Multi-Sector Needs Assessment

Joint Analysis Workshop

Education SectorJoint REACH-OCHA-Sectors analysis of MSNA sectoral preliminary findings

August 2018

01 Introduction

CONTEXT

Northeast Nigeria humanitarian situation

Now in its ninth year, the crisis in north‐east Nigeria remains one of the most severe in the world. In the three worst‐affected states of Borno, Adamawa and Yobe, 1.8 million people are internally displaced and human rights violations continue to be reported daily. Over eighty per cent of internally displaced people (IDPs) are in Borno State, the epicentre of the crisis, and over sixty percent are living in host communities, making it harder to access them with assistance and putting additional pressure on the already stretched resources of these communities.

In preparation for the 2019 Humanitarian Needs Overview, data collection for a multi‐sector needs assessment was launched mid‐June in Borno, Adamawa and Yobe. The preliminary findings from this MSNA will be presented to you during this analysis workshop session.

HOW CAN

REACH HELP

IN THIS

CONTEXT?

MSNA covering the three most affected States

Through this assessment, REACH will be able to inform

the humanitarian community on needs and

vulnerabilities of affected populations in the three

Northeastern States of Nigeria

REACH is bringing to the Nigerian context a strong

assessment background and capacity, implementing

the MSNA, which is an exercise that has been

conducted since several years in many other missions.

Throughout the whole research design process,

REACH coordinated with all the sectors and the Inter-

Sector Working Group to ensure the highest buy-in and

input from all stakeholders. REACH also communicated

regular data collection updates with OCHA

counterparts

Through the main objective of this assessment,

informing on humanitarian nedds and vulnerabilities of

all affected populations in three States, REACH Will be

able to feed its data into key humanitarian milestones

such as the 2019 HNO/HRP coordinated by OCHA.

Strong assessment capacity

Coordination and communication effort

Main objective and outcome

OBJECTIVES

Main objectives

➢ Provide a comprehensive evidence base of multi-sectorial needs among conflict-affected populations in

Adamawa, Borno and Yobe states, including:

➢ Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) residing in formal camps, informal camps and within host community populations

➢ Returnees

➢ Non-Displaced Population

➢ Provide robust evidence to support the Humanitarian Needs Overview and Humanitarian Response Plan for

2019.

Research questions

➢ What is the situation for specific population groups (IDPs, returnees and non-displaced) regarding:

➢ Levels of needs, access and vulnerabilities across Protection, Food Security, Health, Livelihoods, NFI, Shelter, WASH, and Education sectors?

➢ Intentions regarding onward/return movement or remain in location of current displacement?

COORDINATION PROCESS

Defining Scope & Indicators

• Early coordination with OCHA and the ISWG to define the scope and methodology

• Joint process between REACH and each of the Sectors to define indicators for the MSNA

• Coordination between OCHA, Sectors and REACH means that indicators covered will directly feed into 2019 HNO/HRP

Updates During Data Collection & Processing

• Regular communication to OCHA of data collection advancement and achievement during the month of July

• Quick process of data cleaning meant that OCHA and sectors had access to a clean dataset few days after data collection

ended

• Sharing with the sectors of preliminary sectoral findings ahead of the Joint Analysis Workshops

Joint Analysis Initiative

• Sectoral Joint Analysis Workshops from mid- to end-August

• Joint Inter-sectoral Analysis Group end-August and early September with joint meetings in each of the States covered

METHODOLOGY

Methodology Overview

• Mixed method – household surveys and key informants interviews

• Household surveys sample was produced using a probability / stratified cluster sample

• Key informants were targeted purposively for interviews

Household Surveys – Total initial target: 10,084

• The sampling has been created to cover all accesible areas within Adamawa, Borno and Yobe States

• An additional data collection still ongoing (only purposive, not representative, due to methodological challenges) will capture information from hard to reach areas in Borno State.

• For more detailed sampling frames per State, see following slides.

