Final Evaluation Report of Norwegian Church Aid's Emergency Preparedness and Response Programme in South Sudan

Back to results
Author(s)
Shaheen, R., Wichterich, H. & Sardiwal, D.
Publication language
English
Pages
84pp
Date published
01 May 2018
Type
Impact evaluation
Keywords
Conflict, violence & peace, Forced displacement and migration, Recovery and Resillience
Countries
South Sudan
Organisations
Action Against Hunger, Norwegian Church Aid (NCA)

This report was produced for Norwegian Church Aid (NCA) by Action Against Hunger UK’s Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Services. 

NCA started the ‘Emergency Preparedness and Response Programme’ in January 2014 after violence erupted in December 2013, and it has been implemented in a phased approach with Phase 5 completed in August 2017. The overall objective of the programme is the provision of lifesaving assistance to conflict and displaced populations in South Sudan.

This external evaluation is intended to provide NCA with insights into their Emergency Preparedness and Response Programme in South Sudan. The objectives of the evaluation were to assess the relevance and effectiveness of the programme, and the extent to which cross-cutting themes and issues were addressed. This evaluation exercise intends to (i) inform NCA’s existing and forthcoming strategies, (ii) strengthen future humanitarian responses, and (iii) provide assessment on the role of local national actors in the response.

The evaluation covers all the five phases and the Juba response of the Emergency Preparedness and Response Programme from January 2014 to August 2017. Data collection included using mixed methods to conduct focus group discussions, household interviews, observations, semistructured interviews and a document review.

Limitations of this evaluation included vast distances between project sites, limited time, security restrictions, local language barriers, and interpreter and beneficiary recall bias, challenges of beneficiaries and partners to differentiate between organisations and actors or to remember specific products or support received during a specific timeframe. Another limitation is the small number of household interviews as compared to the population targeted which means that it can’t not be considered as a representative sample. The evaluation team was also not able to conduct interviews at health facilities or obtain related health data.