IVAP Analysis Report April 2015
IVAP is proudly funded by ECHO and DFID Background to KP/FATA Complex Emeregency The Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) is a semi-autonomous tribal region in northwestern Pakistan. It borders Afghanistan as well as Pakistan’s Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Baluchistan provinces. More than 5 million people have been registered with the government and/or UNHCR as an internally displaced person (IDP) at some point since 2008 due to violent clashes in the country’s northwest region made up of FATA and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) province. The 2014 military operations in North Waziristan and Khyber Agencies aggravated the situation, leading to the displacement of a further 233,000 families (approximately 1.4 million people). According to latest estimates from the UNHCR (2014), there are currently 1.6 million registered IDPs in KP/FATA.
The vast majority of IDPs in KP/FATA chose to live in host communities (97%) rather than in camps for cultural reasons, including the privacy of females and difficult living conditions in the camps. The rest, who often have no other option, live in IDP camps (3%) (WFP). OCHA and other sources put the proportion of displaced families living outside of camps at 90% (OCHA, 18 June 2014; NYT, 20 June 2014; Al-Jazeera, 26 June 2014; IDMC, 12 June 2013, p.6). Displacement is difficult in Pakistan, which is ranked 146th on the list of 186 countries covered by the Human Development Index (UNDP, 24 July 2014, p.159). An estimated one fifth of its population are poor across the country, while in the KP/FATA a staggering one third of the population are poor (FDMA/UNDP, 2012, p.5; HDR, 2013, p.18; HPG, May 2013, p.21; UNDP, 27 October 2011).
To receive cash, food and other assistance from the government and many UN agencies, IDPs need to be registered as being an IDP and ‘verified’ by the National Database and Registration Authority (NADRA). Under a joint government-humanitarian process, people can be registered when they possess (or have proof that they have applied for) a computerized national identity card (CNIC) that shows that their permanent address or area of origin is from an area that has been designated as ‘conflict affected’ by the Government of Pakistan. Not all displaced persons in KP/FATA have been able to register due to a range of reasons including a lack of official documentation, problems with having more than two addresses or the fact that while their area of origin may be affected by the conflict it may not be specified as such by the government. Female-headed households and other vulnerable groups are often disproportionately represented among those experiencing issues with registration as in many cases they are not able to produce the correct documentation (OCHA, 7 August 2014, p.7).
Even as people have been newly displaced in some parts of the KP/FATA, others have returned. It is estimated that over 2 million people have returned to their areas of origin in the past few years. According to the plans of the government, all displaced persons will be able to return to their area of origin by mid-2016. However, there are still questions about the safety of families returning to areas in FATA, and whether they will have access to basic services and infrastructure, including shelter, health, education, water and sanitation.
1 IVAP Background Since it was established in 2010, the aim of the IDP Vulnerability Assessment and Profiling (IVAP) project has been to gather data on the location, humanitarian needs and vulnerabilities of people displaced due to the complex emergency in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) and the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), Pakistan. Initially piloted by the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), the International Rescue Committee (IRC) has implemented IVAP since mid-2010.
IVAP conducts multi-cluster profiling of the needs and vulnerabilities of displaced persons through door-to-door family-level interviews and phone interviews to update information on existing records. Set up as a service for the humanitarian community, IVAP aims to guide humanitarian responses that are targeted towards the needs of the most vulnerable. IVAP also provides a range of technical support services on profiling and assessments on request to the humanitarian community in Pakistan.
IVAP has been carried out through a series of five funding cycles thanks to the support of ECHO and DFID. The current dataset is based on data gathered from June 2013 to March 2015, with 160,110 displaced families (799,971 individuals) profiled through family-level interviews and records updated on an annual basis through follow-up phone calls. Data collected by IVAP has been shared with the humanitarian community through geographic and cluster-specific bulletins and factsheets, regular presentations, tailored information requests, the referral of cases, and IVAP’s online database. In the past two phases, IVAP has referred over 50,000 families to humanitarian responders for assistance, successfully advocated for the registration of over 10,000 displaced families with government authorities, and consistently placed the priority needs of vulnerable persons on the agenda of the humanitarian community.
IVAP provides one of the few, and by far the most extensive, sources of data on off-camp displacement in KP/FATA. Over the past five years of operation, IVAP has developed a strong reputation for gathering reliable and unbiased profiling data on displacement as well as providing impartial technical assistance on assessment activities. It is clear from this experience that being aware of and responsive to the changing information needs of the government and the humanitarian community, is central to the success of IVAP.
2
Methodology The IVAP methodology is based on a multi-cluster face-to-face family-level survey. The questionnaire form was developed by IVAP based on input from all clusters active in the KP/ FATA humanitarian response. The survey was conducted in all areas where IVAP was able to gain access (including Charsadda, DI Khan, Hangu, Kohat, Kurrum, Nowshera, Peshawar and Tank) where the security situation was operable.
Population IVAP aimed to gather information on all people displaced from the conflict in FATA and living in off-camp host communities in KP. IVAP gathered information on 160,109 displaced families (802,580 individuals) in the period from June 2013 and March 2015 with all information gathered before August 2014 updated over the phone in the period since. In this report, the results of the IVAP profiling exercise are compared with the findings of other needs assessment activities conducted in KP/FATA in this period.
On 7 December 2014, the IVAP dataset was cross-checked against the WFP/UNHCR registration and food distribution lists (excepting families displaced from North Waziristan Agency). The results of the exercise showed that 45,427 families were common to both the IVAP database and the WFP/UNHCR registration list; 14,344 IDP families (12%) had returned (these were mainly IDPs from Bajaur and Mohmand that were profiling in the earlier phases); 10,904 families were NADRA non-verified; and 48,825 families (41%) on the IVAP database did not match with any registration data. Based on this cross-checking, it is estimated that IVAP has covered roughly one-third of the total displaced population.
Methodology During the planning phase, IVAP mapped out the rough concentration of displaced persons in each Union Council (UC) based on secondary data then met with village leaders in every village to gather information about the number and location of displaced persons. Data collection teams went from door-to-door in the areas identified as having a high likelihood of hosting displaced persons to conduct the survey. An extensive public communications campaign (including through posters, newspapers, and over the radio) was conducted to raise awareness about IVAP. Displaced persons that had not been profiled were able to call a hotline to arrange to be profiled by IVAP staff. All data was collected on mobile devices except in the districts of DI Khan and Tank where paper forms were filled due to the sensitivity of mobile data collection in these areas. While the aim of IVAP was to conduct a full census, in effect, IVAP used a non-probability snowball sampling technique under which each respondent was asked to assist the interviewer in identifying other displaced families.
