SINDHUPALCHOK Assessment Unit 09.06.2015
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
District Assessment Nepal Earthquake SINDHUPALCHOK Assessment Unit 09.06.2015 Between 11 May and 24 May, a key informant multi-cluster assessment was conducted in Sindhupalchok covering 64 out of 79 VDCs, or 240,000 people. 93% of people covered under the assessment were reported to be in need of assistance, while 38% were in immediate need. Key informants indicated that shelter and food are the top priority needs, with 80% and 66% of VDCs ranking shelter and food within their top 3 priority needs respectively. Health was ranked as the third priority need. The main sources of information currently used by the population are radio and telephone. However, key informants indicated that there is an urgent need for additional hardware and electricity to charge communication equipment. DISPLACEMENT 88% of the total population was displaced. 39% of the population was living in makeshift shelters in scattered sites, and 46% were in displacement sites. Key informants expect that 70% of the IDPs will remain displaced for more than 6 months, which includes the monsoon period, primarily due to the fear of aftershocks and damages to buildings. (p. 3) SHELTER 88% of houses were reported to be severely damaged or destroyed. A lack of suitable land to rebuild is hampering reconstruction. Key informants estimated that only 1,600 HH (or 3% of the HH covered) started reconstruction. One of the reasons mentioned for this was people’s fear of natural hazards. (p. 8) FOOD SECURITY 80% of households had lost more than half of their food stocks and 56% of households had lost all food stocks. VDCs had on average 4 weeks of food autonomy. Lack of storage space available for food was highlighted as a major concern, especially during the upcoming monsoon season. (p. 9) HEALTH 19% of existing health facilities were reported as closed due to damage or lack of staff and 10 VDCs reported that no health facilities were open. Diarrhea is reported as the most common health problem among children and the second most common among adults. (p. 10) EDUCATION 92% of schools were reported to have been destroyed and key informants indicated that parents were hesitant to send their children to school due to their fear of aftershocks. (p. 12) WATER, SANITATION AND HYGIENE A shortage of water sources is the main priority identified in the sector. This is partly due to the damage to pipelines and taps. This has resulted in a shift towards unsafe water sources, primarily unprotected wells. Key informants indicated that 70% of the population currently does not have access to clean water. Furthermore, key informants estimate that 50% of people are practicing open defecation, primarily due to the lack of toilets. (p. 13) CASH AND NFIS In 41 VDCs of the 64 VDCs, key informants indicated that less than half the shops or markets were open. The main source of cash before and after the earthquakes changed from banks, including cooperatives, to borrowing. Remittances have decreased in importance according to key informants. This is most likely illustrative of the widespread damage to the financial infrastructure. In 50% of the VDCs covered, less than half of the needs can be covered through cash according to informants. (p. 16) Page 1 of 18 METHODOLOGY Between 11 and 24 May 2015, 64 out of 79 VDCs in Sindhupalchock were assessed with the objective to capture the needs of the population within the district. These VDCs represent 83% of the district population or approximately 240,000 people, according to the 2011 Census results. The assessment was designed to collect data from primary sources at the VDC level, through group key informant interviews. Key informants included Government officials, social workers and teachers. In each VDC, at least 3 categories of KIs have been interviewed; a government representative was present in each interview. On average, 10 key informants were interviewed and 40% of the key informants were female. The multi-cluster assessment form was developed through consultations with the district government and humanitarian clusters at district level. Afterwards, data collection enumerators synthesised information from the different key informants into 1 form per VDC, registering information directly on to a tablet using the KoBo Toolbox system. Trained enumerators interviewed key informants and used their training and judgement to control for potential biased answers. In addition, debrief sessions were held with all enumerators where their findings were discussed. Data was inputted and cleaned using Excel. Enumerators were requested to record their confidence for each group of responses and on average, 90% of sector specific responses were ranked as above acceptable confidence. Where data was deemed unreliable, questions were removed from the analysis. During the data collection period on 12 May, a 7.3 magnitude earthquake struck the region and this was followed by several aftershocks. The impact of the earthquake on the primary data collection exercise was significant: The relevance of the data already collected on 18 VDC decreased as it is assumed that the situation has significantly changed particularly because of the proximity of the epicentre to the district. The assessment activities were halted for 6 days following the earthquake and a reduced number of enumerators were available to continue data collection. The resulting dataset includes around 240 indicators from all priority clusters as well as cross-cutting themes such as vulnerable groups. Assessment schedule: Date Event 8 May Assessment preparation 9 May Training enumerators 11-12 May Pre-earthquake data collection 12 May Earthquake 18 – 24 May Resumption of data collection 28 May Dissemination of preliminary findings 9 June Publication of final report While interpreting the findings within this report it is important to be aware that: The results are based on the perceptions of key informants on the situation within a specific VDC. As a result, this assessment is subject to all the general limitations of a key informant assessment, including recall bias and the fact these informants might not represent all segments of the population. All schools were closed during the primary data collection period and several have reopened since. As a result, not all the education specific information will remain relevant. As a result of the reduction in staff following the 12 May earthquake, and existing access constraints, 15 out of the 79 VDCs in the district were not covered. The estimates on population in need and the extent of the problems are a function of the proportion of the population affected and the 2011 Census population figures. 21 questions within the questionnaire were prioritization questions, during which key informants are requested to rank their top 3 problems or needs. An example of such a question is ‘in this area, what are the top 3 priority needs’. The responses were aggregated using the Borda count method and are visualized through heatmaps. These maps are coloured in descending importance order to allow for easy comparison between categories. The darker the colour, the higher the importance of the variable. Page 2 of 18 KEY PRIORITIES Priority sectors as reported by key informants Shelter was perceived as the top priority need despite having the lowest number of people in need reported. This potential contradiction was likely attributed to the shelter response already provided. In addition, the upcoming monsoon also influenced the priority and the need for more permanent and robust shelter. Shelter is of greater priority in rural areas than in population centres. Food was also reported as a high priority, with population centres recording it as a higher priority compared to rural areas. This could be attributed to a more self-sufficient rural lifestyle; however, assistance is still necessary in both areas as large quantities of food and food storage spaces have been destroyed. Health was perceived as the third highest priority followed by education. Communication, protection and NFIs were perceived as of lower importance. HUMANITARIAN PROFILE The humanitarian profile categorises the affected population into mutually exclusive categories, each of which has unique needs. The level of damage to shelters has been used as the defining variable as it is the most representative of displacement and need. The results on the number of people affected illustrate the widespread impact of the earthquakes. Of the 240,000 people surveyed, over 237,000 people (or 99%) have been affected due to damage to their home. At the time of assessment, 88% of the population was displaced due to uninhabitable shelters. This finding is confirmed by a recent shelter cluster assessment in the district, which found 91% of households residing in a shelter different from before the earthquakes. The displaced population were primarily residing in displacement sites (52% of the total number of IDPs). 44% of recorded IDPs were residing in scattered site, defined as families under tarpaulins or in other makeshift shelters, usually in closer proximity to their previous residence. In as many as 52 VDCs more than 75% of the population were displaced. There were only 3 areas where less than 50% of the population were displaced. These are Banshkarka, Fulpingdandagau and Fulpingkatti. As the proportions of those affected and displaced were universally high, there was no significant difference between population centres and rural areas or hard to reach areas compared to other areas. The results indicate that the majority of the population was already affected before the earthquake on 12 May. Of the 18 VDCs assessed before the May 12 earthquake, almost all recorded an affected population of above 90% of the total population. Page 3 of 18 IMPACT Number of people injured and killed per VDC Key informants reported 3,000 deaths (or 1.2% of the population covered) and over 1,000 people have been injured.