Download PDF - Field Exchange - Emergency Nutrition Network

Methodologically, it really struggled toadapt. A major gap was the lack of anyassessment of DFIS’s capacity to adapt tothis escalating conflict environment, norwas consideration given to bringing inexternal expertise, despite the limitedexpertise in-country to work in such a politicisedconflict environment. Erroneously, thefocus of the country programme was onlongterm issues of vulnerability and foodsecurity in Darfur. But fortuitously thismeant that an external consultant wasbrought in during 2004 to support DFIS toaddress underlying issues of vulnerability.Adapting to the new conflict environmentwas not part of the consultant’s terms of reference,although this soon became central toher role. This input was critical but was late.For example, not until mid-2004 did theHEA methodology adapt to doing rapidassessments. Yet these were needed frommid-2003. When rapid assessments werecarried out, the reports were strong andwell-written. Meanwhile the DFIS bulletinswere not. They tended to follow the old formatso they were neither compelling norclear in terms of their key message. A muchsharper and tighter analysis was needed. Inshort, the key early warning/monitoringrole that SCUK could have played during2004 was not fully realised.In order to respect humanitarian principleswhen conflict broke out, and to protectSCUK’s independence, DFIS needed toadapt institutionally to this changed andhighly politicised environment. Mostnotably it needed to distance itself from government,one of the key actors in the conflict.Unfortunately this took a long time to happen,dangerously affecting perceptions ofSCUK. Such an adjustment in institutionalrelationships would never have been easyand could only have been managed by anexpatriate presence. It was too much to haveasked of national staff who had spent yearsbuilding those relationships.Despite these shortcomings, there is evidencethat DFIS played a valuable role earlyon in the conflict, briefing incoming agenciesand providing time-series data (e.g.market price data) on demand. Althoughslow to be written up, its database on livelihoodsbefore the conflict is invaluable forcomparative purposes to understand howlivelihoods have been affected by the conflict,and is being used as such by a smallnumber of international agencies.SCUK’s withdrawal from Darfur waslamented, without exception, by all agenciesinterviewed during this evaluation. It hasleft a gap in information collection andanalysis at state-level that has not yet beenfilled, as most agencies focus on informationcollection in their own particular geographicarea of coverage. Unfortunately the waythat SCUK withdrew did not help to bridgethis gap. Withdrawal appears to havebecome a logistics exercise in which strategicdecisions about handover to other agenciesand even protection of the SCUKresource base, were overlooked. In short,SCUK has not left behind a functioninginformation system in Darfur.1The Darfur Early Warning and Food InformationSystem. Final Evaluation of Phase 111. By MargieBuchanan-SmithEvaluation of use of IFEtraining materialsBy Chloe AngoodAn evaluation was recently conductedof two training modules (Module 1and 2) on Infant Feeding inEmergencies (IFE) developed by theIFE Core Group (UNICEF, WHO, WFP,UNHCR, IBFAN-GIFA, CARE USA, FondationTerre des hommes and ENN) and produced bythe ENN 1 . The purpose of the training modulesis to prepare emergency relief staff to safeguardmaternal and child health in emergencies byensuring appropriate infant feeding. Module 1is aimed at emergency relief staff while Module2 is more specifically designed for health andnutrition workers directly involved with caregiversand infants. Both modules are availablein print, online and on CD.MethodThe evaluation was conducted betweenFebruary and May 2006 and covered the periodApril 2005 – April 2006. It involved an analysisof ENN’s distribution database, downloadsfrom the ENN website, and an email surveytargeting 100 recipients. Thirty-four recipientsresponded to this email (one third of all recipients).Answers were clarified through furtheremails and telephone calls.Main findingsEvaluationChloe has a Bachelors degree and a Masters degree in Development Studies, withan emphasis on HIV/AIDS, nutrition and agriculture. Following 3 years as a programmeco-ordinator for the NGO, Viva Network, in Zimbabwe, she worked forthe HQ offices of Viva Network (programme management and training) and forMango (recruitment). She is currently studying for a MSc in Public HealthNutrition at the University of Southampton and working part-time for the ENN.Figure 1 Use of materials by respondents2520151050None Own interest On file/in libraryPassed to otherorganisationsDistribution of training materialsThe print materials and CDs were distributedon request by the ENN. A discretionary subsidisedcharge was applied, although the materialswere available free to individuals or agencieswho could not afford to pay for them.Overall, 169 copies of Module 1 and 826 ofModule 2 and 47 CDs were distributed to 28organisations (including UN organisations,local and international NGOs, training andresearch institutions) and 13 individuals in 46different countries. In addition, 1755 itemswere downloaded from ENN’s websitebetween December 2005 and April 2006. Therelatively small number of CDs requested maybe due to lack of marketing as the CDs hadbeen developed and produced by the ENN inhouseon a ‘shoe-string’ budget, with no fundingfor larger scale production and distribution.The majority of the materials (90%) were distributedto IFE Core Group members, mainlyUNICEF, UNHCR, IBFAN-GIFA and CAREUSA. The materials were mostly used internallyby these organisations, in regional and fieldcentres, or were distributed to partners. In someinstances, the materials were shared withdonors to highlight the work of the IFE CoreGroup and in one case cited, to successfullyfundraise for continued agency participation inthe IFE Core Group.Only 10% of the print materials were disseminateddirectly to recipients outside of the IFECore Group. Donor agencies did not feature onthe print distribution list but were targeted bysome IFE Core Group members and at thelaunch of the materials at the UN SCN meetingin 2005.Downloading Module 2 from ENN’s websitemay well be a more practical means of access foragencies – web access was identified as a significantaccess point in a previous evaluation ofModule 1. However, even allowing for that, amore proactive targeting of field level operationsis needed.Uses of materialsThe materials have been used in a variety ofways (See figure 1) in different contexts. Theseinclude:• Training field practitioners. For example,UNHCR in Ethiopia used Module 2 to trainfield personnel in seven refugee camps,including doctors, nurses, midwives,community health agents and traditionalbirth attendants.• Producing other training courses and materials.For example, IBFAN-Asia Pacific usedModules 1 and 2 to develop guidelines fortheir partners in how to survey calamitystruck areas following the Asian tsunami.• As an advocacy tool for policy change(see box 1).1See Modules 1 and 2 online at www.ennonline.net and contactdetails at the end for print copies.Advocacy/awarenessraisingTrainingothersCreating othermaterialsno. respondents20