Performance Assessment of Emergency Operation 200266

0

Performance Assessment

of Emergency Operation 200266

Delivering Food Assistance

in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea

Performance Assessment of Emergency Operation 200266

i

Contents

Acronyms ..................................................................................................................... ii

Map ........................................................................................................................... iii

Executive Summary ................................................................................................... iv

Context ..................................................................................................................... vi

Letter of Understanding ................................................................................................. vi

Resourcing ................................................................................................................ viii

Monitoring and Evaluation ............................................................................................. ix

End-of-Project Review ................................................................................................... ix

Part 1: Monitoring and Evaluation ............................................................................. 1

M&E Management and Responsibilities ............................................................................. 1

Analysis of Monitoring Indicators ..................................................................................... 2

Site Visits by WFP Teams ............................................................................................... 2

End-of-Project Review .................................................................................................... 4

Limitations of the Review ............................................................................................... 6

Effectiveness, Efficiency and Equality ............................................................................... 7

Food Distributions ......................................................................................................... 7

Food Receipts ............................................................................................................... 8

Suggested Food Basket Changes ..................................................................................... 8

Distribution Delays ........................................................................................................ 8

Food Quality ................................................................................................................. 9

Food Usage .................................................................................................................. 9

Food Production ............................................................................................................ 9

Specific Findings from Children’s Institutions ................................................................... 10

Paediatric Wards ......................................................................................................... 10

Children’s Institutions .................................................................................................. 10

Part 2: Findings on Food Security ............................................................................ 11

Food Availability .......................................................................................................... 11

Food Access ............................................................................................................... 11

Food Utilization ........................................................................................................... 14

Food Security ............................................................................................................. 16

Coping Strategies ........................................................................................................ 17

Targeting ................................................................................................................... 17

Vulnerable Groups and Priority for Food Assistance .......................................................... 17

Geographical Vulnerability ............................................................................................ 18

Public Distribution System Dependents and Cooperative Farmers ....................................... 19

Kitchen Gardens and Livestock ...................................................................................... 19

Household Size and Composition: Large Families and Elderly People ................................... 20

Part 3: Outcomes and Outputs ................................................................................. 21

Strategic Objective 1: Save lives and protect livelihoods in emergencies ............................. 21

Strategic Objective 5: Strengthen the capacities of countries to reduce hunger through hand-

over strategies and local purchase ................................................................................. 25

Part 4: Impact and Effectiveness ............................................................................. 27

Awareness and Value of WFP Assistance ......................................................................... 28

Suggestions for the Future ........................................................................................... 28

Part 5. Findings, Recommendations and Conclusions ...................................................

Findings ..................................................................................................................... 29

Recommendations ....................................................................................................... 30

Conclusions ................................................................................................................ 30


ii

Acronyms

CFSAM Crop and Food Security Assessment Mission

CMB Cereal-Milk Blend

CSM Corn-Soy Milk Blend

DPRK Democratic People’s Republic of Korea

EMOP Emergency Operation

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

FCS Food Consumption Score

FFCD Food For Community Development

LFP Local Food Production

M&E Monitoring and Evaluation

MUAC Mid-Upper Arm Circumference

PDC Public Distribution Centre

PDS Public Distribution System

PRRO Protracted Relief and Recovery Operation

RFSA Rapid Food Security Assessment

RMB Rice-Milk Blend

UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund

WHO World Health Organization

WFP World Food Programme

Korean terms

dong Neighbourhood

pyeong Area = 3.3 m2

ri Village


iii

Map


iv

Executive Summary

This report focuses on the procedures used to assess the outcomes and effectiveness of

Emergency Operation (EMOP) 200266: Emergency Food Assistance for Vulnerable Groups,

implemented in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) for 15 months, from 1 April

2011 to 30 June 2012.

The operation was launched in response to an appeal for food assistance by the Government

following a harsh winter, heavy rains affecting the main 2010 harvest, and high post-harvest

losses. The World Food Programme (WFP) and the Government signed a Letter of

Understanding that gave WFP staff unprecedented access to food-insecure areas. The aims

were to address chronic hunger and stabilize and reduce acute malnutrition among particularly

vulnerable groups – 310,500 metric tons of food were to assist 3.5 million people in 117

counties, mainly children and pregnant or breastfeeding women – and to support local

production of nutritionally fortified foods. WFP data show that actual food deliveries during the

15 months of EMOP 200266 totalled 103,300 metric tons and reached 3 million people. The

operation did not fully meet its targets because contributions received were insufficient to

provide the resources and inputs required for food deliveries during the lean season.

Nonetheless, WFP assistance over 15 months helped significantly to enhance food intake and

the nutrition status of 3 million vulnerable children, women and men at a time of serious food

insecurity in DPRK. When EMOP 200266 started in April 2011, much of the population were

suffering from prolonged food deprivation, largely because the Public Distribution System ration

had been reduced to less than 200 grams per person, per day following a drought and

successive poor harvests.

The production of locally fortified food has been central to WFP’s work to address undernutrition

and hunger in DPRK since 1998. Through a unique partnership between WFP and the

Government, a network of 13 factories produce fortified biscuits and Super Cereal (blended

food such as Cereal Milk Blend or Corn Soy Milk Blend) enriched with vitamins and minerals.

These are distributed as supplementary food to children and women. During Emergency

Operation 200266, 35,547 metric tons of these foods were produced – 40 percent fortified

biscuits and 60 percent Super Cereal.

Continuous monitoring and evaluation was carried out in all counties.WFP teams conducted

over 3,000 visits, including 2,364 regular monitoring visits to households, schools and

children’s institutions, and 276 logistics monitoring visits. The teams used specific checklists to

standardize their enquiries, and were supported by local officials. There were also two country-

wide assessments and several visits by high-level United Nations and international observers.

The teams found that WFP food had been much appreciated and that it had made a significant

contribution to the alleviation of chronic hunger and malnutrition resulting from drought and

poor harvests. The interventions had been successful in that most of the targeted beneficiaries

had been reached, albeit with reduced rations because of the funding shortfall, and food

consumption scores (FCS) had progressively improved. Proposals to enhance the operation

included improvements to knowledge dissemination, targeting, reporting, travel and food-

management processes.

The various recommendations included scaling up monitoring visits to achieve the targets in the

Letter of Understanding, training in record-keeping for local officials, and updating the

implementation plan and checklists.

A mid-upper arm circumference assessment by the Institute of Child Nutrition and WFP in

November 2011 found acute malnutrition at 14.1 percent among 696 children under 5


v

examined in the 35 counties where Emergency Operation 200266 was implemented. This figure

ranks as “serious” in the World Health Organization classification.

The End-of-Project Review in July 2012 was conducted by WFP staff in 41 operational areas.

They interviewed 134 households, held 81 discussions with county officials and focus groups

and visited 41 children’s institutions and 6 food factories to assess the efficiency, effectiveness

and impact of EMOP 200266.

All targeted counties had received monthly deliveries of wheat and maize, Super Cereal,

biscuits, beans and vegetable oil, but pipeline breaks had reduced the quantities from the

planned amounts. The county officials wished to receive more food and to expand WFP

coverage and increase the range of activities, and 95 percent of households interviewed wish to

receive WFP food in future. In general, the project was successful in reaching the most

vulnerable beneficiaries, but inadequate donor support resulted in food shortages, which in turn

meant that the elderly beneficiary group received only small quantities of food assistance.

Food quality was generally been reported as good. Children had particularly appreciated the

Super Cereal and biscuits. The local food production factories had been pleased with the quality

of raw materials. The review data showed that EMOP 200266 had improved

food consumption and health among children and pregnant and breastfeeding women.

The food security situation had improved from 2011 as a result of larger public distribution

system rations and deliveries of WFP food. The household food consumption output indicator

also improved and achieved its target. But the situation remains fragile, particularly because

households are utilizing coping strategies such as reducing the size of meals and adding water

to food to increase volume, which reduces nutritional value.

The overall conclusions were that EMOP 200266 had been successful in reaching particularly

vulnerable groups, but that food deliveries had fallen short of the original targets because

contributions received were insufficient. Food insecurity was mitigated, but the situation

remains fragile. County officials and beneficiaries wanted WFP’s food assistance to continue in

the longer term. The reviewers felt that with additional resources more could be done to assist

elderly people and promote sustainable development and local food production. Advocacy with

donors should continue with this in mind.