Unit of analysis The basic unit of analysis for the questionnaire section of the survey was the family. Family is defined as the nuclear family (meaning a couple and their unmarried children only), which is usually smaller than the household size which often includes all members of a joint family sharing the same kitchen and living sharing income and expenditure.
3 Questionnaire and interviewer profile The questionnaire (available at www.ivap.org.pk) includes 120 questions covering all the clusters including health, education, WASH, protection, shelter, nutrition, CoRe, livelihoods and food security. The survey questionnaire was developed based on consultation with the cluster coordinators taking into account harmonisation with other need assessment activities in KP/FATA and synergies with past IVAP questionnaires.
Each data collection team was composed of four male and one female data collectors in addition to one supervisor. The female data collection staff members were responsible for interviewing female respondents.
Demographic Profile The profiled population is relatively young with 57.7% aged less than 18 years. Figure 1 gives a snapshot of the age demographic of the population disaggregated by sex. There were also more men than women (51.5% male; 48.5% female).
Average family size – based on the government definition of a nuclear family as parents or married persons with their unmarried children – was found to be 5 persons per family. According to area of origin of these families, this ranged from 5.5 from Bajaur, 5 from Bannu, 5.29 from DI Khan, 4.96 from Hangu, 5.1 from Khyber, 5 from Kohat, 5.06 from Kurrum, 3.5 from Lower Dir, 5.4 from Mohmand, 4.6 from North Waziristan, 4.9 from Orakzai, 5.3 from Peshawar, 4.8 from South Waziristan, 6.5 from Swat, 4.7 from Tank and 5.2 from Upper Dir.
The findings of the exercise showed that there were 239 separated children living in TDP families across KP. In addition, there were 20,852 children who had lost one or both of their parents which is 2.66% of the total population. There were also 7,586 individuals who had been widowed representing nearly 1% of the population.
4 Food Security
Key points • Displaced families continue to be highly vulnerable to food insecurity. In total, 34% of the families had acceptable food consumption while the majority (63%) had borderline food consumption; and 3% had poor food consumption.
• Nearly three quarters of respondents reported that adequate food was available in the market. However, economic access has been the major issue with 74% of the families reporting to not have sufficient money to buy food even when it is available.
• Displaced families living in Hangu were found to be most vulnerable to food insecurity and least vulnerable in DI Khan.
• Food was by far the priority need most commonly identified by respondents with 40% reporting it as their top need.
Food security The analysis of the food security and livelihood situation reveals that the displaced families residing in host communities of various districts continue to be vulnerable to food insecurity. Due to unstable and poor livelihood conditions, the income of the displaced families is very low and thus posing a serious impediment to accessing food. According to the MIRA report, in mid-July in Bannu District, three quarters of the displaced population received food assistance (KP PDMA and OCHA, 31 July 2014, pp.12, 13, 16, 36-37). With only 34% of the families having an acceptable food consumption, the continued need of food assistance seems necessary particularly to those with poor (3%) and borderline (63%) food consumption.
An analysis of the seven-day recall of the food consumed by households revealed that only 35% of families had acceptable food consumption, 63% had borderline food consumption, and 2% had poor food consumption. A majority of families were reported to have low food stocks. Nearly three-quarters (74%) of families reported that their current food stock would last for a week or less while 18% reported that their food stocks would only last 1-2 weeks. Only 8% reported that their family had stocks for more than two weeks. This situation was considerably worse than the situation in District Bannu, where the MIRA found than only 17% of households had food stocks for 10 days of less (MIRA 2014).
Food was reported to generally be available in markets with 72% of respondents stating that this was the case. Access to food tended to be more restricted by insufficient money than the availability of food in markets. Of those profiled, 74% of those reported that they did not have enough money to buy food in the market (up from 68% in 2013). This was broadly consistent with the findings of the MIRA survey in Bannu which found that 66% of families reported that they did not have enough money to afford food.
When asked about the coping strategies used to meet food needs, 87% of families reported that they had used some form of negative coping strategy in the past month. The proportion of families using negative coping strategies was highest in Hangu (97%) followed by Charsadda (92%) and lowest in DI Khan (79%). The most common negative coping strategies used included purchasing food on credit (practiced by 68% of families), borrowing food or relying 5 Figure 1: Families identifying food as their priority need Food as priority need Food Consumption Score Food available in markets Able to afford food
!"# $!"# %!"# &!"# '!"# (!!"#!"# $!"# %!"# &!"# '!"#(!!"#!"# $!"# %!"# &!"# '!"#(!!"#!"# $!"# %!"# &!"# '!"# (!!"#
#)*+,-+..+# #)*+,-+..+# #)*+,-+..+# #)*+,-+..+#
#/*+01+.+,# #/*+01+.+,# #/*+01+.+,# #/*+01+.+,#
#2+345# #2+345# #2+345# #)*+,-+..+# #)*+,-+..+#
#2+345# #)*+,-+..+# #)*+,-+..+#
)*+,-+..+#676+8# 267+8# 267+8# 267+8#
#9#:#;*+3# #9#:#;*+3# #9#:#;*+3# #9#:#;*+3#
#<+*+,=>,# #<+*+,=>,# #<+*+,=>,# #<+*+,=>,# #9#:#;*+3# #9#:#;*+3# #9#:#;*+3# #9:#;*+3# #<+,7+# #<+,6+# #<+,6+# #<+,6+#
9:#;*+3#676+8# 267+8# 267+8# 267+8#
#?+34># #?+34># #?+34># #?+34>#
#2*+88# #2*+88# #2*+88# #2*+88# #?+34># #?+34># #?+34># #?+34># ?+34>#676+8# 267+8# 267+8# 267+8#
#;7*+6# #;6*+7# #;6*+7# #;6*+7#
