Rwanda stakeholder & action mapping 2014 15

Stakeholder & Action Mapping for Rwanda 2014/15
Using the Scaling Up Nutrition Planning & Monitoring Tool
August 2015
Compressed versionof the slide deck

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
2
Disclaimer for the Stakeholder & Action Mapping
It is important to note what the Stakeholder & Action Mapping is, and what it is not.
The Rwanda Stakeholder & Action Mapping intends to help improve nutrition coordination and scale-up
discussion by providing an indicative overview of who the key stakeholders in nutrition are, where they
are working, and an estimate of how many they are reaching, on a chosen few Core Nutrition Actions.
However, the Stakeholder & Action Mapping is not research or exact science. Both the geographical and
beneficiary coverage are estimates based only on the information provided by the organizations who have
reported. The coverage is therefore not to be considered as exhaustive or exact. Moreover, it is voluntary
to report, and not necessarily all stakeholders have been identified or have chosen to contribute.
Also, the Stakeholder & Action Mapping is only focusing on the chosen Core Nutrition Actions. Other
organizations may be working on other nutrition actions that have not been included. Furthermore, the
Stakeholder & Action Mapping is not assessing the quality or accuracy of the reported coverage.
The Stakeholder & Action Mapping only represents a snapshot of the situation in Rwanda. Partners,
projects, programs and funding change continuously, and thus also the support and coverage will
change. The coverage data is provided for 2014, i.e. the last full calendar year.
The Stakeholder & Action Mapping should thus only be interpreted as indicative and directional, and
should not be used for other purposes, nor should estimated coverage under any circumstance be used
or referred to as publicly approved or validated data.
IMPORTANT TO READ

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
3
Executive Summary for the Stakeholder & Action Mapping
Chronic malnutrition (stunting) is still a major public health concern in Rwanda
• Despite progress over the last decade, Rwanda is still in the high severity zone as defined by WHO
• Progress in stunting reduction is consistent, but slow compared to targets set by the Government of Rwanda
• On the positive side, the MDG targets for underweight reduction was achieved, and acute malnutrition
(wasting) is in low severity zones as defined by WHO
There are gaps both in geographical coverage and beneficiary coverage of the Core Nutrition Actions
(CNAs)
• There are many partners supporting the fight against malnutrition in Rwanda, including ministries, donors,
catalysts and field implementers. The scale and support varies across the different stakeholders
• The level of support and coverage of the CNAs also varies among different districts both in number of partners
supporting the district, the number of CNAs implemented, and the coverage of beneficiaries for these CNAs
Further scale-up is needed to accelerate the reduction of stunting in Rwanda
• Geographic coverage of the CNAs should be increased so that more CNAs are reaching all areas of Rwanda
• Beneficiary coverage of the CNAs should be improved so that more CNAs are reaching a higher proportion of
their target groups
• The quality of the coverage needs to be ensured, so that we are not only reaching more beneficiaries, but also
ensuring a level of quality that makes the interventions efficient and sustainable
All partners need to cooperate and contribute to further scale-up nutrition interventions in Rwanda
• The findings in the Stakeholder & Action Mapping can help inform such scale-up discussions

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
4
The Stakeholder & Action Mapping report is structured
according to the following topics and key questions
Introduction, background and objectives of the Stakeholder & Action Mapping
Recap of the food and nutrition situation in Rwanda – highlights from the Nutrition Analysis
• What is the food and nutrition situation nationally?
• What is the food and nutrition situation per district?
Stakeholder & Action Mapping methodology and approach
Stakeholder & Action Mapping overview and analyses
• Who are the main stakeholders working with nutrition in Rwanda?
• What are the main programs?
• What core nutrition actions are the stakeholders working on?
• Where are we working?
• How many are we reaching?
Implications of the findings from the Stakeholder & Action Mapping
• Where and what are the gaps?
• What recommendations for planning and scale up can be made?
Appendix
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
5
Agenda
• Who are the main stakeholders working in nutrition in Rwanda?
• Where are they working?
• How many are they reaching?
• Main recommendations and findings for scaling up
Appendix

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
6
Introduction to the Stakeholder & Action Mapping 2014/15
Objectives of Stakeholder & Action Mapping
• To decide on the prioritized core nutrition actions (CNAs) in Rwanda
• To get a better overview of who is doing what and where in nutrition in Rwanda
• To be better able to identify gaps in coverage of target population and geographies of core nutrition actions
• Ultimately to help inform & improve planning of core nutrition actions, to scale up and eliminate malnutrition
Background for Stakeholder & Action Mapping
• Request by the Social Cluster Ministries and the FNTWG to update the stakeholder mapping from 2012
• Redefining of previous mapping efforts to better understand the coverage of target populations and
geographic areas of CNAs (using updated and improved SUNPMT tool)
What data is collected, and how?
• The mapping exercise collects coverage data directly from key nutrition stakeholders
– Template input from stakeholders on which CNAs they are implementing or supporting and where
– Interview-based data collection for further details on CNAs (including beneficiary coverage)
• The data collected include the following: Organization and program contact details, actions / interventions
being conducted, target group(s), delivery mechanisms, period of program operation, geographic regions of
operation, number of beneficiaries reached

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
7
What can the Stakeholder & Action Mapping help you with?
For Ministries
Get a better overview
of who the partners are
and what they do
Identify potential gaps
in geographic coverage
Identify potential gaps
in action coverage
Help planning &
scale-up of nutrition
actions
For Districts
See what partners are
working with food &
nutrition in your district
Get info on what
actions are being
conducted, and where
How many people are
being reached by
different actions, what
needs to be scaled up
For UN & NGOs
Enhance coordination
though better info on
what organizations are
working in the same
districts and/or on the
same actions
Identify what districts
need further support
See what actions need
to be scaled up, and
where
For Donors
Identify what districts
need further support
See what actions need
more funds to scale up
Help identify what
organizations can
cover different actions
and districts
Improve coordination among partners, and help inform
planning and scale up of nutrition actions in Rwanda

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
8
Updating the Rwanda Stakeholder Mapping, using an
upgraded and more comprehensive M&E tool from REACH
2012: General overview of who does what
and where within nutrition in Rwanda
2015: Map coverage of core nutrition actions to
better inform nutrition planning and scale-up

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
9
The 23 Core Nutrition Actions agreed to map in Rwanda (1/2)
How do they link to the NFNSP, and who are the main target groups
Strategic Direction & Output1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Core Nutrition Actions (CNAs) Target group(s)
Promote optimal breastfeeding practices
Promote optimal complementary feeding
practices
Provide specialized nutritious products for
complementary feeding (e.g. CSB)
Provide Fe+FA supplements
Provide MNP supplements (Ongera)
Provide Vit A supplements
Provide deworming tablets
Provide diarrhoea treatment (w/ ORS/ORS-zinc)
Provide treatment of SAM
Provide & support treatment of MAM
Conduct child growth monitoring / screening
Promote/Provide ANC visits (4+)
2.1
&3
4.2
2.1
&3
4.23.5
5.34.32.3
4.32.3
5.34.32.3
5.34.32.3
4.12.1 6.2
2.1
&3
4.1 5.3
4.22.3
2.3
PLW & HHs w/ ch. u5
PLW & Households
w/ children under 5
6-23 months & PLW
in Ubudehe 1 & 2
Pregnant Women
6-23 months
6-59 months
12-59 mths & 5-15 yrs
u5 w/ severe diarrhoea
u5 with SAM
u5 with MAM
6-59 months
Pregnant Women
4.12.1 6.2
6.2
MIYCN
Micro-nutr
ients
Manage
disease
MAM/
SAM
MNCH
1. Refers to the Strategic Directions and Outputs of the National Food & Nutrition Strategic Plan (2013-18)
Explanations: PLW = Pregnant and Lactating Women, HHs = Households, PW = Pregnant Women, LW = Lactating Women, SAM = Severe Acute Malnutrition, MAM = Moderate Acute Malnutrition, u5
= children under 5 years, ANC = Ante-Natal Care, MNP = Micronutrient Powders, CSB = Corn Soya Blend, ORS = Oral Rehydration Salts/Solution, Fe+FA = Iron & Folic Acid supplements
3.5

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
10
Strategic Direction & Output1
The 23 Core Nutrition Actions agreed to map in Rwanda (2/2)
How do they link to the NFNSP, and who are the main target groups
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Target group(s)
Provide materials and technology for small-scale
horticulture (e.g. kitchen gardens)
Promote food preservation and storage
Provide animals for small-scale husbandry
Provide input for production and consumption of
bio-fortified crops (e.g. beans, sweet potato)
Carry out nutrition education (e.g. cooking
demonstrations)2
Carry out nutrition education at school (e.g. school
gardens)
Provide/Support improved water source
Provide/Support improved sanitation
Promote hygiene / hand washing
Provide conditional social safety net actions (VUP)
Provide school feeding (e.g. One Cup of Milk)
2.1
&3
5.13.2
5.1
2.3 5.34.5
2.3 5.34.5
2.3 5.34.5
2.3 3.5
5.2
Households with
children under 5
Farming households
Households Ub. 1&2
Households with
children under 5
Mothers / caregivers
(w/ children under 5)
Schools
Households + schools
Households + schools
PLW + schools
Households Ub. 1&2
Primary school children
2.3 3.1
2.3 3.2
2.3 3.5
2.3 4.33.4
Food&agriculture
Nutrition
education
WASH
Social
prot.
Core Nutrition Actions (CNAs)
1. Refers to the Strategic Directions and Outputs of the National Food & Nutrition Strategic Plan (2013-18)
2. Should avoid overlap with "Promote optimal breastfeeding practices", "Promote optimal complementary feeding practices" and "Promote hygiene / hand washing"
Explanations: Ub. 1&2 = Ubudehe 1 and 2 categories – the poorest households, VUP = Vision 2020 Umurenge Program – the social security programme of MINALOC

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
11
Agenda
Appendix

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
12
Agenda
Appendix

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
13
Key messages on the nutrition situation in Rwanda
While there have been marked reductions in the prevalence of chronic malnutrition (stunting) over the last
decade, stunting in Rwanda still remains in high severity zone as a major public health concern1
• Nearly 600,000 children under 5 (38%) are chronically malnourished
• There is still a large gap to reach the targets set in the HSSP-3 and NFNSP (18% in 2018)
• Very high1
stunting levels (>40%) persist in 1 of 3 of the country’s districts, and only 3 districts are below 30%
• Further action and scale up is needed to address and accelerate the rate of reduction
Wasting (2.2%) is below the critical thresholds set by WHO (5%), but Severe Acute Malnutrition (0.6%) is
still a public health concern1
(>0.1%)
• Underweight targets as set in the Millennium Development Targets were reached (target 14.5%, now 9%
prevalence among under5s), but there is still a gap to the targets set in HSSP-3 and NFNSP (4% in 2018)
Anemia among children 6-59 months has decreased (down from 38.1% in 2010 to 36.5% in 2014/15), while
anemia among women 15-49 years has increased (17.3% in 2010 to 19.2% in 2014/15)
• Both are still far from normal levels1
(<5%), and anemia thus needs to be further addressed
Several core indicators to reduce stunting are showing slow progress, such as Food Consumption Scores,
Minimum Acceptable Diet and WASH indicators
• Indicates that further focus and scale up is needed
1. As defined by WHO
Source: DHS 2014/15, DHS 2010, HSSP-3, NFNSP

