(Abyan Assessment Report 8-9 July 2012)

34

Acknowledgment

Humanitarian Country Team in Yemen is expressing appreciation for the full support and dedicated efforts provided by the participants in all phases of this process, clusters and staff. In particular, HCT would like to salute the humanitarian commitment of the following agencies and their staff for participating in the field visits under security risks:

UN agencies (UNHCR, UNICEF, WHO, IOM, OCHA)

INGOs (Save the Children, Intersos, DRC, Oxfam)

National NGOs (SHS and CSSW)

Executive Summary:

From 8 July to 9 July 2012 United nations conducted its first inter-agency mission to Abyan[footnoteRef:2]. The mission was led by OCHA and consisted of representatives from UN agencies (UNHCR, UNICEF, WHO, IOM), INGOs (Save the Children, Intersos, DRC, Oxfam) and national NGOs (SHS and CSSW).Due to security situation in Abyan field visits were conducted by members of the local NGOs (insert the name of the Local NGOs and number of participants from each agency). DSS participated in the field visits and conducted in parallel a Security risk Analysis. [2: List of areas visited in Page: ]

The tool used for collecting information was developed based on discussion with humanitarian partners since March 2012. OCHA deployed a mission in March 2012 for developing Multi Cluster/ Sectoral Initial Rapid Assessment (MIRA) to be used in Yemen. Right after the introductory workshop organized in Yemen, OCHA developed a draft investigation form (IF). Different clusters in Yemen reviewed the wording and type of information to be collected through the IF. In Late April a second discussion round organized for the clusters to agree on the logistical arrangements. The clusters during the second round of discussion agreed on selecting two areas to be targeted in piloting assessment; these areas are: Sa'ada/ Abyan.

The clusters realized that in Sa'ada the international Humanitarian community is suffering from the limited resources of information. In addition, there are a lot of restrictions are imposed by Al-houthies on conducting multi cluster assessments and even to operate in the areas under their control. Although continuous discussion succeeded in providing a limited space for operating. Yet OCHA is engaging in dialogue and negotiations with Al-houties to expand the humanitarian space and as part of this discussion is to allow conducting MIRA in Sa'ada. As a Plan B, the clusters agreed to select another area for testing the tool; especially that Al houties are well know with their reluctant manner[footnoteRef:3]. Therefore, clusters agreed on either Arhab, which faces continuous armed clashes between supporter of ex-president and Al Islah political group. The other selected area was Abyan if the security situation permitted. [3: The negotiation with El houthies is continuing. ]

The eruption of military operations in Abyan in May transferred the focus of the international humanitarian community in Yemen to Abyan due to the severity of the military operations. Therefore, it was decided by HCT to conduct urgently the assessment in Abyan.

As a preparation for the field visits OCHA/ Aden field Office organized meetings with the head of the military units operating in South and governors of Abyan and Aden. OCHA team in Aden designed also preparatory technical meetings with a support from Sana'a team to finalize the needed amendments on the general IF prepared during OCHA's mission. Finally, OCHA team organized two brief training on K1 for the teams members to who will participate in the field phase.

Right after conducting the field visits; a team from OCHA Yemen in collaboration with OCHA Pakistan started the data entry phase. IMU of OCHA Yemen completed the data analysis and participating teams were consulted on the lessons learned drafted by OCHA Yemen.

1.0 Introduction

As a direct impact of finalizing the military operation in Abyan, located to the South of Yemen, the humanitarian space became available more than during the Ansar al-Shari'a era. Yemen HCT decided to conduct a Multi-cluster Initial Rapid Assessment (MIRA), the results of which would aid an effective design of humanitarian program and prioritizing allocation of resources.

The MIRA assessment methodology was chosen as an overall joint assessment tool covering all clusters, identifying needs in sufficient details based on core indicators and will not replace any specific cluster assessment. It was chosen to provide decision makers with the needed information for prioritizing the needs and as a result strategically allocate the limited resources. In addition, MIRA Assessment in Abyan was carried out to provide evidence based analysis vis-à-vis the humanitarian context of the Abyan; which will pave the road to design Abyan and South Humanitarian Emergency Response Plan.

1.1 Objectives

OCHA prepared ToR for the assessment and agreed with clusters on the following objectives:

1. To update the existing Security Risk Assessment (SRA) and increase security collaboration between UN agencies and local authorities,

2. To identify and assess needs and gaps that have emerged since the eruption and ending of the military operations in Abyan,

3. To validate the on-going programmes that implemented by partners based on the findings of the MIRA,

4. To capture lessons learn from the exercise in Abyan and improve the process for future use in Yemen.

The Assessment focused on the following cluster specific objectives:

1: Food Security and Livelihoods: focus on the needs of the population disaggregated as war affected population and returnees and verify the needs are driven by lack of availability or due to security situation. The impact of livelihood on food availability and food security situation and general humanitarian situation in Abyan.

2: Health: Evaluate health situation in Abyan, and concentrating on the availability of health services in Abyan. Also focusing on what are the priority issues according to the technical evaluation and beneficiaries perspectives.

3: WASH: Identify the outstanding WASH needs and verify the reasons for such merging needs,

4: Protection: evaluate the impact of conflict on population movements and identify persons concerns. Assess protection issues faced by the population including GBV, child protection related issues, non-discriminatory access to assistance and services, respect of human rights and neutrality of provision of assistance. Assess the situation concerning explosive remnants of war.

5: Logistic: Evaluate the impact of current war and previous clashes on roads capacity and how it affect access related issues.

6: Shelter & Non-food Items: Assess the population and technical perspectives on how shelter related issues are prioritized in any future intervention. Verify NFI needs for population and the gaps.

7: Coordination and Common Services: Liaise with authorities as well as international and national humanitarian communities to gain an overview on the ground and who is doing what where and to identify gaps and needs. Raise the vital concerns for the safety and well being issues that affect safety and security of both affected population and relief aid workers. Ensure international humanitarian principles are respected in all humanitarian actions and no forcibly return is or will take place.

2.0 The MIRA Assessment

2.1 Methodology

The methodology for this assessment used the IASC agreed MIRA methodology.

The following tools were used for the field assessment:

1. Qualitative interviews/discussions with Community Groups among the different target groups, 12 community group discussions were carried out.

2. Structured, quantitative interviews with key informants within the affected areas. About 43 key informants were interviewed that included a broad range of actors.

The MIRA Assessment was articulated around 3 core modules:

1. Module I: the Identification Module

2. Module II: the Generalist Key Informants Module (KI) & Adapted INAC Observation Checklist

3. Module III: the First Level Analysis Module (FLA)

In Modules II and II, the questionnaire follows a fixed sequence that is repeated with each sector:

1. Screening: Using the HESPER method, each sector’s questions begin with one or more ‘screening’ questions. These questions are intended to establish if there is a perceived serious problem in the community related to the sector’s themes.

2. Scoping: Depending on the answer given in the screening question, here additional details are sought on the underlying causes, whether it relates to availability, quality and access including security, physical/logistical and economic constraints.

3. Prioritisation: the community is asked to identify the top three key priorities in addressing the identified serious problems

4. Targeting: The community is asked to identify the main groups within the community that are most affected by the identified top three priorities

2.2 Sample size and site selection

Using purposive sampling (Oct 2011/ACAPS), a sample size of 14 localities was agreed between OCHA and the clusters in Aden. In selecting the 14 locations the following criteria were used:

· It should represent the different population groups (IDPs; New/Old, Returnees, and Non-displaced),

· It should represent the Bedouins, marginalized and those not originally from Abyan.

· It should be either rural or urban areas,

· Different types of topographic settings should be represented, such as the coast, valleys, and mountains,

· It should represent different income/livelihood sources; agriculture, fishery, livestock, small/micro enterprise, and government employees.

Due to security issues, two of the locations were not assessed. Table 1 provides a breakdown of the characteristics of each locality.

2.3 Assessment Teams

Three teams were deployed that comprise UN agencies (UNHCR, UNICEF, WHO, IOM), INGOs (Save the Children, Intersos, DRC, Oxfam) and national NGOs (SHS and CSSW). Each team was composed of 4 members of whom one is the team leader and the other a security focal point. The criteria for membership into a team were:

1. Cluster representation with at least a representative from the protection cluster.

2. Gender representation in each team to ensure a female member of the team to interview women in the communities.

2.4 Training

Prior to the assessment, two training sessions were conducted by OCHA in relation to MIRA (methodology and practical procedures to conduct and ask questions). To pre-test the MIRA questionnaires (Annex A) and assess the performance of the teams, the questionnaires were piloted in three schools that harbored IDPs.

