives and reduce the cost for communities. At the\nsame time, UNHCR will encourage returnees and IDPs to contribute to local communities through\nparticipation in local governance.\n\nReliable information on the numbers, location and condition of returnees \u2013 disaggregated by age,\ngender and other key indicators \u2013 is essential for improving the protection of returnees. Thus,\nInformation Management forms a keystone of the protection strategy. In order to gather\ninformation and ensure that programmes are sensitive to the specific protection needs and\ncapabilities of different groups, UNHCR aims to undertake regular rights-based, participatory\nassessments and monitoring visits to both IDPs and returnees, engaging Age, Gender and Diversity\nmainstreaming principles.\n\nSecondly, UNHCR will reach out to government and development actors to encourage them to\nmainstream returnees into their existing programmes. The aim is to bridge the humanitarian /\ndevelopment divide, thus ensuring persons of concern continue to receive protection after the\nimmediate \u201chumanitarian\u201d phase has passed and are ultimately able to achieve a durable solution.\nUNHCR recognizes that many returnees wish to live in urban areas, which poses specific challenges\nto both humanitarian and development responses. In light of this trend, UNHCR\u2019s pursuit to the right\nto freedom of movement is essential, particularly to ensure that no returnee should be forced to\nreturn to their place of origin, or be resettled to another place where their lives or safety are\nthreatened.\n\n**Undocumented vulnerable returnees**\nMany deportees and spontaneous returnees arrive in Afghanistan in a highly vulnerable physical and\nmental state and are unprepared for the process of reintegrating into their home communities.\nHumanitarian support continues to be required to prevent vulnerable undocumented returnee\nfamilies and individuals from being at risk of death, secondary displacement, sexual abuse, kidnap\nand other kinds of violation of human rights upon their return. Recently conducted surveys confirm\nthat short-term, post-arrival assistance continues to be a key need upon return as 73% of\nrespondents from Herat, Nangarhar and Nimroz listed it as one of the top three concerns followed\nby shelter/housing (44%) and financial support (30%).\n\nFor Afghan families displaced from North Waziristan into Khost and Paktika, the largest need in 2015\nwill continue to be non-food items, food, tents and medical assistance. In addition, families have\nindicated the need for transport and reintegration assistance as many are not able to return back to\nPakistan.\n\nFor many returning Afghan migrants, reintegration remains a challenge. In 2011, an IOM survey of\nreturned migrants found that only 23.3% of respondents had been able to find paid employment. As\ndescribed above for refugee returnees, for undocumented returnees there is also a need to\nintegrate long term reintegration support within humanitarian assistance. In particular, IOM has\nidentified an urgent need for direct reintegration support for specific, highly vulnerable PSN groups\nof non-refugee returnees with high protection risks, which includes unaccompanied minors and\nsingle female returnees.\n\n\n7 |\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "IOM survey",
+          "confidence": 0.6608598232269287,
+          "start": 596,
+          "end": 598
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "survey",
+          "confidence": 0.7106488347053528,
+          "start": 597,
+          "end": 598
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "IOM",
+          "confidence": 0.9713107943534851,
+          "start": 596,
+          "end": 597
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2011",
+          "confidence": 0.9903013706207275,
+          "start": 593,
+          "end": 594
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "returned migrants",
+          "confidence": 0.8324995040893555,
+          "start": 599,
+          "end": 601
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/da33aea6-d61c-31f9-abef-cf7c8c568871/2014%20Afghanistan%20Refugee%20and%20Returnee%20Overview.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        6
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "Unaccompanied migrant children continue to be the largest single group of vulnerable non-refugee\nreturnees assisted by IOM since 2009. Minors move primarily due to lack of employment\nopportunities in Afghanistan, and because the heads of their families had no form of income or were\nnot producing sufficient income. While in the country of exile (Iran) and in the process of\ndeportation, many report facing treatment which is concerning from a protection standpoint. There\nis an urgent need to intervene and avoid secondary displacement by providing minors and their\nfamilies with means of generating income while providing minors primarily with education and a\npractical skill set.\n\nAnother vulnerable group are single female returnees who face particularly high protection risks and\nreintegration challenges. A majority of these women were in need of shelter and vocational training\nto resume their lives in Afghanistan. Other groups include non-refugee returnee families who were\ndisplaced from North Waziristan Agency due to military operations who are unable to return back to\ntheir homes as well as drug-addicted individuals.\n\n2. **RESPONSE STRATEGY**\n\n**Registration**\nGiven its centrality to understanding the refugee population, profile, and vulnerabilities, all of which\nare crucial to designing appropriate and effective interventions, registration is a priority activity for\n2015. Due to significant logistical challenges, mostly linked to large numbers of new arrivals and a\nlack of access due to insecurity, assessments of refugee families have until now been conducted at\nthe household level on the basis of emergency verification. These assessments are being conducted\nfor the purpose of fixing population figures and assistance distribution, and are not intended for\nrefugee status determination purposes or the issuance of documentation.\n\nAt this point in time, transitioning to individual registration will help to stabilize the numbers and\nfacilitate planning further assistance targeting the most vulnerable among the population. The exact\nmodalities of the registration exercise are being discussed with the Government of Afghanistan, and\na mission from Geneva is planned to identify the feasible registration options for this context. The\nauthorities may consider the issuance of documentation for refugees, while UNHCR will continue to\nmaintain and update a database system for all refugees in Khost and Paktika.\n\nThe registration campaign will require significant resources, both in terms of human resources and\nlogistics. It is estimated that it will be carried out in the first three months of 2015 in all districts of\nKhost and Paktika with refugee presence. The exercise will pave the way for the development of\ntargeted longer-term strategies for durable solutions, facilitate voluntary repatriation when\nappropriate and help to identify vulnerable individuals.\n\n**Protection Interventions**\nIn coordination with relevant partners, UNHCR will undertake core protection activities additional to\nregistration in all districts, including assistance to vulnerable cases under the PSN programme (nonfood items and cash assistance of up to USD 500 over one year for chronic and very vulnerable\ncases), legal assistance, child protection and gender/GBV interventions. The humanitarian\ncommunity will also continue to carry out focus group discussions along an AGDM (Age, Gender and\nDisability Mainstreaming) approach with refugee men, women, and young people both in the\ncommunities and in the camp. The purpose of these discussions will be to highlight protection and\nassistance needs of refugees. Separate focus group discussions will be conducted with the host\ncommunities.\n\n\n8 |\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "assessments of refugee families",
+          "confidence": 0.9571978449821472,
+          "start": 252,
+          "end": 256
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": {
+          "text": "fixing population figures and assistance distribution",
+          "confidence": 0.5948455929756165,
+          "start": 281,
+          "end": 287
+        },
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Afghanistan",
+          "confidence": 0.7887064814567566,
+          "start": 346,
+          "end": 347
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2015",
+          "confidence": 0.7162104845046997,
+          "start": 227,
+          "end": 228
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "refugee families",
+          "confidence": 0.8579288721084595,
+          "start": 254,
+          "end": 256
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/da33aea6-d61c-31f9-abef-cf7c8c568871/2014%20Afghanistan%20Refugee%20and%20Returnee%20Overview.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        7
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "The entry point for child protection is primarily through the provision of educational services, which\ninclude psychosocial support. In Khost, emergency education is being implemented in a partnership\nbetween the provincial Department of Education, NRC and UNICEF, and includes both children in\nGulan Camp and children living in communities. In Paktika, where the only implementing partner is\nthe Department of Education, teachers in the refugee population have been hired by the DoE to run\ntemporary learning centres, and will receive training and support to provide psychosocial services to\nchildren as part of the educational programme. Additional child protection activities will focus on the\nidentification of unaccompanied minors (UAMs) and separated children (SC). Cases involving UAMs\nwill be sent to the Best Interest Determination (BID) committee for identification of appropriate care\narrangements, while SCs will be monitored and referred to the BID committee in cases in which\nneglect, abuse, or other problems in existing care arrangements are identified. Cases will be referred\nto ICRC for family tracing as appropriate.\n\nGender Based Violence (GBV) work will focus in identification of cases at risk through awarenessraising and establishment of effective communication networks through which GBV incidents or risk\nfactors can be reported. Participation by refugee women in focus group discussions and recentlyestablished women\u2019s _shuras_ in Gulan Camp and host communities will help to give voice to\nprotection risks and concerns, which can then be mitigated through appropriate interventions.\nUNHCR will also seek to establish an effective referral system, ensure coordination with relevant\nnational authorities and provide vocational training and educational opportunities to vulnerable\nfemale and male groups.\n\nThe provision of services to the local population is essential to avoid the perception amongst host\ncommunities that the refugees constitute a burden on the community or existing local services.\nAccordingly, it is important to ensure that services and activities are provided for both the hosting\ncommunities and the refugees\n\n**Afghan Refugee Returnees**\nAfghanistan is the largest repatriation operation in the world, despite the fact that rates of return\nare much lower compared to the peak years between 2002 and 2008. In total, more than 5.8\nmillion Afghan refugees returned to Afghanistan in the last 12 years; over 4.7 million returned with\nUNHCR and MoRR support. This figure represents over 20% of the current population in\nAfghanistan. This poses considerable challenges to the country\u2019s absorption capacity.\n\nFor 2015 planning purposes, this plan will use the conservative figure of 50,000 Afghan refugee\nreturnees, in need of life-saving assistance to return to their place of origin/intended destination in\nAfghanistan.\n\nPrioritized activities include immediate return assistance needs (cash grants, travel assistance, and\nshort-term integration needs and shelter assistance), protection activities (including legal\nrepresentation), and community-based interventions promoting peaceful co-existence. Activities\ninclude the following:\n\n- Ensuring provision of immediate return assistance (repatriation cash grants, travel assistance,\nprovision of non-food items and shelter assistance), protection and basic assistance at point of\nentry; supporting education registration, lifesaving healthcare, and essential vaccinations for\nchildren under 5 years of age; basic mine awareness and transit facilities;\n\n- Cross-border monitoring, returnee tracking, profiling and an annual multi-functional\ncomprehensive needs assessment;\n\n- Providing legal assistance to help obtain security of land tenure to reduce the threat of forced\nevictions;\n\n- Promoting targeted community-based interventions in areas of high return, including in urban\nsettings where increasing numbers of returnees are settling;\n\n\n9 |\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/da33aea6-d61c-31f9-abef-cf7c8c568871/2014%20Afghanistan%20Refugee%20and%20Returnee%20Overview.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        8
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "- Awareness-raising for the purpose of reducing the risk of GBV and strengthening reporting\nmechanisms; providing appropriate referrals and assistance to GBV victims; strengthening\nnational capacity for sustainable reintegration through an integrated approach aimed at\nfacilitating the transition from humanitarian assistance to long-term development.\n\nThe most vulnerable returnees, including female-headed households and unaccompanied minors\nwill be prioritized for the provision of shelter and access to basic services on arriving at their place of\nreturn.\n\nIn 2015, UNHCR will conduct an annual needs assessments through a multi-functional team involving\nboth humanitarian and development actors to assess refugee returnee needs across Afghanistan,\nwithin all sectors. Focus group discussions will be conducted according to the principles of the\nAGDM/Gender Marking approach. The multi-functional team consists of Protection and Shelter\nCluster regional coordinators in all regions, with Health, WASH and FSAC Cluster members in\nrespective regions. Focus group discussions will be conducted separately for returnee women, girls,\nboys and men.\n\nHousing, land and property disputes are problematic due to limited availability of land (including\nagricultural land, pasture, and 'high value' land in cities), water, firewood and fodder and aggravated\nby environmental degradation. Some of these disputes also result in displacement, which has\nhistorical social, environmental, economic and political contexts. Therefore, UNHCR and partners will\nensure that all assessments, programming and advocacy efforts will adhere to a 'Do No Harm'\nframework and that conflict-sensitive solutions provided by UNHCR and other partners are grounded\nin environmental protection and sustainability.\n\nShelter and basic services assistance will be provided through a community-based approach, which\nwill strengthen resilience through self-help programmes contributing to promoting peaceful\ncoexistence within the communities. The community takes primary responsibility for identifying\neligible beneficiaries to receive shelter assistance, while the Ministry of Refugees and Repatriation\n(MORR), other local authorities, implementing partners, and multi-functional team members play\nadvisory and coordination roles.\n\nThe shelter Beneficiary Selection Committee must include members of the Community Development\nCouncils (CDCs) where present or the provincial, district, village shura, (committee of elders and\ntrustees), or local authorities (district authorities, provincial representatives of MORR). Joint\nmonitoring will be carried out through established communication channels with beneficiaries,\nincluding on land and property issues such as land disputes, ownership, women\u2019s access and control\nof land, engaging with government for relocation sites, social and housing issues. The shelter\npackage includes one latrine per family, thereby increasing environmental hygiene in beneficiary\ncommunities. The shelter programme seeks to contribute to local economies wherever possible by\nusing skilled and unskilled labour in the local market, and by local procurement of raw materials.\n\nUNHCR will continue supporting the Afghan Government\u2019s efforts to develop the role of women and\nhas a strong commitment to the participation of women in decision making and project\nimplementation. Recognising the challenges of facilitating female participation, all interventions\nstrive to involve women in selection, implementation, monitoring, and management to the greatest\nextent possible within regionally and culturally appropriate contexts.\n\n**Undocumented vulnerable returnees**\nThe planned target group in 2015 are 45,000 of the most vulnerable undocumented Afghan\nreturnees from Iran and Pakistan including those families displaced from North Waziristan Agency\nwho are in need of live-saving assistance and return assistance to their province of origin.\n\n\n10 |\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "annual needs assessments",
+          "confidence": 0.955601692199707,
+          "start": 86,
+          "end": 89
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": {
+          "text": "assess refugee returnee needs",
+          "confidence": 0.5507716536521912,
+          "start": 100,
+          "end": 104
+        },
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "UNHCR",
+          "confidence": 0.9368941187858582,
+          "start": 82,
+          "end": 83
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Afghanistan",
+          "confidence": 0.9755702018737793,
+          "start": 105,
+          "end": 106
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2015",
+          "confidence": 0.9892120361328125,
+          "start": 80,
+          "end": 81
+        },
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/da33aea6-d61c-31f9-abef-cf7c8c568871/2014%20Afghanistan%20Refugee%20and%20Returnee%20Overview.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        9
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "Under the framework of its post-arrival humanitarian assistance, IOM will provide a comprehensive\nset of services starting with initial screening and referral of identified vulnerable undocumented\nAfghan returnees according to its established vulnerability criteria in coordination with the\nDirectorate of Refugees and Repatriation (DoRR). This will be followed by provision of non-food item\n(NFI) kits, food packages for families in need, health screening and referral, and provision of overnight accommodation and services at a transit centre. If needed, family tracing will be carried out for\nvulnerable individuals including unaccompanied minors. Protection screening and psycho-social\ncounselling will also be provided in light of observed trend of some beneficiaries suffering from\nexperiences while in detention or deportation procedures. Legal counselling, including facilitating\nregistration for E-Tazkira at transit centres will also be made available for returnees.\n\nThe above humanitarian actions will be complemented by direct reintegration support to specific\nhighly vulnerable groups of non-refugee returnees with high protection risks. For these groups, IOM\nplans to respond to their needs by providing different forms of direct reintegration support through\na flexible reintegration package. As an example, single female returnees will receive shelter and\nreintegration and educational training support at the transit centre in Herat. IOM will most\nimportantly conduct a local market assessment of which income generating activities they could\ncarry out in light of their vulnerable socio-economic status (e.g. home-based activities) after which\nthey will be provided with literacy and other educational training. For UAMs, IOM plans to provide\neducational and skills training for the minors while providing vocational trainings/business\ndevelopment package to heads of households which are suited to labour market demands. These\nactivities will involve DoRR as well as Directorate of Labour, Social Affairs, Martyrs and Disabled in\norder to strengthen their capacity in return and reintegration assistance.\n\nProvision of vocational training or educational assistance to these groups will not only support their\nsustainable reintegration but also support to mitigate various risks such as; becoming a victim of\nhuman trafficking or engaging in irregular migration, increasing their vulnerability to a host of other\nprotection risks.\n\n\n11 |\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/da33aea6-d61c-31f9-abef-cf7c8c568871/2014%20Afghanistan%20Refugee%20and%20Returnee%20Overview.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        10
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**The following sectors are solely in response to the Pakistani Refugees**\n\n**Protection**\nThe provision of services to the local population is essential to avoid the perception amongst host\ncommunities that the refugees constitute a burden on the community, or on existing local services\nand the environment, potentially inflaming feelings of resentment. Accordingly, it is important to\nensure that services and activities are provided for both the hosting communities and the refugees,\nsuch as maintaining or improving the local infrastructure (roads, hospitals, and schools) and ensuring\naccess to resources including water.\n\nRegistration is a priority activity and will help UNHCR and partners to better understand the refugee\npopulation, profile and vulnerabilities. This exercise will pave the way for development of longerterm strategies, design effective interventions and facilitate voluntary repatriation and. Other\nprotection concerns include access to social services, particularly health care; family separation,\nincluding unaccompanied or separated children; presence of single women and elderly without\nsupport within the population; access and mobility for disabled; the risk of human trafficking; access\nto assistance by all community members, particularly women and girls; and the risk of mines and\nunexploded ordnances both in the camp and in communities.\n\n**Camp Management**\nCurrently, there is only one camp and it is located in Gurboz District, Khost Province. No provision is\nbeing made for additional camps, however if the Government decides to open more refugee camps,\nadditional funding will be required. Approximately 3,500 families live in Gulan Camp and it is\nexpected to reach at least 4,000 by January, climbing to 5,000 families by spring. The overall\nobjectives are to provide life-saving assistance and support refuges in organizing themselves to\nbetter their conditions in the camp and provide a safe and secure environment where refugees can\nexercise their rights. In particular, UNHCR will continue to undertake basic site planning and\ninfrastructure work in the camp, security measures in coordination with the authorities, as well as\nshelter.\n\nCamp Governance: UNHCR foresees the following community services as essential in order to\npromote representation and good governance in Gulan Camp:\n\ni) In order to allow community feedback, weekly meetings are held with the camp\n_shura_, a structure of elders, each representing an average number of 50 families;\nii) Dialogue with refugee _Jirga_ and linkage to local _Jirga_ system as appropriate, as well\nas referrals to formal justice system;\niii) Dialogue and activities with female refugees, within a very traditional and\nconservative context that generally prevents women from moving outside the\nconfines of the family compound;\niv) Display of information on services and announcements\n\nSite planning and infrastructure: The importance of preserving and promoting a sense of community\nwithin the camp is paramount, and will reflect existing community structures. Camp planning is\nongoing and should see further developments once the number of refugees is stabilized (with the\npossibility of a harsh winter, it may be expected that the refugee population currently in the\nmountainous areas south and south-east of Gulan, in Gurboz district, may decide to settle in Gulan\ncamp). Some of the activities that will take place in the first half of 2015 include: comprehensive\ndrainage system, access roads, construction of four community centres, improvement of\nwarehousing and distribution facilities and construction of basic support services. In parallel, each\nextended family will be assigned a plot, in a way that preserves the existing settlement pattern in the\ncamp (extended families, sub-tribes, tribes). Site planning will take into consideration possible\n\n\n12 |\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/da33aea6-d61c-31f9-abef-cf7c8c568871/2014%20Afghanistan%20Refugee%20and%20Returnee%20Overview.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        11
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "further extension of the camp to the south and west. Site planning and basic infrastructure will be\ndone to the extent possible using refugees and local communities, thus providing Cash-for-Work\nopportunities.\n\nShelter: Winterization of tents is likely to be largely finished by January 2015. Given the average life\nexpectancy of a tent, the humanitarian community expects to have to replace tents or provide\nalternative shelter for 5,000 families in the camp in the second quarter of 2015. Decisions on shelter\nstrategy (tents or emergency to transitional shelter) will be taken towards the end of the first\nquarter based on assessments of refugees\u2019 intentions of returning to Pakistan.\n\nSecurity: The humanitarian community will continue to support the local authorities, who are\nplanning to deploy an additional 53 ANP to provide security surrounding the perimeter of Gulan\nCamp on a 24-hour basis. Within the camp, support is also required for the deployment of local\nguards on a 24-hour basis, as well as helping refugees to organize a community watch system.\n\n**Shelter and infrastructure/NFIs for hosted communities**\nWith the exception of protection activities, Quick Impact Projects (QIPS) for peaceful co-existence\nand shelter, the humanitarian community does not plan to have large-scale interventions for\nrefugees in host communities, but instead encourages an approach that incorporates refugees into\ndevelopment assistance of the communities. As part of the transitional strategy, advocacy efforts\nwill ensure that the local government includes refugees in service delivery and development plans.\n\nIn coordination with other partners with a strong track record in shelter as a durable solution, the\nshelter operational organisations will develop a strategy to begin in the second half of 2015, after a\nre-assessment of the situation in the spring. The strategy will be influenced by refugees\u2019 intentions\nregarding return and will support local communities hosting large number of refugees. In the first\nhalf of 2015, shelter will continue to be handled within the emergency response framework, taking\ninto account the need for additional protection against the elements during the first months of the\nyear.\n\nThe humanitarian community will continue to provide basic non-food items for all new arrivals as\nwell as replacing part of the non-food items package (plastic sheets, jerry cans and blankets) on a\nneeds basis for up to 4,000 families in Khost and Paktika; as well as on an emergency basis for\npersons with specific needs. A total of 2,500 tents will be distributed also on a needs basis.\nOperational partners are revising distribution modalities in order to make them more effective in\nensuring predictable and equitable distribution in all communities, as well as Gulan Camp.\n\n**Water, sanitation and Hygiene (WASH)**\nIn 2015, the WASH partners will continue to support both refugees and host communities in Khost\nand Paktika. Emergency WASH response will continue to focus on life-saving activities including\nrehabilitation/disinfection of water points (WP), rehabilitation of pipe schemes, water disinfection,\ndistribution of hygiene kits and provision of sanitation infrastructure. The construction of new WPs\nand sustainable sanitation infrastructures will also be considered as an option in the districts that are\nunder-covered.\n\nBased on refugee\u2019s figures and results of the assessments conducted in 2014, nine districts were\nidentified as priority targets for WASH. In Khost province, in order of priority: (1) Gurboz, (2) Khost\nCenter/Lakan, (3) Mandozayi, (4) Terezayi, (5) Spera, (6) Tani and (7) Matoon Shamal. In Paktika\nprovince, the priorities are Barmal and Urgun districts. Barmal is poorly accessible for security\nreasons. In Khost province, the needs of 128,137 individuals were assessed (29,200 refugees and\n98,937 individuals in the host community), using a Rapid Assessment Form to collect quantitative\n\n\n13 |\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/da33aea6-d61c-31f9-abef-cf7c8c568871/2014%20Afghanistan%20Refugee%20and%20Returnee%20Overview.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        12
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "data at village/community level. In Paktika province, the survey was carried out in two districts\n(Barmal and Urgun) using qualitative data collection methods (key informant interview and FGD).\n\nBased on the assessments results, the partners in Khost and Paktika have started to respond to\nacute needs in 2014 and will pursue their efforts in 2015 to reach the selected targets. The activities\nforeseen in 2015 are detailed in the annex and will cover the acute WASH needs of the affected\npopulation where accessibility is granted.\n\nTo prepare for a possible additional refugee crisis in 2015, the WASH cluster will reinforce its\noperational capacity, among others in developing standard assessment forms, strengthening its\ncontingency plan and training key resources at decentralized levels. Under the oversight of the\nWASH cluster, partners will be supported in conducting Rapid Assessment and data processing\nwithin two weeks following onset of a crisis. Additional decision-making tools will be made available\nsuch as a standard WASH Comprehensive Assessment Tool (CAT) and technical guidelines to\nimplement rapid live saving activities\n\n**Emergency Health and Nutrition**\nThe 2014 Humanitarian Needs Overview shows both provinces were among the 13 high-risk\nprovinces identified, to which additional resources from the Common Humanitarian Fund are being\nused. There was no allocation for emergency primary healthcare services in inaccessible areas, nor\ntreatment of malnutrition in 2014 but it is estimated that the refugees will require substantial\nnutrition services in 2015. Khost also ranked high with regard to the prevalence of malnutrition with\n18.2%; well above the emergency threshold of 15%. In Paktika, the overall malnutrition rates stand\nat 8.7%. The targets for the Nutrition cluster are calculated using the overall need for the refugees\nand assuming 50% coverage due to insecurity in many parts of Paktika as well as partner capacity to\nscale up in the two provinces.\n\nUtilizing existing resources, the Nutrition cluster is currently working on a modality to conduct\nnutrition surveys in the area in order to assess the nutritional status of the refugee population. It will\nalso determine whether the additional burden for hosting communities may further exacerbate the\nalready high malnutrition rates, particularly in Khost. If the situation worsens, additional funds will\nbe required in order to adequately respond to the need.\n\nThe spread of contagious but preventable diseases, such as measles, polio and Pertussis are high due\nto very low vaccination coverage of the refugee population. Outbreak of diarrhoeal disease,\nincluding cholera is a major concern for both the refugee population and hosting communities, due\nto the water scarcity in the summer season, endemic prevalence of such diseases and increased\npopulation with poor hygiene practices. The health system in both provinces has no capacity to\nhandle a major cholera outbreak, thus cholera treatment centres are urgently required.\n\nIn addition to communicable diseases, the situation merits scaling up of routine primary healthcare\nservices, particularly with regard to maternal and child health and mental health care. It is known\nthat refugee populations in a camp or among host community suffer from post-traumatic stress\ndisorder. The large influx has overburdened the health service providers; as such there is a dire need\nfor additional support to meet the increased demand.\n\n**Food Security**\nSince the onset of refugees entering Khost and Paktika in mid-2014, assessments have indicated\nfood assistance to be a top priority. WFP began its emergency food assistance to Pakistani refugees\nwith an initial caseload of 1,500 households. The total number of families supported by WFP has\nnow reached nearly 23,000 households, with an expectation that this may increase to at least 30,000\nhouseholds in the coming months, based on the current, most-likely scenario. Food distributions will\n\n\n14 |\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "survey",
+          "confidence": 0.7489559650421143,
+          "start": 12,
+          "end": 13
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "WASH cluster",
+          "confidence": 0.5397471785545349,
+          "start": 109,
+          "end": 111
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Paktika province",
+          "confidence": 0.8003107905387878,
+          "start": 8,
+          "end": 10
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2014",
+          "confidence": 0.9117810130119324,
+          "start": 57,
+          "end": 58
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "affected\npopulation",
+          "confidence": 0.8092980980873108,
+          "start": 90,
+          "end": 92
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "nutrition surveys",
+          "confidence": 0.9901053309440613,
+          "start": 359,
+          "end": 361
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "Nutrition cluster",
+          "confidence": 0.9269136190414429,
+          "start": 307,
+          "end": 309
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Paktika",
+          "confidence": 0.8994693756103516,
+          "start": 330,
+          "end": 331
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "refugee population",
+          "confidence": 0.9613824486732483,
+          "start": 373,
+          "end": 375
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/da33aea6-d61c-31f9-abef-cf7c8c568871/2014%20Afghanistan%20Refugee%20and%20Returnee%20Overview.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        13
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "at all times focus on most vulnerable populations, who are scattered in 12 districts in Khost and\nPaktika provinces. The majority are concentrated in Khost centre, Matun, Gulan camp in Gurboz and\nBermal district in Paktika. To date, WFP has distributed a total of 4,100 metric tons of mixed food.\n\nAt the field level, WFP has worked closely with the local authorities, UNHCR and other UN agencies,\nas well as NGO partners. WFP currently has agreements with two NGOs (MEHR & ORCD) for food\ndistribution, and out-sourced monitors who are able to verify that distributions have been\ncompleted according to agreed protocols, and help identify any gaps and challenges. An agreement\nunder which UNHCR takes over responsibility for secondary transport and distribution, as per\ncorporate protocols, is due to be in place by November.\n\nHost communities have played an important role in helping refugees meet their basic needs, mainly\nachieved through depletion of food stocks, selling and consumption of poultry products, and selling\nof crop seeds set aside for plantation. This had a negative impact on the food security and\nlivelihoods of host communities. In order to address this, the local communities require support with\nagriculture inputs, certified wheat, maize, mung bean, vegetable seeds, small-scale poultry\nproduction, as well as training in livelihood protection. This will bolster their capacity to continue\nhosting refugees and help compensate for their depleted food and seed stocks.\n\n**Education**\nSafeguarding the right to education is an essential strategy to ensure the protection of children and\nadolescents and to fulfil its commitment towards the Education for All Framework. Children and\nadolescents should have access to child-friendly spaces, where recreational and learning activities,\nas well as psycho-social support, will be provided. Educational activities should be safe enough to\nprovide effective protection to refugee children, adolescents, boys and girls. Prevention and\nresponse mechanisms to violence in school should also be established.\n\nAs per initial estimates, 58% of the refugee population are children. Initial educational services and\npsychosocial support are being are being provided for 2,800 refugee children in grades 1-6 in Khost\nin a partnership between DoE, NRC and UNICEF. This needs to be expanded to cover all children,\nincluding older children, and children need to be provided with Pakistani text books (while both the\nPakistani refugees and the host population speak Pashto, the Pakistani children are taught in Urdu\nand English, and generally do not read Afghan Pashto). In addition, DoE and UNICEF are establishing\n100 temporary learning places in Paktika. DoE is providing funding for additional teachers while\nUNICEF is providing teaching and learning materials as well as tents. UNICEF will provide capacity\nbuilding support to DoE in Paktika as well as continuing to provide TLM supplies.\n\n**Partnership and Coordination**\nAt the national level, issues with regard to the displacement are dealt with under the National\nSecurity Council (NSC). Under the leadership of the NSC, and chaired by the Deputy National Security\nAdvisor, a task force monitors ongoing humanitarian activities in Khost and Paktika and provides\nsupport to the provincial committees. Members of this task force include representatives from key\nministries and the Afghan Red Crescent Society. UNHCR, as the mandated UN agency for refugee\nresponse, is represented at the NSC Taskforce meetings. The purpose of the taskforce is to provide\nregular reports to the President and the National Security Advisor via the task force Chair.\n\nOn the basis of recommendations made by this task force, the GoIRA \u2013 in coordination with\nUNHCR \u2013 will lead the refugee response as part of the overall humanitarian response under the\nleadership of the Humanitarian Coordinator. A Task Force has been set up in Kabul by UNHCR to\nfacilitate the coordination of the response to the refugee and displaced families in Khost and Paktika.\nThe task force includes humanitarian partners directly involved in responding to the arrivals and with\ncurrent experience from the region. The members include the following UN agencies: FAO, IOM,\n\n\n15 |\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/da33aea6-d61c-31f9-abef-cf7c8c568871/2014%20Afghanistan%20Refugee%20and%20Returnee%20Overview.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        14
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "UNFPA, UNICEF, UNMAS, WFP and WHO, as well as national and international NGOs: CARE\nInternational, Danish Refugee Council (DRC), the Danish Committee for Aid to Afghan Refugees\n(DACAAR), Health Net International (HNI-TPO), International Medical Corps (IMC), International\nRescue Committee (IRC), Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC), Solidarites International, and The\nLiaison Office (TLO), as well as the Afghan Red Crescent Society (ARCS).\n\nA task force has also been established in Khost, co-chaired by the Governor of Khost and UNHCR.\nThe Governor of Khost has also set up eleven committees in districts affected by the refugee influx.\nThese committees are headed by various active heads of departments and are aimed at helping with\nregistration, coordination of humanitarian organisations and the facilitation of distribution of\nhumanitarian assistance. These 11 committees report to a central secretariat at the provincial level.\nThis secretariat is responsible for ensuring coherence, setting priorities and monitoring performance\nto mitigate corruption and enhance transparency and receives direct support from UNHCR. The\nsecretariat reports directly to the Governor of Khost.\n\nThere are a limited number of humanitarian actors in Khost who were able to cover the most\nessential needs during the emergency phase. The number of actors is slowly increasing and GoIRA, in\ncollaboration with UNHCR, is coordinating the assistance and repartition of coverage by sectors.\nAssistance in areas of WASH, health, shelter and food security is being dealt with by the partners\nalready on the ground, while the Cluster Coordinators are kept informed in Kabul, in order to utilize\nexisting expertise and resources available in-country. Once the emergency phase moves into a more\nstable response, UNHCR will remain responsible for all protection issues, in coordination with\nrelevant partners.\n\nIn Paktika, assistance and support will be coordinated by the Governor\u2019s office \u2013 in cooperation with\nUNHCR \u2013 from Bermal district centre. Remote support to the provincial and district governing\nauthorities will be provided. Regular coordination meetings, co-chaired by the Governor\u2019s office and\nUNHCR, and national non-governmental organizations on the ground take place and have facilitated\nthe coordination of distribution of assistance to refugee families residing mainly in Bermal and\nUrgun districts of Paktika. Coordination and liaison between the Governor\u2019s office, UNHCR and\nnational and international organizations also takes place at the Kabul level.\n\n\n16 |\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/da33aea6-d61c-31f9-abef-cf7c8c568871/2014%20Afghanistan%20Refugee%20and%20Returnee%20Overview.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        15
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**STRATEGIC PRIORITY THREE: TIMELY RESPONSE TO AFFECTED POPULATIONS**\n\n\n**OUTCOME THREE: 3.3 TIMELY PROVISION OF LIFESAVING ASSISTANCE TO REFUGEES, AFGHAN REFUGEE**\n**RETURNEES AND UNDOCUMENTED VULNERABLE RETURNEES**\n\n**Objective 1:** Provision of protection to Pakistani refugees\n\n\nOUTPUTS Locations Indicators Target\n\n\n\n80-100% of\nrefugees\n\n\n12,000 children\n\n\n12,000 children\n\n\n2,000 families\n\n\n20,000\nvulnerable\nfamilies\n\n\n5,000 families\n\n\n100%\n\n\n\nQuality of registration\nand profiling improved Khost and Paktika (including Gulan camp)\nor maintained\n\n\n\n% of persons of concern registered\non an individual basis\n\n\nExtent children of concern have\nnon-discriminatory access to national\nchild protection and social services\n\n\nschool-age children have\naccess to educational and\npsychosocial services\n\n\n# of elderly persons of concern who\nreceive services for their specific needs\n\n\nExtent persons of concern are\nrepresented in leadership\nmanagement structures\n\n\nExtent camp coordination\nmechanisms working effectively\n\n\n% of camp population who\nreceived M/ERW\n\n\n\nSecurity from Violence and\nExploitation: protection of\nchildren strengthened, risk of\nSGBV is reduced and quality of\nresponse improved\n\n\n\nKhost and Paktika (including Gulan camp)\n\n\n\nServices for persons with specific\nKhost and Paktika (including Gulan camp)\nneeds strengthened\n\n\nCommunity-based approach,\nincluding participatory\nassessments, in the emergency\noperation to ensure that the Khost and Paktika (including Gulan camp)\nfollow-up phase supports\ncommunities to regain control of\ntheir lives as quickly as possible\n\n\nCamp management\nand coordination refined Gulan camp\nand improved\n\n\nMine and ERW risk education Gulan camp\n\n\n\n**Objective 2:** Essential services to Pakistani refugees, while pursuing durable solutions\n\n\nActivities Locations Indicator Target\n\n\n\n5,000 families\n\n\n5,000 families\n\n\n5,000 families\n\n\n5,000 families\n\n\n5,000 families\n\n\n5,000 families\n\n\n17 |\n\n\n\nUniform treatment and standards\nof protection and services for\nall refugees\n\n\n\nGulan Camp\n\n\n\nProportion of household with access\nto a functioning toilet\n\n\nProportion of household possessing\nsoap\n\n\nProportion of household with\nemergency tents\n\n\nPreventative and life-saving\nhealth care services provided\n\n\nSupply of potable water increased\nor maintained\n\n\nPerimeter of the refugee\ncamp secured\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/da33aea6-d61c-31f9-abef-cf7c8c568871/2014%20Afghanistan%20Refugee%20and%20Returnee%20Overview.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        16
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "Activities Locations Indicator Target\n\n\n\nComprehensive\nneeds\nassessment\n\n\n2,500\ntents/families\n\n\n3,000 NFI\nkits/families\n\n\n80% of refugees\nhosted\n\n\n\nEnsure Refugees have\nadequate protection from the weather\nin order to create the necessary\nprivacy, psychological comfort, and\nemotional safety through provision of\nemergency shelter and NFI's\n\n\n\nKhost and Paktika\n\n\n\nTo re-assess post-spring the\nemergency shelter situation on the\nground in order to revise the approach\nand develop a transitional\nsolutions according\n\n\nProcurement and distribution\nof emergency tents\n\n\nPopulation has sufficient basic\nand domestic items\n\n\nProportion of households\nwithin intervention areas with\naccess to safe drinking water\n\n\n\nNumber of jerry cans distributed 1,142 jerry cans\n\n\n\nWASH services are provided to refugees\nKhost and Paktika\nand the host communities\n\n\nReduce incidence of maternal and child\nmortality and morbidity in targeted Khost and Paktika\nareas\n\n\n\n# of children vaccinated 136,221\nvaccinated\n\n\n\nProportion of households\nwithin intervention areas with\nsoap available at hand washing area\n\n\nProportion of households\nwithin intervention areas with access\nto a functioning toilet\n\n\nCase fatality rate during epidemics\nare maintained within\ninternationally agreed standards\n\n\nCase fatality rate during epidemics\nare maintained within\ninternationally agreed standards\n\n\n\n80% of refugees\nhosted\n\n\n80% of refugees\nhosted\n\n\nMeasles\nCFR   <5%\nCholera <1%\n\n\nMeasles\nCFR   <5%\nCholera <1%\n\n\n\n% of new unforeseen\nemergencies responded to with\nadequate supplies\n\n\n\n100%\n\n\n\nTo provide Food assistance to meet\ntheir immediate food needs Khost and Paktika\n\n\n\nTo provide Food assistance to meet # of families supplied with adequate 30,000 most\ntheir immediate food needs Khost and Paktika and nutritional food vulnerable\n\nrefugee families\n\n**Objective 3:** Immediate humanitarian needs for refugee returnees and undocumented vulnerable migrant\nreturnees, are met\n\n\n\n# of families supplied with adequate\nand nutritional food\n\n\n\nActivities Locations Indicator Target\n\n\n\n50,000\nrefugee\nreturnees\n\n\n\nVoluntary repatriation: protection and\nbasic assistance upon arrival,\nsupporting education registration,\nlifesaving healthcare, and essential\nvaccinations for children under 5 years\nof age, as well as basic mine/ERW\nawareness, transit facilities and how to\naccess legal aid\n\n\nUndocumented vulnerable returnees:\nprovision of humanitarian assistance\nand return assistance upon arrival.\n\n\nThe most vulnerable returnees will\nbe prioritized for the provision\nof shelter, access to basic services\nand reintegration assistance\n\n\n\nUNHCR and DoRR Encashment/\nreception centres in\nNangarhar, Paktya, Kandahar,\nKabul and Herat provinces\n\n\nHerat, Nangarhar, Nimroz, Khost\nand Paktika\n\n\nHerat, Nangarhar, Kandahar, Kabul,\nNimroz, Gardez, Khost\nand Paktika\n\n\nAreas of highest return with most\nvulnerable\n\n\n\n# of Afghan refugee returnees\nreceiving assistance upon arrival\n\n\n\n# of returnees identified\nas People with Specific Needs\nprovided assistance\n\n\n# of returnees\nassisted at\nplace of return\n\n\n\n# of returnee families covered 5,000\nunder UNHCR Protection refugee\nreturnee monitoring (through H/H returnees\nsurveys and tracking interviews, follow\nup, physical visit of families in their places\nof return\n\n\n# of PSNs assisted 45,000\nUndocumented\nmigrant\nreturnees\n\n\n\n1,360 returnees\n(refugee and\nundocumented\n\n\n245,600\nrefugee\nreturnees\n\n\n18 |\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Locations Indicator",
+          "confidence": 0.5804935097694397,
+          "start": 1,
+          "end": 3
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "refugees",
+          "confidence": 0.9741241931915283,
+          "start": 23,
+          "end": 24
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Locations Indicator",
+          "confidence": 0.6735936403274536,
+          "start": 312,
+          "end": 314
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "UNHCR",
+          "confidence": 0.9144241213798523,
+          "start": 399,
+          "end": 400
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "refugee\nreturnees",
+          "confidence": 0.8164767026901245,
+          "start": 318,
+          "end": 320
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "refugee\nreturnee monitoring",
+          "confidence": 0.9432122111320496,
+          "start": 487,
+          "end": 490
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "UNHCR",
+          "confidence": 0.5901548862457275,
+          "start": 485,
+          "end": 486
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "Afghan refugee returnees",
+          "confidence": 0.5312668681144714,
+          "start": 450,
+          "end": 453
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/da33aea6-d61c-31f9-abef-cf7c8c568871/2014%20Afghanistan%20Refugee%20and%20Returnee%20Overview.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        17
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_22/raw/doc_22_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,223 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "## DISPLACEMENT DASHBOARD\n###### **Mindanao, Philippines Forced Displacement Annual Report, 2015**\n\n\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/857c425c-5a55-3e2c-9a5b-88faadda5e3c/2015_mindanao_displacement_dashboard_annual_report_lr.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "#### MINDANAO DISPLACEMENT AT A GLANCE\n\nForced displacement due to various forms of conflict and natural disaster continue to confront\n\n\nmost of the marginalized and vulnerable population in Mindanao. In 2015, a total of 407,397\n\n\npersons have been forced to flee their homes of which around 37,000 persons have been\n\n\nrepeatedly displaced mostly because of armed conflict, clan war, and generalized form of\n\n\nviolence including human rights violations. These conflict-related displacements recorded an\n\n\nincrease of 127% compared to 2014. The largest of which was the Law Enforcement Operation\n\n\nof government forces against the Bangsamoro Islamic Freedom Fighters (BIFF) which\n\n\ndisplaced more than 148,000 persons in central Mindanao. To date, durable solutions among\n\n\nthese displaced population continue to be a pressing concern especially in an environment\n\n\nwhere peace and order remains to be elusive.\n\n\n\n**2**\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/857c425c-5a55-3e2c-9a5b-88faadda5e3c/2015_mindanao_displacement_dashboard_annual_report_lr.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "### **Central Mindanao** **Island Provinces** **Eastern Mindanao-IPs**\n# ARMED CONFLICT\n##### Related Displacement\n\nNon-international armed conflicts are protracted armed confrontations\noccurring between governmental armed forces and the forces of one or\nmore armed groups, or between such groups arising on the territory of a\nState [party to the Geneva Conventions]. The armed confrontation must\nreach a minimum level of intensity and the parties involved in the conflict\nmust show a minimum of organisation. This category also includes cases\nwhere there is an allegation of an unusual presence of armed groups that\nresults in people seeking safety elsewhere, as well as where arbitrary\ndetentions, disappearances or raids are initiated by a recognized armed\ngroup that targets civilian community.\n\n\n_(\u2018How is the Term \"Armed Conflict\" Defined in International Humanitarian Law?\u2019_\n_International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC Opinion Paper, March 2008)_\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/857c425c-5a55-3e2c-9a5b-88faadda5e3c/2015_mindanao_displacement_dashboard_annual_report_lr.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        2
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**4**\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/857c425c-5a55-3e2c-9a5b-88faadda5e3c/2015_mindanao_displacement_dashboard_annual_report_lr.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        3
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "#### **Armed Conflict Displacement: Central Mindanao**\n\n\n\ntime of the publication of this document, these issues remain\n\na concern for populations repeatedly displaced by this\n\nconflict.\n\n\nThe Mamasapano incident had negative repercussions on\n\nthe deliberation of the proposed Bangsamoro Basic Law\n\n(BBL) in the Congress and Senate hearings, while non-state\n\narmed actors also took advantage of the precarious state of\n\nthe peace process to continue attacks on government and\n\nmilitary targets throughout the year.\n\n\nThe BIFF harassment of military detachments in the towns of\n\nDatu Saudi Ampatuan (Barangay Salbo), Datu Salibo\n\n(Barangay Pagatin), Mamasapano, and Shariff Aguak\n\n(SPMS box) in Maguindanao during the height of the LEOs\n\ncontinued unabated. BIFF attacks on civilian communities in\n\nMILF-stronghold areas in North Cotabato and Maguindanao\n\nprovinces, and in communities with identified internal conflict\n\nwith other BIFF member, further confounded the complex\n\nsecurity situation in the area.\n\n\nEarly November, the BIFF tried but failed to overrun a\n\nmilitary detachment displacing 30 families (estimated 150\n\n###### **MINDANAO PEACE PROCESS**\n\n\n\npersons) in the municipality of Shariff Aguak. On Christmas\n\nEve, the BIFF launched synchronized attacks on military\n\ndetachments, which resulted in 232 families (estimated\n\n1,039 persons) being displaced from their homes in\n\nPigkawayan municipality in North Cotabato province.\n\n\nOverall, during the last quarter of the year, incidents\n\ndocumented by Protection Cluster members resulted in the\n\ndisplacement of 260 families (estimated 1,189 persons) in\n\ncentral Mindanao.\n\n\nA new armed-group called the Ansar Khilafah Philippines\n\n(AKP), claiming to support the Islamic State of Iraq and\n\nSyria (ISIS), emerged in Palimbang municipality of Sultan\n\nKudarat province causing fear amongst communities in the\n\narea. The group\u2019s activities were thwarted in a pursuit\n\noperation conducted by the Philippine Marines, which\n\nresulted in the displacement of 50 families (estimated 250\n\npersons) in late November. This group, and other small\n\nradical groups, contributes to the displacement of civilian\n\npopulations in areas where there are unresolved conflicts\n\nbetween the MILF, the Moro National Liberation Front\n\n(MNLF) and government forces.\n\n\n\nThe year concluded with no significant progress made in the Protection Cluster partners advocate for the pursuit of\n\npassage of the Bangsamoro Basic Law (BBL), which would peace in Mindanao as it is the primary condition for all the\n\nhave laid down the foundation of an autonomous political population of Mindanao - particularly those most\n\nentity, the Bangsamoro, thus paving the way to lasting peace marginalized and under threat - to see their human rights\n\nwith the MILF. In the absence of a law instituting the new fulfilled and for the displaced to find a durable solution to\n\nBangsamoro entity, armed groups are likely to continue their plight.\n\n\nengaging the AFP with ensuing LEOs and subsequent\n\n\ndisplacement.\n\n\n**5**\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/857c425c-5a55-3e2c-9a5b-88faadda5e3c/2015_mindanao_displacement_dashboard_annual_report_lr.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        4
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**6**\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/857c425c-5a55-3e2c-9a5b-88faadda5e3c/2015_mindanao_displacement_dashboard_annual_report_lr.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        5
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "yet to materialize in spite of years of an ongoing peace process. For the taking advantage of the cool afternoon breeze under a mango tree. Their\npeople who live here, fear and displacement have been unwanted features welcoming smiles betray the years of witnessing constant gunfights and\nof everyday life for generations. mortar shelling and their repeated displacement since they were teenagers.\n\n\u201cWe have grown tired of this game of hide-and-seek,\u201d said Guibanea Lasam, \u201cWe are a very lucky lot. All the years of loud explosions coming from guns\na mother of 7 camped out in a madrasah just a few kilometers from where a and battle tanks have rendered us deaf,\u201d laughed a 75-year old Kolot Mama\nmis-encounter between government security forces and the armed groups, from the neighboring town of Shariff Aguak. \u201cAt least we won\u2019t easily die of\nthe Mindanao Islamic Liberation Force (MILF) and the Bangsamoro Islamic shock or pass out,\u201d chorused the group.\nFreedom Fighters (BIFF) took place on 25 January this year. The incident\njeopardized a three-year ceasefire and led to events that caused thousands Amid the laughter shared by these women are stories of loss, suffering and\nof civilians to flee their homes in its aftermath. families torn apart by the decades-long conflict. Their husbands had either\n\njoined the ranks of militant groups or perished in the fighting. Their children\n\nConsidered as one of the world\u2019s longest running insurgencies, the armed have grown up not completing school and joined the long list of the unemclashes between the state forces and Moros seeking some form of     ployed poor.\nindependence in the central region of Mindanao have been ongoing for 4\ndecades now and has over the years generated hundreds of thousands of \u201cWe don\u2019t need anyone guarding us in our communities. We are not scared\ninternally displaced people who are usually left fending for themselves in of going home. In fact, we have not unpacked our things as we thought they\ncongested and unplanned informal settlements such as Mahad Libutan. would allow us to return today. But then we wait for another day, and then\nMany families are displaced multiple times during the same year. another day goes by and then nothing. We\u2019ve just grown weary of moving\n\nbetween places,\u201d said Kolot.\n\n\u201cIn peaceful mornings we sneak into our home village so we could harvest\nour crops and we retreat back in the evacuation center when darkness falls,\u201d Elder people have also expressed their concern over the presence of the\nsaid Guibanea recounting the usual order of things every time clashes break Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) in their communities. They say that\nout in the area. The fighting has now spread to neighboring villages causing the establishment of military posts in villages has limited their ability to move\nother civilians to flee fearing arrest for being suspected of being in alliance freely around without fearing for their safety.\nwith the BIFF or getting caught in crossfire and mortar shelling.\n\n\u201cIf I were to count the number of steps I took from all the running all these\n\nSince leaving their homes, people are desperate to return to their      years, I think I have already explored the whole archipelago,\u201d said Kolot. \u201cIt\ncommunities so they could resume their livelihoods as living conditions in would have been better if I was running for a cause. People are fleeing from\nthe evacuation centers are becoming dire and relief assistance limited or a false idea of peace, that peace can be achieved by fighting is something I\nnon-existent. will never understand. I am at the twilight of my life and I may never see\n\npeace in this lifetime,\u201d she added. **END**\n\n\u201cWe want to go home. The assistance provided is not enough and\nsometimes we don\u2019t even receive food packs,\u201d said Guibanea. \u201cThe last time _By Keneath John Bolisay and Joel Andersson, UNHCR Philippines_\n\n\n**7**\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/857c425c-5a55-3e2c-9a5b-88faadda5e3c/2015_mindanao_displacement_dashboard_annual_report_lr.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        6
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "#### **Armed Conflict Displacement: Zamboanga City**\n\n\n\nMore than two years after fighting erupted between the AFP\n\nand a faction of the MNLF in Zamboanga City, driving\n\n120,000 persons to flee from the mainly Moro communities,\n\n4,117 families (estimated 23,938 persons) are still in need of\n\na durable solution. While progress is gradually being made\n\n\n\nImprovements are needed for these transitory sites and\n\npermanent shelter sites where access to basic services such\n\nas adequate water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) facilities,\n\nelectricity, security, and access road (i.e. Kasanyangan) are\n\noutstanding concerns. Local authorities are working to\n\n\n\nthrough the Zamboanga Roadmap to Recovery and      address these issues, but the completion of these facilities is\n\n\n\nReconstruction (Z3R) Plan led by the city authorities, serious\n\n\n\nexpected to take up to two years.\n\n\n\nprotection concerns still exist for those IDPs living in\n\ninadequate relocation sites identified and supported by   Although the cluster system has transitioned to an early\n\n\n\ninternational organizations.\n\n\nAs of December 2015, out of the targeted 6,500 permanent\n\nhousing units to be constructed, only 2,338 (36%) have been\n\nbuilt. Of this figure, 869 (13%) were awarded to beneficiaries.\n\n\n\nrecovery coordination structure in June, Protection Cluster\n\nactors continue to provide technical support to all the sector\nleads with their main advocacy concerns focused on\n\nensuring permanent shelter is constructed for all IDPs in\n\nareas where they can obtain basic services and immediately\n\n\n\nThe slow pace of the rehabilitation efforts particularly on  access their livelihoods, health care and education.\n\n\n\npermanent housing construction is attributed to the lengthy\n\nprocess of expropriating lands for access road, installation of\n\nbasic utilities, and the objective selection and inclusion of the\n\nmost vulnerable, landless displaced population.\n\n\n\n\n**> page 9**\n\n\n**For more than two years now, durable solutions for**\n**displaced population remain to be a major challenge.**\n**These IDPs in Mampang Transitory Site continue to**\n**endure their situation while waiting for their return or**\n**relocation.**\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/857c425c-5a55-3e2c-9a5b-88faadda5e3c/2015_mindanao_displacement_dashboard_annual_report_lr.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        7
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/857c425c-5a55-3e2c-9a5b-88faadda5e3c/2015_mindanao_displacement_dashboard_annual_report_lr.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        8
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "picture of the plight of indigenous communities in Mindanao\n\ndue to the complex security situation involving the AFP, the\n\nrebel group New Peoples\u2019 Army (NPA), and para-military\n\ngroups. Compared to an annual average of 400 displaced IP\n\nfamilies (estimated 2,000 persons) from the two previous\n\nyears, 2015 posted a much higher number of 3,198 families\n\n\nparamilitary groups, including targeted killings and forced\n\ndisplacement occurred almost each month if not more.\n\n\nPolicing operations undertaken by state security forces and\n\nretaliatory attacks from non-state armed actors within and\n\naround IP communities in Mindanao have caused fear and\n\ninsecurity. Of the 28 incidents recorded in Regions IX\n\n(Zamboanga), X (Northern Mindanao), XI (Davao), XII\n\n\n\n(SOCCSKSARGEN), and XIII (Caraga), 24 of these incidents\n\nhave caused the displacement and human rights violations of\n\n3,154 families of IP descent (estimated 15,417 persons)\n\nwhile 742 families (estimated 3,015 persons) fled from AFP\n\nand NPA armed encounters. These incidents include\n\n\n\n**for the killing of their tribal leaders.**\n\n\n\nreported attacks and killings of IP leaders and activists,\n\nforced recruitment into various armed groups, extra-judicial\n\nkillings, and reported arbitrary arrests from March to October\n\n2015.\n\n\n\nCommission on the Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) and the\n\nimplementation of its mandate enshrined in the Indigenous\n\nPeoples Act of 1997 (IPRA Law).\n\n\nProtection actors, local authorities and international\n\n\n\norganizations have increased their calls for more protection\n\nHuman rights groups and volunteers have identified the\n\nof the IP population. The UN Special Rapporteur for the\n\nfollowing issues affecting IPs that trigger forced\n\nHuman Rights of IDPs, Chaloka Beyani, visited the UCCP\n\ndisplacement: (1) economic interests of national and\n\ncompound in Davao City last July, which was then sheltering\n\nmulti-national companies (agro-industrial and mining),\n\n\n\nincluding influential local landlords and businessmen seeking\n\naccess to the mineral-rich soil of IP\u2019s ancestral lands; (2)\n\n\n\n700 IPs from Talaingod and Kapalong villages. Dr Beyani\n\nhighlighted the lack of focus on this most vulnerable\n\n\n\npopulation, the indigenous peoples, who are potential victims\n\nextra-judicial killings (EJKs) which cause conflict,\n\n\n\ndisplacement, and divides amongst IP groups; (3) difficulty in\n\nobtaining\n\nCertificate of Ancestral Domain Titles due to overlapping\n\n\n\nof government involved extraction and business projects [2] .\n\nLikewise, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights of\n\nIndigenous Peoples, Victoria Tauli - Corpuz, released a\n\n\n\nstatement in September urging the Philippine government to\n\nlaws that complicate land claims of IPs. The lack of\n\n\n\nprotection of these ancestral rights forces IPs off their land\n\noften because of conflict. (4) IP representatives and CHR\n\n\n\nlaunch an investigation to the spate of human rights\n\nviolations committed against IPs in Mindanao [3] .\n\n\n\nofficers have also raised concerns on the capacity and\n\n\n\neffectiveness of the protection provided by the National\n\n\n[2http://www.ohchr.org/en/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=16280&LangID=E](http://www.ohchr.org/en/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=16280&LangID=E)\n\n\n[3http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=16481&LangID=E](http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=16481&LangID=E)\n\n\n\nAs of December 2015, approximately 8,090 IPs remain\n\ndisplaced not able to return to their communities of origin\n\nbecause of security concerns.\n\n\n**10**\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/857c425c-5a55-3e2c-9a5b-88faadda5e3c/2015_mindanao_displacement_dashboard_annual_report_lr.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        9
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "# CLAN FEUD\n##### Related Displacement\n\nA type of violent conflict variously referred to as feuding, revenge\nkillings, blood revenge, vendetta, inter-tribal warfare and clan conflicts. Characterized by sporadic outbursts of retaliatory violence\nbetween families and kinship groups as well as communities this\nphenomenon frequently occurs in areas where government or a\ncentral authority is weak and in areas where there is a perceived\nlack of justice and security.\n\n\n( _Torres, Wilfredo M (ed). \u2018Rido: Clan Feuding and Conflict Management in_\n_Mindanao.\u2019 The Asia Foundation, 2007_ )\n\n\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/857c425c-5a55-3e2c-9a5b-88faadda5e3c/2015_mindanao_displacement_dashboard_annual_report_lr.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        10
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "#### **Clan Feud - Related Displacement**\n\n\n\nCompeting land claims, political differences, and division\n\n\ncontributed to 8 percent of recorded displacement in 2015.\n\n\nOf the 31 security incidents monitored, 18 of these have\n\n\nbeen reported to cause the displacement of 7,759 families\n\n\n(estimated 41,038 persons) in Central Mindanao, the island\n\n\nprovinces and mainland provinces of ARMM, and a\n\n\ncontiguous area of the ARMM.\n\n\nThe enduring land disputes in North Cotabato and border\n\n\n\nLanao del Norte province has flared up twice in the year,\n\n\nresulting in a firefight and triggering the displacement of\n\n\n2,145 families (estimated 11,429 persons) from eight (8)\n\n\nbarangays and reportedly injured four persons. As of\n\n\nreporting time, tension remains high in the area with the\n\n\nelection period approaching.\n\n\nIn April, the displacement of more than 400 families\n\n\n(approximately 1,800 persons) in Wao in Lanao del Sur was\n\n\n\nareas in Sultan Kudarat and Maguindanao provinces    prompted by an attack that killed four (4) and wounded seven\n\n\n\ncontinue to trigger high levels of violence and forced     (7) persons in a Moro community. Tensions and division\n\n\n\ndisplacement among its Moro (Maguindanaon), Christian\n\n\n(Ilonggo) settlers and in other parts, indigenous peoples\n\n\n(Manobos and Tedurays).\n\n\nFighting over the control of strategic patches of lands in the\n\n\n\nbetween the Moro community and Christian settlers are\n\n\ngrowing despite efforts by the AFP, ARMM authorities and\n\n\nMILF leaders to calm the situation. A Christian organization\n\n\nhas called for Wao to be excluded from the proposed\n\n\nBangsamoro Autonomous Region.\n\n\n\narea, which is a productive 40-hectare agricultural zone,\n\n\n\nlocated along the tri-boundary of Columbio, Datu Paglas and\n\n\nTulunan municipalities in Sultan Kudarat, Maguindanao and\n\n\nNorth Cotabato provinces respectively, has resulted in the\n\n\ncombined and repetitive displacement of 2,597 families\n\n\n\nIn Sulu, a political rivalry in the municipality of Old Panamao\n\n\ncaused the displacement of 500 families (estimated 2,500\n\n\npersons) in mid-April.\n\n\n\n(estimated 12,539 persons) as of end of 2015. Nine (9)   In the island provinces, two incidents of clan feud in the\n\n\n\ncivilians killed were killed as a result of armed encounter.\n\n\nAccording to local residents, despite efforts from the local\n\n\nauthorities to settle the land conflict over the years, armed\n\n\n\nmunicipality of Al Barka in Basilan province erupted in\n\n\nOctober and November, resulting in the combined\n\n\n\nprovinces.\n\n\n\n\n\n**12**\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/857c425c-5a55-3e2c-9a5b-88faadda5e3c/2015_mindanao_displacement_dashboard_annual_report_lr.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        11
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "[4http://www.philstar.com/nation/2016/01/21/1544911/7-abu-sayyaf-members-surrender-basilan](http://www.philstar.com/nation/2016/01/21/1544911/7-abu-sayyaf-members-surrender-basilan)\n\n\n\n**13**\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/857c425c-5a55-3e2c-9a5b-88faadda5e3c/2015_mindanao_displacement_dashboard_annual_report_lr.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        12
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "# NATURAL DISASTER\n##### Related Displacement\n\n\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/857c425c-5a55-3e2c-9a5b-88faadda5e3c/2015_mindanao_displacement_dashboard_annual_report_lr.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        13
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**15**\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/857c425c-5a55-3e2c-9a5b-88faadda5e3c/2015_mindanao_displacement_dashboard_annual_report_lr.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        14
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "UNHCR Manila\n\n\n6/F GC Corporate Plaza (JAKA 2 Building)\n\n150 Legaspi Street\n\nLegaspi Village, 1226 Makati City, Manila\n\nTelephone: +63 (02) 403-2336\n\nWebsite: www.unhcr.ph\n\n\nUNHCR Cotabato\n\n\n26 Ilang-Ilang Street corner Rosales Street\n\nRosales Heights 6, 9600 Cotabato City\n\nTelephone: +63 (064) 421-7940\n\nWebsite: www.unhcr.ph\n\nEmail: phicoprc@unhcr.org\n\n\n**DISCLAIMER**\n\n\nThe Annual Mindanao Displacement Dashboard\naims to provide a starting point for information and\nanalysis that can help protection agencies, policy\nmakers and other stakeholders concerning instances\nof forced displacement or solutions (repatriation,\nresettlement, integration). The number of people\ndisplaced / affected may differ from the number in\nneed of humanitarian assistance. To the extent\npossible, the terminology used in the Dashboard\nreflects the _UN Guiding Principles on Internal_\n_Displacement_ and other sources of international law\nand practice. The information reported in the Annual\nMindanao Displacement Dashboard has been\nreceived from members of the Protection Cluster\nacross Mindanao. Consequently, unreported cases\nof forced displacement and solutions are not\nreflected. Updates will be provided as and when\nmore information is received from members.\nAlthough efforts are made to verify the data, the\nUNHCR Mindanao, Philippines takes no\nresponsibility for the incompleteness or inaccuracy of\nthe information. The information provided in this\nAnnual Mindanao Displacement Dashboard does not\nnecessarily reflect the views of UNHCR or any\nindividual member of the Protection Cluster.\n\n\n\n\u00a9 UNHCR Philippines / E. Monato\n\n\n**16**\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Annual Mindanao Displacement Dashboard",
+          "confidence": 0.9735530018806458,
+          "start": 70,
+          "end": 74
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Mindanao",
+          "confidence": 0.8954116106033325,
+          "start": 71,
+          "end": 72
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "people\ndisplaced / affected",
+          "confidence": 0.68297278881073,
+          "start": 113,
+          "end": 117
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Annual\nMindanao Displacement Dashboard",
+          "confidence": 0.9995449185371399,
+          "start": 161,
+          "end": 165
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "E. Monato",
+          "confidence": 0.6727359294891357,
+          "start": 260,
+          "end": 263
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Mindanao",
+          "confidence": 0.6003423929214478,
+          "start": 162,
+          "end": 163
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/857c425c-5a55-3e2c-9a5b-88faadda5e3c/2015_mindanao_displacement_dashboard_annual_report_lr.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        15
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_23/raw/doc_23_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,62 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "**Gender-Based Violence Sub-Working Group (GBV SWG)**\n\n**In Response to Syrian Crisis, Humanitarian Setting**\n\n**Gaziantep- Turkey**\n\n\n**I.** **Background/Justification**\n\n\nDuring conflicts and natural disasters, civilians are at significant risk of harm through\nviolence, abuse or deliberate deprivation. Much of violence is hidden and goes\nunderreported, particularly domestic violence or intimate partner violence, and GBV\nsurvivors may fear the repercussions of reporting incidents, such as forms of\nstigmatization that could jeopardize their future. Under-reporting of GBV makes it\ndifficult, if not impossible, to obtain an accurate measurement of the magnitude of the\nproblem. In emergency situations, often characterized by instability, insecurity, fear,\ndependence, loss of autonomy, the breakdown of law and order, and widespread\ndisruption of community and family support systems, women may be even less likely to\ndisclose incidents of GBV. Until there are services in place that GBV survivors can safely\naccess there is little reason for them to put themselves at risk by disclosing their\nexperience of GBV.\n\n\nAs of 18 May 2015, 259.788 Syrians reside in 25 camps in 10 cities and as of 4 May\n2015, there are 1.759.846 registered Syrians in total in Turkey. Although Turkey has a\nsystem to respond gender-based violence (GBV) cases, it\u2019s overloaded with the high\nnumber of Syrian population in the country. There is an increasing need for a sensitive,\nhighly coordinated and systematic approach to handle GBV cases within the Turkey\ncontext. Therefore strong interagency coordination is needed to achieve the required\nmulti-sectoral approach for an effective humanitarian response to GBV. UN agencies\nhave been supportive with the government institutions on combating GBV and this\nsupport is planned to continue with the activities of GBV Sub-Group.\n\n[Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and](http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/standardsetting/equality/03themes/violence-against-women/Conv_VAW_en.pdf)\n[domestic violence, also known as the Istanbul Convention that is one of the legally](http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/standardsetting/equality/03themes/violence-against-women/Conv_VAW_en.pdf)\nbinding instrument for Turkey as one of the signatory countries, provides specific\nguidance for migration and asylum, integrating policies against multiple sectors and\npromoting international cooperation as written below:\n**Article 60. \u201c** 1. Parties shall take the necessary legislative or other measures to ensure that\ngender based violence against women may be recognized as a form of persecution within\nthe meaning of Article 1, A (2), of the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees\nand as a form of serious harm giving rise to complementary/subsidiary protection.\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/fc555bb0-39dd-3a11-acab-d0db3431381d/2016TermsofReferenceSGBVSub-WorkingGroupSoutheastTurkey.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "2. Parties shall ensure that a gender-sensitive interpretation is given to each of the\nConvention grounds and that where it is established that the persecution feared is for one\nor more of these grounds, applicants shall be granted refugee status according to the\napplicable relevant instruments.\n\n3. Parties shall take the necessary legislative or other measures to develop gender\nsensitive reception procedures and support services for asylum-seekers as well as gender\nguidelines and gender-sensitive asylum procedures, including refugee status\ndetermination and application for international protection. **\u201d**\n\n\nIn order to respond the need in this area, as one of the standards mentioned in many\ninternational guidelines such as IASC, IAWG, and MISP, planning and coordination is\naimed with the establishment of the GBV Sub-Group.\n\n**II.** **Definition of Gender-Based Violence**\n\n\n_Gender-based violence_ as defined in the IASC Guidelines for Addressing Gender-Based\nViolence in Humanitarian Settings \u201cis an umbrella term for any harmful act that is\nperpetrated against a person\u2019s will, and that is based on socially ascribed (gender)\ndifferences between male and females\u201d. It includes acts that inflict physical, mental,\nsexual harm or suffering, as well as threats of such acts, coercion and other deprivations\nof liberty.\n\n\nGBV shall be understood to comprise, but not be limited to:\n\n1. Physical, sexual and psychological violence occurring **in the family**, including\nbattering, sexual exploitation, sexual abuse of children in the household, dowry-related\nviolence, marital rape, traditional practices harmful to women, non-spousal violence and\nviolence related to exploitation.\n\n2. Physical, sexual and psychological violence occurring **within the general community**,\nincluding rape, sexual abuse, sexual harassment and intimidation at work, in educational\ninstitutions and elsewhere, as well as trafficking in women, girls, boys and men, and\nforced prostitution.\n\n\n3. Physical, sexual and psychological violence **perpetrated or condoned by the State**\n**and institutions**, wherever it occurs.\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/fc555bb0-39dd-3a11-acab-d0db3431381d/2016TermsofReferenceSGBVSub-WorkingGroupSoutheastTurkey.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**1.** **Objectives of the GBV Sub-Working Group**\n\n\n1. To establish a multi-sectoral sub-group which focus on all GBV related issues in and\n\nout of camp population at humanitarian settings\n2. To consolidate, coordinate, improve and support the activities of all relevant\n\nstakeholders in the prevention of and response to GBV within the context of\nhumanitarian action in Turkey.\n3. To improve access to relevant information to support operations, advocacy and\n\nawareness raising needs through different trainings and workshops.\n4. To promote best practice in the emergence of a shared vision and strategic framework,\n\nintegrated strategies, coordinated activities, and common protocols used nationally\nand globally in humanitarian crises in GBV.\n5. To support/assist the establishment of referral mechanisms and Standard Operational\n\nProcedures (SOPs) for GBV cases in collaboration with all actors including the NGOs\nand government institutions and to make sure that these procedures are in place.\n6. To build/enhance the capacity of GBV partners by ensuring processes and procedures\n\nare clearly explained and understood, providing standard GBV resources, translating\nkey guidelines if not available, conducting mapping of partners\u2019 capacity to identify\nskills.\n\n\n**III.** **The structure and membership of the GBV Sub-Working Group**\n\n\n**1.** **Leadership**\n\n\nThe GBV Sub-Working Group will be chaired by UNHCR, co-chaired by UNFPA.\nGeneral Directorate of Women\u2019s Status of the Ministry of Family and Social Policies\nas the key government institution to combat GBV in Turkey will support both\nUNHCR and UNFPA through their national and regional capacity.\n\n**2.** **Membership**\n\n\na. In order to ensure a holistic and multi-sectoral approach in the prevention of and\n\nresponse to GBV, membership of the GBV Working Group will be extended to\nnational and local government representatives, international and national NGOs,\ninternational organizations, and other entities providing services in the health,\npsychosocial, legal and security sectors.\n\nb. Membership of national NGOs and entities shall be encouraged, in order to ensure\n\nsustainability of the sub-Working Group. Membership of national NGOs\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/fc555bb0-39dd-3a11-acab-d0db3431381d/2016TermsofReferenceSGBVSub-WorkingGroupSoutheastTurkey.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        2
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "providing services in provinces, districts and/or at community level will be\nparticularly encouraged.\n\n\n**3.** **Meetings**\n\n\na. The GBV Sub-Working Group meetings will be held on Wednesdays of the\n\nsecond week of every month, after the Protection/Community Services Working\nGroup meeting held in Gaziantep.\nb. A draft agenda will be circulated to members of the Sub-Working Group at least\n\nfive days before the regular monthly meeting, giving the members the opportunity\nto suggest additional items for discussion.\nc. Draft minutes will be circulated within one week of the meeting.\n\n**4.** **Reporting**\n\n\na. Members of the Sub-Working Group will submit a monthly brief report to the\n\nChair, at the latest one week before the regular meeting.\nb. The reports will highlight the GBV issues the members and their field counterparts\n\nare addressing, the challenges they are facing and highlight any issues that require\naction by the GBV Sub-Working Group. These issues will be discussed at the\nmonthly meeting of the Sub-Working Group.\nc. The reports will be shared with the relevant national and regional government\n\ninstitutions and NGOs for their future interventions.\n\n\n**IV.** **(ToRs)/functions of the GBV Sub-Working Group**\n\n\n1. In line with the TORs of the identified responsibilities, the Sub-Working Group will\nconsolidate, coordinate, improve and support the efforts and activities of all relevant\nstakeholders in the prevention of and response to GBV, within the context of\nhumanitarian action in Turkey through:\n\n\na. Mapping and updating relevant GBV prevention and response actors in focus areas\n\n(who, what, where);\nb. Liaising with national actors working in the sector to strengthen the coordination,\n\ninformation sharing, management/analysis of cases, data and referrals within the\ncontext of relevant national framework.\nc. Ensuring that analyses are carried out on the GBV situations in focus areas and\n\ndocumented for all actors to use;\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/fc555bb0-39dd-3a11-acab-d0db3431381d/2016TermsofReferenceSGBVSub-WorkingGroupSoutheastTurkey.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        3
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "d. Monitoring the established reporting and monitoring mechanisms to ensure\n\ncoordination of efforts and activities of members and relevant stakeholders;\ne. Providing a forum for sharing information on activities, identifying needs and gaps in\n\nprevention and response, as well as for planning GBV inter-agency activities;\nf. Engaging in inter-agency, multi-sectoral field missions to assess programming\n\nsuccesses and challenges and identify gaps in GBV programming;\ng. Facilitating and supporting awareness-raising initiatives, targeting government bodies\n\nand community structures for the prevention of GBV;\nh. Strengthening the capacity of governmental institutions, NGOs and humanitarian staff\n\nto prevent and respond to GBV by organizing trainings, providing technical support\nand tapping into existing training/capacity development opportunities;\ni. Active liaising with relevant cluster working groups (health, mental health etc.) to\n\nensure that GBV issues are integrated into all humanitarian response efforts.\nj. Liaising with the national level GBV group which is co-lead by MoFSP and AFAD in\n\nAnkara.\nk. Developing national and international advocacy strategy on the issues of GBV to put\n\nthe issue on the agenda of the local, regional and int\u2019l institutions and donors.\n\n2. The work of the GBV Sub-Working Group will be guided by the following principles:\n\n\n**Confidentiality** : ensuring that survivors, witnesses and information sources are protected.\nNo identifying information will be revealed in data resources, nor during coordination or\nother public meetings, when reference is made to (specific) GBV cases;\n\n**Neutrality** : a non-partisan approach in providing services to survivors - not taking sides;\n\n**Impartiality** : non-discrimination on the basis of nationality, race, religious belief,\npolitical views, sexual orientation, social or other status;\n\n**Safety and security** : all actors will prioritize the safety of the survivor, family, witnesses\nand service providers at all times;\n\n**Participatory approach** : ensuring, to the extent possible, consultation with all members\nof the community (women, girls and boys and men) throughout the GBV programming\ncycle;\n\n**Independence** : working without influence of States, government bodies, parties to a\nconflict or other political entities;\n\n**Respect** : actions and responses of all actors will be guided by respect for the choices,\nwishes, rights and the dignity of the survivor.\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/fc555bb0-39dd-3a11-acab-d0db3431381d/2016TermsofReferenceSGBVSub-WorkingGroupSoutheastTurkey.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        4
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**Further Contact**\n\nTayba Sharif, UNHCR, Protection Officer (Gaziantep)\nMeltem A\u011fduk, UNFPA Gender Programme Coordinator and GBV Humanitarian Consultant\n(Ankara)\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/fc555bb0-39dd-3a11-acab-d0db3431381d/2016TermsofReferenceSGBVSub-WorkingGroupSoutheastTurkey.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        5
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_24/raw/doc_24_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,82 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "# **CIVILIAN IMPACT MONITORING PROJECT** **QUARTERLY REPORT**\n\n## **Q1: JANUARY \u2013 MARCH 2019**\n\n**This** **is** **the** **Civilian** **Impact** **Monitoring** **Project** **quarterly** **report,** **providing** **an** **overview** **of** **all**\n**incidents** **of** **armed** **violence** **reported** **to** **have** **impacted** **civilians** **in** **Yemen** **in** **January,**\n**February and March 2019. The report covers civilian casualties, incident distribution, types**\n**of armed violence and impact on civilian infrastructure.**\n\n\n**The** **Civilian** **Impact** **Monitoring** **Project** **(CIMP)** **is** **a** **monitoring** **mechanism** **for** **real-time**\n**collection,** **analysis** **and** **dissemination** **of** **open** **source** **data** **on** **the** **civilian** **impact** **from**\n**armed** **violence** **in** **Yemen,** **with** **the** **purpose** **of** **informing** **and** **complementing** **protection**\n**programming.**\n\n\n**CIMP** **is** **a** **service** **under** **the** **United** **Nations** **Protection** **Cluster** **for** **Yemen** **and,** **since** **going**\n**live** **on** **01** **August** **2018,** **has** **reported** **in** **real-time** **on** **the** **impact** **of** **incidents** **of** **armed**\n**violence** **on** **civilians** **at** **the** **national** **level,** **divided** **into** **5** **hubs:** **Al-Hudaydah,** **Sa\u2019ada,**\n\n\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/190deb10-83d6-3b79-b028-adb262c91115/20190422_cimp_quarterly_report_q1_2019.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "2\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/190deb10-83d6-3b79-b028-adb262c91115/20190422_cimp_quarterly_report_q1_2019.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "3\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/190deb10-83d6-3b79-b028-adb262c91115/20190422_cimp_quarterly_report_q1_2019.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        2
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "4\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/190deb10-83d6-3b79-b028-adb262c91115/20190422_cimp_quarterly_report_q1_2019.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        3
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/190deb10-83d6-3b79-b028-adb262c91115/20190422_cimp_quarterly_report_q1_2019.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        4
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/190deb10-83d6-3b79-b028-adb262c91115/20190422_cimp_quarterly_report_q1_2019.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        5
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "7\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/190deb10-83d6-3b79-b028-adb262c91115/20190422_cimp_quarterly_report_q1_2019.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        6
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "8\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/190deb10-83d6-3b79-b028-adb262c91115/20190422_cimp_quarterly_report_q1_2019.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        7
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_25/raw/doc_25_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,32 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "# United Nations E/CN.3/2020/15 Economic and Social Council Distr.: General\n\n18 December 2019\n\n\nOriginal: English\n\n\n**Statistical Commission**\n**Fifty-first session**\n3\u20136 March 2020\nItem 3 (k) of the provisional agenda*\n**Items for discussion and decision: civil registration and**\n**vital statistics**\n\n## **Introduction of the United Nations Legal Identity Agenda:** **a holistic approach to civil registration, vital statistics and** **identity management**\n\n\n**Report of the Secretary-General**\n\n\n_Summary_\n\n\nThe present report was prepared in accordance with Economic and Social\nCouncil decision 2019/210 and past practices. The Statistical Commission is invited\nto endorse the United Nations Legal Identity Agenda as a holistic approach to civil\nregistration, vital statistics and identity management in the context of extending the\nInternational Programme for Accelerating the Improvement of Vital Statistics and\nCivil Registration Systems, initially adopted by the Commission at its twenty-sixth\nsession; to urge all countries to implement the United Nations Legal Identity Agenda\nas a matter of priority; and to take note of the existing methodological framework for\nthat purpose.\n\n\nPoints for decision by the Commission are contained in paragraph 7 of the report.\n\n\n        - [E/CN.3/2020/1.](https://undocs.org/en/E/CN.3/2020/1)\n\n\n19-22012 (E)  020120\n_***1922012***_\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://unstats.un.org/unsd/statcom/51st-session/documents/2020-15-CRVS-E.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**E/CN.3/2020/15**\n\n## **I. Introduction**\n\n\n1. Recognizing the critical importance of functioning and universal civil\nregistration for the production of reliable, comprehensive, regular and accurate small\narea vital statistics, the Statistical Commission adopted the International Programme\nfor Accelerating the Improvement of Vital Statistics and Civil Registration Systems\n[at its twenty-sixth session (E/1991/25-E/CN.3/1991/32, para. 121 (a)). Under the](https://undocs.org/en/E/1991/25(supp))\nProgramme, the Commission approved and endorsed three revisions of the _Principles_\n_and Recommendations for a Vital Statistics System_, [1] as well as extended series of\nhandbooks and guidelines on the management, operation and maintenance of civil\nregistration and vital statistics systems, [2] on the legal framework, [3] on communication [4]\nand on policies and protocols for safeguarding civil registration records. [5]\n\n\n2. In implementing the International Programme, the Statistics Division of the\nDepartment of Economic and Social Affairs of the Secretariat developed, organized\nand conducted a series of workshops in all regions of the world (with the exception\nof Europe), introducing the methodological framework for civil registration and vital\nstatistics, with the participation of over 100 countries and over 400 professionals from\ncivil registration, official statistics, public health and identity management, as\nregularly reported to the Statistical Commission in yearly reports.\n\n## **II. United Nations Legal Identity Agenda**\n\n\n3. Having noted substantial initiatives in a number of Member States to institute\nand deploy biometric identity credentials to the population that were unconnected to\nthe functioning of civil registration and vital statistics systems, and in an effort to\nprovide Member States with consolidated advice, the Deputy Secretary-General\nestablished the United Nations Legal Identity Expert Group, co-chaired by the\nStatistics Division, the United Nations Development Programme and the United\nNations Children\u2019s Fund and composed of 12 United Nations agencies and\n\n\n**__________________**\n\n1 _Principles and Recommendations for a Vital Statistics System, Revision 1_ (United Nations\n\npublication, Sales No. E.73.XVII.9), _Principles and Recommendations for a Vital Statistics_\n_System, Revision 2_ (United Nations publication, Sales No. E.01.XVII.10) and _Principles and_\n_Recommendations for a Vital Statistics System, Revision 3_ (United Nations publication, Sales\nNo. E.13.XVII.10).\n2 _Handbook on Civil Registration and Vital Statistics Systems: Management, Operation and_\n\n_Maintenance_ (United Nations publication, Sales No. E.98.XVII.11) and \u201cHandbook on Civil\nRegistration and Vital Statistics Systems: Management, Operation and Maintenance, Revision 1\u201d,\nNew York, United Nations, 2018.\n3 _Handbook on Civil Registration and Vital Statistics Systems: Preparation of a Legal Framework_\n\n(United Nations publication, Sales No. E.98.XVII.7) and \u201cGuidelines on the legislative\nframework for civil registration, vital statistics and identity management\u201d, New York, United\n[Nations, 2019, available at https://unstats.un.org/unsd/demographic-social/Standards-and-](https://unstats.un.org/unsd/demographic-social/Standards-and-Methods/files/Handbooks/crvs/CRVS_GOLF_Final_Draft-E.pdf)\n[Methods/files/Handbooks/crvs/CRVS_GOLF_Final_Draft-E.pdf.](https://unstats.un.org/unsd/demographic-social/Standards-and-Methods/files/Handbooks/crvs/CRVS_GOLF_Final_Draft-E.pdf)\n4 _Handbook on Civil Registration and Vital Statistics Systems: Developing Information, Education_\n\n_and Communication_ (United Nations publication, Sales No. E.98.XVII.4) and \u201cHandbook on\ncivil registration, vital statistics and identity management systems: communication for\ndevelopment\u201d, New York, United Nations, 2019.\n5 _Handbook on Civil Registration and Vital Statistics Systems: Policies and Protocols for the_\n\n_Release and Archiving of Individual Records_ (United Nations publication, Sales\nNo. E.98.XVII.6) (under revision).\n\n\n**2/3** 19-22012\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://unstats.un.org/unsd/statcom/51st-session/documents/2020-15-CRVS-E.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**E/CN.3/2020/15**\n\n\nprogrammes. [6] The purpose of the Group was to establish a unified United Nations\nposition with regard to the life cycle approach to legal identity by promoting the\nholistic model of civil registration, vital statistics and identity management, both at\nthe normative level and on the ground.\n\n\n4. In the process, and working closely with the World Bank, the United Nations\nLegal Identity Expert Group developed the operational United Nations definition of\nlegal identity. Legal identity is defined as the basic characteristics of an individual\u2019s\nidentity, for example, name, sex, and place and date of birth, conferred through\nregistration and the issuance of a certificate by an authorized civil registration\nauthority following the occurrence of birth. In the absence of birth registration, legal\nidentity may be conferred by a legally-recognized identification authority; this system\nshould be linked to the civil registration system to ensure a holistic approach to legal\nidentity from birth to death. Legal identity is retired by the issuance of a death\ncertificate by the civil registration authority upon registration of death.\n\n\n5. On the basis of this definition, the United Nations Legal Identity Expert Group\ndeveloped and introduced the United Nations Legal Identity Agenda, which consists\nof the holistic approach to ensure complete civil registration and universal registration\nof all vital events, the production of regular, comprehensive and accurate vital\nstatistics, and the establishment and maintenance of population registers and identity\nmanagement apparatus from birth to death. There should be full interoperability\nbetween these functions in a simultaneous manner, in accordance with international\nstandards and recommendations. [7]\n\n\n6. The United Nations Legal Identity Agenda builds on the existing methodological\nframework for civil registration and vital statistics as developed under the auspices\nof the International Programme for Accelerating the Improvement of Vital Statistics\nand Civil Registration Systems and expands it to ensure a holistic and interoperable\napproach between civil registration, vital statistics production and identity\nmanagement. As described in paragraph 1 above, the work on updating the existing\nframework, consisting of the _Principles and Recommendations for a Vital Statistics_\n_System_ and supporting handbooks and guidelines, to incorporate the holistic approach\nis almost complete.\n\n## **III. Action to be taken by the Statistical Commission**\n\n\n7. **The Commission is invited:**\n\n\n(a) **To endorse the United Nations Legal Identity Agenda as a holistic**\n**approach to civil registration, vital statistics and identity management in the**\n**context of extending the International Programme for Accelerating the**\n**Improvement of Vital Statistics and Civil Registration Systems;**\n\n\n(b) **To urge all countries to implement the United Nations Legal Identity**\n**Agenda as a matter of priority;**\n\n\n(c) **To take note of the existing methodological framework for that purpose.**\n\n\n**__________________**\n\n6 Economic Commission for Africa, Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific,\n\nInternational Organization for Migration, Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for\nHuman Rights, Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, United Nations\nChildren\u2019s Fund, United Nations Development Programme, United Nations Entity for Gender\nEquality and the Empowerment of Women (UN-Women), United Nations Population Fund,\nWorld Food Programme, World Health Organization and Department of Economic and Social\nAffairs of the United Nations Secretariat.\n7 The United Nations Legal Identity Agenda is elaborated in a background document entitled\n\n\u201cUnited Nations strategy for legal identity for all\u201d.\n\n\n19-22012 **3/3**\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://unstats.un.org/unsd/statcom/51st-session/documents/2020-15-CRVS-E.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        2
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_26/raw/doc_26_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,32 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "**CIVILIAN IMPACT MONITORING PROJECT**\n**THEMATIC REPORT: THE AL-HUDAYDAH CEASEFIRE, ONE YEAR ON**\n\n**DATE OF PUBLICATION: JANUARY 2020**\n\n\nThe Al-Hudaydah Agreement was signed in Stockholm on 13 December 2018. Shortly after, on 18 December, a ceasefire in Al-Hudaydah entered into force.\n\nOne of the instant achievements of the agreement was a halt to an offensive that threatened to engulf the critical port city of Al-Hudaydah, fixing the warring\n\nsides to their respective positions, while also leading to a significant reduction in airstrikes across the governorate. However, Al-Hudaydah did not see an\n\nabsolute ceasefire.\n\nAlong all main frontlines, on the outskirts of the city and in southern districts, hostilities continued between the opposing forces, as other elements of the Al\nHudaydah Agreement stalled into a political stalemate. Although the frontlines remained static over the past year, the number of civilian impact incidents\n\nactually increased, and while the total number of civilian casualties was reduced, casualty rates in the governorate were still the highest in the country. The\n\npost-agreement period has also seen a shift in the nature of the impact of armed violence on civilians, with an uptick in direct fire on residential areas, resulting\n\nin more incidents directly impacting on civilian households than before the ceasefire.\n\n**OVERALL FIGURES: 12 MONTHS BEFORE THE CEASEFIRE, COMPARED TO 12 MONTHS AFTER**\n\n\n\nThe total number of civilian casualties fell 62% in the 12 months after the ceasefire compared to the\nprevious 12-month period, from 2,115, from 18 December 2017 to 17 December 2018, to 811, from 18\nDecember 2018 to 17 December 2019. The rate of civilian casualties per month as a direct result of\narmed violence fell from an average of 176 in the 12 months prior to the start of the ceasefire, driven\nlargely by high casualties from airstrikes, to 68 civilian casualties per month in 2019. The rate of civilian\nfatalities also decreased, from 47% in the 12 months before the ceasefire to 25% in the past year.\n\nCivilian casualty rates steadily decreased throughout 2019. The final quarter of the year saw the lowest\ncivilian casualty toll since CIMP began monitoring at the start of 2018. This is likely caused in large part\nby the deployment of joint observation posts on frontlines around Al-Hudaydah city in October 2019,\nwhich resulted in a significant reduction in hostilities in the city, as discussed below. However, despite\nsignificant decreases in civilian casualty rates, the number of incidents of armed violence reported with\na direct civilian impact increased, from 686 in the 12 months prior to 978 in the 12 months since.\n\n\n**Number of incidents**\n\nl **250**\n\n\n\n\n\nCivilian fatalities Civilian injuries\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n**Number of incidents** **Civilian casualties**\n\n\n\n12 months before 12 months after\n\n\n**500**\n\n\n\n**250**\n\n\n\n\n\n**INCIDENTS IN AL-HUDAYDAH CITY IN 2019 COMPARED TO SOUTHERN AL-HUDAYDAH DISTRICTS**\n\n\n\nDespite a slow start to the ceasefire, a particularly notable reduction in hostilities\nwas recorded in Al-Hudaydah city from October 2019, when joint observation\nposts were deployed across the main frontlines around the city. Accompanying\nthis, the downward trend in civilian casualties that started in August continued in\nthe city through October and November. However, while the city saw a\nreduction in hostilities, which drove an overall decrease in the governorate,\nincident and casualty rates remained high in the southern districts.\n\nThe graph to the right compares civilian impact incidents by district, showing\nthose in the two city districts of Al-Hali and Al-Hawak compared to the four main\nhotspot southern districts of Al-Tuhayat, Al-Durayhimi, Bayt Al-Faqih, and Hays.\nWhile both showed a decrease in incident rates from mid-2019, after the five\njoint observation posts were established in October, incident rates in AlHudaydah city continued to fall, but those in the southern districts increased, as\nit appeared combat efforts re-focussed to the governorate's southern frontlines.\n\n\n\n\n\n**Southern frontline districts** **City frontline districts**\n\n\n|70|Col2|\n|---|---|\n|**60**||\n|**50**||\n|**40**||\n|**30**||\n|**20**||\n|**10**||\n|**0**<br>**_17 OCT: JOINT OBSERVATION POSTS DEPLOYED_**||\n\n\n\n**1**\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/533ccb1a-b277-33db-a6dc-1b8622ff3974/20200113_CIMP%20Thematic%2002_Hudaydah%20Ceasefire.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**CIVILIAN CASUALTIES FROM ARMED VIOLENCE BEFORE AND AFTER THE CEASEFIRE**\n\n\n\n**12 months before** **12 months after**\n\n\n\n\n\n**12 months after** There has been an overall decrease in civilian\n\ncasualties since the start of the ceasefire. This was\n\ncaused by airstrikes, which fell 99% in 2019 compared\nto the 12 months prior to the ceasefire. Casualties from\n\nHowever, civilian casualties caused by fire from small\narms and light weapons, including sniper fire,\n\ncontinued in close proximity to residential areas.\n\nincreased from 10 to 58, of whom 19 were children, up\nfrom 4 during the 12 months prior to the ceasefire.\n\n**GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION OF AIRSTRIKE INCIDENTS**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nThe maps show the distribution\nand density of airstrike incidents\nreported to have directly\nimpacted on civilians in AlHudaydah in the 12 months\nbefore the ceasefire compared\nto the 12 months since.\n\nIn the 12 months before the\nceasefire, 363 airstrike incidents\nwere reported to have had a\ndirect civilian impact, resulting in\n1,035 civilian casualties. Since\n18 December 2019, just 9\nairstrike incidents were reported\nto have impacted on civilians in\nthe governorate, resulting in 15\ncivilian casualties, just 1% of\nthose seen in the year prior.\n\n\n\n\n\n**THE PROPORTION OF WOMEN AND CHILDREN HARMED HAS INCREASED SINCE THE CEASEFIRE COMMENCED**\n\n\n\nWhile the overall rates of civilian casualties decreased in the 12 months\nsince the start of the ceasefire, a greater proportion of civilian casualties\nhave been women and children. Before the ceasefire, 25% of civilian\ncasualties was a woman or a child, in the 12 months since this has doubled\nto almost half (49%). Of the 2,115 civilian casualties in the 12 months prior to\nthe ceasefire, 334 were children and 186 were women, a quarter of the total.\nIn the 12 months after the ceasefire entered into force, almost half (49%) of\nthe 811 civilian casualties were children (259) and women (140).\n0\n\nWomen and children casualties Unspeci\ufffded casualties\n\n0\n0\n0\n0\n\n0\n0\n0\nDespite overall decreases, the number of casualties among women and\nchildren as a result of fire from small arms and light weapons increased from\n17 before the ceasefire to 87 in the 12 months after. There has also been a\nslight increase in women and children casualties as a result of explosive\nordnance (EO). Furthermore, increasing incidents impacting directly on\nhouses correlated with an increase in injuries among women and children.\n\n\n\nBefore After\n\n\n\nWomen and children casualties Unspeci\ufffded casualties\n\n\n\nIn 2018, 220 incidents of armed violence impacted on homes and/or\nfarmsteads in Al-Hudaydah, resulting in 666 civilian casualties, of whom 268\n(40%) were women and children. In 2019, this rose to 578 incidents\nimpacting on homes and/or farmsteads, a 62% increase, resulting in 383\ncivilian casualties, of whom 206 (54%) were women and children. Due to the\nrepeated encroachment of armed violence on domestic civilian spaces, the\neffects of psychosocial trauma are likely to be made more acute, while\nwomen and children, who are increasingly reported to be household heads,\nespecially among displaced families, are likely to be particularly vulnerable\nwhen residential spaces are impacted.\n\n700\n\n\n\nBefore\n\n\n\n\n\nAfter\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nIncidents impacting on\ncivilian houses and/or\nfarmsteads\n\n\nWomen and children\nharmed as a result of\nhouses being impacted\n\n\nUnspeci\ufffded civilian\ncasualties as a result of\nhouses being impacted\n\n\n\n**2**\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/533ccb1a-b277-33db-a6dc-1b8622ff3974/20200113_CIMP%20Thematic%2002_Hudaydah%20Ceasefire.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**AL-HUDAYDAH CONTINUES TO SEE THE MOST CIVILIAN IMPACT INCIDENTS AND CASUALTIES COUNTRY-WIDECORRELATION BETWEEN IMPACT FROM REMNANT ORDNANCE AND OTHER TYPES OF ARMED VIOLENCE**\n\n\n\n**AL-HUDAYDAH CONTINUES TO SEE THE MOST CIVILIAN IMPACT INCIDENTS AND CASUALTIES COUNTRY-WIDECORRELATION BETWEEN IMPACT FROM REMNANT ORDNANCE AND OTHER TYPES OF ARMED VIOLENCE**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nJanuary February March April May June July August September October November December\n\n\n\n**CIVILIAN CASUALTIES IN 2019 IN AL-HUDAYDAH COMPARED TO OTHER GOVERNORATES**\n\n\n# \u25a0 AL-HUDAYDAH \u25a0 OTHER GOVERNORATES\n\n\n\nJanuary February March April May June July August September October November December\n\n**THE IMPACT OF ARMED VIOLENCE ON CIVILIAN INFRASTRUCTURE IN AL-HUDAYDAH HAS REDUCED**\n\n\n\n**Case study 1: Restricted access to food and education**\n\n\nThere was an increased impact on education and food infrastructure in the\n\npast 12 months. 7 incidents reportedly impacted food infrastructure, all of\n\nwhich were repeat instances of shellfire hitting the Red Sea Flour Mills, in\n\none of the main contested areas on the outskirts of Al-Hudaydah city. The\n\nincidents potentially pose continued restricted access to crucial food\n\nsupplies for as many as 500,000 households. Similarly, 16 incidents were\n\nreported to have impacted on education facilities in the past year. 5 of\n\nthese were schools, while 11 were incidents impacting on Al-Hudaydah\n\nUniversity medical and engineering faculties, which have been\n\ncommandeered by military forces as defensive and firing positions.\n\n\n**Case study 2: Fishing communities in Al-Hudaydah**\n\n\nAl-Hudaydah\u2019s fishing community saw a significantly reduced impact from\n\nincidents of armed violence since the ceasefire commenced. In 2018, 77\n\nfishermen were reportedly killed, 37 injured, and another 17 reported\n\nmissing as a result of incidents of armed violence, the majority of which\n\nwere as a result of airstrikes, along with three instances of naval shelling\n\nand three seamine incidents. Over 25 boats were reportedly destroyed.\n\nFishing ports in Al-Hawak and Al-Tuhayat, fishing huts on Kamaran island,\n\nand the Ministry of Fisheries in Al-Luheyah were also reportedly hit by\n\nairstrikes last year. The Al-Hawak fish market was also hit by shellfire on 2\n\nAugust 2018 which, together with a follow-up attack outside the Al-Thawra\n\nhospital gates, was reported to have resulted in 55 civilian fatalities and\n\n170 civilian injuries. Since the ceasefire entered into force, airstrikes are\n\nreported to have hit 5 fishing boats, killing 9 fishermen and injuring 6.\n\n\n\nOn the whole, the introduction of the cease\ufffdre resulted in a decrease in\nincidents impacting on civilian infrastructure in Al-Hudaydah. In the 12 months\nprior to the cease\ufffdre, 139 incidents impacted on civilian infrastructure, while in\nthe 12 months after, this almost halved, dropping to 73. The most frequently\nimpacted types of infrastructure are shown in the chart below by number of\nincidents. The 2 infrastructure types to have seen an increase in the past 12\nmonths were education and food, explained in case study 1, to the left.\n\n\n\nThe Civilian Impact Monitoring Project is a service under the United Nations Protection\n\nCluster for the collection, analysis and dissemination of open source data on the civilian\n\nimpact from armed violence in Yemen, to inform and complement protection programming.\n\nFor further information, please visit www.civilianimpactmonitoring.org.\n\n**3**\n\n\n\n50\n\n\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/533ccb1a-b277-33db-a6dc-1b8622ff3974/20200113_CIMP%20Thematic%2002_Hudaydah%20Ceasefire.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        2
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_27/raw/doc_27_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,32 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "## Thematic Report: The Impact of Armed Violence on Civilian Dwellings in Yemen\n\nJuly 2020\n\n\nAs hostilities persist across Yemen, the civilian population continues to be impacted by armed violence. This report\npresents and analyses trends regarding the impact on civilians when armed violence impacts their houses, as civilian\nresidential areas continue to come under fire across the country, particularly from airstrikes and shelling. The report also\nexplores the specific vulnerabilities of women, children and IDP sites, covering trends and case studies from 1 January\n2018 to 30 June 2020.\n\nThe continued impact of armed violence on civilian houses in Yemen\n\nDuring the first half of 2020, 547 incidents of armed violence directly impacted a cumulative total of 2,490 civilian\nhouses. Despite the ongoing ceasefire in Hudaydah, efforts to sustain partial ceasefires in both the north and south of\nthe country, and the UN Secretary General's appeal for a country-wide ceasefire in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, this\nis just 2% fewer than during the previous six months: from July to December 2019, 2,530 civilian houses were impacted\nby armed violence in Yemen. An average of 92 incidents have impacted directly on civilian houses on a monthly basis in\n2020, down 13% from 106 in 2019. However, since November 2019, the number of incidents of armed violence\nimpacting on civilian houses has been gradually increasing.\n\n\nIncidents of armed violence impacting on civilian houses and number of houses impacted\n\n\n**Number of incidents** **Number of houses**\n\n\n\nCivilian houses have predominantly been impacted on frontlines in the north\n\n\n\n\n\n86% of civilian houses directly impacted by armed\nviolence during the first half of 2020 have been\n\nand Ma'rib.\n\ncoming under missile fire.\n\n\n\nHeatmap showing distribution of civilian houses\n\nimpacted by armed violence in 2020\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n**1**\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/7d1fd1a3-830e-34d6-a88b-334e9ca77e24/20200715_CIMP%20Thematic_03_Dwellings.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "A quarter of civilian casualties as a result of armed violence occur at home\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n1 in 4 civilian casualties occurred at home during the\nfirst six months of 2020. Throughout 2018 and 2019, 1\nin 3 civilian casualties occurred at home. However, this\nproportion is not uniform across Yemen. In Ma'rib, half\nof the 47 civilian casualties reported so far in 2020\nhave occurred at home, as dynamic and swiftly shifting\nfrontlines have left civilians with little opportunity to flee\nin advance of escalations of armed violence. In\nHudaydah, a third of civilian casualties have occurred\nat home this year, as fighting persists, including in\ndensely populated urban areas. To date, Hudaydah\nhas seen the most (76) civilian casualties as a result of\nincidents impacting civilian houses this year.\n\n\n\n**P r o t e c t i o n I m p l i c a t i o n s**\nIncidents impacting on the home bear a host of implications for civilians. First and foremost, death and serious injury to\ncivilians is a major risk. Moreover, as houses sustain damages, civilians may be forced to flee, sacrificing property,\nassets, stability, community and livelihood in exchange for safety and shelter, while also putting additional strain on the\nresources of IDP hosting sites. Furthermore, the involuntary exposure of civilians to armed violence in domestic\nspaces is likely to result in acute and lasting cross-generational psychosocial trauma, especially among children.\n\n\nThe proportion of women and children among casualties in houses in increasing\n\n\n\nSince 2018, more than half of the civilian\ncasualties due to armed violence\nimpacting civilian homes have been\nwomen and children. Of a total of 2,847\ncivilians to have been harmed by armed\nviolence in domestic spaces from 1\nJanuary 2018 to 30 June 2020, 1,540\n(54%) were women and children. This\nproportion is steadily increasing. In 2018,\n53% of casualties at home were women\nand children. In 2019, this increased to\n55%, and during the first half of 2020,\nrose again to 57%.\n\n\n\nProportion of women and children among casualties in houses\n\n\n**Women and children casualties** **Unspecified casualties**\n\n\n\n**P r o t e c t i o n I m p l i c a t i o n s**\nWhen compared to unspecified casualties, women and children are proportionately more vulnerable when armed\nviolence impacts the home. Culturally, women and children in Yemen spend more time in domestic spaces than men,\nand the imbalance is exacerbated as the conflict is resulting in higher numbers of women and child-headed households.\n\nAirstrikes are the deadliest type of armed violence to impact civilian homes\n\n\n\nTypes of armed violence impacting civilian\nhouses since 1 January 2018, and resultant\n\ncivilian casualties\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nShelling and airstrikes have had a particularly heavy impact,\ncausing 96% of all incidents impacting on civilian houses since\nthe start of 2018. Although more than twice as many incidents\nwere attributed to shelling, airstrikes have had a deadlier impact,\nresulting in 25% more fatalities than shellfire. Since the start of\n2018, 635 civilians have been killed by airstrikes hitting civilian\nhouses. By comparison, 507 civilians have been killed by shellfire\nhitting homes.\n\nWomen and children in the home are particularly vulnerable to\nairstrikes. Since the start of 2018, 59% of civilian casualties\ncaused by airstrikes hitting civilian homes have been women and\nchildren. By comparison, away from the home, women and\nchildren have comprised a quarter (25%) of the civilian casualties\ncaused by airstrikes. Of six incidents to have resulted in mass\n(>15) casualties among women and children at home, all were\ncaused by airstrikes.\n\n**2**\n\n\n\n\n*** Includes SA/LW, landmines, IEDs and UXO incidents**\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/7d1fd1a3-830e-34d6-a88b-334e9ca77e24/20200715_CIMP%20Thematic_03_Dwellings.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "Risk factors contributing to vulnerability of IDP sites to armed violence **CORRELATION BETWEEN IMPACT FROM REMNANT ORDNANCE AND OTHER TYPES OF ARMED VIOLENCE**\n\n\n\nThe number of incidents of armed violence reported\nto have impacted IDP sites doubled from four in\n2018 to eight in 2019. The number of civilian\ncasualties also doubled, from 41 to 85. This trend is\ncontinuing in 2020; during the first six months of the\nyear, two incidents of armed violence have already\ndirectly impacted IDP sites; although no casualties\nhave yet been reported, these incidents result in\nsignificant displacement (see below).\n\nOf the 14 incidents of armed violence impacting IDP\nsites from 1 January 2018 to 30 June 2020, 10 were\ncaused by shelling, cumulatively resulting in 68\ncivilian casualties, of whom 11 were killed. However,\ndespite accounting for just two of the incidents,\nairstrikes have had a deadlier impact, causing 23\ncivilian fatalities on the sites they struck, more than\ndouble the fatalities from shelling. The two incidents\nin total caused 53 civilian casualties, almost as many\nas from the 10 shelling incidents.\n\nA number of risk factors are likely to heighten the risk\nof exposure of IDP sites to armed violence, including\nproximity to active frontlines and sites of strategic or\nsymbolic significance, such as:\n\n\n\ue0b5\n\nMilitary sites and security infrastructure\n\n\n\ue0b5\n\nContested routes and junction points\n\n\n\ue0b5\n\nMain supply routes\n\n\n\ue0b5\n\nCritical economic or cultural infrastructure\n\n\n\ue0b5\n\nNatural or human-made territorial demarcations\n\nDue to the dynamic nature of the conflict, escalations\ncan be swift and unpredictable, and any such areas\nmay witness direct or remote targeting, or may\nbecome subsumed by hostilities on the ground.\n\n\n\n**Case Study: Al-Khaniq Camp**\nAl-Khaniq camp in Marib is a key example of the risk posed\nby proximity to active and dynamic frontlines. The site has\nbeen impacted by armed violence twice since the start of\n2018. As hostilities escalated and the frontlines shifted earlier\nthis year, artillery shelling hit the site on 26 January. Although\nno casualties were reported, around 1,550 families were\nforced to relocate to Medghal district or Marib city.\n\n\n**P r o t e c t i o n I m p l i c a t i o n s**\nIncidents of armed violence impacting IDP sites present a\nserious risk of death and injury to inhabitants. Furthermore,\nthey likely compound civilians' experiences of psychosocial\ntrauma, due to the repeated exposure to conflict and\nsubsequent destabilisation. Such incidents may also result in\npremature returns, or secondary, or even tertiary, displacement,\nwhich in turn places additional strain on recipient sites. When\none site is impacted, other sites in the vicinity may see sudden\ninfluxes, placing pressure on resources that are already likely\nstretched. Having already faced severe disruption to their lives\nand livelihoods, any additional displacement further undermines\nIDPs' resilience and exposes them to further protection risks.\n\n\n\nCivilian casualties and the vulnerability of women and children on IDP sites\n\n\n\n\n\nSince the start of 2018, incidents of armed violence impacting IDP\nsites have resulted in 126 civilian casualties, of whom over a quarter\n(27%) were fatalities. Women and children comprised more than half\nof the total civilian casualty toll on IDP sites (72 persons, 57%).\n\nWomen and children on IDP sites have also suffered a\ncomparatively higher mortality rate: since the start of 2018, over\nthree quarters of the 34 civilian fatalities caused by incidents\nimpacting IDP sites have been women and children. 1 in 3 (14 of 44)\nchild casualties caused by incidents of armed violence on IDP sites\nwere fatalities, and a 43% (12 of 28) mortality rate was seen for\nwomen. By comparison, just 8 (15%) of the 54 gender-unspecified\ncasualties were fatalities.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n**Injuries** **Fatalities**\n\n\n\nThe Civilian Impact Monitoring Project is a service under the Protection Cluster for the collection, analysis and\ndissemination of open source data on the civilian impact from armed violence in Yemen, to inform and complement\nprotection programming.\n\nFor more information, please visit www.civilianimpactmonitoring.org.\n\n\n**3**\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/7d1fd1a3-830e-34d6-a88b-334e9ca77e24/20200715_CIMP%20Thematic_03_Dwellings.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        2
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_28/raw/doc_28_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,490 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "# **IMPACT OF THE MONSOON &** **COVID-19 CONTAINMENT MEASURES**\n## **Shelter and infrastructure damage in the Rohingya refugee camps**\n\nExtreme monsoon-induced flooding coupled with prolonged inundation in northeast India, eastern Nepal,\nBangladesh, Bhutan, and northern Myanmar has impacted more than five million people in Bangladesh alone\n\n[(NAWG, 03/08/2020). The majority of this flooding occurred along river systems, such as the Brahmaputra and](https://www.humanitarianresponse.info/sites/www.humanitarianresponse.info/files/documents/files/nawg_monsoon_flood_preliminary_impact_and_kin_20200802_final.pdf)\nthe Ganges, and flowed to the northern regions of Bangladesh [(NAWG, 25/07/20).](https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/nawg_monsoon_flood_preliminary_impact_and_kin_20200725_final_draft.pdf) However, the Rohingya\nrefugee camps in the south-eastern district of Cox\u2019s Bazar have been largely untouched by this large-scale\nriver flooding. Despite this, the monsoon season continues to impact the Rohingya refugees, with heavy\nrains and strong winds severely diminishing quality of life.\n\nBetween May and July 2020, an alarming number of Rohingya refugee shelters were damaged, with an\nincrease of more than 100% compared to the same time period in 2019. In just three months, weather events\nsuch as windstorms, heavy rains, slope failure (landslide and soil erosion), and flooding have impacted more\nthan 20,000 households in the camps who urgently need of more substantial shelter assistance.\n\nThe main factors contributing to this radical increase in damages:\n\n - Reduction of shelter and site development programming and monsoon preparedness activities due to\nCOVID-19 containment measures.\n\n - Monsoon season (heavy rainfall and windstorms) and Cyclone Amphan.\n\n - Ongoing use of lightweight and temporary materials such as untreated bamboo and tarpaulin.\n\n - The 2020 monsoon season is ongoing, with continued rain and poor weather conditions forecasted for\n[August, which will likely lead to further shelter damages (BMD, UNDP 06/08/2020).](https://instant.rimes.int/seasonal_forecast)\n\nIn previous years, the vast majority of shelters and public infrastructure received pre-monsoon support so\nthat they could, to some extent, resist the effects of heavy rainfall and windstorms. However, this year Covid19 containment measures resulted in a significant reduction in pre-monsoon and monsoon Shelter and Site\nDevelopment program implementation negatively impacting preparedness and resilience to weather\neffects.\n**Recommendations**\n\n - The urgent provision of additional shelter assistance and increased field presence are needed, which\nmay require a revision of the COVID-19 containment measures in line with the current health\nprecautions.\n\n - Increased resources and funds are necessary to respond to the surge in shelter needs.\n\n - Additional resources are required to ensure Rohingya refugees\u2019 safety and access to humanitarian\nassistance by repairing infrastructure, such as bridges and walkways. Likewise, actors require\nadditional resources to mitigate slope failure.\n\n - Approval for more reliable and safe medium-term shelter solutions are needed to avoid the continuous\nneed for short-term shelter support and to provide dignified living conditions for all Rohingya refugees.\n\n\n\n**Flash report** **\u2013 20 August 2020**\n\n\n**Purpose**\nThis report highlights to decision-makers the significant need for increased shelter support for\nRohingya refugees. The combination of COVID-19 containment measures, temporary shelter\nmaterials, and monsoon weather events has made living conditions in the camps extremely\ndifficult.\n\n**Methodology**\nThis report was developed by the ACAPS-NPM Analysis Hub, the Shelter Sector, and the Site\nManagement and Site Development Sector, with support from UNDP on the analysis of\n[precipitation data. The main data sources include: Daily Incident Monitoring Mechanism](https://npm-iom.shinyapps.io/Incident_Dashboard/)\n[managed by IOM\u2019s NPM Unit, Shelter Rapid Damage Verification Mechanism, Community](https://npm-iom.shinyapps.io/Incident_Dashboard/)\n[Feedback and Response Mechanism. Average rainfall for 2019 and 2020 is based on analysis](https://app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrIjoiNDM1ODliNjUtNjk1NS00Y2MwLTk0MmMtZGFjMjZhOTZkNzdiIiwidCI6IjE1ODgyNjJkLTIzZmItNDNiNC1iZDZlLWJjZTQ5YzhlNjE4NiIsImMiOjh9&pageName=ReportSectionc681cd0ab26f19512c2f)\n[by UNDP\u2019s DRR project using Bangladesh Meteorological Department rainfall data and Regional](https://instant.rimes.int/Dashboard)\n[Integrated Multi-hazard Early Warning System, and monthly precipitation data for 2020 is](https://instant.rimes.int/Dashboard)\naggregated from Climate Forecast System Reanalysis (CFSR) daily precipitation data.\n\n**Limitations**\nThe 2020 monsoon is ongoing and the final impact of the weather on shelter and infrastructure\nin the camps cannot be known. Remote sensing and satellite images were used for precipitation\ndata because not all rain gauges located in and around the camps are currently functional.\nAnalysis of the damages was done at the response level, so an understanding of which camps\nor locations are most impacted cannot be drawn from this report.\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Flash report",
+          "confidence": 0.9283201098442078,
+          "start": 533,
+          "end": 535
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "report",
+          "confidence": 0.8767721652984619,
+          "start": 534,
+          "end": 535
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "ACAPS-NPM Analysis Hub",
+          "confidence": 0.8621001839637756,
+          "start": 602,
+          "end": 605
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2020",
+          "confidence": 0.6818776726722717,
+          "start": 542,
+          "end": 543
+        },
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "Rohingya refugees",
+          "confidence": 0.9939574003219604,
+          "start": 469,
+          "end": 471
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "precipitation data",
+          "confidence": 0.7544809579849243,
+          "start": 628,
+          "end": 630
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "IOM\u2019s",
+          "confidence": 0.6201159954071045,
+          "start": 647,
+          "end": 650
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "Rohingya refugees",
+          "confidence": 0.7148640751838684,
+          "start": 469,
+          "end": 471
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Daily Incident Monitoring Mechanism",
+          "confidence": 0.9483628273010254,
+          "start": 637,
+          "end": 641
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "precipitation data",
+          "confidence": 0.5088258981704712,
+          "start": 628,
+          "end": 630
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Bangladesh",
+          "confidence": 0.5048378109931946,
+          "start": 690,
+          "end": 691
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "primary"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "report",
+          "confidence": 0.5202152132987976,
+          "start": 810,
+          "end": 811
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "report",
+          "confidence": 0.580970287322998,
+          "start": 810,
+          "end": 811
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "camps",
+          "confidence": 0.5046467781066895,
+          "start": 753,
+          "end": 754
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/b90dc202-dc3a-3fc3-9f92-8a018e1ebe63/20200820_acaps_report_impact_of_the_monsoon_covid-19_containment_measures.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "### **Increase in shelter and infrastructure damages**\n\nDue to congestion, site typography, and temporary shelter structures, Rohingya\nhouseholds are extremely exposed to harsh weather events such as windstorms, heavy\nrains, slope failure, landslides, and flooding. The most sought assistance through the\nresponse-wide Community Feedback and Response Mechanism has been shelterrelated assistance, with more than 14,000 referrals made between March and July 2020.\nIn comparison, WASH support, the second most requested service, had approximately\n3,500 referrals over the same time period [(SMSD, 01/08/2020). According to incident](https://app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrIjoiNDM1ODliNjUtNjk1NS00Y2MwLTk0MmMtZGFjMjZhOTZkNzdiIiwidCI6IjE1ODgyNjJkLTIzZmItNDNiNC1iZDZlLWJjZTQ5YzhlNjE4NiIsImMiOjh9&pageName=ReportSectionc681cd0ab26f19512c2f.)\nreporting mechanisms within the Shelter/NFI (SNFI), Site Management, and Site\nDevelopment (SMSD) sectors, there has been a 100% increase in shelter damage\nrecorded during this monsoon period.1 At the same time, weather-related damages to\npedestrian infrastructure including pathways, bridges, and staircases are also being\nreported which constitutes a serious safety concern for all refugees, especially those\nmost vulnerable.\n\nThe SMSD Daily Incident Report managed by IOM\u2019s Needs and Population Monitoring\nUnit (NPM) records the impact of small-scale weather-related incidents, including slope\n[failure, flooding, lightning, and windstorms across the camps (NPM 02/08/2020).2 Between](https://npm-iom.shinyapps.io/Incident_Dashboard/)\nthe 1 May and 31 July 2020, 949 small-scale weather-related incidents affected 22,823\nhouseholds resulting in 20,352 partially damaged shelters and 1,986 completely\ndamaged shelters. In comparison, between May and July 2019, a total of 10,518\nhouseholds were impacted by 1,443 small-scale weather-related incidents with 9,083\npartially and 1,139 totally damaged shelters. Damages reported through the daily incident\nreport are indicative, from rapid on-the-day assessments conducted to inform the\nmobilization of first responders. A more detailed technical shelter assessment is then\n\n\n**Total number of reported shelters damaged (total & partial)**\n\n\n9882\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n2019\n\n\n2020\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n1 There have been no major changes in methodology in the daily incident monitoring mechanism or shelter verification\nexercises between 2019 and 2020 that would have resulted in an increase of 100% in the number of shelter damages recorded.\n\n\n2 The small-scale weather-related incident types that are included in the analysis above include floods, drowning, infrastructure\ndamage, slope-failure, and lightning. The 600+ households impacted by fire in Camp 1E at the beginning of May were not\n\n\n\nFlash Report: Shelter and Infrastructure Damages between May to July 2020\n\n\ncompleted to verify and assess the damages. The Shelter Sector\u2019s Rapid Damage\nVerification Mechanism also recorded a 100% increase in damages, with a total of 19,276\nverified damaged shelters recorded between May and July 2020 compared to 9,600\nduring the same timeframe last year.\n\n### **What has caused such a large increase in damages?**\n\nThe implementation of COVID-19 mitigation measures combined with the temporary\nshelter materials used in housing construction and poor weather conditions all\ncontributed to the drastic increase in damages. As shelter support was not considered\nlifesaving, regular programming was suspended in late March and Rohingya refugees\nwere left without further shelter support or replacement of perishable materials, such as\nbamboo and tarpaulin. Not all shelter repair and improvement programs could be\nimplemented over this period, aggravating the overall risk of damage. Only emergency\nshelter response continued without disruption.\n\nWeather related events\n\nBetween 19 and 21 May 2020, the tail of Cyclone Amphan, one of the largest tropical\ncyclones to make landfall in the Bay of Bengal, swept across Cox\u2019s Bazar, resulting in\n2,439 partially and totally damaged shelters in the camps. However, while there is a direct\ncorrelation between weather events such as heavy rainfall and windstorms and an\nincrease in shelter damages, these events alone do not explain the 100% increase in\nhousing damages.\n\nThough the 2020 monsoon season is ongoing and further shelter damages are likely, with\ncontinued rainfall and poor weather conditions forecasted for August,3 it is important to\nanalyse the impact of the monsoon season so far as the number of reported shelters\ndamaged has surpassed those reported between April and November 2019 [(BMD, UNDP](https://instant.rimes.int/seasonal_forecast)\n\n[06/08/2020, NPM 02/08/2020). However, as the 2019 and 2020 monsoon seasons began in](https://instant.rimes.int/seasonal_forecast)\ndifferent months, with heavy rainfall starting in July 2019 and in June 2020, a direct\ncomparison of precipitation data per month to measure the difference in severity of the\nmonsoon seasons is inaccurate. Therefore, an analysis of different weather events and\nrainfall trends over a longer period of time is more appropriate. According to the\nBangladesh Meteorological Department, the amount of rainfall for between May to July\n2020 was classified as Normal to Below Normal, based on the average calculation of\n\n\nincluded in this analysis and incidents associated with traffic accidents that occurred within the timeframe that are also\nrecorded in the daily incident monitoring were not included in the analysis for this report.\n\n\n[3 Rainfall forecast generated under UNDP DRR project using Bangladesh Meteorological Department\u2019s data with technical](https://instant.rimes.int/Dashboard)\n[support from Regional Integrated Multi-hazard Early Warning System (RIMES) indicate Normal to Above Normal rainfall for the](https://instant.rimes.int/Dashboard)\nmonth of August 2020, which is higher than that recorded average for August during past 30 years.\n\n2\n[Any questions? Please contact us at info@acaps.org](mailto:info@acaps.org)\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "SMSD Daily Incident Report",
+          "confidence": 0.9781706929206848,
+          "start": 196,
+          "end": 200
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": {
+          "text": "records the impact of small-scale weather-related incidents",
+          "confidence": 0.8859044313430786,
+          "start": 213,
+          "end": 220
+        },
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "report",
+          "confidence": 0.5733490586280823,
+          "start": 326,
+          "end": 327
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "IOM\u2019s Needs and Population Monitoring\nUnit",
+          "confidence": 0.6130651235580444,
+          "start": 202,
+          "end": 210
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2020",
+          "confidence": 0.8125348091125488,
+          "start": 241,
+          "end": 242
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2020",
+          "confidence": 0.5147377848625183,
+          "start": 241,
+          "end": 242
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "households",
+          "confidence": 0.8029822707176208,
+          "start": 265,
+          "end": 266
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "daily incident\nreport",
+          "confidence": 0.9901463389396667,
+          "start": 324,
+          "end": 327
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "report",
+          "confidence": 0.5692557692527771,
+          "start": 326,
+          "end": 327
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Camp 1E",
+          "confidence": 0.801001787185669,
+          "start": 444,
+          "end": 446
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2019",
+          "confidence": 0.6914787292480469,
+          "start": 367,
+          "end": 368
+        },
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "precipitation data",
+          "confidence": 0.8548116087913513,
+          "start": 831,
+          "end": 833
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Bangladesh",
+          "confidence": 0.6948445439338684,
+          "start": 872,
+          "end": 873
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2019",
+          "confidence": 0.6804802417755127,
+          "start": 774,
+          "end": 775
+        },
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "daily incident monitoring",
+          "confidence": 0.9675889015197754,
+          "start": 921,
+          "end": 924
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": {
+          "text": "Bangladesh Meteorological Department",
+          "confidence": 0.5727066397666931,
+          "start": 944,
+          "end": 947
+        },
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Bangladesh",
+          "confidence": 0.7661629915237427,
+          "start": 944,
+          "end": 945
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Regional Integrated Multi-hazard Early Warning System",
+          "confidence": 0.6710560917854309,
+          "start": 958,
+          "end": 964
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": {
+          "text": "Normal to Above Normal rainfall",
+          "confidence": 0.5175114274024963,
+          "start": 968,
+          "end": 973
+        },
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": {
+          "text": "Bangladesh Meteorological Department",
+          "confidence": 0.5036047697067261,
+          "start": 944,
+          "end": 947
+        },
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Bangladesh",
+          "confidence": 0.6008226871490479,
+          "start": 944,
+          "end": 945
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/b90dc202-dc3a-3fc3-9f92-8a018e1ebe63/20200820_acaps_report_impact_of_the_monsoon_covid-19_containment_measures.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "past rainfall patterns from the past 30 years (BMD, UNDP 08/2020).4 Although observed\nrainfall in May 2020 was higher than in May 2019, it was still in the Normal to Below\nNormal range.\n\nDuring the months of May to July in both 2019 and 2020, the most commonly reported\nweather incidents impacting shelters were wind/rainstorms and slope-failure, with\nwind/rainstorms accounting for higher amount of damage in 2020 and slope-failure\ncausing the most incidents in 2019 [(NPM 02/08/2020](https://npm-iom.shinyapps.io/Incident_Dashboard/) ). [5]\n\n\n**Weekly reported shelter damages compared with precipitation data**\n\n**May to July 2020**\n\n\n\n7000\n\n\n6000\n\n\n5000\n\n\n4000\n\n\n3000\n\n\n2000\n\n\n1000\n\n\n0\n\n\n\n\n\n450\n400\n350\n300\n250\n200\n150\n100\n50\n0\n-50\n\n\n\n01/05 \n07/05\n\n\n\n08/05 \n14/05\n\n\n\n15/05\n21/05\n\n\n\n22/05\n28/05\n\n\n\n29/05 \n04/06\n\n\n\n05/06 \n11/06\n\n\n\n12/06 \n18/06\n\n\n\n19/06 \n25/06\n\n\n\n26/06 \n02/07\n\n\n\n03/07 \n09/07\n\n\n\n10/07 \n16/07\n\n\n\n17/070 \n23/07\n\n\n\n24/07 \n30/07\n\n\n\nReported Shelter damages (combined partial and total damaged) Precipitation data in mm (CFSR) at collective site\n\n\nDaily Incident Monitoring Mechanism, IOM\u2019s Needs and Population Monitoring Unit, updated 02/08/2020.\nPrecipitation data for 2020 is based on Climate Forecast System Reanalysis (CFSR) daily precipitation\n\n### Temporary shelter & COVID-19 containment measures\n\n\nGovernment regulations have prevented the use of durable shelter materials. Currently,\nonly the use of temporary shelter materials, such as tarpaulin and bamboo, is permitted.\nTherefore, small-scale weather events commonly cause recurrent damage to shelters,\nresulting in an almost-constant need for repairs. Prior to and during the monsoon season,\nthere has generally been a spike in support and materials required to reinforce and repair\ndamages to shelters and public infrastructure in the camps. However, COVID-19\ncontainment measures put a temporary halt to activities carried out by Shelter Sector\npartners, such as shelter improvements, repair, maintenance, training, preparedness\nmessaging, and the delivery of additional shelter materials. Site development partners\ncould not complete pre-monsoon infrastructure reinforcement work on bridges and\npathways or slope failure mitigation initiatives. As a result, accessing essential services\n\n\n4 \u201cNormal\u201d in climate terms is the Long Period Average (LPA) of rainfall over a location, using 30 years or more of rainfall data\nfor the region (measured at a station). The average is considered the \u201cNormal\u201d amount of rainfall for the region. A classification\nof below normal does not indicate the intensity of the rainfall. There can be high intensity rainfall over a short period of time\nfollowed by dry spells which may still result in a Below Normal classification.\n\n\n\nFlash Report: Shelter and Infrastructure Damages between May to July 2020\n\n\nand assistance, including distributions, is even more challenging and dangerous,\nespecially for older people, people with disabilities, people with chronic illness, pregnant\nwomen, and children.\n\nThe shift to critical-only programming on 25 March 20206 meant:\n\n - Only a limited amount of planned shelter improvements, repairs and maintenance were\nconducted pre-monsoon. Emergency assistance continued to be provided, as necessary.\n\n - Technical assistance and installation support normally implemented along with the\ndistribution of shelter materials was not provided. For example, tie down kits were\ndistributed prior to the monsoon season. However, reduced staffing in the camps due to\nCOVID-19 containment measures meant that no technical support and face to face\nassistance was possible. This impacted the quality of installation and the correct use of\nthe materials by less skilled households or households without access to labour.\n\n - The ongoing heavy rain and unstable soil impacts the installation and longevity of\nimportant structural repairs when made during, rather than prior to, monsoon season.\nTherefore, only temporary repairs can be made during the monsoon, and more\nsubstantial structural upgrades that would help shelters withstand poor weather\nconditions are required pre- or post-monsoon, when the ground is dry and sturdy.\n\n - In some cases, materials (i.e. steel footings) could not be distributed as they require\ntraining for proper installation and group activities were restricted as they would increase\nthe risk of COVID-19 transmission.\n\n - Preparedness messaging on how to \u201cprepare your shelter for bad weather\" was not\nconducted at the scale that was planned due to the need to prioritise COVID-19 public\nhealth messaging.\n\n\nIn addition to the challenges posed by the COVID-19 containment measures, many\nhouseholds have not received shelter assistance in more than a year. Given that bamboo\nand tarpaulin weaken over time, shelters become more susceptible to the impacts of\nsmall-scale weather events. Therefore, building materials require frequent replacement,\nhighlighting the incremental nature of temporary shelter assistance in Cox\u2019s Bazar, which\nis unsustainable without a shift to more durable materials and structures such as mud\nwalls or metal double story shelters. The inability to conduct comprehensive, planned\nshelter improvements, repairs and maintenance prior to May of this year correlates with\ntwice as much damage as last year, highlighting the need for robust materials, monsoon\npreparedness activities, and continued access to the camps for shelter assistance\nconducted in accordance with COVID-19 prevention recommendations.\n\n\n5 Definitions of the different small-scale weather events used in the Daily Incident Monitoring Mechanism can be found here.\n[https://npm-iom.shinyapps.io/Incident_Dashboard/](https://npm-iom.shinyapps.io/Incident_Dashboard/)\n\n\n6 RRRC guidance on program restrictions in light of COVID-19: https://rrrc.portal.gov.bd/\n\n\n3\n[Any questions? Please contact us at info@acaps.org](mailto:info@acaps.org)\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "past rainfall patterns",