The successes of EMOP 200266 were achieved with the support of the Government and of the

county officials and focus groups, whose commitment is warmly acknowledged. The

contributions received from donors are also gratefully acknowledged.


vi

Context

Emergency Operation (EMOP) 200266: Emergency Food Assistance for Vulnerable Groups was

launched on 1 April 2011 in response to an appeal for humanitarian food assistance by the

Government of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) following a harsh winter,

heavy rains during the main harvest in 2010 and high post-harvest losses. Implementation was

guided by a Letter of Understanding between the World Food Programme (WFP) and the

Government, which enabled WFP officials to visit beneficiary households, institutions and

markets across the country to an unprecedented extent, and by a rapid food-security

assessment (RFSA) carried out in March 2011 by WFP, the Food and Agriculture Organization of

the United Nations (FAO) and the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF). EMOP 200266

initially aimed to support 3.5 million beneficiaries in 1171 counties with 310,500 metric tons of

food over 12 months. It was later extended to 30 June 2012 at the request of the Government.

The objectives of EMOP 200266 were (i) to provide nutritional support to chronically

undernourished children, women and vulnerable groups with a view to stabilizing and reducing

acute malnutrition, and (ii) to help the Government to reduce hunger and undernutrition by

supporting production of fortified foods in DPRK. The operation provided fortified biscuits and

Super Cereal enriched with vitamins and minerals to address protein and nutrient deficiencies

among children and women resulting from food shortages caused by drought and poor

harvests. These shortages mean that many people in DPRK are chronically hungry, which in

turn impedes their physical and intellectual development. For many young children and

mothers, WFP food is one of the main sources of protein and micronutrients.

During EMOP 200266, which addressed WFP’s Strategic Objective 1 (Save lives and protect

livelihoods in emergencies) and Strategic Objective 5 (Strengthen the capacities of countries to

reduce hunger through hand-over strategies and local purchase), the ongoing Protracted Relief

and Recovery Operation (PRRO) 200114 Nutrition Support for Women and Children (1 April

2011 to 30 June 2012) was suspended.

LETTER OF UNDERSTANDING

The Letter of Understanding signed by WFP and the Government of DPRK on 16 April 2011

increased WFP’s access for monitoring and oversight of its operations under EMOP 200266.

The provisions of the Letter of Understanding were respected, but a lack of funding slowed food

procurement and delayed WFP’s plans for expanding its staff numbers and opening new field-

offices. There were no indications that the Government was reluctant to respect the agreement.

Since 1996, when WFP first began operations in the DPRK, there has been progressive

improvement in operating conditions. The conditions of the 2011 Letter of Understanding were

an improvement on those negotiated for the 2008 emergency, and as a result WFP’s ability to

oversee food distributions was much enhanced.

Staffing

The Letter of Understanding provided for an increase in international staff from 11 to 59, of

whom 60 percent were to be involved in field monitoring, and for the deployment of Korean

speakers of any nationality. Actual staffing increased from 11 to 25 in September 2011,

including five Korean-speaking international food aid monitors whose visas were granted

without problems. Considering EMOP 200266 was only 30 percent funded, the staffing level

exceeded the target.

1 The EMOP started in 107 counties and the coverage was extended to 117 counties at the request of the Government following a WFP review.


vii

Field Offices

WFP has had by far the largest international presence outside of Pyongyang since 1996, but

funding constraints in the last two years forced it to reduce its presence to a main office in

Pyongyang and field offices in Wonsan and Chongjin. The 2011 Letter of Understanding

provided for six field-offices, some in remote areas of the north and east. WFP opened a new

field office at Hamhung in South Hamgyong province but plans to open offices in Haesan and

Haeju were shelved because of funding shortfalls.

Food Distribution and Targeting

The Government’s Global Implementation Plan included a list of beneficiary institutions and

outlets and a breakdown of beneficiaries as a basis for the distribution of food assistance. This

plan was signed by the WFP Representative and the National Coordinating Committee, and was

adhered to throughout EMOP 200266.

Capacity-Building

About 500 government and county officials were trained at six regional workshops in May 2011.

This was to familiarize officials with the terms and conditions of the LoU governing EMOP

200266 and train them to complete the forms, logbooks and tracking sheets used during

implementation.

Monitoring

Food movements and distribution

The Letter of Understanding allowed WFP staff to access any facility where WFP food was stored

or handled, and to access warehouses at entry points to verify stocks and dispatches. WFP was

permitted to install and operate its own computerized tracking system, and the Letter of

Understanding envisaged corresponding improvements in the timeliness of documentation

provided by the Government, enabling rapid access to information on food dispatched and

received.

The Government provided WFP with a list of the schools, nurseries, kindergartens and

orphanages where food was to be distributed, which facilitated monitoring and control. WFP had

to provide only 24 hours’ notice of a monitoring visit to a county. The 2011 Letter of

Understanding was an improvement over 2008 in that WFP was able, on arrival in a county, to

choose the sub-county, institution or household it wished to visit, which greatly increased the

randomness of the monitoring process. WFP’s monitoring teams were in all cases granted

permission to visit households, children’s institutions and Public Distribution Centres chosen at

random. Government officials were fully cooperative.

As soon as food shipments arrived in DPRK, Distribution Plan 1 was activated to transport the

food from the port to county and provincial warehouses and the local food production (LFP)

factories. After verification of these deliveries by WFP monitoring officers, Distribution Plan 2

was issued to move the food to final distribution points.

Food security

WFP was for the first time granted access to markets to monitor the supply and demand for

food and track prices. Some of the markets did not operate every day because people were

planting rice and maize, but those that were open could be visited. WFP and its partners were

also allowed for the first time to measure mid-upper arm circumference to monitor malnutrition

among young children.

Assessment

The Government provided full support for three assessments: (i) the FAO/WFP crop and food

security assessment in October 2011; (ii) mid-upper arm (MUAC) measurements among

children under 5 in November 2011; and (iii) the End-of-Project Review in July 2012.


viii

Logistics and record-keeping

During the monitoring visits there were no signs of food diversions, and the few discrepancies

found in stock keeping were clerical errors of the kind found in other countries where WFP

operates. Food was properly stored, the first-in/first-out principle was observed, and stock

cards were usually accurately kept.

Communications and public information

Fibre-optic cables were installed in all of WFP’s field offices, which greatly improved

connectivity. The government facilitated visits by WFP public information officials, including a

stills photographer and video producer, which produced a good deal of audio-visual and other

material that was posted on WFP’s website.

RESOURCING

Because EMOP 200266 was launched immediately after the Government’s request for

international assistance and the subsequent food security assessment, there was only limited

time for resource mobilization. The operation started with financing via loans from PRRO

200114 and early commitments from Brazil, India, Luxembourg, Norway, Russia, Switzerland

and South Africa, as well as the Central Emergency Response Fund (CERF). This enabled WFP

to distribute limited amounts of locally produced Super Cereal and pulses for the most food-

insecure children and pregnant and breastfeeding women. A few months later, China, Ireland,

Italy, Liechtenstein, the Netherlands and Switzerland, as well as private donors, provided

further support to continue the production of Super Cereal.

At the height of the lean season, Australia, the European Commission Humanitarian Aid and

Civil Protection (ECHO), Sweden and CERF made significant contributions that enabled WFP to

increase assistance for the most vulnerable groups. By the beginning of 2012, Australia,

Canada, Liechtenstein, Norway, Poland and Switzerland reconfirmed financial support, enabling

WFP to maintain distributions until the end of the operation. Allocations of almost US$22 million

were also received from WFP’s Strategic Resource Allocation committee. Overall, EMOP 200266

received US$83.5 million – 32 percent of the funding requirement of US$259.5 million.

WFP arranged 65 visits to implementation sites by donors, who received monthly

implementation reports that included information about monitoring and the food-security

situation. The funding committed by about 20 donors is shown in the table below:


ix

Donor US$

Australia 7 530 843

Brazil 4 016 716

Canada 4 012 036

China 1 000 000

European Commission 12 142 857

India 1 000 000

Ireland 356 125

Italy 429 185

Liechtenstein 198 425

Luxembourg 642 933

Netherlands 34 105

Norway 2 662 657

Poland 155 135

Private donors 190 130

Russian Federation 5 000 000

South Africa 142 878

Sweden 1 600 512

Switzerland 9 863 057

CERF 10 399 003

Multilateral funds 21 924 300

Miscellaneous income 122 319

Total donations 83 423 415

MONITORING AND EVALUATION

Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) continues throughout an operation to assess progress in terms

of specific indicators, with a view to adjusting activities in response to changing circumstances.