• Sampling design: Confidence level: 95%, Margin of error: 10%

Key Informant Interviews – total: 1,481• Main objective: Confirming population estimates in cluster / community to triangulate initial secondary

data

• Sampling: Purposive, indicative and not representative

• Targets for interviews: Recently arrived IDPs, recently arrived IDP Community Leader, non-displaced person, returnees, current NGO worker, current Polio/ health care worker, current Civilian Joint Task Force member ...

8. Current Nigeria Armed Forces member

METHODOLOGY – Sampling frame - Borno

METHODOLOGY – Sampling frame – Adamawa/Yobe

GEOGRAPHICAL COVERAGE

TARGETS AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS

CLUSTERS SAMPLED AND

SURVEYED

• 1,489 clusters

surveyed

• 402 wards covered

• Data collection from

25 June to 4 August

• 10,606 household

surveys completed in 3

States, 63 LGAs (target =

10,084)

• Non-response rate: 2.1%

• 1,481 Key informant

interviews conducted

• 1 Factsheet per LGA

covered (63)

• 1 Factsheet per sector

and per State (27)

• 1 Final report

• 1 clean, anonymised

dataset

TOTAL OF SURVEYS

COMPLETED

PROJECTED NUMBER OF

OUTPUTS

02 Findings

CROSS SECTORAL FINDINGS

• DEMOGRAPHICSHousehold

Household Size

(mean)Male HoH Female HoH Female HoH % Avg. Age of HoH

BORNO STATE 5.3 3530 1099 23.7% 43.5

Central Borno 5.5 856 283 24.8% 43.6

East Borno 5.0 723 288 28.5% 43.5

MMC and Jere 6.1 323 184 36.3% 44.2

Northern Borno 4.1 599 233 28.0% 40.5

Southern Borno 5.7 1029 111 9.7% 45.2

YOBE STATE 7.8 2532 320 11.2% 47.7

Central Yobe 7.9 695 101 11.9% 47.7

Northern Yobe 7.9 681 107 13.6% 49.7

Southern Yobe 7.7 1156 112 8.8% 46.4

ADAMAWA STATE 5.9 2639 258 8.9% 44.9

Northern Adamawa 6.5 958 132 12.1% 45.8

Southern Adamawa 5.5 1681 126 7.0% 44.3

TOTAL 6.1 8701 1677 16.2% 45.0

MAIN INDICATORS COVERED

1. Formal school attendance

2. Informal school attendance

3. Access to child friendly spaces

4. Access to school supplies

5. Education expenses

6. Education barriers

7. Food and nutrition

8. Displacement

9. Prefered assistance and cash for education

SECTORAL FINDINGS

Indicator 1 – FORMAL SCHOOL ATTENDANCE

• Primary school attendance for school aged childern varies between 26.3-50.8%, with lowest of IDPs in Borno,

highest among IDPs in Adamawa.

• High percentages (16.5-58.2%) of school aged who never attended any formal schooling. Worst rates among

IDPs in Borno, lowest among IDPs in Adamawa.

FORMAL SCHOOL ATTENDANCE What is the current FORMAL school attendance status of ${name_hh}?

ChoicesAdamawa Borno Yobe

IDP NONDISPLACED RETURNEE IDP NONDISPLACED RETURNEE IDP NONDISPLACED RETURNEE

Attending preschool 7.0% 2.1% 7.6% 3.6% 5.5% 5.9% 0.7% 3.7% 13.9%

Attending primary school 50.8% 32.5% 45.2% 26.3% 35.5% 35.3% 27.9% 32.6% 37.8%

Attending junior secondary school 14.6% 9.6% 14.0% 6.6% 12.2% 8.9% 10.1% 11.4% 6.0%

Attending senior secondary school 6.0% 3.5% 7.8% 1.7% 3.7% 10.0% 5.4% 6.5% 8.0%

Did not attend any formal school this year 4.7% 1.4% 1.8% 2.9% 1.4% 1.6% 1.5% 0.5% 0.3%

Dropped out this year 0.5% 1.0% 1.0% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.6% 0.3% 0.1%

Never attended any formal school 16.5% 49.9% 22.6% 58.2% 40.9% 37.7% 53.7% 44.9% 33.9%

Indicator 1 – FORMAL SCHOOL ATTENDANCE - Female

Indicator 1 – FORMAL SCHOOL ATTENDANCE

SECTORAL FINDINGS

Indicator 2 – INFORMAL SCHOOL ATTENDANCE

• In Adamawa, among all population groups 1/3 attends Islamic schools, 2/3 never atteneded any non-formal education. In Borno the rates are the opposite.