+          "confidence": 0.7508744597434998,
+          "start": 0,
+          "end": 3
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "BMD",
+          "confidence": 0.7432337999343872,
+          "start": 9,
+          "end": 10
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2020",
+          "confidence": 0.6074045300483704,
+          "start": 14,
+          "end": 15
+        },
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "precipitation data",
+          "confidence": 0.7820518612861633,
+          "start": 114,
+          "end": 116
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "May to July 2020",
+          "confidence": 0.5149661898612976,
+          "start": 120,
+          "end": 124
+        },
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Climate Forecast System Reanalysis",
+          "confidence": 0.8063196539878845,
+          "start": 272,
+          "end": 276
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "Precipitation data",
+          "confidence": 0.6022583842277527,
+          "start": 234,
+          "end": 236
+        },
+        "acronym": {
+          "text": "CFSR",
+          "confidence": 0.734755277633667,
+          "start": 239,
+          "end": 240
+        },
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2020",
+          "confidence": 0.8797757625579834,
+          "start": 263,
+          "end": 264
+        },
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "rainfall data",
+          "confidence": 0.9500073790550232,
+          "start": 467,
+          "end": 469
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": {
+          "text": "LPA",
+          "confidence": 0.9970747232437134,
+          "start": 453,
+          "end": 454
+        },
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "region",
+          "confidence": 0.662655234336853,
+          "start": 471,
+          "end": 472
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "30 years or more",
+          "confidence": 0.5194465517997742,
+          "start": 462,
+          "end": 466
+        },
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Daily Incident Monitoring Mechanism",
+          "confidence": 0.8877196311950684,
+          "start": 1000,
+          "end": 1004
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/b90dc202-dc3a-3fc3-9f92-8a018e1ebe63/20200820_acaps_report_impact_of_the_monsoon_covid-19_containment_measures.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        2
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_29/raw/doc_29_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,32 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "**Note d\u2019information sur les enl\u00e8vements/recrutements**\n**forc\u00e9s dans la r\u00e9gion du Sahel \u2013 Cas du Mali**\n\n\n_El\u00e9ments d\u2019analyse en vue de l\u2019\u00e9laboration d\u2019une note de_\n_plaidoyer par le Groupe de Travail R\u00e9gional de Protection_\n\n\n**Contexte**\n\nLa **rivalit\u00e9 entre les groupes arm\u00e9s JNIM et EIGS** a commenc\u00e9 \u00e0 \u00e9merger en f\u00e9vrier 2020 lorsque\ncertains membres du JNIM ont annonc\u00e9 leur adh\u00e9sion \u00e0 l\u2019EIGS (\u00e0 Nampala, dans le centre du Mali). Les\naffrontements entre les deux groupes arm\u00e9s se sont intensifi\u00e9s pendant le mois d\u2019avril. Les combats se\nsont depuis \u00e9tendus aux r\u00e9gions autour de Gao, Tombouctou, S\u00e9gou, Mopti, et la zone frontali\u00e8re de\nLiptako-Gourma. Cette rivalit\u00e9 pour le contr\u00f4le des ressources et du territoire est susceptible de g\u00e9n\u00e9rer\nde la recherche de nouvelles recrues mais \u00e9galement des revenus suppl\u00e9mentaires, augmentant les\nrisques d'enl\u00e8vement contre ran\u00e7on pour les personnes civiles mais \u00e9galement les personnalit\u00e9s\npolitiques dans les zones isol\u00e9es [1. ]\n\nLes **checkpoints mis en place par JNIM** sur la route entre Gao et Tillaberi (r\u00e9gion o\u00f9 l\u2019EIGS a\ntraditionnellement une forte pr\u00e9sence), repr\u00e9sente aussi une nouvelle dynamique dans la rivalit\u00e9 entre\nles deux groupes et dans la compr\u00e9hension des conflits au Mali. L\u2019objectif de la mise en place de ces\ncheckpoints est le contr\u00f4le sur les v\u00e9hicules de fret, en particulier l\u2019essence, afin d\u2019amoindrir les\nressources et capacit\u00e9s de l\u2019EIGS.\n\nAu premier trimestre de 2020, le monitoring de protection not\u00e9 **une augmentation des attaques de**\n**village** **[2]** dans le Centre du Mali avec une composante communautaire, et des caract\u00e9ristiques souvent\nidentiques [3] :\n\n  - Recrudescence des attaques sur les villages dogons et peuls, avec un cycle de repr\u00e9sailles ;\n\n  - Prof\u00e9ration de menace contre la population civile (menace d\u2019attaque de village, demande de\npayer la zakat et menace en cas de collaboration avec les FDS) qui cause des d\u00e9placements\npr\u00e9ventifs ;\n\n  - Ciblage d\u00e9lib\u00e9r\u00e9 des moyens de subsistance (r\u00e9coltes et champs br\u00fbl\u00e9es, b\u00e9tail vol\u00e9) pour cr\u00e9er\ndes d\u00e9placements ;\n\n  - Nombre important de pertes de vies humaines (souvent > 10 personnes) ;\n\n  - Ciblage particulier sur les cercles de Bankass, Koro, Bandiagara (= zone exond\u00e9e) ;\n\n  - Mouvement de population en augmentation suite aux attaques de village ou aux menaces\nd\u2019attaque de village ;\n\n  - Nouvelle tendance des violences intra-communautaires, signifiant un d\u00e9calage des lignes de\nconflit (attaque de l\u2019auto-d\u00e9fense dogon sur un village dogon causant la mort de 5 personnes) ;\n\n  - Ciblage r\u00e9p\u00e9t\u00e9 des m\u00eames villages.\n\n**Incident de protection : Enl\u00e8vements et recrutements forc\u00e9s**\n\n\nPendant le premier trimestre (Janvier \u2013 Mars 2020), le syst\u00e8me de monitoring de protection au Mali a\nenregistr\u00e9 57 violations du type enl\u00e8vements/pris d\u2019otage/disparitions forc\u00e9. Cela constitue une\naugmentation nette compar\u00e9e avec le premier trimestre 2019, o\u00f9 seulement 20 enl\u00e8vements avaient\n\u00e9t\u00e9 enregistr\u00e9s. 95% des personnes affect\u00e9 par les enl\u00e8vements au premier trimestre de 2020 (54) sont\n\n\n1 Escalating fighting between jihadist groups in Mali increases risks to individuals, cargo disruption in six-month outlook, Corinne\nArcher, Publication: Jane's Intelligence Weekly, 20 May 2020\n2 Le monitoring de protection a rapport\u00e9 141 alertes flash (dont 98 dans les r\u00e9gions de Mopti et S\u00e9gou) entre le mois de f\u00e9vrier\net le mois d\u2019avril. Ceci inclut : 84 attaques des villages (dont Mopti 72 / S\u00e9gou 3) ; 25 menaces d\u2019attaque de village (dont Mopti\n13 / S\u00e9gou 8) ;51 de mouvements de population.\n3 Cluster Protection Mali, _Note de plaidoyer, Attaques contre la population civile dans la r\u00e9gion du Centre (janvier - avril 2020),_\ndisponible ici : [https://www.humanitarianresponse.info/en/operations/mali/protection](https://www.humanitarianresponse.info/en/operations/mali/protection)\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/0977a327-3e72-3595-89f3-04a0d6a24e09/2020_05_-_cp_mali_-_note_dinformation_sur_les_enlevements_et_recrutements_forces.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "des hommes. 51% des enl\u00e8vements au premier trimestre ont \u00e9t\u00e9 rapport\u00e9 dans la r\u00e9gion de Mopti (29),\nsuite par S\u00e9gou 28% (16) et Tombouctou 12% (7). En 2020, 4 enl\u00e8vements ont eu lieu au mois de janvier,\n19 au f\u00e9vrier et 34 au mars.\n\n\n\u2794 L\u2019augmentation pendant le mois de mars est d\u00fb au fait que les GANE utilisent les menaces et\n\nles enl\u00e8vements comme tactique pour d\u00e9stabiliser le processus \u00e9lectoral (\u00e9lections l\u00e9gislatives\nqui ont eu lieu le 29.03 / deuxi\u00e8me tour le 14.04). Les GANE ont cibl\u00e9 surtout **les figures**\n**politiques** . Ce sch\u00e9ma a pu \u00eatre observ\u00e9 surtout \u00e0 Tombouctou o\u00f9 plus de 20 personnes\n(d\u00e9l\u00e9gations politiques, pr\u00e9fets, chef de village, agents humanitaires) ont \u00e9t\u00e9 enlev\u00e9s entre\njanvier et avril (NB : ces incidents n\u2019ont malheureusement pas tous \u00e9t\u00e9 enregistr\u00e9s par le\nsyst\u00e8me de monitoring, mais les informations sont parvenues au Cluster Protection via diverses\nsources). L\u2019\u00e9v\u00e8nement le plus saillant a \u00e9t\u00e9 l\u2019enl\u00e8vement du chef de l\u2019opposition parlementaire\nSoumaila Cisse (URD). Il reste en captivit\u00e9 depuis plus que 60 jours.\n\n\u2794 En comparaison avec la situation a Diffa, il est difficile de produire une analyse qui tendrait \u00e0\n\ndire que rattacher les enl\u00e8vements observ\u00e9s au Mali que les GANE ciblent et enl\u00e8vent surtout\ndes personnes ayant une position sociale privil\u00e9gi\u00e9e et disposant d\u2019un certain pouvoir d\u2019achat\npour demander une ran\u00e7on. Toutefois, il est possible d\u2019avancer que les personnes victimes\nd\u2019enl\u00e8vement sont dot\u00e9es d\u2019une certaine capacit\u00e9 \u00e0 influencer les comportements au sein de\nleurs communaut\u00e9s respectives. Au mois de mars, **une diversit\u00e9 de** **victimes** (34 au total) a \u00e9t\u00e9\naffect\u00e9e par des enl\u00e8vements (2 leaders communautaires, 2 leaders religieux, 8 commer\u00e7ants, 6\nagriculteurs, 4 chauffeurs, 3 \u00e9leveurs, 1 \u00e9tudiant, 4 personnes sans occupation, 2 travailleurs\nhumanitaires, 1 agent d\u2019Etat, 1 autre).\n\n\u2794 Les GANE ont \u00e9galement cibl\u00e9 **des personnes suspect\u00e9es proches ou appartenant aux forces**\n\n**de d\u00e9fense et de s\u00e9curit\u00e9**, accus\u00e9es de complicit\u00e9. Les enl\u00e8vements sont la plupart du temps\neffectu\u00e9s afin d\u2019asseoir l\u2019influence des GANE aupr\u00e8s des communaut\u00e9s, et de faire passer un\nmessage de menaces dirig\u00e9es vers des communaut\u00e9s qui seraient enclines \u00e0 un rattachement\n\u00e0 l\u2019autorit\u00e9 de l\u2019Etat/suspect\u00e9es d\u2019\u00eatre proches des FAMAs et autres forces arm\u00e9es ou\nirrespectueuses des r\u00e8gles (de vie) \u00e9dict\u00e9es par les GANE.\n\n\nLe **mode op\u00e9ratoire** et **l\u2019objectif affich\u00e9** des enl\u00e8vements semble \u00eatre diff\u00e8rent entre le nord et le\ncentre du Mali.\n\n   - A Gao, les enl\u00e8vements sont surtout attribu\u00e9s aux activit\u00e9s criminelles (connect\u00e9s avec le trafic\ndu drogue) sans objectif id\u00e9ologique.\n\n   - A Tombouctou, des chantages et enl\u00e8vements de commer\u00e7ants ou \u00e9lus locaux (personnes avec\nun profil socio-\u00e9conomique \u00e9lev\u00e9) avec demande de ran\u00e7on a la famille ont \u00e9t\u00e9 observ\u00e9s.\n\n   - Une telle tendance n'a pas pu \u00eatre observ\u00e9e dans la r\u00e9gion de Mopti, ou les enl\u00e8vements sont\ndes objets de menaces contre la population suspect\u00e9es d\u2019\u00eatre proche des FSD ou qui ne\nrespecteraient pas l\u2019id\u00e9ologie des GANE.\n\n\nEn vue de fournir une analyse \u00e9quilibr\u00e9e il est \u00e9galement n\u00e9cessaire de faire le lien avec **les all\u00e9gations**\n**d\u2019exactions commises par les forces de d\u00e9fense et de s\u00e9curit\u00e9** . La Division droits de l\u2019homme de la\nMINUSMA a ainsi not\u00e9 une multiplication des ex\u00e9cutions extrajudiciaires (101 victimes), 32 cas de\ndisparitions forc\u00e9es et 32 cas de torture ou traitement cruel inhumain ou d\u00e9gradant et 116 arrestations\narbitraires imputables aux FDSM sur l\u2019ensemble du territoire national [4] .\n\n\n[4 MINUSMA Human Rights Division, https://minusma.unmissions.org/rapports.](https://minusma.unmissions.org/rapports)\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/0977a327-3e72-3595-89f3-04a0d6a24e09/2020_05_-_cp_mali_-_note_dinformation_sur_les_enlevements_et_recrutements_forces.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "Selon les donn\u00e9es fournies par le MRM/UNICEF, on note \u00e9galement pour le premier trimestre de l'ann\u00e9e\n2020, une forte augmentation concernant **les cas de recrutement et utilisation d\u2019enfants par les**\n**forces et groupes arm\u00e9s** ; \u00e0 savoir 159 enfants (131 gar\u00e7ons et 28 filles) par rapport \u00e0 77 enfants pour\nle dernier trimestre de 2019 [5] . Les recrutements et utilisation d\u2019enfants ont lieu particuli\u00e8rement dans les\nr\u00e9gions de Gao (119), Kidal (20), S\u00e9gou (12), Tombouctou (4), Mopti (4). On note \u00e9galement une\naugmentation **des enl\u00e8vements d\u2019enfants**, \u00e0 savoir 12 enfants (6 gar\u00e7ons et 6 filles) pour le premier\ntrimestre 2020, par rapport \u00e0 4 enfants pour le dernier trimestre de 2019. Les enl\u00e8vements d\u2019enfant ont\nlieu principalement dans les r\u00e9gions de Gao (2), Tombouctou (4), Mopti (6).\n\n\n**R\u00e9ponse des acteurs de protection**\n\n\nLa r\u00e9ponse de protection reste relativement limit\u00e9e en raison des difficult\u00e9s d\u2019acc\u00e8s humanitaire dans\ncertaines zones, ainsi que de la capacit\u00e9 r\u00e9duite des acteurs de protection pour la prise en charge (faible\nfinancement et absence de services de base). Les acteurs en charge du monitoring de protection\napportent un appui psychosocial (AMSS, UNHCR, DRC) aux victimes de violations. Une sensibilisation\nsur les risques de protection et les m\u00e9canismes de pr\u00e9vention accompagnent \u00e9galement le projet de\nmonitoring de protection. Pour les enfants associ\u00e9s aux forces et groupes armes (EAFGA), les partenaires\nde la protection de l\u2019enfance travaillent \u00e9troitement avec le CICR pour le r\u00e9tablissement des liens\nfamiliaux. Par ailleurs, ils assurent \u00e9galement le suivi, la r\u00e9int\u00e9gration socio-\u00e9conomique, et la prise en\ncharge holistique transitoire (appui m\u00e9dical, psychosocial, activit\u00e9s r\u00e9cr\u00e9atives et \u00e9ducatives) dans les\ncentres de transit et orientation pour les enfants associ\u00e9s aux forces et groupes arm\u00e9s.\n\n\n**Recommandations**\n\n\n  - Renforcer la coordination des donn\u00e9es du monitoring de protection au niveau r\u00e9gional afin de\ncompl\u00e9ter et affiner l\u2019analyse entre les trois pays ; et particuli\u00e8rement pour les dynamiques dans\nla zone des trois fronti\u00e8res (Liptako-Gourma).\n\n  - Adopter un plaidoyer et des messages communs afin de permettre aux Equipes Humanitaires\nPays du Mali, Niger et Burkina Faso d\u2019assurer un leadership et un \u00ab plaidoyer bas\u00e9 sur le droit \u00bb\nafin de pr\u00e9venir et faire stopper les violations majeures des droits humains.\n\n  - Renforcer les capacit\u00e9s de r\u00e9ponse des acteurs de protection, notamment pour assurer la prise\nen charge des victimes de violations des droits en termes de sensibilisation, appui psychosocial\net prise en charge via des services holistiques.\n\n  - Garantir le r\u00e9tablissement de la pr\u00e9sence des autorit\u00e9s \u00e9tatiques, des services sociaux de base\net de l\u2019Etat de droit permettant ainsi de pr\u00e9venir et lutter contre les violations et atteintes\nr\u00e9p\u00e9t\u00e9es \u00e0 la s\u00e9curit\u00e9, a la dignit\u00e9 et aux droits des personnes civiles (notamment la menace\ndes enl\u00e8vements et recrutements forc\u00e9s) qui pourraient encore se multiplier en raison de\nl\u2019intensification des affrontements entre JNIM et EIGS au Mali.\n\n\n5 Parmi les 159 enfants, 73 font partie des cas d\u00e9j\u00e0 rapport\u00e9s fin 2019 (mais _unverified_ ). 66 sont en cours de documentation par\n\nla MINUSMA.\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/0977a327-3e72-3595-89f3-04a0d6a24e09/2020_05_-_cp_mali_-_note_dinformation_sur_les_enlevements_et_recrutements_forces.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        2
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_3/raw/doc_3_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,112 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "## \u043f\u0435\u0440\u0435\u0448\u043a\u043e\u0434\u0438 \u0434\u043b\u044f \u0443\u0447\u0430\u0441\u0442\u0456 \u0443 \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0433\u0440\u0430\u043c\u0456\n\n#### **\u0411\u0424 \u00ab\u041f\u0440\u0430\u0432\u043e \u043d\u0430 \u0437\u0430\u0445\u0438\u0441\u0442\u00bb** **2021**\n\n\n\n1\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/6a5702a7-e73d-34d3-b0ac-7c9a40e35123/01_2021_r2p_report_on_resolution_767_ukr.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "### \u0417\u041c\u0406\u0421\u0422\n\n##### \u0417\u041c\u0406\u0421\u0422 ........................................................................................................................ 2 \u0412\u0421\u0422\u0423\u041f ........................................................................................................................ 3 I. \u041e\u0421\u041d\u041e\u0412\u041d\u0406 \u0420\u0415\u0417\u0423\u041b\u042c\u0422\u0410\u0422\u0418 \u0414\u041e\u0421\u041b\u0406\u0414\u0416\u0415\u041d\u041d\u042f ........................................................ 4 A. \u0425\u0410\u0420\u0410\u041a\u0422\u0415\u0420\u0418\u0421\u0422\u0418\u041a\u0410 \u0416\u0418\u0422\u041b\u041e\u0412\u041e\u0407 \u0421\u0418\u0422\u0423\u0410\u0426\u0406\u0407 ........................................................ 4 B. \u041d\u0410\u041c\u0406\u0420\u0418 \u0423\u0427\u0410\u0421\u041d\u0418\u041a\u0406\u0412 \u0422\u0410 \u0419\u041c\u041e\u0412\u0406\u0420\u041d\u0406 \u041e\u0411\u041c\u0415\u0416\u0415\u041d\u041d\u042f \u0423\u0427\u0410\u0421\u0422\u0406 .......................... 7 II. \u0412\u0418\u042f\u0412\u041b\u0415\u041d\u0406 \u0412\u0418\u041a\u041b\u0418\u041a\u0418 \u0422\u0410 \u041f\u0415\u0420\u0415\u041f\u041e\u041d\u0418 ............................................................... 9 \u0412\u0418\u0421\u041d\u041e\u0412\u041a\u0418 .............................................................................................................. 11\n\n2\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/6a5702a7-e73d-34d3-b0ac-7c9a40e35123/01_2021_r2p_report_on_resolution_767_ukr.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "### \u0412\u0421\u0422\u0423\u041f\n\n\n##### \u0426\u0435\u0439 \u0437\u0432\u0456\u0442 \u0433\u0440\u0443\u043d\u0442\u0443\u0454\u0442\u044c\u0441\u044f \u043d\u0430 \u0440\u0435\u0437\u0443\u043b\u044c\u0442\u0430\u0442\u0430\u0445 \u043e\u043f\u0438\u0442\u0443\u0432\u0430\u043d\u043d\u044f \u0449\u043e\u0434\u043e \u043d\u0430\u043c\u0456\u0440\u0456\u0432, \u0432\u0438\u043a\u043b\u0438\u043a\u0456\u0432 \u0442\u0430\n\n\n##### \u043f\u0435\u0440\u0435\u0448\u043a\u043e\u0434, \u043f\u043e\u0432\u2019\u044f\u0437\u0430\u043d\u0438\u0445 \u0456\u0437 \u0443\u0447\u0430\u0441\u0442\u044e \u0432 \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0433\u0440\u0430\u043c\u0456 \u0433\u0440\u043e\u0448\u043e\u0432\u043e\u0457 \u043a\u043e\u043c\u043f\u0435\u043d\u0441\u0430\u0446\u0456\u0457 (\u0434\u043e\u043f\u043e\u043c\u043e\u0433\u0438) \u043f\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0440\u0430\u0436\u0434\u0430\u043b\u0438\u043c \u0437\u0430 \u0437\u0440\u0443\u0439\u043d\u043e\u0432\u0430\u043d\u0435 (\u043f\u043e\u0448\u043a\u043e\u0434\u0436\u0435\u043d\u0435) \u0436\u0438\u0442\u043b\u043e \u0432\u0456\u0434\u043f\u043e\u0432\u0456\u0434\u043d\u043e \u0434\u043e \u041f\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0430\u043d\u043e\u0432\u0438 \u041a\u041c\u0423 \u2116767. \u0414\u043e\u0434\u0430\u0442\u043a\u043e\u0432\u0430 \u0456\u043d\u0444\u043e\u0440\u043c\u0430\u0446\u0456\u044f \u0431\u0443\u043b\u0430 \u0437\u0456\u0431\u0440\u0430\u043d\u0430 \u043f\u0456\u0434 \u0447\u0430\u0441 \u0447\u0438\u0441\u043b\u0435\u043d\u043d\u0438\u0445 \u043c\u043e\u043d\u0456\u0442\u043e\u0440\u0438\u043d\u0433\u043e\u0432\u0438\u0445 \u0432\u0456\u0437\u0438\u0442\u0456\u0432 \u0434\u043e \u043d\u0430\u0441\u0435\u043b\u0435\u043d\u0438\u0445 \u043f\u0443\u043d\u043a\u0442\u0456\u0432 \u0414\u043e\u043d\u0435\u0446\u044c\u043a\u043e\u0457 \u0442\u0430 \u041b\u0443\u0433\u0430\u043d\u0441\u044c\u043a\u043e\u0457 \u043e\u0431\u043b\u0430\u0441\u0442\u0435\u0439, \u044f\u043a\u0456 \u0432\u0456\u0434\u0431\u0443\u0432\u0430\u043b\u0438\u0441\u044f \u0443 \u0436\u043e\u0432\u0442\u043d\u0456-\u0433\u0440\u0443\u0434\u043d\u0456. \u0422\u0430\u043a\u043e\u0436 \u043d\u0430\u0448\u0456 \u043c\u043e\u043d\u0456\u0442\u043e\u0440\u0438\u043d\u0433\u043e\u0432\u0456 \u0442\u0430 \u044e\u0440\u0438\u0434\u0438\u0447\u043d\u0456 \u043a\u043e\u043c\u0430\u043d\u0434\u0438, \u0431\u0435\u0440\u0443\u0447\u0456 \u0443\u0447\u0430\u0441\u0442\u044c \u0432 \u0434\u0435\u044f\u043a\u0438\u0445 \u0437\u0430\u0441\u0456\u0434\u0430\u043d\u043d\u044f\u0445 \u043a\u043e\u043c\u0456\u0441\u0456\u0439 \u0437 \u0440\u043e\u0437\u0433\u043b\u044f\u0434\u0443 \u0432\u0456\u0434\u043f\u043e\u0432\u0456\u0434\u043d\u0438\u0445 \u043f\u0438\u0442\u0430\u043d\u044c \u0443 \u044f\u043a\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0456 \u0441\u043f\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0435\u0440\u0456\u0433\u0430\u0447\u0456\u0432 \u0447\u0438 \u0457\u0445 \u0447\u043b\u0435\u043d\u0456\u0432, \u043c\u0430\u043b\u0438 \u0437\u043c\u043e\u0433\u0443 \u0431\u0435\u0437\u043f\u043e\u0441\u0435\u0440\u0435\u0434\u043d\u044c\u043e \u043e\u0442\u0440\u0438\u043c\u0430\u0442\u0438 \u0456\u043d\u0444\u043e\u0440\u043c\u0430\u0446\u0456\u044e \u0449\u043e\u0434\u043e \u0440\u0435\u0430\u043b\u0456\u0437\u0430\u0446\u0456\u0457 \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0433\u0440\u0430\u043c\u0438. \u0424\u043e\u043a\u0443\u0441\u0443\u044e\u0447\u0438\u0441\u044c \u043d\u0430 \u0434\u043e\u0441\u0432\u0456\u0434\u0456 \u0443\u0447\u0430\u0441\u043d\u0438\u043a\u0456\u0432, \u0446\u0435\u0439 \u0437\u0432\u0456\u0442 \u0434\u043e\u043f\u043e\u0432\u043d\u044e\u0454 \u043e\u043f\u0438\u0442\u0443\u0432\u0430\u043d\u043d\u044f, \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0432\u0435\u0434\u0435\u043d\u0435 \u0410\u0433\u0435\u043d\u0442\u0441\u0442\u0432\u043e\u043c \u041e\u041e\u041d \u0443 \u0441\u043f\u0440\u0430\u0432\u0430\u0445 \u0431\u0456\u0436\u0435\u043d\u0446\u0456\u0432 (UNHCR) \u0432 \u043b\u0438\u0441\u0442\u043e\u043f\u0430\u0434\u0456 2020 \u0440\u043e\u043a\u0443, \u043f\u0440\u0438\u0441\u0432\u044f\u0447\u0435\u043d\u0435 \u0430\u0441\u043f\u0435\u043a\u0442\u0430\u043c \u0440\u043e\u0431\u043e\u0442\u0438 \u0442\u0430\u043a\u0438\u0445 \u043a\u043e\u043c\u0456\u0441\u0456\u0439, \u044f\u043a\u0435 \u0442\u0435\u0436 \u0431\u0430\u0437\u0443\u0432\u0430\u043b\u043e\u0441\u044f \u043d\u0430 \u0441\u043f\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0435\u0440\u0435\u0436\u0435\u043d\u043d\u044f\u0445 \u0411\u0424 \u00ab\u041f\u0440\u0430\u0432\u043e \u043d\u0430 \u0437\u0430\u0445\u0438\u0441\u0442\u00bb \u0442\u0430 \u0456\u043d\u0448\u0438\u0445 \u041d\u0423\u041e, \u0449\u043e \u0431\u0440\u0430\u043b\u0438 \u0443\u0447\u0430\u0441\u0442\u044c \u0432 \u0457\u0445\n\n\n##### \u0440\u043e\u0431\u043e\u0442\u0456.\n\n\n##### \u0411\u0424 \u00ab\u041f\u0440\u0430\u0432\u043e \u043d\u0430 \u0437\u0430\u0445\u0438\u0441\u0442\u00bb \u0456\u043d\u0456\u0446\u0456\u044e\u0432\u0430\u0432 \u0434\u043e\u0441\u043b\u0456\u0434\u0436\u0435\u043d\u043d\u044f, \u0449\u043e\u0431 \u0437\u0440\u043e\u0437\u0443\u043c\u0456\u0442\u0438 \u0432\u0456\u0434\u043f\u043e\u0432\u0456\u0434\u043d\u0456\u0441\u0442\u044c\n\n\n##### \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0433\u0440\u0430\u043c\u0438 \u043f\u043e\u0442\u0440\u0435\u0431\u0430\u043c \u043b\u044e\u0434\u0435\u0439, \u044f\u043a\u0456 \u0454 \u0457\u0457 \u0446\u0456\u043b\u044c\u043e\u0432\u043e\u044e \u0430\u0443\u0434\u0438\u0442\u043e\u0440\u0456\u0454\u044e, \u0430 \u0442\u0430\u043a\u043e\u0436 \u0434\u043b\u044f \u0442\u043e\u0433\u043e, \u0449\u043e\u0431 \u0432\u0438\u044f\u0432\u0438\u0442\u0438 \u043f\u043e\u0442\u0435\u043d\u0446\u0456\u0439\u043d\u0456 \u043f\u0456\u0434\u0432\u043e\u0434\u043d\u0456 \u043a\u0430\u043c\u0435\u043d\u0456. \u041c\u0438 \u0432\u0438\u0440\u0456\u0448\u0438\u043b\u0438 \u0437\u0432\u0435\u0440\u043d\u0443\u0442\u0438\u0441\u044f \u0434\u043e \u0442\u0438\u0445 \u0456\u0437 \u043d\u0430\u0448\u0438\u0445 \u0431\u0435\u043d\u0435\u0444\u0456\u0446\u0456\u0430\u0440\u0456\u0432, \u044f\u043a\u0456 \u043d\u0430\u043b\u0435\u0436\u0430\u0442\u044c \u0434\u043e \u0432\u043d\u0443\u0442\u0440\u0456\u0448\u043d\u044c\u043e \u043f\u0435\u0440\u0435\u043c\u0456\u0449\u0435\u043d\u0438\u0445 \u043e\u0441\u0456\u0431 (\u0412\u041f\u041e), \u043b\u044e\u0434\u0435\u0439, \u044f\u043a\u0438\u0445 \u0442\u043e\u0440\u043a\u043d\u0443\u0432\u0441\u044f \u043a\u043e\u043d\u0444\u043b\u0456\u043a\u0442, \u0442\u0430 \u044f\u043a\u0456, \u0437\u0430 \u043f\u043e\u0432\u0456\u0434\u043e\u043c\u043b\u0435\u043d\u043d\u044f\u043c\u0438, \u0441\u0442\u0438\u043a\u0430\u043b\u0438\u0441\u044f \u0437 \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0431\u043b\u0435\u043c\u043e\u044e \u0437\u0440\u0443\u0439\u043d\u043e\u0432\u0430\u043d\u043e\u0433\u043e \u0447\u0438 \u043f\u043e\u0448\u043a\u043e\u0434\u0436\u0435\u043d\u043e\u0433\u043e \u0436\u0438\u0442\u043b\u0430. \u0422\u0430\u043a\u043e\u0436 \u0431\u0443\u043b\u043e \u043e\u043f\u0438\u0442\u0430\u043d\u043e \u043f\u043e\u0442\u0435\u043d\u0446\u0456\u0439\u043d\u0438\u0445 \u0432\u0438\u0433\u043e\u0434\u043e\u043d\u0430\u0431\u0443\u0432\u0430\u0447\u0456\u0432, \u043f\u0440\u043e \u044f\u043a\u0438\u0445 \u0432\u0436\u0435 \u0431\u0443\u043b\u043e \u0432\u0456\u0434\u043e\u043c\u043e \u043c\u043e\u043d\u0456\u0442\u043e\u0440\u0430\u043c \u0442\u0430 \u0442\u0438\u0445, \u043a\u043e\u0433\u043e \u0432\u0438\u044f\u0432\u0438\u043b\u0438 \u043f\u0456\u0434 \u0447\u0430\u0441 \u043f\u043e\u043b\u044c\u043e\u0432\u0438\u0445 \u0432\u0456\u0437\u0438\u0442\u0456\u0432. \u0406\u043d\u0442\u0435\u0440\u0432\u2019\u044e \u0431\u0443\u043b\u0438 \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0432\u0435\u0434\u0435\u043d\u0456 \u0443 \u043f\u0435\u0440\u0456\u043e\u0434 \u0437 \u0436\u043e\u0432\u0442\u043d\u044f \u043f\u043e \u043b\u0438\u0441\u0442\u043e\u043f\u0430\u0434 \u0432 \u0414\u043e\u043d\u0435\u0446\u044c\u043a\u0456\u0439 \u0442\u0430 \u041b\u0443\u0433\u0430\u043d\u0441\u044c\u043a\u0456\u0439 \u043e\u0431\u043b\u0430\u0441\u0442\u044f\u0445 \u0442\u0435\u043b\u0435\u0444\u043e\u043d\u043e\u043c \u0430\u0431\u043e \u043f\u0456\u0434 \u0447\u0430\u0441 \u043e\u0447\u043d\u0438\u0445 \u0437\u0443\u0441\u0442\u0440\u0456\u0447\u0435\u0439. \u041d\u0430\u043f\u0440\u0438\u043a\u0456\u043d\u0446\u0456 \u043e\u043f\u0438\u0442\u0443\u0432\u0430\u043d\u043d\u044f \u0434\u0435\u044f\u043a\u0456 \u0432\u0438\u043f\u0430\u0434\u043a\u0438 \u0431\u0443\u043b\u0438 \u043f\u0435\u0440\u0435\u0430\u0434\u0440\u0435\u0441\u043e\u0432\u0430\u043d\u0456 \u0434\u043e \u043f\u0440\u0430\u0432\u043e\u0432\u043e\u0457 \u043a\u043e\u043c\u0430\u043d\u0434\u0438 \u0411\u0424 \u00ab\u041f\u0440\u0430\u0432\u043e \u043d\u0430 \u0437\u0430\u0445\u0438\u0441\u0442\u00bb \u0437\u0430\u0434\u043b\u044f \u043f\u043e\u0434\u0430\u043b\u044c\u0448\u043e\u0433\u043e \u0441\u0443\u043f\u0440\u043e\u0432\u043e\u0434\u0443. \u0422\u0430\u043a\u0438\u043c \u0447\u0438\u043d\u043e\u043c, \u043d\u0430\u0448\u0430 \u043a\u043e\u043c\u0430\u043d\u0434\u0430 \u043d\u0435 \u0442\u0456\u043b\u044c\u043a\u0438 \u0437\u0456\u0431\u0440\u0430\u043b\u0430 \u0434\u0430\u043d\u0456, \u0430\u043b\u0435 \u0439 \u043e\u043f\u0435\u0440\u0430\u0442\u0438\u0432\u043d\u043e \u043d\u0430\u0434\u0430\u043b\u0430 \u0434\u043e\u043f\u043e\u043c\u043e\u0433\u0443 \u0442\u0438\u043c, \u0445\u0442\u043e \u0432\u0438\u044f\u0432\u0438\u0432 \u0431\u0430\u0436\u0430\u043d\u043d\u044f \u0432\u0437\u044f\u0442\u0438 \u0443\u0447\u0430\u0441\u0442\u044c \u0432 \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0433\u0440\u0430\u043c\u0456, \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0442\u0435 \u0447\u0435\u0440\u0435\u0437 \u0434\u0435\u044f\u043a\u0456 \u043f\u0440\u0438\u0447\u0438\u043d\u0438 \u0441\u0442\u0438\u043a\u043d\u0443\u0432\u0441\u044f \u0437\u0456\n\n\n##### \u0441\u043a\u043b\u0430\u0434\u043d\u043e\u0449\u0430\u043c\u0438 \u0432 \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0446\u0435\u0441\u0456.\n\n\n\n\n\n3\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/6a5702a7-e73d-34d3-b0ac-7c9a40e35123/01_2021_r2p_report_on_resolution_767_ukr.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        2
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "### I. \u041e\u0421\u041d\u041e\u0412\u041d\u0406 \u0420\u0415\u0417\u0423\u041b\u042c\u0422\u0410\u0422\u0418 \u0414\u041e\u0421\u041b\u0406\u0414\u0416\u0415\u041d\u041d\u042f\n#### A. \u0425\u0410\u0420\u0410\u041a\u0422\u0415\u0420\u0418\u0421\u0422\u0418\u041a\u0410 \u0416\u0418\u0422\u041b\u041e\u0412\u041e\u0407 \u0421\u0418\u0422\u0423\u0410\u0426\u0406\u0407\n\n\n\n\u0417\u0430\u0433\u0430\u043b\u043e\u043c \u0431\u0443\u043b\u043e \u0437\u0456\u0431\u0440\u0430\u043d\u043e \u0456\u043d\u0444\u043e\u0440\u043c\u0430\u0446\u0456\u044e \u0449\u043e\u0434\u043e 826 \u0436\u0438\u0442\u043b\u043e\u0432\u0438\u0445 \u043e\u0431\u2019\u0454\u043a\u0442\u0456\u0432, \u0432\u043a\u043b\u044e\u0447\u0430\u044e\u0447\u0438 325\n\n\n\n\u0437\u0440\u0443\u0439\u043d\u043e\u0432\u0430\u043d\u0438\u0445 \u0442\u0430 501 \u043f\u043e\u0448\u043a\u043e\u0434\u0436\u0435\u043d\u0438\u0439. \u0414\u0435\u044f\u043a\u0456 \u0437 \u0440\u0435\u0441\u043f\u043e\u043d\u0434\u0435\u043d\u0442\u0456\u0432 \u043c\u0430\u043b\u0438 \u0443 \u0432\u043b\u0430\u0441\u043d\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0456 \u0431\u0456\u043b\u044c\u0448\u0435 \u043e\u0434\u043d\u043e\u0433\u043e\n\n\u0436\u0438\u0442\u043b\u043e\u0432\u043e\u0433\u043e \u043e\u0431\u2019\u0454\u043a\u0442\u0430, \u0442\u043e\u0436 \u043c\u0438 \u0432\u0438\u0440\u0456\u0448\u0438\u043b\u0438 \u0441\u0444\u043e\u043a\u0443\u0441\u0443\u0432\u0430\u0442\u0438\u0441\u044f \u0441\u0430\u043c\u0435 \u043d\u0430 \u043a\u0435\u0439\u0441\u0430\u0445, \u0431\u043e \u043e\u0434\u0438\u043d \u0439 \u0442\u043e\u0439 \u0441\u0430\u043c\u0438\u0439\n\n\n\n\u0456\u043d\u0444\u043e\u0440\u043c\u0430\u043d\u0442 \u043c\u0456\u0433 \u043c\u0430\u0442\u0438 \u0440\u0456\u0437\u043d\u0438\u0439 \u0434\u043e\u0441\u0432\u0456\u0434 \u0449\u043e\u0434\u043e \u043a\u043e\u0436\u043d\u043e\u0433\u043e \u0437 \u043d\u0438\u0445.\n\n\n##### \u0421\u0442\u0430\u043d \u0436\u0438\u0442\u043b\u0430 \u0437\u0430 \u043e\u0446\u0456\u043d\u043a\u043e\u044e \u043f\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0440\u0430\u0436\u0434\u0430\u043b\u0438\u0445 \u0442\u0430 \u0437\u0430 \u0430\u043a\u0442\u043e\u043c\n\n\u041d\u0435\u043c\u0430\u0454 \u0430\u043a\u0442\u0443 \u041f\u043e\u0448\u043a\u043e\u0434\u0436\u0435\u043d\u0435      \u0417\u0440\u0443\u0439\u043d\u043e\u0432\u0430\u043d\u0435\n\n\n\n\u041f\u043e\u0448\u043a\u043e\u0434\u0436\u0435\u043d\u0435\n\n\n\u0417\u0440\u0443\u0439\u043d\u043e\u0432\u0430\u043d\u0435\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n0 100 200 300 400\n\n\u0421\u0442\u0443\u043f\u0456\u043d\u044c \u043f\u043e\u0448\u043a\u043e\u0434\u0436\u0435\u043d\u044c \u0432\u0456\u0434\u043f\u043e\u0432\u0456\u0434\u043d\u043e \u0434\u043e \u0430\u043a\u0442\u0443\n\n\n\n\u0421\u0442\u0443\u043f\u0456\u043d\u044c \u043f\u043e\u0448\u043a\u043e\u0434\u0436\u0435\u043d\u043d\u044f \u0437\u0430 \u0432\u0438\u0441\u043d\u043e\u0432\u043a\u0430\u043c\u0438 \u043a\u043e\u043c\u0456\u0441\u0456\u0439 \u043d\u0435 \u0437\u0430\u0432\u0436\u0434\u0438 \u0432\u0456\u0434\u043f\u043e\u0432\u0456\u0434\u0430\u0432 \u043f\u0435\u0440\u0441\u043e\u043d\u0430\u043b\u044c\u043d\u0438\u043c\n\n\n\n\u0443\u044f\u0432\u043b\u0435\u043d\u043d\u044f\u043c \u043d\u0430\u0448\u0438\u0445 \u0456\u043d\u0444\u043e\u0440\u043c\u0430\u043d\u0442\u0456\u0432. \u041d\u0430\u043f\u0440\u0438\u043a\u043b\u0430\u0434, \u0443 12% (38) \u0432\u0438\u043f\u0430\u0434\u043a\u0456\u0432 \u0432\u043e\u043d\u0438 \u0432\u0432\u0430\u0436\u0430\u043b\u0438 \u0441\u0432\u043e\u0454 \u0436\u0438\u0442\u043b\u043e\n\n\u0437\u0440\u0443\u0439\u043d\u043e\u0432\u0430\u043d\u0438\u043c, \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0442\u0435 \u043e\u0442\u0440\u0438\u043c\u0430\u043b\u0438 \u0434\u043e\u0432\u0456\u0434\u043a\u0443 \u043f\u0440\u043e \u043f\u043e\u0448\u043a\u043e\u0434\u0436\u0435\u043d\u0435, \u0430 \u0432 5% (23) \u0432\u0438\u043f\u0430\u0434\u043a\u0430\u0445 \u2013 \u043d\u0430\u0432\u043f\u0430\u043a\u0438.\n\n\u0429\u043e\u0434\u043e 16% (134) \u0443\u0441\u0456\u0445 \u043a\u0435\u0439\u0441\u0456\u0432 \u0436\u043e\u0434\u043d\u0438\u0445 \u043e\u0444\u0456\u0446\u0456\u0430\u043b\u044c\u043d\u0438\u0445 \u0432\u0438\u0441\u043d\u043e\u0432\u043a\u0456\u0432 \u043d\u0435 \u0431\u0443\u043b\u043e \u043e\u0442\u0440\u0438\u043c\u0430\u043d\u043e \u0432\u0437\u0430\u0433\u0430\u043b\u0456. \u0422\u0440\u0435\u0431\u0430\n\n\u0432\u0456\u0434\u043c\u0456\u0442\u0438\u0442\u0438, \u0449\u043e \u043f\u043e\u0434\u0435\u043a\u0443\u0434\u0438 \u043c\u0456\u0436 \u0443\u0447\u0430\u0441\u043d\u0438\u043a\u0430\u043c\u0438 \u0442\u0430 \u0447\u043b\u0435\u043d\u0430\u043c\u0438 \u043a\u043e\u043c\u0456\u0441\u0456\u0439 \u0432\u0438\u043d\u0438\u043a\u0430\u043b\u0438 \u043d\u0435\u043f\u043e\u0440\u043e\u0437\u0443\u043c\u0456\u043d\u043d\u044f\n\n\u0449\u043e\u0434\u043e \u043e\u0446\u0456\u043d\u043a\u0438 \u043f\u043e\u0448\u043a\u043e\u0434\u0436\u0435\u043d\u043d\u044f, \u043e\u0441\u043a\u0456\u043b\u044c\u043a\u0438 \u043d\u0435 \u0431\u0443\u043b\u043e \u0447\u0456\u0442\u043a\u0438\u0445 \u0456\u043d\u0441\u0442\u0440\u0443\u043a\u0446\u0456\u0439, \u044f\u043a\u0438\u043c\u0438 \u0431 \u043c\u043e\u0436\u043d\u0430 \u0431\u0443\u043b\u043e\n\n\n\n\u043a\u0435\u0440\u0443\u0432\u0430\u0442\u0438\u0441\u044f.\n\n\n\n4\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/6a5702a7-e73d-34d3-b0ac-7c9a40e35123/01_2021_r2p_report_on_resolution_767_ukr.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        3
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "\u0412\u0430\u0440\u0442\u043e \u0432\u0456\u0434\u043c\u0456\u0442\u0438\u0442\u0438, \u0449\u043e \u0434\u0435\u044f\u043a\u0438\u043c \u043a\u0432\u0430\u0440\u0442\u0438\u0440\u0430\u043c \u0442\u0430 \u0431\u0443\u0434\u0438\u043d\u043a\u0430\u043c \u0431\u0443\u043b\u043e \u0437\u0430\u0432\u0434\u0430\u043d\u043e \u0448\u043a\u043e\u0434\u0438\n\n\n\n\u043d\u0435\u043e\u0434\u043d\u043e\u0440\u0430\u0437\u043e\u0432\u043e: 145 \u2013 \u0434\u0432\u043e\u043a\u0440\u0430\u0442\u043d\u043e, 46 - \u0442\u0440\u0438\u043a\u0440\u0430\u0442\u043d\u043e. 29 \u043e\u0431\u2019\u0454\u043a\u0442\u0456\u0432 \u0431\u0443\u043b\u0438 \u043f\u043e\u0448\u043a\u043e\u0434\u0436\u0435\u043d\u0456 \u0431\u0456\u043b\u044c\u0448\u0435 \u043d\u0456\u0436\n\n\n\n\u0442\u0440\u0438 \u0440\u0430\u0437\u0438, \u0437 \u044f\u043a\u0438\u0445 \u043e\u0434\u0438\u043d \u2013  10.\n\n\n##### \u0416\u0438\u0442\u043b\u043e\u0432\u0438\u0439 \u043e\u0431'\u0454\u043a\u0442 \u0431\u0443\u043b\u043e \u043f\u043e\u0448\u043a\u043e\u0434\u0436\u0435\u043d\u043e...\n\n\n\n700\n\n600\n\n500\n\n400\n\n300\n\n200\n\n100\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n0\n\n\n\n1 \u0440\u0430\u0437 2 \u0440\u0430\u0437\u0438 3 \u0440\u0430\u0437\u0438 4 \u0440\u0430\u0437\u0438 - 4 \u0440\u0430\u0437\u0456\u0432\n\n\n\n\u0411\u0430\u0433\u0430\u0442\u043e \u0436\u0438\u0442\u043b\u043e\u0432\u0438\u0445 \u043e\u0431\u2019\u0454\u043a\u0442\u0456\u0432 \u043f\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0440\u0430\u0436\u0434\u0430\u043b\u0438 \u043f\u0456\u0434 \u0447\u0430\u0441 \u0435\u0441\u043a\u0430\u043b\u0430\u0446\u0456\u0457 \u043a\u043e\u043d\u0444\u043b\u0456\u043a\u0442\u0443 \u0432 2014 \u2013 2015\n\n\n\n\u0440\u043e\u043a\u0430\u0445. \u0417 \u0447\u0430\u0441\u043e\u043c \u0441\u0442\u0430\u043d \u0436\u0438\u0442\u043b\u0430 \u043c\u0456\u0433 \u0437\u043c\u0456\u043d\u0438\u0442\u0438\u0441\u044f: \u043f\u043e\u0433\u0456\u0440\u0448\u0438\u0442\u0438\u0441\u044f \u0447\u0438 \u043f\u043e\u043a\u0440\u0430\u0449\u0438\u0442\u0438\u0441\u044f \u0443\u043d\u0430\u0441\u043b\u0456\u0434\u043e\u043a\n\n\u0440\u0435\u043a\u043e\u043d\u0441\u0442\u0440\u0443\u043a\u0446\u0456\u0457. \u0422\u043e\u043c\u0443 \u0441\u0438\u0442\u0443\u0430\u0446\u0456\u044f \u043d\u0430 \u043c\u043e\u043c\u0435\u043d\u0442 \u0456\u043d\u0442\u0435\u0440\u0432\u2019\u044e \u0432 2020 \u0431\u0443\u043b\u0430 \u0443\u0442\u043e\u0447\u043d\u0435\u043d\u0430 \u043e\u043a\u0440\u0435\u043c\u043e. \u042f\u043a\n\n\n\n\u0432\u0438\u044f\u0432\u0438\u043b\u043e\u0441\u044f, \u0431\u043b\u0438\u0437\u044c\u043a\u043e \u043f\u043e\u043b\u043e\u0432\u0438\u043d\u0438 \u0431\u0443\u043b\u043e \u0447\u0430\u0441\u0442\u043a\u043e\u0432\u043e \u0430\u0431\u043e \u043f\u043e\u0432\u043d\u0456\u0441\u0442\u044e \u0432\u0456\u0434\u043d\u043e\u0432\u043b\u0435\u043d\u043e.\n\n\n##### \u0421\u0442\u0430\u043d \u0436\u0438\u0442\u043b\u0430 \u043d\u0430 \u043c\u043e\u043c\u0435\u043d\u0442 \u043e\u043f\u0438\u0442\u0443\u0432\u0430\u043d\u043d\u044f\n\n\n\n\u0417\u0440\u0443\u0439\u043d\u043e\u0432\u0430\u043d\u043e\n\n\n\u041f\u043e\u0448\u043a\u043e\u0434\u0436\u0435\u043d\u043e\n\n\n\u0427\u0430\u0441\u0442\u043a\u043e\u0432\u043e \u0432\u0456\u0434\u0431\u0443\u0434\u043e\u0432\u0430\u043d\u043e\n\n\n\u041f\u043e\u0432\u043d\u0456\u0441\u0442\u044e \u0432\u0456\u0434\u0431\u0443\u0434\u043e\u0432\u0430\u043d\u043e\n\n\n\u041d\u0435\u0432\u0456\u0434\u043e\u043c\u043e\n\n\n\n0 100 200 300 400\n\n\n5\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/6a5702a7-e73d-34d3-b0ac-7c9a40e35123/01_2021_r2p_report_on_resolution_767_ukr.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        4
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "\u0422\u0456 \u0437 \u043f\u043e\u0442\u0435\u043d\u0446\u0456\u0439\u043d\u0438\u0445 \u0443\u0447\u0430\u0441\u043d\u0438\u043a\u0456\u0432, \u044f\u043a\u0438\u043c \u0434\u043e\u0432\u0435\u043b\u043e\u0441\u044f \u043f\u0435\u0440\u0435\u0457\u0445\u0430\u0442\u0438 \u0437\u0430 \u043c\u0435\u0436\u0456 \u043d\u0430\u0441\u0435\u043b\u0435\u043d\u043e\u0433\u043e \u043f\u0443\u043d\u043a\u0442\u0443 \u043f\u0456\u0441\u043b\u044f\n\n\u043f\u043e\u0448\u043a\u043e\u0434\u0436\u0435\u043d\u043d\u044f \u0457\u0445\u043d\u044c\u043e\u0433\u043e \u0436\u0438\u0442\u043b\u0430, \u043d\u0435 \u043f\u0456\u0434\u043f\u0430\u0434\u0430\u044e\u0442\u044c \u043f\u0456\u0434 \u0434\u0456\u044e \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0433\u0440\u0430\u043c\u0438. \u0422\u0430\u043a\u0438\u043c \u0447\u0438\u043d\u043e\u043c, \u0449\u043e\u0434\u043e 22%\n\n\u0437\u0456 155 \u0432\u0441\u0435 \u0449\u0435 \u043d\u0435\u0432\u0456\u0434\u0431\u0443\u0434\u043e\u0432\u0430\u043d\u0438\u0445 \u043e\u0431'\u0454\u043a\u0442\u0456\u0432 \u043d\u0435\u0440\u0443\u0445\u043e\u043c\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0456, \u0432\u043b\u0430\u0441\u043d\u0438\u043a\u0438 \u043d\u0435 \u043c\u043e\u0436\u0443\u0442\u044c \u043f\u0440\u0435\u0442\u0435\u043d\u0434\u0443\u0432\u0430\u0442\u0438 \u043d\u0430\n\n\u0433\u0440\u043e\u0448\u043e\u0432\u0443 \u0434\u043e\u043f\u043e\u043c\u043e\u0433\u0443.\n##### \u0417\u0430\u043b\u0438\u0448\u0430\u043b\u0438\u0441\u044f \u0432 \u043c\u0435\u0436\u0430\u0445 \u041d\u041f, \u044f\u043a\u0449\u043e \u0436\u0438\u0442\u043b\u043e \u043f\u043e\u0448\u043a\u043e\u0434\u0436\u0435\u043d\u043e\n\n\n\n\n\n\u0422\u0430\u043a\n\n\u0412\u043b\u0430\u0441\u043d\u0438\u043a\u0438 \u0432\u0438\u0457\u0445\u0430\u043b\u0438\n\n\n\n\n\n6\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/6a5702a7-e73d-34d3-b0ac-7c9a40e35123/01_2021_r2p_report_on_resolution_767_ukr.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        5
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "#### B. \u041d\u0410\u041c\u0406\u0420\u0418 \u0423\u0427\u0410\u0421\u041d\u0418\u041a\u0406\u0412 \u0422\u0410 \u0419\u041c\u041e\u0412\u0406\u0420\u041d\u0406 \u041e\u0411\u041c\u0415\u0416\u0415\u041d\u041d\u042f \u0423\u0427\u0410\u0421\u0422\u0406\n\n\n\n\u0417\u0430\u0433\u0430\u043b\u043e\u043c, \u0443 546 \u0432\u0438\u043f\u0430\u0434\u043a\u0430\u0445 (66.1%) \u0440\u0435\u0441\u043f\u043e\u043d\u0434\u0435\u043d\u0442\u0438 \u0440\u043e\u0437\u0433\u043b\u044f\u0434\u0430\u043b\u0438 \u043c\u043e\u0436\u043b\u0438\u0432\u0456\u0441\u0442\u044c \u0443\u0447\u0430\u0441\u0442\u0456 \u0432\n\n\n\n\u0456\u0441\u043d\u0443\u044e\u0447\u043e\u043c\u0443 \u043c\u0435\u0445\u0430\u043d\u0456\u0437\u043c\u0456 \u043a\u043e\u043c\u043f\u0435\u043d\u0441\u0430\u0446\u0456\u0457, \u0432 243 (29.4%) \u2013 \u043d\u0456, \u0442\u043e\u0434\u0456 \u044f\u043a \u0432 37 (4.5%) \u2013 \u043d\u0435 \u0432\u0456\u0434\u043f\u043e\u0432\u0456\u0434\u0430\u043b\u0438\n\n\u0432\u0438\u043c\u043e\u0433\u0430\u043c \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0433\u0440\u0430\u043c\u0438 \u0430\u0431\u043e \u043d\u0435 \u0431\u0443\u043b\u0438 \u0433\u043e\u0442\u043e\u0432\u0456 \u043f\u0440\u0438\u0439\u043d\u044f\u0442\u0438 \u0457\u0445. \u0412\u0440\u0430\u0445\u043e\u0432\u0443\u044e\u0447\u0438, \u0449\u043e \u0434\u043b\u044f \u0437\u0440\u0443\u0439\u043d\u043e\u0432\u0430\u043d\u043e\u0433\u043e\n\n\u0442\u0430 \u043f\u043e\u0448\u043a\u043e\u0434\u0436\u0435\u043d\u043e\u0433\u043e \u0436\u0438\u0442\u043b\u0430 \u0431\u0443\u043b\u043e \u043f\u0435\u0440\u0435\u0434\u0431\u0430\u0447\u0435\u043d\u043e \u0440\u0456\u0437\u043d\u0456 \u0443\u043c\u043e\u0432\u0438, \u0431\u0456\u043b\u044c\u0448 \u0440\u0435\u043b\u0435\u0432\u0430\u043d\u0442\u043d\u043e\u044e \u0437\u0434\u0430\u0454\u0442\u044c\u0441\u044f\n\n\u0434\u0435\u0442\u0430\u043b\u044c\u043d\u0456\u0448\u0430 \u0441\u0442\u0430\u0442\u0438\u0441\u0442\u0438\u043a\u0430 \u0437\u0430 \u043a\u0430\u0442\u0435\u0433\u043e\u0440\u0456\u044f\u043c\u0438. \u0417 325 \u0437\u0440\u0443\u0439\u043d\u043e\u0432\u0430\u043d\u0438\u0445 \u043a\u0432\u0430\u0440\u0442\u0438\u0440 \u0447\u0438 \u0431\u0443\u0434\u0438\u043d\u043a\u0456\u0432 \u0432\u043b\u0430\u0441\u043d\u0438\u043a\u0438\n\n\u0440\u043e\u0437\u0433\u043b\u044f\u0434\u0430\u043b\u0438 \u043c\u043e\u0436\u043b\u0438\u0432\u0456\u0441\u0442\u044c \u0432\u0437\u044f\u0442\u0438 \u0443\u0447\u0430\u0441\u0442\u044c \u0432 \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0433\u0440\u0430\u043c\u0456 \u0449\u043e\u0434\u043e 76.3% \u0437 \u043d\u0438\u0445 \u0439 \u043d\u0435 \u043f\u043b\u0430\u043d\u0443\u0432\u0430\u043b\u0438 \u2013\n\n\u0449\u043e\u0434\u043e 18.5%. \u0423 \u0432\u0438\u043f\u0430\u0434\u043a\u0443 \u043f\u043e\u0448\u043a\u043e\u0434\u0436\u0435\u043d\u0438\u0445 \u043e\u0431\u2019\u0454\u043a\u0442\u0456\u0432 \u0432\u0456\u0434\u043f\u043e\u0432\u0456\u0434\u043d\u0456 \u043f\u043e\u043a\u0430\u0437\u043d\u0438\u043a\u0438 \u0441\u043a\u043b\u0430\u043b\u0438 59.5% \u0442\u0430\n\n\n\n36.5%.\n\n\n\n\u0413\u043e\u043b\u043e\u0432\u043d\u043e\u044e \u043f\u0440\u0438\u0447\u0438\u043d\u043e\u044e \u043d\u0435\u0445\u0442\u0443\u0432\u0430\u043d\u043d\u044f \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0433\u0440\u0430\u043c\u043e\u044e \u0431\u0443\u043b\u043e \u043d\u0435\u0431\u0430\u0436\u0430\u043d\u043d\u044f \u0432\u0456\u0434\u043c\u043e\u0432\u043b\u044f\u0442\u0438\u0441\u044f \u0432\u0456\u0434\n\n\n\n\u043c\u0430\u0439\u043d\u043e\u0432\u0438\u0445 \u043f\u0440\u0430\u0432 \u043d\u0430 \u0436\u0438\u0442\u043b\u043e (161 \u0447\u0438 66%). \u041f\u0440\u0438\u043c\u0456\u0442\u043d\u043e, \u0449\u043e \u0447\u0430\u0441\u0442\u043a\u0430 \u0432\u0456\u0434\u043f\u043e\u0432\u0456\u0434\u0435\u0439 \u0431\u0443\u043b\u0430 \u0441\u0445\u043e\u0436\u043e\u044e \u0443\n\n\u0432\u0438\u043f\u0430\u0434\u043a\u0443 \u0439 \u043f\u043e\u0448\u043a\u043e\u0434\u0436\u0435\u043d\u0438\u0445, \u0456 \u0437\u0440\u0443\u0439\u043d\u043e\u0432\u0430\u043d\u0438\u0445 \u043e\u0431\u2019\u0454\u043a\u0442\u0456\u0432: 64.5% \u0442\u0430 71.7%. \u0412\u0440\u0430\u0445\u043e\u0432\u0443\u044e\u0447\u0438, \u0449\u043e \u0442\u0430\u043a\u0430\n\n\u0432\u0438\u043c\u043e\u0433\u0430 \u0431\u0443\u043b\u0430 \u0432\u0456\u0434\u0441\u0443\u0442\u043d\u044c\u043e\u044e \u0449\u043e\u0434\u043e \u043f\u0435\u0440\u0448\u043e\u0457 \u043a\u0430\u0442\u0435\u0433\u043e\u0440\u0456\u0457, \u0446\u0435 \u0432\u043a\u0430\u0437\u0443\u0454 \u043d\u0430 \u043d\u0438\u0437\u044c\u043a\u0443 \u043f\u043e\u0456\u043d\u0444\u043e\u0440\u043c\u043e\u0432\u0430\u043d\u0456\u0441\u0442\u044c\n\n\u0449\u043e\u0434\u043e \u0443\u043c\u043e\u0432 \u0443\u0447\u0430\u0441\u0442\u0456. \u041d\u0435\u0432\u043f\u0435\u0432\u043d\u0435\u043d\u0456\u0441\u0442\u044c \u0443 \u043f\u043e\u0437\u0438\u0442\u0438\u0432\u043d\u043e\u043c\u0443 \u0440\u0435\u0437\u0443\u043b\u044c\u0442\u0430\u0442\u0456 \u0442\u0440\u0438\u0432\u0430\u043b\u043e\u0457 \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0446\u0435\u0434\u0443\u0440\u0438 \u0442\u0430\n\n\u0432\u0456\u0434\u0441\u0443\u0442\u043d\u0456\u0441\u0442\u044c \u0432\u0456\u0440\u0438 \u0432 \u043e\u0431\u2019\u0454\u043a\u0442\u0438\u0432\u043d\u0456\u0441\u0442\u044c \u043e\u0446\u0456\u043d\u043a\u0438 \u0441\u0442\u0430\u043d\u0443 \u0431\u0443\u043b\u0438 \u0431\u0456\u043b\u044c\u0448 \u043f\u043e\u0448\u0438\u0440\u0435\u043d\u0438\u043c\u0438 \u0432\u0456\u0434\u043d\u043e\u0441\u043d\u043e\n\n\u043f\u043e\u0448\u043a\u043e\u0434\u0436\u0435\u043d\u043e\u0457 \u0432\u043b\u0430\u0441\u043d\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0456 (15% \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0442\u0438 5%). \u0412\u0456\u0434\u0441\u0443\u0442\u043d\u0456\u0441\u0442\u044c \u043f\u0440\u0430\u0432\u043e\u0432\u0441\u0442\u0430\u043d\u043e\u0432\u043b\u044e\u044e\u0447\u0438\u0445 \u0434\u043e\u043a\u0443\u043c\u0435\u043d\u0442\u0456\u0432 \u0442\u0430\n\n\u043d\u0435\u0437\u0430\u0434\u043e\u0432\u0456\u043b\u044c\u043d\u0430 \u0441\u0443\u043c\u0430 \u043a\u043e\u043c\u043f\u0435\u043d\u0441\u0430\u0446\u0456\u0457 \u0437\u0433\u0430\u0434\u0443\u0432\u0430\u043b\u0438\u0441\u044f \u0447\u0430\u0441\u0442\u0456\u0448\u0435 \u0449\u043e\u0434\u043e \u0437\u0440\u0443\u0439\u043d\u043e\u0432\u0430\u043d\u0438\u0445 \u043e\u0431\u2019\u0454\u043a\u0442\u0456\u0432 (18% \u0442\u0430\n\n\u043c\u0430\u0439\u0436\u0435 17% \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0442\u0438 \u0431\u043b\u0438\u0437\u044c\u043a\u043e 9% \u0442\u0430 6%). \u041d\u0430 \u043d\u0435\u0437\u0440\u043e\u0437\u0443\u043c\u0456\u043b\u0443 \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0446\u0435\u0434\u0443\u0440\u0443 \u0441\u043a\u0430\u0440\u0436\u0438\u043b\u0438\u0441\u044f \u043c\u0430\u0439\u0436\u0435\n\n\u0432\u0438\u043a\u043b\u044e\u0447\u043d\u043e \u0432\u043b\u0430\u0441\u043d\u0438\u043a\u0438 \u043f\u043e\u0448\u043a\u043e\u0434\u0436\u0435\u043d\u0438\u0445 \u043e\u0431\u2019\u0454\u043a\u0442\u0456\u0432 (16 \u0447\u0438 8.7% \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0442\u0438 1 \u0447\u0438 1.7%). \u041c\u0430\u0439\u0436\u0435 11% \u0437 \u043d\u0438\u0445\n\n\n\n\u0432\u0436\u0435 \u0431\u0443\u043b\u043e \u0432\u0456\u0434\u043d\u043e\u0432\u043b\u0435\u043d\u043e.\n\n\n\n7\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/6a5702a7-e73d-34d3-b0ac-7c9a40e35123/01_2021_r2p_report_on_resolution_767_ukr.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        6
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "\u041d\u0435\u0431\u0430\u0436\u0430\u043d\u043d\u044f \u0432\u0456\u0434\u043c\u043e\u0432\u0438\u0442\u0438\u0441\u044f \u0432\u0456\u0434 \u043f\u0440\u0430\u0432\u0430 \u0432\u043b\u0430\u0441\u043d\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0456\n\n\n\u0417\u0430\u043d\u0430\u0434\u0442\u043e \u0431\u0430\u0433\u0430\u0442\u043e \u0447\u0430\u0441\u0443 \u0442\u0430 \u0437\u0443\u0441\u0438\u043b\u044c \u0431\u0435\u0437 \u0443\u043f\u0435\u0432\u043d\u0435\u043d\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0456 \u0443\n\u043f\u043e\u0437\u0438\u0442\u0438\u0432\u043d\u043e\u043c\u0443 \u0440\u0435\u0437\u0443\u043b\u044c\u0442\u0430\u0442\u0456\n\n\n\u0412\u0456\u0434\u0441\u0443\u0442\u043d\u0456\u0441\u0442\u044c \u0432\u0456\u0440\u0438 \u0432 \u043e\u0431'\u0454\u043a\u0442\u0438\u0432\u043d\u0435 \u0432\u0438\u0437\u043d\u0430\u0447\u0435\u043d\u043d\u044f \u0441\u0442\u0430\u043d\u0443\n\u043c\u0430\u0439\u043d\u0430\n\n\n\u0412\u0456\u0434\u0441\u0443\u0442\u043d\u0456\u0441\u0442\u044c \u043f\u0440\u0430\u0432\u043e\u0432\u0441\u0442\u0430\u043d\u043e\u0432\u043b\u044e\u044e\u0447\u0438\u0445 \u0434\u043e\u043a\u0443\u043c\u0435\u043d\u0442\u0456\u0432\n\n\n\u041d\u0435\u0434\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0430\u0442\u043d\u044f \u0441\u0443\u043c\u0430 \u0433\u0440\u043e\u0448\u043e\u0432\u0457 \u043a\u043e\u043c\u043f\u0435\u043d\u0441\u0430\u0446\u0456\u0457\n\n\n\u0421\u043a\u043b\u0430\u0434\u043d\u0430 \u0456 \u043d\u0435\u0437\u0440\u043e\u0437\u0443\u043c\u0456\u043b\u0430 \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0446\u0435\u0434\u0443\u0440\u0430,\n\u0437\u0430\u0431\u044e\u0440\u043e\u043a\u0440\u0430\u0442\u0438\u0437\u043e\u0432\u0430\u043d\u0456\u0441\u0442\u044c\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\u0406\u043d\u0448\u0456 \u043f\u0440\u0438\u0447\u0438\u043d\u0438\n\n\n0 20 40 60 80 100 120\n\n\u0417\u0440\u0443\u0439\u043d\u043e\u0432\u0430\u043d\u043e \u041f\u043e\u0448\u043a\u043e\u0434\u0436\u0435\u043d\u043e\n\n\n\n\u041e\u0442\u0436\u0435 \u0440\u0435\u0441\u043f\u043e\u043d\u0434\u0435\u043d\u0442\u0438 \u043f\u0435\u0440\u0435\u0432\u0430\u0436\u043d\u043e \u0431\u0443\u043b\u0438 \u0441\u0442\u0443\u0440\u0431\u043e\u0432\u0430\u043d\u0456 \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0431\u043b\u0435\u043c\u0430\u043c\u0438 \u0434\u043e\u043a\u0443\u043c\u0435\u043d\u0442\u0430\u043b\u044c\u043d\u043e\u0433\u043e\n\n\n\n\u0445\u0430\u0440\u0430\u043a\u0442\u0435\u0440\u0443, \u044f\u043a-\u0442\u043e \u043f\u0440\u0430\u0432\u043e\u043c \u0432\u043b\u0430\u0441\u043d\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0456. \u042f\u043a \u043c\u0438 \u043f\u043e\u0431\u0430\u0447\u0438\u043c\u043e \u0443 \u043f\u043e\u0434\u0430\u043b\u044c\u0448\u043e\u043c\u0443, \u0446\u0456 \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0431\u043b\u0435\u043c\u0438\n\n\n\n\u043d\u0435\u043e\u0434\u043d\u043e\u0440\u0430\u0437\u043e\u0432\u043e \u0432\u0438\u043d\u0438\u043a\u0430\u0442\u0438\u043c\u0443\u0442\u044c \u0437\u043d\u043e\u0432 \u0443 \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0446\u0435\u0441\u0456 \u0440\u0435\u0430\u043b\u0456\u0437\u0430\u0446\u0456\u0457 \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0433\u0440\u0430\u043c\u0438.\n\n\n\n8\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/6a5702a7-e73d-34d3-b0ac-7c9a40e35123/01_2021_r2p_report_on_resolution_767_ukr.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        7
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "### II. \u0412\u0418\u042f\u0412\u041b\u0415\u041d\u0406 \u0412\u0418\u041a\u041b\u0418\u041a\u0418 \u0422\u0410 \u041f\u0415\u0420\u0415\u041f\u041e\u041d\u0418\n\n\n\n\u042f\u043a \u0432\u0436\u0435 \u0437\u0430\u0437\u043d\u0430\u0447\u0430\u043b\u043e\u0441\u044f, \u043b\u044e\u0434\u0438, \u044f\u043a\u0456 \u0441\u043a\u043b\u0430\u0434\u0430\u044e\u0442\u044c \u0446\u0456\u043b\u044c\u043e\u0432\u0443 \u0430\u0443\u0434\u0438\u0442\u043e\u0440\u0456\u044e \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0433\u0440\u0430\u043c\u0438, \u0447\u0430\u0441\u0442\u043e\n\n\n\n\u0432\u0438\u0440\u0456\u0448\u0443\u0432\u0430\u043b\u0438 \u043d\u0435 \u0431\u0440\u0430\u0442\u0438 \u0443\u0447\u0430\u0441\u0442\u044c \u0447\u0435\u0440\u0435\u0437 \u0431\u0440\u0430\u043a \u043d\u0435\u043e\u0431\u0445\u0456\u0434\u043d\u0438\u0445 \u0434\u043e\u043a\u0443\u043c\u0435\u043d\u0442\u0456\u0432, \u044f\u043a\u0456 \u0431 \u043f\u0456\u0434\u0442\u0432\u0435\u0440\u0434\u0436\u0443\u0432\u0430\u043b\u0438 \u0457\u0445\u043d\u0454\n\n\u043f\u0440\u0430\u0432\u043e \u0432\u043b\u0430\u0441\u043d\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0456. \u0422\u0430\u043a, \u0434\u0435\u043a\u043e\u0433\u043e \u0446\u0435 \u0437\u0443\u043f\u0438\u043d\u0438\u043b\u043e \u0432\u0456\u0434 \u043f\u043e\u0434\u0430\u0447\u0456 (\u041f\u0438\u0449\u0435\u0432\u0438\u043a \u0442\u0430 \u0417\u0430\u0439\u0446\u0435\u0432\u0435), \u0440\u043e\u0437\u0433\u043b\u044f\u0434 \u0437\u0430\u044f\u0432\n\n\u0456\u043d\u0448\u0438\u0445 \u0431\u0443\u0432 \u043f\u0440\u0438\u0437\u0443\u043f\u0438\u043d\u0435\u043d\u0438\u0439 (\u041f\u0456\u0432\u0434\u0435\u043d\u043d\u0435). \u041a\u0440\u0456\u043c \u0442\u043e\u0433\u043e, \u0434\u0435\u044f\u043a\u0456 \u0437 \u043e\u0445\u043e\u0447\u0438\u0445 \u0441\u0442\u0438\u043a\u0430\u043b\u0438\u0441\u044f \u0437\u0456 \u0441\u043a\u043b\u0430\u0434\u043d\u043e\u0449\u0430\u043c\u0438\n\n\u0443 \u043f\u0456\u0434\u0433\u043e\u0442\u043e\u0432\u0446\u0456 \u043d\u043e\u0442\u0430\u0440\u0456\u0430\u043b\u044c\u043d\u0438\u0445 \u043a\u043e\u043f\u0456\u0439, \u043e\u0441\u043a\u0456\u043b\u044c\u043a\u0438 \u0441\u0456\u043b\u044c\u0440\u0430\u0434\u0430 \u043d\u0435 \u043c\u0430\u043b\u0430 \u043f\u0440\u0430\u0432\u0430 \u0437\u0430\u0432\u0456\u0440\u044f\u0442\u0438 \u0442\u0430\u043a\u0456 \u0434\u043e\u043a\u0443\u043c\u0435\u043d\u0442\u0438,\n\n\u0430 \u043d\u043e\u0442\u0430\u0440\u0456\u0443\u0441 \u0443 \u0441\u0435\u043b\u0438\u0449\u0456 \u0431\u0443\u0432 \u0432\u0456\u0434\u0441\u0443\u0442\u043d\u0456\u0439 (\u0422\u0440\u0430\u0432\u043d\u0435\u0432\u0435). \u0421\u0438\u0442\u0443\u0430\u0446\u0456\u044f \u0431\u0443\u043b\u0430 \u0449\u0435 \u0441\u043a\u043b\u0430\u0434\u043d\u0456\u0448\u043e\u044e \u0443 \u0432\u0456\u0434\u0434\u0430\u043b\u0435\u043d\u0438\u0445\n\n\u043d\u0430\u0441\u0435\u043b\u0435\u043d\u0438\u0445 \u043f\u0443\u043d\u043a\u0442\u0430\u0445 \u0437 \u043e\u0431\u043c\u0435\u0436\u0435\u043d\u0438\u043c \u0442\u0440\u0430\u043d\u0441\u043f\u043e\u0440\u0442\u043d\u0438\u043c \u0441\u043f\u043e\u043b\u0443\u0447\u0435\u043d\u043d\u044f\u043c, \u0434\u0435 \u043c\u0435\u0448\u043a\u0430\u043d\u0446\u0456 \u043c\u0430\u044e\u0442\u044c\n\n\n\n\u043f\u0440\u043e\u0431\u043b\u0435\u043c\u0438 \u0437 \u043e\u0442\u0440\u0438\u043c\u0430\u043d\u043d\u044f\u043c \u0430\u0434\u043c\u0456\u043d\u0456\u0441\u0442\u0440\u0430\u0442\u0438\u0432\u043d\u0438\u0445 \u043f\u043e\u0441\u043b\u0443\u0433.\n\n\n\n\u0406\u043d\u0448\u0430 \u043f\u043e\u0434\u0456\u0431\u043d\u0430 \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0431\u043b\u0435\u043c\u0430 \u043f\u043e\u043b\u044f\u0433\u0430\u043b\u0430 \u0443 \u0432\u0456\u0434\u0441\u0443\u0442\u043d\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0456 \u0434\u043e\u043a\u0443\u043c\u0435\u043d\u0442\u0456\u0432, \u044f\u043a\u0456 \u0431 \u043f\u0456\u0434\u0442\u0432\u0435\u0440\u0434\u0436\u0443\u0432\u0430\u043b\u0438\n\n\n\n\u043f\u043e\u0432\u2019\u044f\u0437\u0430\u043d\u0456\u0441\u0442\u044c \u0440\u0443\u0439\u043d\u0443\u0432\u0430\u043d\u043d\u044f \u0447\u0438 \u043f\u043e\u0448\u043a\u043e\u0434\u0436\u0435\u043d\u043d\u044f \u0437 \u043a\u043e\u043d\u0444\u043b\u0456\u043a\u0442\u043e\u043c. \u0423 \u0429\u0430\u0441\u0442\u0456 (\u041b\u0443\u0433\u0430\u043d\u0441\u044c\u043a\u0430 \u043e\u0431\u043b\u0430\u0441\u0442\u044c) \u0434\u0435\u044f\u043a\u0456\n\n\u0437\u0430\u044f\u0432\u043d\u0438\u043a\u0438 \u043d\u0435 \u043c\u0430\u043b\u0438 \u0436\u043e\u0434\u043d\u043e\u0433\u043e \u043f\u0440\u0438\u043c\u0456\u0440\u043d\u0438\u043a\u0430 \u0430\u043a\u0442\u0456\u0432, \u044f\u043a\u0438\u043c\u0438 \u0431\u0443\u043b\u043e \u0437\u0430\u0444\u0456\u043a\u0441\u043e\u0432\u0430\u043d\u043e \u0440\u0443\u0439\u043d\u0443\u0432\u0430\u043d\u043d\u044f, \u0442\u0430\u043a\u043e\u0436\n\n\u0436\u043e\u0434\u043d\u043e\u0457 \u043a\u043e\u043f\u0456\u0457 \u043d\u0435 \u0437\u0431\u0435\u0440\u0456\u0433\u043b\u043e\u0441\u044f \u0439 \u0443 \u043c\u0456\u0441\u0446\u0435\u0432\u0456\u0439 \u0412\u0426\u0410. \u041e\u043a\u0440\u0456\u043c \u0446\u044c\u043e\u0433\u043e, \u0434\u0435\u044f\u043a\u0456 \u0437 \u0430\u043a\u0442\u0456\u0432, \u0444\u043e\u0440\u043c\u0430\u043b\u0456\u0437\u043e\u0432\u0430\u043d\u0438\u0445\n\n\n\n\u043c\u0456\u0436 2014 \u0442\u0430 2015, \u0431\u0443\u043b\u0438 \u0441\u043a\u043b\u0430\u0434\u0435\u043d\u0456 \u0416\u041a\u0423, \u0449\u043e \u043d\u0435 \u0432\u0456\u0434\u043f\u043e\u0432\u0456\u0434\u0430\u0454 \u0447\u0438\u043d\u043d\u0438\u043c \u0432\u0438\u043c\u043e\u0433\u0430\u043c.\n\n\n\n\u0414\u0435\u0445\u0442\u043e \u043d\u0435 \u0445\u043e\u0442\u0456\u0432 \u0431\u0440\u0430\u0442\u0438 \u0443\u0447\u0430\u0441\u0442\u044c \u0443 \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0433\u0440\u0430\u043c\u0456 \u0447\u0435\u0440\u0435\u0437 \u043d\u0435\u0431\u0430\u0436\u0430\u043d\u043d\u044f \u0432\u0456\u0434\u043c\u043e\u0432\u043b\u044f\u0442\u0438\u0441\u044f \u0432\u0456\u0434 \u043f\u0440\u0430\u0432\u0430\n\n\n\n\u0432\u043b\u0430\u0441\u043d\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0456 \u043d\u0430 \u0436\u0438\u0442\u043b\u043e (\u041f\u0435\u0440\u0432\u043e\u043c\u0430\u0439\u0441\u044c\u043a\u0435, \u0417\u0430\u0439\u0446\u0435\u0432\u0435, \u0421\u0443\u0445\u0430 \u0411\u0430\u043b\u043a\u0430). \u0423 \u0429\u0430\u0441\u0442\u0456, \u0412\u0440\u0443\u0431\u0456\u0432\u0446\u0456 (\u041b\u0443\u0433\u0430\u043d\u0441\u044c\u043a\u0430\n\n\u043e\u0431\u043b\u0430\u0441\u0442\u044c ), \u041c\u0438\u0440\u043e\u043d\u0456\u0432\u0441\u044c\u043a\u043e\u043c\u0443 (\u0414\u043e\u043d\u0435\u0446\u044c\u043a\u0430 \u043e\u0431\u043b\u0430\u0441\u0442\u044c) \u0431\u0443\u043b\u043e \u0437\u0430\u0444\u0456\u043a\u0441\u043e\u0432\u0430\u043d\u043e \u0432\u0438\u043f\u0430\u0434\u043a\u0438, \u043a\u043e\u043b\u0438 \u043b\u044e\u0434\u0438\n\n\u043d\u0430\u043c\u0430\u0433\u0430\u043b\u0438\u0441\u044f \u0437\u0431\u0435\u0440\u0435\u0433\u0442\u0438 \u043c\u0430\u0439\u043d\u043e\u0432\u0456 \u043f\u0440\u0430\u0432\u0430 \u0443\u0441\u0443\u043f\u0435\u0440\u0435\u0447 \u0443\u043c\u043e\u0432\u0430\u043c \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0433\u0440\u0430\u043c\u0438 \u0432\u0436\u0435 \u043f\u0456\u0441\u043b\u044f \u043e\u0446\u0456\u043d\u043a\u0438\n\n\u0436\u0438\u0442\u043b\u043e\u0432\u0438\u0445 \u043e\u0431\u2019\u0454\u043a\u0442\u0456\u0432 \u043a\u043e\u043c\u0456\u0441\u0456\u0454\u044e. \u0423 \u041c\u0438\u0440\u043e\u043d\u0456\u0432\u0441\u044c\u043a\u043e\u043c\u0443 \u0432\u043e\u043d\u0438 \u043d\u0430\u0432\u0456\u0442\u044c \u043d\u0430\u043f\u0438\u0441\u0430\u043b\u0438 \u0432\u0456\u0434\u043f\u043e\u0432\u0456\u0434\u043d\u0435\n\n\u043a\u043e\u043b\u0435\u043a\u0442\u0438\u0432\u043d\u0435 \u0437\u0432\u0435\u0440\u043d\u0435\u043d\u043d\u044f \u0434\u043e \u043c\u0456\u0441\u0446\u0435\u0432\u043e\u0457 \u0440\u0430\u0434\u0438, \u0437\u0433\u043e\u0434\u043e\u043c \u043f\u0435\u0440\u0435\u043d\u0430\u043f\u0440\u0430\u0432\u043b\u0435\u043d\u0435 \u0434\u043e \u0411\u0430\u0445\u043c\u0443\u0442\u0441\u044c\u043a\u043e\u0457\n\n\u0440\u0430\u0439\u0430\u0434\u043c\u0456\u043d\u0456\u0441\u0442\u0440\u0430\u0446\u0456\u0457. \u0417\u0430 \u0441\u043f\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0435\u0440\u0435\u0436\u0435\u043d\u043d\u044f\u043c \u043b\u044e\u0434\u0438 \u0441\u0442\u0443\u0440\u0431\u043e\u0432\u0430\u043d\u0456 \u043d\u0430\u0441\u0430\u043c\u043f\u0435\u0440\u0435\u0434 \u0442\u0438\u043c, \u0449\u043e \u0432\u043e\u043d\u0438 \u043c\u0430\u044e\u0442\u044c\n\n\u0432\u0456\u0434\u043c\u043e\u0432\u0438\u0442\u0438\u0441\u044f \u0432\u0456\u0434 \u0441\u0432\u043e\u0433\u043e \u043f\u0440\u0430\u0432\u0430 \u0432\u043b\u0430\u0441\u043d\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0456, \u043d\u0435 \u043c\u0430\u044e\u0447\u0438 \u0432\u043f\u0435\u0432\u043d\u0435\u043d\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0456 \u0430\u043d\u0456 \u0432 \u0442\u043e\u043c\u0443, \u0449\u043e \u0432\u043e\u043d\u0438\n\n\n\n\u0437\u043c\u043e\u0436\u0443\u0442\u044c \u043e\u0442\u0440\u0438\u043c\u0430\u0442\u0438 \u043a\u043e\u043c\u043f\u0435\u043d\u0441\u0430\u0446\u0456\u044e \u0432\u0437\u0430\u0433\u0430\u043b\u0456, \u0430\u043d\u0456 \u0449\u043e \u0457\u0457 \u0440\u043e\u0437\u043c\u0456\u0440 \u0431\u0443\u0434\u0435 \u0434\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0430\u0442\u043d\u0456\u043c.\n\n\n\n\u0423 \u0417\u0430\u0439\u0446\u0435\u0432\u043e\u043c\u0443 \u0431\u0443\u043b\u0430 \u0441\u0438\u0442\u0443\u0430\u0446\u0456\u044f, \u043a\u043e\u043b\u0438 \u0434\u0432\u0456 \u043e\u0441\u043e\u0431\u0438 \u0432\u0456\u0434\u043c\u043e\u0432\u0438\u043b\u0438\u0441\u044f \u0432\u0456\u0434 \u0443\u0447\u0430\u0441\u0442\u0456 \u0443 \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0433\u0440\u0430\u043c\u0456 \u0441\u0430\u043c\u0435\n\n\n\n\u0447\u0435\u0440\u0435\u0437 \u043d\u0435\u0434\u043e\u0432\u0456\u0440\u0443 \u0434\u043e \u0434\u0435\u0440\u0436\u0430\u0432\u0438. \u0412\u043e\u043d\u0438 \u043f\u043e\u0431\u043e\u044e\u0432\u0430\u043b\u0438\u0441\u044f, \u0449\u043e \u0432 \u0440\u0430\u0437\u0456 \u0432\u0456\u0434\u043c\u043e\u0432\u0438 \u0432\u0456\u0434 \u043f\u0440\u0430\u0432\u0430 \u0432\u043b\u0430\u0441\u043d\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0456\n\n\n\n\u043d\u0430 \u0436\u0438\u0442\u043b\u043e \u043d\u0435 \u0431\u0443\u0434\u0435 \u0430\u043d\u0456 \u043d\u0430\u0434\u0430\u043d\u043e \u043a\u043e\u043c\u043f\u0435\u043d\u0441\u0430\u0446\u0456\u0457, \u0430\u043d\u0456 \u0432\u0456\u0434\u043d\u043e\u0432\u043b\u0435\u043d\u043e \u0457\u0445 \u043f\u0440\u0430\u0432\u043e \u0432\u043b\u0430\u0441\u043d\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0456.\n\n\n\n\u0414\u0435\u044f\u043a\u0456 \u0437 \u0443\u0447\u0430\u0441\u043d\u0438\u043a\u0456\u0432, \u0447\u0438\u044f \u0432\u043b\u0430\u0441\u043d\u0456\u0441\u0442\u044c \u0440\u043e\u0437\u0442\u0430\u0448\u043e\u0432\u0430\u043d\u0430 \u0443 \u043d\u0430\u0441\u0435\u043b\u0435\u043d\u0438\u0445 \u043f\u0443\u043d\u043a\u0442\u0430\u0445 \u0431\u0456\u043b\u044f \u043b\u0456\u043d\u0456\u0457\n\n\u0437\u0456\u0442\u043a\u043d\u0435\u043d\u043d\u044f, \u043d\u0435 \u043c\u043e\u0433\u043b\u0438 \u043e\u0442\u0440\u0438\u043c\u0430\u0442\u0438 \u0430\u043a\u0442\u0438 \u043e\u0431\u0441\u0442\u0435\u0436\u0435\u043d\u043d\u044f \u0447\u0435\u0440\u0435\u0437 \u043f\u0438\u0442\u0430\u043d\u043d\u044f \u0431\u0435\u0437\u043f\u0435\u043a\u0438. \u0417\u043e\u043a\u0440\u0435\u043c\u0430,\n\n\u043d\u0435\u0437\u0432\u0430\u0436\u0430\u044e\u0447\u0438 \u043d\u0430 \u0456\u0441\u043d\u0443\u044e\u0447\u0438 \u0437\u0430\u043f\u0438\u0442\u0438, \u043a\u043e\u043c\u0456\u0441\u0456\u0457 \u043d\u0435 \u0437\u0434\u0456\u0439\u0441\u043d\u044e\u0432\u0430\u043b\u0438 \u0432\u0438\u0457\u0437\u0434\u0438 \u0434\u043e \u043d\u0435\u0431\u0435\u0437\u043f\u0435\u0447\u043d\u0438\u0445 \u0447\u0430\u0441\u0442\u0438\u043d\n\n\u0442\u0430\u043a\u0438\u0445 \u0441\u0435\u043b\u0438\u0449 \u044f\u043a \u041f\u0456\u0432\u0434\u0435\u043d\u043d\u0435, \u041c\u0430\u0440\u2019\u0457\u043d\u043a\u0430, \u041a\u0440\u0430\u0441\u043d\u043e\u0433\u043e\u0440\u0456\u0432\u043a\u0430, \u0410\u0432\u0434\u0456\u0457\u0432\u043a\u0430, \u041e\u043f\u0438\u0442\u043d\u0435, \u0412\u043e\u0434\u044f\u043d\u0435, \u041f\u0456\u0441\u043a\u0438,\n\n\u0411\u0435\u0440\u0435\u0437\u043e\u0432\u0435 (\u0414\u043e\u043d\u0435\u0446\u044c\u043a\u0430 \u043e\u0431\u043b\u0430\u0441\u0442\u044c) \u0442\u0430 \u0417\u043e\u043b\u043e\u0442\u0435-4 (\u041b\u0443\u0433\u0430\u043d\u0441\u044c\u043a\u0430 \u043e\u0431\u043b\u0430\u0441\u0442\u044c). \u0429\u043e\u0434\u043e \u0434\u0435\u044f\u043a\u0438\u0445, \u0442\u0430\u043a\u0438\u0445 \u044f\u043a\n\n\n9\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/6a5702a7-e73d-34d3-b0ac-7c9a40e35123/01_2021_r2p_report_on_resolution_767_ukr.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        8
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "\u041c\u0430\u0440\u2019\u0457\u043d\u043a\u0430, \u043a\u043e\u043c\u0430\u043d\u0434\u0443\u0432\u0430\u043d\u043d\u044f \u041e\u041e\u0421 \u0432\u0436\u0435 \u0432\u0438\u0440\u0456\u0448\u0438\u043b\u043e, \u0449\u043e \u043c\u043e\u0436\u043b\u0438\u0432\u0456\u0441\u0442\u044c \u0432\u0456\u0434\u0432\u0456\u0434\u0443\u0432\u0430\u0442\u0438 \u0442\u0435\u0440\u0438\u0442\u043e\u0440\u0456\u0457 \u0437\n\n\u00ab\u0447\u0435\u0440\u0432\u043e\u043d\u043e\u0457 \u0437\u043e\u043d\u0438\u00bb \u0432\u0456\u0434\u0441\u0443\u0442\u043d\u044f, \u0449\u043e\u0434\u043e \u0456\u043d\u0448\u0438\u0445, \u044f\u043a \u0411\u0435\u0440\u0435\u0437\u043e\u0432\u0435, \u0440\u0456\u0448\u0435\u043d\u043d\u044f \u0432\u0441\u0435 \u0449\u0435 \u043e\u0447\u0456\u043a\u0443\u0454\u0442\u044c\u0441\u044f.\n\n\n10\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/6a5702a7-e73d-34d3-b0ac-7c9a40e35123/01_2021_r2p_report_on_resolution_767_ukr.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        9
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "### \u0412\u0418\u0421\u041d\u041e\u0412\u041a\u0418\n\n\n\n\u0411\u0443\u043b\u043e \u0437\u2019\u044f\u0441\u043e\u0432\u0430\u043d\u043e, \u0449\u043e \u0431\u0430\u0433\u0430\u0442\u043e \u043f\u043e\u0442\u0435\u043d\u0446\u0456\u0439\u043d\u0438\u0445 \u0443\u0447\u0430\u0441\u043d\u0438\u043a\u0456\u0432 \u043d\u0435 \u043f\u043e\u0456\u043d\u0444\u043e\u0440\u043c\u043e\u0432\u0430\u043d\u0456 \u0432\u0437\u0430\u0433\u0430\u043b\u0456 \u0430\u0431\u043e \u0432\n\n\n\n\u0434\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0430\u0442\u043d\u0456\u0439 \u043c\u0456\u0440\u0456 \u0449\u043e\u0434\u043e \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0433\u0440\u0430\u043c\u0438 \u0433\u0440\u043e\u0448\u043e\u0432\u043e\u0457 \u043a\u043e\u043c\u043f\u0435\u043d\u0441\u0430\u0446\u0456\u0457 (\u0434\u043e\u043f\u043e\u043c\u043e\u0433\u0438). \u0406\u043d\u0444\u043e\u0440\u043c\u0430\u0446\u0456\u0439\u043d\u0438\u0445\n\n\u043a\u0430\u043c\u043f\u0430\u043d\u0456\u0439, \u0441\u043f\u0440\u044f\u043c\u043e\u0432\u0430\u043d\u0438\u0445 \u043d\u0430 \u0446\u0456\u043b\u044c\u043e\u0432\u0443 \u0430\u0443\u0434\u0438\u0442\u043e\u0440\u0456\u044e, \u043d\u0435 \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0432\u043e\u0434\u0438\u043b\u043e\u0441\u044f. \u0412 \u0440\u0435\u0437\u0443\u043b\u044c\u0442\u0430\u0442\u0456 \u043b\u044e\u0434\u0438\n\n\u043f\u043e\u0437\u0431\u0430\u0432\u043b\u0435\u043d\u0456 \u0446\u0456\u0454\u0457 \u043c\u043e\u0436\u043b\u0438\u0432\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0456 \u0432\u0438\u0440\u0456\u0448\u0435\u043d\u043d\u044f \u0436\u0438\u0442\u043b\u043e\u0432\u0438\u0445 \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0431\u043b\u0435\u043c. \u0412\u043b\u0430\u0434\u0430 \u043c\u0430\u0454 \u0437\u0430\u043f\u043e\u0432\u043d\u0438\u0442\u0438\n\n\u043f\u0440\u043e\u0433\u0430\u043b\u0438\u043d\u0443 \u0443 \u043a\u043e\u043c\u0443\u043d\u0456\u043a\u0430\u0446\u0456\u0457 \u0437 \u0412\u041f\u041e \u0442\u0430 \u043b\u044e\u0434\u044c\u043c\u0438, \u044f\u043a\u0438\u0445 \u0442\u043e\u0440\u043a\u043d\u0443\u0432\u0441\u044f \u043a\u043e\u043d\u0444\u043b\u0456\u043a\u0442, \u043e\u0441\u043a\u0456\u043b\u044c\u043a\u0438 \u043f\u043e\u043a\u0438 \u0449\u043e\n\n\u0442\u0456\u043b\u044c\u043a\u0438 \u043e\u0440\u0433\u0430\u043d\u0456\u0437\u0430\u0446\u0456\u0457 \u0433\u0440\u043e\u043c\u0430\u0434\u044f\u043d\u0441\u044c\u043a\u043e\u0433\u043e \u0441\u0443\u0441\u043f\u0456\u043b\u044c\u0441\u0442\u0432\u0430 \u043b\u0438\u0448\u0430\u044e\u0442\u044c\u0441\u044f \u043a\u043b\u044e\u0447\u043e\u0432\u0438\u043c\u0438 \u0456\u043d\u0444\u043e\u0440\u043c\u0430\u0442\u043e\u0440\u0430\u043c\u0438\n\n\n\n\u0449\u043e\u0434\u043e \u0431\u0443\u0434\u044c-\u044f\u043a\u0438\u0445 \u0433\u0443\u043c\u0430\u043d\u0456\u0442\u0430\u0440\u043d\u0438\u0445 \u0456\u043d\u0456\u0446\u0456\u0430\u0442\u0438\u0432.\n\n\n\n\u041f\u0440\u043e\u0446\u0435\u0434\u0443\u0440\u0430 \u0441\u043f\u0440\u0438\u0439\u043c\u0430\u0454\u0442\u044c\u0441\u044f \u044f\u043a \u043d\u0435\u0437\u0440\u043e\u0437\u0443\u043c\u0456\u043b\u0430 \u0442\u0430 \u0437\u0430\u043f\u043b\u0443\u0442\u0430\u043d\u0430. \u0411\u0435\u043d\u0435\u0444\u0456\u0446\u0456\u0430\u0440\u0438 \u043d\u0435 \u0440\u043e\u0437\u0443\u043c\u0456\u044e\u0442\u044c\n\n\n\n\u043b\u043e\u0433\u0456\u043a\u0438 \u0442\u0430 \u0432\u0438\u0440\u0456\u0448\u0443\u044e\u0442\u044c \u043f\u043e\u043a\u0438\u043d\u0443\u0442\u0443 \u0434\u0443\u043c\u043a\u0443 \u043f\u0440\u043e \u0443\u0447\u0430\u0441\u0442\u044c \u0432 \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0433\u0440\u0430\u043c\u0456. \u0422\u043e\u0436 \u0456\u0441\u043d\u0443\u0454 \u043f\u043e\u0442\u0440\u0435\u0431\u0430 \u0457\u0457\n\n\u043f\u043e\u043a\u0440\u0430\u0449\u0438\u0442\u0438, \u043e\u0441\u043e\u0431\u043b\u0438\u0432\u043e \u0449\u043e\u0434\u043e \u0440\u0435\u0433\u0443\u043b\u044f\u0446\u0456\u0457 \u0432\u0456\u0434\u043c\u043e\u0432\u0438 \u0432\u0456\u0434 \u043f\u0440\u0430\u0432\u0430 \u0432\u043b\u0430\u0441\u043d\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0456. \u0417\u0430 \u043d\u0430\u044f\u0432\u043d\u043e\u0457 \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0446\u0435\u0434\u0443\u0440\u0438\n\n\n\n\u043b\u044e\u0434\u0438 \u0447\u0430\u0441\u0442\u043e \u043f\u0435\u0440\u0435\u0431\u0443\u0432\u0430\u044e\u0442\u044c \u043d\u0435\u0432\u043f\u0435\u0432\u043d\u0435\u043d\u0438\u043c\u0438 \u0432 \u0443\u0441\u043f\u0456\u0448\u043d\u043e\u043c\u0443 \u0440\u0435\u0437\u0443\u043b\u044c\u0442\u0430\u0442\u0456.\n\n\n\n\u0413\u043e\u043b\u043e\u0432\u043d\u043e\u044e \u043f\u0435\u0440\u0435\u043f\u043e\u043d\u043e\u044e \u0434\u043b\u044f \u0443\u0447\u0430\u0441\u0442\u0456 \u0454 \u0432\u0456\u0434\u0441\u0443\u0442\u043d\u0456\u0441\u0442\u044c \u043f\u0440\u0430\u0432\u043e\u0432\u0441\u0442\u0430\u043d\u043e\u0432\u043b\u044e\u044e\u0447\u0438\u0445 \u0434\u043e\u043a\u0443\u043c\u0435\u043d\u0442\u0456\u0432 \u043d\u0430\n\n\n\n\u0436\u0438\u0442\u043b\u043e. \u0426\u0456\u043a\u0430\u0432\u043e, \u0449\u043e \u043b\u044e\u0434\u0438 \u0447\u0430\u0441\u0442\u043e \u043a\u0443\u043f\u043b\u044f\u043b\u0438 \u043a\u0432\u0430\u0440\u0442\u0438\u0440\u0438 \u0447\u0438 \u0434\u043e\u043c\u0430 \u0432 \u043e\u0431\u0445\u0456\u0434 \u0444\u043e\u0440\u043c\u0430\u043b\u044c\u043d\u0438\u0445 \u0432\u0438\u043c\u043e\u0433\n\n\u0437\u0430\u043a\u043e\u043d\u043e\u0434\u0430\u0432\u0441\u0442\u0432\u0430 \u0442\u0430 \u043d\u0435 \u043c\u0430\u043b\u0438 \u0437\u043c\u043e\u0433\u0438 \u0444\u043e\u0440\u043c\u0430\u043b\u0456\u0437\u0443\u0432\u0430\u0442\u0438 \u043f\u0440\u0430\u0432\u043e \u0432\u043b\u0430\u0441\u043d\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0456 \u0447\u0435\u0440\u0435\u0437 \u0431\u0440\u0430\u043a \u0447\u0430\u0441\u0443 \u0430\u0431\u043e\n\n\u0444\u0456\u043d\u0430\u043d\u0441\u043e\u0432\u0456 \u0443\u0441\u043a\u043b\u0430\u0434\u043d\u0435\u043d\u043d\u044f. \u041e\u0442\u0436\u0435 \u0432\u043e\u043d\u0438 \u043d\u0430\u043b\u0435\u0436\u0430\u0442\u044c \u0434\u043e \u043d\u0430\u0439\u0431\u0456\u043b\u044c\u0448\u043e\u0457 \u0433\u0440\u0443\u043f\u0438 \u0440\u0438\u0437\u0438\u043a\u0443, \u043e\u0441\u043a\u0456\u043b\u044c\u043a\u0438 \u043d\u0435\n\n\u043c\u043e\u0436\u0443\u0442\u044c \u043f\u0440\u0435\u0442\u0435\u043d\u0434\u0443\u0432\u0430\u0442\u0438 \u043d\u0430 \u0436\u043e\u0434\u043d\u0443 \u043a\u043e\u043c\u043f\u0435\u043d\u0441\u0430\u0446\u0456\u044e \u0443 \u0432\u0438\u043f\u0430\u0434\u043a\u0443 \u043f\u043e\u0448\u043a\u043e\u0434\u0436\u0435\u043d\u043d\u044f \u0457\u0445\u043d\u044c\u043e\u0433\u043e \u0436\u0438\u0442\u043b\u0430\n\n\u0447\u0435\u0440\u0435\u0437 \u0432\u0456\u0439\u0441\u044c\u043a\u043e\u0432\u0456 \u0434\u0456\u0457 \u0430\u0431\u043e \u043f\u0440\u0438\u0440\u043e\u0434\u043d\u0456 \u043a\u0430\u0442\u0430\u043a\u043b\u0456\u0437\u043c\u0438. \u0411\u0443\u0434\u0435 \u0434\u043e\u0440\u0435\u0447\u043d\u043e \u043d\u0430\u0434\u0430\u0442\u0438 \u0437\u0430\u0432\u0447\u0430\u0441\u043d\u0443 \u043f\u0440\u0430\u0432\u043e\u0432\u0443\n\n\n\n\u0434\u043e\u043f\u043e\u043c\u043e\u0433\u0443 \u0442\u0430\u043a\u0438\u043c \u043b\u044e\u0434\u044f\u043c \u043f\u0435\u0440\u0435\u0434 \u0440\u0435\u0430\u043b\u0456\u0437\u0430\u0446\u0456\u0454\u044e \u0431\u0443\u0434\u044c-\u044f\u043a\u0438\u0445 \u0441\u0445\u043e\u0436\u0438\u0445 \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0433\u0440\u0430\u043c \u0443 \u043c\u0430\u0439\u0431\u0443\u0442\u043d\u044c\u043e\u043c\u0443.\n\n\n\n11\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/6a5702a7-e73d-34d3-b0ac-7c9a40e35123/01_2021_r2p_report_on_resolution_767_ukr.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        10
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_30/raw/doc_30_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,78 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "# Thematic Report: A review of the civilian impact of recent hostilities in Ma\u2019rib\n\nApril 2021\n\n\nIn early February, having seen months of stalemated hostilities, the offensive in Ma\u2019rib resumed, with frontlines shifting eastbound\nalong the two main asphalted roads connecting Ma\u2019rib city with Sana\u2019a. The frontlines have progressed towards Ma\u2019rib city, with\nan increasingly significant impact on the civilian population. Amid the intensive fighting, civilian casualties and displacements\nhave been mounting, with several reports of artillery fire landing on and near IDP sites, while rockets and missiles continue to hit\nneighbourhoods in Ma'rib city and heavy airstrikes persist across the governorate. This report summarises recent Ma'rib conflict\ndevelopments and uses CIMP data to examine the direct impact this renewed fighting has had on civilians in Ma'rib.\n\n\nSince the start of 2021, CIMP has recorded 79 incidents of armed violence that have directly impacted civilians in Ma\u2019rib\ngovernorate, resulting in 74 civilian casualties, including 18 fatalities. Of these casualties, 40 were reported in March; the highest\ncivilian casualty count CIMP has recorded in one month in Ma'rib since the project commenced, at the start of 2018. Moreover,\nthe first quarter of 2021 has seen over half the civilian casualty count recorded throughout 2020.\n\n\nAs the lines of control closed in around the Ma\u2019rib dam reservoir, on the more southerly of the two roads connecting Ma'rib city\nwith Sana'a, hostilities became concentrated around Al-Talat Al-Hamra and Jabal Balaq, to the north of the dam. Limited\nhostilities were also reported on the south western shores of the reservoir. On the more northerly route, leading from Jawf\njunction to Ma\u2019rib city, hostilities have been focused around Al-Kasarah and Mashjah areas, and the overlooking high ground,\nparticularly in the vicinity of Jabal Haylan, just south of the route. To the north of the route, fighting has also reportedly reached\nWadi Nakhla and the surrounding heights. The frontlines continue to see daily hostilities, with intermittent advances and\ncounterattacks, as key territory continues to switch between the two sides, accompanied by a heavy rate of airstrikes. Intermittent\nhostilities have also persisted in the south of the governorate, although at a lesser intensity than on the frontlines to the west of\nMa\u2019rib city. Nonetheless, the hostilities remain concentrated around the main supply route leading northbound to Ma\u2019rib city,\nincluding around Al-Abdiyah and Rahabah districts, and on the borders of Jabal Murad district, likely resulting in ongoing\nimplications for access along the route.\n\n**1**\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/dc436de0-3c3f-39d5-841b-deb4e53f991a/20210420_CIMP%20Thematic%2006_Marib.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "Numerous IDP sites are situated around Ma\u2019rib city, and the city itself has a high IDP presence. Reports have suggested that\nviolence has spread into and around IDP sites, with the risk to IDPs compounded by unconfirmed reports of authorities restricting\nthe movement of IDPs away from these areas, as well as reports of military forces establishing positions within IDP sites. CIMP\nhas recorded nine incidents of IDP sites being directly impacted by armed violence in Ma\u2019rib so far this year, affecting at least\nseven different sites, some more than once. All IDP sites impacted are in Sirwah, and all have been affected since 15 February,\ncorresponding with the escalation of the fighting in the governorate. A map of the sites impacted is shown on Page 1. Six IDP\nsites have been impacted by shelling, and two by airstrikes, cumulatively displacing as many as 1,980 households. This is a\nsignificant increase from 2020, when one IDP site had been impacted by shellfire in the governorate, in As Safra area in\nMedghal, in November, injuring a child.\n\n\nWhen IDP sites in Sirwah were first impacted by frontline hostilities in late February and early March, no civilian casualties were\nreported, but there were reports of livestock being killed in some incidents, likely disrupting a critical source of sustenance and\nlivelihood for local families. It is highly likely that many of the families inhabiting the IDP sites had previously fled in the face of\nfast-approaching hostilities, which may explain the absence of civilian casualties. IDP sites in the Dhanah area (As Sawabin and\nWadi Hayyal) were impacted several times by both shelling and airstrikes, and Al-Mil camp has also now been impacted at least\ntwice, resulting in damage to tents, shelter materials and water tanks. Suwaydah camp has also been impacted by shellfire, on 3\nApril, although no casualties were reported. However, in March, civilian casualties on IDP sites increased: 13 civilian casualties\nhave now been reported this year on account of shelling in Sirwah, 12 of whom were women, including one fatality, a pregnant\nwoman. Women and children constitute a large proportion of the IDP population in Yemen (around 80 percent), and are\nparticularly vulnerable when IDP camps are impacted, more-so because a large proportion of IDP households are headed by\nwomen and children.\n\n\n\n\n\n**In** **cident details:**\n\n\n**15 February:** An IDP camp was impacted by missiles in\nAz Zur.\n**16 February:** An IDP camp in Wadi Dhanah was\nimpacted by artillery shells.\n**2 March:** As Sawabin and Wadi Al-Hayyal IDP camps\nwere impacted by airstrikes in Wadi Dhanah, resulting in the\ndeath of livestock.\n**9 March:** As Sawabin IDP camp was impacted by artillery\nshells in Wadi Dhanah, killing livestock.\n**22 March:** Five women were injured when three IDP\nsites, Al-Mil, Al-Khair and Tawasul, were impacted by\nartillery fire, reportedly also damaging 27 tents and 18 water\ntanks.\n**28 March:** Six women and one man were injured when\nshelling impacted Al-Mil camp in Sirwah. One of the women,\nwho was reportedly pregnant, later died of her injuries.\n**30 March:** One woman was injured when missiles\nimpacted As Suwaydah IDP camp.\n**3 April:** As Sawabin IDP camp was impacted by artillery\nshells.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nForward Look\n\n\nDue to the high IDP population and multitude of IDP camps around Ma\u2019rib as hostilities continue, the risk to IDP sites is also\nlikely to persist, particularly those situated along main roads in the vicinity of the city. Should fighting progress towards Ma\u2019rib city,\nfears have been expressed about the increasing risk to civilians, as frontlines will move closer to more densely populated areas,\nespecially those to the west and northwest of the city.\n\n\nAs a result, many IDPs have relocated to other sites within Sirwah, contributing to the severe overcrowding in those IDP sites. If\nthese sites are forced to absorb more people, further pressure will be put on already scarce resources and facilities, increasing\nthe likelihood of the population adopting negative coping mechanisms. Additional concerns include the risk of fires and the\nspread of communicable diseases, especially during the rainy season. Similarly, IDP influx into Ma'rib city is likely to put\nincreasing strain on host communities with social and economic repercussions. Many IDPs in Yemen have already been\ndisplaced once if not on several occasions and remain particularly vulnerable, given they have limited resources and support\nmechanisms.\n\n\n**2**\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "CIMP",
+          "confidence": 0.6096227169036865,
+          "start": 68,
+          "end": 69
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Sirwah",
+          "confidence": 0.5080807209014893,
+          "start": 109,
+          "end": 110
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2020",
+          "confidence": 0.5233149528503418,
+          "start": 173,
+          "end": 174
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "IDPs",
+          "confidence": 0.9010067582130432,
+          "start": 38,
+          "end": 39
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/dc436de0-3c3f-39d5-841b-deb4e53f991a/20210420_CIMP%20Thematic%2006_Marib.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "Of the 74 civilian casualties reported in Ma\u2019rib governorate so far this year, 43 have been reported in Ma\u2019rib city, where the\nmajority of incidents impacting civilians have been on account of shellfire, including missiles and rocketry. Shelling incidents\nimpacting Ma'rib city this year have resulted in 39 civilian casualties. Moreover, as many as 32 houses in the city have been\nimpacted, putting women and children at particular risk, while also threatening further displacement. Throughout 2020, 22 missile\nand rocketry incidents were reported to have impacted civilians in Ma\u2019rib city, resulting in 40 civilian casualties. As of 14 April\n2021, this number has almost been matched, at 39.\n\n\n**Incident details**\n**7 February:** Three civilians were killed and three others were injured when missiles impacted the city.\n**1 March:** One civilian was killed and nine were injured when houses were impacted by shelling in Ar Rawdhah neighbourhood.\n**16 March:** A market in the city was impacted by shellfire, killing three civilians injuring another eight.\n**30 March:** One civilian was killed and five others were injured, including a 13-year-old child, when missiles impacted the city.\n**3 April:** One child was killed and another five children were injured when missiles impacted Ar Rawdah neighbourhood.\n\n\nShelling incidents impacting civilians in Ma'rib city Ma'rib city map\n\n**28**\n\n\n**2020** **2021**\n\n\nForward look\n\n\nMissile and rocket attacks on Ma\u2019rib city show no signs of abating, especially as frontlines reportedly remain within firing range of\nthe city. Although attacks are reported to be targeting military and security sites across the city, many of these are in close\nproximity to residential areas, putting civilians, notably, children and women, and the urban IDP population at continued risk. If\nshellfire on the city persists, a range of civilian services and infrastructure may also be impacted, especially on the outskirts of\nthe city, including health and education facilities, as well as critical water and electricity infrastructure, along with local\nbusinesses, threatening civilians' livelihoods and their access to essential services.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n**3**\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/dc436de0-3c3f-39d5-841b-deb4e53f991a/20210420_CIMP%20Thematic%2006_Marib.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        2
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "IED incidents and remnant explosive ordnance\n\n\nOn 19 March, an IED incident was reported in southern Ma\u2019rib, where the historic Al-Ghazaziyah fort was demolished in\nRahabah district with improvised explosives. The incident was not reported to have resulted in any civilian casualties, but\nimpacted a significant historical and cultural monument, said to date back five hundred years. It appears this may be the first\ncultural heritage site destroyed on account of armed violence in Ma'rib since CIMP initiated its monitoring at the start of 2018.\n\n\nIED demolitions are often used as an intimidatory tactic by parties to the conflict, although houses are more commonly the target\nfor such incidents, often in punitive cases. The destruction of cultural and historic heritage sites is likely to hold a complex\npsychological impact for civilians. In 2020, there were two instances of houses being detonated by IEDs, and a school in Majzar\nwas also demolished in similar circumstances. There have yet to be any reports of houses being demolished with IEDs in Ma'rib\nthis year, but the risk is believed to remain, particularly should grievances arise between forces and the local population.\n\n\nAn IED explosion was reported in Ma'rib city on 31 January, when a number of civilians were allegedly killed and injured when\nan explosive device detonated at the Bin Abbud qat market in the city. Although no further details around the incident were\nreported, it is reflective of the heightened levels of insecurity that have permeated civilian residential and commercial areas\naround Ma\u2019rib city, posing an ever-present threat to the city\u2019s inhabitants.\n\n\nAlthough a lesser threat when compared to shelling and airstrikes, landmines also remain a threat to civilians in Ma\u2019rib; three\nlandmine incidents have reportedly impacted civilians in the governorate since the start of the year, resulting in five civilian\ncasualties. In January, one civilian was killed and another injured in Ma\u2019rib district; the following month, a 50-year-old woman\nwas killed in a landmine explosion in Majzar, and two children were injured when a landmine detonated in Rahabah.\n\n\nForward Look\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nThe recent uptick in hostilities has resulted in increasing civilian casualties, and a rise in displacement as houses and IDP sites\nare repeatedly impacted, with a notable peak in March. Clashes on the ground and airstrikes are highly likely to continue,\npresenting a sustained threat to civilian settlements, including IDP sites. Should hostilities encroach upon Ma'rib city, the risk of\nimpact to the civilian population will rise, including to critical civilian infrastructure and services.\n\n\nAccess around the governorate will also remain heavily dependent on conflict dynamics. Movement along the main supply\nroutes to the west, south and northwest of the city is highly likely to remain restricted amid the ongoing hostilities, which are\nlargely concentrated around these routes. These restrictions may impinge on civilians' ability to access essential goods and\nservices, while possibly also hindering the safe passage of those attempting to flee from conflict areas. Conflict-related access\nrestrictions may also impact the capacity of humanitarian partners to reach those in need. Access on the routes to the north of\nthe city is also likely limited, although these are minor routes, passing predominantly through desert areas.\n\n\nAccess restrictions in the governorate are likely to be further compounded by the presence of landmines and other remnant\nexplosive ordnance, in both active and dormant frontline areas. In what is reportedly a highly contaminated governorate, the\nrainy season brings the heightened possibility of landmine drift, and further hostilities risk displacing people into areas where the\nlandmine threat is unknown, increasing the risk of injury from remnant explosive ordnance, to which IDPs are most vulnerable.\n\n\nThe Civilian Impact Monitoring Project is a service under the Protection Cluster for the\n\ncollection, analysis and dissemination of open source data on the civilian impact from\n\narmed violence in Yemen, to inform and complement protection programming.\n\nFor more information, please visit\nwww.civilianimpactmonitoring.org\n\n\n\n**4**\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/dc436de0-3c3f-39d5-841b-deb4e53f991a/20210420_CIMP%20Thematic%2006_Marib.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        3
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_31/raw/doc_31_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,118 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "**T\u00dcRK\u0130YE CASH-BASED INTERVENTIONS TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP | 2024**\n\n\n**Mapping of Cash-Based Interventions (CBIs) in T\u00fcrkiye in 2022-2023**\n\n\n_Cash-Based Interventions Technical Working Group (CBI TWG) published this document to share a summary of the_\n_findings of Mapping of CBIs in T\u00fcrkiye covering relevant cash assistance programmes in 2022 and projects planned_\n_to continue into 2023. It should be noted that the mapping exercise was completed before 6 February 2023_\n_earthquakes in the southeast T\u00fcrkiye affecting the whole country. For this reason, the mapping exercise could not_\n_cover the repercussions of the earthquake relevant to CBIs in T\u00fcrkiye. Considering that the earthquakes have deeply_\n_affected the humanitarian aid context in T\u00fcrkiye in all its aspects including those related to cash assistance_\n_provision, the summary note below is not aimed to be an exhaustive analysis of the current context. Further findings_\n_of the mapping and detailed programme information can be found on the online interactive dashboard, available_\n_[in English.](https://app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrIjoiODA0ZDMzYzMtY2YzYy00M2JkLWI0NWMtMzQzZDlmZGI3ZTlhIiwidCI6ImU1YzM3OTgxLTY2NjQtNDEzNC04YTBjLTY1NDNkMmFmODBiZSIsImMiOjh9)_\n\n\n**Purpose:** The objective of this mapping exercise was to better discern the current coverage of CBI\nprogrammes in T\u00fcrkiye for the period of 2022-23 and to identify gaps and areas for further harmonisation\nand improvement by providing the opportunity to conduct sectoral and geographic analyses. Also, its aim is\nto serve as a reference tool based on its being a comprehensive glossary of CBI projects in Turkey and to\nfurther promote CBI mainstreaming in the country through this role.\n\n\n**Methodology:** Based on the evolving conditions and needs, the mapping survey is revised on a yearly basis.\nPartners\u2019 focal points are provided with the relevant trainings on completing the updated surveys who then\nenter their CBI project data on ActivityInfo platform based on which the mapping analyses are constructed.\n\n\n**Overview:** The exercise of _Mapping of CBIs in Turkey in 2022-23_ captured information on **61 programmes by**\n**21 organisations** . There were **12** **nationwide** **programmes** implemented by ASAM, IFRC, IOM, Ministry of\nFamily and Social Services, UNFPA, UNHCR and UNICEF.\n\n\nThrough the remaining programmes with more specific spatial coverage, **30** **provinces** were **directly**\n**targeted** . In general, **coverage in T\u00fcrkiye** mainly concentrates on SET, Ankara and the metropolitan cities of\nMarmara and Aegean provinces.\n\n\nThe number of **cash recipients** for the period of 2022-23 was around **3.5 million** in total. It should be noted\nthat these numbers do not capture unique beneficiary figures as it is possible for one beneficiary to receive\nmore than one cash support in this period.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAccording to the **age and gender breakdown** in the\nround of 2022-23, the proportion of women CBI\nbeneficiaries have increased compared to the\nprevious rounds. Programmes targeting adults have\nincreased as well, possibly due to the greater focus\non increasing resilience of vulnerable communities\nthrough targeted economic empowerment\ninterventions in the recent years.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nIn relation to the **nationality breakdown,** the highest number of beneficiaries are Syrians followed by Iraqis,\nAfghans, host community members and other nationalities as in the previous round. The number of CBI\nbeneficiaries from the host community has increased by around 41% compared to the previous round,\nindicating that the CBI programmes of partners are much more inclusive and conducive for social cohesion in\nline with the principle of leaving no one behind.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n1\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "online interactive dashboard",
+          "confidence": 0.5785077810287476,
+          "start": 168,
+          "end": 171
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "survey",
+          "confidence": 0.5734784603118896,
+          "start": 284,
+          "end": 285
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Turkey",
+          "confidence": 0.7719128131866455,
+          "start": 254,
+          "end": 255
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2022-23",
+          "confidence": 0.843937873840332,
+          "start": 209,
+          "end": 210
+        },
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "CBI project data",
+          "confidence": 0.8416767120361328,
+          "start": 311,
+          "end": 314
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Turkey",
+          "confidence": 0.8843465447425842,
+          "start": 339,
+          "end": 340
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2022-23",
+          "confidence": 0.8430666923522949,
+          "start": 468,
+          "end": 469
+        },
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "age and gender breakdown",
+          "confidence": 0.9333314895629883,
+          "start": 518,
+          "end": 522
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Marmara and Aegean provinces",
+          "confidence": 0.5003764629364014,
+          "start": 450,
+          "end": 454
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2022-23",
+          "confidence": 0.9658671021461487,
+          "start": 468,
+          "end": 469
+        },
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/b6b0e82e-6f29-4afa-9049-58421e23fd95/2022-23_CBI-Mapping-T%C3%BCrkiye_Summary_Note.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**T\u00dcRK\u0130YE CASH-BASED INTERVENTIONS TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP | 2024**\n\n\n**Brief Description of CBIs in T\u00fcrkiye:** Based on the **sectoral breakdown** of CBIs in 2022-23, the sector with the\nhighest number of CBI programmes was Protection, followed by Basic Needs and Economic Empowerment.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n**Financial Overview:** Regarding **types of CBI support, one-off** cash assistance projects accounted for around\n**60%** of all CBI programmes captured in this round of mapping, similar to the previous years. On the other\nhand, **regular** cash assistance schemes also maintained their significance considering that many basic needs\nCBI projects distribute regular cash assistance with ad-hoc top-up payments.\n\n\nWith regards to **duration** of CBI programmes, the majority are year-long projects (approximately **77%** of the\nprojects captured) as in the previous rounds, with some seasonal programmes relating to winterisation\nsupport.\n\n\nThe proportion of **unconditional cash** assistance projects ( **53%** ) has increased compared to the previous\nround when the proportions of unconditional and conditional projects were equal, indicating that there\nseems to be positive trend with regards to greater flexibility through relying more on the agency and\ndiscretion of beneficiaries. Most programmes ( **60%** ) adopted an **unrestricted cash modality** whereas the\nmodality of **12%** and **28%** were partially and totally **restricted**, respectively.\n\n\n**Transfer values** of most projects were identified based on programme-specific calculations ( **62%** ). In addition,\nMinimum Expenditure Basket (MEB) calculations ( **17%** ), market research ( **11%** ) and alignment with the\nassistance provided by the relevant line ministry ( **10%** ) were the other fundamental factors based on which\ntransfer values were determined.\n\n\n**Accountability:** All CBI programmes mapped in the round of 2022-23 have **complaint mechanisms** in place.\n**Complaint channels** include rather common ones like _call lines_ etc. and some less traditional methods such\nas deploying _community focal points_ (28%, 17) who are trusted community members provided with relevant\ntrainings helping organisations get community feedback during the entirety of their CBI projects. In addition,\nit was reported that a significant number of projects incorporate **PSEA mechanisms/safeguards** .\n\n\nCBI programmes mapped ( **70%** ) conduct **post-distribution monitoring (PDM)** ; however, **60%** of these PDMs\nare kept strictly internal. Thus, most of the findings and lessons learnt from these PDMs cannot be shared\nthrough inter-agency and public platforms. Even though most programmes have a functioning **M&E system**\n( **85%** ), considering the importance of this aspect, there is still a rather significant proportion of programmes\n( **15%** ) without such a system in place.\n\n\n**Targeting:** **Decreased/lack of financial capacity to meet basic needs** is the leading vulnerability category\ntargeted by CBI programmes, followed by protection vulnerabilities, vulnerabilities related to dependents\nand employment related vulnerabilities among others. This indicates a significant shift in the pattern of\nvulnerability targeting in the context of CBIs because protection related vulnerabilities were the most\ntargeted in the previous rounds. The ongoing economic challenges in T\u00fcrkiye may have been responsible for\nthis by making basic needs and livelihoods challenges even more visible.\n\n\n**Way-forward:** CBI mapping exercises are planned to continue in the coming implementation period as well.\nA primary objective will be to take stock of 2023 programmes to gauge further details of CBIs in the changing\ncontext in the aftermath of the earthquakes. Additionally, mapping efforts can focus on 2024 plans for CBI\nprogrammes in the context of transition from immediate earthquake response to more mid- to long-term\nresponse with a resilience and sustainability focus.\n\n\n2\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/b6b0e82e-6f29-4afa-9049-58421e23fd95/2022-23_CBI-Mapping-T%C3%BCrkiye_Summary_Note.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_32/raw/doc_32_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,369 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "#### **CARIACO NEIGHBOURHOOD,** **PEMBA - CABO DELGADO** **MOZAMBIQUE**\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3d9561ea-fb25-4cfe-b246-7a8963bcb739/20220908_UNHCR%20CUAMM%20GBV%20Safety%20Audit_Cariaco%20Pemba%20June%202022.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "GBV SAFETY AUDIT REPORT \u2013 CARIACO, PEMBA, MOZAMBIQUE\n\n###### Key Message\n\n\nLack of access to safe and inclusive livelihood options for women and girls is increasing\n\nmultiple risks of GBV including sexual exploitation, child marriage, denial of resources, and\n\nintimate partner violence. Displaced women and girls are compelled to resort to the sale\n\nand exchange of sex to meet their basic needs. Livelihoods programmes that engage\n\ndisplaced women and girls at risk in safe, dignified, and sustainable livelihoods options\n\nlinked to GBV response are urgently needed in settings across Cabo Delgado.\n\n\n_The report presents the main findings of the GBV Safety Audit conducted in the_\n\n_neighbourhood of Cariaco, City of Pemba, Cabo Delgado, Mozambique, in June 2022._\n\n\n_The report promotes the UNHCR Policy on The Prevention Of, Risk Mitigation, And_\n\n_Response to Gender-Based Violence of 2020._\n\n\n**Pemba Field Office**\n**Mozambique**\n\n\n**[COVER PHOTOGRAPH:]**\n_Girls discussing their perception of safety and security, Cariaco neighborhood, Pemba, Cabo Delgado. June 2022_\n\n\n2 UNHCR - CUAMM / June 2022\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3d9561ea-fb25-4cfe-b246-7a8963bcb739/20220908_UNHCR%20CUAMM%20GBV%20Safety%20Audit_Cariaco%20Pemba%20June%202022.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "GBV SAFETY AUDIT REPORT \u2013 CARIACO, PEMBA, MOZAMBIQUE G\n\n## Introduction and Methodology\n\nThe aim of the GBV Safety Audits, as a participatory assessment tool with the community, is\n\nto understand the specific GBV risks, community response and prevention mechanisms, and\n\nrelevant gaps regarding access to quality services for GBV survivors, and women and girls\n\nat displacement sites. The Safety Audits are also a rapid GBV assessment and community\n\nengagement tool that informs UNHCR and partner specialized GBV services, as well as all\n\nhumanitarian sector programmes GBV risk reduction and mainstreaming actions.\n\nBetween January and February 2022, the Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) presence in\n\n\nPemba city Cabo Delgado was estimated at around 151,987 individuals. [1] Recent violent\n\n\nattacks by non-state armed groups (NSAG) in Ancuabe district between May and June 2022\n\n\nresulted in a large influx of IDPs, including into Pemba. [2] This acuate displacement situation\n\n\nstrained already fragile services and support mechanisms for IDPs in the capital city of Cabo\n\n\nDelgado. It also exacerbated precarious living conditions of both host families and displaced\n\n\npopulations, particularly of women and girls.\n\n\nThe GBV Safety Audit applied a qualitative and participatory approach. Three main tools\n\nwere implemented to collect data on GBV risks and response mechanisms. These tools were:\n\n\n**Safety Walks** aim to observe, together with women focal points from the community, the\n\nconditions of the neighbourhood, capture the main aspects related to the urban community\n\ninfrastructure and different humanitarian sectors' services and their impact on GBV risks, and\n\nidentify potential restraints in the access to services.\n\n\n**Focus Groups Discussions (FGD)** facilitate gaining greater insight and\n\nunderstanding, among the IDP community, regarding their perceptions of GBV. With a\n\nmaximum of 10 participants to engage the group in a deeper discussion, the FGDs are tools\n\napplied to identify risk factors, as well as strategies to be adopted to increase safety and\n\nminimize the risks of GBV in communities, including community response mechanisms and\n\nservice provision.\n\n\n**Community Mapping** is a visual exercise conducted through the FGD which asks\n\nparticipants to draw or mark the areas that they or a particular group feel are safe/unsafe in\n\nthe IDP site or surroundings. It is equally a visual tool to identify critical service-gaps,\n\nincluding any access challenges.\n\n\n1 IOM Mozambique (February 2022): IDP Baseline Assessment Round 15\n\n2 UNHCR (14 June 2022): Flash Protection Update Ancuabe Forced Displacement. Issue #1-10 June 2022\n\n\nUNHCR \u2013 CUAMM / June 2022 3\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "GBV SAFETY AUDIT REPORT",
+          "confidence": 0.9851381778717041,
+          "start": 0,
+          "end": 4
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": {
+          "text": "participatory assessment tool with the community",
+          "confidence": 0.7473472356796265,
+          "start": 26,
+          "end": 32
+        },
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "REPORT",
+          "confidence": 0.8549180626869202,
+          "start": 3,
+          "end": 4
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "UNHCR",
+          "confidence": 0.772088885307312,
+          "start": 82,
+          "end": 83
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2022",
+          "confidence": 0.8999757170677185,
+          "start": 107,
+          "end": 108
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2022",
+          "confidence": 0.6243822574615479,
+          "start": 107,
+          "end": 108
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "GBV survivors",
+          "confidence": 0.5838719010353088,
+          "start": 56,
+          "end": 58
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "GBV Safety Audit",
+          "confidence": 0.9902633428573608,
+          "start": 209,
+          "end": 212
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": {
+          "text": "qualitative and participatory approach",
+          "confidence": 0.5722213387489319,
+          "start": 214,
+          "end": 218
+        },
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "IDPs",
+          "confidence": 0.8331699371337891,
+          "start": 158,
+          "end": 159
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Safety Walks",
+          "confidence": 0.5847963094711304,
+          "start": 240,
+          "end": 242
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "IDPs",
+          "confidence": 0.5149301886558533,
+          "start": 158,
+          "end": 159
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Community Mapping",
+          "confidence": 0.6310621500015259,
+          "start": 378,
+          "end": 380
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "IDP site",
+          "confidence": 0.5616251826286316,
+          "start": 412,
+          "end": 414
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2022",
+          "confidence": 0.8031963109970093,
+          "start": 438,
+          "end": 439
+        },
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "IDP community",
+          "confidence": 0.6188058853149414,
+          "start": 315,
+          "end": 317
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3d9561ea-fb25-4cfe-b246-7a8963bcb739/20220908_UNHCR%20CUAMM%20GBV%20Safety%20Audit_Cariaco%20Pemba%20June%202022.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        2
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "GBV SAFETY AUDIT REPORT \u2013 CARIACO, PEMBA, MOZAMBIQUE\n\n## Findings\n\n\nCariaco is a neighbourhood of the city of Pemba. According to available data, the\n\n\nneighbourhood has a population of 24,701 IDPs [3] which may have changed recently due to\n\n\nthe movement of IDPs into Pemba following attacks in Ancuabe district. Key findings from\n\n\nthe Safety Audit indicated that women and girls are at increased risk of sexual harassment,\n\n\nrape, and physical assault, particularly by unknown men and boys, and security actors. Boys\n\n\nare also exposed to physical violence and abuse by security actors. Displaced women and\n\n\nadolescent girls have been identified as a group at heightened risk of GBV; poverty and\n\n\nlimited access to basic resources are contributing factors to women and girls\u2019 engagement in\n\n\nselling or exchanging sex which highly expose them to GBV, particularly sexual, physical,\n\n\nand economic violence. Physical and sexual violence by security actors have also been\n\n\nidentified as a major concern, particularly for displaced girls, boys and persons involved in\n\n\nthe sale of sex. High levels of insecurity in the neighbourhood and the presence of security\n\n\nactors are contributing to GBV risks, particularly of sexual harassment and sexual violence\n\n\nat night. Security actors have also been identified as a key perpetrator of GBV, particularly\n\n\nphysical and sexual violence.\n\n\nDespite the availability of GBV services in the city, information about GBV services available\n\n\nis often lacking. In particular, information about the health consequences of GBV and\n\n\nimmediate health care for survivors of sexual violence is very limited, particularly among\n\n\nadolescent girls.\n\n\nBuilding on the findings of the Safety Audit, UNHCR and partners aim to design interventions\n\n\nwith the objective of mitigating GBV risks and improving response for survivors through\n\n\nactively engaging all humanitarian sectors and the community, and by raising awareness,\n\n\nand addressing the urgent need for holistic GBV case management services in the\n\n\nneighbourhood of Cariaco in Pemba.\n\n\nThe tables below summarize the main perceptions of GBV risks and awareness of available\n\n\nservices of the community related to GBV prevention, risk mitigation, and response in the\n\n\nsetting, as well as the findings of the observational Safety Walk.\n\n\n_3_ Northern Mozambique Crisis \u2014 DTM Baseline Assessment Abridged Report Round 16 (June 2022 _)_\n\n\n4 UNHCR - CUAMM / June 2022\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "GBV SAFETY AUDIT REPORT",
+          "confidence": 0.979373574256897,
+          "start": 0,
+          "end": 4
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "REPORT",
+          "confidence": 0.8396853804588318,
+          "start": 3,
+          "end": 4
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "CARIACO, PEMBA, MOZAMBIQUE",
+          "confidence": 0.6574336886405945,
+          "start": 5,
+          "end": 10
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "IDPs",
+          "confidence": 0.5985319018363953,
+          "start": 37,
+          "end": 38
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "available data",
+          "confidence": 0.6905875205993652,
+          "start": 25,
+          "end": 27
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "IDPs",
+          "confidence": 0.5900595784187317,
+          "start": 37,
+          "end": 38
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "observational Safety Walk",
+          "confidence": 0.8769518136978149,
+          "start": 390,
+          "end": 393
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2022",
+          "confidence": 0.5497497916221619,
+          "start": 418,
+          "end": 419
+        },
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3d9561ea-fb25-4cfe-b246-7a8963bcb739/20220908_UNHCR%20CUAMM%20GBV%20Safety%20Audit_Cariaco%20Pemba%20June%202022.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        3
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "GBV SAFETY AUDIT REPORT \u2013 CARIACO, PEMBA, MOZAMBIQUE G\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|District|Pemba|Col3|Col4|Col5|\n|---|---|---|---|---|\n|**Site/Location**|Cariaco Neighbourhood, Pemba city|Cariaco Neighbourhood, Pemba city|Cariaco Neighbourhood, Pemba city|Cariaco Neighbourhood, Pemba city|\n|**Date**|25th and 28th of May 2022; 3rd and 11th of June 2022|25th and 28th of May 2022; 3rd and 11th of June 2022|25th and 28th of May 2022; 3rd and 11th of June 2022|25th and 28th of May 2022; 3rd and 11th of June 2022|\n|**Agencies/organizations conducting**<br>**the Safety Audit**|UNHCR/CUAMM|UNHCR/CUAMM|UNHCR/CUAMM|UNHCR/CUAMM|\n|**Focus Group Discussion (FGD) # of**<br>**participants**|**Women**|**Men**|**Adolescent**<br>**Boys**|**Adolescent**<br>**Girls**|\n|**Focus Group Discussion (FGD) # of**<br>**participants**|**32**|**17**|**8 **|**7 **|\n|**Age Breakdown**|(31) 19 - 59<br>(1) 60+<br> <br>*_Includes a FGD_<br>_conducted with_<br>_women involved_<br>_in the sale of sex_|(17) 19 \u2013 59|<br>(8) 10 -18<br>|(7) 10-18|\n|**Districts of Origin**|Pemba, Mocimboa da Praia, Nangade, Macomia, Muidumbe,<br>Quissanga, Meluco, Palma|Pemba, Mocimboa da Praia, Nangade, Macomia, Muidumbe,<br>Quissanga, Meluco, Palma|Pemba, Mocimboa da Praia, Nangade, Macomia, Muidumbe,<br>Quissanga, Meluco, Palma|Pemba, Mocimboa da Praia, Nangade, Macomia, Muidumbe,<br>Quissanga, Meluco, Palma|\n\n##### Safety-Walk Findings\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|Sector|Findings|\n|---|---|\n|**General Structure**<br>**(lighting, night**<br>**lighting,**<br>**overcrowding,**<br>**privacy at**<br>**household level) **|**Lighting**<br>Participants shared their concerns about the limited public lighting at night which they<br>felt increased GBV risks in the neighbourhood, particularly for women and girls. Limited<br>availability of night lighting prevents people from seeking medical help at night, such as<br>in the case of sexual violence.<br>Most houses have access to lighting at night.|\n|**General Structure**<br>**(lighting, night**<br>**lighting,**<br>**overcrowding,**<br>**privacy at**<br>**household level) **|**Shelter information**<br>In most shelters people sleep in the same room due to lack of space; therefore, privacy<br>is limited. Most houses have wooded doors and locks; however, displaced women often<br>use \u2018capulanas/patterned cloth\u2019 material as doors which increases risks of people<br>accessing the shelter.|\n|**WASH (water**<br>**points, latrines,**<br>**showers) **|<br>**Water access**<br>Water pumps exist in the neighbourhood. The health centre has running water.|\n|**WASH (water**<br>**points, latrines,**<br>**showers) **|<br>**Public latrine information**<br>Most household have their own private latrines which are used exclusively by household<br>members, in general they do not have doors that can be locked.<br>The neighborhood health centre has latrines but need rehabilitation.|\n|**Facilities (schools,**<br>**learning spaces,**<br>**health, markets) and**<br>**Access to Land **|**Schools (primary and secondary)**<br>Primary schools are available within the neighbourhood. Some school staff of a local<br>primary school reported that the number of students increased due to conflict and<br>displacement. They host some students in temporary classrooms made of bamboo.<br>Classrooms are overcrowded. Availability of latrines is limited and not always gender<br>separate with locking doors. Participants reported that school materials are often not<br>available and many students, particularly displaced students, abandon school for lack<br>of resources needed to buy school materials.<br>Students who attend secondary school need to travel to other neighborhoods in the city<br>centre. They usually reach schools by walking or by public transport. FGD reported that<br>teachers might be asking for money in exchange of the school kits.|\n\n\n\nUNHCR \u2013 CUAMM / June 2022 5\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3d9561ea-fb25-4cfe-b246-7a8963bcb739/20220908_UNHCR%20CUAMM%20GBV%20Safety%20Audit_Cariaco%20Pemba%20June%202022.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        4
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "GBV SAFETY AUDIT REPORT \u2013 CARIACO, PEMBA, MOZAMBIQUE\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|Col1|Distribution points<br>Distributions of vouchers usually happen at the neighborhood committee and at the<br>Instituto de Comunica\u00e7ao Social (ICS).|\n|---|---|\n||<br>**Health services**<br>A health centre is available within the neighborhood. It is easily accessible since it is<br>situated in the centre of the neighborhood. Participants reported that in case of GBV,<br>survivors might not seek health care due to limited night lighting on the way to the health<br>centre. Girls reported that transport costs might be a barrier in case they need to reach<br>the central hospital.<br>Displaced people reported that they might face challenges in accessing health care for<br>their children who often do not have a health card. They also mentioned that they might<br>be charged extra fees to access services.<br>The GBV focal point at the local health centre reported that they can provide care for<br>GBV survivors without requiring a police report; if a survivor wants to report the incident<br>to the police, a medical certificate is usually provided. The local health centre has post-<br>rape kits with post-exposure prophylaxis for HIV (PEP), although pregnancy test,<br>Hepatitis B medication and some STI treatment are lacking. Safe abortion services are<br>provided within the health centre.|\n||**Markets**<br>Markets are available within the neighborhood. Some markets have been described as<br>places at high risk of GBV; a market has been indicated being a location for persons<br>involved in the sale of sex and a place where women and girls are highly exposed to<br>sexual harassment, physical and sexual violence by residents and police officers.|\n||**Livelihoods**<br>Most women and girls, particular displaced women and girls, conduct small businesses<br>(such as selling cakes, vegetables, etc. on the street). Some other displaced women go<br>from house to house asking to contribute to household chores (e.g., washing clothes,<br>babysitting) in exchange for little money. Some other women might have access to some<br>land to cultivate outside Pemba (e.g., Miezi, Metuge), which can be up to an hour to<br>travel to by public transport.|\n|**Movements Inside**<br>**and Outside the**<br>**Neighborhood **|**Risks on pathways and access points, curfews**<br>Participants do not feel safe in the neighborhood, particularly at night when police<br>patrolling is limited. They described that the neighborhood structure \u2013 the neighborhood<br>is mainly composed by narrow, dark alleys \u2013 exposes them to GBV and other risks (such<br>as robbery). Girls often walk in groups, especially those who attend evening courses at<br>school. Girls reported that there are many gangs of young people who sexually harass<br>and assault girls. Men community members mentioned that they tend to forbid women<br>and girls to pass next to a house where people using drugs gather.|\n|**Presence of**<br>**Security and Other**<br>**Armed Actors**<br>**Barriers or**<br>**Checkpoints  **|**Presence of security, police or armed forces **<br>Participants complained that the presence of trusted security forces, including<br>community police, is limited in the neighborhood, especially at night. Therefore, they do<br>not feel safe. At the same time, they also feel threatened by police and military,<br>particularly displaced boys and girls; they might be asked for their ID without any specific<br>reason and if they do not show it, they might be beaten or sexually harassed.|\n\n\n\n6 UNHCR - CUAMM / June 2022\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3d9561ea-fb25-4cfe-b246-7a8963bcb739/20220908_UNHCR%20CUAMM%20GBV%20Safety%20Audit_Cariaco%20Pemba%20June%202022.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        5
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "GBV SAFETY AUDIT REPORT \u2013 CARIACO, PEMBA, MOZAMBIQUE G\n\n##### Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) Findings\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|Area|Findings|\n|---|---|\n|**GBV and**<br>**Safety Risks**|<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br>**GBV risks**<br>Women and men reported that the sale of  sex is common among women and girls in the<br>neighbourhood. Women and girl IDPs originating from conflict affected districts in the province,<br>as well as Pemba and other provinces (e.g., Nampula) may be involved in the sale or exchange<br>sex in the neighbourhood. They indicated the area close to the market is a main location for<br>persons involved in the sale of sex in the neighbourhood. The sale of sex might happen also<br>in bottle stores (\u2018barracas\u2019) and other locations (\u2018Casa Azul\u2019- sex work premises). Women and<br>men consider that displaced women and girls are involved in the sale of  sex mainly for<br>economic reasons due to limited access to resources. Displaced women depend mainly on<br>humanitarian aid and the support they receive from host families and small jobs. Therefore,<br>they have limited sources of income. Boys reported that girls involved in the sale of sex [sexual<br>exploitation] often tell them that they are not doing anything wrong since they are not killing or<br>harming anyone; they do it because it is the only means they must access resources.<br> <br>Women mentioned that families may also encourage their daughters to engage in selling sex<br>[sexual exploitation] to access basic items, such as food, soap, coal, or any other item they<br>might need. Women stated that police may frequent sale of sex \u2018_hotspots\u2019_; they might engage<br>with persons involved in the sale of sex or force them to have sex [rape].  Persons involved in<br>the sale of sex are considered at highest risk of GBV; clients who refuse to pay usually beat<br>persons involved in the sale of sex when they request payment.<br> <br>A focus group discussion conducted with women who sell sex felt that the sale of sex is<br>common in Pemba. They noticed more and more displaced women and particularly girls<br>involved in sex work, who often engage in the sale of  to meet their needs.**People who sell**<br>**sex often suffer from physical, economic, emotional, and sexual violence.** Clients are the<br>main perpetrators: they often beat people who sell sex if they claim for their payment or clients<br>might steal their phones or money. Clients often force them to have unprotected sex without<br>their consent. Adolescent girls (aged 14-16 years old), particularly displaced girls, are the group<br>at highest risk of unprotected sex, since they are less able to negotiate with clients.  People<br>who sell sex are often exposed to GBV by military personnel, in particular physical, sexual and<br>economic violence. They might be asked for money or forced to perform sexual intercourse if<br>they do not show their identity document by military; foreign persons involved in the sale of sex,<br>particularly from Zimbabwe, Tanzania and Malawi might be asked to pay up to 1,000 MZT if<br>they do not show their visa or are forced to have sex.  People who sell sex reported that they<br>are also exposed to GBV by the community and being called offensive names; they might also<br>be exposed to GBV by their partners; they often suffer from psychological violence as well as<br>sexual intimate partner violence.<br> <br>Women community actors consider**women and girls with disability**, particularly those with<br>intellectual and developmental disabilities, are the groups at highest risk of GBV. According to<br>women,**girls are at high risk** of sexual harassment by men and boys in the streets, mainly on<br>their way to school. They might be approached by adult men and asked for sexual favours in<br>exchange of food (e.g., \u2018uma bolacha\u2019/biscuits, \u2018um lanche\u2019/snack) and other items, such as<br>clothes and mobile phones.<br>|\n\n\n\nUNHCR \u2013 CUAMM / June 2022 7\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3d9561ea-fb25-4cfe-b246-7a8963bcb739/20220908_UNHCR%20CUAMM%20GBV%20Safety%20Audit_Cariaco%20Pemba%20June%202022.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        6
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "GBV SAFETY AUDIT REPORT \u2013 CARIACO, PEMBA, MOZAMBIQUE\n\n\n8 UNHCR - CUAMM / June 2022\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3d9561ea-fb25-4cfe-b246-7a8963bcb739/20220908_UNHCR%20CUAMM%20GBV%20Safety%20Audit_Cariaco%20Pemba%20June%202022.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        7
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "GBV SAFETY AUDIT REPORT \u2013 CARIACO, PEMBA, MOZAMBIQUE G\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|Col1|home\u2019. Men mentioned that there is a lack of \u2018sisterhood\u2019 between host and displaced women.<br>It is vital to consider the gender dynamics of discrimination towards IDPs and how it<br>impacts especially women\u2019s and girls|\n|---|---|\n|**Access to**<br>**Services**<br>**(Legal and**<br>**Access to**<br>**Justice, Health**<br>**and Mental**<br>**Health, Safety**<br>**and Security,**<br>**Others)**|**Legal**<br>Adult women mentioned that GBV survivors who seek support of community tribunals need to<br>pay a fee, thus discouraging many women. Moreover, adult women mention that community<br>tribunals, whose main function was reported at mediation between survivors and perpetrators,<br>are not very reliable, and their decisions might not necessarily be gender sensitive. A woman<br>who was physically assaulted by her husband reported her situation to a community tribunal;<br>women heard that a few days after her husband went to pay a value to the tribunal and the<br>report against him was immediately withdrawn.<br> <br>Another barrier to accessing more formal legal and justice services is the limited access to<br>identity documentation, especially among displaced women and girls, which is considered as<br>necessary to start legal proceedings.  Most cannot request an identity document without a birth<br>certificate. Therefore, they might be asked for an extra price at the Civil Registry to pay in order<br>to speed the procedure.|\n|**Access to**<br>**Services**<br>**(Legal and**<br>**Access to**<br>**Justice, Health**<br>**and Mental**<br>**Health, Safety**<br>**and Security,**<br>**Others)**|**Health**<br>Community actors usually refer GBV survivors to the health centre, especially in case of sexual<br>violence; they think that survivors might need a police report to be attended at the health centre.<br>Women and girls would not feel safe to walk at night if they need to reach the health centre.<br> <br>Access to sexual and reproductive health services, particularly for young people, is limited.<br>Many young girls, particularly displaced girls, do not know which health services are available.<br>Consequently, adult women reported that many young pregnant girls are not accessing pre-<br>natal health care neither at health centres nor with traditional birth attendants (\u2018_matronas_\u2019). Girls<br>reported that girls who are sexually assaulted may not go to the hospital because they do not<br>know about the importance to seek immediate medical help; they are also afraid of community<br>stigma if health staff break confidentiality, and the community would know about their situation.<br>Transport costs have also been described by girls as a challenge to access the hospital.<br> <br>Moreover, both host community and displaced people might also be charged with extra fees at<br>health centre by health workers to access different health services. People who sell sex<br>mentioned that they receive support and information by NGOs, who are providing them with<br>condoms, lubricants, HIV oral tests, and legal support. It is not clear if displaced people who<br>sell sex have the same access to services and information since they seem to be less<br>connected with host community people who sell sex.|\n|**Access to**<br>**Services**<br>**(Legal and**<br>**Access to**<br>**Justice, Health**<br>**and Mental**<br>**Health, Safety**<br>**and Security,**<br>**Others)**|**Food Security**<br> <br>Women community actors heard of IDPs being physically assaulted by host families when they<br>do not bring at home food from distributions; IDPs might also be asked to share food from<br>distributions with host families.<br> <br>Displaced girls mentioned that they might suffer from denial of resources within the frame of<br>distributions. Community leaders might include their names in the distribution list but when it<br>comes the time to hand over the items, their name might not be called; when they leave, other<br>people receive the items instead of them. Boys confirmed this information: host community<br>might have access to \u2018cheques de valores\u2019 (vouchers) in the place of displaced people. They<br>say that community leaders abuse of their power to include people in the distribution lists in|\n\n\n\nUNHCR \u2013 CUAMM / June 2022 9\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3d9561ea-fb25-4cfe-b246-7a8963bcb739/20220908_UNHCR%20CUAMM%20GBV%20Safety%20Audit_Cariaco%20Pemba%20June%202022.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        8
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "GBV SAFETY AUDIT REPORT \u2013 CARIACO, PEMBA, MOZAMBIQUE\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|Col1|exchange of a fee or the sharing of the food items purchased. If someone does not pick up his<br>food kit due to illness, community leaders may also take the items with them away.|\n|---|---|\n|**Community**<br>**Structures and**<br>**Cultural**<br>**Perceptions**|**Community Structures and Response**<br> <br>Women community actors mentioned that they can lend money to local and displaced women<br>survivors if they need help. There are some other actors who can support women in the<br>community, such as local women\u2019s NGOs - which conduct community sensitization -, traditional<br>birth attendants, health committees, child protection committees. Men mentioned that<br>traditional birth attendants can give support to survivors, especially in case of intimate partner<br>violence and sexual violence, to temporarily accommodate survivors and accompany them to<br>the closest health centre, if needed.**Traditional birth attendants are described as the ones**<br>**who** **\u2018share their****_capulanas_/ printed cloths\u2019 with the survivors**. <br> <br>Women community actors reported that GBV survivors usually seek help with the 10 houses<br>of the community leader (\u2018chefe de 10 casas\u2019) and the blocks of the community leader (\u2018chefe<br>de quarteiroes\u2019). If needed, they will therefore refer GBV survivors to other superior levels of<br>the community leadership structure. In case of sexual violence, survivors are referred to health<br>centres.<br> <br>Women reported that in cases of intimate partner violence (IPV) block leaders or other local<br>authorities (e.g., the \u2018regulos)\u2019 tend to act as medicators between the couple. They tend to<br>attempt to convince survivors not to report the case to justice mechanisms, to avoid that their<br>partners are arrested; they consider this as \u2018protecting\u2019 survivors, block leaders might ask<br>perpetrators to sign a declaration stating that they will never commit violence against their<br>wives/partners again. If the survivor is not satisfied with the agreement and wants to proceed<br>with the case, she might be referred to community tribunals.<br> <br>In the case of child survivors, they may be referred to the community child protection<br>committees. In a case of sexual violence, women community leaders firstly accompany the<br>survivor to police and only after, once obtained the police report, go with GBV survivors to the<br>health centre.<br> <br>Girls mentioned that in case of GBV they would seek support from neighbourhood leaders and<br>police, older family members. In the case of sexual violence specifically, they would only speak<br>to older women family members, because they would feel ashamed to speak to any other<br>people. Men reported that cases of sexual violence against girls are rarely brought to the<br>neighbourhood committees or leaders. Most cases are \u2018solved\u2019 within the family: they ask the<br>oldest \u2018uncle\u2019 within the family to support to take the most appropriate decision.<br> <br> **Cultural Perceptions**<br> <br>Women community actors reported that many women still do not want to report GBV,<br>particularly Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) for fear of social stigma and isolation, and due to<br>financial dependence on their partners. Moreover, men mentioned that community leadership<br>try to collaborate with police; however, the police response is not always immediate, and this<br>discourages survivors to report. Adult men gave the example of a girl who was sexually<br>assaulted; neighbours accompanied her to the hospital; the perpetrator was brought to the<br>neighbourhood committee. However, some weeks after they saw the perpetrator walking freely<br>in the neighbourhood. This outraged the community. They said that this lack of access to justice|\n\n\n\n10 UNHCR - CUAMM / June 2022\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3d9561ea-fb25-4cfe-b246-7a8963bcb739/20220908_UNHCR%20CUAMM%20GBV%20Safety%20Audit_Cariaco%20Pemba%20June%202022.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        9
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "GBV SAFETY AUDIT REPORT \u2013 CARIACO, PEMBA, MOZAMBIQUE G\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|Col1|inevitably contributes to discourages reporting. Boys mentioned that if the perpetrator is<br>unknown, survivors/their families do not see any need to report the case to police.<br>Women mentioned that some women, particularly displaced women, might not know there are<br>GBV services in the city.<br>Adult women reported that adolescent girls rarely seek help if they experience GBV. Sex is still<br>a taboo and parents tend not to speak about sexuality with their daughters and do not inform<br>them about associated risks; cases of mothers who discover their daughters in an already<br>advanced stage of pregnancy are quite common. Moreover, displaced girls do not know where<br>to seek help in the neighbourhood.|\n|---|---|\n|**Accountability**<br>**with Affected**<br>**Population**<br>**(AAP)**|**Complaints and feedback mechanisms**<br> <br>Men community actors mentioned that they can contact the hotline Linha Fala Crian\u00e7a if they<br>need to report a case of GBV regarding a child. In general, participants do not know any other<br>hotlines or channels for complaints.|\n\n\n## RECOMMENDATIONS\n\nThe recommendations listed below are linked to the findings of the Safety Audit. This list is not exhaustive and will\n\nbe presented to the relevant Clusters, services providers, and the community with the aim that they can work\n\ntogether to develop an integrated GBV risk reduction and response plan for the setting.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|Area|Recommendations|Action Plan|\n|---|---|---|\n|**GBV/Protection/Child**<br>**Protection**<br>**and SEA**|Engage<br>with<br>the<br>community<br>to<br>improve<br>awareness and safe access to the UNHCR-<br>CUAMM GBV case management and MHPSS<br>services provided for GBV survivors, access to<br>UNHCR-CUAMM safe spaces as well as other<br>GBV services, such as health centres and<br>_Gabinete de atendimento a mulheres e crian\u00e7as_<br>_vitimas de violencia_. Engage with community<br>actors who have been identified as the main entry<br>points for GBV cases such as community woman<br>leaders, traditional midwives (_\u2018matronas\u2019_) as well<br>as any other humanitarian actors involved in the<br>GBV response already present to build their<br>capacity on GBV and to make survivor centred<br>referrals.|UNHCR-CUAMM, GBV AoR partners<br>present|\n|**GBV/Protection/Child**<br>**Protection**<br>**and SEA**|<br>GBV engagement sessions with women and girls<br>on GBV including child marriage, intimate<br>partner, sexual violence and sexual exploitation<br>and abuse. This should include sessions to<br>discuss sensitive issues such as sexual and<br>reproductive health, including safe sex, family<br>planning, early pregnancies, safe abortion.<br>|UNHCR-CUAMM, GBV AoR partners<br>present|\n\n\n\nUNHCR \u2013 CUAMM / June 2022 11\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3d9561ea-fb25-4cfe-b246-7a8963bcb739/20220908_UNHCR%20CUAMM%20GBV%20Safety%20Audit_Cariaco%20Pemba%20June%202022.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        10
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "GBV SAFETY AUDIT REPORT \u2013 CARIACO, PEMBA, MOZAMBIQUE\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|Col1|GBV engagement sessions with associations of<br>people who sell sex and any other NGOs working<br>with people selling or exchanging sex, including<br>sessions on GBV, safe sex, sexual and<br>reproductive health, and psychosocial support.|UNHCR-CUAMM, GBV AoR partners<br>present|\n|---|---|---|\n||Facilitate safe spaces for women and girls in the<br>neighborhood and promote safe access to quality<br>GBV case management, PSS support, legal<br>information, and as a safe entry point to access<br>other services through mapping neighborhood<br>and city level GBV services.|UNHCR-CUAMM, GBV AoR partners<br>present|\n||Involve community leaders in discussions to<br>enhance community cohesion and reduce<br>discrimination against displaced populations,<br>with the inclusion of women, and girls. Conduct<br>training for community leaders on core Protection<br>topics including GBV and survivor centred<br>access to GBV services/referral pathways|UNHCR-CUAMM, GBV AoR partners<br>present|\n||Engage security actors such as police and<br>community police to assess their role in GBV<br>prevention, risk mitigation and response, and<br>develop a training and engagement plan which<br>should include GBV modules.|UNHCR-CUAMM, GBV AoR partners<br>present|\n||Address the capacity building of boys and men<br>on GBV issues and conflict management through<br>learning<br>sessions<br>tailored<br>for<br>them<br>and<br>enhancing the positive role model approach.|UNHCR-CUAMM, GBV AoR partners<br>present|\n||Ensure access to identity document services are<br>available, particularly for displaced women and<br>girls and other vulnerable groups.|Protection Cluster partners present|\n||Work with the community, and youth groups, to<br>address substance abuse and other potential<br>MHPSS concerns impacting vulnerable young<br>people|Protection Cluster partners present|\n||Link with already existing community female<br>leadership<br>and<br>women\u2019s\u2019<br>groups<br>in<br>the<br>neighborhood and establish/promote accessible<br>complaints and feedback mechanisms for<br>women and girls.|Protection Cluster partners present|\n||Conduct a more in-depth assessment of child<br>protection concerns. Rapidly scale up child<br>protection programs in the urban context to<br>address child labor, child abuse (including child<br>sexual abuse), and access to education.|Child Protection AoR|\n|**Health**|Ensure health and volunteer staff working at the<br>different GBV entry points within health centres<br>(maternity,<br>_SAAJ-Servi\u00e7os_<br>_Amigos_<br>_dos_<br>_Adolescentes e Jovens_, _UATs \u2013Unidades de_<br>_Aconselhamento e Testagem_) are trained to be<br>able to provide survivor-centred care and<br>referrals.<br> <br>Ensure that complete post-rape kits are available<br>at health centre level, including pregnancy tests,<br>emergency contraception, PEP, STD treatment,<br>Hepatitis B vaccine and that safe abortion<br>services are available and providers trained in|Health Cluster, GBV AoR|\n\n\n\n12 UNHCR - CUAMM / June 2022\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3d9561ea-fb25-4cfe-b246-7a8963bcb739/20220908_UNHCR%20CUAMM%20GBV%20Safety%20Audit_Cariaco%20Pemba%20June%202022.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        11
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "GBV SAFETY AUDIT REPORT \u2013 CARIACO, PEMBA, MOZAMBIQUE G\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|Col1|clinical management of rape. Make different<br>family planning methods are available at health<br>centre level, including condoms. Ensure that all<br>services are provided for free and complaints<br>mechanisms are in place.<br>Ensure GBV screening is always conducted in<br>safe and confidential manners, and a safe and<br>confidential space to attend GBV survivors is<br>available at health centre level.<br>Ensure data on GBV cases are collected in<br>confidential manner and safely stored and<br>MISAU case intake forms are available.|Col3|\n|---|---|---|\n|**Shelter**|Increase public lighting on public streets,<br>particularly those pathways girls and women use<br>to reach health centres, schools and police.|Shelter/NFI Cluster partners present|\n|**Food Security**|Ensure food and voucher distributions effectively<br>reach displaced populations, particularly new<br>arrivals and most vulnerable groups, such as girls<br>and<br>female-headed<br>households,<br>displaced<br>households with no family network/host families,<br>as well as vulnerable displaced households who<br>have been in Pemba for any duration of time.|Food Security and Livelihoods<br>Cluster partners present|\n|**Education**|Ensure displaced and vulnerable girls can access<br>school kits and any school material needed (e.g.,<br>photocopies, school uniforms, menstrual hygiene<br>materials) to be able to attend school.|Education Cluster partners present|\n|**Education**|Include rechargeable lamps in school kits to<br>increase the safety of students, particularly girls,<br>who attend school courses at night|Include rechargeable lamps in school kits to<br>increase the safety of students, particularly girls,<br>who attend school courses at night|\n|**Livelihoods**|Identify and provide safe livelihoods options for<br>women and girls and share information on<br>existing/new programmes with GBV actors to<br>include survivors and groups at risk of GBV.|Food Security and Livelihoods Cluster<br>partners present|\n|**All Clusters**|Ensure PSEA awareness raising sessions are<br>held during distributions as well as during<br>sensitization in the community to inform the<br>population about PSEA risks and available<br>support services. Promote accessible complaints<br>and feedback mechanisms, especially for women<br>and children.|All humanitarian actors|\n\n\n\nUNHCR \u2013 CUAMM / June 2022 13\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3d9561ea-fb25-4cfe-b246-7a8963bcb739/20220908_UNHCR%20CUAMM%20GBV%20Safety%20Audit_Cariaco%20Pemba%20June%202022.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        12
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "GBV SAFETY AUDIT REPORT \u2013 CARIACO, PEMBA, MOZAMBIQUE\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n14 UNHCR - CUAMM / June 2022\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3d9561ea-fb25-4cfe-b246-7a8963bcb739/20220908_UNHCR%20CUAMM%20GBV%20Safety%20Audit_Cariaco%20Pemba%20June%202022.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        13
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_33/raw/doc_33_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,345 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "# **JOSINA MACHEL,** **PEMBA, CABO** **DELGADO,** **MOZAMBIQUE**\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/6c73bdf4-8b6b-4029-8d18-6349010ec040/20220908_UNHCR%20CUAMM%20GBV%20Safety%20Audit_Josina%20Machel%20Pemba%20June%202022.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "GBV SAFETY AUDIT REPORT \u2013 CARIACO, PEMBA, MOZAMBIQUE\n\n#### Key Message\n\n\nGBV is a grave concern in urban displacement settings of Cabo Delgado such as\nthe vulnerable neighbourhoods of Pemba. In spite of the significant GBV risks in\nurban displacement settings there is a grave lack of access to basic services for\nsurvivors. In particular healthcare, compressive case management, safety support\n(including safe shelter and women and girls' safe spaces), and access to justice.\nIncreased resourcing is urgently needed for quality GBV services in urban\ndisplacement locations in Cabo Delgado.\n\n\n_The report presents the main findings of the GBV Safety Audit conducted in the_\n\n_neighbourhood of Josina Machel, City of Pemba, Cabo Delgado, Mozambique, in June_\n\n_2022._\n\n\n_The report promotes the UNHCR Policy on The Prevention Of, Risk Mitigation, And_\n\n_Response to Gender-Based Violence of 2020._\n\n\n2 UNHCR - CUAMM / June 2022\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "GBV SAFETY AUDIT REPORT",
+          "confidence": 0.993122398853302,
+          "start": 0,
+          "end": 4
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "REPORT",
+          "confidence": 0.9063843488693237,
+          "start": 3,
+          "end": 4
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2022",
+          "confidence": 0.8725973963737488,
+          "start": 167,
+          "end": 168
+        },
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/6c73bdf4-8b6b-4029-8d18-6349010ec040/20220908_UNHCR%20CUAMM%20GBV%20Safety%20Audit_Josina%20Machel%20Pemba%20June%202022.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "GBV SAFETY AUDIT REPORT \u2013 CARIACO, PEMBA, MOZAMBIQUE G\n\n## Introduction and Methodology\n\n\nThe aim of the GBV Safety Audits, as a participatory assessment tool with the community, is\n\nto understand the specific GBV risks, community response and prevention mechanisms, and\n\nrelevant gaps regarding access to quality services for GBV survivors, and women and girls\n\nat displacement sites. The Safety Audits are also a rapid GBV assessment and community\n\nengagement tool that informs UNHCR and partner specialized GBV services, as well as all\n\nhumanitarian sector programmes GBV risk reduction and mainstreaming actions.\n\n\nJosina Machel is a neighbourhood situated in the city of Pemba. According to official available\n\ndata, the neighbourhood is hosting a population of 44,089 inhabitants, which includes 23,672\n\ninternally displaced inhabitants. Thus, the IDP population is larger than the host community,\n\nand women and children represent the majority of IDPs.\n\n\nThe GBV Safety Audit applied a qualitative and participatory approach. Three main tools\n\nwere implemented to collect data on GBV risks and response mechanisms. These tools were:\n\n\n**Safety Walks** aim to observe, together with women focal points from the community, the\n\nconditions of the site, capture the main aspects risks related to the urban community\n\ninfrastructure and different humanitarian sectors' services and their impact on GBV risks, and\n\nidentify potential restraints in the access to services.\n\n\n**Focus Groups Discussions (FGD)** facilitate gaining greater insight and\n\nunderstanding, among the IDP community, regarding their perceptions of GBV. With a\n\nmaximum of 10 participants to engage the group in a deeper discussion, the FGDs are tools\n\napplied to identify risk factors, as well as strategies to be adopted to increase safety and\n\nminimize the risks of GBV in communities, including community response mechanisms and\n\nservice provision.\n\n\n**Community Mapping** is a visual exercise conducted through the FGD which asks\n\nparticipants to draw or mark the areas that they or a particular group feel are safe/unsafe in\n\nthe IDP site or surroundings. It is equally a visual tool to identify critical service-gaps,\n\nincluding any access challenges.\n\n\nUNHCR \u2013 CUAMM / June 2022 3\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "GBV SAFETY AUDIT REPORT",
+          "confidence": 0.9825406670570374,
+          "start": 0,
+          "end": 4
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": {
+          "text": "participatory assessment tool with the community",
+          "confidence": 0.8260577321052551,
+          "start": 26,
+          "end": 32
+        },
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "REPORT",
+          "confidence": 0.8279948830604553,
+          "start": 3,
+          "end": 4
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "UNHCR",
+          "confidence": 0.6729922294616699,
+          "start": 82,
+          "end": 83
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "GBV survivors",
+          "confidence": 0.6376294493675232,
+          "start": 56,
+          "end": 58
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "official available\n\ndata",
+          "confidence": 0.8086317777633667,
+          "start": 117,
+          "end": 120
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Josina Machel",
+          "confidence": 0.6742824912071228,
+          "start": 103,
+          "end": 105
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "IDPs",
+          "confidence": 0.5366202592849731,
+          "start": 162,
+          "end": 163
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "GBV Safety Audit",
+          "confidence": 0.9549016952514648,
+          "start": 165,
+          "end": 168
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "IDPs",
+          "confidence": 0.7983561158180237,
+          "start": 162,
+          "end": 163
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Community Mapping",
+          "confidence": 0.9964724779129028,
+          "start": 335,
+          "end": 337
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "IDP site",
+          "confidence": 0.8694555759429932,
+          "start": 369,
+          "end": 371
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2022",
+          "confidence": 0.9137083292007446,
+          "start": 395,
+          "end": 396
+        },
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/6c73bdf4-8b6b-4029-8d18-6349010ec040/20220908_UNHCR%20CUAMM%20GBV%20Safety%20Audit_Josina%20Machel%20Pemba%20June%202022.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        2
