DOCSLIB.ORG

Evaluation Report: Volume I

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Evaluation Report: Volume I BASED DECISIONBASEDMAKING - DECENTRALIZED EVALUATION FOR EVIDENCE FOR DECENTRALIZEDEVALUATION Decentralized Evaluation Mid-Term Evaluation of Integrated Risk Management and Climate Services Programme in Malawi from 2017-2019 Final Evaluation Report: Volume I Prepared October 2019 WFP Malawi Evaluation Manager: Jason Nyirenda Prepared by Catherine Longley, Team Leader Sithabiso Gandure, International Evaluator Assa Maganga, National Evaluator Acknowledgements The Evaluation Team is very grateful to the WFP Country Office in Malawi as well as the Regional Bureau in Johannesburg (RBJ) – especially Hegel Balayanga (Evaluation Data Analyst) – for the support provided throughout the evaluation. In particular, we thank the many respondents from Government departments (at national and district levels), non-governmental organisations, research institutes, the private sector, United Nations and other agencies who provided inputs into this evaluation. We are particularly indebted to the beneficiaries at community levels who took time to talk to us and answer our many questions. We also wish to thank the three Field Assistants, Elizabeth Ndenguma, Gerard Malija, and Gift Noniwa. Disclaimer The opinions expressed in this report are those of the Evaluation Team, and do not necessarily reflect those of the World Food Programme. Responsibility for the opinions expressed in this report rests solely with the authors. Publication of this document does not imply endorsement by WFP of the opinions expressed. The designation employed and the presentation of material in maps do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of WFP concerning the legal or constitutional status of any country, territory or sea area, or concerning the delimitation of frontiers. Evaluation Report: Mid-Term Evaluation of IRMP in Malawi from 2017-2019 i | Page Table of Contents Executive Summary .............................................................................................................................................................................. 4 1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................................................................... 9 1.1. Context ................................................................................................................................................................................. 9 1.2. Overview of the Evaluation Subject ....................................................................................................................... 12 1.3. Evaluation Methodology and Limitations............................................................................................................ 14 2. Evaluation Findings ................................................................................................................................................................... 17 2.1. Relevance .......................................................................................................................................................................... 17 2.2. Effectiveness .................................................................................................................................................................... 20 2.3. Efficiency ........................................................................................................................................................................... 32 2.4. Impact ................................................................................................................................................................................ 36 2.5. Sustainability ................................................................................................................................................................... 38 2.6. GEWE .................................................................................................................................................................................. 41 3. Conclusions, Lessons Learned, and Recommendations ............................................................................................. 44 3.1. Overall Assessment/Conclusions ............................................................................................................................ 44 3.2. Lessons Learned [EQ17] .............................................................................................................................................. 47 3.3. Recommendations ........................................................................................................................................................ 48 Annexes ................................................................................................................................................................................................. 57 Annex 1: Geographical coverage of IRMP and other resilience activities ................................................................... 58 Annex 2: IRMP Project Details ...................................................................................................................................................... 