COLLECTING, ANALYSING AND INTERPRETING DATA TO ASSESS NEEDS & INFORM DECISIONS
Since its inception ACAPS has undertaken field needs assessment and produced needs assessment tools.
All documents below distil key points, advice, and pitfalls in carrying out needs assessments. They provide a general introduction to what works and what does not. As such, it is aimed towards humanitarian personnel responding to or preparing for emergencies both at field and headquarters level.
This report presents the results of an exercise to collect and analyse the humanitarian needs assessment reports conducted in the Central African Republic (CAR) since December 2013. It aims to reinforce humanitarian actors’ understanding of the CAR crisis by:
This monitoring needs assessments (MNA) exercise does not cover all the information available and required for an analysis of the crisis. It focuses on the assessment of humanitarian needs over a set period: 1 December 2013 to end June 2014. It therefore does not include assessments made prior to this period, nor works on the CAR and the crisis in the country such as thematic or analytic reports.
This report reflects on lessons that can be learned from needs assessments in the context of the Rohingya crisis. It is based on reviews of assessments in Cox’s Bazar since 2017 and conversations with key assessment stakeholders in the Rohingya response, grounded in global experience and assessment practice. It suggests a series of key recommendations and considerations covering all stages of the assessment process, with the goal to improve future assessments and data quality. It covers assessments targeting Rohingya refugees as well as the Bangladeshi host community.
The report begins by emphasizing the need for coordination and analysis and discusses implications and limitations of different data collection methods. In the next section, it highlights linguistic challenges, showing how they can impact data quality and assessment results. This is followed by a discussion of age, gender, and diversity considerations in the context of needs assessments and operational constraints. The next section discusses enumerator selection and training, followed by suggestions on communicating assessment results back to affected communities. After a series of key literature recommendations, the report closes by showcasing, in a Spotlight, the differences between two major datasets.
A rapid needs assessment was carried out from mid-‐November to mid-December 2013 in Dar’a Governorate and covered a population of 692,000 people across 12 of the 17 sub-districts.
On 5 January, volcanic activity on Kadovar Island, one of the six Schouten Islands of Papua New Guinea, prompted all 591 residents to evacuate. The islanders have been relocated to the Dandan Care centre, located in Turubu LLG (East Sepik Province). The 3.5 hectare site is located on a narrow strip of land physically bound by steep hills on the inland side and the sea. The ground is low-lying and sandy. It is prone to flooding during heavy rains as two running creeks (flowing from inland) flow through either side of the site as they flow out to sea. Access to the main planned resettlement site (of approximately 40 hectares) remains an outstanding issue.
This thematic report provides an overview of available lessons identified from assessments undertaken concerning the humanitarian situation in Syria as well as the situation for Syrian refugees in host-countries. This report is based on conversations with individuals from different organisations working in the region. The document does not intend to provide a comprehensive list of all the issues that should be taken into account while conducting an assessment, but rather provides a starting point for organisations planning an assessment in Syria or the host countries. For more guidance on how to conduct an assessment please see the key resources at the end of this report.
The Multi-‐Sector Needs Assessment (MSNA) provides an overview of needs in Eastern Ukraine, based on reports from households (HHs) and key informants (KIs). It is an initiative of the Ukraine NGO Forum to seek greater understanding of needs across the affected area. The support of ACAPS1 was requested the for this. The assessment covered the five eastern oblasts in an attempt to provide a more comprehensive overview of the humanitarian situation than was available. This would help identify the overall priorities and needs by using a consistent approach across all 5 oblasts so that findings could be compared. It did not focus on assessing only the areas known to be worst impacted by the crisis, rather it considered the entire area (including badly affected areas)2. The assessment uses three distinct areas and the target population in them as the basis for the analysis, and presents information based on key differences between them:
• IDPs living in Dnipropetrovsk, Kharkiv and Zaparizhia, oblasts not affected by active fighting but host to a large number of IDPs.
• IDPs living in areas that remain under the control of the GoU in Donetsk and Luhansk.
• People living in parts of Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts that are under the control of non-‐government actors (both IDPs and people in their place or origin).
