Links between needs assessment and decisions in food crisis responses

Summary of published review1

Workers wade into the Sea to collect WFP food at the southern Somali port of Merka

A recently completed study under the WFP Strengthening Emergency Needs Assessment Capacity (SENAC) project explores the links and disconnects between needs assessment and decision-making, in WFP and its partners, in response to food crises. The study is based on four in-depth case studies conducted in the latter half of 2006 (Sudan - principally the Darfur crisis, Pakistan - the 2005 Kashmir earthquake, Somalia and southern Africa - principally Malawi). Each study involved travel to the regions in question and interviews with key actors in WFP and other bodies. In addition, a number of other 'reference' cases were reviewed through documentation and interviews. The report suggests that the function of needs assessment in relation to decisionmaking is three-fold: to inform internal decisions about response throughout the life of a programme, to influence others' response decisions, and to justify response decisions and appeals for funds.

Informing internal decisions

The study found that in most of the cases reviewed, WFPs own initial decisions about response were under-pinned by adequate information and analysis from assessments, whether conducted by WFP itself or through a collaborative process. Although WFP assessment practice has, in some respects, embraced a wider food security perspective, it is often still geared around one set of response questions, i.e. how much food aid is required and by whom? The rationale for the proposed food aid strategy is not always clear from the analysis of context in assessment reports and is rarely articulated against a wider range of potential response options. Furthermore, progress in informing initial programming decisions is not yet matched by an ability to make informed decisions throughout the life of a programme. The study recommends that WFP adopt an information strategy for all major responses and that this be budgeted explicitly. Overall, the study team concluded that there is a relative under-investment in the information and evidence base to support response decisions, particularly in monitoring and re-assessment. This is particularly evident in protracted crisis response through Protracted Relief and Recovery Operations (PRROs).

Different information requirements were identified in relation to four types of crisis: rapid onset, slow onset, chronic insecurity/ displacement and transition/recovery. What is good assessment practice depends on the context, nature of the crisis, and timeframe for decision-making. The rapid onset cases considered showed the need to agree simple methods for determining initial resource requirements, clearly articulated working assumptions, and the necessity of re-checking those assumptions as situations develop. The slow onset cases showed the importance of agreed triggers for action, based on leading risk indicators or defined thresholds, for effective prevention. The conflict and displacement cases had all these plus other requirements, including ways of assessing unmet need in currently inaccessible areas, ways of understanding the links between food insecurity and exposure to violence, and more robust methods for calculating the needs of dispersed as well as camp populations. The transitional contexts showed the need to invest more in mechanisms (including surveillance) to determine when a programme should change course or wind up.

According to the study, some of the data and analysis currently produced are simply not relevant to the needs of decision-makers, or are not presented in ways that show their relevance. Some important types of information are often not available - such as people's relative dependence on food aid or other assistance, and how this may change over time and space. On the other hand, a number of good new tools (including market analysis) were found to be in use, even though the results did not always appear to inform response decisions. The study found a preponderance of quantitative over qualitative methods of analysis and suggests that a better balance needs to be found between them, particularly in livelihood related assessment.

The study team felt that more use could be made of external (local and international) as well as in-house expertise in conducting situational analysis. This could include sociological and anthropological perspectives in addition to more traditional food security approaches. Good needs assessment - particularly in conflictrelated situations - is often dependent on the quality of political and social analysis, as much as on anthropometric or economic analysis.

Another finding was that analysis from the existing information and analysis mechanisms - early warning, Vulnerability Analysis and Mapping (VAM), Emergency Needs Assessment (ENA), food security monitoring, etc., is not well integrated. In particular, the relationship between VAM analysis and ENA in informing crisis response decisions is often unclear and demands further attention.

Too little attention is given to feedback of information from the operational level, and the need to build in better 'feedback loops' is essential to more responsive programming. At times, the pressure to implement an agreed programme according to plan - especially where complex logistical processes have been established - appears to militate against adaptive programming as needs change or as analysis is refined in the light of local realities.

Influencing external decisions

The link with external decisions was relatively weak. In some cases, decisions - particularly donor funding decisions - clearly precede any formal needs analysis. Many are based on projections of future need, particularly in the case of protracted crises, although the basis for these projections is not always clear.

Donor representatives often claimed that WFP does not help them prioritise between contexts, pointing to the need for a common reference standard and more explicit WFP judgements on relative priorities.

Recent efforts to strengthen needs assessment in WFP have had a significant effect in building credibility. However, trust in WFP assessment reports is clearly still an issue. Donors expressed varying degrees of scepticism, and some felt that there was a tension between the credibility of WFP's assessments and the messages it put out through the media. Regarding the latter, there was a perceived tendency to talk up the scale or severity of a situation and WFP's own role, which was felt to be at odds with objective needs analysis. These credibility barriers appear to be overcome when a robust but constructive relationship exists between donor representatives and WFP country office staff, such that donors can 'interrogate' WFP's findings locally or be directly involved in the assessment process.

Justifying decisions

Moves by WFP towards greater transparency in the assessment process - notably in the practice of publishing assessments reports on the WFP website - have gone a considerable way to providing stronger justification for response decisions, as well as enhancing the influence of the assessments themselves. From the assessment reports reviewed for the study, it is apparent that there is a need to distinguish situational analysis from response option analysis more clearly - but also to make the links between them more explicit. Assessments that are heavily geared towards a particular organisation's response options have limited potential for informing and influencing others' response decisions, and provide a relatively weak platform for justifying the organisation's own response decisions. Demonstrating the links between situational analysis and response options is essential.

