1. IVAP- Progress, Findings and Next Steps

2. IVAP Timeline
Mar 2011 Completion of Peshawar Valley IVAP
May-July 2010 IVAP Pilot
Aug 2010 RTE
Nov 2010 IVAP restart
2008 Start of displacement
Ongoing- Registration process
July 2010 update on findings shared and endorsed by all (WFP, PDMA, FDMA, SSG, OCHA)
April PSM , DSTF tasked with a vulnerability assessment with assistance to continue to vulnerable families
June 2010 –PSM reaffirmed assistance would continue to IVAP vulnerable
Oct PSM note that IVAP should continue and assistance (including food) should continue to the vulnerable
May HCT update of IVAP pilot presented
Jan HCT update of IVAP and results shared at separate meeting
March PSM agreement for assessment
RTE: “while the registration exercise was a logistic triumph, the registration criteria were fundamentally flawed and led to inclusion and exclusion errors both on IDP status and on the need for assistance…thus, the response was category- based (on the registration criteria) rather than status- based (IDP) or needs-based. The major humanitarian actors accepted the flawed registration and used it as a basis for their own distributions.”

3. Partners
FRD

4. Objectives The IVAP project has two main objectives
Provide general assessment data to the humanitarian community for the design and implementation of programs to benefit displaced and host communities.
Profile the level of vulnerability of every conflict displaced family in KPK to allow for targeting of in-kind assistance based on family vulnerability

5. Progress
The IVAP project has profiled over 60,000 conflict IDP families
It is estimated that the IVAP has interviewed 90% of all conflict IDPs who are willing to be surveyed in the Peshawar Valley

6. Key Findings

7. Host vs Camp Population
District
Households
Lower Dir
969
DI Khan
207
Charsadda
4628
Unknown 20
Mardan
1351
Nowshera
2669
Swabi
2050
Kohat
9526
Peshawar
22765
Total
44185 Vs
Camps
No. of Families
15,726

8. Vs Return Intentions Off Camp On Camp
Of those who want to return, most state that families do not know when they will return, because they are unsure of when it will be safe.
Priority needs to return home were: food, material for rebuilding and security

9. Registration
Off Camp
On Camp Vs

10. Current Family Needs Off Camp On Camp
Current family needs right now (n=43774)
1st need n=43774
2nd need n=42489
3rd need n=37040
Composite n=123303
Food
45%
14%
13%
25%
Job opportunities
33%
18%
22%
Assistance with rent
17%
21%
Health services 4%
12%
20%
11%
Temporary shelter 5% 8% 6%
Water 7%
Educational services 2%
Other 0% 3%
Livelihood training 1%
Local transportation
IVAP teams also inquired into the current needs of IDPs in their location of displacement. The most common responses overall (composite) were food, assistance with rent, job opportunities and health services.
On Camp
Current family needs (15,334) On Camp
1st need n=15334
2nd need n=14,188
3rd need n=11,700
Composite n=41,222
Food
55%
13%
10%
28%
Job opportunities
20%
34%
18%
24%
Health services 8%
19%
26%
17%
Temporary shelter 6%
Other 2% 7%
Livelihood training 4%
12%
Educational services 5%
Local transportation 3%
Water 1%
Assistance with rent 0%
The most common responses overall (composite) in On Camp were food, job opportunities and health services.

11. Vs Family Monthly Income Off Camp On Camp
Only 32% of IDP families make over the threshold for poverty assistance programs in Pakistan (5000 Rs/month). Only about 23% of families have more than one source of income.

12. Income Source Off Camp On Camp
Only around 15% have semi-stable positions as servants, shopkeepers, skilled wage laborers or sharecroppers.
On Camp

13. Food Security Off Camp On Camp
IVAP uses three indicators to identify food security: meals eaten per day, negative coping strategies and food consumption score
It must be noted most families surveyed were regular recipients of WFP food assistance at the time of the survey. The average, to acceptable nature of the food security results can largely be attributed to the WFP assistance.
Households surveyed since February show, on average, lower food consumption scores than prior to February.
Both adult males and females are eating an average of 2.8 meals per day.
The most common coping strategies are borrowing food and purchasing food on debt.
Food Consumption Score (n=40,132)
Poor 8%
Borderline
52%
Acceptable
40%
On Camp
Food Consumption Score
Poor 5%
Borderline
54%
Acceptable
41%

14. Top three housing concerns right now (n=43,899)
Shelter
Off Camp
Top three housing concerns right now (n=43,899)
1st need n=43899
2nd need n=43649
3rd need n=39222
Composite n=126770
Lack of money
32%
23%
28%
High cost of goods / services 8%
33%
21%
Lack of cooking facilities 6%
15%
18%
13%
Overcrowding
29% 3% 5%
12%
Harsh weather conditions
11%
Lack of water and sanitations 7%
Privacy 4%
Security 1% 2%
Other 0%
The largest household concerns of IDP families are the lack of money, the high costs of goods and services, lack of cooking facilities, and overcrowding.

