130117 kira methodology briefing
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
1 like•343 views
The KIRA (Kenya Initial Rapid Assessment) is a multi-sector, multi-agency rapid assessment mechanism for rapid onset disasters in Kenya. It aims to provide a shared situational picture through a standardized methodology to collect and analyze secondary and primary data. The results will inform strategic decision making and coordinated response. The KIRA involves capacity building, uses a hub coordination model, and leverages various agency resources and expertise to deploy trained assessment teams within 72 hours to directly observe and gather community-level needs data. Findings are analyzed and consolidated into a 4-page report on priority needs, response capacity, and information gaps.
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
Similar to 130117 kira methodology briefing
Similar to 130117 kira methodology briefing (20)
130117 kira methodology briefing
- 1. THE KENYA INITIAL RAPID ASSESSMENT (KIRA) Briefing on KIRA methodology – 23rd Jan, IFRC
- 2. AGENDA Timing Section 14:00 – 14:15 Introduction to the KIRA 14:15 – 14:30 Development of the KIRA 14:30 – 16:00 Methodology 16:00 – 16:30 Mechanism 16:30 Questions
- 3. INTRODUCTION TO THE KIRA
- 4. WHAT IS IT? The Kenya Initial Rapid Assessment (KIRA) is: • Multi-sector • Multi-agency • Fast turn-around • For rapid onset • Output = shared situational picture • Evidence base for strategic decision making
- 5. THE PROBLEM Lack of timely, cred Pressure on ible humanitarian Information actors to respond Pressure on Donors to allocate funds Poorly Informed Decision Making
- 6. WHY ? Lack of coordinated rapid assessments in Kenya. Previously: o Multiple Assessments o Multiple Methodology o Multiple Report What is the big picture?
- 7. WHY ? Lack of coordinated rapid assessments in Kenya. Previously: o Single Methodology o Comparable over locations o Can be compiled as one report What is the big picture?
- 8. OTHER ADVANTAGES • Jointly owned – everyone has access to the data • Findings jointly agreed • More efficient use of resources • Shared learning/best practice • Reduced beneficiary fatigue • More validation/triangulation between info sources • Humanitarian actors can speak with a common voice IF DONE WELL: • Precedent for a coordinated response • Greater transparency in strategic decision making • More appropriate response = ACCOUNTABILITY
- 9. WHAT IS IT NOT The Kenya Initial Rapid Assessment (KIRA) is not: • A replacement for detailed sectoral assessment • Statistically representative • Counting things directly (numbers come from secondary data sources)
- 10. Rapid Vs. Detailed Sectoral Assessment – When? What TIMELINEprovide to decision makers? info. does it OF ASSESSMENTS ~Day 3 ~Day 15 ~Day 30 Disaster Phase I Phase II Phase III 0-72 Initial Sector Sector hours 1-2 weeks reports Sector reports Sector reports / Sector D reports Clusters reports Confirm scale and give detail on impact of inform relief severity, priority disaster and recovery needs, and identify (areas, groups, sectors) and programming constraints inform relief programming
- 11. WHO SHOULD BE PART OF KIRA? Any organisation with a humanitarian focus: – GoK – national and local – KRCS – NGOs – UN agencies – CBOs – FBOs – Donors – Anyone
- 12. DEVELOPMENT OF THE KIRA
- 13. PROJECT STAGES Participative Consultation Capacity design of with building/ mechanism stakeholders training and tools
- 15. DESIGN PROCESS • Decisions to be supported Decisions • Information needed to make Information decision • Data from which information is Data drawn Assessment framework
- 16. OBJECTIVES Classification OBJECTIVES Overall To provide a mechanism for the assessment of rapid onset crises (including flooding, fires, landslides, disease outbreaks and conflict) Context Provide a shared overview of the scale and severity of the situation in affected areas, both at the local and national level To identify emerging trends in displacement How Support the harmonisation of information gathering by other stakeholders through the review and triangulation of secondary data Content: priority To establish key immediate and emerging humanitarian needs of affected population, needs/response including the newly displaced, non-displaced and host communities priorities Content: Capacity/ To inform targeted assistance through the identification of priority humanitarian Recommendations needs which exceed coping mechanisms and response capacity Content: To identify information gaps and to inform targeted, in depth follow-up assessments Information gaps Content: Constraints Identify potential constraints which could impact upon response to needs Dissemination Collate and disseminate the findings in a timely manner to support decision making, further planning, harmonised actions and the identification of key advocacy issues.