Pre-field activities included the production of a Training Manual for Community Level Assessment teams, a Descriptive Analysis Plan for coding, area and community mapping, and holding a workshop for participating team members. Training was also conducted on mines and unexploded ordinances (UXOs) awareness considering that the assessment was to be carried out in areas with mines and bobby traps.

The pre-crisis population of Abyan governorate was 454, 535 (Ministry of Health, 2006). During field activity, teams visited in all, twelve (12) targeted locations throughout two (2) districts during the period of 8 and 9 July 2012 (Figure 1). The population of Khanfar district and Zingibar are 133, 278 and 32, 380 respectively. The estimated population of the assessed communities range from 5,000 to 96,000 with an average of 34,409 people. The population estimates thus show quite a significant number of people in each of the locations.

Table 2 shows the locations and number of questionnaires administered per module and per location.

2.5 Limitations of the report

The MIRA assessment in the south was a rapid assessment by its nature and this was made clear due to the urgency to provide evidence-base analysis to feed into the Abyan Response Plan. However, due to limitations in time, available resources for training and personnel to participate in the assessment, the continued security and mine risk in the area, the findings of the assessment are limited in terms of: geographic scope; depth of research by sector; and, the extent to which the sampling methodology and sample size is representative for the overall humanitarian situation in Abyan governorate.

Due to presence of mines and bobby traps in most areas in Zingibar and Khanfar district, the demining authority (Yemac) in the south did not authorise the assessment teams to visit Al-Dirjaj and Ubar Othman. Another factor that may limit or influence the findings includes the lack of adequate women participants in the assessment teams.

Figure 1: Assessed districts in Abyan governorate

2.6 Report Structure

The assessment report includes situation overview a summary analysis by problem area/sector and an analysis of the underlying causes contributing to the identified problems. It also examines and ranks the first, second and third priority problems in the assessed locations and the most affected groups within the community. It compares the results of the generalized Key Informant (KI) interviews (Module 11) with the First Level Analysis (Module 111) for similarities and discrepancies. The analysis reveals most serious problem areas and priority areas for further, in-depth assessment and for priority interventions.

The report is to be further enhanced with context level analysis by clusters and eventually given to cluster experts for designing/ updating ongoing specific sectoral response plan included under Abyan Response Plan and in line with the policy recommendations.

Frequency distribution of the problem areas identified as serious problems in each of assessed locations at the KI level is shown in Annex B to highlight the variations within and between locations.

The underlying causes of the problem areas identified as serious problems in each of the assessed locations at KI level is also shown in Annex C. This report does not contain any Secondary Data Review (SDR) in its current version.

While preparing the report and as part of the ongoing discussion with Nutrition cluster; it was realized that including nutrition cluster inputs for the IF was difficult. MIRA is designed on collecting information from the community based level; whereas, nutrition needs are information from the household level. Therefore, a section will be inserted at the end of the report for nutrition findings based on SMART tool. The other challenge was projecting findings of different governorate on Abyan. Nutrition clusters conducted SMART survey in 2012 in the following governorates in partnership with MoPHP. The governorates targeted in 2012 were: Hodeidah, Taiz, Hajja, Rayma and Lahj.

Based on discussion with nutrition cluster, the agreement was to project the findings of Lahj costal area on Abyan.

However, the discussion is ongoing with nutrition cluster on designing set of questions to be included in the future assessments.

Table 1: Description of MIRA assessed locations

#

Assessment Place / Area

Returnees

IDP`s

Host

Assessed Groups

Type of setting*

Major Economic Activities **

New

Old

Host Com.

Host Non

Rural Area

Urban Area

Bedouins 

Marginalized 

Non Abyan

C

V

M

A

G.E

L

F

SME

1

Ja`ar City / Allohom

•

•

•

•

 

 

•

 

 •

 

 

•

 

•

•

 

 

 

2

Ja`ar City / Qaderallah

•

•

•

 

•

 

•

 

•

 

 

•

 

•

 

 

 

 

3

Al-Kud

•

•

•

•

 

•

 

 

 

 

 

•

 

•

 

 

 

 

4

Al-Musemir

•

•

•

•

 

•

 

 

 

 

 

•

 

•

 

 

 

 

5

Amodiah

•

•

•

•

 

•

 

 

 

 

 

•

 

•

 

 

 

 

6

Al-jool

•

•

•

•

 

•

 

 

 

 

 

•

 

•

 

 

 

 

7

Al-Rowah

•

•

•

•

 

•

 

 

 

 

 

•

 

•

 

 

 

8

Al-Mehraq

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

9

Batis

•

•

•

•

 

 

•

 •

 

 

 

•

 

•

 

 

 

•

10

Al-Husn

•

•

•

•

 

•

 

 

 

 

 

•

 

•

 

 

 

 

11

Al-Makhzan

•

•

•

•

 

•

 

 

 

 

 

•

 

•

 

 

 

 

12

Al-Dirjaj

•

•

•

•

 

•

 

 

 

 

 

•

 

•

 

 

 

 

13

Ubar Othman

•

•

•

•

 

•

 

 

 

 

 

•

 

•

 

 

 

 

14

Zinjibar City /Limited

•

•

•

•

 

 

•

 

 

 

 

•

 

 

•

 

 

•

Table 2: Locations assessed and the number of MIRA forms administered.

#

Location

District

MIRA 1

MIRA 2

MIRA 3

Total

Number of forms Per Module

1

Allohom

Khanfar

1

3

1

5

2

Qaderallah

Khanfar

1

3

1

5

3

Al-Mehraq

Khanfar

1

4

1

6

4

Al-Makhzan

Khanfar

1

4

1

6

5

Batis

Khanfar

1

3

1

5

6

Al-Rowah

Khanfar

1

3

1

5

7

Al-Husn

Khanfar

1

3

1

5

8

Al-Kud

Khanfar

1

5

1

7

9

Al-Musemir

Khanfar

1

4

1

6

10

Al-Jool

Khanfar

1

3

1

5

11

Amodiah

Khanfar

1

4

1

6

12

Zinjibar City/Al-Asalah

Zinjibar

1

4

1

6

Total

12

43

12

67

2.7 Key Abyan Assessment Findings

1. Over 70% of the problem areas were described as “serious problems” with the exception of separation from family members, being displaced from home, information, respect, moving from place to place and safety or protection from violence within the community.

2. WASH (Water, Toilets & Keeping Clean) was identified as a “serious problem” in all of the assessed communities.

3. Health (Health Care and Physical Care for under five years of age or over five years of age) was identified as a “serious problem” in the assessed communities.

4. Over 80% of the assessed communities identified food as a “serious problem” in their communities.

5. Over 70% of the communities identified income or livelihood as a “serious problem”.

6. Distress and mental illness were also identified as “serious problems”.

7. Surprisingly most of the protection issues were not identified by the assessment as “serious problems” except for safety and displacement from home.

8. Most of the contributing factors relating to a problem being described as a “serious problem” attributed it to availability, followed by limited economic resources, physical/logistic constraints and security constraints.

9. The top three most “serious problems” as identified by both Key Informants (KI) and First level Analysis (FLA) are water, food and health care with all groups equally affected.

10. There is a high similarity between the priorities of the individual locations at the KIs level and those at the FLA with water having the highest frequency as the first priority.

11. Although Protection was not highlighted as one of the top three priorities, however, it was more pronounced in urban areas with Qaderallah citing it as the first priority problem and Allohom & Al-Mehraq citing it as third priority problem.

12. Education was also not cited as a first priority problem in any of the locations. However, it was cited as a second priority in Al-Makhzan and Allohom with boys & girls being most affected. As a third priority problem, it was also cited by Al-Rowah.

13. Electricity or the lack of it was mentioned as a first priority problem in Al-Musemir, and as a second priority in Amodiah and as both second and third priorities in Zinjibar city.

3.0 Analysis and Results

Upon completion of the field work, the assessment forms were transferred to Sana’a for data entry into the Assessment and Data Compendium (ADC, Beta V.1.01). The ADC was developed by the ADC Support Team in Pakistan. The ADC is still in its pilot stage and the Abyan MIRA forms were used to pilot the system. This meant considerably delays as problems detected in the system by data entry staff had to be communicated to the Support Team for it to be fixed. The slow internet connection in the OCHA Yemen office in Sana’a also contributed to the considerable delay in data entry. In addition to data entry, the ADC was supposed to generate simple analysis and customized reports from the analysis. The system also provided option for export of data into Excel. Generating a cross tabulation of locations and frequency of responses in a sector took considerable time making the system very slow. The alternative was to exporting the raw data into Excel where most of the analysis was done.