• Very high percentage of returnees in Yobe (92,4%) attend Islamic school.

• Accelerated Learning Program mostly prevalent among IDPs and non-displaced in Adamawa, and non-displaced in Borno.

INFORMAL SCHOOL ATTENDANCE What is the current INFORMAL school attendance status of ${name_hh}?

ChoicesAdamawa Borno Yobe

IDP NONDISPLACED RETURNEE IDP NONDISPLACED RETURNEE IDP NONDISPLACED RETURNEE

Attending Accelerated Learning Programme 6.5% 4.9% 1.2% 0.5% 3.7% 0.1% 3.4% 0.7% 0.0%

Attending Islamia school 33.5% 26.5% 27.3% 64.0% 56.7% 59.6% 59.1% 66.6% 92.4%

Dropped out of non-formal education this year 0.7% 0.4% 0.0% 0.3% 0.6% 0.3% 5.5% 0.5% 0.0%

Did not attend non-formal education this year 2.1% 0.7% 0.4% 1.4% 1.5% 2.3% 1.1% 0.7% 1.3%

Never attended any non-formal education 57.2% 67.5% 70.6% 33.5% 36.9% 37.5% 30.8% 30.8% 6.3%

Indicator 2 – INFORMAL SCHOOL ATTENDANCE

Indicator 3: ACCESS TO CHILD FRIENDLY SPACES

Indicator 4: Access to school supplies

Indicator 5: HOUSEHOLD EXPENDITURE

Expenses Housing Food Energy Health Water Education Debt

Adamawa

Northern Adamawa

IDP 9.0% 39.0% 3.3% 17.3% 1.4% 9.1% 10.3%

NONDISPLACED 3.6% 50.5% 3.2% 17.9% 0.8% 6.8% 5.3%

RETURNEE 3.5% 36.8% 3.6% 18.2% 1.3% 14.7% 8.6%

Southern Adamawa

IDP 14.2% 35.9% 6.3% 12.5% 3.3% 14.2% 5.2%

NONDISPLACED 3.0% 46.5% 3.1% 17.4% 0.8% 6.4% 7.2%

RETURNEE 0.6% 45.3% 4.6% 17.1% 1.5% 7.6% 8.7%

Borno

Central Borno

IDP 8.1% 58.1% 5.9% 3.5% 3.1% 2.1% 11.8%

NONDISPLACED 7.8% 56.1% 5.5% 4.6% 6.5% 2.7% 11.0%

RETURNEE 8.4% 58.8% 5.6% 6.6% 3.8% 5.0% 6.9%

East Borno

IDP 14.1% 43.4% 10.0% 1.4% 6.3% 4.0% 11.6%

NONDISPLACED 6.2% 42.8% 24.9% 3.2% 8.7% 1.1% 3.1%

RETURNEE 9.2% 47.5% 14.1% 2.7% 6.1% 2.5% 9.3%

MMC and Jere

IDP 6.1% 55.6% 7.6% 6.2% 4.2% 3.0% 10.2%

NONDISPLCED 9.8% 43.7% 6.7% 8.8% 5.9% 9.6% 7.0%

RETURNEE 4.3% 45.3% 11.3% 6.2% 4.2% 10.5% 8.3%

Northern Borno

IDP 3.4% 67.9% 6.0% 2.2% 3.3% 0.0% 8.8%

NONDISPLACED 3.3% 71.9% 6.2% 2.7% 2.7% 1.1% 4.4%

RETURNEE 6.5% 74.3% 6.9% 0.3% 1.7% 0.3% 4.6%

Southern Borno

IDP 8.3% 51.5% 6.7% 9.7% 1.4% 2.7% 9.4%

NONDISPLACED 3.0% 44.0% 5.7% 17.2% 1.8% 7.9% 7.2%

RETURNEE 3.2% 46.2% 5.1% 14.1% 1.9% 10.8% 7.0%

Yobe

Central Yobe

IDP 4.5% 56.8% 3.0% 10.0% 3.1% 4.2% 10.9%

NONDISPLACED 1.7% 57.7% 3.3% 11.0% 2.8% 4.9% 9.5%

RETURNEE 2.5% 55.2% 4.1% 8.4% 4.9% 3.7% 12.4%

Northern Yobe

IDP 4.0% 54.7% 2.5% 9.9% 3.0% 3.7% 14.1%

NONDISPLACED 1.1% 61.6% 2.8% 10.4% 1.6% 3.4% 9.7%

RETURNEE 0.9% 64.5% 2.1% 8.8% 4.2% 5.1% 6.9%

Southern Yobe

IDP 1.9% 46.5% 5.4% 9.5% 5.5% 2.7% 20.6%

NONDISPLACED 1.8% 52.3% 3.5% 10.5% 3.2% 6.6% 12.5%

RETURNEE 1.8% 51.8% 3.9% 10.7% 3.4% 6.0% 13.6%

Indicator 5: Education expenses

Indicator 6: Education barriers

What barriers does your household face in sending children to school, either formal or informal?