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
14
Situation Analysis Dashboard (National Level)
What is the nutrition situation stakeholders need to address?
Iron deficiency
Underweight
Stunting
Care
Wasting
Food security
Underweight prevalence among children 0-59 mo. old
Stunting prevalence among children 0-59 mo. old
Anemia among women 15-49 yrs old (any anemia)
Indicator Status
SAM prevalence among children 0-59 mo. old
GAM prevalence among children 0-59 mo. old
Population living under national poverty line
Population living in extreme poverty (national line)
Total fertility rate
Percentage with unmet need for family planning
Gender
Poverty
Nutritional
impact
37.9%
2.2%
0.6%
9.3%
19.2%
Underlying
causes
Households with poor & borderline food cons. score
Global Hunger Index rating
21.1%
15.6
Population
Children 6-23 mo. old with min acceptable diet (MAD) 17.8%
Education
Basic
causes
Teenage pregnancy: women 15-19 with a live birth
Women who participate in major household decisions
Global Gender Gap ranking
44.9%
24.1%
5.5%
Xx.x%
7 / 142
4.2
18.9%
Females that completed primary school or higher
Literacy rate 15 years or more - Women
Xx.x%
64.7%
44.2% (2010)
2.8% (2010)
0.8% (2010)
11.4% (2010)
17.3% (2010)
21.5% (2009)
24.1 (2005)
16.8% (2010)
56.7% (2005/06)
35.8% (2005/06)
4.7% (2010)
58.7% (2010)
N/A
4.6 (2010)
18.9% (2010)
30.1% (2010)
60.1% (2005/06)
Severity
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Source
DHS
DHS
DHS
DHS
DHS
DHS
EICV
EICV
DHS
DHS
GGGI
DHS
DHS
DHS
EICV
CFSVA
GHI
Year
2014/15
2014/15
2014/15
2014/15
2014/15
Health &
Sanitation
Under 5 mortality rate (deaths per 1,000 live births)
Low birthweight prevalence (<2,500g)
Women 15-49yrs with problems accessing health care
Household access to improved water source
Household access to improved sanitation facilities
50
X.x%
Xx.x%
74.2%
74.5%
76 (2010)
6.2% (2010)
61.4% (2010)
70.2% (2005/06)
58.5% (2005/06)
N/A
N/A
N/A
DHS
DHS
DHS
EICV
EICV
2014/15
2014/15
2014/15
2010/11
2010/11
2014/15
2010/11
2010/11
2014/15
2014/15
2014
2014/15
2014/15
2014/15
2010/11
2012
2014
Infants 0–5 mo. exclusively breastfed
Timely initiation of solid or semi-solid foods (6-8 mo)
87.3%
55.8%
84.9% (2010)
62.1% (2010)
N/A
N/A
DHS
DHS
2014/15
2014/15
Anemia among children 6-59 mo. old (any anemia) 36.5% 38.1% (2010)DHS 2014/15
Trend
Low
Medium
High
Severity:
Improvement (blue arrow)
No change (yellow arrow)
Worsening (red arrow)
Trend:
Households with handwashing facility, soap & water Xx.x% 2.1% (2010)N/ADHS 2014/15
Vit A deficiency Vitamin A deficiency among children 0-59 mo. old N/A 6.4% (1996)N/A N/A
Iodine deficiency Iodine deficiency among children 6-12 years old N/A N/AN/AN/A N/A
Note: Missing information to be updated as soon as the full Rwanda DHS 2014/15 is released

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
15
Significant reductions in stunting, wasting and underweight
Stunting remains a public health concern, while wasting & underweight are below critical thresholds
Stunting Wasting Underweight
Prevalence among children under
5
2005 2010
DH
S
20001992 2014/15
WHO
severity
threshol
d
20051992 2010
WHO
severity
threshol
d
2014/152000
DH
S
5
2000 2005 20101992 2014/15
WHO
severity
threshol
d
DH
S
5
Note: Prevalence for 1992. 2000 and 2005 have been recalculated using 2006 WHO growth standards
Source: Rwanda DHS, WHO classification of malnutrition severity

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
16
While MDG target is achieved, only wasting seems to be on
track to meet 2018 targets set in the HSSP III and the NFNSP
Stunting Wasting Underweight
5
2005 2010
DH
S
20001992 2014/15
2018
Target
HSSP
3
18%
20051992 2010
2018
Target
HSSP
3
2%
2014/152000
DH
S
5
2000 2005 20101992 2014/15
2018
Target
HSSP
3
4%
DH
S
5
Note: Prevalence for 1992. 2000 and 2005 have been recalculated using 2006 WHO growth standards. HSSP3 = Health Sector Strategic Plan 3 from 2013-2018
Source: Rwanda DHS, WHO classification of malnutrition severity
Backup
MDG
target
14.5
%

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
17
There are still nearly 600,000 stunted children in Rwanda
Population of selected target groups Number of malnourished children
Note: Census data from 2012 adjusted using the Census' medium growth estimates to get 2014 estimates
Source: Rwanda DHS 2014/15, Rwanda National Census 2012
6,00
0
10,00
0
4,00
0
2,00
0
12,00
0
8,00
0
0
641
9,127
10,997
2,536
1,554
Rural
population
33014%
83%
6%
Pregnant
Women
Children
under 2
Households
3%
Children
under 5
Population in
'000s
Total
population
70
0
60
0
0
40
0
50
0
20
0
30
0
10
0
Malnourished children under 5 years old in
'000s
38%
34
UnderweightWasting
144
Stunting
9%
2%
589

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
18
Stunting increases drastically from a child is 6 to 24 months old
Nutritional status of children by age from DHS 2014-15

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
19
Minimum Acceptable Diet (MAD) rates among children 6-23
months are still very low, and progress is slow
Backup
1. Given the standard deviations and confidence interval, this is not a statistical significant improvement
Note: Minimum Acceptable Diet is a composite indicator building on both Minimum Meal Frequency and Minimum Diet Diversity
Source: Rwanda DHS 2010 and 2014/15
18-23 months Total
+1.
0
% of children 6-23 months with Minimum Acceptable
Diet
9-11 months 12-17 months6-8 months
Age
groups
DHS
2010
DHS
2014/15
Only 1%-point
improvement
over 5 years1

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
20
Anemia rates are still high, and reduction is slow for anemia
among children, while anemia among women is increasing
Two provinces with increased anemia
among children 6-59 months
Anemia among women is increasing –
only Kigali and East with reduction
+1.
8
-3.
5
+3.
0
-7.
5
-3.
9
Anemia prevalence among children 6-59
months
West
-1.
6
Kigali
City
South North EastRwanda
DHS
2014/15
DHS
2010
Provinc
e
North
+3.
8
EastSouth West
+1.
9
-1.
0
Kigali
City
-3.
2
+5.
5
+2.
6
Rwanda
Anemia prevalence among women 15-49
years
Backup
Source: Rwanda DHS 2010, Rwanda DHS 2014/15

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
21
Food security as measured with acceptable Food
Consumption Score is improving, but slowly
Backup
-0.4
%
3.8%
% of
population
+0.4
%
Acceptable FCS Poor FCSBorderline FCS
201
2
200
9
1. Given the standard deviations and confidence interval, this is not a statistical significant improvement
Note: CFSVA/NS data from 2015 will be added when available
Source: Rwanda CFSVA/NS 2012
Only 0.4%-point
improvement
over 5 years1

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
22
WASH related indicators are at a low level, and improvement
is limited and behind targets
2017/18
Target
EDPRS2
WATSAN
2014
2010/11
EICV3
25
%
Households with access to
improved water source
Still large gap to reach targets
for access to improved water
Less than half of households
are using appropriate water
treatment methods
Only 2% have a handwashing
facility with soap & water
Households using an appropriate
water treatment method
N/A
DHS 2014/15DHS 2010
10%
Hand
washing
facility
No
water
or
soap
Households with place for
washing hands
Soap
only
0%
Water
& soap
Water
only
Backup
Note: DHS 2014/15 data will be added when available
Source: EICV3, WATSAN 2014, EDPRS2, DHS 2010

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
23
Agenda
Appendix

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
24
Stunting levels are high throughout the country with nearly
1 of 3 districts exceeding the 'very high' severity threshold
1. Among children 0-59 months
Note: Will be updated to DHS 2014/15 data when available. NB! Confidence intervals are rather large on a district level
Source: Rwanda National Nutrition Screening 2014, WHO classification of malnutrition severity
Prevalence of stunting among children under 5 years old
Nyagatare
37%
Gatsibo
37%
Kayonza
33%
Karongi
42% Bugesera
41%
Rusizi
36%
Nyamasheke
39%
Kirehe
40%
Ngoma
35%
Rwamagana
33%
Nyaruguru
38%
Nyamagabe
40%
Rulindo
34%
Gicumbi
38%
Huye
30%
Nyanza
31%
Musanze
33%
Burera
38%
Gakenke
38%
Ngororero
48%
Nyabihu
46%
Ruhango
37%
Muhanga
43%
Kamonyi
39%
Gisagara
36%
Rubavu
48%
City of Kigali
Rutsiro
51%
City of Kigali
Kicukiro
28%
Gasabo
32%
Nyarugenge
26%
20% - 29%
30% - 39%
>40%
Stunting prevalence1
<20%

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
25
Vast regional disparities in
anemia levels, spanning nearly
30 point range (52.7% to 23.0%)
40% of the districts in Rwanda
had anemia levels above
(≥40%) in 2010 (12 out of 30
districts)
The urban district of Kicukiro
is above (≥ 40%) , which shows
that anemia is also a latent
urban problem.
The most alarming districts with ≥
45% of children with anemia are:
Rusizi, Nyamagabe, Gatsibo,
Ngoma, Kirehe, Gisagara and
Nyamasheke
Anemia is a critical public health concern, with 40% of the
districts in Rwanda with anemia levels above (≥ 40%)
Backup
Note: Will be updated to DHS 2014/15 data when available NB! Confidence intervals are rather large on a district level
Source: Rwanda DHS 2010, Rwanda Nutrition Situation Analysis

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
26
Districts with different level of development on key indicators
Ranked by weighted development score (constructed composite index)
<30 30-40 >40
Weighted development
score:
Note: Weighted development score is a composite indicator that consists of stunting prevalence, poverty rates, food security scores, minimum acceptable diet, improved water & improved sanitation.
The chosen weights are shown on top. All indicators are adjusted so that lower is better.
Source: DHS 2010, EICV3 2010-11, CFSVA/NS 2012, National Screening 2014

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
27
Nyagatare
Gatsibo
Kayonza
Karongi
Bugesera
Rusizi
Nyamasheke
Kirehe
Ngoma
Rwamagana
Nyaruguru
Nyamagabe
Rulindo
Gicumbi
Huye
Nyanza
Musanze
Burera
Gakenke
Ngororero
Nyabihu
Ruhango
Muhanga
Kamonyi
Gisagara
Rubavu
City of Kigali
Rutsiro
Districts in South and West are the least developed
City of Kigali
Kicukiro
Gasabo
Nyarugenge
<30 30-40 >40
Weighted development
score:
Note: Weighted development score is a composite indicator that consists of stunting prevalence, poverty rates, food security scores, minimum acceptable diet, improved water & improved sanitation.
The weighted development score is indicative only, and should not be used for other purposes.
Source: DHS 2010, EICV3 2010-11, CFSVA/NS 2012, National Screening 2014 NB! Confidence intervals are rather large on a district level
Weighted development score per district

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
28
Agenda
Appendix

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
29
High-level approach for the Stakeholder & Action Mapping
Time
estimate
Activities
Preparation
1-3 months2
• Introducing the
tool & approach
• Discussing and
deciding on the
Core Nutrition
Actions (CNAs1
)
• Preparing
templates &
letters
Data collection
2-4 months3
Quantitative
analysis
~1+ month
Data
interpretation
~1+
month
Mapping
process
Note: The Stakeholder & Action Mapping can be conducted quicker than the timeline above now that it has already been conducted and the tool and templates have been developed and customized
for Rwanda. Also, the timeline has been stretched due to multiple parallel priorities (one resource working ~30% on the Stakeholder & Action Mapping, not 100%)
1. CNA = Core Nutrition Actions 2. Depending on time to get agreement and sign-off on CNAs and Rwanda specifics in tool 3. Depending on number of districts mapped, the number of participating
organizations, the data availability and the time and resources committed to data collection
Datadissemination
Stakeholderdialogueonscalingupnutrition
• Templates &
letters sent out
• Templates filled in
and returned by
stakeholders
• Beneficiary
coverage
meetings set up
and conducted
• Clean and quality
check data
• Remove potential
duplicates
• Add situation
indicators (DHS)
• Analyze data and
make analysis
output
• Interpret coverage
data with situation
indicators
• Identify potential
coverage gaps
• Make
recommendations
• Compile report /
presentation
Jan-Mar Apr-Jul Aug Sep
Iteration