The following paragraphs detail the collated returns from the survey teams and the subsequent analysis of those returns has identified the acute humanitarian needs with regards to the level and type of humanitarian response required to meet those needs.

3.1 Characteristics of the assessed communities

Of the twelve communities assessed, seven were rural and five were of urban nature. All of the assessed were composed of returnees, IDPS, host, and non-host communities. Allohom (Jaar City) and Qaderallah do have marginalized population, and Batis has the Bedouin population. The major socio-economic activity in almost all of the assessed locations is agriculture except Zingibar. Zingibar has a high number of government employees and small businesses.

The assessment shows that the type of settlement in the assessed locations is of individual homes (non-hosted) in private accommodation except one in a collective centre with a site leader.

The crisis in Abyan has witnessed significant displacement in the south region. On population dynamics in the communities, 45% of the responses indicated that people are returning to the sites, whilst 10% indicated that people are coming to the site. However, 25% of the responses also indicated that people are also moving out of the site with 20% indicating there are no significant population movements.

The assessment showed that all assessed sites were affected by the conflict in Abyan. Of the non-displaced, 80% are host communities with 20% non-host communities. The displaced communities were predominantly all IDPs. On the characteristics of the returnee communities the assessment responses could not tell whether they were returning from IDP situation or from refugee situation. However, as at 20 June 2012, the total number of IDPs in Abyan was 4,589 households. The conflict in Abyan has displaced over 200,000 IDPs most of whom are found in the neighboring governorates.

3.2. Sector Analysis

Situation Overview

On 12 May Yemeni Army with tribes allied with authorities launched a large-scale offensive operations against Ansar al-Sharia aiming to push Pro-Al Qaida militias out of the cities. In mid-June, the Defense Ministry announced that the militants had been driven out of the governorate, including the cities of Zinjibar and Ja'ar, where the militants had practice control over a year during the political unrest.

The fierce fighting, which involve sometimes strikes, has led to a severe deterioration of the humanitarian situation in Abyan governorate. It hampered the ability of the international humanitarian community and among them ICRC to deliver urgent relief aids[footnoteRef:4]. [4: HCT released a message on XXX requesting for respecting IHL and IHRL and allow access to affected people. ]

As a direct impact of the military operation in Abyan, the humanitarian situation deteriorated more as the delivery of basic social services disrupted more. The vulnerability of different groups exacerbated more. Low presence of law enforcement forces and sometimes the disappearance of law enforcement limit if not prevent access of humanitarian organizations and limited its ability to work. The delivery modality now is through implementing partners or through contractors.

Based on the findings of the assessment[footnoteRef:5], WASH (Water, Toilets & Keeping Clean) was identified as a “serious problem” in the assessed communities. Health (Health Care and Physical Care for under five years of age or over five years of age) was identified as a “serious problem” in the assessed communities. Over 80% of the assessed communities identified food as a “serious problem” in their communities. Over 70% of the communities identified income or livelihood as a “serious problem”. This can be considered as a direct impact of the above described factors. [5: Refer to Data Analysis Report Annex I ]

Moreover, Most of the contributing factors relating to a problem being described as a “serious problem” in modules two and three attributed it to availability and the military operations as well as destruction of the infrastructure and security situation can justify this. The second factor is limited economic resources. This factor is in direct relation to the level of poverty people in Abyan are suffering and extent of working opportunities people can find since Ansar al-Shari'a , took over the main cities of the governorate. Finally, physical/logistic constraints and security constraints was the third factor and this lead to another findings appeared in the findings of the assessment.

Unpredictable, most of the protection issues were not identified by the informants as “serious problems” except for safety and displacement from home. One of the reasons was limited time available for interviewers to explain the difference between protection and security. This is considered one of the major gaps appeared in this report. The other reason is the time of conducting the interviews. The field visits were conducted right after the declaration of the military operations. The people at that time did not consider the protection as series issue; as declaring victory affected people psychologically and put them in a positive prediction for future, which by itself guided their perceptions toward livelihood and daily living concerns.

Nevertheless, non-state groups pro and anti government have active presence in Abyan. In addition the political dynamic in South governorates is presenting threats to physical safety of IDPs and other vulnerable groups due to potential political unrest as a result of separation calls. The continuous tension between host communities and IDPs is considered another threatening factor; this can be merged with the historical conflicts between Aden and Abyan. Absence of governmental public service and governmental law order apparatus in Abyan effectively present another challenge, which represents hazards for the legal protection for civilians in Abyan. Lack of public service and governmental social security network operations in Abyan also will weakening the central authorities influence and increase the protection concerns especially for marginalized people who are considered important social segment. Finally, chronic vulnerabilities, protection concerns, economic decline and increase of cost of living all will feed the potential strengthening of organized crime groups and terrorist groups, which by itself consider a major hazard and important protection concern.

IASC defined complex emergency as: “a humanitarian crisis in a country, region or society where there is total or considerable breakdown of authority resulting from internal or external conflict and which requires an international response that goes beyond the mandate or capacity of any single and/or ongoing UN country programme”. In general, this is perfectly fitting the Abyan context. However, this doesn't reflect the driven for the crisis. Taking a look on the Active Learning Network for Accountability and Performance in humanitarian Action; will add to the framework the crisis drivers. ALNAP definition for complex political emergency as: "A situation with complex social, political and economic origins which involves the breakdown of state structures, the disputed legitimacy of host authorities, the abuse of human rights and possibly armed conflict, that creates humanitarian needs. The term is generally used to differentiate humanitarian needs arising from conflict and instability from those that arise from natural disasters."

The crisis in Abyan does not involve breakdown of the state; on the contrary it is a direct consequence of state's efforts to return its authorities to the central government. However, its complexity is appearing on combining political, administrative, security, social and economic factors together to form the direct reason for affected people suffering. The direct impact of these factors on people is deteriorating their humanitarian situation with increase concerns on their protection status. Therefore, in Abyan international humanitarian community is facing humanitarian crisis with overarching protection concern.

In addition to the deterioration of the humanitarian situation, the military campaign success in defeating Ansar al-Shari’a but it does not lead to eliminate antigovernment existence and restrict the presence and activities of non-state actors or even control it. The secure social network is still existing for Al-Qaeda fighters who are currently seeking refuge in the peripheral tribal controlled regions. Al-Qaeda fighters also spread over the different cities seeking revenge. Therefore, the threats of Al Qaeda and Ansar al- Shari'a is not eliminating completely. In brief, the resolution of the political crisis and defeating Ansar al-Shari'a will not end the obstacles in front the political process in country. The transition process which remains largely on track, will directly affected under continuous potential military and security threats. Such threats are spread and existed all over Abyan and can be triggered spontaneously due to:

1: governmental delay in taking the responsibilities of implementing the rule of the law,

2: clashes between armed groups affiliated with Ansar al-Shari'a and pro-governmental tribal groups,

3: potential forcible return for IDPs in Aden and Lahj,

4: mines unexploded ordnances (UXOs) and booby traps at conflict areas

5: continuous shortage in jobs opportunities, deterioration of humanitarian situation and consequently poverty will increase.

According to Abyan and the South Humanitarian and early recovery Response Plan Published in August 2012 by United Nations Humanitarian country team; the fighting in Abyan has displaced nearly 237,000 individuals (39,500 households) and damaged the livelihood of another 180,000-210,000 individuals (30,000-35,000 households). The conflict has had spill-over effects not only in conflict-affected communities but in the southern region as a whole. So the crisis in Abyan impacted not only war non-displaced affected people and IDPs but also host communities in Aden and Lahj as well as refugees.

Conflict in Abyan has severely disrupted the delivery of basic social services, exacerbating widespread and chronic vulnerabilities economic decline and increase of cost of living. Public services, including health care, nutrition, water and sanitation; and security and safety has been suffering from severe serious collapse. The assessment shows serious problems in about 70% of the sectors that demands urgent humanitarian interventions.

Figure 2 shows the frequency of problem areas identified as serious problems in the twelve assessed areas of Zingibar and Khanfar districts. With the exception of safety, separation from family members, access to information, respect, movement between places, and safety or protection from violence within the community, all of the problem areas were considered as serious problems in the communities.

Figure 2: Frequency of problem areas by Key Informants

At the FLA level, a similar pattern was observed with most of the problem areas considered as serious problems (Figure 3). The results show a stronger association between the KIs and the FLA.

Figure 3: Frequency of problem areas at FLA level

In the next section a number of the problem areas are grouped into sectors. The problem areas are analysed to reveal the frequency and the underlying factors contributing to the seriousness of the problem. The underlying factors are grouped into 5 categories; availability, quality, security concerns, physical or logistical constraints and economic constraints.