Monitoring is the day-to-day task of visiting operational sites and collecting data on outputs and

processes; evaluation involves the assessment of longer-term outcomes and impacts. These

complementary functions are the basis of reporting to donors and stakeholders on results

achieved with the funds and resources allocated to an operation.

END-OF-PROJECT REVIEW

An end-of-project review is an assessment of the achievements and shortcomings of a

completed operation. It judges the extent to which operational approaches and activities have

reached their objectives, the effectiveness of activities and the efficiency with which resources

have been used, and considers issues such as outcomes, impact and sustainability.

This report synthesizes the data and findings of project M&E and the end-of-project report for

EMOP 200266.


1

1. The M&E system in DPRK is designed to ensure that: i) adequate food assistance is distributed

as planned; ii) operational problems are identified; and iii) changes in food security in particular

areas are recognized with a view to optimizing the targeting of food to the people in greatest

need. The system assesses results in relation to Strategic Objectives 1 and 5 and the outcome

and output indicators in the logical framework of EMOP 200266.

M&E MANAGEMENT AND RESPONSIBILITIES

2. Teams of WFP international and national staff regularly visited all operational counties, as

envisaged in the Letter of Understanding with the Government and in accordance with the

Guidelines for Planning Food Monitoring Visits. Three Korean-speaking international staff were

the core of the monitoring team. The principles for planning monitoring visits are shown in

Figure 1.

FIGURE 1. PRINCIPLES FOR MONITORING VISITS

Monitoring

type Food movement flow Criteria

LOGISTICS

monitoring:

distribution

plan 1

Blended food raw

ingredients: transport

from the port of entry

to LFP factories

Food for direct

distribution: transport

to county warehouses

For each consignment dispatched, 70% of

total tonnage and 50% of logistics

distribution points are inspected to ensure

complete delivery

Visits are arranged by the logistics unit

according to dispatch information from the

port of entry

24-hour notification required to visit

BENEFICARY

monitoring:

distribution

plan 2

From factories/county

warehouses to the final

distribution points for

beneficiaries (children’s

institutions or public

distribution centres)

24-hour notification required to visit

county/district

Selection of sub-county to visit on arrival

in county

Random selection of institutions to visit

from the Global Implementation Plan – the

list of beneficiary institutions, by county

Random selection of beneficiary

households from WFP logbooks of PDS

centres

Part 1:

Monitoring and Evaluation


2

3. Monitoring teams visited an average of four operational sites per day. This involved:

discussions with county officials from as many departments and offices as possible;

visits to nurseries, kindergartens, primary schools, baby homes, children’s centres and

boarding schools;

visits to paediatric wards and hospitals; and

visits to at least one household including elderly people, a pregnant woman or a nursing

mother.

4. Specific monitoring checklists were developed to ensure that quantitative and qualitative data

were systematically collected and entered into a central database for analysis.

5. Logistics monitoring struck a balance between locations handling large quantities such as LFP

factories, and counties with large beneficiary populations and geographical coverage. The

system ensured that 60 of the 117 counties and half of the LFP factories were visited whenever

a new distribution plan was issued.

6. Beneficiary monitoring captures information on food distribution, operational issues and food

security, focusing on:

storage conditions at warehouses, public distribution outlets and WFP stocks;

receipts and delivery of WFP food and non-food-items;

the number of beneficiaries receiving WFP assistance, by sex and age;

the availability of food and any unmet needs;

government records of food movements, storage and distributions; and

operational issues to be addressed by the Government or WFP.

ANALYSIS OF MONITORING INDICATORS

Site Visits by WFP Teams

7. Between April 2011 and June 2012, WFP teams made random visits to 3,030 sites, of which

716 were county visits (see Figures 2 and 3). Each county was visited five times on average.

WFP monitoring teams travelled 600,000 km during these missions.

FIGURE 2. NUMBER OF COUNTIES VISITED, APRIL 2011–JUNE 2012

23

8

27 21

57

80

73

96

55

29

59 54

22

64

48

0

20

40

60

80

100

Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun

2011 2012


3

FIGURE 3. NUMBER OF FIELD VISITS, APRIL 2011–JUNE 2012

8. During the reporting period, WFP teams made 2,364 regular beneficiary monitoring visits and

276 logistics monitoring visits. There were two country-wide assessments – a Crop and Food

Security Assessment Mission (CFSAM) covering 133 sites and a MUAC survey in 53 locations.

There were also 94 site visits by donors and high-level missions such as the European

Commission on Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection, the Swedish International Development

Agency and the United Nations Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs. WFP

management made 62 visits, and there were an additional 34 visits to LFPs and 14 to food for

community development (FFCD) locations (see Figure 4).

FIGURE 4. NUMBER OF FIELD VISITS, BY ACTIVITY

9. Figure 5 shows regular beneficiary monitoring visits by site. This does not include assessment

missions, visits by donors and WFP management, and visits to LFP factories and FFCD sites.

92

36

130

84

187

306

389

346

193

135

220 245

83

349

235

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun

2011 2012

14

34

53

133

62

94

276

2,364

1 10 100 1,000 10,000

FFCD

LFP

MUAC assessment

CFSAM

Management visit

Donor/High level visit

Logistics monitoring

Beneficiary monitoring


4

FIGURE 5. FIELD VISITS, BY SITE

*Nurseries, kindergartens, primary schools, baby homes, child centres and boarding schools.

END-OF-PROJECT REVIEW

10. In line with standard WFP practice, an end-of-project review in July 2012 assessed the

efficiency, effectiveness, impact and sustainability of WFP’s assistance under EMOP 200266 with

a view to deriving lessons for future operations. After two days of training, six teams of

reviewers covered 41 counties or city districts in eight provinces that had received food since

the start of EMOP 200266 in April 2011. In Pyongyang an LFP factory was visited, but no other

information was collected.

11. The review2 was based on discussions with county officials3 and focus groups representing

pregnant and breastfeeding women and parents of children in institutions, as well as visits to

households,4 children’s institutions and LFP factories.

12. Selection of counties was semi-random: 40 of the 117 counties covered by the operation were

selected initially; Hwangju was added later. Pujon county was visited, but poor roads prevented

access to distant ri and information had to be gathered from county officials. In each county, ri

dong were selected randomly for assessment.

13. The selection of households at the second stage of sampling was not random, but focused on

households with pregnant and breastfeeding women.

2 Sample per site: interview with county officials, visit to one or two children’s institutions or paediatric wards, meeting with focus group for pregnant and breastfeeding women or parents of children at institutions, visits to two, three or four households and, where applicable, to an LFP factory. 3 From county coordination councils and departments of food administration, commerce, public health and education. 4 Two, three or four households, ideally a mix of beneficiary and non-beneficiary households.

579

815

415

427

96

32

County officials

Child institutions*

Pediatric wards/hospital

Households

Distribution sites

Market


5

14. Figure 6 shows that 134 household visits were made in the eight provinces, 51 percent were on

the east coast and 49 percent on the west coast. Of the respondents, 97 percent were women;

data was also collected from 53 children under 5 on illnesses and feeding practices.

FIGURE 6. REVIEW SAMPLE

Province No. of

counties

No. of interviews conducted

County

officials

Focus

groups Households

Children’s

institutions

LFP

factories

Kangwon 3 3 3 10 4 1

Nampo 1 1 1 4 0 0

N Hamgyong 7 7 7 28 9 1

N Hwanghae 7 7 7 16 4 0

Pyongyang 0 0 0 0 0 1

Ryanggang 2 2 2 7 2 1

S Hamgyong 9 9 8 21 10 1

S Hwanghae 4 4 4 22 4 0

N Pyongan 3 3 3 12 4 1

S Pyongan 5 5 5 14 4 0

Total 41 41 40 134 41 6

15. Of the households visited, 64 percent had a pregnant or breastfeeding woman, and 25 percent

were non-beneficiaries; of the remaining 10 percent, most had a child receiving assistance from

a children’s institution (see Figure 7). Most of the 41 children’s institutions visited were

nurseries, primary schools and kindergartens (see Figure 8).

