Scaling Up the Nutrition Response in
CAR – Key Challenges and Lessons
Learnt
1
Needs Assessment and Analysis
2
How were needs assessed in CAR as basis for
response planning?
•
•
•
•
•
•
MIRA was conducted in the five most affected prefectures (Ouham,
Ouham Pende, Ombella Mpoko, Nana Mambere and Bangui) following
the declaration of an interg-agency L3 to collect primary data.
Secondary data were also reviewed to address and further inform the
primary data collection. Participating agencies : 20 (NGOs+UN) – data
collection was done from 23-30 Dec 13
Technical Support for surveys/assessments: Technical lead: WFP - IOM
facilitators in the displacement sites in Bangui
Planning for assessment and resources mobilizations for assessments:
OCHA and partners
Analysis workshop took place in Bangui in January 4 ; Drafting and
revision of MIRA: January 4-5 ; Comments by the InterCluster: January 6;
HC/HCT review and endorsement: January 7-10
SMART survey is being conducted in 16 prefectures – results are
expected Mid-October.
3
Needs Assessment and Analysis- Challenges
• For the nutrition cluster the MIRA data collected was of limited use
• MIRA seemed to be heavy and appeared to be more useful for advocacy
purpose rather than programming
• The villages/quartiers surveyed do not constitute a representative sample of
affected areas;
• Sampling varied because of security;
• Requires secondary data to provide overview; limited secondary data;
• Key informant interviews were predominantly held with local authorities
• SMART delays: recruitment of consultant, setting up of taskforce, access and
security (multiple strategies put in place to mitigate), 2 coordinating gvt
bodies
• Fast-evolving situation  needs change rapidly and central compilation of
new needs/acute situations not well coordinated or disseminate (intersector
level)
Strategic Response Planning
5
How was nutrition cluster strategic
planning developed in CAR?
• Strategic plan was developed based on analysis on geographic priorities, gaps
and updating needs assessment. SRP was adequately aligned with other
programming – needs revision
• The selection and prioritization of projects, and the review and endorsement
of projects was done through selection committee put in place by the cluster
• Target caseload determined, discussed and agreed by cluster members
during a review meetings
• 3/4Ws was done and continually updated to do gap analysis during cluster
meeting - bilateral meeting with partner with regard to geographic coverage
by prefectures and level of implementation of different activities – feedback
were provided to partners, OCHA and donors.
• Issue of “hotspots/enclaves  inter-sector action plans for specific enclaves
put in place
6
Response Planning-Issues and Challenges
• Limited number of cluster partners for nutrition and low technical capacity
of partners in CMAM
• Lack of engagement from partners to take on MAM programming
• Lack of government capacity and lower involvement
• Heavy strategic planning process vs. extremely fast-evolving situation 
means strategic planning often takes too long/no longer up-to-date
• Focus of response was initially in Bangui, lack of inter-sectoral strategy for
outside Bangui  now hubs established
Resource mobilisation
8
Resources…
1.Finance
2.Supply
3.People
Funding
•
•
•
•
Major issues with funding during the first four months of L3 (only
financed at 2%)
Funding was captured through the prioritization of proposals for the CHF
against the cluster strategic plan, and additional funds received from
donors through OPS.
The cluster advocate for gaps through effective communication during
meeting with donors, HCT and others stakeholders, and developed
advocacy notes
Currently funded at 34% (Source: OCHA FTS)
10
Funding issues and challenges
• Initially importance of nutrition was overlooked in CAR
 change in humanitarian leadership and increased
advocacy means profile of nutrition has gone up
• Most of partners are funded through UNICEF and WFP,
which delayed nutrition cluster capacity to scale up due
to administrative procedures of delayed fund release
11
Resource Mobilisation: SUPPLY
12
Supplies
• Caseload calculations were used to identify quantity of nutrition supplies
needed.
• The cluster promoted information sharing around shelf life, storage
conditions and facilitates the planning for preposition and delivery of
supplies through regular cluster meetings and bilateral meetings with
common suppliers.
13
Supplies challenges
• Partners are reluctant to share on monthly basic the status of
their stock.
• Prepositioned stocks were challenged due to security
14
Resource Mobilisation:
HUMAN RESOURCE CAPACITY
Human Resources
• Capacity mapping was conducted for scale up
• Capacity gaps and training needs were identified and included in the SRP
•
On-job training was on partners personnel to build their capacity on IM
16
Human Resources-Challenges
• High turn-over of staff in the field
• Organisations with large scope yet limited human resources to
implement adequately at large scale
• Low human capacity of government
17
Implementation and Monitoring
18
Implementation and Monitoring
•
•
•
•
•
•
Partners were engaged on the definition of objectives/activities/outcomes during
the analysis of SRP. Indicators for monitoring were then identified from each
outcome.
A Nutrition Information Management System was put in place. An
evaluation/Tracking matrix was developed.
According to the protocol put in place, partners were requested to submit their
statistical reports on monthly basic using a new reporting template.
How was the progress in implementation by partners shared and communicated
within the cluster and other stakeholders through bulletin, dashboard, Sitrep and
cluster meetings.
Situation monitoring was generally done by cluster member together with cluster
coordination in the field with focus priority areas. Situation is regularly monitored
and reported against plans with direct measurement of results. Regular meeting is
held to present nutrition cluster data in nutrition cluster meetings with a focus on
analysis and response. Any data collected are analysed and feedback to partners.
Gaps in interventions were systematically identified through a regularly meeting
with partners on the ground. Information collected was used to produce
geographic mapping of CMAM services at prefecture and sub-prefecture level.
19
Cluster achievements
As of end August 2014
137%
BSFP beneficiaries *(6-59 months)
MNP beneficiaries (6-59 months)
102%
IYCF counselling (pregnant and children 023 months)
49%
-
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
80%
SAM admissions (6-59 months)
MAM admissions (6-59 months)
42%
-
Achieved
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
Target
20
Implementation and MonitoringChallenges
•
Progress in gathering data and information for timely, regular reports and for
decision- makers was often, due to inadequate knowledge and skills in data
collection.
•
•
Staff turnover, poor communication, problem of access, insecurity and
transportation make data collection and management more expensive and time
intensive.
Incomplete and no reporting affected the nutrition performance monitoring.
•
QUALITY OF DATA
•
Delayed on implementation due to administrative delays of UNICEF and WFP in
finalizing partnership agreements
21