Delay in payment of CNWs and inadequate tools: Lack of timely payment of CNWs and provision of tools to all CNWs is discouraging to community mobilization efforts. Community, KII, FGD Previous program rejection: Previous program rejection of children who were not caretakers yet within the admission criteria has discouraged some caretakers from seeking assistance from the nutrition programs. Specific to BSFP Community, FGD, KII Lack of continuous monthly admissions and discharges. Lack of monthly caretakers admissions and discharges has seen lack of coverage of eligible children due to “inadequate food” or opportunity for new admissions. Community, CNW, FGD, KII, Overcrowding during distributions: Overcrowding particularly in the IDP camps program staff informal during distributions has made the process disorderly and discouraging to some discussions caretakers. 4.2 STAGE 2: HYPOTHESIS TESTING From the data collected in stage 1, the coverage survey established three hypotheses for further investigation as regards the TSFP: #1: Coverage is different in the different contexts: high in IDP and town sites due to higher density and low in rural set-ups due to the scattered nature of the communities. #2: Coverage is high in near sites and low in distant (approximately 2 hours walk). #3: There is double registration of children in BSFP and TSFP/OTP. Five (5) site areas were purposively selected to test the hypotheses with each hypothesis tested using 2 villages. Door to door case finding was used in identification of MAM children. The decision rule (90% for camp, 70% for urban and 50% for rural setups) was applied in assessing coverage amongst the different contexts. TSFP hypotheses assessment The findings per village are presented in table 4 below. Table 4: Small area survey findings - TSFP Village Village Current Current Recovering Total Decision Decision Total in Total Decision profile covered not (covered rule program (Covered rule covered and (covered and covered and current cases only) Point coverage Single coverage estimate Jazira 2 Town 11 11 6 22 15 <70% 17 29 20 Banbala IDP 12 3 15 15 13 <90% 27 31 27 Tulasharaf Rural 5 0 25 5 2 >50% 30 30 15 Hanoy Distant 12 7 11 19 9 >50% 23 31 15 (rural)
Delay in payment of CNWs and inadequate tools: Lack of timely payment of CNWs and provision of tools to all CNWs is discouraging to community mobilization efforts. Previous program rejection: Previous program rejection of children who were not yet within the admission criteria has discouraged some caretakers from seeking assistance from the nutrition programs. Community, caretakers KII, FGD Specific to BSFP Lack of continuous monthly admissions and discharges. Lack of monthly admissions and discharges has seen lack of coverage of eligible children due to “inadequate food” or opportunity for new admissions. Community, caretakers FGD, KII Overcrowding during distributions: Overcrowding particularly in the IDP camps during distributions has made the process disorderly and discouraging to some caretakers. Community, CNW, program staff FGD, KII, informal discussions 4.2 STAGE 2: HYPOTHESIS TESTING From the data collected in stage 1, the coverage survey established three hypotheses for further investigation as regards the TSFP: #1: Coverage is different in the different contexts: high in IDP and town sites due to higher density and low in rural set-ups due to the scattered nature of the communities. #2: Coverage is high in near sites and low in distant (approximately 2 hours walk). #3: There is double registration of children in BSFP and TSFP/OTP. Five (5) site areas were purposively selected to test the hypotheses with each hypothesis tested using 2 villages. Door to door case finding was used in identification of MAM children. The decision rule (90% for camp, 70% for urban and 50% for rural setups) was applied in assessing coverage amongst the different contexts. TSFP hypotheses assessment The findings per village are presented in table 4 below. Table 4: Small area survey findings - TSFP Village Village profile Current covered Current not covered Recovering Total (covered and covered current cases only) Decision rule Decision Total in program (covered and Total (Covered and Decision rule Point coverage Single coverage estimate Jazira 2 Town 11 11 6 22 15 <70% 17 29 20 Banbala IDP 12 3 15 15 13 <90% 27 31 27 Tulasharaf Rural 5 0 25 5 2 >50% 30 30 15 Hanoy Distant (rural) 12 7 11 19 9 >50% 23 31 15