This interview will feature Roberto Pătrășcoiu, CEO of Habitat for Humanity Romania. He talked to us about the challenges brought about by the humanitarian crisis, opportunities, and what could have worked better.
Please tell us about your role(s) during the humanitarian crisis.
My roles in the refugee crisis have been diverse in this two-year period. I started two years ago by being a Project Manager for the first two months after the beginning of the conflict, after which I hired a designated project manager. Then I was a supervisor at the project level, and now I deal with relations at the governmental and institutional level.
Which were the most difficult moments?
By far, the most difficult period was the first month, given the chaos that came with the start of the conflict and the uncertainty we faced. Also, emotionally, it was very difficult because we did not know what to do and how to do what needed to be done. It was a completely new situation. And from the point of view of work intensity, it was difficult. My colleagues and I also worked 16-20 hours a day. All three stages of the crisis, namely the emergency stage, then a transitional stage of about 6 months, and finally the third stage [integration] were difficult, but in different ways.
Which were the most meaningful moments?
Personally, each yes that I received from each sponsor was of great significance. The fact that we raised a very large amount of money from donations was also an exciting and important part for us. All the thank you messages we received from the refugees we helped and their families are among the pleasant and meaningful moments. When I realized the scope of the crisis and the fact that we can only be relevant when we are all together, the fact that I received a positive response also represented a beautiful and emotional moment.
Please tell us about your organization and how it contributes to addressing the humanitarian crisis.
Habitat for Humanity is a global organization active in 70 countries. In Romania, it has been present since 1996. Habitat for Humanity supports vulnerable people with housing. During the crisis, we were active on three levels: in the first stage, we offered emergency housing (we helped people who were in transit in Romania), then we offered transitional housing (for refugees who stayed 3-6 months in Romania), and in the last stage, we offered permanent housing (for those who settled in Romania).
What worked well in regard to the (Romanian/regional) efforts to address the humanitarian crisis?
In general, Romania managed this crisis well. Beneath this good, however, are many shades of gray. The first to intervene were the citizens and not the Romanian state, which began to be visible only a few weeks after the beginning of the conflict. This was somewhat to be expected, given the novelty of the situation. One thing that the Romanian authorities did well was to coagulate all efforts, both from the point of view of institutional and NGO involvement, as well as from the citizens’ side. Thus, the approach was an integrated one.
What could have worked better?
The refugee integration area was the weak point of the Romanian authorities. The crisis management area worked well, but the integration area, on all levels, was lacking. This actually showed how the authorities and institutions work and how the Romanian state and Romanian institutions are prepared to manage problems other than those of their own citizens. Also, the language barrier represented a difficulty in the integration of refugees.
What are you focusing on in your work at the moment?
I am present in different working groups. In the beginning, the government showed a work plan, within which the recommendations coming from us, Habitat for Humanity, were taken into account.
An important part of my activity consists of participating in events with the aim of influencing public opinion regarding the situation of refugees, where we participate alongside embassies and actors from the Romanian society.
Ensuring internal resources is also among my duties – I make sure that the project team can implement these projects.
What needs do you see at the moment that could be addressed better?
The housing area. The state could have done more than that 50-20 scheme and the fact that it gave this money to the owners was not a calculated decision. They could create a hybrid scheme of providing flats alongside a subsidy that would go towards the refugees. Unfortunately, the Romanian state, apart from subsidies, did not care much about the condition of the refugees.
Any other thoughts and suggestions?
At the moment, we have approximately 80,000 refugees in Romania who have not been integrated. During July-August of this year, all the big NGOs, including us, will end their support schemes. When we leave, we do not know if the Romanian state will still be concerned about the situation of the refugees who will remain in Romania, given that this crisis is no longer on the priority list as it was two years ago.
Interview by Teodora Anca
Photo by Orna Alex
Region: Central and Eastern Europe
Country/(ies): Ukraine, Romania
Topics: Humanitarian Aid, Humanitarian Crisis, Policy Work, Humanitarian Response