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
30
The preparation phase consisted of three main deliverables
Customizing tool to country specifics must be conducted and agreed before starting data collection
Country specifics to
customize tool
Rwanda nutrition
stakeholder overview
External data input for
population & indicatorsA B C
Geography
Geography of mapping exercise
A1
Core nutrition actions
E.g. exclusive breastfeeding,
biofortification, ...
A2
Delivery mechanisms
E.g. health centers, radio, ...
A3
Target groups
E.g. pregnant & lactating women,
households, ...
A4
Combine / Link
Relevant target groups, del.
mech. & indicators per action
A6
Situation indicators
E.g. wasting, anemia, ...
A5
Long-list of all stakeholders
• Who they are, where they
work, what they work on
• Contact details
Draft stakeholder profile for
the key stakeholders:
B1
B2
Population data
• Per district
• Per target group
Data on situation indicators
per district
• Wasting, stunting, etc.
C1
C2
For each year and
geography mapped, what
is the population size of
each target group?
For each year and
geography mapped, what
are the situation indicator
levels?
Preparation
phase

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
31
Population data was mainly collected from the 2012 Census
Preparation
phase
C
1
Target group
Population groups
• Entire population
• Children 6-23 months
• Children 0-59 months (u5)
• Children 5-15 years
• Pregnant women (PW)
• Lactating women (LW)
Households
• Households
• Households with children u5
(Mothers/Caregivers w/ ch. u5)
• Farming households
• Households Ubudehe 1&2
Schools
• Schools
• School children
• Primary schools
• Primary school children
Children with illness
• Children u5 with SAM
• Children u5 with MAM
• Children u5 with severe diarrhea
Sources
Rwanda Population and
Household Census, 2012, NISR
• Population by district
• Population by single age and
sex
• Population growth projections
(medium growth)
Rwanda Population and
Household Census, 2012, NISR
• EICV 3, Thematic Report
Agriculture, 2012, NISR
• MINALOC Ubudehe cat. 2014
Rwanda Education statistics,
MINEDUC 2013/14
• School overview MINEDUC
• Education statistics for 2013
DHS & National Screening data
• MAM & SAM prevalence from
DHS 14/15 & Nat. Nutr. Scr.
• Severe diarrhea from DHS
Methodology
Using population data by district, by
single age and by sex
• Adjusting 2012 figures to 2014 figures by
using medium growth projections in the
Census
• PW in 2014 estimated by the number of
children 0 to 1 year in 2015 (estimate)
• LW estimated by the number of children
0-23 months in 2014
Same as above, but with additional data
• Dividing u5 with 1.5 (based on average
birth spacing) to get HHs with childr. U5
• % farming households from EICV3
• % of HHs in U1&2 from MINALOC data
Using Rwanda Education statistics
• MINEDUC provided number of schools
• Number of school children from statistics
• Schools split by type of school
• School children split by type of school
Multiplying prevalence by age group
• Children u5 multiplied by prevalence of
MAM and SAM (from DHS14/15 & NNS)
• U5 multiplied by severe diarrhea prev.
Note: Target group size in SUNPMT may not match with target group sizes used by other organizations if sources and way of estimating differs

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
32
Data collection was conducted in two steps
Who is doing what and where Coverage for 23 core nutrition actions1 2
Mapping of nutrition stakeholders in
Rwanda – who is doing what and whereObjective
Mapping beneficiary coverage for 23 selected
core nutrition actions
What to
map
Long-list of nutrition stakeholders and their
contribution to the core nutrition actions
• Indicate which of the core nutrition actions
are they working with
• Report their organization role and their
partners for each of the actions
• Report what districts and sectors they are
supporting for each of the actions
Map action coverage for the 23 core nutrition
actions (CNAs)
• How many of the target groups are we covering
for each action, in each district?
• Focus on mapping beneficiaries coverage
• Also get information on project duration,
donors, implementing partners and delivery
mechanism
Data
collection
method
Self-reporting by the stakeholders
• Template was sent out, filled and returned
• Acted as information input for step 2
Collect coverage data using SUNPMT tool
• Interview based data collection
• Careful preparation from stakeholders
Who to
collect
data from
Template sent out to all known nutrition
stakeholders in Rwanda
Selected stakeholders working with the core
nutrition actions (informed by step 1)
Qualitative view Quantitative view
Data
collection

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
33
Some of the coverage data is provided directly by ministries
Data
collection Backup
Data collection sourceCore nutrition actions
Promote optimal breastfeeding practices
Promote optimal complementary feeding practices
Provide specialized nutritious products for complementary feeding
Provide MNP supplements
Provide Vit A supplements
Provide diarrhoea treatment (w/ ORS/ORS-zinc)
Provide treatment of SAM
Support and provide treatment of MAM
Conduct child growth monitoring / screening
Promote/Provide ANC visits (4+)
Provide materials and technology for small-scale horticulture
(Kitchen gardens)
Promote food preservation and storage
Provide animals for small-scale husbandry
Provide input for production and consumption of biofortified crops
(e.g. beans, sweet potato)
Carry out nutrition education (e.g. cooking demonstrations)
Carry out nutrition education at school (school gardens)
Provide/Support improved water source
Provide/Support improved sanitation
Promote hygiene / hand washing
Provide conditional social safety net actions (VUP)
Provide school feeding (One Cup of Milk)
MoH (and partners)
MoH (and partners)
Implementing Partners
MoH
Implementing Partners
MoH
MoH
MoH
MoH
MoH (and partners)
MoH
MoH
Implementing partners
MINAGRI (and partners)
MINEDUC
MINALOC
MIYCN
Micro-nu
trients
Di-se
ase
MAM/
SAM
MCH
Food&
Agriculture
Nut.
Edu.
WASH
Soc.
Sec.
Comments
Split in two target groups
Split in two target groups
From campaign data
From campaign data
Health facilities treatment data
Health facilities treatment data
Other partners also supporting
Other partners also supporting
Other partners also doing promoting
No data available from MINAGRI
No data available from MINAGRI
Other partners also doing SILC

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
34
How is the population coverage calculated by the tool?
To have consistent results, it is important to consistently
map the actions at the same geographic level
Number of beneficiaries in the
target group covered by the
action, in the selected
geography
Population size of the target
group, in the selected
geography
Interview
database
Popula-tio
n
Two sources are used as input for the
population coverage calculation Concrete example
Provide vitamin A supplements to children
6-59 months in Gasabo, in 2014
Sum of all beneficiaries covered per action where
• Country = Rwanda
• Province = Kigali City
• District level = Gasabo
• Action = Provide vitamin A supplements
• Target group: Children 6-59 months
• At least 1 month of 2014 is included in timeframe
Population size where
• Country = Rwanda
• Province = Kigali City
• District = Gasabo
• Target group: Children 6-59 months
Quantitative
analysis

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
35
Important limitations to note on Stakeholder & Action Mapping
Not all nutrition
stakeholders have
participated in the
mapping
Stakeholder & Action Mapping does not cover all organizations working with nutrition in Rwanda
• Focus has been on capturing data from the largest stakeholders, not all stakeholders
• We have sent requests to all known stakeholders, but there may be other organizations that we do not
yet know about that have not been reached out to
• It is voluntary to provide input on the mapping, and some stakeholders have chosen not to participate
Not all
stakeholders have
good data or data
at all
Even for the stakeholders who have participated, there is sometimes limitation in data availability
• Not all stakeholders have collected coverage data for their programs and projects (this is for example
a problem for some of the ministries, e.g. MIGEPROF)
• Some have collected the data, but the data quality is not good enough
• Some organizations are very large and are doing many programs and projects. There may then be
nutrition activities conducted that they have not reported
Missing input
from most WASH
stakeholders
There has been limited participation from WASH stakeholders in the Stakeholder & Action Mapping
• WASH is very important for stunting reduction, and three of the CNAs are related to WASH
• However, WASH is coordinated in separate technical working groups, and have less interaction with
the Food & Nutrition Technical Working Groups than what would be ideal
• The mapping request was therefore also shared with the WASH TWGs, but very few stakeholders
participated in the mapping, meaning that there are large gaps in the completeness of WASH actions
We do not know
the quality of the
coverage or
actions conducted
When providing data of the number of beneficiaries reached with different actions, we do not
necessarily know the quality of these actions
• For example, if one partner have done one large meeting with 500 participants, the quality of the
sensitization may not be as good as if one organization is following 500 beneficiaries individually
• Or for kitchen gardens, the quality and how functional the kitchen garden is may differ
• Coverage is still counted equally, though the quality of the coverage may differ
Data
interpretat.
Note: See also Disclaimer slide

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
36
Agenda
Appendix

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
37
Agenda
Appendix

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
38
37 food & nutrition stakeholders have provided mapping input
Stakeholder profiles have been made for these organizations
Government
UN Agencies
Research /
Academia2
NGOs
• Ministry of Agriculture and Animal
Resources (MINAGRI)
• Ministry of Education (MINEDUC)
• Ministry of Gender and Family
Promotion (MIGEPROF)
• Ministry of Health (MoH)
• Ministry of Local Government
(MINALOC)
• Food & Agriculture Organization (FAO)
• One UN REACH
• International Fund for Agricultural
Development (IFAD)1
• United Nations Children's Fund
(UNICEF)
• World Food Programme (WFP)
• World Health Organization (WHO)
• World Bank1
• Catholic University of Rwanda (CUR)
• International Center for Tropical
Agriculture (CIAT)2
• University of British Columbia (UBC)
• The Access Project (AP)
• Adventist Development and Relief
Agency (ADRA)
• AVSI Foundation RWANDA (AVSI)
• Caritas International Rwanda (Caritas)
• Catholic Relief Services (CRS)
• Clinton Health Access Initiative (CHAI)
• Concern Worldwide Rwanda (CWR)
• Cooperative for Assistance and Relief
Everywhere (CARE)
• Family Health International 360
(FHI360)
• Gardens for Health International (GHI)
• Global Communities (GC)
• Glocal Forum YaLa Africa (GFYA)
• Heifer International Rwanda (HIR)
• International Rescue Committee (IRC)
• Partners In Health (PIH)
• Peace Corps Rwanda (PCR)3
• Rwanda Nutrition Society (RNS)2
• Send a Cow Rwanda (SaCR)
• Society for Family Health (SFH)
• WaterAid Rwanda (WaterAid)
• World Relief Rwanda (WRR)
• World Vision Rwanda (WVR)
1. IFAD and the World Bank have provided input on some of their nutrition sensitive programs, but not directly on the core nutrition actions 2. CIAT and RNS have provided input on research support,
but not directly on the core nutrition actions 3. Peace Corps is a new partner and the Peace Corps Volunteers will start working with food & nutrition from August 2015