FIGURE 7. HOUSEHOLDS BY BENEFICIARY CATEGORY

86

8 7 7 10

33

0

20

40

60

80

100

Pre

gnan

t /

bre

astf

eed

ing

wo

men

Nu

rser

y

Kin

der

gart

en

Pri

mar

y sc

ho

ol

Oth

er

No

n-b

enef

icar

y

Nu

mb

er o

f h

ou

seh

old

s


6

FIGURE 8. CHILDREN’S INSTITUTIONS VISITED

16. Of the households visited, 97 percent were headed by men. Household size ranged from two to

six people, averaging 3.2 members (see Figure 9); 40 percent had at least one child under 5,

62 percent had a child under 18, and 33 percent had an elderly person.

FIGURE 9. HOUSEHOLD COMPOSITION Children Adults Total

<6mo 6-23mo

2-4yrs 5-17yrs 18-59yrs 60+ yrs

Mean 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.3 2.0 0.4 3.2

17. A change in household composition had occurred in the preceding year in 38 percent of cases:

82 percent had a baby, 4 percent had a death and 14 percent had a marriage or other event.

18. PDS dependents accounted for 64 percent of the households; 35 percent were cooperative

farmers and one household was mixed. Data on household type was not recorded in eight

cases.

LIMITATIONS OF THE REVIEW

19. Sampling did not reach planned levels in every location because the time available was limited,

and the assessment covered areas assisted under EMOP 200266 and PRRO 200114. The sample

was not large enough to enable comparison among provinces, but it can be considered

representative in coastal areas. It was not equally divided between PDS dependants and

cooperative farmers, but valid information on household types was obtained. Data on child

illness and feeding practices is limited to children aged under 18 months.

4

10

2

7

3

9

6

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Bab

y h

om

e

Nu

rser

y

Ch

ild c

ente

r

Kin

der

gart

en

Bo

ard

ing

sch

oo

l

Pri

mar

y sc

ho

ol

Ped

iatr

ic h

osp

ital

/war

d

Nu

mb

er o

f in

stit

uti

on

s


7

EFFECTIVENESS, EFFICIENCY AND EQUALITY

Food Distributions

20. WFP distributed food assistance with the help of the Government. When food arrived – by sea

at Nampo, Hungnam or Chongjin, or by rail at Sinuiju and Namyang – the Government

unloaded it in the presence of WFP logistics officers. The food was then stored at the port or

distributed to county warehouses or LFP factories. When the WFP staff were satisfied that food

had arrived, a distribution plan guided delivery by government officials to children’s institutions

and paediatric hospitals, or to pregnant and breastfeeding women and elderly people, using

public distribution outlets in the north-eastern provinces.

21. Actual distributions observed by M&E are compared with planned figures in Figure 10.

Distribution targets were not reached, particularly in the first five months of EMOP 200266,

because of pipeline breaks, lack of funding and delays in procurement and external transport.

FIGURE 10. PLANNED AND ACTUAL FOOD DISTRIBUTIONS

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

40,000

Ap

ril

May

Jun

e

July

Au

gust

Sep

t

Oct

No

v

Dec

Jan

Feb

Mar

Ap

r

May

Jun

2011 2012

me

tric

to

ns

Plan

Actual


8

Food Receipts

22. Of the assessed counties, 68 percent had first received WFP food in 1998 or earlier; another

20 percent had been assisted for the first time in 2007/08. Food deliveries under EMOP 200266

were received most often from June 2011 (see Figure 11).

FIGURE 11. INITIAL FOOD RECEIPTS, BY COUNTY

23. All the counties received wheat and maize, Super Cereal, biscuits, soya beans and vegetable

oil. Food was received monthly, but there were pipeline breaks for some food types and the

quantities were reduced from the tonnages planned in EMOP 200266. Not all county officials

were aware of the planned tonnages, but those who were realized that the amounts actually

received amounted to only a third of the planned quantities. The counties wished to receive

more food and to expand WFP coverage and increase the range of activities.

24. Pregnant and breastfeeding women reported that they usually received food monthly. In some

locations adequate quantities of food were not available from May to September 2011; Super

Cereal rations were also reduced in April 2012.

25. Children’s institutions received food monthly. Distributions were regular because they were

prioritized by WFP and the Government. Some institutions requested larger quantities of food

and a wider range of food types.

26. The LFP factories received the food, premix and packaging in bulk and stored them in their

warehouses.

Suggested Food Basket Changes

27. Changes to the WFP food basket suggested by county officials and women in focus groups

included:

increase the ration of oil for hospitals, children’s institutions and pregnant and breastfeeding

women;

increase rations of Super Cereal for children and pregnant and breastfeeding women;

making rice the main cereal, especially for hospitals and nurseries, because it is easier to

digest;

adding a biscuit ration for nurseries and baby homes;

adding soybeans to rations for children’s institutions to make tofu or soya milk; and

increase the amount of biscuits because children liked them.

Distribution Delays

28. County officials did not report distribution delays, but noted that deliveries from ports to central

warehouses had sometimes been late. A few officials reported difficulties with transport to final

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

Apr 11

May 11

June 11

July 11

Aug 11

Sept 11

Oct 11

Nov 11

Dec 11

Jan 12

Feb 12

Mar 12

Apr 12


9

distribution points. Food was generally dispatched to distribution points within a week of

receipt.

29. Pipeline breaks delayed or reduced the amounts of biscuits, Super Cereal and oil. The breaks

lasted for up to three months, particularly in the initial phase of EMOP 200266. Cereal supplies

were irregular between May and September 2011, and cereals did not reach all beneficiaries

during the lean season.

Food Quality

30. Food quality was generally reported as “good”. All the institutions and beneficiaries interviewed

were very satisfied with food quality, especially Super Cereal and biscuits.

31. The LFP factories were generally very satisfied with the quality of raw materials and were

certain that their products were of good quality. The factories reported adherence to safety and

hygiene standards during production.

Food Usage

32. Women in focus groups stated that their children received and consumed food at schools and

institutions. In a few cases where children had brought biscuits home to share with siblings,

their parents had reminded them that they should eat the biscuits on-site. Half of the pregnant

and breastfeeding women shared some food with their children and husbands. They were

familiar with the foods received, knew how to prepare them, and liked them very much.

33. Institutions were familiar with Super Cereal and could prepare dishes that the children enjoyed,

particularly bread made from CMB. In general they reported that the children enjoyed the food

in any form, particularly Super Cereal. CSM was usually mixed with cereals or prepared as

porridge.

Food Production

34. Since 1998 the local production of fortified food has been central to WFP’s work to address

undernutrition and hunger in DPRK. Under a unique partnership between WFP and the

Government, 13 factories produce biscuits and Super Cereal for distribution as supplementary

food to children and women.

35. The Government provided the factories, warehouses, staff, electrical power and maintenance.

Under WFP oversight, the Government was responsible for supplying ingredients and

distributing biscuits and Super Cereal to nurseries, kindergartens, primary schools and

hospitals. WFP provided a cooking mix of iodized salt and baking soda and a micronutrient

premix of vitamins and minerals – funding shortfalls limited these supplies – and supplied

packaging materials, spare parts and technical expertise in food processing and fortification.

36. During EMOP 200266, production of biscuits and Super Cereal totalled 35,547 metric tons (MT):

biscuits accounted for 40 percent – 14,169 MT – and Super Cereal for 60 percent – 21,378 MT.

The initial plan was to increase production from 3,256 MT to 4,700 MT per month, and a

monthly quota was established for each factory. An optimistic monthly quota of 5,300 MT was

subsequently established on the basis of updated beneficiary numbers and the rations assigned

to them.

37. Between April and August 2011, when most factories suspended their activities, production

varied from 227 MT to 2,311 MT; this was largely because of shortages of raw materials. From

September 2011 stable production was resumed, and in January 2012 production peaked at

4,300 MT. Between January and June 2012, the monthly production quota was revised

quarterly to enable the LFP factories to plan more efficiently. Munchon biscuit factory reported

that its capacity was not fully utilized.

38. WFP teams made 34 regular monitoring visits to LFP factories; review teams re-visited six

factories. The visits included verification of accounts, stocks, raw materials and final products,

and assessments of warehouses. Production lines were checked to ensure that WFP standards

of food production were applied.