At the beginning of April 2015, ACAPS conducted a phone based, multi-sectoral assessment of KIs in all 15 counties of Liberia. The objective of the assessment was to identify the main problems faced by communities, and how their needs differ from the pre-Ebola situation. The assessment intends to inform the ongoing discussions on early recovery and strategic decision making on sustainable development.
The number of new Ebola infections in Sierra Leone is declining, despite the outbreak continuing to claim lives. New cases have dropped to around 9-12 per week, according to recent WHO figures. There were over 500 cases per week at the height of the crisis around late November 2014.
The impact on the lives of the thousands of people directly affected by the disease has been devastating. It has caused substantial suffering to many others, leaving the population very vulnerable.
No recent assessment has evaluated and compared the status of populations in areas with high, medium and low exposure to Ebola. In this report, we refer to low, medium or high exposure areas based on the proportion of Ebola cases up to January 2015, compared to the 2014 population projections for those areas. Low Ebola exposure areas are districts in which the proportion of EVD cases compared to the population is between 0.01% and 0.10%. Medium Ebola exposure districts are defined as districts in which the proportion ranges from 0.11% to 0.20%. High exposure districts are districts in which the proportion of EVD cases is between 0.21% and 0.52%.
The Ebola Needs Analysis Project (ENAP) assessment was designed as a probability sample survey, conducted with 188 KIs from 59 chiefdoms and wards. The aim was to analyse the impact of the Ebola crisis from a multi-sectoral perspective.
Import restrictions from the economic crisis that escalated in 2014 are resulting in severe food shortages and escalating malnutrition rates. A recent assessment of 526 children in several states found GAM rates of 8.9% and SAM of 3.2%. Severe medicine shortages combined with poor hospital services facilitate the spread of diseases such as malaria and diphtheria. Maternal mortality increased by 65% between 2015 and 2016 according to some government data. Approximately one million children do not go to school due to insecurity, food shortages in schools, and teachers’ absenteeism. Protection concerns are widespread as Venezuela recorded increasing violence with one of the highest homicide rates in the world in 2016.
The traffic lights chart depicts an initial multi-sector overview of needs from Round 11 of the NPM Site Assessment – these results are preliminary and require further analysis. Of the 37 indicators have been used in the construction of the Basic Needs Gap, have already been analysed and included in the previously-documented Prioritisation Index and its component sector sub-indices. This product displays results at both camp and mahji block-level, as pockets of high need and other variations cannot be understood through camp-level analysis alone. The size of each point reflects the number of people in need. Sites and blocks are scaled separately. The percentage of persons with needs in that sector are listed next to each site.
The traffic lights diagram above is based on the result of multisectoral priortrisation tool developed by Analysis Hub. The tool uses NPM site assessments Round 12 data from five sectors to priortise needs geographically, at majhee block level. The 32 indicators are selected from the sectors to build up composite index; combine to present basic need gap index at majhee block level. Each indicators are evaluated for their inclusion in the priortrisation tool and selected according to the amount of variation that each indicator revealed. The Bette Verma method is used to calculate the weight of each indicator and multiple deprivation tool is used to calculate the index in STATA. Additional explanation can be found in Rohingya Influx Overview. Camps and sites are tool large and diverse to be effective planning devices. The analysis for basic need gap was done at majhee block level because the majority of differences and variations in needs are between majhee blocks; and camp level analysis can hide the pockets of high need area. To illustrate this, each gap in above diagram is presented at majhee block level.
This traffic lights diagram is based on the result of multisectoral priortrisation tool developed by the Analysis Hub. The tool uses NPM site assessments Round 13 data from four sectors to priortise needs geographically, at majhee block level. The 45 indicators used are selected from the sectors to build up a composite index, and combined to make up Basic Needs Gap Index at majhee block level. Each indicators are evaluated for their inclusion in the priortrisation tool and selected according to the amount of variation it revealed. The Betti-Verma method is used to calculate the weight of each indicator and multiple deprivation tool is used to calculate the index in STATA. Additional explanation can be found in the Rohingya Influx Overview. Camps and sites are too large and diverse to be effective planning devices. The analysis for the Basic Need Gap Index was done at majhee block level because the majority of differences and variations in needs are between majhee blocks; and camp level analysis can hide the pockets of high need area.