- 18. OPERATIONALISATION • Part of contingency planning process • Decentralised • Capacity building while testing • Learn by doing
- 19. KIRA METHODOLOGY
- 20. Elements of the KIRA Secondary data & information Lessons Learnt Lessons Learned Pre - Crisis In Crisis data Primary data DATA CONSOLIDATION ANALYSIS DISSEMINATION
- 21. Who/What How Many Who are the most affected? Where are the most affected areas? What are the most affected sectors? What to do next? Where How much
- 22. WHAT IS SECONDARY DATA? Data collected for purposes other than the rapid needs assessment Why collect it? - Better use of time and resources - Availability - Improved quality of data - more datasets - more disaggregated data - Shared situational awareness of the ‘before’ picture
- 23. % of available information KNOWLEDGE TIMELINE Primary data Secondary data pre crisis Time Event Phase I Phase II Phase III
- 24. PRIMARY DATA COLLECTION WHERE WHO Site selection by Assessment team diversity parameter composition PRIMARY DATA COLLECTION WHAT HOW Primary data Sampling approach collection tools within community
- 25. SITE SELECTION DIVERSITY PARAMETERS: What are some of the factors that determine how communities have been differently impacted?
- 26. EXAMPLE: DISPLACEMENT PROFILE Non Displaced Displaced Friend/ Hosting Non Host Camps Public Buildings Relative Friend/ Police Hosting Non Host Formal Informal Church School Relative buildings
- 27. ASSESSMENT TEAM COMPOSITION • Multi-agency • Multi-sector • Team leader who understands the KIRA methodology • At least 2 men and 2 women • Common language to community • Knowledge of location and local context within team
- 28. PRIMARY DATA COLLECTION TOOLS • Guidelines on procedure • Direct observation module (checklist) • Community module for : - Community Group discussion (M/F) - Community Key informant (M/F) • Specialist Key Informant Removed for now
- 29. PRIMARY DATA COLLECTION TOOLS
- 30. COMMUNITY MODULE Section 1: Site Information Section 2: Problem areas (eg food, water) - Is it a problem area? - What are the key issues? - Was this caused by the event? Section 3: Prioritisation of top issues - What are the top three greatest issue sfor the community right now? - Which are the groups in the community who are most affected/vulnerable to this issue?
- 31. COMMUNITY MODULE How to use the community module? - Facilitated conversation - One interviewer, one note taker - Use question tittle to start the conversation - Issues are NOT read out – these are for classifying answers only NOTE: REQUIRES FAMILIARILY WITH THE TOOL TO USE EFFECTIVELY
- 32. SAMPLING WITHIN THE COMMUNITY MALE COMMUNITY FEMALE COMMUNITY GROUP DISCUSSION GROUP DISCUSSION MINIMUM OPTIONAL ADDITIONAL MALE KEY FEMALE KEY INFORMANT INFORMANT
- 33. INFORMATION PROCESSING STEPS 1 2 3 Collect and Analyse Interpret consolidate Identify
- 34. CONSOLIDATION BY SITE MALE COMMUNITY FEMALE COMMUNITY GROUP DISCUSSIONS GROUP DISCUSSION ONE MALE PERSPECTIVE ONE FEMALE PERSPECTIVE FEMALE KEY MALE KEY INFORMANTS INFORMANT
- 35. INFORMATION PROCESSING STEPS 1 2 3 Collect and Analyse Interpret consolidate Identify
- 36. Other kind of comparisons Region Compare Region A B Compare Compare Older people Younger people
- 37. INFORMATION PROCESSING STEPS 1 2 3 Collect and Analyse Interpret consolidate Identify What is important Why is it important
- 39. ASSESSMENT REPORT • 4 page report Context Methodology Priority needs Response Capacity Constraints Information Gaps Recommendations
- 40. REPORT TEMPLATE
- 41. MECHANISM
- 42. RESOURCING • Multi-agency resourcing • Everyone contributes what they can - Vehicles - Staff - Logistical arrangements – eg connection to local partners (CBO, faith based, etc) - Security - Communications (radios) - Facilities (for analysis/write up)
- 43. Risk Map • Reviewed with UWIANO, UNDP, NDOC, KRCS • Basis for Scenario and hub coverage
- 44. Hub Coordination • 8 Hubs • Focal points: WFP, UNICEF, WVI, NRC, IOM, CONCERN, SC, IR • Support GoK coordination • Develop local CP • Information /3W
- 45. HUB COORDINATION OF KIRA MECHANISM • Capacity building • Triggers • Local arrangements • Review of methodology • ‘Roster’ of trained personnel • Potential for pre-existing agreements regarding resource availability
- 46. AREAS OF POTENTIAL SUPPORT FROM NAIROBI • Secondary data – pre-crisis • Additional field staff • Guidance on managing process • Technical support • Lessons learnt
- 47. QUESTIONS ? For more information: KIRA website: https://sites.google.com/site/kenyainitialrapidassessment/ Kenya humanitarian response website: http://kenya.humanitarianresponse.info Or contact: Emese Csete, ACAPS: ec@acaps.org Lucy Dickinson, OCHA: dickinsonl@un.org Minu Limbu, UNICEF: mlimbu@unicef.org
Editor's Notes