3.2.1 Key Findings that support humanitarian action in Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH)

a) Water

Access to water is one of the major problems in Yemen and Abyan governorate is not an exception. There is a significant lack of adequate access to clean potable water in the south that includes Abyan governorate. Report suggests that water consumption has decreased considerably due to reduced supply and high prices[footnoteRef:6]. The assessment shows that water is still a “serious problem”. About 90% of the communities assessed identified access to safe water for drinking or cooking as a “serious problem”. 58 % of the concerns related to water as a serious problem attribute it to availability (not enough water/water points available or storage capacity), followed by quality (issues of lack of treatment capacity), economic constraints and physical, logistical constraints (Figure 4). [6: Secondary Data Review for Yemen (SDR), 1st Sep 2011 – 15 Feb 2012]

Figure 4: Main concerns related to Water as a serious problem

At the individual community level, availability also ranked high as the primary underlying factor contributing to the problem (Table 1 in Annex C).

b) Toilets

The toilet situation in the assessed communities is not as severe as the water situation. However, 57% of the respondents identified toilets as a serious problem with people not having easy and safe access to clean toilets. Of the underlying factors, 57% attribute it to quality and 43% attribute it to availability (Figure 5).

Figure 5: Main concerns related to Toilet as a serious problem

Examining the responses of the individual locations as shown in Table 2 (Annex C), in Al-Husn and Al-Jool, availability ranked the highest as the main concerns related to toilets as a “serious problem”.

c) Keeping Clean

61% of the KI identified “Keeping Clean” as a serious problem in their communities, of which 68% considered the issue of availability as the main concern followed by economic constraints (Figure 6). Table 3 (Annex C) however, shows variations between the 12 communities but with availability ranking as the primary cause except for Al-Makhzan that cited economic constraint as the underlying cause.

Figure 6: Main concerns related to Keeping Clean as a serious problem

The assessment reveals that WASH is a “serious problem” in the assessed communities with water ranking high followed by sanitation and toilets. The underlying causes are predominantly related to availability and quality.

3.2.2 Key Findings that support humanitarian action in Food

Yemen imports most of its rice and wheat flour. The fragile security and presence of mines and bobby traps has also had its toll on the distribution of food to most affected population. A WFP report suggests that a substantial number of IDPs depends on food rations as their primary and most immediate need[footnoteRef:7]. [7: WFP 2012 Emergency Food and Nutritional Support to Conflict affected populations in Yemen 12/2011 ]

Rising food prices together with reduced purchasing power are contributing to increasing food insecurity in Abyan and the south. 81% of the assessed communities identified food as a “serious problem” in their communities with availability and limited economic resources identified as the principal underlying factors (Figure 7). The food security situation therefore calls for the immediate provision of basic food items. At the twelve locations, four of these attribute it to availability; three attribute it to economic constraints and one attributed it to issues of quality (Table 4, Annex C).

Figure 7: Main concerns related to Food as a serious problem

3.2.3 Key Findings that support humanitarian action in Shelter

Two problem areas relating to shelter were asked in the assessment; place to live in and Clothing, Shoes, Bedding and Blankets.

a) Place to Live In:

Despite the prolonged crisis in Abyan, 56% of the assessed communities do not identify an “adequate place to live in” as a “serious problem”. However, of the 44% that consider it as a “serious problem” the problem was attributed to availability and limited economic resources (see Figure 8 and Table 5 in Annex C).

Figure 8: Main concerns related to Place To Live as a serious problem

b) Clothing, Shoes, Bedding and Blankets (CSBB)

The assessment showed that 58% of the KIs considered CSBB as a “serious problem” with 42% disagreeing. Of those who considered it a “serious problem”, 66% considered economic constraints as the main contributing factor followed by availability (28%) (Figure 9). Table 4 of Annex C shows the identification of the main concerns per location.

Based on the responses to questions about “place to live in” and “CSBB”, shelter is less of a “serious problem” when compared to WASH and Food. At the locations, four revealed that the principal underlying causes was economic constraints (Table 6, Annex C).

Figure 9: Main concerns related to CSBB as a serious problem

3.2.4 Key Findings that support humanitarian action in Income or Livelihood

The conflict in Abyan has had far reaching impact on the lives and livelihood of the population. Increase in prices of basic commodities and lack of jobs has severely affected both IDPs and host communities. This has been confirmed in the assessment with 77% of the KIs considering Income or Livelihood as a “serious problem” and attributing it to availability (63%) and economic constraints (25%) as the main concerns (Figure 10).

Figure 10: Main concerns related to Income/Livelihood as a serious problem

At the individual locations all the KIs ranked availability high in all the communities assessed except Al-Makhzan (Table 7, Annex C).

3.2.5 Key Findings that support humanitarian action in Health

Two problem areas were reviewed to assess if serious problems exist in the health sector; health care and physical health of both under five and population over five years of age.

a) Health Care

The assessment revealed that health care is a “serious problem” by all assessed communities with 52% attributing it to availability and 46% attributing it to limited economic resources (Figure 11). Examination of the responses of individual assessed communities also showed that it was evenly split between availability and economic constraints as their main concerns related to Health Care as a serious problem (Table 8, Annex C).

Figure 11: Main concerns related to Health Care as a serious problem

b) Physical Health

79% of the assessed communities identify physical health as a “serious problem”. Of the underlying factors contributing to physical health of under five children, 76% attribute it to numerous cases of diarrhea and fever and 22% attributing it to respiratory diseases (Figure 12).

Figure 12: Main concerns related to Physical Health (under 5 years of age) as a serious problem

In the population over five years of age, most of the concerns are from pregnancy related diseases (22%) followed by fever, diarrhea, injury and disability (Figure 13).

Tables 9 and 10 in Annex C show the frequency of responses in terms of the underlying causes at each of the assessed communities.

Figure 13: Main concerns related to Physical Health (over 5) as a serious problem

3.2.6 Key Findings that support humanitarian action in Protection

Quite a number of problem used in the assessment characterize issues of protection in the assessed communities. The following examines the frequency of the responses.

a) Distress: Almost all of the communities (98%) assessed identify “distress” as a “serious problem”.

b) Safety: Only 37% consider safety of people as a “serious problem” with 63% considering it not as a “serious problem”. Of the underlying causes, 56% attribute it to landmines and Unexploded Ordinances. Even though safety is not considered by a great number of KIs to be a “serious problem”, however, quite a number of KIs cited it as a safety concern (Table 11, Annex C).

Figure 14: Main concerns related to Safety as a serious problem

c) Separation from family members: 88% of the assessed do not identify separation as a “serious problem”.

d) Being Displaced From Home: 71% of the KIs identify displacement from home as a “serious problem”. Of the main causes they attribute it to issues relating to availability and security concerns ( see Figure 15 and Table 12, Annex C).

Figure 15: Main concerns related to being displaced from home as a serious problem

e) Main concerns of cohabitation: Table 13 in Annex C shows the main concerns regarding cohabitation in the assessed communities. In the 12 communities, 38% of the KIs indicated unequal access to safe drinking water and unequal access to fuel or other basic goods as the main causes regarding cohabitation.

f) Respect: 88% of the assessed do not consider lack of respect as a “serious problem” in their communities.

g) Movement between Places: 84% of the assessed do not identify movement between places as a “serious problem”. However, 16% identify it as a “serious problem” and attribute it to not enough access to food (22%), health services (22%), safe water (11%), not enough access to fuel or basic goods (11%) and others reasons (36%) (Figure 16).

Figure 16: Main concerns related to movement between places as a serious problem

h) Too much free time: 74% of the assessed consider too much free time as a “serious problem” in their communities.

I) Law and Justice: 70% of the assessed do not consider law and justice a “serious problem”. Only 30% consider it a “serious problem”. This pattern is also observed at the FLA level.

j) Safety or Protection: Similarly 88% of the assessed do not consider safety or protection from violence within the community as a “serious problem”.

k) Care for people who are on their own: The assessment revealed that caring for people living alone is also not a “serious problem”.

3.2.7 Key Findings that support humanitarian action in Education

86% of the assessed identify education as a “serious problem” in their communities as children are either not in schools or are not getting a good enough education. Of the main concerns relating to the problem of education, 76% attribute it to availability, whilst 13 % attribute it to economic constraints (see Figure 17 and Table in Annex 14).

