1. No category

Annex 1 -­‐ Detailed methodology Background to the Ukraine MSNA The MSNA is a multi-­‐organisation, multi-­‐sector humanitarian needs assessment in five oblasts of Eastern Ukraine affected by the current crisis. The assessment was initiated by the NGO Forum in Ukraine. The assessment was a collaboration of humanitarian actors in Ukraine, led by the steering committee of the NGO Forum. Field assessment teams (enumerators) and resources were provided by participating NGOs. Contributions to secondary information and joint analysis of findings were made by the broader humanitarian community in Ukraine, including the clusters. Data collected by the HSM was made available by OCHA and merged with the KI data, collected by the MSNA. The assessment process was facilitated by needs assessment experts from ACAPS. The aim, as identified by NGO stakeholders in early 2015, is to update knowledge on the condition and status of the population in order to prioritise interventions. Limited information was available that gave a consolidated overview of the situation across the affected area. For the NGO community, it was also important to design an assessment approach that gave voice to people directly impacted by the crisis. Currently the HSM is the primary multi-­‐sectoral assessment conducted in Eastern Ukraine1. It is an inter-­‐sectoral joint needs assessment mechanism coordinated by OCHA. The KI data presented here is a combination of the HSM Round 5 data (collected through the usual HSM mechanism) and data collected by the MSNA teams. All data were collected during late February and early March 2015. Assessment chronology Date February 2015 26 February – 1 March 2-­‐13 March February – March 14-­‐17 March 17 March 20 March 17-­‐28 March 30 March Assessment Steps Planning, development of tools and methodology Training of field teams Primary data collection Secondary data review Data processing and preliminary analysis Joint analysis working session Initial findings shared Analysis finalized, report writing Report shared MSNA Primary data collection for the MSNA took place between 2-­‐13 March 2015, and covered both GCAs and NGCAs. The primary data collection element was designed specifically for the Eastern Ukraine context. It uses two kinds of primary data; 1
For a list of assessments see the HRP, February 2015, pp 14-­‐16. •
•
KI interviews at the raion level. These were carried out in such a way to complement data from the HSM. They cover more raions than the normal HSM, providing a more comprehensive picture of the situation. HH interviews in all affected oblasts. A total of 431 HH interviews were carried out. The KI data presented here is a combination of the HSM Round 5 data (collected through the usual HSM mechanism) and data collected by the MSNA teams. All data were collected during late February and early March 2015. Data sharing and collaboration on analysis has taken place with the support of OCHA in Ukraine. Assessment objective The overall purpose of this MSNA is to provide information at a strategic level, to identify critical needs according to geographic areas and sectors. It should; • Enhance understanding of the humanitarian impact of the crisis. • Inform the design of humanitarian responses. • Provide evidence for decision making, including resourcing. •
Identify information gaps and needs, including the need for further assessments.
Assessment coverage The MSNA covers the Eastern Ukraine, where the impact of the crisis is greatest. The geographic scope of the assessment is shown in the map below. In order to compare by geographic area, the three areas the analysis is based on are: •
•
Donetska and Luhanska GCAs. Donetska and Luhanska NGCAs. •
Dnipropetrovska, Kharkivska and Zaporizska areas, where a large proportion of IDPs have moved.
For primary data collection, the five oblasts most impacted by the situation have been divided into seven geographical areas. GCAs: •
•
•
•
•
Dnipropetrovsk
•
•
Donetska
Kharkivska
Zaporizska
Donetska
Luhanska
NGCAs: Luhanska
Ukraine MSNA and HSM raions
59 raions covered by MSNA assessments
64 raions covered by HSM assessments
Based on Key Informant Interview in
February and March 2015
Kharkivska
Oblast
Poltavska
Oblast
Luhanska
Oblast
Dnipropetrovska
Oblast
Donetska
Oblast
Zaporizska
Oblast
Household Interview (35 raions)
HSM
MSNA
100
km
Data Sources: OCHA COD, UMSNA, HSM
The situation on the ground is volatile and accessibility in all areas is not ensured, in spite of the Minsk II ceasefire (agreed on the 12 February 2015). This required flexibility at field level. The list of raions to be visited by assessment field teams was randomly selected2, but was also subject to last minute changes due to accessibility constraints. Changes to the planned list of raions due to security were minor. Ukraine MSNA - Security Situation
Based on Key Informant Interview in
February and March 2015
Kharkivska
Oblast
Poltavska
Oblast
Luhanska
Oblast
Dnipropetrovska
Oblast
Donetska
Oblast
Zaporizska
Oblast
No Fighting
Sporadic Fighting
Frequent Fighting
100
km
Data Sources: OCHA COD, UMSNA, HSM
2
See note on KI raion selection to be compatible with the HSM. Conflict areas and IDPs The assessment focuses on identifying needs at group level, within the targeted geographical areas. IDPs are the group of interest in GCAs. The entire population is considered the group of interest in NGCAs. The three key groups being differentiated are: 1. IDPs residing in Dnipropetrovska, Kharkivska and Zaporizska. 2. IDPs residing in Donetska and Luhanska GCAs. 3. People residing in conflict-­‐affected NGCAs of Donetska and Luhanska . This includes residents in their place of origin and IDPs who have remained within the NGCA. The MSNA identifies the needs for each affected group by using two types of primary data: •
HH level -­‐ what HHs report on their circumstances. •
Raion level -­‐ what KIs report on the situation for the entire raion.
Key aspects of the methodology The MSNA report is based on a combination of findings from the HH and KI interviews, secondary data and joint analysis and interpretation by a mixed group of expert stakeholders. Two units of reporting have been used: •
•
Raion, for data from the KI Interviews. Affected group (based on area), for data from the HH interviews. The MSNA methodology consists of five main components: •
•
•
•
•
Secondary data review. KI interviews. HH interviews. Debriefing of team leaders. Triangulation and establishing confidence level about the collected information. Secondary data review In-­‐crisis secondary information was used to inform the design of the primary data collection. An ongoing collection of available secondary data from other assessments, reports and documents is taking place. This data has been used to triangulate and supplement the primary data3 in the preparation of this report. Key Informant (KI) interviews The KI component was designed to cover as many raions as possible that were not covered by the latest HSM4. There are a total of 172 raions in the five oblasts concerned. HSM round 5 covered 64, the MSNA 59, so 123 3
ACAPS has produced a range of briefing notes and secondary data reviews on the Ukraine situation, see http://www.acaps.org/en/country-­‐analysis raions in total of the 172 were covered by the analysis. The information collected through KI interviews only represents the raions covered, not the entire oblast. For quantitative information (such as the number of registered IDPs and the breakdown of these IDPs by living arrangement), a confidence level was indicated on the assessment questionnaires by the enumerators so that a degree of certainty could be attached to each figure. Data has been discarded, where appropriate. KIs included raion officials and other individuals with a general knowledge of the raion. A list of potential KIs was provided to the enumerators. Multiple KIs are interviewed to complete one KI questionnaire. On average between 3 and 4 KIs were interviewed to complete each questionnaire. Household (HH) interviews Giving voice to people impacted by crisis is a critical component of a humanitarian needs assessment. This is often done through community or focus group discussions, but in the Ukrainian context group discussions were not considered to be the most useful way to approach this. With the crisis having continued for months and with the majority of people living in separate dwellings, a HH level interview was considered a more appropriate way of understanding the perceptions and priorities of affected people. In each of the seven identified areas 60 HH interviews were carried out. HHs were randomly selected from the IDP population in the GCAs and from the total population in the NGCAs5. The HH were selected as follows: • In each geographical area, five raions were selected randomly. In the GCA, the raions for the HH assessment were randomly selected from those that are presently housing 80% of the IDP population. • In each raion three settlements / neighbourhoods were selected, based on the advice of the raion officials / KIs during the field work. • In each settlement / neighbourhood four HHs were selected randomly. • In total 12 HHs per raion were interviewed. In total, 420 HH interviews were planned as follows: •
•
•
180 HH within the IDP population of Dnipropetrovska, Kharkivska and Zaporizska. 120 HH within the IDP population of Luhanska and Donetska GCAs. 120 HH within the total population living in Luhanska and Donetska NGCAs. In reality 431 HH interviews have been included in the dataset because, as some teams carried out more interviews than required. Each HH interview was conducted by two people, one to facilitate the discussion and 4
The Humanitarian Situation Monitoring (HSM) is a product of the Humanitarian Community in Ukraine. Data is regularly collected at the raion level from purposively selected raions based on areas hosting high numbers of IDPs and in conflict affected areas. The present round of HSM is round 5. HSM dashboard updates are released every two months. 5
See note on random selection in the “Assessment Limitations” section that follows.
one to take notes and enter the data using a mobile / tablet application. This resource intensive process was selected to ensure a quality exchange between the HH and the assessment team and reduce data entry errors.