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
39
An additional 40+ food & nutrition stakeholders have been
mentioned in the mapping by other partners
Government
Bi-/Multilateral
• Canadian Department of Foreign Affairs,
Trade and Development (DFATD)
• Canadian Food Grain Bank (CFGB)
• Embassy of the Kingdom of Netherlands
(EKN) / Government of Netherlands
• European Union (EU)
• Irish Aid (Irish DFAT)
• Korea International Cooperation Agency
(KOICA)
• Swiss Agency for Development and
Cooperation (SDC)
• UK Department for International
Development (DFID) / UK AID
• United States Agency for International
Development (USAID)
• Ministry of Disaster Management and
Refugee Affairs (MIDIMAR)
• Rwanda Agricultural Board (RAB)
• Rwanda Education Board (REB)
• Rwanda Biomedical Center (RBC)
• Local Administrative Entities
Development Agency (LODA)
• National Women Council (NWC)
• Districts
• Health Facilities
• Schools
NGOs &
Foundations
Field implementers:
• ADEPR
• African Evangelist Enterprice (AEE)
• Association for Humanitarian Peace (APH)
• Association Rwandaise pour la Promotion
du Development Integre (ARDI)
• Benishyaka Association
• Caritas Kabgayi & Gikongoro
• COFORWA (Compagnons Fontainiers du
Rwanda)
• Farming cooperatives
• DUHAMIC ADRI
• Eglise Presbytérienne au Rwanda (EPR)
• Mouvement de Lutte contre la Faim au
Monde (MLFM)
• Rwanda Rural Rehabilitation Initiative
(RWARRI)
• Save the Children Rwanda (StC)
• SDA Iriba
Donor organizations:
• CIFF – Children's Investment Fund Found.,
Global Giving, Oxfam, Gates Foundation,
Keurig Green Mountain (KGM), Fondation
d'Harcourt, CASASCHI, FONERWA, SUN
Multi-Partner Trust Fund, Starbucks, African
Development Bank (AfDB)

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
40
Agenda
Appendix

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
41
Overview of large nutrition specific and sensitive programs
Key programs being implemented in country – see more details in next slides
Nutrition specific
programs
EKN/GoN Nutrition Program
• Lead by UNICEF
• 18 districts (all sectors)
• 2014-17
One UN Joint Nutrition Program
• Lead by WFP
• 2013-16
CIFF Food & Nutrition Program
• Lead by MoH & MINAGRI
• 2015-18
USAID INWA Program
• Lead to be decided
• 2016-20
EU Nutrition Budget Support
• Direct budget support to MoH,
MINAGRI and MINEDUC
• 2013-16
Will in 2016 cover all 30 districts
Programs with food &
nutrition component
USAID Gimbuka Program
• Lead by Caritas
• 9 districts (21 sectors)
• 2012-15
USAID Ejo Heza Program
• Lead by Global Communities
• 2011-16
USAID Higa Ubeho Program
• 10 districts (89 sectors)
• 2009-15
USAID Twiyubake Program
• 2015-20
Nutrition sensitive
agriculture program
USAID Shisha Wumwa Program
• Lead by Land O'Lakes
• 2012-16
Land, Water, Hillside (LWH) program
• Funded by WB, IDA, CIDA, US, ++
• 2010-17
Rural Sector Support Program
• Funded by World Bank
• 2001-16
Post-harvest & Agribusiness
Support Project
• Funded by IFAD
• 2014-19
Rural Income through Exports
• Funded by IFAD
• 2011-18
Kirehe Watershed Mgmt Project
• Funded by IFAD
• 2009-16
A B C
A
1
A
2
A
3
A
4
A
5
B
1
B
2
B
3
B
4
C
1
C
2
C
3
C
4
C
5
C
6
Note: Overview is not exhaustive
Source: Stakeholder interviews

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
42
Nutrition specific programs will in 2016 cover all districts
But from 2017, many districts will be without funding support unless funding is extended
Province District Organization Donor(s) Implementing partner 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Kigali City
Nyarugenge USAID USAID TBD (INGO)
Gasabo UNICEF GoN, USAID, IKEA WRR (from 2015)
Kicukiro USAID USAID TBD (INGO)
South
Nyanza USAID USAID FXB
Gisagara UNICEF EKN CWR (ARDI)
Nyaruguru UNICEF EKN CWR (ARDI)
Huye CIFF CIFF MoH & MINAGRI
Nyamagabe UNICEF EKN, SDC (One UN) WRR, WVR
Ruhango USAID USAID Caritas
Muhanga UNICEF EKN CRS (Caritas Kabgayi)
Kamonyi UNICEF EKN ADRA
West
Karongi UNICEF EKN CRS (EPR)
Rutsiro UNICEF EKN, SDC (One UN) WRR, WVR, Caritas
Rubavu UNICEF GoN, USAID AP
Nyabihu USAID USAID TBD (INGO)
Ngororero CIFF CIFF MoH & MINAGRI
Rusizi UNICEF GoN WRR (from 2015)
Nyamasheke UNICEF EKN, IKEA WVR
North
Rulindo CIFF CIFF MoH & MINAGRI
Gakenke UNICEF GoN, USAID, IKEA AP
Musanze UNICEF GoN, USAID AP
Burera UNICEF GoN Dir. district support
Gicumbi UNICEF EKN, IKEA WVR
East
Rwamagana USAID USAID AEE
Nyagatare CIFF CIFF MoH & MINAGRI
Gatsibo UNICEF EKN ADRA
Kayonza USAID USAID TBD (INGO)
Kirehe UNICEF GoN Dir. district support
Ngoma USAID USAID TBD (INGO)
Bugesera UNICEF GoN, USAID AP
Note: Timeline showing approximate start and end dates with current funding Source: Stakeholder interviews

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
43
Other partners and programs are also present in the districts
Province District Organization Donor(s) Implementing partn. Other stakeholders working in district1
Kigali City
Nyarugenge USAID USAID TBD (INGO) GFYA (FAO, GG)
Gasabo UNICEF GoN, USAID, IKEA WRR (from 2015) GFH (GHI), GFYA (FAO, GG), SFH (USAID), WVR (WVI), GC (USAID/HU closed 2015, T from 2015)
Kicukiro USAID USAID TBD (INGO) GFYA (FAO, GG), SFH (USAID/EH), WVR (WVI)
South
Nyanza USAID USAID FXB SFH (USAID), GC (USAID/EH), AVSI (3x), SaCR (Oxfam,SaC,DFID GPAF)
Gisagara UNICEF EKN CWR (ARDI) SFH (USAID), GC (USAID/EH), CUR (CUL)
Nyaruguru UNICEF EKN CWR (ARDI) Caritas (USAID), SFH (USAID), GC (USAID/EH), WVR (WVI), SaCR (Oxfam,SaC,DFID GPAF)
Huye CIFF CIFF MoH & MINAGRI
CWR (IA cl.'15), SFH (USAID), GC (USAID/EH & T 2015), WVR (WVI), CUR (CUL), CRS
(KGM-cl.2014)
Nyamagabe UNICEF EKN, SDC (One UN) WRR, WVR CWR (IA cl.'15), Caritas (USAID), One UN (SDC), WVR (SDC), GC (USAID/EH), CRS (KGM-cl.2014)
Ruhango USAID USAID Caritas Caritas (USAID), SFH (USAID), AVSI (3x), GC (USAID/HU closed 2015)
Muhanga UNICEF EKN CRS (Caritas Kabgayi) Caritas (USAID), SFH (USAID), GC (USAID/HU closed 2015)
Kamonyi UNICEF EKN ADRA CARE (USAID - closed Mar 2015), Caritas (USAID), SFH (USAID), AVSI (3x), GC (USAID/HU cl. 2015)
West
Karongi UNICEF EKN CRS (EPR) Caritas (USAID), SFH (USAID), GC (USAID/EH), WVR (WVI)
Rutsiro UNICEF EKN, SDC (One UN) WRR, WVR, Caritas Caritas (USAID), SFH (USAID), One UN (SDC, EKN), GC (USAID/EH), WVR (WVI, Koica)
Rubavu UNICEF GoN, USAID AP SFH (USAID), GC (USAID/HU closed 2015)
Nyabihu USAID USAID TBD (INGO) GC (USAID/HU closed 2015)
Ngororero CIFF CIFF MoH & MINAGRI Caritas (USAID), SFH (USAID), GC (USAID/EH)
Rusizi UNICEF GoN WRR (from 2015) FHI360 (USAID), SFH (USAID)
Nyamasheke UNICEF EKN, IKEA WVR SFH (USAID)
North
Rulindo CIFF CIFF MoH & MINAGRI SFH (USAID), WVR (WVI), SaCR (UKAID,Oxfam,Gates Fundation,SaC), GC (USAID/HU closed 2015)
Gakenke UNICEF GoN, USAID, IKEA AP SFH (USAID), WVR (WVI), GC (USAID/HU closed 2015)
Musanze UNICEF GoN, USAID AP GFH (GHI), SFH (USAID), GC (USAID/T - from 2015)
Burera UNICEF GoN Dir. district support PIH (PIH), GC (USAID/T - from end 2015)
Gicumbi UNICEF EKN, IKEA WVR SFH (USAID), AVSI (3x), GC (USAID/HU closed 2015)
East
Rwamagana USAID USAID AEE SFH (USAID), SaCR (Oxfam,SaC,FONERWA)
Nyagatare CIFF CIFF MoH & MINAGRI SFH (USAID), GC (USAID/HU closed 2015)
Gatsibo UNICEF EKN ADRA Caritas (USAID), AVSI (3x), WVR (WVI)
Kayonza USAID USAID TBD (INGO) ADRA (CFGB), SFH (USAID), WVR (WVI) PIH (PIH), SaCR (UKAID,Oxfam,Gates Fundation,SaC)
Kirehe UNICEF GoN Dir. district support SFH (USAID), PIH (PIH)
Ngoma USAID USAID TBD (INGO) IRC (EU), SFH (USAID)
Backup
Note: Overview showing main catalysts and implementing leads only (with donor in parentheses), but not local implementing partners 1. NB! Overview is not exhaustive

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
44
Program overview from 2016 – with implementing partners
Nyagatare
Gatsibo
Kayonza
Karongi
Bugesera
Rusizi
Nyamasheke
Kirehe
Ngoma
Rwamagana
Nyaruguru
Nyamagabe
Rulindo
Gicumbi
Huye
Nyanza
Musanze
Burera
Gakenke
Ngororero
Nyabihu
Ruhango
Muhanga
Kamonyi
Gisagara
Rubavu
City of Kigali
Rutsiro
City of Kigali
KicukiroNyarugenge
USAID
CIFF
UNICE
F
Gasabo
WRR'15
8
districts4
districts18
districts
WVR
WRR
'15
CWR
CWR
WRR, WVR
CRS
WRR, WVR
AP
AP
DS
AP
CRS
ADRA
AP DS
ADRAWVR
FxB
TBD
TBDAEE
TBD
Caritas
TBD TBD
DS
DS
DS
DS
Note: DS = Direct Support, TBD = To Be Decided
Source: Stakeholder interviews

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
45
USD 30+ million in nutrition specific funding on these
programs alone
Donor
Total funding
in USD
Years of
funding
Funding per
year in USD
EKN 17,720,000 3 5,906,667
GoN 6,550,000 4 1,637,500
USAID 1,800,000 3 600,000
IKEA 524,000 2 262,000
UNICEF RR 800,000 4 200,000
SDC 4,900,000 3 1,633,333
USAID 28,800,000 5 5,760,000
CIFF 16,450,000 4 4,112,500
Total nutrition program
funding 77,544,000 20,112,000
EU (Budget support) 33,000,000 3 11,000,000
Total incl. EU budget
support 110,544,000 31,112,000
Over USD 30 million in yearly funding for
next year.. …or ~20 USD per child u51
Pregnant &
Lactating
Women
Target
group USD per
year
USD per
year
Children
u5
Children
u2
6
4
0'
9
7
0'
1,
5
5
0'
Tot
al
#
1. Graph is showing total funding per year divided by total target group, so can not add together figures for Children u2, PLWs and Children u5
Source: Stakeholder interviews, Rwanda National Census

