‍ Somalia & Somaliland

July 2025 Snapshot Report

‍

‍To download this document click here.

‍

‍Talk to Loop, thanks to its partnership with RAAGSAN, is available in Somalia/Somaliland via a voice channel at toll-free number 2023 and supports feedback in Maay, Maxatiri, Benadiri Merka, Bujuuni and Barawani Chimini. To learn more, visit our website and our platform and statistics page.

‍

In July 2025, Loop processed and published ⬇️ 424 pieces of open feedback; a 12% decrease from June (537) and May (541). All feedback was received via the Voice channel. This reduction is in large part due to network disruptions affecting the quality of recordings. This is being raised with relevant mobile networks to identify a solution.

‍

Language use:

‍

The majority of feedback was recorded in⬆️Maxatiri (87%) then ⬇️Maay (13%). While we saw some engagement in Barawani Chimini in previous months, no feedback was published in this or other languages available for communities on Loop’s platform this month. 

 _{It is possible that people recorded feedback in other dialects/languages yet was not published as open feedback for breaching community guidelines, being inaudible or being referred for sensitive feedback.} 

‍

Demographic information:

‍

• ⬆️43% of users in the reporting period are Female. (41% in June)
• ⏸️3% of feedback was shared by Children and Adolescents (14-17) (3% in June)
• ⬆️3% was shared by Elderly (60+). (2% in June)
• ⬇️Feedback from people living with disabilities (PLWD) accounted for 1% (3% in June); one identified as coming from a minority community, too.

• ⬆️0.7% of feedback came from people who are carers for PLWD (0.5% in June) 

‍

If you work for an organisation focusing on communities and people living with a disability in Somalia, please contact us so we can work together to raise their voices more consistently.

‍

• ⏸️2 persons identified as belonging to minority communities (2 in June) used Loop:

‍

‍

‍

Feedback came from different regions across all of Somalia and Somaliland, with a majority coming from Banaadir, Bay, Lower Shabelle and Sanaag. 

However, in ⬆️60% of feedback, people opted not to mention their locations (54% in June). 

‍

⬆️Requests for Assistance (94%) continue to dominate community feedback (89% in June). Other feedback types are:

‍

• ⬇️requests for information (3%) (5% in June) majority being about Loop’s services
• ⬆️thanks (5%) (3% in June)
• ⬇️suggestions/opinions (0.2%) (2% in June), and 
• ⏸️concerns (2%) (2% in June).

‍

‍

Requests for assistance:

‍

Request for information:

‍

Concerns:

 _{In Q2, Loop’s team revised the platform’s thematic areas to align them with the IASC Standards for Collective Feedback Mechanisms. The revision is now complete and the update to the platform is in the final stages. Please visit our platform and use the filters to learn more. The new thematics will be reflected in the upcoming reporting periods.}

‍

 _{This piece of feedback has been tagged with a new sub-thematic tag, "fairness of aid distribution," under the broader theme of "Community feedback on Aid effectiveness." This addition marks an important update to the three main domains that Loop reports on.}

‍

Thanks:

‍

What did community members talk about?

‍

• ⬆️ 84% of all feedback mentioned aid access issues, with most respondents stating they had registered but had not received any updates or support, or that "no organisations operate in our area". These reports came predominantly from unknown locations (57%), as well as Banaadir (7%) and Lower Shabelle (4%).
• ⬆️ 20% of respondents cited food insecurity and hunger, often describing a lack of meals, children sleeping hungry, and no food distributions. The majority came from unidentified regions (50%), but also from Banaadir (9%) and Middle Shabelle (5%), reflecting hunger across both settled and displaced populations.
• ⬇️ 11% reported health-related issues, often mentioning lack of access to clinics, chronic illnesses, or unmet medical needs, particularly among disabled people and pregnant women. These reports were concentrated in Unknown (52%), Banaadir (9%), and Sool (7%).
• ⬇️ 6% discussed drought impacts, especially loss of crops and dry wells. The worst-affected areas were Unknown (32%), followed by Sanaag (12%) and Lower Shabelle (9%), highlighting environmental stress in both central and southern Somalia.
• ⬇️ 5% came from youth requesting support, such as vocational training, education assistance, or school fees, particularly from Unknown regions (52%), Banaadir (10%), and Bay (7%).
• ⬇️ 4% of feedback highlighted shelter concerns, often due to flood-damaged tents or uninhabitable conditions in IDP sites.
• ⬇️ 3% mentioned displacement, mostly due to conflict or floods, with most being displaced from Lower Shabelle or  being displaced to Banaadir.
• ⬇️ 1% of feedback referenced severe water shortages, mainly linked to drought conditions in rural areas.
• ⬇️ <1% cited debt problems, often from medical bills or borrowing to buy food.

