Often times we are confronted with the situation that we must select program/project beneficiaries. and it is very possible that you can have a wrong beneficiary for a right intervention or a right beneficiary for the wrong intervention. But, the intention usually is to have a good match. I undertook a process that seemed simple but gave us amazing results. We were able to have a list of program beneficiaries that was not disputed. We developed a questionnaire which was administered to 505 potential beneficiaries, from who we selected the targeted 440. A weighted score was the basis to identify who should benefit This document explains the weights and the weighted scores

1. DRC-UNICEF Adolescents’ program beneficiary selection analysis notes-Prepared by Innocent K.
Muhumuza, MEAL Coordinator, Adjumani
Background. Danish Refugee Council with funding from UNICEF is implementing a one year program
(December 2018-November 2019) whose aim is to “Reduce adolescent vulnerability to HIV, teenage
pregnancy and violence through social and economic empowerment of adolescent girls and boys in Arua
and Adjumani”. The program targets 900 adolescents as direct beneficiaries selected from Maaji II and
Maaji III refugee settlements in Adjumani and Ofua, Siripi, Ocea in Arua district.
Rationale.
Cognizant of the fact that there are more than 600 adolescents eligible to participate in the program
notwithstanding the varying levels of vulnerability, it is important that an elaborate criteria is followed to
avoid bias in the selection of the beneficiaries. In order to aid the selection process, a questionnaire was
developed and was applied to all eligible beneficiaries. The questionnaire assesses vulnerability based on;
Household headship i.e. Child headed household and/or Unaccompanied minor, Persons with Special
Needs, School dropout, Skilling attained and adolescent parenthood
Beneficiary scoring and weighing.
In order to determine who participates in the program, a weighted score will be considered with a higher
score depicting greater vulnerability.
Key consideration from the questionnaire
1. For all questions that attract a single response, the number assigned to the response depicts the
weight the response carries in regard to vulnerability.
2. For all questions that attract multiple response, a combination of responses attracts depicts less
or more vulnerability as compared on a single response in the same question. However, in order
to determine whether the combination takes heavier or less weight, consideration is given to
what the answer options imply for as to whether they portray greater or less vulnerability.
Specific analysis by vulnerability category
A. Vulnerability category: Child headed household and/or unaccompanied minor: Primary selection
will be based on answers provided in question A1, A2, and A3.
1. For answers to question A1 and A2. the number assigned to the answer option will be considered
as depicting greater or less vulnerability in comparison with the other answer options
2. For answers to question A3, a household head that has a single characteristic will be assigned a
weight of 2 while one with two or more characteristics will be assigned a weight of 4. A
combination of characteristics depicts more vulnerability in the household
3. Question A4 and A5, will only be considered if there is a tie in weighted score among potential
beneficiaries.
4. Calculation: Answer code in A1 x Answer code in A2 x Weight of single answer or multiple answer
in A3 = Total weighted Score. E.g. Respondent lives alone (8), is a female Child (4) and is both with
special needs and chronically ill (4) = 8 X 4 X 4= 128.
Therefore the Maximum possible weighted score is 128

2. B. Vulnerability Category: Special Needs
For answer options in this category
1. An adolescent with a special need in B1. takes a weight of 1
2. One that has two or more special needs in B2. takes a weight of 4 while one with one special need
takes a weight of 2
3. Calculation: With a special need in B1 (1) and has two or more special needs (4) = 1 X 4 = 4.
Therefore the maximum possible weighted score in this category is 4
C. Vulnerability category: School dropout: In this category, an adolescent
1. Who is not in school in C1. takes a weight of two while one in school takes a weight of one
2. One who never attended school in C3. takes a weight of 4 while one who is currently in school in
C2.in lower primary take a weight of 3
3. Calculation: An adolescent out of school (2) and has never attended school (4) = 2 x 4=8.
Therefore the maximum possible weighted score for an adolescent not in school is 8 while,
4. An adolescent in school (1) is out rightly not legible to participate in the program
D. Vulnerability category: No skills training received.
a) An adolescent that dropped out of school and has never received any skilling in D1. takes a weight
of 2 while one who has received some skilling takes 1
b) An adolescent that received skilling in D1.two or more areas takes a weight of 2 while one that
received skilling in one area takes a weight of 4
c) Question D3. Helps to map access to sponsorship opportunities of ability to afford own skilling.
d) Calculation of an adolescent that received skilling (1) in more than one area (2) = 1 X 2= 2. A youth
that received skilling (1) in one area (4) = 1 X 4=4 Therefore the maximum possible score for a
youth that attained skilling is 4
e) An adolescent that is not in school (2) and has never attended school (4) and never received
skilling (2) has a maximum possible weighted score of 16 (2X4X2)
E. Vulnerability category: Adolescent parent
In this category,
a) An adolescent that is a parent in E1. Takes a score of 1, while an expectant adolescent takes 2.
b) For an adolescent that has a child or children with special needs or chronic illness in E3. takes a
score of 2 while one without takes a score of 1.
c) Calculation: an adolescent with children (1) with special needs and/or chronic illness (2) = 1 X 2 =
2
d) An expectant adolescent (2) with children with special needs/chronic illness (2) = 2 X2 =4
e) An expectant mother (2) without children with special needs/chronic illness (1) = 2 X1 =2
f) Therefore the maximum possible weight in this category is 4 and can only be obtained by an
expectant mother who also has children with special needs.
Question E4. Provides vital information for planning for an adolescent mother to participate in the
program but not used as selection criterion.

3. f) For an adolescent with children but lives by herself/herself takes a weight of 2 while where the
adolescent lives with her partner takes a weight of 1.
g) For an adolescent that has more than one child other than her/his own takes a weight of 4, while
one who has one takes 2and for none under his/her care takes 1.
h) An adolescent that has one source of income takes a weight of 4, one with two or more sources
takes 2 while one with no income source takes a weight of 6.
i) Calculation: An adolescent with children living by herself/himself (2), with two or more children
(4) and no source of income (6) = 2 X 4 X 6= 48.
Therefore the maximum possible weighted score for an adolescent with children living by herself/himself
is 24
The maximum possible score for adolescent parent and living by herself/himself is (f) + (i) = 4 + 48= 52.
In view of weighted scores, the maximum possible score of an adolescent child headed/UAC minor’s
household, with special needs, out of school, No skills attained, never attended school, adolescent parent
living by herself/himself and with no income is 200 (128+4+16+52). This implies the most vulnerable has
a maximum possible weighted score of 200.