Fighting Hunger Worldwide Emergency response to conflictaffected people in Eastern Ukraine Monitoring and Evaluation Report January - June 2016
Executive Summary This monitoring and evaluation report covers the period from January to June 2016. Within this period, WFP planned to provide food assistance to 267,000 beneficiaries through a range of modalities (food in-kind, cash and vouchers). The main objective at the outcome level was to increase food accessibility and affordability to vulnerable and food insecure people in eastern Ukraine. Despite access constraints impeding distributions and Third Party Monitoring access, WFP managed to obtain positive results during the reporting period at both output and outcome levels. WFP distributed 6,500 metric tons of food and USD 4 million of cash based transfers to approximately 340,000 beneficiaries. Following WFP s assistance, food consumption increased, quality of diet improved and the use of negative coping strategies reduced among assisted households. Poor food consumption levels were reduced significantly and quality of diet remained at satisfactory levels. The food assistance results showed a decrease in negative coping strategies (such as reducing or skipping meals, selling of productive assets or relying on less preferred food). People assisted were well informed and aware of their entitlements, targeting criteria and usage of complaints mechanisms. Selection and targeting of the most vulnerable and food insecure people face diverse challenges in different areas of assistance. In the government controlled areas, lack of employment and high prices put internally displaced persons and general population at food insecurity risk. In nongovernment controlled areas, where food insecurity levels are higher, the targeting issues in terms of transparency and consistency remain. WFP will continue the dialogue at all levels ensuring the food assistance reaches the most vulnerable and food insecure people. As recommended by the Operation Evaluation report 1 published on 01 August 2016, an analysis of different modalities was conducted. The findings will contribute to making a choice of appropriate modality. While beneficiaries improved their food consumption after receiving assistance, the cash was the most preferred type of assistance. Around 56 percent of people assisted stated they would like to receive cash, 33 percent preferred food in-kind and 11 percent preferred vouchers. Markets remained stable in the first six months of 2016. Food prices in the conflict areas, particularly in Donetsk Non-Government Controlled Area and the Buffer Zone, are around 25 percent higher than in the rest of the country. While local financial institutions in this region continue recovering, very limited access to international banking system remains an issue. Availability of food in non-government controlled area markets is satisfactory and supply is sufficient. The Terminology Note at the end of the document gives details on main WFP Food Security terms and methodologies used, while the Glossary provides with the definitions of commonly used WFP terms. 1 https://www.wfp.org/content/ukraine-emop-200765-emergency-assistance-civilians-affected-conflict-eastern-ukraineoperati 2
Table of Contents Executive Summary... 2 Operational Map: Distributions January-June 2016... 4 Output Results... 5 Outcome Results Food Consumption... 7 Gender Perspectives on Food Consumption Levels... 8 Diet Diversity Score (DDS)... 8 Coping Strategy Index (CSI)... 9 Cross-Cutting Indicators... 10 Usage of Cash and Modality Preferences... 11 Markets - Food Basket Price Trends... 12 Terminology Note... 13 Glossary... 14 Abbreviations and Acronyms... 16 3
Operational Map: Distributions January - June 2016 4
Output Results The results of WFP s Emergency Operation (EMOP) in Ukraine at the outputs level are presented in this section; namely, the number of beneficiaries reached as well as the metrics on food, cash and vouchers distributed. The analysis covers different breakdowns of the data at hand for the period of January-June 2016. 400,000 350,000 300,000 250,000 200,000 Graph 1: Planned and actual numbers of beneficiaries, Jan-Jun 2016 267,000 344,036 Graph 1 shows the number of beneficiaries reached in January- June 2016. As shown on the Graph 1, the actual figures reached around 129 percent of the planned figure. 150,000 This over-achievement (a higher 100,000 number of beneficiaries reached compared to initial plans) is a 50,000 result of the strict control by - authorities in NGCA limiting the Planned Actuals number of times the food assistance could be given to same beneficiaries. Therefore, WFP reached more beneficiaries with fewer rounds of assistance. WFP planned to support beneficiaries with four-month food assistance but this is not always applied on the ground, especially in NGCA due to the aforementioned issue. Significant movement of people/beneficiaries between GCA and NGCA as well as within these areas is another reason for that. The main migration patterns include job search and receiving of social benefits. Graph 2: WFP beneficairies, by gender Graph 2 shows beneficiary data 2 breakdowns from a gender perspective. Overall, WFP assisted more women than men (59 percent versus 41 percent respectively). A reason for this difference is targeting of households headed by women with one or more children. 