1

Shelter-NFI Post Distribution Monitoring Collective Centers: June 30-July 4 2016

Bentiu, Unity State

November 2016

2

Table of Contents Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 2

Objective ....................................................................................................................................................... 3

Methodology and Limitations ....................................................................................................................... 4

Key Findings and Analysis ............................................................................................................................. 5

1. Use of materials..…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….5

2. Reasons why IDPs still live in the marketplace.……………………..……….……………………………………….6

3. Opinion of material……..……………………..……………………………….....……………………………………………..7

4. Most useful items……………………………..…………………………………………………………………………………….8

5. Items needed but not received…...………………………………………………………………………………………….9

6. Material quality and distribution feedback ………..……………………………………………………………..... 10

Recommendations…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………11

Annexes (attached)……………………………………………………………………..…………………………………………………………11

3

Executive Summary Needs: The Bentiu Protection of Civilian site (PoC) in Unity State is the largest PoC site in the country,

with a population of 120,333 internally displaced persons (IDPs), as of November 30, 2016.1 During the

time of distribution, there was ongoing displacement in Bentiu and Rubkona towns, causing higher influx

in the IDP population within the area. Due to limited space of the PoCs, new IDPs have settled in

abandoned marketplaces and occupied government facilities and shops within Bentiu and Rubkona

towns. The new IDPs have sought refuge in alternative locations within the towns in close proximity to

the PoC. These newly displaced individuals were targeted during the assessment and assisted with

distribution of shelter and NFI materials.

Beneficiaries: IDPs displaced in Bentiu town originated from towns including Koch, Leer, Mayendit, Guit,

Mayom, Panyijiar, and Rubkona. IDPs identified the insecurity from the conflict, food insecurity and lack

of services as the primary reasons for traveling to Bentiu town. In June and July 2016, 843 households,

comprising 5,807 individuals were provided with Shelter and non-food item (NFI) materials in Rubkona

market, Kalabalek market, Suk Shabi, Suk Sita, Suk Fransa, the Red Cross and schools within the town.

See Annex 1

Distribution: The International Organization for Migration (IOM) and Concern Worldwide (Concern)

conducted a distribution from June 30 to July 4, 2016 in response to a previous needs and verification

assessment completed in May 2016. The materials distributed were:

Blanket (2)

Mosquito Nets (1)

Plastic Sheets (2)

Rubber Ropes (5)

Nylon Ropes (1)

Bundles of Bamboo (2)

Wooden Poles (6)

Post Distribution Monitoring (PDM): IOM and Concern conducted a PDM assessment during November

2016 targeting the population who received shelter and NFI materials during the July distribution.

Information was collected through household survey questionnaires and focus group discussions

targeting those who received the distributed items. The information from this PDM will be used to make

informed decisions and improve future S/NFI distributions and response in South Sudan.

Key findings:

Lack of Land provision: Approximately 15% of IDPs were unable to construct their shelters due

to uncertainty of land allocation. A communication gap exists between the Relief and

Rehabilitation Commission (RRC) and IDP leadership; This has resulted in IDPs still living in

collective centers.

Inadequate Assessment Methodology: the assessment methodology only focused on needs and

did not take into account a holistic approach of identifying underlying causes.

Quality of the framing materials: IDPs also mentioned the bamboo they received were infected

by termites and have lost structural integrity.

1 IOM Mission South Sudan Mission Movement Trend Tracking (MTT)

4

IDPs provided with S-NFI materials had their materials looted: When fighting broke out in Juba,

Central Equatoria in July 2016, some IDPs residing in Bentiu town feared the violence would

spread to the other states and fled to the Bentiu PoC. Upon return, many found that their S/NFI

materials had been looted.

Objective

The primary objective of the PDM is to improve future distributions to meet the needs of vulnerable

populations. Specifically, this PDM aimed to understand the usefulness of the distribution of shelter and

NFI materials and the effectiveness of response methodology. Finally, PDMs aim to ensure a

participatory approach to S-NFI distributions and to ensure that beneficiaries have mechanisms to voice

their concerns.

Methodology and Limitations

Methodology

Quantitative and qualitative methods were utilized. The PDM team was made up of nine people (two

IOM staff, two Concern staff, and five enumerators identified by the (RRC)2. Information was gathered

directly from the beneficiaries through household surveys and focus group discussions and

complemented by information gathered through Key Informant Interviews with the RRC. From the total

distribution population, a sample size of 111 households was identified3 for the information gathering

exercise.