10

39. The LFP factories require uninterrupted supplies of power, water and packaging materials and

need periodic maintenance. The main needs reported during factory visits were spare parts and

maintenance of the ageing machinery. Storage space was adequate, but tarpaulins were

needed to protect the stocks from rain.

SPECIFIC FINDINGS FROM CHILDREN’S INSTITUTIONS

Paediatric Wards

40. WFP monitoring teams visited 415 paediatric wards or hospitals; another six were visited during

the end-of-project review.

41. Figure 12 shows the main diseases in children admitted to paediatric wards between April 2011

and June 2012, as reported from the 415 visits to hospitals. Of the medical staff at the

hospitals, 55 percent were women.

FIGURE 12. MAIN DISEASES IN PAEDIATRIC WARDS ON ADMISSION

42. The WFP monitoring teams collected information about sources of water at the paediatric

hospitals because it is directly linked to the health and nutritional status of the children. The

main sources were piped water – 84 percent – and well water – 11 percent.

Children’s Institutions

43. WFP monitoring teams visited 815 children’s institutions; the end-of-project review teams

visited another 35. The findings showed that 95 percent of the school officials interviewed

confirmed that all the biscuits provided by WFP were consumed by the pupils and that they

were fully satisfied with the quality.

44. Of the 815 children’s institutions visited during regular monitoring, 75 percent had access to

piped water. Of the caregivers and management staff at children’s institutions, 70 percent were

women.

90% 89%

70%

55%

41%

16% 12%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%


11

FOOD AVAILABILITY

45. The October 2011 CFSAM indicated that cereal production in the 2010/11 marketing year had

been 4.7 million metric tons (MT) compared with national requirements of 5.4 million MT. This

constituted an improvement of 347,000 MT compared with the previous year, largely

attributable to increased availability of fertilizers, fuel and electricity. The cereal gap remained

739,000 MT. However, the Government imported 325,000 MT, leaving a shortfall of

414,000 MT. The CFSAM recommended the provision of 120,000 MT of food for 3 million

people.

46. Production of wheat, barley and potatoes in July 2012 was reported by the Government as

207,000 MT, significantly less than the 500,000 MT estimated by the CFSAM. The main reason

for reduced production was the dry spell in May and June. Flooding, which is common from

June to August in DPRK, affected a number of areas.

FOOD ACCESS

47. Households reported that the main food sources in the week preceding the team visit had been

state shops, PDS and cooperative rations, and home production. Cooperative farmers used a

higher share of home production; PDS dependents relied on state shops, PDS rations and gifts

(see Figure 13).

FIGURE 13. HOUSEHOLD FOOD SOURCES

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

Pu

rch

ased

fro

m

stat

e sh

op

PD

S/C

oo

p r

atio

n

Ow

n p

rod

uct

ion

Gif

t

Gat

her

ing

Pu

rch

ased

fro

m

mar

ket

Hu

nti

ng

or

fish

ing

Foo

d a

id

All Coop farmer PDS dependant

Part 2:

Findings on Food Security


12

Kitchen Gardens and Livestock

48. Kitchen gardens and livestock are two important sources of food that can be directly controlled

by households. On average, 81 percent of the households assessed had kitchen gardens –

98 percent of cooperative farmers and 69 percent of PDS dependents. The average size of the

gardens was 21 pyeong.5 The main crops were vegetables, potatoes, maize and fruit (see

Figure 14).

FIGURE 14. KITCHEN GARDENS

Crop Production

Kg/year

(average)

Kg/year (range)

Maize 32 2-180

Potato 51 6-150

Fruits 37 2-150

Vegetables 126 7-800

49. The July review found that animals were kept by 78 percent of the households – 86 percent of

cooperative farmers and 72 percent of PDS dependents. These were mainly rabbits and poultry

for home consumption. In 2012, the average household kept two animals of each kind, slightly

fewer than in 2011.

Wild Foods

50. Wild foods are an important dietary supplement. Households reported consuming wild

vegetables twice a week. Gathering, hunting or fishing provided 5 percent of household food in

July 2012.

51. Focus group participants noted the importance of wild food in protecting food security:

13 percent ranked it as “very important” and 78 percent as “somewhat important”. County

officials reported that people are advised to maximize the use of wild foods, especially during

difficult times.

Household Expenditure on Food

52. Household expenditures were obtained in July 2012 by using the proportional piling method.

The findings may be inaccurate for food purchases, however, because more food was received

through the PDCs than was purchased. The main expenditure items were food, fuel, clothes and

housing (see Figure 15).

FIGURE 15. HOUSEHOLD EXPENDITURES

5 69.3 m2.

Food 39%

Energy 18%

Housing 11%

Health 1%

Education 1%

Transport 5%

Loan payment

1%

Savings 7%

Clothes 13%

Other 4%


13

53. Of food purchases, households prioritized vegetables, condiments and oil. PDS dependants

allocated more to vegetables, pulses, meat and cereals than cooperative farmers, who

purchased more condiments and oil (see Figure 16).

FIGURE 16. HOUSEHOLD FOOD EXPENDITURE PRIORITIES

PDS and Cooperative Farm Rations

54. Government rations are the main source of cereals for households in DPRK. PDS dependents –

70 percent of the population, mainly workers, officials, professionals and state farmers – are in

principle entitled to an average ration of 573 g per person per day in fortnightly or monthly

allocations. In view of their heavy workload, cooperative farmers are entitled to 600 g per day,

provided in an annual allocation after the main harvest.

55. These entitlements were never received in full: the rations varied according to the availability of

cereals. During EMOP 200266, rations decreased after April 2011 to 200 g or less per person

per day until September, but increased in October 2011 to 350 g per person after the main

harvest and have remained at or above this level since then (see Figure 17).

FIGURE 17. PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM RATIONS, 2008–2012

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Cer

eals

Fru

its

Mea

t/fi

sh

Oil

Pu

lses

Suga

r

Veg

etab

le

Co

nd

imen

ts

Cer

eals

Fru

its

Mea

t/fi

sh

Oil

Pu

lses

Suga

r

Veg

etab

le

Co

nd

imen

ts

Cer

eals

Fru

its

Mea

t/fi

sh

Oil

Pu

lses

Suga

r

Veg

etab

le

Co

nd

imen

ts

All Co-op farmer PDS dependant

3rd

2nd

1st

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

gram

s/p

ers

on

/day

Govt. Target

2008/2009

2009/2010

2010/2011

2011/2012


14

FOOD UTILIZATION

Number of Meals Consumed

56. Adults generally consumed three meals per day; very few households reported two meals. Most

pregnant and breastfeeding women also consume three meals, and some four. But in two-

thirds of the households, servings were reduced as a coping strategy.

Dietary Diversity

57. Households consumed at least one type of cereal, vegetable and condiment almost daily.

Animal or plant protein6 was consumed at most once per week (see Figure 18). The average

household consumed protein on 2.4 days per week, but 19 percent reported zero consumption

of any protein in a week. In general, people’s diet does not provide enough protein, fat or

micronutrients.

FIGURE 18. NUMBER OF DAYS PER WEEK ON WHICH FOODS WERE CONSUMED

6 Pulses, meat, fish, eggs.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

# d

ays

foo

d it

em w

as c

on

sum

ed Coop farmers PDS dependents Total


15

58. Food consumption patterns were further analysed in terms of the number of food groups7

consumed. In general, a daily diet of four food groups8 or fewer is not diverse and lacks

nutrients. Of the households assessed, 83 percent had poor diet diversity at 2010 levels, which

nonetheless constituted an improvement from 2009 and earlier (see Figure 19). Of PDS

dependants, 84 percent had poor diversity, compared with 77 percent of cooperative farmers.

FIGURE 19. HOUSEHOLD DIETARY DIVERSITY

Food Consumption

59. Households were asked about the food items consumed in the week before the assessment to

enable the calculation of a standard food consumption score (FCS) as a proxy indicator for food

insecurity.9 The FCS score is expressed as “poor”, “borderline” or “acceptable”.

60. The findings from WFP’s regular monitoring of 427 households during EMOP 200266 suggest

that food consumption progressively improved only after December 2011 and that the

percentage of “poor” household food consumption decreased until April 2012. After that the

situation deteriorated, mainly as a result of the lean season, and remained stable until the end

of June 2012. The monthly information was obtained from a limited number of households.

