GENDER ASSESSMENT January 2020

Table of Contents

List of graphs ...... ii List of table ...... ii Context ...... iii Objective ...... iii Methodology ...... iv Sampling ...... v Findings ...... vi Gender assessment analysis ...... 1 1. Socioeconomic activities and dynamics in the communities ...... 2 1.1 Current daily activities of women compared to men ...... 2 1.2 Type of livelihood activities preferred by women/girls and men/boys ...... 5 1.2 Suitable job opportunities for men, female youth, elderly people, female headed of household and PWD ...... 5 1.3 Decision making in the household ...... 7 2. Community’s needs, leadership, influence and type of violations ...... 9 2.1 Communities needs ...... 10 2.2 Conflict resolution and leadership, influence...... 12 2.3 Presence of GBV and other protection issues within the communities ...... 17 Conclusion ...... 21

P a g e i | 29

List of figures

• List of graphs

Graph 1: Daily labor activities of Men and women before and after conflict ------2 Graph 2: Time spending selling food commodities ------3 Graph 3: Time spending on farming ------3 Graph 4: Are current daily labor activities for men different from what they were before the current conflict being faced? ------4 Graph 5: What type of work do men/ women prefer to do to generate income? ------5 Graph 6: What opportunities for jobs and skills are available ? ------6 Graph 7: Who in the family should be provided with Cash, crop/ livelihood inputs or livelihood support? ------6 Graph 8: Needs of the communities ------10 Graph 9: Who among those group address the concern? ------11 Graph 10: What are the leadership structures in the community? ------12 Graph 11: Can community members influence a decision made by communities leaders? ------13 Graph 12: Do religious leaders support in dispute resolution? ------13 Graph 13: How can religious leaders support inclusivity? ------14 Graph 14: Ministry of religion affairs, how can they push for inclusion? ------14 Graph 15: Are women involved in a dispute as part of the complainants have a chance to represent their point of view? ------15 Graph 17: Ministry of religion affairs, how can they push for inclusion? ------16 Graph 16: How can religious leaders support inclusivity? ------16 Graph 18: is women can influence decision making in the community? ------17 Graph 19: Presence of GBV and other protection issues within the communities ------18 Graph 20: Comparison of the presence of GBV by LGA ------18 Graph 21: Who are the victims/ survivors of incidents of Rape and Domestic violence most of the time? ------19 Graph 22: Are their agencies/ government ministries/ humanitarian organizations which support such cases? - 19 Graph 23: How can INGOs and state actors ensure information reaches everyone? ------20

• List of tables

Table 1: Number of people assessed per LGA ------v Table 2: Daily labor activities of Men and women before and after conflict by LGA ------4 Table 3: Who in the family should be provided with Cash, crop/ livelihood inputs or livelihood support by LGA? - 7 Table 4: Make most of the decisions on utilization of money, food, shelter, education, livelihood and income in the home ------7 Table 5: Make most of the decisions on utilization of money, food, shelter, education, livelihood and income in the home (women) ------8 Table 6: Make most of the decisions on utilization of money, food, shelter, education, livelihood and income in the home (Youth ) ------8 Table 7: Make most of the decisions on utilization of money, food, shelter, education, livelihood and income in the home (PWD) ------9 Table 8: Needs of the communities by LGA ------10 Table 9: Who among those group address the concern? by LGA ------11 Table 10: What are the leadership structures in the community? By LGA ------12

P a g e ii | 29

Context

The conflict in North-eastern Nigeria has been ongoing since 2009, destabilising Adamawa and Borno states, as well as bordering areas in neighbouring countries, namely Cameroon, Chad and Niger. Some 2.5 million displaced people are estimated to be displaced in the northeast of Nigeria; of this approximately 75% are in host communities, and 79% consist of women, boys and girls. Over a third of all IDPs are in areas that are not accessible to humanitarian agencies, and given the fluid conflict dynamics, stable areas could become inaccessible in future. Prior to the conflict, despite the absence of state presence and government services, the northeast region was characterised by thriving cross-border trade; however, the conflict and its cross- border impacts have seriously affected economic activities and livelihoods resulting in further ethnic and social tensions in all four countries within the Lake Chad region.

Objective

The gender assessment seeks to inform and identify the key gender dynamics present within the communities and organizational structure of the consortium. This information will provide valuable gender related direction on how to strategically implement, manage, and structure activities with the goal of ensuring the gender categories of women, men, girls and boys are appropriately responded to, participate adequately to the project and that the response is relevant to their gender specific needs. The gender assessment focused on the key global gender markers informed by global gender mainstreaming guidelines for EU focus areas as per the Commission’s 2010-2015 strategy for equality between women and men1 prioritized five key areas for action:

1. Equal economic independence for women and men; 2. Equal pay for work of equal value; 3. Equality in decision-making; 4. Dignity, integrity and ending gender-based violence; and 5. Promoting gender equality beyond the EU. Based on the global standard norms of categorizing genders to women, men, boys and girls, the project team sort to further break these categories a step further to female-headed households, young people