15. Disclaimer
All analysis of data from IVAP was done of families that would by internationally all be considered vulnerable. Almost all families earn less than $.60 per person/day, far below the $1/day worldwide standard.
The analysis presented here is to give an understanding of the range of vulnerabilities across a population that is considered highly vulnerable.

16. Vulnerability Analysis
Vulnerability Score Index
CAMP Population
Most Less
80% %
Most Vulnerable Less Vulnerable
60% %
OFF CAMP Population
Vulnerability: Relative ability of the family’s ability to meet their daily food and shelter needs

17. Vulnerability Profiles
Vulnerable on Camp
Average monthly income 2900Rps (>600/person, $.21/day)
76% do not own an asset of any kind
Borderline food consumption scores (due to assistance)
Approximately 2 of 6 family members are vulnerable/dependant1
Most Vulnerable off Camp
Average monthly income is 3100 Rps (<600/person, $.23/day)
72% do not own any assets
Poor to Borderline food consumption scores
2 of 5 family members are vulnerable/dependant
Less Vulnerable off Camp
Average monthly income 6150 Rps (>1000/person, $0.46/person/day)
Likely to own asset of some kind
Reasonable to borderline food consumption scores
Approximately 1 of 5 family members are vulnerable/dependant1

18. Assistance Planning Unsafe: Khyber Kurrum North Wazeristan
Vulnerability Status
Vulerable
Less Vulnerable
Area of Origin
Safe FATA
10,600
2350
Safe KP
2000
1250
Unsafe
22,100
8100
Unsafe:
Khyber
Kurrum
North Wazeristan
South Wazeristan
Bajur (Mamund, Nawagi)
Mohmand (Upper Mohamnd, Safi)
Orakzai
Reasons those from “safe” areas are still displaced:
Individual threats
Land/housing concerns
Health and education services
Don’t believe it is safe
Political involvement
No economic opportunities and destruction of buisnesses
Reasons the safe don’t want to go, integration with wfp

19. Jalozai Population Movement

20. Host Locations of IVAP Most-
Location Targeting
Host Locations of IVAP Most-
Vulnerable Families
On Camp
15,726
Charssada
3,310
Mardan
857
Nowshera
1,746
Peshawar
12,984
Swabi
1,408
Lower Dir
628
Kohat, DI Khan, Tank, Hungu
Unknown

21. Data Sharing Direct Family Targeting Community Data
UN agencies (WFP integration)
Other assistance providers
Open to all
Methods:
IVAP Updates
Periodic Reports
IVAP Website: – also useful for specific data analysis

22. Next Steps Improve access to data
Determine how the data will be used to target assistance
Developing tracking systems for assistance
Determine the next steps for IVAP
Finalize data collection
Updating for new displacements
Updating of vulnerability status and location changes

23. IVAP INCLUSION POLICY
In every village assessed every effort will be made to work with the community leaders and elders to correctly identify only and all of the conflict IDPs. The inclusion policy is explained to all elders and they must sign to having assisted the IVAP team to find every IDP in the community who fits the profile.
Profile:
They self identify as having fled their area of origin due to:
Individual threat
Treat of insecurity
Conflict in the area
No economic opportunities
Families who have fled districts that are not considered to be conflict affected (per the government list) will be included if they express that they fled due to
Families who self identify that they fled their area of origin due to the flood, or any other natural disaster will not be assessed
Families will not be denied assessment due to
Lacking CNIC
Lacking prior registration as a conflict IDP

24. Community Elders/Members
IVAP Process: Round 1
Mass Advertisement
Community
GOAL: Every Village in Every Hosting UC
WFP Monitors
Protection Team and Committees
Concentration maps
Team Leaders
Planning
Teams
Community Elders/Members

25. IDP’s Who have been left in Round 1
Round 2 and Vulnerability
Community
IOM
Teams
IDP’s Who have been left in Round 1
Protection Team
Are you and IDP?
Yes O No
What is your district of origin?
Conflicted districts
None of these
North Waziristan
Khyber
Lower Dir
Swat
Upper Dir
Buner
Mohmand
Shangla
Malakand
Orakzai
Kurrum
Bajur
South Waziristan
Individual Threat
Within the last month?
Threat or Insecurity
Last 1-3 months
Conflict in the area
Last 3-6 months
Harsh weather conditions
Last 6-12 months
No Economic opportunities
More than 1 year ago
More than 2 year ago
More than 3 year ago
Data Cleaning
Filled house hold information is fed into system
Vulnerability Index
Most Vulnerable Least Vulnerable
GOAL: Every IDP household profiled for vulnerability