2020 Magwi Multi-Sector Household Survey Report

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

2020 Magwi Multi-Sector Household Survey Report 2020 Magwi Multi-Sector Household Survey Report FINAL DRAFT to be validated through consultation and interview of local leaders April 2020 Contents FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................................................................................... 4 DASHBOARD ................................................................................................................................................ 6 COMMUNITY CONSOLE .............................................................................................................................. 9 PURPOSE, METHODOLOGY and SCOPE .................................................................................................... 10 PEOPLE WELFARE ...................................................................................................................................... 14 1. LIVELIHOOD ....................................................................................................................................... 14 2. MAIN PROBLEMS and RESILIENCE (COPING CAPACITY) ................................................................... 17 3. FOOD SECURITY................................................................................................................................. 20 4. HEALTH .............................................................................................................................................. 23 5. HYGIENE ............................................................................................................................................ 26 6. EDUCATION ....................................................................................................................................... 28 7. PROTECTION and GENDER ................................................................................................................ 32 ECONOMY ................................................................................................................................................. 37 8. AGRICULTURE.................................................................................................................................... 37 9. LIVESTOCK FARMING ........................................................................................................................ 51 10. ACCESS TO CONSUMER MARKETS, OTHER EXCHANGES and EXPENDITURES ................................ 56 11. PRODUCTIVE ASSETS, ENERGY and NON-FOOD ITEMS .................................................................. 60 12. HUMANITARIAN & DEVELOPMENT AID .......................................................................................... 61 PEACE and PARTECIPATION ...................................................................................................................... 62 13. NATURAL RESOURCES RELATED DISPUTES ..................................................................................... 62 14. SAFETY and CRIMES ........................................................................................................................ 64 15. COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION and LOCAL GOVERNANCE .............................................................. 65 16. MIGRATION and IDPs ...................................................................................................................... 69 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS: This report was made possible thanks to the kind contribution of the Italian Agency for Development Cooperation and the Food Agency Organization Authors Mariam Joshi (AVSI Foundation Coordinator of Monitoring and Evaluation with the support of Bruno Nazim Baroni (AVSI Foundation Head of Monitoring and Quality Assurance) and Kuti Elizabeth and Papa John Martin (survey managers and lead enumerators) AVSI Foundation, South Sudan FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS At the end of January 2020, the overall food security condition of Central and East1 Magwi’s families was largely consistent with a situation of stress (IPC phase 2), with 12% of households with a poor Food Consumption Score (FCS), or 18% suffer from moderate hunger (HHS). Still, in the northern part of the county the scenario is more consistent with that of a crisis (IPC phase 3). In Agoro, over 1/3 of the population has a poor FCS, followed by Iwire and Omeo, with both around 20%. The opposite situation is true for the rest of Magwi, where families are for 2/3 in good food security conditions, and 1/3 in moderate food insecurity (and only a negligible population is suffering severe food insecurity). Overall, these indicators show much better conditions for Magwi in comparison to other counties in Eastern Equatoria State (EES). Moreover, considering a bimodal rain season, hence a less harsh lean season, one should regard food security of Magwi really as a different category compared to the rest of EES. However, positive signs should be viewed with caution as the level of resilience of this population isanything but solid. 