“Rapid Emergency Assistance to the TC Winston affected most
Vulnerable Communities in Fiji Project”
POST DISTRIBUTION SURVEY REPORT
Bua Province
August 2016
Survey conducted by ADRA in the Province of Bua. These areas were badly affected by TC
Winston in February 2016.
Report prepared by Ratu Waisea Waininima and data analysed by Ana Alburqueque- Project
Manager ([email protected]), Virginia Pycroft- Technical Advisor ADRA South Pacific
([email protected]) and Iliapi Tuwai- ADRA Fiji Country Director ([email protected]);
Reviewed by Anna Krikun- ADRA Germany Regional Coordinator for South East Asia and Pacific. Data
collection by 3 volunteers.
1|Page
PDS Report Rakiraki - August 2016
Contents
1.
Acronyms and Abbreviations ................................................................................................ 2
1.
Project Background .............................................................................................................. 3
3.
Introduction and objectives of the monitoring....................................................................... 4
4.
Methodology of data collection and analysis ......................................................................... 4
5.
Main Findings ....................................................................................................................... 5
5.1
Interviewee’s Information ................................................................................................... 5
5.2
Shelter kits ........................................................................................................................ 5
5.3
Food Voucher .................................................................................................................... 6
5.4
Seed packages ................................................................................................................... 8
5.5
Feedback and complaint mechanism .................................................................................... 8
5.6
Actual needs in the community............................................................................................ 8
5.7
Conclusion ......................................................................................................................... 8
1. Acronyms and Abbreviations
ADRA
EU
FAO
NDMO
PDS
Adventist Development and Relief Agency
European Union
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
National Disaster Management Office
Post Distribution Survey
2|Page
PDS Report Rakiraki - August 2016
1. Project Background
The “Rapid Emergency Assistance to the TC Winston affected most Vulnerable Communities in Fiji
Project” funded by ECHO aims to respond to the immediate humanitarian needs of the TC Winston
affected households with shelter, WASH and food assistance to enable quicker recovery of the
vulnerable population. The project has been implemented from March to September 2016.
The overall project results were:
Result 1: 1800 Households improved their living conditions by using the shelter kits to repair their
houses.
Result 2: 1800 Households improved their quality of life by using the distributed WASH kits. The
project will provide hygiene kits and sky hydrants (Improve the water sources).
Result 3: 1800 Households have sufficient food sources and improved food security after provision
of food assistance. The project will provide Cash/Voucher Food and seeds.
The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) support the activities in Koro
Island and Rakiraki through Seed packages and fertilizers.
The project location is Rakiraki District in Ra Province and in the Wainunu and Kubulau Districts in
Bua Province, Savusavu and Navatu Districts in Cakaudrove Province, Koro Island and Vanuabalavu
Island.
Province/ District
Cakaudrove Province
Shelter
Kits
Hygiene
Kits
Food
Cash
Food
Voucher
Seeds
Water System
improved
TOTAL
Households
262
410
175
0
0
0
847
Bua (**)
1955
0
484
0
281
4 Villages
1,955
Ra Province
1630
1390
0
1500
969
Vanuabalavu Island
391
Koro Island
500
Vanua Levu Island
(**)
576
Ba Province (**)
1130
Taveuni Island (**)
Total HHS
391
550
550
576
0
0
0
0
163
5716
1,630
1800
1550
1500
1800
1130
3 Villages
163
7 Villages
7,242
(**) Distributed in partnership with Habitat for Humanity, Live & Learn and CARE
3|Page
PDS Report Rakiraki - August 2016
2. Summary
The post distribution survey of the ECHO project was implemented in Bua Province on August (1st7th); the following are the main findings:


During the focus group, 100% of the participants mentioned that they shared the tools (by
rotating their use every day) between 5 families.
The Household dietary diversity Score after the project intervention is 1 out of 12.
