Nutrition Assessments Theme Group SCN Nutrition in Emergencies Working Group Noreen Prendiville FAO SCN Geneva March 2006
Priority issues for Theme Group 1 Standards in nutrition assessment protocol 2 Nutrition information management, interpretation and use - during periods of crisis 3 Issues needing further attention
Development and use of standard nutrition assessment protocol Current guidelines, training materials who uses what? SMART, WFP, SC-UK, UNICEF, FANTA, WHO (EMRO), Governments Software - what is available? EPI INFO Nutrisurvey (SMART) FANTA Anthropometry, Mortality general agreement on what to measure and how. Non-anthropometric nutrition information e.g. dietary diversity Contextual data on health, food security, care no general agreement and standards therefore presenting a challenge in analysis.
Dietary Diversity/Food consumption Dietary Diversity Indicator of food security Indicator of individual dietary adequacy Ongoing work and development of tools by WFP, FANTA, FAO Further development of DD tool for assessments and sentinel sites Seasonal tables
Nutrition information management - principles of good practice Information systems in place in crisis prone populations Multi-partner assessment (including local authorities) Consensus on the findings and recommendations Clear statement for users of the information Inter-sectoral assessments / contextual analysis / concurrent food security or livelihoods assessments Archiving of raw data in the country Sharing of training resources and opportunities Sincere capacity development for local nutritionists
Use of nutrition information - influencing decision making? Acknowledge crisis prone populations not just emergencies Anthropometry use and abuse e.g. high levels of malnutrition required as evidence of food insecurity Promote use of non-anthropometric data e.g. food consumption Recommendations reflecting underlying causes Document and publicise experiences Understand the history Information for decision making / advocacy (Tracking service?) What information required whose responsibility?
Proposed Tracking Service Tracking Health Performance and Humanitarian Outcomes IASC initiative Expected to provide impartial and timely analysis on the health, mortality and nutrition status of populations of humanitarian concern, as well as on the quality and coverage of response. Would enable objective judgments on the severity and trends of a crisis, and to guide effective humanitarian action including the allocation of resources and the targeting of interventions. Achieved through the analysis and presentation of key indicators, presented in a standardized format to enable comparisons of trends over time within and between crises.
Issues needing further attention / ongoing discussions Classification systems for humanitarian crises/famine/food insecurity. Relationship between malnutrition and mortality Linking nutritional status with food security data Methods for assessing the underlying causes of malnutrition Sampling for dispersed rural populations Use and interpretation of W/H and MUAC Mortality surveillance during periods of crisis Comparisons in W/H, W/A and H/A among populations. Understanding differences in body proportions and growth patterns among populations.
Regional Food Security and Nutrition Working Group in Nairobi FAO, UNICEF, WFP, OCHA, FEWSNET, CRS, ICRC, OXFAM, Save the Children, World Vision, Concern Universal Target countries Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia, Sudan, Djibouti, Eritrea, Uganda, Tanzania, Burundi, DR Congo and Rwanda
Consensus on priority issues to be addressed [Regional Food Security and Nutrition Working Group in Nairobi] Varying food security and nutrition information types make interpretation difficult Comparison of humanitarian situation across borders not currently possible Humanitarian resource allocation inadequately linked to evidence Continued overemphasis on very short-term and late interventions
Working Group priority actions [Regional Food Security and Nutrition Working Group in Nairobi ] Develop mechanism to facilitate information sharing Select and utilise single tool for food security and nutrition analysis within and between countries Promote development of common summary statements to describe evolving situations Share experiences on innovative programme approaches
Integrated Food Security and Humanitarian Phase Classification Reference Table FAO/FSAU Feb 2006
GHA FOOD SECURITY OUTLOOK (Jun.-Dec., 2006) Preliminary Analysis with Poor Rain Scenario, March 6 2006 DRAFT P h a s e C la s s if i c a t io n 5 G e n e r a ll y 4 C h ro n ic a lly F o o d S e c u r e F o o d 3 A c u te F o o d a n d In s e c u r e L iv e lih o o d C ris is 2 H u m a n i ta r i a n 1 F a m i n e / H u m a n i ta r i a n A re a s E m e rg e n c y n o t ic lu d e d in C a ta s t r o p h e a n a ly s is W a tc h M o d e ra te H ig h R is k R is k c o l o u r o f d i a g o n a l li n e s i n d i c a t e s s e v e ri t y For category explanations see http://www.fsausomali.org Contributors to this Draft FS Outlook Map: Ministry Representatives from some governments
Other: Implications of WHO Multi-Centre Growth Reference Study (MGRS) on interpretation of nutrition data. (New reference available in April 2006) Ongoing work by UNICEF and Tulane University on regional analysis of nutrition information in Africa.
Thank you Noreen Prendiville FAO/FSAU Somalia noreen.prendiville@fsau.or.ke