28% of household’s food security condition is still classified as borderline, almost 1/3 of the population spends more than 75% of their budget on food (economic vulnerability), and, unlike agropastoral communities in South Sudan, the population of Magwi does not have direct access to meat products, hence relies on trade for it, i.e. a nutrient-rich diet depends on price stability. Focusing on the livelihood conditions, Magwi’s population is composed almost entirely of agriculturalists. Basic staple crops production, cash crops and casual labour related to agriculture make up the main occupation across communities. There is ample evidence to suggest that Magwi’s population are more market-oriented in comparison to the neighbouring county of Torit. This report finds that there are fewer monocrop farmers, and a small yet significant 12% of farmers (triple that of Torit) that cultivate more than 5 hectares. The use of ox-ploughing or tractors, albeit limited is much more common in Magwi. Moreover, farmers in Magwi are fairly equally inclined to sell around 15% of their produce (more than the average 10% found in Torit), and of those obtaining mostly cash for their occupation, 75% can buy more than food (when only 30% can in Torit); This is most likely helped by the fact that Magwi’s population generally enjoys better access to markets in comparison to other areas of Eastern Equatoria. In this setting, market-related dynamics are discernible. For example, farmers investing in agricultural inputs and in more advanced agricultural tools are markedly better off, while smallholder farmers (cultivating only private land of a size of less than 1 hectare) show more precarious food security conditions. However, such dynamics are still feeble, as witnessed by the fact that only 1 in 5 households obtains mostly cash as a result of their occupation, and families bartering goods seem to do better than those selling to the market. In brief, while Magwi shows findings that are consistent with a subsistence economy, compared to other areas, including Torit, it is much more significant the group of farmers who are engaged in embryonic commercial farming. It is important to note that these differences are well-rooted; for instance, it is a fact that in Magwi county only one-third of adults has no experience of schooling, as compared to two-thirds in Torit county. 1 This report is based on a survey conducted in East and Central Magwi. The are formerly known as Pagori county was not included. Throughout the document, any reference to Magwi is in fact a reference to East and Central Magwi. INTRODUCTION Looking now at the social aspects of the county, on a more positive note, surprisingly, almost no household with elderly and IDPs/Returnees present worse food security conditions. There is evidence to suggest that these informal social safety nets provide a much needed and strong support among the members of the enlarged families and between the community. This is further confirmed by the fact that farmers give away for free as much as 7% of their produce (as compared to 15% for sale). When it comes to general access to services, once again there are important differences between payams. Households in Owinykibul have the greatest distance to schools and the lowest child enrolment rates. It is worth noting that the requests coming from the population are aligned with the level of coverage of services (or the lack of them). Families in Owinykibul demand more assistance to education while those in Omeo, where the greatest share of households must walk further than 30 minutes to reach a water source have improved water management as their top priority. Improved security conditions are reported almost unanimously across Magwi (97% of households did so). Nonetheless, levels of crime are prominent, in particular those against property. Very concerningly, murder is the second most reported crime in the county and the most reported crime in Pajok. This payam in fact, witnesses the highest incidence of crime and stark numbers in abduction and the burning down of houses. On a different note, in Owinykibul, although households report high numbers of natural resource disputes, the level of crimes are the lowest in the county. Finally, looking at the reasons why people have left during the last 12 months, lack of security affects particularly the payams in the north part of Magwi – Ogoro and Omeo – the payams also with the worse food security conditions, located close to Imurok, the payam of Torit county with the worse security and food security condition.