#@+A*5# #@+A*5# #@+A*5# #@+A*5# #;6*+7# #;6*+7# #;6*+7# #;7*+6#
;7*+6#676+8# 267+8# 267+8# 267+8#
#)B36,+8#;>,,>C# #)B37,+8#;>,,>C# #)B37,+8#;>,,>C# #)B37,+8#;>,,>C#
#@7DB,#;>,,>C# #@6DB,#;>,,>C# #@6DB,#;>,,>C# #@6DB,#;>,,>C# #;>,,>C# #;>,,>C# #;>,,>C# #;>,,>C# #E==B,#;>,,>C# #E==B,#;>,,>C# #E==B,#;>,,>C# #E==B,#;>,,>C#
;>,,>C#676+8# 267+8# 267+8# 267+8#
#F7D-*B,+# #F6D-*B,+# #F6D-*B,+# #F6D-*B,+#
#<+005# #<+005# #<+005# #<+005# #F6D-*B,+# #F6D-*B,+# #F6D-*B,+# #F7D-*B,+# F7D-*B,+#676+8# 267+8# 267+8# 267+8#
# # # 2+3K#676+8# #2+3K# #2+3K# #2+3K# 2+3K# #2+3K# #2+3K# #2+3K# N# :JL<#LMB,+4B# L88## L88#267+8# L88## L88#267+8# L88## L88#267+8# Food priority Other priority Poor (1-28) Borderline Not available Available Not able to Able to afford need need (>28 - 42) afford Acceptable (>42) 6 on help from friends (56%), and eating less preferred or cheaper (poor quality) food (20%). Other practices included limiting portion size of meals (14%) and decreasing health care expenses (18%). Some even engaged in selling household assets (7%) and productive assets (2.7%). The main negative coping mechanisms used were relatively standard across the different host districts with the exception of Tank where food was more likely to be purchased on debt. In terms of the priority needs identified by respondents, food was by far the most common with 40% reporting that this was their most important need. It is understandable given the food security analysis presented above that food is by far the top priority assistance need identified by the respondents. In addition to other factors, some geographic variation has also been observed in food security, with families residing in Hangu having the worst food security situation. Female-headed families were more likely to using negative coping strategies (91%) than male- headed families (86%). The following negative coping mechanisms were more commonly practiced among female-headed families compared with male-headed families: decreasing healthcare expenses, borrowing food/relying on help from friends, limiting portion size, and begging. Female-headed families and female widow-headed families were also much more likely to identify food as their top priority need in displacement. Figure 2: Families identifying food as their priority need Food as priority need Able to afford food when available !"# $!"# %!"# &!"# '!"# (!!"#!"# $!"# %!"# &!"# '!"# (!!"# )*+,-*#.*/0123*24/# )*+,-*#.*/0123*24/# )*+,-*56*,3*3#7,+8-9# )*+,-*#5*,3*3#516/*71-3# :68-356*,3*3#7,+8-9# 879-3#5*,3*3#516/*71-3/# ;-3*.-956*,3*3#7,+8-9# :-3*;-<#5*,3*3#516/*71-3/# <8/,=-*356*,3*3#7,+8-9# =9/,>-*3#5*,3*3#516/*71-3# >831?56*,3*3#7,+8-9# ?931@#5*,3*3#516/*71-3/# @ABC#,D*.,E*# ABCD#,E*;,F*# Food priority Other priority Families with food top priority Able to need need not able to afford food afford food 7 Shelter • 0.6% were reported to be living in particularly poor circumstances including in poorly maintained tents. These families were mainly in the Tehsils of Charsadda, DI Khan, Paharpur, Parao, Nowshera and Tank. • 23% of displaced families owned the house in which they were currently living, 61% were living in rented houses and 14% were living with relatives/friends. • 1% of the female headed households have reported that they are living in open air. • Average rent per month was reported to be 2,315 PKR. Rental accommodation was the form of housing most commonly used by displaced persons in KP/FATA with 61% living in rented houses. This is in-line with the findings of a protection cluster assessment, which placed the figure at two-thirds of displaced persons. The same assessment found that more than half of displaced persons renting properties were not aware of their tenancy rights and three quarters of leases were made verbally (Protection Cluster, 31 May 2014, pp.39-42). Similarly, a needs assessment conducted by the DRC of persons displaced from North Waziristan and residing in District Bannu found that 63% of families were living in rented houses (DRC, 20 and 23 November 2014, p.6). However, the vast majority of the remaining families in Bannu were living in accommodation allocated by the village committee (27%). IVAP, meanwhile, found that most of the remaining families (23%) owned the home in which they were living and 16% were living with friends or relatives. This may reflect the fact that the people assessed by DRC were newly displaced, while many of those covered by IVAP have been displaced for several years. The average rent per month was reported to be 2,315 PKR, ranging from an average of 1,521 PKR in Hangu to 2,955 PKR in DI Khan and 2,576 PKR in Peshawar. This was considerably lower than the estimates of average rent costs for District Bannu—5,000 PKR per month—found by the PDMA/OCHA assessment. (KP PDMA and OCHA, 31 July 2014, pp.34-35; MIRA 2014). Of those profiled from June 2013 to April 2015, nearly 70% were living in rental housing. This was up from 58% profiled in 2010 to May 2013 period, during which time a greater proportion owning their own house or staying with relatives or friends. Figure 3: Housing Situation Type of shelter Average rent per month Average # persons per room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pen air / Staying with Rental Own house Average rent per Average number of 8 extremely poorfriends/relatives month (PKR) persons living per room Figure 4: Housing Situation Type of shelter Average rent per month Average # persons per room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pen air / Staying with Average rent per month Average number of extremely poor friends/relatives (PKR) persons living per room Rental Own house 9 WASH • 19% of families depend on an unprotected source of drinking water. • 7% had to walk over 800 metres to access drinking water; 5% walked between 500 and 800 metres; 18% walked less than 500 metres; and 69% had drinking water available inside their dwelling. • The WASH situation was particularly severe in the following UCs: Checkan, Kech, Mahra, Miran, Naivela and Parao in DI Khan district; Doaba, Kahi, Kech Banda, Kotki and Thall