59% 41% Male Female 2 Output data including numbers of beneficiaries, metric tons of food, amounts of CBT distributed, are collected through the Monthly Distribution Report from Cooperating Partners. Data are then inputted into COMET (Country Office Monitoring and Evaluation Tool) under the responsibility of M&E Unit of Country Office Ukraine. 5
Graph 3 and Graph 4 show the achievements in distributions of food in-kind (MT) and CBT modalities (number of transfers) respectively. 120% 80% 60% 40% 20% Graph 3: Food distribution performance Jan-June 2016, % 58% 120% 80% 60% 40% 20% Graph 4: CBT distribution performance Jan-June 2016, % 115% 0% Planned Actual 0% Planned Actual In January-June 2016, WFP distributed 6,500 metric tons of food in-kind against 11,089 metric tons planned to be distributed. Graph 5 shows monthly distributions. Major challenges faced by WFP in achieving the planned figure include challenging accessibility, especially to NGCA and area around contact line (AACL). Since March 2016, Luhansk NGCA was for the most part inaccessible to humanitarian aid as a result of the security situation hampering regular access. 1,800 1,600 1,400 1,200 1,000 800 600 400 200 - Graph 5: Food in-kind distribution (MT)/month 2016 1,115 1,159 636 1,411 577 1,621 January February March April May June Graph 6 shows the distribution of food in-kind in January-June 2016 by area of assistance. Around 70 percent of the food in-kind was distributed in NGCA with the majority (55 percent) distributed in Donetsk NGCA. Graph 6: In-kind distribution in Jan-Jun 2016 15% 2%9% Donetsk GCA Luhansk GCA The Buffer Zone has got 11 percent of food distributions. And around 18 percent was distributed in GCA near the Buffer Zone where beneficiaries preferred food instead of CBT modality due to inaccessibility to markets and financial institutions. 55% 10% 8% Donetsk NGCA Luhanks NGCA Donetsk AACL Luhansk AACL CBT is distributed exclusively in GCA where beneficiaries have regular access to markets and financial institutions. In January-June 2016, WFP actually distributed USD 4,130,000 against the USD 3,600,000 planned. This is a 15-percent overachievement. This is mainly caused by favourable USD/UAH exchange rates. 6
Outcome Results Food Consumption 3 The food consumption score (FCS) based on the frequency and nutritional value of the food consumed by households is one of the main WFP corporate indicators used to measure the progress and efficiency of WFP food assistance operation 4. Graph 7: Overall Food Consumption 80% 60% 67% 81% 76% 40% 20% 0% 20% 16% 21% 13% 3% 3% PAB PDM Non-beneficiaries Poor Borderline Acceptable Graph 7 shows the food consumption pattern before (PAB, March-April 2016) and after WFP assistance (PDM, April-May 2016) of targeted beneficiaries in the eastern Ukraine. The results are compared against the situation among the non-beneficiaries (general population). The share of surveyed households with acceptable food consumption increased from 67 to 81 percent after food assistance, and the share of those with poor food consumption decreased from 13 to 3 percent. Graph 8: Food Consumption by transfer modality 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 72% 57% 85% 78% 67% 76% 29% 15% 23% 13% 12% 19% 20% 14% 3% 3% 10% 4% PAB PDM PAB PDM PAB PDM Food Voucher Cash Poor Borderline Acceptable Food consumption levels analysis also included the comparison of different transfer modalities currently used by WFP. Graph 8 shows an improvement being the decrease of poor food consumption levels for all modalities. Among the two CBT modalities, vouchers reduced significantly the inadequate food consumption levels. 3 http://documents.wfp.org/stellent/groups/public/documents/manual_guide_proced/wfp271745.pdf 4 The FCS is used to classify households into three groups in terms of food consumption: poor, borderline and acceptable; the households with acceptable food consumption are considered with adequate diet, while those with borderline or poor food consumption do not have adequate food consumption level. 7