Recommended publications
  • Cholera in South Sudan Situation Report # 95 As at 23:59 Hours, 29 September to 5 October 2014
    Republic of South Sudan Cholera in South Sudan Situation Report # 95 as at 23:59 Hours, 29 September to 5 October 2014 Situation Update As of 5 October 2014, a total of 6,139 cholera cases including 139 deaths (CFR 2%) had been reportedTable 1. Summary in South of Suda choleran as cases summarizedreported in in Juba Tables County 1 and, 23 2.April – 5 October 2014 New New New deaths Total cases Total Total admisions discharges Total Total cases Reporting Sites 29 Sept to currently facility community Total cases 29 Sept to 29 Sept to deaths discharged 5 Oct 2014 admitted deaths deaths 5 Oct 2014 5 Oct 2014 JTH CTC 0 0 0 0 16 0 16 1466 1482 Gurei CTC (changed to ORP) Closed 28 July 2 0 2 365 367 Tongping CTC 0 2 1 3 69 72 Closed August Jube 3/UN House CTC Closed August 0 0 0 0 97 97 Nyakuron West CTC Closed 15 July 0 0 0 18 18 Gumbo CTC Closed 5 July 0 0 0 48 48 Nyakuron ORP Closed 5 July 0 0 0 20 20 Munuki ORP Closed 5 July 0 0 0 8 8 Gumbo ORP Closed 15 July 0 3 3 67 70 Pager PHCU 0 0 0 0 1 5 6 42 48 Other sites 0 0 0 1 15 16 1 17 Total 0 0 0 0 22 24 46 2201 2247 N.B. To prevent double counting of patients, transferred cases from ORPs to CTCs are not counted in the ORPs. Table 2: Summary of cholera cases reported outside Juba County, 23 April – 5 October 2014 New New New Total cases Total Total admisions discharges deaths Total Total cases Total States Reporting Sites currently facility community 29 Sept to 29 Sept to 29 Sep to deaths discharged cases admitted deaths deaths 5 Oct 2014 5 Oct 2014 5 Oct 14 Kajo-Keji civil hospital 0 0 0 0
    [Show full text]
  • Conflict and Crisis in South Sudan's Equatoria
    SPECIAL REPORT NO. 493 | APRIL 2021 UNITED STATES INSTITUTE OF PEACE www.usip.org Conflict and Crisis in South Sudan’s Equatoria By Alan Boswell Contents Introduction ...................................3 Descent into War ..........................4 Key Actors and Interests ............ 9 Conclusion and Recommendations ...................... 16 Thomas Cirillo, leader of the Equatoria-based National Salvation Front militia, addresses the media in Rome on November 2, 2019. (Photo by Andrew Medichini/AP) Summary • In 2016, South Sudan’s war expand- Equatorians—a collection of diverse South Sudan’s transitional period. ed explosively into the country’s minority ethnic groups—are fighting • On a national level, conflict resolu- southern region, Equatoria, trig- for more autonomy, local or regional, tion should pursue shared sover- gering a major refugee crisis. Even and a remedy to what is perceived eignty among South Sudan’s con- after the 2018 peace deal, parts of as (primarily) Dinka hegemony. stituencies and regions, beyond Equatoria continue to be active hot • Equatorian elites lack the external power sharing among elites. To spots for national conflict. support to viably pursue their ob- resolve underlying grievances, the • The war in Equatoria does not fit jectives through violence. The gov- political process should be expand- neatly into the simplified narratives ernment in Juba, meanwhile, lacks ed to include consultations with of South Sudan’s war as a power the capacity and local legitimacy to local community leaders. The con- struggle for the center; nor will it be definitively stamp out the rebellion. stitutional reform process of South addressed by peacebuilding strate- Both sides should pursue a nego- Sudan’s current transitional period gies built off those precepts.
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 Torit Multi-Sector Household Survey Report
    2019 Torit Multi-Sector Household Survey Report February 2019 Contents RECENT OVERALL TRENDS and BASIC RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................................... 4 BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................................................. 6 TORIT DASHBOARD ..................................................................................................................................... 7 COMMUNITY CONSOLE ............................................................................................................................ 10 I. PURPOSE, METHODOLOGY and SCOPE ............................................................................................. 11 PEOPLE WELFARE ...................................................................................................................................... 15 1. LIVELIHOOD ....................................................................................................................................... 15 2. MAIN PROBLEMS and RESILIENCE (COPING CAPACITY) ................................................................... 17 3. FOOD SECURITY................................................................................................................................. 19 4. HEALTH .............................................................................................................................................. 22 5. HYGIENE ...........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Cholera Situation Analysis and Hotspot Mapping in South Sudan