Data entry platform The MSNA facilitation team choose to use mobile data collection technology to save time on the data entry process. The two questionnaires were adapted to the Open Data Kit (ODK) platform, with the possibility to easily choose English, Ukrainian or Russian language. In most cases, the data were collected on paper during the day, entered into the mobile device at night and then uploaded to the server. Teams decided this was more appropriate because electronic data capture was viewed with suspicion, especially in the GCAs. Field assessment teams and debriefing of field teams Enumerators and team leaders were provided by members of the NGO Forum. They were a mixture of NGO staff, partner staff and individuals recruited specifically for the assessment. A total of 60 enumerators collected primary data, 23 male and 37 female. Although effort was made to have mixed gender teams, there were no male team members in Dnipropetrovska oblast. Teams participated in the two day training, prior to data collection. One was held in Sievierodonetsk and one in Dnipropetrovsk. For teams working in NGCAs only two people could attend the training, due to constraints moving across the line of confrontation. These two took on the role of team leaders and trained the other eight people. Teams consisted of five people (one leader and four enumerators). Two teams operated in each of the seven areas. During data collection team leaders were called daily by the Assessment Facilitation Team (AFT). Once all of the data had been collected and reviewed, detailed debriefing phone calls took place with the team leaders. These calls were documented and information has been incorporated into this report. Safety and security considerations Each organisation providing enumerators was responsible for their security. The location and progress of field teams was monitored by daily liaison with the AFT. The assessment aimed to protect KIs, enumerators and participating organisations by adhering to strict communication protocols. This included sanitising data that could cause harm. No names, or any other data that could be attributed to the identity of KIs, were recorded. During the training enumerators were encouraged to be flexible, thinking of their own security first, as well as that of the KIs and HHs. Enumerators were instructed never to put themselves in danger to collect information. Joint analysis A half day joint analysis session was held on the 17 March. All members of the NGO Forum in Ukraine, Cluster Coordinators and key OCHA staff were invited to participate in this session. 30 people from 20 different organizations participated. The assessment team presented key findings for interrogation and discussion and working groups focused on specific aspects of the findings. Following the joint analysis session, the assessment team finalised the report. The findings were validated by the NGO Forum Steering Committee on 19 March. Findings were presented to the Humanitarian Community in Ukraine at the General Coordination Meeting on 20 March 2015. Assessment limitations Household selection: The MSNA facilitation team provided instructions on how to randomly select the HHs in each settlement. During the debriefing, some teams reported that they could not find IDP HHs randomly and that they used pre-­‐existing lists from KIs. This means that IDPs in these areas were registered and there was a high probability that they were already receiving assistance of some kind. Differences between HSM and MSNA methodology: The MSNA and the HSM were developed separately and use different methodologies. For example, each MSNA questionnaire is based on multi KI interviews while for the HSM, one KI is used for each questionnaire. The two groups provided different in the training to assessment teams, as they were not trained at the same time or by the same people. Despite these differences, it has been possible to merge the two datasets and analyse the information together. Household interview sample size: The Ukraine MSNA can be considered a probability sample survey. The sample of households was drawn by defining seven geographical areas as strata, with 60 interviews for each. The size of the sample has not been designed to provide representative information at oblast level and no extrapolation is possible at this administrative level. Extrapolation of people in need is possible according to the three geographic areas defined in this report: • Donetska and Luhanska GCAs. • Donetska and Luhanska NGCAs.
• Dnipropetrovska, Kharkivska and Zaporizska oblasts.
The estimation of the interval of confidence is provided in the Annex 3. Security context: Only raions that could be accessed (in terms of security) have been included in the primary data collection. The humanitarian situation is likely to be more severe in the raion where the insecurity prevented the assessment teams from operating. This should be considered in all response planning. Training of trainers: Initially training of trainers was planned to ensure that the training of enumerators was solely in Ukrainian and Russian. Unfortunately, it was not possible to find enough English speaking local trainers to carry this out. The training of enumerators was delivered in English, and simultaneously translated. Training materials were provided in Ukrainian and Russian. The impact of this change was minimal, as reflected in the quality of data collected. Translation of questionnaires: HH and KI questionnaires were translated into Russian and Ukrainian. When reviewing the data it was considered that some elements were not translated appropriately. The MSNA team decided not to include these questions in the final reports. Annex 2 – MSNA Questionnaires – HH and KII – English / Ukrainian / Russian Household questionnaire Geographical area: Date (dd/mm/yy): Enumerator code: The household is living in oUrban area oRural area Oblast: Raion / City: Settlement: o Displaced in host families (no rent fee) o Displaced living in rented accommodations o Displaced in collective shelter (schools, public building, vacated, etc.)
o Resident Category A. General information on your Household Gender A1. Could you provide the gender and age of the head of this Household? o Male A2. How many people are living with you? A2.1.Adult (between 18 to 59 years of age) A2.2.Children (under 5 years of age) A2.3.Children (between 5 to 17 years of age) A2.4.Older people between 60 to 69 years of age) A2.5.Older people (> 70 years of age) A2.6.Total number of persons living in your family Age oFemale Male Total Female A3. Is there any person with disability or with chronic illness living with you? A4. If yes, how many? A5. Is there any Children under your care who are separated from their parents (usual caregivers)? o Yes o Yes oNo Adult Children oNo Question for displaced people only A6. How would you qualify your current displacement? o Primary (came here directly from place of origin) o Secondary (were displaced in another location before coming here) o Other ((were displaced in more than one other locations before coming here) A7. How long have you been displaced here? Precise number of days A8. From which place are you coming from? Oblast Raion A9. What was the main reason of your displacement? (tick only one) oDue to the fighting in place of origin oLost of source of income in the place of origin oNo access to basic amenities in place of origin (gas, water, power, etc…) oNo access to service in place of origin (health, school etc…) oNo access to sufficient food in place of origin (health, school etc…) oFear for the security of my family oOther, please specify A10.
Is there any member of your family who has stayed in your place of origin? o Yes oNo A11.
If yes, who (tick all that apply) A12.
If yes, why? (tick all that apply) oMan (between 18 to 59 years of age) oTo look after the house oWork obligation or opportunity oWoman (between 18 to 59 years of age) oNot able to travel here oNot willing to travel here oChildren (under 18 years of age) oTo access essential services oNot enough money to travel oOlder man (above 60 years of age) oOther, please specify: oOlder woman (Above 60 years of age) oPeople with disability o People with chronic illness A13.
Has your household been registered as displaced? o Yes oNo A14.
If yes, by which organism / agency? (tick all that apply) A15.
If no, why? (tick all that apply) oState Emergency Service oDon’t know where to register oMinistry of Social Policy oDon’t have necessary documentations (ID etc…) oAid organization oLack of capacity of the “registration office” to register all the new displaced people oOther, specify: oUnable to physically access the registration centre oUnable to safely access the registration centre oOther, please specify: Question for all respondents A16.
In general, how do you consider the relationship between resident and displaced people in your neighbourhood? (Tick one only) o No displaced people o Tensions already exist o Resident community willing to assist for as long as necessary o Resident community willing to assist, but for limited time o Other (specify ______________) A17.
Are you planning to leave this place in a near future? oNo oYes, as soon as the situation improved oYes, to find a safer place to live oDon’t know 1 B. Food Security and Livelihoods B1. Yesterday, how many meals were eaten by this family?