60 Annex 3. Outcome and output indicator results ................................................................................................................... 63 Annex 4: IRMP Logical Framework ............................................................................................................................................. 74 Annex 5: Integrated Resilience Approach ................................................................................................................................ 81 Annex 6: Other related Resilience interventions ................................................................................................................... 82 Annex 7: Frequency of Shocks by District, 2000-13 ............................................................................................................. 84 Annex 8: Expenditure to Date and Budget Allocations ...................................................................................................... 85 Annex 9: GFCS Impact Pathway ................................................................................................................................................... 86 Annex 10: Bibliography ................................................................................................................................................................... 87 List of Acronyms ................................................................................................................................................................................. 88 List of Figures Figure 1. IRMP Planned budget allocation ................................................................................................................................. 13 Figure 2. Percent of households within targeted communities receiving seasonal climate services with agro- climatic advice ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 22 Figure 3. Percentage of farmers receiving climate services information through different channels ................ 22 Figure 4. Changes in different enterprises inspired by the PICSA training .................................................................... 25 Figure 5. Farmers reporting to practise what they learnt from climate services information via radio ............. 27 Figure 6: Simplified impact pathway based on farmers’ perspectives on linkages between activities .............. 37 Figure 7. Map showing Traditional Authorities (TAs) under Resilience activities ...................................................... 58 Figure 8: Impact pathway diagram developed for the GFCS project ............................................................................... 86 Evaluation Report: Mid-Term Evaluation of IRMP in Malawi from 2017-2019 ii | Page List of Tables Table 1. Beneficiary numbers disaggregated by year, activity and component .......................................................... 12 Table 2. Methodological limitations and mitigation strategies .......................................................................................... 15 Table 3. Outcome indicator results by gender of household head and monitoring survey dataset (Blantyre and Chikwawa Districts only) ........................................................................................................................................................... 20 Table 4. PICSA training received by sampled farmers and usefulness of PICSA tools .............................................. 23 Table 5. Selected Likert statements about PICSA training ................................................................................................... 24 Table 6. Insurance pay-outs to date by district ........................................................................................................................ 28 Table 7: WFP resilience activities by district, highlighting IRMP districts (2018) ......................................................... 59 Table 8. Coping Strategies Index (Blantyre and Chikwawa Districts only) ..................................................................... 63 Table
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Rp13110rp0v10p06b0afr0rp
    Public Disclosure Authorized Government of Malawi World Bank Irrigation, Rural Livelihoods and Agriculture Development Project Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Resettlement Policy Framework Volume 1: Social Impact Assessment Final Report March 2005 Public Disclosure Authorized Ministry of Agriculture Capital City, Lilongwe 3 Irrigation, Rural Livelihoods and Agriculture Development Project Resettlement Policy Framework Volume 1: Social Impact Assessment Final Report Proponent: The Principal Secretary Ministry of Agriculture P.O. Box 30134 Capital City Lilongwe 3 Tel: (265) 1789033 (265) 1789252 Fax: (265) 1789218 (265) 1788738 Consultant: Kempton Consultancy Services Plot No. 4/354D Shire Limited Building P.O. Box 1048 Lilongwe. Malawi. Mobile: (265) 9958136 ii Table of Contents Table of Contents----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- iii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- x LIST OF ACRONYMS ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------xi LIST OF TABLES ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------xii 1.0 Introduction -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    [Show full text]