This report provides an in-depth analysis of the WASH conditions and needs in the Rohingya camps in Cox’s Bazar. It presents the WASH Severity Index, which classifies the Rohingya population at camp-level into five groups by level of need: very high severity, high severity, moderate severity, low severity, and very low severity.
These severity scores were calculated for water, sanitation, and hygiene as well as an overall WASH index. Need is calculated using a combination of indicators from the REACH-UNICEF WASH Household Assessment – Monsoon Follow-up. The Index thus helps to understand where the severity of WASH needs is the highest. The severity index is calculated on the current level of response. There is no “no severity” category as all Rohingya refugees are dependent on aid.
In this report, findings from the REACH-UNICEF survey are contrasted with data from the Needs and Population Monitoring (NPM) survey. A secondary data analysis, interviews with WASH experts, and field visits complement the results.
A multitude of needs assessments have been conducted to capture impacts of the Ebola outbreak on affected communities, since March 2014. This paper reviews all of the assessments on Liberia and Sierra Leone made available to the Ebola Needs Analysis Project (ENAP), between December 2014 and 20 March 2015. Several assessments have been conducted at a regional level. This report focuses only on those conducted on a national level or lower, to allow for disaggregation of results. The review aims to inform the humanitarian response and future assessments, by identifying what information exists and where information gaps remain.
In the complex environment of an epidemic, capacity to identify humanitarian needs is essential to inform and guide operations. Such capacity was challenged in the three countries most affected by the Ebola crisis, due mainly to problems of access and fear of the disease.
This report gathers lessons identified from assessments of the humanitarian situation in West Africa during the later stages of the Ebola crisis, between November 2014 and April 2015. It is based on conversations with individuals from different organisations who conducted assessments, as well as on ACAPS experiences of assessments conducted in Sierra Leone and Liberia during the Ebola Needs Analysis Project (ENAP).
The document provides a starting-point for organisations planning an assessment in this Ebola outbreak or in similar future situations. More general lessons, which have been covered in other publications, are repeated here because experience has indicated they need reinforcing. When considering these lessons, it is important to keep in mind that Liberia and Sierra Leone are developing countries whose public health systems were already weak pre-crisis.
Written by Lars Peter Nissen, ACAPS Director
The world’s first Humanitarian Summit is only a few days away and we are all finalising statements and commitments. There are very divergent opinions on what can be achieved in Istanbul, and a few key actors have chosen to stay away, but most of us are going, oscillating between careful optimism and predictable pessimism.
The discussion on how to improve needs assessments has been high on the humanitarian policy agenda for the past 5-6 years, and some progress has been made. The issue has also been a key element in discussions leading up to the summit. Needs assessment was one of ten issues addressed in the so-called “Grand Bargain”, where donors, agencies and some NGO representatives together have aimed to tackle some of the most difficult issues facing the sector. The grand bargain has been quite an exclusive discussion, with only the heaviest players in the room, and the discussion on needs assessment has been characterised by stark disagreement. It has therefore been fascinating to follow the proceedings from ringside.
On the surface, it can be hard to find the root of the disagreement, among the many different opinions and confusion with respect to language, etc. ACAPS position can be found in this short document, where we outline our vision for the “assessment ecosystem”.
At the core of the discussion lies a fundamental disagreement over whether assessment and analysis are best done through a centralised or a distributed process. Compare the first commitment from the Grand Bargain, with the recommendation from a recent report from the International Development Committee (IDC) of the UK’s House of Commons.
“Aid organisations and donors commit to: Provide a single, comprehensive, cross-sectoral, methodologically sound and impartial overall assessment of needs for each crisis to inform strategic decisions on how to respond and fund thereby reducing the number of assessments and appeals produced by individual organisations.” Grand Bargain
“The global humanitarian system displays a worrying lack of separation of powers between those assessing needs and those appealing for funds. DFID should propose the establishment of an independent body to be responsible for conducting needs assessments in crises. DFID should work with like-minded donors in the build up to and at the Summit to ensure this fundamental problem is addressed.” UK House of Commons International Development Committee
These two visions are not compatible. The Grand Bargain emphasises that we need to pull everybody closer together to be more effective and reduce the number of assessments. The IDC makes the opposite point, and argues that forcing everybody to work off the same assessment creates problem in with lack of checks and balances.