1 https://ec.europa.eu/anti-trafficking/sites/antitrafficking/files/strategic_engagement_for_gender_equality_en.pdf P a g e iii | 29

aged 6 - 11 years and 17 – 25 years, persons with disabilities, and elderly persons. By gauging the gender inclusiveness of services to these groups of people, the project will be able to ensure services are relevant and reaching the most vulnerable persons as well as ensuring services provided by BRICC are impactful to the entire household while reaching the minimum level of positive behavioral change in the community. However, in the assessment there were questions tailored to understand what services/ opportunities are available to women and men and young men and women or boys and girls where relevant. Resources from Genanet2 classifications of how women, men, girls and boys were referenced in this study. Specific categories as topics will be assessed in this research. These are:

• Understanding gender gaps before and after the insurgency • Time utilization - how time is spent • Access and economic activities • Decision and access to information • Internal and external capacities – self-protection/resilience and coping and influence • Presence of GBV and other protection issues within communities

Finally, the assessment ensured that good practices from past learning are referenced and captured as part of the work planning sessions which will reference the recommendations and findings. A key reference point was the finding that informed the assessment’s contextual landscape was the training conducted by the Mercy Corps Gender Specialist to the BRICC project management team and government stakeholders. The training informed the questionnaire and focused on the different types of vulnerable groups in Yobe.

Methodology

The data was collected by enumerators through household surveys. The enumerators were trained intensely for 2 days to broaden their understanding of gender mainstreaming. The foundation of the questionnaire borrowed its key concepts from IASC, Genanet website, Mercy Corps’ Gender Analysis Framework and DRC’s Age Gender and Diversity Global Standards. The questionnaire was compiled by DRC with technical inputs from the different sectors represented within the BRICC consortium. This questionnaire has auto-populated in tablets and smart phones which were used to collect data by the enumerators. The auto-populated responses were then uploaded onto the ‘Comcare’ software where it was automatically saved and sorted as per the categories. The data have been analyzed by Excel and

2 http://www.genanet.de/home.html P a g e iv | 29

SPSS by the DRC MEAL team and shared out to key program management focal persons in BRICC for review.

Sampling

Stratified sampling was used in this assessment to select the households which were surveyed. The first step in stratified sampling was to divide the population into subgroups (strata). Random or systematic samples were then taken from each sub-group. The sub-groups were a representation of the population of concern. The sampling fraction for each sub-group were taken in the same proportion of the sub-group in the population.

• Calculation of the sample size

Z 2 * (p) * (1-p) ss =

c 2

Where: Z = Z value (e.g. 1.96 for 95% confidence level) p = percentage picking a choice, expressed as decimal c = confidence interval, expressed as decimal For this assessment, the margin error is 5% and the confidence level is 95%.

Table 1: Number of people assessed per LGA

LGA FEMALE MALE TOTAL DAMATURU 156 200 356 GEIDAM 105 121 226 GUJBA 159 175 334 GULANI 158 182 340 POTISKUM 184 179 363 YUNUSARI 55 90 145 GRAND TOTAL 817 947 1,764

P a g e v | 29

Findings

• 91% of men practice agriculture, while this proportion is 48% for women • 88% of men spend at least one hour for faming activities while this proportion is 66% for women • Women are more focused on household activities such as cooking and cleaning (73%), looking after children (73%), taking care of the household (60%), and caring for sick relatives (54%) • 88% of men and 83% of women assert that the conflict has not affected their way of living • 78% of men are willing to do a small business, while 62% of women are willing to do small business • 63% of respondents think that women have more skill in doing small business compared to men, however, only 44% of women have been given an opportunity or are empowered to do small businesses • 79% of the respondents think that is should be the men who should receive cash or livelihood inputs as they support the family • 96.6% of women are able to make or influence decisions in their household • The priority needs for most communities was access to education (66% of the respondents) followed by access to health care at 58% and access to livelihoods at 41% • 56% of the respondents stated that the international NGOs provide support to address their needs, 47% is the government and 38% are the local authorities • 53% of the respondents stated that the Bulamas are the most influential people in the communities, followed by the Hakimi district (23%) and the Lawal (20%) • The religious leaders play a major role in the conflict resolution. They are key actors in resolving disputes in communities • Women's decisions in conflict resolution and the management of the communities are considered by the community • The most prevalent violation present in the communities is domestic violence according to 63.4% of the respondents followed by child marriage (57.3%), sexual assault (54.1%) and rape (53.1%) • GBV is most present in Potiskum, followed by Yanusari, Gulani, Gujba and Damaturu • The majority of the victims of gender-based violence (GBV) are young women and older women • The government and humanitarian actors are aware of the GBV presence within the communities and conduct activities to address this issue • For the communities, it will be more relevant for the humanitarian actors and state actors to work on the GBV issues by conducting mobilization and sensitization activities to reach more people

P a g e vi | 29

Gender assessment analysis

This report will analyze several gender outputs between men, women, boys and girls. Focusing on the EU gender guidelines the needs and views of these categories will be framed as different questions concerning time, power, decision making, level of influence and perceptions of the categories by the community. The assessment analysis will give an overview of the daily activities of men and women, girls and boys, the capacities of men and women in entrepreneurship and their willingness to do economic activities, who should receive the support, what kind of support in regards to livelihood that is relevant to men versus what is relevant to women. What assistance is relevant to youth, and finally how the BRICC consortium response can best reach and respond to vulnerable and special groups of persons. Another dynamic this assessment looked at was the specific aspects within households: who makes the decisions on utilization resources within the homestead, particularly with regards to money, food, shelter, education, livelihood, and who determines the appropriate mode of income generation in the household.