  • Map District Site Balaka Balaka District Hospital Balaka Balaka Opd
    Map District Site Balaka Balaka District Hospital Balaka Balaka Opd Health Centre Balaka Chiendausiku Health Centre Balaka Kalembo Health Centre Balaka Kankao Health Centre Balaka Kwitanda Health Centre Balaka Mbera Health Centre Balaka Namanolo Health Centre Balaka Namdumbo Health Centre Balaka Phalula Health Centre Balaka Phimbi Health Centre Balaka Utale 1 Health Centre Balaka Utale 2 Health Centre Blantyre Bangwe Health Centre Blantyre Blantyre Adventist Hospital Blantyre Blantyre City Assembly Clinic Blantyre Chavala Health Centre Blantyre Chichiri Prison Clinic Blantyre Chikowa Health Centre Blantyre Chileka Health Centre Blantyre Blantyre Chilomoni Health Centre Blantyre Chimembe Health Centre Blantyre Chirimba Health Centre Blantyre Dziwe Health Centre Blantyre Kadidi Health Centre Blantyre Limbe Health Centre Blantyre Lirangwe Health Centre Blantyre Lundu Health Centre Blantyre Macro Blantyre Blantyre Madziabango Health Centre Blantyre Makata Health Centre Lunzu Blantyre Makhetha Clinic Blantyre Masm Medi Clinic Limbe Blantyre Mdeka Health Centre Blantyre Mlambe Mission Hospital Blantyre Mpemba Health Centre Blantyre Ndirande Health Centre Blantyre Queen Elizabeth Central Hospital Blantyre South Lunzu Health Centre Blantyre Zingwangwa Health Centre Chikwawa Chapananga Health Centre Chikwawa Chikwawa District Hospital Chikwawa Chipwaila Health Centre Chikwawa Dolo Health Centre Chikwawa Kakoma Health Centre Map District Site Chikwawa Kalulu Health Centre, Chikwawa Chikwawa Makhwira Health Centre Chikwawa Mapelera Health Centre
    [Show full text]
  • Rapid Epidemiological Mapping Of
    7-7 tlp,-n a a RAPID EPIDEMIOLOGICAL MAPPING OF ONCHOCERCTASTS (REMO) rN MALAWI MISSION REPORT (UAY L6 - JUNE 1-5, 1997' FOR WORLD HEALTH ORGANTZATION AFRTCAN PROGRAUME FOR ONCHOCERCIASIS CONTROL (APOC) BY DR. B.E.B. NI{OKE (OVlrCP/cTDl 5O4lAPle7 I O40' STATUS: WHO Temporary Adviser (U197 lOt4329l Professor of Medical/Public Health Parasitology & Entomology School of Biological Sciences Imo State University PMB 2000 Owerri, Nigeria i. ' ., Phoner (234)83-23 05 85 (Home) a Fax: (2341A3-23 18 83 ( it, ') t" rfw JUNE 15, 1997 ,, /.l'^ Fr;r lrr iol nr.;1i :.rr" I .,, ;'1 !r 'y[' ruf II ) SUMMARY Under the sponsorship of the African Programme .for Onchocerciasii Control (APOC), Rapid Epidemiological Mapping of onchocerciasis was conducted in Malawi Uelireen 1,6th May and June l-6th L997. During the course of the exercise-, 4O5 villages were primarily selected to be examined for the prevalence of onchocercal nodules of due to which 48 ( 1f-. 85Ul were not sampled - inaccessibility. Pending the final Atlas GIS analysis of the data, the results showed that: L. O onchocerciasis is apparentty absent from all the 5 Northern Districts of Uafawi: ChitiPa, Karonga, Mzimba, Rurnphi, and NkhatabaY. 2.O In the central Region, onchocerciasis is absent in 7 districts of Kasungu, Nkhotakota, salima, Mchinji, Dowa, Ntchisi and Lilongwe out of the 9 Districts. Ntcheu District has endemic communities on the western border with Mozambique as welI as with the southern border with the Mwanza/Neno area. There is also onchocerciasis at the east-central- part of Dedza district. 3. O The Southern Region is the onchocerciasis zone in Malawi.
    [Show full text]
  • Malawi Country Operational Plan 2017 Strategic Direction Summary
    Malawi Country Operational Plan 2017 Strategic Direction Summary April 26, 2017 1 1.0 Goal Statement While there has been significant progress in the fight against HIV, Malawi still has 980,000 people living with HIV (PLHIV), including 350,000 undiagnosed. The Malawi Population-Based HIV Impact Assessment (MPHIA) showed significant progress toward the globally endorsed targets of 90-90-90. The number of new adult infections each year continues to decline (28,000/year in 2016), coinciding with an increase in ART coverage. With the number of annual HIV-related deaths reduced to 27,000/year in 2016, Malawi continues making progress toward epidemic control. However, MPHIA also highlights a disproportionately high HIV incidence among adolescent girls and young women (AGYW) with point estimates for HIV incidence 8 times higher among females aged 15-24 than males. Therefore, the overarching goal of COP17 is to interrupt HIV transmission by reducing incidence among AGYW through testing and treatment of potential sexual partners (men 15-40) and primary prevention (e.g., expansion of DREAMS and AGYW targeted interventions), thereby interrupting the lifecycle of HIV transmission and accelerating progress to epidemic control. The 1st 90 remains the greatest challenge and requires a number of key strategy shifts: Targeting testing and treatment strategies: Increased focus on targeting men and youth with the most efficient testing modalities (e.g., index case testing) and treatment strategies (e.g., same-day ART initiation) to achieve saturation across all age and gender bands in scale-up districts by the end of FY18. Increasing focus in five “acceleration” districts: Per the MPHIA, the epidemic is most intense in population-dense regions of Southern Malawi, especially Blantyre; therefore, PEPFAR will focus on Blantyre and four other high burden, scale up districts (deemed “acceleration” districts) that include 70% of the national gap to saturation.