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "GBV SAFETY AUDIT REPORT \u2013 CARIACO, PEMBA, MOZAMBIQUE\n\n## Findings\n\n\nKey findings from the Safety Audit in Josina Machel indicate that displaced women and girls\n\nare at highest risk of GBV in the neighbourhood. They are highly exposed to sexual violence,\n\nsexual harassment, and abuse - including by security forces and staff in schools - and\n\nintimate partner violence (IPV). Displaced women and girls in Pemba might also have\n\nexperienced abduction and sexual exploitation by NSAGs before displacement and whilst\n\nfleeing attacks. Early marriage is also GBV risk; also, some girls, particularly displaced girls,\n\nare involved in the sale of sex, which is a major sexual exploitation concern and can expose\n\nthem to risks of other forms for GBV also. People selling sex have been identified as a group\n\nat highest risk of GBV, particularly physical and economic violence by clients. Women and\n\ngirls with disabilities are also a group at risk of GBV.\n\n\nGBV services are still limited in the neighbourhood and GBV survivors face various barriers\n\nin accessing them. Limited presence of health services may prevent GBV survivors from\n\nseeking medical care, especially if GBV incidents occur at night. Limited knowledge of\n\nservices availability, particularly among displaced women and girls, lack of confidence in the\n\ncapacity of police to achieve survivor-centred outcomes in cases, legal fees and fear of\n\nstigma and discrimination may also deter GBV survivors from accessing justice. Community\n\nstigma and discrimination is a deterrent to seek support, particularly in case of sexual\n\nviolence against girls. Survivors are often not able to access GBV services directly but must\n\ngo through community leadership structures, they face lack of confidentiality of their situation\n\nas information is often shared within the community.\n\n\nBuilding on the findings of the Safety Audit, UNHCR and partners aim to design interventions\n\n\nwith the objective of mitigating GBV risks and improving response for survivors through\n\n\nactively engaging all humanitarian sectors and the community, and by raising awareness,\n\n\nand addressing the urgent need for holistic GBV case management services in the\n\n\nneighbourhood of Josina Machel in Pemba.\n\n\nThe tables below summarize the main perceptions of GBV risks and awareness of available\n\n\nservices of the community related to GBV prevention, risk mitigation, and response in the\n\n\nsetting, as well as the findings of the observational Safety Walk.\n\n\n4 UNHCR - CUAMM / June 2022\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/6c73bdf4-8b6b-4029-8d18-6349010ec040/20220908_UNHCR%20CUAMM%20GBV%20Safety%20Audit_Josina%20Machel%20Pemba%20June%202022.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        3
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "GBV SAFETY AUDIT REPORT \u2013 CARIACO, PEMBA, MOZAMBIQUE G\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|District|Pemba|Col3|Col4|Col5|\n|---|---|---|---|---|\n|**Site/Location**|Josina Machel Neighbourhood|Josina Machel Neighbourhood|Josina Machel Neighbourhood|Josina Machel Neighbourhood|\n|**Date**|14,17 and 21 of June 2022|14,17 and 21 of June 2022|14,17 and 21 of June 2022|14,17 and 21 of June 2022|\n|**Agencies/organizations conducting**<br>**the Safety Audit**|UNHCR/CUAMM|UNHCR/CUAMM|UNHCR/CUAMM|UNHCR/CUAMM|\n|**Focus Group Discussion # of**<br>**participants**|**Women**|**Men**|**Adolescent**<br>**Boys**|**Adolescent**<br>**Girls**|\n|**Focus Group Discussion # of**<br>**participants**|**19**|**25**|**7 **|**7 **|\n|**Age Breakdown**|(14) 19 - 59|(17) 19 \u2013 59<br>(2) 60+|(7) 14 \u2013 18<br>|(7) 14 \u2013 18<br>|\n|**Districts of Origin**|Pemba (host community), Mocimboa da Praia, Macomia, Muidumbe,<br>Meluco, Ancuabe, Nantule, Quissanga (IDPs)|Pemba (host community), Mocimboa da Praia, Macomia, Muidumbe,<br>Meluco, Ancuabe, Nantule, Quissanga (IDPs)|Pemba (host community), Mocimboa da Praia, Macomia, Muidumbe,<br>Meluco, Ancuabe, Nantule, Quissanga (IDPs)|Pemba (host community), Mocimboa da Praia, Macomia, Muidumbe,<br>Meluco, Ancuabe, Nantule, Quissanga (IDPs)|\n\n### Safety-Walk Findings\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|Sector|Findings|\n|---|---|\n|**General Structure**<br>**(lighting, night**<br>**lighting,**<br>**overcrowding,**<br>**privacy at**<br>**household level) **|**Lighting information**<br>All participants mentioned that limited public lighting is a great concern in the<br>neighbourhood, particularly at night. Households generally have access to lighting at<br>home.|\n|**General Structure**<br>**(lighting, night**<br>**lighting,**<br>**overcrowding,**<br>**privacy at**<br>**household level) **|**Shelter information**<br>Women community actors mentioned that many IDPs are living within hosting families.<br>Households were already overcrowded before the arrival of newly displaced people from<br>Ancuabe, which has put pressure on already difficult living conditions. IDPs, including<br>women, often have to sleep outside in the courtyard, which is considered as unsafe.<br>They also reported that some women may not know anyone in the city, so they have to<br>rent houses; house rentals might be very high (up to 5,000 MZT/78 USD per month). In<br>some situations, women reported giving a portion of their humanitarian food assistance<br>to pay for rent/stay with host families.|\n|**WASH (water**<br>**points, latrines,**<br>**showers) **|<br>**Water access**<br>Women community leaders mentioned that safe access to clean drinking water is a<br>challenge in the neighbourhood; water pumps exist in some blocks, but they often run<br>out of water. Some other families might have access to water only through buying it.<br>Some families in the neighbourhood have water wells; the owners may sell water, e.g.,<br>10 l of water might cost around 5 MZT; not all displaced women have financial means<br>to buy it.|\n|**WASH (water**<br>**points, latrines,**<br>**showers) **|<br>**Public latrine information**<br>No public latrines are available in the neighbourhood. Most houses have their own<br>latrines and IDPs use them. However, there is often only one latrine for each house and<br>therefore no privacy is ensured (e.g., lack solid doors/locks).|\n|**Facilities (schools,**<br>**learning spaces,**<br>**health, markets) and**<br>**Access to Land **|**Schools (primary and secondary)**<br>Children might attend the following primary and secondary schools: Arco Iris, Marcelino<br>dos Santos, SOS Aldeia das Crian\u00e7as, Colegio Liceal. Local schools require displaced<br>students to hand over the previous school certificate or any other documents to register.<br>If they are not able to hand it over, local school officers reportedly may ask for a bribe<br>to ensure displaced students\u2019 access to schools. Moreover, many displaced boys and<br>girls mentioned that they do not have means to pay for school materials, photocopies,<br>etc. Consequently, many displaced girls and boys still do not have access to education.<br> <br>Men community leaders mentioned that displaced girls often abandon school due to lack<br>of resources and engage in small businesses (e.g., selling of street food). Boys|\n\n\n\nUNHCR \u2013 CUAMM / June 2022 5\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "GBV SAFETY AUDIT REPORT",
+          "confidence": 0.9698789119720459,
+          "start": 0,
+          "end": 4
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "REPORT",
+          "confidence": 0.7813641428947449,
+          "start": 3,
+          "end": 4
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "UNHCR/CUAMM",
+          "confidence": 0.5746031999588013,
+          "start": 131,
+          "end": 134
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "CARIACO, PEMBA, MOZAMBIQUE",
+          "confidence": 0.5077386498451233,
+          "start": 5,
+          "end": 10
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2022",
+          "confidence": 0.7124188542366028,
+          "start": 82,
+          "end": 83
+        },
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Focus Group Discussion",
+          "confidence": 0.5288856625556946,
+          "start": 150,
+          "end": 153
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "participants",
+          "confidence": 0.7851808071136475,
+          "start": 162,
+          "end": 163
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/6c73bdf4-8b6b-4029-8d18-6349010ec040/20220908_UNHCR%20CUAMM%20GBV%20Safety%20Audit_Josina%20Machel%20Pemba%20June%202022.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        4
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "GBV SAFETY AUDIT REPORT \u2013 CARIACO, PEMBA, MOZAMBIQUE\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|Col1|mentioned that they often work as \u2018estivas/informal workers\u2019 instead of going to school:<br>they help traders to carry goods in exchange of 20-50 MTZ/30-80 cents USD, others<br>might be asked by their family members to help with small jobs; boys mentioned that<br>they are happy to gain some financial autonomy, but they also reported that they are<br>deprived of their right to education. Moreover, they might be exposed to harsh physical<br>conditions of child labour or other risks, such as entering criminal gangs, selling drugs,<br>etc.|\n|---|---|\n||**Distribution points info**<br>Most distributions happen within the neighbourhood committee, which includes few<br>women, next to the Mobilia Iuran, the SOS Aldeia and behind Shoprite. Committee<br>leaders and police might be present during distributions; NGOs staff might also be<br>present.|\n||<br>**Health Services**<br>No health centre is available in the neighbourhood. The closest health centres are the<br>E. Mondlane health centre and the Arco Iris health centre (between 30 minutes and one<br>hour walking); no traditional birth attendants are available in the neighbourhood.|\n||**Markets**<br>There is access to small local markets within the neighbourhood, so that women and<br>girls do not necessarily need to walk long distances to have access to basic items, they<br>may have to walk further to larger markets if they need specific items.|\n||**Livelihoods**<br>Very few women have access to \u2018_machambas_/small vegetable fields\u2019. Host community<br>women might have access to their own crops in Miezi, Nancaramo, Mpiri, Metuge which<br>is roughly 45 minutes by public transport. Very few IDP women have_machambas_ as<br>one of the main livelihoods activities they practiced pre-displacement.|\n|**Movements Inside**<br>**and Outside the**<br>**Neighbourhood **|**Risks on pathways and access points, curfews**<br>Informal curfews are in place in the neighbourhood; boys mentioned that they prefer not<br>to walk around after 6pm because of limited public lighting and the related risks such as<br>physical assault, sexual assault or rape. Men mentioned that displaced women and girls<br>often prefer to stay at home in order not to meet police who might sexually harass them,<br>especially if they do not have their identity card.|\n|**Presence of**<br>**Security and Other**<br>**Armed Actors**<br>**Barriers or**<br>**Checkpoints  **|**Presence of security, police or armed forces **<br>Women community leaders mentioned that police presence is very limited in the<br>neighbourhood. Men also mentioned that community police are not present in the<br>neighbourhood anymore and that the police often patrol the neighbourhood only<br>between 4 \u2013 7pm.|\n\n\n\n6 UNHCR - CUAMM / June 2022\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/6c73bdf4-8b6b-4029-8d18-6349010ec040/20220908_UNHCR%20CUAMM%20GBV%20Safety%20Audit_Josina%20Machel%20Pemba%20June%202022.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        5
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "GBV SAFETY AUDIT REPORT \u2013 CARIACO, PEMBA, MOZAMBIQUE G\n\n### Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) Findings\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|Area|Findings|\n|---|---|\n|**GBV and**<br>**Safety Risks**|<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br>**GBV risks**<br> <br>Women community leaders reported that**sexual violence** is a high GBV risk in the<br>neighbourhood. The community shared that risks of rape of girls with multiple perpetrators had<br>also been reported. Men also reported that women and girls are at highest risk of GBV,<br>particularly physical and sexual assault, when they go to fetch water early in the morning and<br>at night when they come home from school; it was reported that girls have been sexually<br>assaulted on their way home from school.<br> <br>Girls reported that they feel most at risk of GBV at night, mainly due to the limited public lighting;<br>those who study at night might ask their family members to come and pick them up.<br> <br>The limited presence of police, particularly at night-time, and the lack of community police is<br>perceived as a GBV risk factor by male community actors. However, security forces might also<br>be perceived as a GBV risk themselves: girls mentioned that they do not feel comfortable when<br>they meet security forces in the street; they often ask girls information about their movements;<br>they might even ask for their phone numbers and girls feel uncomfortable not to answer for fear<br>of retaliation. Men reported that police may request displaced women and girls to show their<br>ID; if they reply that they lost it during flight, the police might ask for money or for sex in<br>exchange for letting them go.<br> <br>Girls and boys also mentioned that girls might be exposed to**sexual harassment and abuse**<br>at** school** by teachers.<br> <br>Girls and boys mentioned also that**many girls in the neighbourhood** are involved in the sale<br>of** sex and are sexually exploited**in order to access to certain goods (e.g., smartphones,<br>better clothes, etc.). Boys reported that girls might de sexually exploited by older men; other<br>girls, particularly displaced girls, may be involved in the sale of sex mainly as a means of<br>obtaining essential goods due to their highly vulnerable living conditions. Both men and boys<br>reported that women and girls involved in the sale of sex might be exposed to different forms<br>of GBV; men mentioned that women and girls involved in the sale of sex  who are beaten by<br>clients may seek help from a neighbourhood representative.<br> <br>Women community members reported that some displaced women and girls arrived in Pemba<br>may have suffered**abductions and sexual violence by NSAGs** before displacement and<br>whilst fleeing attacks. The survivors usually did not seek or receive any services on the route<br>or when they arrived in Pemba. In some cases, women and girls who experience sexual<br>violence perpetrated by NSAG then face further risks of sexual exploitation when displaced;<br>the community reported that girls who were abducted and sexually abused by NSAGs and then<br>manage to escape and come to Pemba are forced to engage in sex work and experience<br>sexual exploitation to be able to survive as basic needs are not being met.  Also, there are risks<br>of GBV perpetrated by security actors, often against girls, including situations of physical<br>violence towards girls by security guards and sexual harassment of girls by armed actors in the<br>community in Pemba. The actors may include police and military actors.<br> <br>**Intimate partner violence (IPV)**is also a GBV risk in the neighbourhood, particularly reported<br>by host community women. Most women are economically dependent on their husbands, which<br>can increase IPV risks significantly.  Marital rape, a form of IPV, is also occurring according to<br>the reports of men who told of men beating and insulting their wives if they tried to resist having<br>sex._(\u2018It is me who brings food at home, you do not bring anything at home, you depend on_<br>_me\u201d-_men focus group discussion participants shared examples of psychological IPV towards<br>women_)_. The men in the FGD identified this situation as marital rape but they felt that many|\n\n\n\nUNHCR \u2013 CUAMM / June 2022 7\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/6c73bdf4-8b6b-4029-8d18-6349010ec040/20220908_UNHCR%20CUAMM%20GBV%20Safety%20Audit_Josina%20Machel%20Pemba%20June%202022.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        6
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "GBV SAFETY AUDIT REPORT \u2013 CARIACO, PEMBA, MOZAMBIQUE\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|Col1|men in the community still consider it a man\u2019s \u2018right\u2019 to have sex with his wife. Thus it is<br>important to also ensure awareness of women and girls as well as men and boys.<br>Women and girls with disability are also highly exposed to GBV. Men reported that<br>adolescent girls with learning disabilities are at risk of sexual assault by adult men at their<br>homes during the day, while their family members/caregivers are out. Such cases are referred<br>to the community leaders and the police; however, they often do not receive police response<br>and the families/caregivers do not accompany survivors to the hospital.<br>Child marriage may also be a GBV risk but needs more in-depth assessment. Boys mentioned<br>situations where girls of 15 years old are forced by their parents to marry an older man.|\n|---|---|\n|**Access to**<br>**Services**<br>**(Legal and**<br>**Access to**<br>**Justice, Health**<br>**and Mental**<br>**Health, Safety**<br>**and Security,**<br>**Others)**|**Legal**<br> <br>Women reported that GBV survivors might go to community tribunals to seek justice; however,<br>a 250 MZT/4 USD fee might be requested and not all women can afford it - although men<br>community actors highlighted displaced women are exempted from paying it. In general, GBV<br>cases, particularly sexual violence, are rarely reported to community tribunals; most reported<br>cases are of extra-marital relations, insults and defamation. An officer working at the<br>community tribunal mentioned that it has been a long time since they received any cases of<br>girl GBV survivors; he said that this is not due to the fact that cases are not happening, but<br>because girls are reluctant to seek help with the community tribunals. Girls confirmed that they<br>would never seek support from community tribunals in case of GBV; women and girls might<br>prefer not to report to community tribunals because of fear of shame and stigma.<br> <br>Some cases might be reported to the police when they cannot be \u2018solved\u2019 within the families or<br>by community leaders; however, the lack of an immediate response discourages community<br>members and survivors in seeking help with police.  Women mentioned that GBV survivors<br>often do not report incidents to police because they do not trust them. Moreover, GBV survivors<br>often do not know the name of their perpetrator and police often tell them that they cannot<br>report the incident without providing the full name of the perpetrator. Girls lack access to police<br>support and in some instances were turned away when they reported sexual harassment<br>cases.<br>|\n|**Access to**<br>**Services**<br>**(Legal and**<br>**Access to**<br>**Justice, Health**<br>**and Mental**<br>**Health, Safety**<br>**and Security,**<br>**Others)**|**Health**<br> <br>No health centre is available within the neighbourhood. The closest health centres are the E.<br>Mondlane health centre and the Arco Iris health centre (between 30 minutes and one hour<br>walking); girls reported that not all girls have financial means to pay for transport to get to the<br>health centres, so they have to walk to the health centre and it is a long distance; moreover, it<br>might be risky to walk to the health centre especially at night. No traditional birth attendants are<br>available in the neighbourhood. Men confirmed that limited access to health services is a barrier<br>for survivors accessing support; moreover, pregnant women, including displaced women, might<br>be asked for a \u2018_refresco/_bribe\u2019 at the health centres to access appropriate treatment.|\n|**Access to**<br>**Services**<br>**(Legal and**<br>**Access to**<br>**Justice, Health**<br>**and Mental**<br>**Health, Safety**<br>**and Security,**<br>**Others)**|**Food Security**<br> <br>Men community leaders reported that not all displaced women are able to get access to<br>distributions, particularly those who do not hold any documentation (identity document, voter<br>card, or a temporary ID (\u2018_espera bilhete\u2019_); IDPs who do not own any ID might receive some<br>leftovers. They complained that the limited access to legal documentation services for<br>displaced people in the city is consequently limiting also IDPs access to humanitarian<br>distributions. Some displaced women were included in the distribution lists; however, they<br>might be asked about how long they have been displaced and if they reply for more than one<br>year, they might be removed from the list by the community leaders.<br>IDPs who have access to food distributions are often forced to hand over the donations to<br>hosting families. As a consequence, displaced women often sell their food donations in order<br>to access an income to be able to open a small business and be less dependent on food<br>donations and hosting families.|\n\n\n\n8 UNHCR - CUAMM / June 2022\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/6c73bdf4-8b6b-4029-8d18-6349010ec040/20220908_UNHCR%20CUAMM%20GBV%20Safety%20Audit_Josina%20Machel%20Pemba%20June%202022.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        7
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "GBV SAFETY AUDIT REPORT \u2013 CARIACO, PEMBA, MOZAMBIQUE G\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nUNHCR \u2013 CUAMM / June 2022 9\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/6c73bdf4-8b6b-4029-8d18-6349010ec040/20220908_UNHCR%20CUAMM%20GBV%20Safety%20Audit_Josina%20Machel%20Pemba%20June%202022.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        8
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "GBV SAFETY AUDIT REPORT \u2013 CARIACO, PEMBA, MOZAMBIQUE\n\n\n\n\n\n\n## RECOMMENDATIONS\n\nThe recommendations listed below are linked to the findings of the Safety Audit. This list is not exhaustive and will\n\nbe presented to the services providers and the community with the aim that they can work together to develop an\n\nintegrated GBV risk reduction and response plan for the setting.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|Area|Recommendations|Action Plan|\n|---|---|---|\n|**GBV/Protection**<br>**And SEA**|Engage with the community to improve awareness<br>and safe access to the UNHCR-CUAMM GBV case<br>management and MHPSS services provided for<br>GBV survivors, access to UNHCR-CUAMM safe<br>spaces as well as other GBV services, such as<br>health centres and_Gabinete de atendimento a_<br>_mulheres e crian\u00e7as vitimas de violencia_. Engage<br>with community actors who have been identified as<br>the main entry points for GBV cases such as<br>community woman leaders, traditional midwives<br>(_\u2018matronas\u2019_) as well as any other humanitarian actors<br>involved in the GBV response already present to<br>build their capacity on GBV and to make survivor-<br>centred referrals.|UNHCR-CUAMM, GBV AoR partners<br>present|\n|**GBV/Protection**<br>**And SEA**|GBV engagement sessions with women and girls on<br>GBV including child marriage, intimate partner,<br>sexual violence and sexual exploitation and abuse.<br>This should include sessions to discuss sensitive<br>issues such as sexual and reproductive health,<br>including<br>safe<br>sex,<br>family<br>planning,<br>early<br>pregnancies, safe abortion.|UNHCR-CUAMM, GBV AoR partners<br>present|\n|**GBV/Protection**<br>**And SEA**|GBV engagement sessions with associations of<br>people who sell sex and any other NGOs working<br>with people selling or exchanging sex, including<br>sessions on GBV, safe sex, sexual and reproductive<br>health, and psychosocial support.|UNHCR-CUAMM, GBV AoR partners<br>present|\n|**GBV/Protection**<br>**And SEA**|Facilitate safe spaces for women and girls in the<br>neighbourhood and promote safe access to quality<br>GBV case management, PSS support, legal<br>information, and as a safe entry point to access other<br>services through mapping neighbourhood and city<br>level GBV services.|UNHCR-CUAMM, GBV AoR partners<br>present|\n|**GBV/Protection**<br>**And SEA**|Involve community leaders in discussions to<br>enhance<br>community<br>cohesion<br>and<br>reduce<br>discrimination against displaced populations, with<br>the inclusion of women, and girls. Conduct training<br>for community leaders on core Protection topics<br>including GBV and survivor centred access to GBV<br>services/referral pathways|UNHCR-CUAMM, GBV AoR partners<br>present|\n\n\n\n10 UNHCR - CUAMM / June 2022\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/6c73bdf4-8b6b-4029-8d18-6349010ec040/20220908_UNHCR%20CUAMM%20GBV%20Safety%20Audit_Josina%20Machel%20Pemba%20June%202022.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        9
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "GBV SAFETY AUDIT REPORT \u2013 CARIACO, PEMBA, MOZAMBIQUE G\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|Col1|Engage security actors such as police and<br>community police to assess their role in GBV<br>prevention, risk mitigation and response, and<br>develop a training and engagement plan which<br>should include GBV modules.|UNHCR-CUAMM, GBV AoR partners<br>present|\n|---|---|---|\n||Address the capacity building of boys and men on<br>GBV issues and conflict management through<br>learning sessions tailored for them and enhancing<br>the positive role model approach.|UNHCR-CUAMM, GBV AoR partners<br>present|\n||Ensure access to identity document services are<br>available, particularly for displaced women and girls<br>and other vulnerable groups.|Protection Cluster partners present|\n||Link with already existing women community<br>leadership<br>and<br>women\u2019s\u2019<br>groups<br>in<br>the<br>neighbourhood and establish/promote accessible<br>complaints and feedback mechanisms for women<br>and girls.|Protection Cluster partners present|\n||Conduct a more in-depth assessment of child<br>protection<br>concerns.<br>Rapidly<br>scale<br>up<br>child<br>protection programmes in the urban context to<br>address child labour, child abuse (including child<br>sexual abuse), and access to education.|Child Protection AoR|\n|**Health**|Ensure health and volunteer staff working at the<br>different GBV entry points within health centres<br>(maternity,<br>_SAAJ-Servi\u00e7os_<br>_Amigos_<br>_dos_<br>_Adolescentes e Jovens_, _UATs \u2013Unidades de_<br>_Aconselhamento e Testagem_) are trained to be able<br>to provide survivor-centred care and safe referrals.<br> <br>Ensure that complete post-rape kits are available at<br>health centre level, including pregnancy tests,<br>emergency contraception, PEP, STD treatment,<br>Hepatitis B vaccine and that safe abortion services<br>are available and providers trained in clinical<br>management of rape. Make different family planning<br>methods are available at health centre level,<br>including condoms. Ensure that all services are<br>provided for free and complaints mechanisms are in<br>place.<br> <br>Ensure GBV screening is always conducted in safe<br>and confidential manners, and a safe and<br>confidential space to attend GBV survivors is<br>available at health centre level.<br> <br>Ensure data on GBV cases are collected in<br>confidential manner and safely stored and MISAU<br>case intake forms are available.|Health Cluster, GBV AoR|\n|**WASH**|Seek ways of increasing safe access to water at<br>household<br>and<br>neighbourhood<br>level,<br>monitor<br>protection risks for women and girls in the sale of<br>water.|WASH Cluster actors|\n|**Shelter**|Increase public lighting on public streets, particularly<br>those pathways girls and women use to reach health<br>centres, schools and police.|Shelter/NFI Cluster partners present|\n|**Food Security**|Ensure food and voucher distributions effectively<br>reach displaced populations, particularly new arrivals|Food Security and Livelihoods Cluster<br>partners present|\n\n\n\nUNHCR \u2013 CUAMM / June 2022 11\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/6c73bdf4-8b6b-4029-8d18-6349010ec040/20220908_UNHCR%20CUAMM%20GBV%20Safety%20Audit_Josina%20Machel%20Pemba%20June%202022.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        10
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "GBV SAFETY AUDIT REPORT \u2013 CARIACO, PEMBA, MOZAMBIQUE\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|Col1|and most vulnerable groups, such as girls and<br>female-headed households, displaced households<br>with no family network/host families, as well as<br>vulnerable displaced households who have been in<br>Pemba for any duration of time.<br>Assess issue of requiring identification documents to<br>register for food assistance as the most vulnerable<br>households often do not have documentation.|Col3|\n|---|---|---|\n|**Education**|Ensure displaced and vulnerable girls can access<br>school kits and any school material needed (e.g.,<br>photocopies, school uniforms, menstrual hygiene<br>materials) to be able to attend school.<br> <br>Promote awareness raising activities and reporting<br>mechanisms<br>in<br>schools<br>to<br>prevent<br>sexual<br>exploitation and abuse and corruption by educators<br>and school staff.<br> <br>Include rechargeable lamps in school kits to increase<br>the safety of students, particularly girls, who attend<br>school courses at night|Education Cluster partners present|\n|**Livelihoods**|Identify and provide safe livelihoods options for<br>women and girls and share information on<br>existing/new programmes with GBV actors to include<br>survivors and groups at risk of GBV.|Food Security and Livelihoods Cluster<br>partners present Cluster, Humanitarian<br>actors supporting livelihood|\n|**All Clusters**|Ensure PSEA awareness raising sessions are held<br>during distributions as well as during sensitization in<br>the community to inform the population about PSEA<br>risks and available support services. Promote<br>accessible complaints and feedback mechanisms,<br>especially for women and children|All humanitarian actors|\n\n\n\n12 UNHCR - CUAMM / June 2022\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/6c73bdf4-8b6b-4029-8d18-6349010ec040/20220908_UNHCR%20CUAMM%20GBV%20Safety%20Audit_Josina%20Machel%20Pemba%20June%202022.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        11
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_34/raw/doc_34_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,848 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "##### **AND NEEDS OF REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE**\n\n**REGIONAL PROTECTION ANALYSIS # 1**\n\n\nBelarus, Bulgaria, Hungary, Republic of\nMoldova, Poland, Romania & Slovakia\n\nData as of 30 September 2022\n\n\n**UNHCR Regional Bureau for Europe** 26 OCTOBER 2022\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/303c55b5-2a90-45a1-bbb4-2af67f7e1e68/20221014%20Displacement%20Patterns%2C%20Protection%20Risks%20and%20Needs%20of%20Refugees%20from%20Ukraine.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "DISPLACEMENT PATTERNS, PROTECTION RISKS AND NEEDS OF REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n#### **Contents**\n\n\nKey findings and recommendations 3\n\nContext 8\n\nMethodology 9\n\nDemographic and displacement patterns 10\n\nProtection overview 13\n\nRefugees\u2019 intentions 13\n\n\nAcknowledgements\n\n\nData used in this report was collected as part of Protection Profiling and\nMonitoring exercises led by UNHCR in Belarus (in partnership with IFRC),\nBulgaria, Hungary, the Republic of Moldova (in partnership with Law Center for\nAdvocates, INTERSOS and REACH), Poland (in partnership with REACH),\nRomania (in partnership with Romanian National Council for Refugees and\nREACH) and Slovakia (in partnership with Human Rights League, Mareena,\nPeople in Need, REACH and Slovak Humanitarian Council).\n\n\nThe analysis of data was coordinated by the Data, Identity Management and\nAnalysis Unit (DIMA) and the drafting of the report was led by the Protection Unit\nin UNHCR\u2019s Regional Bureau for Europe (RBE).\n\n\nWe are grateful for the extensive involvement and support of UNHCR\u2019s partners,\nlocal authorities, civil society, international organizations and donors. Most\nimportantly, UNHCR would like to acknowledge the resilience and strength of\nrefugees from Ukraine, who continue to share with us their challenges, fears and\nhopes.\n\n\n~~CONTACT US~~\n\nUNHCR Regional Bureau for Europe\nData, Identity Management and Analysis Unit (DIMA)\nProtection Unit\nEmail: rbeext@unhcr.org\n\n\n**COVER PHOTOGRAPH:**\n_Poland. Refugees from Ukraine wait to be registered at UNHCR\u2019s cash enrolment centre in_\n_Krakow Tauron Arena. May 2022 \u00a9 UNHCR/Maciej Moskwa_\n\n\n2 R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E, 2 6 O C T O B E R 2 0 2 2\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "DISPLACEMENT PATTERNS",
+          "confidence": 0.6122337579727173,
+          "start": 0,
+          "end": 2
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "report",
+          "confidence": 0.546566903591156,
+          "start": 46,
+          "end": 47
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "REFUGEES",
+          "confidence": 0.9556712508201599,
+          "start": 8,
+          "end": 9
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/303c55b5-2a90-45a1-bbb4-2af67f7e1e68/20221014%20Displacement%20Patterns%2C%20Protection%20Risks%20and%20Needs%20of%20Refugees%20from%20Ukraine.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "DISPLACEMENT PATTERNS, PROTECTION RISKS AND NEEDS OF REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n# Key findings and recommendations\n\n\n\nThis regional analysis is based on **more than** discussions conducted in Poland, Hungary, Slovakia\n**34,000 interviews** with refugees from Ukraine and Moldova. The report presents an overview of\nconducted by UNHCR and partners **in Belarus,** refugees\u2019 demographic profiles and displacement\n**Bulgaria, Hungary, Republic of Moldova, Poland,** patterns and main findings regarding protection\n**Romania and Slovakia between mid-May and end** risks, priority needs and intentions of refugees from\n**September**, complemented with focus group Ukraine.1\n\n\n**78%** **OF RESPONDENTS HAVE BEEN SEPARATED FROM IMMEDIATE FAMILY**\n**MEMBERS**\n## **1**\n\n\n\nThis regional analysis is based on **more than**\n**34,000 interviews** with refugees from Ukraine\nconducted by UNHCR and partners **in Belarus,**\n**Bulgaria, Hungary, Republic of Moldova, Poland,**\n**Romania and Slovakia between mid-May and end**\n**September**, complemented with focus group\n\n\n\n**78%** **OF RESPONDENTS HAVE BEEN SEPARATED FROM IMMEDIATE FAMILY**\n**MEMBERS**\n\n\n\nThis refugee crisis is characterized by high levels of\nfamily separation. Some **78%** of respondents reported\nhaving to separate from immediate family members\ndue to their departure from Ukraine. The vast majority\nof refugees from Ukraine are women and children,\nwith dynamics around family separation resulting in\na large proportion of single female caregivers who\nare acting as primary breadwinners for their families.\nWhilst many respondents indicated that family\nseparations occurred as a result of restrictions on\nfreedom of movement for men due to martial law, a\nlarge percentage equally indicated that their family\nmembers remaining in Ukraine did not wish to leave\nat the time they departed, or were unable to depart,\nfor financial or other reasons.\n\n\n\nFamily separation in a refugee context can\nexacerbate several protection risks including genderbased violence, human trafficking, exploitation,\nisolation and trauma, particularly for persons\nwith specific needs, such as unaccompanied and\nseparated children, older persons and persons with\ndisabilities. Working to mitigate these risks, including\nthrough prioritizing the prevention of and response to\n\n\n1 An interactive online dashboard with key results can be found [here](https://app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrIjoiMWU3NjkzYmEtNDYzMC00M2EyLTkwMjctMGIwZTA0MTQwMjU5IiwidCI6ImU1YzM3OTgxLTY2NjQtNDEzNC04YTBjLTY1NDNkMmFmODBiZSIsImMiOjh9&pageName=ReportSectionb9333061a0a2e93930ea)\n\n\n\ngender-based violence (GBV), protection of children,\nprevention of trafficking and supporting the mental\nhealth and psychosocial wellbeing of refugees in host\ncountries, needs to remain a key focus of the refugee\nresponse. In addition, the effective and early inclusion\nof refugees into national systems \u2013 including access\nto the employment market, social protection, health\nand education services - is key to helping support\ntheir self-sufficiency and mitigating these protection\nrisks.\n\n\nRights to family unity and family life are well\nestablished in international and regional law, whilst\nfamily unity provides an essential framework of\nprotection in displacement. Given the scale of family\nseparation amongst refugees from Ukraine, many\nfamilies may require access to swift, effective and\nflexible family reunification procedures as and when\nthey are able to reunite with relatives. This needs to\ninclude effective routes to family reunification for\nindividuals who may not fall within the scope of the\nTemporary Protection Directive, ensuring that families\nare able to swiftly reunify and stay together.\n\n\n\n3 R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E, 2 6 O C T O B E R 2 0 2 2\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "focus group Ukraine",
+          "confidence": 0.524081289768219,
+          "start": 123,
+          "end": 126
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "report",
+          "confidence": 0.5100113153457642,
+          "start": 52,
+          "end": 53
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "UNHCR",
+          "confidence": 0.5485061407089233,
+          "start": 59,
+          "end": 60
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Belarus",
+          "confidence": 0.5251947641372681,
+          "start": 65,
+          "end": 66
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "refugees",
+          "confidence": 0.5214029550552368,
+          "start": 45,
+          "end": 46
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "interactive online dashboard",
+          "confidence": 0.8773402571678162,
+          "start": 445,
+          "end": 448
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Ukraine",
+          "confidence": 0.8448244333267212,
+          "start": 359,
+          "end": 360
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/303c55b5-2a90-45a1-bbb4-2af67f7e1e68/20221014%20Displacement%20Patterns%2C%20Protection%20Risks%20and%20Needs%20of%20Refugees%20from%20Ukraine.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        2
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "DISPLACEMENT PATTERNS, PROTECTION RISKS AND NEEDS OF REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n\n## **2**\n\n\n\n**24% OF HOUSEHOLDS INCLUDE AT LEAST ONE PERSON AT**\n**HEIGHTENED RISK**\n\n\n\nof respondents reported at least one\n**24%**\nhousehold member with a specific need, including\npersons with disabilities, serious medical needs, older\npersons and separated or unaccompanied children.\nPersons with specific needs may face specific barriers\nthat prevent them from fully enjoying their rights or\naccessing the services they need, and can face\nheightened risks of discrimination, abuse, violence\nand neglect during displacement and in their country\nof asylum.\n\n\n\nData from protection monitoring indicates that\nhouseholds with one or more persons with specific\nneeds may have fewer resources and more limited\naccess to support networks in their host countries\nthan other groups amongst the refugee population.\nMany may have limited access to information on\nexisting services (including health) and face limitations\n\n\n\nin accessing employment opportunities, including\nfamily members who are required to provide care at\nhome.\n\n\nIt is crucial that persons with specific needs are\nsystematically identified at an early stage and referred\nto services and support in a timely manner in order\nto mitigate protection risks. UNHCR recommends\nthat procedures to identify persons at heightened\nrisk are included as part of registration procedures\nfor temporary protection and other forms of legal\nstay, as well as procedures to renew residency and\nother associated documentation in order to enhance\nopportunities for the identification of these groups.\nIdentification of individuals at heightened risk has\nto be further matched with upscaling specialized\nservices with adequate capacity and resources, which\nare adapted to the needs and numbers of persons of\nconcern.\n\n\n## **3**\n\n\n\n**31% OF RESPONDENTS DO NOT HOLD INTERNATIONAL BIOMETRIC**\n**PASSPORTS**\n\n\n\nof respondents do not hold international\n**31%**\nbiometric passports, which permit a greater freedom\nof movement. Respondents travelling without any\ntype of national passport ( **6%** of respondents)\nindicated that they were carrying ID cards, birth\ncertificates or no documents at all. In addition, data\navailable prior to the start of the international armed\nconflict demonstrates that there are groups within\nthe Ukrainian population who are stateless, or who\nmay lack the civil documentation needed to acquire\nor confirm their Ukrainian citizenship and are at risk\nof statelessness.2 This has also been confirmed by\nongoing monitoring and legal support activities in\nhosting countries.\n\n\n\nWhilst states have implemented flexible approaches\nto documentation for individuals seeking to leave\nUkraine as a result of the international armed conflict,\nreliable access to civil documentation is likely to\nbecome a pressing concern for many refugees in\n\n\n\norder to ensure their continued access to rights and\nservices. A lack of civil documentation may also\npose a barrier to return, once conditions permit.\nThis is particularly the case for those who lack key\nforms of Ukrainian civil documentation, those whose\ndocuments have since expired, for children who may\nnot hold passports or have been born in displacement\nand for former residents of non-government\ncontrolled areas of Ukraine. Providing avenues\nfor issuance and replacement of Ukrainian civil\ndocumentation in host countries, including through\nUkrainian Embassies abroad, would be important in\nthis regard. Improving systems to identify stateless\npersons and those at risk of statelessness amongst\nthe refugee population from Ukraine, providing\navenues for documentation, status determination and\nemploying an expansive application of the Temporary\nProtection Directive to include these groups, is also\nkey in ensuring their protection.\n\n\n\n2 UNHCR 2022: Global Trends. Forced Displacement in 2021 [https://www.unhcr.org/62a9d1494/global-trends-report-2021](https://www.unhcr.org/62a9d1494/global-trends-report-2021)\n\n\n4 R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E, 2 6 O C T O B E R 2 0 2 2\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "data",
+          "confidence": 0.6901347041130066,
+          "start": 392,
+          "end": 393
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Ukraine",
+          "confidence": 0.7037409543991089,
+          "start": 468,
+          "end": 469
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "Ukrainian population",
+          "confidence": 0.8578609824180603,
+          "start": 410,
+          "end": 412
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "systems to identify stateless\npersons",
+          "confidence": 0.5830639004707336,
+          "start": 597,
+          "end": 602
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Ukraine",
+          "confidence": 0.8078939318656921,
+          "start": 468,
+          "end": 469
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2022",
+          "confidence": 0.5689936280250549,
+          "start": 647,
+          "end": 648
+        },
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "refugee population from Ukraine",
+          "confidence": 0.5101903080940247,
+          "start": 610,
+          "end": 614
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/303c55b5-2a90-45a1-bbb4-2af67f7e1e68/20221014%20Displacement%20Patterns%2C%20Protection%20Risks%20and%20Needs%20of%20Refugees%20from%20Ukraine.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        3
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "## **4**\n\n\n\nDISPLACEMENT PATTERNS, PROTECTION RISKS AND NEEDS OF REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n\n**ACCOMMODATION AND EMPLOYMENT ARE AMONGST REFUGEES\u2019**\n**PRIORITY NEEDS**\n\n\n\n**Accommodation** and **employment** were highlighted\nas two major and immediate needs reported by\nrefugees, followed by material assistance and\nhealthcare. Respondents additionally highlighted\npriority needs for information on how to access\n**job opportunities,** **medical care, legal status,**\n**accommodation** and **education.**\n\n\n\nHost countries should seek to enhance the economic\nand financial inclusion of refugees from Ukraine,\nincluding access to decent work. This is especially\nimportant given that the majority of respondents\nreported plans to stay in their current host country in\nthe near future. The overall high levels of education\nand the diverse professional skills identified amongst\nthe refugee population can help facilitate this\nprocess.\n\n\n\nagainst protection risks and potential negative coping\nmechanisms and contribute to their host communities.\n\n\nRefugees equally require access to reliable and\naccessible information on how they can access such\nopportunities, services and support in their host\ncountries. It is crucial that all actors work to ensure\nequal access to information on rights, obligations\nand available services as early as possible, through\nmultiple channels and in accessible formats while\nensuring coordination amongst the relevant actors.\n\n\nInformation needs to be provided in line with the\ncommunity\u2019s communication needs and preferences\nas well as in a language they understand. Whilst\nthe majority of respondents preferred to receive\ninformation through digital channels, it is important\nto ensure that a range of communication channels\nand formats are utilised in order to effectively\ncommunicate with all sections of the refugee\ncommunity, including those who may not have\naccess to or be familiar with digital platforms.\nSharing information and key messages via Ukrainian\ncommunity groups and refugee-led organisations will\nbe key in this regard. Information also needs to be\nadapted to persons with specific needs, in particular\npersons with disabilities, older persons and children.\n\n\n\nIt is recommended refugees are afforded additional\nopportunities for learning relevant languages and\nprovided with systems to obtain or recognize\nrelevant qualifications. Considering the high levels\nof family separation and significant proportion of\nsingle caretaker households, access to adequate\nand affordable childcare will be crucial in ensuring\naccess to employment opportunities. Addressing\nthe priority needs of refugees will help support their\nsocio-economic inclusion in host countries, mitigate\n\n\n## **5**\n\n\n\n**63% OF RESPONDENTS PLAN TO STAY IN THEIR CURRENT HOST**\n**COUNTRY IN THE NEAR FUTURE**\n\n\n\nThe current humanitarian crisis in Ukraine coupled\nwith multiple potential safety and security risks in\ncase of return means that host countries should\ncontinue to offer the refugee population access to\npredictable legal status, which enables access to\ndecent work, financial products and entrepreneurship,\nand mitigate potential push factors which risk\nindividuals resorting to negative coping mechanisms\nor premature returns to Ukraine, especially by\npersons at heightened risk, due to the inability to\ncover their basic needs. This is particularly important\ngiven that approximately **21%** of respondents who\nreported an intention to return to Ukraine in the near\nfuture indicated having to consider return to Ukraine\ndue to economic reasons or the need to access basic\nservices, despite reporting fears surrounding their\npotential return due to the ongoing international\narmed conflict.\n\n\n\nRefugees should be empowered to make free\nand informed choices about potential return to\nUkraine. This may include sharing information about\nconditions and available assistance in areas of origin,\ncounselling individuals on their ability to re-enter host\ncountries following a return journey and providing\nadequate support whilst refugees remain in countries\nof asylum.\n\n\nGiven the high levels of family separation as well\nas the importance of staying informed about the\ncurrent situation in Ukraine, including with a view to\npotential future returns, calls for a flexible approach\nto refugee visits to Ukraine to see family, check on\nproperty, arrange for necessary documents, prepare\nto return or for other reasons. Legal status and access\nto rights in host countries should not be prematurely\nwithdrawn as a result of decisions to travel to Ukraine.\n\n\n\n5 R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E, 2 6 O C T O B E R 2 0 2 2\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/303c55b5-2a90-45a1-bbb4-2af67f7e1e68/20221014%20Displacement%20Patterns%2C%20Protection%20Risks%20and%20Needs%20of%20Refugees%20from%20Ukraine.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        4
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "DISPLACEMENT PATTERNS, PROTECTION RISKS AND NEEDS OF REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/303c55b5-2a90-45a1-bbb4-2af67f7e1e68/20221014%20Displacement%20Patterns%2C%20Protection%20Risks%20and%20Needs%20of%20Refugees%20from%20Ukraine.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        5
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "DISPLACEMENT PATTERNS, PROTECTION RISKS AND NEEDS OF REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/303c55b5-2a90-45a1-bbb4-2af67f7e1e68/20221014%20Displacement%20Patterns%2C%20Protection%20Risks%20and%20Needs%20of%20Refugees%20from%20Ukraine.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        6
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "DISPLACEMENT PATTERNS, PROTECTION RISKS AND NEEDS OF REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n# Context\n\n\n\nSince the onset of the Russian Federation\u2019s invasion\nof Ukraine, nearly **one-third of Ukrainians** have\nbeen forced from their homes, which represents\none of the largest human displacement crises in the\n\n\n\nto basic services such as health, water, electricity\nand gas supplies. Within Ukraine, **nearly 7 million**\n**people remain displaced** by the war.\u00b3\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n8 R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E, 2 6 O C T O B E R 2 0 2 2\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/303c55b5-2a90-45a1-bbb4-2af67f7e1e68/20221014%20Displacement%20Patterns%2C%20Protection%20Risks%20and%20Needs%20of%20Refugees%20from%20Ukraine.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        7
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "DISPLACEMENT PATTERNS, PROTECTION RISKS AND NEEDS OF REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n# Methodology\n\n\n\n**Protection monitoring** is a core UNHCR activity\nwhich is carried out to systematically collect\ninformation on the key risks, threats, barriers to\nenjoyment of rights and other challenges affecting\nrefugees, among other population groups. The\nresults of protection monitoring allow UNHCR\nand partners to base responses on the resulting\nevidence and additionally places the experiences\nand perspectives of refugees at the centre of needs\nassessments, programming and advocacy.\n\n\nTo strengthen and promote an evidence-based\nprotection response, UNHCR and its partners have\nimplemented a Protection Profiling and Monitoring\nexercise to regularly collect and analyze data about\nthe profiles, needs and intentions of refugees\nfrom Ukraine and monitor changes over time. This\n\n\n\nreport presents the main results based on **over**\n**34,000 interviews** conducted between **May and**\n**September 2022** in **Bulgaria, Belarus, Hungary,**\n**Republic of Moldova, Poland, Romania and**\n**Slovakia** .\n\n\nInterviews are conducted in different locations,\nincluding border and transit locations, reception\nand transit centres, collective sites, and information\nand assistance points in major cities. Trained\nenumerators from UNHCR and partners digitally\ncollected the data through Kobo Toolbox, which is\nsafely stored in a UNHCR server. Respondents are\nidentified in the selected locations and asked for\ntheir consent to be interviewed using a harmonized\nregional questionnaire.\n\n\n\n**RESPONDENTS BY COUNTRY** **PLACES OF DATA COLLECTION**\n\n\n\n(7%)\n\n\n\nPoland\n\nMoldova\n\nRomania\n\nSlovakia\n\nBelarus\n\nHungary\n\nBulgaria\n\n\n\n1,390\n\n540\n\n127\n\n\n\n18,626\n\n\n\nCollective sites\n\n\nBorder point\n(9%)\n\n\nTransport hubs\n(17%)\n\n\n\nOther\n\n\n\nPrivate\naccommodation\n(3%)\n\nAssistance point\n(33%)\n\n\nTransit centres\n(19%)\n\n\n\n5,038\n\n4,527\n\n3,909\n\n\n\nThe results presented in this report must be\ninterpreted according to the limitations of the\nmethodology and given the context of ongoing\nmovements, particularly:\n\n\n- While the random selection of respondents and\ndiversification in places of data collection are\nused to reduce potential bias and ensure the\nsample covers different segments and profiles of\nthe target population, results cannot necessarily\nbe extrapolated to the population of refugees\nfrom Ukraine as a whole, given the nonprobabilistic sampling method used.\n\n- Considering ongoing population movements,\nand given that the distribution of number of\n\n\n\ninterviews per country reflects in general the\ndistribution of total estimated number of\nrefugees from Ukraine recorded in the selected\ncountries (except for Bulgaria, where the\nexercise started later and is currently scaling up),\ncountry samples have not been weighted for this\nregional analysis.\n\n\n\n\n- The results reflect refugees\u2019 situation, needs and\nintentions at the time of data collection, which\nmay subsequently change depending on a wide\nrange of factors.\n\n\n\n\n- Most enumerators were Ukrainian and/or\nRussian speakers, which could have limited\ninterviews with refugees from other nationalities.\n\n\n\n9 R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E, 2 6 O C T O B E R 2 0 2 2\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Protection Profiling and Monitoring\nexercise",
+          "confidence": 0.7222514748573303,
+          "start": 107,
+          "end": 112
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "interviews",
+          "confidence": 0.5287618041038513,
+          "start": 153,
+          "end": 154
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "UNHCR",
+          "confidence": 0.9496464729309082,
+          "start": 22,
+          "end": 23
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2022",
+          "confidence": 0.6997293829917908,
+          "start": 167,
+          "end": 168
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2022",
+          "confidence": 0.5832954049110413,
+          "start": 167,
+          "end": 168
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE",
+          "confidence": 0.5994867086410522,
+          "start": 8,
+          "end": 11
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Kobo Toolbox",
+          "confidence": 0.8272464275360107,
+          "start": 240,
+          "end": 242
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "UNHCR",
+          "confidence": 0.8124438524246216,
+          "start": 232,
+          "end": 233
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2022",
+          "confidence": 0.680314302444458,
+          "start": 167,
+          "end": 168
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "Respondents",
+          "confidence": 0.8891129493713379,
+          "start": 252,
+          "end": 253
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "harmonized\nregional questionnaire",
+          "confidence": 0.6245858669281006,
+          "start": 269,
+          "end": 272
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "UNHCR",
+          "confidence": 0.616280734539032,
+          "start": 232,
+          "end": 233
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "Respondents",
+          "confidence": 0.8893271684646606,
+          "start": 252,
+          "end": 253
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "report",
+          "confidence": 0.5750845670700073,
+          "start": 354,
+          "end": 355
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "report",
+          "confidence": 0.5974566340446472,
+          "start": 354,
+          "end": 355
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "refugees\nfrom Ukraine",
+          "confidence": 0.5065313577651978,
+          "start": 418,
+          "end": 421
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "country samples",
+          "confidence": 0.7408842444419861,
+          "start": 484,
+          "end": 486
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Ukraine",
+          "confidence": 0.7654500603675842,
+          "start": 461,
+          "end": 462
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "refugees",
+          "confidence": 0.8056479692459106,
+          "start": 459,
+          "end": 460
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/303c55b5-2a90-45a1-bbb4-2af67f7e1e68/20221014%20Displacement%20Patterns%2C%20Protection%20Risks%20and%20Needs%20of%20Refugees%20from%20Ukraine.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        8
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "DISPLACEMENT PATTERNS, PROTECTION RISKS AND NEEDS OF REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n# Demographic and displacement patterns\n\n#### **Demographics**\n\n\n\nAn absolute majority **(99%)** of respondents were\ncitizens of Ukraine, most of them women **(86%)** .\n\n\nRespondents usually travelled from Ukraine\naccompanied ( **74%** ), mainly by close family\nmembers ( **91%** ). Comparing those travelling alone\nversus those travelling accompanied, a higher\nproportion were males ( **20% vs 12%** ), a lower\n\n\n\nproportion were aged between 35 to 59 years old\n( **47% vs 56%** ) and a lower proportion were aged 60\nyears or more ( **25% vs 14%** ). Women and children\nrepresented **88%** of all family members that left\nUkraine together and **13%** of all family members\nwere older persons. Among those who travelled\naccompanied, around **5%** of respondents reported\ntravelling with unrelated children.\n\n\n\n**NATIONALITY AND GENDER** **IMMEDIATE FAMILY AGE GROUP AND GENDER***\n\n\nFemale Male\n\n\n\n**99%**\nare Ukrainians\n\n\nof respondents\nwere females\n\n\n\n_*including the respondent_\n\n\n\n10 R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E, 2 6 O C T O B E R 2 0 2 2\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "DISPLACEMENT PATTERNS",
+          "confidence": 0.7363151907920837,
+          "start": 0,
+          "end": 2
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "UKRAINE",
+          "confidence": 0.9954801797866821,
+          "start": 10,
+          "end": 11
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "REFUGEES",
+          "confidence": 0.6604844331741333,
+          "start": 8,
+          "end": 9
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/303c55b5-2a90-45a1-bbb4-2af67f7e1e68/20221014%20Displacement%20Patterns%2C%20Protection%20Risks%20and%20Needs%20of%20Refugees%20from%20Ukraine.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        9
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "of respondents had a tertiary level of\n###### **75%**\neducation (university level **46%** and vocational level\n**29%** ). **Almost three quarters of respondents** ( **73%** )\nwere employed before leaving Ukraine, while **13%**\nwere retired, **8%** engaged in family responsibilities\nand **5%** unemployed.\n\n\n\nFor respondents who were employed prior to\ndeparting Ukraine, they reported having diverse\nprofessional experience, particularly in the\neducation, services and trade sectors as well as in\nhealthcare.\n\n\n\n**EDUCATION LEVEL** **TOP OCCUPATIONAL SECTORS***\n\n\n\n11%\n\n11%\n\n\n\nUniversity\n\nVocational\n\nSecondary\n\nPost university\n\nNo education\n\nPrimary\n\n\n\n46%\n\n\n\nWholesale & retail\n\nEducation\n\nHealthcare\n\nConstruction\n\nBeauty salon\n\nHotel & restaurant\n\nSocial services\n\n\nPublic administration\n\n\n\n29%\n\n\n\n21%\n\n\n\n6%\n\n\n\n2%\n\n1%\n\n1%\n\n\n\n3%\n\n3%\n\n3%\n\n\n\n4%\n\n4%\n\n4%\n\n\n\nData demonstrates some changes in the profile of\nrespondents depending on the date of departure\nfrom Ukraine. In particular, comparing those who\ndeparted more recently (July-to-September)\nagainst those who departed at the beginning of the\n\n\n\n\n_* Multiple responses possible, so percentages can go over 100% when added._\n\n\ninternational conflict (February-to-March), we find\nthat: a higher proportion are males ( **24% vs 8%** ); a\nlower proportion have university level education\n( **39% vs 53%** ); and a higher proportion travelled\nalone ( **32% vs 18%** ).\n\n\n\n11 R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E, 2 6 O C T O B E R 2 0 2 2\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Data",
+          "confidence": 0.7978630065917969,
+          "start": 191,
+          "end": 192
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Ukraine",
+          "confidence": 0.977910578250885,
+          "start": 61,
+          "end": 62
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "respondents",
+          "confidence": 0.9945005178451538,
+          "start": 1,
+          "end": 2
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/303c55b5-2a90-45a1-bbb4-2af67f7e1e68/20221014%20Displacement%20Patterns%2C%20Protection%20Risks%20and%20Needs%20of%20Refugees%20from%20Ukraine.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        10
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "DISPLACEMENT PATTERNS, PROTECTION RISKS AND NEEDS OF REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n#### **Displacement patterns**\n\n\n\n**Around half** of respondents were forced to leave\ntheir place of origin between end-February and\nMarch 2022. The overall top three places of origin\nwere **Odeska** and **Kharkivska oblasts** and **Kyiv city** .\n\n\nA majority of refugees originating from **Kyiv City,**\n**Kyivska, Kharkivska, Sumska, Zhytomyrska,**\n\n\n\n**Zaporizka and Dnipropetrovska oblasts** left their\nhomes in the beginning of the crisis in February\nand March, whilst those originating from **Odeska,**\n**Mykolaivska, Khersonska, Donetska, Luhanska**\nwere more likely to have left between April and\nSeptember 2022.\n\n\n\n**DATE OF DEPARTURE** **TOP PLACES OF ORIGIN**\n\n\n\n38%\n\n\n\n14%\n\n\n\n12%\n\n\n\n10%\n\n\n\n8%\n\n8%\n\n\n\n11% 11%\n7% 8%\n\n\n\n3%\n\n\n\n7%\n\n\n\n10%\n\n\n\n12%\n\n\n\nOdeska\n\nKharkivska\n\nKyiv city\n\nDonetska\n\nDnipropetrovska\n\nMykolaivska\n\nZaporizka\n\nKhersonska\n\n\n\n5%\n\n\n\nKyivska\n\nFeb Mar Apri May Jun Jul Aug Sep\n\nLvivska 3%\n\n\n\n4%\n\n4%\n\n\n\n**17%** of respondents were displaced in Ukraine before leaving the country. People originating from **Luhanska,**\n**Donetska, Kharkivska, Kyivska, Khersonska, Chernihivska oblasts** and **Kyiv City** were more often displaced in\nUkraine before deciding to leave the country.\n\n\n**15% of respondents** transited through at least one other country before arriving to their current host country;\nhowever, for those interviewed in Bulgaria and Belarus the large majority ( **94% and 82%** ) transited through\nanother country, in contrast to those interviewed in Moldova and Hungary ( **3% and 7%** ). The main observed\nroutes by country were as follows:\n\n\n\n\n- **Poland: 12%** of respondents transited through\nother countries, half of whom travelled through\nRussia and subsequently Belarus and/or Baltic\ncountries, while the rest arrived via other\nneighboring countries (Moldova, Romania,\nHungary and/or Slovakia). Most refuges who\ntravelled through Russia originated from\n**Donetska, Khersonska, Kharkivska, Luhanska**\nand **Zaporizka** oblasts.\n\n- **Romania: 25%** of respondents transited through\nother countries, and among them **83%** travelled\nthrough Moldova.\n\n\n\n\n- **Slovakia: 16%** of respondents transited through\nother countries, and among them **52%** travelled\nthrough Poland, while the rest arrived via other\nneighboring countries (Moldova, Romania,\nHungary)\n\n- **Belarus: 82%** of respondents transited through\nother countries, and among them **61%** travelled\nthrough Poland and **39%** through Russia.\n\n- **Bulgaria: 94%** of respondents transited through\nother countries, and among them **80%** travelled\nthrough Romania.\n\n\n\n**23% of respondents** had been back to Ukraine at least once since their initial departure.\n\n\n12 R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E, 2 6 O C T O B E R 2 0 2 2\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "DATE OF DEPARTURE",
+          "confidence": 0.5702160596847534,
+          "start": 153,
+          "end": 156
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Ukraine",
+          "confidence": 0.5461104512214661,
+          "start": 232,
+          "end": 233
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "respondents",
+          "confidence": 0.8220197558403015,
+          "start": 228,
+          "end": 229
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/303c55b5-2a90-45a1-bbb4-2af67f7e1e68/20221014%20Displacement%20Patterns%2C%20Protection%20Risks%20and%20Needs%20of%20Refugees%20from%20Ukraine.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        11
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "DISPLACEMENT PATTERNS, PROTECTION RISKS AND NEEDS OF REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n# Protection overview\n\n#### **Family separations and support networks**\n\n\n\nThe majority of respondents ( **78%** ) reported that\nthey had been separated from some of their\nimmediate family members as a result of their\ndeparture from Ukraine, the primary reason being\n\n\n\nlimitations on freedom of movement for men due\nto martial law. The second most cited reason for\nseparation was family members not wanting to\nleave their homes.\n\n\n\n**FAMILY SEPARATION** **FAMILY SEPARATION REASONS***\n\n\nMilitary conscription\n\n\n\n56%\n\n\n\n50%\n\n\n\nsepareted from other\n\nfamily members\n\n\n\nDid not want to leave\n\n\nUnable to move/travel\n\n\nOther\n\n\n\n3%\n\n\n\n33%\n\n\n\n\n_* Multiple responses possible, so percentages can go over 100% when added._\n\n\n\nFamily separation in a refugee context can\nexacerbate several protection risks including\ngender-based violence, human trafficking,\nexploitation, isolation and trauma. This is particularly\nthe case for persons at heightened risk, including\nbut not limited to unaccompanied and separated\nchildren, persons with serious medical conditions,\nolder persons and persons with disabilities. In\naddition, only **12%** of respondents reported that\nthey had family members in their current host\n\n\n\ncountry, which may indicate limited formal support\nnetworks and a potential for increased vulnerability\nin the current context. More than half of\nrespondents who had family members in the host\ncountry mentioned that this was their main\nmotivation for choosing this country of destination.\nHouseholds travelling with dependents \u2013 infants,\nchildren and/or older persons \u2013 were more likely to\nreport plans to remain in their current location.\n\n\n\n13 R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E, 2 6 O C T O B E R 2 0 2 2\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/303c55b5-2a90-45a1-bbb4-2af67f7e1e68/20221014%20Displacement%20Patterns%2C%20Protection%20Risks%20and%20Needs%20of%20Refugees%20from%20Ukraine.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        12
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "#### **Persons with Specific Needs**\n\n\n\n**24% of respondents** reported having at least one\nfamily member with specific needs. Disability was\nthe most frequently reported specific need ( **12%** ),\nfollowed by family members with serious medical\nconditions ( **11%** ) and older persons with specific\nprotection risks ( **10%** ).\n\n\n**Slovakia and Romania** had the highest reported\nnumber of households with at least one person with\nspecific needs ( **30% and 26%** ), whilst **Belarus and**\n**Hungary** had the lowest ( **13%** ).\n\n\n**Healthcare** was highlighted as one of the top\npriority needs by respondents who had family\nmembers with specific needs, along with **cash**\nand **accommodation** . Such respondents were\nmore likely to reside in collective accommodation\nor transit/reception centres rather than rented or\nhosted accommodation, which may indicate lower\nlevels of financial means, lower levels of access to\nsupport networks in host countries and subsequent\nincreased vulnerability as compared to other\nsections of the refugee population.\n\n\nFocus group discussions have further revealed that\nsituation of families with specific needs has been\ngradually deteriorating with a lack of resources\n\n\n\nand limited access to job markets. Older persons\nand persons with disabilities who faced disruption\nor loss of family and income were in particular\nneed of in-person information on how to access\nsocial services and additional support.\u2074 Language\nassistance when accessing healthcare and relevant\nservices has also been highlighted as a need for\nthese groups.\n\n\nRefugees taking care of persons with specific needs\nand children highlighted difficulties in accessing\njob markets and available opportunities due to the\nneed to provide care at home. This would often\nexacerbate their vulnerability, especially if they\ndid not have additional support from their family\nmembers or networks.\n\n\n**RESPONDENTS WITH AT LEAST 1 FAMILY MEMBER AT**\n**HEIGHTENED RISKS**\n\n\n\nDisability\n\n\nMedical conditions\n\n\nOlder persons\n\n\n\n11%\n\n\n10%\n\n\n\n12%\n\n\n\n4. UNHCR 2022: Refugees from Ukraine in Poland \u2013 Profiling Update (June): https://data.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/94977\n\n\n14 R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E, 2 6 O C T O B E R 2 0 2 2\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Persons with Specific Needs",
+          "confidence": 0.790257453918457,
+          "start": 6,
+          "end": 10
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "respondents",
+          "confidence": 0.7949749827384949,
+          "start": 17,
+          "end": 18
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "priority needs by respondents",
+          "confidence": 0.5858930945396423,
+          "start": 150,
+          "end": 154
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "host countries",
+          "confidence": 0.6078759431838989,
+          "start": 215,
+          "end": 217
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "refugee population",
+          "confidence": 0.7630547881126404,
+          "start": 228,
+          "end": 230
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/303c55b5-2a90-45a1-bbb4-2af67f7e1e68/20221014%20Displacement%20Patterns%2C%20Protection%20Risks%20and%20Needs%20of%20Refugees%20from%20Ukraine.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        13
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "DISPLACEMENT PATTERNS, PROTECTION RISKS AND NEEDS OF REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n#### **Documentation**\n\n\n\n**94% of respondents** reported that they had\ntravelled from Ukraine with their national passports,\nwith **74%** of them carrying biometric international\npassports, **7%** non-biometric international passports\nand **19%** internal (non-international) passports. The\nUkrainian biometric international passport accords\ngreater freedom of movement to its holders,\n\n\n\nparticularly within the Schengen area where it is\npossible for holders to move between countries\nwithout first obtaining a visa. Those travelling\nwithout passports ( **6%** ) reported having ID cards\nand/or birth certificates with them, with **1%** of\nrespondents reporting that they did not have any of\nthese documents.\n\n\n\n**DOCUMENTS CARRYING DURING TRAVEL** **PASSPORT TYPE***\n\n\n\nNational passport\n\n\nId Card\n\n\nBirth certificate\n\n\n\n22%\n\n\n21%\n\n\n\n94%\n\n\n\nBiometric\n\n\nInternal\n\n\nNon-biometric\n\n\n\n74%\n\n\n\n7%\n\n\n\n20%\n\n\n\nAt the end of 2021, UNHCR estimated as many as\n35,815 persons under its statelessness mandate\nin Ukraine.\u2075 Moreover, according to the Ukrainian\nGovernment\u2019s statistics, 6,047 stateless persons\nwere legally residing in Ukraine at the end of\n2021.\u2076\n\n\nIn addition, according to unofficial estimates\nof international and civil society organizations,\nthere are between 200,000 and 400,000 Roma\npeople living in Ukraine. Between 4 to 8% of the\nRoma community are believed to lack the civil\ndocumentation needed to acquire or confirm their\nUkrainian citizenship.\u2077 In addition, children born\nin non-government controlled areas (NGCA) face\nchallenges in accessing civil documentation issued\nby the Government of Ukraine, placing them at\nrisk of being unable to confirm their Ukrainian\ncitizenship as documents issued in the NGCA are\nnot legally recognized.\n\n\n\n\n_* Due to rounding some percent totals do not add up to 100%._\n\n\nChallenges for stateless persons and those at risk\nof statelessness include an increased risk of being\ndetained or forcibly returned due to lack of proof\nof identity, nationality or country of origin; greater\nrestrictions on freedom of movement; difficulties\nin accessing registration and legal status due to\nlack of documentation; challenges in returning to\nUkraine in case of lack of documentation; difficulties\nin accessing financial or humanitarian aid for which\ndocumentation may be required; fears among\nstateless individuals to approach authorities or\nlocal community for assistance due to longstanding\nmarginalization. Whilst some data on temporary\nprotection granted to stateless persons who\nfled Ukraine has been published, the systematic\nidentification of stateless persons remains a gap.\n\n\n\n5. UNHCR 2022: Global Trends. Forced Displacement in 2021. [https://www.unhcr.org/62a9d1494/global-trends-report-2021](https://www.unhcr.org/62a9d1494/global-trends-report-2021)\n6. UNHCR, Stateless persons: [https://www.unhcr.org/ua/en/stateless-persons](https://www.unhcr.org/ua/en/stateless-persons)\n7. Ibid.\n\n\n15 R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E, 2 6 O C T O B E R 2 0 2 2\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Ukrainian\nGovernment\u2019s statistics",
+          "confidence": 0.6869117617607117,
+          "start": 219,
+          "end": 224
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "UNHCR",
+          "confidence": 0.5166462063789368,
+          "start": 197,
+          "end": 198
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Ukraine",
+          "confidence": 0.9755761027336121,
+          "start": 211,
+          "end": 212
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2021",
+          "confidence": 0.7287007570266724,
+          "start": 195,
+          "end": 196
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "stateless persons",
+          "confidence": 0.9165919423103333,
+          "start": 228,
+          "end": 230
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "data on temporary\nprotection granted to stateless persons",
+          "confidence": 0.5375407934188843,
+          "start": 462,
+          "end": 470
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Ukraine",
+          "confidence": 0.9839158654212952,
+          "start": 472,
+          "end": 473
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2021",
+          "confidence": 0.581140398979187,
+          "start": 498,
+          "end": 499
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "stateless persons",
+          "confidence": 0.8868597745895386,
+          "start": 468,
+          "end": 470
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/303c55b5-2a90-45a1-bbb4-2af67f7e1e68/20221014%20Displacement%20Patterns%2C%20Protection%20Risks%20and%20Needs%20of%20Refugees%20from%20Ukraine.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        14
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "DISPLACEMENT PATTERNS, PROTECTION RISKS AND NEEDS OF REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n#### **Situation in host countries and priority** **needs**\n\n\n\nRefugees reported **safety, family ties and**\n**employment opportunities** as their top three\nmotivations for arriving to the current host country.\n**Family ties** were more frequently reported as a\nreason by respondents in Belarus and Moldova,\nwhile **employment opportunities** were highlighted\nmore often by respondents in Hungary.\n\n\nWhilst **cash** was identified as the most common\nurgent need, it should be noted that cash is viewed\nas a modality in order to meet other basic needs.\nIn this respect, it is likely that the need for cash\nis strongly correlated to the other urgent needs:\nemployment and accommodation, amongst\nothers, including healthcare. **Accommodation**\nwas identified as the most urgent need in Slovakia\nwhilst **employment** was the top need in Hungary. In\naddition, **healthcare** was mentioned as one of the\nthree priority needs in Moldova and Romania.\n\n\nThe majority of respondents **(66%)** were staying in\nhosted or rented accommodation, while **30%** were\nstaying in collective or planned sites (including\ntemporary accommodation in reception / transit\ncenters). Refugees were more likely to stay in\ncollective or planned accommodation in **Hungary**\nand **Romania** . **One third of respondents** were living\nin rented accommodation, with lower proportions in\n**Moldova** and **Romania** .\n\n\n**Accommodation** is likely to become a pressing\nneed, as rental costs and energy prices continue\nto increase in refugee-hosting countries. Focus\ngroup discussions highlighted confusion amongst\nparticipants on whether current host state\nsubsidies for accommodation will continue in the\nlonger term, adding to a sense of insecurity and\nuncertainty around their shelter options. Whilst\n**53%** of respondents reported that they were living\nin rented or hosted accommodation, the fact that\naccommodation continues to be reported as a\nkey need even for this group indicates that these\narrangements may not be secure in the longer term.\n\n\nFocus group discussions highlighted **challenges**\n**with women accessing employment** due to a lack\n\n\n\nof daycare, kindergarten places and other childcare\narrangements, including for school-going children.\nGiven the high levels of family separation and single\nfemale caregivers, addressing this challenge will\nbe key to enhance economic inclusion amongst\nrefugees. In addition, challenges relating to **lack of**\n**knowledge of local languages** and **lack of support**\n**for persons with disabilities to integrate into the**\n**labor market** were highlighted as affecting access\nto decent work.\n\n\n\n**URGENT NEEDS***\n\n\n1st choice 2nd choice 3rd choice\n\n\n\nCash\n\n\nEmployment\n\n\nAccommodation\n\n\nMaterial assistance\n\n\nHealthcare\n\n\nEducation\n\n\nFood\n\n\nFamily reunification\n\n\nLegal advice\n\n\nInformation avout services\n\n\nTransportation\n\n\nPsychosocial support\n\n\nA way to contact family\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n_* Multiple responses possible, so percentages can go over 100% when added._\n\n\n**CURRENT ACCOMMODATION**\n\n\nHosting accommodation\n\n\nRented accommodation\n\n\n\n34%\n\n\n32%\n\n\n\nCollective site\n\n\nReception centre\n\n\nPlanned site\n\n\nTransit centre\n\n\nOther\n\n\nI do not have anywhere to stay\n\n\n\n4%\n\n\n3%\n\n\n2%\n\n\n1%\n\n\n\n14%\n\n\n\n9%\n\n\n\n16 R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E, 2 6 O C T O B E R 2 0 2 2\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "DISPLACEMENT PATTERNS",
+          "confidence": 0.6966320872306824,
+          "start": 0,
+          "end": 2
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "UKRAINE",
+          "confidence": 0.6715033650398254,
+          "start": 10,
+          "end": 11
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "REFUGEES",
+          "confidence": 0.9830984473228455,
+          "start": 8,
+          "end": 9
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Focus\ngroup discussions",
+          "confidence": 0.9967908263206482,
+          "start": 335,
+          "end": 338
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "refugees",
+          "confidence": 0.9192293882369995,
+          "start": 478,
+          "end": 479
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/303c55b5-2a90-45a1-bbb4-2af67f7e1e68/20221014%20Displacement%20Patterns%2C%20Protection%20Risks%20and%20Needs%20of%20Refugees%20from%20Ukraine.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        15
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "DISPLACEMENT PATTERNS, PROTECTION RISKS AND NEEDS OF REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n#### **Information Needs**\n\n\n\nThe majority of respondents indicated their\nmain information needs related to **financial**\n**aid, job opportunities,** **medical care, legal**\n**status,** **accommodation** and **education** . Focus\ngroup discussion participants echoed these key\ninformation needs, including on the possibility to\naccess relevant social protection schemes and a\nlack of information on the right to healthcare and\nhow health services can be accessed.\n\n\n**55%** of respondents had high levels of digital\nawareness and preferred to receive information on\navailable services and opportunities related to their\npriority needs by **social media**, followed by **phone**\n\n\n\nand **in-person information** . **Facebook, Telegram**\n**and Viber** were the **top three** preferred digital\nways of communication. Focus group participants\nemphasised their need to receive detailed\ninformation on their rights in their host countries in\nwritten form, on posters and via Telegram.\n\n\n**Around a quarter** of respondents preferred\nreceiving in-person information or getting advice\nfrom their friends or family. People who are **over**\n**60 years of age** are more interested to receive\ninformation in person or from their friends and\nfamily, in comparison to other respondents.\n\n\n\n**INFORMATION NEEDS*** **PREFERRED INFORMATION CHANNEL***\n\n\n\nFinancial aid\n\nJob opportunities\n\nMedical care\n\nLegal status\n\nAccomodation\n\nEducation\n\nDocumentation\n\nPsychological support\n\nHow to claim asylum\n\nOther\n\nContact with relatives\n\n\n\n6%\n\n4%\n\n4%\n\n3%\n\n\n\n60%\n\n\n\nSocial media\n\n\nBy phone\n\n\nIn person information\n\n\nOrganisation websites\n\n\nFrom friends/family\n\n\nGovernment websites\n\n\nWritten information\n\n\nRadio\n\n\nOther\n\n\n\n2%\n\n\n2%\n\n\n\n55%\n\n\n\n39%\n\n34%\n\n\n\n32%\n\n\n27%\n\n\n25%\n\n\n22%\n\n\n19%\n\n\n\n28%\n\n26%\n\n\n\n20%\n\n\n\n13%\n\n\n\n9%\n\n\n\n\n_* Multiple responses possible, so percentages can go over 100% when added._\n\n\n17 R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E, 2 6 O C T O B E R 2 0 2 2\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/303c55b5-2a90-45a1-bbb4-2af67f7e1e68/20221014%20Displacement%20Patterns%2C%20Protection%20Risks%20and%20Needs%20of%20Refugees%20from%20Ukraine.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        16
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "#### **Intentions**\n\n\n\n14%\n\n\n13%\n\n\n10%\n\n\n\nWhile most refugees surveyed hope to return to\nUkraine one day,\u2079 for **the time being the majority**\n( **63%** ) of respondents reported plans to **stay in**\n**their current host country**, with safety, family ties\nand employment as main reasons for choosing\nand staying in those countries. People **staying in**\n**collective accommodation (including reception /**\n**transit centres)** were less likely to stay in the host\ncountry long term and were considering either\nreturning back to Ukraine or moving onwards.\n**Families with children** were more likely to continue\nstaying in the host country.\n\n\n\n**NEAR FUTURE INTENTIONS**\n\n\nStay in host country\n\n\nDon't know\n\n\nReturn to Ukraine\n\n\nMove to another host country\n\n\n\n63%\n\n\n\n9. 81% of respondents express their continued hope to return to Ukraine one day - UNHCR 2022: Lives on Hold: Intentions and\nPerspectives of Refugees from Ukraine #2 (page 3): [https://data.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/95767](https://data.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/95767)\n\n\n18 R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E, 2 6 O C T O B E R 2 0 2 2\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/303c55b5-2a90-45a1-bbb4-2af67f7e1e68/20221014%20Displacement%20Patterns%2C%20Protection%20Risks%20and%20Needs%20of%20Refugees%20from%20Ukraine.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        17
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "DISPLACEMENT PATTERNS, PROTECTION RISKS AND NEEDS OF REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n\n\nOnly **13%** reported plans to **return to Ukraine** in the\nnear future, but **63%** of those were uncertain as to\nwhen exactly they would do it. A higher proportion\nreported plans to return among those originating\nfrom Kyiv city ( **19%** ). The main reasons behind\nintention to return was the perception that the\nsituation had improved in their place of origin ( **24%** ),\nfollowed by financial reasons ( **13%** ) and a desire\nto go back home and reunite with family members\n( **10%** ). Among those originating from Kyiv city, a\nhigher proportion than average ( **20%** ) reported that\nthe were planning to return as advised by family\n\n\n\nmembers, whilst among those originating from\neastern oblasts a higher proportion ( **31%** ) reported\nthe main reason was perceived improved situation.\n\n\nOut of those planning to return, **88%** were intending\nto go back to the **same oblast** they were residing in\nbefore 24 February 2022, although the proportion\nvaried from **80%** among those previously residing\nin eastern oblasts to **91** to **93%** among those\npreviously living in southern and western oblasts\nand Kyiv city. Those not wanting to return to Ukraine\ncited **safety** and **fear of war** as their primary\nconcern.\n\n\n\n**WHY: REASONS TO RETURN** **WHEN: PLANNING TO RETURN** **CONCERNS ABOUT RETURNING**\n\n\nNo\n\n\n\nImproved situation 24%\n\nUncertain 70%\n\n\n\n24%\n\n\n\nUncertain\n\n\n\n70%\n\n\n\nFinancial reasons\n\n\n\n13%\n\n\n\n9%\n\n\n\n21%\n\n\n\nReunite with family\n\nOther\n\nFamily visit\n\nAdvised by family\n\nFamily evacuation\n\nEmployment\n\nEducation\n\n\n\n10%\n\n10%\n\n9%\n\n7%\n\n6%\n\n5%\n\n3%\n\n\n\nThis month\n\n\nAfter a month\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n**WHY: MAIN REASONS TO MOVE** **WHEN: PLANNING TO MOVE** **WHERE TO: TOP 5 DESTINATION**\n\n\n\nFamily ties\n\n\nSafety\n\n\nEmployment\n\n\nCommunity ties\n\n\nAsylum procedure\n\n\nAdvised\n\n\nOther\n\n\nEducation\n\n\nLanguage\n\n\n\n9%\n\n\n7%\n\n\n5%\n\n\n3%\n\n\n3%\n\n\n2%\n\n\n\n29%\n\n\n\nThis month\n\n\nUncertain\n\n\nAfter a month\n\n\n\n70%\n\n\n\n27%\n\n\n\n4%\n\n\n\nGermany\n\n\nCanada\n\n\nNorway\n\n\nPoland\n\n\nFrance\n\n\n\n23%\n\n\n\n26%\n\n\n\n10%\n\n\n\n18%\n\n\n\n5%\n\n\n4%\n\n\n3%\n\n\n\n**10%** of respondents reported plans to **move to**\n**another host country** and **14%** were uncertain\nabout their plans. Those planning to move to the\n\n\n\nthird countries cited the reasons of **family ties**,\n**safety** and **employment** as primary reasons. The\nmain country of destination was Germany ( **27%** ).10\n\n\n\n10. More detailed information on intentions of refugees from Ukraine can be found at UNHCR 2022: Lives on Hold: Profiles and\nIntentions of Refugees from Ukraine #1, [https://data.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/94176, and UNHCR 2022: Lives on Hold:](https://data.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/94176)\n[Intentions and Perspectives of Refugees from Ukraine #2, https://data.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/95767](https://data.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/95767)\n\n\n19 R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E, 2 6 O C T O B E R 2 0 2 2\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "DISPLACEMENT PATTERNS",
+          "confidence": 0.5572134852409363,
+          "start": 0,
+          "end": 2
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "UKRAINE",
+          "confidence": 0.6433653235435486,
+          "start": 10,
+          "end": 11
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "REFUGEES",
+          "confidence": 0.711714506149292,
+          "start": 8,
+          "end": 9
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/303c55b5-2a90-45a1-bbb4-2af67f7e1e68/20221014%20Displacement%20Patterns%2C%20Protection%20Risks%20and%20Needs%20of%20Refugees%20from%20Ukraine.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        18
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "### DISPLACEMENT PATTERNS, PROTECTION RISKS AND NEEDS OF REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\nREGIONAL PROTECTION ANALYSIS # 1\n\n###### Belarus, Bulgaria, Hungary, Republic of Moldova, Poland, Romania & Slovakia 26 October 2022\n\n\n**UNHCR** Regional Bureau for Europe\nrbeext@unhcr.org\n[www.unhcr.org/europe](https://www.unhcr.org/europe)\n\n\nFor further information visit the UNHCR Operational Data\n[Portal for Ukraine: https://data.unhcr.org/en/situations/ukraine](https://data.unhcr.org/en/situations/ukraine)\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/303c55b5-2a90-45a1-bbb4-2af67f7e1e68/20221014%20Displacement%20Patterns%2C%20Protection%20Risks%20and%20Needs%20of%20Refugees%20from%20Ukraine.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        19
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_35/raw/doc_35_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,380 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "**UNHCR Regional Bureau for Europe** OCTOBER 2022\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e7a4d4de-023f-4c47-a71b-303371e62100/20221017%20Implementation%20of%20TPD%20six%20months%20on.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TEMPORARY PROTECTION DIRECTIVE: SIX MONTHS ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TEMPORARY PROTECTION DIRECTIVE: SIX MONTHS ON\n\n\nContents\n\n\nExecutive summary 4\n\nKey recommendations 6\n\nContext 8\n\nMethodology 8\n\nRegistration 10\n\nAppeal 12\n\nDocumentation 13\n\n\n\nAcknowledgements\n\nInformation used in this report was collected by UNHCR and complemented with\ninformation provided by International Council of Voluntary Agencies (ICVA)\nmembers including the Danish Refugee Council (DRC), World Vision International\n(WVI) and partners such as the European Network on Statelessness and Helsinki\nFoundation.\n\n\nThe report was drafted by the Protection Unit in UNHCR\u2019s Regional Bureau for\nEurope (RBE) with analysis of data coordinated by the Data, Identity\nManagement and Analysis Unit (DIMA).\n\n\nWe are grateful for the extensive involvement and support of UNHCR\u2019s partners,\nlocal authorities, civil society, international organizations and donors. Most\nimportantly, UNHCR would like to acknowledge the resilience and strength of\nrefugees from Ukraine, who continue to share with us their challenges, fears and\nhopes.\n\n\n~~CONTACT US~~\n\nUNHCR Regional Bureau for Europe\nEmail: rbeext@unhcr.org\n\n\n**COVER PHOTOGRAPH:**\n_Poland. Refugees from Ukraine at a Blue Dot Safe Space, Protection and Support Hub in UNHCR\u2019s cash enrolment_\n_centre in Krakow Tauron Arena, May 2022 \u00a9 UNHCR/Maciej Moskwa_\n\n\n\nFreedom of movement 15\n\nFamily reunification 17\n\nPersons with specific needs 18\n\nEducation 21\n\nLabour market 23\n\nSocial protection 25\n\nHealthcare 27\n\nAccommodation 29\n\nEmerging practices: addressing barriers to rights 30\n\n\n\n2 U N H C R R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E, O C T O B E R 2 0 2 2 U N H C R R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E, O C T O B E R 2 0 2 2 3\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e7a4d4de-023f-4c47-a71b-303371e62100/20221017%20Implementation%20of%20TPD%20six%20months%20on.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TEMPORARY PROTECTION DIRECTIVE: SIX MONTHS ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TEMPORARY PROTECTION DIRECTIVE: SIX MONTHS ON\n\n\n### Executive summary\n\nBased on research conducted in 26 countries implementing the Temporary Protection Direction (TPD), this\nreport presents the main findings relating to the practical implementation of the Directive and refugees\u2019 ability\nto access and exercise rights protected under it.\n\nKey findings\n\n\n**THE RIGHTS GUARANTEED UNDER THE DIRECTIVE ARE INTERDEPENDENT:**\n**REFUGEES\u2019 INABILITY TO EXERCISE ONE RIGHT IMPEDED THE REALIZATION OF**\n**OTHER RIGHTS**\n# **1**\n\nThe inability of refugees to exercise one right often negatively impacted the enjoyment of other rights. For\nexample, delayed issuance of documentation to Temporary Protection (TP) beneficiaries impacts their ability to\naccess a wide range of rights; challenges relating to a lack of capacity in local schools significantly impedes\nadults\u2019 access to the labour market, whilst a lack of sustainable, longer-term housing has had a multifaceted\nimpact on refugees\u2019 ability to exercise their other rights including education, employment, and social protection.\n\n\n**REFUGEES ENCOUNTER A RANGE OF PRACTICAL, ADMINISTRATIVE AND**\n**LEGAL BARRIERS TO ENJOYMENT OF RIGHTS**\n# **2**\n\nLack of access to information and language barriers limit refugees\u2019 access to almost all rights provided under\nthe Directive, including registration processes, education, employment, family reunification and social\nprotection. Challenges relating to the lack of a permanent address, lack of childcare options and the inability to\nprovide documents required to access certain services were also commonly raised as barriers to the enjoyment\nof rights.\n\n\n**PERSONS WITH SPECIFIC NEEDS FACE INCREASED OBSTACLES TO ACCESS**\n**RIGHTS GUARANTEED UNDER THE DIRECTIVE; THE LACK OF SYSTEMATIC**\n**IDENTIFICATION PROCEDURES IS ONE OF THE ROOT CAUSES**\n# **3**\n\nAccording to UNHCR protection monitoring, 24% of respondents reported at least one household member with\na specific need, including persons with disabilities, serious medical needs, older persons and separated or\nunaccompanied children. [1] Yet, nine of the 26 countries monitored do not have standard procedures in place to\nidentify persons with specific needs. In the 17 countries where there are procedures in place, the process lacks\ncomprehensiveness, being largely confined to the identification of limited population groups such as\nunaccompanied and separated children or victims of human trafficking. The absence of systematic and\ncomprehensive identification procedures impedes the ability of persons with specific needs to access\nspecialized services and assistance, thereby increasing the risks they face in displacement.\n\n\n1. UNHCR protection monitoring for the Ukraine refugee situation results, May to September 2022. Protection monitoring was\nconducted in Belarus, Bulgaria, Hungary, Republic of Moldova, Poland, Romania and Slovakia.\n\n\n\n\n# **4**\n\n\n\n**SEVERAL OF THE IDENTIFIED CHALLENGES ARE EQUALLY APPLICABLE TO**\n**REFUGEES WHO HAVE BEEN GRANTED STATUS THROUGH NATIONAL ASYLUM**\n**SYSTEMS**\n\n\n\nSeveral identified challenges are equally experienced by refugees from Ukraine who have been granted\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "UNHCR protection monitoring",
+          "confidence": 0.6420170068740845,
+          "start": 486,
+          "end": 489
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "UNHCR",
+          "confidence": 0.9577789306640625,
+          "start": 486,
+          "end": 487
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2022",
+          "confidence": 0.6995015144348145,
+          "start": 499,
+          "end": 500
+        },
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e7a4d4de-023f-4c47-a71b-303371e62100/20221017%20Implementation%20of%20TPD%20six%20months%20on.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        2
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TEMPORARY PROTECTION DIRECTIVE: SIX MONTHS ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TEMPORARY PROTECTION DIRECTIVE: SIX MONTHS ON\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e7a4d4de-023f-4c47-a71b-303371e62100/20221017%20Implementation%20of%20TPD%20six%20months%20on.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        3
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "### Context\n\n\n\nThe international armed conflict in Ukraine\nprecipitated one of the largest displacement crises\nin the world. As of 12 October 2022, over 7.6 million\nrefugees from Ukraine have fled to Europe, and\nalmost seven million people have been internally\ndisplaced. In response, the European Union (EU),\nthrough the Council's Implementing Decision\n2022/382 of 4 March 2022,3 triggered the\napplication of the Temporary Protection Directive\n(TPD) 2001/55/EC, the duration of which has\nrecently been extended until March 2024.\n\n\nUNHCR welcomed the decision to activate the TPD\nin European Union Member States as one way to\nprovide immediate protection from refoulement and\naccess to rights for refugees. UNHCR has a\nparticular interest in the application and\nimplementation of the TPD in view of the specific\nrole afforded to UNHCR under the Directive,4 and\n### Methodology\n\n\nThis report is based on research conducted by\nUNHCR between July and August 2022 in 26\ncountries applying the TPD,6 complemented with\ninformation provided by members of the\nInternational Council of Voluntary Agencies (ICVA)\nmembers including the Danish Refugee Council\n(DRC), World Vision International (WVI) and partners\nsuch as the European Network on Statelessness\n(ENS) and Helsinki Foundation for 4 of the 26\n\n\n\ndue to UNHCR\u2019s mandate to provide international\nprotection to refugees. In this respect, UNHCR has\n[previously compiled a number of promising](https://data.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/93633)\n[practices relating to EU Member States\u2019 application](https://data.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/93633)\nof the TPD,5 including enhanced registration,\npromoting access to information on procedures,\nexpedited issuance of documentation and\ndigitalization of systems.\n\n\nSix months on from the activation of the TPD,\nUNHCR conducted research into the practical\nimplementation of the Directive with a focus on\nrefugees\u2019 access to rights. This report presents the\nfindings from this research, including\nrecommendations on enhancing access to rights\nand protection for refugees from Ukraine.\n\n\n\ncountries covered.7 Research was conducted\nthrough consultations with national authorities, local\nmunicipalities, partner organizations and NGOs\nassisting refugees from Ukraine and through direct\nconsultations with refugee communities themselves\non their experiences accessing their rights under\nthe Directive.\n\n\n\n3. Council Implementing Decision (EU) 2022/382 of 4 March 2022 establishing the existence of a mass influx of displaced persons from Ukraine within\nthe meaning of Article 5 of Directive 2001/55/EC, and having the effect of introducing temporary protection EUR-Lex - 32022D0382 - EN - EUR-Lex\n(europa.eu)\n4. Temporary Protection Directive (TPD) 2001/55/EC, Article 3(3)\n5. UNHCR, \u2018The EU Temporary Protection Directive in Practice 2022\u2019, May 2022, available at [https://data.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/93633](https://data.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/93633)\n6. Research was conducted in Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Republic of Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece,\nHungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain and Sweden.\n7. Greece, Italy, Romania and Poland.\n\n\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e7a4d4de-023f-4c47-a71b-303371e62100/20221017%20Implementation%20of%20TPD%20six%20months%20on.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        4
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TEMPORARY PROTECTION DIRECTIVE: SIX MONTHS ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TEMPORARY PROTECTION DIRECTIVE: SIX MONTHS ON\n\n\n### Registration\n\n**Temporary Protection Directive: Article 10**\n\n\nTo enable the effective application of the Council Decision referred to in Article 5, Member States shall register\nthe personal data referred to in Annex II, point (a), with respect to the persons enjoying temporary protection\non their territory.\n\n\nKey findings and recommendations:\n\n\n   - **Enhanced registration practices, including increased capacities and digitization, continue to**\n**demonstrate efficiencies. All Member States should be actively encouraged to apply similar**\n**practices to enhance access to protection and rights under the TPD.**\n\n   - **TP beneficiaries highlight a need for accurate information on registration processes, rights**\n**attached to TP status and interpretation services at registration points. In some countries,**\n**local authorities require additional guidance on the rights of third country nationals and**\n**stateless persons to access TP registration.**\n\n\n**TOP 5 BARRIERS TO REGISTRATION**\n\n\n\nAt the beginning of the crisis, refugees in several\ncountries reported long queues and waiting times\nassociated with Temporary Protection (TP)\nregistration. This was partially attributed to the large\nnumber of people seeking TP and their uneven\nconcentration in some areas. Multiple countries\nhave since introduced measures to expedite the\nprocess, notably through digitizing the registration\nprocess. Apart from accelerating the process,\ndigitization has significantly expanded geographical\nreach. Nevertheless, some refugees have\nencountered difficulties accessing online\nregistration portals, including due to digital illiteracy\nand language barriers. As of August 2022, in 21 of\nthe 26 countries monitored the registration process\ntakes between 30 minutes to a few days. In the\nremaining five countries, however, the process\ncould last a few weeks to four months. In some\ncases, registration capacities which were scaled up\nat the beginning of the crisis were reduced,\nprolonging the registration process for new arrivals.\nDelays in the registration process impacts\nindividuals\u2019 abilities to access rights protected\nunder the Directive.\n\n\nRefugees reported experiencing several other\nchallenges including a lack of accurate and clear\ninformation about the registration process and the\nrights attached to their status, challenges echoed in\ninformation collected by ICVA network member\nWVI. In some countries, support centres which\nprovide information are located in large cities, which\nare challenging for TP beneficiaries located in rural\nareas to access. Refugees thus mostly relied on\ninformation provided by family members,\ncommunity-based organizations or on information\ngathered through social media outlets which may\nnot be accurate. ICVA network members also\nhighlighted the challenges which older persons face\nin accessing information on registration processes\nwhich is primarily provided through online platforms.\n\n\n\nA lack of interpretation services at registration\npoints was also routinely reported. In some cases,\nvolunteers were sporadically providing\ninterpretation services, but multiple countries\nreported a general lack of predictable interpretation\nservices for individuals seeking to apply for TP,\nwhich created a barrier to understanding and\naccessing registration services.\n\n\nIn addition, although non-Ukrainian nationals are\nincluded under the provisions of the TPD in certain\ncases, [8] a lack of clear guidance to registration staff\nin this regard has reportedly led to some nonUkrainian nationals being denied permission to\nregister or being required to provide additional\ndocumentary evidence relating to their inability to\nreturn to their countries of origin in safe and durable\nconditions. This has resulted in some third country\nnationals being redirected to the regular asylum\nprocedure, despite their prima facie entitlement to\nprotection under the TPD, risking adding an\nadditional burden to national asylum procedures.\nICVA members (Helsinki Foundation through DRC)\nadditionally reported challenges in some cases for\nundocumented individuals and stateless persons to\nestablish their identity and eligibility for TP, with\nresulting challenges in accessing TP registration\nprocedures.\n\n\nUNHCR additionally identified challenges facing\nsome individuals who change their place of\nresidence from one EU MS to another after having\napplied for TP in their first host country. Such\nindividuals, at times, face challenges in accessing\nTP registration in their new host country and are\nasked for evidence that they have \u2018de-registered\u2019\nthemselves in the first MS they were registered in,\ndespite guidance from the European Commission to\nthe contrary. [9]\n\n\n\ninformation\n\n\n\nlack of interpretation difficulty accessing refusal of access to difficulty accessing\n\nlong queues\n\n\n\nrefusal of access to\n\nregistration services\n\n\n\nlack of interpretation\n\n\n\ndifficulty accessing\n\n\n\nservices\n\n\n\nregistration point\n\n\n\ncountries **countries** countries countries countries\n\n\n\n8. As set out in Council Implementing Decision (EU) 2022/382 of 4 March 2022 establishing the existence of a mass influx of displaced persons from\n[Ukraine within the meaning of Article 5 of Directive 2001/55/EC, and having the effect of introducing temporary protection, available at: https://eur-](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:32022D0382)\n[lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:32022D0382.](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:32022D0382)\n9. European Commission\u2019s \u2018Frequently asked questions received on the interpretation of the Temporary Protection Directive and\nCouncil Implementing Decision 2022/382\u2019, available at: [https://home-afairs.ec.europa.eu/system/fles/2022-07/Frequently%20](https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2022-07/Frequently%20asked%20questions%20received%20o)\n[asked%20questions%20received%20on%20the%20interpretation%20of%20the%20Temporary%20Protection%20Directive%20](https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2022-07/Frequently%20asked%20questions%20received%20o)\n[and%20Council%20Implementing%20Decision%202022-382_en.pdf](https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2022-07/Frequently%20asked%20questions%20received%20o)\n\n\n10 U N H C R R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E, O C T O B E R 2 0 2 2 U N H C R R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E, O C T O B E R 2 0 2 2 11\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e7a4d4de-023f-4c47-a71b-303371e62100/20221017%20Implementation%20of%20TPD%20six%20months%20on.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        5
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TEMPORARY PROTECTION DIRECTIVE: SIX MONTHS ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TEMPORARY PROTECTION DIRECTIVE: SIX MONTHS ON\n\n\n### Appeal\n\n**Temporary Protection Directive: Article 29**\n\n\nPersons who have been excluded from the benefit of temporary protection or family reunification by a Member\nState shall be entitled to mount a legal challenge in the Member State concerned.\n\n\nKey findings and recommendations:\n\n\n**It is important that applicants for Temporary Protection have access to an effective remedy**\n**in the event of negative decisions and clarification should be issued on the extent of appeal**\n**rights contained in the TPD. States should institute effective appeal procedures for TP**\n**applicants and provide written reasons for negative decisions.**\n\n\n### Documentation\n\n**Temporary Protection Directive: Article 8 (1)**\n\n\nThe Member States shall adopt the necessary measures to provide persons enjoying temporary protection with\nresidence permits for the entire duration of the protection. Documents or other equivalent evidence shall be\nissued for that purpose.\n\n\nKey findings and recommendations:\n\n\n   - **In light of the recent extension of the TPD, Member States should be encouraged to**\n**immediately renew documentation issued to TP beneficiaries until at least March 2024 in**\n**order to reduce administrative burdens and enhance prospects for refugees\u2019 effective**\n**socio-economic inclusion in host states.**\n\n   - **Member States are encouraged to replicate positive practices from other countries to**\n**facilitate swift issuance of documentation and facilitate refugees\u2019 access to rights.**\n\n\n**TYPES OF DOCUMENTS ISSUED**\n\n\n\ncountries countries countries countries\n\n\n\nIt is currently unclear whether the right of appeal\ncontained at Article 29 of the TPD applies to\nnegative decisions on applications for TP in general,\nor whether it is restricted to decisions taken under\nArticle 28 of the Directive to exclude an individual\nfrom TP due to serious reasons for considering that\nthey have committed a war crime or similarly\nserious acts. Nevertheless, it would be important for\napplicants for TP to have access to an effective\nremedy in the event that their applications are\nrefused.\n\n\n\nAt least six of the 26 countries monitored have not\nset up appeal mechanisms enabling refugees to\nchallenge decisions denying their access to TP. In\nsome countries where appeal mechanisms are in\nplace, refugees faced obstacles to exercising\nappeal rights, mainly due to the lack of written\nrejection letters and a short timeframe set to\ninstitute an appeal. In some countries, the appeal\nalso lacked suspensive effect.\n\n\n\nResidence permit\n\n\n\nTP certificate / card ID card Passport sticker\n\n\n\n**TIME TAKEN TO ISSUE THE DOCUMENT**\n\nHours Days Weeks Months\n\n\n\n\n###### 9\n\nIN\n\n\n###### 1\n\nIN\n\n\n###### 8\n\nIN\n\n\n###### 5\n\nIN\n\n\n\nNo information\n###### 3\n\nIN\n###### 26\n\n\n|Col1|Av|\n|---|---|\n|<br>|<br>|\n\n\n|Col1|Avg.|\n|---|---|\n|<br>|<br>|\n\n\n\ncountries countries countries countries countries\n\n\n12 U N H C R R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E, O C T O B E R 2 0 2 2 U N H C R R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E, O C T O B E R 2 0 2 2 13\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e7a4d4de-023f-4c47-a71b-303371e62100/20221017%20Implementation%20of%20TPD%20six%20months%20on.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        6
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TEMPORARY PROTECTION DIRECTIVE: SIX MONTHS ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TEMPORARY PROTECTION DIRECTIVE: SIX MONTHS ON\n\n\n### Freedom of movement\n\n**Temporary Protection Directive: Article 21 (2)**\n\n\nFor such time as the temporary protection has not ended, the Member States shall, on the basis of the\ncircumstances prevailing in the country of origin, give favourable consideration to requests for return to\nthe host Member State from persons who have enjoyed temporary protection and exercised their right to a\nvoluntary return.\n\n\nKey findings and recommendations:\n\n\n   - **UNHCR welcomes guidance from the European Commission to Member States that**\n**Ukrainians do not need to deregister from TP when they voluntarily return to Ukraine. Such**\n**an approach can help avoid administrative hurdles and facilitate access to rights under the**\n**TPD.**\n\n   - **UNHCR advises that a TP beneficiary\u2019s status and rights should not be affected by a visit to**\n**Ukraine lasting less than three months. Guidance and coherence amongst EU Member**\n**States on this point is important.**\n\n\n\nThe Council's Implementing Decision 2022/382\ntriggered the application of the TPD for an initial\nperiod of one year, with the duration of the TPD\nrecently extended until March 2024.\n\n\n23 out of the 26 countries surveyed issued\ndocumentation to TP beneficiaries which is valid for\n12 months or until March 2023. One country permits\nthe legal stay of TP beneficiaries until 24 August\n2023, regardless of the date of entry, whilst another\nissues foreigner cards valid for two years to TP\nbeneficiaries. One country provides renewable\nresidency permits valid for 6 months at a time.\nIssuing documents with a longer validity period\ncreates advantages for TP beneficiaries and\nenhances their prospects for socio-economic\ninclusion in host countries. For example, refugees\nreported some private landlords are reluctant to\nrent properties to individuals whose residency\nexpires in March 2023, whilst others highlighted\nthat some employers prefer to hire individuals with\na longer-term residency document. Access to\nfinancial services, particularly (micro-)credit and\nloans, as well possibilities for self-employment are\nalso negatively affected (and associated rights to\nwork).\n\n\nDocuments issued to TP beneficiaries varied\nbetween countries; some 14 countries issued\nresidence permits while the remaining countries\nprovided refugees with other types of\ndocumentation including TP certificates and\npassport stickers.\n\n\n\nThe type of documentation issued to refugees often\nhas implications on the enjoyment of certain rights,\nincluding freedom of movement. ICVA members\nDRC and ENS highlighted instances of good\npractice, where residence permits issued to TP\nbeneficiaries carried, for example, tax and social\nsecurity numbers, thereby facilitating access to\nemployment, health and social protection. However,\nin certain countries the document issued to TP\nbeneficiaries does not confirm their residency status\nin the host state, which can affect a TP beneficiary\u2019s\nability to exercise freedom of movement and to\naccess certain rights enumerated under the\nDirective.\n\n\nDelays in issuing documentation was a commonly\nreported challenge. In some 13 countries, refugees\nwait for periods between several weeks to three\nmonths to receive documentation. Given that\naccess to services often hinges on the possession\nof documentation, such delays impede refugees\u2019\naccess to essential rights and services including\neducation, employment and social protection.\n\n\n\nA number of refugees are engaging in pendular\nmovements between Ukraine and host countries,\nengaging in visits to see family members, retrieve\ndocuments, check on property and the overall\nsituation.\n\n\nIn most of the countries monitored, TP beneficiaries\ncan travel to Ukraine or to a third country without\nlosing their status and the rights flowing from it.\nHowever, in some countries there is no clear\nguidance as to how long refugees are permitted to\nremain outside of the host state without losing their\nlegal status and/or benefits attached to it, whilst\nothers reported that varying periods spent outside\nof the country may lead to revocation of TP status\nand/or the cessation of certain benefits such as\naccess to accommodation and financial assistance.\n\n\n\nEven in countries where travel to Ukraine or a third\ncountry does not trigger the revocation of TP status\nand/or the cessation of certain benefits, refugees\nwithout biometric passports have faced difficulties\nentering other Member States (MS) and re-entering\ncountries where they enjoy TP. Similar challenges\nwere reported by ICVA member DRC who\ncontributed to the research.\n\n\nUNHCR welcomes the European Commission\u2019s\nrecent announcement that Ukrainians who intend to\nvoluntarily return do not need to deregister from TP\nwhen they travel to Ukraine. Persons wishing to\nreturn are requested to notify the national or local\nauthorities in their hosting country that they are\nreturning back to Ukraine, provided that such a\nnotification system is in place, with the effect that\ntheir TP registration is treated as \u2018inactive\u2019 and\n\n\n\n10  European Commission Press Release, \u2018Solidarity with Ukraine: EU takes new steps to provide certainty and access to\nemployment to beneficiaries of Temporary Protection\u2019, 10 October 2022, available at: [https://ec.europa.eu/commission/](https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_22_5998. See additionally European Commissi)\n[presscorner/detail/en/ip_22_5998. See additionally European Commission\u2019s \u2018Frequently asked questions on going home to](https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_22_5998. See additionally European Commissi)\n[Ukraine on a voluntary basis in the context of the Temporary Protection Directive\u2019, available at: https://home-afairs.ec.europa.](https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_22_5998. See additionally European Commissi)\n[eu/system/fles/2022-10/Frequently%20Asked%20Questions%20on%20going%20home%20to%20Ukraine%20on%20a%20](https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_22_5998. See additionally European Commissi)\n[voluntary%20basis%20in%20the%20context%20of%20the%20Temporary%20Protection_en_0.pdf.](https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_22_5998. See additionally European Commissi)\n\n\n14 U N H C R R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E, O C T O B E R 2 0 2 2 U N H C R R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E, O C T O B E R 2 0 2 2 15\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e7a4d4de-023f-4c47-a71b-303371e62100/20221017%20Implementation%20of%20TPD%20six%20months%20on.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        7
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TEMPORARY PROTECTION DIRECTIVE: SIX MONTHS ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TEMPORARY PROTECTION DIRECTIVE: SIX MONTHS ON\n\n\n\nbenefits flowing from it discontinued for as long as\nthey are outside of the host country.10 Such an\napproach can help avoid administrative hurdles and\nfacilitate access to rights under the TPD\nshouldindividuals need to return to the EU at a later\npoint. The same guidance reiterates that individuals\nwho returned to Ukraine should have no problem to\nre-enter the EU on the basis of their passports,\nresidency permits or on \u2018humanitarian grounds\u2019.\n\n\n\nThis announcement does not provide guidance on the\nduration of a \u2018short visit\u2019 to Ukraine, which should have\nno impact on an individual\u2019s TP status or rights, as\ncompared to a \u2018voluntary return\u2019 under which a\nperson\u2019s TP registration is inactivated and benefits\ndiscontinued. Therefore, there continues to be scope\nfor differing practices in this regard, with MS applying\nvarying benchmarks to determine whether travel to\nUkraine constitutes \u2018voluntary return\u2019 or not.11\n\n\n### Family reunification\n\n**Temporary Protection Directive: Article 15**\n\n\nIn cases where the separate family members enjoy temporary protection in different Member States, Member\nStates shall reunite family members where they are satisfied that the family members fall under the description\nof paragraph 1(a), taking into account the wish of the said family members. Member States may reunite family\nmembers where they are satisfied that the family members fall under the description of paragraph 1(b), taking\ninto account on a case by case basis the extreme hardship they would face if the reunification did not take\nplace.11\n\n\nKey findings and recommendations:\n\n\n   - **Guidance is needed on how family reunification procedures foreseen by the TPD are**\n**expected to operate in practice, and the facilities and systems Member States are required**\n**to put into effect in this regard.**\n\n   - **Given the scale of family separation, swift, effective and flexible family reunification**\n**procedures are required, including avenues for reunification with for individuals who may**\n**not fall within the scope of the Temporary Protection Directive.**\n\n\n\n11. European Commission\u2019s \u2018Frequently asked questions on going home to Ukraine on a voluntary basis in the context of the\nTemporary Protection Directive\u2019\n\n\n\nLarge scale family separation is one of the defining\nfeatures of the Ukraine crisis. According to results\nfrom UNHCR\u2019s ongoing protection monitoring\nexercise conducted in seven countries,12 78 percent\nof respondents have been separated from their\nimmediate family members. Family separation in a\nrefugee context often exacerbates several\nprotection risks including gender-based violence,\nhuman trafficking, exploitation, isolation and trauma,\nparticularly for persons with specific needs, such as\nunaccompanied and separated children, older\npersons and persons with disabilities. Rights to\nfamily unity and family life are well established in\ninternational and regional law, whilst family unity\nprovides an essential framework of protection in\ndisplacement.\n\n\nNotwithstanding the large-scale family separation,\nat least 12 of the 26 countries monitored lack a\nsystem to reunite families. In some of these\n\n\n\ncountries, TP beneficiaries are legally entitled to\nfamily reunification, however, there is a lack of an\nequivalent process giving effect to the right. Even in\ncountries which have a process in place enabling\nfamily reunification, refugees report facing various\nobstacles such as lack of information about the\nprocedures involved, inability to cover associated\ncosts and difficulty establishing family relations due\nto lack of documentation.\n\n\nWhilst TP beneficiaries have specific rights to family\nreunification under the Directive, it is currently\nunclear which procedures Member States are\nexpected to put into place to give effect to these\nrights. In addition, there are outstanding questions\nrelating to child TP beneficiaries who wish to reunite\nwith their parents or other relatives, as this does not\nappear to be currently provided for under the\nrelevant sections of the Directive.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e7a4d4de-023f-4c47-a71b-303371e62100/20221017%20Implementation%20of%20TPD%20six%20months%20on.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        8
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "### Persons with specific needs\n\n**Temporary Protection Directive: Article 13 (4)**\n\n\nThe Member States shall provide necessary medical or other assistance to persons enjoying temporary\nprotection who have special needs, such as unaccompanied minors or persons who have undergone torture,\nrape or other serious forms of psychological, physical or sexual violence.\n\n\nKey findings and recommendations:\n\n\n      - **The systematic identification of persons with specific needs remains a key gap across many**\n**Member States.**\n\n      - **UNHCR recommends that procedures to identify persons at heightened risk are included as**\n**part of registration procedures for temporary protection and other forms of legal stay, as**\n**well as procedures to renew residency and other associated documentation to enhance**\n**opportunities for the identification of these groups.**\n\n\n\n\n- **Identification of individuals at heightened risk must be further matched with upscaling**\n**specialized services with adequate capacity and resources, which are adapted to the needs**\n**and numbers of persons of concern.**\n\n\n\nFor example, some countries only implement\nidentification procedures for unaccompanied minors\nwhile excluding other population groups including\npeople with disabilities and older persons.\nMoreover, in certain countries, institutions tasked\nwith identifying persons with specific needs operate\non an ad hoc basis due to limited capacity or have\ndrastically reduced their presence at reception\nfacilities, limiting their effectiveness.\n\n\nIn several countries monitored, refugees with\nspecific needs reported limited access to dedicated\nservices including healthcare and suitable\naccommodation, which is partially attributed to the\nlack of or incomplete nature of identification\nprocedures.\n\n\n\nAccording to UNHCR protection monitoring, 24% of\nrespondents reported at least one household\nmember with a specific need, including persons\nwith disabilities, serious medical needs, older\npersons and separated or unaccompanied\nchildren.13 Persons with specific needs can face\nspecific barriers that prevent them from fully\nenjoying their rights or accessing the services they\nneed, and can be at heightened risk of\ndiscrimination, abuse, violence and neglect during\ndisplacement and in their country of asylum. It is\ntherefore crucial that they are systematically\nidentified at an early stage and referred to services\nand support in a timely manner to mitigate\nprotection risks they may face.\n\n\nOut of the 26 countries monitored, 17 have formal\nprocedures in place to identify persons with specific\n\n\n\nneeds, albeit with some gaps in implementation as\noutlined below. Nine countries were identified as\nlacking formal procedures to identify persons at\nheightened risk.\n\n\nIn countries without formal procedures to identify\npersons with specific needs, identification largely\ndepends on how \u201cvisible\u201d specific needs are or on\nwhere individuals are accommodated. For instance,\nTP beneficiaries with specific needs residing in\nsmaller shelters managed by non-governmental\norganizations (NGOs) are more likely to be identified\nas compared to those who live in collective centers\nor with host families. The lack of procedures to\nidentify persons with specific needs hinders their\nability to access dedicated services. To illustrate, in\nsome cases, people with physical disabilities have\nreported being referred to accommodation centers\n\n\n\nwhich are ill-equipped to meet their needs.\nFurthermore, the absence of identification\nprocedures prevents data collection on the\nprevalence of persons with specific needs as well\nas their needs, thereby limiting the development of\na tailored response.\n\n\nIn the 17 countries which have procedures in place\nto identify persons with specific needs, the process\ngreatly varies. Some countries have assigned social\nworkers to reception facilities; some have\nintroduced medical screening at reception facilities.\nSome countries also rely on the assistance of NGOs\nand the Red Cross to identify individuals with\nspecific needs. Even in these countries, however,\nthe process generally lacks comprehensiveness.\n\n\n\n13. UNHCR protection monitoring for the Ukraine refugee situation results, May to September 2022. Protection monitoring was\nconducted in Belarus, Bulgaria, Hungary, Republic of Moldova, Poland, Romania and Slovakia.\n\n\n18 U N H C R R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E, O C T O B E R 2 0 2 2 U N H C R R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E, O C T O B E R 2 0 2 2 19\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e7a4d4de-023f-4c47-a71b-303371e62100/20221017%20Implementation%20of%20TPD%20six%20months%20on.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        9
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TEMPORARY PROTECTION DIRECTIVE: SIX MONTHS ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TEMPORARY PROTECTION DIRECTIVE: SIX MONTHS ON\n\n\n**In Focus**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n### Education\n\n**Temporary Protection Directive: Article 14 (1)**\n\n\nThe Member States shall grant to persons under 18 years of age enjoying temporary protection access to the\neducation system under the same conditions as nationals of the host Member State. The Member States may\nstipulate that such access must be confined to the state education system.\nThe Member States may allow adults enjoying temporary protection access to the general education system.\n\n\nKey findings and recommendations:\n\n\n    - **Supporting schools in host states to increase capacity and provision of language courses**\n**will enhance effective access to education for refugee children from Ukraine as well as**\n**supporting their parents and caretakers to access the labour market.**\n\n    - **Engaging with displaced families and communities on options for education including**\n**through integrating refugee community members into national schools as teaching support**\n**assistants, is key to building trust and promoting effective access to education**\n\n\n**TOP 5 BARRIERS TO EDUCATION**\n\n\nlack of specific\n\n\n\nlack of space in\n\nlocal school\n\n\n\nlanguage barriers lack of permanent\n\naddress\n\n\n\nlack of information\n\n\n\ndocuments required to\n\nregister with local schools\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n**22/26** **17/26** **12/26** **4/26** **4/26**\ncountries countries countries countries countries\n\n\n\n20 U N H C R R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E, O C T O B E R 2 0 2 2 U N H C R R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E, O C T O B E R 2 0 2 2 21\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e7a4d4de-023f-4c47-a71b-303371e62100/20221017%20Implementation%20of%20TPD%20six%20months%20on.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        10
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TEMPORARY PROTECTION DIRECTIVE: SIX MONTHS ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TEMPORARY PROTECTION DIRECTIVE: SIX MONTHS ON\n\n\n### Labour market\n\n**Temporary Protection Directive: Article 12**\n\n\nThe Member States shall authorise, for a period not exceeding that of temporary protection, persons enjoying\ntemporary protection to engage in employed or self-employed activities, subject to rules applicable to the\nprofession, as well as in activities such as educational opportunities for adults, vocational training and practical\nworkplace experience. For reasons of labour market policies, Member States may give priority to\nEU citizens and citizens of States bound by the Agreement on the European Economic Area and also to legally\nresident third country nationals who receive unemployment benefit. The general law in force in the Member\nStates applicable to remuneration, access to social security systems relating to employed or self-employed\nactivities and other conditions of employment shall apply.\n\n\nKey findings and recommendations:\n\n\n   - **Increased provision of childcare (including through increasing the capacity of local schools)**\n**and increased language learning for adults are key to expanding refugees\u2019 effective access**\n**to employment opportunities and supporting their inclusion in host states**\n\n   - **Focus needs to be placed on removing administrative, legal or practical barriers to**\n**accessing decent work, including through skills recognition and upskilling, job-matching**\n**and information provision.**\n\n\n**TOP 5 BARRIERS TO ACCESS LABOUR MARKET**\n\n\n\nThe number of children arriving in EU Member\nStates from Ukraine has been unprecedented and\nhas created significant practical and logistical\nchallenges to rapidly absorb them into national\nschool systems. UNHCR\u2019s research has identified a\nrange of barriers which impede children\u2019s access to\neducation in host countries.\n\n\nIn 22 of the 26 countries monitored, refugees\nreported lack of space in schools as a major\nhindrance to access education at the pre-primary,\nprimary, and secondary levels. The lack of space in\nschools is particularly pronounced in areas hosting\nlarge number of refugees and where most\naccommodation centers are located, such as major\nurban centres. This barrier was confirmed by\nresearch conducted by ICVA members including\nDRC. In several countries, a shortage of teachers is\nalso pointed out as an additional barrier.\n\n\nIn 17 of the 26 countries monitored, language\nbarriers were identified as an obstacle hindering\naccess across all levels of education, with some\nrefugees reporting struggling to understand\npaperwork associated with school registration. This\nwas additionally confirmed by data collected by\nICVA members including WVI. It is positive to note\nthat, to facilitate access to education, many\ncountries have started offering language classes;\nhowever, these classes are currently not at the\nrequired scale to meet the size of the identified\nneeds. Hiring members of the refugee community\nas teaching assistants has been identified as an\nimportant way to both alleviate staffing capacity\nissues in schools as well as addressing language\nbarriers.\n\n\nA lack of stable accommodation also presented a\nchallenge to access to education. TP beneficiaries\nacross 12 countries reported limited access to\neducation due to uncertainties surrounding their\naccommodation arrangements. In particular,\nrefugees housed in emergency reception centers\nhesitated to register their children in school due to\nthe high probability of relocation and subsequent\nneed to enroll their children in an alternative school.\n\n\n\nOther challenges reported included bureaucratic\nrequirements relating to school registration; for\nexample, schools in some countries request medical\nreports, proof of vaccination and authenticated\ntranslation of academic records obtained in Ukraine\nas a precondition to enroll children, which refugees\noften struggle to provide due to various reasons\nincluding inability to cover associated costs. It is\npositive to note that some states have addressed\nthese challenges by implementing flexible\napproaches.\n\n\nTemporary Protection holders have in some cases\nfaced problems enrolling their children in national\neducation systems in host countries if they were not\nprovided with a residency permit or another\ndocument indicating an address linked to their\nplace of residence. The lack of registration of an\naddress, including for some who applied for TP, has\nalso complicated planning of capacity in schools in\nsome EU countries. This is because education\nauthorities are unable to accurately assess how\nmany children of compulsory school age are\npresent in any given school district or education\nadministration entity.\n\n\nWhile the TP Directive guarantees access to\neducation for Ukrainian refugees, it does not oblige\nEU Member States to ensure TP holders enroll\nchildren of compulsory school age in national\nschool systems no more than \u201cthree months from\nthe date on which the application for international\nprotection was lodged by or on behalf of the minor\u201d.\nThis three-month limit on enrolment only applies to\nasylum-seekers (see Article 14 of EU Directive\n2013/33). Member States also do not have the\nobligation to provide preparatory classes, when\nneeded, to TP beneficiaries entering the national\nschool system. Those preparatory classes are only\nmandated for asylum-seekers (ibidem).\n\n\nThis has led some EU countries to postpone\nenrolment of Ukrainian children beyond the threemonth period and to provide exemptions to the\nobligation to organize preparatory classes, creating\na discrepancy in the legal time limit for the\nenrolment of TP holders and asylum-seekers as well\nas the preparatory learning support they receive.\n\n\n\nlack of decent\n\nemployment\n\nopportunities\n\n\n\nlack of child care\n\narrangements\n\n\n\nlanguage barriers lack of information\n\n\n\nlengthy and\n\ncomplicated skills\n\nrecognition procedures\n\n\n###### **22/26 18/26 13/26 12/26 9/26**\n\ncountries countries countries countries countries\n\n\n\n22 U N H C R R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E, O C T O B E R 2 0 2 2 U N H C R R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E, O C T O B E R 2 0 2 2 23\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "national\nschool systems",
+          "confidence": 0.5267863273620605,
+          "start": 302,
+          "end": 305
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "UNHCR",
+          "confidence": 0.6615365743637085,
+          "start": 306,
+          "end": 307
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "host countries",
+          "confidence": 0.5632930397987366,
+          "start": 325,
+          "end": 327
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "refugees",
+          "confidence": 0.977384090423584,
+          "start": 336,
+          "end": 337
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "medical\nreports",
+          "confidence": 0.7489684224128723,
+          "start": 627,
+          "end": 629
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Ukraine",
+          "confidence": 0.9655337929725647,
+          "start": 641,
+          "end": 642
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "refugees",
+          "confidence": 0.6565541625022888,
+          "start": 650,
+          "end": 651
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e7a4d4de-023f-4c47-a71b-303371e62100/20221017%20Implementation%20of%20TPD%20six%20months%20on.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        11
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TEMPORARY PROTECTION DIRECTIVE: SIX MONTHS ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TEMPORARY PROTECTION DIRECTIVE: SIX MONTHS ON\n\n\n\nEffective access to decent employment\nopportunities is key to promoting refugees\u2019 selfsufficiency and to avoid exacerbating protection\nrisks if refugees are unable to meet their basic\nneeds, including risks of exploitation and abuse.\nUNHCR\u2019s research has identified a range of barriers\nwhich are impacting upon refugees\u2019 right to\nemployment under the Directive.\n\n\nIn 22 of the 26 countries monitored, TP\nbeneficiaries reported lack of childcare services as\na major hindrance to access the labour market.\nSimilar observations were made by ICVA members,\naccording to data collected by DRC and WVI. This is\npartly attributed to lack of spaces in day-care\nfacilities and primary schools. In a context where 87\nper cent of household members are women and\nchildren with a high proportion of single\ncaretakers,15 childcare provision is an urgent and\npressing need to promote socio-economic\ninclusion. In 18 of the 26 countries assessed,\nlanguage barriers are also identified as a challenge\nand are exacerbated by the limited availability of\nlanguage classes targeting adults.\n\n\nAcross 13 countries, refugees have also reported a\nlack of information as a barrier to access the labour\nmarket. Refugees generally lacked information on\ntheir rights under applicable employment law and\nrelated working conditions, and available job\nopportunities. In particular, the lack of information\non working conditions exposes refugees to\nexploitative labour and informal employment\nwithout access to social insurance. In some\ncountries, TP beneficiaries have reported working\n\n\n\nlong hours, earning low wages, and being denied\ncertain employment benefits including health\ninsurance which they were otherwise entitled to\nunder the national law. This is worsened by\nemployers' lack of awareness on the rights of TP\nholders to employment, an obstacle identified in\nseveral countries monitored.\n\n\nIn some 12 countries, refugees reported lengthy and\ncomplicated procedures associated with\nrecognition of qualifications, resulting in\nunderemployment and limited access to decent\nemployment opportunities. Other challenges\naffecting refugees\u2019 access to labour markets include\nscarce employment opportunities, including due to\nskills mismatch, and lack of stable accommodation.\nRefugees reported limited housing facilities near\nareas with greater employment opportunities.\nEmployers were also reported as less inclined to\nhire people without a permanent registered\naddress, which poses a challenge for individuals\nliving in temporary accommodation and other\ntransitional forms of shelter.\n\n\nIn most of the countries monitored, refugees can\naccess the labour market by simply registering for\nTP or once they obtain their TP certificates. In a\nlimited number of countries, however, TP\nbeneficiaries additionally require a residence permit\nand/or a work permit to access employment\nopportunities. In some cases, refugees have\nreported delays in obtaining these documents,\nwhich in turn limited their access to employment\nopportunities\n\n\n### Social protection\n\n**Temporary Protection Directive: Article 13 (2)**\n\n\nThe Member States shall make provision for persons enjoying temporary protection to receive necessary\nassistance in terms of social welfare and means of subsistence, if they do not have sufficient resources, as well\nas for medical care. Without prejudice to paragraph 4, the assistance necessary for medical care shall include\nat least emergency care and essential treatment of illness\n\n\nKey findings and recommendations:\n\n\n    - **Ensure unhindered and effective access to documentation and identity documents, in**\n**particular residence registration at the municipal level.**\n\n    - **Review social protection laws and policies to ensure these are inclusive, non-discriminatory,**\n**consistent, clearly formulated and avoid ambiguity. Ensure the establishment of**\n**mechanisms to facilitate enjoyment of rights in practice.**\n\n    - **Strengthen evidence on effective inclusion and systematically identify access barriers**\n**through regular monitoring.**\n\n    - **Build capacity for inclusion through training of social service providers, expanding cultural**\n**mediation and multi-lingual services, combating xenophobia and discrimination and**\n**providing adequate resources.**\n\n\n**TOP 5 BARRIERS TO ACCESS SOCIAL PROTECTION**\n\n\n\ndifferent level of access lack of permanent\n\nexceeds social\n\nlack of information language barriers to social protection to address\nprotection support\n\n\n\nnationals\n\n\n\ncost of living\n\n\n\nexceeds social\n\n\n\ndifferent level of access\n\n\n\nto social protection to\n\n\n\naddress\n\n\n\ncountries countries countries countries countries\n\n\n15. UNHCR, \u2018Lives on Hold: Profiles and Intentions of Refugees from Ukraine\u2019, September 2022, available at: [https://data.unhcr.org/](https://data.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/95767)\n[en/documents/details/95767](https://data.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/95767)\n\n\n24 U N H C R R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E, O C T O B E R 2 0 2 2 U N H C R R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E, O C T O B E R 2 0 2 2 25\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e7a4d4de-023f-4c47-a71b-303371e62100/20221017%20Implementation%20of%20TPD%20six%20months%20on.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        12
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TEMPORARY PROTECTION DIRECTIVE: SIX MONTHS ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TEMPORARY PROTECTION DIRECTIVE: SIX MONTHS ON\n\n\n\nLack of information is reported as a major obstacle\nto accessing social protection, with similar\nobservations made by ICVA members who\ncontributed to the research (WVI, DRC, Helsinki\nFoundation). TP beneficiaries in 15 countries\nreported lacking access to information on their\nentitlements to social protection schemes and how,\nwhere and when to access them. In some countries,\nrelevant entities are also not aware of the rights of\nTP beneficiaries to social protection services,\nresulting in delays and denial of access. Refugees\nacross 12 countries have also reported language\nbarriers as impediments to access social protection\nservices. Service providers generally lacked\ninterpretation services, whilst in some cases the\nrelevant forms are only available in local languages.\n\n\nRefugees also reported that the cost of living\nsubstantially exceeds the social assistance\nprovided. In some countries, refugees only receive\na one-time cash grant, which is inadequate to cover\nliving costs in major cities and towns where many\nare concentrated. Several refugees reported that\nsome individuals have made premature decisions to\nreturn to Ukraine due to their inability to cover their\nbasic needs in host countries.\n\n\nRefugees reported a lack of stable housing as an\nobstacle hindering access to social protection\nservices. Some were unable to register for social\nbenefits due to lack of a permanent registered\naddress, disproportionately impacting those\nresiding in transitional shelters and other forms of\ntemporary accommodation. Some also reported\ndelays in receiving payments due to a change of\naddress.\n\n\n\nIn 15 of the 26 countries monitored, TP beneficiaries\nhave access to social protection on an equal\nstanding with nationals. In the remaining 11\ncountries, refugees do not enjoy similar access as\nnationals, partly due to a lack of permanent\nresidence which is a pre-condition to access certain\nforms of social protection schemes in some\ncountries. The rights of TP beneficiaries to social\nprotection also differs from those of recognized\nrefugees in a number of MS, enabling access to a\nlimited number of schemes only, which may\nparticularly impact those with specific needs, such\nas older persons, persons with disabilities and those\nwith chronic illnesses. In addition, some legal\nbarriers remain for both recognized refugees and\nTP beneficiaries alike, including minimum length-of\nresidence requirements to access certain schemes\n(e.g. social housing or basic income);\ninconsistencies between laws both at the national\nand the local level with differing conditions, with\naccess in some contexts requiring naturalization.\n\n\nThe documentary requirements to access social\nprotection schemes differ by country. In some\ncountries, simply registering for TP or obtaining the\nrelevant certificate is sufficient. In other countries,\nrefugees are required to have a residence permit\nand/or documents proving that they are in need of\nsocial protection.\n\n\nIn light of these findings, recommendations made in\nUNHCR\u2019s Social Protection Policy brief16 published\nin September 2021 still apply and may support a\nmulti-stakeholder approach for facilitating effective\naccess for both refugees from Ukraine and refugees\nfrom other areas of the world.\n\n\n### Healthcare\n\n**Temporary Protection Directive: Article 13 (2)**\n\n\nThe Member States shall make provision for persons enjoying temporary protection to receive necessary\nassistance in terms of social welfare and means of subsistence, if they do not have sufficient resources, as well\nas for medical care. Without prejudice to paragraph 4, the assistance necessary for medical care shall include\nat least emergency care and essential treatment of illness\n\n\nKey findings and recommendations:\n\n\n   - **Integration of healthcare professionals from refugee communities into national healthcare**\n**systems benefits both host and refugee communities, through enhancing health system**\n**capacities, addressing language barriers, facilitating information exchange and building**\n**trust.**\n\n   - **Host states are encouraged to integrate health professionals from Ukraine into national**\n**health systems and work towards their accreditation.**\n\n\n**TOP 4 BARRIERS TO ACCESS HEALTHCARE**\n\n\n\nlack of capacity of the access limited to\n\nlanguage barriers lack of information\nhealthcare system emergency care only\n\n\n\nlack of capacity of the\n\n\n\nemergency care only\n\n\n#### **11/26 9/26 5/26 4/26**\n\ncountries countries countries countries\n\n\n16. [https://www.unhcr.org/partners/ngodirectory/61558a764/unhcr-social-protection-policy-brief.html](https://www.unhcr.org/partners/ngodirectory/61558a764/unhcr-social-protection-policy-brief.html)\n\n\n26 U N H C R R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E, O C T O B E R 2 0 2 2 U N H C R R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E, O C T O B E R 2 0 2 2 27\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e7a4d4de-023f-4c47-a71b-303371e62100/20221017%20Implementation%20of%20TPD%20six%20months%20on.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        13