in Hangu district; Bilitang and Lachi in Kohat; Badabare Maryamzai, Mashoogagar, Pishtakhara Pyan, Sarband, Urmar Bala, Urmar Pyan and Urmar Miani in Peshawar district; Dabrah, Ghara Baloch, Jatataar, Ranwal, Sarangzona, and Shah Alam in Tank. • Unregistered IDPs were 4% more likely to depend on an unprotected source of water. • In 44% of families, female adults were responsible for collecting water; in 33%, male adults were responsible; and in 11% female children and in 11% male children were responsible. There was a large degree of geographic variation in terms of who was responsible for water collection. • 25% of those who reported walking over 800 m to access water did not have appropriate water collection and water storage containers. • 13% of families were depending on open defecation, 0.5% were using communal/public latrines, 52% were using formal latrines at home and 33% were using informal latrines at home. • 44% of families were not using soap to wash hands at critical times. Water: The majority – 81% – of families reported to have access to a protected source of drinking water such as a hand pump, piped water or a protected well. The remaining 19% depended on an unprotected source of drinking water such as a canal, river, open well or surface water. The situation for people displaced from North Waziristan to District Bannu was broadly similar, with one-quarter not having access to clean drinking water (KP PDMA and OCHA, 31 July 2014, p.37). Figure 5: Distance to primary water source !"# $!"# %!"# &!"# '!"# (!!"# )*+,-*#.*/0123*24/# )*+,-*56*,3*3#7,+8-9# :68-356*,3*3#7,+8-9# ;-3*.-956*,3*3#7,+8-9# <8/,=-*356*,3*3#7,+8-9# >831?56*,3*3#7,+8-9# @ABC#,D*.,E*# More than 800m 500-800m Less than 500m At home 10 Figure 6: Families more than 800 m from primary water source Distance to primary water source Ownership of water containers Responsible for water collection !" #!!!" $!!!" %!!!" &'!!!"!"# $!"# %!"# &!"# '!"# (!!"# !"# $!"# %!"# &!"# '!"# (!!"# "()*+,-" #)*+,-.# #)*+,-.# ".*/)" #/+0*# #/+0*# "0,)1," #1-*2-# #1-*2-# #9#P#/*-.# #132-.# #9#P#/*-.# #132-.# "8"O".),-" "021,-" "3,24*5," #4-35+6-# #4-35+6-# "6,17," #7-28-# #7-28-# "87,9,":;/<" #98-:-#;<0=# #98-:-#;<0=# ".,)2" #/-*3# #/-*3# ".*/)"=,->," #/+0*#>-.?-# #/+0*#>-.?-# #R-.DC# #R-.DC# "Q,-CB" ".7?+2" #/8@,3# #/8@,3# "@),55":AB1,5<" #A*-66#;BC2-6=# #A*-66#;BC2-6=# "@),55":;19,-<" #A*-66#;<2:-.=# #A*-66#;<2:-.=# "=252?,-C" #>[email protected]# #>[email protected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ore than 800m 500-800m Do not own suitable Own suitable water Female adult Male adult water collection and collection and Female child Male child Less than 500m At home storage containers storage containers 11 Figure 7: Families depending on an unprotected source of water Primary source of Washing hands at Type of latrine used drinking water critical times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nprotected Protected Not washing Washing Open defecation Other water source water source hands at critical hands at times critical times 12 Of the families profiled, 69% had drinking water available inside their dwelling while 18% had to walk less than 500 metres. A total of 5% had to walk between 500 and 800 metres to access water and 7% had to walk over 800 metres. UN Habitat reported that in some cases, people have to walk as far as several kilometres to access water (2015). In terms of who collects the water, in 44% of cases the adult female was responsible, in 35% a male adult had primary responsibility, and female and male children were responsible in 11% of cases each. Most families – 70% – claimed to have appropriate water collection and storage containers. An assessment performed by CRDO found that the difficulties that displaced persons often experience in accessing clear drinking water, has facilitated the spread of water-borne diseases especially among women and children. Sanitation and hygiene: Most families were either using formal (52%) or informal (33%) latrines at home. Worryingly, 13% were resorting to open defecation. Finally, 0.5% of families were using community or shared latrines. In 60% of the cases where families were using community or shared latrines, separate facilities were available for female use. Meanwhile, for those families using latrines inside the house, in 52% of cases there were more than 15 people using each latrine. The MIRA report in Bannu District similarly found that two-thirds of displaced persons have access to toilets or communal latrines, but that there were not enough toilets and that open defecation is common (KP PDMA and OCHA, 31 July 2014, p.37). Finally, only 56% of families profiled reported that they were using soap to wash hands at critical times. Figure 8: Primary source of drinking water !"# $!"# %!"# &!"# '!"# (!!"# )*+,-*#.*/0123*24/# )*+,-*56*,3*3#7,+8-9# :68-356*,3*3#7,+8-9# ;-3*.-956*,3*3#7,+8-9# <8/,=-*356*,3*3#7,+8-9# >831?56*,3*3#7,+8-9# @ABC#,D*.,E*# Unprotected Protected 13 Nutrition • In 11% of families there was a decrease in breastfeeding since displacement; in 2% breastfeeding stopped entirely; and in <1% there was an increase in breastfeeding. The situation was most acute in Kohat followed by Tank, Hangu, Nowshera and Peshawar. • Rates of severe acute malnutrition were highest in Tank followed by Kohat and Hangu In terms of child nutrition, 17% of families with children under the age of 2 years reported that breastfeeding started within an hour of birth, while 48% reported to have done so within 24 hours. Of those who reported that breastfeeding had decreased due to displacement, the majority (52%) who provided a reason indicated that this was because of insufficient breast milk, which tends to be an indication of the poor nutritional status of lactating mothers. Other cited reasons include that the mother was sick, pregnant, or had died, or that there was a lack of privacy/space. In most families with children under 2 years old, breastfeeding patterns were not reported to have changed since displacement (47%) or the respondent did not know if patterns had changed (39%). In 11% of families there was a decrease, in 2% breastfeeding stopped entirely and in <1% there was an increase in breastfeeding. This situation was most severe in Kohat followed by Hangu, Nowshera and Peshawar. According to the MIRA assessment, few mothers and children displaced from KP/FATA have been receiving assistance to address their specific nutritional needs, in addition, over half of all children displaced from North Waziristan receive less food than prior to displacement with a significant numbers were malnourished (MIRA 2014). MUAC testing was carried out on 81% of children between 6 months and 5 years old, in the remaining cases the child was either not at home or the parents did not allow the test to be conducted. Of those who were tested, the vast majority—97%—had green MUAC status indicating that these children are well nourished, 2% had yellow status indicating that these children are at risk of acute malnutrition and 0.4% had red MUAC status indicating moderate to severe acute malnutrition. Some of those children with red and yellow scores were also chronically ill (19% and 12% respectively). Their illness may help explain their MUAC status. However, with many families refusing to have their children tested, the actual rate of malnourishment may be considerably higher. Figure 9: Change in breastfeeding patterns since displacement !"# $!"# %!"# &!"# '!"# (!!"# )*+,-*#.*/0123*24/# )*+,-*56*,3*3#7,+8-9# :68-356*,3*3#7,+8-9# ;-3*.-956*,3*3#7,+8-9# <8/,=-*356*,3*3#7,+8-9# >831?56*,3*3#7,+8-9# @ABC#,D*.,E*# Change reported (increase, No change decrease or stop) reported 14 Figure 10: Families in which breastfeeding patterns have changed since displacement Change in breastfeeding Breastmilk replacement Main type of water source !"# $!"# %!"# &!"# '!"# (!!"#!"# $!"# %!"# &!"# '!"# (!!"#!"# $!"# %!"# &!"# '!"# (!!"# #)*+,-+..+# #)*+,-+..+# #)*+,-+..+# #/*+01+.+,# #/*+01+.+,# #/*+01+.+,# #2+345# #2+345# #2+345# #)*+,-+..+# #)*+,-+..+# #)*+,-+..+# )*+,-+..+#676+8# )*+,-+..+#676+8# )*+,-+..+#676+8# #9#:#;*+3# #9#:#;*+3# #9#:#;*+3# #<+*+,=>,# #<+*+,=>,# #<+*+,=>,# #9:#;*+3# #9:#;*+3# #<+,7+# #<+,7+# #9:#;*+3# #<+,7+# 9:#;*+3#676+8# 9:#;*+3#676+8# 9:#;*+3#676+8# #?+34># #?+34># #?+34># #2*+88# #2*+88# #2*+88# #?+34># #?+34># #?+34># ?+34>#676+8# ?+34>#676+8# ?+34>#676+8# #;7*+6# #;7*+6# #;7*+6# #@+A*5# #@+A*5# #@+A*5# #;7*+6# #;7*+6# #;7*+6# ;7*+6#676+8# ;7*+6#676+8# ;7*+6#676+8# #)B36,+8#;>,,>C# #)B36,+8#;>,,>C# #)B36,+8#;>,,>C# #@7DB,#;>,,>C# #@7DB,#;>,,>C# #@7DB,#;>,,>C# #;>,,>C# #;>,,>C# #E==B,#;>,,>C# #E==B,#;>,,>C# #;>,,>C# #E==B,#;>,,>C# ;>,,>C#676+8# ;>,,>C#676+8# ;>,,>C#676+8# #F7D-*B,+# #F7D-*B,+# #F7D-*B,+# #<+005# #<+005# #<+005# #F7D-*B,+# #F7D-*B,+# #F7D-*B,+# F7D-*B,+#676+8# F7D-*B,+#676+8# F7D-*B,+#676+8# # # # 2+3K#676+8# 2+3K#676+8# 2+3K#676+8# 2+3K# 2+3K# 2+3K# L88# :JL<#LMB,+4B# L88# :JL<#LMB,+4B# L88# :JL<#LMB,+4B# Breastfeeding Breastfeeding Dried milk Liquid other Unprotected Protected pattern changed pattern did powder than milk water source water source not change Liquid milk Specialised infant formula 15 Community Restoration (CoRe) • Families reported major disruption in their livelihoods with a significant shift from stable sources of income such as agriculture and trade to unstable, casual wage labour. This is in line with the findings reported by IVAP and WFP in 2013 Joint Bulletin. The results show that there has been a major disruption in the livelihoods of displaced families. Agriculture (including farming, livestock and poultry) was the most important source of livelihood at the place of origin with 38% of families reporting agriculture as their main source of income prior to displacement. This dropped to 2.5% in displacement. The proportion of families engaged in small-scale businesses (shopkeepers/traders) also dropped from 6.4% before displacement to 4.5% after. Many families are now depending on less reliable primary sources of income including 37% on unskilled/daily wage labour; 6% on humanitarian assistance; and 15% on income support/zakaat. In total, 17% of families reported that they currently own livestock in host areas. Of these, 4% owned poultry (chicken), 31% owned large ruminants (cows/ buffalos), 19% owned small ruminants (goats/sheep), and 3% owned equines (horses/donkeys/mules). The findings of the MIRA report indicate that while 75% of families from North Waziristan were able to take their livestock with them in displacement, many have found it difficult keep these animals alive due to a lack of shelter, water and fodder (KP PDMA and OCHA, 31 July 2014, p.10). Levels of income were generally very low with 18% of the families reported to have monthly incomes of 5,000 PKR (USD 50) or less; 74% had monthly incomes of less than 10,000 PKR (USD 98) per month. This is particularly low especially considering the average family size of 5.1 people. Particularly for female headed households the per month income is low which is reported to be 7,307 PKR (USD 71) Figure 11: Families depending on insecure sources of livelihoods !"# $!"# %!"# &!"# '!"# (!!"# )*+,-*#.*/0123*24/# )*+,-*56*,3*3#7,+8-9# :68-356*,3*3#7,+8-9# ;-3*.-956*,3*3#7,+8-9# <8/,=-*356*,3*3#7,+8-9# >831?56*,3*3#7,+8-9# @ABC#,D*.,E*# Insecure source Secure source of income of income 16 Figure 12: Families primarily depending on insecure sources of livelihoods in displacement Primary source of livelihood Primary source of livelihood Average monthly income in displacement in area of origin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nsecure Secure Secure Insecure Average monthly income (PKR) 17 Health • 12% of families reported to have at least one family member with a chronic illness. • 3% of individuals were reported to have a physical disability and 0.5% a mental disability. • Of those who had used a government healthcare facility, 89% used out-patient department services, 16% accessed free medicines, 3% used family planning services and at least one member of 15% of families had been hospitalized since displacement. • Reasons for not using health facility included: financial constraints (Kurrum 