Tearfund Disaster Management Key Learning Impartiality and Targeting Last Updated: 15 November 2009 Specific actionable recommendations and relevant background information 1 Limit the geographical area of intervention that has been targeted in order to ensure a meaningful level of assistance is provided Source of Learning: Sahel / West Africa, Bangladesh Background Information: In the Sahel response, a key evaluation recommendation was for partners to work in fewer communities in order to increase efficiency and impact of the interventions. The level of need was such that a higher proportion of people within the targeted communities could be justifiably targeted with support. Similarly, in a Bangladesh evaluation, a key recommendation was to reduce the geographical scope of coverage and provide a more significant assistance package to the targeted beneficiaries. If resources are limited and the available assistance is spread too thin, the support provided to individual beneficiaries may be too small to be meaningful. 2 Carefully consider how the organisation’s neutrality will be perceived in relation to its targeting criteria Source of Learning: Darfur/N.Sudan Background Information: In many conflict situations, teams have had to carefully consider their targeting criteria to ensure they are not perceived as favouring one side in a conflict eg. displaced population, host population and other population. In Darfur it has been important to assist vulnerable nomadic populations, vulnerable IDP populations and their hosts. 3 Carefully consider how the targeting criteria might cause resentment in a community Source of Learning: Sierra Leone, Liberia, DRC, South Sudan, Other Background Information: For projects where large scale resettlement is underway, there is a danger that if the focus is exclusively on returnees rather than the existing population (who are often also chronically vulnerable), there may be imbalance in the assistance provided and resentment towards the returnees as well as towards the NGOs. In countries such as Sierra Leone, South Sudan and DRC, our key learning is that targeting criteria have needed to embrace vulnerable residents as well as vulnerable returnees. 4 For food security projects be clear whether you are targeting the most vulnerable or the most motivated farmers Source of Learning: Various Background Information: Beneficiary selection is a critical issue – is the project intending to target the most vulnerable or to target the most motivated farmer? This is especially important when considering alternative agricultural techniques or approaches that require some innovation. The most vulnerable are unlikely to fit this criteria. 5 Aim to target communities where NGO coverage is likely to be low due to limited access, compared to communities where NGO coverage is likely to be higher because they are on a main road and therefore more accessible Source of Learning: Padang, Indonesia Background Information: In the Padang earthquake response, partners observed a noticeable difference in NGO coverage when comparing communities situated on the main roads out of Padang with communities that were more remote. Communities that were away from the main roads and harder to reach by vehicle often had received no NGO assistance whatsoever. This then informed their targeting criteria in seeking out communities in greatest need.