‍

What did community members request?

‍

• ⬇️13% requested urgent food assistance, with the most pressing requests coming from unknown locations (43% of food requests), Banaadir (8%), and Galgaduud (4%). Many described going days without meals or skipping meals due to unaffordability.
• ⬇️13% asked for financial support, including help with daily household needs, health bills, and restarting small businesses. Requests were most frequent in unknown areas (75%), followed by Galgaduud and Sool (each 6%).
• ⬆️11% sought job opportunities, especially in urban centres like Banaadir (31% of job requests) and Sanaag (8%). Requests included skilled laborers needing tools and youth seeking apprenticeships or start-up capital.
• ⬆️10% requested aid organisations to resume paused programmes or expand into uncovered areas. The majority came from unknown regions (55%), with others from Bay (12%) and Galgaduud (7%).
• ⬇️9% requested healthcare, particularly for chronic illness, maternal care, and disability-related issues. These requests came primarily from unknown regions (67%), Banaadir (13%), and Sool (11%).
• ⬇️9% needed livelihood support, including seeds, tools, livestock, and farming aid, often tied to recent losses from drought or flooding.
• ⬇️6% sought access to clean water, including borehole repairs, storage tanks, and water delivery.
• ⬇️3% requested shelter items, such as tents, tarpaulins, or materials to repair damaged homes, especially following floods.
• ⬇️3% asked for education support, including school fee coverage and vocational training, particularly for youth in urban centres.

‍

⬆️48% (45% in June) of feedback has been replied to by organisations including Loop. 

‍

On organisations’ replies, we have found that:

‍

• The highest number of replies was received from the Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC), followed by Save Somali Women and Children (SSWC), Gargar Relief and Development Organization (GREDO), and others such as Action Against Hunger (ACF), KAALO Aid, Concern Worldwide, and Mandhere Relief and Development Organization (MARDO).
• ⬆️36% (28% in June) responded that they do not currently have an ongoing project in the mentioned area. 
• ⬇️18% (72% in June) of the replies indicated that the organisation had an active project in place to support the community member’s request. The remaining 46% did not specify the status of any relevant project. 
• Among the organisations that confirmed available support, common guidance included advising community members to contact the organisation via its shortcode for further assistance or visit the organisation’s local office. Others did not give any guidance.

‍

Sensitive Reports

‍

Loop handled ⏸️104 sensitive reports this month, a number that remained nearly the same as in June, with only a slight decrease from 106. 

‍

What type of sensitive reports were submitted?

‍

Protection-related issues continued to dominate this month, reflecting the ongoing trend observed since the second quarter and consistently over the past three months, where such concerns have surpassed fraud and service-related complaints.

‍

• ⬇️ 55 of sensitive reports (53%) were related to Protection (including Gender-Based Violence, Child Protection, General Protection, MHPSS, and HLP). While this is a decrease from 73 reports in June, Protection remains the most reported category.
• GBV continues to dominate the types of protection reports submitted to Loop, with ⬆️ 43 GBV reports this month. This reflects a steady upward trend observed since April (9), May (29), and June (39).
• ⬆️ 11 of the sensitive reports concerned fraud and corruption (including aid diversion), doubling from 6 reports in June and remaining consistent with previous months (11 in April and 13 in May).
• ⏸️1 report concerned other types of misconduct, in line with trends from previous months, which consistently range between one and two such cases.
• ⬆️ 37 service-level concerns were received, comprising 22 complaints and 14 non-sensitive requests. This is an increase from last month’s 26 reports, which included 9 complaints and 17 requests.
• ⬇️ No reports related to Sexual Exploitation and Abuse (SEA) were received this month, marking a decrease compared to the 4 reports recorded during Q2. The reports received in May and June were likely influenced by the PSEA network’s radio announcements, which ended in June. No such announcements were made in July, which may have contributed to the drop in reporting. 

