Volunteers Open Doors in Sudan Typically Closed to International Aid Groups

On April 15, 2023, fighting erupted in Sudan’s capital, Khartoum, between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and a paramilitary unit called the Rapid Support Forces (RSF). Since the start of this civil war, the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) estimates that more than 10.7 million people have been displaced. The World Food Program (WFP) estimates that over 25.6 million people are facing acute hunger.

Sudan is one of the largest countries in Africa. Due to its vast territory and the insecurity caused by the ongoing conflict, humanitarian responses have struggled to meet the population's basic needs. Access to humanitarian supplies is severely limited—with few entry points, ongoing violence, logistics constraints, and travel delays once inside the country. Additionally, humanitarian responders and facilities in Sudan are targeted from both sides of the conflict, greatly limiting the role of international aid within Sudan.

In the face of these challenges, a grassroots organization called the Emergency Response Rooms, or ERRs, emerged just weeks into the conflict. Aaron Stanley of the Wilson Center’s Africa Program spoke with Alsanosi Adam, an external communications coordinator for the Emergency Response Rooms of Sudan, to understand how a volunteer-based group is providing life-saving resources and support when many international organizations are unable to.

Aaron Stanley: The ERRs of Sudan are finding ways to provide support to local communities within some of the most difficult to reach areas of Sudan. What makes this possible?

Alsanosi Adam: The ERRs started in the first weeks after the beginning of the war. It started small, in just one area, and focused on mutual support and local solidarity. It has and continues to be volunteer-based, now with almost 10,000 volunteers. Through partnerships with local formal organizations and international non-governmental organizations (INGOs), we have been able to expand support to literally every part of the country. Because we are a coordinated network of community members, we do not have an access issue. We don’t have to go “there” because we are already “here.” We live and work in the areas that others have such difficulty reaching.

Our definition of access is totally different from that of an international organization or the United Nations. The UN often defines access based on where authorities tell them they can go. If they are told they can't use an access point, they stop and wait until they have permission. We don't have to look at access like that; we don't need permission in that way because people are already there. The warring parties don't grant us access like they do with international organizations.

Aaron Stanley: Coordinating and providing support to that large of a network seems like it could create many challenges. How are ERRs structured to support the volunteers and provide aid to those who need it most?

Alsanosi Adam: The response is from the community; the units organize themselves. Generally, each ERR assigns essential coordination roles such as program leaders, finance officials, and reporting officials. The volunteers lead the work at the local level. Then we provide connection and coordination between all the groups at the state level. This is particularly important in places like South Kordofan, North Darfur, and Khartoum, where there is heavy fighting or military presence. Our volunteers have access that others don’t. Providing coordination across the country is the Localization Coordination Council, or LCC, which is made up of about 16 national organization members, representatives from each state’s coordination committee, and INGO observers. The LCC also has technical committees such as communications, finances and reporting, and monitoring, evaluation, and learning. 

Our engagement works through cash transfers. The LCC secures support from a donor, then uses consultative mechanisms to decide how to share funds through cash transfers to the local, volunteer-led ERRs. The cash transfers then support food purchases, the operating of communal kitchens, and necessary medical supplies. Some ERRs also try to address malnutrition and early childhood education when possible. They are taking on development projects that are looking ahead to the end of the conflict.

Aaron Stanley: The ongoing fighting is causing a lot of challenges for humanitarian assistance. For example, the lack of access points and safe transportation corridors make it difficult to deliver food aid. What are some of the challenges that the ERRs struggle with the most?

Alsanosi Adam: Yes, the lack of food coming into the country is a real challenge; the lack of supply is making prices skyrocket. Every couple of months, the prices increase dramatically—and we don’t really have a solution for that. In the areas most under siege or with active front lines—like Khartoum, South Kordofan, and Darfur—we are seeing really high prices of staple foods like rice and lentils. That makes the amount of money we send to local ERRs less valuable.

If $5,000 previously sustained a local ERR for a month, it now only lasts 10 days—and there are real challenges on the ground because of the lack of food. Malnutrition is increasing, as are other health problems. ERR volunteers are having to make tough choices between purchasing more nutritious food that lasts three days, or less nutrient-rich food that allows them to eat for two weeks. They always pick eating for two weeks. Funding is the other challenge—and it has always been the challenge. We have access, we have the networks, we have people on the ground, but if we don’t have adequate funds to send them to buy supplies…

Of course there are security risks. It is a conflict zone—but ERRs understand these risks and take them into consideration—and have ways of mitigating them. But the biggest challenge we face is the lack of funding. We are thankful for funding from development agencies like USAID, and that is important. However, we still think at least 5% of all aid to Sudan should be going through mutual aid groups like the ERRs. It is well below that right now.

ERRs are effective because we are a grassroots community network. We are agile and responsive to local needs. The questions around funding can push an organization to register and look more like a traditional non-governmental organization (NGO). But there is a need for us to stay agile and “grassrooted.” All other things can be mitigated if we have the funding that helps people in need.

Aaron Stanley: In addition to access, a challenge for many international organizations working in active conflict is the concept of neutrality, ERRs are working in SAF and RSF controlled and contested areas. What do you think about neutrality?

Alsanosi Adam: We are not engaging with SAF or RSF at all. The communities are organizing the responses, so we don’t need to negotiate access like an international humanitarian worker. The community is organizing the food kitchens. The community is handing out medical supplies. We don’t need to neutrally negotiate access—we are already there.

Early on, RSF and SAF arrested some volunteers. They questioned them and asked them how they got the money and where they were getting supplies from—things like that. But then people were released and were able to continue providing mutual support for basic day-to-day community needs.

Aaron Stanley: Many of the recent international discussions have been focused on expanding humanitarian access and increasing the delivery of supplies. What do these negotiations mean for the ERRs and how do they impact your work?

Alsanosi Adam: We believe that all access points are important. They all need to be open and remain open to ensure supplies. We also believe the international community can do more to negotiate for an increase in access points and humanitarian corridors so that food can get to the people in hard-to-reach areas who deeply need it. The Geneva Agreement on access points is a good step in the right direction, but more needs to be done. The solution to the challenges we just discussed is more funding and more moving actual food to the communities. As more food gets in, we expect the prices to go down. Basic supply and demand. But we also need increased recognition of the work of the Emergency Response Rooms. We are part of the delivery chain but lack widespread recognition. There is a need to recognize the utility of mutual aid and community-supported initiatives beyond the times when it is difficult for INGOs to gain access. Right now, most of the INGOs we work with are doing so because they don’t have access to communities; it can’t be like that. ERRs are doing so many things and are built by the communities. They are running development projects, coming up with creative food production methods (like small in-home farms), and running community watch units. The Sudanese people have shown their resilience and looking ahead, there is a need to recognize this framework as an effective crisis response mechanism—and one that can better rebuild support post-war when that happens.

Aaron Stanley is a senior program associate for the Wilson Center’s Africa Program and Alsanosi Adam is an external communications coordinator for the Emergency Response Rooms of Sudan.

Cover photo: Young people walk along a street marked by destruction. A bloody power struggle has been raging in Sudan for more than 16 months, triggering a refugee crisis. Mudathir Hameed/picture-alliance/dpa/AP Images.