A-­‐ Number of days B-­‐ How was this food
eaten in past 7 days acquired? If 0 days, do not specify Write the main source of
the main source. food for the past 7 days
B2. How many days over the last 7 days each of the following food items were included/ presented in the ration of members of your household? What was their source? (Use codes below, write 0 if not consumed in last 7 days) Note for enumerator: Determine whether consumption of fish, milk was only in small quantities. B2.1. Cereals and grain: Wheat bread (flour for home bakery), Rye bread, Pastry, Buckwheat, Pasta, Rice, Oatmeal, Muesli B2.2. Roots and tubers: Potato, Sweet potato B2.3. Legumes / nuts: Beans, Peas/canned peas, other nuts, soy, beans, chickpeas, peanuts, lentils B2.4. Orange vegetables (Veg. rich in Vitamin A): Carrot, Red pepper, Pumpkin, dark yellow/orange sweet potato B2.5. Green leafy vegetables: Spinach, Kale, Sour dock, broccoli B2.6. Other vegetables: Onion, Cabbage, Cauliflower, Salad, Tomatoes/Cucumbers, Zucchini, Beets, Sweet pepper, Eggplant, Mushrooms, Corn, Preserved/pickled/salted vegetables B2.7. Orange fruits (Fruits rich in Vitamin A): Apricot, Peach, Orange, Mandarin B2.8. Other Fruits: Apple, Pear, Plums, Lemon, Banana, Cherry-­‐plum, Cherry, Currant, Pineapple, Watermelon, Melon, Preserved fruits B2.9. Meat products: Pork, Chicken, Beef, Lamb, Rabbit meat, Duck's flesh, Salami, Sausages, Frankfurters, Bacon, Sowbelly, Cold boiled pork, Stew (meat in large quantities and not as a condiment or for flavour) B2.10. Liver, kidney, heart and / or other organ meats B2.11. Fish / Shellfish: Canned tuna, Canned sardines, River fish, Sea fish (fish in large quantities and not as a condiment) B2.12. Eggs B2.13. Milk and other dairy products: Fresh milk, Cheese, Sour cream, Fuli (Kefir)/yoghurt, Curd, Condensed milk (exclude margarine/butter or small amounts of milk for tea/coffee) B2.14. Oil / fat / butter: Sunflower oil, Butter, Lard (as the fat for cooking), Margarine B2.15. Sugar: Sugar, Cakes/sweets/cookies, Jam, Honey B2.16. Condiments / Spices: tea, coffee / cocoa, salt, garlic, spices, yeast / baking powder, tomato / sauce, meat or fish as a condiment, condiments including small amount of milk / tea coffee, and herbs or very small quantity of leafy vegetables like parsley and coriander used for flavour Food acquisition codes 1 = Own production (fruits, vegetables, crops, animal) 2 = Fishing / Hunting 3 = Gathering 4 = Loan 5 = market/supermarket/store (purchase with cash) 6 = market/supermarket/store (purchase on credit) 7 = beg for food 8 = exchange labour or items for food 9 = gift (food) from family relatives or friends 10 = food aid from civil society, NGOs, government, WFP, etc. 11 = from host family B3. In the LAST 7 DAYS how many times did you, as a HH, find yourself doing any of the following? Record the number of days in which you experienced this in boxes provided for each (max = 7 days)
B3.1. Eating less-­‐preferred/expensive foods B3.2. Borrowing food or relying on help from friends and relatives B3.3. Limiting portion size at mealtime B3.4. Limiting adult intake in order for small children to eat B3.5. Reducing the number of meals per day 2 B4. During the past 30 days, did anyone in your household have to engage in any following behaviours due to a lack of food or a lack of money to buy food? oYes oNo B4.1.Sold household assets/goods (radio, furniture, refrigerator, television, etc.) oNo, it wasn’t necessary oNot applicable B4.1.1.If ‘No’, why o No, because I already sold those assets or did this activity within the last 12 months and I cannot continue to do it B4.2. Spent savings (e.g. sale of jewellery, cash savings) oYes oNo oNo, it wasn’t necessary oNot applicable B4.2.1.If ‘No’, why: o No, because I already sold those assets or did this activity within the last 12 months and I cannot continue to do it oYes oNo B4.3.Borrowed money / food from a formal lender / bank oNo, it wasn’t necessary oNot applicable o No, because I already sold those assets or did this activity within the last 12 months and I cannot continue to do it oYes oNo B4.4.Sent household members to eat elsewhere B4.3.1.If ‘No’, why oNo, it wasn’t necessary oNot applicable o No, because I already sold those assets or did this activity within the last 12 months and I cannot continue to do it oYes oNo B4.5.Reduced non-­‐food expenses on health (including drugs) and education B4.4.1.If ‘No’, why oNo, it wasn’t necessary oNot applicable o No, because I already sold those assets or did this activity within the last 12 months and I cannot continue to do it oYes oNo B4.6.Sold productive assets or means of transport (sewing machine, wheelbarrow, bicycle, car, etc.) B4.5.1.If ‘No’, why oNo, it wasn’t necessary oNot applicable o No, because I already sold those assets or did this activity within the last 12 months and I cannot continue to do it oYes oNo B4.7.Withdrew children from school B4.6.1.If ‘No’, why: B4.7.1.If ‘No’, why B4.8.1.Begged oNo, it wasn’t necessary oNot applicable o No, because I already sold those assets or did this activity within the last 12 months and I cannot continue to do it oYes oNo oNo, it wasn’t necessary oNot applicable o No, because I already sold those assets or did this activity within the last 12 months and I cannot continue to do it B4.9.Entire household migrated oYes oNo (NOTE: ONLY IF THIS WAS BECAUSE OF AN ISSUE OF FOOD NOT BECAUSE OF INSECURITY) B4.8.1.If ‘No’, why B4.9.1.If ‘No’, why: B5.10.Sold house or land B5.10.1.If ‘No’, why oNo, it wasn’t necessary oNot applicable o No, because I already sold those assets or did this activity within the last 12 months and I cannot continue to do it oYes oNo oNo, it wasn’t necessary oNot applicable o No, because I already sold those assets or did this activity within the last 12 months and I cannot continue to do it B5. Have you faced any problems accessing markets to purchase food over the last 30 days? oYes oNo B6. If yes, why? (tick only three for each availability and accessibility issue) Availability issue o Not enough food (diversity) in markets o Not enough food produced locally o Not enough infant formula o Not enough infant cereal/foods to feed children 6 to 24 months oNot enough food that is suitable for older people o Not enough cooking items or utensils o Not enough fuel/gas for cooking oNot enough water for cooking o Not enough livestock Accessibility issue oPhysical and logistic constraints to market (roads damaged, no transport, etc.).
oMarkets not physically or safely accessible for persons with restricted mobility (older persons, persons with disability) oInsecurity hindering movement or access to goods and services oLack of information on available food (distribution sites, market, time) oDiscrimination to displaced people oLack of money, income or resources B7. How is the quantity and variety of food items available in the local markets ? o Quantity is high o Quantity is moderate o Quantity is low o Variety is high o Variety is intermittent o Variety is low B8. What were your household’s main sources of income in the last B9. Could you estimate the contribution to the total income of each source? 30 days? (as a percentage) Main income source Second source of income Third source of income List of income sources to use: Food Crop Production & Sales Sale of goods Skilled Employment/Salary Pension borrowing Other (specify):_____________ Cash crop Production and Sales Sale of Handicraft/Artisan Products Petty Trade Livestock Production/Sales Casual/Wage Labour Irregular Social Support Sale of Livestock Products Remittance Humanitarian Assistance 3 B10. What were your household’s main expenditures over the past 30 days? B11. Please estimate the relative contribution to total expenditure of Main expenditure Second expenditure Third expenditure expenditures List of expenditure to use: Food commodities Education Fuel Other (specify):____________ Drinking water Rent / housing Household goods, clothes, blankets Health Transport B12. Are there any children in you household participating in the household’s income? oYes oNo oYes oNo B13. Did any member of your family receive any kind of pension or social benefit before the crisis? B14. If yes, has this pension or social benefit been received regularly? o yes, o No, delay is 3 months o No, delay is 1 month o No, delay is more than 3 months o No, delay is 2 months o Pension will not be paid, as we need to register again C. Shelter and NFI C1. Have you faced any problems with your living conditions in the past 30 days? C2. If yes, why? (tick up to three) oBad protection from weather conditions (cold, heat, rain, wind, snow, etc.) oInsecurity of belongings oCollective shelter overcrowded oPersonal insecurity and safety oAbsence of privacy for women and girls oDirty or unhygienic surroundings o Not enough shelter available to rent o Shelter not accessible for people with restricted mobility (older people, people with disability) oOther, specify: ______________ oYes oNo oProblematic relationship with landlord, risk of eviction oShelter / house doesn’t offer privacy for the household oIndividual shelter overcrowded oExposure to risk of fire or electrocution oLack of electricity/lighting o Lack of resources to rent shelter oDiscrimination of the displaced people oLack of information on available shelter (location, cost etc) oLiving with unknown people/away from family/community C3. Do you have access to the following amenities in your place of living? C3.1.Electricity C3.2.Safe water C3.3.Heater system C3.4.Functional Sanitation (toilet, bathroom) C3.5.Functional Kitchen o Always o Always o Always oYes oNo oYes oNo owith minor cut owith minor cut owith minor cut owith major cut owith major cut owith major cut oNo oNo oNo C4. Have you faced any problem in accessing markets to purchase basic NFI in the last 30 days? oYes oNo C5. If yes, why? (tick up to three for availability and accessibility) Not enough NFI available on the markets: NFI are available but access is limited due to: o Bedding items (mattresses, blankets) o Physical and logistic constraints to access the market (roads damaged, long distance, no o Clothing for adults transport, etc.) o Clothing for children o Markets/services not physically accessible for persons with restricted mobility (older persons, o Cooking materials persons with disability) o Stoves/heating system oSecurity constraints restricting movement to the markets o Fuel for heating oLack of information on available NFI (distribution sites, market, time) o Winter kits (blankets, winter clothes etc.) oDiscrimination to displaced people o Personal hygiene products (shampoo, toothbrush, soap) oLack of money, income or resources o Female hygiene products (sanitary pad) o Other: ________________________ oMobility aids/glasses/hearing aids oIncontinence pads/adult diapers oOther, specify 4 D. Health / Nutrition D1. Is any member of your family get sick in the last 7 days? D2. Have you or any member of your household faced any problem in accessing to health services? D3. If yes, why? Not enough services available due to: o Lack of medicine available in health facilities or market oLack of drugs for chronic conditions available in health facilities or market o Lack of medical staff o Lack of female staff o Lack of medical equipment o Lack of functional medical facilities o Lack of referral system oLack of Ambulance oLack of specialised services (eg mental health, chronic disease management) oLack of assistive devices (wheelchairs, glasses, hearing aids) o Other: ___________________ oYes oYes oNo oNo Services are available but access limited due to: o Physical and logistic constraints to access the health facilties (roads damaged, long distance, no transport, etc.) o Health services not physically accessible for persons with restricted mobility (older persons, persons with disability) oCost of transport or cost of services o Lack of information on available health service (location, cost etc..) o Discrimination to displaced people o Security constraints o Limited economic resources o Other: ___________________ D4. Do you know where to get access to the following health care? oPediatric services oVaccination services oPhysical Rehabilitation Services oChronic disease management oOphthalmic care
oIn-­‐patient services oSurgical services oPsychosocial support services oHome based/residential care oDental care
oOut-­‐patient services oReproductive Health Services oGeriatric care oDietician E.