Figure 17: Main concerns related to Education as a serious problem

3.2.8 Key Findings that support humanitarian action in Coordination

Two problem areas were selected to assess serious problems in the coordination sector.

a) Information: 76% of the assessed do not identify access to information as a “serious problem”.

b) The way aid is provided: 74% of the assessed think that the way aid is provided is a “serious problem” in their communities due to inadequate aid. Table 15 shows that at the individual locations most of the responses highlight quality, availability, and political interference as the main concerns relating to the way aid is provided.

3.2.9 Other Problems

KIs were also asked if there were other problems faced in the communities that were not asked in the questionnaire. Tables 3 and 4 shows other problems cited although most of it were specifically asked in the questionnaire. However, quite a few additions were made that include; lack of water for irrigation, concerns about rehabilitation of homes, restoration of basic services, mine clearance, loss of assets and increase in prices.

Table 3: Other Serious Problems as perceived by KI in the assessed locations

Locations

Geography

OTHER SERIOUS PROBLEMS: Are there any other serious problems in your community beside those asked in questionnaire

Sectors

Al-Husn

Rural

Concerns about assets that have been destroyed. Lack of basic services (like water & electricity), presence of Mines.

Loss of assets, lack of services (water & electricity) & Protection

Al-Jool

Rural

 

 

Al-Kud

Rural

Lack of basic services ( like water & electricity), presence of Mines, mine victims, provision of assistance to IDPs with host families, water trucking,

Protection, health care, basic infrastructure (electricity)

Al-Makhzan

Rural

Inadequate sanitation, mine clearance, lack of schools particularly secondary schools for girls and boys, agriculture & support to farmers

Sanitation, Food security, Protection & Education

Al-Musemir

Rural

Shortage of medicine

Health Care

Al-Rowah

Rural

Sanitation, Unemployment, Communications, Mosquitoes

Sanitation, Livelihood

Amodiah

Rural

Lack of mine Awareness, presence of mines

Protection

Allohom

Urban

Lack of water , lack of water for farm irrigation, Sanitation, the absence of police , security & local authorities, the role of popular committee

Wash, Agriculture & Protection

Al-Mehraq

Urban

Shortage of income and livelihood opportunities influencing availability of toilettes

Income/Livelihood, & Toilets

Batis

Urban

Price increase, Sanitation, & Lack of Telecommunication

Price increases, Sanitation, & Lack of Telecommunication

Qaderallah

Urban

1. Families are below the poverty line. Ten people within the family having an a average of 28,000 YR per month. 2. Security problem. 3. Problem with sanitation, 4. Problem with the distribution of health equipment. & 5. Absence of government forces & police station.

Protection, Income, Health Care

Zinjibar City/Al-Asalah

Urban

There are mines, mosquitoes, malaria, no available mosquito nets, no field hospital & deteriorating security

Sanitation (mosquitoes breeding), Protection, Health Care

Table 4: Other serious problems affecting communities at the FLA

No

Locations

Geography

OTHER SERIOUS PROBLEMS: Are there any other serious problems in the community assessed which I have not been listed above?

1

Al-Husn

Rural

Concerns about reconstruction of their destroyed houses, Mines, The basic services such electricity , water and infrastructure

2

Al-Jool

Rural

 

3

Al-Kud

Rural

Collective water tanks - Providing tent - Mines awareness - Disability which affect youth income

4

Al-Makhzan

Rural

Farmers are facing problems with irrigating their lands

5

Al-Musemir

Rural

Shortage of medicine

6

Al-Rowah

Rural

Security ,Sanitation ,Unemployment , Telecommunications

7

Amodiah

Rural

Mines and UXOs

8

Allohom

Urban

Water network, farmers using drink water for irrigation, and security problems

9

Al-Mehraq

Urban

 

10

Batis

Urban

Increase of Prices, Sanitation, Lack of telecommunication

11

Qaderallah

Urban

Poverty is a serious problem in their community Eg: the families consist of 10 members and they are all earning 28,000 YR used for rent (7000yer) and food

3.2.10 Findings of SMART Survey in Lahj governorates

A two-stage cluster sampling methodology using probability proportional to size, 40 and 36 cluster were selected for the Lowland and Mountainous surveys, respectively. Data collection continued from 30th June until 14th July of 2012 in two phases- Lowland zone in the 1st phase and Mountainous zone in the 2nd phase. A total of 1571 children (803 from Lowland and 768 from Mountainous zones) aged 6-59 months from 1504 households (799 from Lowland; and 705 from Mountainous zones) were assessed.

Results revealed a global acute malnutrition (GAM) rate of 23% exceeding the emergency threshold of 15%, and severe acute malnutrition (SAM) rate of 4.5% in the lowland ecological zone. While the GAM rate was 14.3% and SAM rate 2.8% in the mountainous zone which classify the situation as serious according to WHO classification. The results indicate critical nutrition levels in lowland and serious nutrition levels in the mountainous zone, according to WHO severity classification.

3.3. Prioritization

The assessment found that water, sanitation and hygiene together with food and health care services are the top three priorities for almost all the localities assessed.

Table 5 shows the result of the prioritization of problem areas by both KIs and FLAs. At the KI level, water (47%) was ranked the first priority followed by food (33%) as second priority and health care (35%) as the third priority. At the FLA level, water again rated as the first priority (50%) with both food and health care tying as second priority (25% each) and food also ranking as the third priority (33%).

Again there is a high similarity between the KI and FLA level showing a 0.92 correlation between the responses.

Table 5: Prioritisation of problem areas

Problem Area

KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEW

FIRST LEVEL ANALYSIS

First Priority

Second Priority

Third Priority

First Priority

Second Priority

Third Priority

WATER

47%

21%

2%

50%

17%

0%

FOOD

9%

33%

23%

8%

25%

33%

PLACE TO LIVE IN

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

TOILETS

0%

7%

0%

0%

8%

0%

KEEPING CLEAN

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

CLOTHING, SHOES, BEDDING or BLANKETS

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

INCOME OR LIVELIHOODS

7%

0%

2%

8%

0%

0%

PHYSICAL HEALTH

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

HEALTH CARE

23%

12%

35%

17%

25%

25%

DISTRESS

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

SAFETY

2%

2%

19%

0%

0%

17%

EDUCATION

0%

12%

7%

0%

8%

17%

SEPARATION FROM FAMILY MEMBERS

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

BEING DISPLACED FROM HOME

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

INFORMATION

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

THE WAY AID IS PROVIDED

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

RESPECT

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

MOVING BETWEEN PLACES

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

TOO MUCH FREE TIME

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

LAW AND JUSTICE

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

SAFETY OR PROTECTION FROM VIOLENCE WITHIN THE COMMUNITY

2%

0%

0%

8%

0%

0%

ALCOHOL OR DRUG USE

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

MENTAL ILLNESS

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

CARE FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE ON THEIR OWN

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

OTHER SERIOUS PROBLEMS

9%

14%

12%

8%

17%

8%

 

 

 

 

 

 

Affected Beneficiaries:

86% All groups affected

90 % All groups affected

88% All groups affected

91% All groups affected

100 % All groups affected

92% All groups affected

Of the most affected groups within the communities, the assessment shows that all the groups were equally affected by the problems.

Examination of the results of the assessed communities showed a high similarity between the priorities of the individual locations at the KI level and those at the FLA with water having the highest frequency as the first priority. Although protection was not cited as one of the top three priorities overall, however, at the individual community level a different pattern was observed. Protection was more pronounced in urban areas with Qaderallah citing it as the first priority problem and Allohom & Al-Mehraq citing it as third priority problem (Table 6). Education was also not cited as a first priority problem in any of the locations. However, it was cited as a second priority in Al-Makhzan and Allohom with boys & girls being most affected. As a third priority problem, it was also cited by Al-Rowah. Electricity or the lack of it was mentioned as a first priority problem in Al-Musemir, and as a second priority in Amodiah and as both second and third priorities in Zinjibar city.