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
46
Agenda
Appendix

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
47
Overview of core nutrition action categories and roles (1/2)
DonorsCatalysts Field implementersAction category
Responsible
Ministries
MIYCN
MoH
(MIDIMAR –
refugee camps)
UNICEF,
WHO, WFP,
UNHCR,
StC, CRS,
IRC, CHAI
CWR, Caritas, GHI, FHI360, SFH, PIH,
GC, ADRA, Care, WVR, WRR, CUR,
EPR, DUHAMIC ADRI, ADEPR, AEE,
BENISHYAKA, RWARRI
EKN, Irish Aid, SDC, USAID,
GHI, PIH, EU, CFGB, WVI,
IKEA, Koica, WRI, CUL,
UNICEF
Micronutrient
supplementation
MoH UNICEF,
UBC, CRS
ADRA, AP, CWR, WVR, WRR,
Caritas, EPR
EKN, Irish Aid, SDC, WVI,
IKEA, UNICEF
Management of
MAM/SAM
MoH
(MIDIMAR –
refugee camps)
UNICEF,
WHO,
WFP,
UNHCR
CWR, Caritas, GFYA, FHI360, PIH,
ADRA, WVR, RWARRI
Irish Aid, USAID, FAO, GG,
PIH, CFGB, WVI, Koica, EKN,
UNICEF, IKEA, GoN
Disease
Prevention /
Management
MoH UNICEF,
WHO
Several NGOs support campaigns,
e.g. ADRA, CWR and WVR
UNICEF
Maternal,
Neonatal &
Child Health
MoH UNICEF,
WHO, CRS,
GC, AP,
IRC
Caritas, GHI, FHI360, SFH, PIH,
ADRA, CARE, WRR, BENISHYAKA,
RWARRI, EPR, WIF,
DUHAMIC-ADRI, ADEPR + several
supporting screening
USAID, GHI, PIH, EU, CFGB,
MoH, UNICEF, GoN, EKN,
WRI, SDC, IKEA
Note: For explanation on abbreviations, see the full list of stakeholders Source: Rwanda Stakeholder & Action Mapping 2014/15

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
48
Overview of core nutrition action categories and roles (2/2)
DonorsCatalysts Field implementersAction category
Responsible
Ministries
Food &
Agriculture
MINAGRI FAO,
UNICEF,
RCA, CRS,
CWR, IRC,
GC, CIAT
EKN, Irish Aid, GHI, USAID,
FAO, GG, KGM, PIH, EU, AVSI,
FdH, CFGB, WVI, IKEA, Koica,
WRI, SDC, Oxfam, SaC, DFID,
UKAID, Gates, Fonerwa, IFAD,
UNICEF,CASACHI,DFATD, ADB
Nutrition
education
MoH,
MINEDUC,
MINAGRI
UNICEF,
WHO, CRS,
AP, IRC,
GC, StC
CWR, Caritas, GHI, GFYA, FHI360,
SFH, PIH, GC, AVSI, ADRA, CARE,
WVR, WRR, SaCR, CUR, EPR, RNS,
DUHAMIC ADRI, ADEPR, AEE,
BENISHYAKA, RWARRI, WIF
EKN, Irish Aid, GG, USAID,
GHI, FAO, KGM, SUN, PIH, EU,
FdH, AVSI, CFGB, CASASHI,
WVI, Koica, IKEA, WRI,
UNICEF, SDC, Oxfam, SaC,
DFID, UKAID, Gates, Fonerwa,
CUL, ADB
WASH
MoH (hygiene)
MININFRA
(water & sanit.)
MINEDUC
(schools)
UNICEF,
WHO,
CRS, StC,
WaterAid,
AP, GC
EKN, WaterAid, Irish Aid, WVI,
USAID, GHI, KGM, FdH, AVSI,
CASASHI, CFGB, WRI,
UNICEF, SDC, GoN, IKEA,
Oxfam, SaC, Fonerwa, UKAID,
Gates, DFID
Social
Protection
MINALOC,
(MINAGRI &
MINEDUC for
school feeding)
UNICEF,
WFP, CRS,
RAB
CWR, EPR, Caritas, SDA Iriba EKN, Irish Aid, KGM, EU, DFID
WaterAid, CWR, Caritas, GHI,
FHI360, SFH, GC, AVSI, ADRA,
CARE, WRR, SaCR, WVR, EPR,
COFORWA, ADEPR, DUHAMIC
ADRI, AEE, MLFM, APH, RWARRI,
WIF, SNV
Caritas, GHI, GFYA, FHI360, PIH, GC,
AVSI, ADRA, CARE, WVR, WRR,
SaCR, EPR, ARDI, KOAKAKA Local
cooperatives, DUHAMIC ADRI, HIR,
ADEPR, AEE, BENISHYAKA,
RWARRI, ICYUZUZO, SINAPISI, WIF
Note: For explanation on abbreviations, see the full list of stakeholders Source: Rwanda Stakeholder & Action Mapping 2014/15

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
49
Explanation of stakeholder roles
Responsible Ministries – Responsible Ministries are the Ministries that take a lead role in
management of a core nutrition action. The majority of actions are under the Ministry of
Health as they are nutrition-specific or health related, but several are also under MINAGRI
(food & agriculture), MINEDUC (schools & school children), MININFRA (water & sanitation)
and MINALOC (social security)
Field Implementers – Field implementers are the organisations implementing a core nutrition
action. A number of international and local NGOs are field implementers, often through
public infrastructure and resources such as health facilities, community health workers and
schools
Catalysts – Catalysts give support and overview to the organisations carrying out the core
nutrition action. They can also be technical leads for several other organizations. The
catalysts are comprised of a number of UN agencies and international NGOs supporting the
government or subcontracting to other organisations
Donors – Donors provide financial support to allow core nutrition actions to be carried out.
Key donors include multilateral and bilateral organisations, trusts and foundations and also
include the government itself
Backup

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
50
Agenda
Appendix

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
51
Key messages on where the stakeholders are working
All districts have partners working on food & nutrition in their districts:
• However, the number of partners supporting the districts varies widely (from 3 to 13 partners)
The number of Core Nutrition Actions supported by a partner varies substantially
• Some partners are supporting up to 15 (of 23) different Core Nutrition Actions, while others are supporting only one Core
Nutrition Action
• All Core Nutrition Actions are thus not conducted in all districts
There is large variation in the number of sectors that a partner is covering in a district
• Some partners are covering all sectors in a given district, while others may only be supporting 1-2 sectors
• Other partners are only supporting the central district level, e.g. central level coordination and capacity, not direct
implementation at the beneficiary level
• Even though all sectors are covered, that does not necessarily mean that all Core Nutrition Actions are done in all sectors, that
all villages in each sector is supported, or that all beneficiaries are covered
The overview of what partners are working where is only a snapshot of the current situation
• Some projects are being finalized, and others are starting up, so the situation is continuously changing
The geographical mapping builds on the qualitative reporting input provided by the stakeholders in the first phase of the
mapping, and it will thus not necessarily be one to one with the quantitative mapping of beneficiary coverage
• This is e.g. because some districts where not supported in 2014, some CNAs were not carried out in 2014, some data is
provided from central level, data may not be available, etc.
Source: Rwanda Stakeholder & Action Mapping 2014/15

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
52
What catalysts & implementers are working in which districts?
Nyagatare
Gatsibo
Kayonza
Karongi
Bugesera
Rusizi
Nyamasheke
Kirehe
Ngoma
Rwamagana
Nyaruguru
Nyamagabe
Rulindo
Gicumbi
Huye
Nyanza
Musanze
Burera
Gakenke
Nyabihu
Ruhango
Muhanga
Kamonyi
Gisagara
Rubavu
City of Kigali
Rutsiro
City of Kigali
Kicukiro
Gasabo
Nyarugenge
UNICEF
CIAT
GFYA
GFYA
SFH1
WVR
UNICEF
CIAT
GHI
GC
GFYA
SFH1
WVR
UNICEF
PIH
SFH1
HIR
UNICEF
CIAT
SaCR
SFH1
AP
UNICEF
FAO
CIAT
SaCR
SFH1
AP2
WaterAid
WVR
HIR
GC
SaCR
WVR
UNICEF
ADRA2
AVSI
CARE
Caritas
CIAT
GC
SFH1
HIR
UNICEF
Caritas
CIAT
CRS2
GC
SFH1
UNICEF
WFP
FAO
CUR
CWR2
GC
SFH1
CUR
CIAT
CWR
CRS
GC
SFH1
WVR
UNICEF
WFP
FAO
Caritas
CWR2
GC
SaCR
SFH1
WVR
One UN3
UNICEF3
WFP3
WHO3
FAO3
Caritas
CIAT
CWR
CRS
GC
SFH1
WRR4
WVR4
UNICEF
FAO
FHI 360
SFH1
HIR
UNICEF
FAO
CIAT
GHI
GC
SFH1
AP2
HIR
UNICEF
FAO
GC
SFH1
AP2
UNICEF
FAO
GC
SFH1
AP
HIR
Note: The map shows all organizations that
have provided mapping input, but it does
not show whether they are using anyone as
field implementers in the different districts.
Color code explanations:
Project end in 2015
Mostly central district level support
1. SFH is mostly doing social marketing through local CBOs
2. Implementing partner for UNICEF EKN/GoN program
3. One UN Joint Nutrition Program (SDC funded)
4. Implementing partner for One UN SDC program
Ngororero
CIAT
GC
SFH1
HIR
ADRA
CIAT
PIH
SaCR
SFH1
WVR
HIR
FAO
Caritas
GC
SFH1
AP
UNICEF
IRC
SFH1
AP
UNICEF
FAO
AVSI
Caritas
GC
SFH1
HIR
UNICEF
WFP
FAO
Caritas
CIAT
CRS2
GC
SFH1
WVR
One UN3
UNICEF3
WFP3
WHO3
FAO3
Caritas
GC
SFH1
WRR4
WVR4
AVSI
GC
SaCR
SFH1
AP
UNICEF
CIAT
GC
PIH
UNICEF
FAO
GC
SFH1
AP2
WVR
UNICEF
WFP
AVSI
CIAT
GC
SFH1
WVR2
UNICEF
WFP
FAO
ADRA2
AVSI
Caritas
CIAT
WVR
HIR
UNICEF
FAO
SFH1
WVR2
HIR
NB! Only shows stakeholders who have reported

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
53
And how many Core Nutrition Actions (CNAs) are they conducting?
Nyagatare
Gatsibo
Kayonza
Karongi
Bugesera
Rusizi
Nyamasheke
Kirehe
Ngoma
Rwamagana
Nyaruguru
Nyamagabe
Rulindo
Gicumbi
Huye
Nyanza
Musanze
Burera
Gakenke
Ngororero
Nyabihu
Ruhango
Muhanga
Kamonyi
Gisagara
Rubavu
City of Kigali
Rutsiro
City of Kigali
Kicukiro
Gasabo
Nyarugenge
CIAT
GC
SFH1
HIR
UNICEF
WFP
FAO
ADRA2
AVSI
Caritas
CIAT
WVR
HIR
UNICEF
CIAT
GFYA
GFYA
SFH1
WVR
UNICEF
CIAT
GHI
GC
GFYA
SFH1
WVR
ADRA
CIAT
PIH
SaCR
SFH1
WVR
HIR
UNICEF
PIH
SFH1
HIR
UNICEF
CIAT
SaCR
SFH1
AP
UNICEF
IRC
SFH1
AP
UNICEF
WFP
AVSI
CIAT
GC
SFH1
WVR2
UNICEF
FAO
CIAT
SaCR
SFH1
AP2
WaterAid
WVR
HIR
GC
SaCR
WVR
UNICEF
ADRA2
AVSI
CARE
Caritas
CIAT
GC
SFH1
HIR
UNICEF
Caritas
CIAT
CRS2
GC
SFH1
UNICEF
WFP
FAO
CUR
CWR2
GC
SFH1
CUR
CIAT
CWR
CRS
GC
SFH1
WVR
AVSI
GC
SaCR
SFH1
AP
UNICEF
WFP
FAO
Caritas
CWR2
GC
SaCR
SFH1
WVR
One UN3
UNICEF3
WFP3
WHO3
FAO3
Caritas
CIAT
CWR
CRS
GC
SFH1
WRR4
WVR4
UNICEF
FAO
FHI 360
SFH1
HIR
UNICEF
FAO
SFH1
WVR2
HIR
UNICEF
FAO
AVSI
Caritas
GC
SFH1
HIR
UNICEF
WFP
FAO
Caritas
CIAT
CRS2
GC
SFH1
WVR
One UN3
UNICEF3
WFP3
WHO3
FAO3
Caritas
GC
SFH1
WRR4
WVR4
UNICEF
FAO
GC
SFH1
AP2
WVR
UNICEF
CIAT
GC
PIH
FAO
Caritas
GC
SFH1
AP
UNICEF
FAO
CIAT
GHI
GC
SFH1
AP2
HIR
UNICEF
FAO
GC
SFH1
AP2
UNICEF
FAO
GC
SFH1
AP
HIR
Project end in 2015
CNAs covered:
1 CNA
2-4 CNAs
5-9 CNAs
10-15 CNAs
16-23 CNAs