Education / Child protection E1.
E2.
Are you able to send all the children in your household to school? If no, why? (tick up to three) oYes oNo o Lack of School materials, textbooks, pens, boards, etc. o Schools or other spaces are not available for education use (damages, occupied by IDPs or other group) o Schools or spaces are not in good condition (issues with latrines, electricity; furniture unavailable) o Teachers are not available o Constraints with transport to school, dangerous commute, distance or cost o Schools not perceived as safe o Lack of money, income or resources to send children to school o Children needed to help family (include child labour) o Children are sick and can’t attend to school o Lack of adapted infrastructure and service for children with disabilities o Children from displaced family are discriminated o Other: ___________________ E3. Are any of the children in your household exhibiting sign of stress or distress? E4. If yes, which one? oStress oFear oWithdrawn or isolated oPanic attacks oOther, specify: osadness oaggression oanxiety omood swings oreduced self-­‐care osleep disturbances oLoss of motivation/concentration oYes oNo E5. If yes, what actions are taking to help to cope with the stress situation? oSeek support from other family member / friends oSeeking psychosocial support oNothing oOther, specify: F. Protection and GBV
F1. What are the challenges faced by the displaced or affected population living in this settlement / site?
o Personal security living in collective shelters or host families
o Separated families
o Difficulty in acquiring documents
o Lack of information pertaining to assistance
o Family contact
o Inability to move around safely
o Inability to move back and forth across the line of confrontation
o Difficulties with employment
o No problems
o Other: ___________________________________
F2. What type of violence or crimes are of most concern in settlement / site?
o Physical injury as a result of the conflict
o Physical violence, intimidation, harassment
o Shooting, bombs
o Looting, theft, vandalism
o People carrying weapons
o Abduction
o Disappearance
o Arrests, detention
o Evidence of mines, UXO
o No – these changes have not been in evidence
o Other__________________________________
5 G. Communication with affected population G1. What are the main channels of communication available now for your household? Rank three only: 1=first rank, 2=second rank, 3=third rank Internet Newspaper Television Radio Talking to people Road broadcast Mobile phone/SMS Religious leader Signboards Community leader Leaflet Armed forces Others, specify: G2. What are the main issues your household lacks information about? Rank three only: 1=first rank, 2=second rank, 3=third rank How to get healthcare oOther (write in) How to get help after attack Information about situation in place of origin How to replace official documentation How to register for aid How to get water How to get food Finding missing people The security situation here Information about relocation How to get access to education How to find work How to get transport How to get money/financial support How to get help after harassment How to access pensions Other, specify: How to get shelter or shelter materials How to get glasses, mobility aids, hearing aids G3. Is there any constraint to get the information your household needs? Rank three only: 1=first rank, 2=second rank, 3=third rank Don’t know who to ask Don’t trust the available media No access to electricity Other, specify: Don’t have access to usual media No problem H. Access to assistance H1. Did your household receive any assistance since the beginning of the crisis ? H2. If yes, how often do you receive this support? H2.1.Unconditional cash grant oRegular basis (every month) H2.2.Educational kits oRegular basis (every month) H2.3.Support to rent accommodation oRegular basis (every month) H2.4.Health care oRegular basis (every month) H2.5.Winter kits (Blankets, clothes) oRegular basis (every month) H2.6.Psychosocial support oRegular basis (every month) H2.7.Food support oRegular basis (every month) H2.8.Infant formula or other milk product oRegular basis (every month) H2.9.Other, specify: oRegular basis (every month) oYes oNo oNot regular oNot regular oNot regular oNot regular oNot regular oNot regular oNot regular oNot regular oNot regular oOnly once oOnly once oOnly once oOnly once oOnly once oOnly once oOnly once oOnly once oOnly once oNo oNo oNo oNo oNo oNo oNo oNo oNo I. Needs Prioritization I1. What are the top three priority needs for your household? Rank three only: 1=first rank, 2=second rank, 3=third rank. Health Food Education Non Food Items Water Livelihood Shelter Other, specify: Sanitation – Hygiene Protection / Safety and Dignity I2. Are there any other urgent issues, which I have not yet asked you about? (Please write down bullet points only) 6 ADMINISTRATIVE LEVEL QUESTIONNAIRE
Geographical area
oUrban (>50% of Raion pop. living in urban
centres)
oRural (<50% of Raion pop. living in urban
centres)
Oblast name:
Date:
The
Raion is
Raion name:
Enumerator code:
Security situation in last 30 days in
this raion
o Frequent fighting (>once a week) and shelling causing damages/injuries/death
o Sporadic fighting (<once a week) and shelling causing damages/injuries/death
o No fighting (<once a month),no shelling, no damages/injuries/death
Key Informant Detail
Key Informant Type (select all the KI interviewed in the raion):
oGovernment representative
oHead of local administration
oHead of rayon/city council (Rada)
oRayon/City Council social service representative
oDepartment of social services representative
oState Emergency Service representative
oRegional Coordination Centre representative
oState Social Programs on IDPs registration representative
oNGO Representative
oDoctor / Hospital administrator /Health department representative
oTeacher / School director / Education department representative
A.Population
A1. Estimated # of population in Raion
Total
A1.1.Total # who have fled
the Raion due to conflict
A1.2.Total # of officially
registered IDPs within the
raion
A1.3.Estimate of the number
of IDPs actually present within
the raion
A2. Displacement in Raion
Confidence scale
Number of
Key Informant
o 1
o 2
o >2
o 1
o 2
o >2
o 1
o 2
o >2
Confidence scale
Disagreement
among key
informants
o None
o Minor
o Major
o None
o Minor
o Major
o None
o Minor
o Major
Relevant documentary evidence
oThe enumerator actually inspected it
oIt was not accessible, but its existence was credible
oElse
oThe enumerator actually inspected it
oIt was not accessible, but its existence was credible
oElse
oThe enumerator actually inspected it
oIt was not accessible, but its existence was credible
oElse
If zero, enter 0 and nothing if no information
Displaced Population
Total number
Displaced in host families
(no rent fee)
Displaced living in rented
accommodations
Displaced in collective
shelter (schools, public
building, vacated, etc.)