Having worked with the subject matter for the past six years my opinion is very clear: it is naïve and arrogant to pretend that the humanitarian sector is the only sector in the world that will not benefit from stronger checks and balances. I have seen numerous examples of assessments distorted by groupthink (how well did we assess Ebola?) and more or less sinister agency bias. These have made us make the wrong decisions and have moved us away from a needs-based assessment. As a sector with scarce resources we cannot afford this.
Most important, this is not a technical problem, but a political problem. As such, it can only be addressed by constructing a system where a biased assessment is confronted with an alternative narrative, not by coming up with a new assessment methodology.
The Grand Bargain does have good and constructive elements. However, with respect to assessments, it is depressing to see that negotiations among the most important and powerful leaders in the humanitarian sector have yielded a result, which will not move us forward, and will most probably will move us backward.
Paradoxically, the Grand Bargain’s take on assessment is itself the best argument in favour of second opinions in the humanitarian sector, second opinions that will hold us to account and get the right solutions on the table.
ASSESSING SEVERITY to support evidence-based decision making
ACAPS analysis assesses the severity of different components of a crisis in order to support evidence-based decision making. We use the INFORM Global Crisis Severity Index (GCSI) to enable comparisons of scale and severity across the world; we assess the level of humanitarian access in various contexts; and we analyse the level of humanitarian needs for certain population groups in specific contexts.
This report draws on current primary data, a secondary data review of previous conflicts, and discussions with operational actors in Yemen to provide a rapid estimate of the potential humanitarian impact of prolonged urban conflict in Aden to support early response planning (until agencies can conduct needs assessments). It also highlights projected humanitarian implications if the current ceasefire fails.
Heavy rainfall from 23–25 July caused flooding in El Nuhud town, West Kordofan state. An inter-agency rapid assessment concluded on 2 August estimated that more than 23,000 people had been affected in El Nuhud alone. Shelters and WASH infrastructure have been significantly damaged. The ongoing humanitarian response has been insufficient to meet the needs in El Nuhud. At 13 August, at least 4,000 people are reported to remain in need of humanitarian assistance, particularly emergency shelter and WASH assistance. Other areas are affected but beyond the scope of this note.
The April 2019 Rohingya Influx Overview (RIO) describes the evolution of Rohingya refugees’ needs in Cox’s Bazar, based on latest Needs and Population Monitoring (NPM) Site Assessment data collected between 14 January and 19 February 2019.
The report also addresses the potential impact of any severe weather events, as Bangladesh has entered the April-May cyclone season, to be followed by the June-September monsoon season.
JOIN OUR TEAM
There are no positions available at this time. If you have any question, please contact us at jobs(at)acaps.org
Since the publication of ACAPS Nigeria Floods Update I Briefing Note on 26 September, rains have continued although Niger and Benue river levels have dropped slightly. As of 26 September the flooding of the Niger and Benue rivers is affecting 826,400 people and displacing 176,300 people across 12 states. Assessments are ongoing, and numbers are likely to increase. Since 26 September, some 200 deaths and 1,035 injuries have been reported. Assessments indicate that around 17,800 homes were damaged or destroyed across all affected states as of late August. Shelter, food, NFIs, and medical assistance continue to be key needs for the affected population. There is no available data from Adamawa and Taraba states.
What is your mission as an organisation?
With our work we better inform the humanitarian workers to ensure a better response. Humanitarians make life-saving decisions. But in a complex, fast-moving situation, it’s hard to get a clear picture. ACAPS helps you see the crisis.
What is the impact of ACAPS?
Heavy rains over 5-8 March caused flooding in the Southern region of Malawi. As of 10 March, at least 14 districts have been impacted, affecting approximately 468,650 people and displacing more than 31,700 people. At least 30 people have been killed and over 370 injured. Assessments are ongoing. On 8 March, the president declared a state of disaster in the areas affected by ongoing rain and flooding. Priority needs are shelter, WASH, food, livelihood and health assistance.