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
54
How many CNAs are they working on, and how many sectors are they covering?
Nyagatare
Gatsibo
Kayonza
Karongi
Bugesera
Rusizi
Nyamasheke
Kirehe
Ngoma
Rwamagana
Nyaruguru
Nyamagabe
Rulindo
Gicumbi
Huye
Nyanza
Musanze
Burera
Gakenke
Ngororero
Nyabihu
Ruhango
Muhanga
Kamonyi
Gisagara
Rubavu
City of Kigali
Rutsiro
City of Kigali
Kicukiro
Gasabo
Nyarugenge
Project end in 2015
% of sectors covered:
0-25% of sectors
26-50% of
sectors
51-75% of
sectors
76-99% of
sectors
100% of sectors
UNICEF
CIAT
GFYA
GFYA
SFH1
WVR
UNICEF
CIAT
GHI
GC
GFYA
SFH1
WVR
ADRA
CIAT
PIH
SaCR
SFH1
WVR
HIR
UNICEF
PIH
SFH1
HIR
UNICEF
IRC
SFH1
AP
UNICEF
FAO
CIAT
SaCR
SFH1
AP2
WaterAid
WVR
HIR
GC
SaCR
WVR
UNICEF
ADRA2
AVSI
CARE
Caritas
CIAT
GC
SFH1
HIR
UNICEF
Caritas
CIAT
CRS2
GC
SFH1
UNICEF
WFP
FAO
CUR
CWR2
GC
SFH1
CUR
CIAT
CWR
CRS
GC
SFH1
WVR
AVSI
GC
SaCR
SFH1
AP
UNICEF
WFP
FAO
Caritas
CWR2
GC
SaCR
SFH1
WVR
One UN3
UNICEF3
WFP3
WHO3
FAO3
Caritas
CIAT
CWR
CRS
GC
SFH1
WRR4
WVR4
UNICEF
FAO
FHI 360
SFH1
HIR
UNICEF
FAO
SFH1
WVR2
HIR
UNICEF
FAO
AVSI
Caritas
GC
SFH1
HIR
UNICEF
WFP
FAO
Caritas
CIAT
CRS2
GC
SFH1
WVR
One UN3
UNICEF3
WFP3
WHO3
FAO3
Caritas
GC
SFH1
WRR4
WVR4
FAO
Caritas
GC
SFH1
AP
UNICEF
FAO
GC
SFH1
AP2
UNICEF
FAO
GC
SFH1
AP
HIR
CNAs covered:
1 CNA
2-4 CNAs
5-9 CNAs
10-15 CNAs
16-23 CNAs
CIAT
GC
SFH1
HIR
UNICEF
CIAT
SaCR
SFH1
AP
UNICEF
FAO
CIAT
GHI
GC
SFH1
AP2
HIR
UNICEF
CIAT
GC
PIH
UNICEF
FAO
GC
SFH1
AP2
WVR
UNICEF
WFP
AVSI
CIAT
GC
SFH1
WVR2
UNICEF
WFP
FAO
ADRA2
AVSI
Caritas
CIAT
WVR
HIR

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
55
How many CNAs are they working on, and what districts does not have support in all sectors?
Nyagatare
Gatsibo
Kayonza
Karongi
Bugesera
Rusizi
Nyamasheke
Kirehe
Ngoma
Rwamagana
Nyaruguru
Nyamagabe
Rulindo
Gicumbi
Huye
Nyanza
Musanze
Burera
Gakenke
Ngororero
Nyabihu
Ruhango
Muhanga
Kamonyi
Gisagara
Rubavu
City of Kigali
Rutsiro
City of Kigali
Kicukiro
Gasabo
Nyarugenge
CIAT
GC
SFH1
HIR
UNICEF
CIAT
GFYA
GFYA
SFH1
WVR
UNICEF
CIAT
GHI
GC
GFYA
SFH1
WVR
ADRA
CIAT
PIH
SaCR
SFH1
WVR
HIR
UNICEF
PIH
SFH1
HIR
UNICEF
CIAT
SaCR
SFH1
AP
UNICEF
IRC
SFH1
AP
UNICEF
FAO
CIAT
SaCR
SFH1
AP2
WaterAid
WVR
HIR
GC
SaCR
WVR
UNICEF
ADRA2
AVSI
CARE
Caritas
CIAT
GC
SFH1
HIR
UNICEF
Caritas
CIAT
CRS2
GC
SFH1
UNICEF
WFP
FAO
CUR
CWR2
GC
SFH1
CUR
CIAT
CWR
CRS
GC
SFH1
WVR
AVSI
GC
SaCR
SFH1
AP
UNICEF
WFP
FAO
Caritas
CWR2
GC
SaCR
SFH1
WVR
One UN3
UNICEF3
WFP3
WHO3
FAO3
Caritas
CIAT
CWR
CRS
GC
SFH1
WRR4
WVR4
UNICEF
FAO
FHI 360
SFH1
HIR
UNICEF
FAO
SFH1
WVR2
HIR
UNICEF
FAO
AVSI
Caritas
GC
SFH1
HIR
UNICEF
WFP
FAO
Caritas
CIAT
CRS2
GC
SFH1
WVR
One UN3
UNICEF3
WFP3
WHO3
FAO3
Caritas
GC
SFH1
WRR4
WVR4
FAO
Caritas
GC
SFH1
AP
UNICEF
FAO
GC
SFH1
AP2
UNICEF
FAO
GC
SFH1
AP
HIR
Project end in 2015
CNAs covered:
1 CNA
2-4 CNAs
5-9 CNAs
10-15 CNAs
16-23 CNAs
% of sectors covered:
0-25% of sectors
26-50% of
sectors
51-75% of
sectors
76-99% of
sectors
100% of sectors
Backup
UNICEF
FAO
CIAT
GHI
GC
SFH1
AP2
HIR
UNICEF
CIAT
GC
PIH
UNICEF
FAO
GC
SFH1
AP2
WVR
UNICEF
WFP
AVSI
CIAT
GC
SFH1
WVR2
UNICEF
WFP
FAO
ADRA2
AVSI
Caritas
CIAT
WVR
HIR

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
56
What other implementing partners have they reported?
Nyagatare
Gatsibo
Kayonza
Karongi
Bugesera
Rusizi
Nyamasheke
Kirehe
Ngoma
Rwamagana
Nyaruguru
Nyamagabe
Rulindo
Gicumbi
Huye
Nyanza
Musanze
Burera
Gakenke
Nyabihu
Ruhango
Muhanga
Kamonyi
Gisagara
Rubavu
City of Kigali
Rutsiro
City of Kigali
Kicukiro
Gasabo
Nyarugenge
SFH1
:
LCBOs
UNICEF:
WRR'15
GC:
ICYUZUZO
SINAPISI
CRS
SFH1
:
LCBOs
SFH1
:
LCBOs
SFH1
:
LCBOs
UNICEF:
AP2
WaterAid:
COFORWA
SFH1
:
LCBOs
GC:
DUHAMIC
-ADRI
WIF
CRS
UNICEF:
ADRA2
:
RWARI
AVSI:
MLFM
GC:
DUHAMIC-A
DRI,
EPR, CRS
SFH1
:
LCBOs
UNICEF:
CRS2
Caritas
GC:
DUHAMIC-
ADRI, CRS
SFH1
:
LCBOs
UNICEF:
CWR2
:
ARDI
GC:
DUHAMIC-ADRI
AEE
ADEPR
StC
SFH1
:
LCBOs
CWR:
ARDI
SDA IRIBA
CRS:
Caritas
GC:
DUHAMIC-A
DRI. AEE
ADEPR,StC
SFH1
:
LCBOs
UNICEF:
CWR2
ARDI
SDA Iriba
GC:
DUHAMIC-A
DRI.
ADEPR, StC
SFH1
:
LCBOs
One UN3
WRR4
WVR4
CWR:
ARDI
SDA Iriba
CRS:
Caritas
GC:
DUHAMIC-
ADRI. AEE
ADEPR,StC
SFH1
:
LCBOs
UNICEF:
WRR'15
FHI 360:
Local Coops
SFH1
:
LCBOs
UNICEF:
AP2
SNV
GC:
ADEPR
CRS
SFH1
;
LCBOs
UNICEF:
AP2
GC:
ADEPR
CRS
SFH1
:
LCBOs
UNICEF:
SNV
GC:
ADEPR
CRS
SFH1
:
LCBOs
Catalyst / Lead
Project end in 2015
Ngororero
GC:
EPR
SFH1
:
LCBOs
ADRA:
RWARRI
SFH1
:
LCBOs
GC:
Caritas
ADEPR
StC
SFH1
:
LCBOs
IRC:
BENISHYAKA
SFH1
:
LCBOs
AVSI:
MLFM
GC:
DUHAMIC-ADRI,
CRS
SFH1
:
LCBOs
UNICEF:
CRS2
EPR
GC:
Caritas
ADEPR
StC
SFH1
:
LCBOs
One UN3
:
WRR4
Caritas'15
WVR4
'15
GC:
Caritas
ADEPR
StC
SFH1
:
LCBOs
AVSI:
MLFM
GC:
DUHAMIC-ADRI
ADEPR, StC
SFH1
:
LCBOs
UNICEF:
SNV
UNICEF:
AP2
GC:
ADEPR
WIF, CRS
SFH1
:
LCBOs
UNICEF:
WVR2
AVSI:
MLFM, APH
GC:
ADEPR, CRS
SFH1
:
LCBOs
UNICEF:A
DRA2
RWARRI
AVSI:
MLFM
UNICEF:
WVR2
SFH1
:
LCBOs
Shows stakeholders who have reported to work
with other implementing partners
Backup

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
57
Where are the ministries working?
And how many Core Nutrition Actions (CNAs) are they conducting?
Nyagatare
Gatsibo
Kayonza
Karongi
Bugesera
Rusizi
Nyamasheke
Kirehe
Ngoma
Rwamagana
Nyaruguru
Nyamagabe
Rulindo
Gicumbi
Huye
Nyanza
Musanze
Burera
Gakenke
Ngororero
Nyabihu
Ruhango
Muhanga
Kamonyi
Gisagara
Rubavu
City of Kigali
Rutsiro
City of Kigali
Kicukiro
Gasabo
Nyarugenge
MoH
MINAGRI
MINALOC
MINEDUC
MIGEPROF
MoH
MINAGRI
MINALOC
MINEDUC
MIGEPROF
MoH
MINAGRI
MINALOC
MINEDUC
MIGEPROF
MoH
MINAGRI
MINALOC
MINEDUC
MIGEPROF
MoH
MINAGRI
MINALOC
MINEDUC
MIGEPROF
MoH
MINAGRI
MINALOC
MINEDUC
MIGEPROF
MoH
MINAGRI
MINALOC
MINEDUC
MIGEPROF
MoH
MINAGRI
MINALOC
MINEDUC
MIGEPROF
MoH
MINAGRI
MINALOC
MINEDUC
MIGEPROF
MoH
MINAGRI
MINALOC
MINEDUC
MIGEPROF
MoH
MINAGRI
MINALOC
MINEDUC
MIGEPROF
MoH
MINAGRI
MINALOC
MINEDUC
MIGEPROF
MoH
MINAGRI
MINALOC
MINEDUC
MIGEPROF
MoH
MINAGRI
MINALOC
MINEDUC
MIGEPROF
MoH
MINAGRI
MINALOC
MINEDUC
MIGEPROF
MoH
MINAGRI
MINALOC
MINEDUC
MIGEPROF
MoH
MINAGRI
MINALOC
MINEDUC
MIGEPROF
MoH
MINAGRI
MINALOC
MINEDUC
MIGEPROF
MoH
MINAGRI
MINALOC
MINEDUC
MIGEPROF
MoH
MINAGRI
MINALOC
MINEDUC
MIGEPROF
MoH
MINAGRI
MINALOC
MINEDUC
MIGEPROF
MoH
MINAGRI
MINALOC
MINEDUC
MIGEPROF
MoH
MINAGRI
MINALOC
MINEDUC
MIGEPROF
MoH
MINAGRI
MINALOC
MINEDUC
MIGEPROF
MoH
MINAGRI
MINALOC
MINEDUC
MIGEPROF
MoH
MINAGRI
MINALOC
MINEDUC
MIGEPROF
MoH
MINAGRI
MINALOC
MINEDUC
MIGEPROF
MoH
MINAGRI
MINALOC
MINEDUC
MIGEPROF
MoH
MINAGRI
MINALOC
MINEDUC
MIGEPROF
CNAs covered:
1 CNA
2-4 CNAs
5-9 CNAs
10-15 CNAs
16-23 CNAs
MoH
MINAGRI
MINALOC
MINEDUC
MIGEPROF
Backup
Note: The ministries are often working through their implementing agencies, such as RBC, REB, RAB, NWC and LODA, and through the public infrastructure (health facilities, schools, etc.)

