JOINT INTERSECTORAL ANALYSIS FRAMEWORK JIAF Needs Assessment Analysis

JOINT INTERSECTORAL ANALYSIS FRAMEWORK (JIAF) Needs Assessment & Analysis 23 July 2020

2021 Joint Intersectoral Analysis Framework: Agenda Intro Opening Review of process / political landscape; degree of ‘finality’ Structure of guidance Introducing the JIAF The Concepts /components How they fit together Step-by-Step Annex descriptions Conceptual Framework Definitions, examples Key differences from last year Severity scale and the indicator reference table JIAF Step-by-Step (overview) Planning, designing etc Gathering, collating data Telling the story Joint Analysis + Pi. N Risk Analysis and Projection Expert Judgement Elicitation Limitations of the JIAF Agnes / Herbert Marcus Timing 5 m 10 m Herbert 15 m Herbert Marcus 10 m 20 m Herbert 10 m 5 m

Guidance 1 2 Updated HPC Step-by-Step: • key steps • roles and responsibilities • sequence of the needs analysis and planning JIAF Guidance for HNOs 2021: • Key considerations and steps for HAOs, IMOs, analysts, ICCG, sector focal points etc involved in joint needs analysis

Guidance 3 4 Complementary guidance • Risk Analysis and Projections • Response Analysis • Disability Inclusion • Gender Analysis Annotated Templates • HNO • HRP

Structure of JIAF Guidance 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Introduction Overview Approach Step-by-step Annexes

Guidance Structure Section 1: Introduction • • What is the JIAF Why is it important What are its limitations Its origins Section 2: Overview • What are the key questions it tries do answer • The conceptual framework

Guidance Structure Section 3: Approach • Principles guiding the process • Building technical consensus • Applying analytical standards • Joint-intersectoral analysis of context, shocks and impacts • Severity of Humanitarian Conditions and contributing factors

Guidance Structure Section 4: Step-by-step • Plan & design a joint inter-sectoral analysis process • Collating and collecting data for JIAF • JIAF Analysis • Validation of current and forecasted needs

JIAF Conceptual Framework • The JIAF is built around five pillars • each contains different subpillars. • This serves to organize information, visualize relationships and bring a consistent structure to the analysis. • The JIAF Conceptual framework helps frame the story of a population affected by a shock in a consistent and comprehensive manner.

CONTEXT: Relevant characteristics of the Area Of Interest • General characteristics of the political, socio-cultural, economic, legal & policy, technological, demographic, security, infrastructure and environmental conditions. • Example: • Remittances contribute 10% to the GDP of S Sudan …. • Roads outside the capital are unpaved … • Livelihood zones, mobile coverage, etc.

EVENT / SHOCK: An event/condition that disrupts the functioning of a community or society and causes human, material, and economic or environmental losses. • should be localized geographically as to allow an estimation of the number of people living in the affected area, as defined in the 2016 IASC Humanitarian Profile Support Guidance. • Examples: • Conflict within the line of contact; intensity, extents • Earthquake – magnitude, exposure, extents

IMPACT: The primary effects of the event/shock on the population, systems and services in the affected area • • • Impact on people - losses and damages to assets and capital, displacement, violence, mobility issues and livelihood, etc. Impact on systems - damages to infrastructure or means of communication, disruption of social cohesion, markets, services, etc. Impact on humanitarian access -obstacles or challenges for People in Need to access relief actors, for relief actors to access People in Need and other physical constraints.

HUMANITARIAN CONDITIONS: • The consequences of the shock’s impacts on the population • identified in magnitude, analyzed in terms of severity.

HUMANITARIAN CONDITIONS: The severity of Humanitarian Conditions is estimated by taking into account three levels of consequences: • Living standards: Ability of the affected population to meet their basic needs for essential goods and services. • Coping mechanisms: Degree to which people are coping or facing challenges with impact recovery. Coping mechanisms can be positive or negative. • Physical and Mental Wellbeing: Measured by assessing the physical health of the affected population as well as its mental wellbeing, excess morbidity or mortality, malnutrition, psychosocial trauma, grave human rights violations.