This report aims to provide an overview of the impact of the hurricanes Irma and Maria in the Caribbean. For the purposes of this report, the focus is limited to the following seven countries: Anguilla, Antigua and Barbuda, The Bahamas, British Virgin Islands, Dominica, Sint Maarten, and Turks and Caicos Islands. All, except Sint Maarten, are Members of CARICOM. The depth of the report also reflects the limited availability of data, which in turn means that figures and information need to be updated in the future. The current data were based on the Post-Disaster Needs Assessments (PDNAs) conducted in Antigua and Barbuda and in Dominica and by other available sources. These are all listed in the Reference section.
A magnitude 5.9 earthquake struck Haiti on 6 October, and was followed by a magnitude 5.2 aftershock on 7 October and a magnitude 4.2 aftershock on 8 October. The departments affected by seismic activity were Artibonite, North and North-West.
So far, 17 people have died and at least 421 have been injured. The earthquakes destroyed 353 houses and damaged 7,430. An estimated 31,132 people were affected, although needs assessments are still being completed.
Considering the presence of UN agencies, the scale of pre-positioned aid and the reported response by the government as well as national and external relief actors, the need for international assistance and the impact are estimated at low to moderate.
Over 18,800 people have been displaced in March 2019 in Diffa region as a result of Boko Haram activities and attacks against civilians, adding to the 249,000 people previously displaced by the conflict, including 104,300 IDPs, 25,700 returnees and 118,900 refugees from Nigeria. In most cases, IDPs have fled without taking their belongings and are in urgent need of shelter, food and NFI support. Assessments conducted in the IDP sites have also shown a need for improved WASH infrastructure. Protection remain a high concerns as attacks against civilians have continued throughout the month of March and the risk of gender based violence is high.
The Syria Needs Analysis Project (SNAP) started in December 2012, as a collaborative project between ACAPS and MapAction, aimed at bring together available information on humanitarian needs in the Syria crisis. At the time, information-sharing and publications on the humanitarian situation were extremely limited; in this context, SNAP’s initial goal was to help create a shared situational awareness among humanitarian actors, which in turn would contribute to a better-targeted and more needs-based response and improvements in the situation of crisis-affected populations. Over 2.5 years, SNAP has pursued these goals with a combination of independent information products, technical support and capacity building for humanitarian assessments. At the end of 2014, the project name was changed to Strategic Needs Analysis Project, to reflect the growing need for regional and whole-of-crisis analysis following the declaration of an L3 crisis in Iraq. The project closed at the end of June 2015.
Identifying potential future changes
Risk
ACAPS Quarterly/Annual risk analysis outlines a number of key contexts where a notable deterioration may occur within the next six months, leading to a spike in humanitarian needs.
On 24 July, high amounts of rainfall (between 100-200mm at various locations) caused heavy flooding in some parts of Senegal. The districts Kaffrine and Kolda (central and south Senegal) have reportedly been the heaviest affected, with Kaolack and Matam also receiving above average rainfall. Throughout Kaffrine district some 1,500 houses have been destroyed and 7,500 people affected. Because no independent assessment has been carried out yet the actual amount of damage and sectoral needs are not yet known.
The number of people potentially at risk throughout the 2016 flood season is estimated at 210,000.
Since the publication of ACAPS Nigeria Floods Briefing Note on 21 September, river levels in most of the 12 affected states remain high due to flooding, which has affected 441,251 people, and displaced 141,369 people between late August and 24 September. A total of 108 deaths and 192 injuries have been reported as of late August. Rainfall is expected to continue for the next week. Rivers and Bayelsa states are estimated to be amongst the worst affected states where water levels continue to rise. Initial assessments indicate that 13,031 homes were damaged or destroyed across all affected states as of late August. Shelter, food, NFIs and medical assistance continue to be key needs for the affected population.