‍

Who is reporting sensitive reports?

‍

• ⬆️ 98% of reports were submitted by individuals on their own behalf, while the remaining ⬇️ 2% were submitted by community members, parents/relatives or staff from organisations/institutions. This marks an increase from 90% in June. This change is mainly explained by a notable decrease in reports concerning children and adolescents submitted by caregivers and relatives.
• Reports submitted by females continued to rise this month, with ⬆️ 74 sensitive reports submitted by women and girls, representing 71% of all sensitive reports. In comparison, 30 reports (29%) were submitted by men and boys. This marks a steady month-on-month increase in reporting by females since April and appears closely linked to the continued rise in GBV reports.
  
  • This month, 95% of all protection-related reports were submitted by women and girls, an important increase from 71% in May and 88% in June.
  • Reports related to corruption, fraud, and service-level complaints were predominantly submitted by male authors, with a ⬇️ 65% of these reports coming from male authors, showing a slight decrease from 68% in May and 73% in June.
• In terms of age, this month marked a sharp decrease in sensitive reports concerning children and adolescents, falling from 17% in May and 20% in June to just ⬇️ 9% in July. 
• Similar to previous months, reports related to older individuals (aged 60+) remained consistently low and even decreased compared to previous months from 3% to ⬇️ 2%, highlighting a persistent  underrepresentation of the elderly in sensitive reporting. Adults aged 18 to 59 continued to dominate the submissions, accounting for ⬆️ 68% of sensitive reports. Within this group, the distribution was fairly balanced between younger adults (18–29) and those aged 30–59.

‍

Are minority groups submitting reports?

‍

• ⬇️ 10 authors self-identified as belonging to minority groups or clans, mainly from sub-clans of the Bantu, notable Eyle, Shiidle, Kaboole, Mushunguli: 
  
  • Among them, five raised concerns related to gender-based violence, including domestic violence and sexual violence. 
  • One author, the chairman of an IDP camp, reported neglect in the provision of services to his community, which he attributed to perceived minority-based discrimination. He also described instances of verbal discrimination by gatekeepers when seeking support from organisations, and raised concerns about the potentially unfair prioritisation of other camps over his, despite similar levels of need. The report was referred to the CCCM Cluster for further assessment regarding the reported service gaps in the camp.

Are people living with disabilities submitting reports?

‍

• Reports submitted by persons with disabilities saw a significant decrease this month, dropping from 6 reports in June to just ⬇️2 in July. This continued low reporting highlights the persistent underrepresentation of persons with disabilities in sensitive feedback. 
• The types of disabilities that were reported included physical and visual disabilities. 

‍

From which regions were sensitive reports received?

‍

This month, sensitive reports were received from across ⏸️ 14 regions in Somalia and Somaliland, showing continued national coverage.

‍

• Banadir remains the highest reporting area for sensitive feedback with ⬆️ 40 reports, accounting for nearly 38% of the total. Notably, 83% of all the reports coming from the Banadir region were related to GBV, primarily originating from the Kahda, Garasbaley, and Daynille districts. 
• Gedo remained the second-highest reporting region this month with ⬇️7 reports, maintaining a similar trend to the previous month, despite a slight decrease compared to June.
• A notable increase of sensitive reports was observed in Middle Shabelle (7) and Lower Juba (5) this month.
• No sensitive reports were received from Awdal, Bakool, Nugal, or Middle Juba this month, despite some of these regions being represented in the previous quarter. Awdal, Nugaal, and Middle Juba, in particular, continue to show consistently low levels of sensitive reporting over time.

‍

What is the current status of the sensitive reports?

‍

• A total of 104 new cases were opened during July. Of these, 50 cases were closed within the same month, while 54 cases remain open and are currently under follow-up.