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
58
Agenda
Appendix

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
59
Key messages on coverage of Core Nutrition Actions
Geographic coverage of Core Nutrition Actions (CNAs):
• 14 of 23 CNAs are being conducted in all districts
• 6 of 23 CNAs are conducted in 15-29 districts
• 3 of 23 CNAs are conducted in less than 10 districts
• South, West and North with the most support and highest coverage
• Low coverage in Kigali City, but also because people here tend to be better off (high development score)
Beneficiary coverage
• Only 5 CNAs have more than 75% of beneficiaries covered
• 4 CNAs have between 50-75% coverage, 4 CNAs have between 25-50% coverage, and 4 CNAs have below
25% coverage
• 6 CNAs are measured as additional %-points reached, ranging from 1 to 8 additional %-points reached
Action category coverage
• Health categories in general have the highest coverage, though some CNAs are lagging behind also here
(e.g. diarrhoea treatment, 4+ ANC visits and SAM/MAM treatment)
• Nutrition education, including promotion of breast feeding, complementary feeding, and promotion of
hygiene and hand washing have lower coverage than ideal, and should be increased
• WASH has in general low coverage, but that may also be due to low participation rates from WASH partners
• Delivery mechanism analysis could be one source of information to discuss how to best scale up CNAs

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
60
What % of the target group is covered nationally and how? (1/2)
Country relevant actions
# of districts
covered Key delivery mechanisms
CHWs, HFs, Women/Mother groups,
Mass campaigns, PD/H
CHWs, Health centers, UN agencies,
NGOs
CHWs, Health centers, UN agencies
CHWs, Health centers,
Mass campaigns
CHWs, Health centers, Hospitals
Health centers, Hospitals
CHWs, Health centers, PD/H,
Women/Mother groups
CHWs, Health centers, NGOs
Target groups (TG)
Pregnant & lactating women
HHs with children u5 (CBNP)
% of TG
covered
Children 6-23 months
Children 0-59 months with severe
diarrhoea
Children 0-59 months with SAM
Children 0-59 months with MAM
CHWs, HFs, Women/Mother groups,
Mass campaigns, PD/H
20 / 30
23 / 30
4 / 30
7 / 301
30 / 30
30 / 30
30 / 30
30 / 30
Promote optimal
breastfeeding practices
Provide spec. nutritious
products for CF
Promote optimal compl.
feeding practices
Provide diarrhoea treatment
(w/ ORS/zinc)
Provide MNP supplements
(Ongera)
Provide treatment
of SAM
Support and provide
treatment of MAM
MIYCN
Disease
prev./mgmt
Micronutrient
supplementation
MAM/SAM
Provide Vitamin A
supplements
CHWs, Health centers,
Mass campaigns
30 / 30
Conduct child growth
monitoring / screening
Promote/Provide
ANC visits (4+)
MCH
CHWs, Health centers, HospitalsPregnant women30 / 30
CHWs, Health centers, HospitalsPregnant women30 / 30
HHs with children u5 (CBNP)
6-23 months in Ubudehe 1&2
PLW in Ubudehe 1&2
Children 5-15 years
0-25%
26-50 51-75 76-100
1 / 30
30 / 30
30 / 30
1. MNP program (Ongera) is being scaled up, and is in the 2nd half of 2015 in 18 districts
30 / 30
As reported in SUNPMT tool

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
61
What % of the target group is covered nationally and how? (2/2)
# of districts
covered Key delivery mechanisms
FFLS, Agriculture village promotors,
Coops, RAB
CHWs, Coops, NGOs
CHWs, Agriculture village promotors,
FFLS, Mass campaigns, PD/H
Pre-schools, Primary schools,
Secondary schools
Districts, UN agencies, NGOs, CHCs,
Women/mother groups
CHWs, CHCs, FFLS, Community
meetings, PD/H, Mass campaigns
VUP, Social services, FFLS,
Community leaders
Primary schools
Target groups (TG)
% of TG
covered1
Smallholder farming households
Households in Ubudehe 1 & 2
Mothers / Caregivers
Schools
Households in Ubudehe 1 & 23
CHWs, Coops, PD/H, NGOs
30 / 30
27 / 30
28 / 30
29 / 30
30 / 30
30 / 30
15 / 30
Provide materials & techn. for
small-scale horticulture
Provide animals for
small-scale husbandry
Promote food preservation
and storage
Provide input for production &
cons. of biofortified crops
Provide/Support improved
water source
sanitation
Carry out nutr. education
(e.g. cooking demos)
Promote hygiene / hand
washing
Provide conditional social
safety net actions (VUP)
Food&AgricultureWASH2Nutrition
education
Carry out nutr. education at
school (e.g. school gardens)
Districts, UN agencies, NGOs,
Community leaders
Provide school feeding
(One Cup of Milk)
Social
security
CHWs, Coops, NGOs
Household with children under 530 / 30
Household with children under 5
Households
Schools
Households
Schools
Schools
Primary school children
Primary schools
+8%
+3%
+5%
+4%
+1%
0%
+1%
+1%
0-25%
26-50 51-75 76-100
9 / 30
21 / 30
28 / 30
5 / 30
1 / 30
4 / 30
1. Beneficiary coverage displayed as "+X%" represents the additional %-points of households reached over the last calendar year (2014).
2. Have received limited input from WASH stakeholders (who have separate technical working groups), and actual geographic and beneficiary coverage is probably higher
3. Not all Households in Ubudehe 1 & 2 are targets for the Vision Umurenge 2020 Program (aiming mostly for those without employment), so not necessarily aiming for 100% coverage here

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
62
What % of the target group is covered per province? (1/2)
Target groups
(TG)
PLW
HHs w/ children u5
Children 0-59 mths
with severe diarrhoea
with SAM
with MAM
Promote optimal
breastfeeding practices
Provide spec. nutritious
products for CF
Promote optimal compl.
feeding practices
Provide Fe+FA
supplements
Provide deworming
tablets
Provide diarrhoea
treatment (w/ ORS/zinc)
Provide MNP
supplements (Ongera)
Provide treatment
of SAM
Support and provide
treatment of MAM
MIYCN
Disease
prev./mgmt
Micronutrient
supplementation
MAM/SAM
Provide Vitamin A
supplements
Conduct child growth
Promote/Provide
ANC visits (4+)
MCH
Pregnant women
Pregnant women
PLW
HHs w/ children u5
6-23 months in U1&2
PLW in U1&2
Children 12-59 mths
Children 5-15 years
0-25%
26-50 51-75 76-100
Rwanda
total Kigali City South West North East
1. MNP program (Ongera) is being scaled up, and is in the 2nd half of 2015 in 18 districts
3 actions are being
implemented at scale across all
provinces

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
63
What % of the target group is covered per province? (2/2)
Target groups
(TG)
Smallholder farming
households
Households in
Ubudehe 1 & 2
Mothers / Caregivers
Schools
Households in
Ubudehe 1 & 23
Provide materials & techn.
for small-scale horticulture
Provide animals for
small-scale husbandry
Promote food
preservation & storage
Provide input for prod. &
cons. of biofortified crops
Provide/Support
improved water source
Provide/Support
improved sanitation
Carry out nutr. educ.
(e.g. cooking demos)
Promote hygiene /
hand washing
Provide conditional social
safety net actions (VUP)3
Food&AgricultureWASH2Nutrition
education
Carry out nutr. educ. at
school (school gardens)
Provide school feeding
(One Cup of Milk)
Social
security
Household with
children under 5
Household with
children under 5
Households
Schools
Households
Schools
PLW
Schools
Pri. school children
Primary schools
1. Beneficiary coverage displayed as "+X%" represents the additional %-points of households reached over the last calendar year (2014).
2. Have received limited input from WASH stakeholders (who have separate technical working groups), and actual geographic and beneficiary coverage is probably higher
3. Not all Households in Ubudehe 1 & 2 are targets for the Vision Umurenge 2020 Program (aiming mostly for those without employment), so not necessarily aiming for 100% coverage here
Rwanda
total Kigali City South West North East
0-25%
26-50 51-75 76-100
+8%1
+3%1
+5%1
+4%1
+1%1
+1%1
+2%1
+14%1
+7%1
+6%1
+7%1
+8%1
+5%1
+5%1
+2%1
+2%1
+1%1
+5%1
+7%1
+7%1
+1%1
+6%1
+2%1
+1%1
0%1
+1%1
+1%1
+1%1
+1%1
+3%1
+2%1
+1%1
+4%1
+1%1
0%1
+4%1
There is the strongest support
for food & agriculture actions in
the South compared to other
provinces

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
64
What % of the target group is covered per district?
0-25%
coverage
Additional %-points
reached
25-50%
coverage
50-75%
coverage
75-100%
coverage
100+%
coverage
Backup
Source: Stakeholder & Action Mapping 2014/15

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
65
Leverage mapping findings on delivery mechanisms to identify
opportunities for both scale up and synergies of the CNAs
Scale up
Synergies
For the actions with few
delivery mechanisms, is there
potential to increase reach by
extending delivery to other
delivery mechanisms?
For delivery mechanisms
that are less commonly
used, is there potential to
strengthen scale up
through these delivery
mechanisms?
Could some delivery mechanisms be in danger of
becoming over utilized or exhausted? Is it possible
to increase capacity of such delivery mechanisms?
Major use of channel (75-100% of implementors)
Substantial use of channel (50-75% of implementors)
Some use of channel (25-50% of implementors)
Low use of channel (0-25% of implementors)

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
66
Agenda
Appendix

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
67
Agenda
Appendix

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
68
Key messages on gaps
Only a few Core Nutrition Actions (CNAs) have full coverage
• Most CNAs needs to be further scaled up
• There may need to be a discussion of priorities on what CNAs to scale up, and where
• E.g. on cost of scaling up versus effect and how accurately the main target group is addressed (e.g. school
feeding vs actions focusing more directly on children under 5 or under 2)
There is not necessarily a clear link between the districts with the highest stunting rates and the
corresponding action coverage per district
• There may need to be a discussion on what districts to prioritize first, e.g. by investing in more core nutrition
actions and higher coverage
Most districts have a stunting prevalence and a corresponding action coverage where further scale up is
needed
• Should discuss how to best ensure this, e.g. by securing that all districts have dedicated partners and proper
funding (may improve already with the CIFF and USAID INWA programs)
Continued focus on stunting reduction is needed
• Some key situation indicators are on a low level and showing slow progress, e.g. anemia, food consumption
score, minimum acceptable diet and WASH