- 1) Welcome2)Brief round table of introductions3) The purpose of this briefing is to explain the KIRA assessment – how it was developed, what the methodology entails, and what the mechanisms are for launching it.(This session is not meant as a forum for the review of the tools of methodology – that process is managed through the Rapid Assessment Working Group, chaired by OCHA. )
- The agenda breaks this briefing down into sessions – I’ll stop for questions at the end of each session, though I’m happy to take questions as they come up. Tea/coffee is available – I have not planned for a formal tea break, so please help yourself when you desire.
- This first session will give you a very brief outline of what the KIRA is. Incidently, these photos are all from the recent KIRA mission to Tana River
- The Kenya Initial Rapid Assessment (KIRA) is:Multi-sector – this ensures that all sectors are covered , and that there is a balance. Multi-agency – this is key to the overall approach. It provides a more balanced output with a wider focus, and ensures joint buy-in to the results.Fast turn-around – the idea to be able to produce an initial overview of the situation after one of two days, based on secondary information – then a full report after about 10 days, which includes primary data and more secondary data.For rapid onset – this is not being recommended for drought situations – it is not appropriate. Could be used for a slow onset flood though.Output =the output is an assessment report, which allows us to have a shared situational pictureEvidence base for strategic decision making – this is really key; the reason for the initiative is to support early decision making in an emergency.
- This is the problem assessments are trying to solve….The lack of good quality information combined with pressure for humanitarian actors to respond quickly results in poorly informed decision making. This has been identified as a major obstacles to providing high quality responses to people affected by disasters.
- Existing approaches have not provided a coherent picture of humanitarian needs at the country level.At the moment, each agency undertakes its own assessment, using its own methodology, going to its location of operation and covering sectors in which the agency works. Whilst this is adequately supports individual agency operational planning, what we can’t do with these outputs is to consolidate them into a ‘big picture’ of the overall situation which could help to support strategic decision making.
- This is what we are trying to achieve – the same methodology being used across locations, covering all sectors. This form a better basis for comparison, and allows us to consolidate everything into one overall picture of the situation.
- There are many other advantages to this approach:- Jointly owned :everyone has access to the data, and the process is owned by all. - Findings are jointly agreed : this lead to buy-in to ‘big picture’, which will hopefully lead to a more coherent response to address the identified needs.- More efficient use of resources : if we each lend a car, a staff member etc to the process, if is much less costly that undertaking the whole assessment as individual agencies.- Shared learning/best practice : it give us great opportunities to learn from one another, share best practice and capitalise on one another’s strengths.- Reduced beneficiary fatigue : this approach means that we won’t all be rushing out to the same commmunities to ask the same information.- More validation/triangulation between information sources – As the KIRA approach makes heavy use of secondary data sources, this means that we are able to triangulate between different data sources in order to evaluate and validate findings.- Humanitarian actors can speak with a common voice :by coming to a consenses on what the problem is, we are able as the humanitarian community to speak with one voice, to country level parters and to the international community. This will be more powerful than a single voice, and will support advocacy.IF DONE WELL,it can also:- Set a precedent for a coordinatedresponse. If we are all able to coordinate effectively to do an assesment together, we’re strengthening relationships that will hopefully lead to a more coordinated response.- Greater transparency in strategic decision making: just as we are undertaking the assessment in order to provide a better evidence base to support strategic decision making, we are also leaving an audit trail which can help to explain why certain decisions were made – this improves transparency.- More appropriate response = ACCOUNTABILITY – what we are all of course looking for and hoping for, is that a good assessment will help to shape a good response – where people are given the appropriate support which they require, in a timely fashion. In other words, to improve beneficiary accountability.