There appears to be little incentive (and some disincentive) for WFP country programmes to re-assess situations or to monitor change and impact, particularly if this is likely to indicate a scaled down programme. More generally, there appears to be little demand for information and analysis once an operation has commenced, except when a decision to continue or to exit has to be justified.

The diversity of donor practice in decisionmaking was found to be one of the single biggest variables in the study. Greater harmonisation of donor decision-making is a necessary condition for more timely and appropriate allocation of funds. The tendency to allocate funds at the time of greatest media coverage can lead to delayed response (in slow onset crises), frontloaded funding (in rapid-onset) and underfunding in protracted or low profile cases.

Overall, the study team concluded that WFP has a significant opportunity to take a lead in establishing good assessment practice across the sector. This involves a combination of rigour, adaptability to context, effective collaboration and good communication - providing timely information to decision-makers (internal and external) in a form they can use.

Show footnotes

1Darcy. J, Anderson. S and Majid. N (2007). A review of the links between needs assessment and decision-making in response to food crises. Study undertaken for the World Food Programme SENAC project. Humanitarian Policy Group, May 2007. Available at http://documents.wfp.org/stellent/groups/public/documents/ena/wfp128556.pdf

More like this

FEX: The use of evidence in humanitarian decision making

Summary of study1 Location: Ethiopia, DRC and Philippines What we know: Decision making in humanitarian response requires timely information and analysis and there are...

FEX: Livelihoods analysis and identifying appropriate interventions (Special Supplement 3)

3.1 Livelihoods assessment and analysis in emergencies The livelihoods framework provides a tool for analysing people's livelihoods and the impact of specific threats or shocks...

FEX: Needs Assessment and Decision Making in Emergencies

Summary of published report1 Sorghhum plant hit by drought Researchers from the Humanitarian Policy Group (HPG) at the Overseas Development Institute (ODI) recently undertook...

FEX: Emergency Market Mapping and Analysis (EMMA) tool

By Lili Mohiddin and Mike Albu Lili Mohiddin has been an Emergency Food Security and Livelihoods Advisor with OXFAM GB since September 2005, based in the UK. Mike Albu is an...

FEX: A Review of the advances and challenges in nutrition in conflicts and crises over the last 20 years

Abbreviated version of unpublished paper Food distribution at the ICRC kitchen in Tonj. By Frances Mason and Anna Taylor This paper is a shortened version of the complete...

FEX: Suggested New Design Framework for CMAM Programming

By Peter Hailey and Daniel Tewoldeberha Peter Hailey was a Regional Nutrition Specialist in the UNICEF East and Southern Africa Regional Office and is now Senior Nutrition...

FEX: 2011 Edition of the Sphere Handbook Humanitarian Charter and Minimum Standards in Humanitarian Response

Farmers association level consultation at Chuko, Southern Nations, Nationalities and Peoples (SNNPR) province, Ethiopia, August 2009 By Susan Thurstans, Paul Turnbull, Devrig...

FEX: Humanitarian Information Systems and Emergencies

Summary of published paper1 Mother with her child, Bujumbura Rural Province In countries that are both poor and exposed to frequent episodes of debilitating drought or...

FEX: Food aid targeting in East Africa

Consultancy Report The FEWS (Famine Early Warning System) project for the Greater Horn of Africa recently commissioned a review on food aid targeting* in East Africa with the...

FEX: Issues and challenges for livelihoods programming in emergencies (Special Supplement 3)

8.1 Introduction The previous sections of this supplement have highlighted various challenges in livelihood support programming in emergencies. Most of these are within the...

FEX: Challenges for humanitarian response in Kosovo

Houses inhabited by gypsies in northern town of Mitrovica, Kosovo, set on fire by returning Kosovars Annalies Borrel, Rita Bhatia and Anna Young This article looks at...

FEX: Targeting in complex emergencies: the cases of Somalia and Columbia

Summary of case studies1,2 An IDP camp in Somalia where the evaluation was undertaken. The World Food Programme (WFP) recently commissioned research to investigate the...

FEX: International Public Nutrition and Emergencies: The Potential for Improving Practice

Workshop summary by Anuradha Harinarayan, Feinstein International Famine Center, Tufts University Aworkshop was organised by the Feinstein International Famine Center in June...

FEX: Improving the quality of WFP Emergency Operations

It is being recognised more and more that we need to improve the ways in which we measure and document emergency programme efficiency. In particular we need to include an...

FEX: WFP policy on HIV/AIDS

A policy document, 'Programming in the era of AIDS : WFP's response to AIDS/HIV', submitted in February 2003 to the World Food Programme (WFP) Executive board1 has been...

FEX: Better understanding vulnerability in Serbia

By Kate Ogden Since July 2000, Kate Ogden has been a food security advisor in ACF headquarters, Paris. Previously she spent three years working in food security and nutrition...

en-net: Monitoring Nutritional Status Trends in response to changes in Food Insecurity.

Which is a better indicator for monitoring nutritional status trends in response to changes in food insecurity . MUAC or WH ? Rogers. Hi Claudine and Sonya Thanks for your...

FEX: Lessons learned in West Darfur: challenges in assessment methodologies

By Aranka Anema Aranka Anema has a background in medical anthropology. She is currently working with MSF-Holland as Medical Editor and has been involved with the Nutrition...

FEX: From the editor

While there are at least four distinct thematic areas addressed by articles in Field Exchange 37, there is arguably one cross-cutting issue - namely the tendency towards...

FEX: Issue 27 Editorial

Every emergency has a habit of throwing up fresh challenges which force us to re-examine our understanding of vulnerability and how best to respond. However, as shown in this...

Close

Reference this page

Links between needs assessment and decisions in food crisis responses. Field Exchange 33, June 2008. p9. www.ennonline.net/fex/33/links