Gender Perspectives on Food Consumption Levels Graph 9 below shows the food consumption levels by gender of head of household. Targeted men and women had different food consumption levels in PAB, while food consumption improvement was noticed among households headed by women in PDM. While significant positive results in overall reduction of inadequate food consumption levels are seen, the data suggest slower recovery rates among men headed households. Graph 9: Food consumption levels by gender 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 62% 80% 81% 81% 23% 13% 15% 18% 15% 7% 1% 4% Male Female Male Female PAB PDM Poor Borderline Acceptable Lower food consumption of households headed by women in PAB could be explained, among other things, by a lack of employment and lower salary levels. The latest WFP Market Update of April-May 2016 5 highlights some reasons why households headed by women may have lower food consumption prior to WFP assistance. One of the major reasons is lower salaries for women 6. Moreover, respondents of focus group discussions mostly believed that to find an employment for men was somewhat easier. Diet Diversity Score (DDS) 7 Positive outcomes were reported regarding the diet diversity after the WFP assistance (Graph 10). While the diet diversity of households headed by women had higher improvement, both kinds of households increased the diversity of their diets after the WFP assistance 8. Respondents in focus group discussions stated that compared to the regular diet before the conflict, all of them consumed less meat, fish, fruits, dairy products and sweets. Furthermore, most of them switched to cheaper brands of products. Nonbeneficiaries Graph 10: Diet Diversity Score by gender of head of household PDM PAB 5.6 5.9 5.6 5.6 5.2 5.4 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 Female Male 5 http://vam.wfp.org/countrypage_assessments.aspx?iso3=ukr 6 In first quarter 2016, the average salary of a male employee was UAH 5,379 compared to UAH 3,966 for female. 7 http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/user_upload/wa_workshop/docs/fao-guidelines-dietary-diversity2011.pdf 8 Acceptable diverse diet is considered to be one scoring more than 6 DDS index points, that is each of the food groups is consumed at least once a week. 8
Coping Strategy Index 9 (CSI) Strong improvement was also detected in the coping strategies index; it measures short-term strategies used by households to meet their basic food needs. The higher the score the more often families have to adopt negative coping strategies. The average CSI decreased from 14.2 before to 6.1 index points after the WFP assistance. Graph 11 shows the most frequently used food coping strategies. Reliance on less preferred and less expensive food was a widespread coping strategy before the WFP assistance with 53 percent of the households applying this strategy every day. WFP was reported to have a significant effect on index reduction to 13 percent. Graph 11: Proportion of beneficiaries applying Food Coping Strategies on a daily basis Reduce quantities consumed by adults so children can eat? 3% 19% Reduce portion size of meals? 3% 25% Reduce number of meals eaten per day? 2% 17% Borrow food or rely on help from friends or relatives? 3% 0% Rely on less preferred, less expensive food? 13% 53% 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Applied daily, % PAB Applied daily, % PDM Similar results were also observed for other frequently applied strategies such as to reduce portion size of meals; prioritize children; and reduce the number of meals eaten per day. 9 http://documents.wfp.org/stellent/groups/public/documents/manual_guide_proced/wfp271450.pdf 9
Cross-Cutting Indicators Two corporate cross-cutting indicators were measured during the PDM exercise: Protection and Gender. The graphs below show the findings from interviewed beneficiaries. Graph 12: Protection Both types of respondents answered that they did not experience any safety problems going to or coming back from WFP registration or distribution points (Graph 12) meaning the Cooperating Partners were running safe and efficient distributions over the last six months. Male Female More women (52 percent) were found to be responsible for taking decisions on the use of vouchers/food (Graph 13). Women remain more often responsible for the household management as was the case before the conflict. However, there was certain redistribution of responsibilities depending on who was employed after the outbreak of the conflict. FGDs respondents in the region noted that unemployment among men significantly increased. Women continue working in the public sector and trade (markets, shops) also being responsible for buying food, cooking, the welfare and health of children and other household members. Beneficiaries are also informed about their entitlements at registration and distribution points. These activities will continue raising the beneficiaries knowledge about their entitlements, selection processes, programs and donors. 52% Graph 13: Gender (decision making) 3% Women Men Both 45% Graph 14: Accountability Indicators Do you know how to contact agency providing assistance? Have you been told exactly what you are entitled to receive? Do you know how people were chosen to receive assistance? 