Limitations

Of the selected sample as 13% from the caseload of 843 households; approximately 15% were not

present at site any longer or the team could not identify or reach them. The team closely coordinated

with the local authorities and local leaders to disseminate the information. This impacted the sample

size of the population surveyed. In addition, due to the theft of some distributed items, beneficiaries

were not able to provide answers for all questions regarding how the materials were used and how

useful they were considered. However, some questions were rephrased to better understand the

situation. Finally, there is often confusion amongst the beneficiaries when explaining the purpose of a

PDM. Many of the IDPs were under the assumption that the team was there to distribute materials, and

when asked if they received items from July, many individuals responded they had not, even if they had

materials stored in the corner of their shelters. Individuals do not want to be skipped if a distribution is

taking place. Even after the objectives of the PDM is explained, the purpose and activities are not always

clear to the beneficiaries.

2 Enumerators were identified from Rubkona and Bentiu towns, recommended from the RRC 3 90% confidence level with +/- 10% confidence interval

5

Key Findings and Analysis

1. Use of materials

Key Finding: Many of the IDPs living in the collective centers in July at the time of distribution are still

living in the same collective centers.4

Analysis:

A majority of individuals surveyed were still living in the marketplaces, government facilities and shops.

Of the total 111 households that were spoken to, 96% were living in the same marketplaces they were

living in when the distribution was conducted back in July. The remaining 4% had constructed their own

shelters outside of the town. The five households (that comprise this 4%), constructed their own

shelters with the materials distributed, and were slowly moving into them. They said they constructed a

basic shelter, but still gathering more suitable building materials to officially relocate. These households

stated they were living partly in the marketplaces and partly in their shelters.

4 Based on the survey response of 111 individuals

96%

4%0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Yes No

Per

cen

tage

of

IDP

s

Response from IDPs

Chart 1: Are you still living in the marketplace?

6

2. Reasons why IDPs still live in the marketplaces

Key Finding: The primary reasons why IDPs continue to seek shelter in the marketplaces are due to

security and fear outside of town, stolen items and uncertainty of the land to build upon.5

Source: PDM

Analysis:

The reasons why IDPs are still in these marketplaces can be expressed into three categories include:

Security and fear of insecurity outside of the town (41%)

Items were stolen (25%)

Uncertainty of land to build upon (15%)

Of the IDPs who continue to seek shelter in the market place, the majority expressed concern leaving

the marketplaces due to protection and security. Due to active conflict, the IDPs indicated that their

villages were not safe to return and they feel safer in the collective centers. Most of the IDP respondents

noted that they also feel safer in the collective centers and marketplaces in town, which is a contributing

factor to their protracted stay. With the outbreak of violence in Juba during July 2016, many of the IDPs

expressed they feared the active conflict would spread to other states and they fled to the Bentiu PoC

for protection. While they were gone, the towns were looted and their items were taken. This has

contributed to their prolonged stay in the marketplaces. For those who did not run to the PoC, they

responded that they are hiding their materials and stated they are saving the items for later use, since

they had not been instructed where to build their shelters by the government.6 The IDPs are waiting to

5 Based on the survey response of 111 individuals 6 This gap was identified during the PDM and the issue was shared with the RRC

25%

8%

7%15%

41%

4%

Chart 2: Why are IDPs still in marketplaces?

Items Stolen (25%) Not enough materials (8%)

Other (7%) Unsure of land (15%)

Protection/Security Concerns (41%) Saving for future (4%)

7

be shown the land to build on from the RRC, but did not actively inquire themselves. Before leaving

Bentiu, IOM staff was shown the land allocated by the government for IDPs to construct their shelters.

3. Opinion of material

Key Finding: The communication gap regarding land allocation between the RRC and the IDPs proved

to be a major factor limiting the use of the distributed materials.7

Source: PDM

Analysis:

Based on the survey responses6, 71% considered the materials provided useful. Although a sample of

the respondents (25%, noted above in Chart 2) indicated their materials had been stolen, this population

stated they used some of the materials before they were stolen and considered them useful. The

population who had their items looted is included in the 71%. However, 29% of the IDPs surveyed said

the materials did not adequately serve their needs.8 These respondents mentioned they are not using

the distributed materials, but they will use the materials to construct shelters, if shown land to build

upon. If given the option, the IDPs would vacate the collective centers and construct on land allocated to

build upon so that materials can enter the marketplaces in town.

