According to Need? Needs assessment and decision-making in the humanitarian sector

1. According to Need?Needs assessment and decision-making in the humanitarian sector Study Launch London, 25 September 2003 Humanitarian Policy Group

2. Background and problem statement • Origins – defining the problem • Impartiality & the inequity of allocations • Prioritising the most urgent cases • Proportionate and appropriate response • Trust and credibility • An agenda of common concern – agency and donor

3. The ODI study • Aim • Scope, approach, constraints • 3 main areas of focus • Conceptual: definitions, criteria, thresholds • Practice of needs assessment • Decision-making and needs analysis

4. Findings 1: definitions, criteria, thresholds Different interpretations of ‘humanitarian need’ and ‘crisis’ Assessing severity – need and risk Lack of consistently applied thresholds Needs and rights – a false dichotomy

5. Findings 2: Assessment practice Lack of formal, stand-alone assessments Progress on technical level. But process is haphazard and largely uncoordinated Inconsistent measurement of key indicators: mortality, morbidity, manutrit. A ‘front-loaded’ process

6. Findings 3: Assessment practice cont’d Assessing food security and nutrition Assessing health needs ‘Response’ vs ‘needs’ assessments Criteria for good assessment

7. Findings 4: Decision-making Needs analysis and other factors in decision-making Resource led? Assessment tied to funding processes Assessments conducted by implementing agencies - trust, objectivity? Mutual ‘construction’ of crises

8. Findings 5: Decision-making cont’d Disconnect between needs assessment and top-level decision-making? Transparency of donor and agency entry/exit criteria Assessment and accountability

9. Issues arising • Demographics • ‘Numbers affected’ and ‘vulnerable groups’ • Assessing protection threats • The cost of assessments • Needs responsiveness and the dangers of ‘normalisation’ • Assessed and unassessed need

10. ‘People affected’: spheres of risk • Threats that are: • Actual • Imminent • 3. Potential 3 2 1 1

11. Recommendations 1 Core criteria: threats to life, health, subsistence, physical security • actual or imminent threats => Levels of acute risk • Agreed thresholds, universally applied: • mortality, morbidity, malnutrition • protection?

12. Recommendations 2 Routine measurement of key indicators => surveillance • Assessment task forces • heads of sectoral working groups; CHAP • independent assessors?

13. Recommendations 3 Sectoral issues - e.g. WHO and UNICEF joint health assessment • Assessment task forces • heads of sectoral working groups; CHAP • independent assessors?

14. Some questions for discussion 1 • Is the analogy with emergency medicine appropriate? • Risk and needs analysis • The link with impact assessment • What do we assume about levels of dependency on relief?

15. Some questions for discussion 2 • Expert consensus and sectoral working groups • A humanitarian ‘index’? • Independent assessment capacity? • Funding assessments • Assessment, monitoring, evaluation

16. Overseas Development Institute 111 Westminster Bridge Road London SE1 7JD Tel: 020 7922 0300 Fax: 020 7922 0399 Email: hpgadmin@odi.org.uk Website: www.odi.org.uk