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TEMPORARY PROTECTION DIRECTIVE: SIX MONTHS ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TEMPORARY PROTECTION DIRECTIVE: SIX MONTHS ON\n\n\n\nLanguage barrier is one of the most reported\nimpediments for access to healthcare, with similar\nobservations made by ICVA members including\nDRC. In many countries, TP beneficiaries reported a\nlack of interpretation services at health facilities,\nwith patients often expected to bring their own\ninterpreters. It is positive to note that initiatives to\nprovide translation services for refugees seeking\nhealthcare have been introduced in some countries,\nalthough such initiatives require upscale and\nexpansion. Lack of information or knowledge on\nhow to access health services is also mentioned as\nan obstacle hindering access to healthcare. In this\nregard, TP beneficiaries particularly reported\nlacking information on how to access medical\nservices and where and how to submit\nreimbursement claims.\n\n\nThe limited capacity of health facilities is also\nfrequently reported, a challenge that predates the\nUkraine crisis in many of the countries monitored.\nFurthermore, in certain countries, TP beneficiaries\nare only entitled to emergency care, depriving them\nof access to preventive and tertiary healthcare\nservices. The limitation of access to emergency\ncare is particularly challenging for people with\npre-existing medical conditions, with some\nreportedly forced to return to Ukraine to access\naffordable care for their conditions.\n\n\n\nTP beneficiaries with pre-existing medical\nconditions faced increased challenges to access\nhealthcare services. The limited capacity of\nhealthcare systems in some countries often means\nthat there are long waiting times to access medical\ncare. Even in countries where there is greater\naccess to general healthcare, there is limited access\nto specialized medical services. Refugees also\nreported the lack of documentation proving\nprevious diagnosis as additional obstacle for\nindividuals with pre-existing medical conditions.\n\n\nUNHCR monitoring has identified that, amongst the\n63% of survey respondents who were engaged in\neconomic activity prior to leaving Ukraine, 7% were\nworking in health or social services.17 The presence\nof large numbers of qualified professionals amongst\nthe refugee community is an asset to host states.\nTheir engagement in the national health sector can\nbring several benefits to hosting communities,\nbeyond facilitating access to healthcare for\nrefugees, including enhancing health system\ncapacity, easing language barriers and facilitating\ninformation exchange with the refugee community\non access to health services as well as building trust\nbetween host and refugee communities. Healthcare\nworkers who are able to continue practicing their\nprofessional skills in displacement will additionally\nbe a larger asset to recovery efforts in Ukraine once\nconditions for return exist.\n\n\n### Accommodation\n\n**Temporary Protection Directive: Article 13 (1)**\n\n\nThe Member States shall ensure that persons enjoying temporary protection have access to suitable\naccommodation or, if necessary, receive the means to obtain housing.\n\n\nKey findings and recommendations:\n\n\n   - **A lack of sustainable, longer-term housing has had a multifaceted impact on refugees\u2019**\n**ability to exercise their other rights including education, employment, and social protection.**\n\n   - **Persons with specific needs, including older persons, people with disabilities and people**\n**with pre-existing medical conditions, require accessible and adapted accommodation**\n**located in areas with access to essential services including health care.**\n\n\n\nAll the 26 countries monitored have a scheme in\nplace to provide TP beneficiaries with\naccommodation or subsidies to that end. The type\nof accommodation assistance provided significantly\ndiffers by country. Some countries provide state-run\naccommodation centres, whilst some also provide\nrental subsidies to refugees opting to live in private\nhousing. Several countries also offer grants to\nindividuals hosting TP beneficiaries.\n\n\nIt is worth noting, however, the accommodation\nassistance schemes which are in place are\npredominantly for the short-term. UNHCR\u2019s\nintentions surveys found that 27% of respondents\nwould need to find another form of accommodation\nwithin the next 6 months.8 Around a quarter of\nrefugees were also unsure of how long they would\nbe able to stay in their current accommodation.\nRespondents who could only stay for three months\nor less in their current accommodation most\nfrequently indicated that the free accommodation\n\n\n18. Ibid\n\n\n\nprogramme they were benefiting from would end\nsoon, that the rental / lease period is running out, or\nthat they have been requested to leave.\n\n\nMeanwhile, finding alternative accommodation\nremains a challenge, mostly due to a shortage of\naffordable accommodation, common in urban areas\nwhere many refugees reside. Refugees also face\ndifficulty accessing housing markets, including due\nto lack of documentation and the temporary nature\nof their stay as landlords often prefer long-term\ntenants. A lack of sustainable, longer-term housing\nis having a multifaceted impact on refugees\u2019 ability\nto exercise their other rights including education,\nemployment, and social protection. The need to\ntransition towards longer-term and more durable\naccommodation remains a critical need. In addition,\npersons with specific needs reported several\nchallenges in securing accessible and adapted\naccommodation located in areas with access to\nessential services including health care.\n\n\n\n17. UNHCR, \u2018Lives on Hold: Profiles and Intentions of Refugees from Ukraine\u2019, July 2022, available at: [https://data.unhcr.org/en/](https://data.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/94176)\n[documents/details/94176](https://data.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/94176)\n\n\n\n28 U N H C R R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E, O C T O B E R 2 0 2 2 U N H C R R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E, O C T O B E R 2 0 2 2 29\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "UNHCR monitoring",
+          "confidence": 0.7330085039138794,
+          "start": 310,
+          "end": 312
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "survey",
+          "confidence": 0.7560380697250366,
+          "start": 321,
+          "end": 322
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "UNHCR",
+          "confidence": 0.8620138168334961,
+          "start": 310,
+          "end": 311
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Ukraine",
+          "confidence": 0.9884672164916992,
+          "start": 332,
+          "end": 333
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "intentions surveys",
+          "confidence": 0.9050114154815674,
+          "start": 677,
+          "end": 679
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "UNHCR",
+          "confidence": 0.9730110764503479,
+          "start": 674,
+          "end": 675
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "refugees",
+          "confidence": 0.9511832594871521,
+          "start": 634,
+          "end": 635
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Lives on Hold",
+          "confidence": 0.8801572322845459,
+          "start": 907,
+          "end": 910
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": {
+          "text": "Profiles and Intentions of Refugees from Ukraine",
+          "confidence": 0.5171346664428711,
+          "start": 911,
+          "end": 918
+        },
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "UNHCR",
+          "confidence": 0.953926146030426,
+          "start": 904,
+          "end": 905
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Ukraine",
+          "confidence": 0.9841150045394897,
+          "start": 917,
+          "end": 918
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2022",
+          "confidence": 0.9832308292388916,
+          "start": 921,
+          "end": 922
+        },
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "Refugees",
+          "confidence": 0.8731541633605957,
+          "start": 915,
+          "end": 916
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e7a4d4de-023f-4c47-a71b-303371e62100/20221017%20Implementation%20of%20TPD%20six%20months%20on.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        14
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TEMPORARY PROTECTION DIRECTIVE: SIX MONTHS ON\n\n### Emerging practices: addressing barriers to rights\n\n\n\nTHE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TEMPORARY PROTECTION DIRECTIVE: SIX MONTHS ON\n\n\n\n\n\nThis non-exhaustive compilation of emerging practices draws from examples of how\npractical, administrative and legal barriers to the enjoyment of rights contained under\nTemporary Protection Directive have been addressed in several countries.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nRegistrion Documentation Freedom of movement Education Labour market Social Protection Healthcare\n\n\nDisclaimer: The boundaries and names shown and the designations used on this map do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations.\n*Serbia and Kosovo (S/RES/1244 [1999])\n\n\n\n30 U N H C R R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E, O C T O B E R 2 0 2 2\n\n\n\nU N H C R R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E, O C T O B E R 2 0 2 1 31\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e7a4d4de-023f-4c47-a71b-303371e62100/20221017%20Implementation%20of%20TPD%20six%20months%20on.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        15
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE**\n**TEMPORARY PROTECTION DIRECTIVE:**\n**SIX MONTHS ON**\n\nOctober 2022\n\n\nwww.unhcr.org/europe\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e7a4d4de-023f-4c47-a71b-303371e62100/20221017%20Implementation%20of%20TPD%20six%20months%20on.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        16
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_36/raw/doc_36_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,102 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "# **VENEZUELA**\n#### **SHELTER, ENERGY AND NFI CLUSTER**\n##### Cluster Overview HRP 2022-2023\n\nwww.sheltercluster.org/venezuela\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/7fa79027-2a31-3f0a-a235-2e4690804ed8/2022%20UNHCR_VEN_cluster%20overview%20to%20share.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "Cluster Coordinator:\n\nAdriana M. Dur\u00e1n\ndurangam@unhcr.org / coord.venezuela@sheltercluster.org\n\n\nAssistant Information Management Officer:\n\nAdriana Ramirez\nramiread@unhcr.org / im.venezuela@sheltercluster.org\n\n\nShelter Assistant:\n\nEmigdio Filardi\nfilardig@unhcr.org\n\n\nFront cover photo: Construction of a community center, Delta Amacuro, Asociaci\u00f3n NILO, Nina Hurtado\n\n\nwww.sheltercluster.org/venezuela\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/7fa79027-2a31-3f0a-a235-2e4690804ed8/2022%20UNHCR_VEN_cluster%20overview%20to%20share.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "###### Humanitarian Needs Overview - Shelter, Energy and NFIs Response in 2021 Response converage in 2021 Planned Results for HRP 2022 - 2023 HRP 2022 \u2013 2023 Shelter, Energy and NFI projects list\n\n\n###### 5 6 7 8 9\n\n\n\n3\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/7fa79027-2a31-3f0a-a235-2e4690804ed8/2022%20UNHCR_VEN_cluster%20overview%20to%20share.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        2
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "Construction of a walkway for indigenous communities, Bolivar. Credits: Nina Hurtado, Asociaci\u00f3n Nilo.\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/7fa79027-2a31-3f0a-a235-2e4690804ed8/2022%20UNHCR_VEN_cluster%20overview%20to%20share.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        3
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "## Humanitarian Needs Overview\n\nShelter, Energy and NFIs\n\n\n\nFor several years, and in the context of a prolonged\neconomic crisis, Venezuela has been impacted by a\nhuman mobility crisis and a progressive\ndeterioration in the access to basic services.\n\n\nSince 2020, and in the context of COVID-19\npandemic and focalised violence situations, **human**\n**mobility** has become more dynamic, incorporating\nan influx of returnees, with incoming **needs** **for**\n**temporary shelters** . The common use of informal\ncross borders has led to protection risks, including\npeople involved on pendular movements to obtain\ntheir means for subsistence.\n\n\nAdditionally, impact of continued **natural disasters**,\nincluding heavy rains and floods, have generated\nsignificant needs of basic NFIs, temporary shelters\nand preparedness for risks mitigation and response.\n\n\n\n**Access** **to** **basic** **services** including access to energy,\nhas been compromised in several regions of\nVenezuela, leading to a significant impact on the life\nquality, including impacts in food preservation,\npossibility to provide education, livelihoods, among\nothers. This has provoked significant life-threatening\nrisks and environmental impacts associated to the\nmassive use of firewood as a source of energy for\ncooking, use of gasoline, kerosene and improvised\nconnections to the national electric network.\n\n\nIn the context of the pandemic and economic crises,\nthe infrastructure of institutions providing essential\nservices to population such as health institutions,\ncommunity spaces and schools lacked maintenance\nand **worsened** **their** **shelter** **conditions**, including\naccess to energy, disabling their possibilities to save\nlives of the most vulnerable population.\n\n\n\nNFI distribution after floods in Zulia. Credits: UNHCR. Beneficiaries from NFI distributions. Credits: Asociaci\u00f3n Nilo.\n###### Urgent humanitarian assistance is needed to provide a critical response:\n\n\n\nImprovements on\n**temporary shelters**\n**and access to NFIs** are\nrequired to support\n**people on the move.**\n\n\n\n**Basic NFIs, temporary**\n**shelters and**\n**construction capacities**\nare required for people\naffected by **natural and**\n**anthropic disasters**\n\n\n\n**Repairs,** **constructions**\n**and** **improvements** **for**\n**community** **spaces** **and**\n**institutions** providing\nbasic services is required.\n\n\n\n**Access** **to** **renewable**\n**sources** **of** **energy** is\nrequired to **fulfil** **the**\n**basic** **needs** **of** **the** **most**\n**vulnerable** **population**\nand represents an urgent\npriority for remote areas.\n\n\n\n5\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/7fa79027-2a31-3f0a-a235-2e4690804ed8/2022%20UNHCR_VEN_cluster%20overview%20to%20share.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        4
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**102 K** people\nbenefited with\n**NFI**\n\n\n\n**227 K** people\n\n**Energy**\n\n\nbenefited with **Shelter**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n**935 K** people reached\nby shelter, energy and\nNFI activities during\n2021.\n\n\n\n**94** **health centers** were benefited from repairs,\nenergy improvements and NFIs, providing an\nimportant support to the COVID-19 pandemic\nprevention, including the support for triage and\nvaccination areas. **35** **temporary**\n**collective** centers in border areas (including\nPASIs) were benefited by the response, focusing\non supporting vulnerable people on the\nmove. **78** **community** **centers** and **21**\n**schools** providing protection and essential\nservices to population have been benefited\nthrough shelter, energy and NFI response.\n\n\n\n**US$6.7** millions, funding\nreceived during 2021\naccording to Financial\nTracking Service (FTS).\n\n\n**1106 street solar lamps** were installed in public\nplaces, including the surroundings of\ninstitutions benefited by the response, to\nprovide illumination also preventing associated\nprotection risks. **42 electric systems**, including\nphotovoltaic systems for institutions,\norganizations, community centers and\ncollective shelters, were installed allowing\naccess to basic services for the most vulnerable\npopulation.\n\n\n\nBasic NFI distribution was critical in the\n\n**222** **refugee** **housing** **units** **(RHUs)** were assistance of vulnerable people specially those\ninstalled: 104 RHUs in health centres, 24 in affected by flooding and by armed\ncollective temporary shelters and PASIs, 21 in conflicts. NFIs delivered included **14,037**\nmilitary and civil coordination authority spaces, **portable** **solar** **lamps,** **2988** **habitat** **kits,** **1852**\nand 73 in community spaces, community **family** **kits** and **845** **individual** **kits**, comprising\ncenters, institutions, communities, authorities critical items like mosquito nets and insect\nand other locations. **87** **centers** **and** repellents to prevent extended diseases, pads,\n**institutions** including temporary shelters were sheets and cooking items, rechargeable fans,\n\n6 benefited by rehabilitations and extensions. among others.\n\n\n\n**222** **refugee** **housing** **units** **(RHUs)** were\ninstalled: 104 RHUs in health centres, 24 in\ncollective temporary shelters and PASIs, 21 in\nmilitary and civil coordination authority spaces,\nand 73 in community spaces, community\ncenters, institutions, communities, authorities\nand other locations. **87** **centers** **and**\n**institutions** including temporary shelters were\nbenefited by rehabilitations and extensions.\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/7fa79027-2a31-3f0a-a235-2e4690804ed8/2022%20UNHCR_VEN_cluster%20overview%20to%20share.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        5
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "Humanitarian assistance covered 18 states and Capital District:\n\n\n\n\n\n7\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/7fa79027-2a31-3f0a-a235-2e4690804ed8/2022%20UNHCR_VEN_cluster%20overview%20to%20share.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        6
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "###### Humanitarian actions to guarantee better access to shelter, energy and NFI\n\n\n\nFor the **HRP** **2022** 27 partner organisations\nsubmitted 26 projects proposal, including 24\nintersectoral projects to guarantee safe and\ndignified shelter, access to energy and/or basic NFI\nto affected population.\n\n\nTo address humanitarian needs, including new\nchallenges related to COVID-19, and guarantee\nrelief to more than 1,9 M people in need, partner\norganisations require $54 M.\n\n\n**For HRP 2021:**\n\n\n**Submitted:**\n\n\n**To assist:**\n\n\n**In:**\n\n\n\nCluster partners will focus their actions on five\n**objectives for 2022** :\n\n\n###### **1** **2** **3** **4**\n\n\n\n\n\nAssist with construction, expansion,\nrehabilitation, access to energy and equipment\nfor critical health services\nAssist with construction, expansion, rehabilitation\nin spaces that provide essential services; and with\nsecure and dignified access to shelter\n\nAssist with better access to energy in\ncommunities, community centers and institutions\nAssist with better access to basic NFIs and\nproviding equipment for spaces and institutions\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/7fa79027-2a31-3f0a-a235-2e4690804ed8/2022%20UNHCR_VEN_cluster%20overview%20to%20share.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        7
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "### HRP 2022 -2023 Shelter, Energy and NFI projects list\n\n\n\nPrograma de empoderamiento para la resiliencia de\ncomunidades en riesgo de protecci\u00f3n en los estados\nMiranda y Dtto. Capital\n\nInd\u00edgenas Warao del Delta venezolano con atenci\u00f3n\nmultisectorial en educaci\u00f3n, alimentaci\u00f3n, energ\u00eda y\nagua.\n\n\n\nFAO, TECHO,\nUNDP\n\n\nTinta Violeta,\nCOOPI\n\n\nProyectos\nAcuario\n\n\nTECHO\n\n\nConstruyendo\nFuturos\n\n\nUCV\n\n\nDividendo\nVoluntario\npara la\nComunidad\n\n\nTinta Violeta\n\n\nTrazando\nEspacios\n\n\nFundaci\u00f3n\nVivienda\nPopular\n\n\nCISP\n\n\nFundairiarte\n\n\nCOOPI\n\n\n\nREDUCCI\u00d3N DE RIESGOS DE DESASTRES POR\nINUNDACIONES RECURRENTES CENTRADA EN\nCOMUNIDADES ALTAMENTE VULNERABLES DE ZULIA,\nM\u00c9RIDA Y MIRANDA.\n\n\nEspacios seguros y servicios de protecci\u00f3n y SSR en\ncomunidades de seis estados del pa\u00eds\n\n\nMejoramiento de la red el\u00e9ctrica para los habitantes\nde la Comunidad Nueva Jerusalen. Cuman\u00e1, estado\nSucre\n\nComunidades Resilientes: programa de reducci\u00f3n de\nriesgos, respuesta y fortalecimiento de capacidades\ncomunitarias frente a amenazas naturales, socionaturales y/o antr\u00f3picas.\n\n\nJ\u00f3venes Construyendo Futuros: Generaci\u00f3n de\nsoluciones transformadoras y resilientes que\ndinamizan las econom\u00edas locales y dan soluci\u00f3n a\nproblem\u00e1ticas comunitarias.\n\n\nMejorar las condiciones de vida de 2 comunidades\nind\u00edgenas, con una visi\u00f3n integral priorizando salud,\ncapacitaci\u00f3n y organizaci\u00f3n comunitaria.\n\n\nAlimentaci\u00f3n escolar para ni\u00f1os, ni\u00f1as y adolescentes\nubicadas de los estados Sucre, Zulia y Apure.\n\n\nProtecci\u00f3n integral a ni\u00f1os, ni\u00f1as, adolescentes,\nmujeres y personas con alto nivel de vulnerabilidad en\ncomunidades en riesgo para mitigar la\nsubalimentaci\u00f3n y la violencia, integrando un\ncomponente de formaci\u00f3n en medios de vida\n\n\nCentro Educativo Comunitario para el Desarrollo\nSostenible de Guaruchal\n\n\nProyecto H\u00e1bitat Sano. Mejorando el acceso al agua y\nlos espacios de protecci\u00f3n y alojamientos individuales,\nde grupos vulnerables\n\n\nFortalecimiento de capacidades de respuesta\ncomunitaria e institucional ante la ocurrencia de\ndesastres naturales y de origen antr\u00f3pico en los\nestados Trujillo y M\u00e9rida\n\n\nATENCION INTEGRAL A NI\u00d1OS, NI\u00d1AS, ADOLESCENTES,\nADULTOS, INDIGENAS NO INDIGENAS, DESPLAZADOS Y\nREFUGIADOS CON DIVERSOS TIPOS DE DISCAPACIDAD.\n\n\nMejora de los servicios WASH en centros educativos,\ngarantizando condiciones adecuadas para la\nformaci\u00f3n, y preparaci\u00f3n de alimentos limpios y\nseguros en el Estado Amazonas.\n\n\n\nCESVI\n\n\nNILO\n\n\n\nMEJORAMIENTO DEL ACCESO A ENERGIA TRAVES DE\nRET\nUNA ESTRATEGIA DE SOSTENIBILIDAD\n\n\n\nFundaci\u00f3n\nSenderos\n\n\nUNHCR\n\n\nRed de Casas\nDon Bosco\n\n\nIOM\n\n\nDegania\n\n\nCPDH SVIAA\nOVJNU\n\n\nCEPAI\nAmazonas\n\n\nHEKS\n\n\nHEKS\n\n\nALINCA\n\n\n\nBiochar y Energ\u00eda (BC&E) para el secuestro de CO2 en\nsuelos de las comunidades rurales del eje p\u00e1ramo del\nEstado M\u00e9rida.\n\n\nAcceso a los derechos y servicios b\u00e1sicos y asistencia\nhumanitaria para los refugiados y solicitantes de asilo,\nlas personas en movilidad y las comunidades de\nacogida en Venezuela.\n\n\nConstrucci\u00f3n de capacidades en los servicios de\nprotecci\u00f3n infantil y del ambiente protector para\ngrupos vulnerables, de ni\u00f1os, ni\u00f1as y adolescentes en\nocho estados de Venezuela.\n\n\nAsistencia multisectorial directa para venezolanos\nvulnerables y fortalecimiento de capacidades\ninstitucionales locales y comunitarias\n\n\nEvaluaci\u00f3n nutricional, asistencia alimentaria,\nprotecci\u00f3n de ni\u00f1os, ni\u00f1as y adolescentes en\ncomedores comunitarios y escolares, estimulando la\nproducci\u00f3n de alimentos.\n\n\nCreaci\u00f3n de Brigadas para la Asistencia Alimentaria y\nPuntos de reparaci\u00f3n solidaria en Escuelas y\nComunidades Vulnerables en los Estados Amazonas,\nFalc\u00f3n, Zulia y T\u00e1chira\n\n\nAtenci\u00f3n Humanitaria a comunidades ind\u00edgenas\nHu\u00f6tt\u00f6ja, Maco, S\u00e1nema y comunidad periurbana en\nlos municipios Manapiare y Atures, estado Amazonas.\n\n\nMejoras del acceso a los servicios de salud y\nseguridad nutricional en instituciones publicas y\ncomunidades vulnerables en la regi\u00f3n central y centro\noccidental de Venezuela\n\n\nMejoras del acceso a los servicios de salud y\nseguridad nutricional en instituciones publicas y\ncomunidades vulnerables en la regi\u00f3n oriental de\nVenezuela\n\n\nAsistencia a comunidades vulnerables de Venezuela\nmediante acciones integradas en Seguridad\nAlimentaria, Protecci\u00f3n, Salud, WASH, Nutrici\u00f3n y\nAlojamiento, Energ\u00eda y Enseres; con Formaciones y\nenfoques de resiliencia en medios de Vida.\n\n\n\n9\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/7fa79027-2a31-3f0a-a235-2e4690804ed8/2022%20UNHCR_VEN_cluster%20overview%20to%20share.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        8
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "##### **THANK YOU FOR YOUR KIND SUPPORT!**\n\nwww.sheltercluster.org/venezuela\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/7fa79027-2a31-3f0a-a235-2e4690804ed8/2022%20UNHCR_VEN_cluster%20overview%20to%20share.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        9
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_37/raw/doc_37_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,73 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "## **6**\n\nINTER-AGENCY\nPARTNERS IN A\nCOORDINATED\nRESPONSE PLAN\n\n\nTO ASSIST UP TO\n## **30,000**\n\nINDIVIDUALS IN NEED\nOF HUMANITARIAN AID\n\n\nWITH A TOTAL\n## **$11.5 M Country Context**\n\nOF INTER-AGENCY\nREQUIREMENTS\n\n\n\nThe **inter-agency Regional Refugee Response Plan (RRP)** outlines the\ncomprehensive response and activities to support countries\u2019 efforts to protect\nand assist refugees, and other persons in need of humanitarian aid, coming from\nUkraine. It includes the financial requirements of partners in all countries under\nthe Regional RRP (including UN agencies, national and international nongovernmental organizations and civil society), covering the period from March to\nDecember 2022, and working closely with concerned host Governments.\n\n\nIn **Belarus,** RRP partners support Government-led efforts through a\nmultisectoral approach. The response focuses, among others, on provision of\nprotection services; cash assistance; distribution of basic household goods,\nincluding warm winter clothing for the most vulnerable groups and people with\nspecific needs; facilitating access to employment, education, and health\nservices; and information/data management as well as strengthening national\ncapacities. The response will identify and address refugees\u2019 needs, with due\nconsideration of age, gender and diversity.\nhis summary of the Regional RRP in **Belarus** reflects the **recalibration of the**\n**RRP** completed in September 2022. It presents needs\u2019 analysis and response\npriorities, as well as partners\u2019 financial requirements, which are reflected under\nthe \u201cOther Countries\u201d chapter of the Regional RRP.\n\n\nSince 24 February 2022 and as of 27 September 2022, a total of 55,998 border\ncrossings to Belarus from Ukraine have been recorded with 244 border crossings\nby third country nationals. The number of persons who have transited through\nthe EU countries before entering Belarus totals to 40,113 (32,565 through\nPoland, 6,427 through Lithuania, and 1,121 through Latvia), while 15,885 have\ncrossed directly from Ukraine. [1] Since the second half of April 2022, border\ncrossing points have remained closed on the Ukrainian side and direct border\ncrossings remain low.\n\n\n\nThe Government of Belarus allows all refugees from Ukraine to access Belarusian territory without visa\nrequirements. Those who wish to seek international protection have access to asylum procedures, irrespective\nof their nationality. Third country nationals fleeing the war in Ukraine and traveling to their countries of origin\n\n\n1 These statistics are provided by the State Border Committee of Belarus (SBC) and reflect all border crossings from Ukraine and EU countries.\nThese may include pendular cross-border and transit movements.\n\n\n\n1\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/2173a2cd-7878-46f9-b8e7-5c00211282b6/2022_10_03%20-%20RRP%20Ukraine%20Situation%20Addendum_Annex%20I.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "Ukraine Situation\nRegional Refugee Response Plan\nSummary and Inter-Agency Funding Requirements March \u2013 December 2022\n\nSeptember 2022 Recalibration\n\nBELARUS\n\n\nor permanent residence are allowed to enter, transit, and exit Belarus visa-free. All COVID-19 restrictions have\nbeen lifted at border crossing points with Ukraine and no PCR test is needed to enter Belarus for those seeking\nprotection.\n\n\nSince 24 February and as of 27 September 2022, 14,881 refugees from Ukraine have registered with the\nMinistry of Interior (MOI) for a legal status in Belarus. 8,559 Ukrainians have been recorded by the MOI\u2019s\nDepartment on Citizenship and Migration (DCM) as persons granted permits for temporary stay up to 90 days.\n1,788 Ukrainians have applied for asylum in Belarus. Out of those, 1,011 Ukrainians have been granted\ncomplementary protection. 3,053 have applied for 1-year temporary residence permits while 1,481 have\napplied for permanent residence permits.\n\n\nOn 14 September 2022, the President of Belarus signed an amendment to the Decree No. 420 of 30 August\n2014 (issued on 16.09.22) \u201cOn the stay of citizens of Ukraine in the Republic of Belarus\u201d. This amendment\nprovides the legislative basis for facilitated access of citizens from Ukraine to medical care, employment,\neducation, and pensions (the latter only for Ukrainians with permanent residence).\n\n\nSurveys have shown that most refugees arriving in Belarus come from the Donetsk, Luhansk and Kharkiv\nregions. Groups of people at heightened risk include women; female-headed households; children, especially\nunaccompanied and separated children (UASC); elderly people; people with disabilities; and people in need\nof medical support. Most refugees from Ukraine are hosted by relatives or friends, while others found private\naccommodation, some linked to employment.\n\n\nThe Government leads the response to the Ukraine refugee situation in Belarus with the support of interagency partners. The Belarusian Red Cross Society (BRCS) is the Government-recognized entity for\ninternational aid delivery and distribution. The number of people fleeing from Ukraine to Belarus is relatively\nsmall compared to other neighbouring countries. However, the crisis in Ukraine unfolds in an unpredictable\nmanner and refugees from Ukraine continue to arrive through EU countries and through Russia.\n\n**Needs Analysis**\n**Protection needs** include identifying the most vulnerable refugees, including survivors of violence; victims of\ntrafficking; elderly people; single women; female-headed households; people with disabilities; and children,\nparticularly UASC. Protection services, referral pathways and follow-up systems will need to be strengthened\nin collaboration with relevant Government entities and Civil Society Organizations (CSOs). This includes legal\ncounselling and assistance, rehabilitation support, **child services** including Best Interest Procedures (BIP),\nas well as capacity building on **Gender-Based-Violence (GBV)**, including risk prevention and response, and\ntemporary safe accommodation.\n\n\nComplementing the capacity on **psycho-social and mental health** services was identified as one of the\nprimary needs. Emergency **medical treatment** is generally provided free of charge in Belarus. According to\nthe recent amendments made to Decree No. 420, citizens of Ukraine who arrived in Belarus after 24 February\n2022 and have not yet applied for a residence permit will have access to medical care on an equal basis with\ncitizens of Belarus. Some groups of people, such as third country nationals, will need support with their medical\nneeds.\n\n\nThe most vulnerable groups, such as families and single parents with small children and elderly people, will\nneed to be supported with **one-time emergency cash assistance, basic household** items and warm clothing\nto settle in private accommodation in the host communities and to be prepared for the cold **winter months** .\n\n\nRecent amendments to Decree No. 420 grant all children from Ukraine access to all levels of **education** .\nHowever, (pre-)school-aged children from Ukraine will need assistance to start the new school year. School\nadministration, teachers and other education specialists require additional support to identify and respond\neffectively to children\u2019s heightened levels of distress.\n\n\nRecent amendments to the Decree No. 420 simplify the employment recruitment procedures for Ukrainian\nnationals and stateless persons from Ukraine and waive some fees for the employers. A good understanding\nof socio-economic profiles, market opportunities and key stakeholders is vital to assist and enable refugees\nto protect their assets, adapt to local market needs, and contribute to local economies. The needs of vulnerable\n**host communities** must also be addressed in the planning of all interventions to foster social cohesion and\na welcoming environment.\n\n\n\n2\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/2173a2cd-7878-46f9-b8e7-5c00211282b6/2022_10_03%20-%20RRP%20Ukraine%20Situation%20Addendum_Annex%20I.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "Ukraine Situation\nRegional Refugee Response Plan\nSummary and Inter-Agency Funding Requirements March \u2013 December 2022\n\nSeptember 2022 Recalibration\n\nBELARUS\n\n\n**Response strategy and sector priorities**\nPriority will be given to the collection of **age and gender disaggregated data** to strengthen and promote an\nevidence-based protection response to the Ukraine refugee situation. These efforts will provide a better\nunderstanding and regional comparability of the profiles, intentions, and needs of refugees coming from\nUkraine to Belarus. The capacity of local actors in data collection is being strengthened.\n\n\nWithin the **protection response** strategy, partners will continue to regularly monitor access to territory and\nasylum procedures, as well as reception conditions of new arrivals. Individual counselling is offered through\navailable hotlines including for legal counselling and referrals to adequate services. Social services will be\nprovided with particular attention to elderly people, people with disabilities and specific needs.\n\n\n**Child protection** response activities will focus on working with CSOs and local education and social protection\nadministrations to strengthen the child protection system. Attention will be paid to creating child-friendly spaces\nfor children and families. Child protection coordination will be strengthened to respond to immediate protection\nneeds of UASC and other children at heightened risks.\n\n\n**Protection from GBV** will be strengthened by using the existing social structures and capacities in Belarus\nincluding the national GBV protection network of social and healthcare service providers and CSOs that\nprovide psycho-social counselling, case management and referral to other specialized services, as well as\nsafe shelter. Safe spaces for counselling and referral, with particular attention to the specific needs of women,\ngirls, boys, elderly people, and people with disabilities, will be established in the regions.\n\n\nA key response priority is **psycho-social support** particularly for children and their caregivers, women, elderly\npeople, and people with disabilities, who might have suffered from or witnessed violence, including victims of\ntrafficking. A psycho-social mobile team has been established to provide individual counselling and capacity\nbuilding for frontline workers working with children. RRP Partners are also working towards provision of\npsycho-social support to survivors and those at-risk of GBV. RRP Partners will facilitate access to **mental**\n**health** **services** by providing specialized services where needed and strengthening the capacity of the local\nhealthcare system.\n\n\nDepending on the needs, RRP partners will support with referrals and payments for **healthcare services and**\n**medications** as per the needs identified. Special focus must be given to the needs of people with terminal\nand chronic diseases and disabilities. RRP partners will also strengthen the provision of sexual and\nreproductive health (SRH) services, as well as antenatal, obstetrics and post-natal care in accordance with\ninternational standards. Early childhood services will include counselling on nutrition and vaccinations and\nproviding multidisciplinary services to families with children affected by developmental delays or disabilities.\n\n\nIn cooperation with national authorities, RRP partners launched their emergency response during the first\nweeks of the crisis by providing and prepositioning of **basic** items for immediate assistance. The assistance\nwill be adapted to the needs for the **winter months** and mid- to long-term needs to support refugees to settle\nin host communities. **One-time emergency cash assistance** for vulnerable groups will continue to support\npayments for adequate accommodation and heating costs, while particularly vulnerable cases will be\nsupported with temporary accommodation. Several crisis centers have been renovated over the summer and\nRRP partners are planning to further provide winter assistance such as blankets and winter clothing to these\ncenters.\n\n\nRRP Partners will strengthen the outreach to (pre-)school-aged children to assist in accessing the national\n**education** system and will provide school supplies and uniforms to support the start into the new school year.\nRRP Partners will also work with local actors to strengthen and scale-up safe space programmes in schools\nin the regions with a high presence of refugees.\n\n\nPartners will develop a **livelihoods and resilience** strategy in collaboration with the Government to better\nplan mid- and long-term interventions. Joint assessments will be conducted together with local authorities.\nRefugees and host communities will benefit from skills mapping, job intermediation and placement, and\nawareness raising on employment, self-employment and other income-generating opportunities. Digital\nsolutions will contribute to these efforts.\n\n\nAs majority of refugees from Ukraine are women and children, specific attention to **gender issues** will be\ncross-cutting in the response planning. Recognizing the need for communities\u2019 voices to drive decision-making\nand ensuring safe space, efforts will be made to support partners in meaningful engagement and\n**communication with communities** . To address potential **sexual exploitation and abuse (SEA)** risks, all\nnational and international partners involved in the provision of support will be informed, coordinated, and\n\n\n\n3\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "age and gender disaggregated data",
+          "confidence": 0.9787858724594116,
+          "start": 38,
+          "end": 43
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Ukraine",
+          "confidence": 0.8944782018661499,
+          "start": 0,
+          "end": 1
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "refugees",
+          "confidence": 0.7726308703422546,
+          "start": 78,
+          "end": 79
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/2173a2cd-7878-46f9-b8e7-5c00211282b6/2022_10_03%20-%20RRP%20Ukraine%20Situation%20Addendum_Annex%20I.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        2
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "Ukraine Situation\nRegional Refugee Response Plan\nSummary and Inter-Agency Funding Requirements March \u2013 December 2022\n\nSeptember 2022 Recalibration\n\nBELARUS\n\n\ntrained on protection from SEA. Effective and accessible feedback and response mechanisms will be\nestablished and will include confidential and safe channels.\n\n**Coordination**\nRRP partners support the Government\u2019s efforts to respond to the Ukraine refugee situation. UNHCR leads\nand coordinates the implementation of the RRP in line with the Refugee Coordination Model (RCM) in close\ncollaboration and consultation with relevant Government counterparts, and with the support of inter-agency\npartners and other stakeholders.\n\n\nWithin the framework of this RRP and building on existing country-level humanitarian coordination structures,\nan inter-agency Refugee Coordination Forum (RCF), composed of all partners involved in the response, has\nbeen established at country level. This has enabled RRP partners to work efficiently together to maximize the\nresponse, ensure complementarity and avoid duplications. It also aims at guiding joint advocacy initiatives and\nresource mobilization efforts.\n\n**Financial requirements March-December 2022 | USD**\nRRP partners are appealing for an estimated **$** **11.5 M** for the period from March to December 2022. The\nbelow table presents recalibrated financial requirements of the appealing inter-agency partners per sector in\n**Belarus as of September 2022,** with funding received thus far. **In 2022, Belarus** has been largely a country\nof transit for refugees from Ukraine and it currently hosts a relatively small number of refugees compared to\nthe number of border crossings. However, in addition to women and children a significant portion of the\nUkrainian refugee population in Belarus are vulnerable elderly people. Limited funding will negatively affect\nresponse implementation and create an extremely challenging operational environment, should the situation\nin the region worsen and number of refugees increase.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n*Breakdown of Protection requirements\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|requirements $ 800,000|** This is a breakdown by sector of the requirements for cash assistance which are included in the above total sectoral budgets. Cash assistance is used as a cross-cutting modality across the various sectors, including|\n|---|---|\n|**Basic Needs**|<br>protection, and is budgeted for accordingly and in line with a basic needs approach. As the modality of choice of<br>persons of concern, cash assistance will be used as the primary means to meet immediate basic needs and<br>provide important protection outcomes.|\n|**$ 800,000**|**$ 800,000**|\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n4\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/2173a2cd-7878-46f9-b8e7-5c00211282b6/2022_10_03%20-%20RRP%20Ukraine%20Situation%20Addendum_Annex%20I.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        3
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_38/raw/doc_38_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,1033 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/5fe5c1fa-5766-47df-997d-c4ee00f1fc28/2023-UNHCR-EDU_Report-screen%5B78%5D.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "ABOUT THIS REPORT\n\n\nThe 2023 UNHCR Refugee Education Report outlines\nthe challenges faced by the nearly 15 million refugee\nchildren of school age [1] under UNHCR\u2019s mandate,\nincluding school-aged Venezuelans displaced abroad.\nBut it also highlights the achievements and aspirations\nof refugee youth who, with the right support, have\nattained the highest of educational goals through\nperseverance, resilience, determination, and sheer\nhard work.\n\n\nData on refugee enrolments and population numbers\nis drawn from UNHCR country operations and refers\nto the 2021-2022 academic year. The report also\nreferences the latest available data on enrolment and\nout-of-school children and youth from the UNESCO\nInstitute for Statistics (UIS).\n\n\n1 Calculated for 2022, counting the number of children of preprimary, primary and secondary age in countries reporting\ndata and applying the ratio to the global population of\nrefugees displaced abroad \u2013 for more information on refugee\ndemographics, see UNHCR\u2019s annual report Global Trends in\nForced Displacement 2022.\n\n\n\nThe increasing complexity of humanitarian\nemergencies involving forced displacement presents\nseveral challenges when it comes to data collection.\nIn addition, essential progress in the incorporation\nof refugees in national education systems creates\nadditional challenges, such as a lack of data on student\nenrolment disaggregated by protection status \u2013 an\nissue that is likely to persist for the foreseeable future.\n\n\nWhere refugees are incorporated into national systems,\nit is often difficult to keep track of when and where\nthey are accessing education. In other contexts, where\nsome refugees attend camp schools and others public\nschools, data reported by country operations is only on\ncamp-based populations (and thus not representative\nof all school-aged refugees).\n\n\nDespite these limitations, over 70 countries have\nprovided data, allowing us to build the most complete\npicture yet of refugee education worldwide, and while\nprogress can be seen, it remains clear that we remain a\nlong way from allowing all refugee learners to exercise\ntheir fundamental right to education.\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "UNHCR Refugee Education Report",
+          "confidence": 0.6607604026794434,
+          "start": 5,
+          "end": 9
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "Report",
+          "confidence": 0.5923617482185364,
+          "start": 8,
+          "end": 9
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "UNHCR",
+          "confidence": 0.9135167002677917,
+          "start": 5,
+          "end": 6
+        },
+        "producer": {
+          "text": "UNHCR country operations",
+          "confidence": 0.6178864240646362,
+          "start": 85,
+          "end": 88
+        },
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.987458348274231,
+          "start": 4,
+          "end": 5
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2021-2022",
+          "confidence": 0.9987786412239075,
+          "start": 92,
+          "end": 93
+        },
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "primary"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Global Trends in\nForced Displacement 2022",
+          "confidence": 0.8415879607200623,
+          "start": 168,
+          "end": 174
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "annual report",
+          "confidence": 0.5506986975669861,
+          "start": 166,
+          "end": 168
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "UNHCR",
+          "confidence": 0.9813709855079651,
+          "start": 163,
+          "end": 164
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Global",
+          "confidence": 0.6998014450073242,
+          "start": 168,
+          "end": 169
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2022",
+          "confidence": 0.977452278137207,
+          "start": 173,
+          "end": 174
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2022",
+          "confidence": 0.6828337907791138,
+          "start": 173,
+          "end": 174
+        },
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "data on student\nenrolment",
+          "confidence": 0.7904072999954224,
+          "start": 217,
+          "end": 221
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "refugees",
+          "confidence": 0.6104514598846436,
+          "start": 203,
+          "end": 204
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "data reported by country operations",
+          "confidence": 0.7188321948051453,
+          "start": 277,
+          "end": 282
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "school-aged refugees",
+          "confidence": 0.663059651851654,
+          "start": 294,
+          "end": 296
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/5fe5c1fa-5766-47df-997d-c4ee00f1fc28/2023-UNHCR-EDU_Report-screen%5B78%5D.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "##### **CONTENTS**\n\n**Foreword by Filippo Grandi, UN High Commissioner for Refugees** ....................................................................................4\n\n\n**Data analysis: Over 50 per cent of refugee children not in school** ..................................................................................... 6\n\n\n**First person: Nilab Akhmad, from Afghanistan** **.** .......................................................................................................................14\n\n\n**First person: Monicah Malith, from South Sudan** **.** ...................................................................................................................16\n\n\n**First person: Manar Emad, from Iraq** **.** ..........................................................................................................................................18\n\n\n**Call to action: Steps towards education for all refugees** ......................................................................................................20\n\n\n**The Final Word: Leonardo Garnier, Special Advisor to the UN Secretary-General** ......................................................23\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/5fe5c1fa-5766-47df-997d-c4ee00f1fc28/2023-UNHCR-EDU_Report-screen%5B78%5D.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        2
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "The very first High Commissioner for Refugees, a\nNorwegian diplomat called Fridtjof Nansen, set a\nformidable standard for his successors.\n\n\nAs the League of Nations grappled with the tumultuous\naftermath of the First World War, Nansen was handed\na trio of Herculean tasks: not just to help hundreds\nof thousands of people who had fled violence and\nrevolution, but also to organize the repatriation of\nprisoners of war and mobilize famine relief in Russia.\n\n\nAs he tackled this bulging in-tray, Nansen spent almost\na decade at the pinnacle of global diplomacy. Well\nbefore that, however, he had shot to global attention as\na pioneering polar explorer. And he could have gone\nin so many other directions. After leaving school, he\nconsidered engineering, military service, and forestry,\nbefore settling on zoology (hoping it wouldn\u2019t get in the\nway of his true passion, skiing).\n\n\n\nhe would never have ventured into academia. Academia\nled to field work, which led to exploration, which led to\nrenown, high politics and diplomacy, and eventually the\nNobel Peace Prize.\n\n\nI mention this great humanitarian not only because\nhe was one of my predecessors but also because\nhis multifaceted career highlights a crucial point\nabout opportunity. Nansen would have regarded the\neducation that unleashed his potential as an automatic\nright. Had he known of the struggles faced today by\nrefugees seeking access to education, he would have\nbeen dismayed.\n\n\nIn June, I was in Kenya, which hosts 624,000 refugees\nand asylum-seekers, including thousands displaced\nover the past few months alone. An island of stability\nin a fragile region, Kenya has little choice but to handle\nthe consequences of conflict and climate change. This\nincludes helping refugee children go to school. In this\nrespect, Kenya\u2019s commendable willingness to support\ndisplaced children must be matched by adequate\nresources.\n\n\n\n4 **UNLOCKING POTENTIAL** | The right to education and opportunity education\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/5fe5c1fa-5766-47df-997d-c4ee00f1fc28/2023-UNHCR-EDU_Report-screen%5B78%5D.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        3
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "Kenya \u00a9 UNHCR/Samuel Otieno\n\n\nJust over 70 per cent of primary school-age refugees\nare enrolled in school. Yet, the higher up the\neducational ladder you go, the steeper the drop-off in\nnumbers, because opportunities to study at secondary\nand tertiary level are limited. The pattern is the same\nat the global level, as UNHCR\u2019s latest education report\nreveals: gross enrolment rates for refugees are 65 per\ncent for primary-age children, 41 per cent for secondary\nand 6 per cent at tertiary level; figures that are lower\nthan enrolment levels for non-refugee children, which\nare markedly higher in all but the lowest-income states.\n\n\nThis matters for several reasons.\n\n\nFirst, around 20 per cent of the world\u2019s refugees live\nin the world\u2019s 46 least developed states, which are\nsomehow expected to shoulder this responsibility even\nthough they collectively account for just 1.3 per cent of\nglobal GDP. The result? Of the nearly 15 million schoolage refugees, half are not in school. With the displaced\npopulation rising every year, there is a significant and\nincreasing proportion of the world\u2019s children who are\nmissing out on their education.\n\n\n\nWhere refugee-hosting countries have implemented such\npolicies, they need predictable, multi-year support from\nglobal and regional financial institutions, high-income\nstates, and the private sector \u2013 money, technology,\nexpertise, training \u2013 creating a broader base of support.\nWe cannot expect overstretched countries with scarce\nresources to take the task on by themselves.\n\n\nIn this year\u2019s report, we have asked three refugees to\ntell the story of their path through education, and of their\nhopes and aspirations for what comes next. They are\nstories of success, but also of struggles, setbacks, and\nobstacles that many young non-refugees do not have to\nthink about, let alone face. They are showing what can\nbe achieved, but they also make me think of the children\nwho have been, and are being, left behind.\n\n\nThis is not just about statistics and targets. It\u2019s about\ndevelopment, opportunity, unexpected connections,\nopening doors, setting off chain reactions. What would\nwe have lost if a young Nansen had not been able to go\nto school? And what are we losing, collectively, because\nhalf of today\u2019s refugee children are not in school? We\ncan let these potential explorers, diplomats, engineers,\nforesters, and zoologists languish, or we can ensure they\nfulfil their potential \u2013 to their benefit, and to ours.\n\n\n\n**UNLOCKING POTENTIAL** | The right to education and opportunity education 5\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/5fe5c1fa-5766-47df-997d-c4ee00f1fc28/2023-UNHCR-EDU_Report-screen%5B78%5D.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        4
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "A clearer picture is emerging\nof refugee education\n\n\nAt the end of 2022, the number of forcibly displaced\npeople across the globe had reached 108 million,\nincluding 35.3 million refugees. [2] The school-aged\nrefugee population, which last year was around 10\nmillion, has jumped to 14.8 million. [3]\n\n\nOf those children, 51 per cent are estimated to be out\nof school: that\u2019s more than 7 million refugee children\nmissing out on education.\n\n\nMost accurate picture yet of refugee education\n\n\nFor this report covering the academic year 2021-22,\n**over 70 countries** hosting refugees are included in our\nassessment of access to education for refugees \u2013 more\nthan ever, giving us the most accurate picture yet.\n\n\n\nData from these countries indicate that average gross\nenrolment rates for refugees stands at **38 per cent** for\npre-primary, **65 per cent** for primary, **41 per cent** for\nsecondary, and **6 per cent** for tertiary. [4]\n\n\nThese figures do not include the situation for refugees\nfrom Ukraine (see section \u2018Hurdles to learning for\nUkraine\u2019s children\u2019 below).\n\n\nAt first glance, this year\u2019s figures seem to represent\na decrease in pre-primary and primary enrolment, an\nincrease in secondary enrolment, and no change to\ntertiary enrolment, when compared to the 2022 UNHCR\nrefugee education report. However, because last year\u2019s\nfigures are drawn from a smaller number of countries\n(just over 40 were included) it is impossible to draw\ndirect comparisons.\n\n\n\n2 UNHCR, \u201cGlobal Trends Report 2022\u201d (Copenhagen: UNHCR, 2022), https://www.unhcr.org/global-trends-report-2022.\n\n3 UNHCR country operations. All figures specific to refugees are calculations of the author with data from UNHCR country operations.\n\n4 UNHCR country operations.\n\n\n6 **UNLOCKING POTENTIAL** | The right to education and opportunity education\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "UNHCR\nrefugee education report",
+          "confidence": 0.6880947351455688,
+          "start": 263,
+          "end": 267
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "report",
+          "confidence": 0.5299871563911438,
+          "start": 266,
+          "end": 267
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "UNHCR",
+          "confidence": 0.8103775978088379,
+          "start": 263,
+          "end": 264
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2022",
+          "confidence": 0.9589367508888245,
+          "start": 262,
+          "end": 263
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2022",
+          "confidence": 0.6955980658531189,
+          "start": 262,
+          "end": 263
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "refugees",
+          "confidence": 0.9428805112838745,
+          "start": 151,
+          "end": 152
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Global Trends Report 2022",
+          "confidence": 0.9715059399604797,
+          "start": 303,
+          "end": 307
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "Report",
+          "confidence": 0.5783160328865051,
+          "start": 305,
+          "end": 306
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "UNHCR",
+          "confidence": 0.718257486820221,
+          "start": 300,
+          "end": 301
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Global",
+          "confidence": 0.549781084060669,
+          "start": 303,
+          "end": 304
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2022",
+          "confidence": 0.9976669549942017,
+          "start": 306,
+          "end": 307
+        },
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "refugees",
+          "confidence": 0.9269243478775024,
+          "start": 326,
+          "end": 327
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/5fe5c1fa-5766-47df-997d-c4ee00f1fc28/2023-UNHCR-EDU_Report-screen%5B78%5D.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        5
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "Refugee enrollment rates\n\nAverage reporting countries, 2021\u201322\n\n\nStriving for gender parity\n\n\nOn average, there is gender parity with similar malefemale access rates for refugee learners.\n\n\nOf the countries that provided gender disaggregated\ndata, the average primary enrolment rates for males\nstood at 63 per cent, while the rate for females was 61\nper cent. At secondary level, the corresponding figures\nwere 36 per cent and 35 per cent. [5]\n\n\nGender disparities in primary education access\n\nCountries with largest gaps, refugee enrollment rates\n\n\n\nRefugee gross enrollment rates\n\nAverage reporting countries, gender\n\n\nHowever, this does not mean that gender parity has\nbeen achieved in every refugee-hosting country. The\ngraphic below illustrates some of the disparities, with\nlonger lines indicating bigger gender gaps. Senegal\nand Gabon show the greatest disparities: in Senegal, for\nexample, enrolment rates are 53 per cent for females\nand 36 per cent for males; conversely, in Gabon the\nsituation is reversed, with 100 per cent enrolment for\nboys and 78 per cent for girls. [6]\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nSource: UNHCR operations\n\n\n\n\n\n103%\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n64%\n\n57%\n\n\n\n\n\nSenegal: **+17pp** 36%\n\n\n\n53%\n\n\n\n20% 40% 60% 80% 100%\n\n\n5 UNHCR country operations.\n\n6 UNHCR country operations.\n\n\n**UNLOCKING POTENTIAL** | The right to education and opportunity education 7\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/5fe5c1fa-5766-47df-997d-c4ee00f1fc28/2023-UNHCR-EDU_Report-screen%5B78%5D.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        6
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "Access problems persist\n\n\nClear disparities are observed when comparing access\nrates for refugees versus national averages at the\nprimary and secondary levels. While the global average\nprimary gross enrolment rates for males and females\nwere 103 per cent and 101 per cent, [7] respectively, they\nwere only 63 per cent and 61 per cent for refugee males\nand females, respectively. [8] At the secondary level, these\ndifferences are also apparent with the enrolment rate\nfor refugee males and females, which are less than half\nthe global average.\n\n\nGross enrollment rates\n\nGlobal averages and refugee reporting countries, gender\n\n\nRefugees\n\nGlobal average Source: UNHCR operations and UNESCO-UIS\n\n\nA deeper dive into the situation in the top refugeehosting countries further highlights the gap in\neducational access for refugees. As illustrated below,\nthe countries with the largest discrepancies are Peru,\nColombia, and Bangladesh, where there is a difference\nof 80, 80, and 74 percentage points, respectively,\nbetween refugee enrolment and the national average. [9]\n\n\n7 UNESCO-UIS, \u201cUIS Statistics,\u201d 2023, [http://data.uis.unesco.org/;](http://data.uis.unesco.org/)\nEnrolment rates can exceed 100% because of over-age learners such\nas students repeating years, or those catching-up on missed years of\nschooling.\n\n8 UNHCR country operations.\n\n9 UNHCR country operations.\n\n10 UNESCO-UIS, \u201cUIS Statistics.\u201d\n\n\n\nThe data also shows that upper-middle-income\ncountries with large forcibly displaced populations, such\nas T\u00fcrkiye, Colombia and Peru, have national average\nsecondary enrolment rates that exceed 100 per cent, [10]\nwhile rates for refugees and Venezuelans displaced\nabroad are dramatically lower. In Colombia, for instance,\nsecondary enrolment rates for displaced Venezuelans\nare close to one fifth of the rates for the host population.\n\n\nIn other settings, such as Uganda and Ethiopia, while\naverage secondary enrolment rates are low in general,\nthey are still markedly lower for refugees.\n\n\nSecondary gross enrollment rates\n\nRefugees and national averages, top hosting countries\n\n\nRefugees\n\nNational average\n\n\n\n8 **UNLOCKING POTENTIAL** | The right to education and opportunity education\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "global average",
+          "confidence": 0.54390549659729,
+          "start": 25,
+          "end": 27
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.9304807782173157,
+          "start": 194,
+          "end": 195
+        },
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "refugees",
+          "confidence": 0.9278759360313416,
+          "start": 12,
+          "end": 13
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "UIS Statistics",
+          "confidence": 0.8838624954223633,
+          "start": 190,
+          "end": 192
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "UNESCO-UIS",
+          "confidence": 0.91597580909729,
+          "start": 118,
+          "end": 119
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.9259657263755798,
+          "start": 194,
+          "end": 195
+        },
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "refugees",
+          "confidence": 0.888961136341095,
+          "start": 12,
+          "end": 13
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Secondary gross enrollment rates",
+          "confidence": 0.6608586311340332,
+          "start": 342,
+          "end": 346
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "refugees",
+          "confidence": 0.9415544271469116,
+          "start": 340,
+          "end": 341
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/5fe5c1fa-5766-47df-997d-c4ee00f1fc28/2023-UNHCR-EDU_Report-screen%5B78%5D.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        7
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "A changing picture?\n\n\nThe customary, if depressing, picture is for secondary\nenrolment for refugee children to be markedly lower than\nfor primary \u2013 and for the gap at secondary level between\nrefugees and non-refugees to be significant. The latest\nfigure, of 41 per cent, shows a potentially encouraging\nimprovement on last year, when it was 37 per cent, albeit\nthe analysis is not based on the same countries. [11]\n\n\nBut the picture is very mixed. In T\u00fcrkiye, in just two years,\nrefugee enrolment rocketed from 27 per cent to over 60\nper cent. In Pakistan, by contrast, the figure dipped from\n5 per cent to 1 per cent and back up to 3 per cent over\nthe same period. [12] In Colombia, meanwhile, enrolment for\ndisplaced Venezuelans fell to 22 per cent, down from 30\nper cent the year before. [13]\n\n\nThe question of quality\n\n\nnational examinations, where they are able to do so, their\npass rates at all levels are high, at times exceeding the\nnational average. In our reporting countries, 78 per cent\nof refugee students who sit primary exams pass them.\nThe figures are 71 per cent and 61 per cent for lower and\nupper secondary, respectively. [14] At the primary level, pass\nrates are higher for males than for females, at 83 per cent\nand 78 per cent, respectively. [15]\n\n\nNational examination refugee pass rates\n\n\n11 UNHCR country operations.\n\n12 UNHCR country operations.\n\n13 UNHCR country operations.\n\n14 UNHCR country operations.\n\n15 UNHCR country operations.\n\n\n\nIn the Democratic Republic of the Congo, an astounding\n96 per cent of refugees who take primary national examinations pass, well above the national figure of 71 per cent. [16]\n\n\nPrimary national examination pass rates\n\nTop hosting countries, comparison refugees\nand national averages\n\n\nRefugees\n\nNational average\n\n\nSource: UNHCR operations\nand Rossiter & Konate\n\n\nMany factors affect learning, but one of the most obvious\nis the quality of teaching. We lack sufficient data to know\nthe proportion of teachers engaging with refugee learners\nwho have acquired a minimum level of qualifications, but\nother indicators can serve as useful proxies for quality\neducation, such as pupil-to-teacher ratios.\n\n\nThere is no consensus on the ideal ratio, which in any case\nvaries between age groups. However it is agreed that\nyounger children and learners from disadvantaged backgrounds benefit from a lower pupil-to-teacher ratio. [17] While\nfew countries are able to report reliable figures, some\nappear to have very high ratios \u2013 Uganda, for instance, has\nan average of 73 refugee pupils for each teacher. [18]\n\n\nThe differences with national averages are also marked\nin some cases. For example, while the national average\npupil-to-teacher ratio in Burundi is 43, [19] for refugees it is\n62. [20]\n\n\n16 UNHCR country operations.\n\n17 OECD, \u201cEducation GPS: Class Size & Student-Teacher Ratio\u201d\n(Paris: OECD, 2022), [https://bit.ly/3R0Sbvk.](https://bit.ly/3R0Sbvk)\n\n18 UNHCR country operations.\n\n19 World Bank, \u201cWorld Bank Open Data: Pupil-Teacher Ratio,\nPrimary,\u201d World Bank Open Data, 2018, [https://data.worldbank.org.](https://data.worldbank.org)\n\n20 UNHCR country operations.\n\n\n\n**UNLOCKING POTENTIAL** | The right to education and opportunity education 9\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "secondary\nenrolment for refugee children",
+          "confidence": 0.5529596209526062,
+          "start": 13,
+          "end": 18
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "last year",
+          "confidence": 0.5066994428634644,
+          "start": 56,
+          "end": 58
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "refugee children",
+          "confidence": 0.6105095744132996,
+          "start": 16,
+          "end": 18
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "National examination refugee pass rates",
+          "confidence": 0.9062972068786621,
+          "start": 266,
+          "end": 271
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "refugee students",
+          "confidence": 0.9484382271766663,
+          "start": 207,
+          "end": 209
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "primary"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "national averages",
+          "confidence": 0.5358262062072754,
+          "start": 343,
+          "end": 345
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Uganda",
+          "confidence": 0.5943440198898315,
+          "start": 471,
+          "end": 472
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "refugee learners",
+          "confidence": 0.8159428238868713,
+          "start": 385,
+          "end": 387
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Education GPS",
+          "confidence": 0.6136279106140137,
+          "start": 537,
+          "end": 539
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "OECD",
+          "confidence": 0.787971556186676,
+          "start": 534,
+          "end": 535
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2022",
+          "confidence": 0.5446587800979614,
+          "start": 551,
+          "end": 552
+        },
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "refugee pupils",
+          "confidence": 0.7108661532402039,
+          "start": 481,
+          "end": 483
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/5fe5c1fa-5766-47df-997d-c4ee00f1fc28/2023-UNHCR-EDU_Report-screen%5B78%5D.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        8
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**REGIONAL SPOTLIGHT:**\n##### **ACCESS IN THE** **AMERICAS**\n\nAt the end of 2022, there were more than 700,000\nrefugees and 5.3 million others in need of protection\nin the Americas. [21] Most were Venezuelans displaced\nabroad: Colombia (2.5 million), Peru (976,400)\nand Ecuador (555,400) host the largest displaced\npopulations in the region. [22]\n\n\nRefugee enrolment\n\n\nThe data indicates that refugee enrolment in the\nAmericas is low. For one thing, enrolment rates drop off\nin the transition from primary to secondary education\nin virtually every reporting country. There are also big\ndifferences between national averages and refugee\nenrolment. As the graph below shows, in Peru, for\n\n\n\nAssessments / learning\n\n\nThere have been interesting advances in the\nmeasurement of learning for forcibly displaced\npopulations in the Americas region.\n\n\nIn Colombia, the Saber 11 exam evaluates competencies\nat the 11th grade and is a requirement to access\nhigher education. Available disaggregated data for\nVenezuelans indicates that they are performing similarly\non the subjects tested in comparison to Colombian\nnationals. In results for 2020, Venezuelans scored an\naverage of 46 points in English on Saber 11, while the\ncorresponding score for Colombians was 47. In maths,\nthe average score for Venezuelans was 49, while the\nscore for Colombians was 51. [25]\n\n\nFurther progress in assessment of learning is\nanticipated. In 2025, the next edition of a 16-country\nregional survey that measures 3rd and 6th graders\u2019\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n22 UNHCR.\n\n23 UNHCR country operations.\n\n24 UNESCO-UIS, \u201cUIS Statistics.\u201d\n\n25 R4V, \u201cGIFMM Colombia: An\u00e1lisis de Resultados Del Examen de Estado de La Educaci\u00f3n Media, ICFES \u2013 Saber 11 (2022) En Poblaci\u00f3n\n[Escolar Refugiada y Migrante de Venezuela,\u201d 2022, https://www.r4v.info/es/document/gifmm-colombia-analisis-de-resultados-del-examen-](https://www.r4v.info/es/document/gifmm-colombia-analisis-de-resultados-del-examen-de-estado-de-la-educacion-media-icfes-0)\n[de-estado-de-la-educacion-media-icfes-0.](https://www.r4v.info/es/document/gifmm-colombia-analisis-de-resultados-del-examen-de-estado-de-la-educacion-media-icfes-0)\n\n\n10 **UNLOCKING POTENTIAL** | The right to education and opportunity education\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Refugee enrolment",
+          "confidence": 0.9070913791656494,
+          "start": 94,
+          "end": 96
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2022",
+          "confidence": 0.513641357421875,
+          "start": 28,
+          "end": 29
+        },
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Saber 11 exam",
+          "confidence": 0.7395517826080322,
+          "start": 178,
+          "end": 181
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Colombia",
+          "confidence": 0.576704740524292,
+          "start": 61,
+          "end": 62
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "forcibly displaced\npopulations",
+          "confidence": 0.5264579653739929,
+          "start": 166,
+          "end": 169
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "disaggregated data",
+          "confidence": 0.5413417816162109,
+          "start": 197,
+          "end": 199
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": {
+          "text": "measurement of learning for forcibly displaced\npopulations",
+          "confidence": 0.6289875507354736,
+          "start": 162,
+          "end": 169
+        },
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Colombia",
+          "confidence": 0.7054924964904785,
+          "start": 175,
+          "end": 176
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2022",
+          "confidence": 0.5149794816970825,
+          "start": 346,
+          "end": 347
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2020",
+          "confidence": 0.9874165058135986,
+          "start": 220,
+          "end": 221
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "Venezuelans",
+          "confidence": 0.7957404255867004,
+          "start": 200,
+          "end": 201
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "16-country\nregional survey",
+          "confidence": 0.748321533203125,
+          "start": 283,
+          "end": 286
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "survey",
+          "confidence": 0.6829979419708252,
+          "start": 285,
+          "end": 286
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "UNESCO-UIS",
+          "confidence": 0.6284579038619995,
+          "start": 302,
+          "end": 303
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Colombia",
+          "confidence": 0.8608209490776062,
+          "start": 175,
+          "end": 176
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2022",
+          "confidence": 0.5535043478012085,
+          "start": 333,
+          "end": 334
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2025",
+          "confidence": 0.9182801842689514,
+          "start": 276,
+          "end": 277
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "3rd and 6th graders",
+          "confidence": 0.7033637166023254,
+          "start": 288,
+          "end": 292
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "UIS Statistics",
+          "confidence": 0.9477142095565796,
+          "start": 305,
+          "end": 307
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "UNESCO-UIS",
+          "confidence": 0.8281803131103516,
+          "start": 302,
+          "end": 303
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2022",
+          "confidence": 0.7100145816802979,
+          "start": 333,
+          "end": 334
+        },
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/5fe5c1fa-5766-47df-997d-c4ee00f1fc28/2023-UNHCR-EDU_Report-screen%5B78%5D.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        9
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "Primary education: pupil to teacher ratios\n\nNational and refugee averages\n\n\nHurdles to learning for Ukraine\u2019s children\n\n\nAs of June 2023, there were almost 6 million Ukrainian\nrefugees across Europe. [26] An estimated **40 per cent**,\nor nearly 2.5 million, are children. [27] Most have fled to\nneighbouring or nearby countries, including Poland,\nGermany, Moldova, Romania, and Czechia.\n\n\nThe European Union has taken decisive action\nto ensure that refugee children from Ukraine are\nwelcome in host countries through the activation of\nthe Temporary Protection Directive (TPD), which grants\nresidency permits to eligible individuals, giving them\naccess to government services, including education.\n\n\nNumber of Ukrainian refugee school aged children\n\nEnrolled by hosting country\n\n\nPoland\n\n\nCzechia\n\n\nBulgaria\n\n\nRepublic of Moldova\n\n\nRomania\n\n\nSlovakia\n\n\nHungary\n\n\n\nRefugee\n\nNational\n\n\nFor a variety of reasons, however, around six in 10\nUkrainian refugee children are not in host country\nschools. The levels vary: for example, the estimated\ngross enrolment rate in primary and secondary\neducation across Bulgaria, Czechia, Hungary, Moldova,\nPoland, Romania, and Slovakia (which collectively\nhosted just over 2.5 million Ukrainian refugees as of\n14 June, 2023) is [43 per cent, with a wide range in](https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/ukrainian-refugees-pathways-inclusion-education-insights-host-countries)\nindividual countries of between 4 and 59 per cent.\nData in other countries varies but is not encouraging.\n\n\n\n0 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000 400,000\n\n\n26 UNHCR, \u201cUkraine Situation Flash Update #46,\u201d UNHCR Operational Data Portal (ODP), 2023, [https://data.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/100493.](https://data.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/100493)\n\n27 UNHCR, \u201cRegional Refugee Response Plan for the Ukraine Situation,\u201d 2022, [https://bit.ly/3qXvSf5.](https://bit.ly/3qXvSf5)\n\n\n**UNLOCKING POTENTIAL** | The right to education and opportunity education 11\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/5fe5c1fa-5766-47df-997d-c4ee00f1fc28/2023-UNHCR-EDU_Report-screen%5B78%5D.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        10
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "I Masha, 12, from Dnipro in Ukraine reads a book in her\nroom at a refugee shelter in Krak\u00f3w, Poland.\n\u00a9 UNHCR/Anna Liminowicz\n\n\nLack of clarity\n\n\nThe lack of take-up of educational opportunities is\npartly down to different approaches between member\nstates to some rights under TPD, while refugees have\nalso encountered various obstacles such as a lack of\ninformation on availability of schools, language barriers,\nand a lack of relevant documentation such as previous\nschool records.\n\n\nCompounding the situation, Ukraine\u2019s education\nministry has encouraged the use of an e-learning\nprogramme devised in response to the COVID-19\npandemic, called the All-Ukraine Online School. [28] In the\nperiod between February and June 2022, host states\ntook different approaches, from immediate enrolment\nin local schools where refugees and non-refugees learn\nalongside each other, to a combination of host country\nand Ukrainian curricula, to full-time remote learning\nusing Ukraine\u2019s e-learning platform.\n\n\nData on how many refugees follow the online Ukrainian\ncurriculum is limited. However, in summer 2022, over\n\n\n\n50 per cent were doing so in Moldova, Slovakia and\nRomania, while less than 30 per cent were following it\nin Poland. There is a generalized understanding that\na non-segregated setting is a better approach since\nit allows children to interact with their classmates and\nreceive appropriate support. [29]\n\n\nMixed blessings\n\n\nOnline learning has proved a mixed blessing. Some\nevidence suggests that few children are using it, or that\nthey are following both online courses and the host\ncountry curriculum, doubling their workload. [30]\n\n\nHowever, in Moldova, online learning provided by\nthe Ukrainian education ministry is the most widely\naccessed education service by refugee primary and\nsecondary school-aged children: up to 61 per cent were\nstudying online [31] not including preschool learners. [32]\nAccording to one assessment, 82 per cent of parents\nsaid they preferred their children to study via Ukrainian\nonline platforms rather than go to primary schools. In\nGeorgia, an estimated 45 per cent study online while in\nRomania the figure is 71 per cent. [33]\n\n\nAdditional barriers\n\n\nDespite the right policies being in place, there are\nother barriers to accessing school for Ukrainian refugee\nchildren. With many parts of Ukraine are still affected by\nwar, it is difficult for refugee families to plan for a return\nhome, [34] which also affects decisions on whether to put\nchildren into host-country education systems or stick\nwith the Ukrainian curriculum.\n\n\nIn addition, capacity in host country national education\nsystems \u2013 including shortages of teachers and other\nstaff \u2013 is a challenge, particularly in towns and cities.\nCzechia, Poland and Hungary are facing severe teacher\nshortages, [35] while some countries are struggling to find\nenough professionals to provide mental health and\npsychosocial support. [36]\n\n\n\n28 Save the Children, \u201c\u2018This Is My Life, and I Don\u2019t Want to Waste a Year of It\u2019: The Experiences and Wellbeing of Children Fleeing Ukraine,\u201d\n[Save the Children\u2019s Resource Centre, 2022, https://bit.ly/3EiUvWQ.](https://bit.ly/3EiUvWQ)\n\n29 European Commission, \u201cSupporting the Inclusion of Displaced Children from Ukraine in Education: Considerations, Key Principles and\nPractices for the School Year 2022-2023,\u201d 2022.\n\n30 Save the Children, \u201c\u2018This Is My Life, and I Don\u2019t Want to Waste a Year of It.\u2019\u201d\n\n31 REACH and UNICEF, \u201cMoldova: Multi-Sector Needs Assessment,\u201d 2022, [https://bit.ly/45sSNOl.](https://bit.ly/45sSNOl)\n\n32 Inter-Agency Education Working Group, \u201cMoldova Rapid Education Needs Assessment\u201d (UNHCR, 2023).\n\n33 Inter-Agency Operational Update, \u201cCzech Republic: Inter-Agency Operational Update.,\u201d 2022, [https://data.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/96855.](https://data.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/96855)\n\n34 Inter-Agency Education Working Group, \u201cMoldova Rapid Education Needs Assessment.\u201d\n\n35 Akila Quinio et al., \u201cWanted: Tens of Thousands of Teachers to Staff Europe\u2019s Schools,\u201d Financial Times, September 2, 2022.\n\n36 European Commission, \u201cSupporting the Inclusion of Displaced Children from Ukraine in Education: Considerations, Key Principles and\nPractices for the School Year 2022-2023.\u201d\n\n\n12 **UNLOCKING POTENTIAL** | The right to education and opportunity education\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "school records",
+          "confidence": 0.5339579582214355,
+          "start": 84,
+          "end": 86
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Moldova",
+          "confidence": 0.7556317448616028,
+          "start": 199,
+          "end": 200
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2022",
+          "confidence": 0.6002166271209717,
+          "start": 189,
+          "end": 190
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2022",
+          "confidence": 0.5715173482894897,
+          "start": 128,
+          "end": 129
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "refugees",
+          "confidence": 0.9885616302490234,
+          "start": 55,
+          "end": 56
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "online Ukrainian\ncurriculum",
+          "confidence": 0.8126248121261597,
+          "start": 179,
+          "end": 182
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Ukraine",
+          "confidence": 0.5338394641876221,
+          "start": 166,
+          "end": 167
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2022",
+          "confidence": 0.8294382095336914,
+          "start": 189,
+          "end": 190
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "refugees",
+          "confidence": 0.9334906935691833,
+          "start": 176,
+          "end": 177
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Moldova: Multi-Sector Needs Assessment",
+          "confidence": 0.6579359173774719,
+          "start": 630,
+          "end": 635
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "REACH and UNICEF",
+          "confidence": 0.8514089584350586,
+          "start": 625,
+          "end": 628
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Moldova",
+          "confidence": 0.9829528331756592,
+          "start": 630,
+          "end": 631
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2022",
+          "confidence": 0.8540564179420471,
+          "start": 637,
+          "end": 638
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2022-2023",
+          "confidence": 0.7637314200401306,
+          "start": 750,
+          "end": 751
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "Displaced Children",
+          "confidence": 0.746041476726532,
+          "start": 733,
+          "end": 735
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Moldova Rapid Education Needs Assessment",
+          "confidence": 0.8202738761901855,
+          "start": 648,
+          "end": 653
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "Inter-Agency Education Working Group",
+          "confidence": 0.8362857103347778,
+          "start": 642,
+          "end": 646
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Moldova",
+          "confidence": 0.6587356925010681,
+          "start": 630,
+          "end": 631
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2022",
+          "confidence": 0.572211742401123,
+          "start": 637,
+          "end": 638
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2022-2023",
+          "confidence": 0.7784801721572876,
+          "start": 750,
+          "end": 751
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "Displaced Children",
+          "confidence": 0.706627368927002,
+          "start": 733,
+          "end": 735
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/5fe5c1fa-5766-47df-997d-c4ee00f1fc28/2023-UNHCR-EDU_Report-screen%5B78%5D.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        11
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "I \u0007Ukrainian refugees build a\nbreakdancing robot at a robotics\nclass run by NGO Next Step\nAssociation in Budapest, Hungary.\n\u00a9 UNHCR/Erno Simon\n\n\n**UNLOCKING POTENTIAL** | The right to education and opportunity education 13\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/5fe5c1fa-5766-47df-997d-c4ee00f1fc28/2023-UNHCR-EDU_Report-screen%5B78%5D.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        12
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/5fe5c1fa-5766-47df-997d-c4ee00f1fc28/2023-UNHCR-EDU_Report-screen%5B78%5D.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        13
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "Undeterred, I secured admission to the dental faculty\nat a private university in Odesa and was fortunate that\nmy father was able to find a way to pay my fees. With\nthe unwavering support of my family and a lot of hard\nstudying, I completed the first two years of university\nand then applied for a DAFI scholarship. [37] Thankfully my\ndiligent studies and excellent exam scores meant I was\ngranted a DAFI scholarship, which enabled me to finish\nthe course. I will always remember the day and moment\nwhen I heard the happy news about the scholarship!\n\n\n_I haven\u2019t forgotten those_\n_who were left behind.\u201d_\n## \u201c\n\nThings were going so well, but then suddenly, my family\nand I were on the move again. The war in Ukraine\nmade life too risky and dangerous, and we were forced\nto leave Ukraine, as we had left Afghanistan all those\nyears before. At the time I was in the final semester\nof my master\u2019s degree and, once again, life was full\nof unbearable uncertainty, complications and doubts:\nwould Germany be as welcoming as Ukraine? Would\nI be able to learn another new language and adapt\nto another new culture? I wanted to start my PhD,\nbut at the same time I was struggling even to find an\napartment!\n\n\nAt that moment, I thought back to my idol: Malala\nYousufzai, the Pakistani student who suffered so much\nfor her right to receive an education, and who has done\nso much for female education. Every time I read about\nher courage, it gave me courage of my own to forge\nahead. She made me believe that one day I would stop\nfeeling helpless, would achieve my goals \u2013 and then\nhelp girls in my own country who need support at this\ndevastating time for Afghanistan.\n\n\nI haven\u2019t forgotten those who were left behind \u2013 like my\nfriend Sarah, who recently finished school and wanted\nto go to university, until the de facto authorities forbade\nwomen from doing so. Kabul fell one day before she\nand her classmates were due to take their final school\nexam, and Sarah\u2019s ambitions of becoming a politician\nhave been cut short along with her education.\n\n\nOr Lina, who has been a teacher for the past 12 years\nand says that she and her colleagues are continuing\ntheir jobs but are always facing financial and other\ndifficulties.\n\n\n\nI \u0007Nilab, who is studying for PhD in therapeutic\ndentistry, consults reference books at the library.\n\u00a9 UNHCR/Gordon Welters\n\n\nI want to encourage them and other women and\ngirls to embrace their aspirations, to surmount the\nchallenges in their way, to nurture an unyielding spirit of\ndetermination.\n\n\nI know it is not easy: I have been ignored, people closed\ndoors on me even when I deserved opportunities, but I\nhave stood strong and today I am embarking on a PhD\nin therapeutic dentistry to achieve the highest level\nof education and become the best I can be. I know\nthat even though you might be strong and brave, that\ndoesn\u2019t mean you won\u2019t feel hurt by other people\u2019s\nnegative words and attitudes, but you have to ignore\nthem and push on. And I want to be a voice for those\nwho I can\u2019t help directly.\n\n\nI hope powerful and influential people read my story\nand my message and are inspired to help women and\ngirls across the world to achieve their potential as I\nhave done.\n\n\n\n37 The DAFI (Albert Einstein German Academic Refugee Initiative) scholarship programme offers qualified refugee and returnee students the\npossibility to earn an undergraduate degree in their country of asylum or home country.\n\n\n**UNLOCKING POTENTIAL** | The right to education and opportunity education 15\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/5fe5c1fa-5766-47df-997d-c4ee00f1fc28/2023-UNHCR-EDU_Report-screen%5B78%5D.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        14
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "opportunities.\n\n\nI believe sharing my experiences can empower other\nrefugee girls who face challenges and setbacks like\nmine, and who can discover that education is the key\nto transforming your life, breaking free from societal\nconstraints, and charting your own path.\n\n\n\nmen waiting in line. Luckily for me, my aunt was going to\nKenya to seek safety from the conflict, and my father let\nme go with her to help with household chores. At that\ntime, education was not even a dream of mine.\n\n\nIt took three days on a lorry loaded with soda crates to\nreach Kakuma refugee camp and from there we went\nto Eldoret. I remember my arrival date vividly: it was a\nSunday morning, 10 a.m., on 13 July 2008.\n\n\n\n16 **UNLOCKING POTENTIAL** | The right to education and opportunity education\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/5fe5c1fa-5766-47df-997d-c4ee00f1fc28/2023-UNHCR-EDU_Report-screen%5B78%5D.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        15
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "When I enrolled in primary school a year later, I was\nthe oldest in my class, could only speak my mother\ntongue, did not know how to write my name, and could\nnot even count to 10! But I was determined and worked\nhard and soon caught up. By the end of the year I was\ntop of my class.\n\n\nAs the crisis in South Sudan worsened, financial\nconstraints made it hard to continue paying school fees,\nwhile the social and cultural pressure to marry became\nunbearable as I grew through my teenage years\u2014I\nwould come home from school to find numerous men\nhaving visited my aunt seeking to marry me\u2014but I\nwished to continue my education.\n\n\n_The scholarship\u2026 freed me from the_\n_idea that someone would demand_\n## \u201c\n_something in return for my education.\u201d_\n\n\nOne man volunteered to pay my school fees, and I felt I\nhad found someone who really cared about my studies,\nbut then he told me I would have to marry him in return.\nI felt betrayed and cheated, and rejected his bargain,\nalthough sometimes I felt it would be easier just to be\nmarried and have someone provide for me. Through a\nchurch group, I was able to find a sponsor and worked\nhard through high school, but just before national exams\nmy father got sick, his health worsening with each\npassing day. Losing my father was a devastating blow.\nI had no one to hold me up. In the midst of my grief, I\nsummoned all of my strength to honour his memory and\nfinish my exams successfully.\n\n\n\nAs I looked to the future after school and the dream of\nuniversity, scholarships offered a glimmer of hope in\nproviding financial support and shielding young refugee\ngirls like me from forced marriages, but the COVID-19\npandemic hit and everything was delayed.\n\n\nI had always wanted to improve the justice system in\nmy country of South Sudan, so I applied to study law at\nthe University of Nairobi. Halfway through my first year,\nI heard about the DAFI scholarship on social media. I\nimmediately applied and was lucky to be selected. The\nscholarship has given me peace of mind, knowing my\nfees will be paid, and it has freed me from the idea that\nsomeone would demand something in return for my\neducation.\n\n\nLast year I was elected President of the University\nof Nairobi Students Association, becoming the firstever female refugee to hold the post. In that role, I am\nadvocating for increased financial support for refugee\nstudents and for greater kindness, because we refugees\nhave all suffered hostility and trauma in our lives.\n\n\nMy personal journey exemplifies the resilience and\ndetermination of refugee girls and shows that by\nempowering us through education we can break the\ncycle of hardship and provide a path towards a brighter\nfuture. If you seize every opportunity, no one and\nnothing can hinder you from achieving what you want.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/5fe5c1fa-5766-47df-997d-c4ee00f1fc28/2023-UNHCR-EDU_Report-screen%5B78%5D.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        16
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/5fe5c1fa-5766-47df-997d-c4ee00f1fc28/2023-UNHCR-EDU_Report-screen%5B78%5D.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        17
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "virtual tutoring sessions to help me stay on track. I also\nmade sure to take care of my mental and physical health\nby taking study breaks, staying active, and connecting\nwith friends and family.\n\n\nIn addition to the challenges of online learning, the\npandemic also hit clinical rotations, in which students\ngain valuable real-world experience working with\npatients and healthcare professionals. Hospitals and\nclinics had to limit the number of students allowed in\ntheir facilities, which meant that my classmates and I\nhad to compete for very few spots, making it harder\nto get the hands-on experience needed to become\na competent nurse. I was persistent and was able to\nsecure a place at a local hospital to complete my clinical\nrotations. I made sure to keep up to date with all the\nlatest safety protocols and precautions, so that I could\nshow the hospital that I was serious about keeping\nmyself and my patients safe.\n\n\n_My dream of becoming a_\n_nurse has come true.\u201d_\n## \u201c\n\nI learned a lot from working in the hospital, but the\nexperience brought challenges too. I was worried\nabout bringing the virus home to my family because,\nas a healthcare worker, I was at higher risk of exposure\nto the virus. I was particularly concerned about the\npotential impact on my loved ones. I took every\npossible precaution to minimize the risk of transmission,\n\n\nI COVID-19 vaccines in cold storage. \u00a9 UNHCR/Jose Cendon\n\n\n\nincluding wearing personal protective equipment in\nhospital, washing my hands frequently and practising\nsocial distancing.\n\n\nWhile getting sick or spreading the virus was a\nconstant worry, I also felt it was important to continue\nworking and doing my part to help patients during this\nchallenging time.\n\n\nI have to say that the pandemic also had some positive\neffects. I saw first-hand the impact that nurses can\nhave on patients\u2019 lives, which made me even more\ndetermined to pursue my dream and make a difference\nin the world. The pandemic also forced me to be more\nadaptable and flexible in my approach to learning and\nproblem-solving. I had to find new ways to connect\nwith my classmates and instructors, which has helped\nme develop new skills and strategies for working in a\nrapidly changing world. While the pandemic has been\ndifficult, it has also been helpful for me to grow and\ndevelop as a person and a future nurse.\n\n\nI graduated in 2022 and am now a fully qualified nurse,\nand at the same time, I have also enrolled to study law\nat university. My dream of becoming a nurse has come\ntrue. I love my job, and I want to be the best nurse I can\nbe.\n\n\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/5fe5c1fa-5766-47df-997d-c4ee00f1fc28/2023-UNHCR-EDU_Report-screen%5B78%5D.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        18
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**With the right support from donors, civil society, and other partners, refugee hosting countries can fully integrate**\n**refugee children and youth into national education systems, ensuring inclusivity and opportunity for all.**\n\n\n\nEducation is essential to thrive in life, leading to better\nemployment opportunities, higher wages, and improved\nlife outcomes. For girls specifically, higher education is\nassociated with a lower likelihood of early marriage and\npregnancy, allowing girls to take charge of their own\ndestinies.\n\n\nThe stories in this report are a testament to the strength\nof refugee children and youth \u2013 and especially of girls\nand young women \u2013 who in the face of adversity few\ncan imagine, have maintained their resolve to stay in\nschool and continue their education.\n\n\n\nHowever, the sober figures presented in this report\nhighlight how much work remains to be done so that\nachieving Sustainable Development Goal 4 on Quality\nEducation and its targets becomes a reality for all\nlearners everywhere, including refugees. In line with\nthe Global Initiative on Education in Situations of Crisis\nand the Call to Action on Financing Education, agreed\nat the 2022 Transforming Education Summit, and in\nanticipation of the 2023 Global Refugee Forum, the\npriority areas of action are laid out below.\n\n\nRecognizing the efforts that states have already made to\nincrease opportunities for refugees, we call on a variety\nof actors, including partners, civil society, donors, and\nothers to support states to:\n\n\n\n20 **UNLOCKING POTENTIAL** | The right to education and opportunity education\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/5fe5c1fa-5766-47df-997d-c4ee00f1fc28/2023-UNHCR-EDU_Report-screen%5B78%5D.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        19
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**1.** Improve access to education and\nlearning outcomes for children\nand youth affected by crises.\n\n\n**Civil society and partners can support host states by:**\n\n\n\u00bb Advocating for governments to include all young\npeople in their national education plans in ways that\nrespect the diversity of needs, abilities, and capacities, and are free from all forms of discrimination.\n\n\n\u00bb Supporting states to monitor and ensure that all\nstudents in school are acquiring the foundational literacy, numeracy, and socio-emotional skills essential\nfor learning success.\n\n\n\u00bb Supporting states to ensure education programmes\nequip young people with essential work and life\nskills, as well as demand-driven training specifically\nfor refugees.\n\n\n**States can:**\n\n\n\u00bb Remove existing social, economic, and political\nbarriers to primary and secondary education for all\nchildren and adolescents, including refugees.\n\n\n\u00bb Uphold existing commitments and international laws\nand treaties stipulating that refugees can access\neducation on a par with host country nationals.\n\n\n\n**2.** Build inclusive, crisis-resilient\neducation systems.\n\n\n**Donors and partners can support host states by:**\n\n\n\u00bb Ensuring schools are equipped with information and\ntools to safeguard health and well-being, provide\nadequate nutrition, water, and sanitation, and protect\nlearners from violence, sexual exploitation and\nabuse.\n\n\n\u00bb Advocating for the alignment of emergency education with both national programmes and the\nminimum standards for education set out by the\nInter-agency Network for Education in Emergencies\n(INEE).\n\n\n**3.** Scale up and mainstream high-impact\nand evidence-based interventions into\nnational policies and programming.\n\n\n**Donors and partners can support host states through**\n**action in these thematic areas:**\n\n\n\u00bb Teachers \u2013support refugee teachers\u2019 inclusion in\nnational teacher management systems, align their\nrecruitment and deployment with national standards,\nrecognize their prior qualifications, and ensure predictable multi-year financing for their recruitment and\nprofessional development.\n\n\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/5fe5c1fa-5766-47df-997d-c4ee00f1fc28/2023-UNHCR-EDU_Report-screen%5B78%5D.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        20
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "I Ukrainian children and their teacher at a learning centre in Bucharest, Romania, set up by PepsiCo in the first weeks of the\nUkrainian refugee emergency. \u00a9 UNHCR/Andrew McConnell\n\n\n\n\u00bb Gender equality and inclusion \u2013ensure refugee boys\nand girls have equal access to national education\nsystems.\n\n\n\u00bb Early childhood education \u2013 ensure refugee children\nhave access to early childhood education where it is\navailable to host country children.\n\n\n\u00bb Socio-emotional skills and psychosocial support \u2013\nprovide refugee children with adequate support to\ndevelop the socio-emotional and foundational skills\nthat will strengthen their learning.\n\n\n\u00bb Protection from violence \u2013 ensure all children are\neducated in safe spaces and live in communities free\nof violence.\n\n\n\u00bb Education technology and innovation - support\nchildren and youth with evidence-based, connected\neducation programmes that use tech-enabled teaching and learning practices, contributing to improved\ndigital skills, life skills and learning outcomes.\n\n\n\n**4.** Maintain and increase external financing,\nensuring it reaches all learners equitably\nand aligns with national planning priorities.\n\n\n**Donors can support host states by:**\n\n\n\u00bb Ensuring reliable, multi-year funding to build education systems that are agile, responsive to the onset\nof crises, and inclusive of refugees.\n\n\n\u00bb Restating and meeting their commitments to allocate\n0.7 per cent of gross national income to overseas aid,\nand to devote at least 10 per cent of that to education.\n\n\n\u00bb Supporting UNHCR to innovate and find solutions\nto both new and longstanding problems \u2013 from\nclassroom equipment, infrastructure, connectivity,\nand online resources to teacher training, apprenticeships, and internships, and encouraging the private\nsector also to play a role.\n\n\n**States are encouraged to:**\n\n\nMeet commitments to increase overall spending for education, and targeting the increase equitably so that it benefits the most marginalized learners, including refugees.\n\n\n\n22 **UNLOCKING POTENTIAL** | The right to education and opportunity education\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/5fe5c1fa-5766-47df-997d-c4ee00f1fc28/2023-UNHCR-EDU_Report-screen%5B78%5D.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        21
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "##### **THE FINAL WORD**\n\nLeonardo Garnier,\nSpecial Adviser to the UN Secretary-General on\nTransforming Education\n\n\n**Let\u2019s welcome refugee children**\n**to their learning adventure**\n\n\nLearning is discovering, looking for answers to neverending questions, finding out, reading about something\nthat baffles you, sharing your search with others,\nlearning with and from others. Learning is not just about\nanswering questions, but about imagining and collectively\nconfronting new and more challenging questions, or\nlooking at them from a different perspective.\n\n\nEducation is the key to building a learning society, a society in which we learn to learn, we learn to do, we learn\nto live together, and we learn to live. Learning does not\nbegin at school. It starts much earlier, and it never ends.\nIt\u2019s truly a lifelong adventure. When we deny such an\nadventure to any person, for whatever reason, we are\ndenying them access to the most important path to a\nproductive, collaborative, meaningful and enjoyable life.\nThat is why we regard education as an essential and\nenabling human right: a right that opens the door to\nother rights.\n\n\nAnd yet, for many different reasons, millions of children\nand young people are still denied their right to education, their right to learn. Poverty, long distances to\nschool, lack of teachers and infrastructure, gender inequality, discrimination in rights and in practice, as well as\nthe lack of adequate facilities for persons with disabilities, are some of the reasons why the right to education\nis denied to millions.\n\n\nBut, as this report attests, all those barriers are compounded in a particularly perverse way by the challenge\nfaced by increasing numbers of forcibly displaced\nlearners \u2013 especially refugees. Suddenly and through\nno fault of their own, they find themselves not just out of\nschool, but out of their homes, their communities, their\ncountries, and their cultures. They are in unfamiliar territory, often lacking a sense of belonging. And they don\u2019t\nalways feel welcome. Learning, for them, can become\nan almost impossible mission.\n\n\nI still vividly recall my dismay when, years ago, a\nMinister of Education in my home country of Costa\nRica lamented that resources had to be allocated to\nforeign children who sought refuge in our schools after\n\n\n\nI Leonardo Garnier. \u00a9 UN Photo/Jaclyn Licht\n\n\nfleeing war in other Central American countries. Those\nchildren simply wanted to be welcomed, receive their\nschool meals, use the bus to get to school, and sit in a\nclassroom and learn, just like any other student. What\nthe minister failed to comprehend then was that every\nchild, irrespective of their origin, belongs in school.\nGiven the unique challenges forcibly displaced children\nface, they deserve not only a place in school, but also a\nwarm welcome and dedicated support.\n\n\n_It is imperative that we embrace the_\n_educational journey of displaced children\u201d_\n## \u201c\n\nIs there a cost in this effort for host countries? Yes, of\ncourse, and it is important that the international community steps up to help countries in their efforts to integrate displaced and refugee children in their schools.\nBut let\u2019s not focus only on the cost as a central concern,\nsince there are also huge long-term benefits for host\ncountries. Education is about learning to live together,\nand sharing the classroom with foreign, displaced classmates serves as a wonderful lesson in love and solidarity for our children \u2013 and for us: we become better\npeople.\n\n\nLet us also remember that many of those children\nwe host today in our schools will be our future fellow\ncontributing citizens. And let us not forget that many of\nus are descendants of yesterday\u2019s displaced children\n\n- and here, I think of my grandpa, once a teenaged\nmigrant himself.\n\n\nIt is imperative that we embrace the educational journey\nof displaced children. Education is their right and our\nresponsibility. By providing them with quality education\nand offering them the care and support they need,\nwe foster their resilience, nurture their potential, and\ncontribute to a more inclusive and compassionate society. Let us not deny them the transformative power of\neducation but rather open ourselves, our classrooms,\nand communities to their unique stories, knowledge,\nand aspirations. Together, we can create a world where\nno child is left out and where every learning adventure\ncan flourish.\n\n\n\n**UNLOCKING POTENTIAL** | The right to education and opportunity education 23\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/5fe5c1fa-5766-47df-997d-c4ee00f1fc28/2023-UNHCR-EDU_Report-screen%5B78%5D.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        22
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS**\n\nReport compiled and produced by: Cirenia Chavez Villegas, Arash Bordbar, Tristan McConnell, Becky Telford, Charlie\nDunmore, Laura Bowles, Suzy Hopper and Barney Thompson.\n\n\nWith thanks to Artur Borkowski and Lily Calaycay from UNESCO\u2019s Section for Migration, Displacement, Emergencies and\nEducation (EME) for their contribution to the data and policy analyses on Ukrainian refugee children.\n\n\nGraphics: Jan Luka Frey\n\n\nTo contact the education team at UNHCR for more information on our education work or to discuss donations, funding,\nscholarships, data, partnerships and other forms of collaboration, please email Becky Telford at [telfordm@unhcr.org.](mailto:telfordm%40unhcr.org?subject=)\n\n\nUNHCR, the UN Refugee Agency, is a global organisation dedicated to saving lives, protecting rights, and building a better\nfuture for people forced to flee their homes because of conflict and persecution. We lead international action to protect\nrefugees, forcibly displaced communities, and stateless people.\n\n\nWe deliver life-saving assistance, help safeguard fundamental human rights, and develop solutions that ensure people have\na safe place called home where they can build a better future. We also work to ensure that stateless people are granted a\nnationality.\n\n\nWe work in over 130 countries, using our expertise to protect and care for millions.\n\n\n\u00a9 UNHCR, September 2023\n\n\nCover photo: \u00a9 UNHCR/Charity Nzomo\n\n\nLayout and design: BakOS DESIGN\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/5fe5c1fa-5766-47df-997d-c4ee00f1fc28/2023-UNHCR-EDU_Report-screen%5B78%5D.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        23
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_39/raw/doc_39_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,354 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "# **YEMEN**\n## Forced evictions analysis\n\n### **INTRODUCTION**\n\nThe current conflict in Yemen that started in 2014 has forced millions of Yemenis to flee\ntheir homes, leading to widespread internal displacement. According to UNHCR, 86% of\ndisplacement in 2023 in Yemen is because of war, armed conflict, and generalised violence\n(UNHCR unpublished).\n\n\nDisplaced people in Yemen increasingly face the risk of forced eviction, broadly defined by\nthe OHCHR as \u201cthe permanent or temporary removal against their will of individuals, families\nand/or communities from the homes and/or land which they occupy, without the provision of,\n[and access to, appropriate forms of legal or other protection\u201d (OHCHR accessed 31/08/2023). In](https://www.ohchr.org/en/special-procedures/sr-housing/forced-evictions)\n2023, according to National Protection Cluster (NPC) responders, the overall number of forced\nevictions in Yemen has risen by an estimated 10% compared to 2022 (NPC unpublished).\n\n\nMany internally displaced Yemenis have sought refuge in makeshift displacement sites, on\npublicly and privately owned land, and in collective centres, such as schools. Increasingly,\nboth private and public land on which IDP sites are situated is being claimed back, resulting\nin the forced eviction of the IDPs who have settled there. The majority of these people do not\npay any rent, but some provide free labour in return for living on the site (Consultation session with\nNPC responders 29/08/2023).\n\n\nOther IDPs rent flats and houses. With the deteriorating economic situation in the country,\nincluding the loss of livelihoods and reduced income opportunities, more and more IDPs are\n[unable to afford rent and exposed to the risk of forced eviction (NRC et al. 02/10/2023; Consultation](https://www.nrc.no/contentassets/394fca24bf83477bac05282fcccfda67/joint-ngo-cso-statement---millions-still-struggling-to-survive-in-yemen---final---02.10.pdf)\nsession with NPC responders 29/08/2023).\n\n\nYemen lacks comprehensive and effective legal frameworks to protect tenants and property\nrights, putting some individuals at risk of arbitrary eviction. The national legal framework\nlegalises evictions upon the default of rent payment after three months, essentially affecting\nthe majority of IDP families [(Yemen NIC accessed 06/12/2023). A contributing factor is the lack](https://yemen-nic.info/db/laws_ye/detail.php?ID=18844)\nof legal awareness among IDPs and landlords on the limited substantive and procedural\nlegal safeguards available, necessitating the involvement of the judiciary if a tenant does not\nconsent to an eviction or if the eviction legality is disputed. Most IDPs lack access to legal aid\nor lawyers for advice and representation, mostly because of a lack of means to afford it.\n\n\n1   Any comments or questions? Please contact us at info@acaps.org\n\n\n\nThematic report\n28 December 2023\n\n\nA high level of tenure insecurity in Yemen compounds forced eviction threats. Inequalities\nin Yemeni society result in the heightened exposure of some population groups, such\nas Al Muhamasheen, to forced evictions. These groups lack access to tribal or other\ninformal patronage networks and support mechanisms and face discrimination from host\n[communities and other IDPs (MRG accessed 06/12/2023; UN-Habitat 07/08/2020). Evictions leading](https://minorityrights.org/minorities/muhamasheen/)\nto the premature return of IDPs to their place of origin, i.e. when they return home without the\nrequired security in place, may undermine the Principles of Voluntary Return in Safety and\n[Dignity (UN-Habitat 07/08/2020).](https://yemenportal.unhabitat.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/220217_State-of-Yemeni-Cities.pdf)\n\n\nAs the forced eviction rate increases, affected people may experience homelessness, new\ndisplacement, and exposure to exploitation and abuse in their new location. They may have to\nrelocate to new, cheaper, and less-serviced neighbourhoods or locations that lack access to\nlivelihoods and have reduced access to healthcare and education facilities. These will likely\nincrease humanitarian needs as well.\n\n\nAgainst this background, this analysis, jointly produced by the NPC and ACAPS, aims to\nprovide an overview of the causes, drivers, impacts, and response gaps surrounding forced\neviction in Yemen.\n\n\n**Acknowledgement**\n\n\nThis product was made possible by the generous support of the Directorate-General for\nEuropean Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations. The analysis is a joint product\nbetween, ACAPS, The Yemen Protection Cluster, and the House Land and Property working\ngroup.\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://www.acaps.org/fileadmin/Data_Product/Main_media/20231228_ACAPS_Yemen_analysis_hub_forced_evictions_analysis.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "### **FORCED EVICTION FIGURES**\n\nAccording to data from the Global Camp Coordination and Camp Management (CCCM)\nCluster and the NPC, more households residing in rented accommodation experience eviction\nthreats than those in managed IDP sites. In December 2023, 29% of households in privately\nrented accommodations received eviction threats, compared to only 7% in managed IDP\n[sites (UNHCR unpublished; UNHCR accessed 06/12/2023).](https://data2.unhcr.org/ar/dataviz/193)\n\n\nMap 1. Number of households evicted from IDP sites by district, January\u2013\nSeptember 2023\n\n\n[Source: UNHCR (accessed 06/12/2023)](https://data2.unhcr.org/ar/dataviz/193)\n\n\n\nFigure 1. Households in rental accommodation (left) compared to households\nin IDP sites (right) who received eviction threats from July\u2013December 2023\n\n\nSource: UNHCR (unpublished)\n\n\nAccording to the CCCM tracker, in 2023, the five districts with the highest number of IDP\nhouseholds evicted from hosting sites were Al Ma\u2019afer (Ta\u2019iz governorate), Dar Sa\u2019d (Aden),\nMa\u2019rib City, Qatabah (Ad Dali), and Tuban (Lahj).\n\nFigure 2. Districts with the highest number of households evicted from IDP\nsites, January\u2013September 2023\n\n\n[Source: UNHCR (accessed 06/12/2023)](https://data2.unhcr.org/ar/dataviz/193)\n\n\n\n2\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "FORCED EVICTION FIGURES",
+          "confidence": 0.8665972948074341,
+          "start": 5,
+          "end": 8
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "UNHCR",
+          "confidence": 0.7338383793830872,
+          "start": 72,
+          "end": 73
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.7534558773040771,
+          "start": 47,
+          "end": 48
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.7653887867927551,
+          "start": 47,
+          "end": 48
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "households",
+          "confidence": 0.80837482213974,
+          "start": 30,
+          "end": 31
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "CCCM tracker",
+          "confidence": 0.7641923427581787,
+          "start": 156,
+          "end": 158
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "UNHCR",
+          "confidence": 0.8421071171760559,
+          "start": 72,
+          "end": 73
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.5104357600212097,
+          "start": 81,
+          "end": 82
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.7880846858024597,
+          "start": 47,
+          "end": 48
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "households",
+          "confidence": 0.7362161874771118,
+          "start": 30,
+          "end": 31
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://www.acaps.org/fileadmin/Data_Product/Main_media/20231228_ACAPS_Yemen_analysis_hub_forced_evictions_analysis.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "Map 2. Number of households evicted outside IDP sites by district, January\u2013\nOctober 2023\n\n\nSource: UNHCR (unpublished)\n\n\nData from NPC responders showed that household eviction numbers outside IDP sites in\n2023 were highest in Amran, At Ta\u2019iziyah (Ta\u2019iz governorate), Dhamar City (Dhamar), Sa\u2019dah,\n(Sa\u2019dah) and Sanhan wa Bani Bahlul (Sana\u2019a).\n\nFigure 3. Districts with the highest number of households evicted outside IDP\nsites, January\u2013October 2023\n\n\nSource: NPC (unpublished)\n\n\n### **KEY FINDINGS**\n\n\n- There is an increasing trend of private landowners requesting IDPs to vacate their land for\ntheir own use and purposes, often owing to property speculations.\n\n- Similarly, in light of the prospects of peace and economic recovery, the authorities are\nincreasingly claiming back land and reinstating services in public buildings, such as the\nschools and health centres that IDPs are using as collective centres.\n\n- Many IDPs not living in IDP sites but renting flats or houses are being evicted because of\ntheir inability to pay rent. This trend is worsening with increasing inflation, unemployment,\nand livelihood losses (Consultation session with NPC responders 29/08/2023).\n\n- Forced evictions in Yemen overall have increased by an estimated 10% in 2023 compared\nto 2022. From January\u2013October 2023, the NPC and CCCM responders recorded\nthe eviction of or eviction threats to close to 61,400 individuals. The data showed the\nhighest numbers in Ma\u2019rib and Ta\u2019iz in the areas under the control of the Internationally\nRecognized Government of Yemen (IRG). In the areas controlled by the de-facto authority\n(DFA) in the north of Yemen (also known as the Houthis), the highest numbers were in\nAd Dali, Al Bayda, Al Hodeidah, Al Jawf, Amanat Al Asimah, Amran, Dhamar, Hajjah, Ibb,\nMa\u2019rib, Sa\u2019dah, Sana\u2019a, and Ta\u2019iz (NPC unpublished).\n\n- The main driver of forced evictions is insecure tenure, emphasised by the lack of legal\nrecourse to eviction threats.\n\n- IDPs at risk of forced eviction from their location of displacement are often unable to\nreturn to their place of origin because of insecurity, housing damage, and a lack of basic\nservices and livelihood opportunities.\n\n- Eviction threats are also likely increasingly affecting members of the host community in\nrented accommodations, as the cost-of-living crisis makes housing unaffordable [(MEE](https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/libya-thousands-expelled-homes-arabic-press-review)\n[08/09/2023). These people include government employees who have not regularly received](https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/libya-thousands-expelled-homes-arabic-press-review)\ntheir salary since the onset of conflict in 2014, especially in urban areas (Consultation\nsession with NPC responders 29/08/2023).\n\n- There are many reasons for the lack of effective legal protection from evictions. These\ninclude the lack of safeguards for IDPs who fail to pay rent because of displacementrelated loss of livelihood, tenants\u2019 and landlords\u2019 lack of legal awareness of the judicial\nprocess that governs forced evictions, the lack of tenancy agreements, and poor\neconomic conditions that prevent tenants from being able to afford legal aid/lawyers for\nlegal advice/representation during eviction.\n\n- Among the IDPs, the elderly, Al Muhamasheen, and women- and child-headed households\nare the most at risk of forced evictions. Migrants and refugees experience high eviction\nrisk as well.\n\n\n\n3\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://www.acaps.org/fileadmin/Data_Product/Main_media/20231228_ACAPS_Yemen_analysis_hub_forced_evictions_analysis.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        2
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "- Forced evictions can pose a risk of new displacement and cause people to move from\ntheir jobs, resulting in protection concerns. Forced evictions can also reduce or remove\naccess to basic services, potentially exposing the evicted to health risks, exploitation,\n[and violence (ICRC 12/06/2020; Consultation session with NPC responders 29/08/2023).](https://www.icrc.org/en/publication/4344-displaced-cities-experiencing-and-responding-urban-internal-displacement-outside)\n\n- Besides the continuous, dedicated response of the NPC, in coordination with the Housing,\nLand and Property Working Group (HLP WG), protection responders, and other clusters,\nNPC responders also need to work closely with other clusters and the Durable Solutions\nWorking Group to effectively respond to eviction cases, especially on a policy level. The\nfocus should lie on providing and expanding legal representation, mediation, counseling\nfor people facing eviction threats, and awareness-raising for authorities and host\ncommunities on eviction mechanisms (Consultation session with NPC responders 29/08/2023).\nRecommendations are outlined in a separate section at the end of this document.\n\n### **METHODOLOGY**\n\n\n- The report is based on primary data analysis of eviction data covering a large number of\nIDP-managed sites (from the CCCM Cluster), Shelter Cluster data on damaged housing\nand shelters, NPC data, and the HLP WG monitoring and eviction tracker covering\nevictions inside and outside managed sites.\n\n- It also used a secondary data analysis of publicly available sources on forced evictions\nand land tenure issues in Yemen.\n\n- Two consultation sessions with NPC responders and ACAPS supplemented these\nanalyses. The first consultation engaged key collaborators delivering HLP-related\nservices in the country, while the second involved the wider protection community of\nthe NPC in Yemen. The consultations were held in September and October 2023. An\nadditional consultation was held with the NPC Strategic Advisory Group in November.\n\n### **LIMITATIONS**\n\n\n- There is limited available information directly related to the impact on specific groups\nof people facing evictions who might be more exposed to certain risks and who have\nspecific needs.\n\n- Publicly available information on the impact of forced evictions is often qualitative,\nmaking it difficult to compare and aggregate data continuously and countrywide.\n\n- Data on evictions from managed IDP sites covered by CCCM and collective centres and\nfrom rented accommodation is collected through different mechanisms.\n\n- Quantitative data on forced evictions outside managed IDP-hosting sites is largely\nbased on sample datasets from monitoring and recently launched mechanisms to track\nevictions.\n\n\n\n**Response to forced evictions by the international humanitarian community and**\n**local responders:**\n\n\nThe NPC, in coordination with the HLP WG, protection responders, and other clusters,\nare working to address and coordinate the response to forced evictions. NPC\ninitiatives launched between 2022\u20132023 include the following.\n\n- In June 2023, the NPC, in coordination with other clusters, released the Framework\nfor Voluntary Relocations of IDPs Elsewhere in the Country to address requests\nfor IDP relocations in a principled manner. The framework facilitates relocations\nin line with humanitarian principles and reduces evictions that violate the rights of\n[the displaced (NPC 20/06/2023).](https://reliefweb.int/report/yemen/framework-voluntary-relocations-idps-elsewhere-country)\n\n- The NPC also provided legal assistance, including legal representation, mediation,\ncounselling, and conflict resolution, through 16 responders (as at November\n[2023), ten of whom supported HLP case management (NPC accessed 26/11/2023).](https://app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrIjoiZWI1ZmRkZGItYTRlYS00YWVjLTliNzMtN2VkOWM3OWQ1NmZmIiwidCI6ImU1YzM3OTgxLTY2NjQtNDEzNC04YTBjLTY1NDNkMmFmODBiZSIsImMiOjh9)\n\n- The NPC HLP monitoring tools include the Humanitarian Response Plan HLP\nindicators and eviction tracker (NPC unpublished).\n\n\n\n4\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "eviction data",
+          "confidence": 0.9738948345184326,
+          "start": 210,
+          "end": 212
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "report",
+          "confidence": 0.6354885101318359,
+          "start": 202,
+          "end": 203
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "CCCM Cluster",
+          "confidence": 0.6890985369682312,
+          "start": 222,
+          "end": 224
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "IDP-managed sites",
+          "confidence": 0.5746934413909912,
+          "start": 217,
+          "end": 219
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.6693439483642578,
+          "start": 175,
+          "end": 176
+        },
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "IDP-managed sites",
+          "confidence": 0.8324798345565796,
+          "start": 217,
+          "end": 219
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "primary"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Shelter Cluster data",
+          "confidence": 0.7436642646789551,
+          "start": 226,
+          "end": 229
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "primary"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "NPC data",
+          "confidence": 0.8513763546943665,
+          "start": 235,
+          "end": 237
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "primary"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "HLP WG monitoring and eviction tracker",
+          "confidence": 0.8206823468208313,
+          "start": 240,
+          "end": 246
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Yemen",
+          "confidence": 0.691312849521637,
+          "start": 314,
+          "end": 315
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "primary"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Data on evictions from managed IDP sites",
+          "confidence": 0.5100381374359131,
+          "start": 407,
+          "end": 414
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Humanitarian Response Plan HLP\nindicators",
+          "confidence": 0.780161440372467,
+          "start": 645,
+          "end": 650
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "NPC",
+          "confidence": 0.7108587622642517,
+          "start": 625,
+          "end": 626
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.5054547190666199,
+          "start": 614,
+          "end": 615
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.6111369729042053,
+          "start": 614,
+          "end": 615
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "responders",
+          "confidence": 0.7539634108543396,
+          "start": 608,
+          "end": 609
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://www.acaps.org/fileadmin/Data_Product/Main_media/20231228_ACAPS_Yemen_analysis_hub_forced_evictions_analysis.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        3
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "### **LEGAL FRAMEWORKS**\n\n**Forced evictions \u2013 definition in international law**\n\n\nThe OHCHR broadly defines forced evictions as \u201cthe permanent or temporary removal against\ntheir will of individuals, families and/or communities from the homes and/or land which they\noccupy, without the provision of, and access to, appropriate forms of legal or other protection\u201d.\nAs per resolution 1993/77 of the UNCHR, the \u201cpractice of forced eviction constitutes a gross\nviolation of human rights, in particular the right to adequate housing\u201d [(UHCHR 10/03/1993).](https://www.refworld.org/docid/3b00f0c514.html)\nYemen has also signed several international legal instruments with specific provisions for\nsafeguarding the right to adequate housing and protection against forced eviction from home\nor land:\n\n- [Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights](https://www.ohchr.org/EN/UDHR/Pages/UDHRIndex.aspx)\n\n- [Article 11, Paragraph 1, of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights](https://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CESCR.aspx)\n\n- [Articles 17, 23, and 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights](https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/international-covenant-civil-and-political-rights)\n\n- [Article 27, Paragraph 3, of the Convention on the Rights of the Child](https://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CRC.aspx)\n\n- Article 14, Paragraph 2 (h), of the [Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination](https://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CEDAW.aspx)\n[against Women](https://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CEDAW.aspx)\n\n- [Article 5 (e) of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination](https://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CERD.aspx)\n\n- Guideline Number 6, Paragraph 38 (d), of the [Guidelines for the Implementation of the Right to](https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G19/353/90/PDF/G1935390.pdf?OpenElement)\n[Adequate Housing](https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G19/353/90/PDF/G1935390.pdf?OpenElement)\n\n\n- [The UN Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement.](https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G98/104/93/PDF/G9810493.pdf?OpenElement)\n\n\nInternational law recognises that there are exceptional circumstances when evictions may be\ncarried out consistently with human rights principles, for example, when displacing people\nfrom hazard-prone land to protect lives [(OHCHR 01/05/2014). States, however, should adopt](https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Publications/FS25.Rev.1.pdf)\nlegislation to prohibit forced evictions and ensure that, prior to carrying out any evictions, all\nfeasible alternatives are explored in consultation with the affected people. Several procedural\nprotection mechanisms should also be applied before eviction, including meaningful\nconsultation with those affected, the provision of sufficient notice for all affected people prior\nto a scheduled eviction, the provision of legal remedies, and the provision of legal aid so the\naffected people can pursue legal action. Individuals affected by eviction orders should have\nthe right to adequate compensation for any loss of property, and evictions should never result\n[in individuals becoming homeless or put them at risk of other human rights violations (OHCHR](https://tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/15/TreatyBodyExternal/Download.aspx?symbolno=INT/CESCR/GEC/6430&Lang=en)\n[1997).](https://tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/15/TreatyBodyExternal/Download.aspx?symbolno=INT/CESCR/GEC/6430&Lang=en)\n\n\n\n**Protection from forced evictions in the Yemeni national legal framework**\n\n\nArticle 91 of Rental Law No. 22 of 2006 titled \u2018Arranging the Relations between the Owner and\nthe Tenant\u2019 states that an owner is not authorised to force a tenant out unless the tenant is in\nrent arrears for three months in a row, there is a pressing reason for eviction as determined\nby a court, or there is property misuse, such as when a court issues a verdict on acts that\n[are criminal or not in line with the objective of the tenancy agreement (Republic of Yemen NIC](https://yemen-nic.info/db/laws_ye/detail.php?ID=18844)\n[accessed 06/12/2023). In Yemen Law No. 14 of 2022, Article 360 calls for the detention of those](https://yemen-nic.info/db/laws_ye/detail.php?ID=18844)\n[who default in the payment of rent debt (LCRD Yemen accessed 06/12/2023). A landlord can also](http://www.lcrdye.org/250/)\nend a contract when it has expired without special notice, and rental contracts cannot be more\n[than three years long (UN-Habitat 07/08/2020).](https://yemenportal.unhabitat.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/220217_State-of-Yemeni-Cities.pdf)\n\n\nThe DFA amended Tenancy Law No. 22 of 2006 in their areas of control for the duration of\nthe war through Law No. 4 of 2021, whereby additional interim safeguards were introduced\nfor tenants, such as the prohibition of increasing rent and the specific suspension of eviction\nbecause of rent default if sufficient warranties are substantiated. While these measures\nprovide a certain level of protection against eviction, they do not address the full spectrum of\nits causes. Only a small number of tenants are able to provide payment warranties to suspend\n[eviction (SabaNet 22/11/2021).](https://www.saba.ye/ar/news3164989.htm)\n\n\n**Causes of forced eviction**\n\n\n**Private landowners are claiming land back for investment and speculation purposes.**\nForced evictions have been especially increasing on private land sites, where groups of IDPs\nhave stayed for years without paying the landowner (Consultation session with NPC responders\n04/10/2023). Recently, however, landlords have begun investing in the land and have stopped\nsupporting longer-term tenancy or the construction of more permanent infrastructure as\nrequired by IDPs (Consultation session with NPC responders 29/08/2023). Increased interest in land\ninvestment is triggered by the increased demand for housing caused by the high numbers of\nIDPs, for example in Sana\u2019a [(Al-Monitor 17/03/2022). Many new houses are also being built in](https://www.al-monitor.com/originals/2022/03/real-estate-yemens-sanaa-still-thrives-despite-war)\nother cities, such as Mokha, where service infrastructure such as the harbour and airport have\nbeen reconstructed, increasing the risk of forced eviction when landlords try to make bigger\nprofits from the sale of their land (Consultation session with NPC responders 04/10/2023).\n\n\n**Government bodies are reclaiming public land and collective centres for service rebuilding**\n**and, sometimes, to increase their political capital.** Local authorities are reclaiming public sites\non which groups of IDPs have settled to restart public services and provide new infrastructure.\nOther evictions from public land are related to concerns about potential disruptions to the\nhost community\u2019s social cohesion, especially when there is a lack of investment for them\n(Consultation session with NPC responders 04/10/2023). Reported eviction cases from public land\n\n\n\n5\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://www.acaps.org/fileadmin/Data_Product/Main_media/20231228_ACAPS_Yemen_analysis_hub_forced_evictions_analysis.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        4
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "point to political reasons and the precarious situation of IDPs from particular areas of origin\nwho are not welcomed by the authorities (Consultation session with NPC responders 29/08/2023).\nFor example, a Norwegian Refugee Council report described the situation in Abyan as a\n[political campaign against \u2018northern\u2019 IDPs (NRC 02/11/2023).](https://www.nrc.no/globalassets/pdf/reports/yearning-for-a-home-that-no-longer-exists/the-dilemma-facing-people-forced-to-flee-in-yemen.pdf)\n\n\n**Tenants are unable to pay rent for flats and houses because of increased living costs and**\n**insufficient livelihood opportunities.** Most individual evictions involve renters who are more\nthan three months delayed in paying rent (Consultation session with NPC responders 29/08/2023).\nAccording to the UNHCR, in 2023, almost half of all the surveyed tenants who paid rent were\nlate by three to four months, after which a landlord can evict a tenant (UNHCR unpublished). The\nlack of tenants\u2019 awareness of their rights and lack of access to legal redress to challenge\nevictions aggravate their situation.\n\nFigure 4. Average number of months that tenants cannot pay rent in 2023 by\npercentage of households\n\n\nSource: UNHCR (unpublished)\n\n\nThe number of tenants surveyed by UNHCR who were able to pay monthly rent fell from 17%\nin 2022 to 12% in 2023.\n\n\n\nFigure 5. Percentage of households in rented accommodation able to regularly\npay rent in 2022 and 2023\n\n\nSource: UNHCR (unpublished)\n\n\nA major reason behind delays or failure in paying rent is the lack or loss of sufficient\nlivelihood options that would provide some financial security. At the same time, rents are\nrising as a consequence of the cost-of-living crisis and the depreciation of the Yemeni rial in\nIRG-controlled areas, as well as a housing shortage in many urban areas, especially those\n[seeing an influx of displaced people (Sky News 11/01/2023; SCSS 01/06/2023; A24NA 27/08/2022).](https://www.skynewsarabia.com/varieties/1587993-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%8A%D9%85%D9%86-%D8%A7%D8%B1%D8%AA%D9%81%D8%A7%D8%B9-%D8%A7%D9%95%D9%8A%D8%AC%D8%A7%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A8%D9%8A%D9%88%D8%AA-%D8%AA%D9%81%D8%A7%D9%82%D9%85-%D9%85%D8%B9%D8%A7%D9%86%D8%A7%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D9%88%D8%A7%D8%B7%D9%86%D9%8A%D9%86)\nForced evictions because of rent non-payment are therefore likely to increase, not only for\nthe displaced but also for host communities whose purchasing power is decreasing with the\ncontinued economic crisis.\n\n\n**Insecure tenure is a compounding factor that increases the risk of forced evictions.** An\n[estimated 1.4 million IDPs overall are living with insecure tenure (ACAPS 29/12/2022). Most IDP](https://www.globalprotectioncluster.org/sites/default/files/2023-01/protection_analysis_update_january_to_september_2022.pdf)\nsites, whether managed or not, lack tenure agreement or sometimes only involve a verbal\nagreement. Figures from the CCCM displacement tracker show that about half of the IDP\nhouseholds in IDP sites had no tenure agreement from January\u2013September 2023.\n\n\n\n6\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://www.acaps.org/fileadmin/Data_Product/Main_media/20231228_ACAPS_Yemen_analysis_hub_forced_evictions_analysis.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        5
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "Figure 6. Households in IDP sites with tenure agreements in 2023\n\n\n[Source: UNHCR (accessed 06/12/2023)](https://data2.unhcr.org/ar/dataviz/193)\n\n\nLikewise, most IDPs living in privately rented accommodation lack a rental agreement,\nincreasing the risk of eviction or eviction threats. A 2020 survey among renters in Yemen\nby the Overseas Development Institute and the Global Land Alliance found that almost all\nrenters (98%) felt that the biggest eviction threat was the owner asking them to leave. The\nsecond most often named reason by more than 80% of respondents for insecure tenure\nwas the lack of money or other resources to pay rent [(Prindex 02/2021). The survey did not](https://www.prindex.net/documents/631/PX1305_Prindex_Report_www_v2.pdf)\ndifferentiate between displaced and non-displaced people, and results may point to the\ngeneral tenure insecurity any renter in Yemen faces because of the lack of implementation\nof legal protection from evictions.\n\n\n**Some land on which IDP sites are located is unsuitable for settlement** . While most evictions\nare landowner-driven, in some areas, the risk of flooding causes authorities to evict people\nfrom IDP sites without being able to provide suitable land for relocation, as was reported in\nIbb (Consultation session with NPC responders 29/08/2023).\n\n\n\n**Groups at heightened risk of forced eviction**\n\n\n**The absence of protection mechanisms for marginalised people from forced eviction,**\n**especially those displaced, increases the risk of repeated forced eviction.** The most-atrisk groups are those that have no social protection mechanisms and no tribal protection\nor protection from customary law (Consultation session with NPC responders 29/08/2023). These\ngroups include Al Muhamasheen, who are often excluded from efforts by host communities\nand local authorities when supporting IDPs. They regularly face eviction threats from the\nowners of the land where they take refuge [(UN-Habitat 07/08/2020; MRG accessed 06/12/2023).](https://yemenportal.unhabitat.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/220217_State-of-Yemeni-Cities.pdf)\nThere have been reported cases of Al Muhamasheen evicted or relocated from IDP sites\nbeing refused at other sites. Some IDPs also consider as competition and discriminate\nagainst migrants and refugees (Consultation session with NPC responders 04/10/2023).\n\n\n**Older people, people living with disabilities with no family support, and women- and child-**\n**headed households are especially at risk of forced evictions and have no legal protection.**\nAn estimated two-thirds of older people do not have an income, and a similar number have\n[had to borrow money since the conflict began and rely on others to meet their needs (Dorcas](https://dorcas.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Dorcas-Report-Older-People-in-Conflicts.pdf)\n[28/06/2022). Women and children are also especially at risk of evictions when the male](https://dorcas.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Dorcas-Report-Older-People-in-Conflicts.pdf)\nhousehold head has left to earn money or is imprisoned, leaving women and children behind\n[with no money to hand and no male authority figure in the household (ACAPS 14/04/2023). In Al](https://www.acaps.org/fileadmin/Data_Product/Main_media/20230414_ACAPS_Yemen_challenges_to_housing_land_and_property_rights.pdf)\nHawtah, for example, UN-Habitat found that 55 child-headed households were particularly\n[tenure insecure, exposing them to a high risk of eviction (UN-Habitat 07/08/2020)](https://yemenportal.unhabitat.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/220217_State-of-Yemeni-Cities.pdf)\n\n\n**Protection risks stemming from forced evictions**\n\n\n**Insufficient access to legal protection for tenants with insecure tenure increases their**\n**risk of forced eviction.** Many landlords still do not know their rights and obligations, and\nneither do the tenants know the rights and legal protection they are entitled to. For tenants\nwho do and want to challenge eviction threats, access to legal safeguards is also often not\naffordable (Consultation session with NPC responders 04/10/2023). Legal practitioners, however,\nhave reported an increase in court cases in relation to forced evictions in recent few years,\nnoting that forced eviction cases have become among the highest litigated cases in DFA\nareas (UNHCR unpublished). This could reflect the increase in forced eviction cases but\nalso a higher level of awareness and/or accessibility of legal protection options through\nhumanitarian organisations. Corresponding information on the issue from IRG-controlled\nareas is not available.\n\n\n**During forced eviction, civil documentation, HLP documentation, and other belongings**\n**are confiscated** (Consultation session with NPC responders 04/10/2023). These confiscations often\nleave evicted people without basic belongings to start a home somewhere else. Regarding\n\n\n\n7\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://www.acaps.org/fileadmin/Data_Product/Main_media/20231228_ACAPS_Yemen_analysis_hub_forced_evictions_analysis.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        6
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "document confiscation, IDPs rarely have the money to apply for replacement, or they do\n[not have access to the issuing authority (ACAPS 14/04/2023). As a result, evicted people may](https://www.acaps.org/fileadmin/Data_Product/Main_media/20230414_ACAPS_Yemen_challenges_to_housing_land_and_property_rights.pdf)\nremain without the essential documents needed to claim their full range of rights [(ACAPS](https://www.globalprotectioncluster.org/sites/default/files/2023-01/protection_analysis_update_january_to_september_2022.pdf)\n[29/12/2022). Although such confiscations are criminal acts, given affected tenants\u2019 lack of](https://www.globalprotectioncluster.org/sites/default/files/2023-01/protection_analysis_update_january_to_september_2022.pdf)\naccess to effective legal support, landlords are not deterred from such practices (Consultation\nsession with NPC responders 04/10/2023).\n\n\n**Household heads with rent arrears risk detention.** Household heads have been imprisoned,\noften over months and without legal assistance, because of their inability to pay outstanding\nrent debt (Consultation session with NPC responders 04/10/2023). They remain detained until their\nfamily manages to gather whatever funds they can to pay off the fines and the accumulated\nrental arrears (Consultation session with NPC responders 29/08/2023). It is likely extremely\nchallenging to find enough money for this given that the family already had insufficient funds\nto meet their original debts. The rest of the household also needs to find a new place to stay\nwhile their head is imprisoned.\n\n\n**Female tenants with rent arrears face a heightened risk of sexual harassment and**\n**exploitation.** This threat includes landlords\u2019 proposals of sexual relationships when female\n[tenants do not have an income (ACAPS 14/04/2023).](https://www.acaps.org/fileadmin/Data_Product/Main_media/20230414_ACAPS_Yemen_challenges_to_housing_land_and_property_rights.pdf)\n\n\n**The risk of poverty and redisplacement increases** when IDPs are evicted and settle in\ndangerous and cheaper, low-serviced neighbourhoods. Others put up tents in gardens or\non green strips by the roadside, living in substandard conditions (Consultation session with NPC\nresponders 29/08/2023). Access to humanitarian services and resources to provide services\nand infrastructure in a new location might be limited, and IDPs risk losing their livelihoods,\nleading to poverty. They may also be forcibly evicted again for occupying public land or\n[private property without permission (ICRC 12/06/2020).](https://www.icrc.org/en/publication/4344-displaced-cities-experiencing-and-responding-urban-internal-displacement-outside)\n\n\n**Gaps in the forced eviction response**\n\n\n**Lack of process implementations for the safe relocation of IDPs in the case of mass**\n**evictions from sites**\n\n- The 2022 truce inspired the authorities to desire restarting public services in locations\nwhere IDPs have settled. The NPC\u2019s relocation framework has been supporting IDPs\u2019\nsafe relocation and providing them alternative land [(NPC 20/06/2023). In spite of the](https://reliefweb.int/report/yemen/framework-voluntary-relocations-idps-elsewhere-country)\nguidance available, however, eviction cases of IDPs hosted on private and government\nland still occur without an eviction notice in some cases, and the affected people are not\nconsulted nor safely relocated. NPC data collection on 2023 eviction threats from Ma\u2019rib\nshows that for 27 of 33 evictions from both private and public sites, such as museums\nand college buildings, no alternative land was provided for more than 7,500 households\n(NPC unpublished).\n\n\n\nFigure 7. Households in Ma\u2019rib IDP sites under eviction threat with no alternative\nland available\n\n\nSource: NPC (unpublished)\n\n- In some cases where alternative land for evicted IDPs was found, the necessary\ninvestment for building infrastructure or making services available and accessible to the\nrelocated IDPs has not been addressed (Consultation session with NPC responders 04/10/2023).\n\n\n**Landlords\u2019 and tenants\u2019 insufficient awareness of their rights**\n\n- With landlords and tenants not being aware of the possible legal redress and the required\nprocedural mechanisms for evictions, more awareness needs to be built around the\nproper tenure agreements for privately rented accommodation and IDP sites where there\nare often no tenure agreements or only verbal ones (Consultation session with NPC responders\n29/08/2023).\n\n- Legal assistance, mediation, and engagement in community-led and customary-led\nsolutions before, during, and following evictions are not yet provided to those affected by\nevictions and require scaling up (Consultation session with NPC responders 29/08/2023).\n\n\n**Underuse of legal assistance and traditional mechanisms dealing with evictions**\n\n- Local community leaders and sheikhs who are trusted by the community might be able to\ninfluence eviction decisions and support finding alternative sites. Traditional mechanisms\nto deal with evictions is not yet sufficiently understood and could help in the finding of\ndurable solutions (Consultation session with NPC responders 29/08/2023).\n\n\n\n8\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://www.acaps.org/fileadmin/Data_Product/Main_media/20231228_ACAPS_Yemen_analysis_hub_forced_evictions_analysis.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        7
