Attachments
Overview of the Multi-Sectoral Assessment of Needs
This factsheet aims to provide a snapshot of multi-sectoral conditions, needs, and challenges among Myanmar migrants in Rayong as captured between May and June 2024 by IOM Thailand’s multi-sectoral assessment of needs. The purpose of this assessment is to provide insights regarding the severity of needs among migrant populations, identify vulnerable population groups and geographic areas with the most acute needs, inform assistance planning and relevant Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) targets, and provide sectoral and inter-sectoral baselines for future assessments.
Methodology
The tool was developed by IOM’s Migration Data and Research Unit (MDRU) in collaboration with various sectoral IOM units specialized in labor, health, protection topics, among others. The survey is conducted at household level, but also includes questions for which the respondent had to answer on behalf of every member of their household (for example, the ages of all members of the household). IOM surveyed a representative sample randomly selected within the population of interest, which included Myanmar migrants in Rayong. IOM sought an equal balance between female and male respondents. Answers from 659 respondents were analysed. Counting all respondents and their household members, 1,334 individuals are represented by this assessment.
Due to the high number of indicators of interest, the survey was split into two tools: tool 1 focusing on questions about multi-sectoral conditions (MSA) and tool 2 on access to services (ASI). Respondents were interviewed using either one of these tools, never both. Some questions, however, particularly those regarding demographics and migration history, were covered in both tools to understand the basic profiles of all participating respondents and their households. As a result, the sample size for data analysis varies between indicators. Questions which appeared only in one of the tools but were answered by all respondents remain representative at a 90 per cent confidence interval with a 5 per cent margin of error. Questions which were covered in both tools have a 95 per cent confidence interval with a 5 per cent margin of error.