South Sudan + 1 more

Yida interagency rapid host community nutrition and mapping assessment

Attachments

Executive Summary

An Inter-Agency Rapid Assessment of host community populations in the vicinity of Yida Refugee Camp was undertaken over four days from 12 to 14 February in order to address existing gaps in knowledge regarding the number, location and humanitarian needs of host community populations in the area.

The catchment area for the assessment was Yida Boma, determined by available resources (teams retasked from another delayed survey). Other Bomas exist within Yida Payam and Pariang County, however, and no definitive catchment area for Yida “Host Community” has been agreed.

The assessment included MUAC and edema screening for U5 and PLW present during the survey.
Demographic data were collected for all individuals reported to be living in the area (total population), as well as those reported to have slept in visited domiciles the evening before (24 hour population).
Questions relating to latrine coverage and water collection were included ate the request of WASH and health actors.

The host community population of Yida Boma was assessed to be 2,951 individuals of whom 1,991 were reported to have slept in Yida Boma domiciles the night before. Approximately 66% (1,962 individuals) of the Yida Boma host community resides in three villages within Yida Camp itself, the remainder residing in six villages outside of the camp.

The assessment revealed an under-5 GAM rate of 5.65%. This rate is similar to that assessed by a June 2012 assessment conducted by MSF-F, though the catchment area for the MSF assessment is not known, and the most recent assessment was conducted during the post-harvest period.

The GAM rate for host community PLW was recorded as 35.9%, according to the <230mm MUAC measure. This result is concerning, although was noted that only a subset of PLW reported to be living in the area were present during the assessment, and that the reported total number of PLW resident in the area was well below the national average.

Latrine coverage was reported to be very low across the host community, including host community populations residing within Yida Camp. 95.7% of host community participants reported utilizing open defecation, compared with 3.8% reporting using latrines improved with a latrine slab.

Water sourcing was variable according to location. Overall 81% of the host community reported boreholes (hand pumps or Yida Camp water points) as their primary source of water, with 19% reporting standing water as the primary water source. Participants from Nyokbil and Dunga villages reported the highest usage of surface water as primary water source, at 85% and 76% respectively.

Recommendations for immediate further action include:

  1. Interventions addressing the needs of host community PLW.
  2. Targeted distributions for U5 including referral mechanisms for severally malnourished children.
  3. Host community latrine coverage should be addressed immediately.
  4. A borehole and hand pump should be constructed between Nyokbil and Dunga villages, and WASH assessment undertaken across the broader host community.
  5. Broader Food Security, Livelihoods and Nutrition Assessments should be undertaken to assess host community populations outside of Yida Boma catchment area.
  6. Market assessments are recommended to determine the feasibility of cash-based programming.