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**Insufficient support for IDPs with return intentions and those who have returned to their**\n**place of origin**\n\n- Return intentions among IDPs vary widely across Yemen. Protection Cluster consultations\nhighlighted the high number of people intending to return, for example from Aden to\nAl Hodeidah (Consultation session with NPC responders 29/08/2023). These IDPs require\ninformation and assistance for voluntary and safe return in coordination with clusters,\nauthorities, and other key stakeholders. Transport, for example, is expensive and often\nunaffordable. Many also do not know about the state or occupancy of their homes or the\nlevel of landmine contamination in their areas of origin. Some return home without the\n[required security in place (UN-Habitat 07/08/2020).](https://yemenportal.unhabitat.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/220217_State-of-Yemeni-Cities.pdf)\n\n- All returnees require support for the long-term security of livelihoods, protection, shelter\navailability, and access to basic services, including water, sanitation, and health facilities.\nSupport coordination across clusters for returnees and those with return intentions is\nrequired, reinforced by the NPC\u2019s HLP case management tool.\n\n- While the NPC captures return intentions in eviction cases that follow a process of\nnotification and consultation, access to IDPs and inquiring about their return intention\nbecomes more difficult where forced evictions happen, more specifically in DFAcontrolled areas.\n\n- There is anecdotal evidence that some IDPs who had settled on privately owned land\nwere given a limited period of one week to vacate the land. The expectation was that\nthe majority of these individuals would return to their areas of origin, and authorities in\nthese areas requested cash for protection assistance. This raises concerns about the\npotential to contribute to premature returns if assistance was provided without the\nproper assessment of return intents and the risk to areas of origin. Likewise, reports from\nAl Buja on the west coast, where people had fled to from Hays district, suggest that IDPs\nwere evicted on the basis that they had homes in their areas of origin, likely also without\nassessment of the return option (Consultation session with NPC responders 29/08/2023).\n\n- Parties to the conflict have occupied land and driven people out of their homes. With\npeople returning to their homes, there may be disputes that require mediation support.\nSuch situations need to be included in humanitarian programming (Consultation session with\nNPC responders 29/08/2023).\n\n\n\n**Recommendations to the NPC, responders, the Durable Solutions Working Group,**\n**and other stakeholders for the response to forced evictions:**\n\n\n**To the NPC and the Durable Solutions Working Group**\n\n- Encourage authorities to establish and support local alternative dispute resolution\nprocesses that can help prevent evictions where none are available.\n\n- Engage in joint advocacy and awareness raising with the relevant authorities on\nevictions from sites in line with the Centrality of Protection strategy.\n\n- Provide training and capacity-building for local authorities on the importance of\nrespecting human rights and international standards when dealing with eviction\ncases.\n\n- Promote the use of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms to resolve conflicts\nrelated to land and housing to secure people\u2019s HLP rights.\n\n- Address the risk of forced evictions in assessments, analyses, and planning\nfor area-based initiatives of humanitarian, durable solutions and development\nresponders.\n\n- Develop, in coordination with the Inter-Cluster Coordination Mechanism, a\nhumanitarian policy position on addressing evictions, and mainstream it across\nall humanitarian responders.\n\n\n**To NPC responders**\n\n- Strengthen and increase funding for the provision of legal assistance that provides\naccess to legal representation, counselling, and mediation for individuals and\ngroups facing forced eviction threats and increases their awareness of their legal\nrights as tenants.\n\n- Mobilise more responders to provide legal assistance to improve legal\nrepresentation access, mediation, counselling, and awareness for individuals and\ncommunities with insecure tenure.\n\n- Explore and strengthen collaboration with traditional leaders and customary\nresolution mechanisms.\n\n- Facilitate dialogue between authorities, traditional leaders, and affected\ncommunities to foster understanding, cooperation, and conflict resolution.\n\n- Develop mediation mechanisms that incorporate both formal and customary\ndispute resolution processes to address eviction-related disputes and include\nthem in 2024 NPC priority activities.\n\n\n\n9\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://www.acaps.org/fileadmin/Data_Product/Main_media/20231228_ACAPS_Yemen_analysis_hub_forced_evictions_analysis.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        8
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "- Build the capacity of responders to negotiate with landlords and local authorities\non behalf of tenants. In line with good practice, also ensure the commencement of\nnegotiations with private landlords, with the support of the authorities, three months\nbefore the end of the land agreement. This is a proactive and advisable approach\nto mitigate potential negative impacts and seek mutually acceptable solutions. In\nthe past, responders, with the support of the local authority, successfully negotiated\nwith landlords for extension or identified alternative land in an early stage before the\n[eviction/end of land agreement in line with the NPC Framework for Voluntary Relocations of](https://reliefweb.int/report/yemen/framework-voluntary-relocations-idps-elsewhere-country)\n[IDPs Elsewhere in the Country.](https://reliefweb.int/report/yemen/framework-voluntary-relocations-idps-elsewhere-country)\n\n- For cases threatened with eviction, strengthen referral pathways to access\nhumanitarian assistance that may address/mitigate eviction, particularly cash-based\ninterventions.\n\n\n**Legal aid and support**\n\n- Strengthen and increase funding for legal assistance that provides access to legal\nrepresentation, counselling, and mediation for individuals and communities facing\nevictions and eviction threats.\n\n- Explore and strengthen collaboration with traditional leaders and customary\nresolution mechanisms.\n\n- Facilitate dialogue between authorities, traditional leaders, and affected communities\nto foster understanding, cooperation, and conflict resolution.\n\n- Develop mediation mechanisms that incorporate both formal and customary dispute\nresolution processes to address eviction-related disputes and include them in 2024\nNPC priority activities.\n\n- Build the capacity of responders in negotiations with landlords and local authorities.\nIn line with good practice, also ensure the commencement of negotiations with\nprivate landlords, with the support of the authorities, three months before the end of\nthe land agreement.\n\n\n**Community empowerment and mobilisation**\n\n- Strengthen the capacity of local communities to understand their housing and land\nrights, including how to access legal systems and advocate their rights.\n\n- Encourage community-led initiatives to document land tenure and property ownership\nthrough culturally sensitive methods.\n\n- Provide livelihood assistance and social cohesion activities, as well as financial\nsupport for emergency cases, to help IDPs cover rent or find alternative housing\nsolutions.\n\n\n\n\n- Enhance collaboration with the relevant public institutions for joint actions.\n\n\n**Data collection and documentation**\n\n- Strengthen existing systems to collect and report data on eviction cases and their\nimpacts to inform evidence-based advocacy and targeted interventions.\n\n- Improve data collection on eviction drivers from the landlords\u2019 perspective and overall\ncountry eviction trends that affect IDPs as a group of the population.\n\n\n**Awareness-raising campaigns**\n\n- Conduct awareness-raising campaigns targeting both authorities and communities\nto promote an understanding of the importance of IDP housing rights and the negative\nimpacts of forced evictions.\n\n\n**Coordination with Multipurpose Cash Assistance programmes**\n\n- Closely coordinate and use referrals for Multipurpose Cash Assistance to address\nlong-term socioeconomic needs and reduce coping mechanisms with potentially\nharmful consequences associated with evictions.\n\n\n**Advocacy**\n\n- Work with NNGOs, INGOs, and civil society organisations to advocate the rights of\nthose at risk of eviction and legal protection for tenants, including IDPs.\n\n- Collaborate with customary leaders in advocating housing rights for all without\ndiscrimination.\n\n- Advocate a displacement/protection-sensitive public policy for eviction.\n\n\n**Linkages with other strategic initiatives in the country**\n\n- Work with development and durable solutions responders to reduce the risk of\ndisplacement and evictions, in line with the Centrality of Protection strategy for\nYemen.\n\n- Support all efforts that bring an end to displacement and promote durable solutions\nfor displaced people, e.g. returning to places of origin once the conditions conducive\nto return are in place, local integration, or relocation.\n\n- To avoid premature returns, ensure coordination with the Durable Solutions Working\nGroup in areas where a high risk of evictions continue through the completion of\nintention surveys and communication of findings-analysis to inform principled\napproaches to address evictions and eviction threats.\n\n\n\n10\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://www.acaps.org/fileadmin/Data_Product/Main_media/20231228_ACAPS_Yemen_analysis_hub_forced_evictions_analysis.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        9
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_4/raw/doc_4_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,162 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "# **GUATEMALA**\n## **An\u00e1lisis de protecci\u00f3n**\n#### An\u00e1lisis de las tendencias de los riesgos de protecci\u00f3n relacionados con discriminaci\u00f3n, violencia y desplazamiento.\n\n###### **NOVIEMBRE DE 2024**\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e9b5cee5-d9b7-4d8b-83dd-0e1d7c56b459/01._analisis_de_proteccion_pau_2024_final_29_noviembre_2024.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**GUATEMALA** noviembre de 2024\n\n##### **_RESUMEN EJECUTIVO_**\n\n\nDespu\u00e9s de las elecciones en 2023 caracterizadas por altos niveles\nde incertidumbre y protestas sociales, una nueva administraci\u00f3n\nde gobierno con tendencia progresista se enfrenta a importantes\nretos, en un ambiente caracterizado por la polarizaci\u00f3n pol\u00edtica,\naltas expectativas de cambio, una oposici\u00f3n importante en el\nCongreso de la Rep\u00fablica.\n\n\nLas necesidades humanitarias en 2024 han incrementado de 300\nmil personas en necesidad (PiN por las siglas en ingl\u00e9s) con\nrespecto al 2023. En total, el Equipo Humanitario de Pa\u00eds (EHP),\ncalcul\u00f3 que 5,3 millones de personas (30% de la poblaci\u00f3n)\npresentaban necesidades humanitarias y de ellas, 2.9 millones\n(54.7% del PiN) presentaban necesidades de protecci\u00f3n.\n\n\nEn 2024 est\u00e1 caracterizado por choques relacionados con los\nimpactos del cambio clim\u00e1tico y los desastres, altos \u00edndices de\nviolencia (incluida la violencia basada en g\u00e9nero y contra las\nmujeres) [i], y un incremento del tr\u00e1nsito de personas refugiadas y\nmigrantes en movimientos mixtos, adem\u00e1s de personas\ndesplazadas internas y retornadas con necesidades de protecci\u00f3n.\n\n\nEstos choques se exacerban y afectan de manera m\u00e1s espec\u00edfica a los pueblos ind\u00edgenas, comunidades rurales, mujeres, ni\u00f1as,\nni\u00f1os, adolescentes, personas con discapacidad, personas en movimientos mixtos, como refugiadas y migrantes, y aquellas\nque se desplazan internamente en busca de protecci\u00f3n. Con base en lo anterior, el an\u00e1lisis del Sector de Protecci\u00f3n del EHP,\nidentific\u00f3 que los principales riesgos de protecci\u00f3n a los que se ve expuesta la poblaci\u00f3n y que requieren atenci\u00f3n prioritaria:\n\n\n**1.** **Discriminaci\u00f3n y estigmatizaci\u00f3n, denegaci\u00f3n del acceso a recursos, oportunidades, servicios y/o acceso humanitario.**\n**2.** **Violencia basada en g\u00e9nero.**\n**3.** **Robo, extorsi\u00f3n, desalojo forzado o destrucci\u00f3n de bienes personales.**\n**4.** **Impedimento o restricci\u00f3n il\u00edcita a la libertad de circulaci\u00f3n y desplazamiento forzado.**\n\n\n**MEDIDAS URGENTES NECESARIAS**\n\n\nMitigar los riesgos de protecci\u00f3n provocados por el incremento de la violencia, inseguridad, falta de acceso a la justicia, cambio\nclim\u00e1tico, desalojos forzados y la inseguridad alimentaria que se desarrollan en un contexto social y pol\u00edtico complejo,\ncaracterizado por profundas desigualdades, y una movilidad humana y un desplazamiento forzado interno que se incrementa\na\u00f1o a a\u00f1o. Por lo anterior, es necesario:\n\n\n- Incidir para que el Gobierno proporcione respuesta oportuna, suficiente y de calidad a las personas refugiadas y migrantes\nen movimientos mixtos, personas desplazadas internas y retornadas y aquellas en movilidad humana en general,\nincluyendo mecanismos de protecci\u00f3n complementaria y espec\u00edfica para prevenir riesgos.\n\n- Asegurar la incorporaci\u00f3n de la Centralidad de la Protecci\u00f3n en el Plan Nacional de Respuesta y Plan de Respuesta\nHumanitaria, a trav\u00e9s de indicadores espec\u00edficos que permitan medir los avances en materia de protecci\u00f3n, los cuales se\nmaterializar\u00e1n en la estrategia independiente de Protecci\u00f3n del EHP.\n\n- Fortalecer los mecanismos de atenci\u00f3n y respuesta, as\u00ed como los servicios p\u00fablicos de protecci\u00f3n y atenci\u00f3n integral para\nsobrevivientes de violencia y medidas de protecci\u00f3n para la ni\u00f1ez, mujeres y personas refugiadas y migrantes en\nmovimientos mixtos, personas desplazadas internas y retornadas y aquella en movilidad humana en general, poblaci\u00f3n\nind\u00edgena, personas LGTBIQ+ y otras poblaciones en situaciones de alto riesgo.Incidir por el reconocimiento oficial del\nfen\u00f3meno del desplazamiento forzado interno en Guatemala, con el fin de promover una respuesta que prevenga,\natienda, proteja y garantice soluciones duraderas con un enfoque intercultural y diferenciado. Adem\u00e1s de la creaci\u00f3n de\nun marco jur\u00eddico especializado en l\u00ednea con los Principios Rectores.\n\n\nP\u00e1gina 2\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e9b5cee5-d9b7-4d8b-83dd-0e1d7c56b459/01._analisis_de_proteccion_pau_2024_final_29_noviembre_2024.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**GUATEMALA** noviembre de 2024\n\n##### **CONTEXTO**\n\n\n**Casos de violencia**\n\n\n\n**contra mujeres,**\n\n**ni\u00f1os, ni\u00f1as y**\n\n**adolescentes**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nA lo largo de 2023 e inicios de 2024, el pa\u00eds ha sido impactado por diferentes crisis que se superponen agudizando la situaci\u00f3n\nde protecci\u00f3n y acceso a respuesta efectiva para miles de personas:\n\n\n**UN CONTEXTO SOCIAL Y POL\u00cdTICO ENMARCADO EN LA VIOLENCIA E INSEGURIDAD**\n\n\nA pesar de ser la econom\u00eda m\u00e1s destacada de Centroam\u00e9rica y con un PIB en aumento (3.5 % en 2023 y una estimaci\u00f3n de 3%\npara 2024), [ii] las tasas de pobreza y desigualdad de Guatemala se encuentran entre las m\u00e1s altas de la regi\u00f3n de Am\u00e9rica Latina\ny el Caribe, debido a la existencia de una numerosa poblaci\u00f3n desatendida, en su mayor\u00eda rural e ind\u00edgena [iii] (el \u00edndice de\ndesarrollo humano es de 0.629 [iv] y el coeficiente de Gini es de 48.3) [v] . Se estima que en 2023 un 55.1% de la poblaci\u00f3n viv\u00eda en\npobreza y que el tama\u00f1o de la econom\u00eda informal de Guatemala represent\u00f3 un 49% del PIB (71.1% de la poblaci\u00f3n ocupada\nse encuentra empleada en el sector informal) [vi] . En Guatemala 61.6% de las personas viven en pobreza multidimensional, es\ndecir, 6 de cada 10 personas enfrentan privaciones en el 30% o m\u00e1s de los 17 indicadores relacionados a salud, seguridad\nalimentaria y nutricional; educaci\u00f3n; empleo digno; vivienda y acceso a servicios b\u00e1sicos [vii] .\n\n\nEn el 2023, la Encuesta Nacional de Calidad de los Hogares (ENCABIH), destac\u00f3 que, a nivel nacional, aproximadamente 49 de\ncada 100 mujeres han sufrido alg\u00fan incidente de violencia a lo largo de su vida en los espacios comunitarios, escolar, laboral,\nen su relaci\u00f3n de pareja o en su familia. El \u00e1mbito en el que las manifestaciones de violencia hacia las mujeres son m\u00e1s\nfrecuentes es el comunitario, con 28.7%; y la violencia con mayor incidencia es de tipo sexual, alcanzando un 34.48%, seguida\npor la violencia psicol\u00f3gica con un 31.67% (le siguen la violencia f\u00edsica con 18.14% y la econ\u00f3mica con 14.93%). No obstante,\nel subregistro, ocasionado principalmente por la falta de acceso a los servicios y desconfianza en el sistema de justicia y\nprotecci\u00f3n, no permite contar con toda la informaci\u00f3n, para tener una mirada completa de la problem\u00e1tica.\n\n\nAdicionalmente, la presencia de grupos de delincuencia organizada contin\u00faa planteando serios desaf\u00edos a la protecci\u00f3n de la\npoblaci\u00f3n en general, por su alcance, control y violencia ejercida. Las pandillas tienen gran influencia en el pa\u00eds, y est\u00e1n\nvinculadas a delitos violentos, extorsi\u00f3n, reclutamiento forzado y actividades relacionadas con el tr\u00e1fico de drogas il\u00edcitas. En\n2023, la tasa de incidencia delictiva total fue de 196 por 100 mil habitantes, un aumento del 10.5% respecto a 2022, el mayor\nincremento en los \u00faltimos 10 a\u00f1os; adicionalmente, aunque la tasa de muertes violentas se redujo en un 2% (60 muertes\nmenos) en comparaci\u00f3n con 2022, se registr\u00f3 un aumento en el n\u00famero de homicidios en 118 municipios (34.7% del total\nnacional) en comparaci\u00f3n con 2022, concentr\u00e1ndose en el centro del pa\u00eds y en algunos municipios fronterizos con Honduras,\nEl Salvador y M\u00e9xico.\n\n\n1 De acuerdo con el Monitoreo de Movimientos Mixtos de ACNUR en Honduras, el Instituto Nacional de Migraci\u00f3n registr\u00f3 de manera oficial 545,043 entradas irregulares en 2023, lo que marc\u00f3 un incremento\npromedio de 80% con respecto a 2022. Para 2024, al mes de junio se hab\u00edan registrado 248,035 ingresos irregulares (37% de los ingresos corresponden a mujeres, 63% a hombres y 25% son menores de edad).\nEs importante identificar estas cifras como referencia para Guatemala, ya que estos n\u00fameros dan cuenta de poblaci\u00f3n refugiada y migrante en movimientos mixtos, que van en tr\u00e1nsito para seguir su camino\npor Guatemala, con direcci\u00f3n a M\u00e9xico y Estados Unidos. Esto significa que este n\u00famero de personas, adem\u00e1s de las personas hondure\u00f1as que siguen saliendo del pa\u00eds en b\u00fasqueda de protecci\u00f3n, pasan por el\npa\u00eds sin que se cuente con un registro o un esquema de respuesta, lo que incrementa de manera desproporcionada los riesgos de protecci\u00f3n.\n\n\nP\u00e1gina 3\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e9b5cee5-d9b7-4d8b-83dd-0e1d7c56b459/01._analisis_de_proteccion_pau_2024_final_29_noviembre_2024.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        2
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**GUATEMALA** noviembre de 2024\n\n\nDe la misma forma, los patrones de discriminaci\u00f3n y desigualdad generan tensiones sociales que suelen expresarse\np\u00fablicamente a manera de manifestaciones. Durante el 2023, El Alto Comisionado de las Naciones Unidas para los Derechos\nHumanos (OACNUDH) observ\u00f3 un total de 243 manifestaciones en todo el pa\u00eds, en su mayor\u00eda pac\u00edficas, protagonizadas por\nuna diversidad de actores entre ellos pueblos ind\u00edgenas, estudiantes y organizaciones de la sociedad civil. Esta cifra muestra\nun aumento del 77.37% en comparaci\u00f3n con 2022 [viii] . Las principales peticiones exigieron el respeto por el Estado de derecho;\nlos resultados de las elecciones; la libertad de expresi\u00f3n y rechazaron algunas iniciativas de ley [ix] . Los pueblos ind\u00edgenas\nrecurrieron a la protesta social solicitando espacios de participaci\u00f3n en la toma de decisiones que afectan sus derechos\ncolectivos. En octubre 2023, comenzaron una serie de manifestaciones denominadas \u201c paro nacional \u201d, iniciado por las\nautoridades ind\u00edgenas de los 48 Cantones de Totonicap\u00e1n y de la Municipalidad Ind\u00edgena de Solol\u00e1, las cuales fueron apoyadas\npor otras autoridades ind\u00edgenas, movimientos campesinos, sociales y actores del sector privado.\n\n\nEn el plano pol\u00edtico, el 20 de agosto 2023, el Tribunal Supremo Electoral (TSE) declar\u00f3 ganador en la segunda vuelta, al binomio\npresidencial del partido Semilla, con el 60.91% de los votos a favor [x], no obstante, preocuparon los persistentes intentos de\nsocavar el resultado del proceso electoral, considerados incompatibles con el derecho internacional de los derechos humanos\ny la legislaci\u00f3n guatemalteca [xi] . Despu\u00e9s de tomar posesi\u00f3n en el Congreso de la Rep\u00fablica, Bernardo Ar\u00e9valo como presidente\nde Guatemala, present\u00f3 su gabinete de Gobierno integrado por siete mujeres y siete hombres [xii] y el plan para los primeros\n100 d\u00edas de su gobierno se bas\u00f3 en la recuperaci\u00f3n de la econom\u00eda del pa\u00eds, el combate a la corrupci\u00f3n, as\u00ed como de la\ndelincuencia y fortalecimiento al Organismo Ejecutivo [xiii] . Con este precedente en la elecci\u00f3n de Gobernadores\nDepartamentales se evidenci\u00f3 mayor apertura a espacios de participaci\u00f3n ciudadana, por ejemplo, la postulaci\u00f3n de personas\nacad\u00e9micas y autoridades ind\u00edgenas, eligi\u00e9ndose 12 hombres y 10 mujeres.\n\n\n**VULNERABILIDAD AL CAMBIO CLIM\u00c1TICO**\n\n\nGuatemala es uno de los pa\u00edses m\u00e1s vulnerables al cambio clim\u00e1tico y debido a una combinaci\u00f3n de factores el pa\u00eds ocupa el\nnoveno lugar en el mundo por nivel de riesgo a sus efectos; se encuentra en el quinto lugar entre los pa\u00edses con mayor\nexposici\u00f3n econ\u00f3mica a tres o m\u00e1s amenazas y est\u00e1 dentro de los cinco pa\u00edses nivel a nivel global m\u00e1s afectados por\ninundaciones, huracanes y terremotos, con un 40.8% de la poblaci\u00f3n expuesta a cinco o m\u00e1s amenazas simult\u00e1neamente [xiv], lo\nque afecta tanto a la biodiversidad, la seguridad y los medios de vida de las comunidades.\n\n\nLa agricultura, de la cual depende gran parte de la poblaci\u00f3n guatemalteca, se ve gravemente afectada por el cambio clim\u00e1tico\ny los desastres. De acuerdo con la clasificaci\u00f3n mundial para catalogar la gravedad y la magnitud de la inseguridad alimentaria\naguda y cr\u00f3nica que se analiza en la CIF (Clasificaci\u00f3n Integrada de la Seguridad Alimentaria en Fases), publicada en agosto de\neste a\u00f1o [xv], para el periodo de junio a agosto 2024, aproximadamente 3 millones de personas est\u00e1n en Fase de Crisis (fase 3) o\nFase de Emergencia (fase 4) y, por lo tanto, requieren acciones urgentes para proteger sus medios de vida. Algunos factores\nque han podido incidir sobre las cifras de la CIF pueden estar asociados a las sequ\u00edas, como lo ocurrido este a\u00f1o con el\nfen\u00f3meno del Ni\u00f1o que se prolong\u00f3 hasta mayo, periodo en el cual hubo menos cantidad de lluvia, temperaturas elevadas y\nun incremento excesivo de incendios forestales (2,571 incendios [xvi] reportados a nivel nacional en 2024, que afectaron 40,700\nhect\u00e1reas [xvii] ).\n\n\nLas altas temperaturas y la falta de lluvias han impactado en el precio de los alimentos en el pa\u00eds y la capacidad de producci\u00f3n\nde las personas se ha visto mermada, incluso han aumentado las tasas de desnutrici\u00f3n sobre todo en mujeres, ni\u00f1as y ni\u00f1os\nque suelen llevarse la peor parte con relaci\u00f3n a los escases de alimentos.\n\n\nDurante el a\u00f1o 2024, se preve\u00eda una temporada m\u00e1s activa que el promedio climatol\u00f3gico (1991-2020) y a la fecha se han\nobservado 15 tormentas, 10 huracanes y 4 huracanes mayores, cifras que superan el promedio y que se alinean con lo\npronosticado [xviii] . Para mitigar estos riesgos, Guatemala necesita fortalecer sus pol\u00edticas ambientales, mejorar la infraestructura\nresiliente, promover pr\u00e1cticas agr\u00edcolas sostenibles con enfoque de g\u00e9nero y aumentar la educaci\u00f3n y la concienciaci\u00f3n sobre\nel cambio clim\u00e1tico en toda la poblaci\u00f3n.\n\n\nPor otra parte, los riesgos de protecci\u00f3n relacionados al cambio clim\u00e1tico exacerban la exposici\u00f3n de grupos de poblaci\u00f3n m\u00e1s\nvulnerables debido a las desigualdades econ\u00f3micas y sociales, pr\u00e1cticas discriminatorias y marginaci\u00f3n; condiciones de\npobreza end\u00e9mica que afecta en mayor proporci\u00f3n a las mujeres, ni\u00f1os, ni\u00f1as y adolescentes, poblaci\u00f3n ind\u00edgena, poblaci\u00f3n\n\n\nP\u00e1gina 4\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e9b5cee5-d9b7-4d8b-83dd-0e1d7c56b459/01._analisis_de_proteccion_pau_2024_final_29_noviembre_2024.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        3
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**GUATEMALA** noviembre de 2024\n\n\nrural, personas afrodescendientes y personas en movilidad humana. Seg\u00fan el Grupo Consultivo sobre Investigaci\u00f3n Agr\u00edcola\nInternacional (CGIAR) hay una correlaci\u00f3n estrecha entre las zonas m\u00e1s impactadas por el cambio clim\u00e1tico, por la pobreza y\npor temas de violencia y conflicto donde las interacciones entre cambio clim\u00e1tico, seguridad y desplazamiento est\u00e1n creando\nefectos agravantes y en cascada que aumentan la vulnerabilidad de las poblaciones y suponen un reto para los gobiernos y las\norganizaciones humanitarias [xix] . A esto se debe sumar la desigualdad social y econ\u00f3mica que viven las comunidades rurales e\nind\u00edgenas y las personas en pobreza extrema que las hacen especialmente vulnerables, ya que a menudo tienen menos acceso\na recursos, informaci\u00f3n y servicios.\n\n\n**CAMBIOS EN LA POL\u00cdTICA Y GOBERNANZA MIGRATORIA REGIONAL: SITUACI\u00d3N DE MOVILIDAD HUMANA**\n\n\nDada su ubicaci\u00f3n geogr\u00e1fica, Guatemala se caracteriza por ser un pa\u00eds de origen, tr\u00e1nsito, destino y retorno de personas en\nmovilidad humana, incluyendo personas migrantes, refugiadas, solicitantes de la condici\u00f3n de refugiado y personas\nguatemaltecas retornadas y desplazadas; y est\u00e1 sujeta a los cambios de pol\u00edticas migratorias regionales, especialmente por\nparte de Estados Unidos y M\u00e9xico. Luego de levantarse la aplicaci\u00f3n del T\u00edtulo 42 el 11 de mayo de 2023, volvi\u00f3 a entrar en\nvigencia el T\u00edtulo 8 para las solicitudes de personas buscando acceso a territorio estadounidense en la frontera con M\u00e9xico, a\ntrav\u00e9s de la aplicaci\u00f3n CBP-One para obtener una cita en un punto de entrada y la implementaci\u00f3n de un nuevo reglamento\nque autoriza a los agentes fronterizos a denegar el derecho a solicitar asilo a la mayor\u00eda de las personas cruzando la frontera\nde forma irregular.\n\n\nA partir del 5 de junio de 2024, los procedimientos de asilo y aplicaci\u00f3n de la ley de inmigraci\u00f3n de Estados Unidos son m\u00e1s\nestrictos, esta pol\u00edtica afecta la posibilidad de acceder a asilo para personas que no ingresen a su territorio por los puertos de\nentrada oficiales, y busca incentivar el uso de v\u00eda legales como el Programa CBPOne y reducir los cruces ilegales que ponen en\nriesgo la vida y seguridad de las personas [xx] . Desde junio 2023, el programa Movilidad Segura, establecido en acuerdo entre los\nGobiernos de Estados Unidos y Guatemala, y en cooperaci\u00f3n con ACNUR y OIM, ha sido una alternativa para que personas\nrefugiadas y migrantes guatemaltecas ingresen de manera segura y regular a Estados Unidos. A partir de julio 2024 este\nprograma est\u00e1 disponible tambi\u00e9n para personas salvadore\u00f1as, hondure\u00f1as y nicarag\u00fcenses que comprueben haber ingresado\nde manera regular a Guatemala antes del 16 de julio de 2024 [xxi] .\n\n\nEstas medidas implementadas por el gobierno estadounidense, para desincentivar los movimientos de personas hacia el norte,\nse han traducido en una reducci\u00f3n del tr\u00e1nsito por la regi\u00f3n. Seg\u00fan el monitoreo del IBC Human Mobility [xxii], al mes de\nseptiembre de 2024, cerca de 263 mil personas cruzaron el Dari\u00e9n (frontera entre Colombia y Panam\u00e1), lo que representa una\nreducci\u00f3n del 43% respecto al mismo periodo de 2023. De la misma forma, el Instituto Nacional de Migraci\u00f3n [xxiii] de la Rep\u00fablica\nMexicana reporta que entre enero y agosto de 2024 se identific\u00f3 a 726,597 personas que ingresaron irregularmente a M\u00e9xico,\nmientras que en el mismo periodo de 2023 se registraron 912,768. Esto supone un decremento del 22% en el n\u00famero de\npersonas identificadas. Si bien se aprecia una disminuci\u00f3n en el flujo de personas desplaz\u00e1ndose por la regi\u00f3n en 2024, el\nn\u00famero de personas sigue siendo muy elevado y los riesgos de protecci\u00f3n, como se se\u00f1alan a continuaci\u00f3n, siguen\naumentando.\n\n\nEn Guatemala, no existe un sistema de registro que permita establecer datos oficiales, por ello las organizaciones humanitarias\nllevan a cabo su asistencia sobre la base de estimados. Seg\u00fan \u00e9stos, para enero del a\u00f1o 2024 se observ\u00f3 un aumento del 29%\nde personas en movimientos mixtos en Guatemala [xxiv] y las solicitudes de la condici\u00f3n de refugiado se han incrementado en un\n33% (1176 nuevas solicitudes a septiembre 2024) comparando 2023.\n\n\nA trav\u00e9s de los datos compilados por la OIM (Organizaci\u00f3n Internacional para la Migraciones) en su Matriz de\nSeguimiento del Desplazamiento (DTM por sus siglas en ingles), se ha constatado una mayor presencia de mujeres y ni\u00f1as en\nlos flujos mixtos, llegando a m\u00e1s del 35% de mujeres y 8% de ni\u00f1as en tr\u00e1nsito. Al mismo tiempo, se revela que un 11% de las\nmujeres migrantes en tr\u00e1nsito son gestantes o lactantes; y cerca del 43% de las mujeres consultadas por la OIM reportaron\nhaber sufrido alg\u00fan tipo de violencia durante la ruta [xxv] . A estas cifras se suma que el 97% de las personas que cruzan por\nGuatemala indicaron haber experimentado incidentes de protecci\u00f3n [xxvi] .\n\n\nPor otro lado, el informe de Monitoreo de Movimientos Mixtos de ACNUR (Alto Comisionado de Naciones Unidas para los\nRefugiados) del primer cuatrimestre de 2024, destaca que, de 2,385 personas encuestadas, el 50% manifestaron que el miedo\na sufrir violencia e inseguridad fue una de las razones de salida de sus pa\u00edses de origen y 12% manifestaron haber sido v\u00edctimas\n\n\nP\u00e1gina 5\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e9b5cee5-d9b7-4d8b-83dd-0e1d7c56b459/01._analisis_de_proteccion_pau_2024_final_29_noviembre_2024.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        4
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**GUATEMALA** noviembre de 2024\n\n\nde violencia directa. Tambi\u00e9n se\u00f1alaron haber sufrido al menos un incidente de protecci\u00f3n en la ruta, siendo el robo (57%), la\nestafa (41%) y la extorsi\u00f3n (22%) los cr\u00edmenes m\u00e1s comunes.\n\n\nAnte el contexto de violencia e inseguridad descrito en Guatemala y los cambios en las pol\u00edticas migratorias regionales, las\npersonas en movimientos mixtos se exponen a mayores riesgos de protecci\u00f3n; por ello, identificar los perfiles, las necesidades\nhumanitarias, las vulnerabilidades y capacidades, es urgente para asegurar una asistencia integral que previene y reduce\nriesgos, adem\u00e1s de facilitar el acceso a derechos.\n\n\nLos movimientos mixtos se refieren a los flujos de personas que viajan juntas, por las mismas rutas y utilizando los mismos\nmedios de transporte, pero por motivos diferentes. Las personas que viajan como parte de los movimientos mixtos tienen\ndiferentes necesidades y pueden incluir a solicitantes de la condici\u00f3n de refugiado, refugiados, v\u00edctimas de la trata, ni\u00f1os\ny ni\u00f1as no acompa\u00f1ados o separados y migrantes en situaci\u00f3n irregular. Denominarlas de manera correcta facilitar\u00eda una\nidentificaci\u00f3n y respuesta adecuada, pues se garantizar\u00eda que las personas refugiadas tengan acceso a dicha condici\u00f3n y\nque las personas migrantes en vulnerabilidad reciban el apoyo que requieren (Informe Anual 2023 ACNUR. Monitoreo de\nMovimientos Mixtos)\n\n\nDe otro lado, las cifras de personas guatemaltecas retornadas no muestran reducciones considerables, siendo mayor el\nincremento de personas devueltas desde Estados Unidos. Los datos del IGM (Instituto Guatemalteco de Migraci\u00f3n) del primer\nsemestre 2023 [xxvii] con relaci\u00f3n al 2024, muestran lo siguiente:\n\n\na) v\u00eda \u00e1rea proveniente de Estados Unidos, hay un incremento de 51% (22,286 en 2023 y 33,553 en 2024) [xxviii] ;\nb) v\u00eda terrestre provenientes de M\u00e9xico hay una disminuci\u00f3n del 28% (10,520 en 2023 y 7,589 en 2024) [xxix] ;\nc) v\u00eda \u00e1rea proveniente de M\u00e9xico, hay una disminuci\u00f3n del 42% (4,205 en 2023 y 2,443 en 2024) [xxx]\n\n\nEl retorno de personas es importante abordarlo desde una perspectiva integral para comprender las necesidades, retos y\nvulnerabilidades, asistencia y atenci\u00f3n especializada a grupos familiares y ni\u00f1ez no acompa\u00f1ada, as\u00ed como el proceso de\nreintegraci\u00f3n. Desde el enfoque de protecci\u00f3n, es necesario identificar a las personas con necesidades de protecci\u00f3n\ninternacional, ya que su estad\u00eda en el pa\u00eds podr\u00eda incrementar sus riesgos, revictimizarles o dada su situaci\u00f3n podr\u00edan\nconvertirse en personas desplazadas internamente, pues para muchas regresar al pa\u00eds puede implicar no poder regresar a sus\nligares de origen ya que su vida e integridad se encuentran en peligro.\n\n\nPara atender estas m\u00faltiples situaciones, en diciembre 2023, se realiz\u00f3 el lanzamiento de la Pol\u00edtica Migratoria, esfuerzo\nliderado por el Instituto Guatemalteco de Migraci\u00f3n (IGM) que se estructura en torno a cuatro ejes tem\u00e1ticos: 1) Derechos\nhumanos y grupos vulnerables; 2) Integraci\u00f3n y reintegraci\u00f3n sostenible de los migrantes; 3) Servicios migratorios y gesti\u00f3n\nintegral de fronteras; 4) Migraci\u00f3n y desarrollo sostenible.\n\n\nP\u00e1gina 6\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e9b5cee5-d9b7-4d8b-83dd-0e1d7c56b459/01._analisis_de_proteccion_pau_2024_final_29_noviembre_2024.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        5
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**GUATEMALA** noviembre de 2024\n\n##### **RIESGOS DE PROTECCI\u00d3N**\n\n\nFrente a los impactos del cambio clim\u00e1tico, de la violencia y de la escasa oferta laboral, el acceso limitado y cobertura de\nservicios esenciales y especializados, diferenciados y de calidad constituye _per se_ un riesgo de protecci\u00f3n por la ausencia de\nrespuesta inmediata que garantice una reducci\u00f3n de riesgos de protecci\u00f3n para las v\u00edctimas y personas m\u00e1s vulnerables.\n\n\nLas poblaciones rurales, ind\u00edgenas y en movilidad humana tienen menos acceso a servicios ya sea por falta de disponibilidad,\ncapacidades institucionales o deficiencias en la calidad de los servicios. A principios del a\u00f1o 2024 el Ministerio de Educaci\u00f3n\n(MINEDUC) realiz\u00f3 un censo de la infraestructura educativa que determin\u00f3 que a nivel nacional 5,386 centros educativos no\ncuentan con abastecimiento de agua y 10,484 requieren reparaci\u00f3n de las tuber\u00edas de agua y que la infraestructura educativa\nha sufrido en las \u00faltimas d\u00e9cadas los impactos del de cambio clim\u00e1tico y desastres naturales [xxxi] .\n\n\nPor ejemplo, en educaci\u00f3n, las comunidades rurales, especialmente las ind\u00edgenas, enfrentan carencias significativas en\ninfraestructura y disponibilidad de servicios educativos. Se estima que en 2023 cerca de 2.7 millones de ni\u00f1os, ni\u00f1as y\nadolescentes en Guatemala se encontraban fuera del sistema educativo (1.8 millones en educaci\u00f3n inicial - de 0 a 4 a\u00f1os; 350\nmil en b\u00e1sicos; y 677 mil en diversificado) [xxxii] . El acceso a la educaci\u00f3n se torna m\u00e1s complejo para las personas con necesidades\nde protecci\u00f3n internacional, como refugiados y solicitantes de esta condici\u00f3n, a quienes la falta de documentos de\nidentificaci\u00f3n y documentos de estudios previos se les convierte en una barrera de acceso al derecho, as\u00ed como la falta de\nreconocimiento del Documento Personal de Identidad Especial que expide desde 2019 el Registro Nacional de las Personas\n(RENAP), contradiciendo acuerdos y reglamentos existentes en el pa\u00eds, como el Acuerdo 1753-2019 Reglamento de\nEquiparaci\u00f3n y Equivalencias de los Estudios en los Niveles de Educaci\u00f3n Preprimaria [xxxiii] .\n\n\nAdicionalmente, la poblaci\u00f3n experimenta profundas deficiencias en el acceso a salud, incluida la salud sexual y reproductiva\n\n  - la asistencia a mujeres, ni\u00f1as y adolescentes v\u00edctimas de violencia basada en g\u00e9nero, incluida la violencia sexual. De acuerdo\ncon la Comisi\u00f3n Econ\u00f3mica para Am\u00e9rica Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL), el gasto p\u00fablico en salud s\u00f3lo representa el 2.48 % del\nPIB [xxxiv], situ\u00e1ndose por debajo de lo observado en Am\u00e9rica Latina (2.9 % del PIB) y de Centroam\u00e9rica (2.8 % del PIB). El acceso\na la salud es limitado y desigual, con un \u00edndice de cobertura universal de servicios de salud en 57 puntos sobre 100 en 2023, [xxxv]\nsituando al pa\u00eds entre los de menor cobertura en Centroam\u00e9rica, s\u00f3lo por encima de Nicaragua y Honduras. Muchas \u00e1reas\nrurales carecen de centros de salud, lo que obliga a las personas a recorrer largas distancias e invertir m\u00e1s recursos para recibir\natenci\u00f3n m\u00e9dica b\u00e1sica.\n\n\nEn cuanto al servicio de agua y saneamiento, la situaci\u00f3n no es menos preocupante; la inversi\u00f3n en este sector es de s\u00f3lo 1%\ndel PIB y se considera que alrededor de tres millones de personas en el pa\u00eds no tienen acceso a servicio de agua potable [xxxvi] .\nEsta situaci\u00f3n contribuye, no s\u00f3lo al incremento de riesgos de salud, sino que tambi\u00e9n exacerba la problem\u00e1tica de\ndesnutrici\u00f3n aguda [xxxvii] . Por ejemplo, en la semana epidemiol\u00f3gica 21 [xxxviii], del 19 al 25 de mayo de 2024, se registraron 12,290\ncasos de desnutrici\u00f3n aguda a nivel nacional, 22% m\u00e1s de casos respecto al a\u00f1o pasado. De ellos, el 22% (2,683 casos) fueron\ncasos graves, que requirieron atenci\u00f3n y seguimiento inmediato para evitar la muerte por desnutrici\u00f3n aguda.\n\n\nUn reciente estudio revel\u00f3 que Guatemala ocupa el puesto 195 en t\u00e9rminos de coeficiente intelectual (CI) entre 198 pa\u00edses del\nplaneta. Seg\u00fan el informe, Guatemala tiene un puntaje de 47,72 [xxxix], superado por otros pa\u00edses de la regi\u00f3n como Nicaragua,\nHonduras, El Salvador, y Panam\u00e1 y \u00fanicamente superando, a nivel global, a Sierra Leona, Liberia y Nepal [xl] . Para algunos\nanalistas, estos resultados pueden ser una evidencia de un mal m\u00e1s grave: los altos \u00edndices de desnutrici\u00f3n infantil, que\nrepresentan una de las principales causas de los bajos resultados a nivel cognitivo. De acuerdo con este estudio, la desnutrici\u00f3n\nest\u00e1 relacionada con una reducci\u00f3n de hasta 14 puntos en el coeficiente intelectual de las personas menores de edad [xli] .\n\n\nLas barreras en el acceso a servicios son mucho m\u00e1s complejas para pueblos ind\u00edgenas y afrodescendientes. Seg\u00fan el Informe\ndel OACNUDH 2023, la discriminaci\u00f3n racial y el racismo sist\u00e9mico contin\u00faan impactando en el goce y disfrute de los derechos\nhumanos. Un an\u00e1lisis de estad\u00edsticas oficiales evidenci\u00f3 que el porcentaje de hogares que padece privaciones\nmultidimensionales (carencia en 5 dimensiones: calidad de vida, servicios b\u00e1sicos, empleo, educaci\u00f3n y tecnolog\u00eda) es de 86.1%\n\n\nP\u00e1gina 7\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e9b5cee5-d9b7-4d8b-83dd-0e1d7c56b459/01._analisis_de_proteccion_pau_2024_final_29_noviembre_2024.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        6
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**GUATEMALA** noviembre de 2024\n\n\npara el pueblo Xinka y el 82.3% para el pueblo Maya, mientras que para el pa\u00eds es de 63.2% [xlii] . En esa l\u00ednea, las mujeres,\nespecialmente las ind\u00edgenas, sufren altos niveles de discriminaci\u00f3n y violencia de g\u00e9nero, mientras que las personas LGTBIQ+\nenfrentan discriminaci\u00f3n y estigmatizaci\u00f3n, con poca protecci\u00f3n legal. Esta discriminaci\u00f3n limita sus oportunidades\necon\u00f3micas y contribuye a la persistencia de la pobreza y la desigualdad. Adem\u00e1s, muchas personas con discapacidad\nencuentran barreras significativas para acceder a servicios b\u00e1sicos [xliii] .\n\n\nEn un contexto de violencia, los desaf\u00edos para la atenci\u00f3n humanitaria y la protecci\u00f3n de las personas m\u00e1s vulnerables se\ntornan m\u00e1s complejos, por la magnitud, la d\u00e9bil presencia institucional y las dificultades de acceso a territorios bajo el control\nde grupos criminales.\n\n\nLas debilidades de los servicios (tanto por el acceso, como por la disponibilidad en los territorios) se manifiestan de manera\nmuy aguda para las personas refugiadas y migrantes, quienes generalmente cruzan el pa\u00eds por puestos no oficiales, creando\nmovimientos invisibles institucionalmente, que son dif\u00edciles de medir, lo que representa desaf\u00edos para la atenci\u00f3n humanitaria\ny la protecci\u00f3n. Incluso, nacionalidades de Centro Am\u00e9rica que pueden ingresar de forma regular al territorio bajo el Acuerdo\nCA-4, no conocen este acuerdo, lo que hace que en su tr\u00e1nsito por Guatemala se alejen de las rutas principales y asistencia\np\u00fablica (com\u00fanmente centralizada), dificult\u00e1ndoles el acceso a la respuesta humanitaria existente en la ruta de tr\u00e1nsito,\nexponi\u00e9ndoles a mayores riesgos. Se debe mencionar que, la fragilidad en el sistema de protecci\u00f3n es aprovechada por las\nredes de delincuencia local, ya que las personas en movimientos mixtos son com\u00fanmente enga\u00f1adas, pagan precios y tarifas\nelevadas por servicios b\u00e1sicos, se exponen a las redes de tr\u00e1fico (coyotaje local) y pueden ser v\u00edctimas de trata o violencia.\n\n###### RIESGO 2 Violencia basada en g\u00e9nero\n\n\nSeg\u00fan los datos oficiales disponibles con corte al 2023, la Encuesta Nacional de Calidad de los Hogares (ENCABIH) destac\u00f3 que,\naproximadamente 49 de cada 100 mujeres hab\u00edan sufrido alg\u00fan incidente de violencia a lo largo de su vida en los espacios\ncomunitarios, en la escuela, en el trabajo, en su relaci\u00f3n de pareja o en su familia. El \u00e1mbito en el que las manifestaciones de\nviolencia hacia las mujeres fueron m\u00e1s frecuentes fue el comunitario, con 28.7% y el familiar represent\u00f3 la incidencia m\u00e1s baja\ncon 13.5%. La violencia con mayor incidencia en mujeres y adolescentes de 15 a\u00f1os y m\u00e1s fue la violencia, alcanzando un\n34.48%, seguida por la violencia psicol\u00f3gica (31.67%), la violencia f\u00edsica (18.14%) y la econ\u00f3mica (14.93%). No obstante, el\nsubregistro, ocasionado principalmente por la falta de acceso a los servicios y confianza en el sistema de justicia y protecci\u00f3n\nno permite contar con toda la informaci\u00f3n, para tener una mirada completa de la problem\u00e1tica.\n\n\nEn el 2023, el Ministerio P\u00fablico (MP) report\u00f3 que la violencia (f\u00edsica, sexual, psicol\u00f3gica) contra mujeres, ni\u00f1ez, y adolescencia\nrepresent\u00f3 el 14% (42,208 casos) del total de los delitos reportados. Seg\u00fan informaci\u00f3n del Grupo Guatemalteco de Mujeres\n(GGM), para el 2023 se registraron un total de 491 Muertes Violentas de Mujeres (MVM); de ellas se infiere que 297 fueron\nfemicidios. Del total de las MVM, el 52% fueron mujeres con edades comprendidas entre los 31 a 45 a\u00f1os. El Departamento\nde Guatemala sigue siendo uno de los m\u00e1s violentos en el cual se cometi\u00f3 el 44% del total de las MVM, siendo las zonas m\u00e1s\nviolentas en el municipio de Guatemala la zona 18, zona 6, zona 1 y zona 5.\n\n\nA pesar de estas cifras, el acceso a justicia, prevenci\u00f3n y protecci\u00f3n para las mujeres, ni\u00f1as y adolescentes es muy restrictivo,\nya que el sistema judicial, con frecuencia, desestima, archiva o suspende las investigaciones. Muestra de ello es que, para\n2024, el 14% del total de los delitos (42,208 casos) fue el de violencia contra mujeres, ni\u00f1ez, y adolescencia, registr\u00f3 en sus\nmanifestaciones f\u00edsica, sexual, psicol\u00f3gica. Por otro lado, las fiscal\u00edas y agencias fiscales de la mujer utilizaron una serie de\nmedidas procesales como: desestimaciones, archivo, criterio de oportunidad, sobreseimiento, suspensi\u00f3n de la persecuci\u00f3n\npenal, solicitudes de conversi\u00f3n; adem\u00e1s se han utilizado procedimientos abreviados y aceptaci\u00f3n de cargos. En este a\u00f1o 2024\nel MP ha desestimado 204,473 denuncias reportadas en fiscal\u00edas locales. Lo anterior s\u00f3lo contribuye a incrementar la\ndesconfianza en el sistema, los riesgos de protecci\u00f3n y la implementaci\u00f3n de mecanismos negativos de afrontamiento para las\nv\u00edctimas, as\u00ed como el desplazamiento interno o la huida del pa\u00eds.\n\n\nLa ni\u00f1ez y adolescencia, tambi\u00e9n se ve fuertemente impactada por este riesgo. En el 2023 se registraron 26,767 delitos contra\nla ni\u00f1ez y adolescencia, un aproximado de 73 casos al d\u00eda; 41 casos de femicidio contra ni\u00f1as y adolescentes; 62,306 embarazos\nen ni\u00f1as y adolescentes de 10 a 19 a\u00f1os (2,289 en ni\u00f1as de 10 a 14 a\u00f1os). En el mismo a\u00f1o se registraron 6,261 ni\u00f1os, ni\u00f1as y\nadolescentes (NNA) v\u00edctimas de violencia sexual, es decir, 17 casos al d\u00eda; 12,996 NNA v\u00edctimas de maltrato infantil, 36 casos\nal d\u00eda. Los departamentos con mayor n\u00famero de v\u00edctimas de violencia sexual registradas son Guatemala (1,508), Alta Verapaz\n\n\nP\u00e1gina 8\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e9b5cee5-d9b7-4d8b-83dd-0e1d7c56b459/01._analisis_de_proteccion_pau_2024_final_29_noviembre_2024.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        7
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**GUATEMALA** noviembre de 2024\n\n\n(494), Escuintla (412), Huehuetenango (411), Quetzaltenango (345), zonas que adem\u00e1s coinciden con el corredor de tr\u00e1nsito\nde personas en movimientos mixtos.\n\n\nDe otro lado, la Oficina del Alto Comisionado de Naciones Unidas para los Derechos Humanos (OACNUDH), ha indicado que la\ntendencia a la estigmatizaci\u00f3n, acoso, discriminaci\u00f3n y violencia contra las personas de diversa orientaci\u00f3n sexual, identidad\ny expresi\u00f3n de g\u00e9nero y caracter\u00edsticas sexuales (SOGIESC), persisten en el pa\u00eds y se incrementan con ciertos grupos de\npoblacionales. El Observatorio Nacional de Derechos Humanos y Violencias por Orientaci\u00f3n Sexual e Identidad de G\u00e9nero de\nla Asociaci\u00f3n Lambda, registr\u00f3, de enero a diciembre 2023, 39 muertes violentas, presuntamente por motivos de identidad de\ng\u00e9nero y orientaci\u00f3n sexual (21 hombres gais, 10 mujeres transg\u00e9nero, 4 mujeres lesbianas, 4 hombres bisexuales) [xliv],\nsuper\u00e1ndose en un 17% la cifra registrada en 2022. El 2023 es el a\u00f1o con mayor n\u00famero de muertes violentas desde que el\nObservatorio comenz\u00f3 su registro en 2019.\n\n\nEl mapeo de servicios para la atenci\u00f3n a sobrevivientes de VBG realizado por el \u00e1rea de responsabilidad de VBG en el 2023,\nconfirm\u00f3 la falta de cobertura en el nivel departamental y municipal, en vista que los servicios est\u00e1n incompletos, no son\naccesibles a las personas sobrevivientes de violencia, los horarios escasamente disponibles en fin de semana y d\u00edas festivos.\nEsta situaci\u00f3n limita una atenci\u00f3n inmediata, mitigar los riesgos en la salud para los casos de violencia sexual, las infecciones\nde transmisi\u00f3n sexual (ITS) y embarazos no deseados.\n\n\nExiste p\u00e9rdida de la confianza en el sistema de seguridad y justicia, la credibilidad en las instituciones, en operadores de salud,\nprogramas de protecci\u00f3n social, situaci\u00f3n que naturaliza y perpet\u00faa la violencia, ocasionando riesgos para la repetici\u00f3n e\nincremento de femicidios, muertes violentas, mujeres desaparecidas, j\u00f3venes en riesgo de abuso y trata. Finalmente, hay que\ndestacar que los datos de VBG se basan \u00fanicamente en los casos reportados y en cifras oficiales, sin embargo, no reflejan la\nmagnitud de la problem\u00e1tica, dado el alto grado de subregistro que existe en el pa\u00eds de la VBG por temor, falta de informaci\u00f3n,\nbarreras de acceso, estigmatizaci\u00f3n y discriminaci\u00f3n, desconfianza, miedo a las represalias, normas y pr\u00e1ctica que perpet\u00faan\ny han naturalizado la VBG, entre otras.\n\n###### RIESGO 3 Robo, extorsi\u00f3n, desalojo forzado o destrucci\u00f3n de bienes personales\n\n\nLa situaci\u00f3n de violencia en Guatemala es compleja y multifac\u00e9tica, marcada por altos \u00edndices de criminalidad y diversos tipos\nde violencia que afectan a diferentes sectores de la sociedad. Es una combinaci\u00f3n de criminalidad organizada, violencia de\ng\u00e9nero, desplazamiento forzado interno y limitaciones institucionales. En 2023, la tasa de incidencia delictiva total fue de 196\npor 100 mil habitantes, un aumento del 10.5% respecto a 2022, el mayor incremento en los \u00faltimos 10 a\u00f1os [xlv] .\n\n\nLos delitos contra el patrimonio (robos, hurtos y extorsiones) incrementaron en comparaci\u00f3n con 2022, superando los niveles\nprepandemia de 2019. Los dos delitos m\u00e1s frecuentes en 2023 fueron las extorsiones y los hurtos [xlvi] . La variaci\u00f3n interanual\n(2022-2023) del delito de extorsiones fue del 22.9%. De acuerdo con el \u00cdndice de Denuncias de Delitos, de enero 2024, las\nautoridades reportan que 9 de cada 10 extorsiones se realizan desde un centro carcelario [xlvii] . En 2023, 7 de cada 10 robos y\nhurtos ocurrieron en los departamentos de Guatemala y Escuintla, superando las cifras prepandemia de 2019, principalmente\n\u00e1reas altamente urbanas y comerciales. Hubo un descenso en Quetzaltenango, Retalhuleu y Suchitep\u00e9quez, mientras que\nGuatemala, Izabal y Santa Rosa registraron aumentos significativos [xlviii] .\n\n\nEn 2023 se registraron diariamente 77 delitos contra el patrimonio, con una tasa de v\u00edctimas de 158.2 por cada 100 mil\npersonas. Estos delitos aumentaron un 16.2% en comparaci\u00f3n con 2022, principalmente debido a las extorsiones y hurtos. Los\nrobos y hurtos a motocicletas, veh\u00edculos, armas de fuego y transporte aumentaron en 2023, con 5 de cada 10 robos y hurtos\nsiendo a motocicletas. En cuanto a robos y hurtos a veh\u00edculos y motocicletas aumentaron un 4.7% respecto a 2022 [xlix] .\n\n\nLas extorsiones constituyen un delito que atenta contra la propiedad y la vida de las personas. De acuerdo con el informe del\nObservatorio de Derechos de Propiedad, indica que las medidas adoptadas por las v\u00edctimas para protegerse han sido acciones\nde protecci\u00f3n, entre estos los cambios de ruta, venta de negocios, cambio de residencia o n\u00famero de tel\u00e9fono y contrataci\u00f3n\nde seguridad [l] . Ese cambio de residencia constituye una forma de desplazamiento forzado interno para proteger la vida e\nintegridad personal. Una medida del Estado para combatir el fen\u00f3meno de las extorsiones en las zonas capitalinas y en los\ndepartamentos m\u00e1s afectados fue la creaci\u00f3n del Grupo Especial Contra las Extorsiones (GECE), anunciada el 8 de febrero del\n\n\nP\u00e1gina 9\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e9b5cee5-d9b7-4d8b-83dd-0e1d7c56b459/01._analisis_de_proteccion_pau_2024_final_29_noviembre_2024.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        8
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**GUATEMALA** noviembre de 2024\n\n\n2024 [li] . La problem\u00e1tica de robos y extorsiones para las personas en\nmovimientos mixtos es un riesgo permanente. El Informe de Monitoreo de\nMovimientos Mixtos de ACNUR, muestra en la gr\u00e1fica un aumento en el\nn\u00famero de personas que han sufrido incidentes de protecci\u00f3n en la ruta,\nen contraste con 2023, observando un incremento significativo de\nporcentaje de personas que reportaron sufrir alg\u00fan incidente en ruta. El\nrobo y la extorsi\u00f3n son los incidentes m\u00e1s recurrentes para las personas.\nEn el 2023 la Procuradur\u00eda de los Derechos Humanos (PDH) recibi\u00f3 75\ndenuncias sobre vulneraci\u00f3n de derechos de las personas en movilidad\nhumana, mientras que en 2022 se recibieron 62.\n\n\nEsta poblaci\u00f3n tambi\u00e9n se ve expuesta a abusos por parte de algunos\nfuncionarios estatales. Con regularidad, las personas han expresado tener\nque haber pagado sobornos para acceder a servicios que son gratuitos, y\ntambi\u00e9n otros derechos se les niegan (como salud, higiene, alimentaci\u00f3n)\ncuando han permanecido detenidas por las autoridades migratorias en\npuntos fronterizos y en el Aeropuerto Internacional La Aurora, vulnerando adem\u00e1s su derecho a solicitar protecci\u00f3n\ninternacional [lii] . Esto tambi\u00e9n puede estar ligado a que el Ministerio de Gobernaci\u00f3n disolvi\u00f3 la Divisi\u00f3n de Puertos,\nAeropuertos y Puestos Fronterizos (DIPAFRONT) ante las denuncias de hechos de corrupci\u00f3n que vinculaban a elementos de\nesa unidad [liii] .\n\n\nOtro de los fen\u00f3menos que se observan dentro de este riesgo es el de desalojos forzados, que cada a\u00f1o son m\u00e1s frecuentes.\nEn el primer semestre del 2024, el Comit\u00e9 de Unidad Campesina (CUC) [liv] report\u00f3 15 desalojos y hay dos m\u00e1s programados,\nsiendo Pet\u00e9n, Alta Verapaz, Baja Verapaz, Escuintla e Izabal los departamentos m\u00e1s afectados. En 2023, el Ministerio P\u00fablico\npresent\u00f3 42 desalojos por los delitos de usurpaci\u00f3n y usurpaci\u00f3n agravada a los \u00f3rganos jurisdiccionales. El OACNUDH\ndocument\u00f3 cinco de estos casos que afectaron 503 familias ind\u00edgenas, aumentando un 101% el n\u00famero de familias afectadas\nen comparaci\u00f3n con 2022 y adicionalmente, registr\u00f3 cinco intentos de desalojo que generaron incertidumbre y temor a otras\n313 familias. Aunque la Polic\u00eda Nacional Civil [lv] tiene un protocolo de actuaci\u00f3n para desalojos, la norma a\u00fan no establece las\nacciones posteriores para salvaguardar la vida e integridad f\u00edsica y patrimonial de las personas. Por ello, deber\u00eda existir pol\u00edtica\ninterinstitucional m\u00e1s clara que permita el acompa\u00f1amiento de estos casos, as\u00ed como la generaci\u00f3n de cifras oficiales de las\npersonas afectadas.\n\n\nLas personas m\u00e1s vulnerables y afectadas por los desalojos son las mujeres, los ni\u00f1os, las ni\u00f1as, los j\u00f3venes, los adultos mayores\ny los pueblos ind\u00edgenas. Las mujeres son particularmente vulnerables a causa de la discriminaci\u00f3n jur\u00eddica y otras formas de\ndiscriminaci\u00f3n que suelen darse en materia de derecho de propiedad o acceso a la misma (incluida la propiedad de una\nvivienda); adem\u00e1s de la preocupante exposici\u00f3n a sufrir actos de violencia y abuso sexual cuando se quedan sin hogar [lvi] .\n\n\nLas pandillas tienen gran influencia en el pa\u00eds, y se disputan el control de los territorios [lvii] . La mayor parte de sus actividades se\nconcentran en Ciudad de Guatemala, zonas suburbanas y algunas regiones como Escuintla y Quetzaltenango. Un estudio\ndesarrollado entre 2019 y 2020, destac\u00f3 que estos grupos controlan territorios mediante la extorsi\u00f3n, el narcotr\u00e1fico y la\nviolencia, y que cada _\u201cclica\u201d_ (c\u00e9lula basada en un barrio) opera con autonom\u00eda de las dem\u00e1s, lo que frecuentemente genera\nconflictos entre ellas por el control de los territorios. Esto limita gravemente la movilidad de los y las habitantes porque\nestablece \"fronteras invisibles\", como l\u00edneas imaginarias que dividen zonas o barrios. Los controles territoriales se presentan\nen zonas donde la presencia del Estado es escasa o d\u00e9bil, lo que le asegura a cada grupo operar con libertad y legitimar su\ncontrol sobre la poblaci\u00f3n [lviii] .\n\n\nLa manera de operar de las pandillas est\u00e1 asociada con altos niveles de extorsi\u00f3n y violencia, obligando a comerciantes,\ntransportistas y residentes a pagar _\"cuotas\"_ para operar sus negocios y contribuir a mantener la \u201c paz \u201d . En consecuencia, la\neconom\u00eda local se ha visto gravemente impactada, ya que las actividades comerciales se reducen por el miedo y la carga\n\n\nP\u00e1gina 10\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e9b5cee5-d9b7-4d8b-83dd-0e1d7c56b459/01._analisis_de_proteccion_pau_2024_final_29_noviembre_2024.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        9
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**GUATEMALA** noviembre de 2024\n\n\nfinanciera de las extorsiones. Para 2023, el n\u00famero de denuncias por extorsi\u00f3n mostr\u00f3 un incremento de 22.9% (18,096\ndenuncias) en comparaci\u00f3n con 2022 y las mujeres denunciaron m\u00e1s casos en comparaci\u00f3n con los hombres.\n\n\nEl control territorial que ejercen las pandillas limita el acceso a derechos b\u00e1sicos como la educaci\u00f3n y la salud. Lo anterior\npuede estar contribuyendo por un lado a incrementar la deserci\u00f3n escolar (en un pa\u00eds donde, por diferentes variables, 2.7\nmillones de ni\u00f1os, ni\u00f1as y adolescentes est\u00e1n por fuera del sistema educativo) y, de otro lado a limitar el acceso a atenci\u00f3n\nm\u00e9dica adecuada, adem\u00e1s de fragmentar el tejido social comunitario, creando un ambiente de desconfianza y miedo.\n\n\nDebido a la suma de todos estos factores y como mecanismo de afrontamiento o autoprotecci\u00f3n, el desplazamiento forzado\nse habr\u00eda estado incrementando en el pa\u00eds e incluso la salida a M\u00e9xico y Estados Unidos. Sin embargo, al no contar en el pa\u00eds\ncon un reconocimiento oficial de esta problem\u00e1tica y en consecuencia sin un registro, es muy complejo establecer cifras que\npermitan dimensionar en reales proporciones el problema y poder establecer mecanismos sistem\u00e1ticos de prevenci\u00f3n,\natenci\u00f3n y restablecimiento para las personas desplazadas. De acuerdo con la Encuesta Nacional de Condiciones de Vida\n(ENCOVI) 2023 llevada a cabo por el INE (Instituto Nacional de Estad\u00edstica) de Guatemala, entorno a 1.2 millones de personas\ntuvieron que abandonar sus hogares y desplazarse por causas relacionadas con la violencia, el cambio clim\u00e1tico o los desastres\nnaturales [lix] .\n\n\nPor otro lado, la PDH en su _\u201cD_ _iagn\u00f3stico sobre Desplazamiento Forzado_ _Interno\u201d,_ ratific\u00f3 que los hechos que causan este\nfen\u00f3meno son la violencia, secuestros, amenazas, agresi\u00f3n sexual, violaci\u00f3n, violencia intrafamiliar y desalojo, entre otros [lx],\ntambi\u00e9n puede incluirse la violencia contra la mujer. Resalt\u00f3 que los desplazamientos colectivos se presentan como\nconsecuencia de desalojos forzosos y que Guatemala no cuenta con espacios para dar respuesta a personas desplazadas\ninternas, ya sea de forma individual o colectiva [lxi] .\n\n\nEl desplazamiento forzado interno tiene un impacto diferenciado; por ejemplo, la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos\n(CIDH) indic\u00f3 que el desplazamiento forzado de los pueblos ind\u00edgenas o sus integrantes, les puede colocar en una situaci\u00f3n\nde especial vulnerabilidad, ya que trae secuelas destructivas sobre el tejido \u00e9tnico y cultural, genera un claro riesgo de\nextinci\u00f3n, cultural o f\u00edsico, por lo cual es indispensable que los Estados adopten medidas espec\u00edficas de protecci\u00f3n que\nconsideren sus particularidades, as\u00ed como su derecho consuetudinario, valores, usos y costumbres para prevenir y revertir los\nefectos de dicha situaci\u00f3n [lxii] . La CIDH, en su visita _in loco_ a Guatemala en julio 2024, tambi\u00e9n destac\u00f3 que los desalojos y\ndesplazamiento forzado interno niegan el derecho a la tierra, el territorio, los recursos naturales [lxiii] [lxiv], y otros derechos,\nimplicando para las personas una precarizaci\u00f3n de sus medios de vida y derechos, situaci\u00f3n que tiene un impacto mayor para\nlas ni\u00f1as, ni\u00f1os y adolescentes, mujeres, personas mayores y personas con discapacidad [lxv] [lxvi] .\n\n\nLa Unidad de Protecci\u00f3n a Defensoras y Defensores de Derechos Humanos Guatemala (UDEFEGUA) evidenci\u00f3 en 2023 un\nincremento de agresi\u00f3n contra personas, organizaciones y comunidades defensoras de derechos humanos, con m\u00e1s de 5,922\nagresiones con relaci\u00f3n al 2022. Por su parte el OACNUDH registr\u00f3 100 casos de ataques contra personas defensoras de\nderechos humanos, que corresponden a 288 v\u00edctimas (180 hombres, 68 mujeres, 17 comunidades ind\u00edgenas y 23\norganizaciones). Esto significa un aumento del 264% en el n\u00famero de v\u00edctimas, con respecto a las registradas por el OACNUDH\nen 2022 [lxvii] .\n\n\nP\u00e1gina 11\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e9b5cee5-d9b7-4d8b-83dd-0e1d7c56b459/01._analisis_de_proteccion_pau_2024_final_29_noviembre_2024.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        10
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**GUATEMALA** noviembre de 2024\n\n##### **RESPUESTA**\n\n\n**AVANCES EN MATERIA DE PROTECCI\u00d3N**\n\n\nOcho Centros de Atenci\u00f3n para Personas Migrantes y Refugiados (CAPMiRs) en \u00e1reas fronterizas y de tr\u00e1nsito (Pet\u00e9n,\nIzabal, Chiquimula, Guatemala, Huehuetenango, Tec\u00fan Um\u00e1n, Quetzaltenango, y San Marcos) y un kiosco en Esquipulas\nofrecen asistencia humanitaria, atenci\u00f3n m\u00e9dica y psicosocial, adem\u00e1s de identificar y referir casos de protecci\u00f3n a\nentidades estatales y civiles, como las Casas del Migrante. Durante el primer semestre de 2024, 4,819 personas recibieron\natenci\u00f3n en salud primaria (37% NNA, 32% mujeres) y 36,252 personas fueron apoyadas con suministros esenciales de\nagua, saneamiento e higiene. Las unidades m\u00f3viles atendieron a m\u00e1s de 113,000 personas con servicios m\u00e9dicos,\npsicosociales y nutricionales, incluyendo evaluaciones nutricionales para 832 ni\u00f1os/as menores de 5 a\u00f1os. El sistema de\nprotecci\u00f3n para refugiados proces\u00f3 196 solicitudes en ocho misiones descentralizadas, mientras que proyectos como \"PDH\nM\u00f3vil\" y UNIVET operaron unidades m\u00f3viles en nueve departamentos para informaci\u00f3n, prevenci\u00f3n y atenci\u00f3n de\nviolaciones de derechos, violencia, y trata de personas.\n\n\nA nivel nacional la Coordinadora Nacional para la Prevenci\u00f3n de la Violencia Intrafamiliar y en Contra de la Mujer\n(CONAPREVI) ha establecido las Redes de Derivaci\u00f3n, Mesa contra la Violencia, Explotaci\u00f3n y Trata de Personas, Mesa para\nla Prevenci\u00f3n de Embarazos en Adolescentes, y la presencia institucional de los mecanismos para el avance de las mujeres\nSecretar\u00eda Presidencial de la Mujer (SEPREM) y la Defensor\u00eda de la Mujer Ind\u00edgena (DEMI). Destacan las iniciativas de la\nSecretar\u00eda contra la Violencia Sexual, Explotaci\u00f3n y Trata de Personas (SVET), el Ministerio de Gobernaci\u00f3n y fiscal\u00edas\nespecializadas para prevenir violencia y apoyar a sobrevivientes, complementadas por organizaciones civiles y los Centros\nde Apoyo Integral a Mujeres sobrevivientes de Violencia (CAIMUS).\n\n\nA nivel municipal, los Centros de Atenci\u00f3n Permanente (CAP) y los Centros de Atenci\u00f3n Integral Materno Infantil (CAIMI),\nbrindan servicios permanentes, apoyados por redes comunitarias y espacios seguros. Estas acciones abordan riesgos de\nviolencia, salud y promueven la participaci\u00f3n juvenil para mitigar y prevenir su repetici\u00f3n. Aunque no hay reconocimiento\noficial del desplazamiento forzado interno en Guatemala, sociedad civil, academia y la PDH han trabajado para visibilizarlo.\nEn abril 2023 [lxviii], se realiz\u00f3 un taller para proponer una pol\u00edtica nacional que aborde este fen\u00f3meno m\u00e1s all\u00e1 de su\ndimensi\u00f3n jur\u00eddica, desafiando estigmas y promoviendo derechos como vivienda y tierras comunitarias. En septiembre\n2023, el Equipo T\u00e9cnico Nacional de El Marco Integral Regional de Protecci\u00f3n y Soluciones MIRPS, con ACNUR, organiz\u00f3 un\ntaller para analizar conceptos, marcos normativos y desaf\u00edos en la recopilaci\u00f3n de datos [lxix] . Legislativamente, en septiembre\n2023, se present\u00f3 la \"Ley de Prevenci\u00f3n, Protecci\u00f3n y Atenci\u00f3n Integral de Personas en Condici\u00f3n de Desplazamiento\nInterno\" [lxx], conocida en el Congreso en abril 2024, que busca: 1) reconocimiento oficial del desplazamiento interno, 2)\nformulaci\u00f3n de pol\u00edticas nacionales y territoriales para prevenirlo, y 3) creaci\u00f3n de un registro \u00fanico de personas\ndesplazadas.\n\n\n**DIFICULTADES Y MEDIDAS RELACIONADAS CON EL ACCESO**\n\n\nEn el contexto de Guatemala, el acceso a las personas m\u00e1s vulnerables e impactadas por los riesgos planteados sigue siendo\nun desaf\u00edo, tanto por cuestiones geogr\u00e1ficas, la adaptaci\u00f3n de los servicios al contexto \u00e9tnico-ling\u00fc\u00edstico, la capacidad de\ncobertura, calidad y especializaci\u00f3n; temas de seguridad por el control de grupos criminales en ciertas \u00e1reas, como por las\nbarreras culturales, la prevalencia de normas sociales y g\u00e9nero que siguen perpetuando la violencia contra las mujeres, y\njustifican una serie de pr\u00e1cticas nocivas que ponen en riesgo los derechos humanos de toda la poblaci\u00f3n, especialmente\naquellos en situaci\u00f3n de mayores riesgos de protecci\u00f3n, seguridad y violencia.\n\n\n**DEFICIENCIAS CR\u00cdTICAS DE FINANCIAMIENTO Y POBLACI\u00d3N ALCANZADA**\n\n\nP\u00e1gina 12\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e9b5cee5-d9b7-4d8b-83dd-0e1d7c56b459/01._analisis_de_proteccion_pau_2024_final_29_noviembre_2024.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        11
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**GUATEMALA** noviembre de 2024\n\n\nLos requerimientos financieros anuales del sector fueron de 51.2 millones de d\u00f3lares, de los cuales (al mes de octubre de 2024)\nsolo se ha alcanzado a cubrir un 26.3% que equivale a 10.8 millones de d\u00f3lares [lxxi] . Es necesario crear medios apropiados de\nprotecci\u00f3n legal como medida de protecci\u00f3n al derecho a la vivienda y cuestiones de tierra, acceso a agua y saneamiento,\nsalud y seguridad de las personas, entre otras. En alguna medida, el seguimiento de las condiciones de las personas\ndesalojadas forzadamente lo brinda la PDH a trav\u00e9s de su Protocolo para la Atenci\u00f3n de Desalojos [lxxii] .\n\n##### **RECOMENDACIONES**\n\n\n~~\u2022~~ Continuar fortaleciendo las capacidades de los servicios de protecci\u00f3n especializados, diferenciados, de calidad,\ndescentralizados y m\u00f3viles, particularmente para personas en movimientos mixtos, personas refugiadas y solicitantes de\ndicha condici\u00f3n, desplazadas forzadamente, personas retornadas con necesidades de protecci\u00f3n y personas\nsobrevivientes de violencia basada en g\u00e9nero, ni\u00f1os, ni\u00f1as y adolescentes, personas ind\u00edgenas, con discapacidad y\nLGBTIQ+.\n\n- Fortalecer la descentralizaci\u00f3n de los servicios esenciales para sobrevivientes de violencia, programaci\u00f3n de prevenci\u00f3n,\nprotecci\u00f3n y mitigaci\u00f3n de riesgos en contexto de emergencia, con enfoque de derechos y libres de discriminaci\u00f3n.\n\n- Impulsar y apoyar los esfuerzos para cumplir con la Recomendaci\u00f3n General 33 del Comit\u00e9 CEDAW para garantizar el\nderecho de acceso efectivo de las mujeres a la justicia, la reparaci\u00f3n transformadora y el sistema de justicia que elijan,\ncon debida diligencia y la protecci\u00f3n de sus derechos contra todas las formas de discriminaci\u00f3n.\n\n- Continuar implementando de manera efectiva la Pol\u00edtica Migratoria con los actores responsables y vinculados en cada\nuno de los ejes estrat\u00e9gicos.\n\n- Seguir cumpliendo con las observaciones finales del Comit\u00e9 de Derechos del Ni\u00f1o emitida en su 96 per\u00edodo de sesiones,\nreferente al s\u00e9ptimo informe peri\u00f3dico de Guatemala, especialmente a las \u201cmedidas especiales de protecci\u00f3n\u201d para ni\u00f1os\ny ni\u00f1as solicitantes de asilo, refugiados y migrantes.\n\n- Promover el establecimiento de sistemas de protecci\u00f3n de la ni\u00f1ez en los \u00e1mbitos familiar, comunitario y municipal,\nasegurando la desconcentraci\u00f3n de servicios de atenci\u00f3n psicosocial al nivel municipal, accesibles y con pertinencia\ncultural.\n\n- Seguir implementando proyectos de protecci\u00f3n especializados, diferenciados, de calidad, particularmente para personas\nen movilidad humana y sobrevivientes de violencia de g\u00e9nero.\n\n- Promover espacios seguros y redes de apoyo a nivel comunitario como medidas de protecci\u00f3n y mitigaci\u00f3n de riesgos de\nviolencia de g\u00e9nero y contra las mujeres en situaciones de emergencia.\n\n\n**RIESGO 2** Violencia basada en g\u00e9nero\n\n~~\u2022~~ Fortalecer la cobertura de los servicios esenciales para personas sobrevivientes de violencia basada en g\u00e9nero,\nespecialmente para poblaci\u00f3n en situaci\u00f3n de riesgo como refugiadas, migrantes, personas con discapacidad, personas\nLGTBIQ+, atendiendo a la condici\u00f3n rural, \u00e9tnica y geogr\u00e1fica.\n\n- Reforzar los procesos institucionales (administrativos, log\u00edsticos y operacionales) para que estos sean r\u00e1pidos y adaptados\npara responder a contextos de emergencia, especialmente en torno a los efectos adversos del cambio clim\u00e1tico, violencia\ne inseguridad.\n\n~~\u2022~~ Fortalecer los Centros de Apoyo Integral para Mujeres Sobrevivientes de Violencia (CAIMUS) para la atenci\u00f3n integral,\nsegura, confidencial y gratuita a las mujeres v\u00edctimas y sobrevivientes de violencia en Guatemala.\n\n~~\u2022~~ Fomentar la implementaci\u00f3n del Plan Nacional para la Prevenci\u00f3n y Erradicaci\u00f3n de la Violencia Contra la Mujeres\n(PLANOVI) 2020-2029, mediante la programaci\u00f3n institucional para acciones de prevenci\u00f3n, atenci\u00f3n, protecci\u00f3n y\nsanci\u00f3n de la violencia contra las mujeres, y otros marcos de pol\u00edticas p\u00fablicas y marcos legales.\n\n\nP\u00e1gina 13\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e9b5cee5-d9b7-4d8b-83dd-0e1d7c56b459/01._analisis_de_proteccion_pau_2024_final_29_noviembre_2024.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        12
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**GUATEMALA** noviembre de 2024\n\n\n- Asegurar la protecci\u00f3n de las mujeres, ni\u00f1as, ni\u00f1os y adolescentes contra la violencia sexual y la participaci\u00f3n de las\nmujeres en la prevenci\u00f3n, manejo y transformaci\u00f3n de los conflictos y en la recuperaci\u00f3n postconflicto, en l\u00ednea con de la\nRecomendaci\u00f3n General No. 30 del Comit\u00e9 CEDAW.\n\n- Incorporar las acciones necesarias incluidas en la recomendaci\u00f3n General No.37 de la CEDAW sobre las dimensiones de\ng\u00e9nero de la reducci\u00f3n del riesgo de desastres en el contexto del cambio clim\u00e1tico.\n\n- Priorizar la transversalidad y centralidad de la protecci\u00f3n en las estrategias, planes de contingencia, respuestas y gesti\u00f3n\nde casos ante las violencias, desastres y cambio clim\u00e1tico, as\u00ed como asegurar la incorporaci\u00f3n de acciones de prevenci\u00f3n,\nmitigaci\u00f3n de riesgos de VBG y protecci\u00f3n de la ni\u00f1ez en los planes de preparaci\u00f3n y respuesta intersectorial y en la\nestrategia de protecci\u00f3n del EHP.\n\n- Continuar con acciones de incidencia para el incremento de fondos para servicios de respuesta tanto humanitarios como\nestatales, que aseguren la gesti\u00f3n de casos de personas sobrevivientes de VBG, el apoyo psicosocial, los espacios seguros\npara mujeres y ni\u00f1as, la atenci\u00f3n en salud, principalmente el manejo cl\u00ednico de la violencia sexual, las medidas de\nprotecci\u00f3n y la seguridad.\n\n- Fortalecer y promover el trabajo de las redes y organizaciones locales y comunitarias que brindan servicios y acompa\u00f1an\na las mujeres, ni\u00f1as, ni\u00f1os adolescentes, as\u00ed como personas LGTBIQ+. Esta es una acci\u00f3n que pude contribuir a los\nesfuerzos de localizaci\u00f3n del sistema humanitario.\n\n\n**RIESGO 3** Robo, extorsi\u00f3n, desalojo forzado o destrucci\u00f3n de bienes personales\n\n- Continuar reforzando la capacidad de las fuerzas de seguridad y del sistema judicial para procesar casos de manera r\u00e1pida\ny eficaz, reduciendo la impunidad e implementando sistemas accesibles y confidenciales para denunciar delitos y abusos,\nespecialmente para las v\u00edctimas de violencia de g\u00e9nero y extorsi\u00f3n.\n\n- Desarrollar un sistema de informaci\u00f3n, caracterizaci\u00f3n del fen\u00f3meno de desalojos forzosos para facilitar su abordaje y\nestrategia de respuesta integral y continuar mejorando las iniciativas para proteger a los pueblos ind\u00edgenas contra los\ndesalojos forzosos de sus territorios.\n\n- Apoyar los esfuerzos de desarrollo de pol\u00edticas p\u00fablicas y rutas que prevengan, atiendan y reparen los derechos de las\npersonas v\u00edctimas de desalojos y de la violencia, en particular que aquellas que se desplazan internamente por estas\ncausas.\n\n- Trabajar de manera coordinada con las organizaciones de base comunitaria y organizaciones ind\u00edgenas para promover el\ndesarrollo de pol\u00edticas p\u00fablicas en materia de vivienda, tierra y propiedad.\n\n- Caracterizar y visibilizar los efectos de la violencia sobre los grupos m\u00e1s vulnerables, ya as\u00ed generar evidencia para una\nagenda de incidencia.\n\n\n- Implementar una estrategia interinstitucional para la reducci\u00f3n de violencia y construcci\u00f3n de paz a nivel territorial.\n\n- Caracterizar las zonas m\u00e1s impactadas por el desplazamiento y las restricciones a la movilidad.\n\n- Abordar el fen\u00f3meno del desplazamiento forzado interno en Guatemala con miras a su reconocimiento oficial, a trav\u00e9s\nde la determinaci\u00f3n de las poblaciones afectadas, el desarrollo de sistemas de registro y la recopilaci\u00f3n de mecanismos\nde protecci\u00f3n y asistencia humanitaria, restablecimiento, as\u00ed como la promoci\u00f3n de un marco jur\u00eddico espec\u00edfico.\n\n- Dise\u00f1ar un sistema de atenci\u00f3n integral que proporcione servicios de salud, apoyo psicol\u00f3gico, asesoramiento legal,\nasistencia humanitaria y reasentamiento seguro a las personas desplazadas, procurando el acceso a vivienda, educaci\u00f3n\ny empleo.\n\n\nP\u00e1gina 14\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e9b5cee5-d9b7-4d8b-83dd-0e1d7c56b459/01._analisis_de_proteccion_pau_2024_final_29_noviembre_2024.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        13
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**Notas**\n\n\n[i La clasificaci\u00f3n de riesgo de la plataforma INFORM, ubica a Guatemala como un pa\u00eds de riesgo alto y muy vulnerable. Aqu\u00ed.](https://drmkc.jrc.ec.europa.eu/inform-index/INFORM-Risk/Country-Risk-Profile)\n[ii Banco Mundial. Guatemala panorama general. Aqu\u00ed](https://pip.worldbank.org/country-profiles/GTM)\n[iii Banco Mundial. Guatemala panorama general. Aqu\u00ed](https://pip.worldbank.org/country-profiles/GTM)\n[iv Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Desarrollo (PNUD). Informe sobre Desarrollo Humano Global 2023/2024 \"Salir del estancamiento: reimaginar la cooperaci\u00f3n en un mundo polarizado\". Aqu\u00ed](https://www.undp.org/es/guatemala/noticias/presentacion-local-del-informe-global-sobre-desarrollo-humano-2023/2024)\nv Banco Mundial. \u00cdndice de Gini - [Guatemala. Aqu\u00ed](https://datos.bancomundial.org/indicator/SI.POV.GINI?locations=GT)\n[vi Banco Mundial. Guatemala Panorama general. Aqu\u00ed](https://www.bancomundial.org/es/country/guatemala/overview)\n[vii Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Desarrollo (PNUD). An\u00e1lisis de Pobreza Multidimensional y Protecci\u00f3n Social en Guatemala. 2024. Aqu\u00ed](https://www.undp.org/es/guatemala/publicaciones/analisis-de-pobreza-multidimensional-y-proteccion-social-en-guatemala)\n[viii Alto Comisionado de las Naciones Unidas para los Derechos Humanos. Situaci\u00f3n de los derechos humanos en Guatemala durante 2023. Aqu\u00ed](https://issuu.com/oacnudhgt/docs/informe_anual_2023)\n[ix Alto Comisionado de las Naciones Unidas para los Derechos Humanos. Situaci\u00f3n de los derechos humanos en Guatemala durante 2023. Aqu\u00ed](https://issuu.com/oacnudhgt/docs/informe_anual_2023)\n[x Tribunal Supremo Electoral. Acuerdo 1659-2023. Aqu\u00ed](https://www.tse.org.gt/images/Acuerdos2023/1659-2023)\n[xi Alto Comisionado de las Naciones Unidas para los Derechos Humanos. Guatemala: Persistentes intentos de socavar el proceso democr\u00e1tico extremadamente preocupantes. Aqu\u00ed](https://oacnudh.org.gt/2023/10/01/guatemala-persistentes-intentos-de-socavar-el-proceso-democratico-extremadamente-preocupantes-alto-comisionado-de-las-naciones-unidas-para-los-derechos-humanos/)\n[xii Rep\u00fablica. Ellas son las siete mujeres del gabinete de Bernardo Ar\u00e9valo y Karin Herrera. 11 de enero de 2024. Aqu\u00ed](https://republica.gt/politica/ellas-son-las-siete-mujeres-del-gabinete-de-bernardo-arevalo-y-karin-herrera--20241814120)\n[xiii Diario La Hora. Ar\u00e9valo enfocar\u00e1 sus primeros 100 d\u00edas en econom\u00eda, combatir la corrupci\u00f3n y delincuencia, 9 de noviembre de 2023. Aqu\u00ed](https://lahora.gt/nacionales/hquino/2023/11/09/arevalo-enfocara-sus-primeros-100-dias-en-economia-combatir-la-corrupcion-y-delincuencia/#:~:text=El%20plan%20del%20presidente%20electo%20Bernardo%20Ar%C3%A9valo%20para,de%20la%20delincuencia%20y%20fortalecimiento%20al%20Organismo%20Ejecutivo)\nxiv Banco Mundial. Panorama del cambio clim\u00e1tico, Resumen de Pa\u00eds - [Guatemala. Aqu\u00ed](https://climateknowledgeportal.worldbank.org/country/guatemala)\n[xv Clasificaci\u00f3n Integrada de la Seguridad Alimentaria en Fases Aqu\u00ed](https://portal.sesan.gob.gt/informacion/descargas/cif/)\nxvi Coordinadora Nacional para la Reducci\u00f3n de Desastres - [CONRED-. Bolet\u00edn Informativo No. 163-2024. Sistema CONRED Combate Incendios Activos en 8 Departamentos. Aqu\u00ed](https://conred.gob.gt/sistema-conred-combate-incendios-activos-en-8-departamentos/)\n[xvii Emisoras Unidas. M\u00e1s de 40 Mil Hect\u00e1reas de Bosque Perdidas por Incendios, 20 mayo, 2024. Aqu\u00ed](https://emisorasunidas.com/2024/05/20/bosques-guatemala-incendios-forestales-mayo-2024/)\n[xviii Instituto Nacional de Sismolog\u00eda, Vulcanolog\u00eda, Meteorolog\u00eda e Hidrolog\u00eda. Perspectiva Clim\u00e1tica Mensual, noviembre 2024. Aqu\u00ed](https://insivumeh.gob.gt/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/202411_perspectivaClimatica_insivumeh.pdf)\nxix CGIAR - [ACNUR. Soluciones Integradas para el Cambio Clim\u00e1tico, la Seguridad y el Desplazamiento en Guatemala. 2024. Aqu\u00ed](https://alliancebioversityciat.org/publications-data/soluciones-integradas-para-el-cambio-climatico-la-seguridad-y-el-desplazamiento)\n[xx Ayuda Guatemala ACNUR. Anuncio del gobierno de los Estados Unidos, junio 2024. Aqu\u00ed](https://help.unhcr.org/guatemala/2024/06/27/anuncio-del-gobierno-de-los-estados-unidos/)\n[xxi Movilidad Segura. Aqu\u00ed](https://movilidadsegura.org/guatemala/)\n[xxii IBC Human Mobility Dashboard. Aqui](https://www.rcplac.org/en/ibcs-and-working-groups/ibc-on-human-mobility/ibc-human-mobility-dashboard)\n[xxiii Boletines Estad\u00edsticos 2024. Aqui](https://portales.segob.gob.mx/es/PoliticaMigratoria/Boletines_Estadisticos)\n[xxiv Organizaci\u00f3n Internacional para las Migraciones (OIM). Guatemala-Reporte sobre el Monitoreo de Flujos 11, abril 2024. Aqu\u00ed](https://dtm.iom.int/reports/guatemala-reporte-sobre-el-monitoreo-de-flujos-11-1-30-abril-2024)\nxxv Monitoreo de flujos en puntos fronterizos en Guatemala. [Aqu\u00ed](https://infounitnca.iom.int/migracion-en-transito/)\nxxvi IBC on Human Mobility (IBC-HM) .\n[xxvii Informe Anual de Labores IGM 2023. Aqu\u00ed](https://igm.gob.gt/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/20240117_Informe-anual-de-labores-IGM-2023.pdf)\n[xxviii Guatemaltecos Retornados V\u00eda \u00c1erea Procedentes de Estados Unidos de Am\u00e9rica. Enero al 21 de junio 2024. Aqu\u00ed](https://igm.gob.gt/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/RESUMEN-RETORNADOS-AEREOS-Y-TERRESTRES-AL-22-DE-JUNIO-2024-2.pdf)\n[xxix Guatemaltecos Retornados V\u00eda Terrestre Procedentes de M\u00e9xico, enero al 22 de junio 2024. Aqu\u00ed](https://igm.gob.gt/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/RESUMEN-RETORNADOS-AEREOS-Y-TERRESTRES-AL-22-DE-JUNIO-2024-4.pdf)\n[xxx Guatemaltecos Retornados V\u00eda \u00c1rea Procedentes de M\u00e9xico. Enero al 18 de junio 2024. Aqu\u00ed](https://igm.gob.gt/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/RESUMEN-RETORNADOS-AEREOS-Y-TERRESTRES-AL-22-DE-JUNIO-2024-3.pdf)\nxxxi Direcci\u00f3n de Planificaci\u00f3n Educativa -DIPLAN. Sistema de Registros Educativos. 2024.\n[xxxii Fondo de las Naciones Unidas para la Infancia (Unicef). Aqu\u00ed Invertir en la infancia. 2023. Aqu\u00ed](https://www.unicef.org/guatemala/media/5771/file/Invertir%20en%20la%20infancia%20-%20Informe%20completo.pdf)\nxxxiii Ministerio de Educaci\u00f3n. Reglamento de Equiparaci\u00f3n y Equivalencias de los Estudios en los Niveles de Educaci\u00f3n Preprimaria - Primaria y Media, en los Subsistemas de Educaci\u00f3n Escolar y Extraescolar,\n[Acuerdo 1753-2019. Aqu\u00ed](https://digeex.mineduc.gob.gt/digeex/books/ag-1753-2019/)\nxxxiv Organizaci\u00f3n Panamericana de la Salud. Perfil de Pa\u00eds - [Guatemala. Aqu\u00ed](https://hia.paho.org/es/paises-2022/perfil-guatemala)\n[xxxv Fondo de las Naciones Unidas para la Infancia (Unicef). Invertir en la infancia. 2023. Aqu\u00ed](https://www.unicef.org/guatemala/media/5771/file/Invertir%20en%20la%20infancia%20-%20Informe%20completo.pdf)\n[xxxvi Procuradur\u00eda de los Derechos Humanos. Informe anual circunstanciado de actividades y de la situaci\u00f3n de los Derechos Humanos 2023. Aqu\u00ed](https://www.pdh.org.gt/documentos/seccion-de-informes/informes-anuales/informe-anual-circunstanciado-pdh-2023.html)\nxxxvii Secretar\u00eda de Seguridad Alimentaria y Nutricional. Sistema de Informaci\u00f3n Nacional de Seguridad Alimentaria y Nutricional - [Desnutrici\u00f3n Aguda. Aqu\u00ed](https://portal.siinsan.gob.gt/desnutricion-aguda/)\nxxxviii Secretar\u00eda de Seguridad Alimentaria y Nutricional. Sistema de Informaci\u00f3n Nacional de Seguridad Alimentaria y Nutricional - [Desnutrici\u00f3n Aguda. Aqu\u00ed](https://portal.siinsan.gob.gt/desnutricion-aguda/)\n[xxxix World Population Review. Countries by IQ - Average IQ by Country 2024. Aqu\u00ed](https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/average-iq-by-country)\n[xl World Population Review. Countries by IQ - Average IQ by Country 2024. Aqu\u00ed](https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/average-iq-by-country)\n[xli BBC News. Guatemala: por qu\u00e9 la mayor econom\u00eda de Centroam\u00e9rica tiene uno de los peores coeficientes intelectuales del mundo. Aqu\u00ed](https://www.bbc.com/mundo/articles/cd1x9yg9876o)\n[xlii Alto Comisionado de las Naciones Unidas para los Derechos Humanos. Situaci\u00f3n de los derechos humanos en Guatemala durante 2023. Aqu\u00ed](https://issuu.com/oacnudhgt/docs/informe_anual_2023)\n[xliii El Fondo de las Naciones Unidas sobre los Derechos de las Personas con Discapacidad (UNPRPD). An\u00e1lisis de Situaci\u00f3n de los Derechos de las Personas con Discapacidad en Guatemala. Aqu\u00ed](https://guatemala.un.org/sites/default/files/2021-12/An%C3%A1lisis%20de%20la%20Situaci%C3%B3n%20de%20los%20Derechos%20de%20las%20Personas%20con%20Discapacidad%20en%20Guatemala_2021%20-%20UNPRPD%20FINAL.pdf)\n[xliv Observatorio Nacional de Derechos Humanos y Violencias por Orientaci\u00f3n Sexual e Identidad de G\u00e9nero de la Asociaci\u00f3n Lambda. Registro de muertes violentas. Aqu\u00ed](https://observatorio.asociacion-lambda.org/public/estadisticas)\n[xlv Proyecto Regional PNUD-Infosegura. An\u00e1lisis de seguridad ciudadana en Guatemala 2023. Publicada en 2024. Aqu\u00ed](https://www.undp.org/es/guatemala/publicaciones/analisis-de-seguridad-ciudadana-en-guatemala-2023)\n[xlvi Proyecto Regional PNUD-Infosegura. An\u00e1lisis de seguridad ciudadana en Guatemala 2023. Publicada en 2024. Aqu\u00ed](https://www.undp.org/es/guatemala/publicaciones/analisis-de-seguridad-ciudadana-en-guatemala-2023)\n[xlvii Coalici\u00f3n por la Seguridad Ciudadana. \u00cdndice de Denuncias de Delitos, enero 2024. Aqu\u00ed](https://cien.org.gt/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Presentacion-IDD-y-tema-del-mes-enero-2024-vf.pdf)\n[xlviii Proyecto Regional PNUD-Infosegura. An\u00e1lisis de seguridad ciudadana en Guatemala 2023. Publicada en 2024. Aqu\u00ed](https://www.undp.org/es/guatemala/publicaciones/analisis-de-seguridad-ciudadana-en-guatemala-2023)\n[xlix Proyecto Regional PNUD-Infosegura. An\u00e1lisis de seguridad ciudadana en Guatemala 2023. Publicada en 2024. Aqu\u00ed](https://www.undp.org/es/guatemala/publicaciones/analisis-de-seguridad-ciudadana-en-guatemala-2023)\n[l Observatorio de Derechos de la Propiedad. Encuesta Virtual de Percepci\u00f3n Alta Incidencia de Extorsiones en Guatemala, Primer semestre 2024. Aqu\u00ed](https://www.observatoriopropiedad.org/encuesta-virtual-de-percepcion/)\n[li Instituto de Ense\u00f1anza para el Desarrollo Sostenible - IEPADES. Bolet\u00edn Extorciones. febrero 2024. Aqu\u00ed](https://iepades.org/2024/07/05/boletin-extorsiones/)\n[lii Procuradur\u00eda de los Derechos Humanos. Informe anual circunstanciado de actividades y de la situaci\u00f3n de los Derechos Humanos 2023. Aqu\u00ed](https://www.pdh.org.gt/documentos/seccion-de-informes/informes-anuales/informe-anual-circunstanciado-pdh-2023.html)\n[liii Diario La Hora. Gobernaci\u00f3n disuelve la Dipafront ante denuncias de corrupci\u00f3n.13 de febrero 2024. Aqu\u00ed](https://lahora.gt/nacionales/hquino/2024/02/13/gobernacion-disuelve-la-dipafront-ante-denuncias-de-corrupcion/)\n[liv Diario de Centro Am\u00e9rica. Ejecutivo insta a entidades del Estado a posponer desalojos, 20 de junio 2024. Aqu\u00ed](https://dca.gob.gt/noticias-guatemala-diario-centro-america/ejecutivo-insta-a-entidades-del-estado-a-posponer-desalojos/)\n[lv Divisi\u00f3n de Fuerzas Especiales de la Polic\u00eda Nacional Civil, Ministerio de Gobernaci\u00f3n. Protocolo de Desalojo. Aqu\u00ed](https://mingob.gob.gt/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Protocolo-de-manifestaciones-y-desalojos.pdf)\n[lvi Desalojos en Am\u00e9rica Latina. Aqu\u00ed](https://www.corteidh.or.cr/tablas/24967.pdf)\n[lvii InSight Crime. Perfil de Guatemala. 18 enero 2024. Aqu\u00ed](https://insightcrime.org/es/noticias-crimen-organizado-guatemala/guatemala/)\n[lviii Su\u00e1rez G\u00f3mez, Ram\u00edrez C\u00e1rdenas, Nieto L\u00f3pez. Las fronteras invisibles en las comunas 16 y 70 de Medell\u00edn (2008-2013): poder, territorio y resistencia. Aqu\u00ed](https://bibliotecadigital.udea.edu.co/bitstream/10495/27255/1/SuarezJorge_2018_FronterasInvisiblesComunas.pdf)\n[lix Encuesta Nacional de Condiciones de Vida 2023. Aqu\u00ed](https://www.ine.gob.gt/publicaciones3.php?c=84)\n[lx Procuradur\u00eda de los Derechos Humanos. Diagn\u00f3stico Sobre Desplazamiento Forzado Interno Desde el An\u00e1lisis de Expedientes de la Procuradur\u00eda de los Derechos Humanos Periodo 2017-2018. Aqu\u00ed](https://www.pdh.org.gt/documentos/seccion-de-investigacion/notas-conceptuales/2020-11/6277-nota-conceptual-pdh-2020-desplazamiento-forzado-interno/file.html)\nlxi Procuradur\u00eda de los Derechos Humanos. Contribuci\u00f3n del Procurador de los Derechos de Guatemala sobre \u201cel nexo entre los desplazamientos forzados y las formas contempor\u00e1neas de esclavitud\u201d en ocasi\u00f3n\n[del 48\u00ba per\u00edodo de sesiones del Consejo de Derechos Humanos de las Naciones Unidas. Marzo 2021. Aqu\u00ed](https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Slavery/SR/ReportHRC48/States/Guatemala-es_I.pdf)\n[lxii Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos. Cuadernillo de Jurisprudencia de la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos. No. 3: Personas en Situaci\u00f3n de Desplazamiento. P\u00e1rrafo 176. Aqu\u00ed](https://biblioteca.corteidh.or.cr/tablas/r33821-2020.pdf)\n[lxiii Comisi\u00f3n Interamericana de Derechos Humanos. Mensaje Conferencia de prensa, Visita in loco a Guatemala. 26 de julio de 2024. Aqu\u00ed](https://www.oas.org/es/cidh/prensa/ConferenciaPrensa/2024/7_26_visita_in_loco_guatemala.pdf)\n[lxiv Comisi\u00f3n Interamericana de Derechos Humanos. Conferencia de Prensa 30 de julio 2024. Aqu\u00ed](https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/relatedvideo?q=visita%20in%20loco%20guatemala&mid=BC0D4D65518202C1BBCABC0D4D65518202C1BBCA&ajaxhist=0)\n[lxv Comisi\u00f3n Interamericana de Derechos Humanos. Mensaje Conferencia de prensa, Visita in loco a Guatemala. 26 de julio de 2024. Aqu\u00ed](https://www.oas.org/es/cidh/prensa/ConferenciaPrensa/2024/7_26_visita_in_loco_guatemala.pdf)\n[lxvi Comisi\u00f3n Interamericana de Derechos Humanos. Conferencia de Prensa 30 de julio 2024. Aqu\u00ed](https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/relatedvideo?q=visita%20in%20loco%20guatemala&mid=BC0D4D65518202C1BBCABC0D4D65518202C1BBCA&ajaxhist=0)\n[lxvii Alto Comisionado de las Naciones Unidas para los Derechos Humanos. Situaci\u00f3n de los derechos humanos en Guatemala durante 2023. Aqu\u00ed](https://issuu.com/oacnudhgt/docs/informe_anual_2023)\n[lxviii JOTAY. Taller pol\u00edtica p\u00fablica para atender al desplazamiento forzado en Guatemala. Aqu\u00ed](https://www.jotayguatemala.org.gt/es/articulo/taller-politica-publica-para-atender-al-desplazamiento-forzado-en-guatemala)\n[lxix Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores. MINEX concluy\u00f3 el taller \"Aproximaciones al Desplazamiento Interno\". Septiembre 2023. Aqu\u00ed](https://x.com/MinexGt/status/1697798440548221307)\n[lxx Cristosal. Iniciativa de Ley de prevenci\u00f3n y atenci\u00f3n integral de personas en condici\u00f3n de desplazamiento forzado interno de Guatemala, Iniciativa de Ley No. 6292. Aqu\u00ed](https://cristosal.org/ES/iniciativa-de-ley-de-prevencion-y-atencion-integral-de-personas-en-condicion-de-desplazamiento-forzado-interno-de-guatemala/)\n[lxxi Oficina de la ONU para la Coordinaci\u00f3n de Asuntos Humanitarios (OCHA). Guatemala Plan de Respuesta Humanitario 2024. Aqu\u00ed](https://humanitarianaction.info/plan/1173/ge/7542)\n[lxxii Procuradur\u00eda de los Derechos Humanos. Protocolo para la Atenci\u00f3n de Desalojos. Aqu\u00ed](https://www.pdh.org.gt/transparencia/acuerdos-pdh/2019/3378-2-acuerdo-nmero-sg-085-2019-protocolo-para-la-atencin-de-desalojos/file.html)\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e9b5cee5-d9b7-4d8b-83dd-0e1d7c56b459/01._analisis_de_proteccion_pau_2024_final_29_noviembre_2024.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        14
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e9b5cee5-d9b7-4d8b-83dd-0e1d7c56b459/01._analisis_de_proteccion_pau_2024_final_29_noviembre_2024.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        15
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_40/raw/doc_40_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,554 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "#### **DISPLACEMENT PATTERNS,** **PROTECTION RISKS AND NEEDS OF** **REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE**\n###### Regional Protection Analysis #3 Trends analysis: Moldova, Poland, Romania, and Slovakia\n\n**UNHCR Regional Bureau for Europe** November 2023\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/422e28e5-e6d2-49ba-b30d-4707170bc381/2023%2011%2013%20Ukraine%20regional%20protection%20Report%20No%203.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "DISPLACEMENT PATTERNS, PROTECTION RISKS AND NEEDS OF REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n#### **Contents**\n\n\nExecutive summary 3\n\nKey findings 3\n\nKey recommendations 4\n\nContext 5\n\n\nMethodology 6\n\nTrends analysis: access to rights in host countries 7\n\n\nAccess to temporary protection 7\n\nTemporary visits to Ukraine and impact on access to rights 8\n\nAccess to documentation 9\n\nAccess to accommodation 11\n\nAccess to work 13\n\nAccess to education 15\n\nAccess to healthcare 16\n\n\n**Acknowledgements**\n\nData used in this report was collected as part of Protection Profiling and Monitoring exercises led by\nUNHCR in: the **Republic of Moldova**, in partnership with Charity Center for Refugees, Law Center for\nAdvocates, INTERSOS and REACH; **Poland**, in partnership with REACH until December 2022; **Romania**, in\npartnership with Romanian National Council for Refugees and REACH; **Slovakia**, in partnership with\nHuman Rights League, Mareena, People in Need, REACH and Slovak Humanitarian Council.\n\n\nWe are grateful for the extensive involvement and support of UNHCR\u2019s partners, local authorities, civil\nsociety, international organizations, and donors. Most importantly, UNHCR would like to acknowledge the\nresilience and strength of refugees from Ukraine, who continue to share with us their challenges, fears,\nand hopes.\n\n\n**Contact us**\n\nUNHCR Regional Bureau for Europe\nData, Identity Management and Analysis Unit (DIMA)\nProtection Unit\nEmail: rbeext@unhcr.org\n\n\n**Cover photograph:**\n\nPoland. Iryna, a refugee from Ukraine, arrived to Poland together with her three children. Iryna says the\nassistance she receives from various humanitarian organizations, including Mother\u2019s House, is invaluable.\nOctober 2023 \u00a9 UNHCR/ Anna Liminowicz\n\n\n**2** **U N H C R R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E**, N O V E M B E R 2 0 2 3\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/422e28e5-e6d2-49ba-b30d-4707170bc381/2023%2011%2013%20Ukraine%20regional%20protection%20Report%20No%203.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "DISPLACEMENT PATTERNS, PROTECTION RISKS AND NEEDS OF REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n# Executive summary\n\n#### **Key findings**\n\n\n\n**A complex landscape of access to rights in host**\n**countries emerges.** Over time, refugees from\n## **1**\nUkraine have encountered a contrast between positive\ntrends impacting access to rights, including the\neffectiveness of temporary protection and swift access\nto employment markets, alongside notable hurdles\nincluding in accessing sustainable accommodation and\nhealthcare. The overall picture is influenced by the\nsituation in individual host countries and the sociodemographic characteristics of refugees.\n\n\n**Reduction in the percentage of refugees with**\n**missing identity documentation, yet with**\n## **3**\n**ongoing challenges.** The proportion of refugees\nreporting missing identity documents decreased in Q2\n2023 and Q3 2023 compared to previous periods.\nDespite this decline, **23% of respondents still reported**\n**missing documentation in Q3 2023**, mainly biometric\npassports, and an increasing number of refugees face\ndifficulties obtaining identity documents in their host\ncountries. Additionally, the necessity to collect\ndocumentation continues to drive back-and-forth\nmovements between host countries and Ukraine.\n\n\n\n**Growing difficulties for refugees returning from**\n**short visits to Ukraine.** The proportion of\n## **2**\nrespondents who experienced challenges upon their\nreturn to host countries following visits to Ukraine\ntripled, f **rom 6% in Q4 2022 to 18% in Q3 2023** . These\nchallenges include issues such as the revocation of\nlegal status, suspension of social protection benefits,\nand obstacles when re-entering host countries after\nvisiting Ukraine. Notably, a relatively high proportion of\nrefugees in Poland experienced these challenges.\n\n\n**Reduced access to key rights amongst**\n**refugees with specific needs.** Over time,\n## **4**\nhouseholds with individuals who have specific needs\n\n- such as older persons, persons with disabilities, and\nthose with serious medical conditions \u2013 report lower\nlevels of access to various rights, including identity\ndocumentation, long-term housing, healthcare, and\nemployment. This trend highlights a worsening\nvulnerability among these groups as displacement\npersists.\n\n\n\n**U N H C R R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E,** N O V E M B E R 2 0 2 3 3\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "refugees\nreporting missing identity documents",
+          "confidence": 0.7983217239379883,
+          "start": 150,
+          "end": 155
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Ukraine",
+          "confidence": 0.5376712679862976,
+          "start": 227,
+          "end": 228
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.9120452404022217,
+          "start": 158,
+          "end": 159
+        },
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "refugees",
+          "confidence": 0.9426435828208923,
+          "start": 150,
+          "end": 151
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/422e28e5-e6d2-49ba-b30d-4707170bc381/2023%2011%2013%20Ukraine%20regional%20protection%20Report%20No%203.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        2
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "DISPLACEMENT PATTERNS, PROTECTION RISKS AND NEEDS OF REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n#### **Key recommendations**\n\n\n\n**UNHCR recommends against the reduction of**\n**support to host countries, host communities and**\n## **1**\n**the refugee community.** As safety and security\nconcerns prevent many refugees from currently\nreturning to Ukraine, the focus must remain on\nsupporting people where they are, providing full\naccess to legal status and rights and with a particular\nfocus on the most vulnerable. Refugees should be\nsupported to make free and informed decisions on\ntheir future..\n\n\n**UNHCR recommends continued efforts to**\n**address administrative or legal barriers which**\n## **3**\n**hinder refugees\u2019 access to documentation services.**\nRefugees, particularly those with specific needs,\nrequire additional support to replace and issue civil\nstatus and identity documentation in host countries, to\nensure their access to rights and reduce risks of\nstatelessness.\n\n\n\n**[UNHCR recommends](https://www.refworld.org/pdfid/649a7c744.pdf)** **that refugees\u2019 legal**\n**status and associated rights in host countries**\n## **2**\n**are unaffected by a visit to Ukraine lasting less than**\n**three months.** In the event of longer-term travel to\nUkraine, UNHCR recommends that hosting countries\nopt for deactivation of legal status instead of\nrevocation or cancellation \u2013 to avoid administrative\nburdens and facilitate renewed access to protection\nand assistance if required. The ability of refugees to\ntravel home for short periods can help pave the way\nfor more durable returns in the future, once conditions\npermit.\n\n\n**UNHCR recommends further support for the**\n**most vulnerable to access their rights.** 27% of\n## **4**\nhouseholds include at least one individual with a\nspecific need. Challenges faced by vulnerable groups\nin host countries have the potential to influence return\ndecisions, even in suboptimal conditions in Ukraine. [1]\nStrategies to include refugees in national systems\nshould strive to address the unique challenges the\nmost vulnerable face in accessing decent work,\ndocumentation, social welfare and other rights.\n\n\n\n1. UNHCR, Lives on Hold: Intentions and Perspectives of Refugees and IDPs from Ukraine #4, July 2023 available at: https://data.unhcr.org/en/\ndocuments/details/101747\n\n\n**4** **U N H C R R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E**, N O V E M B E R 2 0 2 3\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/422e28e5-e6d2-49ba-b30d-4707170bc381/2023%2011%2013%20Ukraine%20regional%20protection%20Report%20No%203.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        3
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "DISPLACEMENT PATTERNS, PROTECTION RISKS AND NEEDS OF REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n# Context\n\n\n\nThe full-scale war in Ukraine has triggered one of\nthe largest displacement crises in the world. As of\nOctober 29, 2023, over 6.2 million refugees from\nUkraine have been recorded \u2013 94% of whom are\ndispersed across Europe. [2]\n\n\nSince the beginning of the crisis, UNHCR has been\nclosely assessing the protection situation of\n\n\n\nof the regional protection monitoring exercise,\nUNHCR has so far released two regional reports\n[(frst report,](https://data.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/96447) [second report).](https://data.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/100191)\n\n\nThis report, the third in the series, explores the\ntrends related to refugees\u2019 access to rights in _**four**_\n_**countries:**_ Moldova, Poland, Romania, and Slovakia.\nThe report is based on **18,501** interviews conducted\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n2. UNHCR, Ukraine Refugee Situation, Operational Data Portal available at [https://data.unhcr.org/en/situations/ukraine](https://data.unhcr.org/en/situations/ukraine)\n\n\n**U N H C R R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E,** N O V E M B E R 2 0 2 3 5\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "frst report",
+          "confidence": 0.7509427070617676,
+          "start": 94,
+          "end": 96
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "report",
+          "confidence": 0.679652988910675,
+          "start": 95,
+          "end": 96
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "UNHCR",
+          "confidence": 0.938422679901123,
+          "start": 68,
+          "end": 69
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "UKRAINE",
+          "confidence": 0.6598518490791321,
+          "start": 10,
+          "end": 11
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.8417338132858276,
+          "start": 35,
+          "end": 36
+        },
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "REFUGEES",
+          "confidence": 0.7262568473815918,
+          "start": 8,
+          "end": 9
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/422e28e5-e6d2-49ba-b30d-4707170bc381/2023%2011%2013%20Ukraine%20regional%20protection%20Report%20No%203.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        4
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "DISPLACEMENT PATTERNS, PROTECTION RISKS AND NEEDS OF REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n# Methodology\n\n\n\nUNHCR conducts protection monitoring to\nsystematically gather information on the challenges\nfacing forcibly displaced and stateless persons.\nProtection monitoring allows UNHCR to conduct\nevidence-based programming and advocacy, which\nis informed by the experiences and perspectives of\nforcibly displaced and stateless persons.\n\n\nUNHCR and its partners have been implementing a\nProtection Profiling and Monitoring exercise to\nregularly collect and analyze data about the\nprotection situation of refugees from Ukraine and\nmonitor changes over time. Interviews are\nconducted in various locations, including\ninformation and assistance points, community\ncenters, collective sites, transit locations and\nreception and registration centers. Trained\nenumerators digitally collect data through Kobo\nToolbox, which is safely stored in a UNHCR server.\n\n\nRespondents are identified in the selected locations\nand asked for their consent to be interviewed using\na harmonized regional questionnaire. The results\npresented in this report must be interpreted\naccording to the limitations of the methodology and\nthe context, particularly:\n\n\n- While the random selection of respondents and\ndiversification in places of data collection are\nused to reduce potential bias and ensure the\nsample covers different segments and profiles of\nthe target population, results cannot necessarily\nbe extrapolated to the population of refugees\nfrom Ukraine as a whole, given the nonprobabilistic sampling method used.\n\n\n\n\n- The comparison of results across time might be\naffected by the changes in distribution of\ninterviews by locations across time in the\ndifferent countries.\n\n\n- The results reflect refugees\u2019 situation and needs\nat the time of data collection, which may\nsubsequently change depending on a wide\nrange of factors.\n\n\nWith the goal of reducing sampling errors and\nensuring regional results are more representative of\nthe overall refugee population, for this regional\nanalysis, post-stratification weights have been\napplied. The weights were calculated to adjust the\nsample by two criteria: (i) using the estimated\nnumber of refugees recorded in each country to\nadjust the completed interviews in each country to\nthe true population distribution across countries,\nand (ii) using estimates of refugee arrivals across\nquarters to adjust the completed interviews in each\nquarter to the real distribution of arrivals within each\ncountry.\n\n\n**RESPONDENTS BY COUNTRY**\n\n\n\nPoland\n\n\nMoldova\n\n\nSlovakia\n\n\nRomania\n\n\n\n11,852\n\n\n\n4,062\n\n\n\n1,751\n\n\n\n836\n\n\n\n**6** **U N H C R R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E**, N O V E M B E R 2 0 2 3\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Kobo\nToolbox",
+          "confidence": 0.5802599191665649,
+          "start": 123,
+          "end": 125
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "UNHCR",
+          "confidence": 0.8165518045425415,
+          "start": 13,
+          "end": 14
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "UKRAINE",
+          "confidence": 0.5021234750747681,
+          "start": 10,
+          "end": 11
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "Respondents",
+          "confidence": 0.6212482452392578,
+          "start": 135,
+          "end": 136
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "harmonized regional questionnaire",
+          "confidence": 0.8215791583061218,
+          "start": 152,
+          "end": 155
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Ukraine",
+          "confidence": 0.851916491985321,
+          "start": 223,
+          "end": 224
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "refugees",
+          "confidence": 0.5649634599685669,
+          "start": 221,
+          "end": 222
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "completed interviews",
+          "confidence": 0.7396102547645569,
+          "start": 348,
+          "end": 350
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "refugee population",
+          "confidence": 0.8435155153274536,
+          "start": 306,
+          "end": 308
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/422e28e5-e6d2-49ba-b30d-4707170bc381/2023%2011%2013%20Ukraine%20regional%20protection%20Report%20No%203.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        5
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "DISPLACEMENT PATTERNS, PROTECTION RISKS AND NEEDS OF REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n# Trends analysis: access to rights in host countries\n#### **Access to temporary protection3**\n\n\n\nIn response to the mass influx of refugees from\nUkraine, the European Union triggered the\napplication of the Temporary Protection Directive\n\n- for the first time [4] - enabling refugees\u2019 swift access\nto rights and protection.\n\n\nThe vast majority of refugees surveyed have both\nregistered for temporary protection and received a\npositive decision. This demonstrates the practical\n\n\n**ACCESS TO TEMPORARY PROTECTION**\n\n\n\nefficiency of temporary protection in this context, in\nmanaging a mass flow, providing recognition of\ninternational protection needs and guaranteeing\nswift access to safety, documentation and rights.\nOut of the small portion of refugees who have not\napplied for temporary protection, most cited not\nintending to stay in the current host country as their\nprimary reason for not doing so.\n\n\n\n**JUL - SEP 2023**\n\n\nof respondents applied for\ntemporary protection\n\n\n**Top reasons for not applying***\n\n\n\n**OCT - DEC 2022**\n\n\nof respondents applied for\ntemporary protection\n\n\n**Top reasons for not applying***\n\n\n\n**JAN - MAR 2023**\n\n\nof respondents applied for\ntemporary protection\n\n\n**Top reasons for not applying***\n\n\n\n**APR - JUN 2023**\n\n\nof respondents applied for\ntemporary protection\n\n\n**Top reasons for not applying***\n\n\n\nNot staying here\n\n\nDo not need it\n\nApplied for\n\nresidency\n\n\n\n84%\n\n\n\nNot staying here\n\n\nDo not need it\n\nApplied for\n\nresidency\n\n\n\n87%\n\n\n\nNot staying here\n\n\nDo not need it\n\nApplied for\n\nresidency\n\n\n\n84%\n\n\n\nNot staying here\n\n\nDo not need it\n\nApplied for\n\nresidency\n\n\n\n81%\n\n\n\n9%\n\n\n3%\n\n\n\n8%\n\n\n5%\n\n\n\n12%\n\n\n4%\n\n\n\n10%\n\n\n9%\n\n\n\nof respondents who applied for\ntemporary protection have\nreceived a positive decision\n\n\n\n**100%**\nof respondents who applied for\ntemporary protection have\nreceived a positive decision\n\n\n\nof respondents who applied for\ntemporary protection have\nreceived a positive decision\n\n\n\nof respondents who applied for\ntemporary protection have\nreceived a positive decision\n\n\n\n*Due to rounding some percent totals do not add up to 100%\n\n\n3. Findings related to temporary protection apply to all countries except Moldova.\n4. Council Implementing Decision (EU) 2022/382 of 4 March 2022 establishing the existence of a mass influx of displaced persons from Ukraine\nwithin the meaning of Article 5 of Directive 2001/55/EC, and having the effect of introducing temporary protection available at [https://eur-lex.](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?toc=OJ%3AL%3A2022%3A071%3ATOC&uri=uriserv%3AOJ.L_.20)\n[europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?toc=OJ%3AL%3A2022%3A071%3ATOC&uri=uriserv%3AOJ.L_.2022.071.01.0001.01.ENG](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?toc=OJ%3AL%3A2022%3A071%3ATOC&uri=uriserv%3AOJ.L_.20)\n\n\n**U N H C R R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E,** N O V E M B E R 2 0 2 3 7\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/422e28e5-e6d2-49ba-b30d-4707170bc381/2023%2011%2013%20Ukraine%20regional%20protection%20Report%20No%203.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        6
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "DISPLACEMENT PATTERNS, PROTECTION RISKS AND NEEDS OF REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n#### **Temporary visits to Ukraine and impact on** **access to rights**\n\n\n\nSince their initial arrival to host countries, 37% of\nrefugees surveyed during Q3 2023 have visited\nUkraine at least once \u2013 a slight increase from the\nprevious three quarters. During all four quarters, the\ntop three reasons for temporarily returning to\nUkraine have remained unchanged: to visit family\nmembers who stayed behind, to obtain documents,\nand to check on property.\n\n\nUpon their return from short visits to Ukraine, some\nrefugees report experiencing difficulties in host\ncountries \u2013 from revocation of legal status to\nsuspension of social protection benefits. In fact,\nwhen comparing Q4 2022 and Q3 2023, the\n\n\n**TEMPORARY VISITS TO UKRAINE**\n\n\n\nproportion of refugees who reported facing\ndifficulties upon their return from Ukraine tripled,\njumping from 6% to 18%.\n\n\nComparatively, a higher proportion of refugees in\nPoland reported facing obstacles upon their return\nfrom Ukraine. In Q3 2023, out of refugees in Poland\nwho reported visiting Ukraine, 27% experienced\nchallenges upon their return, a significant increase\nfrom 7% recorded in Q4 2022. This increase\ncoincides with the adoption of a new law, which\nstipulates that stays outside of Poland for over 30\ndays will result in loss of temporary protection\nstatus. [5]\n\n\n\n**OCT - DEC 2022**\n\n\nof respondents visited Ukraine\nat least once\n\n\n**Reasons for temporarily returning**\n**to Ukraine***\n\n\n\nof respondents visited Ukraine\nat least once\n\n\n**Reasons for temporarily**\n**returning to Ukraine***\n\n\n\n**JAN - MAR 2023** **APR - JUN 2023** **JUL - SEP 2023**\n\n\n\nof respondents visited Ukraine\nat least once\n\n\n**Reasons for temporarily**\n**returning to Ukraine***\n\n\n\nof respondents visited Ukraine\nat least once\n\n\n**Reasons for temporarily**\n**returning to Ukraine***\n\n\n\nVisiting relatives\n\nObtain documents\n\nCheck on property\n\nAccess healthcare\n\nCheck on situation\n\n\n\n51%\n\n26%\n\n22%\n\n15%\n\n15%\n\n\n\nVisiting relatives\n\nObtain documents\n\nCheck on property\n\nAccess healthcare\n\nCheck on situation\n\n\n\n45%\n\n26%\n\n22%\n\n21%\n\n15%\n\n\n\nVisiting relatives\n\nObtain documents\n\nCheck on property\n\nAccess healthcare\n\nCheck on situation\n\n\n\n41%\n\n28%\n\n25%\n\n18%\n\n17%\n\n\n\nVisiting relatives\n\nObtain documents\n\nCheck on property\n\nAccess healthcare\n\nCheck on situation\n\n\n\n49%\n\n34%\n\n25%\n\n22%\n\n17%\n\n\n\nof respondents faced issues\nupon return to their current\nhost country.\n\n\n**Difficulties faced upon return to**\n**host country***\n\n\n\nof respondents faced issues\nupon return to their current\nhost country.\n\n\n**Difficulties faced upon return to**\n**host country***\n\n\n\nof respondents faced issues\nupon return to their current\nhost country.\n\n\n**Difficulties faced upon return to**\n**host country***\n\n\n\nof respondents faced issues\nupon return to their current\nhost country.\n\n\n**Difficulties faced upon return to**\n**host country***\n\n\n\nDifficulty crossing\n\nStatus revoked\n\nOther\n\n\n\n62%\n\n\n\nStatus revoked\n\nBenefits\nsuspended\nDifficulty crossing\n\n\n\n71%\n\n41%\n\n\n\nStatus revoked\n\nBenefits\nsuspended\nDifficulty crossing\n\n\n\n69%\n\n50%\n\n\n\nStatus revoked\n\n\n\nBenefits\nsuspended\n\n\n\n10%\n\n\n\n74%\n\n55%\n\n\n\n27%\n\n19%\n\n\n\n14%\n\n\n\n10%\n\n\n\nOther\n\n\n\n*Multiple responses were possible, so percentages can go over 100% when added.\n\n\n5. UNHCR Poland (2023), Protection Monitoring Brief #3 available at [https://data.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/102103](https://data.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/102103)\n\n\n**8** **U N H C R R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E**, N O V E M B E R 2 0 2 3\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Temporary visits to Ukraine",
+          "confidence": 0.5242234468460083,
+          "start": 17,
+          "end": 21
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "UKRAINE",
+          "confidence": 0.9634088277816772,
+          "start": 10,
+          "end": 11
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.9483703374862671,
+          "start": 48,
+          "end": 49
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "Q3 2023",
+          "confidence": 0.5121464729309082,
+          "start": 47,
+          "end": 49
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "REFUGEES",
+          "confidence": 0.9872085452079773,
+          "start": 8,
+          "end": 9
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "property\n\nAccess healthcare\n\nCheck on situation",
+          "confidence": 0.8715656995773315,
+          "start": 450,
+          "end": 456
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "host country",
+          "confidence": 0.6173202395439148,
+          "start": 475,
+          "end": 477
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "respondents",
+          "confidence": 0.9579328894615173,
+          "start": 467,
+          "end": 468
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/422e28e5-e6d2-49ba-b30d-4707170bc381/2023%2011%2013%20Ukraine%20regional%20protection%20Report%20No%203.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        7
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "#### **Access to documentation**\n\n\n\nAs compared to Q4 2022 and Q1 2023, during Q2\n2023 and Q3 2023 the percentage of respondents\nwith at least one household member missing\nidentity documentation declined. For instance, in Q3\n2023, 23% of refugees surveyed reported having at\nleast one family member missing identity\ndocumentation \u2013 a drop from 30% recorded in Q4\n2022. This decrease is likely linked to the adoption\nof [resolution 66 by the Cabinet of Ministers of](https://www.kmu.gov.ua/npas/pro-zabezpechennia-zdiisnennia-zakordonnymy-dypl-a66?fbclid=IwAR2EUWq4njoouHe-Q-ng6uP74SiEvGI2BEKe5GIunEO6ZeJr_Aazc-6wnL4)\nUkraine, which expanded the ability of Ukrainian\ndiplomatic institutions to register vital events and\nissue civil status and identity documents abroad.\n\n\nDespite the overall decline, however, the proportion\nof refugees with at least one household member\nmissing identity documentation \u2013 mostly a biometric\npassport \u2013 remains considerable: 23% in Q3 2023.\nMoreover, an increasing number of refugees report\ninability to obtain identity documentation in host\ncountries. During Q3 2023, out of the 23% of\nrefugees reporting missing documentation, 33%\nreported that they could not obtain a replacement in\nhost countries, an increase from 27% recorded in\nQ4 2022. The largest share of refugees who are\nunable to obtain documentation is recorded in\n\n\n\nRomania, which may partly be due to long waiting\nperiods to access identity documentation services\nin the country, reportedly stretching up to six\nmonths.\n\n\nIn host countries, numerous factors hinder refugees\u2019\naccess to documentation, including requirements to\npresent supporting documents (which many may\nhave lost during displacement or left behind in\nUkraine), long waiting periods, and associated\nprocessing fees. Moreover, despite reporting a\nhigher number of household members missing\ndocumentation, some refugees who fled areas of\nUkraine under the temporary military control of the\nRussian Federation face additional challenges, such\nas being asked to travel back to Ukraine to retrieve\ndocuments that prove nationality. [6]\n\n\nUNHCR continues to provide legal services and\ncounselling to support access to documentation\namongst the refugee community. In Poland, UNHCR\nalso supports Ukrainian consular offices to enhance\ntheir operations.\n\n\n\n6. UNHCR Poland (2023), Protection Monitoring Brief #3 available at [https://data.unhcr.org/fr/documents/download/102103](https://data.unhcr.org/fr/documents/download/102103)\n\n\n**U N H C R R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E,** N O V E M B E R 2 0 2 3 9\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/422e28e5-e6d2-49ba-b30d-4707170bc381/2023%2011%2013%20Ukraine%20regional%20protection%20Report%20No%203.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        8
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "DISPLACEMENT PATTERNS, PROTECTION RISKS AND NEEDS OF REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n\n**ACCESS TO DOCUMENTATION**\n\n\n**OCT - DEC 2022** **JAN - MAR 2023** **APR - JUN 2023** **JUL - SEP 2023**\n\n\n\nof respondents with at least\none household member\nmissing one or more identity\ndocument\n\n\n**Top missing documents***\n\n\n\nof respondents with at least\none household member\nmissing one or more identity\ndocument\n\n\n**Top missing documents***\n\n\n\nof respondents with at least\none household member\nmissing one or more identity\ndocument\n\n\n**Top missing documents***\n\n\n\nof respondents with at least\none household member\nmissing one or more identity\ndocument\n\n\n**Top missing documents***\n\n\n\nBiometric passport\n\n\nNonbiometirc\npassport\n\n\nInternal passport\n\n\n\n27%\n\n\n\nBiometric passport\n\n\nNonbiometirc\npassport\n\n\nInternal passport\n\n\n\n24%\n\n\n12%\n\n\n1%\n\n\n\nBiometric passport\n\n\nNonbiometirc\npassport\n\n\nInternal passport\n\n\n\n18%\n\n\n8%\n\n\n1%\n\n\n\nBiometric passport\n\n\nNonbiometirc\npassport\n\n\nInternal passport\n\n\n\n16%\n\n\n11%\n\n\n2%\n\n\n\n4%\n\n\n3%\n\n\n\n**Ability to replace documents in**\n**the host country****\n\n\n\n**Ability to replace documents in**\n**the host country****\n\n\n\n**Ability to replace documents in**\n**the host country****\n\n\n\n**Ability to replace documents in**\n**the host country****\n\n\n\nYes\n\n\nNo\n\n\nDo not know\n\n\n\n59%\n\n\n\nYes\n\n\nNo\n\n\nDo not know\n\n\n\n65%\n\n\n\nYes\n\n\nNo\n\n\nDo not know\n\n\n\n61%\n\n\n\nYes\n\n\nNo\n\n\nDo not know\n\n\n\n60%\n\n\n\n27%\n\n\n14%\n\n\n\n25%\n\n\n10%\n\n\n\n8%\n\n\n\n33%\n\n\n\n33%\n\n\n\n6%\n\n\n\n*Multiple responses were possible, so percentages can go over 100% when added\n** Due to rounding, some percent totals do not add up to 100%\n\n\n**In focus: Limited access to identity documentation for older persons**\nAs with other households, over time, the share of households comprised of older persons reporting\nmissing documentation has declined. Concerningly, however, the percentage of older persons who\nreported that they are unable to obtain documentation in host countries has continuously increased and\nremains comparatively high. For instance, in Q3 2023, among households comprised of older persons\nmissing documentation, 52% reported being unable to a replacement in host countries, a noticeable\nuptick from 32% recorded in Q4 2022.\n\n\n**COMPARISON BETWEEN HOUSEHOLDS COMPRISED OF OLDER PERSONS AND OTHERS**\n\n\n\nRespondents inability to replace missing\ndocumentation (households comprised of older\npersons)\n\n\n40%\n\n\n32%\n\n\n\nRespondents inability to replace missing\ndocumentation (households not comprised of older\npersons\n\n52%\n\n\n\n45%\n\n\n\n\n\nOct-Dec 2022 Jan-Mar 2023 Apr-Jun 2023 Jul-Sep 2023\n\n\n**10** **U N H C R R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E**, N O V E M B E R 2 0 2 3\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Internal passport",
+          "confidence": 0.948623538017273,
+          "start": 150,
+          "end": 152
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "host country",
+          "confidence": 0.5067474842071533,
+          "start": 198,
+          "end": 200
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "older persons",
+          "confidence": 0.6117960214614868,
+          "start": 344,
+          "end": 346
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Biometric passport",
+          "confidence": 0.5856690406799316,
+          "start": 158,
+          "end": 160
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "older persons",
+          "confidence": 0.7060760259628296,
+          "start": 344,
+          "end": 346
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/422e28e5-e6d2-49ba-b30d-4707170bc381/2023%2011%2013%20Ukraine%20regional%20protection%20Report%20No%203.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        9
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "DISPLACEMENT PATTERNS, PROTECTION RISKS AND NEEDS OF REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n#### **Access to accommodation7**\n\n\n\nThe majority of refugees surveyed reported living in\nrented accommodation. That said, since the onset\nof the crisis, many refugees have grappled with\nlimited access to sustainable housing,\npredominantly due to the short-term nature of\naccommodation support schemes.\n\n\nIn all four quarters, refugees cited the ending of free\naccommodation programs as the main reason for\nhaving to leave their current housing within three\nmonths. Comparatively, during Q4 2022 and the\nfirst two quarters of 2023, a higher proportion of\nrefugees in Romania reported having to leave their\naccommodation within three months. Delays with or\na lack of reimbursement for hosting families from\nthe government\u2019s assistance programme have\npurportedly led to the eviction of some refugees in\nBucharest. [8] More recently, in Q3 2023, the inability\n\n\n**ACCESS TO ACCOMMODATION**\n\n\n\nof refugees to afford the cost of their\naccommodation has become a more commonlyreported reason for needing to leave their current\nhousing, which may indicate that financial resources\nare becoming increasingly strained amongst the\nrefugee community.\n\n\nAccess to private housing markets remains\nchallenging for many, including due to high rental\ncosts and the preference of some landlords for long\nterm tenants. As UNHCR previously noted, the lack\nof access to sustainable accommodation has a\nmultifaceted impact on refugees and can hinder the\nenjoyment of their other rights, including education.\nFor instance, some refugees have reported an\ninability to enroll their children in host country\nschools because of repeated relocations from\ndifferent accommodation. [9]\n\n\n\n**OCT - DEC 2022** **JAN - MAR 2023** **APR - JUN 2023** **JUL - SEP 2023**\n\n\n\n**Current accomodation***\n\n\nRented\n\n\n\n58%\n\n\n\n**Current accomodation***\n\n\nRented\n\n\n\n59%\n\n\n\n**Current accomodation***\n\n\nRented\n\n\n\n64%\n\n\n\n**Current accomodation***\n\n\nRented\n\n\n\n60%\n\n\n\nCollective site\n\nHosted by relatives\n\nHosted by others\nHotel by\ngovernments\n\n\n\n13%\n\n12%\n\n9%\n\n8%\n\n\n\nCollective site\n\nHosted by relatives\n\nHosted by others\nHotel by\ngovernments\n\n\n\n12%\n\n10%\n\n10%\n\n8%\n\n\n\nCollective site\n\nHosted by relatives\n\nHosted by others\nHotel by\ngovernments\n\n\n\n11%\n\n10%\n\n8%\n\n7%\n\n\n\nCollective site\n\nHosted by relatives\n\nHosted by others\nHotel by\ngovernments\n\n\n\n15%\n\n10%\n\n9%\n\n7%\n\n\n\n**Length of stay in the current**\n**accommodation***\n\n\n\n**Length of stay in the current**\n**accommodation***\n\n\n\n**Length of stay in the current**\n**accommodatio ***\n\n\n\n**Length of stay in the current**\n**accommodation***\n\n\n\nNo limit\n\nDo not know\n\n3 - 12 months\n\n1 - 3 months\n\n< 1 month\n\n\n\n45%\n\n\n28%\n\n\n23%\n\n\n\nNo limit\n\nDo not know\n\n3 - 12 months\n\n1 - 3 months\n\n< 1 month\n\n\n\n22%\n\n\n24%\n\n\n\n45%\n\n\n\nNo limit\n\nDo not know\n\n3 - 12 months\n\n1 - 3 months\n\n< 1 month\n\n\n\n50%\n\n\n\nNo limit\n\nDo not know\n\n3 - 12 months\n\n1 - 3 months\n\n< 1 month\n\n\n\n55%\n\n\n\n21%\n\n\n21%\n\n\n\n19%\n\n\n20%\n\n\n\n3%\n\n\n2%\n\n\n\n5%\n\n\n3%\n\n\n\n4%\n\n\n4%\n\n\n\n3%\n\n\n2%\n\n\n\n**Main reasons for having to leave** **Main reasons for having to leave**\n**accommodation within 3 months**** **accommodation within 3 months****\n\n\n\n**Main reasons for having to leave**\n**accommodation within 3 months****\n\n\n\n**Main reasons for having to leave**\n**accommodation within 3 months****\n\n\n\nEnd of programme\n\nAsked to leave\n\nCannot afford\n\nMoving to another\n\nDo not know\n\n\n\n32%\n\n\n23%\n\n\n16%\n\n\n12%\n\n\n10%\n\n\n\nEnd of programme\n\nAsked to leave\n\nCannot afford\n\nMoving to another\n\nDo not know\n\n\n\n21%\n\n\n14%\n\n\n10%\n\n\n5%\n\n\n\n50%\n\n\n\nEnd of programme\n\nAsked to leave\n\nCannot afford\n\nMoving to another\n\nDo not know\n\n\n\n36%\n\n\n28%\n\n\n21%\n\n\n17%\n\n\n2%\n\n\n\nEnd of programme\n\nAsked to leave\n\nCannot afford\n\nMoving to another\n\nDo not know\n\n\n\n45%\n\n\n21%\n\n\n18%\n\n\n9%\n\n\n3%\n\n\n\n*Due to rounding, some percent totals do not add up to 100%\n** Multiple responses were possible, so percentages can go over 100% when added.\n\n\n7. On access to accommodation, to ensure that the findings are not affected by place of interview, interviews conducted in collective shelters have\nbeen excluded from the analysis.\n8. European Council on Refugees and Exiles (March 2023), Information Sheet \u2013 measures in response to the arrival of displaced people fleeing\nUkraine (March 2023) available at [https://ecre.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/ECRE-Update-November-2022-Implementation-of-the-TPD.pdf](https://ecre.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/ECRE-Update-November-2022-Implementation-of-the-TPD.pdf)\n9. [UNHCR Poland (2023), Protection Monitoring Brief #2 available at Document - Poland Protection Monitoring Brief #2 (August to November 2022)](https://data.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/99574)\n[(unhcr.org)](https://data.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/99574)\n\n\n**U N H C R R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E,** N O V E M B E R 2 0 2 3 11\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/422e28e5-e6d2-49ba-b30d-4707170bc381/2023%2011%2013%20Ukraine%20regional%20protection%20Report%20No%203.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        10
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**In focus: limited access to sustainable accommodation for households including older persons,**\n**persons with disabilities and person with serious medical conditions ***\n\nHouseholds comprised of older persons and households with at least one individual with a disability or a\nserious medical condition were more likely to report that they were living in collective shelters as\ncompared to other households. The percentage of households with at least one person with a disability\nreporting that they are living in collective sites has also increased from 13% Q4 2022 to 24% in Q3 2023.\nConversely, the percentage of other households reporting that they live in collective shelters has\nremained relatively stable over the same period.\n\nMoreover, a higher percentage of households with at least one person with a disability and households\nwith a serious medical condition reported having to leave their current accommodation within three\nmonths \u2013 mostly due to the ending of free accommodation programs and inability to afford their current\naccommodation. This highlights the precarity of their accommodation arrangements as well as the\ncompounded impact of the termination of free housing schemes on these vulnerable groups.\n\n\n            - On access to accommodation, to ensure that findings are not affected by place of interview, interviews conducted in collective shelters have been excluded from the analysis.\n\n\n**COMPARISON BETWEEN HOUSEHOLDS WITH AT LEAST ONE PERSON WITH A DISABILITY AND THOSE WITHOUT**\n\n\n\nHouseholds living in collective shelters (with at least\none household member with a disability)\n\n\n18%\n\n\n15%\n13%\n\n\n\nHouseholds living in collective shelters (without a\nperson with a disability)\n\n\n24%\n\n\n\nOct-Dec 2022 Jan-Mar 2023 Apr-Jun 2023 Jul-Sep 2023\n\n\n**12** **U N H C R R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E**, N O V E M B E R 2 0 2 3\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/422e28e5-e6d2-49ba-b30d-4707170bc381/2023%2011%2013%20Ukraine%20regional%20protection%20Report%20No%203.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        11
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "DISPLACEMENT PATTERNS, PROTECTION RISKS AND NEEDS OF REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n#### **Access to work**\n\n\n\nSeveral host countries have introduced measures to\nensure refugees\u2019 swift inclusion in labour markets\n\n- from organizing free language courses to\ninformation provision on available job opportunities.\nIn this context, a sizable and a stable portion of\nrefugees aged 18-59 reported being employed in\nhost countries or remotely. It is worth noting,\nhowever, that a substantial number of refugees\n(28% in Q3 2023) are not able to seek employment\ndue to their caring responsibilities.\n\n\n**ACCESS TO WORK**\n\n\n\nDuring all reporting periods, language barriers and\nlack of opportunities suited to one\u2019s skills were the\nmost frequently cited impediments to employment.\nA lack of access to childcare services is an\nadditional limiting factor: in all reporting periods,\nnearly half of households with young children (0-4\nyears old) reported lacking access to childcare\nservices, a challenge that often disproportionately\naffects the ability of single parents to secure and\nkeep jobs. In addition, the enrolment rates in public\nschools are still relatively low, [10] and almost 30% of\nheads of household in Romania and Moldova are\nfull-time caregivers. [11]\n\n\n\n**OCT - DEC 2022** **JAN - MAR 2023** **APR - JUN 2023** **JUL - SEP 2023**\n\n\n\n**Main activity in the host country**\n**(respondents between age**\n**18-59)***\nEmployed in host\n\n\n\n**Main activity in the host country**\n**(respondents between age**\n**18-59)***\n\n\n\n**Main activity in the host country**\n**(respondents between age**\n**18-59)***\n\n\n\n**Main activity in the host country**\n**(respondents between age**\n**18-59)***\n\n\n\nEmployed in host\n\ncountry\n\nUnemployed\n\n\nFamily\nresponsibilities\n\nEmployed remotely\n\n\nStudent\n\n\n\nUnemployed\n\n\nFamily\nresponsibilities\n\nEmployed remotely\n\n\nOther\n\n\n\n20%\n\n\n28%\n\n\n8%\n\n\n3%\n\n\n\n40%\n\n\n25%\n\n\n22%\n\n\n9%\n\n\n5%\n\n\n\nEmployed in host\n\ncountry\n\nUnemployed\n\n\nFamily\nresponsibilities\n\nEmployed remotely\n\n\nStudent\n\n\n\n44%\n\n\n23%\n\n\n22%\n\n\n8%\n\n\n4%\n\n\n\nEmployed in host\n\ncountry\n\nUnemployed\n\n\nFamily\nresponsibilities\n\nEmployed remotely\n\n\nStudent\n\n\n\n43%\n\n\n23%\n\n\n23%\n\n\n8%\n\n\n4%\n\n\n\ncountry\n\n\n\n42%\n\n\n\n**Main reasons of unemployment**\n**in host country (respondents**\n**between age 18-59)****\n\n\n\n**Main reasons of unemployment**\n**in host country (respondents**\n**between age 18-59)****\n\n\n\n**Main reasons of unemployment**\n**in host country (respondents**\n**between age 18-59)****\n\n\n\n**Main reasons of unemployment**\n**in host country (respondents**\n**between age 18-59)****\n\n\n\nLanguage barrier\n\n\nNo opportunities\n\n\nLack childcare\n\n\nEducation\nrecognition\n\nNot staying\n\n\n\n37%\n\n\n29%\n\n\n12%\n\n\n9%\n\n\n5%\n\n\n\nLanguage barrier\n\n\nNo opportunities\n\n\nLack childcare\n\n\nEducation\nrecognition\n\nNot staying\n\n\n\n36%\n\n\n31%\n\n\n\nLanguage barrier\n\n\nNo opportunities\n\n\nLack childcare\n\n\nEducation\nrecognition\n\nNot staying\n\n\n\n27%\n\n\n24%\n\n\n8%\n\n\n7%\n\n\n7%\n\n\n\nLanguage barrier\n\n\nNo opportunities\n\n\nLack childcare\n\n\nEducation\nrecognition\n\nNot staying\n\n\n\n33%\n\n\n27%\n\n\n11%\n\n\n7%\n\n\n7%\n\n\n\n11%\n\n\n9%\n\n\n5%\n\n\n\n*Due to rounding, some percent totals do not add up to 100%\n** Multiple responses were possible, so percentages can go over 100% when added.\n\n\n10. UNHCR, Education on hold: almost half of school-aged children from Ukraine missing out on formal education available at [https://www.unhcr.org/](https://www.unhcr.org/news/briefing-notes/education-hold-almost-half-school-aged-refugee-children-uk)\n[news/briefng-notes/education-hold-almost-half-school-aged-refugee-children-ukraine-missing-out](https://www.unhcr.org/news/briefing-notes/education-hold-almost-half-school-aged-refugee-children-uk)\n11. [UNHCR\u2019s fourth intentions survey Micro-data available at Survey of intentions and perspectives of refugees from Ukraine #4 - June 2023 (unhcr.](https://microdata.unhcr.org/index.php/catalog/934)\n[org)](https://microdata.unhcr.org/index.php/catalog/934)\n\n\n**U N H C R R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E,** N O V E M B E R 2 0 2 3 13\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/422e28e5-e6d2-49ba-b30d-4707170bc381/2023%2011%2013%20Ukraine%20regional%20protection%20Report%20No%203.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        12
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "DISPLACEMENT PATTERNS, PROTECTION RISKS AND NEEDS OF REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n\n**In focus: limited access to work for households including people with disabilities and persons with**\n**serious medical conditions.***\n\nIn comparison with others, a significantly smaller and reducing portion of refugees (aged 18-59) from\nhouseholds including individuals with a disability are employed . In Q3 2023, for example, only 18% of\nrespondents with at least one household member with a disability reported being employed,\nsubstantially lower than 54% reported by other respondents. Over time, there has also been a steep\ndrop in the share of respondents from households including individuals with a disability who reported\nbeing employed \u2013 down from 38% in Q4 2022 to 18% in Q3 2023.\n\n\nRefugees with disabled household member/s often experience heightened challenges finding work, as\nthey may need to stay home to care for their family member/s. This is partly because of the acute lack of\naccess to specialized services for persons with disabilities, including due to lack of early identification\nprocedures and delays with the recognition of disability status.* Furthermore, households with at least\none person with a disability routinely report the lack of special education for children, which further\nreduces their chances of employment.\n\n\nUNHCR has provided cash assistance to vulnerable sections of the refugee community in neighbouring\ncountries since the start of the full-scale invasion of Ukraine, providing bridging support whilst their\ninclusion in employment and national systems is pursued. Since the beginning of the crisis (and as at the\nend of October 2023), UNHCR has provided cash assistance to over 530,000 refugees, including\npersons with specific needs.\n\n\n       - UNHCR Poland (2022), Protection Monitoring Brief #1, avilable at https://data.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/97143; UNHCR (2022) the implementation of the Temporary Protection Directive: six months on available at Document - THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TEMPORARY PROTECTION DIRECTIVE\n\n       - SIX MONTHS ON (unhcr.org)\n\n\n**COMPARISON: LEVEL OF EMPLOYMENT BETWEEN RESPONDENTS WITH AT LEAST ONE HOUSEHOLD MEMBER WITH A**\n\n**DISABILITY AND THOSE WITHOUT**\n\n\n\nRespondents employed in host country and remotely\n(with at least one family member with a disability)\n\n\n\nRespondents employed in host country and remotely\n(without a family member with a disability)\n\n\n\n\n\n53% 53% 54%\n50%\n\n\n\nOct-Dec 2022 Jan-Mar 2023 Apr-Jun 2023 Jul-Sep 2023\n\n\n**14** **U N H C R R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E**, N O V E M B E R 2 0 2 3\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/422e28e5-e6d2-49ba-b30d-4707170bc381/2023%2011%2013%20Ukraine%20regional%20protection%20Report%20No%203.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        13
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "#### **Access to education**\n\n\n\nDuring the reporting periods, the share of\nhouseholds reporting at least one child of school\nage not enrolled in host country schools remained\nlargely unchanged, staying within the 29-37% range.\n\n\nAt the country level, however, Romania witnessed a\nsharp decline in the percentage of households who\nreported having children not enrolled in local\nschools. During Q3 2023, 39% of households in\nRomania reported having at least one child not\nregistered in local schools, a marked decline from\n70% recorded in Q4 2022. This drop may be\nassociated with the new government assistance\n\n\n**ACCESS TO EDUCATION**\n\n\n\nprogram, which made the enrollment of children in\nRomanian schools one of the eligibility criteria for\nreceiving assistance.\n\n\nIn all countries \u2013 and across all reporting periods\n\n- the primary reason cited for not registering\nchildren in host country schools is preference to\ncontinue online learning through the Ukrainian\ncurriculum. However, as focus group discussions\nrevealed, several factors contribute to refugees\u2019\npreference to enroll their children online, including\nnon-admission to host country schools, limited\nspace in schools, and language barriers. In\nRomania, for instance, language barriers remain an\nimportant obstacle to enrollment in local schools.\n\n\n\n**OCT - DEC 2022** **JAN - MAR 2023** **APR - JUN 2023** **JUL - SEP 2023**\n\n\n\nof Households reported having\nat least once child not\nregistered in host country\nschools\n\n\n**Reasons for not enrolling**\n**children in host country schools***\n\n\n\nof Households reported having\nat least once child not\nregistered in host country\nschools\n\n\n**Reasons for not enrolling**\n**children in host country schools***\n\n\n\nof Households reported having\nat least once child not\nregistered in host country\nschools\n\n\n**Reasons for not enrolling**\n**children in host country schools***\n\n\n\nof Households reported having\nat least once child not\nregistered in host country\nschools\n\n\n**Reasons for not enrolling**\n**children in host country schools***\n\n\n\nPrefer online\n\n\nLanguage barrier\n\n\nNo space\n\n\n\n82%\n\n\n\nPrefer online\n\n\nLanguage barrier\n\n\nNo space\n\n\n\n85%\n\n\n\nPrefer online\n\n\nLanguage barrier\n\n\nNo space\n\n\n\n81%\n\n\n\nPrefer online\n\n\nLanguage barrier\n\n\nNo space\n\n\n\n80%\n\n\n\n8%\n\n\n5%\n\n\n\n14%\n\n\n5%\n\n\n\n17%\n\n\n7%\n\n\n\n10%\n\n\n7%\n\n\n\n*Multiple responses were possible, so percentages can go over 100% when added.\n\n\n**U N H C R R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E,** N O V E M B E R 2 0 2 3 15\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Ukrainian\ncurriculum",
+          "confidence": 0.8748341798782349,
+          "start": 172,
+          "end": 174
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Romania",
+          "confidence": 0.7542202472686768,
+          "start": 213,
+          "end": 214
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.9200578331947327,
+          "start": 243,
+          "end": 244
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2022",
+          "confidence": 0.8135676383972168,
+          "start": 235,
+          "end": 236
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "refugees",
+          "confidence": 0.8837553858757019,
+          "start": 187,
+          "end": 188
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/422e28e5-e6d2-49ba-b30d-4707170bc381/2023%2011%2013%20Ukraine%20regional%20protection%20Report%20No%203.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        14
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "DISPLACEMENT PATTERNS, PROTECTION RISKS AND NEEDS OF REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n#### **Access to healthcare**\n\n\n\nDuring all four quarters under review, the proportion\nof refugees who reported difficulties accessing\nhealthcare remained high. In Q3 2023, 35% of\nrefugees surveyed reported experiencing difficulties\naccessing healthcare, a slight increase from 30%\nrecorded in Q4 2022, 28% recorded in Q1 2023,\nand 32% recorded in Q2 2023.\n\n\nIn all reporting periods, long waiting times and\ninability to afford medical fees (and associated fees)\nwere the most commonly reported barriers to\nhealthcare. However, the prevalence of these and\nother barriers to healthcare varied between\n\n\n**ACCESS TO HEALTH CARE**\n\n\n\ncountries. In Poland and Slovakia, for example, long\nwaiting time was the most reported impediment\nhindering refugees\u2019 access to healthcare, while in\nMoldova, inability to afford high medical and related\ncosts was the most commonly reported.\n\n\nDenial of access to healthcare \u2013 which often stems\nfrom lack of awareness among medical\nprofessionals about the extent of refugees\u2019 rights to\nhealthcare \u2013 also continues to inhibit refugees\u2019\naccess to medical care, particularly in Moldova and\nSlovakia.\n\n\n\n**OCT - DEC 2022** **JAN - MAR 2023** **APR - JUN 2023** **JUL - SEP 2023**\n\n\n\nof respondents reported\ndifficulties accessing\nhealthcare\n\n\n**Difficulties accessing healthcare***\n\n\n\nof respondents reported\ndifficulties accessing\nhealthcare\n\n\n**Difficulties accessing healthcare***\n\n\n\nof respondents reported\ndifficulties accessing\nhealthcare\n\n\n**Difficulties accessing healthcare***\n\n\n\nof respondents reported\ndifficulties accessing\nhealthcare\n\n\n**Difficulties accessing healthcare***\n\n\n\nLong wait\n\nLanguage barrier\n\nCannot afford\n\nDenied access\n\nLack of information\n\nNot available\n\nDocumentation\n\n\n\n70%\n\n\n\nLong wait\n\nLanguage barrier\n\nCannot afford\n\nDenied access\n\nLack of information\n\nNot available\n\nDocumentation\n\n\n\n68%\n\n\n\nLong wait\n\nLanguage barrier\n\nCannot afford\n\nDenied access\n\nLack of information\n\nNot available\n\nDocumentation\n\n\n\n72%\n\n\n\nLong wait\n\nLanguage barrier\n\nCannot afford\n\nDenied access\n\nLack of information\n\nNot available\n\nDocumentation\n\n\n\n84%\n\n\n\n30%\n\n\n24%\n\n\n13%\n\n\n11%\n\n\n9%\n\n\n3%\n\n\n\n31%\n\n\n21%\n\n\n17%\n\n\n15%\n\n\n11%\n\n\n5%\n\n\n\n27%\n\n\n26%\n\n\n14%\n\n\n12%\n\n\n10%\n\n\n5%\n\n\n\n27%\n\n\n23%\n\n\n20%\n\n\n15%\n\n\n9%\n\n\n9%\n\n\n\n*Multiple responses were possible, so percentages can go over 100% when added.\n\n\n**16** **U N H C R R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E**, N O V E M B E R 2 0 2 3\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/422e28e5-e6d2-49ba-b30d-4707170bc381/2023%2011%2013%20Ukraine%20regional%20protection%20Report%20No%203.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        15
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "DISPLACEMENT PATTERNS, PROTECTION RISKS AND NEEDS OF REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n\n**In focus: limited access to work for households including people with disabilities and persons with**\n**serious medical conditions.**\n\nDuring all reporting periods, a comparatively higher percentage of households with at least one person\nwith a disability or a serious medical condition reported experiencing difficulties accessing healthcare\nthan other households, mostly because of long waiting times as well as high medical and associated\nfees. For instance, in Q3 2023, 49% of households with at least one person with a disability struggled to\naccess healthcare \u2013 considerably higher than 32% recorded among other households in the same\nperiod.\n\n\n**ACCESS TO HEALTHCARE FOR HOUSEHOLDS WITH AT LEAST ONE PERSON WITH A SERIOUS MEDICAL CONDITIONS VS OTHER**\n\n**HOUSEHOLDS**\n\n\n\nRespondents who reported difficulties accessing\nhealthcare (with at least one person with a serious\nmedical condition)\n\n\n\nRespondents who reported difficulties accessing\nhealthcare (without a person with a serious medical\ncondition)\n\n\n\n47% 48%\n\n42%\n39%\n\n\nOct-Dec 2022 Jan-Mar 2023 Apr-Jun 2023 Jul-Sep 2023\n\n\n**U N H C R R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E,** N O V E M B E R 2 0 2 3 17\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Respondents who reported difficulties accessing\nhealthcare",
+          "confidence": 0.9237028360366821,
+          "start": 151,
+          "end": 157
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.8608795404434204,
+          "start": 196,
+          "end": 197
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2022",
+          "confidence": 0.621687114238739,
+          "start": 194,
+          "end": 195
+        },
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/422e28e5-e6d2-49ba-b30d-4707170bc381/2023%2011%2013%20Ukraine%20regional%20protection%20Report%20No%203.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        16
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "### DISPLACEMENT PATTERNS, PROTECTION RISKS AND NEEDS OF REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n##### Regional Protection Analysis #3 Trends analysis: Moldova, Poland, Romania, and Slovakia NOVEMBER 2023\n\n**UNHCR** Regional Bureau for Europe\n[rbeext@unhcr.org](mailto:rbeext%40unhcr.org?subject=)\n[www.unhcr.org/europe](https://www.unhcr.org/europe)\n\n\nFor further information visit the UNHCR Operational Data Portal for Ukraine:\n[https://data.unhcr.org/en/situations/ukraine](https://data.unhcr.org/en/situations/ukraine)\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/422e28e5-e6d2-49ba-b30d-4707170bc381/2023%2011%2013%20Ukraine%20regional%20protection%20Report%20No%203.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        17
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_41/raw/doc_41_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,1880 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "# **UNHCR Bangladesh 2023 Standardized** **Expanded Nutrition Survey (SENS)**\n### Final Executive Summary [1]\n\n1 Version updated 4 January 2024\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Expanded Nutrition Survey",
+          "confidence": 0.9795475602149963,
+          "start": 11,
+          "end": 14
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "Survey",
+          "confidence": 0.8838699460029602,
+          "start": 13,
+          "end": 14
+        },
+        "acronym": {
+          "text": "SENS",
+          "confidence": 0.9853618144989014,
+          "start": 15,
+          "end": 16
+        },
+        "author": {
+          "text": "UNHCR",
+          "confidence": 0.8685528039932251,
+          "start": 3,
+          "end": 4
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Bangladesh",
+          "confidence": 0.9942880272865295,
+          "start": 4,
+          "end": 5
