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.