- The Kenya Initial Rapid Assessment (KIRA) is not:A replacement for detailed sectoral assessment – this is seen as one of many assessments which will need to be conducted throughout a relief operation, and it is not suggesting that other assessments should not take placeStatistically representative – it’s about characterising the way in which different groups have been impacted – but not measuring the impact on each group or counting who is in each group – that comes later.Counting things directly (numbers come from secondary data sources).
- There are three main times when primary data is collected:1) During the first 72 hours to confirm (or identify) scale and severity; confirm (or identify) priority needs (areas, groups, sectors), and identify constraintsNB – scale indicates how big the disaster is, severity indicates how bad it is2) During the initial 1-2 weeks to give detail on impact of disaster (on areas, groups, sectors) and to inform relief programming3) For in-depth assessments after 2 weeks by clusters to inform relief operations. Later assessments inform recovery programming. For an initial rapid assessment, the time focus is on the first 72 hours and the initial 1-2 week timeframe.
- In terms of who should be part of the process – any agency with a humanitarian focus. This is an inclusive process, with the net having been cast widely as the strength of the approach lies in the diversity of participation.
- I’ll talk to you briefly now on how the KIRA was developed, in order to give a little history to the methodology
- The initiative was Instigated by the KHPT, to address and identified gap highlighted within the RTE for Kenya drought response It was started in May with wide consultations with stakeholders. This got people to the table to help input into design processDesign was carried out in sept/oct, participatively.3) We are now rolling out the results of this. That is not to say that the process is perfect (and certainly, one of the realities of a coordinated process is that you can’t please everyone), but there is a need to agree, and to learn through doing.
- This is the timeline which was originally conceived earlier in the year. Given the elections and the desire to be well prepared, the timeline was very ambitious – hence having strict methodology input and review deadlines, so that we had something to train people in. The good news is that we are pretty much on track!
- The process taken to design the tools started from the point of view of – what are the decision which we need to supported by the assessment? Next, we looked at what information we would need in order to support those decisions.We then tried to identify the individual data that were needed from which to derive that information.Eg, if the decision is – which sector/s should be prioritised as they are heavily impacted and there is likely to have a response gap?Information: Impacted sectors, response capacityData: Impacted sectors: community group discussionPriority sectors: community group discussionCapacity on the ground within each sector: baseline info (3w)Identification of sectors where demand likely to outstrip supply – key informant - DSG
- Objectives were developed through the working group as a starting point. Following on from this, the report outline was determined. Once fleshed out with some of the content that each section should cover,
- The approach to the design follows global guidance from the IASC, both in terms of coordinated needs assessments, and also best practice in multi-sector rapid assessments – but ensuring that the approach is adapted to the local context. A heavy influence in the process has been the upcoming election period – presents its own challenges, in terms of being characterised by frequent individual incidents/ events, rather than one event affecting all areas at the same time. Many lessons will be taken away from this process, will greatly help global best practice for situations other than rapid onset natural disasters
- Part of contingency planning process – we will talk more on the mechanisms later, but the KIRA is being rolled out as part of the contingency planning processDecentralised – we’re trying to build capacity at the decentralised level, through the humanitarain hub structuresCapacity building while testing – This will enhance local capacity and ownership, foster coordination at a regional level, and allow us to leave from the field.Learn from doing! – what we’ve seen in some countries is that the process gets bogged down figuring out the methodology, when really anything done together tends to be better than what came before – so we are trying in kenya to learn from doing. With the fourth KIRA mission underway here, there are lots of opportunities.