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.9136406183242798,
+          "start": 5,
+          "end": 6
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.5738784670829773,
+          "start": 5,
+          "end": 6
+        },
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/20299a92-34a5-48b9-8247-c3caee793a44/2023_BAN_CXB%20SENS%20FINAL%20EXEC%20SUMMARY_4%20JAN%202024.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "2023 Standardized Expanded Nutrition\n\nSurvey (SENS)\n\n#### **SUMMARY OF THE 2023 SENS FINDINGS:**\n\n\n**Two Standardized Expanded Nutrition Survey (SENS) were conducted from 2** **[nd]** **-20** **[th]**\n\n\n**November 2023 with the objective to assess the general nutrition and health situation**\n\n\n**of Rohingya refugees living in Cox\u2019s Bazar district. The first survey, representing**\n\n\n**Kutupalong Mega Camps (31 unregistered camps), assessed 486 children 6-59**\n\n\n**months and 640 women of reproductive age from 554 households while the second**\n\n\n**survey, representing Nayapara and Kutupalong Registered Camps, assessed 346**\n\n\n**children 6-59 months and 727 women of reproductive age from 515 households.**\n\n\n**The 2023 SENS results indicate a deteriorating acute malnutrition situation of very**\n\n\n**high public health concern in Mega Camps (15.4%) and an unchanged situation of**\n\n\n**medium public health concern in Registered Camps (9.6%). The differences in the**\n\n\n**surveys can be attributed to varying in coping mechanisms among the old refugees**\n\n\n**and the post-2017 influx, IYCF indicators, and the incidence of diarrhoea at the time**\n\n\n**of the survey which was higher in the Mega camps as described below.**\n\n\n**In both surveys, chronic malnutrition (stunting) remained critical and unchanged**\n\n\n**(41.2%) compared to 2022 while anemia improved among refugees compared to 2021**\n\n\n**although still near critical levels among children under five (38.2%) and medium levels**\n\n\n**among women of reproductive age (24.1%).**\n\n\n**Breastfeeding practices among children under two years old in both surveys were**\n\n\n**acceptable but children did not consume adequate diets in terms of diversity or**\n\n\n**frequency during the complementary feeding period. Early initiation of breastfeeding**\n\n\n**was 93.3% and exclusive breastfeeding was 69.9%. Only 16.3% of children 6-23**\n\n\n**months consumed a minimum acceptable diet.**\n\n\n**Measles vaccinations (98.5%), vitamin A supplementation (90.6%), deworming**\n\n\n**(97.4%), and program coverage for BSFP (93.5%) were above targets for children**\n\n\n**under five. Program coverage for women of reproductive age was 89.3% for ANC and**\n\n\n**86.0% for BSFP which was slightly below the 90% UNHCR target.**\n\n\n**Household access to improved water sources (99.9%) and soap (95.8%) were**\n\n\n**sufficient although open defecation was practiced by more than two-thirds (69.9%) of**\n\n\n**the children under five. Access and utilization of long-lasting insecticide-treated nets**\n\n\n**(LLIN) were above or near targets across all camps and improved compared to**\n\n\n\n**previous survey rounds. 82.3% of households owned at least one LLIN while 70% of**\n\n\n**under-five children and 79.2% of pregnant women slept under a LLIN.**\n\n\n\n2\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "2023 Standardized Expanded Nutrition\n\nSurvey",
+          "confidence": 0.977820873260498,
+          "start": 0,
+          "end": 5
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "Survey",
+          "confidence": 0.9232921004295349,
+          "start": 4,
+          "end": 5
+        },
+        "acronym": {
+          "text": "SENS",
+          "confidence": 0.9985116124153137,
+          "start": 6,
+          "end": 7
+        },
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Cox\u2019s Bazar district",
+          "confidence": 0.8916584849357605,
+          "start": 83,
+          "end": 88
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.9995676875114441,
+          "start": 0,
+          "end": 1
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.9254372119903564,
+          "start": 0,
+          "end": 1
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "Rohingya refugees",
+          "confidence": 0.9688584208488464,
+          "start": 79,
+          "end": 81
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "primary"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "SENS results",
+          "confidence": 0.5042064785957336,
+          "start": 166,
+          "end": 168
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "survey",
+          "confidence": 0.7736214399337769,
+          "start": 263,
+          "end": 264
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Mega Camps",
+          "confidence": 0.8136909008026123,
+          "start": 185,
+          "end": 187
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.9864751696586609,
+          "start": 165,
+          "end": 166
+        },
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "IYCF indicators",
+          "confidence": 0.793457567691803,
+          "start": 246,
+          "end": 248
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "survey",
+          "confidence": 0.7303645014762878,
+          "start": 263,
+          "end": 264
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2022",
+          "confidence": 0.6938904523849487,
+          "start": 304,
+          "end": 305
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "old refugees",
+          "confidence": 0.5586333870887756,
+          "start": 235,
+          "end": 237
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "surveys",
+          "confidence": 0.912788450717926,
+          "start": 365,
+          "end": 366
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": {
+          "text": "Breastfeeding practices among children under two years old",
+          "confidence": 0.8372433185577393,
+          "start": 355,
+          "end": 363
+        },
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2022",
+          "confidence": 0.598412036895752,
+          "start": 304,
+          "end": 305
+        },
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "LLIN",
+          "confidence": 0.5640329122543335,
+          "start": 628,
+          "end": 629
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "survey",
+          "confidence": 0.7747167944908142,
+          "start": 615,
+          "end": 616
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "households",
+          "confidence": 0.8655959367752075,
+          "start": 623,
+          "end": 624
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/20299a92-34a5-48b9-8247-c3caee793a44/2023_BAN_CXB%20SENS%20FINAL%20EXEC%20SUMMARY_4%20JAN%202024.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "2023 Standardized Expanded Nutrition\n\nSurvey (SENS)\n\n#### Highlights of 2023 SENS in Cox\u2019s Bazar Rohingya Camps\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|Under-5 Wasting (by WHZ)<br>Very high public health significance<br>15.1%<br>Worsening Trend|Under-5 Stunting (by HAZ)<br>Very high public health significance<br>41.2%<br>No Change|\n|---|---|\n|**Under-5 Anemia**<br>**Medium public health significance**<br> <br> <br> <br> <br>**_Improving Trend_**<br>**38.2%**|**Women Anemia**<br>**Medium public health significance**<br> <br> <br> <br> <br>**_Trends N/A_**<br>**24.1%**|\n|**Exclusive Breastfeeding for infants <6**<br>**months**<br>**Under UNHCR Target >75%**<br> <br> <br> <br> <br>**_Improving Trend_ **<br>**69.9%**|**Minimum Acceptable Diet (MAD) for**<br>**children 6-23 months**<br>**No established target**<br> <br> <br> <br> <br>**_Worsening Trend_ **<br>**16.5%**|\n|**Under-5 Coverage of Blanket**<br>**Supplementary Feeding Programs**<br>**Above UNHCR Target >90%**<br> <br> <br> <br> <br>**_No Change_ **<br>**93.5%**|**% HH owning at least one treated**<br>**mosquito net (LLIN)**<br>**Above UNHCR Target >80%**<br> <br> <br> <br> <br>**_Improving Trend_ **<br>**82.3%**|\n|**Average amount of water collected/**<br>**person/ day in protected containers**<br>**Above UNHCR Target >20lppd**<br> <br> <br> <br> <br>**_No Change_**<br>**35.8 L**|**% Under-5 using a toilet/latrine**<br>**No established target**<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br>**_Trends N/A_**<br>**30.1%**|\n\n\n\n3\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "2023 Standardized Expanded Nutrition\n\nSurvey",
+          "confidence": 0.9615883231163025,
+          "start": 0,
+          "end": 5
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "Survey",
+          "confidence": 0.837212085723877,
+          "start": 4,
+          "end": 5
+        },
+        "acronym": {
+          "text": "SENS",
+          "confidence": 0.9994561076164246,
+          "start": 6,
+          "end": 7
+        },
+        "author": {
+          "text": "WHZ",
+          "confidence": 0.8561680912971497,
+          "start": 28,
+          "end": 29
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Cox\u2019s Bazar Rohingya Camps",
+          "confidence": 0.8861279487609863,
+          "start": 17,
+          "end": 23
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.9998512268066406,
+          "start": 0,
+          "end": 1
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.8489919900894165,
+          "start": 0,
+          "end": 1
+        },
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Average amount of water collected",
+          "confidence": 0.8225563168525696,
+          "start": 456,
+          "end": 461
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/20299a92-34a5-48b9-8247-c3caee793a44/2023_BAN_CXB%20SENS%20FINAL%20EXEC%20SUMMARY_4%20JAN%202024.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        2
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "2023 Standardized Expanded Nutrition\n\nSurvey (SENS)\n\n#### Background\n\nViolence in Rakhine State, Myanmar, which began on 25 August 2017, drove more than 700,000 Rohingyas\nacross the border to Cox\u2019s Bazar, Bangladesh [2] . Those fleeing the violence joined an estimated 200,000\npeople who had fled earlier waves of displacement. The pre-existing refugee camps (Kutupalong and\nNayapara Registered Camps and Kutupalong Mega Camps*) were expanded to host the new influx, which\nput an immense strain on the existing infrastructure and humanitarian services. UNHCR, on behalf of the\nNutrition Sector and partners, has been conducting annual nutrition surveys since the 2017 influx to monitor\nthe health and nutrition situation in the camps.\n\n\nThis report summarizes the 2023 SENS conducted from 2 [nd ] - 20 [th] November 2023 led by UNHCR in\ncollaboration with UNICEF and WFP; implemented by Concern Worldwide with support from Action Against\nHunger, Eco-Social Development Organization (ESDO), Gonoshasthaya Kendra (GK), Society for Health\nExtension and Development (SHED) and Social Assistance and Rehabilitation for the Physically Vulnerable\n(SARPV). Approvals were sought from the National Nutrition Services (NNS), the Refugee Relief and\nRepatriation Commissioner (RRRC), and the Civil Surgeons\u2019 office in Cox\u2019s Bazar. Technical support was\nprovided by the Nutrition Sector Assessment and Information Management Technical Working Group.\n\n#### Survey Objectives\n\nThe objectives of 2023 SENS were to determine the health and nutrition status of children aged 6-59 months\nand pregnant and lactating women 15-49 years. The main indicators collected included household\ndemography, anthropometry, health, and nutrition indicators of children and women of reproductive age 1549 years, morbidity, mosquito net coverage, and Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene (WASH). The findings of the\nsurvey will be used to inform nutrition programs through the designing of responsive interventions aimed at\nimproving the overall maternal, infant, and young child health and nutrition status for the refugees as well as\nadvocacy for humanitarian support to improve the food security situation that has shown to impact on the\nnutrition status among the Rohingya refugees.\n\n#### Methodology\n\nTwo cross-sectional nutrition surveys were conducted following the SMART methodology and UNHCR\nStandardized Expanded Nutrition Survey (SENS) guidelines. In Kutupalong Mega camps two-stage cluster\nsampling was applied and in Nayapara and Kutupalong registered camps, simple random sampling was\napplied. The surveys were conducted with a representative sample of 1069 households including\nanthropometric measurements for 832 children aged 6 to 59 months and 1323 women of reproductive age\n(15-49 years). A qualitative assessment was planned for December 2023 to triangulate the quantitative\nfindings from the SENS through small-scale key informant interviews and focused group discussions.\n\nTraining occurred for 5 days including theoretical sessions, anthropometric standardization, and a pilot test.\nDemography, anthropometry, IYCF, and child and women questionnaires were administered in all randomly\nselected households across, while WASH and mosquito net data were collected in every other household.\nTeams comprised five members including a team leader, two anthropometric measurers, a hemoglobin\nmeasurer, and an interviewer. Supervisors from partner organizations continually supervised the teams and\nperformed data quality checks. Community nutrition volunteers and block leaders guided the survey teams\nto the selected households during data collection.\n\n\n2 [https://www.unhcr.org/rohingya-emergency.html](https://www.unhcr.org/rohingya-emergency.html)\n\n*Mega camps refer to 31 camps in Ukhiya and Teknaf hosting the unregistered refugees\n\n4\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "2023 Standardized Expanded Nutrition\n\nSurvey",
+          "confidence": 0.6782119870185852,
+          "start": 0,
+          "end": 5
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "Survey",
+          "confidence": 0.8139458298683167,
+          "start": 4,
+          "end": 5
+        },
+        "acronym": {
+          "text": "SENS",
+          "confidence": 0.9272385835647583,
+          "start": 6,
+          "end": 7
+        },
+        "author": {
+          "text": "UNHCR",
+          "confidence": 0.8847458362579346,
+          "start": 104,
+          "end": 105
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.9913240671157837,
+          "start": 0,
+          "end": 1
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2017",
+          "confidence": 0.5869125127792358,
+          "start": 123,
+          "end": 124
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "Rohingyas",
+          "confidence": 0.9432728886604309,
+          "start": 33,
+          "end": 34
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "annual nutrition surveys",
+          "confidence": 0.5213505029678345,
+          "start": 118,
+          "end": 121
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "UNHCR",
+          "confidence": 0.8890769481658936,
+          "start": 104,
+          "end": 105
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.6026892066001892,
+          "start": 0,
+          "end": 1
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.5573800206184387,
+          "start": 0,
+          "end": 1
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "Rohingyas",
+          "confidence": 0.5961436629295349,
+          "start": 33,
+          "end": 34
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "SENS",
+          "confidence": 0.5414563417434692,
+          "start": 271,
+          "end": 272
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "Survey",
+          "confidence": 0.63897305727005,
+          "start": 265,
+          "end": 266
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.9568567276000977,
+          "start": 154,
+          "end": 155
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.9519132375717163,
+          "start": 154,
+          "end": 155
+        },
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "anthropometric measurements",
+          "confidence": 0.7332425117492676,
+          "start": 460,
+          "end": 462
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.8903636336326599,
+          "start": 488,
+          "end": 489
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.6436426043510437,
+          "start": 488,
+          "end": 489
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "households",
+          "confidence": 0.8297624588012695,
+          "start": 458,
+          "end": 459
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "survey teams",
+          "confidence": 0.7792267203330994,
+          "start": 600,
+          "end": 602
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "survey",
+          "confidence": 0.7814790606498718,
+          "start": 600,
+          "end": 601
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "selected households",
+          "confidence": 0.684350848197937,
+          "start": 604,
+          "end": 606
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/20299a92-34a5-48b9-8247-c3caee793a44/2023_BAN_CXB%20SENS%20FINAL%20EXEC%20SUMMARY_4%20JAN%202024.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        3
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "###### Figure 1: Geographic Representation of 2023 SENS Surveys in Cox\u2019s Bazar Rohingya Camps\n\nThe first SENS represented the 31\nunregistered camps from post 2017 influx\nin Ukhiya and Teknaf \u2192 results referred to\nas **\u201cMega Camps\u201d** in this report.\n\n\nThe second SENS represents Kutupalong\nand Nayapara Registered Camps \u2192\nresults referred to as **\u201cRegistered**\n**Camps\u201d** in this report.\n\n#### Interpretation of the Severity of Malnutrition\n\n\n**WHO/UNICEF CLASSIFICATION OF PUBLIC HEALTH SIGNIFICANCE FOR CHILDREN <5 YEARS OF AGE**\n\n|Indicators|Very High|High|Medium|Low|Very low|\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n|Wasting|\u2265 15|10 - < 15|5 - < 10|2.5 - < 5|< 2.5|\n|Stunting|\u2265 30|20 - < 30|10 - < 20|2.5 - < 10|< 2.5|\n|Anaemia*||>40|20-39%|5-19%||\n\n\n\n- _WHO Classification of Public Health Significance for all population groups_\n\n#### Key Findings for Children 6-59 months\n###### Acute Malnutrition by WHZ: The 2023 SENS results indicated a deteriorating global acute malnutrition\n\n(GAM) situation of very high public health concern (15.1%) and the worst situation reported since the 2017\ninflux (Figure 1).\n\n  - In Mega Camps, the GAM prevalence worsened to 15.4%, and in Registered Camps, the prevalence\nremained an unchanged situation of medium public health concern at 9.6% (Table 1).\n\n  - Severe acute malnutrition (SAM) of 2.0% is at the threshold of the acceptable target for UNHCR\nrefugee settings. At 2.1% in Mega Camps, it surpassed the threshold while the prevalence was lower\nin Registered Camps (0.9%).\n\n  - GAM was almost 1.5 times higher among children 6-23 months (19.0%) compared to children 24-59\nmonths (12.7%). There were no major differences in prevalence by sex (15.3% for females vs. 16.6%\nfor males).\n###### Acute Malnutrition by MUAC: MUAC based GAM prevalence (4.4%) was three times lower than GAM\n\nby WHZ. The majority of the low MUAC cases (90.1%; 30/33) were among children 6-23 months.\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/20299a92-34a5-48b9-8247-c3caee793a44/2023_BAN_CXB%20SENS%20FINAL%20EXEC%20SUMMARY_4%20JAN%202024.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        4
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "2023 Standardized Expanded Nutrition\n\nSurvey (SENS)\n\n###### Combined Acute Malnutrition (cGAM): The combined acute malnutrition prevalence (cGAM) by\n\nweight-for-height Z-score (WHZ) and/or low MUAC and/or edema is the most relevant indicator for caseload\nplanning for nutrition treatment programs [3] . Combined GAM showed an overall prevalence of 16.1%.\n###### Chronic Malnutrition (Stunting): The prevalence remained at 41.2%, which is considered critical and\n\nthere was no changed compared to the 2022 survey. Prevalence in mega camps was 41.3% and in\nRegistered Camps was 38.5%. Stunting increased with age, affecting 30.5% of children 6-23 months and\n47.6% of children 24-59 months.\n###### Anemia: The overall prevalence is 38.1%, improved among refugees in both survey contexts compared to\n\n2021 (50.3%) although still at or near the high threshold of 40%. Prevalence was 38.1% in Mega Camps and\n40.1% in Registered Camps. Children 6-23 months were more affected by anemia (56.2%) than children 2459 months (27.3%).\n###### Figure 2: Overall Weighted Wasting, Stunting, and Anemia Prevalence Trends (2017- 2023) among Children 6-59 months in Cox\u2019s Bazar Rohingya Camps (2023) [4] Table 1: Prevalence of Acute Malnutrition by WHZ, MUAC, and Combined Criteria among Children 6-59 months in Cox\u2019s Bazar Rohingya Camps (2023)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|Indicators|Col2|Mega Camps<br>(95% CI)|Registered Camps<br>(95% CI)|Overall<br>(Weighted)|\n|---|---|---|---|---|\n|Acute Malnutrition<br>by Weight for Height<br>Z-score (WHZ)<br>Very high if \u2265 15%<br>(WHO-UNICEF)|Combined GAM|**15.4%**<br>(11.9 - 19.5)|**9.6%**<br>(6.9 - 13.2)|**15.1%**|\n|Acute Malnutrition<br>by Weight for Height<br>Z-score (WHZ)<br>Very high if \u2265 15%<br>(WHO-UNICEF)|Combined MAM|**13.3%**<br>(10.2 - 17.1)|**8.7%**<br>(6.2 - 12.2)|**13.1%**|\n|Acute Malnutrition<br>by Weight for Height<br>Z-score (WHZ)<br>Very high if \u2265 15%<br>(WHO-UNICEF)|Combined SAM|**2.1%**<br>(1.1 - 3.9)|**0.9%**<br>(0.3 - 2.5)|**2.0%**|\n|Acute Malnutrition by<br>Mid Upper Arm<br>Circumference<br>(MUAC)|Combined GAM|**4.5%**<br>(2.8 -7.1)|**3.2%**<br>(1.8 -5.6)|**4.4%**|\n|Acute Malnutrition by<br>Mid Upper Arm<br>Circumference<br>(MUAC)|Combined MAM|**3.3%**<br>(1.9 -5.7)|**2.9%**<br>(1.3 - 5.1)|**3.3%**|\n|Acute Malnutrition by<br>Mid Upper Arm<br>Circumference<br>(MUAC)|Combined SAM|**1.2%**<br>(0.6 - 2.6)|**0.3%**<br>(0.1 - 1.6)|**1.2%**|\n|Acute Malnutrition by<br>combined criteria|Combined GAM|**16.3%**<br>(12.7 - 20.5)|**11.3%**<br>(8.4 - 15.0)|**16.1%**|\n|Acute Malnutrition by<br>combined criteria|Combined MAM5|**13.6%**|**10.1%**|**13.4%**|\n\n\n3 Outpatient therapeutic programs/ stabilization centers and targeted supplementary feeding programs.\n4 Weighting provides the overall nutrition situation across all the 33 camps.\n5 Based on manual calculation since ENA for SMART software only provides prevalence of combined GAM and combined SAM.\n\n\n\n6\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "2023 Standardized Expanded Nutrition\n\nSurvey",
+          "confidence": 0.8514745235443115,
+          "start": 0,
+          "end": 5
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "Survey",
+          "confidence": 0.6870793104171753,
+          "start": 4,
+          "end": 5
+        },
+        "acronym": {
+          "text": "SENS",
+          "confidence": 0.9736618399620056,
+          "start": 6,
+          "end": 7
+        },
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.995755672454834,
+          "start": 0,
+          "end": 1
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2022",
+          "confidence": 0.6342030167579651,
+          "start": 105,
+          "end": 106
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "refugees",
+          "confidence": 0.5845542550086975,
+          "start": 170,
+          "end": 171
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "primary"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "2022 survey",
+          "confidence": 0.5223726630210876,
+          "start": 105,
+          "end": 107
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "Survey",
+          "confidence": 0.5870567560195923,
+          "start": 4,
+          "end": 5
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2022",
+          "confidence": 0.8207101225852966,
+          "start": 105,
+          "end": 106
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "refugees",
+          "confidence": 0.772068977355957,
+          "start": 170,
+          "end": 171
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "survey",
+          "confidence": 0.6376050710678101,
+          "start": 173,
+          "end": 174
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Cox\u2019s Bazar Rohingya Camps",
+          "confidence": 0.5689278841018677,
+          "start": 268,
+          "end": 274
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.6870002150535583,
+          "start": 261,
+          "end": 262
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2021",
+          "confidence": 0.9028246402740479,
+          "start": 177,
+          "end": 178
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "refugees",
+          "confidence": 0.9245322942733765,
+          "start": 170,
+          "end": 171
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Cox\u2019s Bazar Rohingya Camps",
+          "confidence": 0.5463334321975708,
+          "start": 300,
+          "end": 306
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.8212835192680359,
+          "start": 307,
+          "end": 308
+        },
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "ENA",
+          "confidence": 0.5698580741882324,
+          "start": 987,
+          "end": 988
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/20299a92-34a5-48b9-8247-c3caee793a44/2023_BAN_CXB%20SENS%20FINAL%20EXEC%20SUMMARY_4%20JAN%202024.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        5
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "2023 Standardized Expanded Nutrition\n\nSurvey (SENS)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|(WHZ and/or MUAC<br>and /or edema)|Combined SAM|2.7%<br>(1.5 - 4.6)|1.2 %<br>(0.5 - 2.9)|2.6%|\n|---|---|---|---|---|\n|Acute Malnutrition by<br>Weight for Height Z-<br>score (WHZ) by Age<br>Group|6-23 months|**19.3%**<br>(13.3- 27.8)|**12.3%**<br>(4.8 \u2013 24.4)|**19.0%**|\n|Acute Malnutrition by<br>Weight for Height Z-<br>score (WHZ) by Age<br>Group|24-59 months|**12.9%**<br>(8.3- 19.5)|**8.2%**<br>(5.6 - 11.9)|**12.7%**|\n|Acute Malnutrition by<br>Weight for Height Z-<br>score (WHZ) by Sex|Male|**15.4%**<br>(11.9 - 19.5)|**12.4%**<br>(8.2 - 18.1)|**15.3%**|\n|Acute Malnutrition by<br>Weight for Height Z-<br>score (WHZ) by Sex|Female|**17.1%**<br>(12.1 - 23.6)|**6.9%**<br>(4.0 - 11.7)|**16.6%**|\n\n\n###### Table 2: Prevalence of Stunting (2023) among Children 6-59 months in Cox\u2019s Bazar\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|Rohingya Camps (2023)|Col2|Col3|Col4|\n|---|---|---|---|\n|**Indicators**|**Mega Camps**<br>**(95% CI)**|**Registered Camps**<br>**(95% CI)**|**Overall**<br>**(Weighted)**|\n|Stunting (HAZ),Very high if \u2265 30% (WHO-UNICEF)|Stunting (HAZ),Very high if \u2265 30% (WHO-UNICEF)|Stunting (HAZ),Very high if \u2265 30% (WHO-UNICEF)|Stunting (HAZ),Very high if \u2265 30% (WHO-UNICEF)|\n|6-59 months|**41.3%**<br>(37.0 - 45.8)|**38.5%**<br>(33.5 - 43.7)|**41.2%**|\n|6-23 months|**30.6%**<br>(27.0 - 34.4)|**29.2%**<br>(23.3 - 35.9)|**30.5%**|\n|24-59 months|**47.8%**<br>(41.3 - 54.5)|**42.9%**<br>(35.7 - 50.4)|**47.6%**|\n\n\n###### Concurrent forms of malnutrition: Two-thirds (66.7%) of children 6-59 months were affected by at least\n\none of the assessed forms of malnutrition (wasting, stunting, underweight, and anemia). A quarter of children\nwere affected by two or more forms of malnutrition with the most common burden being stunting and anemia\n(12%), primarily affecting children 6-23 months (Figure 3).\n###### Figure 3: Forms of Malnutrition among Children 6-59 months\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n7\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/20299a92-34a5-48b9-8247-c3caee793a44/2023_BAN_CXB%20SENS%20FINAL%20EXEC%20SUMMARY_4%20JAN%202024.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        6
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "2023 Standardized Expanded Nutrition\n\nSurvey (SENS)\n\n###### Table 3: Prevalence of Anemia (2023) among Children 6-59 months in Cox\u2019s Bazar\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|Rohingya Camps (2023)|Col2|Col3|Col4|\n|---|---|---|---|\n|**Indicators**|**Mega Camps**<br>**(95% CI)**|**Registered Camps**<br>**(95% CI)**|**Overall**<br>**(Weighted)**|\n|Total Anemia (<11.0 g/dL),High if \u2265 40% (WHO)|Total Anemia (<11.0 g/dL),High if \u2265 40% (WHO)|Total Anemia (<11.0 g/dL),High if \u2265 40% (WHO)|Total Anemia (<11.0 g/dL),High if \u2265 40% (WHO)|\n|6-59 months|**38.1%** <br>(32.2 - 44.3)|**40.1%** <br>(32.4 - 48.4)|**38.2%**|\n|6-23 months|**56.0%** <br>(46.9 - 64.7)|**60.0%** <br>(51.0 - 68.4)|**56.2%**|\n|24-59 months|**27.2%** <br>(22.3 - 32.7)|**30.1%** <br>(21.6 - 40.3)|**27.3%**|\n\n\n###### Health and Nutrition Program Coverage and 2 Weeks Period Prevalence of Diarrhea\n\nThe overall prevalence of diarrhea among children 6-59 months in the past two weeks was 21.6% and 31.5%\namong younger children aged 6-23 months with a lower prevalence in Registered Camps than Mega Camps\nin both age groups. Of children with diarrhea, 81.8% received ORS while 52.6% received zinc, with a higher\nproportion of proper management of diarrhea in Registered Camps than in Mega Camps. Diarrhea was higher\namong wasted children (28%) than non-wasted children (18%). Coverage of measles vaccination, vitamin A\nsupplementation, and blanket supplementary feeding programs were above targets for children under five\n(Table 4).\n\n###### Table 4: Health and Nutrition Program Indicators among Children 6-59 months in Cox\u2019s Bazar Rohingya Camps (2023)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|Indicator|Mega Camps<br>(95% CI)|Registered Camps<br>(95% CI)|Overall<br>(Weighted)|Targets|\n|---|---|---|---|---|\n|**Prevalence of diarrhea** (two-week<br>recall) among children 6-59 months|**22.0%**<br>(18.1 - 26.4)|**14.9%**<br>(11.3 - 19.3)|**21.6%**||\n|**Use of ORS during diarrhea** episode<br>among children 6-59 months|**81.3%**<br>(69.5 - 89.2)|**92.3%**<br>(82.1 - 96.9)|**81.8%**||\n|**Use of zinc during diarrhea** episode<br>among children 6-59 months|**51.4%**<br>(32.8 - 67.2)|**78.8%**<br>(56.4 91.5)|**52.6%**||\n|**Measles vaccination** with card or<br>recall among children 9-59 months|**97.2%**<br>(94.7 - 98.6)|**98.5%**<br>(96.1 - 99.4)|**97.3%**|\u2265 95%|\n|**Vitamin A supplementation** within<br>past 6 months with card or recall<br>among children 6-59 months|**91.8%**<br>(86.0 - 95.3)|**90.6%**<br>(82.9 - 95.0)|**91.7%**|\u2265 90%|\n|**Deworming coverage** results among<br>children 24-59 months|**94.7%**<br>(90.0 - 97.3)|**97.4%**<br>(94.2 - 98.9)|**94.8%**|>75%|\n|**Coverage of blanket supplementary feeding programs (BSFP)**:|**Coverage of blanket supplementary feeding programs (BSFP)**:|**Coverage of blanket supplementary feeding programs (BSFP)**:|**Coverage of blanket supplementary feeding programs (BSFP)**:|**Coverage of blanket supplementary feeding programs (BSFP)**:|\n|6-59 months|<br>Not Applicable|**96.9%**<br>(93.0 - 98.7)|**93.5%**|>90%|\n|6-23 months|<br>**92.3%**<br>(80.7 - 97.1)|Not Applicable|Not Applicable|Not Applicable|\n|Nutrition-sensitive e-voucher<br>coverage (24-59 months)|**94.4%**<br>(91.5 - 96.4)|**94.4%**<br>(91.5 - 96.4)|**94.4%**<br>(91.5 - 96.4)|**94.4%**<br>(91.5 - 96.4)|\n\n\n#### Infant and Young Child Feeding Practices among Children 0-23 months\n###### Exclusive Breastfeeding: Exclusive breastfeeding was 69.9% among infants in the camps an\n\nimprovement compared to the 2022 IYCF assessment (62.3%) but below the UNHCR target of 75%. For the\n30% of infants who did not exclusively breastfeed, non-breastmilk liquids were introduced in the first two days\nincluding sweetened tea, cocoa, and water mixed with honey/sugar/glucose (Figure 5). The main reason for\nintroducing non breastmilk liquids was family, cultural, social, and religious beliefs. Continued breastfeeding\nfor the first two years occurred at acceptable levels, but complementary feeding practices were suboptimal.\n\n\n8\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "2023 Standardized Expanded Nutrition\n\nSurvey",
+          "confidence": 0.7988453507423401,
+          "start": 0,
+          "end": 5
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": {
+          "text": "Prevalence of Anemia",
+          "confidence": 0.6068549156188965,
+          "start": 17,
+          "end": 20
+        },
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "Survey",
+          "confidence": 0.7968055605888367,
+          "start": 4,
+          "end": 5
+        },
+        "acronym": {
+          "text": "SENS",
+          "confidence": 0.9975453019142151,
+          "start": 6,
+          "end": 7
+        },
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Cox\u2019s Bazar",
+          "confidence": 0.9337679743766785,
+          "start": 28,
+          "end": 32
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.9997655749320984,
+          "start": 0,
+          "end": 1
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.9865907430648804,
+          "start": 0,
+          "end": 1
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "Children 6-59 months",
+          "confidence": 0.9315246939659119,
+          "start": 24,
+          "end": 27
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Total Anemia",
+          "confidence": 0.6851538419723511,
+          "start": 166,
+          "end": 168
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Health and Nutrition Program Indicators",
+          "confidence": 0.9491347074508667,
+          "start": 525,
+          "end": 530
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Cox\u2019s Bazar Rohingya Camps",
+          "confidence": 0.8529180884361267,
+          "start": 535,
+          "end": 541
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.5510228872299194,
+          "start": 542,
+          "end": 543
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.9540056586265564,
+          "start": 542,
+          "end": 543
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "Children 6-59 months",
+          "confidence": 0.9382299780845642,
+          "start": 531,
+          "end": 534
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Prevalence of diarrhea",
+          "confidence": 0.9871518611907959,
+          "start": 603,
+          "end": 606
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "children 6-59 months",
+          "confidence": 0.9859975576400757,
+          "start": 616,
+          "end": 619
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Deworming coverage",
+          "confidence": 0.6572775840759277,
+          "start": 972,
+          "end": 974
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "children 6-59 months",
+          "confidence": 0.5573504567146301,
+          "start": 910,
+          "end": 913
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Coverage of blanket supplementary feeding programs",
+          "confidence": 0.7159398198127747,
+          "start": 1058,
+          "end": 1064
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "IYCF assessment",
+          "confidence": 0.9226274490356445,
+          "start": 1334,
+          "end": 1336
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "UNHCR",
+          "confidence": 0.844060480594635,
+          "start": 1345,
+          "end": 1346
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "camps",
+          "confidence": 0.6385946869850159,
+          "start": 1327,
+          "end": 1328
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2022",
+          "confidence": 0.9922977089881897,
+          "start": 1333,
+          "end": 1334
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2022",
+          "confidence": 0.9603000283241272,
+          "start": 1333,
+          "end": 1334
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "infants",
+          "confidence": 0.8566739559173584,
+          "start": 1324,
+          "end": 1325
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/20299a92-34a5-48b9-8247-c3caee793a44/2023_BAN_CXB%20SENS%20FINAL%20EXEC%20SUMMARY_4%20JAN%202024.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        7
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "2023 Standardized Expanded Nutrition\n\nSurvey (SENS)\n\n###### Complementary Feeding: While 79.2% of young children were introduced to semisolid food at the\n\nappropriate time (6-8 months), the diversity and frequency of foods were insufficient and remained low\nthroughout the first two years. 26.9% of young children consumed a minimally diverse diet (at least 5 groups)\nand 47.3% of young children ate a minimum number of times for an overall minimum acceptable diet\nprevalence of 16.3%, which marks a reduction since the 2022 IYCF assessment. [6] Children consumed an\naverage of 3.7 food groups out of 8, primarily breastmilk and grains/roots/tubers, with some contribution from\nmeat/poultry/fish and vitamin A rich fruits and vegetables (Figure 4). Compared to 2022, fewer children\nconsumed legumes, eggs, dairy products, and non-vitamin A rich fruits and vegetables. More than half of\nchildren (54.5%) consumed unhealthy food and almost a third (28.8%) consumed sugar sweetened\nbeverages although these were reductions since 2022. Stunting prevalence concurrently rose rapidly\nthroughout the young child\u2019s life from 18.8% at age 6-8 months to 44.0% by age 21-23 months due in part to\ninsufficient complementary feeding practices (Figure 6).\n\n###### Table 5: IYCF Indicators among Children 0-23 months in Cox\u2019s Bazar Rohingya Camps\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|Indicator|Age<br>Range|Mega<br>Camps<br>(95% CI)|Registered<br>Camps<br>(95% CI)|Overall<br>(Weighted)|Targets|\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n|Early initiation of breastfeeding<br>(within 1 hour of birth)|0-23m|**93.2%**<br>(87.3 - 96.2)|**94.4%**<br>(89.2 - 97.2)|**93.3%**|\u2265 85%|\n|Child fed colostrum|0-23m|**93.2%**<br>(87.3 - 96.2)|**96.9%**<br>(90.0 - 99.1)|**93.4%**||\n|Child given other liquids than breast<br>milk in the first 2 days after delivery|0-23m|**26.9%**<br>(15.5 - 42.5)|**11.7%**<br>(6.9 - 18.9)|**26.2%**||\n|Exclusive breastfeeding under 6<br>months|0-5m|**70.0%**<br>(52.9 - 82.9)|**68.1%**<br>(45.8 - 84.3)|**69.9%**|\u2265 75%|\n|Continued breastfeeding at 1 year|12-15m|**97.2%**<br>(81.4 - 99.6)|**94.7%**<br>(63.9 - 99.5)|**97.1%**|>90%|\n|Continued breastfeeding at 2 years|20-23m|**63.6%**<br>(45.6 - 78.5)|**62.1%**<br>(30.5 - 85.9)|**63.5%**|>60%|\n|Bottle feeding|0-23m|**4.7%**<br>(2.2 - 9.8)|**8.0%**<br>(2.8 - 20.4)|**4.8%**|<5%|\n|Introduction of solid, semi-solid or soft<br>foods|6-8m|**78.9%**<br>(62.1 - 89.6)|**86.7%**<br>(64.8 - 95.8)|**79.2%**|>60%|\n|Consumption of iron-rich or iron-<br>fortified foods|6-23m|**89.1%**<br>(80.4 - 94.3)|**94.8%**<br>(87.4 - 98.4)|**89.4%**|>60%|\n|Consumption of eggs and/ or flesh<br>food|6-23m|**51.6%**<br>(34.2 - 68.7)|**56.0%**<br>(38.8 - 71.9)|**51.8%**||\n|Consumption of zero vegetables and<br>fruits|6-23m|**44.0%**<br>(34.2 - 54.4)|**40.5%**<br>(23.9 - 59.6)|**43.8%**||\n|Unhealthy food consumption|6-23m|**54.3%**<br>(43.0 - 65.3)|**59.5%**<br>(49.5 - 68.8)|**54.5%**||\n|Sugar sweetened beverage<br>consumption|6-23m|**29.3%**<br>(21.6 \u2013 38.4)|**17.2%**<br>(10.8 - 26.3)|**28.8%**||\n|Average daily number of food groups<br>consumed (out of 8)|6-23m|**3.7**|**4.0**|**3.7**|>5|\n|Minimum Diet Diversity (MDD)|6-23m|**26.6%**<br>(18.8 - 36.0)|**32.8%**<br>(19.1 - 50.1)|**26.9%**||\n|Minimum Meal Frequency (MMF)|6-23m|**47.3%**<br>(35.3 - 59.1)|**48.3%**<br>(30.5 - 66.5)|**47.3%**||\n|Minimum Acceptable Diet (MAD)|6-23m|**16.3%**<br>(8.0 - 30.2)|**20.7%**<br>(10.7 - 36.2)|**16.5%**||\n\n\n\n6 ACF/UNICEF. Infant and Young Child Feeding Survey. Rohingya Camps, Cox\u2019s Bazar, Bangladesh. October 2022.\n\n\n\n9\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/20299a92-34a5-48b9-8247-c3caee793a44/2023_BAN_CXB%20SENS%20FINAL%20EXEC%20SUMMARY_4%20JAN%202024.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        8
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "2023 Standardized Expanded Nutrition\n\nSurvey (SENS)\n\n###### Figure 4: Proportion of Children (0-23 months) that consumed the food group in the past 24 hours\n\n\n100.0%\n\n\n80.0%\n\n\n60.0%\n\n\n40.0%\n\n\n20.0%\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|Col1|Breastmilk|Grains,<br>roots and<br>tubers|Meat, fish,<br>poultry|Vit. A Rich<br>Fruits and<br>Vegetable<br>s|Other<br>Fruits and<br>Vegetable<br>s|Legumes,<br>nuts and<br>seeds|Eggs|Dairy<br>products|\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n|Mega Camps|85.9%|78.8%|48.9%|47.3%|19.6%|22.3%|8.7%|3.8%|\n|Registered Camps|83.6%|90.5%|44.0%|47.4%|25.0%|17.2%|29.3%|3.4%|\n|Overall|85.8%|79.3%|48.7%|47.3%|19.8%|22.1%|9.6%|3.8%|\n\n\nMega Camps Registered Camps Overall\n\n\n###### Figure 5: Patterns of infant feeding practices by age group (0-5 months)\n\n\n###### Figure 6: Stunting prevalence by age group (6-23 months)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n10\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "2023 Standardized Expanded Nutrition\n\nSurvey",
+          "confidence": 0.9624589085578918,
+          "start": 0,
+          "end": 5
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "Survey",
+          "confidence": 0.7255247235298157,
+          "start": 4,
+          "end": 5
+        },
+        "acronym": {
+          "text": "SENS",
+          "confidence": 0.999828577041626,
+          "start": 6,
+          "end": 7
+        },
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.9998950958251953,
+          "start": 0,
+          "end": 1
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.8453323245048523,
+          "start": 0,
+          "end": 1
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "Children",
+          "confidence": 0.5689049959182739,
+          "start": 19,
+          "end": 20
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Patterns of infant feeding practices",
+          "confidence": 0.6954942345619202,
+          "start": 315,
+          "end": 320
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Stunting prevalence",
+          "confidence": 0.5375332236289978,
+          "start": 336,
+          "end": 338
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/20299a92-34a5-48b9-8247-c3caee793a44/2023_BAN_CXB%20SENS%20FINAL%20EXEC%20SUMMARY_4%20JAN%202024.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        9
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "2023 Standardized Expanded Nutrition\n\nSurvey (SENS)\n\n###### Figure 7: IYCF Prevalence Trends among Children 0-23 months in Cox\u2019s Bazar Rohingya Camps (2019-2023) [7]\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n7 _Some IYCF indicators were not assessed in 2019(continued breastfeeding, MMF, MDD, MAD, etc)._\n\n\n\n11\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "2023 Standardized Expanded Nutrition\n\nSurvey",
+          "confidence": 0.7930849194526672,
+          "start": 0,
+          "end": 5
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "Survey",
+          "confidence": 0.7724955081939697,
+          "start": 4,
+          "end": 5
+        },
+        "acronym": {
+          "text": "SENS",
+          "confidence": 0.996842622756958,
+          "start": 6,
+          "end": 7
+        },
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Cox\u2019s Bazar Rohingya Camps",
+          "confidence": 0.8860450983047485,
+          "start": 25,
+          "end": 31
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.999688982963562,
+          "start": 0,
+          "end": 1
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2019-2023",
+          "confidence": 0.9455905556678772,
+          "start": 32,
+          "end": 33
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "Children 0-23 months",
+          "confidence": 0.9023420810699463,
+          "start": 21,
+          "end": 24
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/20299a92-34a5-48b9-8247-c3caee793a44/2023_BAN_CXB%20SENS%20FINAL%20EXEC%20SUMMARY_4%20JAN%202024.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        10
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "2023 Standardized Expanded Nutrition\n\nSurvey (SENS)\n\n#### Indicators for Women of Reproductive Age (15-49 years)\n\nAmong women of reproductive age, acute malnutrition was low (1.8%) and anemia was of medium public\nhealth significance (24.1%). Program coverage (antenatal care, iron folic acid supplementation and blanket\nsupplementary feeding) was high for pregnant and lactating women, a continuation of the trend for the past\nrounds of SENS although BSFP coverage was slightly below the 90% target in Mega Camps at 85.5% (Fig.8).\n\n###### Table 6: Health and Nutrition Indicators among Women of Reproductive Age in Cox\u2019s\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|Bazar Rohingya Camps (2023)|Col2|Col3|Col4|\n|---|---|---|---|\n|**Indicator**|**Mega Camps**<br>**(95% CI)**|**Registered Camps**<br>**(95% CI)**|**Overall**<br>**(Weighted)**|\n|Low MUAC (<210mm) among<br>women of reproductive age|**1.8%**<br>(0.9 - 3.3)|**1.3%**<br>(0.7 - 2.4)|**1.8%**|\n|Low MUAC (<210mm) among PLW<br>with child<6 months|**1.8%**<br>(0.4 - 7.0)8|**0.0%**<br>(0.0 - 0.0)|**1.8%**|\n|Mean women\u2019s MUAC (mm)<br>|**265.2**<br>(259.8 - 270.5)|**282.7**<br>(277.9 - 287.5)|**266.0**|\n|Total Anemia (<12.0 g/dL)|**24.1%**<br>(21.6 - 26.9)|**24.5%**<br>(18.2 - 32.1)|**24.1%**|\n|Antenatal care coverage (pregnant)|**89.1%**<br>(77.4 - 95.1)|**94.7%**<br>(78.6 - 98.9)|**89.3%**|\n|Iron folic acid supplementation<br>coverage (pregnant)|**93.8%**<br>(80.3 - 98.2)|**92.1%**<br>(80.3 - 97.1)|**93.7%**|\n|Blanket supplementary<br>feeding coverage (pregnant<br>and lactating)<br>_Target >90%_|**85.5%**<br>(76.9 - 91.2)|**96.2%**<br>(87.8 - 98.9)|**86.0%**|\n\n\n###### Figure 8: Prevalence Trends for Antenatal Care Coverage and Iron Folic Acid supplementation among Pregnant Women in Cox\u2019s Bazar Rohingya Camps (2019-2023)\n\n100.0%\n\n\n80.0%\n\n\n60.0%\n\n\n40.0%\n\n\n20.0%\n\n|Col1|ANC IFA supplementation<br>Kutupalong Mega Camps|Col3|ANC IFA supplementation<br>Registered Camps|Col5|\n|---|---|---|---|---|\n|Sept/Oct-19|34.6%|43.3%|70.3%|71.0%|\n|Oct/Nov-21|75.0%|62.5%|82.1%|79.9%|\n|Nov/Dec-22|93.4%|85.5%|80.6%|78.7%|\n|Nov-23|89.1%|93.8%|94.7%|92.1%|\n\n\n\nSept/Oct-19 Oct/Nov-21 Nov/Dec-22 Nov-23\n\n\n12\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "2023 Standardized Expanded Nutrition\n\nSurvey",
+          "confidence": 0.7679057121276855,
+          "start": 0,
+          "end": 5
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": {
+          "text": "Indicators for Women of Reproductive Age",
+          "confidence": 0.8326777219772339,
+          "start": 12,
+          "end": 18
+        },
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "Survey",
+          "confidence": 0.7907801270484924,
+          "start": 4,
+          "end": 5
+        },
+        "acronym": {
+          "text": "SENS",
+          "confidence": 0.998120129108429,
+          "start": 6,
+          "end": 7
+        },
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.9991158843040466,
+          "start": 0,
+          "end": 1
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.8508965373039246,
+          "start": 0,
+          "end": 1
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "Women of Reproductive Age",
+          "confidence": 0.7532035708427429,
+          "start": 14,
+          "end": 18
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "primary"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Low MUAC",
+          "confidence": 0.5841214060783386,
+          "start": 226,
+          "end": 228
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "women of reproductive age",
+          "confidence": 0.673185408115387,
+          "start": 236,
+          "end": 240
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Mean women\u2019s MUAC",
+          "confidence": 0.8204215168952942,
+          "start": 363,
+          "end": 368
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Total Anemia",
+          "confidence": 0.702052891254425,
+          "start": 424,
+          "end": 426
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Antenatal care coverage",
+          "confidence": 0.65913325548172,
+          "start": 488,
+          "end": 491
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "pregnant",
+          "confidence": 0.5493194460868835,
+          "start": 492,
+          "end": 493
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Registered Camps",
+          "confidence": 0.8049823641777039,
+          "start": 760,
+          "end": 762
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "Sept/Oct-19",
+          "confidence": 0.9329203367233276,
+          "start": 787,
+          "end": 790
+        },
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/20299a92-34a5-48b9-8247-c3caee793a44/2023_BAN_CXB%20SENS%20FINAL%20EXEC%20SUMMARY_4%20JAN%202024.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        11
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "2023 Standardized Expanded Nutrition\n\nSurvey (SENS)\n\n#### Household Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH)\n###### Access to Protected Water: Rohingya refugee households had universal access to protected or treated\n\nwater sources (public taps, handpumps/ boreholes, and piped household connections). Most households\n(62.0%) collected their water from a piped connection (Figure 9). Refugees collected an average of 35.8 liters\nof water per person per day in protected containers which is above the UNHCR standard of 20 liters per\nperson per day. Refugees in registered camps accessed more water than those in Mega Camps (46.1 vs.\n35.4 liters per person).\n###### Access to Soap: More than 95% of households in both camps had access to soap. Access to Latrines: More than 99% of households in both camps used a toilet but the proportion of children\n\nunder 5 using a toilet was lower (30.1%). Two-thirds of children (67.6%) practiced open defecation which is\na vector for the spread of infectious disease and is an increase from the 58% reported in the 2022 WASH\nKAP survey (Figure 10). [9]\n\n###### Table 7: WASH Indicators among Households in Cox\u2019s Bazar Rohingya Camps (2023)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|Indicator|Mega Camps<br>(95% CI)|Registered<br>Camps<br>(95% CI)|Overall<br>(Weighted)|\n|---|---|---|---|\n|Proportion of households collecting drinking water<br>from protected/ treated sources<br>_Target: >95%_|**100.0%**<br>(100.0 - 100.0)|**98.8%**<br>(91.2 - 99.9)|**99.9%**|\n|Average water collected per person/day<br>(protected containers)_Target: \u2265 20 L/ person/ day_|**35.4 L**|**46.1 L**|**35.8 L**|\n|\u2265 20 L/ person/ day|**60.3%**<br>(41.8 - 73.1)|**67.4%**<br>(50.6 - 80.7)|**60.6%**|\n|15 - <20 L/ person/ day|**8.5%**<br>(6.3 - 11.2)|**8.8%**<br>(4.5 - 8.8)|**8.5%**|\n|<15 L/ person/ day|**31.2%**<br>(20.9 - 43.7)|**23.8%**<br>(14.8 - 35.8)|**30.9%**|\n|Proportion of households using a latrine/ toilet|**99.0%**<br>(95.7 - 99.8)|**100.0%**<br>(100.0 - 100.0)|**99.0%**|\n|Proportion of children under 5 using a latrine/<br>toilet|**29.9%**<br>(23.7 - 37.0)|**34.3%**<br>(25.4 - 44.4)|**30.1%**|\n|Proportion of households with access to soap|**95.9%**<br>(79.2 - 99.3)|**93.8%**<br>(82.1 - 98.1)|**95.8%**|\n\n\n###### Figure 9: Primary Household Water Source (%)\n\n\n###### Figure 10: Where do under-five children defecate? (%)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n9 _UNHCR/REACH. WASH and Shelter Third Party Monitoring. WASH Household KAP Survey. Rohingya Camps, Cox\u2019s Bazar, Bangladesh. 2022._\n\n13\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "2023 Standardized Expanded Nutrition\n\nSurvey",
+          "confidence": 0.7945650219917297,
+          "start": 0,
+          "end": 5
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "Survey",
+          "confidence": 0.713875949382782,
+          "start": 4,
+          "end": 5
+        },
+        "acronym": {
+          "text": "SENS",
+          "confidence": 0.9904788732528687,
+          "start": 6,
+          "end": 7
+        },
+        "author": {
+          "text": "UNHCR",
+          "confidence": 0.6660632491111755,
+          "start": 100,
+          "end": 101
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.9994679093360901,
+          "start": 0,
+          "end": 1
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.8601587414741516,
+          "start": 0,
+          "end": 1
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "Rohingya refugee households",
+          "confidence": 0.8523882627487183,
+          "start": 32,
+          "end": 35
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "2022 WASH\nKAP survey",
+          "confidence": 0.7266694903373718,
+          "start": 228,
+          "end": 232
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "survey",
+          "confidence": 0.9052908420562744,
+          "start": 231,
+          "end": 232
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2022",
+          "confidence": 0.9998003840446472,
+          "start": 228,
+          "end": 229
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2022",
+          "confidence": 0.9848360419273376,
+          "start": 228,
+          "end": 229
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "households",
+          "confidence": 0.909502387046814,
+          "start": 151,
+          "end": 152
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "WASH Indicators among Households",
+          "confidence": 0.5324093103408813,
+          "start": 249,
+          "end": 253
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Cox\u2019s Bazar Rohingya Camps",
+          "confidence": 0.7376765012741089,
+          "start": 254,
+          "end": 260
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.5465827584266663,
+          "start": 261,
+          "end": 262
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.9144246578216553,
+          "start": 261,
+          "end": 262
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "households",
+          "confidence": 0.9489383101463318,
+          "start": 151,
+          "end": 152
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Average water collected per person/day",
+          "confidence": 0.6662206053733826,
+          "start": 393,
+          "end": 400
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "households",
+          "confidence": 0.9394514560699463,
+          "start": 319,
+          "end": 320
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Proportion of households using a latrine/ toilet",
+          "confidence": 0.6400406956672668,
+          "start": 627,
+          "end": 635
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "households",
+          "confidence": 0.8331294655799866,
+          "start": 629,
+          "end": 630
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/20299a92-34a5-48b9-8247-c3caee793a44/2023_BAN_CXB%20SENS%20FINAL%20EXEC%20SUMMARY_4%20JAN%202024.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        12
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "2023 Standardized Expanded Nutrition\n\nSurvey (SENS)\n\n#### Indicators for Mosquito Net Access and Utilization\n\nOwnership of long-lasting insecticide treated nets (LLINs) was 82.3% across all camps which was above the\nUNHCR target of 80% for the first time (Figure 11). In Rohingya camps, 3.3 people shared a LLIN compared\nto the UNHCR goal of 2 persons per LLIN). About two-thirds of household members (67.6%) slept under an\nLLIN with higher utilization among at-risk populations of children under five (70.0%) and pregnant women\n(79.2%). Under-five children and pregnant women are protected from dengue transmission when all age\ngroups are covered by LLIN.\n\n###### Table 8: Mosquito Net Access and Utilization in Cox\u2019s Bazar Rohingya Camps (2023)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|Indicator|Mega Camps<br>(95% CI)|Registered<br>Camps<br>(95% CI)|Overall<br>(Weighted)|Targets|\n|---|---|---|---|---|\n|Proportion of households owning at<br>least one mosquito net (any type)|**100.0%**<br>(100.0 - 100.0)|**99.6%**<br>(96.8 - 100.0)|**99.9%**<br>||\n|Proportion of households owning at<br>least one treated LLIN|**82.4%**<br>(64.9 - 92.2)|**79.6%**<br>(70.4 - 86.5)|**82.3%**<br>|Target of ><br>80%|\n|Average number of persons per<br>LLIN|**3.3**|**3.1**|**3.3**|2 persons/<br>LLIN|\n|Proportion of household members who slept under an LLIN:|Proportion of household members who slept under an LLIN:|Proportion of household members who slept under an LLIN:|Proportion of household members who slept under an LLIN:|Proportion of household members who slept under an LLIN:|\n|All ages|**67.6%**|**67.2%**|**67.6%**||\n|Children 0-59 months|**69.9%**|**71.2%**|**70.0%**||\n|Pregnant women|**80.6%**|**48.0%**|**79.2%**||\n\n###### Figure 11: Proportion of Households with at least one Mosquito Net, (2021-2023)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n14\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "2023 Standardized Expanded Nutrition\n\nSurvey",
+          "confidence": 0.701252281665802,
+          "start": 0,
+          "end": 5
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": {
+          "text": "Indicators for Mosquito Net Access and Utilization",
+          "confidence": 0.8497281670570374,
+          "start": 12,
+          "end": 19
+        },
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "Survey",
+          "confidence": 0.7502763867378235,
+          "start": 4,
+          "end": 5
+        },
+        "acronym": {
+          "text": "SENS",
+          "confidence": 0.99700528383255,
+          "start": 6,
+          "end": 7
+        },
+        "author": {
+          "text": "UNHCR",
+          "confidence": 0.873908281326294,
+          "start": 40,
+          "end": 41
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Rohingya camps",
+          "confidence": 0.5213412046432495,
+          "start": 55,
+          "end": 57
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.9987803101539612,
+          "start": 0,
+          "end": 1
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.8453288078308105,
+          "start": 0,
+          "end": 1
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "household members",
+          "confidence": 0.7812094688415527,
+          "start": 80,
+          "end": 82
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Indicator",
+          "confidence": 0.503995954990387,
+          "start": 162,
+          "end": 163
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.8781788945198059,
+          "start": 159,
+          "end": 160
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "households",
+          "confidence": 0.9309313297271729,
+          "start": 223,
+          "end": 224
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/20299a92-34a5-48b9-8247-c3caee793a44/2023_BAN_CXB%20SENS%20FINAL%20EXEC%20SUMMARY_4%20JAN%202024.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        13
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "2023 Standardized Expanded Nutrition\n\nSurvey (SENS)\n\n\n#### Discussion / Focus Areas\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|Acute<br>Malnutrition<br>(Wasting)|\u2022 In Mega Camps, there was a deteriorating acute malnutrition situation of very high<br>public health concern (15.4%) and the highest prevalence since the 2017 Influx. In<br>Registered Camps, wasting was 9.6% and of medium public health concern.<br>\u2022 Focus on the identification and treatment of acute illnesses among malnourished<br>children enrolled in nutrition programs to improve recovery outcomes.<br>\u2022 Enhance the effectiveness of the GMP, ensuring regular follow-ups for children,<br>particularly those exhibiting static weight or weight loss. Strengthen the referral system<br>between BSFP, TSFP, and OTP including the use of accurate anthropometric<br>equipment, automatic look up charts, and trained staff. Most children who missed<br>enrolment in treatment programs were solely identified by low WHZ. Untreated cases<br>of wasting contribute to higher prevalences of acute malnutrition and stunting.<br>\u2022 Consider expansion of community based MUAC screening criteria to identify missed<br>children with low WHZ. Screening criteria of MUAC <140mm could identify up to 80%<br>of the low WHZ acute malnutrition cases with confirmatory anthropometric<br>measurements at nutrition centers or screening by WHZ could be done to avoid false<br>positives from expanded MUAC.<br>\u2022 Conduct a coverage survey to determine whether the proportion of unenrolled acutely<br>malnourished children reflects the accurate camp situation.<br>\u2022 Conduct a follow-up nutrition assessment in 6 months in Mega Camps to determine<br>whether acute malnutrition is still above the very high prevalence threshold and whether<br>program changes are having an impact on the reduction of malnutrition.<br>\u2022 Determine reasons for the difference in GAM between Mega vs Registered Camps<br>through data triangulation with the qualitative assessment and secondary data sources<br>(e.g., food security data, IYCF assessments, coverage assessments).|\n|---|---|\n|**Chronic**<br>**Malnutrition**<br>**(Stunting)**|\u2022 <br>Stunting remained the most persistent and prevalent form of malnutrition affecting<br>refugee children in 2023 with little progress made on this indicator since 2017. Age<br>group trends in stunting suggest inadequate nutrient intake during the complementary<br>feeding period from 6-23 months.<br>\u2022 <br>Assess and improve the intra-household utilization of supplementary food products<br>provided for children 6-23 months and E-voucher top up for children 24-59 months and<br>any differences in outcomes for wasting and stunting between younger and older<br>children since they are enrolled in different modalities.<br>\u2022 <br>Review and analyze the drivers of stunting in the Rohingya context to develop clear<br>recommendations, actions, and targets for reduction.|\n|**IYCF**|\u2022 <br>The average under two child breastfeeds and eats 2.5 times per day and consumes<br>food from the grains/roots and tubers group with occasional contribution from meat, fish,<br>and poultry group and vitamin A rich fruits and vegetables group. To achieve MAD,<br>children need to eat at least one more time per day and from two more food groups<br>(e.g., eggs, dairy, legumes, other fruits, and vegetables). 43.8% of children did not<br>consume fruits or vegetables while 54.5% consumed unhealthy food and 28.8%<br>consumed sugar sweetened beverages.<br>\u2022 <br>Continue promoting early initiation and improving exclusive breastfeeding by<br>addressing the introduction of non-breastmilk liquids in the first few days after birth.<br>\u2022 <br>Emphasize improved complementary feeding practices including increased diversity<br>and frequency. The focus of the complementary feeding initiation_(mukhe bhaat)_ <br>ceremony could be shifted to more nutrient dense foods such as WSB+ with added<br>ingredients and other types of rice-based porridges that include multiple food groups.<br>\u2022 <br>Partners could set joint targets for standard IYCF indicators like MDD, MMF, MAD,<br>consumption of egg/flesh foods, etc. as there are no currently established targets but<br>the prevalences are low.|\n|**Anaemia**|\u2022 <br>Anemia, as a marker of access to micronutrients (vitamins and minerals), is of medium<br>public health significance among women and children (although at the high end of the<br>range in children).|\n\n\n\n15\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "2023 Standardized Expanded Nutrition\n\nSurvey",
+          "confidence": 0.7316946983337402,
+          "start": 0,
+          "end": 5
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": {
+          "text": "identification and treatment of acute illnesses",
+          "confidence": 0.7522459030151367,
+          "start": 92,
+          "end": 98
+        },
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "Survey",
+          "confidence": 0.8451839685440063,
+          "start": 4,
+          "end": 5
+        },
+        "acronym": {
+          "text": "SENS",
+          "confidence": 0.9939361214637756,
+          "start": 6,
+          "end": 7
+        },
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Mega Camps",
+          "confidence": 0.5210976600646973,
+          "start": 31,
+          "end": 33
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.9994322657585144,
+          "start": 0,
+          "end": 1
+        },
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "coverage survey",
+          "confidence": 0.5914343595504761,
+          "start": 290,
+          "end": 292
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "follow-up nutrition assessment",
+          "confidence": 0.6357355117797852,
+          "start": 317,
+          "end": 320
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Mega Camps",
+          "confidence": 0.7759875059127808,
+          "start": 324,
+          "end": 326
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "refugee children",
+          "confidence": 0.725422739982605,
+          "start": 462,
+          "end": 464
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "food security data",
+          "confidence": 0.7250136733055115,
+          "start": 398,
+          "end": 401
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "refugee children",
+          "confidence": 0.7996793389320374,
+          "start": 462,
+          "end": 464
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "IYCF assessments",
+          "confidence": 0.7795951962471008,
+          "start": 402,
+          "end": 404
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2017",
+          "confidence": 0.5025398135185242,
+          "start": 474,
+          "end": 475
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "refugee children",
+          "confidence": 0.8723981380462646,
+          "start": 462,
+          "end": 464
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "indicator",
+          "confidence": 0.7725580930709839,
+          "start": 472,
+          "end": 473
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2017",
+          "confidence": 0.9439171552658081,
+          "start": 474,
+          "end": 475
+        },
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "refugee children",
+          "confidence": 0.9024325013160706,
+          "start": 462,
+          "end": 464
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "IYCF indicators",
+          "confidence": 0.9511843323707581,
+          "start": 853,
+          "end": 855
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/20299a92-34a5-48b9-8247-c3caee793a44/2023_BAN_CXB%20SENS%20FINAL%20EXEC%20SUMMARY_4%20JAN%202024.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        14
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "2023 Standardized Expanded Nutrition\n\nSurvey (SENS)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|Col1|\u2022 Prevalence of anemia by child\u2019s age suggests poor iron stores were laid down among<br>pregnant women. With near universal enrolment in ANC/BSFP and reported<br>consumption of iron folic acid by pregnant women, high BSFP coverage among PLWs<br>and children 6-23 months, and high vitamin A supplementation deworming coverage<br>among children, other factors may be influencing anemia in the Rohingya camps such<br>as low consumption of heme iron and co-factors like the retinol form of vitamin A,<br>magnesium, and copper.<br>\u2022 Conduct an anemia causal study to determine the anemia etiology in the camp setting.<br>\u2022 Explore various avenues to improve micro-nutrient intake through the introduction of<br>other sources like kitchen gardens, increased access to animal source foods,<br>micronutrient powders (MNPs), and/or rice fortification.|\n|---|---|\n|**Food**<br>**Security**|\u2022 <br>Ration cuts from USD12 to USD8 per person occurred in 2023. As of the November<br>2023 post distribution monitoring (PDM), 90% of the refugee population did not have<br>adequate food consumption, a 12% increase since May 2023. Analysis done both by<br>the nutrition sector as well as the PDMs have shown an associated worsening of both<br>the food security and nutrition situation.10 <br>\u2022 <br>Low diet diversity among 6-23 months old children indicates issues with food access<br>availability or utilization and is associated with overall poor household diet diversity and<br>low diet diversity among women (MDD-W). Women\u2019s nutrition status impacts child<br>anemia and stunting prevalence. By 6 months of age, a sizable proportion of children<br>are already stunted (18.8%) and anemic (72.7%).<br>\u2022 <br>Assess women\u2019s diet diversity in the next SENS or food security monitoring. The limited<br>data that exist on the diets of women and adolescent girls in refugee contexts suggests<br>that their diets are poor and that this contributes to malnutrition in their children. The<br>high nutrient needs of adolescent girls and PLW constitute a significant portion of the<br>household cost of a nutritious diet. Increased focus should be placed on SBCC<br>campaigns targeted towards decision makers of household resources to allocate<br>appropriate resources for adolescent girls\u2019 nutrient requirements as a time of life that<br>may allow for catch up and as future mothers.|\n|**Health**|\u2022 <br>Maintain the high coverage of measles vaccination, vitamin A supplementation, and<br>deworming campaigns.<br>\u2022 <br>Work with health sector partners to address the increased prevalence of diarrhea and<br>treatment with ORS and zinc.<br>\u2022 <br>Maintain high coverage and utilization of long-lasting insecticide treated nets through<br>regular distribution, and sensitization about utilization among priority groups (under-five<br>children and pregnant women).|\n|**WASH**|\u2022 <br>Maintain water access above UNHCR standards(>20 lpppd) with a focus on minimizing<br>geographic disparities in camps.<br>\u2022 <br>Prioritize awareness and behavior change around open defecation for under-five<br>children. Only 25% of households mentioned latrine use as a diarrhea prevention<br>measure in the 2022 UNHCR WASH KAP Survey.|\n|**Cross**<br>**Cutting**|\u2022 <br>Develop and implement a multi-sectoral action plan across nutrition, health, food<br>security, WASH, education, and protection sectors for stronger collaboration,<br>advocacy, and investment including joint targets for multisectoral indicators (i.e.,<br>stunting, anemia, minimum acceptable diet).<br>\u2022 <br>Scale up and increase investments in nutrition prevention approaches including social<br>behavior change programs.<br>\u2022 <br>Conduct a technical review of the ongoing/ current treatment and prevention nutrition<br>programs to identify areas to strengthen for quality interventions and better outcomes.<br>\u2022 <br>Consider the lifecycle approach for nutrition prevention and treatment services during<br>the most nutritionally vulnerable stages of life. Female adolescence is a missed<br>opportunity to focus on a high intake of micronutrient rich foods when biological needs<br>are especially high and the cost of a nutritious diet increases.|\n\n\n\n10 WFP. Post Distribution Monitoring, Cox\u2019s Bazar, Bangladesh. November 2023.\n\n\n\n16\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/20299a92-34a5-48b9-8247-c3caee793a44/2023_BAN_CXB%20SENS%20FINAL%20EXEC%20SUMMARY_4%20JAN%202024.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        15
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "2023 Standardized Expanded Nutrition\n\nSurvey (SENS)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "2023 Standardized Expanded Nutrition\n\nSurvey",
+          "confidence": 0.5922257900238037,
+          "start": 0,
+          "end": 5
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "Survey",
+          "confidence": 0.9552872180938721,
+          "start": 4,
+          "end": 5
+        },
+        "acronym": {
+          "text": "SENS",
+          "confidence": 0.9980049729347229,
+          "start": 6,
+          "end": 7
+        },
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.9871917963027954,
+          "start": 0,
+          "end": 1
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.5932646989822388,
+          "start": 0,
+          "end": 1
+        },
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "primary"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/20299a92-34a5-48b9-8247-c3caee793a44/2023_BAN_CXB%20SENS%20FINAL%20EXEC%20SUMMARY_4%20JAN%202024.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        16
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_42/raw/doc_42_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,856 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/c0ec89cb-4440-4199-8efe-c9777c3dcf3b/2024%2006%2028%20Inter-Agency%20Insights%20on%20Protection%20and%20Accountability%20for%20Refugees%20from%20Ukraine.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "INTER-AGENCY INSIGHTS ON PROTECTION AND ACCOUNTABILITY FOR REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n# **Contents**\n\n\nAcknowledgements\b 2\nContext\b 3\nKey findings\b 3\nKey recommendations \b 5\nGeneral protection\b 6\nAccountability to affected people\b 10\nChild protection \b 14\nGender-based violence\b 17\nMethodology \b 21\nEndnotes\b 23\n\n# **Acknowledgements**\n\n\nThe analysis of general protection and AAP data was supported by Jad Ghosn (UNHCR). Principal authors:\nMeron Yared, Associate Reporting Officer and Mohammed Ghafour, Community-Based Protection Officer. The\nanalysis of the child protection data was developed by the UNICEF Europe and Central Asia Regional Office in\ncollaboration with UNHCR. Principal author: Anja Teltschik (Protection Specialist - Monitoring, Evaluation and\nData) and Sergii Lavrukhin (Community-Based Protection Officer) with support from Marco Delogu (independent\nUNICEF consultant) and Meghan Ingram (UNICEF Child protection consultant). The GBV Analysis was\ndeveloped by the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) Eastern Europe and Central Asia Regional Office\n(EECARO). Principal author: Mariana Santoyo Baham\u00f3n (GBV in Emergencies Preparedness Specialist) with\nsupport from Hassan Eini-Zinab (Population and Development Programme Analyst), Ana Ara\u00fajo (Regional GBV\nin Emergencies Specialist) and Annie Waweru (GBV in Emergencies Specialist). The analysis of gender and\npeople with disabilities was developed by UN Women, Principal author: Arianna Pearlstein (Research\nConsultant). The work on the chapter was coordinated and reviewed by UNHCR, Olga Vorontsova-Mykhailova,\nSenior Community-Based Protection Officer, and Jad Ghosn, Senior Information Management Officer.\n\n\n**Cover photograph:**\n\nUkrainian refugee Maryna, once head of supplies at a building materials company, fled with her daughter and\nother families to escape the war\u2019s explosions. She organized a convoy of four cars, including her sister-in-law,\nbest friend, and their children. They are now living in Romania and received cash assistance from UNHCR when\nthey arrived.\n\u00a9 UK for UNHCR/Ioana Epure\n\n\n**2**\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "general protection and AAP data",
+          "confidence": 0.949946939945221,
+          "start": 63,
+          "end": 68
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "Meron Yared",
+          "confidence": 0.6521359086036682,
+          "start": 80,
+          "end": 82
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Context",
+          "confidence": 0.71586674451828,
+          "start": 19,
+          "end": 20
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "\b",
+          "confidence": 0.7339054346084595,
+          "start": 17,
+          "end": 18
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": null
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "child protection data",
+          "confidence": 0.8872081637382507,
+          "start": 98,
+          "end": 101
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "Anja Teltschik",
+          "confidence": 0.6983188390731812,
+          "start": 120,
+          "end": 122
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Europe and Central Asia",
+          "confidence": 0.5064675807952881,
+          "start": 106,
+          "end": 110
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": null
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "GBV Analysis",
+          "confidence": 0.9764518737792969,
+          "start": 161,
+          "end": 163
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "Mariana Santoyo Baham\u00f3n",
+          "confidence": 0.9808093309402466,
+          "start": 188,
+          "end": 191
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Eastern Europe and Central Asia",
+          "confidence": 0.6957549452781677,
+          "start": 174,
+          "end": 179
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "analysis of gender and\npeople with disabilities",
+          "confidence": 0.8029860258102417,
+          "start": 231,
+          "end": 238
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "Arianna Pearlstein",
+          "confidence": 0.8568978905677795,
+          "start": 247,
+          "end": 249
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Romania",
+          "confidence": 0.5750147104263306,
+          "start": 343,
+          "end": 344
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/c0ec89cb-4440-4199-8efe-c9777c3dcf3b/2024%2006%2028%20Inter-Agency%20Insights%20on%20Protection%20and%20Accountability%20for%20Refugees%20from%20Ukraine.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "INTER-AGENCY INSIGHTS ON PROTECTION AND ACCOUNTABILITY FOR REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n# **Context**\n\n\n\nThe full-scale war in Ukraine has caused one\nof the largest displacement crises in the\nworld. Since its escalation in February 2022,\n[nearly six million refugees from Ukraine have](https://data.unhcr.org/en/situations/ukraine)\nfled to Europe alone.\n\n\nWith the objective of collecting\ncomprehensive data on the situation and\nneeds of refugees from Ukraine, UNHCR in\ncollaboration with the regional sector leads\nhas conducted a multi-sectoral needs\nassessment (MSNA) in **seven countries:**\n\n# **Key findings**\n\n\n**Accountability to Affected People**\n**(AAP):**\n\n- **82% of households were satisfied with the aid** [1]\nthey received in the three months prior to the\ninterview. However, nearly half of these\nhouseholds still fall below the poverty line,\nindicating that the aid, while appreciated, may\nnot be sufficient [2] .\n\n- Seven percent of households were dissatisfied\nwith the aid they received during the three\nmonths prior to the interview date. Of these,\n**70% were dissatisfied with financial aid \u2013** cash\nassistance (53%) and vouchers (17%)\nrespectively. Dissatisfaction with financial aid is\nparticularly prominent among households with at\nleast one household member with a disability.\n\n- **29% of refugee households faced challenges**\n**accessing information on rights, entitlements**\n**and services**, with not knowing where to look for\ninformation and not knowing which information\nsource to trust cited as the top barriers.\nHouseholds with at least one person with a\ndisability faced more barriers accessing\n\n\n\n**Bulgaria, Czechia, Hungary, Moldova,**\n**Poland, Romania, and Slovakia.** The data\ncollection exercise focused on various\nsectors, including education, healthcare, and\nprotection.\n\nThis regional report presents **key findings**\n**related to protection**, including child\nprotection, gender-based violence, and\naccountability to affected populations.\n\n\n\ninformation, as compared to other households.\nIn general, women prefer **to access information**\n**online** rather than in person, as do most\nrefugees from Ukraine.\n\n- **While mobile messaging platforms and social**\n**media channels are the preferred means of**\n**communication** for the majority of respondents,\nvulnerable households, such as households with\nat least one person with a disability, households\ncomprised of older persons, and households\nwith limited financial means (those who are\nhosted in free accommodation provided by\ngovernment, NGOs or by a host family and\nhouseholds who have no employed family\nmember) **prefer to receive information via**\n**helpline, phone call or through face-to-face**\n**interaction** .\n\n- The top priority needs for refugees are\n**employment/livelihood, healthcare and**\n**accommodation** . However, for households who\nhave at least one member with a disability and\nfor those who have no employed family\nmembers, **food** and **healthcare** are the top two\npriority needs. Moreover, employment and\n\n\n**3**\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "multi-sectoral needs\nassessment",
+          "confidence": 0.99053555727005,
+          "start": 84,
+          "end": 87
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": {
+          "text": "MSNA",
+          "confidence": 0.9904741644859314,
+          "start": 88,
+          "end": 89
+        },
+        "author": {
+          "text": "UNHCR",
+          "confidence": 0.7382382154464722,
+          "start": 73,
+          "end": 74
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "seven countries",
+          "confidence": 0.777834951877594,
+          "start": 93,
+          "end": 95
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2022",
+          "confidence": 0.6456913948059082,
+          "start": 38,
+          "end": 39
+        },
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE",
+          "confidence": 0.5456057190895081,
+          "start": 7,
+          "end": 10
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "data\ncollection exercise",
+          "confidence": 0.8844462037086487,
+          "start": 337,
+          "end": 340
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "households",
+          "confidence": 0.5628356337547302,
+          "start": 155,
+          "end": 156
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/c0ec89cb-4440-4199-8efe-c9777c3dcf3b/2024%2006%2028%20Inter-Agency%20Insights%20on%20Protection%20and%20Accountability%20for%20Refugees%20from%20Ukraine.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        2
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "INTER-AGENCY INSIGHTS ON PROTECTION AND ACCOUNTABILITY FOR REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n\n\nlivelihoods support were the highest priority\nneeds among female-led households with\nchildren and across household types.\n\n\n**Social cohesion:**\n\n- Regionally, almost **one third of respondents**\n**reported experiencing hostile behavior or**\n**attitudes** from the local population.\n\n\n**Child Protection:**\n\n\n\n\n- **Forty-eight percent of respondents reported**\n**protection concerns in their residence area** for\ngirls and boys under 18. The most reported risks\nwere neglect, psychological violence in the\ncommunity, physical violence in the community\nand worsened mental health and psychosocial\nwellbeing.\n\n\n\n\n- A **noticeable share of households (12%)** do not\nknow where to turn to when an incident of\nviolence against children occurs.\n\n\n\n\n- Children belonging to certain households face\n**greater child protection risks and have higher**\n**protection needs** than others. These\nhouseholds include households with children\nwho do not belong to a nuclear family, including\nthose who are in formal foster or family-based\ncare arrangements or those who have no\nformalized care arrangement in place;\nhouseholds with children where no household\nmember is employed; households headed by an\nolder person or by a person under the age of 25\nyears, and households with multiple risks (e.g.\nolder persons with a disability).\n\n\n\n**Gender-Based Violence (GBV):**\n\n- Women and girls cited **healthcare,**\n**accommodation, and employment** as their top\nthree priority needs. Ensuring access to these\nessential services can provide lifesaving support\nwhile reducing GBV risks. **Economic**\n**empowerment** is key in enabling women and\ngirls, including survivors of GBV, in accessing\nlifesaving healthcare and related GBV response\nservices.\n\n- The main reported barriers limiting women and\ngirls\u2019 access to services (including GBV services),\nare a **lack of awareness about available**\n**services, stigma and feelings of shame,**\n**language barriers, area of residence (urban vs.**\n**rural, with limited access to services reported**\n**in rural areas) and cultural barriers** .\n\n- Regionally, **mental health and psychosocial**\n**problems increased with age and differed by**\n**gender** . Across all age groups over 12, females\nconsistently reported higher levels of such\nproblems, highest among those aged 35 and\nolder. However, among children under age 11,\nthere were more boys with mental health\nproblems than girls.\n\n\n\n**4**\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/c0ec89cb-4440-4199-8efe-c9777c3dcf3b/2024%2006%2028%20Inter-Agency%20Insights%20on%20Protection%20and%20Accountability%20for%20Refugees%20from%20Ukraine.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        3
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "INTER-AGENCY INSIGHTS ON PROTECTION AND ACCOUNTABILITY FOR REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n# **Key recommendations**\n\n\n\n**On AAP and social cohesion:**\n\n- Ensure an inclusive approach in providing\ninformation when designing AAP and\ncommunication with communities strategies and\ntools - for example, in addition to the social\nmedia and digital communication, making sure\nthat **information is provided through helplines**\n**and in-person to the most vulnerable**\n**households.**\n\n- More work needs to be done to **maximize the**\n**follow up response to feedback and**\n**complaints.**\n\n- Design and mainstream **social cohesion**\n**programming** across sectors in the work with\nthe refugee and host communities using\nmulti-stakeholder approach.\n\n\n**On persons with disabilities**\n\n- **Additional support should be provided to**\n**households who have a member with a**\n**disability** to access essential needs while\nensuring continued access to health services.\nThese households face more challenges\nattaining essential needs such as health services\nand food, therefore these areas should\nparticularly be targeted.\n\n- Conduct further research into and take action to\n**address the information access challenges**\nfaced by households with at least one member\nwith a disability;\n\n- **Adapt information provision** in accordance with\nthe needs of the households with at least one\nmember with disability, e.g. via helpline, phone\ncall or through face-to-face interaction.\n\n\n**On child protection**\n\n- Child protection must remain a cornerstone of\nthe refugee response in host countries\nconsidering the high level of protection\nconcerns. **Host countries must increase their**\n**efforts to systematically identify and integrate**\n**refugee children** from Ukraine with protection\nneeds into their statutory child protection\n\n\n\n\n- Support and conduct an **in-depth Interagency**\n**GBV Risk Assessment to identify and reflect**\n**comprehensively on concerns of women and**\n**girls and possible mitigation strategies.** This\nassessment should also be conducted in\ndifferent accommodation settings to fully\nunderstand the living conditions and possible\nrisks of GBV for women and girls depending on\nthe type of accommodation.\n\n\n\nsystems and strengthen the systems\u2019 capacity to\nmeet their needs, improve coordination with\nother sectors and ensure preparedness.\n\n\n\n\n- National child protection authorities of refugee\nhosting countries must **ensure early**\n**identification, registration and assessment of**\n**unaccompanied and separated children**, and of\nchildren accompanied by an adult who is not\ntheir parent, in line with the best interests of the\nchild.\n\n\n\n\n- Governments should work together with key\nstakeholders to assess **the availability, quality,**\n**and comparability of data** on refugee children\nfrom Ukraine and implement actions necessary\nto create an integrated child protection data\nenvironment.\n\n\n\n**On gender-based violence**\n\n\n\n\n- Host countries need to address key needs\nhighlighted by women, such as **healthcare,**\n**accommodation and especially employment/**\n**livelihoods to effectively mitigate GBV risks** .\n\n\n\n\n- National authorities and organizations in refugee\nhosting countries need to **promote the**\n**engagement of women-led and refugee-led**\n**organizations** to consistently include GBV risk\nmitigation in national policies and strategies\nacross sectors and to ensure health, protection\nand economical empowerment needs are fully\nintegrated in the national response mechanisms.\n\n- Encourage government agencies and womenled organizations to develop and **effectively use**\n**age and culturally appropriate awareness**\n**raising programmes and technical guidance to**\n**mitigate digital GBV risks.** This can partly be\nachieved through information sharing using\npreferred channels of information and by setting\nup appropriate feedback mechanisms.\n\n\n\n**5**\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "GBV Risk Assessment",
+          "confidence": 0.9877926707267761,
+          "start": 362,
+          "end": 365
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "refugee children",
+          "confidence": 0.556713879108429,
+          "start": 335,
+          "end": 337
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/c0ec89cb-4440-4199-8efe-c9777c3dcf3b/2024%2006%2028%20Inter-Agency%20Insights%20on%20Protection%20and%20Accountability%20for%20Refugees%20from%20Ukraine.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        4
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "INTER-AGENCY INSIGHTS ON PROTECTION AND ACCOUNTABILITY FOR REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n# **General protection**\n\n\n\n**Demographic profiles**\n\nThe majority of respondents were women, with\npercentages ranging from 65% in the Czech\nRepublic to as high as 89% in Poland. Over half of\nrespondents fall within the 35-59 age group.\n\n\n**% RESPONDENTS BY GENDER**\n\n\nWomen Men\n\n\n\nTotal Bulgaria Czech\n\nRep.\n\n\n\n**AVERAGE HOUSEHOLD SIZE PER COUNTRY**\n\n\n2.4\n2.3 2.3\n2.2 2.2\n2.1\n\n\n\n2.8\n\n\n\n2.2\n\n\n\nHungary Moldova Poland Romania Slovakia\n\n\n\nAcross all adult age categories, females consistently\nrepresent a higher percentage than males. Notably,\nfemales aged 35-59 constitute the largest\nproportion at 25%, followed by females aged 18-34\nat 15%. The gender-specific distribution can be\nattributed to various factors, notably the military\nconscription in Ukraine. This policy likely resulted in\na significant portion of males being unable to leave\nthe country, either due to compulsory military\nservice or their voluntary decision to stay and serve.\n\n\n**AGE GROUP AND GENDER PYRAMID**\n\n\nFemale Male\n\n\n\nRegional 82%\n\n\n67%\n\n\n65%\n\n\n67%\n\n\n81%\n\n\n89%\n\n\n88%\n\n\n85%\n\n\n**AGE OF RESPONDENTS**\n\n\n52%\n\n\n29%\n\n\n\n18%\n\n\n33%\n\n\n35%\n\n\n33%\n\n\n19%\n\n\n11%\n\n\n12%\n\n\n15%\n\n\n\n2%\n\n\n1%\n\n\n\n25%\n\n\n\n15%\n\n\n\n9%\n\n\n6%\n\n\n8%\n\n\n\n18%\n\n\n18-34 35-59 60+\nyears old\n\n\nOverall, the total average household size is\nreported at 2.3 individuals. Romania stands out with\nthe highest average household size among the\nseven countries at 2.8 individuals per household.\n\n\n**6**\n\n\n\n60+ years old\n\n\n35-59\n\n\n18-34\n\n\n12-17\n\n\n5-11\n\n\n3-4\n\n\n0-2\n\n\n\n4.1%\n\n\n7.3%\n\n\n4.9%\n\n\n6.4%\n\n\n8.1%\n\n\n1.7%\n\n\n1.4%\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "AGE GROUP AND GENDER PYRAMID",
+          "confidence": 0.9859535098075867,
+          "start": 201,
+          "end": 206
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Ukraine",
+          "confidence": 0.5129770040512085,
+          "start": 165,
+          "end": 166
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/c0ec89cb-4440-4199-8efe-c9777c3dcf3b/2024%2006%2028%20Inter-Agency%20Insights%20on%20Protection%20and%20Accountability%20for%20Refugees%20from%20Ukraine.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        5
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "INTER-AGENCY INSIGHTS ON PROTECTION AND ACCOUNTABILITY FOR REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nThe survey results, weighted by the distribution of\nrefugees across host countries, reveal Kharkivska\n(12%), Dnipropetrovska (10%), Khersonska (9%), and\nOdeska (9%) as the most common areas of origin for\nrespondents. A significant portion also came from\nDonetska (8%), Zaporizka (7%), Kyiv (6%), and\nKyivska (5%) oblasts. The remaining respondents\noriginated from other oblasts throughout Ukraine.\n\n\nThe data however demonstrates variations in the\noblast of origin of Ukrainian refugees across\ndifferent host countries. Kharkivska is the only\noblast that consistently ranks among the top four in\nall 7 host countries. Refugees from Odeska oblast\nmake up a significant portion in Moldova (46%),\nRomania (40%) and Bulgaria (18%), likely due to\nthese countries\u2019 geographical proximity. Similarly,\nZakarpatska oblast, bordering Hungary, sees a high\nconcentration of refugees originating from there\n(39%) but not in the top 4 in any of the other\ncountries. Interestingly, Poland, despite bordering\nUkraine, shows a more balanced distribution across\noblasts, potentially reflecting its larger refugee\npopulation.\n\n\nThe main language spoken at home was Ukrainian,\nat 44%. 33% of respondents reported speaking\nmainly Russian, and 21% reported speaking\nUkrainian and Russian equally. However, the main\n\n\n\nlanguage spoken at home by Ukrainian refugees\nvaries depending on the host country. In Bulgaria\n(52%), Czech Republic (43%), Moldova (64%) and\nSlovakia (53%) the majority reported speaking both\nlanguages at home. In Romania the majority\nreported speaking Russian (41%), while in Poland\n(62%) the majority reported speaking Ukrainian.\nInterestingly, only a small fraction (3%) spoke\nanother language regionally, with most of this group\nwas hosted in Hungary, where 26% reported\nspeaking Hungarian.\n\n\n**MAIN LANGUAGES SPOKEN AT HOME**\n\n\nOther\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nMainly Ukrainian\n\n\n**7**\n\n\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "survey results",
+          "confidence": 0.5289083123207092,
+          "start": 11,
+          "end": 13
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "survey",
+          "confidence": 0.9133575558662415,
+          "start": 11,
+          "end": 12
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "UKRAINE",
+          "confidence": 0.6061326861381531,
+          "start": 9,
+          "end": 10
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "REFUGEES",
+          "confidence": 0.6885808110237122,
+          "start": 7,
+          "end": 8
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "respondents",
+          "confidence": 0.6859700083732605,
+          "start": 247,
+          "end": 248
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "Ukrainian refugees",
+          "confidence": 0.6464055776596069,
+          "start": 272,
+          "end": 274
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "MAIN LANGUAGES SPOKEN AT HOME",
+          "confidence": 0.6072883605957031,
+          "start": 374,
+          "end": 379
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Slovakia",
+          "confidence": 0.536544919013977,
+          "start": 301,
+          "end": 302
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/c0ec89cb-4440-4199-8efe-c9777c3dcf3b/2024%2006%2028%20Inter-Agency%20Insights%20on%20Protection%20and%20Accountability%20for%20Refugees%20from%20Ukraine.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        6
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "INTER-AGENCY INSIGHTS ON PROTECTION AND ACCOUNTABILITY FOR REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n\n\nThe consequences of the full-scale war Ukraine\nhave been highly gendered in nature. This inter alia\nis reflected in the composition of adults and children\nin the households. Households with only adult\nwomen and children make up 38.5% of households,\nwhile households with only adult males and children\nmake up 0.5%.\n\n\nWomen with children households are the largest\nhousehold category for nearly all countries,\nfollowed by women without children at 25.7 percent\nof households. Two exceptions are Bulgaria, where\nthe largest household category is of women without\nchildren (31.3% vs. 33.2% respectively), and\nRomania, where the second largest household\ncategory is those consisting of both females and\nmales with children. These findings already indicate\nthe importance of ensuring that the needs of\nwomen and children are integrated throughout\nrefugee response efforts across the region. It must\nbe noted that due to the very small portion of\nhouseholds consisting only of males with children,\nthe results of this group could not be comparatively\nanalyzed with the other household types.\n\n\n**REGIONAL HOUSEHOLD COMPOSITION**\n\n\n39%\n\n\n26%\n\n\n16%\n13%\n\n\n7%\n\n\n1%\n\n\n\n**Access to temporary protection**\n\nOn 4 March 2022, the EU Council triggered the\napplication of the Temporary Protection Directive to\nrefugees from Ukraine, providing millions with swift\naccess to legal status and associated rights. Initially\nactivated for one year, the application of the\nDirective has since been extended for an additional\ntwo years \u2013 until March 2025.\n\n\nMost households surveyed (95%) have applied for\ntemporary protection, while 5% of households have\nnot applied for temporary protection. Comparatively,\nthe proportion of households who have not applied\nfor temporary protection is substantially higher in\nHungary (35%); this is largely because many\nrefugees in Hungary have obtained different legal\nstatuses in lieu of temporary protection, e.g.\nresidence permits.\n\n\n**TEMPORARY PROTECTION APPLICATION STATUS BY**\n**COUNTRY**\n\n\n98% 98% 97% 96% 96%\n91%\n\n\n65%\n\n\n\nSlovakia Romania Moldova Hungary\n\n\n\nFemale\nwithout\nchildren\n\n\n\nFemale\nwith\nchildren\n\n\n\nMale\nwithout\nchildren\n\n\n\nMale with Both\nChildren without\nchildren\n\n\n\nBoth with\n\nchildren\n\n\n\nPoland Bulgaria Czech\n\nRep.\n\n\n**Social cohesion**\n\n\n\nRegionally, almost one third of respondents\nreported experiencing hostile behavior or attitudes\nfrom the local population. The highest rate of hostile\nbehavior was reported in the Czech Republic\nfollowed by Poland, while the lowest was in\nMoldova and Hungary. Households with at least one\nmember employed reported a higher percentage of\nexperiencing hostile behavior at 33%, compared to\n23% for households with no employed members;\nthis could potentially be due to their increased\ninteraction with the local population.\n\n\n\nRegionally, roughly 11% of households surveyed had\na member with a Level 3 disability [3] . About 16% of\nhouseholds with one member with a disability\nreported having no member employed, relative to\n8.6% of households without a member with a\ndisability. The composition and employment status\nof households suggest that it is important to\nincrease access to employment and livelihood\nassistance tailored to the situation of these\nhouseholds, as is further indicated by the priority\nneeds discussed below.\n\n\n**8**\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/c0ec89cb-4440-4199-8efe-c9777c3dcf3b/2024%2006%2028%20Inter-Agency%20Insights%20on%20Protection%20and%20Accountability%20for%20Refugees%20from%20Ukraine.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        7
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "INTER-AGENCY INSIGHTS ON PROTECTION AND ACCOUNTABILITY FOR REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n\n**% OF HOUSEHOLDS REPORTING HOSTILE BEHAVIOR**\n\n\n\n**Household has no employed**\n\n**members**\n\n\n\n**Household has employed**\n\n**member(s)**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nVerbal aggression stands out as the most frequently\nreported type, with 73% of those who reported\nhostile behavior highlighting instances of verbal\naggression. Discriminatory behavior while searching\nfor a job or seeking accommodation was also high\nat 37%.\n\n\n**TYPE OF HOSTILE / UNWELCOMING BEHAVIOURS (OUT OF**\n**THOSE WHO REPORTED HOSTILE BEHAVIOUR)**\n\n\n\nVerbal aggression\n\n\nDiscriminatory behavior (e.g. while\nsearching for job, accommodation)\n\nHostile/aggressive comments in\nsocial media\n\nHostile/aggressive comments in news\nforums online\n\n\nPhysical attack\n\n\nOther\n\n\nSexual harassment\n\n\n\n37%\n\n\n28%\n\n\n19%\n\n\n9%\n\n\n4%\n\n\n1%\n\n\n\n73%\n\n\n\nWhen asked about the presumed reasons for\nhousehold behavior, the top three reasons were\nrefugee status, ethnicity, and language \u2013 all three\noptions are interconnected and linked to identity of\nthe respondents.\n\n\nA notable association was found between\nperceived hostility and mental health challenges.\nThose who reported experiencing hostile behaviour\nor attitudes from members of the host population\nwere more likely to report mental health and\npsychosocial problems (39%) than those who did\nnot report experiencing hostile behaviour (27%).\nPerceived hostility may increase vulnerability to\ndistress, and at the same time, those with mental\nhealth problems may be targeted with greater\nhostility and/or perceive their environments as more\nhostile [4] .\n\n\n\n**9**\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/c0ec89cb-4440-4199-8efe-c9777c3dcf3b/2024%2006%2028%20Inter-Agency%20Insights%20on%20Protection%20and%20Accountability%20for%20Refugees%20from%20Ukraine.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        8
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "INTER-AGENCY INSIGHTS ON PROTECTION AND ACCOUNTABILITY FOR REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n# **Accountability to affected people**\n\n\n\n**Satisfaction with aid received in the last**\n**three months** **[5]**\n\nThe majority of households \u2013 82% \u2013 reported being\nsatisfied with the aid (any type of humanitarian of\nState-provided aid) they received in the last three\nmonths. Comparatively, a higher satisfaction rate\nwas recorded in Moldova (98%), followed by\nSlovakia (90%), and Hungary (88%) - and a relatively\nlower satisfaction rate was reported in Romania\n(61%), Bulgaria (69%), and Poland (77%).\n\n\n**SATISFACTION WITH AID RECEIVED BY COUNTRY**\n\n\n\n**AID DISSATISFACTION PER TYPE OF AID**\n\n\nHumanitarian financial aid (cash)\n\n\nHumanitarian distributions (non-food\nitems, clothing, food, etc.)\n\n\n\n54%\n\n\n\n34%\n\n\n\nGovernment social protection\n(government)\n\nGovernment housing\nprogrammes\n\n\nGovernment assistance programmes\n\n\nHumanitarian financial aid (vouchers)\n\n\nHumanitarian protection services\n\n\n\n3%\n\n\n\n22%\n\n\n21%\n\n\n21%\n\n\n17%\n\n\n\n90%\n\n\n\n98%\n\n\n\n77%\n\n\n\n82%\n\n\n\n88%\n84%\n\n\n\n69%\n\n\nTotal Bulgaria Czech\n\nRep.\n\n\n\n61%\n\n\nHungary Moldova Poland Romania Slovakia\n\n\n\n**Reasons for dissatisfaction with aid**\n\nAmong households dissatisfied with aid, the most\ncommon reason was that the assistance received\nwas insufficient or not frequent enough, as reported\nby 45% of respondents. Additionally, 40% cited not\nreceiving aid on time or experiencing delays in its\ndelivery. Fourteen percent found the assistance or\nservices to be of poor quality, while 11% indicated\nthat the aid provided did not meet their most urgent\nneeds.\n\n\n**REASONS FOR AID DISSATISFACTION**\n\n\n\n**Type of aid HHs were dissatisfied with**\n\nSeven percent of HHs were dissatisfied with the aid\nthey received, mostly in Romania (14%) and Bulgaria\n(9%). Out of the 7% of HHs who indicated\ndissatisfaction, 70% were unsatisfied with financial\naid, cash assistance (53%) and vouchers (17%)\nrespectively. Dissatisfaction with cash financial aid is\nparticularly prominent among households with at\nleast one household member with a disability, as\ncompared to households without a person with a\ndisability (62% vs 52%).\n\n\nThe same holds for humanitarian distributions,\nwhere 44.3% of households with a member with a\ndisability reported dissatisfaction with humanitarian\ndistributions, relative to 31.6% of households who\ndo not have any member with a disability.\n\n\nOn a positive note, only 3% of HHs reported being\ndissatisfied with the protection assistance they\nreceived.\n\n\n**10**\n\n\n\nAssistance received was insufficient / was not\nenough / Assistance is not frequent enough\n\nDid not receive the aid on time / delays in\ndelivery of aid\n\nAssistance/Services received were of poor\nquality\n\nThe assistance delivered was not what the\nhousehold needed the most (not useful)\n\n\nOther\n\nThe assistance was not easily accessible (e.g.\nthe distribution or the service points were too\nfar away)\n\nI was unsure of my entitlements\n\n\nI was not consulted on what I need\n\n\nPrefer not to' answer'\n\n\nDont know\n\n\nServices did not feel safe or were not\n\nprovided in a safe way\n\n\n\n45%\n\n\n40%\n\n\n\n14%\n\n\n11%\n\n\n10%\n\n\n9%\n\n\n6%\n\n\n6%\n\n\n1%\n\n\n1%\n\n\n0%\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/c0ec89cb-4440-4199-8efe-c9777c3dcf3b/2024%2006%2028%20Inter-Agency%20Insights%20on%20Protection%20and%20Accountability%20for%20Refugees%20from%20Ukraine.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        9
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "INTER-AGENCY INSIGHTS ON PROTECTION AND ACCOUNTABILITY FOR REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n\n\n**Access to information**\n\nThe majority, 71% of households, surveyed have not\nfaced any challenges accessing information on\nrights, entitlements, and services. Among the 29%\nrefugee households who faced challenges\naccessing information, not knowing where to look\nfor information and not knowing which information\nsource to trust were reported as the top barriers.\nUnavailability of information in languages refugees\nunderstood and a lack of up-to-date information\nwere also cited as obstacles to accessing\ninformation.\n\n\nOverall, households with a person with disability\nfaced more barriers accessing information, when\ncompared to other households. To illustrate, while\n72% of refugee families without a person with a\ndisability reported not facing any obstacles\naccessing information, 60% of households with a\nperson with a disability reported not experiencing\nchallenges accessing information.\n\n\n**CHALLENGES IN ACCESSING INFORMATION**\n\n\n\nthan men (18%), and more men (34%) prefer face to\nface interactions than women (28%). Disseminating\ninformation and facilitating access and\ncommunication through technology has many\nadvantages and it is an overall preferred method by\nmost individuals, both male and female. However,\nthere are a number of GBV risks facilitated by digital\nand online spaces, including sextortion, imagebased abuse, cyberbullying, online gender and\nsexual harassment, cyberstalking, using technology\nto locate survivors and/or identification of potential\ntrafficking victims, etc), which need to be borne in\nmind and mitigated by all stakeholders.\n\n\nMeanwhile, the results showed that vulnerable\nhouseholds, including households with a person\nwith a disability and households comprised of older\npersons, prefer helpline over other means of\ncommunication. Households with very low income\nalso prefer to receive information via phone call or\nhelpline, which may be due to limited access to\ninternet or low technological skills.\n\n\n**PREFERRED MEANS OF RECEIVING INFORMATION**\n\n\n\nNo challenges\n\n\nI don\u2019t know where to look for\ninformation\n\nI don\u2019t know which information to\ntrust\n\nInformation is not available in the\nlanguage(s) I speak\n\nThe available information is not\nwhat I need\n\nInformation available not up to\ndate\n\nInformation is not available in\nformats that are accessible for me\n\n\nDon't know\n\nI have limited internet connectivity\nthat makes difficult accessing\nonline information\nI don\u2019t have a device to access\nonline information\n\n\nPrefer not to answer\n\n\n\n14%\n\n\n10%\n\n\n6%\n\n\n4%\n\n\n4%\n\n\n3%\n\n\n3%\n\n\n2%\n\n\n1%\n\n\n1%\n\n\n\n71%\n\n\n\nPhone call / Helpline\n\n\nTelegram\n\n\nFace to face (helpdesk, outreach\nvolunteer, community centers)\n\n\nOfficial websites\n\n\nViber\n\n\nFacebook\n\n\nEmail\n\n\nSMS\n\n\nWhatsapp\n\n\nMessenger\n\n\nOther\n\n\n\n32%\n\n\n32%\n\n\n28%\n\n\n26%\n\n\n25%\n\n\n22%\n\n\n12%\n\n\n11%\n\n\n10%\n\n\n9%\n\n\n6%\n\n\n\n**Preferred means of receiving**\n**information**\n\nThe majority of respondents preferred online means\nof communication, such as mobile messaging\nplatforms and social media channels. More women\n(27%) prefer using the communication app Viber\n\n\n\n**Preferred means of providing feedback**\n**to aid providers**\n\nTo provide feedback, HHs with at least one\nhousehold member with a disability prefer helpline\n(38% vs 31%) and face to face interaction (29% vs\n23%), compared to HHs who have no member with\n\n\n**11**\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/c0ec89cb-4440-4199-8efe-c9777c3dcf3b/2024%2006%2028%20Inter-Agency%20Insights%20on%20Protection%20and%20Accountability%20for%20Refugees%20from%20Ukraine.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        10
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "INTER-AGENCY INSIGHTS ON PROTECTION AND ACCOUNTABILITY FOR REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n\n\na disability. Helpline preference is also higher\namong HHs who are hosted in free\naccommodations provided by government, NGOs or\nby a host family. Similarly, HHs comprised of older\npersons, HHs who do not have any employed\nmember, and those with limited income prefer to\nprovide feedback via helpline/phone call.\n\n\nWomen-centered feedback and complaints\nmechanisms are key to identify and respond to\nconcerns of women and girls at risk of and survivors\nof GBV, they also act as early warning systems for\nsexual exploitation and abuse (SEA) cases which\ntend to go highly under-reported in humanitarian\nsettings. Based on the data collected, the preferred\nmethod for providing feedback for both female and\nmale responders and heads of households is a\nphone call to a helpline.\n\n\n**PREFERRED MEANS OF PROVIDING FEEDBACK TO AID**\n**PROVIDERS**\n\n\n\nsensitivity of the subject matter, more awareness\nneeds to be done especially in the remote and\nmarginalized areas to ensure an inclusive and\nstronger awareness among the refugees about the\nsafe reporting channels.\n\n\n**ACCESS TO SAFE AND CONFIDENTIAL REPORTING AND**\n**INFORMATION**\n\n\nDon't know\n\n\n\n**% of HH who reported receiving an**\n**appropriate response after reporting**\n**through reporting channels**\n\nTo complement the FRM loop, this indicator aimed\nto also looked into the follow up response that\nrefugees receive through the available channels,\nsuch as hotlines, digital communication, information\ndesks at community centers and other available\ncommunity outreach channels. While 68.5% shows\na rather positive level of follow up, more work\nneeds to be done to maximize the follow up\nresponse to feedback and complaints which is at\nthe core of AAP.\n\n\n**%HH RECEIVING APPROPRIATE RESPONSE THROUGH**\n**VARIOUS CHANNELS**\n\n\n\nNo\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nPhone call / Helpline\n\n\nTelegram\n\n\nFace to face (helpdesk, outreach\nvolunteer, community centers)\n\n\nViber\n\n\nSMS\n\n\nEmail\n\n\nOfficial websites\n\n\nFacebook\n\n\nMessenger\n\n\nWhatsapp\n\n\nLeaflets\n\n\n\n32%\n\n\n24%\n\n\n24%\n\n\n24%\n\n\n15%\n\n\n13%\n\n\n12%\n\n\n12%\n\n\n10%\n\n\n10%\n\n\n2%\n\n\n\n**Access to safe and confidential**\n**reporting channels**\n\nEnsuring access to safe and confidential channels\nas part of the Feedback and Response Mechanism\n(FRM) is one of the core actions under the AAP. It\naims to make sure that refugees know where to\nreport allegations of misconduct and/or other\ncomplaints about the humanitarian aid in a safe and\nconfidential manner. Given the importance and\n\n\n**12**\n\n\n\n\n\nNo\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/c0ec89cb-4440-4199-8efe-c9777c3dcf3b/2024%2006%2028%20Inter-Agency%20Insights%20on%20Protection%20and%20Accountability%20for%20Refugees%20from%20Ukraine.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        11
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "INTER-AGENCY INSIGHTS ON PROTECTION AND ACCOUNTABILITY FOR REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n\n\n**Top 10 priority needs of refugee**\n**households**\n\n\n\n\n- HHs who have at least one member with a\ndisability rank food (22.5% vs 17%) and\nhealthcare (70% vs 30%) as a higher priority\nneed than average.\n\n\n\n\n- Among HHs who do not have employed\nmember, the need for food (23.5% vs 14%) and\nhealthcare (48% vs 27%) is substantially higher.\n\n\n\nhouseholds reporting having one member with an\nL3 disability reported adopting coping strategies\nrelative to 54% of households who do not. The\ndegree of crisis [6] coping strategies in the 30 days\nprior to the interview was also almost twice as\nfrequently reported by households with at least one\nmember with a disability (23% vs. 13%). Concerning\nspecific coping actions, among households with at\nleast one member with a disability, 56% reported\nhaving spent savings compared to 41% of\nhouseholds who have no member with a disability.\nTwice as many households with at least one\nmember with a disability reported reducing\nessential health expenditures compared to\nhouseholds who do not.\n\n\nThe vulnerability of households who have at least\none member with a disability is also indicated in\npriority needs, as only 9.5% of these households\nreported having no priority needs. For these\nhouseholds, healthcare services, employment/\nlivelihoods support, accommodation, and food were\nthe top reported needs.\n\n\n**% HOUSEHOLDS ADOPTING COPING STRATEGIES**\n\n\n\n\n- HHs comprised of older persons reported a\nhigher need for winter clothes compared to\nother households.\n\n\n\n**TOP 10 PRIORITY NEEDS OF REFUGEE HOUSEHOLDS**\n\n\n\nEmployment / Livelihoods support\n\n\nHealthcare services\n\n\nAccommodation\n\n\nLanguage courses\n\n\nFood\n\n\nEducation for children under 18\n\n\nTrainings/Education of adults\n\n\nMedicines\n\n\nWinter clothes\n\n\nSupport with registration/legal\nassistance/documentation\n\n\n\n28%\n\n\n27%\n\n\n24%\n\n\n20%\n\n\n17%\n\n\n11%\n\n\n10%\n\n\n8%\n\n\n8%\n\n\n7%\n\n\n\n15%\n\n\n7%\n\n\n7%\n\n\n6%\n\n\n6%\n\n\n5%\n\n\n3%\n\n\n1%\n\n\n1%\n\n\n1%\n\n\n\n43%\n\n\n\n**Adoption of coping strategies**\n**depending on the type of household**\n\nHouseholds with children seem to be vulnerable to\nadopting livelihood coping strategies, which\nrepresent ways households deal with economic\nchallenges. These strategies include spending\nsavings, selling assets, purchasing food on credit,\nreducing essential expenses, withdrawing children\nfrom school, selling property, migrating, involving\nchildren in income generation, and resorting to risky\njobs. Specifically, 53% of households with children\nreported adopting such coping strategies compared\nto 43% for households with no children.\n\n\nHouseholds with at least one member with a\ndisability appear more vulnerable to adopting\nlivelihood coping strategies. Specifically, 64% of\n\n\n\nSpend savings\n\n\nReduce essential health expenditures\n(including drugs)\n\n\nReduce essential education expenditures\n\n\nUse degrading sources of income, illegal\nwork, or high risk jobs\n\nSell household assets/goods\n(radio/furniture/TV...)\n\n\nMigrate/ become displaced\n\n\nPurchase food on credit or borrowed food\n\n\nSell productive assets or means of transport\n(sewing machine, bicycle, car, etc.)\n\n\nSell house or land (Including inside Ukraine)\n\n\nInvolve school-aged children in income\ngeneration\n\n\nWithdraw school-aged children from school\n\n\n\n**13**\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/c0ec89cb-4440-4199-8efe-c9777c3dcf3b/2024%2006%2028%20Inter-Agency%20Insights%20on%20Protection%20and%20Accountability%20for%20Refugees%20from%20Ukraine.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        12
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "INTER-AGENCY INSIGHTS ON PROTECTION AND ACCOUNTABILITY FOR REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n# **Child protection**\n\n\n\nThe Ukraine conflict has uprooted millions [7, 8] of girls\nand boys from their homes, putting them at an\nincreased risk of violence, exploitation, abuse, and\nfamily separation [9] . **Family separation** is the defining\nfeature of the Ukraine refugee crisis, as many male\nfamily members had to remain in Ukraine, primarily\ndue to martial law. [10]\n\n\nThe refugee child population from Ukraine is highly\ndiverse and so are their needs and the risks they\nface. For instance, there are many girls and boys\nwho are separated from one or both parents or from\ntheir previous legal or customary caregiver, but may\nbe accompanied by other adults who may have\nbeen given some form of responsibility for them by\nparents or Ukrainian authorities [11] ; unaccompanied\nchildren [12] ; children with a disability or disabilities, a\nchronic illness or children living in households\nheaded by an older person or a young person;\nchildren whose family identifies with a minority\nethnic group; stateless children; and children who\nhave been evacuated from institutional care in\nUkraine.\n\n\nCare and custodial arrangements, including\nguardianship, are among the many issues that arise\nwhen unaccompanied or separated children from\nUkraine arrive or are identified in host countries in\nEurope. Different legal regimes may apply to them\nwithin countries depending on their status and\neligibility for temporary protection or national\nhumanitarian protection schemes. Children are\nparticularly vulnerable to legal challenges when\narriving stateless or undocumented [13] . Protection\nconcerns may further aggravate when\nunaccompanied children remain outside the scope\nof national child protection systems. Moreover, in\nmany host countries there remains a lack of data on\nthe prevalence of child protection risks and specific\nneeds among the different sub-groups of the child\npopulation from Ukraine.\n\n\nChild protection has been a cornerstone of the\nrefugee response [14] . At the same time, this refugee\nsituation has revealed and exacerbated underlying\ngaps in the child protection systems of host\ncountries, including a lack of preparedness and\ncapacity to plan and implement a coordinated\nhumanitarian child protection response, integrate\n\n\n**14**\n\n\n\nrefugee children into the national child protection\nsystems and case management processes, and\nprovide adequate mental health and psychosocial\nsupport services.\n\n\nThe findings of this regional analysis aim to shed\nlight on protection risks facing refugee children with\na view of addressing their particular needs.\n\n\n**Birth registration is critical**\n\nBirth registration is a key first step towards\nprotecting children. Identity documents are\nessential for refugee children to access legal status,\nprotection and services in host countries. Without a\nbirth certificate, a child can be at risk of\nstatelessness, for instance. Documentation also\nplays a central role in facilitating the return of\nrefugee children to their country of origin in safety\nand dignity, when the time comes.\n\n\nAcross five countries (responses from Poland were\ndisregarded due to limitations), 98 % of children\nunder the age of five years had their birth registered\nin Ukraine, the host country or a third country\naccording to the respondents, or registration is in\nprocess.\n\n\n**Children\u2019s right to a family environment**\n\nIn line with the Convention on the Rights of the\nChild, all children have a right to a family\nenvironment. Children need safe and stable\nrelationships with caring adults to thrive, and such\nrelationships are far more likely to be created in a\nfamily environment. Children separated from their\nfamilies have an increased risk of becoming a victim\nof violence, exploitation, trafficking, discrimination,\nand other types of abuse.\n\n\nMost children in the MSNA sample belong to a\nnuclear family (92%), while 9% of children are in\nother care arrangements. [15] There were notable\ndifferences among countries with regards to the\nlatter. The highest percentage of children not\nbelonging to the nuclear family was reported by\nrespondents in Czech Republic (13%), and the\nlowest in Romania and Slovakia (4% each).\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/c0ec89cb-4440-4199-8efe-c9777c3dcf3b/2024%2006%2028%20Inter-Agency%20Insights%20on%20Protection%20and%20Accountability%20for%20Refugees%20from%20Ukraine.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        13
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "INTER-AGENCY INSIGHTS ON PROTECTION AND ACCOUNTABILITY FOR REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n\n\nOf the children not belonging to the nuclear family,\nmost children in the sample were in a formalized\ncare arrangement with their extended family\naccording to the respondents (504 children). Very\nfew children in the sample were reported to be in\nan informal arrangement with the extended family\n(12 children), in foster care (29 children), in a formal\n(17 children) or informal (13 children) family-type care\narrangement, or in no care arrangement (4 children).\n\n\n**Risks faced by refugee girls and boys**\n\n\n**RISKS REPORTED FOR GIRLS/BOYS UNDER THE AGE OF 18**\n**IN THE NEIGHBOURHOOD ACROSS SURVEYED COUNTRIES**\n\n\nGirls Boys\n\n\n\nHouseholds with at least one girl/boy under the age\nof 18 years were asked about a range of potential\nrisks that the girl(s)/boy(s) face in their residence\narea. Across all seven countries where this question\nwas asked, almost 52% of the respondents reported\n\u2018no concerns\u2019 for both girls and boys in their\nresidence area.\n\n\nFor those respondents who did report the concerns,\nthe most reported risks for boys in their residence\narea included: physical violence in the community (8\n%), psychological violence in the community (15 %),\nworsened mental health and psychosocial wellbeing\n(7 %), increased vulnerability to online violence (8\n%), neglect and abuse (14 and 9 % respectively)).\nThe most reported risks for girls in their residence\narea were similar, with slightly lower percentages\nfor all risks, except vulnerability to online violence In\naddition, the risk of sexual violence in the\ncommunity for girls was reported across six of the\nseven countries with 6 %.\n\n\n**Awareness of reporting channels for**\n**violence against children**\n\nBeing aware of available services is one of the\npre-conditions for service access and use. The\nawareness of services to report cases of violence\nagainst children in the community is high, with 88 %\nof households reporting service awareness.\n\n\nThis indicates that services supporting the reporting\nof violence against children are largely available\nand that most of the households surveyed would\nresort to law enforcement of refugee hosting\ncountries to report such incidences, or to other\npublic institutions. Fewer would call a helpline or\ncontact an NGO. The data also suggest that there is\nstill a small but noticeable share of members (12 %)\nin the surveyed households who do not know\nwhere to turn if such an incident happens.\n\n\n**15**\n\n\n\nNo concerns*\n\n\nPsychological violence in the\ncommunity**\n\n\nIncreased vulnerability to neglect**\n\n\nIncreased vulnerability to violence\nonline**\n\n\nPhysical violence in the community**\n\n\nIncreased vulnerability to abuse**\n\n\nWorsened mental health and\npsycho-social wellbeing*\n\n\nSexual violence in community**\n\n\nIncreased risks of trafficking**\n\n\nPsychological violence within home**\n\n\nIncreased risks of separation from the\nfamily and/or placement into\nresidential facility*\n\n\nSexual violence in home**\n\n\nPhysical violence within home**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n_*Respondents from all seven countries._\n_**Respondents from six out of seven countries._\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "age\nof 18 years",
+          "confidence": 0.5371946096420288,
+          "start": 150,
+          "end": 154
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "residence\narea",
+          "confidence": 0.5762478113174438,
+          "start": 176,
+          "end": 178
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "respondents",
+          "confidence": 0.9020662307739258,
+          "start": 194,
+          "end": 195
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/c0ec89cb-4440-4199-8efe-c9777c3dcf3b/2024%2006%2028%20Inter-Agency%20Insights%20on%20Protection%20and%20Accountability%20for%20Refugees%20from%20Ukraine.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        14
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "INTER-AGENCY INSIGHTS ON PROTECTION AND ACCOUNTABILITY FOR REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n\n**% HOUSEHOLDS REPORTING BEING AWARE OF SERVICES TO REPORT CASES OF VIOLENCE AGAINST CHILDREN IN THE**\n**COMMUNITY**\n\n\n**Total** Bulgaria Czech Rep. Hungary Moldova Poland Romania Slovakia\n\n\n**SERVICES RESPONDENTS WILL USE TO REPORT CASES OF VIOLENCE AGAINST CHILDREN IN THE COMMUNITY**\n\n\n\nBulgaria Czech Rep. Hungary Moldova Poland Romania Slovakia\n\n\n\n94%\n\n\n25%\n\n\n12%\n\n\n15%\n\n\n1%\n\n\n0.2%\n\n\n\nPolice\n\n\nGovernment\nServices\n\n\nHelpline\n\n\nNGO Services\n\n\nNo services\navailable\n\n\nOther\n\n\n\n**Total**\n\n84%\n\n\n21%\n\n\n15%\n\n\n9%\n\n\n0.4%\n\n\n1%\n\n\n\n88%\n\n\n26%\n\n\n23%\n\n\n8%\n\n\n0.2%\n\n\n1%\n\n\n\n86%\n\n\n21%\n\n\n17%\n\n\n7%\n\n\n0.4%\n\n\n0%\n\n\n\n97%\n\n\n38%\n\n\n41%\n\n\n25%\n\n\n0%\n\n\n0.1%\n\n\n\n79%\n\n\n17%\n\n\n10%\n\n\n7%\n\n\n1%\n\n\n1%\n\n\n\n13%\n\n\n13%\n\n\n9%\n\n\n0.2%\n\n\n1%\n\n\n\n91%\n\n\n\n91%\n\n\n24%\n\n\n17%\n\n\n14%\n\n\n0%\n\n\n0.2%\n\n\n\n**Employment level of households with**\n**children**\n\nMost of the households with and without children\nbelow the age of 18 have at least one member\nemployed (65 % and 61 % respectively) but there is\nstill a considerable share (35 % and 39 %\nrespectively) that does not and may thus be\ndependent on social protection schemes.\n\n\n**16**\n\n\n\n**HHs with children with young/older**\n**head of household**\n\nChildren living in households headed by a young or\nan older person may have greater protection needs\nthan others. However, this is also influenced by a\nrange of factors, such as the health, disability, and\nsocioeconomic status of the head of household.\nThe percentage of households with children with an\nolder head of household across the countries\namounts to 6 % \u2013 ranging from 7 % in Bulgaria to 4\n% in Romania. The percentage of children with a\nhead of household under the age of 25 years\nacross the countries is 7 %, ranging from 15 % in\nHungary to 2 % in Moldova.\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/c0ec89cb-4440-4199-8efe-c9777c3dcf3b/2024%2006%2028%20Inter-Agency%20Insights%20on%20Protection%20and%20Accountability%20for%20Refugees%20from%20Ukraine.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        15
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "INTER-AGENCY INSIGHTS ON PROTECTION AND ACCOUNTABILITY FOR REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n# **Gender-based violence**\n\n\n\n**Background**\n\nGender Based Violence (GBV) disproportionately\naffects women and girls and severely increases\nduring humanitarian emergencies. Due to conflict\nand displacement, women and girls are at increased\nrisk of experiencing various forms of GBV, including\nsexual exploitation and abuse (SEA), sex trafficking,\nsexual violence, exploitation, domestic and intimate\npartner violence (IPV), during transit and in host\ncountries where they seek refuge.\n\n\n**TOP REPORTED NEEDS BY HOUSEHOLD TYPE**\n\n\n\n**Key needs highlighted by women and**\n**girls**\n\nHouseholds led by women reported healthcare,\naccommodation, and employment as their top\npriority needs, while households with only men or\nmen and women reported healthcare and\naccommodation as their main needs. While at least\none priority need was reported across household\ntypes, this was the highest among female-led\nhouseholds with children, with 87% reporting at\nleast one priority need. Moreover, while livelihood\nand employment support were reported as a need\nacross household groups, only among female-led\nhouseholds with children was it reported as the\nmain priority need.\n\n\n\n**Female with no children**\n\nAccommodation\n\n\n\n**Female with children**\n\nAccommodation\n\n\n\n**Male with no children**\n\nAccommodation\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nLanguage\ncourses\n\n\nLivelihoods\nsupport\n\n\n\nFood\n\n\nservices\n\n\n\nLanguage\ncourses\n\n\nLivelihoods\nsupport\n\n\n\nFood\n\n\nservices\n\n\n\nLanguage\ncourses\n\n\nLivelihoods\nsupport\n\n\n\nFood\n\n\nservices\n\n\n\n**Male with children**\n\nAccommodation\n\n\n\n**Mixed with no children**\n\n\n\n\n\n**Mixed with children**\n\n\n\nAccommodation\n\n\n\nAccommodation\n\n\n\nFood\n\n\nservices\n\n\n\n\n\nLanguage\ncourses\n\n\nLivelihoods\nsupport\n\n\n\nLanguage\ncourses\n\n\nLivelihoods\nsupport\n\n\n\nLanguage\ncourses\n\n\nLivelihoods\nsupport\n\n\n\n\n\nFood\n\n\nservices\n\n\n\nFood\n\n\nservices\n\n\n\n**Note: \u201cmale with children\u201d makes up only 0.5% of the total sample, and therefore it was not possible to comparatively analyze the results they provided due**\n**to the small sample size**\n\n\n**17**\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/c0ec89cb-4440-4199-8efe-c9777c3dcf3b/2024%2006%2028%20Inter-Agency%20Insights%20on%20Protection%20and%20Accountability%20for%20Refugees%20from%20Ukraine.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        16
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "INTER-AGENCY INSIGHTS ON PROTECTION AND ACCOUNTABILITY FOR REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n\n\nA lack of access to essential services \u2013 including\naccommodation and employment \u2013 exposes\nwomen and girls to a number of GBV risks, such as\nsexual violence, sexual exploitation and abuse\n(SEA), and intimate partner violence (IPV). In most\ncases \u2013 IPV survivors who are lacking access to\nfinancial resources, service providers and\naccommodation \u2013 will be unable to leave abusive\nrelationships, rendering the provision of these\nservices extremely critical.\n\n\n**PERCENTAGE OF HOUSEHOLDS REPORTING AT LEAST ONE**\n**NEED, BY HOUSEHOLD TYPE**\n\n\n\n79%\n\n\nFemale\nwith no\nchildren\n\n\n\n87%\n\n\nFemale\nwith\nchildren\n\n\n\n85%\n81%\n\n\n\n71% 70%\n\n\nMale with Male with Mixed with\nno children children* no children\n\n\n\nMixed with\n\nchildren\n\n\n\nneed. Among female household members who\nreportedly had a health problem and were unable to\naccess necessary healthcare, 40% cited the inability\nto schedule appointments as the primary barrier,\ncompared to 32% for male household members.\nAdditionally, 20% of female members cited financial\nconstraints and inability afford clinical fees as a\nbarrier, in contrast to 15% for male household\nmembers. This again underscores the need for a\ncomprehensive response which includes\ncoordinated interventions, such as economic\nempowerment and cash assistance aligned with\nsafe and sustainable accommodation. These can\nenable survivors of GBV to access healthcare and\nother GBV-related services. Regarding the\nunavailability of specific medications, 16% of male\nhousehold members reported this issue, while it\naffected 11% of female household members.\n\n\nBarriers in accessing mental health and\npsychosocial support services were also\nhighlighted, including not knowing where to go\n(42% female and 39% male), and language barriers\n(16% female and 19% male), amongst others.\n\n\n**TOP 5 HEALTH BARRIERS - BY GENDER**\n\n\nFemale Male\n\n\n\n**\u201cmale with children\u201d makes up only 0.5% of the total sample, and**\n**therefore it was not possible to comparatively analyze the results due to**\n**the small sample size**\n\n\n**One in ten women face barriers when**\n**accessing healthcare**\n\nHealth care is the first entry point \u2013 oftentimes the\nonly one \u2013 for survivors in high-risk environments\nseeking life-saving assistance related to GBV.\nOverall, 28% of all household members reported\nneeding to access health care in the 30 days prior\nto the survey. Of those who required health care,\n89% were able to access health services without\nproblems while 11% reported an unmet health care\n\n\n**18**\n\n\n\nAccess to Health Facilities:\nUnable to make an\nappointment\n\n\nLanguage barriers\n\n\nKnowledge and Information:\nLack of Knowledhe of how to\naccess health services\n\n\nFinancial Constraints: could\nnot afford fee at the clinic\n\n\nUnavailabnle services:\nSpecific medication, treatment\nor service needed unavailable\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "survey",
+          "confidence": 0.8472115993499756,
+          "start": 452,
+          "end": 453
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "survey",
+          "confidence": 0.5705267190933228,
+          "start": 452,
+          "end": 453
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "household members",
+          "confidence": 0.9423987865447998,
+          "start": 437,
+          "end": 439
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/c0ec89cb-4440-4199-8efe-c9777c3dcf3b/2024%2006%2028%20Inter-Agency%20Insights%20on%20Protection%20and%20Accountability%20for%20Refugees%20from%20Ukraine.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        17
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "INTER-AGENCY INSIGHTS ON PROTECTION AND ACCOUNTABILITY FOR REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n\n\n**Safety and Security**\n\nWomen tend to feel slightly less safe than men\nwhile walking alone at night, although the majority\nstill reported feeling safe or fairly safe\u201489% of\nwomen compared to 91% of men.\n\n\n**HOW SAFE DO YOU FEEL WALKING ALONE IN YOUR**\n**AREA/NEIGHBOURHOOD AFTER DARK BY GENDER OF**\n**RESPONDENT?**\n\n\n**Female** **Male**\n\n\n\nShared\nAccommodation\n\n\n\n**TYPE OF ACCOMMODATION**\n\n\n**Female**\n\n\nOther\nHotel / Hostel\n\n\n\n**Male**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nVery safe or fairly safe\n\n\nBit unsafe or very unsafe\n\n\n\nVery safe or fairly safe\n\n\nBit unsafe or very unsafe\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nOther\nHotel / Hostel\n\n\n\n\n\nCollective sites and shared spaces are home to 10%\nand 16% women and girls respectively. These\nspaces often lack privacy, posing risks for women\nand girls, particularly sexual and physical violence\nby other individuals in the shelter (known or\nunknown to women and girls). Sex trafficking and\nSEA are also specific risks for women and girls living\nin these spaces.\n\n\n27% of women and girls live in either free\naccommodation provided by government or NGO\n(19%) or partially subsidized (8%). The majority (64%)\nof the individuals surveyed live in private\naccommodation (out of which 63% are female and\n66% are male). While private accommodation might\nbe seen as the safest option, women and girls that\nare living alone might face the risks even living in\nthis type of accommodation due to intersecting\nvulnerabilities, such as lack of livelihoods.\n\n\n\nShared\nAccommodation\n\n\n\n**Accessing to GBV services is**\n**insufficient**\n\nGBV risks are heightened when there is a lack of\nawareness on where and how to access specialized\nservices.\n\n\nTo understand the level of awareness of GBV\nservices, respondents were asked an indirect\nquestion \u201cIf someone in your community is subject\nto gender-based violence and asks for your help,\nwould you be able to tell this person about the\nfollowing services in this area?\u201d\n\n\nThe results revealed significant gaps: 25% were\nunaware of health services and over half did not\nknow about psycho-social services, legal\nassistance, or specific helplines. The highest\nawareness was for safety and security services\n(such as contacting the police), but still, one-fifth\nanswered no or don\u2019t know.\n\n\n**19**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/c0ec89cb-4440-4199-8efe-c9777c3dcf3b/2024%2006%2028%20Inter-Agency%20Insights%20on%20Protection%20and%20Accountability%20for%20Refugees%20from%20Ukraine.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        18
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "INTER-AGENCY INSIGHTS ON PROTECTION AND ACCOUNTABILITY FOR REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n\n\n**% OF RESPONDENTS WHO ARE UNAWARE OF GBV**\n**SERVICES IN THE AREA (ANSWERED NO OR DON\u2019T KNOW)**\n\n\n\n**PERCENTAGE OF HOUSEHOLDS REPORTING PERCEIVED**\n**BARRIERS TO ACCESSING GBV SERVICES (BY TYPE OF**\n**BARRIER)?**\n\n\n\nSpecific helpline to call and\nrequest a service\n\n\nPsycho-social services\n\n\nLegal assistance\n\n\nHealth services\n\n\nSafety and security services\n\n(police, safe shelters)\n\n\n\n55%\n\n\n50%\n\n\n49%\n\n\n\n14%\n\n\n14%\n\n\n13%\n\n\n12%\n\n\n11%\n\n\n6%\n\n\n3%\n\n\n3%\n\n\n2%\n\n\n2%\n\n\n2%\n\n\n1%\n\n\n1%\n\n\n\n25%\n\n\n20%\n\n\n\nIn response to the question, \u201cWhat are the major\nbarriers to accessing GBV services?\u201d the responses\nincluded lack of awareness (14%), stigma and shame\n(14%), fear of retaliation (13%), and language barriers\n(12%). Six percent reported a lack of trust in host\ncountry services. Female headed households with\nchildren report highest concern of fear of retaliation,\nwhile female headed households without children\nreport highest concern is a lack of information.\nHouseholds with at least one member with a\ndisability reported higher rates for each barrier.\n\n\n\nStigma and shame\n\n\nLack of awareness\n\n\nFear of retaliation\n\n\nLanguage and cultural barriers\n\n\nDont know\n\n\nLack of trust in host country\nservices\n\n\nInadequate service availability\n\n\nDiscrimination and bias\n\n\nFinancial constraints\n\n\nLegal and institutional barriers\n\n\nPrefer not to answer\n\n\nLack of trained professionals\n\n\nGeographic barriers\n\n\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/c0ec89cb-4440-4199-8efe-c9777c3dcf3b/2024%2006%2028%20Inter-Agency%20Insights%20on%20Protection%20and%20Accountability%20for%20Refugees%20from%20Ukraine.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        19
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "INTER-AGENCY INSIGHTS ON PROTECTION AND ACCOUNTABILITY FOR REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n# **Methodology**\n\n\n\nEach country adopted a unique sampling approach,\ndependent on factors such as the availability of\nsampling frames and information regarding\npopulation distribution by geographic area and\naccommodation type. The objective was to ensure a\ndiverse sample representative of the population\u2019s\ncomposition. A combination of different sampling\nmethods was used, typically incorporating multiple\nstages and blending convenience sampling, cluster\nrandom sampling, and simple random sampling (the\nlatter being exclusive to Romania).\n\n\nFor the regional analysis, population weights were\napplied based on the most up-to-date figures\nregarding the number of individual refugees\n\n\n\nrecorded in each country. This ensured the analysis\nmore accurately represented the broader refugee\npopulation across the region.\n\n\nNo GBV specific information on incidents or\nexperiences of women and girls nor survivors were\nrecorded in this assessment, to safeguard them and\nfollow the GBV Guiding Principles of Safety,\nConfidentiality, Respect and Non-discrimination [16] .\n\n\nAppropriate measures were implemented to ensure\nthe protection of personal data and guarantee\nconfidentiality in all data collection and processing\nactivities. Consent was requested and recorded for\nall selected participants, providing clear information\non the purpose, and expected use of the data.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nGlobal Metrics Random selection of settlements + convenience\nBulgaria 1,054 2,255 Jul-Aug\nLtd sampling for households\u2019 selection.\n\n\nCzech Sample distribution by geographical strata +\n1,218 2,648 June-Jul SocioFactor\nRepublic convenience sampling for households\u2019 selection.\n\n\n\nHungary 682 1,511 Jun-Aug\n\n\n\nT\u00e1rki Social\nResearch\nInstitute, IOM,\nUNHCR\n\n\n\nRandom selection of districts + convenience\nsampling for households\u2019 selection.\n\n\n\nREACH, Sample distribution by geographical strata +\nMoldova 890 2,130 Aug-Sep\nUNHCR convenience sampling for households\u2019 selection.\n\nSample distribution by geographical strata +\nPoland 5,645 13,420 Jul-Aug UNHCR, IOM random selection of districts + convenience\nsampling for households\u2019 selection.\n\n\n\nCSCM, IOM,\nRomania 1,222 3,485 Jul-Sep\nUNHCR\n\n\nUNHCR, IOM,\nSlovakia 819 1,853 Jul-Aug WHO, UNICEF,\nSHC\n\n**Total** **11,530** **27,302** **Jun-Sep**\n\n\n\nSample distribution by geographical strata +\nsimple random selection of households from cash\nenrolment lists.\n\nTwo strata (collective sites vs. private\naccommodation); random selection of districts +\nconvenience sampling for households\u2019 selection.\n\n\n**21**\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "sampling frames",
+          "confidence": 0.840631365776062,
+          "start": 32,
+          "end": 34
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "REFUGEES",
+          "confidence": 0.7792954444885254,
+          "start": 7,
+          "end": 8
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Global Metrics",
+          "confidence": 0.8553621768951416,
+          "start": 225,
+          "end": 227
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "cash\nenrolment lists",
+          "confidence": 0.8791264891624451,
+          "start": 412,
+          "end": 415
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "households",
+          "confidence": 0.9643875956535339,
+          "start": 315,
+          "end": 316
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/c0ec89cb-4440-4199-8efe-c9777c3dcf3b/2024%2006%2028%20Inter-Agency%20Insights%20on%20Protection%20and%20Accountability%20for%20Refugees%20from%20Ukraine.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        20
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "INTER-AGENCY INSIGHTS ON PROTECTION AND ACCOUNTABILITY FOR REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n\n\n**Limitations**\n\nDue to sampling limitations and the nonprobabilistic selection of respondents, the MSNA\nresults present limitations regarding the\ngeneralization of findings. Due to sampling\nlocations, the results might be skewed towards a\nmore vulnerable population.\n\n\nMoreover, there was a notably high non-response\nrate concerning sensitive questions related to\nincome, expenditure, mental health, psychosocial\nwell-being, and protection.\n\n\nIt\u2019s important to highlight that there were slight\ndifferences in the questionnaire across countries, as\nnot all questions were consistently included in all\ncountry-level questionnaires, and some answer\noptions were adjusted. However, the regional\nanalysis only incorporated questions that could be\nconsolidated for consistency across all participating\ncountries.\n\n\nFurthermore, certain indicators have been excluded\nfrom the regional analysis either due to insufficient\nsample size or the unavailability of variables across\nall countries. This limitation also affected the\ndisaggregation of data by certain age groups.\n\n\nThe MSNA does not cover the entire population of\nchildren in need of protection like unaccompanied\nchildren placed in alternative residential care\nfacilities of the host country, or groups of evacuated\nchildren from institutions in Ukraine.\n\n\n**22**\n\n\n\nQuestions were answered by adult respondents.\nConsequently, the results do not capture the views\nof the children in the household and may not fully\ncapture the child protection risks that they may face,\nespecially those occurring in the home.\n\n\nMoreover, the modality of the survey generates a\nlack of in-depth responses, so experiences related\nto more sensitive issues such as wellbeing,\nprotection and particularly GBV, would not have\nbeen captured. Most of the risks outlined are\nassumptions based on trends around GBV in\nemergency contexts, but more in-depth information\nis needed.\n\n\nSampling and indicators selection, and differences\nin the questionnaires across countries, limited the\ncapacity to produce gender, age and disability\ndisaggregated data.\n\n\nLastly, the survey was conducted during the\nsummer months, coinciding with both host\ncountries\u2019 and Ukrainian school holidays. This\nperiod often sees many households temporarily\nvisiting Ukraine, which impacted the accessibility of\nhouseholds and posed challenges in meeting\ntargets, particularly in certain countries and\ngeographic locations.\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "MSNA",
+          "confidence": 0.9190782308578491,
+          "start": 27,
+          "end": 28
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "questionnaire",
+          "confidence": 0.5997545123100281,
+          "start": 93,
+          "end": 94
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "UKRAINE",
+          "confidence": 0.8700649738311768,
+          "start": 9,
+          "end": 10
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "MSNA",
+          "confidence": 0.9135885834693909,
+          "start": 175,
+          "end": 176
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Ukraine",
+          "confidence": 0.5746309161186218,
+          "start": 210,
+          "end": 211
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "survey",
+          "confidence": 0.7082514762878418,
+          "start": 266,
+          "end": 267
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "survey",
+          "confidence": 0.5977249145507812,
+          "start": 266,
+          "end": 267
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "questionnaires",
+          "confidence": 0.7973635196685791,
+          "start": 328,
+          "end": 329
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Ukraine",
+          "confidence": 0.9596099853515625,
+          "start": 375,
+          "end": 376
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "households",
+          "confidence": 0.8896186947822571,
+          "start": 372,
+          "end": 373
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "survey",
+          "confidence": 0.8267194032669067,
+          "start": 348,
+          "end": 349
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "survey",
+          "confidence": 0.7039328217506409,
+          "start": 348,
+          "end": 349
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Ukraine",
+          "confidence": 0.9128907918930054,
+          "start": 375,
+          "end": 376
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "households",
+          "confidence": 0.9247382879257202,
+          "start": 372,
+          "end": 373
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/c0ec89cb-4440-4199-8efe-c9777c3dcf3b/2024%2006%2028%20Inter-Agency%20Insights%20on%20Protection%20and%20Accountability%20for%20Refugees%20from%20Ukraine.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        21
