Lessons Learned from Use of the Paper and Electronic Voucher Systems by Cosaca Consortium for the 2016/17 El Niño Emergency Drought Response in Mozambique
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
LESSONS LEARNED FROM USE OF THE PAPER AND ELECTRONIC VOUCHER SYSTEMS BY COSACA CONSORTIUM FOR THE 2016/17 EL NIÑO EMERGENCY DROUGHT RESPONSE IN MOZAMBIQUE BY HOLLY WELCOME RADICE Final SUBMITTED TO SAVE THE CHILDREN 7 SEPTEMBER 2017 Contents Acknowledgments ........................................................................................................................................ iii Acronyms ..................................................................................................................................................... iv List of figures ................................................................................................................................................. v Executive summary ...................................................................................................................................... vi 1.0 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Methodology ................................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Limitations of study....................................................................................................................... 2 2.0 Background ....................................................................................................................................... 4 2.1 General country information ........................................................................................................ 4 2.2 Cash based programming in Mozambique ................................................................................... 5 2.3 Background COSACA voucher activities ........................................................................................ 6 3.0 Study Findings ................................................................................................................................... 9 3.1 Results: food security and livelihoods .......................................................................................... 9 3.2 Vendors’ experiences and perceptions on use of vendors ......................................................... 14 4.0 Analysis of voucher activity process ............................................................................................... 16 4.1 What went well? ......................................................................................................................... 16 4.2 What did not go well? ................................................................................................................. 18 4.3 Cross-cutting themes: child participation, protection, gender ................................................... 23 4.4 What are the best practices that were generated for COSACA? ................................................ 24 4.5 Cost efficiency ............................................................................................................................. 25 4.0 Conclusions & Recommendations ........................................................................................................ 28 4.1 Conclusions ....................................................................................................................................... 28 4.2 Recommendations ............................................................................................................................ 29 Annex I: People contacted .......................................................................................................................... 33 Annex II: Beneficiary households by area ................................................................................................... 36 Annex III: Number of participants by tool................................................................................................... 37 Annex IV: References .................................................................................................................................. 38 Annex V: Scope of work ............................................................................................................................. 42 ii Acknowledgments The author would like to thank all the individuals from the four NGOs studied in this report who graciously participated in interviews and replied to requests for data. Special recognition goes out to the 20 enumerators who collected the data and the four translators who made the focus group discussions and key informant interviews in the field possible. A tremendous appreciation goes out to the administration, logistics, and finance staff of the COSACA partners who worked very hard to make the study happen on a tight schedule. The author also wishes to acknowledge the invaluable contributions of beneficiaries, project vendors, and local officials who graciously gave their time and opinions to shape the report’s contents. This document is an output from a project funded by UK Aid from the UK Department for International Development (DFID) for the benefit of developing countries and beyond. However, the views expressed and information contained within it are not necessarily those of or endorsed by DFID, which can accept no responsibility for such views or information or for any reliance placed on them. iii Acronyms CBP Cash Based Programming CMU Central Management Unit COSACA Concern Worldwide, Oxfam, Save the Children and Care International CRM Complaints and Response Mechanisms DFID Department for International Development ECHO European Commission Humanitarian Aid EMMA Emergency Market Mapping Analysis FGD Focus Group Discussions FSL Food Security & Livelihoods HEA Household Economy Analysis HH Household HIV/AIDS Human Immunodeficiency Virus/Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome KII Key Informant Interviews LMMS Last Mile Mobile Solutions MEAL Monitoring, Evaluation, Accountability, and Learning MEB Minimum Expenditure Basket MZN Mozambican Meticais NGO Non-Governmental Organization PDM Post Distribution Monitoring RAM Rapid Assessment Market SETSAN Secretariat for Food Security and Nutrition Sida Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency SOP Standard Operating Procedure UN United Nations US United States WASH Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene WFP World Food Program iv List of figures Chart 1: Percentage of respondents by NGO Chart 2: Sources of income compared Chart 3: Livestock ownership baseline vs. end line Chart 4: Reasons for incurring debt baseline vs. end line Chart 5: Coping strategies used baseline vs. end line Chart 6: Food group by percentage households consuming Chart 7: Wait time at fairs per voucher type Map 1: COSACA voucher intervention areas Table 1: Number of sources of income per household by percentage current vs. 12 months prior Table 2: Comparison reasons for not having seeds for next planting season baseline vs. end line Table 3: Average number meals consumed per day by percentage HH reporting: 2015, baseline vs. end line Table 4: Comparison of cost for different voucher types v Executive summary Objectives In response to the crisis arising from the 2015-2016 drought, Concern Worldwide, Oxfam, Save the Children and Care International (COSACA) consortium implemented a food voucher activity with over 40,000 households in 12 districts across the six provinces in Mozambique. The activity was part of a larger project with funding from Department for International Development (DFID), Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida), and the European Commission Humanitarian Aid (ECHO). COSACA commissioned an evaluation of the food voucher activities with the aim to capture, lessons learned from the use of the two delivery mechanisms (paper and e-vouchers), the impact of the voucher program on household food security, and cost efficiency of the two delivery mechanisms. The themes of child participation, gender, and protection were analyzed throughout the study. The work intends that it should contribute towards the improvement of COSACA’s service delivery of future humanitarian assistance. Methodology An independent consultant conducted the field research in July-August 2017. The study included 284 household interviews, 17 focus group discussions (FGD) with 229 people (74% females, 26% males; 79% adults, 21% children) voucher beneficiaries, and 57 key informant interviews (KII) including vendors for food distributions, community leaders, other Government of Mozambique officials, and non- governmental organization (NGO) staff. Also, the consultant completed a literature review of project documents and related materials. Key findings on impact on households Agricultural production has increased as a source of income compared to 12 months ago. The number of households claiming to have livestock has increased since the baseline (58% vs. 46%). Over eighty-five percent of the respondents claimed to have planted in the last planting season. Eighty percent of the respondents claim to be eating two or more meals a day; this is a 30% improvement from the 2015 figures for Gaza Province. Nineteen percent of the respondents currently have debt, and on average, the debt has been held for 4.4 months. Nearly 70% of the debt has been incurred since the last food distribution; food expenses still are the primary reason for taking on debts but show an improvement against the baseline (37%). The use of three coping mechanisms see significant reductions—Comparing family