Indicator 7: Food and nutrition

Indicator 8: Displacement

Indicator 9 – Preference for education assistance

Education Index

Existing vulnerabilities and risks

Vulnerability indicators

Questionnaire question - Example

questions only, to be identified

depending on local context Response if Vulnerable

Example: Household is

Vulnerable caseload

(>=5 out of 10): Scale Contribution

Household has children that

have not currently attending

any formal or informal

school

What is the current FORMAL school

attendance status of the child?

What is the current INFORMAL

school attendance status of the

child?

“Not currently attending” or “Dropped

Out”“Not currently attending 3

Household has children that

have never attended any

formal school

What is the current FORMAL school

attendance status of the child?

“Never attended any formal school” “Never attended” 3

Household reports any

barrier in accessing schools

What barriers does your household face

in sending children to school, either

formal or informal?

Reports at least 1 barrier “1 barrier 2

Household reports not

having access to school

supplies

Does your household have access to

any of the following items?

Does not mention “school bags” “school

notebooks” or “school text books”“no school supplies” 2

EDUCATION SECTOR INDEX

Adamawa

LGA Education Index

hong 81.6%

maiha 77.7%

shelleng 76.3%

lamurde 74.8%

mubinorth 73.9%

fufore 73.3%

mayobelwa 73.0%

jada 72.9%

toungo 72.3%

demsa 70.8%

song 70.6%

ganye 70.2%

numan 67.2%

yolasouth 66.5%

gombi 65.5%

michika 64.4%

madagali 63.2%

guyuk 61.1%

girei 60.3%

mubisouth 50.1%

yolanorth 46.7%

Borno

LGA Education Index

konduga 76.8%

magumeri 73.8%

nganzai 70.5%

gubio 66.5%

bama 66.0%

ngala 65.7%

kwayakusar 64.8%

kaga 63.8%

guzamala 63.6%

bayo 61.2%

mafa 61.1%

gwoza 59.6%

maiduguri 59.1%

askirauba 58.9%

jere 56.5%

chibok 56.4%

damboa 53.9%

dikwa 53.0%

biu 50.0%

kukawa 49.5%

kalabalge 49.2%

monguno 47.2%

mobbar 36.7%

Yobe

LGA

Education

Index

bursari 81.3%

nangere 76.6%

karasuwa 76.2%

yusufari 75.4%

fune 75.3%

jakusko 74.8%

yunusari 72.6%

shani 71.9%

machina 68.8%

tarmua 67.5%

nguru 66.7%

fika 62.3%

hawul 60.6%

bade 59.7%

geidam 58.0%

damaturu 57.6%

gujba 55.2%

potiskum 53.2%

gulani 50.9%

Food Security Index

Existing vulnerabilities and risks

Vulnerability indicators

Questionnaire question - Example

questions only, to be identified

depending on local context Response if Vulnerable

Example: Household is

Vulnerable caseload

(>=5 out of 10): Scale Contribution

Food Consumption Score is

borderline or poorFood Consumption Score calculation “Poor” or “Borderline” Poor 2

reduced Coping Strategies

Index

Reduced Coping Strategies Index (for

food coping)