Displaced in Other
category not listed here
Number of Key
Informant
o 1
o 2
o >2
o 1
o 2
o >2
o 1
o 2
o >2
o 1
o 2
o >2
Disagreement
among key
informants
o None
o Minor
o Major
o None
o Minor
o Major
o None
o Minor
o Major
o None
o Minor
o Major
Relevant documentary evidence
oThe enumerator actually inspected it
oIt was not accessible, but its existence was credible
oElse
oThe enumerator actually inspected it
oIt was not accessible, but its existence was credible
oElse
oThe enumerator actually inspected it
oIt was not accessible, but its existence was credible
oElse
oThe enumerator actually inspected it
oIt was not accessible, but its existence was credible
oElse
TOTAL (check total
displaced in raion is same
as A1.3.)
A3. Do you have information about gender repartition among the displaced people?
oMany more men than woman
oMore women than men
oMore men than women
oMany more women than men
oEqual
oDon't know
1 B.Protection and GBV
B1. What are the challenges faced by the displaced or affected population living in this raion?
o Personal security living in collective shelters or host families
o Separated families
o Difficulty in acquiring documents
o Lack of information pertaining to assistance
o Family contact
o Inability to move around safely
o Inability to move back and forth across the line of confrontation
o Difficulties with employment
o No problems
o Other: ___________________________________
B2. What type of violence or crimes are of most concern in your raion? o Physical injury as a result of the conflict
o Physical violence, intimidation, harassment
o Shooting, bombs
o Looting, theft, vandalism
o People carrying weapons
o Abduction
o Disappearance
o Arrests, detention
o Evidence of mines, UXO
o No – these changes have not been in evidence
o Other__________________________________
B3.Is there any report on children separated from their parents / usual caregivers in this raion?
oYes
oNo
oDon’t know
B4. If yes, who are the main care providers for the Unaccompanied Children? (tick only one)
oChildren institution
oHost family
oRelative
oNobody
B5.Which groups are more vulnerable than others to safety risks and discrimination in accessing assistance or services?
(rank only top three:1= most at risk, 2=second most at risk, 3=third most at risk)
Women and girls
Elderly people
Men and boys
Persons with mental / physical disability
LGBT persons
Tatar people
Other, specify
Roma people
Non-Orthodox religious minorities
C.Food security and nutrition
C1. Which group faces the biggest risks of food shortages in this raion? (rank only top three:1= most at risk, 2=second most at risk,
3=third most at risk)
Displaced people living in host families (no rent fees)
Displaced people in rented accommodations
Displaced people in collective centers
Resident population who have not been displaced
None
Don’t know
С2. Food sources: What are the sources of food for the affected people (IDPs OR people living in conflict affected area) living in
this raion? Three sources only, 1=first source, 2=second source, 3=third source
Market (supermarket, shops, open air market)
Community/family friends
Household production
No food is available
Humanitarian community
No alternative sources of food
Government
Other
C3. Has any problems been identified in feeding children under 2 years old since the crisis started in this Raion?
oYes
oNo
oDo not know
C4. Since the emergency, what foods are most commonly fed to children 6-24 months of age? (tick only one)
oNormal milk
oInfant formula
oSolid food for infant (cereal..)
oBreastfeeding
oDo not know
C5. Since the beginning of the event, has any of the following items been distributed or donated? (select all that apply)
oNo distribution oDried infant formula oReady to use infant formula oBaby bottles oBaby teat oDo not know oOther infant complementary food
C6. Are pregnant and lactating women currently receiving any targeted food assistance?
oYes
oNo
oDo not know
C7. Overall, the general status of Food Security of affected people in this raion:
None
Not life-threatening
0
1
2
3
4
Life-threatening
5
6
2 D.Shelter and non-food items
D1. Shelter issues: Which of the following issues is the most reported?
Rank three only: 1=first rank, 2=second rank, 3=third rank
Bad protection from weather conditions (cold, heat, rain, wind, snow, etc.)
Insecurity of belongings
Collective shelter overcrowded
Personal security and safety
Discrimination of the IDPs by the renters
Lack of electricity/lighting
Bad condition / quality of the accommodation
Lack of suitable accommodations for rent
No problem
Lack of money to rent an accommodation
Problematic relationship with landlord - eviction
Shelter / house doesn’t offer privacy
Individual shelter overcrowded
Exposure to risk of fire, live wire
Absence of privacy for women and girl
Dirty or unhygienic shelter environment
Heating facilities not available
Size of the room not appropriate
D2. Overall, the general status of Shelter conditions of affected people in this raion:
None
Normal to serious situation
0
1
2
3
4
D3. Overall, the general status of NFI conditions of affected people in this raion:
None
Normal to serious situation
0
1
2
3
4
Major to catastrophic situation
5
6
Major to catastrophic situation
5
6
E.Health
E1. Health issues: rank three most reported issues among the
following
(rank 1=most important, 2= second most important, 3=third most
important)
Non-Communicable diseases:
Psychological trauma
Injuries (war wounded)
Disabilities (physical, intellectual)
Cardiovascular diseases (hypertension)
Respiratory diseases (asthma)
Diabetes
Skin diseases
Pregnancy related diseases
Communicable diseases
Diarrheal diseases
Acute watery diarrhea (cholera)
Upper respiratory infection
Tuberculosis
HIV/AIDS/STIs
Measles
E2. Were the following health services regularly available and
accessible within your raion over the last 30 days?
(Select if yes)
oFirst Aid Emergency and Trauma care
oIn-patient emergency and Trauma care
oPaediatric care/EPI
oMaternal Health care
oReferral pathway for obstetric emergencies
oTB diagnosis & treatment
oHIV/AIDS testing, counselling and treatment
oOpioid substitution therapy (OST)
oMental Health care
oNon-communicable diseases/ chronic care
oBlood bank facilities
oLaboratory facilities
Acute flaccid paralysis (Suspected Polio)
Other diseases
Malnutrition
Gender Based Violence
Other ______________
E3. Overall, the general status of Health in this raion:
None
Normal to serious situation
0
1
2
3
4
Major to catastrophic situation
5
6
F.WASH
F1. What are the direct sources of water used for drinking in the Raion (Tick all that apply)
o Wells
o Trucked (free)
o Trucked (purchased)
o Reservoirs / tank
o Public pipe network
o Purchased bottles
F2. Overall, the general status of Water / Sanitation / Hygiene conditions of affected people in this raion:
None
Normal to serious situation
Major to catastrophic situation
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
3 G.Education
G1. Number of pupils in this raion (enter number)
Number
Number
Pre-conflict number of pupils
Number of additional pupils from displaced
families
Current number of pupils
G2. Number of schools or education facilities in this raion by status (enter number)
Without damage
With slight damage
With heavy damage
Kindergartens
% of total
Not in operation
Secondary schools
Vocational
Universities
All education facilities
H.Livelihood
H1. To what extent the employment situation has been changed in this raion?
Cuts
o Didn’t change
o Some jobs were cut (up to 30%)
o Many jobs in the area were cut (30-70%)
o Most of jobs were cut (over 70%)
Alternative employment options
o Employers don’t use unpaid leave and part-time employment practices
o Employers force unpaid leave and part-time employment practices occasionally
o Employers force unpaid leave and part-time employment practices frequently
H2. Are pensions and social assistance being paid as normal in this raion?
o Yes
o No, delay is 1 month
o No, delay is 2 months
o No, delay is 3 months
o No, delay is more than 3 months
o Not paid
H3. Are wages being paid as normal in this raion?
o Yes
o No, delay is 1 month
o No, delay is 2 months
o No, delay is 3 months
o No, delay is more than 3 months
o No, salaries has been reduced (employees were sent to non-covered leaves or transferred to part-time)
H4. Has access to the consumer financial system been affected in this Raion?
oYes
oNo
oDon’t know
H5. If yes, how? o Closing of some bank branches
o Closing of most bank branches
o Long waiting time to withdraw money
o Limits on withdrawals (UAH)
I. Needs Prioritization
I1. What are the top three priority needs in the Raion for the community?
Rank three only: 1=first rank, 2=second rank, 3=third rank.