Table 6: Top three priorities (1st, 2nd & 3rd) as perceived by KIs in the assessed localities

Locations

Geography

First Priority Problem

First priority: Most affected groups

Second Priority Problem

Second priority: Most affected groups

Third Priority Problem

Third priority: Most affected groups

Al-Husn

Rural

Food

All groups

Toilets

All groups

Health care

All groups

Al-Jool

Rural

Water

All groups

Food

All groups

Health care

All groups

Al-Kud

Rural

Water

All groups

Food

All groups

Health care

All groups

Al-Makhzan

Rural

Health Care

All groups/Women

Education

Boys

Protection

All groups

Al-Musemir

Rural

Electricity

All groups/Girls

Water

All groups

Health care

All groups

Al-Rowah

Rural

Health Care

All groups

Food

All groups

Education

Boys & Girls

Amodiah

Rural

Water

All groups

Electricity

All groups

Food

All groups

Allohom

Urban

Water

All groups

Education

All groups

Protection

All groups

Al-Mehraq

Urban

Water/Health Care

All groups

Water

All groups

Protection

All groups

Batis

Urban

Income/Livelihood

All groups

Health Care

All groups

Food

All groups

Qaderallah

Urban

Protection

All groups

Water

All groups

Food

All groups

Zinjibar City/Al-Asalah

Urban

Water

All groups

Food/Electricity

All groups

Food/Electricity

All groups

At the FLA level, protection also seemed to be more pronounced in the urban areas with Qaderalla citing it as a first priority and as a third priority in Al-Mehraq (Table 7). Like the KI interviews, Al-Makhzan also cited protection as a third priority. Again Education was not cited as a first priority problem in any of the locations at the FLA but was cited as a second priority in Al-Makhzan and as a third priority at Al-Rowah and Allohom. Unlike the KIs, all groups are affected at the FLA. At the FLA, electricity or the lack of it was mentioned as a first priority problem in Al-Musemir, and as a second priority in Amodiah and Zinjibar and as third priority in Al Kud.

Table 7: Top three priorities (1st, 2nd & 3rd) as perceived at the FLA for each of the assessed localities

Location

Geography

First Priority Problem

First priority: Most affected groups

Second Priority Problem

Second priority: Most affected groups

Third Priority Problem

Third priority: Most affected groups

Al-Husn

Rural

Food

All groups

Toilets

All groups

Health care

All groups

Al-Jool

Rural

Water

All groups

Food

All groups

Health care

All groups

Al-Kud

Rural

Water

All groups

Food

All groups

Electricity

All groups

Al-Makhzan

Rural

Health Care

All groups

Education

All groups

Protection

All groups

Al-Musemir

Rural

Electricity

All groups

Water

All groups

Health care

All groups

Al-Rowah

Rural

Health Care

All groups

Food

All groups

Education

All groups

Amodiah

Rural

Water

All groups

Electricity

All groups

Food

All groups

Allohom

Urban

Water

All groups

Health Care

All groups

Education

All groups

Al-Mehraq

Urban

Water

All groups

Health Care

All groups

Protection

All groups

Batis

Urban

Income/Livelihood

All groups

Health Care

All groups

Food

All groups

Qaderallah

Urban

Protection

All groups

Water

All groups

Food

All groups

Zinjibar City/Al-Asalah

Urban

Water

All groups

Electricity

All groups

Food

All groups

4.0 Conclusion

1. WASH (Water, Toilets & Keeping Clean) was identified as a “serious problem” in all the assessed communities.

2. Food was identified as a “serious problem” in the assessed communities.

3. Health care services were identified as a “serious problem” in the assessed communities.

4. Livelihood of over 70% of the communities is described as a “serious problem”.

5. The top three most “serious problems” as identified by both Key Informants (KI) and community groups are water, food and health care with all groups equally affected.

6. Protection was identified as a priority problem in the urban areas of Qaderallah, Allohom and Al-Mehraq.

7. Education is a priority problem in Al-Makhzan, Allohom and Al-Rowah with boys & girls being most affected.

8. Basic service such as electricity is a priority problem in Al-Musemir, Amodiah and Zinjibar city.

5.0: Lessons Learned

5.1: Training:

5.1.1-The insufficient time duration of training;

Although the teams received two full days of training on MIRA methodology (theoretically & practically), it was insufficient to provide them with a full understanding on the MIRA forms and the data to be collected, on the other hand an additional training material in Arabic unfortunately was not explained to the teams thoroughly and were not handed over to the teams before enough time.

Lesson learned:

· Sufficient training period(theoretical & practical) should be assigned to the assessment teams and keep the trained staff in roster,

· Time needs to be dedicated for additional clarification

· Training material should be provided to teams a week before conducting field visits to ensure full understanding of the assessment.

5.1.2-Not abiding by the MIRA methodology & training instructions:

It was witnessed that in some cases the teams were rushing in to filling the forms during the interview time. Most of the first part (description module MIRA1) and all the third part (first level analysis module MIRA3) been filed by team leaders after getting back from the field in the next 2/3 days and according to their personal perspectives.

Lesson learned:

· Team members should abide by the MIRA methodology and training instructions.

· Providing the teams with sufficient GPS equipments; so team leader can complete the first module.

· Time should be provided to the teams as a working day after the field visit to complete module three by all team members in a wrap up session.

· Assessment coordinator need to conduct monitoring visits during the field visits and during the last wrap up session.

5.1.3-Misunderstanding of questions:

The interpretation of questions led to different meaning.

Lesson learned:

· The Arabic translation of the forms needs to be strengthened.

· Thorough training should be provided.

· Enough time needs to be dedicated for defining different terminologies used by different clusters.

· The IF should be reviewed after each training session to incorporate the needed explanation in s separate guidance to be provided to team members.

5.1.4-Lack of experience in data collecting & communicating with local communities:

Some of the team members did not introduce the assessment and IF and team members properly to informants and assessed communities. In addition, some team members used technical terminologies. In some cases also the dialect used is different from the local dialect with a mixed English language.

Lesson learned:

· Team members should be provided with K1 techniques,

· Selection of team members in best cases should based on previous experience and if not;

· Basic instructions need to be part of the training; like: introducing the team members, explaining the objective of the assessment and stress on avoiding the use of technical words as much as possible.

5.1.5.The gender balance on the team:

One of the main gaps was no enough female in the teams. Due to traditional habits; local women need female to talk with them.

Lesson learned:

Ensure a gender balance is essential to collect reliable information that represent the needs of all groups men/ women and children.

5.1.6.Security issues:

The teams could not visit all planned sites due to security incidents.

Lesson learned:

Alternative sites need to be assigned.

5.1.7. Gap in collecting collective information:

The IF is missing questions for Nutrition, although it is one of the major crisis at the national level.

Lesson learned:

· Continue discussion with clusters who are relying on household level.

· Seeking advice from NTF and clusters in the field for finding a proper way for incorporating HH level type of information in CBL tool; in both IF and MIRA report.

· Protection cluster and nutrition cluster need to be consulted more to enhance the sections related to protection and nutrition and to ensure comprehensive overview can be covered in future assessments.

5.2: Data entry phase:

The data entry team faced many obstacles:

1. Repeating data entry for some forms due to problems with the internet connection

1. The website response faced delay and sometimes data lost due to slow internet speed.

1. Some comments on the platform :

· In section 2 in Module 2& 3 … the most affected groups do not give you more selection choices than one only for each priority.

· The ranking of questions in Module 3 is not correct (starting from G15).

· G15 in Module 3 (COHABITING) is not mentioned in Module 2.

Lesson learned:

· All of these technical issues should be reviewed and solved by the assessment technical provider, to avoid any issues at the data entry phase.

· If possible and internet is available in the areas to be assessed, IF need to be on smart phones or iPads or other smart instruments.

Annex A

Multi/cluster-sector initial & rapid assessment (MIRA)

Community level assessment

Assessment Form & Instructions

التقييم الأولي والسريع متعدد القطاعات

تقييم المستوى المجتمعي

استمارة التقييم والتوجيهات

I. Description Module

(The description module needs to be filled in by all team members - collectively - before the assessment starts. It provides a description of the site and community assessed. This information is essential to compare the humanitarian situation across different affected areas or communities and establish humanitarian priorities.CAUTION: In some instances, assessment teams will visit sites where different communities coexist. A village may for example be composed of both host and displaced communities. Whenever feasible, communities of interest should be assessed independently (using different investigation forms). Standard definitions are provided in Annex I.)

- وحدة الوصف1

هناك حاجة لتعبئة وحدة الوصف من قبل جميع أفراد الفريق جماعياً قبل بدء التقييم. إنها تقدم وصفاً للموقع والتقييم المجتمعي. وهذه المعلومات ضرورية لمقارنة الوضع الإنساني في مختلف المناطق أو المجتمعات المتأثرة وإنشاء أولويات إنسانية.

تحذير: في بعض الحالات تقوم فرق التقييم بزيارة مواقع حيث تتعايش مجتمعات مختلفة. يمكن أن تتكون قرية على سبيل المثال من كل من المجتمعات المضيفة والنازحة. وحيثما كان مجدياً فإن المجتمعات المعنية ينبغي تقييمها بصورة مستقلة (باستخدام مختلف استمارات التحقيق) توجد تعاريف معيارية في الملحق (1).