The second portion of the assessment focused on leadership, position of influence and the needs of the communities. The leadership of community leaders, how much influence community members have over these decisions, ability of leaders to support communities, presence of humanitarian or government interventions within the communities which address the needs of the communities. The analysis, in particular, focused on the ability of women to participate and influence the community management, women’s level of influence on the decision making, and presence of women in power. The gender assessment also mapped out communities with protection concerns.

P a g e 1 | 29

1. Socioeconomic activities and dynamics in the communities

1.1 Current daily activities of women compared to men

This chapter outlines the income generating activities commonly carried out by men and women. This is in comparison with the daily activities each gender category engages in throughout the day. In addition, this is compared to their means of livelihood after the conflict. The daily labor activities of men and Graph 1: Daily labor activities of Men and women before and after conflict

Male female

91%

73%

60%

58%

54%

48%

32%

30%

29%

19%

16%

11%

7% 2%

FARMING C A S U A L SELLING FOOD TAKING CARE CARE OF SICK HUNTING C A R E O F C O O K I N G LABOUR COMMODITIES O F T H E RELATIVES CHILDREN CLEANING SHOP HOUSEHOLD women in this assessment refers to activities that they do throughout the day and how they spend their days. As graph 1 shows, men are generally engaged in income-generating activities more than women. It is noted that farming is the primary source of income and practiced by 91% of men while 48% of women practice farming. The selling of food commodities and casual labor are the second and third highest income generating activities and are also practiced more by men than women. Less than 40% of women are engaged in the selling of food commodities and partaking in casual labor. The assessment on usage of time during the day shows that women are more focused on household activities like cooking and cleaning (73%), looking after children (73%), taking care of the household (60%), and caring for sick relatives (54%). Women have less time to engage in income generating activities than men as they spend most of their day engaged in home care activities.

Graph 2 shows that men spend more time farming than women A total of 20% of men spend at least half a day farming while only 6% of women spend their day farming. Similarly, 11% of men spend most of their days in the week farming as opposed to only 6% of women’s weekly occupation.

P a g e 2 | 29

Graph 3 depicts a different situation where women spend more time selling food commodities more than men. The proportion of women (25%) who are engaged in food selling for more than 1 hour is higher compared to men (15%). However, proportionately almost 50% men and 50% women are engaged in

Graph 3: Time spending on farming

most of the days 11% 6%

more than 3 hours 43% 29%

half the day 20% 6%

below 30 minutes 2% 17%

1 to 2 hours 13% 25%

0 to1 hours 10% 17%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Male Female Graph 2: Time spending selling food commodities

most of the days 9% 4%

more than 3 hours 32% 30%

half the day 11% 10%

below 30 minutes 15% 17%

1 to 2 hours 17% 25%

0 to1 hours 16% 13%

Male Female food selling. This could be because women might prefer this form of trade as opposed to farming, as compared to men who stated that they prefer farming to any other kind of trade at 91% as shown in graph 1.

In the LGA comparison (see table 2), the way in which men and women spend time is similar to graph 1. Men spend more time conducting income-generating activities more than women who spend more time carrying out household activities. Notably in Yunusari (83%) and Geidam (53%) of the respondents stated that women engage in farming activities more than women who sell commodities (34%). This means in particular locations women prefer farming as the most favorable income generating activity. In Potiskum and Geidam, the responses showed that the proportion of women carrying economics activities is higher than the other LGAs. In Damaturu, women are more focused on household activities than economic

P a g e 3 | 29

activities compared to the other LGAs, meaning that more economic empowerment activities might be required in this LGA to have a successful outcome for income generating outputs.

Table 2: Daily labor activities of Men and women before and after conflict by LGA

LGAs DAILY LABOUR ACTIVITIES DAMATURU GEIDAM GUJBA GULANI POTISKUM YUNUSARI TOTAL Men Farming 98% 97% 78% 90% 91% 100% 91% Selling food commodities shop 86% 58% 44% 39% 67% 48% 58% Taking care of the household 56% 32% 15% 20% 32% 41% 32% Cooking cleaning 3% 5% 7% 6% 12% 9% 7% Care of children 8% 11% 10% 10% 14% 12% 11% Care of sick relatives 33% 19% 7% 9% 28% 17% 19% Casual labour 75% 51% 45% 52% 71% 61% 60% Hunting 24% 23% 8% 14% 14% 14% 16% Female Farming 46% 58% 37% 46% 44% 83% 48% Selling food commodities shop 23% 41% 26% 17% 47% 34% 30% Taking care of the household 71% 75% 42% 49% 60% 84% 60% Cooking cleaning 96% 77% 44% 55% 83% 94% 73% Care of children 95% 78% 49% 53% 79% 94% 73% Care of sick relatives 90% 52% 19% 32% 65% 74% 54% Casual labour 29% 16% 20% 23% 48% 32% 29% Hunting 2% 3% 1% 2% 2% 5% 2%

Another aspect assessed was the economic activities before the insurgency and after the insurgency. Therefore, this question was administered: “Are current daily labor activities different from what they were before the current conflict being faced?”.

