Shafak Organisation, with the support of IOM, conducted a Rapid Needs Assessment of 145 households (770 individuals) across Idleb (75.2%) and Hama (24.8%) governorates of Syria during late May and early June 2026. All surveyed households are returnees who recently re-established in areas classified at Severity Level 4 under the HNO. The assessment documents acute and overlapping vulnerabilities confirming the urgent need for Multi-Purpose Cash Assistance (MPCA).

The RNA covered 145 returnee households across 2 governorates, 3 districts, 5 sub-districts, and 15 communities. Idleb accounted for 75.2% of the sample (109 HH) and Hama 24.8% (36 HH). Data was collected between 24 May and 1 June 2026.

The average household size is 5.31 members (770 individuals across 145 HH). Households are large, with 26.2% having 7 or more members — indicating high dependency ratios. 83.4% of households are headed by married individuals; 9.7% are widow-headed — a significant protection vulnerability. Civil documentation coverage is strong at 96.6%, though 3.4% (5 HH) lack valid ID documents, creating a protection gap requiring referral.

Vulnerability is widespread and often overlapping. 37.9% of households include pregnant or lactating women, 31% have chronically ill members, and 29% include elderly persons (60+). Given multi-select survey methodology, many households carry two or more vulnerability categories simultaneously — making the population among the most at-risk in the region.

All 145 surveyed households are returnees. Households were displaced an average of 2.55 times over the past 5 years (median: 3 times, range: 0–5), with first displacements recorded as early as 2012. The majority returned to their areas of origin between late 2024 and mid-2025, primarily from displacement camps in northern Syria including Atma, Killi, Qah, Sarmada, and Afrin. Returns were predominantly driven by improved security conditions and family reunification motives — a fragile but protective return dynamic.

The shelter situation among returnee households is acute. 53.1% of properties require significant rehabilitation and 8.3% are completely destroyed — meaning 61.4% of assessed households returned to non-habitable or barely habitable structures. Only 2.8% of properties were found intact. Correspondingly, 49.7% of households currently live in abandoned or unfinished buildings, reflecting the absence of safe housing options in areas of return.

Livelihoods among returnee households are overwhelmingly informal and precarious. 53.8% engage in temporary employment and 31% in seasonal work; only 5.5% hold permanent employment. 0% of households received cash assistance in the preceding 6 months, while 51.7% depend on agriculture and 46.9% on day-to-day seasonal labour — income streams highly sensitive to seasonal volatility and weather shocks.

The severity of food insecurity is starkly evidenced by near-universal adoption of negative coping strategies. 97.2% of households rely on cheaper or less preferred foods — the most common reduced coping strategy indicator (rCSI) — and 61.4% reduce the number of meals per day. Expenditure is dominated by food (100% of HH spend on food) and debt relief (66.9%), confirming a cycle of indebtedness directly linked to income shortfalls.

Household preferences are unambiguous: 100% of all 145 surveyed households identified cash support as their primary need, with 99.3% specifying direct cash sums as the preferred delivery mechanism. This universal cash preference — combined with functional local markets confirmed by prior market assessments — strongly validates MPCA as the most appropriate and demand-driven response modality. Only 2.8% (4 households) received any food basket assistance in the 3 months prior to the survey.