D1. Characteristics of the assessment

Date:

Team name/code:

Team leader/organization :

Assessment code*:

* assign an arbitrary code (for example use the 2 initials of the district of the assessment and the time (hour.mn) of the assessment: “AD1530”) and replicate this code on the front page of each of the modules of the assessment before distributing to team members

د-1 خصائص التقييم

التاريخ:

اسم/رمز الفريق:

رئيس الفريق/المنظمة:

رمز التقييم:*

* خصص رمز جزافي (على سبيل المثال استخدام حرفين كبيرين لمديرية التقييم) والوقت (الساعة والدقيقة) للتقييم: "AD1530") وكرر هذا الرمز على أعلى صفحة كل وحدات التقييم قبل التوزيع إلى أفراد الفريق

D2. Administrative and geographical location of the site

Governorate:

District:

Sub district:

Village:

Place code (if available):

Latitude:

Longitude:

د-2 الموقع الإداري والجغرافي للموقع

المحافظة:

المديرية:

المركز:

القرية:

رمز المكان (إن وجد):

خط العرض:

خط الطول:

D3. Type of setting

□ Urban

□ Rural

□ Other (specify):

د-3 نوع الوضع

· حضري

· ريفي

· أخرى (حدد).

D4. Type of settlement

Private or individual accommodation

□ Individual homes (non-hosted)

□ Non host

□ Others (specify):

Camp or camp-like settlement

□ Planned camp or settlement

□ Self-settled camp or settlement

□ Collective center

□ Reception or transit site

د-4 نوع التجمع السكاني

سكن خصوصي أو فردي

·

منازل فردية (غير مضيفة)

· لا يوجد ضيف

· أخرى (حدد)

مخيم أو تجمع سكاني شبيه بالمخيم

· مخيم أو تجمع سكانيشبه مخطط

· مخيم أو تجمع سكانيمأهول ذاتياً

· مركز جماعي

· موقع استقبال أو عبور

D4a. In the case of a camp or camp-like settlement: is there a site leader/manager?

□ Yes

Name:

Contact (tel.):

Organization:

□ No

□ Do not know

د-4-أ في حالة مخيم أو تجمع سكاني شبه مخيم: هل هناك رئيس/مدير موقع؟

· نعم

الاسم:

الاتصال (تلفون):

المنظمة:

· لا

· لا أعرف

D5. Are people moving from or to the site in ways that may significantly influence the population (tick all that apply)?

□ People are coming in the site

□ People are moving out the site

□ People are returning to the site

□ There are no significant population movements

د-5 هل يتحرك الناس من وإلى الموقع في طرق يمكن أن تؤثر بصورة كبيرة على السكان

(ضع إشارة على كل ما ينطبق)؟

· يأتي الناس إلى الموقع

· يتحرك الناس خارج الموقع

· يعود الناس إلى الموقع

· ليس هناك تحركات سكانية كبيرة

D6. Characteristics of the community assessed *

Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

□ Affected

□ Non displaced

□ Host

□ Non host

□ Displaced

□ IDPs

□ Refugees and/or asylum seekers

□ Migrants

□ Others of concern

□ Returnees

□ Returning from IDP situation

□ Returning from refugee situation

*to the extent possible, the assessment team should assess only one group (level 3) at a time as different groups - even when living in the same site - may have different needs. When groups cannot be assessed independently (e.g. lack of representative Key Informant) tick all that apply. Definitions of each group are provided in Annex I.

د-6 خصائص المجتمع الذي جرى تقييمه*

المستوى1

المستوى 2

المستوى3

· متأثر

· غير نازح

· مضيف

· غير مضيف

· نازح

· نازحين

·

· لاجئين و/أو طالبي لجوء

·

· مهاجرين

·

· آخرين ذوي اهتمام

· عائدين

· عائدين من وضع نزوح

·

· عائدين من وضع لجوء

* إلى المدى الممكن على فريق التقييم أن يقيم فقط مجموعة واحدة (المستوى 3) في وقت حيث المجموعات المختلفة - حتى عند العيش في نفس الموقع - يمكن أن يكون لديها احتياجات مختلفة. عندما لا يمكن تقييم المجموعات بصورة مستقلة (مثلاًعدم وجود مقدم المعلومات الأساسي الممثل) ضع إشارة على ما ينطبق. تعريفات كل مجموعة موجودة في الملحق (1).

D7. What is the estimated size of the population on site (total)?

د-7 ما هو الحجم التقديري للسكان في الموقع (إجمالي)؟

D8. What is the estimated size of the community assessed?

د-8 ما هو الحجم التقديري للمجتمع الذي جرى تقييمه؟

D9. If any – which are the other characteristics of the site or the community assessed that may have a significant influence on affected people’s ability to cope with the crisis or that may influence the type of interventions required? (e.g. important sex and/or age and/or ethnic unbalance within the community, etc.)?

د-9 إن وجد - ما هي الخصائص الأخرى للموقع أو المجتمع الذي جرى تقييمه التي يمكن أن يكون لها تأثير كبير على قدرة الناس المتأثرين في التغلب على مشكلات ومصاعبالأزمة أو التي يمكن أن تؤثر على نوع التدخلات المطلوبة؟ (مثلاًجنس و/أو عمر هام و/أو عدم توازن عرقي ضمن المجتمع ...)؟

II. Generalist Key Informant Module

(The Generalist Key Informant Module can be filled in by the different team members independently. It is composed of 2 sections:Section 1 allows for the identification of serious problems faced by communities and their main causes. It is based on affected communities’ perception of the situation. Section 2 allows respondents to rank their top 3 problems and identify for each of the priority problems, sub-groups within the community that are more impacted.It is recommended to interview 4 generalist key informant in each community assessed: two male and two female. If different communities need to be assessed in one site, it is recommended to start assessing those simultaneously to mitigate possible resentment among affected communities.CAUTION: Ensure that the assessment code (defined in D1 of the Description Module) is reported on the front page of each module of the Investigation Form before distributing them to team members.)

- نموذج مقدم معلومات رئيسي عام2

يمكن تعبئة نموذج مقدم المعلومات الرئيسي العام من قبل مختلف أفراد الفريق بصورة مستقلة. وهو يتكون من قسمين:

القسم 1: يسمح بتحديد المشكلات الخطيرة التي تواجه المجتمعات وأسبابها الرئيسية. وهي مبنية على رؤية المجتمعات المتأثرة للوضع.

القسم 2: يسمح للمجيبين بترتيب المشكلات الثلاث الأولى وتحديد كل المشكلات ذات الأولوية والمجموعات الفرعية ضمن المجتمع والمتأثرة أكثر.

نوصي بمقابلة أربعة مقدمي معلومات رئيسيين عامين في كل مجتمع جرى تقييمه (اثنين من الذكور واثنين من الإناث) إذا كانت هناك حاجة لتقييم المجتمعات المختلفة في موقع واحد نوصي ببدء تقييم أولئك بصورة متزامنة لتخفيف إمكانية الاستياء بين المجتمعات المتأثرة.

تحذير: تأكد أن رمز التقييم (المعرف في د-1 من نموذج الوصف) موجود على أعلى صفحة كل وحدة من استمارة التقييم قبل توزيعها على أعضاء الفريق.

Assessment Code:

رمز التقييم:

Key Informant profile:

□ Female □ Male

Social background / position:

Function:

Age:

صورة عن مقدم المعلومات الرئيسي

· أنثى ذكر

الخلفية الاجتماعية/المركز:

الوظيفة:

العمر:

SECTION I

Identification of “serious problems” and their potential causes

القسم 1

تحديد "المشكلات الخطيرة" وأسبابها المحتملة

G1. WATER: Is there a serious problem in your community because people do not have enough water that is safe for drinking or cooking?

□ Yes□ No □ Do not know

ز-1 الماء: هل هناك مشكلة خطيرة في مجتمعك لأن الناس ليس لديهم مياه كافية آمنة للشرب أو الطبخ؟

نعم لا لا أعرف

G1a. If yes, what are the main concerns related to water (choose up to 3)?

There is not enough water/water points available

The water available is not safe for drinking or cooking (e.g. due to contamination by excreta)

There is not enough water sanitation/treatment capacity (e.g. filters, chlorine tabs)

There are not enough recipients (jerry cans, buckets) - there is not enough water storage capacity

There is not enough access to water due to physical/logistical constraints*

There is not enough access to water due to security constraints

There is not enough access to water due to limited economic resources

Other(s) – specify:

*for example: unavailable transportation, damaged infrastructure (roads, bridges) etc.

