Inter-Agency Real Time Evaluation of the Humanitarian ... - alnap

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Annex 7: Cluster Output Review Table # Cluster 1 2 3 4 5 1 Agriculture Indicator: Standing Crops Wheat seed at Animals / Livestock* (million ha) HH level (mt) Damaged / In Need: 2.400.000 600.000 277.000 Supported: 511.180 25.250 261.730 DIFFERENCE / GAP: (1.888.820) (574.750) (15.270) ‐ ‐ Source: Agriculture Cluster, FAO Statistics, 2011 * FAO assessment for 39 / 81 districts 2 Education Indicator: Number Schools: <strong>of</strong> Number <strong>of</strong> TLCs Beneficiaries ERF Proposals $ Damaged / In Need: 10.493 1.328.482 6.000.000 Supported: 479 2.846 331.595 500.000 DIFFERENCE / GAP: (10.014) 2.846 (996.887) (5.500.000) Source: Education Cluster, Jan 2011 3 Emergency Shelter Indicator: Emergency Shelter (ES) Blankets Bedding / Mats 1‐Room ER Shelter Damaged / In Need: 1.743.926 4.775.747 3.487.852 657.442 Supported: 1.127.598 2.114.892 336.852 176.457 DIFFERENCE / GAP: (616.329) (2.660.855) (3.151.000) (480.985) *Source: Shelter Cluster, Feb 2011 4 Food Indicator: Food Support, people Funding, USD Food Support, people* Food (MT)* Damaged / In Need: 5.700.000 596.000.000 4.685.659 60.907 Supported: 5.400.000 363.560.000 2.998.822 34.108 DIFFERENCE / GAP: (300.000) (232.440.000) (1.686.837) (26.799) Source: Food Cluster, January 2011 * 24 Oct 2010 5 Nutrition Indicator: Emergency nutrition needs, children* Outpatient Therapeutic Programmes (OTP), Children screened WFP Supported Blanket feeding, Children Damaged / In Need: 260.000 180.000 Supported: 81.463 593.411 520.000 39.000 Emergency nutrition needs, women* 134 | P age
6 Water Sanitation and Hygiene DIFFERENCE / GAP: (178.537) 593.411 520.000 (141.000) Sources: Nutrition Cluster Jan 2011, WFP VAM Sept 2010 *The 'supported' figure is an estimate, based on severly and moderately malnourished children / women identified and supported after screening Indicator: Estimated WASH Caseload, people* Water Supply Hygiene NFIs Sanitation Damaged / In Need: 7.301.300 Supported: 3.474.313 5.246.700 7.608.206 1.832.395 DIFFERENCE / GAP: (3.826.987) (2.054.600) 306.906 (5.468.905) Source: Wash Cluster Statistics, January 2011 * from Sept 21, 2010 7 Health Indicator: Health Facilities Acute Respiratory Diarrhoea Treatment Centers (DTC)* Infection Centres (ARI) 8 Child Protection ‐ Sub Cluster Damaged / In Need: 515 100 71 Supported: 67 42 DIFFERENCE / GAP: (515) (33) (29) ‐ ‐ Source Health Cluster, Jan 2011 * Sept 2010 Indicator: CFSs, beneficiaries NFIs, beneficiaries Damaged / In Need: Supported: 364.119 369.503 DIFFERENCE / GAP: 364.119 369.503 ‐ ‐ 9 Protection Indicator: Watan Cards Damaged / In Need: 1.463.436 Supported: 1.462.168 DIFFERENCE / GAP: (1.268) ‐ ‐ ‐ Source: Protection Cluster and NADRA, Jan 2011 10 Logistics Indicator: Airlift (mt) Sorties Damaged / In Need: Supported: 12.060 3.502 DIFFERENCE / GAP: 12.060 3.502 ‐ ‐ ‐ 135 | P age
Page 1 and 2:
Inter‐Agency Real Time Evaluation
Page 3 and 4:
Annex 4.1 Group meetings with the a
Page 5 and 6:
Conclusions and recommendations bas
Page 7 and 8:
Area Finding Conclusion Recommendat
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15:
Page 18 and 19:
IA RTE of the humanitarian response
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53:
7.2 Monitoring IA RTE of the humani
Page 54 and 55:
Page 56 and 57:
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
9 ‐ Annexes Annex 1: Terms of Ref
Page 64 and 65:
4. METHODOLOGY IA RTE of the humani
Page 66 and 67:
The ‘IA RTE Framework’ as Diagr
Page 68 and 69:
Needs IA RTE EVALUATION FRAMEWORK D
Page 70 and 71:
Access, Principles, Advocacy IA RTE
Page 72 and 73:
M&E IA RTE EVALUATION FRAMEWORK Dim
Page 74 and 75:
IA RTE EVALUATION FRAMEWORK Dimensi
Page 76 and 77:
IA RTE EVALUATION FRAMEWORK Dimensi
Page 78 and 79:
� Have relevant, prioritized, inc
Page 80 and 81:
Action, HAP 2007 Standard in Humani
Page 82 and 83:
� Approves the final IA RTE repor
Page 84 and 85: (details see row below) � Sindh:
Page 86 and 87: words and a main text of no more th
Page 88 and 89: UNICEF United Nations Children Fund
Page 90 and 91: Baltistan and Pakistan‐Administer
Page 92 and 93: continues to impede returns. The ND
Page 94 and 95: Surname, Forenames Org. ♂♀ Meth
Page 110 and 111: Summary of interviews by category o
Page 112 and 113: 21. Ashfar Ahmad Save the Children
Page 114 and 115: 19. Farrusch Mirza UNICEF 20. Hamad
Page 116 and 117: 13 . Dube Alfred WHO 14 . Masooma H
Page 118 and 119: 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. Fareeha Ummar O
Page 120 and 121: Annex 4.3: Field Work Itenerary Dat
Page 122 and 123: Date Riccardo Polastro Nicolai Stee
Page 124 and 125: Date Riccardo Polastro Nicolai Stee
Page 126 and 127: Annex 5 Interview Guide IA‐RTE In
Page 128 and 129: . With whom (military, government,
Page 130 and 131: 6‐ Did the needs assessments take
Page 132 and 133: Millions 900,0 800,0 700,0 600,0 50
Page 136 and 137: Source: Logistics Cluster, Feb 2011
Page 138 and 139: Pakistan Initial Floods Emergency R
Page 140: Ms. Aatika Nagrah, a development pr
show all

Inter-Agency Real Time Evaluation of the Humanitarian ... - alnap

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?