• In addition, 76 cases opened in previous reporting periods were closed in July, bringing the total number of cases closed during the month to 126.
• Of the total number of 126 cases closed in July:
  
  • 50% were successfully resolved, with follow-up actions such as signposting or referral to appropriate services, completed to the satisfaction of the author or based on agreed outcomes. 
  • The rate of successful case closures has notably increased, largely due to improved signposting for individuals who do not require or do not consent to further referral.
  • The remaining 50% were closed due to the authors being unreachable, no actionable solution being possible, or the report being withdrawn. Withdrawals often occurred when individuals were testing the number or when initial concerns were later clarified as general requests rather than protection-related issues. In cases where no actionable solution was possible, this was primarily due to survivors declining referral to protection services or, in some instances, Loop discontinuing contact based on risk assessments, when continued contact was deemed to pose a risk to the author.

‍

How many referrals were made this month?

‍

• ⬆️ 34 sensitive reports were referred this month, with 27 referrals for assistance, including 6 referral for immediate assistance, and 7 related to corruption, fraud, and service-level complaints. This marks a continued upward trend from 30 referrals in June and 28 in May.
• ⏸️  91% of all referrals submitted this month were acknowledged, including ⬆️ 93% of assistance-related referrals (25 out of 27) and ⬆️ 86% of allegation-related referrals (6 out of 7). While the overall response rate remains relatively strong, several responses are still pending despite follow-up reminders sent to the receiving organisations. In the case of protection-related referrals, acknowledgements are generally timely; however, confirmation on whether services were provided often takes longer. This highlights the need for improved responsiveness and follow-through from partner agencies.
• Of the 27 protection referrals made this month, 15 survivors have received services. In 3 cases, support was offered by the receiving organisations, but the survivors either declined the assistance or did not attend the scheduled appointments. One referral was declined as the organisation was not operational in the survivor’s geographical area; a new referral has since been initiated. The remaining eight referrals are still pending updates, primarily due to challenges in reaching the survivors or the complexity of the cases, which require additional time for assessment and identification of appropriate services.
• All six referrals for immediate assistance, including 5 rape cases, were submitted within 24 hours, and in all instances, survivors received the required support in less than 48 hours, demonstrating effective coordination and prioritisation of urgent needs. 

‍

Which types of organizations received referrals, and how responsive were they?

‍

• National NGOs: 12 referrals – ⬇️83% response rate (10 acknowledged). National NGOs continue to show strong engagement with referrals, despite a decrease compared to previous months. 
• International NGOs: 18 referrals – ⬆️ 100% response rate (18 acknowledged). International NGOs showed a strong response rate this month, increasing acknowledgment rate compared to previous months.
• UN Agencies: 4 referrals – ⬆️ 75% response rate (3 acknowledged). There is a small increase in acknowledgement from UN agencies seen this month. 
• ⏸️ Government Entities: No referrals were made to governmental actors this month.

‍

‍

What are the key trends in sensitive feedback this month? 

‍

As in previous months, GBV reporting continued to rise - from 9 cases in April to 43 in July - with 77% of reports coming from Mogadishu, particularly Khada district which alone accounted for 23 cases. 

‍

Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) remains the most commonly reported form of GBV in the city. Survivor accounts point to a range of contributing factors, including displacement, overcrowded informal settlements, economic hardship, shifting power dynamics (e.g women earning a small income), household tensions linked to resource strain, violent behaviour, and substance abuse.

‍

Some narratives suggest that disclosures are shaped not only by rising violence but also by the urgency of unmet needs. In several cases, survivors declined specialized GBV services or psychosocial support, expressing a preference for financial or material aid. For some, disclosure may be a strategy to access such support, or a reflection of the belief that cash is a more immediate and tangible need. Inconsistent practices among service providers around cash support may also be fuelling confusion and shaping expectations.

‍

This evolving landscape calls for urgent action, including updated, district-level service mapping to clarify referral pathways and deeper analysis of Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) dynamics and survivor coping strategies in Mogadishu. Loop has already shared the findings and recommendations from its quarterly report and delivered a presentation during the last GBV AoR meeting, where both coordinators and members discussed the need for further assessments from GBV actors and strengthened support.

‍

‍