ز-1-أ إذا كانت الإجابة نعم ما هي التخوفات الرئيسية الخاصة بالماء (اختر حتى ثلاث إجابات)؟

ليس هناك مياه كافية/نقاط مياه متوفرة

المياه المتوفرة ليست آمنة للشرب أو الطبخ (مثلاً بسبب التلوث بالغائط)

ليس هناك إصحاح مياه كافي/قدرة معالجة (مثلاًفلترات أو حنفيات بالكلور)

ليس هناك متلقين كافين (صفائح، جرادل) - ليس هناك قدرة خزن كافية للمياه

ليس هناك وصول كافي إلى الماء بسبب معوقات مادية/لوجستية*

ليس هناك وصول كافي إلى المياه بسبب الموانع الأمنية

ليس هناك وصول كافي للمياه بسبب محدودية الموارد الاقتصادية

أخرى - حددها

* على سبيل المثال: عدم وجود وسائل النقل وتضرر البنية التحتية (الطرق والجسور ... الخ).

G2. FOOD: Is there a serious problem in your community with food; for example because there is no food or because it is not possible to access or cook food?

□ Yes□ No □ Do not know

ز-2 الغذاء: هل هناك مشكلة خطيرة في المجتمع بالنسبة للغذاء على سبيل المثال بسبب عدم وجود الغذاء أو بسبب أنه من غير الممكن الحصول عليه أو طبخ الطعام؟

نعم لا لا أعرف

G2a. If yes, what are the main concerns related to food (choose up to 3)?

There is not enough food available (including in markets, etc.)

There is not enough diversity in food

There is not enough access to food sources (i.e. markets) due to physical/logistical constraints

There is not enough access to food sources (i.e. markets) due to security constraints

There is not enough access to food sources (i.e. markets) due to limited economic resources

Agricultural production* is disrupted due to the loss of assets (seeds, boats, etc.)

Agricultural production is disrupted due to physical/logistical constraints

Agricultural production is disrupted due to security constraints

Agricultural production is disrupted due to limited economic resources

There are not enough cooking facilities

There are not enough cooking utensils

There is not enough cooking fuel

Other(s) - specify:

*including fishing and livestock

ز-2-أ إذا كانت الإجابة نعم ما هي التخوفات الرئيسية الخاصة بالغذاء (اختر حتى ثلاث إجابات)؟

ليس هناك غذاء كافي متوفر (بما في ذلك في الأسواق .... الخ)

ليس هناك تنوع كافي في الغذاء

ليس هناك وصول كافي إلى مصادر الغذاء (أي الأسواق) بسبب عوائق مادية/لوجستية

ليس هناك وصول كافي لمصادر الغذاء (أي الأسواق) بسبب عوائق أمنية

ليس هناك وصول كافي إلى مصادر الغذاء (أي الأسواق) بسبب محدودية الموارد الاقتصادية

الإنتاج الزراعي مضطرب* بسبب فقدان الممتلكات (البذور والقوارب .... الخ)

الإنتاج الزراعي مضطرب بسبب عوائق مادية/لوجستية

الإنتاج الزراعي مضطرب بسبب عوائق أمنية

الإنتاج الزراعي مضطرب بسبب محدودية الموارد الاقتصادية

ليس هناك تسهيلات طباخة كافية

ليس هناك أدوات طباخة كافية

ليس هناك وقود طباخة كافي

أخرى - حددها:

* بما في ذلك الاصطياد والمواشي.

G3. PLACE TO LIVE IN: Is there a serious problem in your community because people do not have an adequate place to live in?

□ Yes□ No □ Do not know

ز-3 مكان للعيش فيه:

هل هناك مشكلة خطيرة في مجتمعك بسبب أن الناس ليس لديهم مكان للعيش فيه؟

نعم لا لا أعرف

G3a. If yes, what are the main concerns related to shelter (choose up to 3)?

There is not enough shelter space available

There is not enough shelter space available due to grievances on land issues

There is not enough access to rented shelter space due to limited economic resources

There are not enough building/repair materials available locally

There is not enough access to building materials due to physical/logistical constraints

There is not enough access to building materials due to security constraints

There is not enough access to building materials due to limited economic resources

There is a lack of skills to build/repair shelters

There is a lack of basic household items in shelters

Other(s) - specify:

ز-3-إذا كانت الإجابة نعم ما هي التخوفات الرئيسية الخاصة بالمأوى (اختر حتى ثلاث إجابات)؟

ليس هناك حيز مأوى كافي متوفر

ليس هناك حيز مأوى كافي متوفر بسبب شكاوي في قضايا الأرض

ليس هناك حصول كافي على حيز مأوى مستأجر بسبب محدودية الموارد الاقتصادية

ليس هناك مبنى كافي/مواد ترميم متوفرة محلياً

ليس هناك وصول كافي إلى مواد البناء بسبب عوائق مادية/لوجستية

ليس هناك وصول كافي إلى مواد البناء بسبب عوائق أمنية

ليس هناك وصول كافي إلى مواد البناء بسبب محدودية الموارد الاقتصادية

هناك انعدام لمهارات بناء/ترميم المأوى

هناك انعدام لمواد الأسرة الأساسية في المأوى

أخرى - حددها

G4. TOILETS: Is there a serious problem in your community because people do not have easy and safe access to clean toilets?

□ Yes□ No □ Do not know

ز-4 المراحيض: هل هناك مشكلة خطيرة في مجتمعك بسبب أن الناس ليس لديهم وصول سهل وآمن إلى المراحيض النظيفة؟

نعم لا لا أعرف

G4a. If yes, what are the main concerns related to toilets (choose up to 3)?

There are not enough toilets available

There are not enough family toilets available

There are not enough separate toilets for men and women

There is not enough privacy

Toilets are not clean enough (e.g. toilets are not maintained, no soap and water is available)

There is not enough access to toilets due to security constraints

Other(s) - specify:

ز-4-أ إذا كانت الإجابة نعم ما هي التخوفات الرئيسية المتعلقة بالمراحيض (اختر حتى ثلاث إجابات)؟

لا يوجد هناك مراحيض كافية متوفرة

لا يوجد هناك مراحيض أسرية كافية متوفرة

لا يوجد هناك مراحيض مستقلة كافية للرجال والنساء

لا توجد هناك خصوصية كافية

المراحيض غير نظيفة بصورة كافية (مثلاً المراحيض لا يعتني بها و لا يوجد صابون ولا ماء أو مكان مناسب للغسل (عند مقابلة النساء اقترح كذلك انعدام "المواد الصحية" كخيار)

G5. KEEPING CLEAN: Is there a serious problem in your community because it is difficult for people to keep clean; for example because there is not enough soap, water or suitable place to wash (when interviewing women also propose the lack of “sanitary material” as an option)?

□ Yes□ No □ Do not know

ز-5 الاحتفاظ بالنظافة: هل هناك مشكلة خطيرة في مجتمعك بسبب أنه من الصعب على السكان الاحتفاظ بالنظافة: ربما على سبيل المثال لسبب عدم وجود صابون كافي أو مياه كافية أو مكان مناسب للغسيل (عند مقابلة نساء عليك أن تقترح كذلك أن أحد الأسباب قد يكون عدم وجود المواد الصحية)؟

نعم لا لا أعرف

G5a. If yes, what are the main concerns related to keeping clean (choose up to 3)?

There is not enough water available

There is not enough soap available

There are not enough places to wash

There is not enough access to water, soap or places to wash due to security constraints

There is not enough access to water or soap due to limited economic resources

Other(s) - specify:

ز-5-أ إذا كانت الإجابة نعم ما هي التخوفات الرئيسية الخاصة بالنظافة (اختر حتى ثلاث إجابات)؟

لا توجد هناك مياه كافية متوفرة

لا يوجد هناك صابون كافي متوفر

لا يوجد هناك أماكن كافية للغسل

لا يوجد هناك وصول كافي للماء والصابون أو الأماكن للغسل بسبب عوائق أمنية

لا يوجد هناك وصول كافي للماء والصابون بسبب محدودية الموارد الاقتصادية

أخرى - حددها

G6. CLOTHING, SHOES, BEDDING or BLANKETS: Is there a serious problem in your community because people do not have enough or good enough clothing, shoes, bedding or blankets (csbb)?

□ Yes□ No □ Do not know

ز-6 الملابس والأحذية والأسرة أو البطانيات: هل هناك مشكلة خطيرة في مجتمعك بسبب أن الناس ليس لديهم ملابس أو أحذية أو أسرة أو بطانيات كافية أو جيدة؟

نعم لا لا أعرف

G6a. If yes, what are the main concerns related to csbb (choose up to 3)?

There is not enough clothing, shoes, bedding or blankets available (including in markets, etc.)

There is not enough access to csbb due to ph