    [Show full text]
  • Connectivity Solutions for 752 PEPFAR Supported MOH Clinics
    REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) #MAL-122019-EMR Connectivity Solutions for 752 PEPFAR Supported MOH Clinics ELIZABETH GLASER PEDIATRIC AIDS FOUNDATION (EGPAF) NED BANK House, City Centre, P.O. Box 2543, Lilongwe, Malawi FIRM DEADLINE: Friday, 17 January 2020 at 11am INTRODUCTION Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric AIDS Foundation (“EGPAF” or “Foundation”), a non-profit organization, is a world leader in the fight to eliminate pediatric AIDS. Our mission is to prevent pediatric HIV infection and to eliminate pediatric AIDS through research, advocacy, and prevention and treatment programs. For more information, please visit http://www.pedaids.org. OBJECTIVE OF THE ASSIGNMENT | SCOPE OF WORK | EXPECTED DELIVERABLES EGPAF seeks to contract with a reputable Vendor to immediately meet our current connectivity needs (with the possibility of fulfilling future needs as they arise) in support of an ambitious national Electronic Medical Records (EMR) initiative. It is anticipated that the selected Vendor can assess our requirements, develop a comprehensive and effective solution to implement at all 752 PEPFAR-supported MOH Clinics throughout Malawi (see Attachment 1), and eventually implement and install, in coordination with the necessary Foundation staff, all necessary infrastructure at each site to reflect its proposed solution(s). More specifically, the selected Contractor is expected to offer a fast and affordable Carrier Backbone network services to cover 752 clinics across the 28 Districts in Malawi to support regular and incremental data transmission from the Clinics/health facilities to a Central Data Repository hosted at the Ministry of Health. The winning Contractor will be responsible for installation of last mile connection to connect each health facility to the backbone network, including configuring Point-to-Point connections between the health facility and the Central Data Repository.
    [Show full text]
  • MALAWI Main Health Facilities and Population Density March 2020
    MALAWI Main Health Facilities and Population Density March 2020 Chitipa Chitipa District CHITIPA Hospital Karonga District Karonga old Hospital Hospital KARONGA Chilumba UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA RUMPHI Rumphi Rumphi District Hospital ZAMBIA NORTHERN MZUZU CITY Mzuzu Central MZUZU Hospital Nkhata Bay NKHATA BAY Nkhata Bay MZIMBA District Hospital Mzimba District Hospital LIKOMA LILONGWE CITY Lake Malawi MOZAMBIQUE Lilongwe Central Hospital Bwaila/Bottom Hospital NKHOTAKOTA KASUNGU Nkhotakota District Hospital Kasungu Kasungu District Hospital NTCHISI ZOMBA CITY Ntchisi District CENTRAL Hospital DOWA Dzaleka Refugee Camp (44,385) MCHINJI Dowa SALIMA Dowa District Salima District Mchinji District Hospital Hospital ZOMBA Hospital LILONGWE CITY ZOMBA CITY Zomba Central Hospital DEDZA LILONGWE Dedza Dedza District BLANTYRE CITY Hospital Mangoche Mangochi District ZOMBA MANGOCHI Hospital NTCHEU Ntcheu Ntcheu District Hospital BLANTYRE CITY Capital City MACHINGA CHIRADZULU Balaka District Liwonde BLANTYRE Queen Elizabeth Central Hospital Hospital Major town MOZAMBIQUE Machinga District Hospital BALAKA Refugee camp / settlement Machinga LIMBE Lake (Number of refugees) ZOMBA CITY Chilwa NENO Road Zomba Central Hospital Mwanza District Hospital SOUTHERN ZOMBA District BLANTYRE PHALOMBE THYOLO BLANTYRE Region MWANZA Chiradzulu District Hospital CHIRADZULU International border BLANTYRE CITY MULANJE Chikwawa District Health facility Hospital Thyolo District Mulanje District Hospital Hospital Central Hospital District Hospital CHIKWAWA THYOLO Population density (People per Sq. Km) < 100 Bangula 101 - 250 NSANJE 251 - 500 ZIMBABWE Nsanje District Hospital 501 - 1,000 > 1,000 The boundaries and names shown and the designations used on this map do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations. Creation date: 3 Apr 2020 Sources: OSM, UNCS, UNOCHA, Camps: UNHCR, Health Facilities: HDX/WHO-CDC, Population Density: Malawi NSO Feedback: [email protected] | Twitter: @UNOCHA_ROSEA | www.unocha.org/rosea | www.reliefweb.int.