41% and Hangu 29%); difficult terrain to access facility (Tank 18% and DI Khan 9%); distance to facility (Hangu 49% and Tank 40%); security (DI Khan 4%); not aware of location (34%). • Of those who had visited a healthcare facility since displacement, 51% reported that required medicines were unavailable; 9% that required staff were unavailable. • Women in 15% of families reported to not have access to healthcare providers to assist with birth. A significant proportion of individuals profiled—12%—reported to have at least one family member with a chronic illness. The most commonly identified chronic health issues included kidney problems, arthritis and Hepatitis B & C. The MIRA report, meanwhile, indicated that skin infections, diarrhea, colds and malaria were particularly common (KP PDMA and OCHA, 31 July 2014, p.14; OCHA, 7 August 2014, p.3). A total of 3% of individuals were reported to have a physical disability. In addition, 0.5% of individuals were reported to have a mental disability, however, this is likely to under-reported for a number of reasons including the stigma attached to mental illness, poor diagnosis and lack of prioritisation With regard to access to healthcare, 64% of families claimed to have used a government health facility since displacement. This is unsurprising given that the majority of families Figure 13: Issues faced when using government healthcare facilities Accessed government healthcare Availability of Availability of female staff medicines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ccessed government healthcare Not accessed Reported that female Reported that required facility since displacement staff were not available medicines not available 18 Figure 14: Issues faced when using government healthcare facilities Accessed government healthcare Availability of Availability of Charge for services facility since displacement female staff medicines (OPD, hospitalisation etc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ealthcare Healthcare facility Female staff not Required medicines Charged for services facility accessed not accessed available not available 19 Figure 15: Reasons for not using government healthcare facilities Accessed government healthcare Availability of Availability of Charge for services facility since displacement female staff medicines (OPD, hospitalisation etc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ot accessed Accessed Female staff not Required medicines Charged for services available not available 20 profiled had been displaced for several years. Of those who had used a government healthcare facility since displacement, most had used out-patient department services (89%), 16% accessed free medicines, and at least one member of 15% of families reporting to have used a healthcare facility had been hospitalized. Of those families that had not used a government health facility since displacement, more than a third noted that this was because they were not aware of the location of the facility, others indicated that it was due to the long distance to the facility (27%) and 13% to financial constraints. Of those who had visited health facilities, 51% noted that some medicines required were not available, 16% were charged for services, and 8% experienced issues due to the unavailability of staff (primarily female staff). 34% of families did not experience any issues. An assessment by the protection cluster, meanwhile, found that there was a near-total absence of female health workers in healthcare facilities available to displaced persons (Protection Cluster, 31 May 2014, p.48). In terms of vaccinations, children in 47% of families received routine vaccinations and women in 18% of families were vaccinated against tetanus. The relatively low rates of vaccination among children is partially due to activities by non-state armed groups in FATA to prevent people especially children from being vaccinated against polio and other communicable diseases (AP, 1 March 2014; AFP, 29 March 2014; AFP, 14 April 2014; AFP, 26 May 2014). 21 Education • 69% of school-aged children were reported to be attending school after displacement. • School attendance was lowest in the districts of DI Khan, Kurrum and Tank district. • More children from North Waziristan and Khyber Agencies were attending school before displacement (compared with their school attendance in host communities); children from other agencies were more likely to be attending school since they had been displaced. • 55% of children in female-headed families were attending school; less than the average of 60%. • Reasons for not attending school: Children going to Madrassa (Central Kurrum 21% and Tank 14%) long distance to school (Nowshera 15% and Paharpur 12%) associated expenses (Peshawar Town I 39%, Peshawar Town II 30%); and lack of documentation (Charsadda and Peshawar 4% each). • Registration status had little impact on education indicators. Many displaced children are out of school due to the displacement and because they have had to work to help their families survive. However, many children in KP and FATA had difficulties accessing schools before displacement, with non-state armed groups attacking schools forcing students and especially girls to stay at home (ICG, 23 June 2014, pp.13-15; Remote Control Project, June 2014, p.15; IRIN, 16 June 2014). In terms of school attendance, 69% of families reported that they were sending at least one of their children to school at present (up from 64% before displacement). In total, 144,106 school-aged children (67%) were reported to be attending school while 138,428 children were not. This represents an increase from a reported 66% of children attending school in their area of origin. The main reason given for families not sending their children to school in host communities was insufficient money for school fees and other expenses such as uniforms, books, etc. (29%). This was followed by cases in which children were attending a madrassa (18%), working (14%), or not attending school due to cultural issues (10%). Of those families with children attending school, most (79%) did not report any issues. Meanwhile, 10% reported a shortage of adequate school infrastructure (e.g. furniture, study materials and a proper classroom) and 3% pointed to an absence of staff. Figure 16: Families with children in school !"