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
69
Only a few of the core nutrition actions have full coverage
Iron and folic acid
supplements
Biofortified crops
Food storage &
preservation
MNP supplements
(Ongera)4
Small scale
horticulture
(kitchen gardens)
Small scale animal
husbandry
Improved
water source2
Diarrhoea treatment
Vitamin A supplements
Hygiene and
hand washing
Treatment of SAM
Child growth
Deworming tablets
Social safety net
actions (VUP)3
Optimal compl. feeding
Nutrition education
at schools
(school gardens)
Improved
sanitation2Treatment of MAM
ANC visits (4+)
Specialized nutritious
food for
complementary feeding
Schoold feeding
(One Cup of Milk)
Nutrition
education
Optimal breast
feeding
+1%-po
ints1
+1%-po
ints1
+3%-po
ints1
+4%-po
ints1
+8%-po
ints1
+5%-po
ints1
Source: Stakeholder & Action Mapping Rwanda 2014/15
0-25% 26-50% 51-75% 76-100%
1. Beneficiary coverage displayed as
"+X%-points" represents the additional
%-points of households reached over the
last calendar year (2014)
2. Have received limited input from WASH
stakeholders (who have separate technical
working groups), and actual coverage is
probably higher
3. Not all Households in Ubudehe 1 & 2 are
targets for the Vision Umurenge 2020
Program, so not necessarily aiming for
100% coverage here
4. MNP program (Ongera) is being scaled
up, and is in the 2nd half of 2015 in 18
districts

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
70
Prevalence of stunting varies across districts, and not all the
districts with high stunting have all core nutrition actions
Stunting strongly prevalent in most districts,
especially in the West & South-East
All districts with 15 or more CNAs,
but only one district with all 23 CNAs
1. NB! Confidence intervals are rather large on a district level
Source: Rwanda National Nutrition Screening 2014, Rwanda Stakeholder & Action Mapping 2014/15
10-14
15-19
23
20-22
# of Core Nutrition Actions
being conducted per district
Nyagatare
Gatsibo
Kayonza
Karongi
Bugesera
Rusizi
Nyamasheke
Kirehe
Ngoma
Rwamagana
Nyaruguru
Nyamagabe
Rulindo
Gicumbi
Huye
Nyanza
Musanze
Burera
Gakenke
Ngororero
Nyabihu
Ruhango
Muhanga
Kamonyi
Gisagara
Rubavu
City of Kigali
Rutsiro
Nyagatare
Gatsibo
Kayonza
Karongi
Bugesera
Rusizi
Nyamasheke
Kirehe
Ngoma
Rwamagana
Nyaruguru
Nyamagabe
Rulindo
Gicumbi
Huye
Nyanza
Musanze
Burera
Gakenke
Ngororero
Nyabihu
Ruhango
Muhanga
Kamonyi
Gisagara
Rubavu
City of Kigali
Rutsiro
20% - 29%
30% - 39%
>40%
Stunting prevalence among
children 0-59 months 1
<20%

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
71
Only one district have an action intensity where more than 75%
of core nutrition actions reach at least 30% of target population
Stunting strongly prevalent in most districts,
especially in the West & South-East
Only one district with more than 75% of actions
reaching over 30% of target population
0% - 25%
26% - 50%
76% - 100%
51% - 75%
% of actions with at least 30%2
of
target population covered
1. NB! Confidence intervals are rather large on a district level 2. 30% of target population covered or more than 1%-points additional beneficiaries covered (for Food & Agriculture and WASH infrastructure)
Source: Rwanda National Nutrition Screening 2014, Rwanda Stakeholder & Action Mapping 2014/15
Nyagatare
Gatsibo
Kayonza
Karongi
Bugesera
Rusizi
Nyamasheke
Kirehe
Ngoma
Rwamagana
Nyaruguru
Nyamagabe
Rulindo
Gicumbi
Huye
Nyanza
Musanze
Burera
Gakenke
Ngororero
Nyabihu
Ruhango
Muhanga
Kamonyi
Gisagara
Rubavu
City of Kigali
Rutsiro
Nyagatare
Gatsibo
Kayonza
Karongi
Bugesera
Rusizi
Nyamasheke
Kirehe
Ngoma
Rwamagana
Nyaruguru
Nyamagabe
Rulindo
Gicumbi
Huye
Nyanza
Musanze
Burera
Gakenke
Ngororero
Nyabihu
Ruhango
Muhanga
Kamonyi
Gisagara
Rubavu
City of Kigali
Rutsiro
Nyamagabe is also
the only district where
all 23 core nutrition
actions are being
implemented
20% - 29%
30% - 39%
>40%
Stunting prevalence among
children 0-59 months 1
<20%

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
72
What actions are not being conducted and where?
Backup
1. MNP program (Ongera) is being scaled up, and is already now (2nd half 2015 in 18 districts)
Source: Stakeholder & Action Mapping Rwanda 2014/15

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
73
Monitor Maintain
Scale up Investigate
Many districts are not adequately addressed, and scale-up
discussion in these districts may be necessary
60
%
70
%
40
%
0
%
30
%
50
%
30
%
80
%
40
%
0
%
50
%
60
%
Gatsibo
GicumbiNyagatare
Rwamagan
a Kayonza
Musanze
Ngororer
o
Nyamagab
e
Kirehe
Ruhang
o Nyarugur
u
Muhang
a
Rubavu
Rutsiro
Bugesera
Nyabih
u
% of actions with at least 30%2
of target population covered
Gakenke
Nyamashek
e
Ngoma Rulind
o Rusizi
Burera
Huye
Karongi
Kamonyi
Gisagara
NyanzaKicukiro
Gasabo
Nyarugeng
e
1. Among children 0-59 months old. NB! Confidence intervals are rather large on a district level
2. 30% of target population covered or more than 1%-points additional beneficiaries covered (for Food & Agriculture and WASH infrastructure)
Source: Stakeholder & Action Mapping Rwanda 2014/15, Rwanda National Nutrition screening 2014
Wes
tNort
h
Sout
h
Eas
t
Kigali
City

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
74
Agenda
Appendix

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
75
Summary of initial recommendations on planning and scale-up
Increase
geographic
reach
Improve
action &
beneficiary
coverage
Focus on
stunting and
on improving
core indicators
Main issues
Some districts have limited support,
leaving gaps in geographic coverage
Some partners seem to be spread
thinly (e.g. covering some sectors
and villages here and there) instead
of focusing their efforts
Initial recommendations
Secure that all districts have dedicated
partners in fighting malnutrition
Encourage partners to focus efforts
more geographically (cover all villages
& sectors in an area) to simplify
coordination & increase efficiency
Several CNAs are not present in all
districts, and many are just done in
some sectors and villages
Beneficiary coverage is low for many
of the CNAs – large parts of the target
groups are not reached
Many core nutrition actions should
be scaled up to cover more districts,
sectors and villages
When core nutrition action is present
in districts, coverage of the target
groups needs to be improved
Stunting is still high, and rate of
reduction is slow
Main indicators are lagging behind,
like Minimum Acceptable Diet, Food
Consumption Scores and WASH
access
Continue focus on reducing chronic
malnutrition, but accelerate scale-up
Complementary feeding practices,
food diversity & availability, and
water source, sanitation and hygiene
needs to be further improved
A
B
C
✗ ✓

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
76
Increase geographic reach, but don't spread resources too thin
A
Large differences in district support
Even with many partners,
some are only covering a few sectors
Secure that all districts have dedicated
partners in fighting malnutrition
Encourage partners to cover all villages
and sectors in a district to simplify
coordination and increase efficiency
# of districts
supported
Avg % of
sectors
Number of partners per
district
Average
partners
:
6
Districts
Each point represent an
implementing partner

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
77
Improve action & beneficiary coverage
B
Some CNAs are only present
in a few districts
Beneficiary coverage for many of the
CNAs are too low
Scale up core nutrition actions to cover
more districts, sectors and villages
(e.g. by piggybacking on other programs)
Improve CNA coverage of the target
groups, while also focusing on the
quality of the action coverage
Provide specialized nutritious products for
CF
Provide micronutrient suppl.
(MNPs/Ongera)1
Provide/Support improved water
source
Provide school feeding (One Cup of
Milk)
sanitation
Promote food preservation and
storage
Promote hygiene / hand
washing
Provide animals for small-scale animal
husbandry
Carry out nutrition education (e.g. cooking
demos)
50
%
0
%
100
%
Growth monitoring /
screening
Iron and folic
acid
Spec. products for CF (e.g.
CSB)
Nutr. education (e.g. cooking
demos)
School feeding (One Cup of
Milk)
MNPs
(Ongera)Diarrhoea treatment
(ORS/zinc)
Deworming
tabletsVitamin A
supplements
Social safety net actions
(VUP)
ANC visits (4+)Hygiene / hand
washing
Nutr. educ. school (School
gardens)
Small-scale horticulture (Kitchen
gardens)
Improved
sanitation
Food preservation &
storage
Biofortified crops (beans, sweet
potato)
Small-scale animal
husbandry
Improved water
source
Treatment of
SAM
Optimal BF
practicesOptimal CF
practices
Treatment of
MAM
# of districts per
CNA:
Beneficiary
coverage per CNA:
>75%
50-75
%
25-50
%
<25%
+%-pt
s
30 districts
<30 districts

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
78
Focus on stunting and main lagging indicators
C
Stunting progress is still too slow Main indicators showing limited progress
Continue focus on stunting reduction and
the 1st 1000 days windows of opportunity,
but significant acceleration is needed
Complementary feeding practices,
food diversity & availability,
and WASH should be further improved
among children under 5
years
-2
0
-7
-6
2018 target2
2005 2010 2014/15
Min. Acc. Diet1 +1.
0
75.2%5
Anemia 6-59 mths1
Improved
water
+0.
4
Acceptable FCS3
74.5%4
-1.
6
+0.
7
201
02014/1
5
(2009)
(2012)
(2010/
11)
Source: 1. Rwanda DHS 2010 & DHS 2014/15 2. HSSP-3 3. CFSVA/NS 2009 & 2012 4. EICV3 2010/11 5. WATSAN 2014

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
79
Progress from 2010 to 2014/15 is far from sufficient to reach
2018 target
40
%
60
%
20
%
30
%
0
%
50
%
Rwanda stunting prevalence
18.0%
2018
target
51.0%
37.9%
24.5%
Yea
r
18.0%
-15.0
%
2014-15
33.0%
44.2%
2005
44.2%
2010
HSSP III target
trajectory
2014/15-18 target
trajectory
2005-10
actual
2005-10-14/15-18
trajectory
2010-14/15
actual
Immediate scale-up of nutrition interventions is needed
to accelerate stunting reduction
Current trajectory leads
to estimated 33% stunting
prevalence in 2018,
a 15%-point gap from
the HSSP III target
Source: Rwanda DHS 2010 & DHS 2014/15, HSSP-3

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
80
Rwanda is still far behind some of the best practice countries
in stunting reduction
Rwand
a
Brazil
Gambi
aVietna
m
Per
uMauritani
aMaharashtr
a
Countrie
s
Average Annual Rate of Reduction1
in stunting (in
%2
)
Average:
4%
AARR
Africa
average
1. Average Annual Rate of Reduction (AARR) is calculated from the 4-6 best consecutive years of reduction for each country from 1995 – 2015. 2. In %, not %-points
Note: Rwanda calculated from DHS 2010 to DHS 2014/15
Source: WHO/UNICEF/World Bank database
Backup
Other countries' success show that there is potential to
further accelerate stunting reduction in Rwanda

Rwanda
Stakeholder &
Action Mapping
2014-15 -
81
Agenda
Appendix

Rwanda stakeholder & action mapping 2014 15

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (8)

Similar to Rwanda stakeholder & action mapping 2014 15

Similar to Rwanda stakeholder & action mapping 2014 15 (20)

More from SUN Civil Society Network

More from SUN Civil Society Network (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)