88% of the men and 83% of the women asserted that the conflict has not affected their way of living (see graph 4), which meant that most of the women always carried out more household activities than

Graph 4: Are current daily labor activities for men different from what they were before the current conflict being faced? Male Female

12% 17%

88% 83%

No Yes No Yes

P a g e 4 | 29

economics activities as shown in the table above. Meanwhile, 12% of the men and 17% of women surveyed said they have changed their activity because of the conflict.

1.2 Type of livelihood activities preferred by women/girls and men/boys

This chapter outlines the type of income generating activities preferred by men and women to improve their living conditions. The three main preferred modes of income cited by men and women were small businesses, casual labor and small trade. Overall, the proportion of men who are willing to do this business is higher compared to women. Graph 5 shows that 78% of the respondents stated that men are willing to do a small business compared to 62% of women. For causal labor there is a 10% difference

Graph 5: What type of work do men/ women prefer to do to generate income? 78%

64% 62% 63% 58% 58% 60% 54% 48% 49% 41% 39%

16% 16% 10% 13% 10% 7% 7% 5% 4% 5% 6% 3% 1% 0% 2% 1%

female male

between men and women, with men being more willing to do casual labor than women. For petty trade, it was noted that 49% of women are willing to engage in these activities and 63% of the men are willing to engage in casual labor as compared to any other trade. These statistics show that women are less willing to engage in income-generating activities as compared to men.

1.2 Suitable job opportunities for men, female youth, elderly people, female headed of household and PWD

P a g e 5 | 29

This chapter outline the most suitable work for different categories of people within the communities. It can be noted that most of the men are suitable for the semi-skilled trade while the other categories of people like youth female, elderly person, female head of households and people with disabilities (PWD) are more suitable for petty trade. Petty trade is also the most suitable work for PWD.

Graph 6: What opportunities for jobs and skills are available?

Graph 7: Who in the family should be provided with Cash, crop/ livelihood inputs or livelihood support?

FEMALE HEADED MEN FEMALE YOUTH ELDERLY PERSON PWD HH SEMI78.8% SKILLED TRADE 49% 47% 18% 39% 25% PETTY TRADE 28% 48% 52% 53% 61% CROP SALES 23% 5% 30% 7% 14%

CROP SALES PETTY TRADE SEMI SKILLED TRADE

14.6% 4.0% 1.4% 1.2%

Husband Wife Boys Girls Grand parents The low percentage of women willing to conduct income-generating activities may be explained by the role of women in their communities. They are perceived as the home nurturers and men are perceived as the income generators and bread winners. As seen in table 1, women are confined to household- related tasks for the better portion of their day while men are engaged in income-generating activities the bulk of their day. This perception by the communities is reflected in graph 7 where 79% of the respondents assert that it is the men who should be provided with cash, livelihood inputs or livelihood support for the family, whereas only 15% think women should be provided with these inputs. When data is broken down by LGAs, it is noted that the proportion of respondents who believe that the women should provide with income generating support for the family is higher in Potiskum at 28%, Damaturu at 15% and 4% in Yunusari.

Table 3 indicates that community members feel is more appropriate to provide inputs for cash, livelihoods or farming to the men as opposed to any other gender category. P a g e 6 | 29

Table 3: Who in the family should be provided with cash, crop/ livelihood inputs or livelihood support by LGA?

LGAs FAMILY SUPPORT Total DAMATURU GEIDAM GUJBA GULANI POTISKUM YUNUSARI Girls 0.8% 0.0% 5.7% 0.0% 0.6% 0.0% 1.4% Grand parents 1.7% 0.4% 1.5% 2.1% 0.6% 0.0% 1.2% Husband 76.1% 85.0% 77.8% 87.1% 64.5% 94.5% 78.8% Boys 6.2% 1.8% 3.0% 2.9% 6.3% 1.4% 4.0% Wife 15.2% 12.8% 12.0% 7.9% 28.1% 4.1% 14.6% Grand Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

1.3 Decision making in the household

This chapter outlines the decision makers of household resources like the use of the money, food, shelter, education, livelihood and income. As shown in table 4, most women and men are able to make decisions within their households, as only 4.4% of the women and 1.4% of the men cannot make decisions within the home. However, there are some households where the men make the most decisions, according to 58% of the respondents. Furthermore, it shows that in most occasions household resources decision making is consultative within the members of the family represented by 34.6%, 34.2% and 25.5% of men, women and youth making decisions most times respectively. This would indicate that for this response the family will participate in resource utilization if they are given support by the BRICC project. It also shows that if supported, families will support each other in managing the resource, be it a commodity shop or farming.

Table 4: Make most of the decisions on utilization of money, food, shelter, education, livelihood and income in the home

DECISION MAKER MEN WOMEN YOUTH Consult family 5.5% 23.5% 23.8% Make all decisions 58.0% 12.3% 9.5% Make few minor 0.6% 25.6% 32.3% Make no decision 1.4% 4.4% 8.9% Most times 34.6% 34.2% 25.5% Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

Regarding the LGAs, there is an inclination that in Damaturu women have less decision-making power in the household compared to men. It was noted that only 10.4% of women say they make all or most of the decisions in their home, while this proportion is 93.3% for men. Despite the obvious differences in decision-making between LGAs where Damaturu shows women having less decision-making power at 53.1% on making minor decisions only as opposed to Gulani where 12.6% of women make minor P a g e 7 | 29

decisions. On average 23.5% of women in all LGAs are consulted and 31.5% of them make decisions most times. Only 5.2% make no decisions. This indicates that there is a high likelihood of women being involved in decisions concerning resource mobilization and utilization from the support accorded to them in the BRICC project. Data shows that women are consulted at least 35% of the time, which is a quarter of the times decisions are being made. This may be due to the perception that women depend on men for financial support and thus do not have an opinion on how the money should be sourced or used. Socio- economic capacity building within the area of response may improve the score from 35% to a higher percentage by the end of the project.