Health
Food Security
Water
Shelter
Education
Non Food Items
Livelihood
Sanitation – Hygiene
Protection / Safety and Dignity
I2. Which group of people are most vulnerable? Rank three only: 1=first rank, 2=second rank, 3=third rank
Ages categories (rank 3)
Vulnerable Group (Rank 3)
Infants/toddlers < 5 years old
Female head of household
Children ( 5 to 12 years old)
Single women (including widows)
Youth female (13-17 years old)
Persons with disability
Youth male (13-17 years old)
Older persons (60 and above)
Women (18-59 years old)
Persons with chronic illness
Men (18 - 59 years old)
Minorities
Older persons (60+ years old)
Children with no caregiver (unaccompanied children)
I3. Any comments, observation about the Raion
4 SEVERITY SCALE
0 No problem: There are no shortages or disruption in basic services. There may be needs in the geographical area but are not life threatening. 1 Minor Problem: Few people are facing shortages or disruption in basic services. 2 Moderate problem: Many people are facing short-­‐ages or disruption in basic services. 3 Major Problem: Shortages and disruption of services are affecting everyone, but they are not life threatening. Severe Problem: As a result of shortages and disruption of services, people can die. (Potentially life threatening) Critical Problem: As a result of shortages and disruption of services, some people have already died. (Evidence of deaths due to lack of humanitarian assistance) Catastrophic Problem: As a result of shortages and disruption of services, many people have already died 4 5 6 5 Annex 3 – Point estimates and confidence intervals, using survey estimation Aldo Benini A note for ACAPS Ukraine Multi Sector Needs Assessment (MSNA) -­‐ Point estimates and confidence intervals for select key variables, using survey estimation Statistical appendix to the MSNA report Introduction ................................................................................................................................................. 2 Unweighted estimates ................................................................................................................................. 3 Estimates weighted by affected populations ............................................................................................... 6 Estimation settings ....................................................................................................................................... 9 Estimation commands used ....................................................................................................................... 11 25 March 2015 Appendix on survey estimates Introduction
The Ukraine MSNA can be considered a probability sample survey. The sample of households was drawn by defining seven geographical areas as strata, with interview quotas for each. Within these areas, lower level administrative units (raion) were drawn from the list of raions exceeding a defined threshold of persons affected by the crisis. This makes inference to the total population impossible, but allows generalization to the affected population. In subsequent stages, through a cluster sampling process, neighborhoods known to host affected persons and finally households were selected. The sampling information available allows us to model the sample as a stratified two-­‐stage (raion and households) sample. This is approximate because the neighborhood and within-­‐
neighborhood selections are not documented in detail. In survey estimation, the computed confidence intervals are therefore somewhat too narrow (because the full extent of clustering is not taken into account). This is counteracted by the way the finite population correction is applied; we used the total number of raion in each stratum, rather than only those raion included in the first stage sampling frame. Practically, these differences are likely minor. This note report estimates for proportions and means of a small number of variables of substantive interest. We report the point estimates and confidence intervals, but do not present standard errors as these are likely of no interest in the MSNA context. The estimates are broken down by three areas that are key to the reporting, and which in this statistical note are known simply as Area_a, Area_b and Area_c. All estimates are presented twice: 1. Unweighted estimates: These are in line with aid agencies that do not customarily use sampling weights in their needs assessments. 2. Weighted estimates: These follow the intuition that units (households) that represent, in sample terms, large numbers of affected persons should be weighted more heavily than other representing small numbers. The conclusions from the same estimate, once unweighted, once weighted, are not always the same. We demonstrate with a test that the difference, between Area_b and Area_c, in food consumption scores is not statistically significant for the unweighted estimates. It is significant, although not strongly, for the weighted version. Other tests are not presented. From an accuracy viewpoint, weighted estimates are preferable. Unweighted estimates
FCS categories, by analysis area
Number of strata
Number of PSUs
=
=
7
35
Number of obs
Population size
Design df
=
=
=
431
431
28
---------------------------------------------------------------------FCS
|
Area of control
category |
Area_a
Area_b
Area_c
Total
----------+----------------------------------------------------------Acceptab |
0.832
0.792
0.700
0.784
| [0.772,0.880] [0.669,0.877] [0.553,0.815] [0.727,0.832]
|
Borderli |
0.126
0.142
0.133
0.132
| [0.083,0.186] [0.074,0.253] [0.073,0.231] [0.097,0.177]
|
Poor |
0.042
0.067
0.167
0.084
| [0.019,0.090] [0.036,0.120] [0.089,0.292] [0.056,0.123]
|
Total |
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
|
---------------------------------------------------------------------Key: column proportions
[95% confidence intervals for column proportions]
Pearson:
Uncorrected
Design-based
chi2(4)
=
F(3.64, 102.02) =
16.1092
2.8732
P = 0.0307
Mean food consumption scores
Entire sample Survey: Mean estimation
Number of strata =
Number of PSUs
=
7
35
Number of obs
Population size
Design df
=
=
=
431
431
28
-------------------------------------------------------------|
Linearized
|
Mean
Std. Err.
[95% Conf. Interval]
-------------+-----------------------------------------------B_2_a |
61.21346
1.46529
58.21195
64.21497
--------------------------------------------------------------
By area of interest Survey: Mean estimation
Number of strata =
Number of PSUs
=
7
35
Number of obs
Population size
Design df
=
=
=
431
431
28
Area_a: analysisarea = Area_a
Area_b: analysisarea = Area_b
Area_c: analysisarea = Area_c
3 -------------------------------------------------------------|
Linearized
Over |
Mean
Std. Err.
[95% Conf. Interval]
-------------+-----------------------------------------------B_2_a
|
Area_a |
63.01047
1.499943
59.93798
66.08297
Area_b |
63.525
2.863902
57.65856
69.39144
Area_c |
56.04167
3.773342
48.31233
63.77101
--------------------------------------------------------------
Test of difference between Areas b and c Adjusted Wald test
[B_2_a]Area_b - [B_2_a]Area_c = 0
F(
1,
28) =
Prob > F =
2.50
0.1254
Problems with living conditions last 30 days
Number of strata
Number of PSUs
=
=
7
35
Number of obs
Population size
Design df
=
=
=
431
431
28
---------------------------------------------------------------------Had
|
problem
|
with
|
living
|
condition |
last 30
|
Area of control
days
|
Area_a
Area_b
Area_c
Total
----------+----------------------------------------------------------No |
0.524
0.717
0.950
0.696
| [0.413,0.631] [0.573,0.827] [0.839,0.986] [0.630,0.755]
|
Yes |
0.476
0.283
0.050
0.304
| [0.369,0.587] [0.173,0.427] [0.014,0.161] [0.245,0.370]
|
Total |
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
|
---------------------------------------------------------------------Key: column proportions
[95% confidence intervals for column proportions]
Pearson:
Uncorrected
Design-based
chi2(2)
F(2.00, 56.00)
=
=
63.6817
13.9402
P = 0.0000
Safe water access
Number of strata
Number of PSUs
=
=
7
35
Number of obs
Population size
Design df
=
=
=
431
431
28
4 ---------------------------------------------------------------------Safe
|
water
|
Area of control
access
|
Area_a
Area_b
Area_c
Total
----------+----------------------------------------------------------No acces |
0.115
0.058
0.108
0.097
| [0.064,0.199] [0.021,0.152] [0.041,0.258] [0.062,0.150]
|
Major cu |
0.031
0.025
0.225
0.084
| [0.007,0.123] [0.004,0.153] [0.141,0.340] [0.053,0.128]
|
Minor cu |
0.058
0.100
0.250
0.123
| [0.034,0.097] [0.055,0.174] [0.180,0.336] [0.096,0.156]
|
Always |
0.796
0.817
0.417
0.696
| [0.702,0.866] [0.684,0.902] [0.288,0.558] [0.632,0.754]
|
Total |
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
|
---------------------------------------------------------------------Key: column proportions
[95% confidence intervals for column proportions]
Pearson:
Uncorrected
Design-based
chi2(6)
=
F(4.80, 134.36) =
84.1287
7.0549
P = 0.0000
Problem with access to basic NFI
Note number of observations is 430 (1 missing value). Number of strata
Number of PSUs
=
=
7
35
Number of obs
Population size
Design df
=
=
=
430
430
28
---------------------------------------------------------------------Had
|
problems |
with
|
basic NFI |
last 30
|
Area of control
days
|
Area_a
Area_b
Area_c
Total
----------+----------------------------------------------------------No |
0.602
0.521
0.508
0.553
| [0.540,0.661] [0.416,0.624] [0.385,0.631] [0.500,0.606]
|
Yes |
0.398
0.479
0.492
0.447
| [0.339,0.460] [0.376,0.584] [0.369,0.615] [0.394,0.500]
|
Total |
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
|
---------------------------------------------------------------------Key: column proportions
[95% confidence intervals for column proportions]
Pearson:
Uncorrected
Design-based
chi2(2)
F(1.90, 53.15)
=
=
3.3239
1.2820
P = 0.2849
Problems with access to health services
Number of strata
Number of PSUs
=
=
7
35
Number of obs
Population size
Design df
=
=
=
431
431
28
5 ---------------------------------------------------------------------Had
|
problems |
accessing |
health
|
Area of control
services |
Area_a
Area_b
Area_c
Total
----------+----------------------------------------------------------No |
0.696
0.692
0.683
0.691
| [0.604,0.775] [0.544,0.809] [0.580,0.771] [0.629,0.748]
|
Yes |
0.304
0.308
0.317
0.309
| [0.225,0.396] [0.191,0.456] [0.229,0.420] [0.252,0.371]
|
Total |
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
|
---------------------------------------------------------------------Key: column proportions
[95% confidence intervals for column proportions]
Pearson:
Uncorrected
Design-based
chi2(2)
F(1.90, 53.16)
=
=
0.0584
0.0165
P = 0.9804
Estimates weighted by affected populations
FCS categories, by analysis area
Number of strata
Number of PSUs
=
=
7
35
Number of obs
Population size
Design df
=
=
=
431
1382905
28
---------------------------------------------------------------------FCS
|
Area of control
category |
Area_a
Area_b
Area_c
Total
----------+----------------------------------------------------------Acceptab |
0.910
0.899
0.736
0.835
| [0.784,0.966] [0.796,0.953] [0.581,0.848] [0.734,0.903]
|
Borderli |
0.079
0.032
0.115
0.071
| [0.029,0.199] [0.006,0.158] [0.057,0.217] [0.031,0.154]
|
Poor |
0.011
0.069
0.150
0.094
| [0.003,0.045] [0.029,0.155] [0.083,0.256] [0.057,0.150]
|
Total |
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
|
---------------------------------------------------------------------Key: column proportions
[95% confidence intervals for column proportions]
Pearson:
Uncorrected
Design-based
chi2(4)
F(2.72, 76.15)
=
=
23.6375
2.8186
P = 0.0497
6 Mean food consumption scores
Entire sample Survey: Mean estimation
Number of strata =
Number of PSUs
=
7
35
Number of obs
Population size
Design df
=
=
=
431
1382905
28
-------------------------------------------------------------|
Linearized
|
Mean
Std. Err.