    GTFCC Meeting for the Working Groups on CHOLERA SITUATION ANALYSIS Surveillance AND HOTSPOT MAPPING IN (Epidemiology and Laboratory) (15th to 17th SOUTH SUDAN March 2019) BACKGROUN D 1. South Sudan borders Uganda, Kenya, Ethiopia, Sudan, DR Congo, & CAR 2. Got independence in 2011 3. Protracted Grade 3 crisis since 2013 (situation improving since Sept 2018) 4. Severe food insecurity – 7.1million (63% of population) – 45,000 faced with famine 5. 1.87 million IDPs & 2.27million refugees to neighboring countries 1. Multisectoral taskforce in place chaired by MoH with the other sectors (Water & COORDINATION OF Humanitarian Affairs) and partners (Health + WASH) CHOLERA CONTROL clusters as members 2. Draft National Cholera Control Plan pending WASH assessment & stakeholder review/costing 3. Implemented preventive OCV campaigns since 2017 (2.9 million doses approved 27/Mar/2019) 4. Sub-optimal involvement of other sectors and WASH in OCV preventive campaigns CHOLERA IN SOUTH 1. South Sudan endemic for SUDANcholera 2. Since the 2013 crisis onset – cholera outbreaks – 2014 - 2017 3. Between 2014-2017 at least 28,676 cases & 644 deaths reported 4. All outbreaks started in Juba 5. Cases reported along River Nile, cattle camps, IDPs, islands, & Commercial hubs 1600 Cholera cases in South Sudan, 2014 s e s a 1200 Cholera cases in South Sudan, 2014 s c e f s a o 2014 c f r 800 o 2014 e 1000 r e b b m 400 m CHOLERA IN u u N N 0 0 1 3 5 7 9 111315171921232527293133353739414345474951 1 3 5 7 9 111315171921232527293133353739414345474951 Week of onset Week of onset 1900 Cholera cases in South Sudan, 2015 s e s SOUTH a c 1600 Cholera cases in South Sudan, 2015 f o s r 900 e e 2015 b s m a 1200 u c N f o -100 r 800 1 3 5 7 9 111315171921232527293133353739414345474951 SUDAN e 2015 Week of onset b m 400 u Cholera cases in South Sudan, 2016 s N e 1600 s a 0 c f 1200 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Humanitarian Response Plan South Sudan
    HUMANITARIAN HUMANITARIAN PROGRAMME CYCLE 2021 RESPONSE PLAN ISSUED MARCH 2021 SOUTH SUDAN 01 About This document is consolidated by OCHA on behalf of the Humanitarian Country Team and partners. The Humanitarian Response Plan is a presentation of the coordinated, strategic response devised by humanitarian agencies in order to meet the acute needs of people affected by the crisis. It is based on, and responds to, evidence of needs described in the Humanitarian Needs Overview. Manyo Renk Renk SUDAN Kaka Melut Melut Maban Fashoda Riangnhom Bunj Oriny UPPER NILE Abyei region Pariang Panyikang Malakal Abiemnhom Tonga Malakal Baliet Aweil East Abiemnom Rubkona Aweil North Guit Baliet Dajo Gok-Machar War-Awar Twic Mayom Atar 2 Longochuk Bentiu Guit Mayom Old Fangak Aweil West Turalei Canal/Pigi Gogrial East Fangak Aweil Gogrial Luakpiny/Nasir Maiwut Aweil West UNITY Yomding Raja NORTHERN South Gogrial Koch Nyirol Nasir Maiwut Raja BAHR EL Bar Mayen Koch Ulang Kuajok WARRAP Leer Lunyaker Ayod GHAAL Tonj North Mayendit Ayod Aweil Centre Waat Mayendit Leer Uror Warrap Romic ETHIOPIA Yuai Tonj East WESTERN BAHR Nyal Duk Fadiat Akobo Wau Maper JONGLEI CENTRAL EL GHAAL Panyijiar Duk Akobo Kuajiena Rumbek North AFRICAN Wau Tonj Pochalla Jur River Cueibet REPUBLIC Tonj Rumbek Kongor Pochala South Cueibet Centre Yirol East Twic East Rumbek Adior Pibor Rumbek East Nagero Wullu Akot Yirol Bor South Tambura Yirol West Nagero LAKES Awerial Pibor Bor Boma Wulu Mvolo Awerial Mvolo Tambura Terekeka Kapoeta International boundary WESTERN Terekeka North Mundri
    [Show full text]
  • Magwi County
    Resettlement, Resource Conflicts, Livelihood Revival and Reintegration in South Sudan A study of the processes and institutional issues at the local level in Magwi County by N. Shanmugaratnam Noragric Department of International Environment and Development No. Report Noragric Studies 5 8 RESETTLEMENT, RESOURCE CONFLICTS, LIVELIHOOD REVIVAL AND REINTEGRATION IN SOUTH SUDAN A study of the processes and institutional issues at the local level in Magwi County By N. Shanmugaratnam Noragric Report No. 58 December 2010 Department of International Environment and Development Studies, Noragric Norwegian University of Life Sciences, UMB Noragric is the Department of International Environment and Development Studies at the Norwegian University of Life Sciences (UMB). Noragric’s activities include research, education and