Table 5: Make most of the decisions on utilization of money, food, shelter, education, livelihood and income in the home (women)

LGA DECISIONS DAMATURU GEIDAM GUJBA GULANI POTISKUM YUNUSARI TOTAL Women consult family 32.3% 25.7% 15.3% 18.5% 26.2% 22.8% 23.5% make all decisions 0.6% 14.2% 18.3% 17.1% 7.2% 18.6% 11.7% make few minor 53.1% 28.8% 16.2% 12.6% 27.5% 30.3% 28.1% make no decision 4.2% 2.7% 11.7% 5.3% 3.3% 1.4% 5.2% most times 9.8% 28.8% 38.6% 46.5% 35.8% 26.9% 31.5% Grand Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Compared to the men and women, most of the youth (32%) only takes a minor decision in their household, while 10% are able to take all the decisions. Meanwhile, around 26% are able to take all the decisions in their household. It can be seen that less than 2% of the youth can take all the decision in their dwelling in Damaturu. In Gujba and Gulani, the proportion of the youth making most of the time the decision is higher than others LGAs. Overall, youth are less involved in the decision making than the men and the women (see table 6).

Table 6: Make most of the decisions on utilization of money, food, shelter, education, livelihood and income in the home (Youth)

LGA DECISIONS DAMATURU GEIDAM GUJBA GULANI POTISKUM YUNUSARI TOTAL Youth consult family 40.4% 26.1% 19.8% 14.1% 19.6% 22.1% 23.8% make all decisions 1.1% 11.9% 14.7% 13.5% 2.5% 22.8% 9.5% make few minor 38.5% 34.5% 25.1% 22.9% 41.6% 28.3% 32.3% make no decision 14.9% 8.8% 8.7% 6.8% 8.3% 1.4% 8.9% most times 5.1% 18.6% 31.7% 42.6% 28.1% 25.5% 25.5% Grand Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

P a g e 8 | 29

When it comes to people with disability (PWD), it was noted that most of them do not make a decision within their household (34%), while those who can take minor decisions are the same number (34%). Only 7% of the PWD can make all the decision their household. Damaturu is the LGA where most of the PWD cannot make or take a minor decision for their household. The proportion of PWD who can make all the decision is higher in Yunusari than others LGAs. Meanwhile, it was noted that 17% of the PWD take most of the time the decision in their household in Potiskum.

Table 7: Make most of the decisions on utilization of money, food, shelter, education, livelihood and income in the home (PWD)

LGA DECISIONS DAMATURU GEIDAM GUJBA GULANI POTISKUM YUNUSARI TOTAL PWD consult family 3.9% 27.9% 14.4% 12.6% 13.8% 30.3% 14.9% make all decisions 0.6% 4.4% 10.8% 11.8% 1.9% 15.2% 6.6% make few minor 45.5% 28.8% 35.3% 37.6% 22.6% 27.6% 33.7% make no decision 48.3% 27.9% 29.0% 26.5% 44.4% 15.9% 34.4% most times 1.7% 11.1% 10.5% 11.5% 17.4% 11.0% 10.4% Grand Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

In summary, it is noted that majority of economic activities are conducted by men. Women, on the other hand, are expected to also contribute to economic activities such as farming, selling food commodities and small trade despite carrying out household activities also carry out. This indicates that for women to be engaged in livelihood activities, the project must take into account that their time is divided between household chores and income generating activities. Men are currently more engaged in economics activities and therefore during criteria creation when searching for persons with pre-existing skills. Men may be at an advantage point more than women. The criterion should consider the indicators from the assessment that show that women are more engaged in household chores more than economic activities due to cultural perceptions of the roles of women in the home. In addition, the community has a strong belief system that it is the role of the man to provide for the family and therefore expects any financial support should be given to the men as represented in graph 7 where respondents assert that all household expenses should be catered for by the male head of household. However, the assessment also showed that women are more skilled in small business than men.

2. Community’s needs, leadership, influence and type of violations

This chapter will outline the influence specific categories of persons have on leadership, their roles in leadership, the roles of women specifically in influencing leadership or in leading, the needs of the communities, the level of power and influence the current leadership in the community and the presence of human rights violations encountered by people in the community. P a g e 9 | 29

2.1 Communities needs

The graph 8 illustrates which unaddressed needs the communities have during the time of the assessment. As per the respondents, it was noted that the first needs outlined by the communities was access to education at 66%, followed by lack of access to healthcare at 58% and lack of access to livelihoods and income generating activities at 41%. Graph 8: Needs of the communities

According to Table 8, when broken down by LGA; each area has different needs levels. Gulani, Geidam and Potiskum LGAs have similar needs levels which are the access to education, health and livelihoods. While in Damaturu, needs for education and health facilities are highest ranking, followed by the need for social amenities at 74%. In Gujba the third most urgent need was the lack of a market center/shade at 46% while in Yanusari the third most urgent need was water infrastructures and sanitation facilities at 44%.