    [Show full text]
  • PLACE REPORT Malawi September 2018
    PLACE REPORT Malawi September 2018 Table of Contents Table of Contents 2 List of Figures And Tables 7 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 10 1.1 Background and Objectives ............................................................................................................................ 10 1.2 Funding and Districts ...................................................................................................................................... 10 1.3 Methods ............................................................................................................................................................. 11 1.4 Results ............................................................................................................................................................... 13 1.4.1 Over 3500 Community Informants Identified Venues 13 1.4.2 Bars were the most common type of venue reported 13 1.4.3 Over 4000 Venues were Visited and Found to be Operational 13 1.4.4 Venue Type Differed by District 13 1.4.5 Key Populations Visit Venues 14 1.4.6 Female Sex Workers Live Onsite at Some Venues 14 1.4.7 Availability of Prevention Services at Venues 14 1.4.8 2,635 FSW Interviewed 15 1.4.9 Many FSW use cell phones but do not meet partners online 15 1.4.10 Receptive anal sex among women 15 1.4.11. Injecting drug use 15 1.4. 12. FSW who lived at the venue had more sexual partners 16 1.4.13 Among FSW: Self-Reported HIV Infection and ART 16 1.4.14 Access to services 17 1.4.15 638 MSM Interviewed 17 1.4.16 Frequency of Cell Phone and Social Media Use by MSM 17 1.4.17 Many MSM Report Sex with Women 17 1.4.18 MSM: Self-Reported HIV Infection and ART 18 1.4.20 PLACE I: Zomba Special Study: Viral Suppression among FSW & MSM 19 1.4.21 Results Size Estimates: FSW 19 1.4.22 Results Size Estimates: MSM 20 2 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Food Security Monitoring Report Malawi May 2004
    Food Security Monitoring Report Malawi May 2004 Food Deficit Areas: April 2004 – March 2005 VAC Chitipa Karonga MALAWI Vulnerability Assessment Committee Rumphi Malawi Districts Mzimba National Nkhata Bay EPAs Vulnerability Cities Assessment Protected Areas Committee Lakes Kasungu Nkhotakota In collaboration with Ntchisi SADC FANR Dowa Mchinji Salima Vulnerability Lilongwe Assessment Dedza Committee N Mangochi Ntcheu Malawi VAC Livelihood Analysis Machinga Balaka Affected Areas No Deficit Zomba Mwanza VAC Affected Blantyre Phalombe Chiradzulu Highly Affected Thyolo Mulanje Severely Affected Chikwawa SADC FANR 1:4000000 Vulnerability Nsanje Assessment Committee World Food Programme Acknowledgements The Malawi Vulnerability Assessment Committee (MVAC) would like to thank the following participants who contributed to researching, analysing, writing up and presenting the information in this report: Walusungu Kayira (Ministry of Economic Planning and Development) Isaac Chirwa (Ministry of Agriculture, Irrigation and Food Security) Patricia Nyirenda (Ministry of Agriculture, Irrigation and Food Security) Philemon Siwinda (National Statistics Office) Sam Chimwaza (FEWS NET) Evance Chapasuka (FEWS NET) Dominique Blariaux (Food and Agriculture Organization) John Mulanda (Food and Agriculture Organization) Moses Kachale (Food and Agriculture Organization) Roslyn Harper (World Food Programme) Masozi Kachale (World Food Programme) Vincent Gondwe (Concern Worldwide) Charles Rethman (Save the Children UK) Gladys Ntambalika (Save the Children UK) The Southern Africa Development Community (SADC) Food, Agriculture and Natural Resources (FANR) Regional Vulnerability Assessment Committee (RVAC), in collaboration with international partners, provided regional support for this assessment. The Malawi Vulnerability Assessment Committee also wishes to thank the British Department for International Development (DFID), FEWS NET, the RVAC and Save the Children (UK), who provided financial backing for the assessment.