Although a trend can be discerned, caution is needed when interpreting the findings on a larger

scale.

61. Data from the end-of-project review (see Figure 20) showed improved food consumption

compared with 2011, but the timing of the assessments was not the same. It can be assumed,

however, that the situation in July 2011 was worse than in 2012 because the CFSAM was a

post-harvest assessment and the RFSA took place after a series of shocks. Nonetheless,

57 percent of households had borderline consumption: if a shock were to reduce food

production and rations, these households could slip into the “poor” category. Even with the

improvement after 2011, food consumption had not returned to 2009/10 levels but was still

better than in 2008.

7 Based on the WFP standard food consumption table: eight food groups are analysed: cereals, pulses, animal protein, dairy products, oil or fat, sugar, vegetables and fruit. 8 Based on International Food Policy Research Institute guidelines: <4.5 food groups consumed during the previous 24 hours indicates low diversity, 4.5–6 medium and 6+ high diversity. 9 FCS is a composite based on dietary diversity, food frequency and relative nutritional importance of the food groups consumed: the higher the FCS, the higher the dietary diversity and frequency. High food consumption increases the possibility that a household achieves nutrient adequacy. The FCS cut-off points used by WFP for DPRK include “poor” <=28, “borderline” >28-42 and “acceptable >42.

91% 97% 81% 83%

8% 3% 19% 16%

0% 1%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

RFSA WFP WFP WFP

June Jun/Jul May-June July

2008 2009 2010 2012

1 - Low (<4) 2 - Medium (5-6) 3 - High (>=7)


16

FIGURE 20. HOUSEHOLD FOOD CONSUMPTION

FOOD SECURITY

62. Of the counties visited during the review, 71 percent had a food deficit, 22 percent had a

surplus and 7 percent were mixed10 in terms of county food production. Imported foods came

from the cereal basket and provincial sources. The pattern was similar for exports.

63. County officials and women in focus groups reported that the three main factors affecting food

security were floods, cold winters and lack of agricultural inputs; 50 percent of the county

officials identified all of these. Natural disasters were mentioned by 24 percent of county

officials.

64. Asked to rank factors affecting food security in order of importance, the women identified

floods, low food production, drought, low PDS rations, and lack of agricultural inputs. Wild

foods, kitchen gardens and livestock were rated as “somewhat important” factors, but food

prices were generally regarded as not important (see Figure 21).

FIGURE 21. FACTORS AFFECTING FOOD SECURITY

WASH = water, sanitation and hygiene.

65. County officials categorized 59 percent of the counties as neutral and 22 percent as more food

insecure than other counties in their provinces, but were unable to report on variations over

10 Some food items are imported and some are exported.

41%

17% 4%

77% 66%

25%

30%

35%

25%

19% 28%

57%

29% 48%

72%

4% 6% 19%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

RFSA WFP WFP RFSA CFSAM WFP

June July May-Jun Feb Oct July

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Poor (<28) Borderline (28-42) Acceptable (>42)

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100% Very important Somewhat imporant


17

periods of years. The main causes of county food insecurity were limited arable land,

mountainous terrain, reliance on food imports and a high proportion of PDS dependents.

66. Of the 41 counties, 39 reported that food security was better in July 2012 than in the previous

year, largely as a result of increased PDS rations. A few also observed that WFP food had

improved the situation. Many officials expected the situation to deteriorate in the coming

months with the news of reduced early crop production.

COPING STRATEGIES

67. County officials reported that in times of food shortage people were encouraged to utilize wild

foods, cultivate more vegetables and use food sparingly. The counties had mobilized as many

people as possible for agriculture to maximize food production. Focus groups listed utilization of

wild foods, cultivating kitchen gardens, keeping livestock, eating smaller meals and obtaining

support from relatives as the main coping strategies.

68. The most common household coping strategies were to rely on less preferred foods, limit

portion sizes, obtain support from relatives and add water to food to increase its volume (see

Figure 22). The percentage of households limiting portion sizes and relying on less preferred

foods had increased compared with 2011 and 2010. Adding water to meals had returned to

2008/09 levels after an improvement in 2010.

FIGURE 22. HOUSEHOLD COPING STRATEGIES

69. Data from the regular monitoring visits to 427 beneficiary households during EMOP 200266

showed that 52 percent preferred less expensive food and 47 percent relied on relatives and

friends.

TARGETING

70. The review focused on the most vulnerable and those prioritized for food assistance, and sought

data on the characteristics of vulnerable households.

Vulnerable Groups and Priority for Food Assistance

71. Asked to name the most vulnerable groups, county officials and focus groups identified elderly

people, pregnant and breastfeeding women, children, PDS dependents and households with

many children or dependents (see Figure 23). The main reasons for vulnerability were inability

to work and earn income and dependence on PDS rations.

59%

26%

40%

61% 66%

14%

70%

50%

73%

37%

13%

71%

25% 32%

2%

38%

1% 0%

47%

0%

26%

59% 64% 68%

10%

87%

25% 29%

Add water to meals to increase volume

Borrowed food, helped by friends or

relatives

Limited portion sizes

at meals

Reduced number of

meals per day

Rely on less preferred, less

expensive food

Restricted consumption by adults for

children to eat

Wild food collection

2008 - RFSA 2009 - WFP 2010 - WFP 2012 - WFP


18

FIGURE 23. VULNERABLE GROUPS IDENTIFIED

HH = householders.

72. Half of the county officials stated that WFP’s activities reached the most vulnerable. The focus

groups were of the view that WFP had reached more than half, but not elderly people or, in

some cases, PDS dependents. If EMOP 200266 had been better funded, more elderly people

could have been assisted. The officials and householders said that in future activities they

would give greater priority to children, pregnant and breastfeeding women, and elderly people

(see Figure 24). All county officials and 95 percent of householders emphasized that food

assistance would be needed in future.

FIGURE 24. PRIORITY GROUPS IDENTIFIED FOR ASSISTANCE

Geographical Vulnerability

73. Asked about differences in food security between their counties and other counties in the

province, the officials observed that in general differences were minimal, but that towns were

sometimes reported as more food-insecure because there were fewer kitchen gardens or wild

foods. In some counties the most vulnerable people lived in remote mountainous areas.

78%

46% 39%

46%

22% 12%

2% 0

68%

54% 49% 46%

24%

0 8% 5%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Eld

erly

Pre

gnan

t /

bre

astf

eed

ing

wo

men

Ch

ildre

n

HH

wit

h m

any

child

ren

PD

S d

epen

den

t

HH

wit

h m

any

dep

end

ants

Sick

ch

ildre

n

Urb

an H

H

County officals Focus groups

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Elderly

Pregnant / breastfeeding women

Children

HH County officials


19

74. The household data revealed differences between the coastal areas, but sample sizes were

limited and counties had not been selected to represent the geographical areas so much as WFP

coverage. Poor food consumption was more common on the east coast, but dietary diversity –

based on recalled consumption on the day before the review took place by 24 respondents –

was better (see Figures 25 and 26). This suggests that households on the west coast were

more vulnerable in case of a decline in food production.

FIGURE 25. FOOD CONSUMPTION IN COASTAL AREAS

FIGURE 26. DIETARY DIVERSITY ON THE EAST AND WEST COASTS

Public Distribution System Dependents and Cooperative Farmers

75. Cooperative farmers were more food-secure than PDS dependents, who were less likely to have

kitchen gardens and livestock, but PDS dependents had marginally higher proportions of

“acceptable” and “poor” consumption than cooperative farmers. On the other hand, dietary

diversity based on 24-hour recall among PDS dependents was poorer than among cooperative

farmers.

Kitchen Gardens and Livestock

76. Focus groups and county officials observed that households without kitchen gardens or

livestock were more vulnerable to food insecurity. The household data showed a strong

correlation between poor food consumption and diversity and the absence of kitchen gardens

and livestock, which clearly contribute significantly to household food utilization.

22% 27%

63% 50%

15% 23%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

West East


87% 79%

12% 20% 1% 2%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

West East

1- Low (<4) 2 - Medium (5-6) 3 - High (>=7)


20

Household Size and Composition: Large Families and Elderly People

77. Two commonly reported vulnerabilities were families with many children or dependants and

households with elderly people, either in families or living alone. In households with fewer than

three members or with five or more members, food consumption and diversity were poorer.

