evaluation of general food distribution in northern uganda: gulu ...

tools; however it ensures food security for the beneficiaries, which ultimately is thehumanitarian obligation of NRC.For future food aid operations, the Evaluation therefore recommends:♦♦♦♦In future humanitarian operations that involve continued food distribution during anextended period of time and on a massive scale NRC’s should continue to prioritise beingclose to the field and implement its undisputed humanitarian objective of serving peoplein need.In protracted situations, NRC should – as now also obliged by its Emergency FoodSecurity and Distribution Policy - as early as possible, explore the possibility of combininggeneral food distribution with alternative strategies. If the situation calls for it and allowsfor it, topping up/complimenting WFP food supplies for a period of time should beconsidered. Alternative strategies should also include livelihoods initiatives, incomegeneration activities, cash programmes or voucher programmes possibly earmarked forfood.Given that this combination of approaches might be new to NRC, some investmentsshould be made in analysis/research, which could lead to developing a toolbox or a kitthat combines cash and in-kind programmes and also considers the options for toppingup/complimenting food supplies. Striking a balance between various approaches ischallenging and should be researched 2 .NRC’s Emergency Food Security and Distri bution Policy should give more concreteguidance on different options and alternative/complimentary solutions that can becombined with the general food distribution activities.1.2 Project Efficiency & CoverageFor approximately USD 1.8 million per year, NR C has organised, arranged, distributed andmonitored food assistance to some 755,000 people on a monthly basis during insecure andrestrictive times. This means on average a cost of USD 2.3 per IDP per year. This cost isover and above the expenditures for food itself and WFP’s own costs. In view of the efficientfield operation, use of local resource base and the number of beneficiaries reached costefficiency may be argued to be similar to other operations of this magnitude.NRC has distributed food without major delays or failures, despite WFP pipeline breakages,storage shortages, low trucking capacity or funding delays etc. This has indeed beenpossible because of a flexible work force of experienced and disciplined people who havegrown with the organisation and possesses detailed local knowledge. The investment incapacity building of 200 volunteers has proven worthwhile. In addition, m anagement andground supervision of the operation with constant communication and dialogue withbeneficiaries and camp/community networks provides smooth distribution of aid and anopportunity to solve conflicts and problems that may arise along the way. When beneficiariesare involved as much as possible a fair and dignified distribution of food aid may be ensuredand hence also a mitigation of potential conflicts amongst beneficiaries.However, revalidation and verification exercises for food registration take a lot of time andrequire close supervision and management. When data collection, entry and verification areoutsourced to different organisations it leads to many errors and beneficiaries losing out on2In order not to invent the wheel, reference may be made to findings from many safety net programmes, voucher for workprogrammes or cash for work programmes. NRC is at present joining hands with other cluster stakeholders in making jointassessments and the findings of these assessments may inform future alternative strategies.2