    [Show full text]
  • Page 1 1.0 BACKGROUND 1.1 Introduction Malawi's Economy
    1.0 BACKGROUND 1.1 Introduction Malawi’s economy depends very largely on agriculture. Over the past decade rainfall distribution and pattern has been changing frequently to the disadvantage of the agricultural sector whose agricultural production is mostly rain fed despite concerted efforts of promoting irrigation. About 180,000ha of irrigation schemes have been developed so far against a potential of 800,000ha of irrigable land. Over 42,000ha of this potential is in the Shire Valley. The major crops that are being grown under irrigation are sugarcane and rice, maize in low lying areas which is mostly sold green on-the-cob, and supplementary irrigation of tea, coffee, and macadamia. Maize is the major staple food followed by rice, cassava, sorghum and millet. The Shire Valley has the potential of growing crops under irrigation and thus contributes to the food security and poverty alleviation initiatives. This potential has remained virtually unexploited because of lack of readily available water for irrigation. The most reliable source is the Shire River and development of irrigation in the Shire Valley would mean harnessing these waters. However, the Shire River is also the source of electrical energy for the whole country. Only recently a hydropower generation plant was commissioned at Kapichira Falls on the Shire River. Thus, there is competition of water use among the various stakeholders that rely upon the Shire River for the provision of their services. The notable stakeholders are Blantyre Water Board and Electricity Supply Commission (ESCOM). The Shire Valley Irrigation Project is being planned for development to cover an area of 42,320ha.
    [Show full text]
  • Region District Testing Sites Southern Region Blantyre Blantyre Dream
    BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance Supplemental material placed on this supplemental material which has been supplied by the author(s) BMJ Global Health Table of COVID-19 Laboratory Testing Sites in Malawi on 31st August 2020 Region District Testing Sites Southern Region Blantyre Blantyre Dream Blantyre Light House College of Medicine Malamulo Adventist Malawi Liverpool Wellcome Trust Queen Elizabeth Central Hospital Mwanza Mwanza District Hospital Mangochi Mangochi District Hospital Zomba Zomba Central Hospital Balaka Balaka Dream Balaka District Hospital Thyolo Thyolo District Hospital Neno Neno District Hospital Phalombe Phalombe District Hospital Chiradzulu Chiradzulu District Hospital Mulanje Mulanje District Hospital Chikwawa Chikwawa District Hospital Nsanje Nsanje District Hospital Machinga Machinga District Hospital Central Region Lilongwe Bwaila Hospital Kamuzu Central Hospital Kamuzu Barracks Lilongwe Light House Partners in Health UNC Project Lilongwe Salima Salima District Hospital Mchinji Mchinji District Hospital Dowa Dowa District Hospital Kasungu Kasungu District Hospital Nkhotakota Nkhotakota District Hospital Dedza Dedza District Hospital Nkhoma Mission Ntcheu Ntcheu District Hospital Ntchisi Ntchisi District Hospital Northern Region Mzimba Mzuzu Central Hospital Mzimba South District Hospital Wezi Medical Centre Nkhata Bay Nkhata Bay District Hospital Karonga Karonga District Hospital Karonga MEIRU Chitipa Chitipa District Hospital Likoma Likoma Rumphi Rumphi District Hospital MEIRU: Malawi Epidemiology and Intervention Research Unit Mzumara GW, et al. BMJ Global Health 2021; 6:e006035. doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2021-006035.