HUMANITARIAN CONDITIONS: • Severity for the HC Pillar is SEVERITY OF NEED, PEOPLE IN NEED 1. LIVING STANDARDS 2. COPING MECHANISMS 3. PHYSICAL & MENTAL WELLBEING 1 2 3 4 5 aggregated, distributed across the population at the units of analysis and the crisis level • Severity is ‘thresholded’ to establish Intersectoral Pi. N • Sub-Pillar Pi. N is not recommended / endorsed due to the interrelated nature of the sub-pillars

Humanitarian Conditions: Subpillar Relationships: SHOCK IMPACT 1. 2. COPI NG MECHANISM S LIVING STANDARDS PHYSICAL & MENTAL WELLBEING 3. • The Humanitarian Conditions subpillars are all interrelated. • The JIAF analysis is framed within an ‘analysis period’ for a given crisis, and for this analysis period, the unit of analysis is geographic areas and affected populations (sub-district, IDPs for example). • The Humanitarian Conditions Subpillars can (but not always) be seen as a cycle, following a shock and its impact: • From having no problems, to having some issues with addressing basic needs, to engaging in increasingly negative coping strategies, ultimately leading to negative effects on their wellbeing. • Feedback loops within one pillar, or between two can also be present – the progression is not always circular as described and many processes can be occurring simultaneously.

THE JIAF SEVERITY MODEL JIAF SEVERITY SCALE REFERENCE TABLE • Measuring intersectoral severity is a central function of the JIAF • Achieved by applying the JIAF severity model, supported by the set JIAF Severity Scale • All the indicators used in assessing the Humanitarian Conditions are scaled. • The scales refer to the definitions overall seen here. • When executed to its fullest potential, the methodology enables distribution of the 1 total number of people in an area or affected group across the five severity classes. Severity Class Name 1 2 Key reference outcome • Se None / Minimal • Living Standards are acceptable (taking into account the context): possibility of having Stress • Living Standards under stress, leading to adoption of coping strategies (that reduce ability some signs of deterioration and/or inadequate social basic services, possible needs for strengthening the Legal framework. • Ability to afford/meet all essential basic needs without adopting unsustainable Coping Mechanisms (such as erosion/depletion of assets). • No or minimal/low risk of impact on well-being. to protect or invest in livelihoods). • Inability to afford/meet some basic needs without adopting stressed, unsustainable and/or short-term reversible Coping Mechanisms. • Minimal impact on well-being (stressed physical/mental well-being) overall. • Possibility of having some localized/targeted incidents of violence (including human rights violations). 3 Severe • Degrading Living Standards (from usual/typical), leading to adoption of negative Coping Mechanisms with threat of irreversible harm (such as accelerated erosion/depletion of assets). Reduced access/availability of social/basic goods and services • Inability to meet some basic needs without adopting crisis/emergency - short/medium term irreversible - Coping Mechanisms. • Degrading well-being. Physical and mental harm resulting in a loss of dignity. 4 2 3 5 Extreme 4 5 Catastrophic • Collapse of Living Standards, with survival based on humanitarian assistance and/or long term irreversible extreme coping strategies. • Extreme loss/liquidation of livelihood assets that will lead to large gaps/needs in the short term. • Widespread grave violations of human rights. Presence of irreversible harm and heightened mortality • Total collapse of Living Standards • Near/Full exhaustion of coping options. • Last resort Coping Mechanisms/exhausted. • Widespread mortality (CDR, U 5 DR) and/or irreversible harm. Widespread physical and mental irreversible harm leading to excess mortality. • Widespread grave violations of human rights. Potential Response objectives Building Resilience & Supporting Disaster Risk Reduction & Protecting Livelihoods & Preventing & Mitigating Risk of extreme deterioration of Humanitarian conditions Saving Lives & Livelihoods Reverting/Preventing Widespread death and/or Total collapse of livelihoods