The Household dietary diversity Score after the project intervention is 1 out of 12. However
is important to remark that the beneficiaries are in process to harvest the vegetables and
fruits that can impact positively the household dietary diversity score.
The household dietary diversity was:
76% of beneficiaries HHDS were 1 out of 12
14% of beneficiaries HHDS were 2 out of 12
8% of beneficiaries HHDS were 3 out of 12
1% of beneficiaries HHDS were 4 out of 12
1% of beneficiaries HHDS were 5 out of 12


The households preferred cash/voucher then they can decide what kind of seeds or roots to
buy or garden tools.
100% mentioned they are satisfied with the seed packages.
3. Introduction and objectives of the monitoring
The Post Distribution Survey was conducted in the province of Ra from the 1st to 7th August. The
main objective was to find out how beneficiaries are using the materials that have been given and
their feedback on the distribution mechanism.
The project distributed:



4.
Shelter kits
Food Voucher.
Seed Packages.
Methodology of data collection and analysis
Coordination
The project staffs coordinated with assistance from the NDMO and Village’s headman in identifying
the communities and the household who will participate in the interviews, focus group and life
stories.
Methodology: This survey utilized quantitative and qualitative methods to gather information on a
sample of respondents from 12% of the total households that benefited from the project in Bua
Province. The method used to gather data is explained below:
a)
Quantitative Methods and Tools: To gather efficient and accurate data on the project
participants, ADRA Fiji gathered quantitative data utilizing Android smartphones with an electronic
survey application (Koo Toolbox). Given the tight timeline of the project, surveying project
4|Page
PDS Report Rakiraki - August 2016
participants using smartphones and online services reduced the time that would be needed to enter
the data into a database after the initial collection from 97 participants. The project team elaborated
the questionnaire with the technical support of ADRA Germany and FAO Fiji team considering the
baseline questionnaire and project indicators.
b)
Qualitative Methods and Tools: ADRA Fiji gathered qualitative data through focus groups
and life stories. Focus groups were conducted in the following villages: Natokalau, Nasasaivua,
Raviravi, Nadivakarua and Namalata. The project documented pictures and videos.
Sampling Methods: The sample selected included the vulnerable people (affected households,
women, elderly, and people with disabilities). This was made possible by the Village Headman and
community leader records.
Data Analysis and Report Preparation: The quantitative data gathered from the surveys were
analysed. The analysis of this data took the form of descriptive statistics and comparative analysis
across gender and the vulnerable groups relevant to the project criteria.
5.
Main Findings
5.1 Interviewee’s Information
97 people were interviewed (Each people represent a household. Total households have 459
members) and have the following demographics:
Gender
Male
Female
Age 0 to 5
6%
3%
Age 6 to 18
14%
20%
Description
Disabled people (women)
Disabled people (Men)
Number of breastfeeding women
Number of pregnant women
Age 19 to 64
22%
25%
65 years +
5%
5%
%
0.4%
0.6%
3%
0.2%
5.2 Shelter kits
ADRA Fiji team followed the Shelter cluster recommendation and distribute shelter community kits.
The shelter community kits have construction tools to be use by 5 families. The shelter community
tools are:
Individual Kit
2 * (6mX4m) tarpaulin
1 bucket
1 rope
1 solar torch
Communal kit (per 5HH)
2 spades
3 saws
3 knives
Binding wire
2 pinch bars 50mm – 75mm nails
4 hammers
Mosquito Netting
Single netting
a) During the focus group, 100% of the participants mentioned that they shared the tools (by
rotating their use every day) between 5 families.
5|Page
PDS Report Rakiraki - August 2016
b) 70% of the interviewees mentioned that in future kits are important to include: Forks, First aid
kit, solar lamps, chlorine, eating utensils, solar torch, wheelbarrow, rain coats, and gumboots.
c) 99% mentioned they waited at the distribution site for 30 min/1hr.
d) 98% mentioned the quality of the shelter kit was good and 2% mentioned it was fair.
e) 97% mentioned the packaging was Good and 3% fair.
f) 99% mentioned the timing of the shelter kit was excellent.
g) 100% of the beneficiaries are currently using the shelter kit.
h) 100% mentioned that the shelter kit was very useful.