45% 44% 58% Accountability to beneficiaries (Graph 14) is also one of WFP s operation worldwide concerns. Currently, all efforts are being made within WFP in Ukraine to raise awareness of beneficiaries about contacts of agency providing assistance, levels of informed beneficiaries about entitled assistance, as well as awareness of how people were chosen to receive assistance. Each of the accountability indicators were above 40% (Graph 14). WFP is discussing the plan to establish its own hotline assistance to ensure proper feedback, provision of detailed information on distributions (including targeting processes and entitlements) and other types of support to beneficiaries. Meanwhile, all partners support WFP with their hotlines to collect feedback from people assisted. Informative leaflets on targeting criteria and ration sizes continue to be distributed at food distribution points. 10
Usage of Cash and Modality Preferences Graph 15 shows the usage of cash by people assisted under the cash assistance modality. When people assisted were asked to report how they spent the cash provided by WFP over last 30 days, food made 65 percent of the total amount. 21 percent were spent on health and hygiene items, 7 percent on accommodation and 9 percent on other. Graph 15: Cash Purchases in % of total funds redeemed 9% 21% 7% 65% Food Rent/accommodation Health & Hygiene Other (Clothing, Education, Fuel for cooking etc) Graph 16 shows the redemption of vouchers by people assisted. Supermarket reports show meat products (28 percent) and other types of food (16 percent) including canned food items, spices, etc. are the most preferred food items among people assisted under the voucher modality. The graph also shows a high number of purchases of cereals and sugar. One of the key findings is that Non-Food Items (NFIs) make only 11 percent of all redeemed vouchers. This is a significant reduction against the last M&E report 2015 where around 35 percent of the voucher transferred funds were redeemed on NFIs. 28% Graph 16: Voucher redemption (Supermarkets reports 2016) 16% 11% 10% 9% 8% 8% 6% 2% 1% 1% Meat products Other - food (spices, appetizers, sauces, tea, canned goods...) Other - NFI (HH chemical goods, toys, packages, clothes,...) Cereals and grain Sugar or sweets Oil / fat / butter Milk and Fruits and other dairy vegetables products Fish and other seafood Other - beverages Eggs It is recommended to increase the amount of CBT modalities including the piloting of CBT implementation in NGCA areas. Furthermore, a combination of CBT modalities and SCOPE 10 could provide with a much more diverse and widespread network of traders, farmers and local shops at a community/village level. 10 SCOPE is WFP s digital beneficiary and transfer management platform that supports the WFP programme intervention cycle from beginning to end. It is a cloud-based solution used for beneficiary registration, intervention setup, distribution planning, entitlement transfers and distribution reporting. 11
Mar-14 Apr-14 May-14 Jun-14 Jul-14 Aug-14 Sep-14 Oct-14 Nov-14 Dec-14 Jan-15 Feb-15 Mar-15 Apr-15 May-15 Jun-15 Jul-15 Aug-15 Sep-15 Oct-15 Nov-15 Dec-15 Jan-16 Feb-16 Mar-16 Apr-16 May-16 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% Graph 17: Beneficiary Satisfaction with Quantity/Modality 98% 97% 91% Food Voucher Cash During the post-distribution monitoring, people assisted were also asked about their preference between the three modalities. The majority (around 56 percent) declared the cash to be the most preferred modality (Graph 18), approximately 11 percent stated vouchers, and 33 percent still feel they would prefer receiving food in-kind. In most of the cases, food in-kind assistance covered elderly people or those with limited access to markets due to insecurity in the Buffer Zone and inaccessible areas in NGCA. Markets - Food Basket Price Trends On the whole, the beneficiary satisfaction with the quantity of assistance provided by WFP was high above 90 percent (Graph 17). Beneficairies of food in-kind are the most satisfied (98 percent), and the less satisfied with the quantity of assistance are the beneficiaries of cash (91 percent). Whereas, focus group discussions with beneficiaries of food in-kind assistance show a preference to receive less pasta and more rice and buckwheat in the parcel. Nearly all respondents asked for more butter, sugar and flour. Some would like to have tea and sweets (especially families with children), tomato paste, canned vegetables or other dried fruit. Graph 18: Beneficiary modality preference, % 11% Graph 19 represents the dynamics of food basket national cost starting from the conflict in March 2014 till June 2016. The food basket cost increased by 56 percent during this period. The red sections of the graph represent the seasonal decrease in the food basket price. The decreases were also experienced earlier this year, in February 2016. Slow recovery of the Ukrainian economy may be one of main explanations of this effect. In fact, the food inflation decreased significantly from 50 percent in June 2015 to almost 3 percent in June 2016. 33% 56% Voucher Cash Food 750.0 700.0 650.0 600.0 Graph 19: Ukraine (National) value of food basket, UAH 668.0 550.0 500.0 427.8 450.0 400.0 The cost of food basket remains 24 percent higher in NGCA compared to GCA. The food basket cost in Luhansk NGCA is lower than in Donetsk NGCA. Higher cost of food basket is registered in settlements situated closer to contact line. More information on Market Monitoring could be found at WFP VAM Ukraine webpage. 12