Table 8: Needs of the communities by LGA

LGA SERVICES NEEDED TOTAL DAMATURU GEIDAM GUJBA GULANI POTISKUM YUNUSARI Education 96% 60% 54% 69% 53% 59% 66% Health 86% 56% 48% 60% 37% 67% 58% Livelihoods 30% 41% 43% 50% 44% 39% 41% Water and sanitation facilities 43% 32% 28% 36% 32% 44% 35% Market 31% 39% 46% 41% 20% 33% 35% Worship place 74% 32% 14% 23% 6% 34% 30% Social centre 8% 16% 19% 15% 8% 11% 13%

Respondents when asked to rank who address these needs asserted that majority of their needs are responded to by international NGO at 56% and are most likely to address their needs, while the government at (47%) and the local authorities at (38%) as seen in graph 9.

P a g e 10 | 29

Graph 9: Who among those group address the concern?

56% ; 47%

36%

24%

17%

INGO Government Authorites Local NGOs UN agencies

However, at the LGAs level according to the findings represented in table 9. In Potiskum it is the government who are the first actors to address the needs while in other LGAs, international NGOs are the first actors. However, at 24% ability to respond for local NGOs is substantial and would be interpreted that if the local NGOs are supported, they may be more efficient at responding. Table 7 shows that the local NGOs are particularly active in Damaturu and Giedam.

Table 9: Who among those group address the concern? by LGA

ADRESS ISSUES DAMATURU GEIDAM GUJBA GULANI POTISKUM YUNUSARI TOTAL INGO 78% 66% 58% 61% 16% 76% 56% Government 76% 12% 43% 46% 54% 24% 47% Authorities 63% 13% 29% 40% 31% 29% 36% Local NGOs 39% 30% 21% 23% 13% 19% 24% UN agencies 29% 19% 10% 12% 9% 27% 17%

P a g e 11 | 29

2.2 Conflict resolution and leadership, influence.

This chapter outlines who are the leaders in the communities and which actors within the community influence decision making for communities. Graph 10: What are the leadership structures in the community?

As seen in graph 10, the Bulamas (53%) 53.2% are the most influence people in the communities and then comes the Hakimi

District at 23.3%and the Lawan at 20%. 23.3% 20.2% Meanwhile, in Potiskum it’s the Hakimi district who is the most influential of the 3.2% community leaders at 71%, while in Bulama Hakimi district Lawan Wakili Yanusari it is the Lawan at 61% as seen in table 10.

Table 10: What are the leadership structures in the community? By LGA

LGA COMMUNTIES LEADERS TOTAL DAMATURU GEIDAM GUJBA GULANI POTISKUM YUNUSARI Bulama 91.3% 51.8% 73.4% 43.5% 14.3% 35.9% 53.2% Hakimi district 0.3% 15.9% 10.2% 22.4% 71.3% 3.4% 23.3% Lawan 8.1% 31.4% 14.1% 32.1% 3.6% 60.7% 20.2% Wakili 0.3% 0.9% 2.4% 2.1% 10.7% 0.0% 3.2% Grand Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

Community leaders are responsible for managing all the issues faced by the communities and tasked to find solutions. They are the key link between communities and the humanitarian and development actors who respond to their needs such as INGOs, NGOs and state actors. On the other hand, their decisions are always consultative and not unilateral because the members of the community can influence the decisions made by the community leaders. Moreover, when we consider LGAs, we note that in some of them, community leaders have more in power than others. Indeed, despite the cumulativeness and ability to influence decisions as noted here, graph 11 shows that the decisions community leaders make for the communities such as Giedam at 22% cannot be influenced by the community members. While a smaller percentage of 13% is the case for Yunusari.

P a g e 12 | 29

Graph 11: Can community members influence a decision made by communities leaders?

DAMATURU GEIDAM GUJBA GULANI POTISKUM YUNUSARI Yes 91.57% 77.88% 95.21% 97.35% 98.35% 86.90% No 8.43% 22.12% 4.79% 2.65% 1.65% 13.10%

It was noted that religious leaders play a major role in conflict resolution. They are key actors in resolving disputes in communities as shown in graph 12.

Graph 12: Do religious leaders support in dispute resolution?

DAMATURU GEIDAM GUJBA GULANI POTISKUM YUNUSARI Yes 97.2% 100.0% 98.5% 97.6% 99.7% 98.6% No 2.8% 0.0% 1.5% 2.4% 0.3% 1.4% They are also willing to support inclusivity meaning that they can push an agenda, including female PWD, youth and female head of household in the community structures. In Yanusuri, 42% of the respondents assert that the religious leaders are no willing to include some categories of the people in the conflict resolution mechanism compare to others LGA where more than 70% of the respondents say that the communities leaders are willing to support inclusivity in the conflict resolution (see graph 13).

P a g e 13 | 29

Graph 13: How can religious leaders support inclusivity?