# $!"# %!"# &!"# '!"# (!!"# )*+,-*#.*/0123*24/# )*+,-*56*,3*3#7,+8-9# :68-356*,3*3#7,+8-9# ;-3*.-956*,3*3#7,+8-9# <8/,=-*356*,3*3#7,+8-9# >831?56*,3*3#7,+8-9# @ABC#,D*.,E*# 22 Children attending Children not school attending school Figure 17: School attendance by family School attendance in Attendance in area Reasons for not attending school Issues at school in host community of origin of those not attending in host Cultural issues Distance to school High cost !"# $!"# %!"# &!"# '!"# (!!"#!"#$!"#%!"#&!"#'!"#(!!"#!"# $!"#%!"#&!"#'!"#(!!"#!"#$!"#%!"#&!"#'!"#(!!"#!"#$!"#%!"#&!"#'!"#(!!"# #)*+,-+..+# #)*+,-+..+# #)*+,-+..+# #)*+,-+..+# #)*+,-+..+# #/*+01+.+,# #/*+01+.+,# #/*+01+.+,# #/*+01+.+,# #/*+01+.+,# #2+345# #2+345# #2+345# #2+345# #2+345# #)*+,-+..+# #)*+,-+..+# #)*+,-+..+# #)*+,-+..+# #)*+,-+..+# )*+,-+..+#676+8# )*+,-+..+#676+8# )*+,-+..+#676+8# )*+,-+..+#676+8# )*+,-+..+#676+8# #9#:#;*+3# #9#:#;*+3# #9#:#;*+3# #9#:#;*+3# #9#:#;*+3# #<+*+,=>,# #<+*+,=>,# #<+*+,=>,# #<+*+,=>,# #<+*+,=>,# #9:#;*+3# #9:#;*+3# #9:#;*+3# #9:#;*+3# #<+,7+# #<+,7+# #<+,7+##9:#;*+3# #<+,7+# #<+,7+# 9:#;*+3#676+8# 9:#;*+3#676+8# 9:#;*+3#676+8# 9:#;*+3#676+8# 9:#;*+3#676+8# #?+34># #?+34># #?+34># #?+34># #?+34># #2*+88# #2*+88# #2*+88# #2*+88# #2*+88# #?+34># #?+34># #?+34># #?+34># #?+34># ?+34>#676+8# ?+34>#676+8# ?+34>#676+8# ?+34>#676+8# ?+34>#676+8# #;7*+6# #;7*+6# #;7*+6# #;7*+6# #;7*+6# #@+A*5# #@+A*5# #@+A*5# #@+A*5# #@+A*5# #;7*+6# #;7*+6# #;7*+6# #;7*+6# #;7*+6# ;7*+6#676+8# ;7*+6#676+8# ;7*+6#676+8# ;7*+6#676+8# ;7*+6#676+8# #)B36,+8#;>,,>C# #)B36,+8#;>,,>C# #)B36,+8#;>,,>C# #)B36,+8#;>,,>C# #)B36,+8#;>,,>C# #@7DB,#;>,,>C# #@7DB,#;>,,>C# #@7DB,#;>,,>C# #@7DB,#;>,,>C# #@7DB,#;>,,>C# #;>,,>C# #;>,,>C# #;>,,>C# #;>,,>C# #E==B,#;>,,>C# #E==B,#;>,,>C# #E==B,#;>,,>C##;>,,>C# #E==B,#;>,,>C# #E==B,#;>,,>C# ;>,,>C#676+8# ;>,,>C#676+8# ;>,,>C#676+8# ;>,,>C#676+8# ;>,,>C#676+8# #F7D-*B,+# #F7D-*B,+# #F7D-*B,+# #F7D-*B,+# #F7D-*B,+# #<+005# #<+005# #<+005# #<+005# #<+005# #F7D-*B,+# #F7D-*B,+# #F7D-*B,+# #F7D-*B,+# #F7D-*B,+# F7D-*B,+#676+8# F7D-*B,+#676+8# F7D-*B,+#676+8# F7D-*B,+#676+8# F7D-*B,+#676+8# # # # 2+3K#676+8# 2+3K#676+8# 2+3K#676+8# 2+3K#676+8# 2+3K#676+8# 2+3K# 2+3K# 2+3K# 2+3K# 2+3K# N# N# N# N# L88# :JL<#LMB,+4B# :JL<#LMB,+4B# :JL<#LMB,+4B# :JL<#LMB,+4B# :JL<#LMB,+4B# Cultural issues Long distance Cost of school Not attending Attending Not attending Attending (e.g. no separate to school fees, books etc. school for girls) 23 Protection • 7% reported that children in their family were suffering from psychological and social distress. This was highest among families in Charsadda and Kohat. • Children in 3% of families were working. • Children in 692 families were reported to be facing discrimination accessing services. • Children in 254 families were reported to be in conflict with the law. • 59 children were separated or unaccompanied. • Family members were missing from 4619 families. • 89% of family heads possessed a CNIC. Female family heads families were more than two times as likely to not have a CNIC. • 49% reported that they were not registered, 40% reported that they were registered, and 11% were registered but blocked. Families headed by female widows were far more likely to not be registered. In 2,221 cases, at least one family member was still in the area of origin. In most of these – 28.7% these family members were protecting property, in 14% they were protecting family livestock, and 6.1% they could not afford to move to host area. In 43 cases, family members were reportedly still living in the area of origin due to a physical or mental disability. There has been a significant decrease in the number of respondents noting that they were not registered because they did not know about the registration process (15% of families profiled between 2010-2012; 9% profiled in 2013-2015). Similarly the proportion of respondents noting that they were not registered due to problems with their CNIC decreased from 10% to 7%. This tends to indicate a better system for registration with information communicated more effectively to displaced persons. Figure 18: Self-reported IDP Registration Status !"# $!"# %!"# &!"# '!"# (!!"# )*+,-*#.*/0123*24/# )*+,-*56*,3*3#7,+8-9# :68-356*,3*3#7,+8-9# ;-3*.-956*,3*3#7,+8-9# <8/,=-*356*,3*3#7,+8-9# >831?56*,3*3#7,+8-9# @ABC#,D*.,E*# Not registered Registered Registered but blocked 24 Figure 19: Reasons for not registering as a TDP with the government/UNHCR Self-declared registration Don’t know Unable to reach Complicated process Lack of Problem with status about process registration site at registration site documentation CNIC !" #!$!!!" %!$!!!"!"# $!"# %!!"#!"# $!"# %!!"#!"# $!"# %!!"#!"# $!"# %!!"#!"# $!"# %!!"# "&'()*(++(" #&'()*(++(# #&'()*(++(# #&'()*(++(# #&'()*(++(# #&'()*(++(# ",'(-.(+()" #,'(-.(+()# #,'(-.(+()# #,'(-.(+()# #,'(-.(+()# #,'(-.(+()# #/(012# #/(012# #/(012# #/(012# #/(012# #&'()*(++(# "/(012" #&'()*(++(# #&'()*(++(# #&'()*(++(# #&'()*(++(# "&'()*(++(" &'()*(++("343(5" &'()*(++(#343(5# &'()*(++(#343(5# &'()*(++(#343(5# &'()*(++(#343(5# &'()*(++(#343(5# "6"7"8'(0" #6#7#8'(0# #6#7#8'(0# #6#7#8'(0# #6#7#8'(0# #6#7#8'(0# "9('():;)" #9('():;)# #9('():;)# #9('():;)# #9('():;)# #9('():;)# #67#8'(0# #67#8'(0# #67#8'(0# #67#8'(0# #67#8'(0# "67"8'(0" "9()4(" #9()4(# #9()4(# #9()4(# #9()4(# #9()4(# 67"8'(0"343(5" 67#8'(0#343(5# 67#8'(0#343(5# 67#8'(0#343(5# 67#8'(0#343(5# 67#8'(0#343(5# "<(01;" #<(01;# #<(01;# #<(01;# #<(01;# #<(01;# "/'(55" #/'(55# #/'(55# #/'(55# #/'(55# #/'(55# #<(01;# #<(01;# #<(01;# #<(01;# #<(01;# "<(01;" <(01;"343(5" <(01;#343(5# <(01;#343(5# <(01;#343(5# <(01;#343(5# <(01;#343(5# "84'(3" #84'(3# #84'(3# #84'(3# #84'(3# #84'(3# "=(>'2" #=(>'2# #=(>'2# #=(>'2# #=(>'2# #=(>'2# #84'(3# #84'(3# #84'(3# #84'(3# #84'(3# "84'(3" 84'(3"343(5" 84'(3#343(5# 84'(3#343(5# 84'(3#343(5# 84'(3#343(5# 84'(3#343(5# "&?03)(5"8;));@" #&?03)(5#8;));@# #&?03)(5#8;));@# #&?03)(5#8;));@# #&?03)(5#8;));@# #&?03)(5#8;));@# "=4A?)"8;));@" #=4A?)