    [Show full text]
  • The Malawi LGPI Survey Sampling and Weighting the Local Governance Performance Index (LGPI) Survey Was Conducted in Malawi During March and April 2016
    The Malawi LGPI Survey Sampling and Weighting The Local Governance Performance Index (LGPI) survey was conducted in Malawi during March and April 2016. This survey seeks to measure and better understand governance and service delivery at the local level. Importantly, this is a highly clustered survey, which facilitates measurement and inference at the local (in this case, village) level. The survey covers the following topics: political participation, social norms and institutions, education, health, security, welfare, corruption, land, and dispute resolution. The sample was stratified on region (North, Central, South), the presence of matrilineal and patrilineal ethnic groups, and the ‘urban’/rural divide. Because patrilineal groups are rare in Malawi and we wanted to maximize variation in matrilineal and patrilineal heritage, we oversampled Primary Sampling Units (PSUs) from the patrilineal stratum. We sampled 22 PSUs, namely ‘Traditional Authorities’ (TAs). These 22 sampled TAs are located in 15 of Malawi’s 28 districts.1 Within each TA (i.e., PSU), we selected randomly four enumeration areas (EAs) as Secondary Sampling Units (SSUs). EAs are comparable to census tracts. Both PSUs and SSUs were selected without replacement according to the principle of Probability of Selection Proportional to Measure of Size (PPMS). Within each EA, we sampled four villages, based on known geographical points provided on the maps of the EAs produced for Malawi’s latest population census. Once in the village, enumerators followed a random walk pattern to select households. After they entered the household, the interviewer collected the necessary data about composition of the household. Both the contact questionnaire and the main questionnaire we programmed on digital tablets, including the selection of the final respondent in the household through a digital version of the “Kish grid”.
    [Show full text]
  • Advert for Phase I 2021-2022 Road and Bridge
    Government of the Republic of Malawi Accelerating Malawi’s Economic Growth R o a d s A u t h o r i t y Invitation for Bids (IfB) (National Competitive Bidding) ROAD AND BRIDGE MAINTENANCE PROGRAMME (Phase I: 2021-2022 Financial Year) 1. Source of funding 1.1. The Roads Authority (RA) with funding from Roads Fund budgeted public funds for the procurement of various works in the 2021 – 2022 financial year. The RA intends to apply part of the funds to cover eligible payments under Phase I of the Road and Bridge Maintenance Programme. 1.2. The RA now invites sealed bids from eligible bidders for the execution of various Civil Works contracts for the 2021-2022 Financial Year. The Scope of work comprise the following: • Sectional Periodic Maintenance and Shoulder Reconditioning of Paved Roads; • Rehabilitation of Unpaved Roads; • Pothole Patching and Edge Repairs on Paved Roads; • Road Centre and Edge Lines Marking on Paved Roads; • Road Signs Replacement and Markings; • Accident Spots Improvement Intervention Measures; • Repair of Major Drainage Structures; • Spot Repairs and Drainage improvement Works on Trunk Roads; • Replacement of Timber and Bailey Bridges with Concrete Decks; 2. Bidding procedures 2.1. Bidding will be conducted in accordance with the open tendering procedures contained in the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets (PPDA) Act (2017) and the Public Procurement Regulations of 2020 of the Government of the Republic of Malawi and is open to all bidders from eligible source countries. All eligible bidders are required to show evidence of registration with the National Construction Industry Council of Malawi (NCIC) in the appropriate Civil Engineering Category and have renewed their membership for the current financial year.
    [Show full text]