Kenya Food Security and Outcome Monitoring (FSOM) Consolidated Report September 2015



  • September month is a post harvest month in many areas of the country. The long rains harvest this year was 12% above the 5 year average.

  • While food consumption have improved for many beneficiaries over the last 4 years, deteriorations were recorded in the three pastoral zones North-eastern, Northern and Northwestern. The worst consumption situation was found in North-western and North-eastern pastoral zones where 19-34% of the households had a poor food consumption score. Only 26% of beneficiaries had an acceptable food consumption score in Turkana (North-western).

  • WFP beneficiaries who received a General Food Distribution (GFD) had a worse food consumption score than households engaged in food/cash for assets. Only 40% of GFD beneficiaries had an acceptable food consumption score compared with 60% of food for asset and 70% of cash for asset households. This could be a result of the reduced food rations given to GFD beneficiaries as well as the different severity in the overall food security situation in the geographical areas where the three interventions are implemented.

  • Results show that none of the livelihood zones reach the threshold for what is regarded as good dietary diversity (IFPRI threshold of 6). However South-eastern Marginal Mixed Farming (Kitui) almost reached it with 5.7 and continues to have the highest dietary diversity among WFP beneficiaries. Two livelihood zones remained at, or below the threshold for what is regarded as poor dietary diversity (3.5) these were North-western pastoral livelihood zone (Turkana) and Kakuma refugee camp.

  • The percentage of children 6-23 months receiving the minimum acceptable diet in September 2015 was 7.0% which, while well below the target of 70%, is nearly double the number consuming a MAD in May 2015 and over triple the 2.2% meeting the MAD in September 2014.

  • Households’ purchasing power has steadily improved compared to the previous three years as food prices in some zones reduced and some 43% of beneficiary households and 49% among non-beneficiaries were able to afford the minimum healthy food basket.