#8;));@# #=4A?)#8;));@# #=4A?)#8;));@# #=4A?)#8;));@# #=4A?)#8;));@# #8;));@# #8;));@# #8;));@# #8;));@# #8;));@# "8;));@" "B::?)"8;));@" #B::?)#8;));@# #B::?)#8;));@# #B::?)#8;));@# #B::?)#8;));@# #B::?)#8;));@# 8;));@"343(5" 8;));@#343(5# 8;));@#343(5# 8;));@#343(5# 8;));@#343(5# 8;));@#343(5# "C4A*'?)(" #C4A*'?)(# #C4A*'?)(# #C4A*'?)(# #C4A*'?)(# #C4A*'?)(# "9(--2" #9(--2# #9(--2# #9(--2# #9(--2# #9(--2# #C4A*'?)(# #C4A*'?)(# #C4A*'?)(# #C4A*'?)(# #C4A*'?)(# "C4A*'?)(" C4A*'?)("343(5" C4A*'?)(#343(5# C4A*'?)(#343(5# C4A*'?)(#343(5# C4A*'?)(#343(5# C4A*'?)(#343(5# "9?*'(A()"D/4A0E7F"#9?*'(A()#D/4A0E7F# #9?*'(A()#D/4A0E7F# #9?*'(A()#D/4A0E7F# #9?*'(A()#D/4A0E7F# #9?*'(A()#D/4A0E7F# "9?*'(A()"D/4A0E77F"#9?*'(A()#D/4A0E77F# #9?*'(A()#D/4A0E77F# #9?*'(A()#D/4A0E77F# #9?*'(A()#D/4A0E77F# #9?*'(A()#D/4A0E77F# "9?*'(A()"D/4A0E777F"#9?*'(A()#D/4A0E777F# #9?*'(A()#D/4A0E777F# #9?*'(A()#D/4A0E777F# #9?*'(A()#D/4A0E777F# #9?*'(A()#D/4A0E777F# 9?*'(A()# 9?*'(A()# 9?*'(A()# 9?*'(A()# 9?*'(A()" 9?*'(A()# "9?*'(A()"D/4A0E7GF"#9?*'(A()#D/4A0E7GF# #9?*'(A()#D/4A0E7GF# #9?*'(A()#D/4A0E7GF# #9?*'(A()#D/4A0E7GF# #9?*'(A()#D/4A0E7GF# 9?*'(A()"343(5" 9?*'(A()#343(5# 9?*'(A()#343(5# 9?*'(A()#343(5# 9?*'(A()#343(5# 9?*'(A()#343(5# /(0H"343(5" /(0H#343(5# /(0H#343(5# /(0H#343(5# /(0H#343(5# /(0H#343(5# /(0H# /(0H# /(0H" /(0H# /(0H# /(0H# K# K# K# K# K" 7GI9"IJ?)(1?" 7GI9#IJ?)(1?#K# 7GI9#IJ?)(1?# 7GI9#IJ?)(1?# 7GI9#IJ?)(1?# 7GI9#IJ?)(1?# Not registered Registered Don’t know Unable to reach Complicated Lack of Problem with about registration registration site process at documentation CNIC (e.g. dual Registered process registration site (e.g. CNIC) address, duplicate but blocked family number) 25 References AFP (2014). Internally Displaced. Available at: www.afp.com/en/search/site/idps pakistan/ CRDO (2013) TIRAH Conflict affected IDPs. Available from: http://crdo.org.pk/index.php/research?download=21:assessment-report-tirah-idp-s DRC (2014). Rapid Need Assessment II, Summary of Findings. Available at: http://www.humanitarianresponse.info/sites/www.humanitarianresponse.info/files/assessmen ts/Bannu%20DRC%20Rapid%20Needs%20Assessment%20II%20November%202014%20FINAL.p df FDMA/UNDP (2012). FATA Disaster Management Plan. Hashim, A. (Al-Jazeera), (2014). Pakistan Camp lies empty despite IDP exodus. Available at: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/southasia/2014/06/pakistan-camps-empty-as-idps-seek-safety- 201462641413507516.html ICG (2013). Policing Urban Violence in Pakistan. Available at: http://www.crisisgroup.org/en/regions/asia/south-asia/pakistan/255-policing-urban-violence- in-pakistan.aspx IDMC (2013). North West Pakistan: Massive new displacement and falling returns require rights-based response. Available at: http://www.internal- displacement.org/assets/library/Asia/Pakistan/pdf/201306-ap-pakistan-overview-en.pdf IRIN (2014). Pakistan’s traumatized war children play soldiers and Taliban. Available at: http://www.refworld.org/publisher,IRIN,,PAK,539ff82f4,0.html IVAP & WFP (2013). IVAP Bulletin. Available at: www.ivap.com.pk Mehsud, I.T. (NYT), (2014). Aid Scarce as Pakistan Flee Conflict. Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/21/world/asia/pakistanis-flee-conflict-in-north-waziristan- region.html?_r=0 Mosel, I. & Jackson, A. (HPG) (2013). Santuary in the City? Urban Displacement and Vulenerability in Peshawar, Pakistan. HPG Working Paper. Available at: http://www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi-assets/publications-opinion-files/8389.pdf Multi-Cluster Initial Rapid Assessment BANNU REPORT (MIRA) (2014). Coordinated Assessment. MIRA. Remote Control Project (2014). Terrorists’ relocation and the societal consequences of US drone strikes in Pakistan. Available at: http://remotecontrolproject.org/category/our- reports/?s=pakistan UN HABITAT (2015). Improving Living conditions of IDPs out off camps through WASH Interventions (Completed) | Pakistan | Projects | UN-HABITAT Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific (Fukuoka). [online] Available at: http://www.fukuoka.unhabitat.org/projects/pakistan/detail11_UNDP (2011). Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Government and UNDP release: Millenniumen.html Development Goals Report. Available at: http://www.pk.undp.org/content/pakistan/en/home/presscenter/pressreleases/2011/10/27/kh yber-pakhtunkhwa-government-and-undp-release-first-ever-millennium-development-goals- report.html UNDP (2013). Human Development Report. Complete Report Available at: http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/human-development-report-2014 UNDP (2014). Human Development Report. Complete Report Available at: http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/human-development-report-2014 UNOCHA (2014) Pakistan: Humanitarian Bulletin Issue 28 | 18 June – 19 July 2014. Available at: http://reliefweb.int/report/pakistan/pakistan-humanitarian-bulletin-issue-28-18- june-19-july-2014 UNOCHA a. (2013). Pakistan: North Waziristan Displacements Situation Report No. 9. Available at: http://reliefweb.int/report/pakistan/pakistan-north-waziristan-displacements-situation- report-no-9-7-august-2014 UNOCHA a. (2014). Pakistan: Humanitarian Bulletin. Available at: http://reliefweb.int/report/pakistan/pakistan-humanitarian-bulletin-issue-29-18-july-19-august- 2014 UNOCHA c. (2014). Protection Cluster detailed assessment –areas of return and areas of displacement, KP, FATA, Pakistan. Available at: http://reliefweb.int/report/pakistan/protection- cluster-detailed-assessment-areas-return-and-areas-displacement-kp-fata UNOCHA, (2015). Humanitarian Bulletin Pakistan (Extracted from). Issue 32. Available at: http://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/Pakistan%20HB_Issue%2032_Final.pdf UNOCHA, (2015). Pakistan Humanitarian Snapshot –Bara return Overview. Available at: http://www.humanitarianresponse.info/system/files/documents/files/PAK691_Pakistan_Huma nitarian_Snapshot_Jan15_v1_A4_20150130_0.pdf