Getting suitable data

1. Getting suitable data • range of data sources • surveys: sampling strategies, questionnaires • reporting systems: forms, outputs • sentinel sites: clinics, programmes, survey clusters Ctown4.ppt

3. Surveys • sampling strategy – general (see next slide) • multi-stage, PPS, known probability of individual selection • small-scale: 30*30 (or 33*6, or …); segmentation vs spin-a-bottle • match earlier surveys • sample same population • match age-bands • keep same measures/questions (don’t change questionnaire lightly) • match seasons

7. DHS anthropometric questionnaire module Source: DHS Kenya report 1994

8. DHS feeding practices questionnaire module Source: DHS Kenya report 1994

9. Example of reference standards Source: WHO ‘Measuring Change in Nutritional Status’ (1983)

10. FSAU nutrition question-naire module (1) Source: FSAU

11. FSAU nutrition question-naire module(2) Source: FSAU

12. UNICEF model question-naire module Source: UNICEF MICS Manual (1995)

13. UNICEF model question-naire module Source: UNICEF MICS Manual (1995)

14. Reporting systems (clinics, programmes) • need to be useful at all levels • provide information on trends not levels • use all, or select by convenience • stepwise aggregation (district, province …) • preferably should have validation surveys/capacity • Sentinel sites (clinics, programmes) • same principles plus: • select sites usually for early change • focus on good data quality, training, data flow, supervision • use as signal of change in that area (but note not representative, by design) • capacity to follow up, validate, important

15. Sentinel sites – survey • resample same clusters at regular intervals • issue of if same hhds/kids, replacement, etc • otherwise much the same as for sentinel clinics etc • see examples of Zimbabwe, ALRMP-Kenya, Namibia plan.

16. Reporting form Source: FSAU

17. Reporting form. Source: EOS, Ethiopia

18. FSAU Integrated Phase Classification (IPC). Source: FSAU, Tech Manual V 1, Table 1, May 2006

19. FSAU IPC: General Interpretation Source: FSAU, Tech Manual V 1, Table 2, May 2006

20. FSAU IPC: Wasting Source: FSAU, Tech Manual V 1, Table 4, May 2006

21. FSAU IPC: Response framework Source: FSAU, Tech Manual V 1, Table 16, May 2006

22. Uganda 10% Somalia 15% Ethiopia 20% Kenya & Sudan pastoralists 25% Equivalent wasting level

23. Eh?

24. 1.1 Malnutrition by area Wasting was highest in Mudzi (9%). A verification exercise using clinic data was done for Mudzi and there was an indication of sharp increase in malnutrition in January 2005. Results from the 2005 vulnerability assessments done in May 2005 revealed that Mudzi district was among the districts that were food insecure. Comparison with data collected in November 2004 shows that wasting rates are higher in all the 10 sites. This is an indication of worsening of nutritional situation as it is expected that nutrition should improve during this time (March) as people start eating food from their agricultural produce. Source: Zimbabwe

25. = Hunger Season = Moderate = Post Rains/Harvest

26. Results of area-level surveys, Kenya Source: Small scale survey dataset SEMmrge10_21B.sav

27. Source: Small scale survey dataset SEMmrge10_21B.sav

29. Source: CHANIS Report, Oct 2006

30. Source: CHANIS Report, Oct 2006

31. IPC Survey Results, Sool Plateau, Somalia June 2006 Source: FSAU Nutrition Update September 2006

32. Sentinel site surveillance results, Bakool, Somalia August 2006 Source: FSAU Nutrition Update September 2006

33. Source: Small scale survey dataset SEMmrge10_21B.sav

34. Program data