- This section is the main meat of the briefing. This will give you a fast tour to familiarise you with the main concepts.
- The KIRA is made up of the following components…Pre-disaster info: Population figures for affected areas, demographic breakdown, Common Operational Data sets (such as p-codes), large studiesFrom past baseline studies, census, sector specific information, national institutions (bureau of statistics)Disaster specific information: what is known already about the disaster from local government, national institutions, media, and reports from agencies working in affected areasLessons learned from previous similar events and other information that is known about the area that can inform how the situation is likely to unfold…this could include what worked and what didn’t work, immediate needs (e.g. saris)…also known information that may not be in the form of “data” such as child protection risks, locally specific water treatment practices, school holidays, or religious information (e.g. in the middle of Ramazan).And an element of primary data collection: in the early stages could be observations from flyovers, visits to the affected areas, key informant and community group interviews….in the initial days and weeks (phase 1 and 2) this primary data collection will be convenience and purposive sampling and at the community level. Bring the information through consolidation.Analyse and make sense of the information.The dissemination or sharing phase is less about “having a perfect report” and more about an ongoing process of updating information as knew knowledge and understanding of the situation comes to hand and making this available as widely as possible.
- I will now go over some aspects of the primary data collection approach, in four sections
- What we are trying to do through our selection of sites is to CHARACTERISE how different groups have been impacted differently by the event, so that we can ensure that each group receives the support that it needs, and that the more vulnerable are prioritised. This is not in terms of natural variation which you would get within a community – such as age, gender, disability, chronic illness – but rather, what could lead to differences BETWEEN communities?Group activity – turn to your neighbour and discuss what you feel might be some of the key factors which will affect how people will be impacted differently. See if you can guess what each of these images might be suggesting as some possible parameters.
- So, we’ve talked about some of the factors which can affect the impact of an event. Here’s an example of how we can break this down into different categories. This way, we can start to tartget different groups which we think might be impacted differently.
- Thefolllowing are requirements for the team composition:Multi-agency – this ensures a balance of different view pointsMulti-sector – Team leader who understands the KIRA methodology – so long as one person is familiar with it, the other can be trained in half a day before the assessment.At least 2 men and 2 women – to ensure that women assessors can engage with the women, and men with the men.Common language to community – might be Kiswahili, might be another – might need translatorsKnowledge of location and local context within team – this is last, but not at all least; it is essential to have this knowledge within the team, so that it’s possible to understand what is ‘normal’ for this community, and this area. Otherwise, it is very hard to understand the difference between event impact, and pre-event development issues. This person will also bring knowledge on what the likely evolution could be for communities – for instance, they might know that certain coping strategies tend to be used.
- The tools were drafted in sept/oct and have gone through a number of revisions, modifications and adaptations. Guidelines: What is relatively new are the guidelines which are now packaged with the tool. These are still in draft form at the moment. DO module: this is essentially a checklist Community module: the same module can be used for either community group discussions or for community key informant interview
- This is what the guidelines look like
- The community module is in three sections:Section 1: site information : this is where key information about the site visited is recordedSection 2: Problems areas: This covers 17 themes which largely map onto sectors. For each theme, there are three components:- Is it a problem area?- What are the key issues? – this is a list of potential issues within the theme. - Was this caused by the event? – this screens to ensure we are talking about the impact of an event rather than development issues.Section 3: Prioritisation of top issues:This gets the community to select and prioritise three things of greatest concern to their community, as well as getting them to reflect who are the most vulnerable/at risk for this particular area.GIVE OUT HANDOUTS WITH ONE PAGE OF THE COMMUNITY MODULE
- So how is this used? A few key points:Facilitated conversation: the purpose of the tool is to have a facilitated conversationOne interviewer, one note takerUse question title to start the conversationIssues are NOT read out – these are for the note taker to classify answers quickly, making it easier to analyse laterFAMILIARITY – what is important is how well people know the tools. For instance, the community may start talking about food, but then start talking about livelihoods as well. The notetaker should be familiar enough with the tool that they can flip between sections, record the answers and carry on, rather than either stopping the discussion, or asking the community to repeat themselves.NOW, turn to your neighbour and practice to ask the other a question, and to use the sheet to record the response (you will be interviewer AND notetaker just this once). Then swap so the other gets a chance.Hopefully this will give you a taste of how the tools should be used.