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "INTER-AGENCY INSIGHTS ON PROTECTION AND ACCOUNTABILITY FOR REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE\n\n# **Endnotes**\n\n\n\n1 \u2018aid\u2019 encompasses various forms of assistance received\nby respondents, including but not limited to humanitarian\nfinancial aid (cash and vouchers), humanitarian\ndistributions (non-food items, clothing, food, etc.),\nhumanitarian protection services, government social\nprotection and assistance programs, government housing\nprograms and other types of aid.\n2 [Helping Hands - The Role of Housing Support and](https://data.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/108068)\n[Employment Facilitation in Economic Vulnerability of](https://data.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/108068)\n[Refugees from Ukraine, page 3](https://data.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/108068)\n3 Level 3 disability refers to individuals experiencing\nsignificant limitations in functioning, as assessed through\na comprehensive set of questions covering mobility,\nvision, hearing, cognition, self-care, and communication.\n4 [Navigating health and well-being challenges for refugees](https://data.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/108629)\n[from Ukraine, page 17](https://data.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/108629)\n5 From the date of interview\n6 Crisis coping strategies include the following: Selling\nproductive assets (ex. car, sewing machine), withdrawing\nchildren from school, reducing essential health or\neducation expenditure due to lack of resources to cover\nbasic needs.\n7 Source: [https://data.unhcr.org/en/situations/ukraine,](https://data.unhcr.org/en/situations/ukraine)\naccessed on 21 March 2024.\n8 UNICEF, Humanitarian Action for Children, Ukraine and\nRefugee Response, 2024.\n9 Source: [The Uprotected_Overview of the Impact of](https://alliancecpha.org/sites/default/files/2024-01/The%20Uprotected_Overview%20of%20the%20Impact%20of%20Humanitarian%20Crises%20on%20Children%20in%202023_English%20%281%29.pdf)\n[Humanitarian Crises on Children in 2023_English (1).pdf](https://alliancecpha.org/sites/default/files/2024-01/The%20Uprotected_Overview%20of%20the%20Impact%20of%20Humanitarian%20Crises%20on%20Children%20in%202023_English%20%281%29.pdf)\n[(alliancecpha.org).](https://alliancecpha.org/sites/default/files/2024-01/The%20Uprotected_Overview%20of%20the%20Impact%20of%20Humanitarian%20Crises%20on%20Children%20in%202023_English%20%281%29.pdf)\n10 [DISPLACEMENT PATTERNS, PROTECTION RISKS AND](https://data.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/96447)\n[NEEDS OF REFUGEES FROM UKRAINE - REGIONAL](https://data.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/96447)\n[PROTECTION ANALYSIS #1 (unhcr.org)](https://data.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/96447)\n\n\n\n11 Note that this is typically not the case in situations of\nchildren in migration in Europe\n12 Unaccompanied children: children who have been\nseparated from both parents and other relatives and are\nnot being cared for by an adult who, by law or custom, is\nresponsible for doing so. (UN Committee on the Rights of\nthe Child, General Comment No 6).\n13 For more on the legal issues, see, e.g.: United Nations\nChildren\u2019s Fund UNICEF (July 2023). Fulfilling the rights of\nchildren without parental care displaced from Ukraine. An\nanalysis of international and European law.\n14 Child Protection in Humanitarian Action: \u201cChild protection\nis the \u2018prevention of and response to abuse, neglect,\nexploitation and violence against children\u2019. The objectives\nof humanitarian action are to: \u2022 Save lives, alleviate\nsuffering and maintain human dignity during and after\ndisasters; and \u2022 Strengthen preparedness for any future\ncrises. Effective child protection builds on existing\ncapacities and strengthens preparedness before a crisis\noccurs. During humanitarian crises, timely interventions\nsupport the physical and emotional health, dignity\nand well-being of children, families and communities.\u201d\n[(cpms_2019_fnal_en.pdf (alliancecpha.org), p.19).](https://alliancecpha.org/sites/default/files/technical/attachments/cpms_2019_final_en.pdf)\n15 Only fve out of six countries (excluding Moldova) asked\nrespondents whether the children in their household are\ndirectly related (meaning part of the nuclear or extended\nfamily).\n16 Interagency Minimum Standards for Gender Based\nViolence in Emergencies Programming, GBV Area of\nResponsibility, 2019. Available at: https://www.unfpa.org/\nsites/default/files/pub-pdf/19-200_Minimun_Standards_\nReport_ENGLISH-Nov.FINAL_.pdf\n\n\n**23**\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/c0ec89cb-4440-4199-8efe-c9777c3dcf3b/2024%2006%2028%20Inter-Agency%20Insights%20on%20Protection%20and%20Accountability%20for%20Refugees%20from%20Ukraine.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        22
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "# **STAYING SAFE:** **INTER-AGENCY** **INSIGHTS ON** **PROTECTION AND** **ACCOUNTABILITY FOR** **REFUGEES FROM** **UKRAINE**\n\n## June 2024\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/c0ec89cb-4440-4199-8efe-c9777c3dcf3b/2024%2006%2028%20Inter-Agency%20Insights%20on%20Protection%20and%20Accountability%20for%20Refugees%20from%20Ukraine.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        23
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_43/raw/doc_43_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,72 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "**ACC\u00c9L\u00c9RER LE LEADERSHIP DES ONG LOCALES ET NATIONALES DANS LES M\u00c9CANISMES DE**\n\n**COORDINATION HUMANITAIRE : CAS D\u2019ETUDE DU CLUSTER PROTECTION MALI**\n\n\n1\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/5835ee09-3631-40ac-8037-2ebfe944ebbc/2024%2012%20-%20CP%20Mali%20-%20Bonnes%20pratiques%20sur%20la%20localisation-%20CP%20Mali%20%20VF.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "# Contexte\n\nLe Cluster Protection, activ\u00e9 au Mali en avril 2012, est constitu\u00e9 de\ndeux domaines de responsabilit\u00e9 (Violences Bas\u00e9es sur le Genre\net Protection de l\u2019Enfant) et trois groupes de travail (Lutte AntiMine Humanitaire, Logement Terre Propri\u00e9t\u00e9 et Ressources\nNaturelles, Documentation Civile). Le Cluster Protection, ses\ndomaines de responsabilit\u00e9 et groupes de travail sont fonctionnels\naussi bien au niveau national que dans les principales r\u00e9gions\nhumanitaires. Ils ont pour r\u00f4le d\u2019amener les acteurs de protection\n\u00e0 s\u2019engager et \u00e0 se coordonner pour pr\u00e9venir et r\u00e9pondre aux\nviolations des droits de l\u2019homme et de r\u00e9pondre aux besoins de\nprotection des populations affect\u00e9es par les crises et les\ninondations.\n\n\nLes acteurs membres du Cluster Protection sont des organisations\nnon gouvernementales (ONG) (internationales, nationales et\nlocales), des services \u00e9tatiques, des agences des Nations Unies,\ndes bailleurs et le mouvement de la croix rouge comme\nobservateurs.\n\n\nEn 2021, l'\u00e9tat des lieux de la participation des acteurs nationaux et\nlocaux dans les structures de coordination de la protection au Mali\na r\u00e9v\u00e9l\u00e9 un fort leadership des agences onusiennes et des services\n\u00e9tatiques, tandis que les ONG nationales/locales \u00e9taient faiblement\nrepr\u00e9sent\u00e9es, voire absentes, limitant ainsi leur contribution \u00e0 la\nprise de d\u00e9cision strat\u00e9gique en mati\u00e8re de protection. Cette\nsituation a mis en \u00e9vidence la n\u00e9cessit\u00e9 de renforcer la participation\net le leadership des acteurs nationaux/locaux dans les structures de\n\n\n\ncoordination du Cluster Protection et ses domaines de\nresponsabilit\u00e9 pour une r\u00e9ponse plus inclusive et efficace aux\nbesoins des populations affect\u00e9es.\n\n\nCes \u00e9l\u00e9ments ont constitu\u00e9 la base pour lancer l\u2019initiative\nlocalisation en 2021 au sein du Cluster Protection au Mali, en\napplication des directives du Sommet d\u2019Istanbul et de l\u2019engagement\ndu Cluster Protection au niveau global \u00e0 soutenir les partenaires\nlocaux afin qu'ils prennent la place qui leur revient au c\u0153ur du\nsyst\u00e8me humanitaire. Ce soutien aux acteurs nationaux et locaux\npasse, entre autres, par leur implication et leur engagement au sein\ndes m\u00e9canismes de coordination de la protection (notamment \u00e0 la\ngestion de ces structures).\n\n\nDepuis lors, on constate une am\u00e9lioration de la participation des\nacteurs nationaux et locaux (services \u00e9tatiques et ONG nationales)\nau sein du Cluster Protection et ses domaines de responsabilit\u00e9 mais\naussi une manifestation de la prise de conscience de ces derniers,\nnotamment des ONG nationales, de leur importance/poids dans les\nstructures de coordination et dans la r\u00e9ponse. Les structures de\ncoordination au Mali envisagent \u00e9galement de plus en plus des\nmod\u00e8les de Co-coordination avec les acteurs locaux.\n\n\nLa strat\u00e9gie nationale r\u00e9vis\u00e9e du Cluster Protection pour 20242026 s\u2019inscrit dans cette continuit\u00e9 de soutien \u00e0 la localisation. En\neffet, l\u2019un de ses axes strat\u00e9giques est consacr\u00e9 \u00e0 la localisation de\nla protection et au renforcement de la coordination du Cluster.\n\n\n\n2\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/5835ee09-3631-40ac-8037-2ebfe944ebbc/2024%2012%20-%20CP%20Mali%20-%20Bonnes%20pratiques%20sur%20la%20localisation-%20CP%20Mali%20%20VF.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "# 1. Objectf de l\u2019initatve\n\nL\u2019objectif de cette initiative est de promouvoir la repr\u00e9sentation et\nle leadership des acteurs nationaux/locaux dans les structures de\ncoordination du Cluster Protection et ses domaines de\nresponsabilit\u00e9.\n\n# 2. Approche M\u00e9thodologique\n\n\nDes rencontres et consultations ont \u00e9t\u00e9 men\u00e9es par la coordination\ndu Cluster Protection avec les acteurs locaux membres du cluster,\nles membres du Groupe Consultatif Strat\u00e9gique et les membres du\nCluster Protection. Ces consultations et rencontres ont permis de\nfaire ressortir les acquis et les d\u00e9fis de la localisation au niveau de\nla protection. Des recommandations ont \u00e9galement \u00e9t\u00e9 formul\u00e9es,\nlors des rencontres, pour mener \u00e0 bien l\u2019initiative de la localisation.\nCes recommandations sont, entre autres, le renforcement des\ncapacit\u00e9s des acteurs locaux, le plaidoyer pour la visibilit\u00e9 des ONG\nnationales, et le renforcement du leadership des ONG nationales\nau sein du Cluster Protection.\n\n# 3. R\u00e9sultats et impacts de l\u2019initatve de la localisaton de la protecton\n\nD\u2019une mani\u00e8re g\u00e9n\u00e9rale, l\u2019initiative localisation du Cluster\nProtection a favoris\u00e9 une grande motivation des ONG\nnationales/locales \u00e0 participer aux structures de coordination du\nCluster Protection aussi bien au niveau national que r\u00e9gional. En\neffet, au d\u00e9but de l\u2019initiative, peu d\u2019ONG nationales participaient\n\n\n\n\n\naux rencontres du cluster. Il a d\u2019ailleurs fallu l\u2019appui de l\u2019ONG AMSS\n(ONG nationale) pour mobiliser certaines ONG nationales \u00e0\nparticiper \u00e0 la premi\u00e8re consultation des acteurs locaux sur la\nlocalisation. Aujourd\u2019hui 88 membres du Cluster Protection sont\ndes organisations locales et nationales\n\n\nComposition du Cluster\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n3\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/5835ee09-3631-40ac-8037-2ebfe944ebbc/2024%2012%20-%20CP%20Mali%20-%20Bonnes%20pratiques%20sur%20la%20localisation-%20CP%20Mali%20%20VF.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        2
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "L\u2019un des r\u00e9sultats de cette initiative est sa contribution \u00e0 la prise\nde conscience/connaissance des ONG nationales, sur leur r\u00f4le et\npoids dans les structures de coordination humanitaire. L\u2019on a\nconstat\u00e9 un engouement des ONG \u00e0 s\u2019impliquer dans les\nstructures de coordination \u00e0 travers la redynamisation d\u2019un\n\u00ab cadre de concertation d\u2019ONG nationales \u00bb au niveau national qui\ns\u2019est sold\u00e9 par la cr\u00e9ation de la Plateforme des ONG Nationales\nintervenant dans l\u2019Humanitaire (PONAH) en 2024. Le Fonds\nR\u00e9gional pour l\u2019Afrique de l\u2019Ouest et du Centre a \u00e9galement \u00e9t\u00e9 un\nlevier pour la participation des ONG nationales et locales au\nCluster Protection \u00e0 travers ces crit\u00e8res d\u2019\u00e9ligibilit\u00e9s au Fonds.\n\n\nDe plus :\n\n\n- La coordination du Cluster a impliqu\u00e9 les ONG nationales dans\nla mise en \u0153uvre de ses activit\u00e9s directes, a d\u00e9sign\u00e9 des\nacteurs locaux comme points focaux du Cluster Protection\ndans certains forums humanitaires et a revu \u00e0 la hausse le\nnombre de repr\u00e9sentants des ONG nationales au sein du\nGroupe Consultatif Strat\u00e9gique.\n\n- A l\u2019issue de la s\u00e9ance de s\u00e9lection du Co-coordinateur du\nCluster Protection en mars 2024, le Comit\u00e9 Directeur a fait le\nchoix de DRC (ONG internationale) et de AMSS (ONG\nnationale) pour appuyer la coordination du Cluster au niveau\nnational. Cette initiative vise \u00e0 faire la promotion de la\nlocalisation \u00e0 travers un transfert progressif des comp\u00e9tences\naux ONG nationales.\n\n\n\n\n- La Co-facilitation du Cluster Protection r\u00e9gional de\nTombouctou est assur\u00e9e par l\u2019ONG AMSS de mars 2022 \u00e0\nd\u00e9cembre 2024 \u00e0 la suite d\u2019un processus de s\u00e9lection\ncomp\u00e9titif.\n\n- La Co-facilitation du groupe de travail coh\u00e9sion sociale de\nTombouctou est assur\u00e9e par AVS depuis 2023, avec l\u2019appui\nfinancier du projet Empower WCA de CRS / USAID pour les six\npremiers mois.\n\n- La Co-facilitation du domaine de responsabilit\u00e9 protection de\nl\u2019enfant (CPAoR) au niveau national est assur\u00e9e par AMSODE\ndepuis 2022, suite \u00e0 un processus de s\u00e9lection comp\u00e9titif. Le\nCo-lead du CPAoR au niveau national est assur\u00e9 par la Direction\nNationale de la Promotion de la Femme, de l\u2019Enfant et de la\nFamille et au niveau r\u00e9gional le lead est assur\u00e9 par la Direction\nr\u00e9gionale de la Promotion de la Femme, de l\u2019enfant et de la\nFamille.\n\n- Le Groupe de Travail Logement, Terre, Propri\u00e9t\u00e9 et Ressources\nNaturelles est co-facilit\u00e9 par AVS au niveau national depuis\n2023.\n\n- Le Groupe de Travail Documentation Civile est Co-facilit\u00e9 par\nl\u2019ONG IRAD depuis 2023 au niveau national.\n\n- La Co-coordination pour le GBV AoR au niveau Central est\nd\u00e9sormais assur\u00e9 par trois parties dont UNFPA- PNVBG\n(Structure \u00e9tatique) et ASDMIN (une Organisation de la soci\u00e9t\u00e9\ncivile dirig\u00e9e par les femmes).\n\n\nLe r\u00f4le de Co-coordination et/ou de Co-facilitation des ONG\nnationales a permis aux ONG nationales et locales, de renforcer\n\n\n\n4\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/5835ee09-3631-40ac-8037-2ebfe944ebbc/2024%2012%20-%20CP%20Mali%20-%20Bonnes%20pratiques%20sur%20la%20localisation-%20CP%20Mali%20%20VF.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        3
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "leur participation et visibilit\u00e9 au sein de la coordination\nhumanitaire, d'accro\u00eetre leurs capacit\u00e9s dans la conduite des\nop\u00e9rations d'assistances aux b\u00e9n\u00e9fices des populations affect\u00e9es\net de contribuer \u00e0 une meilleure compr\u00e9hension des dynamiques\nen mati\u00e8re de protection, notamment les aspects de protection \u00e0\nbase communautaire, le monitoring de protection et les\n\u00e9valuations et analyses de Protection.\n\n\nL\u2019apport des ONG nationales et locales, \u00e0 temps partiel ou total, a\npermis d\u2019assurer une implication de ces structures (OSC nationales\nou locales) dans les activit\u00e9s du Cluster et de ses domaines de\nresponsabilit\u00e9 au niveau strat\u00e9gique et op\u00e9rationnel, mais\n\u00e9galement \u00e0 contribuer aux discussions humanitaires afin\nd\u2019orienter les travaux multisectoriels et les strat\u00e9gies.\n\n\nProjets soumis HRP\n\n\n# 4. Le\u00e7ons apprises\n\nLe renforcement du Leadership des ONG nationales/locales a\nfavoris\u00e9 un meilleur acc\u00e8s et une meilleure contextualisation des\ninterventions, renfor\u00e7ant leur pertinence et leur acceptation par\nles communaut\u00e9s locales. Elle a \u00e9galement permis le\nrenforcement des capacit\u00e9s locales, la durabilit\u00e9 des actions et la\nr\u00e9activit\u00e9 face aux crises. De plus, il a \u00e9t\u00e9 constat\u00e9 la participation\net l'appropriation des initiatives de protection par les populations\nlocales, augmentant ainsi l'efficacit\u00e9 et l'impact global des\nprogrammes de protection au Mali, mais aussi un meilleur partage\ndes informations de terrain et des retours des populations\naffect\u00e9es.\n\n\nToutefois, le leadership des ONG nationales et locales, en\nparticulier dans le domaine de la coordination, souffre d\u2019un\nmanque de ressources humaines (d\u00e9di\u00e9e \u00e0 la coordination) et de\ncapacit\u00e9s techniques et institutionnelles (comp\u00e9tences\nsp\u00e9cifiques, moyens logistiques) et des contraintes financi\u00e8res, ce\nqui peut affecter l\u2019efficacit\u00e9 globale des initiatives de protection.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n5\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/5835ee09-3631-40ac-8037-2ebfe944ebbc/2024%2012%20-%20CP%20Mali%20-%20Bonnes%20pratiques%20sur%20la%20localisation-%20CP%20Mali%20%20VF.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        4
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "Financement re\u00e7u en 2024\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAfin de renforcer l\u2019expertise des ONG nationales et locales en\nmati\u00e8re de coordination du Cluster, il y a besoin de renforcer leurs\ncapacit\u00e9s institutionnelles, organisationnelles et financi\u00e8res par\ndes formations et un soutien technique. Il est aussi essentiel\nd'am\u00e9liorer la communication et la coordination entre diff\u00e9rents\nacteurs avec des m\u00e9canismes clairs et r\u00e9guliers. De plus, il est\ncrucial que le Cluster Protection soutienne les plaidoyers des\nacteurs locaux et nationales dans la mobilisation des ressources\nn\u00e9cessaires pour prendre en charge le personnel d\u00e9di\u00e9 \u00e0 la\ncoordination.\n\n\nLa s\u00e9lection d'un coordinateur local ou d'une ONG nationale doit\n\u00eatre men\u00e9e de mani\u00e8re transparente et ouverte. Tous les\nmembres doivent \u00eatre impliqu\u00e9s dans l'\u00e9laboration et la validation\ndes termes de r\u00e9f\u00e9rence pour la Co-coordination. Par ailleurs, le\nprocessus doit \u00eatre comp\u00e9titif afin d\u2019offrir l\u2019opportunit\u00e9 \u00e0 toutes\n\n\n\nles ONG nationales et locales membres du Cluster, de postuler, d\u00e8s\nle moment o\u00f9 ils r\u00e9pondent aux crit\u00e8res de s\u00e9lection.\n\n# 5. Recommandatons\n\n- Organisation, en 2025, des sessions de d\u00e9veloppement des\ncapacit\u00e9s sur la coordination, par le Cluster Protection, au\nprofit des Co-coordinateurs /Co-facilitateurs du Cluster et des\nAoR aussi bien au niveau national que r\u00e9gional.\n\n- Renforcement du plaidoyer pour le financement des positions\nde Co Coordination/Co-facilitation des ONG\nnationales/locales.\n\n- Plaidoyer pour l\u2019\u00e9valuation et l\u2019\u00e9ligibilit\u00e9 (renforcer la liste des\nONG \u00e9ligibles aux fonds humanitaires) des ONG Nationales\n/locales et /ou dirig\u00e9es par des femmes et des jeunes.\n\n- D\u00e9velopper une note commune (Cluster Protection, AoR, et\nGroupe de Travail) d\u2019orientation sur le processus de s\u00e9lection\nd\u2019une organisation locale ou nationale pour la Cocoordination/Co facilitation du Cluster Protection et ses AoR\naussi bien au niveau national que r\u00e9gional.\n\n\n\n6\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/5835ee09-3631-40ac-8037-2ebfe944ebbc/2024%2012%20-%20CP%20Mali%20-%20Bonnes%20pratiques%20sur%20la%20localisation-%20CP%20Mali%20%20VF.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        5
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "# 6. Ressources\n\n\n   - [Strat\u00e9gie Du Cluster Protection Mali 2024 -2026](https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.dropbox.com%2Fscl%2Ffi%2F9rj1fuido66mqaptj5hdu%2FStrategie-Revisee-2024-2026_Cluster-Protection-au-Mali.pdf%3Frlkey%3Dkdog4ok7b3fb8pairnn4f0d8l%26dl%3D0&data=05%7C02%7CSALLO%40unhcr.org%7C7116817901644de4b56b08dd4f4ebb5a%7Ce5c37981666441348a0c6543d2af80be%7C0%7C0%7C638753921744473651%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=RWWrsZFj0xLYQIOpWi1tP%2BHBWJ6w4nYW9Y%2BZ5LHhrNY%3D&reserved=0)\n\n   - [Note sur la Localisation : Analyse et Recommandations](https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.dropbox.com%2Fscl%2Ffi%2Fp3agd51hgalzq11a5b34s%2F2021-01-CP-Mali-Note-sur-la-localisation-Final.pdf%3Frlkey%3Db7t6n9wka7abpz4js3tjl0shp%26dl%3D0&data=05%7C02%7CSALLO%40unhcr.org%7C7116817901644de4b56b08dd4f4ebb5a%7Ce5c37981666441348a0c6543d2af80be%7C0%7C0%7C638753921744496307%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=dlE%2FK5MXCnzR4gVrahLVCeNTEHtFRTj8H%2Bcl9NQnorU%3D&reserved=0)\n\n   - [Note d'Orientation Co-facilitation](https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/axm4cycbn9ubf44415iai/Note-d-Orientation-Co-facilitateur-AMSS.pdf?rlkey=bg87qvxy9sscqyb6hum4gqxp4&dl=0)\n\n   - [TdR, renforcement de la coordination nationale en mati\u00e8re de lutte](https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.dropbox.com%2Fscl%2Ffi%2F1xvqpbs3c52g6o0hja1wf%2FTDR-Renforcement-de-la-coordination-du-GBV-AoR-Mali-WLO-Project.pdf%3Frlkey%3Dgylq0nww32tdb38n3ypsrr65f%26dl%3D0&data=05%7C02%7CSALLO%40unhcr.org%7C7116817901644de4b56b08dd4f4ebb5a%7Ce5c37981666441348a0c6543d2af80be%7C0%7C0%7C638753921744513441%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=yQJZVyGACriJ1U7YDsUa8Cfp8kc2v3T48Zlwm2Xn4Bo%3D&reserved=0)\n[contre les VBG : Appel \u00e0 une co-coordination par une ONG nationale](https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.dropbox.com%2Fscl%2Ffi%2F1xvqpbs3c52g6o0hja1wf%2FTDR-Renforcement-de-la-coordination-du-GBV-AoR-Mali-WLO-Project.pdf%3Frlkey%3Dgylq0nww32tdb38n3ypsrr65f%26dl%3D0&data=05%7C02%7CSALLO%40unhcr.org%7C7116817901644de4b56b08dd4f4ebb5a%7Ce5c37981666441348a0c6543d2af80be%7C0%7C0%7C638753921744513441%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=yQJZVyGACriJ1U7YDsUa8Cfp8kc2v3T48Zlwm2Xn4Bo%3D&reserved=0)\n[\u00e0 leadership F\u00e9minin (WLO)](https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.dropbox.com%2Fscl%2Ffi%2F1xvqpbs3c52g6o0hja1wf%2FTDR-Renforcement-de-la-coordination-du-GBV-AoR-Mali-WLO-Project.pdf%3Frlkey%3Dgylq0nww32tdb38n3ypsrr65f%26dl%3D0&data=05%7C02%7CSALLO%40unhcr.org%7C7116817901644de4b56b08dd4f4ebb5a%7Ce5c37981666441348a0c6543d2af80be%7C0%7C0%7C638753921744513441%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=yQJZVyGACriJ1U7YDsUa8Cfp8kc2v3T48Zlwm2Xn4Bo%3D&reserved=0)\n\n   - [Termes de Reference Co-Coordination du domaine de](https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.dropbox.com%2Fscl%2Ffi%2Fuqtshckpc50fpzmejst9a%2FTDR-Role-et-responsabilit-de-la-Co-Coordination-GBV-AoR-Bamako.pdf%3Frlkey%3Dzoel984ae1gvckgbco60gs3yq%26dl%3D0&data=05%7C02%7CSALLO%40unhcr.org%7C72074b7045c24529cd7508dd4f606763%7Ce5c37981666441348a0c6543d2af80be%7C0%7C0%7C638753997641219097%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Na9ZRp4xHT9vzj3KUemSHkq3puqSj%2B8G2u7%2B%2B%2FkzCh0%3D&reserved=0)\n[responsabilit\u00e9 de la protection contre les violences Bas\u00e9es](https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.dropbox.com%2Fscl%2Ffi%2Fuqtshckpc50fpzmejst9a%2FTDR-Role-et-responsabilit-de-la-Co-Coordination-GBV-AoR-Bamako.pdf%3Frlkey%3Dzoel984ae1gvckgbco60gs3yq%26dl%3D0&data=05%7C02%7CSALLO%40unhcr.org%7C72074b7045c24529cd7508dd4f606763%7Ce5c37981666441348a0c6543d2af80be%7C0%7C0%7C638753997641219097%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Na9ZRp4xHT9vzj3KUemSHkq3puqSj%2B8G2u7%2B%2B%2FkzCh0%3D&reserved=0)\n[Sur Le Genre - Au Niveau national-Bamako](https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.dropbox.com%2Fscl%2Ffi%2Fuqtshckpc50fpzmejst9a%2FTDR-Role-et-responsabilit-de-la-Co-Coordination-GBV-AoR-Bamako.pdf%3Frlkey%3Dzoel984ae1gvckgbco60gs3yq%26dl%3D0&data=05%7C02%7CSALLO%40unhcr.org%7C72074b7045c24529cd7508dd4f606763%7Ce5c37981666441348a0c6543d2af80be%7C0%7C0%7C638753997641219097%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Na9ZRp4xHT9vzj3KUemSHkq3puqSj%2B8G2u7%2B%2B%2FkzCh0%3D&reserved=0)\n\n   - [Appel \u00e0 manifestation d\u2019int\u00e9r\u00eat, Co Coordination GBVAoR](https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.dropbox.com%2Fscl%2Ffi%2F0y8ws70knu5hp92iqkd4n%2FAMI-co-coordination-GBV-AoR-Mali-r-vise-OK.pdf%3Frlkey%3Dycona08pwsghivgkkc291id3g%26dl%3D0&data=05%7C02%7CSALLO%40unhcr.org%7Cd9093fe8e86848ddb2e908dd519f76e0%7Ce5c37981666441348a0c6543d2af80be%7C0%7C0%7C638756467514055828%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=fmD3yH%2F8gaHAHd75Z4PBzaKFMeFZCPAhGZb9l3SzElw%3D&reserved=0)\n\n   - Grand Bargain Document\n\n   - [TdR Facilitateur-CPAoR Mali Dec 2021 Final .pdf](https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/8iel776t5e1xl4biuc72f/TdR-Facilitateur-CPAoR-Mali-Dec-2021-Final.pdf?rlkey=wltu22yavn2chdg22mmslu2iu&e=1&dl=0)\n\n   - [TDR Facilitation du Sous-cluster Protection de l\u2019enfant en](https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/8iel776t5e1xl4biuc72f/TdR-Facilitateur-CPAoR-Mali-Dec-2021-Final.pdf?rlkey=wltu22yavn2chdg22mmslu2iu&dl=0)\n[situation d\u2019urgence au Mali](https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/8iel776t5e1xl4biuc72f/TdR-Facilitateur-CPAoR-Mali-Dec-2021-Final.pdf?rlkey=wltu22yavn2chdg22mmslu2iu&dl=0)\n\n\n7\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/5835ee09-3631-40ac-8037-2ebfe944ebbc/2024%2012%20-%20CP%20Mali%20-%20Bonnes%20pratiques%20sur%20la%20localisation-%20CP%20Mali%20%20VF.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        6
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_44/raw/doc_44_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,72 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "##### 2024 CRITICAL FUNDING NEEDS IN EUROPE\n\nOctober 2024\n\n\nAs of mid-2024, countries in Europe are hosting some 21.2 million forcibly displaced and stateless people \u2013\n16 per cent of the global displaced population. For 2024, UNHCR\u2019s financial requirements in Europe stand at\n**US$ 1.466 billion** to assist some 6.7 million forcibly displaced and stateless people in need across the\nregion.\n\n\n**The war in Ukraine has displaced almost one-third of the country\u2019s population**, with some 3.7 million\npeople internally displaced and over 6.7 million refugees globally, including 6.1 million in Europe. UNHCR\nand partners are supporting national authorities in providing humanitarian assistance to displaced\nUkrainians both within and outside of the country. Meanwhile, **many continue to take perilous journeys**\n**towards Europe from other regions** along dangerous sea and land routes where they face abuse,\nexploitation, sexual violence and detention. UNHCR and partners are working with States to ensure a\nfavorable protection environment for people on the move, while advocating for safer migration pathways.\n\n\nHowever, **the funding outlook remains uncertain in** **Europe.** UNHCR calls for more support amidst low\nfunding levels in 2024, which unless addressed will negatively impact its ability to provide assistance to\nforcibly displaced and stateless people. As of 30 September, UNHCR has received only 50 per cent of its\nfunding needs for activities in Europe, less than during the same period in 2023. Winter assistance in\nparticular remains critical, notably inside Ukraine and the Republic of Moldova, where funding gaps are\nlimiting UNHCR and partners\u2019 ability to reach those in need with vital support in 2024-25.\n\n\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/374e9362-93fe-47ef-8f0f-6555c9efb172/2024%20Critical%20Funding%20Needs%20-%20Europe.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**Without further crucial funding, in 2024 UNHCR will be unable to reach**\n**vulnerable displaced people and communities in Europe, including:**\n\n\n\n**Key Figures:**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n**13.2 million**\nrefugees under UNHCR\u2019s mandate\n\n\n\n**1.5 million** **4.9 million**\nasylum- internally\nseekers displaced people\n\n|Col1|Col2|Col3|Col4|Col5|Col6|\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n|||||||\n\n\n\nstateless people **507,967**\nothers of concern\n\n\n\n\n\n**21.2 million**\nforcibly displaced\nand stateless\npeople in Europe\n\n\n###### **Financial Information**\n\nIn 2024, UNHCR has appealed for **$1.466 billion** to provide assistance to over **6.7 million**\nforcibly displaced and stateless people in need across Europe.\n\n\n\n**FORCIBLY DISPLACED AND STATELESS**\n**PEOPLE IN NEED ACROSS EUROPE**\nmillion\n# 6.7\n\n\n**REQUESTED FOR UNHCR\u2019S ACTIVITIES IN**\n**EUROPE IN 2024**\n\n$ billion\n# 1.466\n\n\n\n**TOTAL FUNDING (AS OF 30 SEPT 2024)**\n\n\n\n**TOTAL CONTRIBUTED OR PLEDGED (AS OF**\n**30 SEPT 2024)**\n\n\n$ million\n# 728.9\n\n\nPage 2 **U N H C R R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E,** O C T O B E R 2 0 2 4\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/374e9362-93fe-47ef-8f0f-6555c9efb172/2024%20Critical%20Funding%20Needs%20-%20Europe.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "2024 CRITICAL FUNDING NEEDS IN EUROPE\n\n###### **Ukraine Situation**\n\n\nAs the full-scale war in Ukraine continues unabated, ongoing hostilities are heavily impacting civilians,\nwith **3.7 million people currently internally displaced.** [1] UNHCR and partners are on the frontline\nproviding lifesaving assistance to the newly displaced, including psychosocial support, legal assistance,\ncore-relief items, cash assistance and emergency shelter support and repairs. Where conditions allow,\nUNHCR is supporting government-led early-recovery efforts including repairs to civilian housing and\ninfrastructure. Heading into yet another winter\u2014and with targeted attacks compromising energy\ninfrastructure in parts of the country\u2014additional funding is critical to help scale up assistance for millions\nof people to repair their damaged homes, afford electricity and heating costs, and ensure they have\naccess to essential non-food items such as clothing, heaters, thermal kits, as well as cash assistance.\n\n\nOver **6.1 million refugees** from Ukraine have sought safety across Europe, where host countries have\ngenerously provided protection, access to services, and inclusion into national systems. However, host\ngovernments and communities need support to guarantee access to rights and services, provide\ndedicated support for the most vulnerable, foster greater inclusion and ensure social cohesion. UNHCR\nleads the **[Regional Refugee Response Plan](https://data.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/105903)** (RRP) for the Ukraine Situation in these efforts along with\nmore than 300 partners. In 2024, UNHCR aims to assist over **850,000 refugees with protection support**\nincluding information and counselling, targeted cash for protection and socio-economic activities,\nincluding livelihoods support. For more on UNHCR's 2024 plans and financial requirements for the\nUkraine Situation, see **[here.](https://data.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/106081)**\n\n\n**UNHCR\u2019S 2024 FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS**\n**FOR UKRAINE SITUATION COUNTRIES**\n\nUS$ million\n# 993.3\n\n\n**TOTAL FUNDED (as of 30 Sept 2024)**\n%\n# 52\n\n\n\n**COUNTRY** **TOTAL**\n**BUDGET**\n**(USD)**\n\n\n\n**TOTAL FUNDED**\n**(%)**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nBulgaria **$17.0M** 71%\n\nCzech Republic **$11.9M** 44%\n\nEstonia **$4.2M** 50%\n\nHungary **$14.2M** 60%\n\nLatvia **$4.2M** 50%\n\nLithuania **$4.2M** 50%\n\nPoland **$85.0M** 38%\n\nRep. of Moldova **$102.8M** 60%\n\nRomania **$54.3M** 45%\n\nSlovakia **$20.3M** 53%\n\nUkraine **$598.9M** 52%\n\n\n\n\n\n[1 IOM DTM - Ukraine](https://dtm.iom.int/ukraine)\n\n\nPage 3 **U N H C R R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E,** O C T O B E R 2 0 2 4\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/374e9362-93fe-47ef-8f0f-6555c9efb172/2024%20Critical%20Funding%20Needs%20-%20Europe.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        2
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "###### **Mediterranean and North-West African Maritime Routes**\n\nThe Western Mediterranean and North-West African maritime routes towards Europe are experiencing\nongoing **high arrivals of refugees and asylum-seekers**, with 132,050 arrivals and over 1,000 reported\ndead or missing so far this year. [2] In August 2024 some 22,600 asylum-seekers and migrants arrived to\nEurope by sea. [3] Addressing the complex challenges associated with these mixed movements requires\nrobust and consistent collaboration among states, focusing on comprehensive route-based strategies\nthat address the full spectrum of protection needs, potential solutions and the capacities of states.\n\n\nUNHCR is working to strengthen cooperation with national authorities and partners to improve\ncoordinated search and rescue operations along the primary sea routes, while delivering protection\nsupport and identifying the most vulnerable among those arriving. These efforts are realized through\nUNHCR\u2019s presence at key border and arrival points including Cyprus, Greece, Italy, Malta and Spain to\nidentify protection and humanitarian needs, provide assistance after disembarkation and support states\nin strengthening their asylum capacities. However, **UNHCR\u2019s response is hampered by critical**\n**underfunding** \u2014including in Greece where UNHCR activities remain only 45 per cent funded [4] impacting on the ability to deliver protection assistance including legal aid and referrals to specialized\nservices for vulnerable persons arriving.\n\n\n\nare present at disembarkation points in Italy\nand other Mediterranean countries, where\npeople arrive after undertaking perilous sea\njourneys. UNHCR works with national\nauthorities to ensure those arriving by sea\nare provided with adequate assistance and\ninformation\u2014including medical assistance,\nwhere needed\u2014while identifying\nopportunities for socio-economic inclusion\nand durable solutions, including\nresettlement and complementary pathways.\nA high number of sea arrivals continue to be\nobserved in Mediterranean countries in\nEurope and along the Northwest African\nmaritime route towards the Canary Islands.\n\n\n# 81.2\n\n%\n\n\n**(USD)** **(%)**\n\n\nMalta **$2.2M** 68%\n\nSpain **$6.8M** 73%\n\n\n**The \"Whole-of-Route\" Approach**\nUNHCR works with states to address the\nchallenges of irregular and mixed movements\nat Europe\u2019s borders through a comprehensive\n[route-based approach. This strategy focuses on](https://www.refworld.org/policy/strategy/unhcr/2024/en/148087)\ncoordinated actions to protect refugees and\nmigrants, uphold their rights and reduce\ndangerous journeys. It emphasizes cooperation\namong states, UN agencies and civil society to\nmanage irregular movements and ensure\nresponses align with international obligations.\n\n\n\n2 Mediterranean Situation [Operational Data Portal](https://data.unhcr.org/en/situations/mediterranean)\n3 8,500 arrivals to Italy; 6,900 to Greece; 6,500 arrivals to Spain (4,095 of whom arrived in the Canary Islands); and 216 to Cyprus.\n4 As of 30 September 2024.\n\n\n\nPage 4\n\n\n\n**U N H C R R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E,** O C T O B E R 2 0 2 4\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/374e9362-93fe-47ef-8f0f-6555c9efb172/2024%20Critical%20Funding%20Needs%20-%20Europe.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        3
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**2024 CRITICAL FUNDING NEEDS IN EUROPE**\n\n###### **South Eastern Europe**\n\n\nAs of June 2024, some 3,000 refugees and asylum-seekers were present in South Eastern Europe,\nincluding 199 unaccompanied and separated children. [5] UNHCR\u2019s [Strategy for engagement in mixed](https://reliefweb.int/report/world/strategy-unhcr-engagement-mixed-movement-western-balkans-revision-october-2021)\n[movements in the Western Balkans sets a foundation to work with partners to strengthen asylum systems](https://reliefweb.int/report/world/strategy-unhcr-engagement-mixed-movement-western-balkans-revision-october-2021)\nand identify viable solutions for refugees, as well as to eradicate statelessness, while fostering\nopportunities for integration and inclusion for those granted international protection. UNHCR is helping\nto build the capacities of local authorities to gradually assume greater responsibility for their asylum\nsystems, while also improving protection-sensitive migration management across the region, including\nrecognising the importance of effective return mechanisms for those not in need of international\nprotection. **Funding is needed to support these efforts and ensure sustainable programming** for\nintegration and inclusion, and to identify durable solutions for refugees, asylum-seekers and stateless\npeople in the region \u2013 which is itself a region of emigration.\n\n# 30.7\n\n\n%\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n5 Non-Ukrainian nationals; of these, 52 per cent were in Bosnia and Herzegovina; 25 per cent in Serbia; 7 per cent in Kosovo; 6 per cent each in Albania\nand Montenegro; and 4 per cent in North Macedonia. In North Macedonia, this number includes individuals outside government-run centres, with forcibly\ndisplaced and stateless people accommodated in government or IOM-run centres, asylum centres, and transit facilities. UNHCR utilises arrival data to\nestimate the numbers involved. Note: References to Kosovo shall be understood to be in the context of Security Council Resolution 1244 (1999).\n\n\nPage 5 **U N H C R R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E,** O C T O B E R 2 0 2 4\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/374e9362-93fe-47ef-8f0f-6555c9efb172/2024%20Critical%20Funding%20Needs%20-%20Europe.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        4
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "2024 CRITICAL FUNDING NEEDS IN EUROPE\n\n###### **Statelessness**\n\n\nJust under **490,000 stateless individuals are currently present in Europe** (out a total 4.4 million people\nglobally). In the region, UNHCR is providing legal advice and assistance to affected individuals, while\nengaging governments in developing Statelessness Determination Procedures, offering\nrecommendations on legislative proposals, and providing submissions to human rights mechanisms\n[along with legal and technical guidance on interpreting the UN Conventions on Statelessness. UNHCR](https://www.unhcr.org/what-we-do/protect-human-rights/ending-statelessness/un-conventions-statelessness)\nhas also co-facilitated regional initiatives to bring together high-level stakeholders in South Eastern\nEurope to address issues related to access to documentation and overcome obstacles to nationality,\nresulting in renewed commitments from participating States.\n\n\nUNHCR continues to support national authorities with the issuance of civil documentation, while\nundertaking advocacy, awareness-raising and capacity building. In October 2024, UNHCR is launching\nthe [Global Alliance to End Statelessness, bringing together key stakeholders to achieve the goal of](https://www.unhcr.org/what-we-do/protect-human-rights/ending-statelessness)\nending statelessness. While national initiatives and ongoing strong political will in Europe remain\npromising, concrete efforts are needed to support those without legal recognition in the region.\n\n\n\n**UNHCR\u2019S 2024 FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS**\n**FOR STATELESSNESS-RELATED ACTIVITIES**\n**IN EUROPE**\n\n\n\n**TOTAL FUNDED (as of 30 Sept 2024)**\n\n\n\nThe breakthrough came early this year when with UNHCR\u2019s support, Sadik\u2019s wife Buqa obtained identity documents. This\nenabled the registration of their children in birth registries and paved the way for them to apply for identity documents.\nThe new legal status has opened new frontiers for the family, granting them access to healthcare, education, social\nassistance, and more.\n\n\n\u00a9 UNHCR/Igor Sljivancanin\n\n\n_* References to Kosovo shall be understood to be in the context of Security Council Resolution 1244 (1999)._\n\n\nPage 6 **U N H C R R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E,** O C T O B E R 2 0 2 4\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/374e9362-93fe-47ef-8f0f-6555c9efb172/2024%20Critical%20Funding%20Needs%20-%20Europe.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        5
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "###### **2024 Europe financial requirements by outcome area**\n\nTotal: $1,465,225,124\n\n\n\n**OUTCOME AREA (OA)** **FINANCIAL**\n**REQUIREMENTS (USD)**\n\nOA1: Access to territory,\n$211,813,735\nregistration and documentation\n\nOA2: Refugee status\n$33,974,100\ndetermination\n\nOA3: Protection policy and law $54,927,225\n\nOA4: Gender-based violence $28,706,368\n\nOA5: Child protection $30,391,118\n\nOA6: Safety and access to justice $122,329,625\n\nOA7: Community engagement\n$146,627,784\nand women\u2019s empowerment\n\nOA8: Well-being and basic needs $347,232,237\n\nOA9: Sustainable housing and\n$213,922,043\nsettlements\n\n\n\n**OUTCOME AREA (OA)**\n\n\n\n**FINANCIAL**\n**REQUIREMENTS (USD)**\n\n\n\nOA11: Education $40,111,597\n\nOA13: Self-reliance, economic\n$49,004,339\ninclusion and livelihoods\n\nOA14: Voluntary repatriation and\n$12,650,941\nsustainable reintegration\n\nOA15: Resettlement and\n$15,313,313\ncomplementary pathways\n\nOA16: Local integration and other\n$112,163,620\nlocal solutions\n\nEA17: Systems $10,228,918\n\nEA18: Support $13,128,504\n\nEA19: People $5,688,961\n\nEA20: External $17,010,696\n\n\n\n\n\n**For more information, reports and other resources:**\n\n\n\n\n- [UNHCR Europe webpage](https://www.unhcr.org/europe/)\n\n- [UNHCR Europe region quarterly](https://www.unhcr.org/europe/search?search=quarterly%20updates&sm_site_name[]=Europe%20site)\nupdates\n\n- [UNHCR Europe country](https://www.unhcr.org/europe/search?search=Bi-annual%20fact%20sheet%202024%2009&sm_site_name%5B0%5D=Europe%20site)\noperation fact sheets\n\n\n\n\n- [UNHCR Global Focus](https://reporting.unhcr.org/operational/regions/europe)\nEurope webpage\n\n- [UNHCR Ukraine Emergency](https://www.unhcr.org/emergencies/ukraine-emergency)\nwebpage\n\n\n\n**Operational data portals:**\n\n\n- [Ukraine Refugee Situation](https://data.unhcr.org/en/situations/ukraine)\n\n- [Europe Sea Arrivals](https://data.unhcr.org/en/situations/europe-sea-arrivals)\n\n\n\nwebpage **Contact:**\n\nUNHCR Regional Bureau for\nEurope\n[rbeext@unhcr.org](mailto:rbeext%40unhcr.org?subject=)\n**[Join our mailing list](https://manage.kmail-lists.com/subscriptions/subscribe?a=VYAYG5&g=QZGRtb)**\nwww.unhcr.org/europe\n\n\n\nPage 7 **U N H C R R E G I O N A L B U R E A U F O R E U R O P E,** O C T O B E R 2 0 2 4\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/374e9362-93fe-47ef-8f0f-6555c9efb172/2024%20Critical%20Funding%20Needs%20-%20Europe.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        6
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_45/raw/doc_45_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,142 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/9a640afb-0eec-4bff-9e10-158ac15c6e45/2024%20UNHCR%20Protection%20Brief%20%28Yemen%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "### Operational Context & Analysis\n\nAfter ten years of conflict, Yemen remains one of the world\u2019s worst humanitarian crises,\ncharacterised by conflict, climate change, economic collapse, as well as the breakdown of\npublic institutions and services. According to the 2024 Humanitarian Needs Overview, over\nhalf of the population (an estimated 18.2 million individuals) require humanitarian\nassistance, including 4.5 million internally displaced people (IDPs) and over 60,000\nrefugees and asylum-seekers, mostly from Somalia and Ethiopia.\n\nThe administration of the country remains divided between the Internationally Recognised\nGovernment (IRG) in the south, including Aden, and the _de facto_ authorities (DFA) in the\nnorth, including Sana\u2019a. In practice, this means that any humanitarian or protection\nactivities must be coordinated with two separate authorities, depending on where in the\ncountry they are implemented.\n\nWhile there has been a _de facto_ continuation of the April 2022 UN-brokered truce (despite\nofficially expiring in October 2022), the overall security situation remains unstable with\nfrequent low-level violations in front-line areas. In lieu of a longer-term political solution to\nthe ongoing crisis, prospects for a lasting peace remain dim, while regional developments\nin the Middle East and the Red Sea continue to adversely affect the security, economic,\nand political situation in Yemen.\n\nThe ongoing conflict and related breakdown of basic infrastructure and services, as well as\nlimited availability of humanitarian assistance, has left many displaced individuals and\nhouseholds living in substandard conditions. Inadequate water and sanitation facilities\ncontribute to frequent outbreaks of cholera, with resulting malnutrition. Compounding the\nseverity of these needs, Yemen\u2019s economy is in crisis, with over 80% of the population now\nliving below the poverty line. Of the 96,907 IDP and host community households (588,835\nindividuals) assessed to date in 2024, almost 50% reported earning 25,000 Yemeni Rial\n(50 USD) or less per month, with 35% reporting no income at all. This forces some families\nto rely on harmful coping mechanisms, such as skipping meals, taking children out of\nschool to work, begging, and exposing women and children to other forms of exploitation\nand abuse, including early marriage.\n\nFrom February 2024, pre-existing tensions in Yemen\u2019s banking sector escalated, following\na series of decisions by the central banks in Aden and Sana\u2019a that restricted transactions\ninvolving banks headquartered outside of their respective areas of control. In practice, this\nmeant that funds could no longer be transferred between banks in the north and south of\nthe country. Although the banks have since de-escalated the situation, the macroeconomic\nsituation remains extremely challenging, with a shortage of hard currency, obstacles to\ncurrency exchange, and rapid depreciation of the Yemeni Rial. These developments have\nplaced additional strain on displaced households, and impacted the implementation of\nhumanitarian and protection activities, with some activities halted altogether, exacerbating\nexisting protection risks.\n\n\nUNHCR / 4 December, 2024 2\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/9a640afb-0eec-4bff-9e10-158ac15c6e45/2024%20UNHCR%20Protection%20Brief%20%28Yemen%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "Humanitarian access remains a major concern in Yemen. Bureaucratic impediments, along\nwith general insecurity, the threat posed by explosive remnants of war (ERW), and the\narrest and detention of aid workers, continue to hinder the delivery of humanitarian and\nprotection activities. Restrictions on the movements of Yemeni female aid workers present\na particular challenge to the delivery of culturally appropriate outreach and support\nactivities, where the presence of female staff is essential. The pervasive presence of ERW\nand landmines in Hodeidah, Ta\u2019iz, and Ma\u2019rib governorates, makes Yemen one of the most\nheavily mine-contaminated countries in the world. [1]\n\nClimactic changes, environmental degradation, and severe weather events are significant\ndrivers of need and displacement in Yemen, and these continue to worsen in both severity\nand frequency year on year. The 2024 rainy season brought unprecedented flooding to all\ngovernorates, affecting 100,000 families, and severely exacerbating existing shelter,\ninfrastructure, and protection needs. At the same time, Yemen is among the world\u2019s worst\nwater crises. Water scarcity is a growing concern, with steadily declining ground water\nlevels. This has the potential to further aggravate tensions in the country, as competition\nover access to diminishing water supplies increases.\n\n## Key Trends & Figures\n\n\n##### 60,050\n\nregistered asylum-seekers and refugees as of\n31 October 2024, of which 18,494 (31%) are in\nthe north, and 41,556 (69%) are in the south,\nand 9,800 (16%) live in Kharaz, Yemen\u2019s only\nrefugee camp (located in the south).\n##### 4.5 million\n\ninternally displaced people (IDPs), including\napproximately 1.5 million living in dedicated\nsites in the north and south.\n\n\n##### 45%\n\nof assessed refugee and asylum-seeker\nhouseholds have at least one family member\nwith a specific need _(average household size is_\n_two)_ .\n\n##### 91%\n\nof assessed IDP households have at least one\nmember with an identified vulnerability _(average_\n_household size is six)._\n\n\n\n_1_ _UNOCHA (2024). Humanitarian Needs Overview: Yemen 2024_\n\n\nUNHCR / 4 December, 2024 3\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/9a640afb-0eec-4bff-9e10-158ac15c6e45/2024%20UNHCR%20Protection%20Brief%20%28Yemen%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        2
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**Refugees and asylum-seekers:**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n**Note** : The currency exchange rate varies between the north and south. In October 2024,\nthe exchange rate was approximately 530 Yemeni Rial to 1 USD in the north, and\napproximately 2000 Yemeni Rial to 1 USD in the south.\n\n\nUNHCR / 4 December, 2024 4\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/9a640afb-0eec-4bff-9e10-158ac15c6e45/2024%20UNHCR%20Protection%20Brief%20%28Yemen%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        3
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**Specific needs identified among the refugee and asylum-seeker population by household**\n\n\n\n**13%**\nChild at Risk\n\n\n**14%**\nWomen at risk\n\n\n\n**16%**\n\nDisability\n\n\n**21%**\nSerious medical condition\n\n\n\n**11%**\nOlder person at risks\n\n\n**24%**\nSingle parent\n\n\n\n**Internally displaced people (IDPs):**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|IDP age and gender distribution<br>+60 Years<br>18-59 Years<br>5-17 Years<br>0-4 Years<br>0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0%<br>Male Female|Col2|\n|---|---|\n|<br>34.9%<br>49.9%<br>11.9%<br>2.9%<br>0.4%<br>No income<br>Less than USD 50<br>More than USD 50 and less than USD 100<br>More than USD 100 and less than USD 200<br>More than USD 200<br>% of IDP households<br>**Average monthly IDP household income**|<br>34.9%<br>49.9%<br>11.9%<br>2.9%<br>0.4%<br>No income<br>Less than USD 50<br>More than USD 50 and less than USD 100<br>More than USD 100 and less than USD 200<br>More than USD 200<br>% of IDP households<br>**Average monthly IDP household income**|\n\n\n\n**Civil documentation**\n\n###### **54 % 71 % 42 %**\n\n\n\n% of assessed IDP\n\nhouseholds with at\n\nleast one child not\n\nregistered with a\n\nbirth certificate\n\n\n\n% of assessed IDP\n\nhouseholds with at\n\nleast one member\n\nwithout a national\n\nidentity card\n\n\n\n% of children who\n\nlack birth\ncertificates\n\n\n\nUNHCR / 4 December, 2024 5\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/9a640afb-0eec-4bff-9e10-158ac15c6e45/2024%20UNHCR%20Protection%20Brief%20%28Yemen%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        4
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**Vulnerabilities identified among the IDP population by household**\n\n\n\n**67%**\nChronic medical condition\n\n\n**29%**\nIndividuals in need of legal\nassistance (including legal\nadvice, mediation and dispute\nresolution services, legal\nrepresentation, and detention\nmonitoring).\n\n\n**21%**\nFemale head of household\n\n\n\n**45%**\nPregnant or lactating\nwomen\n\n\n**28%**\nChildren not attending\nschools\n\n\n**20%**\nSerious medical condition\n\n\n\n**42%**\nPersons in need of\npsychosocial support\n\n\n**24%**\nPersons with disabilities\n\n\n**17%**\nChildren supporting their\nfamilies\n\n\n\n_Ali, Amer, Ismail, and Saleh, Somali refugees, stand with their new back-to-school kits in Aden. Refugee_\n_children attend school together with the host community. \u00a9UNHCR/Gregory Doane_\n\n\nUNHCR / 4 December, 2024 6\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/9a640afb-0eec-4bff-9e10-158ac15c6e45/2024%20UNHCR%20Protection%20Brief%20%28Yemen%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        5
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "## Protection risks\n\n**Protection Risk I \u2013 Risks relating to internal displacement**\n\n**Internal displacement** continues to affect millions of people across Yemen, in the north\nand south, with entire communities having been forced to flee multiple times due to conflict,\nclimate related disasters, and deteriorating socio-economic conditions. The complex\npolitical, security, and economic situation in the country creates significant protection risks\nfor displaced populations and host communities. IDPs face particular challenges, as\ncompared to non-displaced communities, in accessing basic services, including civil and\nidentity documentation, and frequently experience social and economic marginalisation,\nwith some families resorting to harmful coping mechanisms as a result. Of the\napproximately 4.5 million internally displaced people, around 80% are women and children,\nwith around one quarter (26%) of households headed by women.\n\nInternally displaced people remain heavily dependent on humanitarian aid, particularly the\nmost vulnerable, such as women at risk, children, older people, people with disabilities,\nand people with other specific needs. UNHCR found that, of the IDP households assessed\nto-date in 2024, 91% had at least one member with a vulnerability. Individuals with specific\nneeds are often at risk of social marginalisation and isolation due to the social and\neconomic context in Yemen and can find it particularly challenging to support themselves\nwithout humanitarian assistance.\n\nMany IDPs experience barriers to accessing basic rights and services, including\nhealthcare, education, employment, and freedom of movement, because they do not have\nbasic civil or identity documents. According to UNHCR, in 2024, 42% of displaced children\ndo not have birth certificates, and 71% of displaced households reported that at least one\nfamily member does not have an identification document.\n\nDisplaced populations are often more seriously affected by the lack of civil documentation,\nparticularly those who have been displaced multiple times. They can face significant\nchallenges in retaining, replacing, or obtaining new documents. This is due to various\nfactors, such as loss of documents during initial displacement, difficulty in retaining\ndocuments in substandard living conditions, and challenges in accessing essential services\nwhile living in remote and hard to reach areas.\n\nProof of address is often a requirement to issue new civil or identity documentation, and\nindividuals living in displacement may struggle to clearly establish their place of residence,\nespecially when they are living in an informal IDP site. Particularly vulnerable individuals,\nincluding people with disabilities or people facing movement restrictions, may face added\nchallenges. Obtaining civil documents, including national identity cards, is an important\nstep to ensure the prevention of statelessness amongst these at-risk populations, and also\nto safeguarding their housing, land and property (HLP) rights.\n\n\nUNHCR / 4 December, 2024 7\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/9a640afb-0eec-4bff-9e10-158ac15c6e45/2024%20UNHCR%20Protection%20Brief%20%28Yemen%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        6
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "The deteriorating economic situation in the country, including rapid inflation and\ndevaluation of the Yemeni Rial, along with limited livelihoods opportunities, has contributed\nto an increase in forced evictions. Many families find it increasingly difficult to pay their rent,\nwhich leaves them vulnerable to eviction, along with a wide variety of other serious\nprotection risks. The majority of IDPs live in host communities, with around 1.5 million IDPs\nliving in over 2,300 designated IDP sites. These sites are often in rural areas, and are\nfrequently unsafe and overcrowded, with only limited access to basic services and\ninfrastructure.\n\n\nMembers of the Muhamasheen ethnic community are particularly vulnerable due to their\nhistoric marginalisation. The Muhamasheen often live separately from the majority\npopulation, and frequently experience discrimination when seeking to access basic public\nservices or engage in employment and/or livelihoods activities, which is further aggravated\nby conditions of displacement.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nInternally displaced children often face obstacles in accessing education. Many are forced\nto abandon their studies to support their families or can find it challenging to access schools\ndue to a shortage of school places in displacement sites.\n\nA significant number of internally displaced households report adopting harmful coping\nmechanisms. UNHCR found that, in 2024, 77% of IDP households resort to borrowing\nmoney to purchase basic goods. Reliance on debt places internally displace households in\na vulnerable position and reduces their economic independence. Additionally, 70% of\nhouseholds reported reducing the size of meal portions, indicating a widespread\ncompromise of their nutritional intake. These coping strategies expose internally displaced\nfamilies to further protection risks and perpetuate a cycle of poverty that limits their ability\nto work and improve their living conditions.\n\n\nUNHCR / 4 December, 2024 8\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/9a640afb-0eec-4bff-9e10-158ac15c6e45/2024%20UNHCR%20Protection%20Brief%20%28Yemen%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        7
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**Protection Risk II \u2013 Risks for refugees and asylum-seekers**\n\n**Refugees and asylum-seekers:** Yemen acceded to the 1951 Refugee Convention and its\n1967 Protocol in 1980, and remains the only state in the Arabian Peninsula to have done\nso. Yemen is also a party to many international human rights and humanitarian law\ninstruments. Although a party to the 1951 Convention, the ability of Yemen to fulfil its\ninternational obligations has been negatively affected by protracted crises, and the lack of\na national legislative framework on refugee protection.\n\nDespite its domestic challenges and large-scale internal displacement, Yemen hosts over\n60,000 refugees and asylum-seekers, with the majority originated from Somalia and\nEthiopia. Asylum-seekers and refugees are at particular risk of social and economic\nmarginalisation, with many struggling to access meaningful employment and livelihoods\nopportunities, and some living in acute poverty as a result. This is particularly true of\nindividuals and households at heightened risk, who are often heavily reliant on\nhumanitarian assistance to meet their basic needs.\n\nThe registration and protection regime in the country is complicated by the practical division\nin administrative responsibilities between the north and south, with a different agency\nresponsible for the registration and documentation of refugees and asylum-seekers in each\nlocation. Since 1991, the IRG has been granting _prima facie_ refugee status to Somali\nnationals in the IRG-controlled areas, while other nationalities, including Ethiopians, are\nregistered and documented by UNHCR as asylum-seekers. Since 2023, the authorities in\nDFA-controlled areas have resumed the registration of new asylum-seekers. Prior to this,\nthe registration of new asylum-seekers was largely suspended since 2016, following the\noutbreak of the civil conflict, save for a period between November 2018 and September\n2019. As a result, a significant number of asylum-seekers and refugees were unable to\naccess registration or documentation in DFA-controlled areas. Without documentation,\nrefugees and asylum-seekers may struggle to regularise their presence, establish their\nidentity, move freely, or access basic public services in the country. There continues to be\na considerable backlog of refugees and asylum-seekers waiting for their documents to be\nissued or renewed.\n\nGiven the present situation in Yemen, refugee and asylum-seeker households are\nparticularly vulnerable to the effects of the deteriorating economic situation, with many\nstruggling to find employment or other meaningful routes to economic self-reliance. Work\npermits can be obtained by foreign nationals, including refugees and asylum-seekers, but\nthe associated fees often make this unaffordable to those most in need of employment.\nThis, combined with the very high rates of unemployment in the country, means that steady\nand legal employment is practically inaccessible to many within this community.\n\nRefugees and asylum-seekers at heightened risk, including women at risk, children, older\npeople, and people with disabilities, are often unable to participate in socio-economic\nactivities, and so are disproportionately affected by the current deteriorating economic\nsituation. In 2024, 76% of assessed refugee and asylum-seeker households had at least\none member with a specific need. This puts them at particular risk of abuse or exploitation,\nwith some adopting coping strategies that ultimately put them at risk of more serious harm.\n\nIn some cases, families may have to choose between meeting their basic needs or, for\nexample, continuing to support their children in education. UNHCR has observed\nincreasing numbers of early school dropout, with children at risk of exploitation, abuse, or\nneglect, as a result. In 2024, 50% of refugee households reported resorting to borrowing\n\n\nUNHCR / 4 December, 2024 9\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/9a640afb-0eec-4bff-9e10-158ac15c6e45/2024%20UNHCR%20Protection%20Brief%20%28Yemen%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        8
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "money to purchase basic goods, while 49% of refugee households reported reducing the\nsize of meal portions. In line with these findings, since the beginning of 2024, UNHCR has\nobserved an increase in requests for humanitarian assistance.\n\nFor many of the most vulnerable refugees, third country resettlement remains a key durable\nsolution and protection tool. Nevertheless, Yemen has only a relatively small number of\nthird-country resettlement places in 2024. As a result, only a small number of cases can be\nsubmitted for resettlement, and then only on urgent or emergency medical or protection\ngrounds.\n\n**Protection Risk III \u2013 Risks in the context of mixed movement**\n\n**Mixed movements:** Yemen continues to be a key transit country for people on the move,\nwith considerable numbers undertaking dangerous journeys from the East and Horn of\nAfrica to Yemen, with many ultimately intending to travel onward to the Kingdom of Saudi\nArabia (KSA) or the Sultanate of Oman (Oman). Those arriving in Yemen in this way have\ndiverse profiles, including individuals in need of international protection, and those affected\nby the conflict in Ethiopia, [2] travelling with or alongside individuals seeking improved\neconomic opportunities or intending to reunify with family members elsewhere in the region.\nMany of those on the move have specific needs, including survivors of trafficking, survivors\nof violence, and people with disabilities or serious medical needs. Arrivals on the Yemen\ncoast also include a high proportion of unaccompanied or separated children.\n\nSmuggling or trafficking networks are often used to reach the Yemeni coast, as well as to\nmove onwards within Yemen. Since the beginning of 2024, 11 shipwrecks have been\nreported, with at least 678 people drowned or missing at sea. Individuals travelling along\nthese routes are at heightened risk of abuse and/or exploitation, often by the smugglers or\ntraffickers themselves, and widespread gender-based violence and torture for ransom have\nalso been reported. [3] High numbers of deaths and injuries have also been reported as\npeople have sought to move on from Yemen and cross to Saudia Arabia. [4]\n\nThe DFA authorities in the north continue to detain and forcibly transfer large numbers of\nforeign nationals to the south. Although this is purportedly done as a public security and\nimmigration-control measure, the basis on which particular individuals are detained and\nexpelled is not always clear. While UNHCR is able to obtain some information in respect\nof these detentions, including the number of people involved, UNHCR has only limited\naccess to detention centres in the north. Those in detention are usually unable to contact\nfamily or have access to legal representation. As a result, no effective screening can be\nconducted to identify persons in need of international protection, individuals with specific\nneeds, or family members at risk of separation.\n\n\n2 UNHCR Position on Returns to Ethiopia, March 2022:\n[https://www.refworld.org/policy/countrypos/unhcr/2022/en/124066.](https://www.refworld.org/policy/countrypos/unhcr/2022/en/124066)\n3 Ravenstone Consult _Captive Commodities: Commodification, exploitation and missingness of Ethiopian irregular_\n\n_migrants on the Eastern Route to Yemen and Saudi Arabia_, March 2023: [https://mixedmigration.org/wp-](https://mixedmigration.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/Captive-Commodities-Ethiopians-on-Eastern-migration-route.pdf)\n[content/uploads/2023/03/Captive-Commodities-Ethiopians-on-Eastern-migration-route.pdf.](https://mixedmigration.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/Captive-Commodities-Ethiopians-on-Eastern-migration-route.pdf)\n4 Human Rights Watch \u2018Saudi Arabia: Mass Killings of Migrants at Yemen Border\u2019, 21 August 2023:\n\n[https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/08/21/saudi-arabia-mass-killings-migrants-yemen-border;](https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/08/21/saudi-arabia-mass-killings-migrants-yemen-border) Mixed Migration\n[Centre \u2018Saudi Border Killings Continue\u2019, 5 June 2024: https://mixedmigration.org/saudi-border-killings-continue/.](https://mixedmigration.org/saudi-border-killings-continue/)\n\n\nUNHCR / 4 December, 2024 10\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/9a640afb-0eec-4bff-9e10-158ac15c6e45/2024%20UNHCR%20Protection%20Brief%20%28Yemen%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        9
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "### Challenges & Opportunities\n\nThe arrest and detention of United Nations and NGO staff in the north of the country has\nserved to further reduce the operational environment and inhibit humanitarian activities, as\nthe United Nations has minimized the exposure of staff to risk, and prioritized lifesaving\nand life sustaining activities.\n\nThe resumption of registration of new asylum-seekers in DFA-controlled areas since 2023\nhas the potential to significantly improve the protection environment for refugees and\nasylum-seekers in the north, who now have access to registration and documentation.\nDiscussions are continuing between UNHCR and the IRG and DFA authorities,\nrespectively, to nationalise further elements of the refugee and asylum-seeker registration\nprocess. This has the potential to ensure more consistent and sustainable service provision\nin the future.\n\nUNHCR continues to build on its strong working relationship with the civil registration\nauthorities in the north and south to support improved access to civil registration and\ndocumentation for internally displaced people, including access to birth registration and\ncertificates. Access to civil status documentation supports a series of key protection\noutcomes, including access to basic services, support for school enrolment, establishing\nfamily links, providing proof of identity, and preventing statelessness.\n\nFor Somali nationals seeking voluntary return to Somalia, UNHCR continues to support the\nAssisted Spontaneous Return (ASR) programme. This programme provides free transport\nfor individuals seeking to return to Somalia, with a reinstallation grant and further\nsubsistence allowance upon their return to support their reintegration in the country. The\nreturn is organized by UNHCR through boat movements from Aden to Berbera in\nSomaliland, with further onward movements to central and southern Somalia. Since the\nbeginning of the ASR programme in 2017, UNHCR in Yemen has assisted some 7,840\nrefugees from Somalia to return. In 2024, over 1,700 Somali refugees with an intention to\nreturn received counselling from UNHCR.\n\nTo enhance national ownership, UNHCR continues working with the IRG and DFA\nauthorities, other UN and humanitarian agencies, donors, civil society international and\nnational organizations, community and women-led organisations, as well as the internally\ndisplaced people, refugees and asylum-seekers, and the host community to enhance the\nprotection and assistance of forcibly displaced persons.\n\n\nUNHCR / 4 December, 2024 11\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/9a640afb-0eec-4bff-9e10-158ac15c6e45/2024%20UNHCR%20Protection%20Brief%20%28Yemen%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        10
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "## Calls to Action\n\n**Improved environment for humanitarian operations** : Delivering aid to those most in\nneed across Yemen remains an international humanitarian imperative and requires an\noperating environment which assures the safety and security of aid workers. The release\nof arbitrarily detained staff should be immediate and unconditional. All detained\nhumanitarian staff must be treated in accordance with international humanitarian law and\nhuman rights law.\n\n**The protection of humanitarian space:** Yemen is among the least permissive operational\nenvironments globally. UNHCR and other humanitarian partners face ongoing restrictions\nand challenges that impede the delivery of critical lifesaving interventions, and limit access\nto vulnerable forcibly displaced people, including women and girls. Donors have a vital\nadvocacy role to play in supporting the humanitarian community in advocacy efforts for\nstrengthened humanitarian space.\n\n**Adoption of a national legal framework for the protection of refugees** : Yemen has not\nyet adopted a national legal regime for the protection of refugees. The development and\nadoption of such a framework would be an important step toward improving the protection\nof refugees and asylum-seekers in the country. UNHCR stands ready to provide technical\nsupport to the authorities at all stages in the development and adoption of such a\nframework.\n\n**Working towards durable solutions for IDPs:** Durable solutions for internally displaced\npeople are a priority. Given the ongoing conflict, humanitarian interventions have until\nrecently remained focused on the emergency response, while efforts in pursuit of durable\nsolutions need to be further strengthened. With the right levels of donor support, there can\nbe scope to use humanitarian assistance strategically to support longer term development\ngoals, including return and local integration for internally displaced people, while continuing\nto address immediate humanitarian needs.\n\nIn order to support improved access to durable solutions for the internally displaced, the\nnational 2013 IDP Policy should be strengthened, with the development of a supporting\naction plan to guide its implementation, and support to build the capacity of local and\nnational authorities, alongside civil society and community organisations. UNHCR stands\nready to provide technical support to the authorities, civil society, and local community\norganisations at all stages in the development of such an action plan.\n\n**Improved access to solutions for the most vulnerable refugees:** There continues to be\nan urgent need for a dedicated and predictable resettlement quota for Yemen to address\nthe most compelling needs among the refugee population. UNHCR calls upon donor and\nresettlement countries to support the most vulnerable refugees by providing a dedicated\nresettlement quota. In light of the complex political and security context in Yemen, this may\nrequire resettlement countries to utilise flexible resettlement processing modalities, and\nUNHCR Yemen stands ready to support this process.\n\n\nUNHCR / 4 December, 2024 12\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/9a640afb-0eec-4bff-9e10-158ac15c6e45/2024%20UNHCR%20Protection%20Brief%20%28Yemen%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        11
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**Strengthened response to mixed movements:** There is an urgent need to strengthen\nthe response to mixed movements, including in the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden, through\nimproved search and rescue at sea, increased humanitarian access, including for the safe\nidentification and referral to appropriate registration and asylum procedures of those with\ninternational protection needs, measures to enhance protection from the high levels of\nexploitation and abuse for those on the move, and increased solutions for those in need of\ninternational protection. International support in the form of funding and resettlement places\nis critically needed.\n\n**Re-enforcing the centrality of protection** : Yemen continues to face a protection crisis\ncharacterized by civilian casualties, protracted large-scale displacement, marginalisation,\ndiscriminatory legal and social norms, and the consequences of extreme poverty, all of\nwhich have a profound effect on displaced people across the country. Protection remains\ncentral to the humanitarian response in Yemen. UNHCR leads the Protection Cluster and\nis the mandated agency for the protection and identification of solutions of refugees. In this\ncapacity, it drives the development of protection and solutions strategies and initiatives at\nthe inter-agency level, and works to ensure that protection and solutions are integrated\nacross all sectors of the humanitarian response in the country, including at the\nHumanitarian Country Team level. UNHCR calls upon all humanitarian actors, donors, and\ncivil society organisations working to support forcibly displaced persons in Yemen, to work\nin support of the centrality of protection, ensuring that protection is fully integrated in all\nelements of their humanitarian and development work.\n\n\nUNHCR / 4 December, 2024 13\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/9a640afb-0eec-4bff-9e10-158ac15c6e45/2024%20UNHCR%20Protection%20Brief%20%28Yemen%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        12
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/9a640afb-0eec-4bff-9e10-158ac15c6e45/2024%20UNHCR%20Protection%20Brief%20%28Yemen%29.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        13
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_46/raw/doc_46_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,62 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "# **CRITICAL FUNDING NEEDS**\n## **IN THE MIDDLE EAST AND NORTH AFRICA**\n\n##### **10 October 2024**\n\n_[UNHCR is also appealing for its response to displacement inside Lebanon and across the border into the Syrian Arab Republic](https://reporting.unhcr.org/document/9279)_\n_[(Syria). Ongoing hostilities and displacement orders in Lebanon continue to displace people - more than 600,000 as of 8 October](https://reporting.unhcr.org/document/9287)_\n_2024, according to the UN. UNHCR is working with humanitarian partners and the authorities to urgently find safe shelter and_\n_provide people with essential relief items, cash assistance, shelter assistance, medical care and other support. In addition, more_\n_than 250,000 people \u2013 both Lebanese and Syrians \u2013 have crossed into Syria in search of safety. UNHCR is coordinating the_\n_inter-agency response to the influx and leads the Protection and Shelter/NFI sectors in Syria._\n\n#### **INTRODUCTION**\n\n\n\nThe Middle East and North Africa region continues to face\ncompounding crises.\n\n\nThe number of Sudanese refugees in North Africa has\nincreased substantially over the past 18 months, with more\nthan 700,000 people approaching UNHCR in **Egypt** since\nApril 2023 and nearly 69,000 new arrivals to **Libya** . UNHCR is\nworking with governments and humanitarian partners to sustain\nan emergency response to help those fleeing the horrors of\nwar; however, the regional response to the Sudan situation\ncontinues to be severely underfunded.\n\n\nAfter more than 13 years, the **Syria Situation** remains one of\nthe largest displacement crises in the world. Close to 6 million\nSyrian refugees are hosted in the neighbouring countries.\nMaintaining assistance to Syrian refugees in host countries\nin the region remains of paramount importance, particularly\ngiven the already heightened vulnerabilities among refugees\nin host countries and added pressure on host governments. A\nlack of adequate resources has exacerbated tensions between\nrefugees and host communities, decreased opportunities\nfor livelihoods and strained already overstretched national\nsystems.\n\n\nYears of devastating conflict in **Yemen** have left 18.2 million\npeople dependent on humanitarian assistance. In **Iraq**,\nUNHCR also urgently needs resources to continue supporting\nthe authorities in ensuring access to civil documentation and\ninclusion in the national social safety net for some 1 million\ninternally displaced Iraqis.\n\n\nUNHCR is responding to two refugee situations in **Algeria** : a\nnearly 50-year-old displacement of Sahrawi refugees in five\nrefugee camps near Tindouf in the south-west of the country,\nand an urban asylum-seeker and refugee population of diverse\norigin in Algiers and other governorates.\n\n\n\n**Mauritania** has hosted a significant number of refugees since\n2012 and continues to face a large influx of Malian refugees;\nmore than 100,000 people have arrived in 2024 alone. UNHCR\nis providing vital assistance to the most vulnerable refugees\nand invests in the resilience of more than 250,000 refugees as\nwell as host communities in the Hodh Chargui region.\n\n\nThe number of refugees and asylum-seekers registered with\nUNHCR in **Morocco** increased significantly in recent years.\nUNHCR works to ensure access to asylum and protection\nunder the framework of the National Strategy for Immigration\nand Asylum (SNIA) and towards the inclusion of refugees and\nasylum-seekers in national social protection systems.\n\n\nAmid a rising trend in the magnitude and complexity of forced\ndisplacement and the importance of ensuring self-reliance\nand empowerment, UNHCR is re-emphasizing the approach\nof sustainable programming. While the principles underlying\nsustainable programming are not new, addressing critical\nfunding gaps in MENA operations will support the processes\nrelated to **sustainable programming** in the coming years and\nensure funding is used for longer term benefits to refugees and\nthe countries that host them, and which will be tailored to each\ncountry operations\u2019 contexts.\n\n\nAs the end of 2024 approaches, UNHCR\u2019s operations in the\nregion face a funding shortfall of US$ 1.431 billion. Below is\nan overview of the **most critical funding gaps** and potential\nconsequences for vulnerable populations if additional funds\nare not secured. The UNHCR activities outlined here are part\nof the comprehensive needs presented in the Global Appeal\nand can be implemented by the end of 2024 with additional\nfunding support.\n\n\n\n[www.unhcr.org](https://www.unhcr.org/) 1\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1fdd8bae-8669-44c4-af93-53df14bba12c/2024Critical_Funding_Needs_in_MENA.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "### **ALGERIA**\n\n**Protection**\n\n\n\nCRITICAL FUNDING NEEDS IN MENA / 10 OCTOBER 2024\n\n\nCritical funding need: **$5.5 million**\n\n\n\nRefugee access to crucial legal and identity documents will be diminished, severely restricting their access to essential services\nand increasing their vulnerability. For instance, UNHCR has registered 2,455 individuals so far in 2024, but the average waiting\ntime for the asylum-seeking process is currently 126 days, while registration takes around 156 days. Without additional funding,\nthese delays could be prolonged, leaving people in legal limbo and unable to work or access rights. GBV survivors and others at\nrisk will not have access to safe shelters, psychosocial support, medical care, or access to economic opportunities to facilitate their\neffective reintegration into the community.\n\n\n**WASH**\n\nUNHCR supports the entire refugee population in the five camps near Tindouf \u2013 more than 90,000 refugees [1] - with lifesaving\nhealth and WASH activities. UNHCR will be unable to replace deteriorating reservoirs, extend the water distribution network, or\nenhance water storage and management. This would lead to increased risks of water shortages and contamination, endangering\nthe health of the refugees. Substandard waste and sanitary management would also pose significant health hazards to the camp\nresidents. Access to quality obstetric care and services as well as essential medicines will also be compromised.\n\n\n\n1\n\n\n\n_UN agencies use different points of reference for the population living in the Tindouf refugee camps. For example, UNHCR uses the number 90,000 to refer to the_\n_\u2018most vulnerable refugees\u2019 although recognizing that assistance needs are much higher. The Sahrawi Response Plan launched in November by the UN resident_\n_coordinator in Algeria uses the higher 173,600 figure to ensure humanitarian assistance is comprehensive._\n\n\n### **EGYPT**\n\n**Health**\n\nAs medical needs continue to rise among new arrivals from\nSudan, public health services are overwhelmed, and many\nindividuals face high out-of-pocket costs. Underfunding means\nUNHCR will not be able to support some 16,100 refugee\npatients, including those chronic diseases who depend on\nmonthly medications. Without this support, many lives are at\nrisk.\n\n\n**Education**\n\nCurrently, around 54 per cent of all school-aged arriving from\nSudan are out of school. Education grants are critical to help\nintegrate 73,000 children into the education system in 2024.\nWith the current levels of funding, the operation will be able\nto support only 19,000 school-aged refugee children, leaving\n54,000 students without the assistance they need. This may\nlead to an increase in child labour rates and other negative\ncoping mechanisms.\n\n\n**Basic Needs**\n\nThe growing refugee population in Egypt, combined with\nthe challenging socio-economic environment, has drastically\nincreased the need for assistance to meet basic needs. Without\nadditional funding, 72,000 refugees will be left without support,\nheightening their risk of exposure to harsh weather, inadequate\nhousing, and homelessness.\n\n\n\nCritical funding need: **$7.2 million**\n\n\n\n[www.unhcr.org](https://www.unhcr.org/) 2\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1fdd8bae-8669-44c4-af93-53df14bba12c/2024Critical_Funding_Needs_in_MENA.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "### **IRAQ**\n\n**Protection**\n\n\n\nCRITICAL FUNDING NEEDS IN MENA / 10 OCTOBER 2024\n\n\nCritical funding need: **$40 million**\n\n\n\nRegistration and documentation renewal will be delayed for some 31,000 people, putting them at risk of arrest, detention and\ndeportation. Freedom of movement will be restricted and access to public services and livelihoods will be curtailed. Around 35,000\nrefugees and asylum-seekers will also not have access to legal assistance to protect them from these risks and address legal\nissues that ensure their safety.\n\n\n**Education**\n\nSome 21,000 school-aged Syrian refugee children in the Kurdistan Region of Iraq remain out of school. Funding is crucial to build\nmore schools to increase enrollment and to provide 50,000 refugee students with transportation support, remedial and Kurdish\nlanguage classes and learning materials. This is essential to support the Government commitment to include refugee children in\nthe national education system. Prolonged lack of access to quality public education will impede their ability to achieve economic\nself-reliance and undermine social cohesion between refugee and host communities.\n\n\n**Basic Needs**\n\nIn Iraq, the most socio-economically vulnerable refugees depend on multipurpose cash assistance from UNHCR to cover essential\nneeds such as food, healthcare, and rent. Without sustained funding, 76,000 vulnerable refugees, including female-headed\nhouseholds, people with disabilities, and the elderly, through this vital cash assistance risk falling into further hardship and poverty.\nThis includes being driven to adopt harmful coping mechanisms like reducing food intake, entering into early or forced marriages,\nor becoming trapped in cycles of debt.\n\n\n### **JORDAN**\n\n**Basic Needs**\n\nUNHCR cash assistance provides a critical lifeline to vulnerable refugees and asylum-seekers\nin Jordan. Some 32,000 of the most vulnerable\nrefugees would confront increased poverty and\nhardship, unable to pay their rent, reducing food\nconsumption and exacerbating malnutrition levels\nif additional funding is not secured. Refugees\nmight resort to child labour, forced marriage, or\ntaking on additional debt.\n\n\n**Shelter**\n\nThe conditions of the shelters (\u201ccaravans\u201d) in\nZaatari and Azraq refugee camps remain critical\ndue to the wear and tear and limited life span\nof such shelters. Without additional shelter\nsupport, some 4,300 people in the camps would\nbe more exposed to harsh weather, health risks,\nand protection issues, including gender-based\nviolence. Existing shelters might also become\novercrowded, leading to deteriorating living\nconditions and increased tension among camp\nresidents.\n\n\n**Health**\n\nSome 97,000 refugees and asylum-seekers face\nreduced access to essential health services,\nincluding primary, secondary, and tertiary care.\nThis could lead to increased mortality and\noverburdened local health facilities, affecting both\nrefugees and host communities. Crucial mental\nhealth services will also be affected.\n\n\n\nCritical funding need: **$31 million**\n\n\n\n[www.unhcr.org](https://www.unhcr.org/) 3\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1fdd8bae-8669-44c4-af93-53df14bba12c/2024Critical_Funding_Needs_in_MENA.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        2
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "CRITICAL FUNDING NEEDS IN MENA / 10 OCTOBER 2024\n\n\n**Health**\n\nUnderfunding will severely limit UNHCR\u2019s ability to provide essential health services for 35,000 members of Sudanese refugee and\nhost communities - including vulnerable groups such as children, pregnant women, the elderly, and individuals with chronic health\nconditions - leading to increased morbidity and mortality rates. Without adequate funding, critical interventions such as medical\nsupplies, vaccinations, maternal and child health services, and treatment for communicable diseases will be drastically reduced.\nThis shortage will exacerbate existing health challenges, potentially leading to outbreaks of preventable diseases and worsening\noverall public health conditions. Moreover, the inability to support health facilities adequately will strain the local healthcare\ninfrastructure, diminishing both the quality and accessibility of care for all populations involved.\n\n\n**Protection**\n\nLocal authorities and ministries in the east are implementing a registration system and documentation to facilitate access to services\nand freedom of movement, in accordance with the Ministry of Interior\u2019s decision. So far, authorities have registered and issued\n30,000 cards, but their resources have quickly depleted and they are running out of resources to continue registration. UNHCR has\nbeen requested to support this initiative, as resource shortages risk preventing further registration, exposing refugees to potential\ndeportation and increased GBV risks. Approximately 40,000 vulnerable individuals will be directly impacted, including women,\nchildren, and other vulnerable groups among the Sudanese refugee population.\n\n\n**Shelter and Core Relief Items**\n\nOvercrowded and inadequate shelters heighten the risk of disease transmission and compromise the safety and dignity of refugees,\nwith current shelter solutions falling below minimum humanitarian standards. In-kind support will be provided to Sudanese refugees\nwith heightened risk and vulnerability if funding is available.\n\n\n**Education**\n\nOnly one-third of primary school-aged children and 5% of secondary school-aged children in Mbera refugee camp are enrolled due\nto lack of financial means, documentation, and schools. The situation is equally dire outside of the camp in Hodh Chargui, where\nthe enrolment rate is only 6%. School kits, capacity building and salaries for teachers, and support to transition from the Malian to\nMauritanian curriculum will all increase access to education for some 45,000 refugee children.\n\n\n[www.unhcr.org](https://www.unhcr.org/) 4\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1fdd8bae-8669-44c4-af93-53df14bba12c/2024Critical_Funding_Needs_in_MENA.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        3
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "CRITICAL FUNDING NEEDS IN MENA / 10 OCTOBER 2024\n\n\n**Shelter**\n\nMbera camp now hosts over 110,000 refugees against a capacity of 70,000. UNHCR cannot meet the shelter needs of all new\narrivals through its cash for shelter programme, without additional resources. Camp infrastructure also require rehabilitation\nfollowing degradation resulting from harsh climate conditions. Housing needs have also spiked outside of the camp and 70 sites\nin Hodh Chargui is hosting over 130,000 refugees (87% women and children). UNHCR does not have adequate resources to invest\nin sustainable housing solutions and community infrastructure, decongest the camp and improve services in host communities.\n\n\n**WASH**\n\nHodh Chargui is vulnerable to desertification and drought, and faces significant stress on water resources. In Mbera camp, the\nratio of over 40 people per latrine in some areas expose refugees and surrounding communities to significant health and hygiene\nrisks. Access to water and proper maintenance of WASH services are vital to ensure decent living conditions for some 120,000\npeople and peaceful coexistence with host communities.\n\n\n**Basic Needs and Livelihoods**\n\nWith the growing refugee population in Morocco and limited resources, a growing number of refugees are in desperate need of\nassistance to meet their basic needs. Without additional funding, basic assistance for some 1,600 families will be reduced. Support\nto promote income-generating activities, vocational training and job placements will also be compromised, further increasing the\nnumber of refugees relying on cash assistance to cover their basic needs.\n\n\n**Education**\n\nEducation assistance to some 1,200 refugee children registered in Moroccan public schools, which plays a key role in reducing\nschool dropouts and negative coping mechanisms such as child labour and/or marriage, will also be compromised.\n\n\n**Health**\n\nPending the inclusion of refugees in the ongoing social protection reform, UNHCR remains a main stakeholder supporting refugees\u2019\naccess to secondary and tertiary healthcare. Lack of funding will impact UNHCR\u2019s capacity to pay for critically needed medication\nand lifesaving specialized medical interventions for more than 500 vulnerable refugees.\n\n\n[www.unhcr.org](https://www.unhcr.org/) 5\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1fdd8bae-8669-44c4-af93-53df14bba12c/2024Critical_Funding_Needs_in_MENA.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        4
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "CRITICAL FUNDING NEEDS IN MENA / 10 OCTOBER 2024\n\n\n**Basic Needs**\n\nUNHCR\u2019s cash-based assistance targets only the most vulnerable; those who live hand to mouth in truly precarious and desperate\nsituations. Multi-purpose cash assistance assists families to put food on the table, pay for medicines, and keep children in school.\nEmergency cash assistance is disbursed rapidly for urgent cases, such as for those at risk of eviction from their homes or in need of\nimmediate and life-saving medical care. Cash for Protection works with refugees within a case management framework to address\nspecific and often more complicated protection issues holistically. Around 46,000 IDPs and 3,100 refugee households are affected\nby the current funding shortfall.\n\n\n**Protection**\n\nHolding an identity document is one of life\u2019s basics. Without an ID card, one cannot access basic services, freedom of movement\nis reduced, and risk of detention and arrest increased. Finding work is also made more difficult. According to UNHCR\u2019s protection\nmonitoring, over 54% of families have at least one child without a birth certificate, and 71% have family members without national\nidentity cards. Displaced populations are often unable to access or have lost civil documentation and face challenges getting\nreplacements for reasons connected to their displacement. Often legal assistance is needed to resolve the issue and access to\njustice is inhibited by the lack of identity documents. Without additional funding, 12,780 IDPs and IDP returnees won\u2019t be able to\naccess identity documents or legal assistance.\n\n\nUNHCR\u2019s protection monitoring found that 91% of IDP households have at least one member with a vulnerability. Without additional\nfunding, 3,170 extremely vulnerable people will go without urgent tailored support to those processing trauma and living with mental\nhealth issues, survivors of gender-based violence, elderly individuals often living alone, and people with disabilities.\n\n\n[For more information, please contact the UNHCR MENA Regional Ofce in Amman (Jordan) at: MENAreporting@unhcr.org](https://www.unhcr.org/)\n\n[www.unhcr.org](https://www.unhcr.org/) ~~6~~\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1fdd8bae-8669-44c4-af93-53df14bba12c/2024Critical_Funding_Needs_in_MENA.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        5
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_47/raw/doc_47_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,417 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "**T\u00dcRK\u0130YE CASH-BASED INTERVENTIONS TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP | 2024**\n\n\n**Mapping of Cash and Voucher Assistances (CVAs) in T\u00fcrkiye in 2024**\n\n\n_Cash-Based Interventions Technical Working Group (CBI TWG) published this document to_\n_share a summary of the findings of Mapping of CVAs in T\u00fcrkiye in 2024, along with the_\n_background information and purpose (Annex A). Further findings of the mapping and detailed_\n_programme information can be found on the online interactive dashboard, currently available_\n_in_ _[English.](https://app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrIjoiZjdjNmNjZGItNGVmYS00NWNlLWEwZTUtZDBkMDhhMmIyMmJkIiwidCI6ImU1YzM3OTgxLTY2NjQtNDEzNC04YTBjLTY1NDNkMmFmODBiZSIsImMiOjh9)_\n\n\n**Overview:** The exercise of _Mapping of CVAs in T\u00fcrkiye in 2024_ captured information on **85**\n**programmes by 26 organisations**, 54 of them being designed for the earthquake response\nand 31 of them are outside the earthquake response. Out of 85 projects, 41 projects were\nreported by National NGOs, 23 by UN Agencies, 20 by INGOs and one was reported by civil\nsociety organizations.\n\n\nThe mapping also captured information related to **17 nationwide projects** implemented by\nTRC, UNFPA, UNICEF, UNHCR, ELAF and Islamic Relief Worldwide. These include SSN and\nprojects related to cash for protection, cash for basic needs (including winterisation cash), and\nhigher education. The existence of diverse CVA projects aiming at national coverage is\nencouraging; on the other hand, sectors should further analyse whether these interventions\nadequately meet the needs and are capable of practically addressing the gaps, specifically in\nregions that have commonly experienced limited presence of support such as provinces of\nCentral, Northern and Eastern Anatolia.\n\n\nIn general, support **coverage in T\u00fcrkiye** mainly concentrates on southeastern T\u00fcrkiye due to\nFebruary 2023 earthquake (EQ) response, followed by Istanbul, Izmir, and the metropolitan\ncities of Marmara and Aegean provinces and 31 provinces which are targeted with various\nCVA by partners. The current round of mapping exercise found some promising examples\nincluding the geographical expansion of cash-based interventions under Protection, Health\nand Basic Needs sector such as CVA in Van and A\u011fr\u0131 provinces. As mentioned above, this is not\nthe case in all sectors and gaps remain in other regions of Anatolia. Moreover, the CVA\nprogrammes also spread to neighbouring provinces of 11 EQ affected provinces, including\nMardin, Diyarbak\u0131r, Elaz\u0131\u011f and Kayseri. For example, complementary cash-based interventions\nbasic needs support coverage mostly focuses on southeastern T\u00fcrkiye, resulting in gaps in\nother areas.\n\n\n\nThe number of **CVA recipients** indicated as 4.72 million, marking a decrease approximately\n2.5 million when compared to last round. It should be noted that these numbers do not\ncapture unique beneficiary figures as it is\npossible for one beneficiary to receive\nmore than one cash support that\ncomplements each other in the 2024\n\nassistances provided by partners.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nThe overall **budget** for CVA programmes in\nT\u00fcrkiye in 2024 was reported as $486\nmillion, marking a significant decrease\nfrom the $2 billion allocated in 2023. This\ndecline was anticipated due to the\nreduction in earthquake-related projects\nand the reluctance of some partners to\ndisclose their programme budgets. In\n\n\n1\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "apping of Cash and Voucher Assistances",
+          "confidence": 0.7294924855232239,
+          "start": 16,
+          "end": 22
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "ASH-BASED INTERVENTIONS TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP",
+          "confidence": 0.9185197949409485,
+          "start": 5,
+          "end": 10
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "\u00fcrkiye",
+          "confidence": 0.933712363243103,
+          "start": 26,
+          "end": 27
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "024*",
+          "confidence": 0.9155524373054504,
+          "start": 11,
+          "end": 12
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "024*",
+          "confidence": 0.9547372460365295,
+          "start": 11,
+          "end": 12
+        },
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "mapping",
+          "confidence": 0.879266619682312,
+          "start": 180,
+          "end": 181
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2023",
+          "confidence": 0.8012988567352295,
+          "start": 313,
+          "end": 314
+        },
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "CVA recipients",
+          "confidence": 0.5749012231826782,
+          "start": 455,
+          "end": 457
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "T\u00fcrkiye",
+          "confidence": 0.5489212274551392,
+          "start": 530,
+          "end": 531
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2024",
+          "confidence": 0.9190053343772888,
+          "start": 513,
+          "end": 514
+        },
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/d92f402e-e3de-468d-9581-ce56a5777b3b/2024_CVA_Mapping-Summary.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**T\u00dcRK\u0130YE CASH-BASED INTERVENTIONS TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP | 2024**\n\n\n2023, $1.56 billion was allocated specifically for earthquake response, whereas in 2024, this\namount dropped to $35 million. For comparison, the total budget for CVA activities was $123\nmillion in 2022 and $560 million in 2021. These figures indicate that following the large-scale\nearthquake response, CVA funding levels in T\u00fcrkiye have returned to their pre-earthquake\nnorms.\n\n\n**Age and gender breakdown** indicates that women (49.9%) received more CVA assistance\nwhen compared to men (30.8%) girls (%9.6) and boys (9.6%). Women received nearly 16 per\ncent more assistance in 2024 compared to the 2023 mapping. This increase may be attributed\nto the revised criteria for TRC programmes including SSN that is deprioritizing working-age\nmen and prioritizing women and the provision of targeted assistance for women. On the other\nhand, 679 non-binary children and 1824 non-binary adults were provided with CVA in 2024.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nMapping brings out that **nationality breakdown** of the beneficiaries of the cash-based\ninterventions across sectors are expectedly reflecting the population size of different groups;\nSyrians (55%) being the highest number of beneficiaries, followed by host community\nmembers (39%), Iraqis (2.4%), Afghans (2.3%) and Iranians (<1%). Other nationalities targeted\ninclude nationals of Angola, Bangladesh, Cameroon, Central Africa, Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia,\nGuinea, Mali, Morocco, Pakistan, Palestine, Republic of the Congo, Russia, Senegal, Somalia,\nSudan, Ukraine and Yemen. There is decrease in the numbers of host community members as\n1.86 million received cash assistance while over 2.5 million received cash assistance in 2023\ndue to the EQ response. On the other hand, 59.043 and 83.313 host community members\nwere targeted in 2021-22 and 2022-23 periods, respectively.\n\n\n**Brief Description of CVAs in T\u00fcrkiye:** Based on the **sectoral breakdown** of CVAs in 2024,\nmost projects are reported under **Basic Needs** (49), followed by Protection (27), Economic\nEmpowerment (17), Education (11), Shelter/NFI (7), WASH (7), Health (6) and FSL (5). Within\nthe scope of Basic Needs CVAs, including Shelter/NFI, approximately 4 million beneficiaries\nwere reached and almost 50% of reached beneficiaries were Turkish nationals. As a result,\nalmost all the Turkish nationals reached with CVA in 2024 is reached under Basic Needs sector;\nhowever, it should be noted that more than one sector selection was possible while entering\ndata. Protection sector provided cash for protection to over 152.000 beneficiaries. Basic\nNeeds being the top sector for CVAs is unsurprising noting the increasing needs due to the EQ\nand increase in the provision of Multi-Purpose Cash Assistance (MPCA).\n\n\n2\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/d92f402e-e3de-468d-9581-ce56a5777b3b/2024_CVA_Mapping-Summary.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**T\u00dcRK\u0130YE CASH-BASED INTERVENTIONS TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP | 2024**\n\n\n**CVA Projects by Sector**\n\n\n\n60\n\n50\n\n40\n\n30\n\n20\n\n10\n\n0\n\n\n\n**49**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n**7** **7** **6** **5**\n\n\n|Col1|Col2|Col3|Col4|Col5|Col6|Col7|\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n||||||||\n||||||||\n||||||||\n||||||||\n||||||||\n||||||||\n\n\n\nIn 2024, 49 MPCA programmes are reported for CVA Mapping which is the type of CVA that\nreached over 4.5 million beneficiaries. MPCA is widely preferred by partners last year as this\nmodality can cover Basic Needs and other sectoral needs in an effective and swift manner. In\nterms of market feasibility, [Joint Market Assessment Round 2](https://data.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/104988) that was conducted by CBI TWG\nmembers in November 2023 revealed that markets and FSPs in the EQ zone is available and\nfunctional and no observation were made indicating disfunctions in market feasibility and\naccessibility in this round, noting there might be discrete problems. Therefore, CBI TWG\nrecommended provision of CVA in the region with an emphasis on the advantages of providing\nMPCA rather than providing in-kind assistance.\n\n\nIn 2024, 65 CVA programming that included individuals in **rural** areas were conducted while\n75 programmes designed to cover individuals in the urban areas, 40 programmes covered\nTemporary Accommodation Centres, 38 programmes covered temporary formal settlements\nand 25 programmes covered temporary informal settlements. In 2023, only 9 projects covered\nTemporary Accommodation Centres and 3 programmes covered temporary settlements\n(formal and/or informal), marking a significant increase in contextual targeting of TACs and\nformal/informal settlements. It should be noted that one programme can cover more than\none context.\n\n\nWhen we look at the **appealing situation**, 41 projects appealed under 3RP while 44 did not\nand 40 projects are appealed under Flash Appeal which is specifically created for determining\nfunding needs for the EQ response. Of the 85 programmes reported for CVA Mapping, 58 of\nthem reported to Activity Info as well and 32 of them can be reached through [Services Advisor](https://turkiye.servicesadvisor.net/en)\nthat is a platform for persons in need and partners can find the geographical coverage and\nother related information regarding existing programmes in T\u00fcrkiye. [1]\n\n\n**Financial Overview:** The mapping provides information on **fundings** provided for CVA\nprojects in T\u00fcrkiye. [2] In 2024, ECHO provided over $333.7 million funds million to ACTED, CARE,\nGOAL, IBC, SENED, SGDD-ASAM, WALD, IOM and UNFPA while around $328 million funds\nwere provided directly to TRC mainly for the SSN and CCTE projects. Other donors include\n\n\n1 Partners are recommended to follow monthly reporting deadlines to Activity Info and provide regular\ninformation for the sake of the recognition level of their programmes and monitoring of programmes\u2019 progress.\nPartners are also encouraged to update their programme information on Services Advisor regularly.\n2 It should be noted the figures captured in the mapping are approximate figures and if more precise information\nis needs, relevant donor agencies should be contacted directly.\n\n\n3\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/d92f402e-e3de-468d-9581-ce56a5777b3b/2024_CVA_Mapping-Summary.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        2
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**T\u00dcRK\u0130YE CASH-BASED INTERVENTIONS TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP | 2024**\n\n\nPRM, Caritas, DG NEAR, Japan Government, New Zealand Government, Denmark\nGovernment, Sweden Government, Cordaid, GIZ, Swiss Agency for Development and\nCooperation (SDC) and private donors (foundations, individuals, etc.).\n\n\nRegarding **types of CVA support,** an increase in the overall number of programmes providing\n**regular** cash assistance (44%) was recorded when compared to last year (31%). One-off cash\nassistance projects accounted for around 56% of all CVA programmes (48) captured in this\nround of mapping, marking a decrease when compared to last year (53 programmes, 69%).\nThis decrease in the number of one-off programmes is explained by the reducing number of\nprogrammes for the EQ response. Partners are strongly encouraged to provide MPCA support\nfor 3 months and then adopt horizontal expansion, meaning that providing support to as many\nbeneficiaries as possible considering the limited funding. [3] One-off support should be provided\nafter a crisis situation with an aim to cover immediate needs.\n\n\nIn the context of **duration**, majority of programmes take beneficiaries seasonal/short-term\n(52, approximately 61% of projects captured) with seasonal programmes such as those\nrelating to support for agricultural workers or winterisation support, which are mostly under\nBasic Needs sector and the EQ-specific programmes.\n\n\n**Conditional and unconditional cash** assistance projects differ in terms of the numbers of CVA\nprogrammes mapped under each category. In 2024, partners provided beneficiaries with 71\nunconditional and 14 conditional CVA programmes. Since the purpose of the conditional cash\nprojects is to induce predetermined behavioural changes in beneficiaries expected to enhance\ncertain positive characteristics such as resilience, they are mostly observed in sectors such as\nEconomic Empowerment and Education. In 2024, programmes indicating shelter/WASH\nrehabilitation was also observed in the EQ zone. Conditions for these programmes include\nattendance/excellence in higher education, business establishment/development,\nattendance/completion of vocational training, etc.\n\n\nNearly 65% of CVA programmes utilised **unrestricted cash** generally used under Basic Needs\nsector (34) and Protection sector (18). Projects in the Basic Needs (including Shelter/NFI) and\nWASH utilized **restricted cash** more prevalently as restriction in this respect aims to have the\ncash assistance spent in a certain way conducive for meeting predetermined specific needs.\nRestricted programmes are generally restricted to the purchase of food, hygiene/sanitary\nitems, clothing, business materials, expenses of legal aid, agricultural supplies and rent.\n\n\nVarious **transfer mechanisms** are used satisfactorily in T\u00fcrkiye context because many\norganisations need to utilise more than one mechanism considering how many different\ngroups they target. In 2024, transferring the assistance to name and national ID via bank (44),\ntransfer to accounts pre-owned/opened by the beneficiaries (21) and transferring the\nassistance to name and national ID via PTT (13) are among widely used transfer mechanisms.\nUsing market card vouchers (10), prepaid cards (i.e. PTT) (9) and beneficiary-named accounts\n(i.e. K\u0131z\u0131layKart) (8) are other transfer mechanisms deployed. For instance, since Protection\nsector partners reach out to a wide range of beneficiaries, various transfer mechanisms can\nbe deployed under a single programme.\n\n\nCash partners in T\u00fcrkiye have extensive experience with various transfer mechanisms, and\ninter-agency coordination plays a key role in facilitating the exchange of this technical\nknowledge. In 2024, three programmes have utilized NAGIS as their financial service provider,\nproviding assistance to their beneficiaries through an e-voucher platform. The use of e\n\n3 MPCA Guidance January 2025 Update\n\n\n4\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/d92f402e-e3de-468d-9581-ce56a5777b3b/2024_CVA_Mapping-Summary.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        3
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**T\u00dcRK\u0130YE CASH-BASED INTERVENTIONS TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP | 2024**\n\n\nvouchers such as LCW and Defacto as well as market cards from retailers like A101, B\u0130M, \u015eOK,\nand Migros, decreased to 17 programmes compared to 21 in 2023. However, market vouchers\nremain more widely used than in pre-2023 rounds. The market vouchers are perceived to\nprovide advantages to organisations because disbursement of the assistance is less\nproblematic compared to various financial services. For example, a program that provide\nassistance to combination of refugees from several different nationalities (and thus under\ndifferent protection regimes) and Turkish citizens, picking an FSP that would respond the\nneeds of the entire target group is challenging compared to giving out vouchers of a private\nentity as counted above. However, these voucher agreements are generally done with chain\nmarkets and numbered commercial entities and cannot be inclusive of wide range of vendors.\nIn turn, distributing large amount of assistance through limited number of entities disrupts\nthe market and negatively impacts local businesses. CBI TWG continues to advocate for multipurpose cash assistance over e-vouchers in T\u00fcrkiye context.\n\n\nSSN remains as the flagship program that provides MPCA to 1.8 million beneficiaries with over\n$328 million budget. There has been a significant increase in the number of programmes\ntransferring assistance directly to beneficiaries using their names and national ID numbers, as\nMPCA programmes predominantly rely on these mechanisms in recent years. To illustrate, 44\nprogrammes in total transferred assistance to name and national ID number, 34 of them being\nMPCA programmes.\n\n\nIn the mapping findings dashboard, taking the average **transfer value** for **one-off MPCA**\nprojects is around TRY 11.770. It still should be noted that there are various sectoral nuances\nand distinctions that can only be gauged by dedicated sector analyses. For instance, while\nShelter sector partners provided an average of TRY 33.157 for one-off MPCA, Protection\nsector provides around TRY 9.828 based on the identified needs. Average for the **regular**\n**MPCA transfer value** is calculated as TRY 6.785. In addition, one programme provided a topup value of TRY 600 per person to their MPCA beneficiaries.\n\n\nBasic Needs sector CVAs\u2019 transfer values are generally determined based on specific\nframeworks such as Minimum Expenditure Baskets (MEBs), particularly that estimated\nthrough TRC\u2019s calculation methodology in the context of SSN assistance. In addition, CBI TWG\nprovided an MPCA Guidance [4] in March and updated the guidance in July to partners who are\nwilling to provide MPCA and provided MPCA Targeting Criteria Guidance [5] . In revising the\ntransfer value guidance for 2024, several critical considerations were considered to align with\nthe evolving needs and contexts of affected populations. Recognizing that context has shifted\naway from being defined as an \"emergency,\" the guidance encompasses guidance towards\nmultiple transfers to ensure sustained support in 2024.\n\n\nPartners are also asked how they identify transfer values for their programmes. Majority\n(49%) indicated that they aligned the transfer value with CBI TWG MPCA Guidance and 24%\nconduct programme-specific calculations while 16% aligned their assistance with the line\nministry and 10% adopted sectoral guidance on the transfer values while deciding on the\ntransfer value for their programmes.\n\n\nAdditionally, MPCA providing partners were asked if they are adjusting their transfer amounts\nwith respect to exchange rates and an overwhelming majority (78%) indicated that they do\nnot adjust the transfer amount. CBI TWG concluded that there should be more recalibrations\n\n\n4 [T\u00fcrkiye: Guidance Note on Multi-Purpose Cash Assistance in T\u00fcrkiye](https://data.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/107224)\n[T\u00fcrkiye: Guidance Note on Multi-Purpose Cash Assistance in T\u00fcrkiye - July 2024](https://data.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/110709)\n5 [T\u00fcrkiye: Cash-Based Interventions Technical Working Group MPCA Targeting Criteria Guidance](https://data.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/111120)\n\n\n5\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/d92f402e-e3de-468d-9581-ce56a5777b3b/2024_CVA_Mapping-Summary.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        4
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**T\u00dcRK\u0130YE CASH-BASED INTERVENTIONS TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP | 2024**\n\n\nfor fixed transfer amounts since these were able to cover less and less of the needs of\nbeneficiaries in 2024 due to high inflation and other economic stagnation trends.\n\n\n**Accountability to Affected Population:** 99% percent (84) of all CVA programmes mapped\nin the round of 2024 has **complaint mechanisms** in place, this marks an increase when\ncompared to 2023 (93%, 77). **Complaint channels** include rather common ones like _call lines,_\n_e-mail, complaint box, in-person counselling, social media, chat applications_ etc. and also\nsome less prevalent methods such as deploying _community focal points_ (32%, 27) who are\ntrusted community members provided with relevant trainings helping organisations get\ncommunity feedback during the entirety of their CVA projects and postal mail (20%, 17).\n\n\n\n\n\nIn the latest round, partners were asked\nwhether their projects incorporate **PSEA**\n**mechanisms/safeguards** . The response of\naround 93% (79) of the projects in this\nregard was positive and it marks an increase\nin comparison with last year (87%,67). This\nalso points to a significant increase when\ncompared to previous years and indicates\nthat this is positioned to be a significant area\nof priority for 2025 as PSEA risks can be\nhighly salient in cash support contexts.\n\n\n\n\n\nAround 84% (71) of CVA programmes mapped conduct **post-distribution monitoring (PDM),**\nmarking a slight decrease in comparison with the last round (92%, 71) but still a significant\nincrease when compared to previous round in 2022 in which only 59% of the programmes had\nPDM. The reason for the decrease in the PDM numbers are stemming from unfeasibility and\nthe nature of cash such as projects being emergency response programmes (i.e. EQ-specific,\ncash assistance to \u0130zmir fire survivors) and cash provided as a case management tool therefore\nstandardization is not possible for conducting survey.\n\n\nMost of the programmes that has PDM in place prefers to keep the results strictly internal\n(86%, 61), hindering the potential benefits that may be reaped with greater information\nsharing and mutual learning and 7% shares PDMs only with the Inter-agency partners.\nPartners were encouraged to conduct PDMs for their CVA projects and share their finding and\nlessons learnt as much as possible. For example, some partners are developing their own\nanalytical frameworks for evaluation reports based on PDMs that can be publicly shared. As\nPDM reports can sometimes get too detailed to be meaningfully shared with everyone,\nsharing at least reports on summary findings and analytical frameworks expounding on\nlessons learnt conducive for effective and well-coordinated PDM processes in this way is\nadvocated for as a good practice. Partners are advised to prepare their own learning materials\nbased on information captured in their PDM processes and disseminate these in relevant\ncoordination platforms. CBI TWG also provided guidance on PDM that can be reached via [this](https://data.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/95420)\n[link.](https://data.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/95420)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n6\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "PDM",
+          "confidence": 0.9004029631614685,
+          "start": 327,
+          "end": 328
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "urvey.",
+          "confidence": 0.6061473488807678,
+          "start": 385,
+          "end": 386
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "\u0130zmir",
+          "confidence": 0.5608267784118652,
+          "start": 364,
+          "end": 367
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2022",
+          "confidence": 0.8456063866615295,
+          "start": 317,
+          "end": 318
+        },
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "PDMs",
+          "confidence": 0.5737587213516235,
+          "start": 472,
+          "end": 473
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/d92f402e-e3de-468d-9581-ce56a5777b3b/2024_CVA_Mapping-Summary.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        5
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**T\u00dcRK\u0130YE CASH-BASED INTERVENTIONS TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP | 2024**\n\n\nEven though most programmes have a functioning **M&E system** (93%, 79), considering the\nimportance of this aspect, there is still several programmes (7%, 6) without such a system in\nplace. This issue needs to be further tackled within 2025 and in the coming years as well. Most\nutilized methodologies for M&E include survey (individual or family interviews/face to face)\n(63), phone survey (58), FGDs (47) and key informant interviews (37). The frequency of M&E\nindicates that partners prefer monthly (31), yearly (20), quarterly (11), continuous (9), twice\na year (5) and weekly (3) data collection.\n\n\n**Targeting:** With respect to **CVA programmes by vulnerability**, unsurprisingly economic\nvulnerabilities (65) is the top category in line with the current recessionary economic context,\nfollowed by vulnerabilities related with dependency (58), reflecting the change in partners\napproach towards adopting solutions of self-reliance more and protection vulnerabilities\nincluding comes as third most targeted vulnerability. This indicates a significant shift in the\npattern of vulnerability targeting in the context of CVAs because protection related\nvulnerabilities were the most targeted in the previous rounds and this trend has been\nchanging for three consecutive rounds. The ongoing economic challenges in T\u00fcrkiye may have\nbeen responsible for this by making basic needs and livelihoods challenges even more visible.\nAnalysis also shows that more than half of the CVAs target more than one category of activity,\nand this is also supported with number of unrestricted cash programs available in T\u00fcrkiye.\n\n\nAlthough there is a limited amount of cash for health program in T\u00fcrkiye due to the\npresumption that health costs are mostly covered by public institutions, mapping analysis\nshow that there are 53 CVA programmes targeting health-related vulnerabilities, 31 does so\nthrough multi-purpose cash assistance.\n\n\nThe analysis of **CVA programmes by targeting** aligns closely with the findings on vulnerabilitybased targeting. In 2024, economically vulnerable households were the most frequently\ntargeted group, with 66 programmes designed to support them. Persons with disabilities (65),\nfemale-headed households (62), single parents and caregivers (53), elderly individuals (50),\nhouseholds with a high dependency ratio (50), and children and youth (44) followed as key\nbeneficiary groups. It is important to note that, regardless of the specific targeting criteria,\nnearly all programmes ultimately aim to address economic vulnerabilities, underscoring the\nprimary objective of CVA interventions in providing financial relief to those in need in this\nchallenging economic environment.\n\n\nIn 2024, 17 partners implemented 43 projects targeting individuals affected by or at risk of\ngender-based violence (GBV). These projects which had a combined budget of approximately\n$65.4 million, provided support to over 1.8 million individuals. It is important to note that\nwhile these initiatives include cash components for GBV-related needs, they are not dedicated\nGBV programmes per se. Among these projects, 30 were designed as part of the earthquake\nresponse, while 26 fell under emergency cash assistance. Additionally, 24 of the 43 projects\nwere delivered as MPCA, highlighting the role of flexible cash support in addressing\nvulnerabilities linked to GBV.\n\n\nIn 2024, 17 partners implemented 36 projects aimed at supporting people who cannot access\nadequate shelter. These programmes, with a total budget of approximately $83 million,\nreached around 2 million people, primarily in earthquake-affected provinces. Among these\ninitiatives, 23 were part of the earthquake response, while 19 were classified as emergency\ncash assistance programmes. Additionally, 20 of these projects were delivered as MPCA.\n\n\nIn terms of **required documentations**, FID Card or passport, civil registration paper, disability\nreport, MERNIS registration paper, business registration documents, travel permit and social\n\n\n7\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "&E system*",
+          "confidence": 0.9039527177810669,
+          "start": 23,
+          "end": 27
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "T\u00dcRK\u0130YE CASH-BASED INTERVENTIONS TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP",
+          "confidence": 0.6392806768417358,
+          "start": 2,
+          "end": 10
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "025",
+          "confidence": 0.5600984692573547,
+          "start": 69,
+          "end": 70
+        },
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "CVA programmes by vulnerability",
+          "confidence": 0.5125472545623779,
+          "start": 172,
+          "end": 176
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "T\u00fcrkiye",
+          "confidence": 0.6611205339431763,
+          "start": 275,
+          "end": 276
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/d92f402e-e3de-468d-9581-ce56a5777b3b/2024_CVA_Mapping-Summary.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        6
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**T\u00dcRK\u0130YE CASH-BASED INTERVENTIONS TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP | 2024**\n\n\nsecurity transcript documents are among the required for registration to programme. It\nshould be noted that 15 programmes did not require any specific documentation to qualify as\na beneficiary.\n\n\nPartners adopted various **methods to prevent duplication of cash and voucher assistance**\nsuch as conducting information sharing through working groups (42), as well as cross-checking\nbeneficiary lists with other CVA programmes (38), geographical targeting (34),\nhousehold/individuals surveys and assessments (31) and sharing information through\nbilateral meetings (29). Of those 37 programmes that chose a **cross-checking programme**, 19\nprogrammes crosschecked their beneficiary list with internal mechanisms, 8 programmes\nutilized GIZ cross-checking among cash partners, 8 cross-checked their beneficiaries with SSN\nbeneficiaries while 1 programme adopted SOYB\u0130S and one programme was cross-checked\nthrough UNHCR cross-check mechanism. It is important to highlight that the use of crosschecking mechanisms has increased compared to previous rounds. Notably, for the first time,\norganizations have reported to implement internal cross-checking processes within their own\nprogrammes. This shift may be driven by the need to ensure the horizontal expansion of\nprogrammes, allowing them to reach a broader range of beneficiaries while maintaining\nefficiency and minimizing duplication of assistance.\n\n\n**Programme Details:** Mapping dashboard includes a programme details page which gives the\nopportunity to filter all CVA programs by various criteria and acquire program-specific details.\nPartners are encouraged to benefit from this function to better understand the supported\ncommunities, implemented interventions and see the gaps, which may enhance the\neffectiveness of the CVAs in T\u00fcrkiye.\n\n\n**ACTED** 's 12-month response in Hatay province, titled **\u201cIntegrated Emergency and Resilience**\n\n**Response for EQ-affected communities in Hatay\u201d** aimed to address immediate needs and\n\nenhance resilience of earthquake-affected communities in formal sites, informal sites, and\n\nneighborhoods. Objectives included providing critical winterisation items, dignified shelter\n\nsolutions, and improving indoor handwashing and dishwashing facilities for the needs of\n\naffected population. ACTED supported over 2900 beneficiaries with $79.000 budget.\n\n\nThrough **UNFPA** -supported **Women and Girls Safe Space (WGSS)** operated by KAMER\n\nFoundation, survivors and those under risk of gender-based violence (GBV) received essential\n\nservices, including case management, psychosocial support, and cash assistance integrated\n\nwithin the GBV case management process. Case managers worked with survivors to create\n\npersonalized support plans, connecting them to legal, healthcare, and shelter services. The\n\ncash assistance provided as an emergency one-off payment or as monthly support for up to\n\nthree months, addressing immediate and long-term GBV related needs to 112 women, 18 girls\n\nand 9 boys with around $53.000 budget.\n\n\nMain programmes conducted in 2024 include SSN, Collective Kindness and winterisation\nsupport. In 2024, **Social Safety Net (SSN)** project conducted by TRC and MoFSS. In 2024, SSN\nreached over 1.8 million beneficiaries with over $328 million budget provided by DG ECHO\nand a transfer value of TRY 500 per person provided to beneficiaries monthly with additional\nTRY 600 per person top-up value, targeting households with high dependency ratio. The\n\n\n8\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/d92f402e-e3de-468d-9581-ce56a5777b3b/2024_CVA_Mapping-Summary.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        7
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**T\u00dcRK\u0130YE CASH-BASED INTERVENTIONS TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP | 2024**\n\n\ncalculation is made according to the Minimum Expenditure Basket by K\u0131z\u0131layKart analysers\nwhich is defined as the minimum amount of money that is needed to purchase selected\nnumber of items on a monthly basis through K\u0131z\u0131layKart. Details can be reached from\n[K\u0131z\u0131layKart website.](https://platform.kizilaykart.org/en/index.html#about)\n\n\nThis round also captured the **winterisation** **programmes** designed for 2024-2025 winter\nperiod. Within the scope of winterisation, in 2024, 6 organizations with 9 programmes\nprovided support to over 61.700 beneficiaries (19.400 Syrian, 8.000 Turkish, 460 Afghan and\n70 Iraqi nationals, approximately) with $3.3 million budget and 5 provinces were directly\ntargeted mainly located in the EQ-affected region and one nation-wide programme was\nreported. For details, please see the [Dashboard.](https://app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrIjoiZjdjNmNjZGItNGVmYS00NWNlLWEwZTUtZDBkMDhhMmIyMmJkIiwidCI6ImU1YzM3OTgxLTY2NjQtNDEzNC04YTBjLTY1NDNkMmFmODBiZSIsImMiOjh9)\n\n\n9\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/d92f402e-e3de-468d-9581-ce56a5777b3b/2024_CVA_Mapping-Summary.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        8
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**T\u00dcRK\u0130YE CASH-BASED INTERVENTIONS TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP | 2024**\n\n\n**Key Takeaways:**\n\n\n_Geographical Coverage_\n\n\n  - The CVA Mapping captured 85 programmes by 26 organizations, including earthquake\n(EQ) response and other needs.\n\n  - Programmes cover 31 provinces, mainly focusing on SET, Ankara, Marmara, and\nAegean regions.\n\n  - Expansion observed in Van and A\u011fr\u0131 provinces and neighboring EQ-affected provinces\nlike Mardin, Diyarbak\u0131r, Elaz\u0131\u011f, Sivas, and Kayseri.\n\n  - Coverage remains limited in Central, Northern, and Eastern Anatolia.\n\n\n_Actors_\n\n\n  - Major actors include TRC, UNFPA, and UNHCR with 11 nationwide projects, 17 nationwide projects in total.\n\n  - Various sectors involved: Basic Needs, Protection, FSL, Shelter/NFI, Economic\nEmpowerment, Education, WASH and Health.\n\n  - Partners include SGDD-ASAM, DRC, TRC, and several international donors like ECHO,\nUSAID, and others.\n\n\n_Transfer Amounts_\n\n\n  - Overall CVA budget for 2024: $486.25 million.\n\n  - EQ-related responses account for $35 million, decreasing from $1.62 billion in 2023.\n\n  - Average transfer value for one-off MPCA assistance: TRY 11.772. Regular MPCA\ntransfer value: TRY 6.784 for three months.\n\n  - Partners widely utilized CBI TWG MPCA Guidance Note while determining transfer\namounts.\n\n  - Most partners do not adjust transfer amounts based on exchange rates, which poses\na challenge due to inflation and economic conditions.\n\n\n_Sectoral Cash_\n\n\n  - Basic Needs sector: Largest, reaching over 3.9 million beneficiaries.\n\n  - Protection sector: Cash for protection provided to over 152.000 beneficiaries.\n\n  - MPCA programmes: Widely used, covering Basic Needs and other sectors efficiently.\n\n  - Most CVA programmes used unrestricted cash, particularly in Basic Needs.\n\n\n_Monitoring/Impact Assessment_\n\n\n  - 99% of programmes have complaint mechanisms.\n\n  - 93% incorporate PSEA mechanisms.\n\n  - 84% conduct post-distribution monitoring (PDM) and this ratio marks a significant\nincrease when compared to pre-2023 rounds and a slight decrease compared to last\nyear. Partners mostly keep PDM reports internal.\n\n  - Partners are encouraged to share PDM findings and lessons learnt for mutual learning.\n\n\n10\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "VA Mapping",
+          "confidence": 0.991550087928772,
+          "start": 25,
+          "end": 27
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "T\u00dcRK\u0130YE CASH-BASED INTERVENTIONS TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP",
+          "confidence": 0.8300750255584717,
+          "start": 2,
+          "end": 10
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "024*",
+          "confidence": 0.7138873338699341,
+          "start": 11,
+          "end": 12
+        },
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/d92f402e-e3de-468d-9581-ce56a5777b3b/2024_CVA_Mapping-Summary.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        9
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**T\u00dcRK\u0130YE CASH-BASED INTERVENTIONS TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP | 2024**\n\n\n**Annex A. Background**\n\n\n**Purpose:** The objective of this mapping exercise was to better discern the current coverage\nof CVA programmes in T\u00fcrkiye for the period of 2024 and to identify gaps and areas for further\nharmonisation and improvement by providing the opportunity to conduct sectoral and\ngeographic analyses. Also, its aim is to serve as a reference tool on the basis of its being a\ncomprehensive glossary of CVA projects in T\u00fcrkiye and to further promote CVA mainstreaming\nin the country through this role.\n\n\n**Methodology:** Based on the evolving conditions and needs, the mapping survey is revised on\na yearly basis. Partners\u2019 focal points are provided with the relevant trainings on completing\nthe updated surveys who then enter their CVA project data on ActivityInfo platform based on\nwhich the mapping analyses are constructed.\n\n\nThe changes in 2024 round of mapping included: Categorisation of CVA programmes by\nvulnerability and targeting, including new breakdowns such as GBV-related vulnerabilities,\nenhanced section for programme details and brief project descriptions.\n\n\n11\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "apping survey",
+          "confidence": 0.9758551716804504,
+          "start": 126,
+          "end": 128
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "urvey",
+          "confidence": 0.6939093470573425,
+          "start": 127,
+          "end": 128
+        },
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "\u00fcrkiye",
+          "confidence": 0.9633828401565552,
+          "start": 45,
+          "end": 46
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "024*",
+          "confidence": 0.5632557272911072,
+          "start": 11,
+          "end": 12
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "024*",
+          "confidence": 0.9014288187026978,
+          "start": 11,
+          "end": 12
+        },
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "CVA project data",
+          "confidence": 0.9969093203544617,
+          "start": 152,
+          "end": 155
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2024",
+          "confidence": 0.9825337529182434,
+          "start": 170,
+          "end": 171
+        },
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/d92f402e-e3de-468d-9581-ce56a5777b3b/2024_CVA_Mapping-Summary.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        10
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_48/raw/doc_48_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,212 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "### Expert Meeting on Alternative Care and Guardianship for Unaccompanied and Separated Children (UASC) in Bulgaria\n\n##### January 2025\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/ec6619e6-8c23-403c-af6f-1a8caea14978/2025-03-REPORT-UASC%20Expert%20meeting.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: EXPERT MEETING ON ALTERNATIVE CARE AND GUARDIANSHIP FOR UASC\n\n##### CONTENTS\n\n\n**PARTICIPATING INSTITUTIONS .............................................................................................. 3**\n\n\n**LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS .......................................................................................................... 3**\n\n\n**BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................................ 4**\n\n\n**MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND SOCIAL POLICY POSITIONS ............................................. 6**\n\n\n**DISCUSSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................................................... 8**\n\n\n**1.** **On Alternative Care ......................................................................................................... 8**\n\n\nBackground ........................................................................................................................................... 8\n\n\nChallenges .......................................................................................................................................... 10\n\n\nRecommendations ............................................................................................................................ 12\n\n\nGovernment Response .................................................................................................................... 14\n\n\n**2.** **On Guardianship: ........................................................................................................... 17**\n\n\nBackground ........................................................................................................................................ 17\n\n\nChallenges .......................................................................................................................................... 19\n\n\nRecommendations ............................................................................................................................ 20\n\n\nCover Photo: Unaccompanied Minors who took part in the \u201cHere where I am\u201d Photography workshop\nposing at the opening of the exhibition in November 2024/ \u00a9 UNHCR\n\n\nUNHCR BULGARIA /January 2025 2\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/ec6619e6-8c23-403c-af6f-1a8caea14978/2025-03-REPORT-UASC%20Expert%20meeting.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: EXPERT MEETING ON ALTERNATIVE CARE AND GUARDIANSHIP FOR UASC\n\n##### PARTICIPATING INSTITUTIONS\n\n\nUNHCR thanks National Bureau for Legal Aid and its partner Bulgarian Helsinki Committee for\nsupporting the organisation of the Expert Meeting on Alternative Care and Guardianship for\nUnaccompanied and Separated Children in Bulgaria, which convened as part of UNHCR multistakeholder consultations under the Refugee Coordination Model, as well as UNICEF and the\nInternational Organisation for Migration (IOM); and the Ministry of Labour and Social Policy,\nthe State Agency for Child Protection and the State Agency for Refugees at the Council of\nMinisters, the National Police Department for the Prevention of Juvenile Crime, Burgas, Ruse\nand Lesichovo municipalities, the Bulgarian Red Cross, the Council of Refugee Women in\nBulgaria, the Foundation for Access to Rights, the National Network for the Child, SOS Children\nVillages, directors of family-family type accommodation centres in Sofia, Burgas and Ruse, IGA\nFoundation as well as academia representatives for their active participation and their\ncontributions throughout the consultations.\n\n\n_UNHCR is grateful to the Ministry of Labour and Social Policy and the State Agency for Social_\n_Assistance, the State Agency for Refugees, UNICEF and BRC family-type accommodation canter in_\n_Pazardjik for their valuable additional inputs on the initial draft of this report._\n\n\n**January 2025**\n\n##### LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS\n\n\n**ASA**  - Agency for Social Assistance\n\n\n**BHC**   - Bulgarian Helsinki Committee\n\n\n**BRC**  - Bulgarian Red Cross\n\n\n**CRWB**  - Council of Refugee Women in Bulgaria\n\n\n**FAR**  - Foundation for Access to Rights\n\n\n**IOM**  - International Organisation for Migration\n\n\n**MLSP**  - Ministry of Labour and Social Policy\n\n\n**NBLA**  - National Bureau for Legal Aid\n\n\n**SACP**  - State Agency for Child Protection\n\n\n**SAR**  - State Agency for Refugees at the Council of Ministers\n\n\n**UASC**  - Unaccompanied and Separate Children\n\n\n**UNHCR**  - UN Refugee Agency\n\n\n**UNICEF**  - United Nations Children\u2019s Fund\n\n\n3 UNHCR BULGARIA / January 2025\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/ec6619e6-8c23-403c-af6f-1a8caea14978/2025-03-REPORT-UASC%20Expert%20meeting.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        2
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: EXPERT MEETING ON ALTERNATIVE CARE AND GUARDIANSHIP FOR UASC\n\n##### BACKGROUND\n\n\nOn 23 October 2024, UNHCR in collaboration with its partner Bulgarian Helsinki Committee\n(BHC) convened an expert meeting on Alternative care and Guardianship for unaccompanied\nand separated children in Bulgaria, intended as part of annual UNHCR consultations with civil\nsociety, service providers and communities. The purpose was to take stock of the existing\nchallenges and provide recommendations on how to address them, taking into account the\nopportunities for legislative and police changes arising in the context of the implementation of\nthe EU Pact on Migration and Asylum, as well as access to funding opportunities so as to ensure\nchildren have access to reception and care withing the national child protection system.\n\n\nIn total, 35 representatives of residential care services accommodating children seeking or\ngranted international protection including Ruse, Burgas, Pazardzhik, Lesichovo and Sofia, the\nmunicipalities which are in charge of commissioning services on their territory, the State Agency\nfor Refugees, the State Agency for Child Protection, the National Bureau for Legal Aid, the\nNational Foster Care association, IOM, UNICEF, the Bulgarian Red Cross (BRC), and NGOs\nproviding legal and social assistance \u2013 SOS for Children Villages, Foundation to Access Rights\n(FAR), BHC, and the Council of Refugee Women in Bulgaria (CRWB) took part in the meeting.\n\n\nIn welcoming the participants, UNHCR praised the commitment of the participants to child\nprotection in an environment where political and social dedication to human rights of forcibly\ndisplaced and stateless persons are declining while armed conflict and displacement is rising\naround Bulgaria. UNHCR considered the belief that Bulgaria is a transit country as a challenge\nto child protection, underlining that Bulgaria is a country where children at risk, including\nunaccompanied and separated children, find the care and protection they deserve, and are\nentitled under European human rights law and EU standards. While there is much to be done\nto improve the reception and protection of UASC as long as their stay in Bulgaria, a common\nunderstanding and commitment to the principle is a big first step. Referring to the findings and\nrecommendations of the Special Representative of the Secretary General of the Council of\nEurope on migration and refugees in 2023 and the Roundtable on alternative care and\nguardianship in April 2024, as well as the series of events on response to the vulnerabilities of\nUASC organised by UNHCR in collaboration with the EU Asylum Agency and the Greek Ministry\nof Migration and Asylum in July 2024, collective thinking by experts provides an opportunity to\nfind new solutions to old challenges, as well as looking at those challenges from new angles.\n\n\nThe recommendations that the experts participating in this event identified should also inform\nthe national implementation of the EU Pact on Migration and Asylum with regards to child\nprotection. In this respect, UNHCR has made several comments and recommendations for the\nnational implementation process.\n\n\nThese include, in particular:\n\n\n    - introducing robust identification mechanisms for UASC and other children at risk,\nincluding those with disabilities, victims of trafficking, those at risk of trafficking, and\nthose experiencing trauma, at the earliest possible stage and ensuring they have\neffective access to services.\n\n\nUNHCR BULGARIA /January 2025 4\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/ec6619e6-8c23-403c-af6f-1a8caea14978/2025-03-REPORT-UASC%20Expert%20meeting.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        3
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: EXPERT MEETING ON ALTERNATIVE CARE AND GUARDIANSHIP FOR UASC\n\n\n    - introducing provision for the appointment of a guardian as soon as possible to protect\nthe child\u2019s rights, in addition to a legal representative for the purposes of legal\nprocedures. This framework should also include professional guardians who are\ntrained,establishing an independent guardian institution to recruit, train, appoint, and\nmonitor guardians for UASC and a supervisory mechanism to monitor the performance\nof tasks of representatives and review complaints from unaccompanied minors and\nensure they are equipped with the necessary resources.\n\n    - ensuring that adequate resources are allocated for family-based care arrangements (and\nsupervised independent living arrangements when appropriate), and that inclusion of\nUASC into the national child protection system be prioritized, strengthened and\ncollaborate with UNHCR to monitor alternative care standards. Cooperate with UNHCR,\nmunicipalities and child protection NGOs to enhance the national capacity of supervised\nindependent living arrangements, including by allocating resources for this purpose;\n\n\n    - introducing procedures to consistently assess the best interest of the child from the\nmoment of arrival and allocate the necessary financial and administrative resources to\nsupport the effective functioning of these procedures. The responsible institution of\nconducting with best interested procedure are child protection departments. A\nmultidisciplinary approach is necessary for the guarantee that the best interest of UASC\nis respected.\n\n\n**This is right time for the Government of Bulgaria to adopt its National Strategy for the Child.**\n\n\nIt is also important for the experts and civil society to leverage this process to improve\nprotection and solutions for UASC, incorporating also the European Commission\u2019s\n[Recommendatons on developing and strengthening integrated child protecton systems in the](https://commission.europa.eu/document/36591cfb-1b0a-4130-985e-332fd87d40c1_en)\n[best interests of the child, the](https://commission.europa.eu/document/36591cfb-1b0a-4130-985e-332fd87d40c1_en) [General Comment No. 6](https://www.unhcr.org/media/convention-rights-child-general-comment-no-6-2005-treatment-unaccompanied-and-separated) concerning the Removal of\n[unaccompanied and separated children outside their country of origin, the General Comment](https://www.refworld.org/legal/general/crc/2013/en/95780)\n[No. 14](https://www.refworld.org/legal/general/crc/2013/en/95780) concerning the best interests of the child - a primary consideration of Convention on\nthe Rights of the Child.\n\n\nUNHCR also stresses the EU Fundamental Rights Agency\u2019s (FRA) [handbook on guardianship for](https://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2014/guardianship-children-deprived-parental-care)\n[children deprived of parental care and FRA and EU Asylum Agency\u2019s](https://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2014/guardianship-children-deprived-parental-care) [Practcal Tool for Guardians](https://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2023/practical-tool-guardians-asylum-procedure)\n\n[\u2014 The asylum procedure.](https://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2023/practical-tool-guardians-asylum-procedure)\n\n\n5 UNHCR BULGARIA / January 2025\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/ec6619e6-8c23-403c-af6f-1a8caea14978/2025-03-REPORT-UASC%20Expert%20meeting.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        4