assignments, focusing particularly, but not exclusively, on developing countries and countries with economies in transition. Noragric Reports present findings from various studies and assignments, including programme appraisals and evaluations. This Noragric Report was commissioned by the Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (Norad) under the framework agreement with UMB which is administrated by Noragric. Extracts from this publication may only be reproduced after prior consultation with the employer of the assignment (Norad) and with the consultant team leader (Noragric). The findings, interpretations and conclusions expressed in this publication are entirely those of the authors and cannot be attributed directly to the Department of International Environment and Development Studies (UMB/Noragric). Shanmugaratnam, N. Resettlement, resource conflicts, livelihood revival and reintegration in South Sudan: A study of the processes and institutional issues at the local level in Magwi County. Noragric Report No. 58 (December 2010) Department of International Environment and Development Studies, Noragric Norwegian University of Life Sciences (UMB) P.O.
    [Show full text]
  • Crossing Lines: “Magnets” and Mobility Among Southern Sudanese
    “Magnets” andMobilityamongSouthernSudanese Crossing Lines United States Agency for InternationalDevelopment Agency for United States Contract No. HNE-I-00-00-00038-00 BEPS Basic Education and Policy Support (BEPS) Activity CREATIVE ASSOCIATES INTERNATIONAL INC In collaboration with CARE, THE GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY, AND GROUNDWORK Crossing Lines “Magnets” and Mobility among Southern Sudanese A final report of two assessment trips examining the impact and broader implications of a new teacher training center in the Kakuma refugee camps, Kenya Prepared by: Marc Sommers Youth at Risk Specialist, CARE Basic Education and Policy Support Activity (BEPS) CARE, Inc. 151 Ellis Street, NE Atlanta, GA 30303-2439 and Creative Associates International, Inc. 5301 Wisconsin Avenue, NW Suite 700 Washington, DC 20015 Prepared for: Basic Education and Policy Support (BEPS) Activity US Agency for International Development Contract No. HNE-I-00-00-00038-00 Creative Associates International, Inc., Prime Contractor Photo credit: Marc Sommers 2002 Crossing Lines: “Magnets” and Mobility among Southern Sudanese CONTENTS I. Introduction: Do Education Facilities Attract Displaced People? The Current Debate .........................................................................................................................1 II. Background: Why Study Teacher Training in Kakuma and Southern Sudan? ......... 3 III. Findings: Issues Related to Mobility in Southern Sudan........................................... 8 A. Institutions at Odds: Contrasting Perceptions........................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Mining in South Sudan: Opportunities and Risks for Local Communities
    » REPORT JANUARY 2016 MINING IN SOUTH SUDAN: OPPORTUNITIES AND RISKS FOR LOCAL COMMUNITIES BASELINE ASSESSMENT OF SMALL-SCALE AND ARTISANAL GOLD MINING IN CENTRAL AND EASTERN EQUATORIA STATES, SOUTH SUDAN MINING IN SOUTH SUDAN FOREWORD We are delighted to present you the findings of an assessment conducted between February and May 2015 in two states of South Sudan. With this report, based on dozens of interviews, focus group discussions and community meetings, a multi-disciplinary team of civil society and government representatives from South Sudan are for the first time shedding light on the country’s artisanal and small-scale mining sector. The picture that emerges is a remarkable one: artisanal gold mining in South Sudan ‘employs’ more than 60,000 people and might indirectly benefit almost half a million people. The vast majority of those involved in artisanal mining are poor rural families for whom alluvial gold mining provides critical income to supplement their subsistence livelihood of farming and cattle rearing. Ostensibly to boost income for the cash-strapped government, artisanal mining was formalized under the Mining Act and subsequent Mineral Regulations. However, owing to inadequate information-sharing and a lack of government mining sector staff at local level, artisanal miners and local communities are not aware of these rules. In reality there is almost no official monitoring of artisanal or even small-scale mining activities. Despite the significant positive impact on rural families’ income, the current form of artisanal mining does have negative impacts on health, the environment and social practices. With most artisanal, small-scale and exploration mining taking place in rural areas with abundant small arms and limited presence of government security forces, disputes over land access and ownership exacerbate existing conflicts.