[95% Conf. Interval]
-------------+-----------------------------------------------B_2_a |
63.53962
2.7251
57.9575
69.12173
--------------------------------------------------------------
By area of interest Survey: Mean estimation
Number of strata =
Number of PSUs
=
7
35
Number of obs
Population size
Design df
=
=
=
431
1382905
28
Area_a: analysisarea = Area_a
Area_b: analysisarea = Area_b
Area_c: analysisarea = Area_c
-------------------------------------------------------------|
Linearized
Over |
Mean
Std. Err.
[95% Conf. Interval]
-------------+-----------------------------------------------B_2_a
|
Area_a |
63.3057
1.297448
60.648
65.9634
Area_b |
67.91263
2.589853
62.60756
73.21771
Area_c |
58.43186
4.734561
48.73355
68.13017
--------------------------------------------------------------
Test of difference between Areas b and c Adjusted Wald test
[B_2_a]Area_b - [B_2_a]Area_c = 0
F(
1,
28) =
Prob > F =
3.09
0.0899
Problem with living conditions last 30 days
Number of strata
Number of PSUs
=
=
7
35
Number of obs
Population size
Design df
=
=
=
431
1382905
28
7 ---------------------------------------------------------------------Had
|
problem
|
with
|
living
|
condition |
last 30
|
Area of control
days
|
Area_a
Area_b
Area_c
Total
----------+----------------------------------------------------------No |
0.421
0.662
0.972
0.755
| [0.337,0.509] [0.491,0.798] [0.868,0.994] [0.606,0.860]
|
Yes |
0.579
0.338
0.028
0.245
| [0.491,0.663] [0.202,0.509] [0.006,0.132] [0.140,0.394]
|
Total |
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
|
---------------------------------------------------------------------Key: column proportions
[95% confidence intervals for column proportions]
Pearson:
Uncorrected
Design-based
chi2(2)
F(1.70, 47.56)
=
=
86.4730
18.3655
P = 0.0000
Safe water access
Number of strata
Number of PSUs
=
=
7
35
Number of obs
Population size
Design df
=
=
=
431
1382905
28
---------------------------------------------------------------------Safe
|
water
|
Area of control
access
|
Area_a
Area_b
Area_c
Total
----------+----------------------------------------------------------No acces |
0.074
0.013
0.086
0.050
| [0.022,0.223] [0.002,0.081] [0.030,0.225] [0.018,0.128]
|
Major cu |
0.057
0.004
0.261
0.113
| [0.011,0.244] [0.000,0.044] [0.142,0.428] [0.048,0.246]
|
Minor cu |
0.097
0.069
0.299
0.164
| [0.054,0.169] [0.029,0.155] [0.204,0.416] [0.102,0.254]
|
Always |
0.772
0.915
0.354
0.673
| [0.587,0.890] [0.829,0.960] [0.176,0.584] [0.472,0.826]
|
Total |
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
|
---------------------------------------------------------------------Key: column proportions
[95% confidence intervals for column proportions]
Pearson:
Uncorrected
Design-based
chi2(6)
=
F(4.03, 112.72) =
143.5981
11.3773
P = 0.0000 Problem with access to basic NFI
Note number of observations is 430 (1 missing value). Number of strata
Number of PSUs
=
=
7
35
Number of obs
Population size
Design df
=
430
= 1382886.7
=
28
8 ---------------------------------------------------------------------Had
|
problems |
with
|
basic NFI |
last 30
|
Area of control
days
|
Area_a
Area_b
Area_c
Total
----------+----------------------------------------------------------No |
0.674
0.405
0.602
0.518
| [0.364,0.881] [0.273,0.551] [0.485,0.708] [0.381,0.652]
|
Yes |
0.326
0.595
0.398
0.482
| [0.119,0.636] [0.449,0.727] [0.292,0.515] [0.348,0.619]
|
Total |
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
|
---------------------------------------------------------------------Key: column proportions
[95% confidence intervals for column proportions]
Pearson:
Uncorrected
Design-based
chi2(2)
F(1.91, 53.56)
=
=
20.6423
2.7101
P = 0.0780 Problems with access to health services
Number of strata
Number of PSUs
=
=
7
35
Number of obs
Population size
Design df
=
=
=
431
1382905
28
---------------------------------------------------------------------Had
|
problems |
accessing |
health
|
Area of control
services |
Area_a
Area_b
Area_c
Total
----------+----------------------------------------------------------No |
0.635
0.766
0.747
0.741
| [0.371,0.836] [0.650,0.852] [0.646,0.826] [0.666,0.805]
|
Yes |
0.365
0.234
0.253
0.259
| [0.164,0.629] [0.148,0.350] [0.174,0.354] [0.195,0.334]
|
Total |
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
|
---------------------------------------------------------------------Key: column proportions
[95% confidence intervals for column proportions]
Pearson:
Uncorrected
chi2(2)
=
3.9278
Design-based F(1.92, 53.65) =
0.7005
P = 0.4950 Estimation settings
Variables of substantive interest
storage display
value
variable name
type
format
label
variable label
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------FCScategory
long
%10.0g
FCScategory
FCS category
B_2_a
double %10.0g
Food consumption score (WFP)
S1_0
byte
%10.0g
Had problem with living condition last 30
days
S3_2
byte
%10.0g
Safe water access
S4_0
byte
%10.0g
Had problems with basic NFI last 30 days
D2_0
byte
%10.0g
Had problems accessing health services
9 Description of the stratified sample
for records with complete values in variables of substantive interest. Survey: Describing stage 1 sampling units
Stratum
-------1
2
3
4
5
6
7
-------7
#Units
included
-------5
5
5
5
5
5
5
-------35
#Units
omitted
-------0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-------0
#Obs with #Obs with
#Obs per included Unit
complete missing
---------------------------data
data
min
mean
max
-------- -------- -------- -------- -------71
0
12
14.2
16
59
1
11
11.8
12
60
0
10
12.0
14
60
0
12
12.0
12
60
0
12
12.0
12
60
0
9
12.0
14
60
0
11
12.0
13
-------- -------- -------- -------- -------430
1
9
12.3
16
-----------------431
Note: Units included are raions. Units omitted are not reported because the raions not
sampled are not recorded in the dataset.
Pattern of missing values in variables of substantive interest:
variables with no mv's: FCScategory B_2_a S1_0 S3_2 D2_0
Variable
| type
obs
mv
variable label
-------------+------------------------------------------------------------S4_0
| byte
430
1
Had problems with basic NFI last 30 days
--------------------------------------------------------------------------Patterns of missing values
+------------------------+
| _pattern
_mv
_freq |
|------------------------|
|
+
0
430 |
|
.