>9 15 2

Household reports no

market access in last two

weeks

Have you had physical access to a

market in the last two weeks?

“No” No 2

Not enough fuel to meet

their needs

Yesterday, did you have enough fuel to

meet your cooking fuel needs?

“No” No 2

Any unsustainable food

sources utilized in the last

month

What sources of food has your

household used in the last month?

(aid, foraged wild foods, consumed seed

stocks)Only food assistance 2

CROSS-SECTORAL ANALYSIS

- % HOUSEHOLDS WITH BOTH Education / Protection / Food Security

Adamawa

LGA

Education

Index

Edu-

FoodSec

hong 81.6% 27.4%

maiha 77.7% 21.0%

shelleng 76.3% 6.9%

lamurde 74.8% 33.7%

mubinorth 73.9% 46.9%

fufore 73.3% 3.8%

mayobelwa 73.0% 8.4%

jada 72.9% 19.2%

toungo 72.3% 19.7%

demsa 70.8% 20.7%

song 70.6% 8.5%

ganye 70.2% 14.2%

numan 67.2% 21.2%

yolasouth 66.5% 6.5%

gombi 65.5% 23.9%

michika 64.4% 23.1%

madagali 63.2% 20.9%

guyuk 61.1% 8.7%

girei 60.3% 3.3%

mubisouth 50.1% 10.0%

yolanorth 46.7% 3.8%

Borno

LGA

Education

Index

Edu-

FoodSec

konduga 76.8% 22.3%

magumeri 73.8% 34.6%

nganzai 70.5% 29.6%

gubio 66.5% 20.8%

bama 66.0% 41.4%

ngala 65.7% 36.6%

kwayakus

ar 64.8% 8.0%

kaga 63.8% 18.8%

guzamala 63.6% 32.8%

bayo 61.2% 5.3%

mafa 61.1% 21.5%

gwoza 59.6% 18.6%

maiduguri 59.1% 17.4%

askirauba 58.9% 19.7%

jere 56.5% 14.6%

chibok 56.4% 16.9%

damboa 53.9% 20.7%

dikwa 53.0% 29.8%

biu 50.0% 9.2%

kukawa 49.5% 13.2%

kalabalge 49.2% 14.6%

monguno 47.2% 38.1%

mobbar 36.7% 12.0%

Yobe

LGA

Education

Index Edu-FoodSec

bursari 81.3% 12.5%

nangere 76.6% 16.8%

karasuwa 76.2% 15.3%

yusufari 75.4% 14.9%

fune 75.3% 15.6%

jakusko 74.8% 23.3%

yunusari 72.6% 23.5%

shani 71.9% 4.2%

machina 68.8% 17.1%

tarmua 67.5% 9.6%

nguru 66.7% 14.6%

fika 62.3% 9.1%

hawul 60.6% 4.6%

bade 59.7% 16.0%

geidam 58.0% 10.0%

damaturu 57.6% 12.5%

gujba 55.2% 13.9%

potiskum 53.2% 11.0%

gulani 50.9% 19.1%

03 Discussion

SECTORAL FINDINGS – Group discussions

(1) What are the key trends across geographical areas and population groups?

(1) What information is most striking and relevant to Education partners?

(1) Does this information confirm or contradict other data sources, contextual information or action plans?

(1) What are the key information gaps, or questions that the data raises?

(1) What are key recommendations going forward?

(1) Your own questions!

THANK YOU

FOR YOUR

ATTENTION