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: EXPERT MEETING ON ALTERNATIVE CARE AND GUARDIANSHIP FOR UASC\n\n##### MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND SOCIAL POLICY POSITION\n\n\nThe Agency for Social Assistance Agency (ASA) has clarified their position that the identification\nof a child as a child (i.e. under 18), and that he/she is not accompanied by parents or relatives,\nis crucial for access to the rights and guarantees for child protection at the earliest possible\nstage (at the child's first contact with institutional representatives). According to the legislation\nin force in the field of migration and asylum in the Republic of Bulgaria, a police authority that\nhas identified an unaccompanied child shall notify the Social Assistance Directorate of the\nchild's place of residence. The notification letter shall also include information on the identified\nneeds of the unaccompanied child during the initial contacts with them, including risk factors\n(trafficking, smuggling, violence). In this regard, strengthening resources for early identification\nof children (at the border or within) and risk assessment in initial actions with children will\nprevent the undue detention of unaccompanied children in the centres of Ministry of Interior,\nand enhance the effectiveness of actions in combating trafficking and exploitation.\n\n\nAt present, representation of UASC seeking and granted international protection is carried out\nunder the Law of Asylum and Refugee Act (LAR) by lawyers registered in the Legal Aid Register\nof the National Legal Aid Bureau (NLAB). Representation of unaccompanied children is partially\nregulated and regulated in various legal acts. Unaccompanied children in an international\nprotection procedure are represented by lawyers from the NBLA, while those who have not\napplied under the LAR or have been refused status are represented by social workers from the\nChild Protection Departments (CPD) of the Social Assistance Directorates (SAD) only in the\nprocedures and proceedings regulated by the Law of Foreigners. In this way, in practice,\nseparate modes of representation are distinguished according to the migration status of the\nchild, which is contrary to the principle of non-discrimination. According to MLSP the guardians\nshould be independent and should not be assigned to the social workers of the ASA, since the\nlegal framework empowers them to define and implement specific child protection measures\nand to supervise their implementation.\n\n\nBecause of these functions, it is not appropriate for the social worker to perform, on the one\nhand, supervisory functions and, on the other hand, again to perform representative functions\nin relation to the unaccompanied child which put him in the situation of conflict of functions\nand interests. In administrative proceedings with UASC the social worker from the ASA is\ninvolved by virtue of Art. 15 of the Child Protection Act, a function which differs from legal\nrepresentation, guardianship or custody.\n\n\nAccording to the ASA, in cases where protection measures are taken and an unaccompanied\nforeign child is placed in a social service for children, the Directorate for Social Assistance makes\nan assessment which concerns the location of the social service facility. An assessment is made\nof the social, educational and health infrastructure in the area, as well as the availability of social\nservice providers and NGOs and international organisations that could provide specialised\nsupport to children, expertise and an interpreter.\n\n\nASA has identified the need for targeted familiarisation of the local authorities and the local\ncommunity with the profile and needs of refugee children, as well as with the commitments of\nthe state and local authorities to guarantee their rights and interests as regulated in the national\nlegislation in the field of child protection, migration, asylum and refugees. In this regard, all\n\n\nUNHCR BULGARIA /January 2025 6\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/ec6619e6-8c23-403c-af6f-1a8caea14978/2025-03-REPORT-UASC%20Expert%20meeting.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        5
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: EXPERT MEETING ON ALTERNATIVE CARE AND GUARDIANSHIP FOR UASC\n\n\nopportunities should be taken to build models and good practices for joint efforts, coordination\nand partnership.\n\n\nThe need to increase the capacity and preparation for the placement of unaccompanied children\nin social services for residential care is also recognised, therefore it is necessary to create\nadditional support mechanisms for these services. The provision of sufficiently qualified\ninterpreters and cultural mediators will support comprehensive social work with\nunaccompanied children. A proposal has been made by the ASA to provide multidisciplinary\nteams of specialists with the necessary expertise at district level to provide targeted support to\ninstitutions and local authorities in their work with unaccompanied refugee children. This team\nshould be composed of experts from state institutions, international and non-governmental\norganisations.\n\n\nThe assessment of the best interests of an unaccompanied child requires a multidisciplinary\napproach and interaction between the competent State authorities. The ASA, as the child\nprotection authority, when making this assessment, considers:\n\n\n**(1)** the wishes and feelings of the child; **(2)** the physical, mental and emotional needs of the child;\n**(3)** the age, **(4)** sex, **(5)** background and **(6)** other characteristics of the child; **(7)** the danger or\nharm that has been caused to the child or is likely to be caused to the child; **(8)** the ability of the\nparents to care for the child; **(9)** the consequences that will occur to the child if circumstances\nchange; **(10)** other relevant circumstances.\n\n\nIt is necessary to collect information and provide opinions from various institutions relevant to\nthe rights and interests of UASC to make the assessment. It is acknowledged by the ASA that it\nincludes measures for referral to medical services, specialized psychological support, family\ntracing, family reunification, education, legal support, use of social services, etc. In this regard,\nthe possibility of developing standard operating procedures for the work with UASC and a\nprocedure for assessing their best interest could be considered as part of the Coordination\nMechanism for Unaccompanied Foreign National Children, including refugee children.\n\n\nThe assessment of the best interests of the child shall be carried out by all authorities\nresponsible for the reception of unaccompanied children in international protection\nproceedings. It includes taking immediate action to refer them to specialised care and services\nand to ensure that their special needs are met. It is based on the need to protect children and\nfind a long-term and sustainable solution. The assessment ensures that the unaccompanied\nchild can live in an environment that meets their needs and respects their rights.\n\n\nASA proposes that multidisciplinary teams of qualified professionals be formed and trained to\nmake a well-informed and joint decision about the best interests of the child, following a\ncomplex assessment of the child's situation and needs for health, psychological, emotional\nsupport, an understanding of the particularities of the environment from which they come, an\nassessment of the risk to the child and an assessment of their relationship with the adults around\nthem.\n\n\n7 UNHCR BULGARIA / January 2025\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/ec6619e6-8c23-403c-af6f-1a8caea14978/2025-03-REPORT-UASC%20Expert%20meeting.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        6
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: EXPERT MEETING ON ALTERNATIVE CARE AND GUARDIANSHIP FOR UASC\n\n##### DISCUSSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS\n\n###### _1. On Alternative Care_ **_Background_**\n\n\nUnaccompanied children seeking international protection in Bulgaria are children at risk within\nthe meaning of the Child Protection Act. Under Article 3 of the UN Convention on the Rights\nof the Child, the state is obliged to take all actions to ensure such protection and support, in\naccordance with the best interests of the child.\n\nBulgarian legislation envisages that unaccompanied and separated children (UASC) are to be\naccommodated:\n\n\n**(1)** With family members or relatives, it is not necessary to be blood related, foster family,\nsocial or integrated integrated-social service for residential care under the conditions\nand procedures of the Law on Child Protection (Art. 4, para 2).\n\n\n**(2)** In other accommodation places with special conditions for children, thus prioritizing\ncommunity-based and alternative care models.\n\n\nAccording to the provisions of the LAR, in addition to the measures listed under the Child\nProtection Act, unaccompanied children seeking or granted international protection may be\nplaced in other places with special conditions for children under 14, defined as minors (Article\n29, para. 10 (2) and Article 33 (2)). In three reception centres, the State Agency for Refugees\nhave established so-called safe/protected areas where unaccompanied refugee children are\naccommodated. These facilities do not consistently provide the necessary reception conditions\nand care. Such arrangements may be appropriate only as emergency measure, pending\nplacement within the national child protection system.\n\n\nDespite recent progress, few residential care services have agreed to accommodate\nunaccompanied children, while currently only three such services, specialized in\naccommodation of such children accommodate UASC throughout the country including crisis\ncentre for unaccompanied children in Ruse, the residential care service in Oborishte district in\nSofia and the transitional housing in Burgas. Throughout the country, residential care services\nsuch as those in Vidin, Novo Selo, Ruse, Pazardzhik, Momchilgrad, Silistra, Lesichovo,\nZvanichevo, Shumen, Sofia, Kardzhali etc., have also accommodated unaccompanied children\nalongside Bulgarian ones, but this is not sufficient to address the need for placements in view\nof the number of unaccompanied children seeking international protection: **12,754** from\nJanuary 2021 until end of October 2024, including 358 unaccompanied children\naccommodated at SAR centres as of 31 October 2024.\n\n\nParticipants highlighted the efforts that have already been made to facilitate the adaptation of\nUASC. Representatives of residential care services and crisis centres highlighted the need to be\naware of the cultural background of the children and show flexibility to accommodate their\nneeds, working patiently to build a relationship of trust and offer them a sense of perspective.\n\n\nUNHCR BULGARIA /January 2025 8\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/ec6619e6-8c23-403c-af6f-1a8caea14978/2025-03-REPORT-UASC%20Expert%20meeting.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        7
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: EXPERT MEETING ON ALTERNATIVE CARE AND GUARDIANSHIP FOR UASC\n\n\nThe need to work with the parents was stressed as well as the necessity to provide emotional\nsupport to UASC, have well developed social skills and are able to take care of themselves. They\nhave gone through emotionally traumatic experiences and endured family separation but lack\nsuch support.\n\n\nConscious efforts are made to support their inclusion in various activities conducted at local\nlevel by the municipalities which host such children, including their participation at various\ncultural and sports events organized by the respective municipality. Directors of services shared\ntheir experience with organizing welcome events for newly accommodated children, as well as\ncelebrating birthdays. Their efforts are geared towards ensuring that children either attend\nschool or have access to employment when they are above the mandatory school age.\n\n\nThe issue of whether to have specialized residential care services for UASC or instead focusing\non placing them together with national children was raised. Participants highlighted the need to\nrely on both, emphasizing that specialized institutions do not necessarily lead to segregation.\nOn the contrary, as they aim to provide family-based care, those accommodated in them share\nsimilar characteristics (culture, language) just as they would in a family.\n\n\nAdditionally, the directors of alternative care facilities emphasize the essential role of\ninterpreters and cultural mediators. There should be authorized legal representatives in every\nmunicipal town where UASC are accommodated. The family accommodation centres do not\nhave the opportunity to organize transportation every time needed to the reception centres\nwhere the procedures take place. In terms of capacity building, the staff need to be familiar with\nthe national characteristics of the country of origin of UASC to avoid conflict situation and\ntensions between UASC and Bulgarian children. UASC must be prepared before their\naccommodation in the alternative care facilities for their rights and obligations.\n\n\nThe internal rules of family type accommodations should be translated in Arabic/Farci and\ndistributed among all facilities who are working with UASC. A compulsory Bulgarian course\nshould be provided. During the discussion some of participants shared that the Regional\nEducation Inspectorates in different places interpret the law of enrolment of UASC not in same\nway. UASC who are over 16 years old usually prefer to work than study. There is challenge with\nthe Labor Inspectorate of finding a suitable jobs as most of the employers require Bulgarian.\n\n\nAfter Bulgaria fully entered the Schengen area, some of the family reunification procedures has\nbeen violated. After issuing a Schengen visa, instead of arriving to Bulgaria, parents directly go\nto Western European countries while asking the child to join them illegally, despite all child\nprotection measures which are taken by responsible institutions (SAR, ASA/child protection\ndepartments, legal representatives, care givers, teachers) during his stay in Bulgaria.\n\n\nWhile services are ready to undertake the tasks of providing care, they highlighted the need to\nreceive more support from state institutions to ensure the provision of services and support in\nareas which are not directly covered by residential services such as child development, MHPSS,\neducation, and healthcare.\n\n\nThe search for new opportunities for alternative care and services for unaccompanied children\nseeking international protection in Bulgaria is a key factor for solving the problem of placing\nunaccompanied children in an environment close to the family, where they will receive individual\n\n\n9 UNHCR BULGARIA / January 2025\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/ec6619e6-8c23-403c-af6f-1a8caea14978/2025-03-REPORT-UASC%20Expert%20meeting.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        8
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: EXPERT MEETING ON ALTERNATIVE CARE AND GUARDIANSHIP FOR UASC\n\n\nsupport and better adaptation to the new environment. The insufficient number of available\nplaces in the existing social services-residential care in the country, the unforeseen financial\ncosts in the services for specific care for these children (translators, mentors), the lack of skills\nin the teams of the services for working with refugee children, the insufficient knowledge of the\ncultural and ethnic specificities of these children, the language barrier, the persistently negative\nstereotypes in society \u2013 all hinder the socialization of children and require normative changes\nin national legislation.\n\n\nSAR follows policies to respect the rights of unaccompanied children and plans for alternative\ncare and services. Currently, SAR has prepared a project proposal \"Establishment of Alternative\nSocial Services for Unaccompanied Refugee Children in Bulgaria.\" [1]\n\n\nParticipants further observed that in some cases working with UASC may be easier than\nworking with national children deprived of parental care. However, more awareness-raising is\nnecessary especially among the local population which may initially have concerns with the\npresence of foreign adolescents in their communities, given their negative portrayal, especially\nyoung men from the Middle East. The support of local municipalities, which oversee establishing\nand maintaining such services, is of crucial importance. Despite the challenges, the care of\nunaccompanied children has numerous benefits for both the children themselves and host\nsocieties. These children bring their culture, experiences in diverse societies during their\njourneys and dedication to education and work, their skills and labour power Bulgaria needs. As\ninternational experiences and studies have demonstrated, when they are given educational and\nintegration opportunities, young refugees can become a powerful source of economic, social\nand cultural development locally and nationally.\n\n###### **_During the meeting, the following barriers which negatively impact access to_** **_alternative care were identified:_**\n\n\n\u27a2 **COMMUNICATION**\nLack of funding within the financial standard allocated to the social services to cover the cost\nof interpretation and lack of interpreters hinders effective communication between the\npersonnel of the service providers and the children accommodated. This is one of the main\nreasons for social care service providers to hesitate about accommodating such children. Initial\nidentification and referral, as well as providing them effective services, including MHPSS and\npersonal development opportunities, is also hampered by the lack of interpreters.\n\n\n\u27a2 **CAPACITY-BUILDING NEEDS**\nLimited knowledge and training about the displacement experiences of UASC, their behavioural\npatterns and culture as well as the national legislative framework in Bulgaria and the countries\ntheir parents may be residing and the European standards. Frequent staff turnover at such\nfacilities, due to, among others, the low pay, limits the impact of training. The creation of website\n\n\n1 The funding has been granted under a direct grant procedure entitled: Procedure No. 3 Specific Objective 1\n\"Common European Asylum System\", Specific Objective 2 \"Legal Migration and Integration\". It is planned to construct\n5 family type accommodation centers with capacity x 12 places for unaccompanied children and 1 Transitional\nHousing with capacity x 8 places for unaccompanied children. The project will be implemented in partnership with 5\nmunicipalities, IOM and UNICEF within 4 years.\n\n\nUNHCR BULGARIA /January 2025 10\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/ec6619e6-8c23-403c-af6f-1a8caea14978/2025-03-REPORT-UASC%20Expert%20meeting.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        9
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: EXPERT MEETING ON ALTERNATIVE CARE AND GUARDIANSHIP FOR UASC\n\n\nor share place with legislative changes, methodologies, contact numbers of responsible\ninstitutions and translators, legal representatives, volunteers, etc. was proposed as well.\n\n\n\u27a2 **ADOLESCENTS AND YOUNG MEN TRANSITIONING TO ADULTHOOD**\nGiven capacity-building needs, concerns regarding the age of the children in view of appearance\nof some children to be older, the absence of documents and concerns about potential risks of\naccommodating aging-out children and young men transitioning to adulthood with younger\nchildren.\n\n\n\u27a2 **LIMITED MHPSS SUPPORT**\nLimited and project-based MHPSS available at reception centres, safe zones and alternative\ncare facilities. This is compounded by experiences of children during displacement, including\ntrauma, lack of parental support, exclusion from education and child development opportunities\nas well as limited emotional development and support opportunities as adolescents.\n\n\n\u27a2 **SAFETY**\nConcerns about children absconding from the residential care services including due to\narrangements with smugglers and expectations of the family members and community\ndisplaced in third countries or country of origin who need their children to find employment as\nsoon as possible for reasons of survival and/or paying debts they have undertaken to be able to\npay the smugglers. These concerns are compounded by unclear accountability for the children\u2019s\nsafety and protection from abuse and exploitation, including sexual and labour exploitation, as\nwell as trafficking in human beings.\n\n\n\u27a2 **SOCIAL COHESION:**\nPotentially negative at udes of the local community, and lack of programs to support social\ncohesion with local host communities. Political concerns of municipalities, especially Sofia, to\nset up residential care facilities to host UASC due to protests by the host community.\n\n\n\u27a2 **EDUCATION:**\nBulgarian language classes \u2013 residential care services do not have the opportunity to provide\nsuch classes. The educational system is currently not well-prepared to ensure the effective\ninclusion of unaccompanied children due to lack of teachers who have experience working with\nUASC, lack of preparatory classes, lack of additional language and educational support and\nneeds to adapt to their needs.\n\n\n\u27a2 **ADAPTATION:**\nChildren residing at registration-reception centres of SAR have difficulties transitioning to\nplacements within residential care services following a daily schedule and stricter rules.\n\n\n11 UNHCR BULGARIA / January 2025\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/ec6619e6-8c23-403c-af6f-1a8caea14978/2025-03-REPORT-UASC%20Expert%20meeting.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        10
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: EXPERT MEETING ON ALTERNATIVE CARE AND GUARDIANSHIP FOR UASC\n\n###### **_To address the identified challenges, participants proposed the following_** **_recommendations for the Government of Bulgaria to:_**\n\n\n**1.** Ensure that alternative care standards are in place and monitored.\n\n\n**2.** Incorporate an additional component in the financial standard for social services for children\n\nto cover the needs of unaccompanied children when they are accommodated at such\nservices such as interpretation, dietary requirements in accordance with cultural and\nreligious considerations, additional psychological support.\n\n\n**3.** Develop methodology handbook on working with unaccompanied children to be made\n\navailable to social workers and other experts, in collaboration with the international and\nnational stakeholders.\n\n\n**4.** Consistently organize preparatory meetings between unaccompanied children residing at\n\nRRCs and the residential care service provider prior to placement.\n\n\n_According to ASA, the recommendation has a practical orientation and is within the competence_\n_of the staff of the alternative care facility and the registration and reception Centres of the SAR_\n_who work directly with children._ _Also, the Coordination Mechanism for Interaction between_\n_Institutions and Organisations in Cases of Unaccompanied or Separated Children of Foreigners_\n_on the Territory of the Republic of Bulgaria, including Children Seeking and/or Granted_\n_International or Temporary Protection (Coordination Mechanism), approved and put into practice_\n_in 2022, includes similar activities, including the preparation of the child for removal from the_\n_SAR centre and placement in the designated social service._ _The Coordination Mechanism includes_\n_commitments of the ASA and the Mayor of the municipality to undertake preparatory actions_\n_(prior to the delivery of a decision to grant international protection) to negotiate the placement of_\n_the child in an appropriate social service and the placement of the child in the service._ _In this_\n_respect, the ASA and the child's representative shall hold a team meeting with the head and the_\n_staff of the service._ _The social worker from the child protection department shall take action to_\n_prepare the child for removal from the RRC centre and placement in the designated social service._\n\n\n**5.** Ensure availability of Bulgarian language classes and additional educational support and\n\nprovide capacity-building to teachers teaching Bulgarian as a foreign language and\nemphasize that attendance of UASC is mandatory.\n\n\n**6.** Consider placing unaccompanied children in dedicated residential care facilities (including\n\nsetting up such facilities, where possible with EU funding with the aim of transitioning to\nstate-delegated activity) as well as in existing services, together with national children. SAR,\nwith the partnership of UNICEF and IOM and six municipalities has a pilot project for\nprovision of six specialized services for UASC in Bulgaria.\n\n\n_At present, there is no obstacle for children from the target group to be placed in existing social and_\n_integrated health and social services for residential care as a protection measure under the Child_\n_Protection Act._ _However, it is important to note that municipalities as the main provider of social_\n_services in the country have a leading role in the processes related to the planning, establishment,_\n_management and provision of social services._ _It has also been pointed out by the ASA that the_\n_establishment of specialised residential care centres for unaccompanied children should be recognised_\n_as a need by local authorities._ _The establishment of such centres through project activities will_\n_improve the capacity to accommodate unaccompanied foreign children in the social services for_\n_children under the Children Act._\n\n\nUNHCR BULGARIA /January 2025 12\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/ec6619e6-8c23-403c-af6f-1a8caea14978/2025-03-REPORT-UASC%20Expert%20meeting.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        11
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: EXPERT MEETING ON ALTERNATIVE CARE AND GUARDIANSHIP FOR UASC\n\n\n**7.** Establish a repository where all relevant materials concerning working with unaccompanied\n\nchildren, information and other materials can be uploaded and made accessible.\n\n\n_The exchange of information between institutions regarding the situation of unaccompanied_\n_children is crucial for the follow-up action to be taken to ensure to the fullest extent the rights_\n_and interests of unaccompanied children._ _In this regard, the ASA considers that the establishment_\n_of an integrated inter-institutional information system (database), which would track the path of_\n_an unaccompanied child from the moment of entry into Bulgaria until leaving the country, even_\n_after that, would enable to follow the situation of the child, the work of the institutions and the_\n_actions taken at national level._ _Currently, each institution collects data independently and there_\n_are no uniform statistics on the number and movement of unaccompanied foreign children, which_\n_is a prerequisite for their exposure to a number of risks - exploitation, violence, abuse, and_\n_disappearance._\n\n\n**8.** Ensure the mechanism and standards introduced to monitor the quality of social services\n\nconsiders the needs of UASC, noting that the Social Services Quality Agency (SQSA)\nestablished by the ASA relating to the control and monitoring of the provision of social\nservices.\n\n\n**9.** Adopt a holistic approach to providing care for UASC, including mental health support and\n\nprevention of self-harm.\n\n\n**10.** Strengthen the national foster care system and ensure unaccompanied children have\n\neffective access to it building on some good practice examples.\n\n\n**11.** Provide support for the integration of such children, including targeted measures, and offer\n\nthem clear perspectives and opportunities to enable them to see their future in Bulgaria.\n\n\n**12.** Updating of the National Map of Social Services by the ASA, with an up-to-date analysis of\n\nthe needs for new social services, in order to plan services including the number of\nunaccompanied children seeking international protection, noting that there were a total of\n358 unaccompanied children (as for January 2025)in the reception centres RRC of the SAR\nfor whom has to be taken protection measures according to Child Protection Act in Bulgaria.\n\n\n**13.** Additional training of foster parents for placement of unaccompanied children and inclusion\n\nof foster care as a state delegated social service.\n\n\n_UNHCR to:_\n\n\n**14.** Provide capacity-building for personnel of residential care services on working with\n\nunaccompanied children, including working with UASC considering their displacement\nexperiences and trauma, their behavioural patterns and cultural background standards\n\n\n**15.** Support refugee communities to provide foster care to unaccompanied children, in\n\nparticular children under 14.\n\n\n_All stakeholders to:_\n\n\n**16.** Organize meetings and awareness-raising events with the local community and consider the\n\npossibility of launching a nation-wide awareness-raising campaign.\n\n\n13 UNHCR BULGARIA / January 2025\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/ec6619e6-8c23-403c-af6f-1a8caea14978/2025-03-REPORT-UASC%20Expert%20meeting.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        12
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: EXPERT MEETING ON ALTERNATIVE CARE AND GUARDIANSHIP FOR UASC\n\n###### **_Government responses regarding alternative care_**\n\n\n_**Alternative care standards**_\n\n\nIn 2022, a part of legislation for the social services sector, which aims to create the conditions\nfor improving their quality and effectiveness in supporting the people who use them and is\nrelevant for individualizing support and care for users, was adopted, namely the Regulation on\nthe Quality of Social Services. The regulation sets new and more precise quality standards for\nall types of social services, including residential care, which are about organisation and\nmanagement, about staff qualifications and professional development, and about the\neffectiveness of the service in terms of outcomes for individuals. Also, in July 2024, changes\nwere made to the Regulation on the conditions and procedure for application, selection and\napproval of foster families and placement of children in them (promulgated in State Gazette No.\n64 of 30.07.2024). As an annex to the Ordinance, requirements for the care that foster families\nprovide for the children placed with them are regulated.\n\n\n_**Financial standard for social services**_\n\n\nThe Social Services Act (SSA) regulates a new procedure for financing social services. According\nto Article 45 of the Social Services Act, each social service included in the National Map of Social\nServices is financed from the state budget according to a standard for state-delegated activity,\nwhich is intended to finance the costs of its provision and the costs of referral by the\nmunicipality for the use of the service. The standard for each social service delegated by the\nState is determined depending on the type of social service; the way it is used; the group of\nusers of the social service; the duration of its provision; the quality standards of the social\nservice; and the requirements for the necessary specialists.\n\n\nArticle 67 of the Regulations for the Implementation of the Social Welfare Act regulates the\nelements of costs that form the amount of the standard for the state-delegated activity for the\nsocial service of residential care, among them are the costs of communications; costs of\naccompanying the persons using the service for the purpose of medical examinations and\nconsultations, use of other social services, visits to medical institutions, educational institutions,\nadministrative and judicial authorities and others, including costs specific to the service.\n\n\nGiven the timing of the adoption of the National Social Services Map (RMS No 574 of\n08.08.2024) and considering the timing of the drafting of the State Budget for 2025, it is\nproposed to postpone the entry into force of the standards for the financing of social services\ndefined under Article 45 of the Social Services Act until 2026. In addition, an intersectoral\nworking group was established by the Order of the Executive Director of the ASA RD012684/18.12.2024 to develop a proposal for the financing standards for social services to be\nfinanced from the state budget for 2026.\n\n\nUNHCR BULGARIA /January 2025 14\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/ec6619e6-8c23-403c-af6f-1a8caea14978/2025-03-REPORT-UASC%20Expert%20meeting.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        13
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: EXPERT MEETING ON ALTERNATIVE CARE AND GUARDIANSHIP FOR UASC\n\n\n_**Capacity-building**_\n\n\nIt has been indicated by the ASA that the agency in partnership with leading international\norganizations (UNICEF, UNHCR, IOM) and with the assistance of NGOs conducts periodic\ntrainings on working with unaccompanied foreign and refugee children for social workers in the\nchild protection system. International and non-governmental organizations support the\nDirectorate of Social Assistance by providing translation in consultations with UASC and their\nfamilies.\n\n\n_**Mental Health and Psychosocial Support**_\n\n\nInter-institutional cooperation is one of the key factors for improving support and ensuring the\nrights of unaccompanied refugee children in all spheres of public life (health, education, social\npolicy, home affairs, culture, sport, etc.). Taking into account the complexity of the needs of\nunaccompanied children, all child protection authorities are committed to protecting their rights\nand interests and, within the limits of their powers and competence, to taking appropriate\nadministrative or other measures. The ASA also indicated that resources should be made\navailable in places of placement for unaccompanied children to assess the traumatic experience\nof each identified unaccompanied child and to include them in programmes for the prevention\nof conflict and risk behaviour - aggression, violence, etc. This implies the provision of additional\nresources from a network of specialists with the necessary expertise to carry out this\nassessment in SAR centres, social services for children and other places of accommodation for\nunaccompanied children.\n\n\n_**Foster care**_\n\n\nTaking into account the needs of unaccompanied refugee children who are children at risk under\nthe Child Protection Act, the provision of foster care is among the protection measures that can\nbe provided for these children. The provision of foster care for different groups of vulnerable\nchildren, including unaccompanied refugee children, is also included in the project \"Improving\nthe capacity of the Social Assistance Agency staff in relation to the modernization of social\nprotection systems - Component 1\" implemented by the ASA.\n\n\nASA has indicated that with regard to foster care, there is a need to identify potential and\nresources for recruitment of foster families from the community of origin of unaccompanied\nrefugee children. The Agency presents the example of the Netherlands, which has a foster care\nmodel where children are placed with foster families from their community. Of course, these\nfamilies should be successfully integrated into Bulgarian society, screened and assessed\naccording to the child protection legislation.\n\n\n15 UNHCR BULGARIA / January 2025\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/ec6619e6-8c23-403c-af6f-1a8caea14978/2025-03-REPORT-UASC%20Expert%20meeting.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        14
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: EXPERT MEETING ON ALTERNATIVE CARE AND GUARDIANSHIP FOR UASC\n\n\n_**Social inclusion and integration**_\n\n\nIn addition to the participants\u2019 recommendations, ASA indicated that targeted work and\npreparation of the host community is needed. Conducting systematic information campaigns\nand media events, as well as direct meetings with representatives of local communities where\npersons with humanitarian and refugee status live, is aimed at building bridges between\ncommunities and good coexistence. On the other hand, refugees must respect all obligations of\nthe host country in order to be fully integrated.\n\n\nASA proposes to explore, through the assistance of international and non-governmental\norganizations, the resources and opportunities to involve members of the community of origin\nof the children to support social work and to support the process of adaptation and integration\nin Bulgaria. Exploring good practices in Bulgaria and Europe for the protection and integration\nwork of unaccompanied refugee and migrant children in host societies and presenting them to\nthe professional community is an important step for successful policy making in this direction.\n\n\nASA notes that another essential element of the successful integration of unaccompanied\nchildren in Bulgaria is the development of mechanisms to motivate unaccompanied children to\njoin the education system by providing the necessary hours for learning Bulgarian language and\nbridging the gaps in the children's education to date. Including children in vocational skills\ndevelopment courses could also support their integration into society.\n\n\nThe ASA has indicated that the Agency has provided its territorial structures - the Regional\nSocial Assistance Directorates and the Directorate for social assistance with guidelines on\nmeasures and activities for the protection and support of UASC, as well as on coordination and\ninteraction with other competent state and municipal authorities. The regional directorates of\nsocial assistance has been given emphasis on the need to explore the capacity of residential\ncare services for the placement of unaccompanied refugee children, as well as to explore the\nresources and at udes of established foster families.\n\n\nUNHCR BULGARIA /January 2025 16\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/ec6619e6-8c23-403c-af6f-1a8caea14978/2025-03-REPORT-UASC%20Expert%20meeting.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        15
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: EXPERT MEETING ON ALTERNATIVE CARE AND GUARDIANSHIP FOR UASC\n\n###### _2. On Guardianship:_ **_Background_**\n\n\nUN Convention on the Rights of the Child emphasizes the role of guardians in protecting unaccompanied\nand separated children and representing their best interest. The European Union Strategy Against Trafficking\nin Human Beings places emphasis on appointing guardians as soon as UASC are identified. UNHCR\u2019s\nstrategy on the protection of UASC in Bulgaria is aligned, among others, with the Council of Europe [Guiding](https://rm.coe.int/cm-rec-2019-11-guardianship-en/16809ccfe2)\n[Principles and Implementng Guidelines](https://rm.coe.int/cm-rec-2019-11-guardianship-en/16809ccfe2) for Effective Guardianship for Unaccompanied and Separated\nChildren as well as [General Comment 6 of the Conventon on the Protecton of the Child:](https://nmd.bg/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/6-Tretirane-na-nepridrujni-deca.pdf)\n\n\n17 UNHCR BULGARIA / January 2025\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/ec6619e6-8c23-403c-af6f-1a8caea14978/2025-03-REPORT-UASC%20Expert%20meeting.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        16
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: EXPERT MEETING ON ALTERNATIVE CARE AND GUARDIANSHIP FOR UASC\n\n\nIn Bulgaria, Article 25 of the Law on Asylum and Refugees regulates the legal representation of\nunaccompanied children, which is provided by lawyers from the legal aid register of the National\nBureau for Legal Aid (NBLA), appointed by the Chairperson of the NBLA or a person designated\nby them. The role of the representative under Article 25 currently combines that of providing\nlegal assistance and representation to the unaccompanied child and other activities which\nwould normally fall within the scope of the role of a guardian or caregiver. The Family code\ncontains provisions regulating the appointment of guardians particularly regarding\nunaccompanied children as well as general provisions on the scope of the competences of\ncaregivers with whom the child is accommodated pursuant to a child protection measure.\n\n\nThe power of the National Legal Aid Bureau and the lawyers registered with the NLAB have\nbeen diluted as a result of the changes to the Asylum and Refugee Act, published in the Official\nGazette, issue 89 of 16.10.2020, which provided the provision of conditions for the receipt of\nlegal aid to foreigners seeking international protection in the Republic of Bulgaria, as well as\nthe provisions of Article 25 of LAR, concerning unaccompanied children. In accordance with\nthe agreements, NBLA developed and printed a handbook for lawyers - representatives of\npersons from vulnerable groups within the meaning of \u00a7 1, item 17 of the additional provisions\nof the LAR with a focus on unaccompanied minors and minors seeking or granted international\nprotection.\n\n\nNBLA points out that according to the Bulgarian legislation, legal aid in the country is provided\nonly by lawyers registered in the National Legal Aid Register, and according to the Legal Aid\nAct, it is organized and administered by the National Legal Aid Bureau and the Bar Councils.\n\n\nOn the other hand, under the national legislation, the institutions of guardianship and custody\nare regulated in the Family Code, according to the norms of which guardianship is established\nover minors whose parents are unknown, deceased, under full custody or deprived of parental\nrights, as well as unaccompanied foreign minors who are on the territory of the Republic of\nBulgaria. Guardianship shall be established over minors whose parents are unknown,\ndeceased, placed under full custody or deprived of parental rights, as well as over\nunaccompanied minors who are on the territory of the Republic of Bulgaria. The guardianship\nand trusteeship authority shall be the mayor of the province or an official designated by them,\nand he/she shall be obliged to appoint a guardianship council or a trustee and deputy trustees.\n\n\nCurrently, representatives of the management and the administration of the NBLA participate\nin working groups on the drafting of legislative changes in relation the implementation of the\nEU Pact on Migration and Asylum.\n\n\nParticipants discussed that the EU Pact on Migration and Asylum distinguishes between the\nneed to ensure representation of unaccompanied children and the need to provide legal\nassistance and representation to applicants including unaccompanied children. Such separation\nof guardianship and legal representation would be required to effectively implement the\nrelevant provisions under the Pact files, and is in line with the EU Fundamental Rights Agency\u2019s\n[(FRA) and Council of Europe guidance.](https://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra-2014-guardianship-children_en_0.pdf)\n\n\nUNHCR BULGARIA /January 2025 18\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/ec6619e6-8c23-403c-af6f-1a8caea14978/2025-03-REPORT-UASC%20Expert%20meeting.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        17
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: EXPERT MEETING ON ALTERNATIVE CARE AND GUARDIANSHIP FOR UASC\n\n###### **_During the meeting, the following barriers which negatively impact access to_** **_guardianship and representation were identified:_**\n\n\n\u27a2 **LEGAL REPRESENTATION**\nAdditional responsibilities placed on the representative (NBLA lawyer) concerning being in\ncharge of day-to-day care and aspects of the child\u2019s life which do not concern procedural\nrepresentation and legal assistance. NBLA lawyers which have the necessary skills and training\nare not always available and appointed in all regions of the country where unaccompanied\nchildren are present; low fees paid to NBLA lawyers further discourage them from applying for\nsuch roles. Currently there is no mechanism to ensure consistent control of the quality of the\nprovision of services by NBLA lawyers, and they do not have access to interpreters to enable\nthem to engage meaningfully with the child they are representing.\n\n\n\u27a2 **GUARDIANSHIP LEGISLATION**\n\n\nProvisions in the Family Code regarding guardianship of unaccompanied children do not fully\nreflect the needs and circumstances of unaccompanied children. The existing law does not\nenvisage the possibility of having professional guardianship and does not provide sufficient\nguarantees to ensure their qualifications, training and independence. There is also no\nmechanism envisaged to monitor the quality of guardianship in line with the child\u2019s best\ninterests. Various options were discussed, including guardians being appointed by the\nrespective regional governor (rather than mayor of the municipality), the regional directorate of\nsocial assistance or though setting up of a type of a dedicated social service.\n\n\n\u27a2 **GUARDIANSHIP AND REPRESENTATION FOR MIGRANT CHILDREN**\n\n\nThe representation of children who have not applied for international protection or whose\nclaims have been refused is provided by social workers from the departments of child protection\nand while the legislation provides for legal assistance, this is not consistently ensured in practice.\n\n\n19 UNHCR BULGARIA / January 2025\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/ec6619e6-8c23-403c-af6f-1a8caea14978/2025-03-REPORT-UASC%20Expert%20meeting.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        18
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: EXPERT MEETING ON ALTERNATIVE CARE AND GUARDIANSHIP FOR UASC\n\n###### **_To address the identified challenges, participants proposed the following_** **_recommendations for the Government of Bulgaria to:_**\n\n\n**1.** Introduce the necessary legal and policy changes to ensure clear division of\n\nresponsibilities and distinction between the roles of legal representatives and guardians\nin a manner that allows reinforced legal representation and guardianship in line with the\nEU standards as envisaged under the new EU Pact on Migration and Asylum.\n\n\n**2.** Consider introducing provisions for the appointment of a guardian as soon as possible\n\nto protect the child\u2019s rights, in addition to a legal representative for the purposes of legal\nprocedures and introduce a limit on the number of children for which a guardian is\nresponsible to ensure that each child\u2019s best interest is pursued by the guardian.\n\n\n**3.** Creation of an Oversight Mechanism to monitor the implementation of the\n\nresponsibilities of the representatives and guardians/carers, ensuring independence and\navailable resources;\n\n\n**4.** Establish a supervisory mechanism to monitor the performance of tasks of\n\nrepresentatives and guardians, ensure its independence and available resources.\n\n\n**5.** Set up a child-friendly feedback and complaint mechanism to review complaints from\n\nunaccompanied minors.\n\n\n**6.** Consider identifying or establishing an independent institution to appoint and monitor\n\nguardians, including the possibility of professional guardianship.\n\n\n**7.** Consider legislative amendments to introduce a definition of a separated child and\n\nregulate the representation of such children.\n\n\n**8.** Ensure unaccompanied children who have not applied for international protection or\n\nwhose applications have been finally refused have effective access to legal assistance\nand representation from lawyers from NBLA.\n\n\n**9.** Provide initial and continuous capacity-building for NBLA lawyers and guardians, and\n\nallocate the necessary resources, including for child protection actors that could provide\nprofessional guardians.\n\n\n**10.** Ensure legal representatives and guardians have effective access to interpretation to\n\nfacilitate communication with children.\n\n\nUNHCR BULGARIA /January 2025 20\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/ec6619e6-8c23-403c-af6f-1a8caea14978/2025-03-REPORT-UASC%20Expert%20meeting.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        19
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/ec6619e6-8c23-403c-af6f-1a8caea14978/2025-03-REPORT-UASC%20Expert%20meeting.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        20
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_49/raw/doc_49_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,189 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "# **MOLDOVA** **OLDER REFUGEES** **BRIEFING NOTE**\n#### Disability & Age Task Force Refugee Coordination Forum Moldova\n\n\n### **JANUARY 2025**\n\n\n\nThe **Disability & Age Task Force (DATF)** was established in March 2022 with the support of\nthe Refugee Coordination Forum and under the **Protection Working Group** . The Task Force\nis composed of humanitarian actors including Government authorities, United Nations\nAgencies, International and National NGOs, and Organizations of Persons with Disabilities\n(OPDs), providing specific services for people with disabilities and older people. Its\nobjective is to improve the inclusion of older persons and persons with disabilities in the\nUkrainian Refugee Response in the Republic of Moldova, ensuring access to mainstream\nservices as well as guaranteeing the availability of specific services to respond to needs.\n## **BACKGROUND**\n\n\nAlmost three years have passed since\nRussia\u2019s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in\nFebruary 2022, forcing millions of\nUkrainians to flee the country in search of\nsafety. Moldova in its turn is the country\nthat has received **the largest numbers of**\n**refugees per capita** of the population of\n**2,4 million** . As of end December 2024,\nabout 135,000 refugees from Ukraine still\nremained sheltered in Moldova, with\nabout 76,000 having received asylum,\ntemporary protection, or residence status\n\nin Moldova to enable their continued legal stay in the country and access to services.\nThe refugees in Moldova are primarily arriving from the Southern and Southwestern parts\nof Ukraine, including from the city of Odessa.\n\nThe demographic composition of those crossing the border is made up primarly of women\ntravelling with dependents (infants, children and older persons), with a large proportion of\nthem becoming single caregivers as a consequence of family separation forced by the\nconflict.\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/08ca5e61-27a6-4270-9545-646d19136103/202501_BN_Older_Refugees_Moldova_Eng.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**are people with disabilities** and **17% are older people** . Among older people around 50%\nare persons with disabilities which exacerbate the risks that this category of refugees\nfaces.\nThis briefing note aims to provide an overview of the situation of older refugees in\nMoldova and the gaps and needs they face, as well as the current efforts being made by\nhumanitarian stakeholders to address these challenges.\n\nFrom the **Socio-Economic Insights Survey** (SEIS) conducted by the IMPACT Initiative in1\nAugust 2024, the following **four main areas** were identified as significantly impacting\n**older refugees** compared to other groups:\n\n**Access to Information:** Older refugees face significant challenges in\naccessing information compared to other refugee groups. Many lack the\nnecessary devices to connect online, and the available information is often\nnot presented in formats that accommodate their needs.\n\n\n**Healthcare Access:** Access to healthcare and to medicines emerged as\nurgent priorities for older refugees, with a significantly higher proportion\nidentifying these needs as compared to younger refugee groups.\n\n\n**Support Channels:** Refugees aged 75 and above are less likely to have access\nto secure and private channels for seeking support, or reporting concerns,\nincluding sensitive community issues (only 75% reported access compared to\nan average of 95% of other age groups).\n\n\n**Social Assistance:** Seventy percent (70%) of refugees aged 75 and above\nreported the need to have better access to social assistance services to\nimprove their socio-economic situation in Moldova as compared to the other\nage groups which is less then 50%.\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Socio-Economic Insights Survey",
+          "confidence": 0.9996925592422485,
+          "start": 84,
+          "end": 87
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "named",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": {
+          "text": "Survey",
+          "confidence": 0.9698904752731323,
+          "start": 86,
+          "end": 87
+        },
+        "acronym": {
+          "text": "SEIS",
+          "confidence": 0.9969745874404907,
+          "start": 90,
+          "end": 91
+        },
+        "author": {
+          "text": "IMPACT Initiative",
+          "confidence": 0.9073250889778137,
+          "start": 95,
+          "end": 97
+        },
+        "producer": {
+          "text": "IMPACT Initiative",
+          "confidence": 0.5732117891311646,
+          "start": 95,
+          "end": 97
+        },
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Moldova",
+          "confidence": 0.9573754668235779,
+          "start": 55,
+          "end": 56
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2024",
+          "confidence": 0.9955099821090698,
+          "start": 99,
+          "end": 100
+        },
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "older refugees",
+          "confidence": 0.9827743172645569,
+          "start": 52,
+          "end": 54
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Healthcare Access",
+          "confidence": 0.5041795372962952,
+          "start": 174,
+          "end": 176
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Moldova",
+          "confidence": 0.7967715859413147,
+          "start": 298,
+          "end": 299
+        },
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "Refugees aged 75 and above",
+          "confidence": 0.6767647862434387,
+          "start": 215,
+          "end": 220
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/08ca5e61-27a6-4270-9545-646d19136103/202501_BN_Older_Refugees_Moldova_Eng.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "## **KEY RESULTS 2024**\n\nSince the beginning of the refugee\nresponse humanitarian actors have\nsupported older refugees through different\nprograms and activities, as reported to the\nRefugee Coordination Forum. Among the\nkey results in 2024, from January to\nSeptember the organizations involved in\nthe response reported the following results:\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|Individuals receiving cash assistance (MPCA, Winter<br>Cash, GBV response)|12.748|6.425|926|\n|---|---|---|---|\n|Individuals receiving cash assistance (MPCA, Winter<br>Cash, GBV response)||||\n|Individuals receiving medical support (procurement of<br>health commodities, medical referral, financial support<br>for medical services)|121|61|15|\n|Individuals receiving medical support (procurement of<br>health commodities, medical referral, financial support<br>for medical services)||||\n|Individuals<br>participating<br>in<br>MHPSS<br>services<br>and<br>activities (including level 4 of IASC pyramid)|1.225|210|2|\n|Individuals<br>participating<br>in<br>MHPSS<br>services<br>and<br>activities (including level 4 of IASC pyramid)||||\n|Persons with Specific Needs provided with targeted<br>protection assistance|671|228|103|\n|Persons with Specific Needs provided with targeted<br>protection assistance||||\n|Individuals receiving hygiene kits, including first aid kits|986|540|162|\n|Individuals receiving hygiene kits, including first aid kits||||\n|Individuals provided with individual legal assistance|548|209||\n|**Total older people supported in 2024**|**17.153**|**7.994**|**1.208**|\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/08ca5e61-27a6-4270-9545-646d19136103/202501_BN_Older_Refugees_Moldova_Eng.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        2
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "## **GAPS AND NEEDS**\n\n**Healthcare Access** : Older refugees face barriers to secondary healthcare\ndue to physical accessibility issues, high costs, and inconsistent\napplication of Temporary Protection (TP) status rights by service\nproviders.\n\n\n**Housing Challenges** : Closure of Refugee Accommodation Centers (RACs)\ncreates uncertainty for older refugees, especially those with limited\nfinances or mobility which need essential services which are near RACs.\n\n\n**Financial Instability** : Rising living costs leave older refugees financially\ninsecure, relying on pensions, savings, or aid, often leading to reduced\nspending on food or healthcare.\n\n\n**Employment Barriers** : Language, ageism, and health issues prevent older\nrefugees from working, while cash assistance for rent often excludes those\nunable to find employment.\n\n\n**Social Isolation** : Separation from family, limited mobility, and lack of\ntailored social activities exacerbate isolation among older refugees,\nhighlighting a need for age-appropriate community initiatives.\n\n\n**Information Access** : Limited digital skills and lack of in-person information\nsharing, hinder older refugees' access to essential information, updates,\nand registration for benefits like TP.\n\n\n**Data Disaggregation and Targeted Assistance** : Insufficient data on the\nspecific needs of older refugees hinders targeted support by\nhumanitarian organizations.\n## **RECOMANDATIONS**\n\n\nFor the **Government of Moldova** : **\u200b**\n\nImprove communication to all refugees, including older ones, about rights and\nservices under TP status.\nContinue improving accessibility and adaptation for people with limited mobility\u200b.\n\n\n\u200bFor the **Humanitarian Community** :\u200b\n\nImprove disaggregated data collection and analysis to better target support for\nvulnerable groups, including older persons.\nContinue to promote psychosocial support services to reduce isolation and\nimprove mental health.\nReview cash-for-rent criteria to better include older persons and secure funding to\naddress their particular rental vulnerabilities.\nExpand access to assistive products tailored to older refugees\u2019 specific needs.\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "disaggregated data collection",
+          "confidence": 0.6126152276992798,
+          "start": 311,
+          "end": 314
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "older persons",
+          "confidence": 0.5643115043640137,
+          "start": 348,
+          "end": 350
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "cash-for-rent criteria",
+          "confidence": 0.7400171160697937,
+          "start": 343,
+          "end": 345
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "older persons",
+          "confidence": 0.5066875219345093,
+          "start": 325,
+          "end": 327
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/08ca5e61-27a6-4270-9545-646d19136103/202501_BN_Older_Refugees_Moldova_Eng.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        3
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "## **STORIES FROM REFUGEES**\n\n_\u201cI had heard about this sport, but I didn't know what Nordic walking was until now. After_\n_today\u2019s workout, I think it\u2019s great for keeping fit, especially for older people. It involves the_\n_whole body, from legs to hands.\u201d_\n\n\nTatiana, a 61-year-old refugee from Odessa, arrived in S\u00eengerei, Moldova, in March 2023,\nleaving behind her husband and son. \" _I feel safe here; we\u2019re supported in every way, and it_\n_feels like home,_ \" she told us.\nOn the day we met her, Tatiana, along with other refugees and volunteers at the Safe\nCommunity Space, practised Nordic walking with a professional trainer. The group bonded\nquickly and decided to make it a daily activity with the walking sticks provided. In S\u00eengerei,\nwhere refugees stay with local families, they rarely have opportunities to connect.\nActivities like these help them socialise, feel supported, and become part of the\ncommunity. Tatiana believes that through these gatherings, they feel useful, valued, and\n\n##### **CONTACTS**\n\n**Co-leads of the Task Force**\n\n**Daniele Pedretti**, Age Inclusion Specialist _HelpAge_, Daniele.Pedretti@helpage.org\n\n**Alberto Tonon**, Disability Inclusion Specialist, _UNHCR_, Tonon@unhcr.org\n\n**Ludmila Malcoci**, Executive Director _Keystone Moldova,_ Lmalcoci@khs.org\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/08ca5e61-27a6-4270-9545-646d19136103/202501_BN_Older_Refugees_Moldova_Eng.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        4
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_5/raw/doc_5_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,213 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "## **NEW ISSUES IN REFUGEE RESEARCH**\n\n**Research Paper No. 205**\n\n# **Ordered disorder:** **African asylum seekers in Israel** **and discursive challenges to** **an emerging refugee regime**\n\n\n**Yonathan Paz**\n\n\nE-mail: yonathan.paz@alumni.lse.ac.uk\n\n\nMarch 2011\n\n\n**Policy Development and Evaluation Service**\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/451637b7-6b25-36cb-81f7-0d5b1ceb308d/0349E1BAB7009CF785257850006FA04C-Full_Report.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "**Policy Development and Evaluation Service**\n**United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees**\n\n**P.O. Box 2500, 1211 Geneva 2**\n\n**Switzerland**\n\n\n**E-mail: hqpd00@unhcr.org**\n\n**Web Site: www.unhcr.org**\n\n\nThese papers provide a means for UNHCR staff, consultants, interns and associates, as well\nas external researchers, to publish the preliminary results of their research on refugee-related\nissues. The papers do not represent the official views of UNHCR. They are also available\nonline under \u2017publications\u2018 at <www.unhcr.org>.\n\n\nISSN 1020-7473\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/451637b7-6b25-36cb-81f7-0d5b1ceb308d/0349E1BAB7009CF785257850006FA04C-Full_Report.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "''Let nothing be called natural\nin an age of bloody confusion,\nordered disorder, planned caprice,\n\nand dehumanized humanity,\nlest all things be held unalterable!''\n\n\nBertolt Brecht, dramatist, poet and a refugee.\n\n_The Exception and the Rule_, 1937\n\n\n**Introduction**\n\n\nThis paper analyses Israel\u2018s response to a recent influx of African asylum seekers, a\nphenomenon whose nature and scale are unprecedented in Israel\u2018s history. It\naddresses three intertwined questions. What are the discursive challenges to the\nconstruction of an Israeli refugee regime? What dynamics foster their development?\nAnd how can those challenges be explained and deconstructed?\n\n\nSince early 2006 Israel has become a destination country for thousands of Africans\nwho are willing to take a long and risky journey to Israel. As with other industrialized\ncountries, Israel has responded with a range of exclusionary and at times contradictory\npolicies which aim to control and limit entrance to its territory. Unlike other such\ncountries, however, until very recently Israel did not have an asylum system, and its\nongoing institutional evolution is partly a response to the recent influx.\n\n\nAlthough it carries distinctive features, Israel\u2018s asylum regime is guided by the\nprevalent exclusionary logic which dominates the policies of other developed\ncountries. This has important implications for the asylum seekers. Their countries of\norigin and the scale of their influx challenge existing \u2017humanitarian spaces\u2018. Once a\ncritical threshold has been crossed, they are seen as a threat which can no longer be\ncontained. Accommodating measures are being rejected for self-preservation\nconsiderations, spurred-on by Israel\u2018s ethnonational identity.\n\n\nRelatively little has been written about the meaning and significance of these\ndevelopments (Willen 2010a, 2010b; Afeef 2009; Kritzman-Amir 2009; Yacobi 2009;\nMan 2010). This study seeks to complement the existing literature, drawing on a\ncombination of primary and secondary sources.\n\n\nDuring July 2010, a period of field work was carried out in which 14 semi-structured\ninterviews were conducted. Representatives of the key institutional bodies that deal\nwith refugees and asylum seekers were interviewed; namely the state (officials and\npoliticians); civil society (senior NGO staff and academics); and personnel at the\nOffice of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). It further\ndraws on a multidisciplinary review of academic papers, key governmental documents\nand diverse media reports. [1]\n\n\n1Three key newspapers are cited; _Haaretz \u2013_ a central-left newspaper, _Jerusalem Post_ - a central-right\nnewspaper and _Ynet,_ a news website, owned by Israel\u2018s most popular, politically-mainstream\nnewspaper _Yedioth Aharonot_\n\n\n1\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/451637b7-6b25-36cb-81f7-0d5b1ceb308d/0349E1BAB7009CF785257850006FA04C-Full_Report.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        2
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "The paper consists of two parts. The first provides a historical overview that aims to\nsituate the influx within a regional geo-political context. The second suggests a\nthreefold evaluative typology of discourses; security, ethnonationalism and the gravity\nof the holocaust \u2013 societal pillars which critically influence both the state and the\nasylum seekers.\n\n\nBy critically presenting the evolution of Israel\u2018s responses to the influx, it argues that\na pattern of \u2017ordered disorder\u2018 governs a spectrum of rejectionist responses,\nunderpinned by the fundamental role of the \u2017asylum-migration nexus\u2018. The ordered\ndisorder also explains the degree of accommodating measures, provided by all actors.\nThe disordered relationship between the nation-state and the asylum seekers becomes\nthe Israeli \u2015national order of things\u2016 (Malkki 1995a).\n\n\n**African asylum seekers in Israel**\n\n\nSince the end of 2006 Israel has experienced an increasing influx of African refugees\nand asylum seekers. [2] The majority surreptitiously cross the continental border\nbetween Africa and Asia through Israel\u2018s southern border with Egypt. The asylum\nseekers originate mainly from Sudan and Eritrea, as well as other Sub-Saharan\ncountries. At the time of writing, it is estimated that around 26,000 asylum seekers\nhave entered Israel and a few hundred more continue to cross the border every month\n(Nathan 2010).\n\n\n_Sources: UNHCR Statistical Yearbooks. No data available for 2003. UNHCR has not yet published_\n_data for 2010._\n\nThe Sinai desert serves as a geographical barrier between the countries and only short,\n'sensitive' strips of the 260 kilometres are fenced. The asylum seekers often pay large\nsums to Bedouin smugglers (operating from both sides) who traffic them through the\ndesert. In a border characterised by an active trade of drugs, tobacco, weapons and\n\n\n2 As I demonstrate below the \u2017refugee terminology\u2018 is contentious. In the interest of coherence I\npredominantly use the term \u2015asylum seekers\u2016, a term which does not tells us much about motivation\nbut refers to the claim, which ought to stand evaluation. Thus, in this work, a person is considered an\nasylum seeker, until proven otherwise.\n\n\n2\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/451637b7-6b25-36cb-81f7-0d5b1ceb308d/0349E1BAB7009CF785257850006FA04C-Full_Report.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        3
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "women [3] (Lutski 2005; Levenkron and Dahan 2003; Goldschmidt 2006), the asylum\nseekers have become yet another valuable commodity in the border\u2018s thriving political\neconomy. [4]\n\n\nThe journey is arduous and there are frequent reports of violence and starvation en\nroute. Since 2007, 250 cases have been reported of women who have been raped by\nBedouin smugglers, and it is estimated that many more go unreported (Wurgaft 2010;\nSTW 2010). After surviving this journey, asylum seekers arrive at a border patrolled\nby Israeli and Egyptian troops where Egyptian policy has made the crossing a deathdefying task. The UN and human rights organisations have documented more than 60\nfatal shootings of unarmed individuals since the summer of 2007 (UN 2010; HRW\n2008; AI 2008). While the frequency of such reports has decreased, shootings\ncontinued to occur in 2010 (Reuters 2010).\n\n\nThe scale and scope of this phenomenon is unprecedented in Israel. For the first time\nin its history, the country has become a destination for African migration. Moreover,\nthe plight of the refugees cannot be solely understood by traditional explanatory\nfactors such as conflict, violence and violations of human rights. Although these\nfactors drive refugees from Sudan and Eritrea, they are also intimately intertwined\nwith the \u2015globalisation of asylum seeking\u2016 (Gibney 2003, 23; 2004),\nunderdevelopment and economic incentives which often explain secondary\nmovements.\n\n\nThis \u2017asylum-migration nexus\u2018 notion recognizes the blurring of the traditional\ndistinction between economic and forced migrants (Castels 2007, 26), creating\npractical and rhetorical difficulties to differentiate these categories (Richmond 1995;\nHear 1998; Nyberg\u2013S\u00f8rensen, Hear, and Engberg\u2013Pedersen 2002; Crisp 2003). The\nrelationship reshapes and stratifies the refugee label, allowing developed countries to\ndesign restrictionist refugee regimes in which an array of deterrence measures serve to\nprotect sovereign territories from the invasion of \u2017bogus, opportunistic aliens\u2018 (Zetter\n2007; Chimni 1998).\n\n\n**African migration to Israel**\n\n\nAccording to UNHCR, the Middle East and North Africa host a fifth of the world's\nrefugees, excluding the considerable and growing population of Palestinian refugees. [5]\nSyria and Lebanon, Israel's northern neighbours, host a significant number. Syria is\nthe third largest refugee hosting country in the world with, according to government\nfigures, more than a million Iraqi refugees, while Lebanon hosts 50,000 refugees. To\n\n\n3 A parliamentary inquiry found that between 2001-2005, an annual number of 1,000 women were\ntrafficked through the border for prostitution (Lutski, 2005). Comprehensive enforcement has since\nsignificantly reduced the scale of women trafficked into Israel\n4 It is reported that in the case of some Eritreans, initial payment was made already in Eritrea (Interview\nwith a senior UNHCR official).\n5Article 1D of the 1951 Convention exclude persons who receive assistance from other UN bodies. It\nintentionally excludes the Palestinians who were displaced as a result of the 1948 war, and were under\nthe auspices of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East\n(UNRWA), an agency which was established prior to UNHCR. Palestinian refugees and their\ndescendants are now estimated at 4.7 million (UNRWA 2009). _Refugee Survey Quarterly_ has recently\npublished a special issue which provides a detailed historical account of this multifaceted issue (RSQ\n2009).\n\n\n3\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "reports",
+          "confidence": 0.748915433883667,
+          "start": 154,
+          "end": 155
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "vague",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": {
+          "text": "Reuters",
+          "confidence": 0.8166483044624329,
+          "start": 165,
+          "end": 166
+        },
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": {
+          "text": "Israel",
+          "confidence": 0.8142309784889221,
+          "start": 179,
+          "end": 180
+        },
+        "publication_year": {
+          "text": "2003",
+          "confidence": 0.5204105973243713,
+          "start": 321,
+          "end": 322
+        },
+        "reference_year": {
+          "text": "2010",
+          "confidence": 0.979688823223114,
+          "start": 163,
+          "end": 164
+        },
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/451637b7-6b25-36cb-81f7-0d5b1ceb308d/0349E1BAB7009CF785257850006FA04C-Full_Report.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        4
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "the east of Israel, Jordan hosts nearly 500,000 refugees, and to the South, Egypt (from\nwhich the majority of asylum seekers cross to Israel) hosts a population of more than\n100,000 (UNHCR 2009; USCRI 2009). It is also known that Egypt has a vast\npopulation of unregistered foreign nationals who are not accounted for in refugee\nstatistics. Estimates of their number vary considerably (Harrell-Bond and Zohry 2003;\nNassar 2008).\n\n\nWhile such numerical and comparative analysis suggests that Israel\u2018s asylum seeker\npopulation is relatively small, this approach does not illuminate the social and\npolitical issues which give Israel\u2018s asylum seekers particular political and cultural\nweight. Surrounded by Arab and Muslim countries with weaker economies, Israel\u2018s\nprosperity and democratic structure act as significant pull factors for migrants. The\ncountry\u2018s decision to follow UNHCR guidelines and not to deport Eritreans and\nSudanese while tolerating their unauthorised work must also function as an incentive.\n\n\nIt is also important to consider the circumstances that prompt Sudanese and Eritreans,\nthe two dominant groups of asylum seekers, to make Israel their first or second\ncountry of asylum (Afeef 2009, 9). While their circumstances significantly differ,\nEritreans and Sudanese share a desire to seek better protection and to pursue new\neconomic opportunities. They leave behind violence, poverty, difficult asylum\nprocedures, the dangers of forced return, a lack of durable solutions and social\nexclusion (HRW 2008).\n\n\nUntil 2006 the issue of asylum seekers in Israel did not constitute a dramatic policy\nconcern. Their small numbers and the limited institutional capacity to deal with them\npartially explain the significant gap that appeared between Israel\u2018s historic role in\ncontributing to the strengthening of the international refugee regime and its domestic\npolicies. [6] No Israeli refugee law was drafted, leaving a space which was filled by\npatchy and often inadvertent responses to the increasing influx (Kemp and Kritzman\n2008).\n\n\nIn the past, Israel has recognised groups of refugees and asylum seekers as a gesture\nof goodwill. Notable examples of such \u2017humanitarian anomalies\u2018 are the decision to\ngrant refuge to a few hundred Vietnamese boat-people in the end of the 1970s and to\nadmit a group of Muslim Bosnian refugees during the 1990s. (Ben-Dor and Adut\n2003, 21-22; Markowitz 1996).\n\n\nFollowing its withdrawal from South Lebanon in 2000, Israel admitted nearly 6,000\nmembers (and their families) of the South Lebanese Army, a sectarian militia who\ncollaborated with Israel during its occupation of South Lebanon. Such precedents,\ncoupled with public pressure, led former Prime Minister (PM) Olmert to grant an\nexceptional temporary residency to approximately 500 Darfurian asylum seekers in\nSeptember 2007 (Mualem 2007).\n\n\nIsrael historically handled asylum requests by outsourcing the process to UNHCR,\nusing the assistance of the agency\u2018s honorary correspondent in Israel, which later\nbecame an official representative office (UNHCR 2007) It was only in 2001, 50 years\n\n6 Driven by the horrors of the Holocaust in Europe and aiming to protect the Jewish refugees from\nWorld War II the young state of Israel was among the first 26 states who participated, alongside other\nJewish organisations in drafting the Convention, to which it became an official signatory in 1954. The\nstate\u2018s commitment was further strengthen when the Convention\u2018s 1967 protocol was signed in 1968.\n\n\n4\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/451637b7-6b25-36cb-81f7-0d5b1ceb308d/0349E1BAB7009CF785257850006FA04C-Full_Report.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        5
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "after the Refugee Convention was established, that Israel formulated an internal\ndirective which outlined procedures for the treatment of refugees and asylum seekers.\nThis procedure maintained the pre-existing hybrid nature of the RSD process; both the\nstate and UNHCR were involved (Ben-Dor and Adut 2003; Kemp and Kritzman\n2008). [7] An updated version of the directive was intended to come into force in\nJanuary 2011.\n\nThis status quo has been under immense pressure since 2006. The influx has focused\npublic attention on the issue and vividly demonstrated through the response of various\ninstitutions that a critical threshold has been crossed. The presence of 26,000 asylum\nseekers in dispersed urban centres is particularly visible in a small country such as\nIsrael and is generating considerable tensions.\n\n\n**Ordered disorder**\n\n\nThe government\u2018s incorporation of a range of deterrence measures alongside some\naccommodating procedures cannot be simply dismissed as stemming from Israel\u2018s\ninexperience in dealing with asylum seekers. The tension between Israel\u2018s democratic\nstructures, backed by its international commitments, and the state\u2018s attempts to shape\ntechnologies of power which control and limit entrance to its territory, is expressed in\na response to asylum seekers that can be understood as \u2017ordered disorder\u2018 _._\n\n\nThe pattern of \u2017ordered disorder\u2018 is guided by a consistent logic intended to make\nasylum claims unsustainable. The state\u2018s trial-and-error measures for dealing with\nrefugees have shaped the sense of non-policy which has been described by others as\nchaotic bureaucratic ambiguity (Afeef 2009, 11) and governmental unruliness (Willen\n2010b).\n\n\nHowever, behind this ostensible chaos or unruliness lies an ordering principle which\naims to deliver a clear and unwelcoming message. Ultimately, the range of measures\nemployed to send a \u2017no-entry\u2018 signal, and the array of deterrence signals used to\nreduce the numbers of future arrivals, establish the temporariness of asylum claims in\nIsrael.\n\n\nConversely, NGOs, the media and Israeli officials have held Israel accountable to the\nhigh standards of its international commitments. Thus, in parallel to employing harsh\ndeterrence measures, Israel has also offered limited and differing degrees of\nprotection.\n\n\nOver time, the government has issued a few thousand work permits to Sudanese and\nEritreans, exercising a degree of tolerance and recognition of their needs, although\nthese were exceptional permits that had to be renewed. But the majority of asylum\nseekers have not received such permits and have been forced to work illegally to\nsurvive. Such uneven, contradictory action exempts the state from declaring its\nallegiance either to deterrence or tolerance.\n\n\n7UNHCR made the initial identification and interview of the asylum seeker. On the basis this process, a\nrecommendation was given to the National Status Granting Body (NSGB), an inter-ministerial\ncommittee responsible for considering UNHCR recommendations. The final decision was taken by the\nMOI.\n\n\n5\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/451637b7-6b25-36cb-81f7-0d5b1ceb308d/0349E1BAB7009CF785257850006FA04C-Full_Report.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        6
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "A senior Ministry of Interior (MOI) official demonstrated the logic of non-policy\nwhen he was asked about employment issues in a session of the \u2017Special\nParliamentary Committee on the Problem of Foreign Workers\u2018 (SCPFW, 2010): \u2015In\nprinciple the law is there, on the other hand there is a decision not to enforce [it]\u2016.\nRealising that enforcement of unlawful employment may force the government to\nprovide care for the tens of thousands of asylum seekers, the state tolerates their work,\nand nurtures the general disorder.\n\n\n\u2017Ordered disorder\u2018 can also be perceived as a response to the challenges the refugees\npose to what anthropologist Lisa Malkki (1995a; 1995b) calls the \u2015national order of\nthings\u2016. Issues of sovereignty and nationalism constitute the \u2015regime of order and\nknowledge\u2016 (Malkki 1995a, 5) that make-up the Israeli nation-state, are challenged by\nthe subversion that asylum seekers create. Their liminal status threatens the perceived\nnational order of things as they confront the state with their refugeehood.\n\n\nAs Agamben (1995) puts it (in reference to Arendt (1978)), refugees represent \u2015a\ndisquieting element\u2026by breaking up the identity between man and citizen, between\nnativity and nationality, the refugee throws into crisis the original fiction of\nsovereignty\u2016. In the face of this symbolic threat, Israel has employed a range of\n\u2015specialised correctives\u2016 (Malkki 1995a, 8) to restore the \u2017real\u2018 national order of\nthings.\n\n\nWhile this politically useful framework of \u2017ordered disorder\u2018 has consistently\noverarched the state\u2018s rejectionist policies, a pattern of evolution should also be\nacknowledged, especially in the implementation of Israel\u2018s \u2017corrective\u2018 impulses.\nAfeef (2009) fruitfully cites three examples of the contradictory policies which began\nto unfold as the influx increased.\n\n\nFirst, the policy of detention, a key deterrence measure, was exercised even prior to\n2006. As citizens of an \u2017enemy state\u2018 the early arrivals from Sudan were held in\ndetention for long periods, because they were identified as a potential security threat,\nwhich effectively debarred them from the asylum procedure (Tal 2007). This\narrangement was increasingly applied to the majority of the asylum seekers who\narrived in Israel (including minors), regardless of their nationality. [8]\n\n\nSecond, the equally hostile response of \u2017hot return\u2018, whereby asylum seekers were\nimmediately returned to Egypt after crossing the border. Israel forcibly returned to\nEgypt an estimated 220 asylum seekers who were caught crossing the border, denying\ntheir right to claim asylum, in spite of the state\u2018s knowledge of Egyptian policies\nwhich sometimes breached the Convention\u2018s non-refoulement principle. Following a\npetition to the Israeli Supreme Court it seems that this policy is no longer practiced,\nbut human rights organisations claim that it continues to periodically occur (RRF\n2008, 2009).\n\n\nFurthermore, in attempting to address concerns regarding over-crowding and\nemployment pressures the government initiated the \u2017Hadera-Gedera Provision\u2018,\nnamed after the two cities which geographically delineated a \u2017no-go\u2018 area for\n\n\n8 The functions of the prison system deserve further research. They arguably operate as \u2017revolving\ndoors\u2018 centres (although at different periods Sudanese asylum seekers were in prison for more than a\nyear).\n\n\n6\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/451637b7-6b25-36cb-81f7-0d5b1ceb308d/0349E1BAB7009CF785257850006FA04C-Full_Report.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        7
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "refugees. This provision attempted to legally secure and isolate the Tel-Aviv\nmetropolitan area, Israel\u2018s economic heart from being \u2017hijacked\u2018 by the asylum\nseekers\u2018 low-cost labour.\n\n\nThis policy created economic-political pressures on smaller more desolate towns and\nprevented refugees from accessing UNHCR offices and NGOs\u2018 services in Tel-Aviv.\nFollowing a petition to the Supreme Court and strong public pressure from NGOs,\nMembers of Knesset (MK) and officials in the local authorities, the MOI cancelled\nthis \u2017corrective provision\u2018, more than a year after it was announced (Afeef 2009, 13).\n\n\nMore recently, driven by its dependence on UNHCR, the government established a\nnew RSD Unit within the newly formed Population, Immigration and Border\nAuthority (Ilan 2008; Wurgaft 2009). From July 2009 this unit was given the role of\nundertaking the RSD process.\n\n\nThis transition followed a comprehensive preparatory process which involved training\nby UNHCR and other organisations, who commended the government for its efforts. [9]\nAlthough ostensibly a positive step of taking responsibility for refugee protection \u2014\nor at least as one interviewee observed: \u2015a work in progress\u2016 heading in this direction\n\n- the RSD unit exists within ongoing institutional disorder, which severely\nundermines its capabilities.\n\n\nUNHCR\u2018s head in Israel has stated: \u2015They are quite serious in how they approach it,\nbut the biggest drawback ... is that there is no legal framework in place. There are no\npublished procedural guidelines on their work\u2016 (Friedman 2010a). A patchwork of\nadministrative decisions and political strategy block access to refugee status.\n\n\nAt present Sudanese and Eritreans, who constituting 85 per cent of the refugee\npopulation, do not go through the RSD process. Instead, they receive temporary group\nprotection which indicates the government\u2018s recognition that that they are likely to\nsuffer persecution. This status, however, strategically delays the RSD process and the\npotential convention status (Kritzman-Amir 2009). Moreover, it was recently reported\nthat out of 3,000 applicants of other nationalities, only two were granted refugee\nstatus (Weiler-Polak 2010).\n\n\nLastly, and perhaps most dramatically, PM Netenyahu recently approved the\ngovernment\u2018s long-lasting intention to erect a surveillance fence along parts of the\nEgyptian border. Stating that Israel will remain open to refugees from conflict zones\nhe framed the fence as a \u2015strategic decision to secure Israel's Jewish and democratic\ncharacter\u2016, arguing that \"We cannot let tens of thousands of illegal workers infiltrate\nIsrael through the southern border and inundate our country with illegal aliens\"\n(McCarthy 2010).\n\n\nThe following sections demonstrate how three core preoccupations \u2017discursively\ndress\u2018 the bare lives of refugees in Israel and illuminate the \u2015chronic tension between\n\n[the refugees\u2018] presence as bare life and as political actors, subject of history\u2016 (Malkki\n2002, 359). They are: (a) securitisation and its relations to the Israeli-Palestinian\nconflict, (b) ethnonationalism and (c) the legacy of the holocaust. These discourses\n\n\n9 The government\u2018s serious attempts were repeatedly mentioned in the interviews.\n\n\n7\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/451637b7-6b25-36cb-81f7-0d5b1ceb308d/0349E1BAB7009CF785257850006FA04C-Full_Report.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        8
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "have developed as Israel\u2018s ideological \u2017containment threshold\u2018 for the presence of\nasylum seekers has been crossed.\n\n\nIn reality, the three discourses are closely intertwined as key pillars of Israeli identity\nand society. Yet analytically distinguishing between them highlights how each creates\nparticular problems for the construction of an Israeli asylum regime and how asylum\nseekers serve as a template in the discourses\u2018 formation.\n\n\n**Security discourse**\n\n\nThe gravity of the security prism in Israel cannot be overstated. Officially managed\nunder a legal \u2017state of emergency\u2018 since its establishment 62 years ago, Israel has\nfought eight major wars, exercised countless military operations, experienced vicious\nterror attacks and continues to engage in the intricate Israeli-Palestinian conflict while\ndealing with threats of destruction.\n\n\nUnder these conditions, security in Israel cannot be dismissed only as a social\nconstruct, but should rather be seen as a pivotal \u2017societal pillar\u2018 that has psychological\nand social elements, based in Israel\u2018s geo-political reality. It is not surprising that\nasylum seekers (some of whom are citizens of hostile states to Israel) entering\nillegally through the notorious Egyptian border are conceived as a security threat.\n\n\nThe inability of the asylum seekers to voice their agency has become a fertile ground\nfor a campaign which used vilifying rhetoric to construct a number-oriented, securitycentred discourse. As Gibney (2002, 41) has pointed out, despite fleeing from terror\nand persecution, refugees often unwillingly become representatives of such violent\nand repressive phenomena in refugeedom.\n\n\nFollowing the 2006 influx, discussions about asylum seekers were gradually\nsecuritised, culminating with the recent decision to erect the surveillance fence. The\nhead of the Egyptian-Israeli fence project is a high ranking army officer who was\ndefined by one military correspondent as the \u2015father and mother of the separation\nwall\u2016 between Israel and the West Bank (Buhbut 2006). Such presence serves as a\nuseful reminder of the close connection between managing Israel\u2018s new security\nconcerns about asylum seekers and its control over the Occupied Palestinian\nTerritories.\n\n\nThe Israeli state began to frame the influx of asylum seekers as a security concern\nfrom early 2006, in parallel to the establishment of the \u2017hot returns\u2018 procedure. In a\nspecial meeting in early 2008 former PM Olmert employed a disturbing \u2017natural\ndisaster\u2018 terminology to describe the situation, stating: \u2015This is a tsunami that can\ngrow and we need to take every measure to stop it\". This threatening imagery helped\nhim to argue that security officials should \"prevent the refugee infiltrations, even if\nthe matter requires the use of force\" (JP 2008).\n\n\nThe \u2017asylum-migration nexus\u2018 was strategically used to give a security dimension to\nwhat Willen (2010a, 508) calls \u2015the epistemological and classificatory confusion\u2016 that\naccompanied the state\u2018s refusal to describe the arrivals as refugees or asylum seekers.\nInstead, it denounced them as \u2017infiltrators\u2018 ( _mistanenim)_ and later, fuelled by\nrejectionist rhetoric by politicians and others, coined the neologism \u2013 \u2015labour\n\n\n8\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/451637b7-6b25-36cb-81f7-0d5b1ceb308d/0349E1BAB7009CF785257850006FA04C-Full_Report.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        9
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "infiltrators\u2016 ( _mistaneniavoda_ ) in an effort to associate refugees with a threat to the\nemployment prospects of Israelis.\n\n\nAs one academic interviewee observed, the ongoing primacy of this term\ndemonstrates \u2015the success of agents within the [governmental] institutions to inject\nthis discourse and create a sort of panic\u2016 characterised by a \u2015takeaway feeling \u2013 they\nwill come here, take what we have, and change this place\u2016.\n\n\nThis \u2015takeaway feeling\u2016 partly explains the urgency of an MK who suggested various\nsecurity technologies that allowed Israel to act in a middle zone between violence and\ndoing nothing: \u2015\u2026preventing entrance, a fence, guard dogs, sensors\u2026arrivals will not\nbe answered and received, we will not let them in\u2016\u2026\u2016Between killing and not acting\nthere is prevention, [and the state should act upon it] if Israel wishes to survive\u2016.\n\n\nHowever, any discussion which touches upon security-related issues must also\nconsider the close triangular relationships between African refugees, Palestinian\nrefugees and Israeli security considerations. In the Israeli context, the term \u2017refugee\u2018\nis traditionally associated with two types of refugee: Jewish holocaust survivors who\nfled Europe and the Palestinian refugees who were displaced as a result of the 1948\nWar.\n\n\nThe state fears that recognizing African asylum seekers as refugees will open the\nPandora\u2018s Box of Palestinian refugees\u2018 claims for territory, compensation and most\nimportantly, right of return. Combined, these demands are perceived as a threat for the\ncountry\u2018s ethnonational character and its very existence as a Jewish and democratic\nstate (cf. Shafir and Peled 1998; Yiftachel 2000; 2006; Gavison 1999).\n\n\nAlthough article 1D of the 1951 Convention excludes the Palestinian refugees, the\nresolution concerning their fate has remained amongst the key intricate issues in the\nnegotiations between the sides (e.g. Peters and Gal 2009). Although the two \u2017refugee\nissues\u2018 are not legally or practically related, the primordial/contemporary presence of\nthe Palestinian refugees shapes immigration debate in Israel. As one interviewee\nclaimed, the issue of Palestinian refugees accompanies any discussion about African\nrefugees.\n\n\nThe \u2015labour infiltrators\u2016 terminology serves three key functions. First, it portrays the\nrefugees as a threat to Israeli employment. Second, this neologism enables the state to\nde-link the contemporary influx from the contentious tensions associated with the\n\u2017Palestinian refugee\u2018 as a symbol for territorial claims.\n\n\nFinally, it draws on an emotionally freighted term and set of events that suggest grave\ndanger to Israeli identity and individuals. Infiltration is associated with a specific\nhistorical episode, (and in many ways a contemporary one too); 'infiltrators'\n\n[ _mistanenim_ ] are associated with the Palestinian _Fedayeen_ [10] movement which\nemerged as a response to the 1948 war and the establishment of Israel.\n\n\nImmediately after the war thousands of Palestinian refugees began to cross the border\nback to their houses. At first, they were motivated by socio-economic concerns\n\n\n10Arabic for self-sacrificer.The term refers to different groups, in different times. It is cited here to\naddress the post 1948 period throughout the 1950s.\n\n\n9\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/451637b7-6b25-36cb-81f7-0d5b1ceb308d/0349E1BAB7009CF785257850006FA04C-Full_Report.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        10
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "regarding their families, property, crops and houses. These returns were perceived by\nthe Israeli side as an act of infiltration that did not only involve trespassing but also\nconstituted a threat to the new state.\n\n\nAs the post-war tensions increased, the infiltration changed its purpose, and developed\ninto a national struggle. Throughout the 1950s (arguably with the support of the\nneighbouring states) groups of Palestinian guerrilla fighters attacked Israeli civilian\nand military targets. These acts were followed by retaliation by the Israeli army,\nleading to many causalities on both sides (for a detailed account see Morris 1997;\nBenvenisti 2002).\n\n\nOne NGO worker highlighted the state\u2018s intention to take the issue \u2015to a place that\nconnects [the refugees] to the Palestinian struggle and security dilemmas\u2026but it is a\nmanipulation of the discourse\u2016. Other interviewees highlighted important nuances, as\na different NGO worker argued: \u2015the phobia from the [African] refugees began with\nthe phobia from the Palestinian refugees, but it has received a life of its own\u2016.\n\n\nReferring to the legal aspects of the emerging asylum regime, a third interviewee\ntouched on this evolution: \u2015a ten years process has taken place, and the Palestinian\nissue has not really succeeded to enter the asylum regime because they have\nsucceeded in creating deterrence...they suddenly realised however, that the refugee\nconvention can be a serious explosive even without the Palestinian refugees\u2026even\nthough every Israeli has the Palestinian issue here [pointing at her nape], it is no\nlonger at the forefront. The demographic issue is \u2013 and demography is not only the\n\n[Israeli-Palestinian] conflict, demography is a few more things including [the\nquestion]: \u2017do you want Israel to become Africa?\u2018\u2016 [A3].\n\n\n**The ethnonational discourse**\n\n\nIsrael\u2018s Declaration of Independence refers to the state as \u2015the birthplace of the Jewish\npeople\u2016 and their \"ancient homeland\u2016. It states that Israel would \u2015open the\ngates...wide to every Jew and confer upon the Jewish people the status of a fully\nprivileged member of the comity of nations\u2016 (MFA 1948/2010). Established to\nexpress the right of the Jewish people to self-determination and grounded in the\nZionist ideology, Israel\u2018s Jewish and democratic character is underlined by the 1950\nLaw of Return which constructs a distinctive migration regime.\n\n\nThe law establishes the \u2015natural right\u2016 of every Jew to return to the homeland and\nbecome a citizen, based on ethno-religious ancestral ties which are represented in the\nmodern nation, and in the ideological commitment to Jewish immigration (Sachar\n2000; Shuval 1998). The law constructs a migration regime that defines the\nparticularities of membership claims while excluding those who do not meet its\ndemands, creating varying degrees of a much-debated structural discrimination\nagainst non-Jews, and in particular Palestinians (cf. Carmi 2003; Yiftachel 2006;\nGavison 2010).\n\n\nThe state actively seeks, via a range of institutions, to encourage Jewish\n\u2017homecoming\u2018 and sustain a Jewish demographic majority. Israel\u2018s self-defined\n\u2015Jewish and democratic\u2016 character creates inherent tensions for non-Jewish migrants\n(amongst others) who are conceived by some as an existential threat (Kritzman-Amir\n\n\n10\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/451637b7-6b25-36cb-81f7-0d5b1ceb308d/0349E1BAB7009CF785257850006FA04C-Full_Report.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        11
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "2009), not only demographically but \u2015...one or a combination of biological dilution\n...cultural downgrading, security danger, subversion and political instability\u2016 (Smooha\n2002, 478 cited in Afeef 2009, 3).\n\n\nWhile these tensions were arguably contained for decades, from the 1990s onwards\nthree patterns of migration to Israel challenged the state\u2018s definitional features. First,\nIsrael absorbed more than one million Jewish and non-Jewish migrants from the\ncollapsing Soviet Union who were primarily driven by economic considerations. [11]\nSecond, the government encouraged labour migration from overseas to replace\nPalestinian workers from the West Bank and Gaza who were gradually rejected due to\nthe deterioration in the security situation following the 1987 first _Intifada._ [12]\n\n\nFrom the state\u2018s prism, these labour migrants were not perceived as immigrants but\nonly as authorised workers who met the booming economy\u2018s needs (Kemp and\nReijman 2008; Reijman 2009; Kemp 2010). Accordingly, government policy towards\nthem consisted of differing policies, including a large-scale governmental deportation\ncampaign targeted at authorised workers who overstayed their visas and became\nunauthorised (Willen 2007). The third transformation is the ongoing influx of African\nmigrants.\n\n\nAgainst this backdrop, the 2006 refugee influx met heightened anxiety over the\ntransforming ethnonational character of the Israeli nation-state. The idea that mass\ninflux involves demographic change has deep roots and was tactically used by Jews\nthemselves prior to establishment of the state and during the British mandate\n(Neuman 1999). This language was engaged again, intensified by these changing\npatterns of migration and the ongoing focus on state security, to represent asylum\nseekers as a serious threat to both social cohesiveness and security - conveyed through\nthe transportable, easy-to-use refugee template.\n\n\nPoliticians and public officials further inflamed the debate by releasing controversial\nstatements. PM Netanyahu employed rejectionist rhetoric: \u2015infiltrators cause cultural,\nsocial and economic damage, and pull us towards the Third World\u2016 and, in a slip of\ntongue, he later referred to the infiltrators as \u2015surge of refugees who threaten to wash\naway our achievements and damage our existence as a Jewish democratic state\u2016\n(Goldstein 2010).\n\n\nThe head of the SCPFW has called for a stop to the \u2015illegal infiltration\u2016 and defined it\nas an immediate \u2015demographic, cultural, religious and social threat\u2015...\u2015[as] the Jewish\npeople have spent 100 years building a Jewish state and in 10 years the infiltrators can\nwash it all down the drain\" (Katz 2010).\n\n\nSuch pronouncements were followed by a semi-xenophobic media campaign\norganised by the mayor of Eilat, Israel\u2018s resort city and the nearest city to the southern\nborder, who complained about the municipal burden associated with the number of\nAfrican asylum seekers in his city. He called Israel\u2018s inaction \u2015national suicide\u2016\n(Friedman 2010b), while comfortably failing to mention the economic benefits of the\nasylum seekers\u2018 low-cost labour in the city\u2018s hotels, tolerated by both government and\n\n\n11 This was enabled by a 1970 amendment to the Law of Return which expanded its scope to include\nthe spouses and close relative of any Jew.\n12Arabic for uprising.\n\n\n11\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/451637b7-6b25-36cb-81f7-0d5b1ceb308d/0349E1BAB7009CF785257850006FA04C-Full_Report.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        12
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "his municipality. Another example of a religious-ethnonational discourse was the call\nof local rabbis in South Tel-Aviv\u2018s deprived neighbourhoods (in which many asylum\nseekers and migrant labourers reside) not to rent flats to the \u2015dangerous infiltrators\u2016\n(Harkov 2010).\n\n\nOne academic interviewee has argued that the state\u2018s \u2015remarkable consistency in its\noverall rejection of the refugees can be understood through its core concerns with\n\u2015their \u2017otherness\u2018, the state does not want both the Muslim [refugee] and the Christian\n\n[refugee]\u2026but the basic logic is simple, and it has to do with their increasing numbers\nand the nature of the Jewish state\u2016...[something] \u2015which cannot be overridden as a\nparanoia per se\u2016.\n\n\nAs a few civil society and academic interviewees pointed out, these base fears are\nenacted by the \u2017socialisation\u2018 of public officials who feel they are \u2015the Jewish\ndemocratic state\u2018s gatekeepers\u2016, bearing responsibility to limit the non-Jewish\nimmigration to Israel as much as possible. One NGO worker argued that these\nofficials see their role as \u2015preventing drastic demographic deterioration... similarly to\nthat of the Dutch boy who plugs a dike with his finger\u2016.\n\n\nIn contrast, one NGO worker argued that civil society organisations \u2015advocate a\nperception of \u2017universalistic citizenship\u2018, where everyone should have rights\u2026they do\nnot see the nationality issue as relevant, but publicly, it is not stated. In today\u2018s public\natmosphere, we will not say it out loud because it does not serve the struggle and the\nstrategy\u2016. As the same NGO worker argued: \u2015the central issue here is [one that\naddresses] the nature of Israeli civil society, the struggle is about the character of\nIsrael as a state, and the refugees are not really sharing this struggle, they are rather\ndisempowered by it\u2016.\n\n\nBoth security and ethnonational discourses have intensified as the numbers of asylum\nseekers have risen sharply, crossing a critical threshold beyond which refugee issues\ncan no longer be ignored as \u2017out of sight, out of mind\u2018. The next section highlights a\nthird challenge which complements the ethnonational, security-conscious image: the\nexperience of the holocaust.\n\n\n**The holocaust/genocide discourse**\n\n\nThe holocaust is a fundamental social component of the Israeli society - its legacy is\ndeeply rooted in past and contemporary Israeli identity (Zertal 2005). The\naforementioned decision of former PM Olmert to give temporary residence to 500\nDarfurians can be seen as an exceptional \u2017humanitarian anomaly\u2018, akin to those\ngranted by Israel in the past. While it has a humanitarian dimension, granting\nrecognised survivors of genocide protection in Israel inherently relates to Jews\u2018 and\nIsraelis\u2018 own experiences of genocide.\n\n\nThis \u2017holocaust discourse\u2018 has an ongoing role in shaping policies and attitudes\ntowards asylum seekers. It creates a degree of accommodating space for asylum\nseekers vis-\u00e0-vis Israel\u2018s commitment to human rights. The influx heightened the\ntension between ethnic nationalism, embedded in the state\u2018s identity, and an array of\nhumanitarian responses which followed the initial arrival of Sudanese (and later other)\nrefugees. These humanitarian responses were partially (and arguably) motivated by\n\n\n12\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/451637b7-6b25-36cb-81f7-0d5b1ceb308d/0349E1BAB7009CF785257850006FA04C-Full_Report.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        13
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "the shared \u2017intimacy\u2018 of the genocide experience between Israelis and Sudanese from\nDarfur.\n\n\nThe centrality of this issue was highlighted in 2006-7 which saw a significant increase\nin the numbers of asylum seekers. Analogies to the holocaust as the Israeli/Jewish\n\u2017moral barometer\u2018 were commonly drawn by politicians (Knesset Discussion 2007),\nacademics - including a leading holocaust scholar who compared Israel\u2018s policies to\nSwitzerland\u2018s and Britain\u2018s policies towards Jews in the Second World War (TAU\n2007; Bauer 2008), reserve soldiers who served at the border and witnessed Egyptian\nshootings (Bereshkovsky 2007) and even senior religious figures (Ynet 2007).\n\n\nOne newspaper\u2018s editorial explicitly defined the linkage: \u2015The first moral\ncommandment of the state of the Jews is that it does not have the right to slam the\ndoor in the face of refugees fleeing genocide\u2016 (Haaretz 2007). Such calls led many\nother Israelis to express their moral commitment by providing donations or food\nproducts, or by hosting asylum seekers in their houses or settlements.\n\n\nAs Willen (2010a) has pointed out, the \u2015kinship of genocide\u2016 between Jewish\nexperiences of the holocaust and Darfurian survivors shaped accommodating\nhumanitarian responses but it also led to the creation of a hierarchy of suffering in\nwhich Darfurian Sudanese received a special humanitarian primacy over others. Their\nspecific, \u2017right\u2018 kind of suffering could be better accommodated than others forms of\nsuffering.\n\n\nWith the rise in the numbers of Eritrean asylum seekers who gradually and\nsignificantly outnumbered the Sudanese (and particularly that of Darfurians), the\ninflux reached its critical threshold. The kinship of genocide towards asylum seekers\nhas eroded and the short-span of this episodic golden-era (if indeed there was ever\none) has reached its end. This made room for the deeper tensions between\nhumanitarianism and ethnonationalism. The migration side of the asylum-migration\nnexus undermined the asylum side as the \u2015labour infiltrators\u2016 terminology took\nprimacy.\n\n\nIn the words of some interviewees, the moral obligations of holocaust survivors were\nbalanced with more pragmatic concerns. A government official stated: \u2015the people of\nIsrael are merciful in their nature, and the experience of the holocaust hovers above \u2013\nthose who will be recognised as refugees will be treated with all due respect, but those\nwho are not recognised \u2013 people need to understand that this becomes a heavy\nfinancial burden\u2016. An MK argued that the kinship of genocide is not the issue:\n\u2015people do not know what is Eritrea, what kind of state, at most they will tell you\n\u2017something in Africa\u2018, they do not know\u2026Sudan, Darfur, Ethiopia, Africa, Muslims \u2013\neverything in one parcel \u2013 only few are really aware of the details\u2016.\n\n\nCivil society workers however, were intently aware of the way this balance had tipped\naway from the cultural weight of genocide, partially because they instrumentally\nattempted the holocaust discourse to support their advocacy and fund-raising\ncampaigns, an endeavour most referred to as a mistake. One academic highlighted the\nearly success of this technique as it \u2015paved the way for many people to understand\nand identify with the situation experienced by other people, through their collective\nhistory, and it was genuine personal identification\u2016.\n\n\n13\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/451637b7-6b25-36cb-81f7-0d5b1ceb308d/0349E1BAB7009CF785257850006FA04C-Full_Report.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        14
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "Yet while the \u2015story of the Darfurians \u2026 enabled doing things for the rest\u2016, this\ninterviewee also identified the \u2015constricting\u2016 results of focusing on such a\n\u2015particularistic experience\u2016 to generate empathy and support for refugees: \u2015Israelis\nfind it difficult to identify with something they are not familiar with, but it does not\nmean we should not respond to it\u2016.\n\n\nLikewise, an NGO worker highlighted the Eritreans\u2018 subsequent problem: \u2015to market\ntheir refugehood\u2016\u2026it was much easier to mobilise public opinion\u2026[regarding]\ngenocide refugees. The political salience of language and carefully selected\nappellations was highlighted by many interviewees as they traced the transformations\nin the discourse from \u2015Auschwitz, and Israel\u2018s legacy of the holocaust\u2016 to deep\nconcerns with regard to the \u2015the faith of Israel if this influx will continue\u2016.\n\n\nThe kinship of genocide sheds light on the salience of the security and\nethnonationalist discourses. Moreover, it created a window of opportunity to see the\nasylum seekers as purposive actors. While the kinship has eroded, holocaust\ndiscourse, as a fundamental pillar of the Israeli society will continue to shape people\u2018s\ninterpretative readings and the state\u2018s responses to asylum seekers.\n\n\n**Conclusion**\n\nDrizzle, trickle, flow, surge, flood, tidal-wave and even tsunami. Water metaphors are\ncommonly used to refer to asylum seekers and refugees. Turton (2003b) points out\nthree common features of such forced migration metaphorical language. First, the\nlanguage is shaped in inescapable but unpredictable terms as something which must\nbe resisted. Second, it dehumanises its subjects while shaping their presence as a\nthreat. Third, it relies on an \u2017us versus them\u2018 dichotomy.\n\n\nThese features are central to this paper\u2018s quest to explain and deconstruct the\ndiscursive challenges surrounding African asylum seekers and refugees in Israel. It\nhas sought to establish \u2017calmer waters\u2018 in which these discourses and their political\nimplications can be analytically evaluated. The exclusionist measures which have\nconstituted Israel\u2018s patchy policy responses highlight its strategy to cement asylum\nclaims as unsustainable, in the hope the surge of refugees will one day dry up.\n\n\nIsrael\u2018s \u2017refugee problem\u2018, albeit new, is not going to suddenly disappear. Far from\nbeing a local problem, critical analysis reveals the issue\u2018s developing salience. The\nfuture of Israel\u2018s asylum regime will be shaped by the discourses which were\nidentified in this study and others which will probably emerge and re-emerge.\n\n\nThe paper presented two intertwined arguments. First, the discursive formations\nwhich developed as a response to the influx are underlined by the reduction of the\nasylum seekers to the level of \u2017bare life\u2018, a form of depoliticised existence (Agamben\n1998). The asylum seekers serve, on a conceptual level, a convenient and an agencylimited template for these discourses to form, essentially affecting the treatment they\nreceive, which often serve the political interests of others. Second, the asylummigration nexus has a fundamental role in shaping debates over the \u2017correct\u2018 or\n\u2017accurate\u2018 definition of the asylum seekers \u2013 a category which cannot be distinctively\nconceptualised from economic migrants.\n\n\n14\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/451637b7-6b25-36cb-81f7-0d5b1ceb308d/0349E1BAB7009CF785257850006FA04C-Full_Report.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        15
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "Drawing on such overlaps, Israel has constructed its own \u2015national order of things\u2016\n(Malkki, 1995): an ordered disorder which serves the evolutionary pattern through\nwhich it responds to asylum seekers. This ordered disorder progresses through\nostensibly contradictory and confused policies, but a vivid exclusionary principle\ngoverns its overall execution. Essentially, the exclusionary logic is not radically\ndifferent from the spectrum of measures used by other countries that limit the entrance\nof unwanted individuals to their territory.\n\n\nInstigating this spectrum of responses, asylum seekers are shaped and perceived by\nthe state as a blank slate, open to discursive turns supported by the strategic choices of\nactors from across the political spectrum. While anathema to many, and provided that\nthe current influx continues at its current rate, it is not impossible to envisage the\nestablishment of Israel\u2018s first \u2017infiltrators city\u2018 or refugee camp.\n\n\nServing a multiplicity of functions this ostensible \u2017city of infiltrators\u2018 would become a\ndetention centre for the asylum seekers, a deterrence measure for future arrivals and\nsimultaneously, a humanitarian space where their physical needs would be met\n(SCPFW 2010). Widely rejected and criticised, such considerations continue to live as\na potential policy resolution in the mind of decision makers, and may indeed\nmaterialise if the numbers of refugees continue to rise at current rates.\n\n\nBut another route can also be contemplated. Israel may develop legislation which\ntransforms the \u2017kinship of genocide\u2018 into a more inclusionist \u2017kinship of refugees\u2018\nwhich will respond to Israel\u2018s unique ethnonational character and past legacies while\naccommodating others\u2018 unique circumstances and history. Either way, as Foucault\n(cited in Campbell 1998, 515) has stated in support of the Vietnamese boat people:\n\u2015People\u2018s misfortune must never be the silent remainder of politics\u2016 \u2013 this paper\nattempted to reflect on a process which may allow exactly that.\n\n\n15\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/451637b7-6b25-36cb-81f7-0d5b1ceb308d/0349E1BAB7009CF785257850006FA04C-Full_Report.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        16
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_50/raw/doc_50_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,52 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "# **MOLDOVA**\n##### **IANUARIE 2025**\n## **NOT\u0102 INFORMATIV\u0102 CU PRIVIRE** **LA REFUGIA\u021aII \u00ceN V\u00c2RST\u0102**\n###### Grupul de lucru pentru dizabilitate \u0219i v\u00e2rst\u0103 Forumul de Coordonare pentru Refugia\u021bi din Republica Moldova\n\nGrupul **operativ privind dizabilitatea \u0219i v\u00e2rsta (DATF)** a fost \u00eenfiin\u021bat \u00een martie 2022 cu\nsprijinul Forumului de coordonare pentru refugia\u021bi \u0219i \u00een cadrul **Grupului de lucru pentru**\n**protec\u021bie** . Grupul operativ este compus din actori umanitari, inclusiv autorit\u0103\u021bi\nguvernamentale, agen\u021bii ale Organiza\u021biei Na\u021biunilor Unite, ONG-uri interna\u021bionale \u0219i\nna\u021bionale \u0219i organiza\u021bii ale persoanelor cu dizabilitate (OPD), care ofer\u0103 servicii specifice\npentru persoanele cu dizabilit\u0103\u021bi \u0219i \u00een v\u00e2rst\u0103. Obiectivul s\u0103u este de a \u00eembun\u0103t\u0103\u021bi\nincluziunea persoanelor \u00een v\u00e2rst\u0103 \u0219i a persoanelor cu dizabilit\u0103\u021bi \u00een r\u0103spunsul ucrainean\npentru refugia\u021bi din Republica Moldova, asigur\u00e2nd accesul la serviciile generale, precum \u0219i\ngarantarea disponibilit\u0103\u021bii serviciilor specifice pentru a r\u0103spunde nevoilor.\n#### **INFORMA\u021aII DE BAZ\u0102**\n\n\nAu trecut aproape trei ani de la invazia la\nscar\u0103 larg\u0103 a Ucrainei de c\u0103tre Rusia \u00een\nfebruarie 2022, for\u021b\u00e2nd milioane de\nucraineni s\u0103 p\u0103r\u0103seasc\u0103 \u021bara \u00een c\u0103utare\nde siguran\u021b\u0103. La r\u00e2ndul s\u0103u, Moldova este\n\u021bara care a primit cel mai mare num\u0103r de\nrefugia\u021bi pe cap de locuitor raportat la\npopula\u021bia de 2,4 milioane. La sf\u00e2r\u0219itul lunii\ndecembrie 2024, aproximativ 135 000 de\nrefugia\u021bi din Ucraina erau \u00eenc\u0103 ad\u0103posti\u021bi\n\u00een Moldova, dintre care aproximativ\n\n76 000 au primit azil, protec\u021bie temporar\u0103 sau statut de rezident \u00een Moldova pentru a le\npermite acestora s\u0103 r\u0103m\u00e2n\u0103 legal \u00een \u021bar\u0103 \u0219i s\u0103 aib\u0103 acces la servicii.\nRefugia\u021bii din Moldova sosesc \u00een principal din sudul \u0219i sud-vestul Ucrainei, inclusiv din\nora\u0219ul Odessa.\n\nCompozi\u021bia demografic\u0103 a persoanelor care trec frontiera este format\u0103 \u00een principal din\nfemei care c\u0103l\u0103toresc cu persoane aflate la \u00eentre\u021binere (sugari, copii \u0219i persoane \u00een v\u00e2rst\u0103),\n\n - mare parte dintre acestea devenind \u00eengrijitoare singure ca urmare a separ\u0103rii familiale\nfor\u021bate de conflict.\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/690a6894-4991-43ff-8356-0a7a1052e8c5/202501_BN_Older_Refugees_Moldova_Ro.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "persoanele \u00een v\u00e2rst\u0103, aproximativ 50% sunt persoane cu dizabilit\u0103\u021bi, ceea ce agraveaz\u0103\nriscurile cu care se confrunt\u0103 aceast\u0103 categorie de refugia\u021bi.\n\nAceast\u0103 not\u0103 informativ\u0103 \u00ee\u0219i propune s\u0103 ofere o imagine de ansamblu a situa\u021biei\nrefugia\u021bilor \u00een v\u00e2rst\u0103 din Moldova, a lacunelor \u0219i nevoilor cu care se confrunt\u0103 ace\u0219tia,\nprecum \u0219i a eforturilor actuale depuse de p\u0103r\u021bile interesate din domeniul umanitar\npentru a aborda aceste provoc\u0103ri.\n\n\u00cen urma **Sondajului de Opinii** **Socio-Economice (SEIS)** 1 realizat de ini\u021biativa IMPACT \u00een\naugust 2024, urm\u0103toarele **patru domenii principale** au fost identificate ca av\u00e2nd un\nimpact semnificativ asupra **refugia\u021bilor \u00een v\u00e2rst\u0103** \u00een compara\u021bie cu alte grupuri:\n\n\n**Accesul la informa\u021bii:** \u00cen compara\u021bie cu alte grupuri de refugia\u021bi, refugia\u021bii \u00een v\u00e2rst\u0103 se\nconfrunt\u0103 cu provoc\u0103ri semnificative \u00een ceea ce prive\u0219te accesul la informa\u021bii. Mul\u021bi\nnu dispun de dispozitive necesare pentru a se conecta online, iar informa\u021biile\ndisponibile nu sunt adesea prezentate \u00een formate care s\u0103 r\u0103spund\u0103 nevoilor lor.\n\n\n**Accesul la asisten\u021b\u0103 medical\u0103:** Accesul la asisten\u021b\u0103 medical\u0103 \u0219i la medicamente a\nap\u0103rut ca o prioritate urgent\u0103 pentru refugia\u021bii \u00een v\u00e2rst\u0103, o propor\u021bie semnificativ mai\nmare identific\u00e2nd aceste nevoi \u00een compara\u021bie cu grupurile de refugia\u021bi mai tineri.\n\n\n**Canale de sprijin:** Refugia\u021bii \u00een v\u00e2rst\u0103 de 75 de ani \u0219i peste sunt mai pu\u021bin susceptibili\nde a avea acces la canale sigure \u0219i private pentru a solicita sprijin sau pentru a\nraporta preocup\u0103ri, inclusiv probleme sensibile ale comunit\u0103\u021bii (doar 75% au raportat\nacces, comparativ cu o medie de 95% pentru alte grupuri de v\u00e2rst\u0103).\n\n\n**Asisten\u021b\u0103 social\u0103:** \u0218aptezeci la sut\u0103 (70%) dintre refugia\u021bii \u00een v\u00e2rst\u0103 de 75 de ani \u0219i\npeste au raportat necesitatea de a avea un acces mai bun la serviciile de asisten\u021b\u0103\nsocial\u0103 pentru a-\u0219i \u00eembun\u0103t\u0103\u021bi situa\u021bia socio-economic\u0103 \u00een Moldova, \u00een compara\u021bie\ncu celelalte grupe de v\u00e2rst\u0103, care este mai mic\u0103 de 50%.\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/690a6894-4991-43ff-8356-0a7a1052e8c5/202501_BN_Older_Refugees_Moldova_Ro.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "#### **REZULTATE CHEIE 2024**\n\nDe la \u00eenceputul r\u0103spunsului pentru refugia\u021bi,\nactorii umanitari au sprijinit refugia\u021bii \u00een\nv\u00e2rst\u0103 prin diferite programe \u0219i activit\u0103\u021bi,\ndup\u0103 cum s-a raportat la Forumul de\ncoordonare pentru refugia\u021bi. Printre\nrezultatele-cheie \u00een 2024, din ianuarie p\u00e2n\u0103\n\u00een septembrie, organiza\u021biile implicate \u00een\nr\u0103spuns au raportat urm\u0103toarele:\n\n\n\n\n|Persoane care primesc asisten\u021b\u0103 \u00een numerar (MPCA,<br>ajutor pentru \u00eenc\u0103lzire, r\u0103spuns la VBG)|12.748|6.425|926|\n|---|---|---|---|\n|Persoane<br>care<br>beneficiaz\u0103<br>de<br>sprijin<br>medical<br>(achizi\u021bionare de produse de s\u0103n\u0103tate, consulta\u021bii<br>medicale, sprijin financiar pentru servicii medicale)|121|61|15|\n|Persoane care particip\u0103 la serviciile \u0219i activit\u0103\u021bile<br>MHPSS (inclusiv nivelul 4 din piramida IASC)|1.225|210|2|\n|Persoanele cu nevoi specifice care beneficiaz\u0103 de<br>asisten\u021b\u0103 de protec\u021bie specific\u0103|671|228|103|\n|Persoane care primesc truse de igien\u0103, inclusiv truse<br>de prim ajutor|986|540|162|\n|Persoane<br>care<br>beneficiaz\u0103<br>de<br>asisten\u021b\u0103<br>juridic\u0103<br>individual\u0103|548|209||\n|**Num\u0103rul total de persoane \u00een v\u00e2rst\u0103 sus\u021binute  \u00een**<br>**2024**|**17.153**|**7.994**|**1.208**|\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/690a6894-4991-43ff-8356-0a7a1052e8c5/202501_BN_Older_Refugees_Moldova_Ro.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        2
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "### **LACUNE \u0218I NEVOI**\n\n**Accesul la asisten\u021b\u0103 medical\u0103:** Refugia\u021bii \u00een v\u00e2rst\u0103 se confrunt\u0103 cu bariere \u00een\naccesul la asisten\u021ba medical\u0103 secundar\u0103 din cauza problemelor de\naccesibilitate, a costurilor ridicate \u0219i aplicarea neconsecvent\u0103 la statutul de\nprotec\u021bie temporar\u0103 (TP) de c\u0103tre furnizorii de servicii.\n\n\n**Provoc\u0103ri legate de locuin\u021be:** \u00cenchiderea centrelor de cazare pentru refugia\u021bi\n(RAC) creeaz\u0103 incertitudine pentru refugia\u021bii \u00een v\u00e2rst\u0103, \u00een special pentru cei cu\nposibilit\u0103\u021bi financiare sau mobilitate redus\u0103, care au nevoie de servicii\nesen\u021biale \u00een apropierea RAC-urilor.\n\n\n**Instabilitate financiar\u0103:** Cre\u0219terea costurilor de trai \u00eei face pe refugia\u021bii \u00een\nv\u00e2rst\u0103 s\u0103 fie nesiguri din punct de vedere financiar \u0219i s\u0103 se bazeze pe pensii,\neconomii sau ajutoare, ceea ce duce adesea la reducerea cheltuielilor pentru\nalimente sau asisten\u021b\u0103 medical\u0103.\n\n\n**Bariere \u00een calea ocup\u0103rii for\u021bei de munc\u0103:** Limba, discriminarea pe criterii de\nv\u00e2rst\u0103 \u0219i problemele de s\u0103n\u0103tate \u00eei \u00eempiedic\u0103 pe refugia\u021bii \u00een v\u00e2rst\u0103 s\u0103\nlucreze, \u00een timp ce ajutorul \u00een numerar pentru chirie \u00eei exclude adesea pe cei\ncare nu \u00ee\u0219i pot g\u0103si un loc de munc\u0103.\n\n\n**Izolarea social\u0103:** Separarea de familie, mobilitatea limitat\u0103 \u0219i lipsa\nactivit\u0103\u021bilor sociale adaptate exacerbeaz\u0103 izolarea \u00een r\u00e2ndul refugia\u021bilor \u00een\nv\u00e2rst\u0103, subliniind necesitatea unor ini\u021biative comunitare adaptate v\u00e2rstei.\n\n\n**Accesul la informa\u021bii:** Competen\u021bele digitale limitate \u0219i lipsa schimbului de\ninforma\u021bii direct de la surs\u0103 \u00eempiedic\u0103 accesul refugia\u021bilor \u00een v\u00e2rst\u0103 la\ninforma\u021bii esen\u021biale, actualiz\u0103ri \u0219i \u00eenregistrarea pentru beneficii precum\nProtectia Temporar\u0103 (TP).\n\n\n**Dezagregarea datelor \u0219i asisten\u021ba direc\u021bionat\u0103:** Insuficien\u021ba datelor cu\nprivire la nevoile specifice ale refugia\u021bilor \u00een v\u00e2rst\u0103 \u00eempiedic\u0103 acordarea de\nsprijin direc\u021bionat de c\u0103tre organiza\u021biile umanitare.\n\n\n### **RECOMAND\u0102RI**\n\n\n\nPentru **Guvernul Republicii Moldova** :\n\n\n\n\u00cembun\u0103t\u0103\u021birea comunic\u0103rii c\u0103tre to\u021bi refugia\u021bii, inclusiv c\u0103tre refugia\u021bii \u00een v\u00e2rst\u0103, cu\nprivire la drepturile \u0219i serviciile care sunt acoperite prin statutul de Protec\u021bie Temporar\u0103.\nContinuarea \u00eembun\u0103t\u0103\u021birii accesibilit\u0103\u021bii \u0219i adapt\u0103rii pentru persoanele cu mobilitate\nredus\u0103.\n\n\n\nPentru **comunitatea umanitar\u0103** :\n\n\u00cembun\u0103t\u0103\u021birea colect\u0103rii \u0219i analizei datelor dezagregate pentru a direc\u021biona mai bine\nsprijinul c\u0103tre grupurile vulnerabile, inclusiv persoanele \u00een v\u00e2rst\u0103.\nContinuarea promov\u0103rii serviciilor de sprijin psihosocial pentru reducerea izol\u0103rii \u0219i\n\u00eembun\u0103t\u0103\u021birea s\u0103n\u0103t\u0103\u021bii mintale.\nRevizuirea criteriilor de plat\u0103 \u00een numerar a chiriilor pentru a include mai bine\npersoanele \u00een v\u00e2rst\u0103 \u0219i pentru a asigura fonduri care s\u0103 r\u0103spund\u0103 vulnerabilit\u0103\u021bilor\nspecifice \u00een materie de \u00eenchiriere.\nExtinderea accesului la produse asistive adaptate nevoilor specifice ale refugia\u021bilor \u00een\nv\u00e2rst\u0103.\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/690a6894-4991-43ff-8356-0a7a1052e8c5/202501_BN_Older_Refugees_Moldova_Ro.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        3
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "### **ISTORII DE LA REFUGIA\u021aI**\n\n_\"Am auzit de acest sport, dar p\u00e2n\u0103 acum nu \u0219tiam ce este mersul nordic. Dup\u0103_\n_antrenamentul de ast\u0103zi, cred c\u0103 este minunat pentru a te men\u021bine \u00een form\u0103, \u00een special_\n_pentru persoanele \u00een v\u00e2rst\u0103. Implic\u0103 \u00eentregul corp, de la picioare p\u00e2n\u0103 la m\u00e2ini.\"_\n\n\nTatiana, o refugiat\u0103 \u00een v\u00e2rst\u0103 de 61 de ani din Odessa, a ajuns \u00een S\u00eengerei, Moldova, \u00een\nmartie 2023, l\u0103s\u00e2ndu-\u0219i \u00een urm\u0103 so\u021bul \u0219i fiul. \" _M\u0103 simt \u00een siguran\u021b\u0103 aici; suntem sprijini\u021bi din_\n_toate punctele de vedere \u0219i m\u0103 simt ca acas\u0103_ \", ne-a spus ea.\n\u00cen ziua \u00een care am \u00eent\u00e2lnit-o, Tatiana, \u00eempreun\u0103 cu al\u021bi refugia\u021bi \u0219i voluntari de la Safe\nCommunity Space, a practicat mersul nordic cu un instructor profesionist. Grupul s-a\nconsolidat rapid \u0219i a decis s\u0103 fac\u0103 din aceasta o activitate zilnic\u0103 cu bastoanele puse la\ndispozi\u021bie. \u00cen S\u00eengerei, unde refugia\u021bii stau cu familiile locale, ace\u0219tia au rareori ocazia de a\nstabili leg\u0103turi. Activit\u0103\u021bi precum acestea \u00eei ajut\u0103 s\u0103 se socializeze, s\u0103 se simt\u0103 sprijini\u021bi \u0219i\ns\u0103 devin\u0103 parte a comunit\u0103\u021bii. Tatiana crede c\u0103, prin aceste \u00eent\u00e2lniri, ei se simt utili,\n\n\n**Persoane de contact**\n\n**Co-leaderi ai grupului de lucru**\n\n**Daniele Pedretti**, specialist \u00een incluziunea persoanelor \u00een v\u00e2rst\u0103 _HelpAge_, Daniele.Pedretti@helpage.org\n\n**Alberto Tonon**, specialist \u00een incluziunea persoanelor cu dizabilit\u0103\u021bi, _UNHCR_, Tonon@unhcr.org\n\n**Ludmila Malcoci**, director executiv _Keystone Moldova_, Lmalcoci@khs.org\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/690a6894-4991-43ff-8356-0a7a1052e8c5/202501_BN_Older_Refugees_Moldova_Ro.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        4
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_6/raw/doc_6_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "## Lebanon Baalbek-Hermel Governorate Profile (June 2015)\n\n#### **GENERAL OVERVIEW**\n\nThe Bekaa valley was split into two governorates in May 2014; Baalbek/Hermel and Bekaa. Bekaa hosts Lebanon\u2019s largest\nofficial border crossing with Syria in Masnaa. The Baalbak-Hermel Governorate is predominantly Shiite with pockets of\nChristians and Sunnis. Several UN agencies and NGOs have offices across the valley and regular inter-agency and sector\ncoordination meetings are held in Zahle. Localized coordination structures are also established for Aarsal and the Hermel\ndistrict.\n\n\n\n\n#### **POPULATION OVERVIEW**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#### **SOCIO ECONOMIC OVERVIEW**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#### **CHANGES IN CONTEXT JANUARY TO JUNE**\n\nThe northeastern border region remained highly volatile with consistent infiltration attempts by Islamist Armed Opposition Groups and recurrent LAF shelling along the outskirts of Aarsal, Fakiha and Ras Baalbak. A new round of Qalamoun\nbattles was launched in the first week of May and is ongoing. Access to Aarsal continued to be inhibited by the security\ncontext. While some assistance has trickled in through local partners, UN agencies have been denied access since August\n2014.\n\n\nRestrictions on access were formalized in January with the imposition of specific entry criteria. In addition, the Government of Lebanon requested the suspension of UNHCR registration. As a result, the number of new arrivals substantially\ndiminished and the number of registered refugees remains consistent.\n\n\nLike in the rest of the Bekka, the number of Syrian refugees living in informal settlements has continued to increase with\n196 new informal settlements since December 2014 and 5,058 refugees newly accommodated there.\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/d32a9f10-3328-3d09-967d-ebb78236bad0/06072015-Baalbek-HermelGovernorateProfile.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "#### **HUMANITARIAN AND STABLIZATION TRENDS**\n\nLack of access to Aarsal remains a challenge. Activities are ongoing, monitoring is undertaken remotely which is\nchallenging; however new techniques have been adapted to respond to this situation. Agencies have been able to\nprovide relatively consistent services and respond to emergency situations through local staff members and partner\norganizations.\n\n\nSince the August 2014 hostilities, the LAF has tightened its security cordon around Aarsal, limiting movement of refugees\nto and from the town.\n\n\nAccess to services has been of concern in Aarsal given that almost 50 per cent of the registered Syrian refugees are\nwithout documentation and have feared crossing checkpoints along the way. Some restrictions imposed by the LAF\nbetween the outskirts and Aarsal town have impacted the approximately 3,000 individuals remaining. Fuel, food and\nother materials for the numerous businesses have been restricted. There is one formal transit site managed by DAF and 93\ninformal settlements inside Aarsal town.\n\n\nA total of 8,900 households in Aarsal benefited from $200 worth of winter fuel support (and a hygiene kit covering the first\nquarter of 2015).\n\n\nLike in the Bekka, innovative institutional support includes the Municipal Support Assistant (MSA) Programme where\nsome international NGOs have seconded staff to several municipalities to support the work of the municipality staff and\nprovide information to refugees. Eleven Mapping of Risk and Resources programmes are being implemented.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|Col1|Col2|Col3|Col4|\n|---|---|---|---|\n|||||\n|||||\n\n\n\n\n\nBaalbek\n\n\nEl Hermel\n\n|14 7 15 5 8 5 3 7 5<br>3 5 3 1 4 2 3 2 3|Col2|Col3|Col4|Col5|Col6|\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n|14<br>15<br>8<br>3<br>7<br>5<br><br>3<br>5<br>3<br>4<br>2<br>3<br>2<br>3<br>7<br>5<br>1<br>5<br><br>|3|5|3|1|4<br>2<br>3<br>2<br>3<br>|\n\n\n\nKey contacts\n\n\n\n**UNHCR** Maeve Murphy, murphym@unhcr.org **UNDP** George Akl, george.akl@undp.org\n**Ministery of Social Affairs (MoSA)** Hussein Salemm, hussein.salemm@hotmail.com\n\n\n**Baalbek-Hermel Governor** Mr. Bashir Khodr\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n**41 UN Agencies and NGOs operating in Baalbek-Hermel**\n\n\nACF, Al Masjed Com, AMEL, ARCPA, Beyond, CCP JAPAN, CLMC Lebanon,\nDanish Red Cross, DRC, EPL, FAO, GVC, HI, HOOPS, IMC, Intersos, IOCC Lebanon,\nIOM, IQRAA, IRC, ISAD, Lebanese Red Cross, LOST, MAP-UK, MDM, MEDAIR,\nMercy Corps, MoSA, NRC, OXFAM, SCI, SFCG, TdH - It, UNDP, UNFPA, UNHCR,\nUNRWA, URDA, Welfare Association, WHO, Arab Puppet Theatre\n\n\n\n**Disclaimer:** The boundaries and names shown on this map do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations.\n**Data Source:** Lebanese Population - Central Administration of Statistics (CAS) year 2002 dataset,   Poverty data: CAS, UNDP and MoSA Living Conditions and Household Budget Survey 2004-5,\nSyrian Refugee Population - UNHCR as of 30/06/2015, Humanitarian Intervention Data - Activity Info as of 30/06/2015, Palestinian Refugee Population- UNRWA, Lebanese Returnees data IOM as of 30/06/2015\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Syrian Refugee Population - UNHCR",
+          "confidence": 0.5670925974845886,
+          "start": 683,
+          "end": 688
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "Syrian Refugee Population",
+          "confidence": 0.6651118397712708,
+          "start": 683,
+          "end": 686
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Humanitarian Intervention Data - Activity Info",
+          "confidence": 0.6907762885093689,
+          "start": 696,
+          "end": 702
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": null,
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/d32a9f10-3328-3d09-967d-ebb78236bad0/06072015-Baalbek-HermelGovernorateProfile.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_7/raw/doc_7_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "## Lebanon Bekaa Governorate Profile (June 2015)\n\n#### **GENERAL OVERVIEW**\n\nThe Bekaa valley was split into two governorates in May 2014; Baalbek/Hermel and Bekaa. Bekaa hosts Lebanon\u2019s largest\nofficial border crossing with Syria in Masnaa. The Bekaa governorate is split into three administrative districts (Zahle,\nWest Bekaa and Rashaya), composed of over 85 municipalities. The Bekaa valley is an area confessionally mixed with\nChristians, Sunnis, Shiittes and Druze. The governorate has an average altitude of 1,000m above sea level. Inter-agency\nand sector coordination meetings take place in Zahle.\n\n\n\n\n#### **POPULATION OVERVIEW**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#### **SOCIO ECONOMIC OVERVIEW**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#### **CHANGES IN CONTEXT JANUARY TO JUNE**\n\nSecurity trends in Bekaa were shaped by the intensifying conflict on the border between Islamist Armed Opposition\nGroups (I/AOGs) and other actors. The Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) scaled up search and arrest operations, particularly\nin areas associated with I/AOG support networks including informal tented settlements and collective shelters. Heavy\nshelling of the border region by LAF was accompanied by a reinforcement of state and non-state security forces. Inside\nAarsal, Lebanese and Syrian nationals were increasingly abducted for ransom or information, while violent criminal\nincidents became more frequent.\n\n\nThe LAF have implemented evictions policy focused on settlements located within the vicinity of LAF facilities and assets,\nalong vital supply lines and in border areas. Over 7,000 individuals have had to relocate since January and a further 4,400\nhave been notified to vacate their sites.\n\n\nRestrictions on access were formalized in January with the imposition of specific entry criteria. In addition, the\nGovernment of Lebanon requested the suspension of registration of Syrian refugees conducted by UNHCR. As a result,\nthe number of new arrivals substantially diminished and the number of registered refugees has remained consistent.\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/f4a30221-b7b3-3f14-9ee0-6447917679b8/07062015__BekaaGovernorateProfile.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "#### **HUMANITARIAN AND STABLIZATION TRENDS**\n\nThe Bekaa valley has received the highest number of Syrian refugees in Lebanon which has put strains on already fragile\nservices and increased the vulnerability of host communities, as they compete over employment, accommodation, access\nto public services, and infrastructure. More than 40 per cent of the refugee population live in Informal Tented Settlements;\nand as a result, have limited access to basic services.\n\n\nWinterization campaign was finalized in April and reached over 270,000 registered refugees, some of whom reside in\nremote locations.\n\n\nIn 2015, five agencies will be financing their own cash programs while a total of 19 organizations are working on assessing\nalmost 25,000 households; of those, over 9,000 are expected to benefit from $175 per month in cash assistance.\nHousehold visits as part of the targeting process confirmed that the highest number of poor refugee families in\nsub-standard shelter live in the Bekaa.\n\n\nThe evictions committee continues to track and respond to the security-driven LAF evictions mostly taking place in\nCentral Bekaa. The committee\u2019s members are consistently conducting vulnerability and technical assessments and\nmobilizing assistance where needed.\n\n\nThrough the National Poverty Targeting Program, MoSA aims to help 18,000 poor Lebanese families that have been\naffected by the impact of the Syria crisis. At the moment only 7-8 per cent are being targeted due to lack of resources.\n\n\nInterventions with municipalities through the Mapping of Risk and Resource programme have taken place in 16\nmunicipalities. In addition, socio-cultural and socio-economic committees aiming at supporting Lebanese-Lebanese\nsocial stability by reducing tensions between Lebanese citizens themselves and supporting social interaction between\nLebanese and Syrians have been established in Central Bekaa municipalities (Bar Elias, Majd El-Anjar, Taalbaya, Saadnayel,\nTerbol and Zahle). Local peacebuilding bodies have been created in several municipalities in West Bekaa, supported by\n\nmunicipality staff and provide information to refugees.\n\n#### **MOST VULNERABLE LOCALITIES**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n~~Barr Elias~~\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|Col1|Col2|Col3|Col4|Col5|Col6|Col7|Col8|Col9|Col10|Col11|Col12|Col13|Col14|Col15|\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n|||||||||||~~  pp~~|~~  or~~|~~   the~~|~~    w~~|~~    w~~|\n||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||\n|||||||||||~~**hle**~~|||||\n||||||||||||||||\n|||||||<br>|~~Qabb Elias~~|||~~Z~~|~~hl\u00e9~~||~~Ra~~|~~Ra~~|\n|||||||<br>~~  as~~||||~~!(~~<br>|||~~!(~~|~~!(~~|\n||||||||||||||||\n|||||||~~ se~~<br>||!(<br>~~Chtaura~~|||||||\n|||||||~~   st~~||||~~!(~~<br>~~Bar E~~|~~lias~~||||\n|||||||~~ d~~||||||~~Kfarzabad~~|||\n||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||~~!(~~<br>~~Aa~~|~~njar~~|||\n||||||||~~!(~~<br>~~**West Bek**~~<br>~~Jou~~|~~** aa**~~<br>~~b~~|||||||\n|~~Qar~~<br>~~t Vulnerable~~<br>~~ Most Vulnerable~~<br> Most Vulnerable<br>~~ dastres)~~|~~Qar~~<br>~~t Vulnerable~~<br>~~ Most Vulnerable~~<br> Most Vulnerable<br>~~ dastres)~~|~~Qar~~<br>~~t Vulnerable~~<br>~~ Most Vulnerable~~<br> Most Vulnerable<br>~~ dastres)~~|~~Qar~~<br>~~t Vulnerable~~<br>~~ Most Vulnerable~~<br> Most Vulnerable<br>~~ dastres)~~|~~Qar~~<br>~~t Vulnerable~~<br>~~ Most Vulnerable~~<br> Most Vulnerable<br>~~ dastres)~~|~~Qar~~<br>~~t Vulnerable~~<br>~~ Most Vulnerable~~<br> Most Vulnerable<br>~~ dastres)~~|~~Qar~~<br>~~t Vulnerable~~<br>~~ Most Vulnerable~~<br> Most Vulnerable<br>~~ dastres)~~|~~Qar~~<br>~~t Vulnerable~~<br>~~ Most Vulnerable~~<br> Most Vulnerable<br>~~ dastres)~~|~~Qar~~<br>~~t Vulnerable~~<br>~~ Most Vulnerable~~<br> Most Vulnerable<br>~~ dastres)~~|~~Qar~~<br>~~t Vulnerable~~<br>~~ Most Vulnerable~~<br> Most Vulnerable<br>~~ dastres)~~|~~Qar~~<br>~~t Vulnerable~~<br>~~ Most Vulnerable~~<br> Most Vulnerable<br>~~ dastres)~~|~~Qar~~<br>~~t Vulnerable~~<br>~~ Most Vulnerable~~<br> Most Vulnerable<br>~~ dastres)~~|~~Qar~~<br>~~t Vulnerable~~<br>~~ Most Vulnerable~~<br> Most Vulnerable<br>~~ dastres)~~|~~Qar~~<br>~~t Vulnerable~~<br>~~ Most Vulnerable~~<br> Most Vulnerable<br>~~ dastres)~~|~~Qar~~<br>~~t Vulnerable~~<br>~~ Most Vulnerable~~<br> Most Vulnerable<br>~~ dastres)~~|\n|~~ Most Vulnerable~~|||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||\n|~~ Most Vulnerable~~|||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||\n|r cities|||||~~So~~|~~So~~|~~So~~|~~So~~|~~So~~|~~So~~|~~So~~|~~So~~|~~So~~|~~So~~|\n||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||\n\n\n#### **HUMANITARIAN ACTORS**\n\n\n\nZahle\n\n\nWest Bekaa\n\n\nRachaya\n\n\nKey contacts\n\n\n|13 10 19 4 9 6 4 9 11 810 5|Col2|Col3|Col4|Col5|Col6|Col7|Col8|Col9|\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n|9|7|11|5|6|4|4|2|7<br>5<br>4|\n|4|4|7|2|3|2|1|2|2<br>1<br>1|\n\n\n\n**UNHCR** Maeve Murphy, murphym@unhcr.org **UNDP** George Akl, george.akl@undp.org\n**Ministery of Social Affairs (MoSA)** Hussein Salemm, hussein.salemm@hotmail.com\n\n\n**Bekaa Governor** Mr. Antoine Sleiman\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n**53 UN Agencies and NGOs operating in Bekaa**\n\n\nABAAD, ACF, AJEM Lebanon, AMEL, Arab Puppet Theatre, AVSI, Beyond, CARE,\nCLMC Lebanon, DRC, EPL, FAO, HabitatForHumanity, HI, Himaya, Humedica,\nHWA, IA, IMC, Intersos, IOCC Lebanon, IOM, IQRAA, IR Lebanon, IRC, IRW, ISAD,\nKAFA, Lebanese Red Cross, MAP-UK, MDM, MEDAIR, Medical Teams\nInternational, Mercy Corps, MoSA, MS Lebanon, MSL Lebanon, NRC, OXFAM, RI,\nSCI, SFCG, UNDP, UNFPA, UNHCR, UNIDO, UNRWA, URDA, Welfare Association,\nWHO, WVI\n\n\n\n**Disclaimer:** The boundaries and names shown on this map do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations.\n**Data Source:** Lebanese Population - Central Administration of Statistics (CAS) year 2002 dataset,   Poverty data: CAS, UNDP and MoSA Living Conditions and Household Budget Survey 2004-5,\nSyrian Refugee Population - UNHCR as of 30/06/2015, Humanitarian Intervention Data - Activity Info as of 30/06/2015, Palestinian Refugee Population- UNRWA, Lebanese Returnees data IOM as of 30/06/2015\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/f4a30221-b7b3-3f14-9ee0-6447917679b8/07062015__BekaaGovernorateProfile.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_8/raw/doc_8_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,73 @@
+[
+  {
+    "input_text": "## Lebanon North Governorate Profile (June 2015)\n\n#### **GENERAL OVERVIEW**\n\nNorth Lebanon, which previously constituted one governorate with seven districts, was split into two governorates in 2014: Tripoli\nand five surrounding districts (T5) maintained the denomination of North Governorate, while the district of Akkar became a governorate by itself. Tripoli Governorate is composed of six districts; Tripoli, El Koura, El Batroun, Bcharre, Zgharta, and El Minnie-Dennie.\nIt has a mixed confessional population of Sunnis, Alawites, and Christians. Tripoli is the capital of the north Governorate and the\nsecond largest city in the country. Inter-agency coordination and sector coordination meetings for the North take place in Tripoli.\n\n\n#### **POPULATION OVERVIEW**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#### **SOCIO ECONOMIC OVERVIEW**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#### **CHANGES IN CONTEXT JANUARY TO JUNE**\n\nAlthough a double-PBIED attack on 10 January threatened to trigger a resumption of armed conflict in Tripoli, this reporting period\nprovided further evidence that the implementation of the security plan has continued to successfully limit organized armed activity\nbetween Jabal Mohsen and Bab Tabbaneh. The security plan has been in effect in Tripoli since 1 April 2014 to prevent the resurgence\nof armed clashes between the Beb El Tebbeneh (Sunnis) and Jabal Mohsen (Alawites) communities. These are historically divided\nalong sectarian lines and political affiliation against and pro the Syrian regime.\n\n\nSince its implementation, the security plan has been challenged by some sporadic incidents including clashes among groups, targeted actions against some individuals and confrontation. Meanwhile search operations continue resulting in the arrest of 919 individuals residing in various locations in the North allegedly due to individuals overstating their visa or in some instances crime related\nactivities/ suspicions. While Syrians, Lebanese and Palestinians are temporarily arrested, the majority is released after a few hours of\nverification while other are detained for longer periods for investigations purposes. Also, 299 individuals were arrested on terrorism\nrelated activities/ suspicions.\n\n\nCrime continued at the same rates and was not affected by the implementation of the security plan while an increase in civil unrest\nsuch as demonstrations, sit-ins and roadblocks were noted during the reporting period. Other reported incidents included road\nblockages caused by snow and armed interpersonal and interfamily disputes.\n\n\nThe number of people in need in the North has remained stable since the introduction of new registration procedures.\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/c0c7b636-3eff-3af1-b069-e2f1a579a7a4/08072015_NorthGovernorateProfile.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        0
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  {
+    "input_text": "#### **HUMANITARIAN AND STABLIZATION TRENDS**\n\nAt the onset of the Syrian emergency, refugee started fleeing neighboring Syria through Lebanon\u2019s northern borders, settling first\nalong the border in Wadi Khaled, where relief efforts were initially focused. However, many continued further south to arrive in Tripoli\nfrom where they often dispersed to its five adjacent districts, with a total Lebanese population of over 550,000 persons.\n\n\nAs of late May, Syrian refugees were spread in over 289 villages and lived mainly in very challenging urban and semi-urban contexts.\nApproximately 81 per cent of them are living in rented accommodation; however, refugees who are unable to cover the high rents\nresort to living in substandard accommodation including non-residential dwellings such as garages and unfinished buildings.\nPartners are working to rehabilitate these to improve the standard of living. There are 16 fewer informal settlements with 4,339 less\npeople living in them compared to December 2014.\n\n\nAn outreach system through Community Development Centers (CDCs), Social Development Centers (SDCs) and Refugee Outreach\nVolunteers (ROVs) is in place to provide support and identify vulnerable refugees with specific needs and refer them to existing\nservices. Access to healthcare facilities remains a challenge with only 8 public hospitals which are supported \u2013 with limited bed\ncapacity- and 5 primary health care centers in the governorate, in addition to the high costs of secondary health care.\n\n\nThe MRR (Map of Risks and Resources) is piloted in Minieh and Dedde municipalities as a coordination tool among all actors to link the\nrisks and needs of the community with the actual and planned interventions. The outcome of the exercise was presented to mayor of\nMinieh and a dedicated coordination body was set-up to strengthen the coordination among partners and with the municipality. This\nexercise is still on-going.\n\n\nA study conducted with northern citizens, including a majority of Lebanese, reported a continuous increase of positive relations\n\n\n|Col1|Col2|Col3|Col4|Col5|Col6|Col7|Col8|Col9|\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n|<br>|<br>|<br>|<br>|<br>|<br>|<br>|<br>|<br>|\n|~~  re still the~~||~~     a~~|~~     jor~~|~~     ity~~||~~      i~~||~~       6~~|\n|~~  late Octo~~|~~   e~~|~~   r~~|~~    cla~~|~~    sh~~|~~    s~~|||~~     th~~|\n|<br>|<br>|<br>|<br>|<br>|<br>|<br>|<br>|<br>|\n|delivery b|y|t|e|ag|n|ci|e|s.|\n||||||||||\n||||||||||\n|~~  eeds rem~~|~~   i~~||~~    er~~|~~    y~~|~~     i~~|~~     h~~||~~      s~~|\n|~~  institutio~~||~~ a~~|~~ re~~|~~  co~~|~~  n~~|~~  i~~||~~  re~~|\n|~~  institutio~~|||||||||\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|9|6|12|2|7 3|3 2 7|8 6|2|\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n|8|4|11|1|5<br>5|3<br>6<br>3|8|4|\n|6|3|6|2|5<br>1|3<br>4<br>3|1|3|\n|5|3|3|1|6<br>1|2<br>1<br>3|8<br>0|3|\n|4|4|5|1|5<br>2<br>|2<br>1<br>3|4|4|\n|2|2|1|0|2<br>0|0<br>0<br>2|0|1|\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n**Disclaimer:** The boundaries and names shown on this map do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations.\n**Data Source:** Lebanese Population - Central Administration of Statistics (CAS) year 2002 dataset,   Poverty data: CAS, UNDP and MoSA Living Conditions and Household Budget Survey 2004-5,\nSyrian Refugee Population - UNHCR as of 30/05/2015, Humanitarian Intervention Data - Activity Info, Palestinian Refugee Population- UNRWA\n\n\n",
+    "datasets": [
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "study",
+          "confidence": 0.9275565147399902,
+          "start": 338,
+          "end": 339
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "northern citizens",
+          "confidence": 0.8750783801078796,
+          "start": 341,
+          "end": 343
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "supporting"
+      },
+      {
+        "dataset_name": {
+          "text": "Syrian Refugee Population - UNHCR",
+          "confidence": 0.5749185681343079,
+          "start": 991,
+          "end": 996
+        },
+        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
+        "description": null,
+        "data_type": null,
+        "acronym": null,
+        "author": null,
+        "producer": null,
+        "geography": null,
+        "publication_year": null,
+        "reference_year": null,
+        "reference_population": {
+          "text": "Syrian Refugee Population",
+          "confidence": 0.6900168657302856,
+          "start": 991,
+          "end": 994
+        },
+        "is_used": "False",
+        "usage_context": "background"
+      }
+    ],
+    "document": {
+      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/c0c7b636-3eff-3af1-b069-e2f1a579a7a4/08072015_NorthGovernorateProfile.pdf",
+      "pages": [
+        1
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]