July 2010
On the road to better….
Response analysis
FSNWG
Food Security and Nutrition Working Group
Efforts in 2012 & 2013
Situation & Response analysis – FSNWG 2012
Regional IPC Map
Seasonal Calendars
Response matrix
1. Situation Analysis
with hotspot details
2. Situation Analysis
seasonality for each
livelihood system
Where are we now?
3. Response analysis
5. Predictive Analysis
3-6 month forecast for
each livelihood system
and wealth group
Where are we going?
6. Response analysis
3-6 month action plan
What could we plan?
Where are we now?
4. Predictive Analysis
3-6 month forecast
Where are we going?
What could we be
doing now?
7. ADVOCACY &
PLANNING
What should we do?
December 2012
On the road to better….
Response analysis:
July 2010
 …past attempts have been challenging
 …is complex, with various layers of enquiry to define the most
appropriate response
 …is context specific – down to LZ & district level
 …its logical or simple for those with intimate knowledge of an area
 …needs to link emergency activities to long-term sustainable
development goals – identification of no regrets options
 …should incorporate lessons from past good practice
 …investigate options outside the box – innovation is key
Data
Process
Purpose
Task
Steps
Finding a common framework using different
approaches…..2012
1. Situation
2. Scenario
3. Response
Current
Conditions
Trigger Event
Most Likely
Outcomes
FSN situation
Hotspot areas
Affected pop.
Analogue
Year/Event
Level of Risk Coping &
Developm
ent
Objectives
IPC situation
analysis
FEWS NET
Gov’t FSN WG
e.g. KFSSG
FSNAU……
FSN maps
Seasonal
calendars
Prices
Production etc
IPC predictive Scenario
HEA
analysis
building
Outcome
IGAD COF
(WFP, FEWS) analysis
El Nino/La
Nina WGs
FSN maps
ICPAC
NDVI
CEWARN
Pop data
Pop data
Trend data
Quantify the
problem
Explain
Outcomes
HEA
baseline
data
Livelihood
Context
4. Contingency
Plan
Response
Options
Response
Selection
Contingency
Plan
Options that
best fit level
of risk,
coping,
developmen
t context
RAF
LEGS
SPHERE
RA
considerations
Preparedness
for timely
implementation
RAF
Decision
trees
Response
selection
matrix
Do No
Harm
indicators
Contingency
planning:
Gov’t e.g. DSGs
WFP
NGOs
Donors?
NDMA/ALRMP
NGO plans &
guidelines
RA
considerations – FSN
& market
Calendars
LT strategies
Response Analysis Considerations
Operating Environment

Situational analysis
o Needs assessment
o Causal analysis
o Projection/forecast
Feasibility analysis












Market assessment
o Feasibility of market interventions
Donor resources
Organizational capacity
Partner agency capacity
Government policy
Access and security
Timeliness
Record of past programs
o M&E records
o Lessons learned documentation
Influence of large agencies
Conditionality/targeting considerations
Logistics
Value for money analysis
adapted from
Dan Maxwell et al. ODI
Agency environment

Organizational considerations
o Mandate and mission
o Objectives in field
o Capacity and skill set
Appropriateness considerations






