1. Measuring impact on Household Food Security Marijke de Graaf 31 October 2012

2. Promoting Farmers Marketing Organizations (FMOs) in Ethiopia Consortium 6 NGO’s Oromia Regional State 2008 - 2011 Overall Goal: improve livelihood of 11.543 smallholder farmers (25% women) by promoting production and market access. Expected results Increase annual income of 8.363 smallholder farmers from birr 5.500 to birr 8.000 (€ 230 to € 330) Strengthen 115 farmer marketing organizations

3. West Shao Zone - Toke Kutayo, Ambo, Adaberga, Dandi, Jeldu, South West Shoa Zone – Becho, Dawo, Sadden Sodo, East Shao Zone – Illu West Arsi Zone – Shashemene, ArsiNegelle, Siraro, Adaba, Shalla Bale Zone - Sinana, Agarfa, Goba

4. Intervention strategies capacity building for 115 FMOs Organizational and management capacity Production capacity of FMO’s - improved seeds, high value crops and methods (wheat, teff, maize, barley, linseed, haricot beans) Facilitate business planning, marketing (bulking, storing, processing, timing, linking maximize trading margin or turn- over) through local business development service providers including access to financial services

5. Monitoring system Conduct annual surveys for measuring the trends towards the impact and continuous learning Formal survey using structured questionnaire Assess impact of intervention on same families year after year, sample size of 626 FMO members (5% of total) Use control group of non members (about 125)

6. Demographic data Respondents Sample size of members 626 Hhs 5% of target group. Sample sixe of non members 130 Hhs, 20% of member sample Household heads : male 78,9 % female 21,1 % 78% of Hhs heads within 19 – 50 age range Household size: 60% of Hh 6-10 family members. 28% 1 – 5 family members 12% 11 or more family members

7. Indicators education status of school age children Building materials and house type Main source of income (% engaged in ….) Land holding Livestock ownership (new lifestock bought) FMO members and non-members market outlet Household Food Insecurity Access Scale Members satisfaction on services offered

8. Household Food Insecurity Access Scale (HFIAS) Method is based on the idea that the experience of food insecurity (access) causes predictable reactions and responses Brief survey instrument with 9 occurrence and 9 frequency questions asking about changes Households made to diet or consumption patterns As a result of limited resources to acquire food

9. Household Food Insecurity Access Scale (HFIAS) cont. The 9 questions reflect increasing severity of food insecurity, divided into three domains: a)Anxiety over food b)Insufficient dietary quality c)Insufficient quantity of food Two key uses: 1.Compare change over time in one group (impact of interventions) 2.Comparing food access across populations (determining areas most in need of assistance)

10. Nine generic questions, grouped by domain: A.Anxiety and uncertainty about the household food supply: 1.Did you worry that your household would not have enough food? B. Insufficient Quality (includes variety and preferences of the type of food): 2.Were you or any household member not able to eat the kinds of foods you preferred because of a lack of resources? 3.Did you or any household member have to eat a limited variety of foods due to a lack of resources? 4.Did you or any household member have to eat some foods that you really did not want to eat because of a lack of resources to obtain other types of food?

11. Nine generic questions, grouped by domain: (continuation) C. Insufficient food intake and its physical consequences: 5.Did you or any household member have to eat a smaller meal than you felt you needed because there was not enough food? 6.Did you or any household member have to eat fewer meals in a day because there was not enough food? 7.Was there ever no food to eat of any kind in your household because of a lack of resources to get food? 8.Did you or any household member go to sleep at night hungry because there was not enough food? 9.Did you or any household member go a whole day and night without eating anything because there was not enough food?

12. Results of HFIAS index The food secure HHs are those HHs who didn’t worry that their HH would have not have enough food. Overall Percentage of Food Secure Hhs among members and non members Except for CDI # food secure HHs increased. Moreover, # food secured non members HHS is lower than members. 2011201020092008 Members 58,7 % Non members 50,8 % Members 63,2 % Non members 42,7 % Members 63,6 % Members 46,6 %

13. HHs who are food insecure can be classified in 3 broad categories 201120102009 % HHs who were not able to eat the kind of preferred food, two or more times during the year M49,941,244,5 N-M61,458,256,7 % HHs who eat few kind of food day after day M48,241,345,36 N-M55,258,255,38 % HHs who eat they preferred not to eat M42,314,125,01 N-M47,427,940,76 mildly food insecure HHs are those who were not able to eat the kinds of foods they preferred and eat just a few kinds of food day after day because of lack of resources. As of two times per year it was registered

14. 201120102009 % HHs members who eat small meal than they felt needed M 44,936,341,6 N-M 52,255,957,7 % HHs members who eat fewer meal in a day M 43,032,739,9 N-M 52,647,856,1 Moderately food insecure are those HHs who eat smaller meals, fewer meals in a day and cheaper food. The survey revealed that more non-members are moderately food insecure than members, which could be attributed to the project implementation.

15. 201120102009 % No food available in the HH due to lack of money M10,19,5 N-M17,413,6 % HHs members who go to sleep at night hungry M14,510,9 N-M24,615,2 % HHs members who go a whole day and night without eating anything M9,68,3 N-M12,915,2 Severely food insecure is a reflection of having answered that there was no food in the house, someone went to bed hungry or someone went a whole day without eating.

16. Experiences HFIAS Relatively easy to apply and process and provides for concrete data on household food security Reference period preferably one month, preferably during lean period and applied during same period of the year Usefulness of last three indicators: no food to eat of any kind, go to sleep hungry, go a whole day and night without eating only during emergencies Comparisons with control group is feasible

17. Thanks for your attention Observations/questions?