Afghanistan

Winterization assessment: Preliminary findings, June 2020 | Kabul, Afghanistan

Format
Assessment
Sources
Posted
Originally published
Origin
View original

Attachments

ES/NFI Winterization Response 2019/2020

Between November 2019 and March 2020, the ES/NFI Cluster and its partners, in coordination with the Government of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan (GoIRA), provided the following winterization response:

  • Scope: 71,405 (out of 95,350) vulnerable households in all 34 Provinces across Afghanistan
  • Funding: $19.2 million from the Afghanistan Humanitarian Fund and bilateral donors, and $2.4 million from GoIRA for heating/fuel, shelter, and warm clothing expenses
  • Assistance Provided: Minimum winterization package ($200 USD per household)
    • Modalities: Restricted Cash, Unrestricted Cash, In-kind, Vouchers
    • Assistance was meant to provide the equivalent of one of the following:
      • One gas cylinder with 5kg capacity and 60kg of gas per month (x3 months)
      • One bukhari stove and 200kg of wood per month (x3 months)

Good could be provided in single or multiple instalments of restricted or unrestricted cash, vouchers, directly as in-kind, or a mixture of different modalities totalling $200 USD.

Research Objectives

Evaluate the effectiveness of the 2019/2020 Winterization response across Afghanistan, at four levels:

I. Household: Understand the impact of and beneficiary satisfaction with the winterization assistance provided.

II. Community: Assess effects of the assistance on non-beneficiary households in the community and community dynamics.

III. Organisations: Evaluate the availability and use of guidance and procedures, and identify common implementing challenges in the different regions.

IV. Coordination: Identify coordination challenges and best practices in Kabul and the different regions.

Scope

Methodology

Household Survey

  • 4,899 HH interviews with beneficiaries and non0beneficiaries.
  • Statistically significant at the regional level, with a 95% confidence level and a 7% margin of error.

Key Informant Interviews – Organisations

  • 44 key informant interviews with representatives of 20 implementing organisations.
  • 32 programme staff & 12 M&E staff.

Key Informant Interviews – Coordinating Bodies

  • 31 key informant interviews with national and regional Clusters, OCHA, MORR and ANDMA

Limitations

  • With the household head being predominantly male in Afghanistan, conditions and needs of women may be misrepresented.
  • In-kind and voucher assistance was only provided by a small number of organisations, resulting in a strong dependence of the assessment’s findings on the modalities’ effectiveness on the performance of a few organisations.
  • Non-beneficiary households were not equally sampled across all regions of Afghanistan, due to the absence of comprehensive populations lists, resulting in an underrepresentation in the Central Highlands, South, and West.
  • Due to differences in how organisations defined ‘restricted cash’, REACH, for the purpose of this assessment, provided respondents with a standardised definition (see Metadata slides) and allowed them to determine if the assistance received was ‘restricted’. This enabled the assessment to compare spending behaviour, based on respondents’ perception of conditionality. Upon request, data can be re-analysed applying organisations’ individual definitions of ‘restricted cash’.