5.3
Food Voucher
ADRA Fiji team has distributed cash for food (FJD40) to 1,550 households. In Bua Province food Cash
was distributed to 484 households.
a) 90% mentioned they bought food with the voucher, and 10% mentioned they bought Non-food
items.
b) 100% mentioned they are satisfied with the distribution process.
c) The households mentioned that the food cash lasted two weeks for them.
d) 60% of household mentioned that women decided on what food items to buy. 40% said that Men
decided on the food cash.
e) 100% of households mentioned they are satisfied with the food cash because they can buy from
the village shop (Kiosk) instead of paying for bus fare to go to town to buy food.
f) 100% mentioned that the food voucher was very useful. 100% of the beneficiaries mentioned
that the food cash has helped them.
g) 90% of households suggested to ADRA and EU to extend the food cash assistance until their crops
can be harvested and 10% requested the food voucher money could be increased to meet the
food need.
“It was easy to get the food; we bought food in the village! We did not go to the town and with the
money we save we buy more food for our children”.
Beneficiaries in Bua
The Household dietary diversity is the number of different food groups consumed over a given
reference period. A more diversified diet is associated with a number of improved outcomes in areas
such as birth weight, child anthropometric status, and improved hemoglobin concentrations.
The Household dietary diversity Score after the project intervention is 1 out of 12. However is
important to remark that the beneficiaries are in process to harvest the vegetables and fruits that
can impact positively the household dietary diversity score.
The household dietary diversity was:
76% of beneficiaries HHDS were 1 out of 12
14% of beneficiaries HHDS were 2 out of 12
8% of beneficiaries HHDS were 3 out of 12
1% of beneficiaries HHDS were 4 out of 12
1% of beneficiaries HHDS were 5 out of 12
6|Page
PDS Report Rakiraki - August 2016
Household Dietary Diversity Score
beef, pork, lamb,
goat, rabbit wild
game, chicken,
duck, or other
birds, liver, kidney,
heart or other
fresh or dried fish
organ meats
Beans or shellfish
1%
5%
3%
Condiments
1%
bread, rice,
noodles, biscuits,
or any other food
made from millet,
Vegetables
sorghum, maize,
14%
rice, and wheat
15%
potatoes, yams,
manioc, cassava, or
any other foods
made from roots or
tubers
98%
Note: The beneficiaries did not report to eat: fruits, eggs, cheese, oil and sugar.
7|Page
PDS Report Rakiraki - August 2016
5.4
Seed packages
The project has distributed the seed packages to 1,800 households. The seed packages content: 10g
Tomatoes seeds, 100g Chinese cabbage seeds, 100g watermelon seeds, 20g English Cabbage, and
10g cucumber seeds.
78% of households mentioned that the variety, germination rate, packaging and resistance to pest
and diseases were excellent.
a) The households planning to eat and sell the vegetables and fruits they had successfully
harvested.
b) The households mentioned that they need fertilizers.
c) The households preferred cash/voucher then they can decide what kind of seeds or roots to buy
or garden tools.
d) 100% mentioned they are satisfied with the seed packages.
e) Households mentioned that they need the following training: cash crop training.
5.5 Feedback and complaint mechanism
70% mentioned there was an ADRA team to whom complaint or give feedback on the distribution
site, 20% mentioned there were none and 10% mentioned they do not know.
5.6 Actual needs in the community
70% mentioned they are in need of food assistance, 20% of carpenters and 10% water assistance.
5.7 Conclusion
The communities are satisfied with the items that have been distributed. Most of the communities
are currently using the Shelter kits and Seed Packages.
8|Page
PDS Report Rakiraki - August 2016