YUNUSARI

POTISKUM

GULANI

GUJBA

GEIDAM

DAMATURU

DAMATURU GEIDAM GUJBA GULANI POTISKUM YUNUSARI not willing 0.3% 4.9% 8.4% 7.6% 41.9% 17.2% they don't know 10.1% 2.2% 5.1% 5.6% 13.8% 0.0% willing to be 0.0% 16.4% 5.1% 2.1% 1.7% 2.8% willing to do 89.6% 76.5% 81.4% 84.7% 42.7% 80.0%

Women also contribute to conflict resolution, and in decisions made by community leaders. The community management is inclusive as it has a representation of women and they are active in decision making and consultation. Community leaders also bring together the complainant and accused as a way of ensuring social cohesion. Graph 14: Ministry of religion affairs, how can they push for inclusion?

YUNUSARI POTISKUM GULANI GUJBA GEIDAM DAMATURU

DAMATURU GEIDAM GUJBA GULANI POTISKUM YUNUSARI not willing 3.1% 3.5% 12.3% 20.0% 41.3% 8.3% they don't know 15.2% 2.7% 9.6% 9.7% 17.4% 0.7% willing to be 0.8% 18.1% 9.9% 6.8% 0.8% 18.6% willing to do 80.9% 75.7% 68.3% 63.5% 40.5% 72.4%

P a g e 14 | 29

Graph 15: Are women involved in a dispute as part of the complainants have a chance to represent their point of view?

DAMATURU GEIDAM GUJBA GULANI POTISKUM YUNUSARI Yes 98.3% 84.1% 84.1% 88.8% 87.9% 84.8% No 1.7% 15.9% 15.9% 11.2% 12.1% 15.2%

They are also willing to support inclusivity meaning that they can push an agenda including female PWD, youth and female head of household in the community structures. In Yanusuri, 42% of the respondents assert that the religious leaders are no willing to include some categories of the people in the conflict resolution mechanism compare to others LGA where more than 70% of the respondents say that the communities leaders are willing to support inclusivity in the conflict resolution (see graph 16).

P a g e 15 | 29

Graph 17: How can religious leaders support inclusivity?

YUNUSARI

POTISKUM

GULANI

GUJBA

GEIDAM

DAMATURU

Graph 16: Ministry of religion affairs, how can they push for inclusion?

YUNUSARI POTISKUM GULANI GUJBA GEIDAM DAMATURU

It was noted that women's opinions during conflict resolution were considered by community leaders. This is the case in Yanusuri where 50% of the respondents say that women have influence in decision- making in the community. In Potiskum (38%) and Geidam (35%) show a that women do have influence although at different proportions. However, this case appears to be the case only in those three communities. The other LGAs show that decision making by women in conflict resolution and community management remains limited (see graph 18).

P a g e 16 | 29

Graph 18: is women can influence decision making in the community?

YUNUSARI

POTISKUM

GULANI

GUJBA

GEIDAM

DAMATURU

0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% 90.0% 100.0% DAMATURU GEIDAM GUJBA GULANI POTISKUM YUNUSARI Ccannot influence 1.7% 6.6% 4.5% 6.5% 15.2% 11.0% Medium influence 52.0% 34.1% 41.6% 36.5% 15.4% 26.9% Strong influence 28.4% 35.0% 35.9% 33.8% 38.6% 50.3% Weak influence 18.0% 24.3% 18.0% 23.2% 30.9% 11.7%

2.3 Presence of GBV and other protection issues within the communities

This chapter focuses on presence of human rights violations which will be referenced also as protection concerns. In addition, the frequency of these violations in the communities and whether there is reprieve for survivors of human rights violations or actors responding to these needs.

Overall, it was noted that respondents were skeptical to give information on presence of protection concerns. However, the feedback given was that violations such as rape, child marriage, sexual assaults and domestic violence do exist in these communities, as according to graph 19. The most prevalent violation present in the communities was domestic violence at 63,4% as per the percentage of the respondents followed by child marriage at 57,3% of the respondents, sexual assault at 54.1% and rape at 53.1%.

P a g e 17 | 29

Graph 19: Presence of GBV and other protection issues within the communities

Child Marriage

Domestic violence

Sexual assault

Rape

Rape Sexual assault Domestic violence Child Marriage happens a lot 5.2% 5.4% 8.2% 16.2% happens often 8.9% 12.8% 17.9% 13.3% not aware 46.9% 45.9% 37.3% 42.7% once in a while 39.0% 36.0% 36.6% 27.8%

When comparing how often gender based violence (GBV) occurs in in communities, child marriage came as the most prevalent at 16,2% meaning it happens a lot more than others forms of GBV, while domestic violence is the type of violation which happen often at 18%. Despite being present in all the communities, rape was stated as happening once in a while by 39% of the respondents.

In comparison by LGA, Graph 120 shows that Geidam is the most affected LGA by the presence of GBV followed by Potiskum, Yanusari, Gulani and Gujba (in almost the same proportion) and finally Damaturu.