THE JIAF SEVERITY SCALE REFERENCE TABLE Severity Class 1 Name Key reference outcome None / • Living Standards are acceptable (taking into Minimal account the context): possibility of having some signs of deterioration and/or inadequate social basic services, possible needs for strengthening the Legal framework. • Ability to afford/meet all essential basic needs without adopting unsustainable Coping Mechanisms (such as erosion/depletion of assets). • No or minimal/low risk of impact on well-being. Potential Response objectives Building Resilience & Supporting Disaster Risk Reduction

THE JIAF SEVERITY SCALE REFERENCE TABLE Severity Class Name Key reference outcome Potential Response objectives 2 Stress • Living Standards under stress, leading to adoption of coping strategies (that reduce ability to protect or invest in livelihoods). • Inability to afford/meet some basic needs without adopting stressed, unsustainable and/or short-term reversible Coping Mechanisms. • Minimal impact on well-being (stressed physical/mental well-being) overall. • Possibility of having some localized/targeted incidents of violence (including human rights violations). Supporting Disaster Risk Reduction & Protecting Livelihoods

THE JIAF SEVERITY SCALE REFERENCE TABLE Severity Class Name 3 Severe Key reference outcome Potential Response objectives • Degrading Living Standards (from usual/typical), Protecting leading to adoption of negative Coping Mechanisms Livelihoods with threat of irreversible harm (such as accelerated & erosion/depletion of assets). Reduced Preventing & access/availability of social/basic goods and Mitigating services Risk of extreme deterioration • Inability to meet some basic needs without of Humanitarian adopting crisis/emergency - short/medium term conditions irreversible - Coping Mechanisms. • Degrading well-being. Physical and mental harm resulting in a loss of dignity.

THE JIAF SEVERITY SCALE REFERENCE TABLE Severity Class 4 Name Key reference outcome Extreme • Collapse of Living Standards, with survival based on humanitarian assistance and/or long term irreversible extreme coping strategies. • Extreme loss/liquidation of livelihood assets that will lead to large gaps/needs in the short term. • Widespread grave violations of human rights. Presence of irreversible harm and heightened mortality Potential Response objectives Saving Lives & Livelihoods

THE JIAF SEVERITY SCALE REFERENCE TABLE Severity Class 5 Name Key reference outcome Catastro- • Total collapse of Living Standards phic • Near/Full exhaustion of coping options. • Last resort Coping Mechanisms/exhausted. • Widespread mortality (CDR, U 5 DR) and/or irreversible harm. Widespread physical and mental irreversible harm leading to excess mortality. • Widespread grave violations of human rights. Potential Response objectives Reverting/ Preventing Widespread death and/or Total collapse of livelihoods

THE JIAF INDICATOR REFERENCE TABLE • The Indicator Reference Table contains a listing of the globally agreed on indicators for the JIAF Pillars /Subpillars • The majority use a 5 point scale aligned with the overall JIAF Severity Scale • Some indicators put forward for the Humanitarian Conditions subpillars are Proxies… • All are the product of negotiation • The IRT is a starting point – you will have to work with what you have • Some thresholds will need to be contextualized

JIAF Step-by-Step

PLAN & DESIGN Set up a team Agree on scope of the analysis Geo Scope, depth, analysis unit Affected Population Groups Define info needs & review indicators

COLLATE AND COLLECT Compile the evidence base ü Identify institutions and networks that can provide secondary data. ü Identify what information is available from community engagement. Identify information gaps ü Thematic, geographical, sectoral, population groups Elicitate expert input or draft alternative source

JOINT ANALYSIS Identify contributing factors Describe, explain & interpret Review Pi. N aggregates Establish scenario/forecast VALIDATION Present output Final review and validation of findings & results