78. The data from the review showed that only 14 percent of households with elderly members had

poor food consumption, compared with 30 percent of households without. However., 68 percent

of households with elderly people had “borderline” food consumption, compared with

51 percent of those without. Households with elderly people had slightly lower food-

consumption scores, however, and were at higher risk of falling into the “poor” consumption

category in the case of a shock.

79. Households with elderly members had reduced meal sizes and added water to increase food

volume more often than those without. This practice affects food quantity and nutrient intake

for the whole household, which is not measured in the food-consumption groups, and implies

that their diet is nutritionally inadequate.


21

80. This section refers to the logical framework of EMOP 200266 in discussing the extent to which

the targets of the operation were met during and after implementation.

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 1:

SAVE LIVES AND PROTECT LIVELIHOODS IN EMERGENCIES

Outcome 1

Improved food consumption over assistance period for

target population

Households with poor food consumption scores reduced from 77 percent to 30 percent

81. The target of reducing poor food consumption from 77 percent to 30 percent of households was

exceeded: in July 2012 poor food consumption was observed in only 25 percent of households

(see Figure 27). The improvement in food consumption was steady during EMOP 200266, as

measured by standard food-security assessments. Measurement of the baseline and the final

results took place in different months, however, so food consumption was unlikely to be the

same – but the improvement was very clear and WFP food contributed towards the

achievement.

Part 3:

Outcomes and Outputs


22

FIGURE 27. HOUSEHOLD FOOD CONSUMPTION

82. Despite the work of WFP and its international partners, much of the population of DPRK

suffered food deprivation from May to September 2011 because the PDS cereal ration was

reduced to 200 grams per person, per day – a third of minimum daily energy requirements.

The reduction of the ration is one reason why 66 percent of beneficiaries still had poor food

consumption in October 2011. Commercial imports, bilateral assistance and an early harvest

did not cover cereal requirements, and many urban PDS-dependent households depended on

rural relatives to provide some cereals. Other coping mechanisms included collecting wild foods,

adding water to increase food volume, using informal markets and reducing the size or number

of meals.

83. WFP sought to ensure that food was available from May to October, the most difficult period,

but was hampered by pipeline breaks and a lack of funding. The improvement in FCS after

December may be attributed to a better harvest of winter vegetables and the scaling up of WFP

food distributions from October 2011.

Outcome 2

Stabilized acute malnutrition in target groups of children

Prevalence of low MUAC among children under 5 stabilized at 5 percent of target group

84. The preliminary findings from the national nutrition survey conducted in September – October

2012 by the government in partnership with UNICEF, the World Health Organization and WFP,

indicate modestly improved child nutritional situation. Chronic malnutrition was found at 27.9

percent, a reduction from 32.4 percent in 2009 (MICS) which translates into “poor” situation

based on WHO standards. Child acute malnutrition reduced to 4.0 percent from 5.2 percent and

the situation is considered “acceptable”.

85. In November 2011, the Institute of Child Nutrition and WFP measured MUAC in 696 children

under 5 in 35 counties where EMOP 200266 was being implemented. The global acute

malnutrition rate was 14.1 percent, severe acute malnutrition was 1.6 percent and moderate

acute malnutrition was 12.5 percent.

77% 66%

25%

19% 28%

57%

4% 6% 19%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

RFSA CFSAM WFP

February October July

2011 2011 2012



23

86. In October 2011, UNICEF supported the Ministry of Public Health in a rapid screening and

treatment of SAM among children under 5 in 25 counties, reaching 80 percent of the

200,297 children aged 6–59 months. The results showed critical malnutrition rates in terms of

WHO standards, in that 17.4 percent were acutely malnourished. A follow-up screening in the

same area in February 2012 showed an improvement, in that acute malnutrition had been

reduced to 5.4 percent (see Figure 28).

FIGURE 28. ACUTE MALNUTRITION IN CHILDREN, OCTOBER AND NOVEMBER 2011, FEBRUARY 2012 (MUAC)

87. In view of the fragile food and nutrition security situation in DPRK, UNICEF and the Ministry of

Public Health started community management of acute malnutrition projects in the 25 most

vulnerable counties, mainly in towns in four north-eastern provinces. Save the Children has

intervened in 25 counties in three other provinces. The aims are to address acute malnutrition,

manage the food and nutrition security of vulnerable populations, and counter the inevitable

increase in acute malnutrition and the negative long-term consequences for development. WFP

is already providing nutritious meals for children in institutions, and will address moderate

acute malnutrition under these community programmes to complement the treatment of

severely malnourished children as soon as the national guidelines are finalized.

Outputs 1.1, 2.1 and 2.2

1.1 and 2.1

Food items distributed in sufficient quantity and quality to targeted beneficiaries.

2.2

Days of food rations distributed to targeted beneficiaries

88. Figures 29 and 30 show that actual quantities of food distributed were well below the target,

particularly during the first five months of EMOP 200266, because of pipeline breaks, lack of

funding and procurement and external transport delays. As a result, output 2.2 – days of food

rations distributed – did not achieve its target.

17.4%

14.1%

5.4%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

UNICEF WFP UNICEF

October November February

2011 2011 2012


24

89. During its 15 months, EMOP 200266 distributed 103,300mt of food to 3 million people.

FIGURE 29. PLANNED AND ACTUAL QUANTITIES OF FOOD DISTRIBUTED, APRIL 2011– JUNE 2012

FIGURE 30. PLANNED AND ACTUAL NUMBERS OF BENEFICIARIES ASSISTED, APRIL 2011–JUNE 2012

Note: Beneficiaries may not have received the full food basket or full ration entitlements.

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

40,000

April May June July August Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun

2011 2012

me

tric

to

ns

Plan

Actual

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

3,500,000

4,000,000


2011 2012

Be

ne

fici

arie

s

Plan

Actual


25

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 5: STRENGTHEN THE CAPACITIES OF COUNTRIES TO

REDUCE HUNGER THROUGH HAND-OVER STRATEGIES AND LOCAL PURCHASE

Outcome 3

Increased local production capacity for fortified foods

44 percent increase in production of fortified foods, including complementary

food and special nutritional products

Output 3.1

Fortified food production quantity

13 food factories supported, with full production capacity increased from

3,256 metric tons to 4,700 metric tons per month

90. Thirteen LFP factories were supported throughout EMOP 200266. Average production increased

in some factories, and in spite of a pipeline break at one stage caused by late arrivals of

donations and a lack of raw materials annual local food production totalled 35,547 MT, which

amounts to 55 percent of planned output (see Figures 31 and 32).

FIGURE 31. TARGET AND ACTUAL TONNAGES OF FORTIFIED BLENDED FOODS PRODUCED IN LFP FACTORIES

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000


2011 2012

1,742 1,371

2,311

743

227

3,639

1,858

2,900 2,976

4,331 3,941

3,282 3,617

1,455 1,149

me

tric

to

ns

Plan

Actual


26

FIGURE 32. ACTUAL LFP FACTORY PRODUCTION SHARE, APRIL –JUNE 2011, BY FOOD TYPE

MM= maize meal.

Output 3.1

Number of people reached through LFPs

91. Figure 33 shows the monthly average number of beneficiaries reached between April 2011 and

June 2012. For the reasons given above, it was not possible to achieve the targets.

FIGURE 33. BENEFICIARIES REACHED PER MONTH ON AVERAGE, BY TYPE, APRIL 2011–JULY 2012

Biscuits 40%

CMB 38%

CSM 16%

RMB 1%

MM 5%

7,733 9,506

292,044 312,514

652,417 679,554

-

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

800,000


27

92. Discussions with county officials, focus groups and staff at children’s institutions indicated that

EMOP 200266 had improved:

health and nutrition among pregnant and breastfeeding women and children;

attendance rates at children’s institutions;

children’s recovery rates at paediatric hospitals;

the birthweight of babies; and

food consumption.

93. Impacts were difficult to measure. Some county officials estimated changes in low birthweight

percentages, for example, but these could not be verified. The prevalence of child malnutrition

remains a challenge in that the interpretation of the indicators varies among counties and

institutions, but even slight improvements constitute success in terms of EMOP 200266

objectives.

94. In response to the reviewers’ question as to what peoples’ lives would be like without WFP food

assistance, many people observed that they would find a way to manage and that the

Government would help them. A significant number reported that the health and nutrition of

children and women would decline.