Tropical Cyclone Idai hit eastern Zimbabwe with heavy rains and strong winds on 15-16 March. Manicaland and Masvingo provinces are mostly impacted, facing massive destructing caused by floods and landslides. An estimated number of 12,500 to 15,000 people have been affected overall, with at least 9,600 people (1,600 households) in the hardest hit districts, Chimanimani and Chipinge (Manicaland province). As of 18 March at least 82 people have died, 200 people are injured, thousands are displaced, and many properties, crops and livestock have been damaged and destroyed. More than 200 people are still missing. Assessments are on going and numbers are likely to increase. Priority needs are shelter, WASH, food, livelihood, and health assistance.
Heavy rainfall since 25 March triggered floods across Herat, Badghis, Faryab, Sari Pul, Jowzjan and Balkh provinces in western and northern Afghanistan affecting 17,000 people. As assessments are ongoing and some of the affected areas are difficult to access, the full impact remains unclear. Available information suggests that vast areas of agricultural land have been damaged, and livestock lost, compounding already high levels of food insecurity in the affected provinces. Shelter needs are likely high as hundreds of houses have been damaged or destroyed. IDPs living in tents and makeshift camps are affected. Afghanistan has been experiencing severe floods since early March, affecting more than 143,000 people across the country.
ACAPS mapped the analysis landscape in Yemen during January and February 2019 during the start-up phase of the Yemen Analysis Hub. We developed a meta-database of over 130 primary datasets, needs assessments and analysis products publicly available (mostly in English) and interviewed over 25 organisations working on data collection and analysis in Yemen in the field or remotely. We compared the analysis landscape to an ‘ideal’ analysis ecosystem and identified lessons and recommendations.
ACAPS published these findings for use by other analysis organisations, researchers or think tanks interested in analysis or analysis capacity building.
Heavy rainfall in Bamako on 16 May caused flash floods in all six communes of the city, flooding streets, damaging houses and washing away property. At least 16 people have been killed and several others injured. 10 people are known to have died in Niamakoro district, one of the worst affected areas. According to initial assessments, 101 families (around 575 people) have been affected, with some of them forced from their homes and staying in temporary accommodation. Up to 300 households (around 1,710 people) may have been affected in total. According to the Malian Red Cross, food, medical care and medicine, as well as NFIs are the priority needs.
CrisisInSight is the new ACAPS analysis portfolio which captures developments for sudden-onset disasters, protracted, and forgotten crises. This approach combines tools for understanding crises, by assessing the level of severity and humanitarian access, with trends and forward-looking analysis.
Over the last couple of years, the amount of data produced in humanitarian emergencies has increased drastically. In 2010 an average of 215 reports were produced per disaster - by 2018 this number had reached 600, according to Reliefweb statistics, and the numbers continue to grow.
HUMANITARIAN ANALYSIS
ACAPS supports the humanitarian community's work on severity and trends by diving into the current situation of more than 100 key crises around the globe, while helping actors anticipate and respond to emerging crises.
This note summarizes a longer document on the potential impact of pre-monsoon and monsoon rains in the Rohingya camps of Cox’s Bazar. It has drawn on the past impact of rains in the Rohingya settlements and in Cox’s Bazar and Bangladesh more generally. The Rohingya camps at this scale have never existed in this season before so there is no direct past experience of how they have withstood a monsoon in Bangladesh. The number of people in the settlements and the nature of the temporary living conditions and facilities all indicate that the impact of a normal rainy season will make the provision of on-going response to the influx challenging. A severe monsoon will have a serious impact on needs.
Disclaimer: This note is based on a subjective assessment of the potential impact of the monsoon on camps and is considered a worst-case scenario.
A list of abbreviations can be found below the glossary.
Affected areas: Geographical areas affected by the hazard. Not all people in those areas will necessarily require humanitarian response.?
By using our Site, you confirm that you accept these terms and conditions and that you agree to comply with them.
These terms and conditions (together with the Privacy Notice and Copyright Policy) outline the terms and conditions on which you may make use of our website www.acaps.org (our Site), whether as a visitor, guest or a registered user. Use of our Site includes accessing, browsing, or registering to use our Site.
©ACAPS 2018
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial No Derivatives 4.0 International license