- Imagine that this is a site. The recommendation is that the minimum data collection carried out is one male community group discussion, one female community group discussion and direct observation by all of the team.Optional additional data collection would be through male of female key informants, or additional community group discussions. At all times, respondents are asked to reflect on the needs of the COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE
- We can break analysis down into 3 steps:We first need to summarize the information we have and relate it to the overall population size…are we talking 10% of the population affected or 50% of the population….in Bangladesh it is useful to see things in proportions as well as absolute numbers (because the numbers are so large!)
- This slide will give you an example of consolidation by site. Imagine you go to a community and carry out data collection in a number of ways. In this example:2 male community group discussions1 male community KI1 female community group discussion 2 female KLDirect observationsThe animation shows how we combine all male information, and separately all female info, so that we end up with one female and one male perspective from each site.
- Back to the analysis steps – step 2:The next step is to compare that information in terms of groups of people ( minorities, livelihood groups, displaced and non-displaced…)In terms of locations within the affected areaAnd in terms of sectors…wash, food, health, shelter…
- We also do comparisons:Between regions (different parts of the affected area)Between sectors (which things are the most urgent? Which will become a priority soon?)Between different groups (e.g. people who remain in their houses and people who have been displaced from their homes, minorities, elderly…)Over time (how are things evolving)And we relate it to what we knew about the situation before the disaster.
- Finally, step 3 of analysis is interpretation….working out what all this means…This is where we identify what is important and why. By having the whole assessment team engage on this, we ensure that we have a balanced view, from different points of view and different expertise.
- Here are a few images of the analysis for Tana river.You end up with a lot of information (remember, this is analysis of secondary AND primary data)You will need to debate as a group about what is most important and whyIt’s not always an easy or comfortable process, but this is where the real value gets added.
- And this is the output.- The sections have been determined through the design process.
- In the guidance not, there is a report template which helps to give guidance on what kind of information to put within each section.
- We will now move on to discussing the assessment mechanism.
- The multi-agency approach to the process, and to the design of the process, is continued when it comes to funding the process. Everyone contributes what they can, whether it is cars, people, or other resources.
- Let’s talk briefly about the contingency planning process for elections. A great deal of planning is currently underway to ensure that we are prepared for the elections, of which this is a part.This is the risk map for the coming months. It is wider reaching than 2007/2008, due to devolotion – elections will also cover county governorship.
- In order to provide support to coordination at the local level which is taking place at the district (DSG), the contingency plan has put into place the concept of humanitarian hubs, essentially being a network and support mechanism to facilitate the coordination process. There are eight hubs.
- Capacity building had been taking place at the regional level, using the hub designations laid out within the contingency planning processThe intention has been to build capacity to enable assessments to be launched by the hub, if the decision to launch it is made. By ensuring there is local capacity, this will ensure that assessment team members are from the area (increased contextual knowledge, increased ability to draw upon local networks of contacts, foster relationship at a sub-national level, more efficient that using national resources which could becomes overstretched in an emergency. Also if things are kicking off in many locations at a time, then will need all resources possible.The local arrangements differ from hub to hub. For instance, key points of contact with local government vary (eg DMO are a very useful point of contact, but are only in ASAL areas). Trainings have been run in close coordination with contingency planning processes, to facilitate discussion on what the local arrangements should be.During the first phase of hub trainings, the methodology has been reviewed and feedback received from field practitioners. This has not only helped to shape the approach, and has provided testing opportinities for the tools, for SoPs and for guidelines.
- Of course, just because it is coordinated at the hub level does not mean there will be no support from Nairobi. These are areas of possible support from Nairobi:Secondary data: the collection and preparation of secondary, baseline information about each areaAdditional field staff: it may be possible for additional field staff to be sent from Nairobi, though obviously the preference is for people who work in those locationsGuidance on managing process/Technical support: we are on hand to provide practical advice, technical input and guidanceLessons learnt : we will be gathering feedback on the approach and tools, on reports, and gathering tips and tricks for running the process smoothly.
- Questions