Terminology Note Major terms dealt with in this report are: Food security defined at the World Food Summit in 1996 as "when all people, at all times, have physical and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food to meet their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life". Food security includes aspects of availability, access, utilization and as well stability. Household food security is the application of this concept to the family level. Food insecurity being an insufficient access to adequate food. As long as food security indicators do not assess adequacy of nutrient intake, households may be classified as food secure but individual nutrient intake may not be adequate. Households with a per capita daily kilocalorie intake greater than 2,100 kilocalories are considered to have adequate food consumption. When analysing food insecurity, it is not enough to know the duration of the problem that people are experiencing, but also how intense or severe the impact of the identified problem is on the overall food security and nutrition status. Main indicators that WFP uses to measure food security on household level are Food Consumption Score, Dietary Diversity Score, reduced (food) Coping Strategy Index, Livelihood-Based Coping Strategy Index and Share of Expenditure on Food. The food consumption score (FCS) is one of the main WFP corporate indicators used for measuring household food consumption and, thus, progress and effectiveness of the operations. The FCS, an indicator of dietary quality and frequency of consumption, is calculated using the frequency of consumption (number of days) of eight food groups consumed by a household during the seven days before the survey. The FCS is used to classify households into three groups: poor, borderline or acceptable food consumption and the households with acceptable food consumption are considered food secure, while those with borderline or poor food consumption don t have adequate food consumption level. The dietary diversity indicator on the other hand measures the number of different food groups consumed over a given period. It provides an estimation of the quality of a diet and it is a good complement to FCS since it provides a complete picture of the household diet. WFP uses the following thresholds for interpretation: 6+ = good dietary diversity; 4.5 6 = medium dietary diversity; <4.5 = low dietary diversity. Reduced (food) copying strategies index (rcsi) measures the short-term strategies households use to meet their basic food needs. It is used for better understand the frequency and severity of changes in food consumption behaviours when faced with a shortage of food. Households were asked how many of the preceding seven days they did not have enough food or money to buy food and adopted one of the coping strategies. The higher the CSI value, the higher the degree of food insecurity. The minimum possible CSI value is 0, while the maximum is 56. The livelihood-based Coping Strategy Index is measured to understand better longer-term household coping capacities. Household livelihood and economic security is determined by income, expenditures and assets. Understanding the behaviours households engage in to adapt to recent crises provides insights into the difficulty of their situation, and how likely they will be to meet challenges in the future. Households were asked if anyone in their households had to engage in any of the ten coping strategies because there was not enough food or money to buy food during the past 30 days. One neutral strategy, four stress strategies, three crisis strategies, and three emergency strategies were asked based on the severity of the strategies. The higher the CSI value, the higher the degree of food insecurity. Share of expenditure on food gives impression how much of all budget of household they use for food (indicator measuring economic vulnerability). A categorical variable is created that equates ranges of the food expenditure share to levels of food insecurity, with the most food insecure spending greater than 75% of their budget on food and food secure spend less than 50%. 13