    [Show full text]
  • Water for Eastern Equatoria (W4EE)
    Water for Eastern Equatoria (W4EE) he first integrated water resource management (IWRM) project of its kind in South Sudan, Water Water for Eastern for Eastern Equatoria (W4EE) was launched in Components 2013 as part of the broader bilateral water Tprogramme funded through the Dutch Multiannual Equatoria (W4EE) Strategic Plan for South Sudan (2012–2015). W4EE focuses on three interrelated From the very beginning, W4EE was planned as a pilot components: IWRM programme in the Torit and Kapoeta States of The role of integrated water resource manage- Eastern Equatoria focusing on holistic management of the ment in fostering resilience, delivering economic Kenneti catchment, conflict-sensitive oversight of water Component 1: Integrated water resource management of the development, improving health, and promoting for productive use such as livestock and farming, and Kenneti catchment and surrounds peace in a long-term process. improved access to safe drinking water as well as sanitati- on and hygiene. The goal has always been to replicate key Component 2: Conflict-sensitive management of water for learnings and best practice in other parts of South Sudan. productive use contributes to increased, sustained productivity, value addition in agriculture, horticulture, and livestock The Kenneti catchment is very important to the Eastern Equatoria region for economic, social, and biodiversity reasons. The river has hydropower potential, supports the Component 3: Safely managed and climate-resilient drinking livelihoods of thousands of households, and the surroun- water services and improved sanitation and hygiene are available, ding area hosts a national park with forests and wetlands operated and maintained in a sustainable manner. as well as wild animals and migratory birds.
    [Show full text]
  • Uganda Fighting for Decades
    Southern Torit County Displacement and Service Access Brief Torit County, Eastern Equatoria State, South Sudan, November 2017 Background Map 1: Displacement in southern Torit County Major Town In response to reports of persistent needs and a growing population From Juba of Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) in the mountain and valley Assessed Village areas of southern Torit County, REACH joined a Rapid Response Mission team constituted by the World Food Program (WFP) and the Torit United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund (UNICEF) in Gunyoro village, Ifwotu Payam. A concurrent screening and distribution took place in Iholong village, also in Ifwotu Payam, but was cut short due to nearby fighting. Gunyoro The assessment was conducted from 17-20 November and consisted of 4 KI interviews with community leaders, 2 gender-disaggregated Iholong Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) with a total of 28 participants, continuous interaction with community members during aid provision, Magwi and general observation of the area by foot and helicopter. Findings should be considered as indicative only, and further verification via site visits should occur where possible. Population Movement and Displacement Torit and the foothills of the Imatong Mountains to its south have seen To Uganda fighting for decades. In the last few years, the population in the area via Nimule has been in flux, with frequent displacement inflows and outflows, and nearly continuous internal movements. Imatong Mountains Displacement into southern Torit County Road Displacement to southern Torit County has been occurring Displacement to the area continuously since 2013, with two large waves following conflict in the Displacement within the area last few years.