1
1 |
+------------------------+
Record with missing value in basic NFI provision (variable S4_0):
+---------------------------+
| ID2
stratum
raion |
|---------------------------|
| 364
Area_2
sloviansk |
+---------------------------+
Survey estimation settings, weighting with affected persons
Two stage sample (raion, then household), with weights, strata, and finite population correction svyset raion [pw = svyweight], strata( stratum) fpc( AllRaionIn7Areas) || ID2
10 where storage display
value
variable name
type
format
label
variable label
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------raion
byte
%16.0g
raion
Raion / City
svyweight
float %9.0g
Affected persons represented by the
interviewed household
stratum
long
%8.0g
stratum
Geographical area
AllRaionIn7Ar~s byte
%10.0g
Number of all raion in the geographical
area (fpc variable)
ID2
int
%10.0g
Original sort order (numeric) as HH ID
pweight:
VCE:
Single unit:
Strata 1:
SU 1:
FPC 1:
Strata 2:
SU 2:
FPC 2:
svyweight
linearized
missing
stratum
raion
AllRaionIn7Areas
<one>
ID2
<zero>
Survey estimation settings, unweighted
Two stage sample (raion, then household), with strata and finite population correction, but without weights svyset raion, strata( stratum) fpc( AllRaionIn7Areas) || ID2
pweight:
<none>
VCE: linearized
Single unit: missing
Strata 1: stratum
SU 1: raion
FPC 1: AllRaionIn7Areas
Strata 2: <one>
SU 2: ID2
FPC 2: <zero>
Estimation commands used
Stata do-­‐file ********************************
* Preparations
*
********************************
set more off
* Set working directory as appropriate:
* cd ..
* Import from Excel:
* import excel "C:\...\150318_1155_AB_UMSNA_HH_data_work_withID2inCol200.xlsx",
sheet("ToSTATA") firstrow
* save "C:\...\150318_1454_AB_UMSNA_HH_data_selectVars.dta"
* or use other file name of choice.
* Label various variables and their values [details not shown because of minor interest;
results appear when running describe]
* Encode those string variables that need to be passed as numeric, e.g. the raion
identifier:
encode Ge_05, gen(raion)
* Calculate the number of sample HH in each raion [needed for the sampling weights]
gsort Ge_01 Ge_04 raion
11 by raion: gen obsByRaion = _N
* Calculate survey weights reflecting affected persons in the raion
gen svyweight = PoP_Severity / obsByRaion
label var svyweight "Affected persons represented by the interviewed household"
* Save file:
* save "C:\...\150318_1454_AB_UMSNA_HH_data_selectVars.dta", replace
*Describe variables:
describe
* Describe
label list
label list
label list
label list
label list
label list
label list
value labels:
stratum
oblast
raion
FCScategory
analysisarea
noyes
S3_2 /* Levels of safe water access */
********************************
* WEIGHTED ESTIMATES
*
********************************
* Define survey estimation settings for weighted estimates:
des raion svyweight stratum AllRaionIn7Areas ID2
svyset raion [pw = svyweight], strata( stratum) fpc( AllRaionIn7Areas) || ID2
* Describe structure of stratified sample for records with complete values in variables
of substantive interest, which are:
des FCScategory - D2_0
svydescribe FCScategory - D2_0
* Describe pattern of missing values in variables of substantive interest:
mvpatterns FCScategory - D2_0
* Identify record with missing value in basic NFI provision (variable S4_0):
list ID2 stratum raion if S4_0 == ., noobs
* Estimates:
* Proportions of FCS categories, by analysis area
svy: tabulate FCScategory analysisarea, ci col format(%7.3f)
* Means of the food consumption score:
* Entire sample:
svy: mean B_2_a
* By area of control:
svy: mean B_2_a, over( analysisarea)
* Test of the difference between two group means [for illustration only]
test [B_2_a]Area_b - [B_2_a]Area_c = 0
* Proportion of HH with problems with living conditions last 30 days:
svy: tabulate S1_0 analysisarea, ci col format(%7.3f)
* Proportions of households by levels of safe water access:
svy: tabulate S3_2 analysisarea, ci col format(%7.3f)
* Proportion of households with problems with NFI access last 30 days
svy: tabulate S4_0 analysisarea, ci col format(%7.3f)
* Proportions of households with problems with access to health services:
svy: tabulate D2_0 analysisarea, ci col format(%7.3f)
********************************
* UNWEIGHTED ESTIMATES
*
********************************
* Define survey estimation settings for weighted estimates:
svyset, clear
svyset raion, strata( stratum) fpc( AllRaionIn7Areas) || ID2
* Describe structure of stratified sample for records with complete
* values in variables of substantive interest, which are:
svydescribe FCScategory - D2_0
12 * Estimates:
* Proportions of FCS categories, by analysis area
svy: tabulate FCScategory analysisarea, ci col format(%7.3f)
* Means of the food consumption score:
* Entire sample:
svy: mean B_2_a
* By area of control:
svy: mean B_2_a, over( analysisarea)
* Test of the difference between two group means [for illustration only]
test [B_2_a]Area_b - [B_2_a]Area_c = 0
* Proportion of HH with problems with living conditions last 30 days:
svy: tabulate S1_0 analysisarea, ci col format(%7.3f)
* Proportions of households by levels of safe water access:
svy: tabulate S3_2 analysisarea, ci col format(%7.3f)
* Proportion of households with problems with NFI access last 30 days
svy: tabulate S4_0 analysisarea, ci col format(%7.3f)
* Proportions of households with problems with access to health services:
svy: tabulate D2_0 analysisarea, ci col format(%7.3f)
set more on
* End of do-file 13 Annex 4: Frequency by type of assistance HH"repor'ng"receiving"uncondi'onal"cash"grant"assistance""
since"the"begining"of"the"crisis""
56%$
DL$NG$Oblasts$
DL$Gov$Oblasts$
39%$
64%$
21%$
71%$
DKZ$Oblasts$
0%$
10%$
No$
20%$
HH"repor'ng"receiving"food"assistance"
since"the"begining"of"the"crisis"
30%$
Only$once$
12%$
40%$
50%$
Not$regular$
60%$
70%$
80%$
3%$
DL$NG$Oblasts$
9%$
6%$
DL$Gov$Oblasts$
11%$
6%$
DKZ$Oblasts$
90%$
100%$
Regular$basis$(every$month)$
45%$
30%$
0%$
10%$
No$
HH"repor'ng"receving"winter"kits"assistance"
since"the"begining"of"the"crisis"
DL#NG#Oblasts#
3%#
57%#
DKZ#Oblasts#
39%#
66%#
0%#
10%#
No#
20%#
30%#
Only#once#
Not#regular#
50%#
60%#
70%#
80%#
90%#
100%#
Regular#basis#(every#month)#
86%#
0%#
0%#
10%#
No#
20%#
30%#
Only#once#
40%#
Not#regular#
50%#
10%#
No#
60%#
70%#
80%$
9%$
90%$
100%$
Regular$basis$(every$month)$
17%#
80%#
Regular#basis#(every#month)#
4%#
20%#
Only#once#
30%#
5%#
6%# 5%# 6%#
6%#
40%#
12%#
50%#
Not#regular#
60%#
70%#
80%#
12%#
90%#
5%#
100%#
Regular#basis#(every#month)#
HH"repor'ng"receiving"Educa'on"kits"assistance""
since"the"begining"of"the"crisis""
7%# 5%#3%#
4%#
70%$
77%#
95%$
DL$NG$Oblasts$
66%#
60%$
26%$
84%#
DKZ#Oblasts#
98%#
DKZ#Oblasts#
50%$
6%$
79%#
HH"repor'ng"receiving"support"to"rent"accomoda'on"
since"the"begining"of"the"crisis""
DL#Gov#Oblasts#
40%$
Not$regular$
DL#Gov#Oblasts#
6%#
DL#NG#Oblasts#
Only$once$
30%$
11%$
50%$
21%$
DL#NG#Oblasts#
3%#
28%#
40%#
20%$
23%$
HH"receiving"health"care"assistance""
since"the"begining"of"the"crisis"
95%#
DL#Gov#Oblasts#
13%$
45%$
22%$
13%#
90%#
DL$Gov$Oblasts$
86%$
DKZ$Oblasts$
84%$
0%$
100%#
10%$
No$
20%$
Only$once$
30%$
40%$
Not$regular$
4%$
11%$ 3%$
50%$
60%$
70%$
80%$
Regular$basis$(every$month)$
13%$
3%$
90%$
100%$