Glossary Accountability obligation to demonstrate that work has been conducted in compliance with agreed rules and standards or to report fairly and accurately on performance results vis-à-vis mandated roles and/or plans. Beneficiaries a WFP beneficiary is a targeted person who is provided with WFP food. Beneficiary contact monitoring a systematic investigation to monitor the beneficiaries' perceptions of a WFP operation. COMET the WFP s comprehensive online tool to design, implement and monitor programmes and to improve organisational performance. Comparison group - a group of individuals who are not exposed to a WFP operation, but who share characteristics similar to those of the target group. Disaggregated data information broken down by sex, age or other relevant variables to reveal the different needs, priorities, activities and interests of distinct groups, and their access to and control over resources, services and activities. Disaggregated data are essential for monitoring interventions and outputs in order to establish who is participating in WFP operations and who is benefiting from them. Effect intended or unintended change due directly or indirectly to a WFP operation. These changes (results) can be at the output, outcome and/or impact levels. Effectiveness the extent to which the operation's objectives were achieved, or expected to be achieved, taking into account their relative importance. Efficiency a measure of how economical inputs are converted to outputs. Evaluation the systematic and objective assessment of an on-going or completed operation, programme or policy, its design, implementation and results. The aim is to determine the relevance and fulfilment of objectives, as well as efficiency, effectiveness, impact and sustainability. Feedback the transmission of findings generated through the monitoring and evaluation process to parties for whom it is relevant and useful so as to facilitate learning. This may involve the collection and dissemination of findings, conclusions, recommendations and lessons from experience. Finding - a finding is an accumulation of evidence from an assessment, review or evaluation that allows for a factual statement. Focus group a small, homogeneous group formed to discuss open ended questions about a certain topic. Focus group respondents are encouraged to talk among themselves so that a discussion unfolds among the participants rather than between the evaluator/researchers and the respondents. Food insecurity when people lack secure access to sufficient amounts of safe and nutritious food for normal growth and development, and an active and healthy life. Food insecurity may be caused by the unavailability of food, insufficient purchasing power, inappropriate distribution, or inadequate use of food at the household level. Food security when all people, at all times, have physical, social and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food which meets their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life. Goal the highest-level result to which a WFP operation is intended to contribute. It is measured by impact indicators. Impact lasting and/or significant effects of the intervention, social, economic, environmental or technical, on individuals, gender and age-groups, households, communities and institutions. Impact can be intended or unintended, positive and negative, macro (sector) and micro (household). Indicator quantitative or qualitative factor or variable that provides a simple and reliable means to measure achievement or to reflect the changes connected to a WFP operation. Input the financial, human, and material resources required to implement the WFP operation. Lessons generally applicable conclusions based on evaluation or review experiences with WFP operations or policies that extrapolate from the specific circumstances to broader situations. Frequently, lessons highlight strengths or weaknesses in preparation, design, and implementation that affect performance, outcome, and impact. Logframe (Logical Framework) a management tool used to design projects and programmes. It involves identifying inputs, outputs, purpose (outcomes), and goal (impact), and their causal relationships, related performance indicators, and the assumptions or risks that may influence success and failure. It thus facilitates planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of a WFP operation. 14