95. County officials and women in focus groups rated the most effective activities as food

distributions for children and pregnant and breastfeeding women (see Figure 34). The children

needed the food to support growth, and improved nutrition among pregnant women had

reduced the prevalence of low birthweight and enhances the health of babies. Health officials

reported faster recovery rates among children in paediatric hospitals.

FIGURE 34. MOST EFFECTIVE ACTIVITIES REPORTED BY COUNTY OFFICIALS AND FOCUS GROUPS

FGD: focus group discussion; FFCD: food for community development.

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

FFCD

All

Pregnant / breastfeeding women

Children

FGD County offical

Part 4:

Impact and Effectiveness


28

96. Parents observed that children were not hungry when they came home from institutions after

receiving WFP-supported on-site meals, that they were very happy with the food provided, and

wished the assistance to continue. The LFP factory managers and staff reported that they were

happy to produce fortified food for children and women. The manager of the Munchon biscuit

factory was particularly proud that their biscuits had been ranked the best in the country.

Awareness and Value of WFP Assistance

97. The reviewers found that the county officials were aware that WFP was a major humanitarian

organization that provided food assistance for vulnerable and disaster-affected people and that

it also addressed hunger in general. Some knew that WFP was a United Nations organization.

98. The women in focus groups knew that WFP provided food for vulnerable groups such as women

and children, and some mentioned the nutritional value of the food. They also knew that WFP

was an international organization, but not always that it is part of the United Nations.

99. All those interviewed were very happy with WFP’s food assistance and hoped that the

programmes would continue. Of the householders interviewed, 5 percent stated that they would

not need WFP food assistance, 10 percent said that they would need it in an emergency or

during a lean season, and 85 percent said that they would need continuous food assistance in

future.

Suggestions for the Future

100. The county officials were keen to continue with the implementation of WFP’s activities. They

hoped to receive assistance for pregnant and breastfeeding women, children and hospitals,

and to be able to include elderly people more fully. More than half of the counties also asked

for FFCD activities, which were much preferred: they had been successful in the past and had

been included in PRRO 200114. Some also asked for support for children in middle school.

101. The county officials also hoped that WFP would be able to provide food regularly according to

the original allocations so that beneficiaries could be sure of continuous receipts of WFP food.

Oil and pulses were much in demand for inclusion in the food basket, and more Super Cereal

and biscuits were requested.


29

FINDINGS

EMOP 200266 was effective in that it reached many of the targeted beneficiaries.

Implementation was satisfactory in spite of operational challenges such as a funding shortfall.

Overall, the reviewers found that EMOP 200266 had been much appreciated by the beneficiaries

and county officials, and that it had reached the most needy population groups. Food had been

of good quality and much liked by the beneficiaries. In general, food had been received fairly

regularly but in reduced quantities as a result of funding shortfalls. Many of the county officials

understood the reasons behind the reduced food receipts.

Food security in terms of household food consumption had improved since 2011, but was

poorer than in 2009 and remained precarious. A large proportion of households had

“borderline” food consumption and were reducing serving sizes, adding water to meals and

relying on cheaper foods. Their intake of protein was low and their dietary diversity was poor in

terms of the number of food groups consumed. Any shock or reduction in food availability

would reduce such households to the “poor” food-consumption category. The population groups

most likely to experience food-related shocks were children, pregnant and breastfeeding

women and elderly people. PDS-dependent households and those with many children or

dependants could resist a shock more easily, but dependents were largely unable to provide

income to support the household.

The main factors that mitigated food insecurity were the PDS rations and gathering wild foods,

cultivating kitchen gardens and keeping livestock. But floods, droughts, and lack of agricultural

inputs all tended to exacerbate food insecurity.

Food consumption improved with ownership of a kitchen garden or livestock. Women from the

focus groups and the county officials stated that households without kitchen gardens or

livestock were more vulnerable to food insecurity.

County officials and beneficiaries wanted WFP’s food assistance to continue. An important issue

raised was the need for continuous support without pipeline breaks so that food would be

delivered regularly. The reviewers noted suggestions that the rations should be increased in

size and should contain more food types. These proposals would be analysed, taking into

consideration the nutritional value of the food basket and the prevailing poor dietary diversity.

The current targeting of population groups was seen as appropriate, but if adequate funding

were available more support could be provided for elderly people. It was suggested that FFCD

projects should be planned for the future with a focus on sustainable development and

improved food production – major factors in preventing food insecurity. Projects to increase

access to kitchen gardens and small livestock were also suggested.

Part 5:

Findings, Recommendations

and Conclusions


30

RECOMMENDATIONS

For its next operation, WFP should maintain the conditions agreed in the Letter of

Understanding with the Government for EMOP 200266 so that the extent and quality of

monitoring can be maintained.

Training and orientation for local officials, for example in children’s institutions, are highly

recommended. WFP might, for instance, consider developing information, education and

communications materials on Super Cereal.

WFP’s beneficiary targeting of young children and pregnant and breastfeeding women is

appropriate and should continue. Locally produced Super Cereal and biscuits are highly

appreciated and should continue to be provided in future.

Inclusion of the elderly in food assistance could be considered, especially in the most food-

insecure areas during lean seasons to ensure that elderly people and their families consume

larger quantities of food.

WFP should consider standardizing rations for projects. EMOP and PRRO rations should be

matched as much as possible.

WFP should consider including pulses in household rations to increase consumption of protein.

A CFSAM is needed to determine the prospects of food production in 2012. It should capture

information on household food consumption to understand how this indicator will develop,

especially in terms of the high proportion of borderline food consumption, coping strategies and

reduced production of early crops.

WFP should support as far as practicable the creation and improvement of kitchen gardens and

small livestock as means to avert food insecurity.

WFP should continue to advocate with donors to ensure that more funding and resources are

available to prevent pipeline breaks, especially during lean seasons.

CONCLUSIONS

102. It is clear that in delivering 103,000 metric tons of food assistance over 15 months,

EMOP 200266 made a significant contribution to enhancing the food intake and nutrition

status of 3 million vulnerable children, women and men at a time of serious food insecurity

in DPRK. When the operation started in April 2011, much of the population were suffering

from prolonged food deprivation, largely because the PDS ration had been reduced to less

than 200 g per person per day following a drought and successive poor harvests.

103. The successes of WFP’s EMOP 200266 were achieved with the support of the Government of

DPRK and of the many county officials and focus groups involved in implementing it. Their

commitment and hard work are warmly acknowledged. In particular, WFP staff were granted

unprecedented access to the project areas under the terms of the Letter of Understanding

with the Government, which made it possible to deliver food assistance to many needy

people and to monitor outputs and outcomes with a view to optimizing the activities.

104. The generous contributions received from the donors who supported the operation are also

gratefully acknowledged.

105. But it has to be said that EMOP 200266 received only a fraction of the required funding and

resources requested from the international community. Potential donors may have been

inhibited by the regime of sanctions currently applied to DPRK, but the lack of funding and

resources caused EMOP 200266 to fall well short of its targets, particularly in the first seven

months. This meant that WFP was unable to mobilize sufficient food to address the

widespread hunger and malnutrition and hence contribute to maintaining public health. As

the 2011 CFSAM noted: “… health officials interviewed reported a 50 to 100 percent increase

in the admissions of malnourished children into paediatric wards compared to last year, a

sharp rise in low-birthweight … and several cases of oedema. Inadequate food intake has

clearly compounded the health and nutrition status of vulnerable groups”.

106. WFP has acknowledged the resulting delays and inconveniences resulting from late

procurement and external transport delays. A review of procurement processes was carried


31

out with a view to preventing future shortfalls as far as possible, and the WFP country office

undertook a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats analysis to improve

operational effectiveness and efficiency.

107. WFP continues to be concerned about the long-term intellectual and physical development of

young children, who are malnourished because their diet is monotonous and lacking in

protein, fats and micronutrients. Operational activities continue to focus on providing

nutritious food products to address the nutritional needs of young children and their

mothers.

WFP in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea

21 Munsudong, Pyongyang, DPR Korea

Tel: +850 2 3817219 / +850 2 3817217

Fax: +850 2 3817639

Email: [email protected]

Front cover photo: WFP/Rein Skullerud

mailto:[email protected]

Performance Assessment of Emergency Operation 200266

Documents

Transcript of Performance Assessment of Emergency Operation 200266