    [Show full text]
  • Distribution of Ethnic Groups in Southern Sudan Exact Representationw Ohf Iteh En Isleituation Ins Tehnen Acrountry
    Ethnic boundaries shown on this map are not an Distribution of Ethnic Groups in Southern Sudan exact representationW ohf iteh eN isleituation inS tehnen aCrountry. The administrative units and their names shown on this map do not imply White acceptance or recognition by the Government of Southern Sudan. Blue ") State Capitals This map aims only to support the work of the Humanitarian Community. Nile Renk Nile Sudan Renk Admin. Units County Level Southern Darfur Southern Shilluk Berta Admin. Units State Level Kordofan Manyo Berta Country Boundary Manyo Melut International Boundaries Shilluk Maban Sudan Fashoda Dinka (Abiliang) Abyei Pariang Upper Nile Burum Malakal Data Sources: National and State Dinka (Ruweng) ") boundaries based on Russian Sudan Malakal Baliet Abiemnhom Panyikang Map Series, 1:200k, 1970-ties. Rubkona Guit County Boundaries digitized based on Aweil North Statistical Yearbook 2009 Aweil East Twic Mayom ") Nuer (Jikany) Canal (Khor Fulus) Longochuk Southern Sudan Commission for Census, Dinka (Twic WS) Nuer (Bul) Statistics and Evaluation - SSCCSE. Fangak Dinka (Padeng) Digitized by IMU OCHA Southern Sudan Aweil West Dinka (Malual) Nuer (Lek) Gogrial East Unity Nuer (Jikany) Northern Bahr el Ghazal ") Luakpiny/Nasir Aweil Maiwut Aweil South Raga Koch Gogrial West Nuer (Jegai) Nyirol Ulang Nuer (Gawaar) Aweil Centre Warrap ") Tonj North Ayod Kwajok Mayendit Leer Dinka (Rek) Fertit Chad Nuer (Adok) Nuer (Lou) Jur Chol Tonj East ") Wau Akobo Western Bahr el Ghazal Nuer (Nyong) Dinka (Hol) Uror Duk Jur River Rumbek North Panyijar
    [Show full text]
  • Cholera in South Sudan Situation Report # 93 As at 23:59 Hours, 15-21 September 2014
    Republic of South Sudan Cholera in South Sudan Situation Report # 93 as at 23:59 Hours, 15-21 September 2014 Situation Update As of 21 September 2014, a total of 6,128 cholera cases including 139 deaths (CFR 2.27%) had beenTable reported1. Summary in of South cholera Sudan cases asreported summarized in Juba in County Tables, 23 1 April and –2.21 September 2014 New New New deaths Total cases Total Total admisions discharges Total Total cases Reporting Sites 15-21 Sept currently facility community Total cases 15-21 Sept 15-21 Sept deaths discharged 2014 admitted deaths deaths 2014 2014 JTH CTC 3 3 0 0 16 0 16 1455 1479 Gurei CTC (changed to ORP) Closed 28 July 2 0 2 365 367 Tongping CTC 0 2 1 3 69 72 Closed August Jube 3/UN House CTC Closed August 0 0 0 0 97 97 Nyakuron West CTC Closed 15 July 0 0 0 18 18 Gumbo CTC Closed 5 July 0 0 0 48 48 Nyakuron ORP Closed 5 July 0 0 0 20 20 Munuki ORP Closed 5 July 0 0 0 8 8 Gumbo ORP Closed 15 July 0 3 3 67 70 Pager PHCU 1 1 0 0 1 5 6 42 48 Other sites 0 0 0 1 15 16 1 17 Total 4 4 0 0 22 24 46 2190 2244 N.B. To prevent double counting of patients, transferred cases from ORPs to CTCs are not counted in the ORPs. Table 2: Summary of cholera cases reported outside Juba County, 23 April –21 September 2014 New New New Total cases Total Total admisions discharges deaths Total Total cases Total States Reporting Sites currently facility community 15-21 Sept 15-21 Sept 15-21 deaths discharged cases admitted deaths deaths 2014 2014 Sept 2014 Kajo-Keji civil hospital 0 0 0 0 3 4 7 86 93 CES Yei Hospital -- 0
    [Show full text]