Monitoring a continuing function that uses the systematic collection of data on specified indicators to inform management and the main stakeholders of an ongoing WFP operation of the extent of progress and achievement of results in the use of allocated funds and food aid. Objective the purposes and goal of a WFP operation, representing the desired state which the operation is intended to achieve. Outcome the medium-term results of an operation s outputs. Relates to the purpose level of the Logframe hierarchy. Outputs the products, capital goods and services which result from a WFP operation; includes changes resulting from the operation which are relevant to the achievement of outcomes. Relates to the output level of the Logframe hierarchy. Partners the individuals and organisations that collaborate to achieve mutually agreed upon objectives. Performance the degree to which an operation or organisation (WFP or partner) operates according to specific criteria/standards/guidelines or achieves results in accordance with stated goals or plans. Post-distribution monitoring information collected at the household level on the quantity of food received, the use of food aid, and its acceptability and quality. Pre-assistance baseline the analysis and description of the situation prior to the start of a WFP operation, against which change can be assessed or comparisons made. Purpose the improved situation that a WFP operation is expected to contribute significantly to if completed successfully and on time. It is measured by outcome indicators. Qualitative data observations that are categorical rather than numerical, and often involve attitudes, perceptions and intentions. Quantitative data observations that are numerical. Relevance the extent to which the objectives of a WFP operation are consistent with beneficiaries needs, country needs, organisational priorities, and partners and donors' policies. Reliability consistency or dependability of data, with reference to the quality of the instruments, procedures and analyses used to collect and interpret data. Results the outputs, outcomes and/or impacts (intended or unintended, positive and/or negative) of a WFP operation. Results-based management a management strategy focusing on performance and achievement of outputs, outcomes and impacts. Results chain the causal sequence for an operation that stipulates the necessary sequence to achieve desired objectives - beginning with inputs, moving through activities and outputs, and culminating in outcomes and impacts. Stakeholders agencies, organisations, groups or individuals who have a direct or indirect interest in the operation, or its evaluation. Survey a data collection method that involves a planned effort to collect required data from a sample of the relevant population. The relevant population consists of people affected by the WFP operation (or, in the case of a control or comparison group, of people with similar characteristics). Sustainability the continuation of benefits from a WFP operation after major assistance has been completed. Target group the specific individuals or organisations for whose benefit the WFP operation is undertaken. Terms of reference the purpose and scope of the assessment, review or evaluation, the methods to be used, the standard against which performance is to be assessed or analyses are to be conducted, the resources and time allocated, and reporting requirements, generally conveyed in a written document. Third party monitoring - defined as monitoring by parties that are external to a projects direct beneficiary chain and management structure (e.g., local or international civil society organizations, academia etc.) Triangulation the use of three or more theories, sources or types of information, or types of analysis to explore, verify and substantiate an assessment. Validity the extent to which the data collection strategies and instruments measure what they purport to measure. Vulnerability the presence of factors that place people at risk of becoming food insecure or malnourished, including those factors that affect their ability to cope. 15
Abbreviations and Acronyms AACL COMET CBT CSI DDS DL GCA EMOP FCG FCS FGD GCA IDP KIIS M&E MT NGCA NFI NGO OCHA PAB PDM PPS rcsi RDD TPM UAH UN UNHCR USD WFP Area around Contact Line Country Office Monitoring and Evaluation Tool Cash Based Transfers Coping Strategy Index Diet Diversity Score Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts Government Controlled Areas Emergency Operation Food Consumption Group Food Consumption Score Focus Group Discussion Government Controlled Areas Internally Displaced Person Kiev International Institute of Sociology Monitoring and Evaluation Metric ton Non-Government Controlled Area Non-Food Items Nongovernmental Organization United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs Pre-assistance baseline Post-distribution monitoring Probability Proportional to Size Reduced Coping Strategy Index Random Digit Dialling Third Party Monitoring Ukrainian Hryvnia United Nations Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees United States Dollar World Food Programme 16
Contacts World Food Programme Ukraine Country Office Email: wfp.ukraine@wfp.org Website: wfp.org/countries/ukraine Twitter: @WFP_Ukraine Food Security Analyst: Gerd Buta gerd.buta@wfp.org Food Security Analyst: Lyubomyr Kokovskyy lyubomyr.kokovskyy@wfp.org Monitoring and Evaluation Officer: Dmytro Samorodov Dmytro.samorodov@wfp.org 17 Project Manager Kiev International Institute of Sociology (KIIS) Andrey Kashin a.kashin@kiis.com.ua