Internal comparison of response options
– related to best practice
External analysis of gaps in response
Risk assessment/ prevention of
unintended consequences
o Market distortion risks
o Staff security and safety
o Recipient community security
o Risk of theft, diversion or corruption
o Reputational/legal risks to agency
o Do no harm analysis
o Fits into ongoing interventions
Cost effectiveness
Assessment of recipient preferences
Evidence of post-distribution dynamics
Regional seasonal calendars
Seasonal response options:
April – June 2013…..
Dry season
Above normal Long rains
April
Milk available.
May
June
July - Sept
Good pasture/water Calving conditions
Prolonged availability
Looking
forward
to
next
dry
season
July
–
Sept
availability
good but protection to of pasture as rains
• Prioritise to keep young
kids in livestock
school in
are predicted to be
Prices of staples
• Preserve milk andwet/cold
fodder for
the dry season
conditions
good – access to milk
increase slightly as Cattle & shoat
• Diversification
condition
good/priceof off-farm income
own stocks
Monitor
• Expansion of safety nets/ FSL support
diminish waiting for increases
• performance
Surge capacity
of pasture
sectors
- although
• Monitor rain
and
next harvest
susceptible
• Designtoshort-term
interventions contribute to longand water
regeneration,
migration
disease.
term objectives
• labour
Monitor crop
performance,
if rains belowAgricultural
•
Opportunity
to
invest in long-term – innovation,
marginal
farmers/rainfed
opportunitiesnormal check
Improved
availability
commercialisation,
engage private sector, targeting
areas of shoat & cattle
available –weeding
settled poor
milk
Cross-border Crisis Calendar Analysis: 2008/9
Garissa-Afmadow El Niño/floods Contingency Planning
Assessment
• No contingency plan in place
• No analysis done on flood
scenario
• Dissatisfaction with usefulness
of existing CPs for droughts
• No mechanisms for
coordination across-borders
• No mechanisms for joint
strategic analysis and
planning across-Districts
What was done?
• Crisis calendar analysis
• Developed inter-agency
cross-border response
strategy
• Looked at start-up timelines
• Scheduled interventions and
decisions
• Decided on cross-border
coordination mechanisms
• Looked at what needs to
change for this to work!
Flood analysis – Garissa & Afmadow Sept 09
Drought Wajir Pastoralists 2010/2011 –
survival threshold deficits
WSG: P 58%
WSG: M 50%
200%
160%
250%
180%
140%
200%
120%
% minimum food needs
% minimum food needs
160%
% minimum food needs
WSG: R 30%
140%
100%
150%
120%
100%
80%
60%
40%
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
20%
0%
0%
50%
0%
ref.year
curr.year
thresholds
food aid/safety nets
other
labour
livestock sales
crop sales
crops
milk sales
milk
Thresholds
livelihoods protection
survival
ref.year
ref.year
curr.year
thresholds
food aid/safety nets
other
labour
livestock sales
crop sales
crops
milk sales
milk
Thresholds
livelihoods protection
survival
curr.year
thresholds
food aid/safety nets
other
labour
livestock sales
crop sales
crops
milk sales
milk
Thresholds
livelihoods protection
survival
Impact of moderate El- Niño 2012 : Turkana Agro-past
Kerio Riverine Agropastoralists
Very poor
Livelihood deficit 11%
Survival deficit 35%
Total Income (food +cash)
District: Kerio
Livelihood Zone: KAP
Household type: VP
Poor
Livelihood deficit
12%
Survival deficit
10%
Turkwell Riverine Agropastoralists
Very poor
Livelihood deficit 26%
Survival deficit 9%
Total Income (food +cash)
District: Turkwell
Livelihood Zone: TAP
Household type: VP
District: Kerio
Livelihood Zone: KAP
Household type: VP
140%
Total Income (food +cash)
140%
140%
120%
120%
120%
100%
100%
100%
80%
80%
80%
60%
60%
60%
40%
40%
40%
20%
20%
20%
0%
ref.year
curr.year
survival
livelihoods protection
Thresholds
milk
milk sales
crops
crop sales
livestock sales
labour
thresholds
0%
0%
ref.year
curr.year
food aid/safety nets
other
labour
livestock sales
crop sales
crops
milk sales
milk
Thresholds
thresholds
ref.year
curr.year
food aid/safety nets
other
labour
livestock sales
crop sales
crops
milk sales
milk
Thresholds
thresholds
September 2012
FSNWG Livestock & pastoral Sub-group
Identification of response activities
Sectors
• Livestock health & feed
• Human nutrition, health & sanitation
• Access & availability of food
• Water harvesting & collection
• Conflict & cross-border issues
• Infra-structure
• Access to markets & market prices
• Community-based Early Warning
+ Implications for programming
+ Drawing on best practice in similar analogue years
+ targeting hotspots & using on-going programming as
entry points