Graph 20: Comparison of the presence of GBV by LGA

YUNUSARI

POTISKUM

GULANI

GUJBA

GEIDAM

DAMATURU

DAMATURU GEIDAM GUJBA GULANI POTISKUM YUNUSARI Rape 30.3% 66.8% 43.4% 49.1% 76.9% 60.0% Sexual assault 36.5% 70.4% 45.5% 45.3% 73.6% 64.1% Domestic violence 39.9% 88.1% 54.2% 49.1% 79.9% 87.6% Child Marriage 30.3% 80.1% 50.9% 49.4% 72.2% 84.1%

P a g e 18 | 29

Graph 21 shows that the majority of survivors of gender-based violence (GBV) are young women following by older women. However, in Gujba, Gulani and Potiskum, young men are stated to also be survivors of GBV in a much lower proportion than women.

Graph 21: Who are the victims/ survivors of incidents of Rape and Domestic violence most of the time?

YUNUSARI

POTISKUM

GULANI

GUJBA

GEIDAM

DAMATURU

DAMATURU GEIDAM GUJBA GULANI POTISKUM YUNUSARI young women 99.2% 98.7% 91.0% 95.0% 98.6% 100.0% older women 1.4% 1.3% 4.8% 4.4% 5.0% 0.7% young men 2.0% 1.8% 9.0% 6.5% 6.6% 0.7% elderly person 0.0% 0.0% 2.4% 5.0% 6.3% 0.0% female adult 12.9% 3.1% 4.8% 3.5% 3.6% 2.1% male adult 1.7% 0.4% 1.5% 0.9% 1.9% 0.0%

It was noted that the government and humanitarian actors are aware of the GBV presence within the communities and worked through various responses to address the concerns. Unfortunately, it was also noted that some LGAs have better GBV response coverage than others as seen in graph 22. In Yanusari, 32.4% of the respondents asserted that there are no actors working with the communities to tackle problem of GBV, and this is the same with Geidam at 28.8%.

Graph 22: Are their agencies/ government ministries/ humanitarian organizations which support such cases?

DAMATURU GEIDAM GUJBA GULANI POTISKUM YUNUSARI Yes 83.1% 71.2% 89.8% 91.8% 86.0% 67.6% No 16.9% 28.8% 10.2% 8.2% 14.0% 32.4% P a g e 19 | 29

Graph 23: How can INGOs and state actors ensure information reaches everyone?

YUNUSARI POTISKUM GULANI GUJBA GEIDAM DAMATURU

DAMATURU GEIDAM GUJBA GULANI POTISKUM YUNUSARI COMMUNITY MOBILIZATION 70.8% 48.7% 56.0% 72.1% 42.4% 29.7% IEC MATERIALS 0.0% 10.2% 7.8% 5.0% 9.4% 0.7% ROLE PLAY 0.0% 0.0% 9.6% 0.6% 0.3% 1.4% SENSITIZATION 29.2% 41.2% 26.6% 22.4% 47.9% 68.3%

All the communities stated that it would be more relevant for the humanitarian actors and state actors to work on the GBV issues by carrying out community mobilization and sensitization which would reach more people and have a wider impact. They also recommended that the processes should be inclusive by involving the community leaders and women in designing, planning and implementation of such activities. Interestingly all communities relayed that IEC material and role plays would not be effective to addressing GBV issues as shown in graph 23.

P a g e 20 | 29

Conclusion

In summary, it was noted that men have the responsibility of providing income for the family more than women. Men are seen as the main breadwinner in charge of covering all the needs of the family and relegate the women to the play the role of managing the household and caring for the children or the sick within the household. The community also perceives the role of a woman to be solely this and only a quarter of the women in most communities contribute income to the household or earn an income through farming, selling food commodities or carrying out petty trade. The assessment also indicated that despite women, having more skills in small business may not be willing to carry out business activities instead of the male head of household. We also noted that most business activities are carried out by the men. Men are more skilled in technical skills more than women who incase such support is to be provided may need some capacity building in socio economic empowerment.

Meanwhile, the women participate actively in the decision making in the household, however the proportion of male making sole decisions in the household in high at 58%. However, women will be involved in decisions concerning income generation and management within the household. Other members of the household are also consulted on matters to do with resource management within the household. Therefore, projects targeting households might benefit from including adult members of the household in capacity building sessions. This might contribute in impacting the outputs on livelihood support for small businesses as other members of the family might participate in running the businesses.

Women also take part in community management and are part of the leadership of community leaders and participate in conflict resolution especially if they are part of the conflict as either the complainant or the accused. Women are also able to influence decisions made by community leaders by contributing their opinions.

The most urgent needs of the communities were stated to be lack of access to education, lack of access to healthcare and lack of access to livelihoods and income. However, some communities stated that lack of social centers for religious activities and lack of adequate market facilities was a big issue for them.

The needs mentioned by the communities were partially responded to by the international NGOs, in other LGAs by the government and in some by NGOs. However, many needs were not yet responded to.

Communities also stated that there is a strong prevalence of GBV within their communities. The main GBV concern was domestic violence, closely followed by child marriage. The majority of the survivors of Rape were young women, followed by older women. However, communities responded that the state

P a g e 21 | 29

actors and INGOs are presently responding to these protection concerns. Communities stated that the best way to resolve this was through awareness raising and community mobilization.

In conclusion, programming should be consultative within households to ensure the most relevant support is provided for the most relevant householder. Women are consulted within the household but need empowerment to manage small business and technical skill businesses support. Leaders have a strong influence over the community and government and national NGOs are present and working hard to support communities and thus are important stakeholders who must be engaged for the project to be successful.

P a g e 22 | 29