Stakeholder mapping lr part 1
-
Upload
sun-civil-society-network -
Category
Government & Nonprofit
-
view
195 -
download
0
Transcript of Stakeholder mapping lr part 1
Nutrition Stakeholder and Action Mapping : Rwanda case study
Learning Route Workshop
Kigali October 2016
Rwanda CSA Learning Route 2016 2
Agenda
• What is nutrition stakeholder and action mapping ?
• Objectives of stakeholder and action mapping
• What the results of stakeholder and action mapping show
• What can the stakeholder and action mapping help you with ?
• Historical background of the nutrition stakeholder and action
mapping in Rwanda
• Some key analysis results and maps from both the 2012
mapping and the 2015 mapping
Rwanda CSA Learning Route 2016 3
What is Nutrition Stakeholder and Action Mapping ?
Indicative view of :
• Who the key stakeholders in nutrition are
• Where they are working
• Delivery channels used
• Estimate of how many they are reaching
Important to know :
• It is not a research or exact science.
• Estimates of geographical and beneficiary coverage based on the info
reported and should not be used as publicly approved or validated data
• Not necessarily all stakeholders can be identified as reporting is voluntary
• Focusing on chosen Core Nutrition Actions (CNAs) and not all organizations
work on them
• Not assessing the quality of interventions
• Partners , projects and programme funding changes continuously
Rwanda CSA Learning Route 2016 4
Objectives of Stakeholder & Action Mapping
Get better overview of who is doing what and where in nutrition in
Rwanda
Identify potential gaps in nutrition action coverage of geographies &
beneficiaries
Help inform and improve planning and scale up of core nutrition actions
in Rwanda
Rwanda CSA Learning Route 2016 5
What the results of the Stakeholder & Action Mapping show
Overall: Shows the current situation and, by showing the
gaps, the potential for scale-up of mapped actions
Who does what,
where?
Via which
delivery
mechanisms?
How many
beneficiaries
are reached?
Rwanda CSA Learning Route 2016 6
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 CSA Learning Route 2016 7
Background of the nutrition stakeholder mapping in Rwanda
• Partners were already being coordinated through the Nutrition
Technical Working Group (NTWG) that later became National
Food and Nutrition Technical working Group (NFNTWG)
• No much information was known about what they do and where
they are working
• It was not easy to prioritize interventions, allocate and track
partners
• One UN/REACH proposed to the government to conduct the
mapping as a way to support addressing these issues, and the
proposal was approved
• First mapping conducted in 2012-2013 (using 2012 data) and it
was updated in 2015 (using 2014 data)
Rwanda CSA Learning Route 2016 8
Nutrition stakeholders and key interventions in 2012
Rwanda CSA Learning Route 2016 9
Nutrition interventions and sector coverage in 2012
Rwanda CSA Learning Route 2016 10
Nutrition interventions and stunting prevalence in 2012
11
Situation Analysis Dashboard (National Level) What is the nutrition situation stakeholders need to address? (2015 mapping)
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
Nu
trit
ion
al
imp
act
37.9%
2.2%
0.6%
9.3%
19.2%
Un
derly
ing
cau
ses
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
cau
ses
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/A DHS
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/A N/A N/A N/A
Note: Missing information to be updated as soon as the full Rwanda DHS 2014/15 is released
12
What catalysts & implementers are working in which districts? How many CNAs are they working on, and how many sectors are they covering? (2015 mapping )
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
Color code explanations:
Project end in 2015
Mostly central district level support
% of sectors covered:
0-25% of sectors
26-50% of sectors
51-75% of sectors
76-99% of sectors
100% of sectors
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.
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
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
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
NB! Only shows stakeholders who have reported
13
What % of the target group is covered nationally and how? (1/2)
(2015 mapping)
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 6-59 months
Children 0-59 months with severe
diarrhoea
Children 0-59 months with SAM
Children 0-59 months with MAM
Children 6-59 months
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 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
MIY
CN
D
isease
pre
v./m
gm
t
Mic
ron
utr
ien
t
su
pp
lem
en
tati
on
M
AM
/SA
M
Provide Vitamin A
supplements
CHWs, Health centers,
Mass campaigns 30 / 30
Conduct child growth
monitoring / screening
Promote/Provide
ANC visits (4+)
MC
H
CHWs, Health centers, Hospitals Pregnant women 30 / 30
CHWs, Health centers, Hospitals Pregnant women 30 / 30
Pregnant & lactating women
HHs with children u5 (CBNP)
6-23 months in Ubudehe 1&2
PLW in Ubudehe 1&2
Children 12-59 months
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
14
What % of the target group is covered nationally and how? (2/2) (2015 mapping)
Country relevant actions
# of districts
covered Key delivery mechanisms
FFLS, Agriculture village promotors,
Coops, RAB
FFLS, Agriculture village promotors,
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
FFLS, Agriculture village promotors,
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
Provide/Support improved
sanitation
Carry out nutr. education
(e.g. cooking demos)
Promote hygiene / hand
washing
Provide conditional social
safety net actions (VUP)
Fo
od
& A
gri
cu
ltu
re
WA
SH
2
Nu
trit
ion
ed
ucati
on
Carry out nutr. education at
school (e.g. school gardens)
Districts, UN agencies, NGOs,
Community leaders
Provide school feeding
(One Cup of Milk)
So
cia
l
secu
rity
FFLS, Agriculture village promotors,
CHWs, Coops, NGOs Household with children under 5 30 / 30
Household with children under 5
Households
Schools
Households
Schools
Pregnant & lactating women
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
15
Prevalence of stunting varies across districts, and not all the
districts with high stunting have all core nutrition actions (2015 mapping)
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%
16
Only one district have an action intensity where more than 75%
of core nutrition actions reach at least 30% of target population (2015 mapping)
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%
17
Action & beneficiary coverage (2015 mapping)
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
479
1521
27282829
0 10 20 30
Provide specialized nutritious products for CF Provide micronutrient suppl. (MNPs/Ongera)1
Provide/Support improved water source Provide school feeding (One Cup of Milk)
Provide/Support improved 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)
113
37
35
1618
303033
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 tablets Vitamin 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 practices Optimal CF practices
Treatment of MAM
# of districts per CNA: Beneficiary coverage per CNA:
>75%
50-75%
25-50%
<25%
+%-pts
30 districts
<30 districts
Source: Rwanda Stakeholder & Action Mapping 2014/15
Thank you
Merci beaucoup
Murakoze cyane