FSL Cluster Coordination meeting,28th November, 2013

PRELIMINARY FINDINGS OF THE EFSAs IN PIBOR, GUMRUK,

KONGOR AND ACHARI

Assessment coverageLocations covered: Pibor, Gumuruk and Kongor

Payams in Pibor County and Achari in Pochalla County- based on access

Assessments conducted from 7th October -2nd November 2013

Collaborative effort of Plan International, NPA, Oxfam, WFP and MSF (Nutrition)

1,269 HHs assessed across the four locations, 4,314 children under 5 years screened for acute malnutrition using MUAC

Quantitative and qualitative methods used in data collection

Objective Develop an understand of the food security

and livelihoods situation of the communities in the 4 locations: specifically

o Current food security and livelihoods situation

o How people are coping o How the situation may evolve in the short

and medium termo If any critical needs

Findings: Food Security Situation

•Overall, worse FS outlook compared with the rest of JS (31% SFI vs 5.5%; 53% MFI vs 32%)• Variations in FI levels but Achari reflects worse situations compared to the rest

Food consumption

• 62% of HHs have inadequate food consumption (31% poor and 31% borderline)• Worse food consumption compared to the rest of Jonglei• Achari with worse FCS while Pibor is better

Food access•Composite indicator integrating income reliability, stability and HH expenditures

•78% have poor food access •Variations exist across locations

Income activities/sources

•Main income sources: Sale of natural resources, sale of livestock, •Variations: Pibor, Gumuruk due to availability of functioning markets•Less sale of natural resources in Kongor due to lack of market

Expenditures

•77% income spent on food; 36% on cereals alone

Expenditures on food

•Less spending on food in Kongor due to lack of a functioning market

Coping strategies index

•32% and 3% use medium and high coping strategies respectively compared to only 2% in the rest of JS; indicating more use of adverse coping strategies in Pibor than the rest

Coping strategies applied

•More HHs use each of the coping strategies in Pibor than else where in JS and South Sudan

Shocks

•Insecurity greatest shock reported•Lack of food reported only in JS due to limited market access•Delayed rains and weeds least shocks because few people cultivated

RecommendationsA combination of conditional and unconditional

food assistance depending on possible operation modes

Targeted supplementary feeding programme to keep the acute malnutrition levels low

Regular situation monitoringFisheries assistance through providing access to

fishing gearsProvision of veterinary servicesProvision of education and health servicesSanitation interventionsAgricultural production inputs for next season if

the situation improves