7 Based on the survey response of 111 individuals 8 32 out of 111 individuals stated this

71%

29%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Yes No

Per

cen

tage

of

IDP

s

Responses from IDPs

Chart 3: Were the materials provided useful?

8

4. Most useful items

Key Finding: The most useful items were considered NFI materials including mosquito nets, blankets

and plastic sheets.9

Source: PDM

Analysis:

Respondents were asked to indicate which of the materials they found most useful.10 The most frequent

response was:

Mosquito nets (32%)

Blankets (32%)

Plastic sheets (13%)

It was inferred that these three items were considered the most useful because they were not shelter

construction materials and they were used often by households. Because of the land constraints, the

shelter items were not considered very useful. The rubber and nylon ropes, bamboo and wooden poles

were not considered as useful as the NFI materials, although IDPs indicated these were primarily being

stored for later use. These were intended for shelter construction and without access to land to

construct the shelters, the IDPs did not find a common use for them. Some of the IDPs shared how they

considered the mosquito nets very useful, but since most of the individuals in a household exceed five

people, the mosquito nets distributed were not enough for the household.

9 Based on the survey response of 111 individuals 10 Some respondents provided more than one response to answer this question.

32% 32%

8% 8% 7%13%

Per

cen

tage

of

IDP

s

Responses from IDPs

Chart 4: Which material was the most useful?

Mosquito Net (32%) Blanket (32%) Ropes-Rubber/Nylon (8%)

Wooden Poles (8%) Bamboo (7%) Plastic Sheet (13%)

9

5. Items needed, but not received

Key Finding: The most requested items that were not received during the distribution were solar

lamps, kitchen sets, and water and sanitation/hygiene (WASH) items.11

Source: PDM

Analysis:

Survey respondents were asked to highlight the most needed materials they did not receive during the

distribution. The most frequent responses were:

Solar lamps (37%)

Kitchen sets (20%)

IDPs expressed security and protection concerns when it gets dark, and don’t have any resources to see

at night. A majority of respondents, (37%) requested solar lamps for future distributions. This item was

requested more than any other item, and therefore considered an unmet need. Before this distribution

was conducted in July, some of the IDPs had very simple kitchen sets to use for cooking. However, after

the July crisis, their kitchen sets were stolen. Many of the IDPs do not have proper kitchen sets to cook

with. Approximately 20% stated kitchen sets are a priority need so they can cook for themselves and

their families.

11 Based on the survey response of 65 individuals

37%

20% 20%

8% 6% 6% 3%

Per

cen

tage

of

IDP

s

Repsonses from IDPs

Chart 5: Which items did you need that were not received?

Solar Lamps (37%) Kitchen Sets (20%) Wash Items (20%) Mosquito Net (8%)

Wooden Poles (6%) Plastic Sheets (6%) Bamboo (3%)

10

6. Material quality and distribution feedback

Key Finding: The bamboo poles had termite damage when initially distributed, and were therefore

used as firewood.12

Source: PDM

Analysis:

Part of the survey questionnaire provided an opportunity for IDPs to voice complaints regarding the

distribution, or on the materials themselves. The most commonly expressed complaints/feedback:

Termite damage from the bamboo poles (48%)

Request for another distribution (36%)

48% of the respondents who voiced complaints indicated that the bamboo poles were received rotten

from termite damage, which prevented them from being used. There was no other option but to use the

bamboo poles for firewood. This was a major point commonly expressed by nearly half the population

that answered this question. Additionally, IDPs expressed concern for their counterparts who arrived

after the distribution was conducted and have no shelter or NFI materials. Some of the respondents

mentioned during the surveys that new populations have arrived to the collective centers after the

distribution was conducted. This information came informally during conversation. 36% of the survey

respondents provided feedback that another distribution should be conducted to account for the newly

displaced as well as for those whose materials were looted after the July crisis in Juba.

12 Based on the survey response of 25 individuals

48%36%

16%0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Termite Damage Request for AnotherDistribution

Received Materials Were NotWhat Was Needed

Per

cen

tage

of

IDP

s

Responses from IDPs

Chart 6: What are your complaints about the distributions or materials?

11

Recommendations Based on the information collected from the household surveys and focus group discussions, the

following is recommended for future distributions:

1. Framing strength analysis. All framing elements should be inspected before being dispatched

for distribution. Overall storage conditions should be improved to increase the life-cycle of the

items in storage environments that have extreme weather conditions and exposure to insect

damage.

2. Household size should be an important factor in determining quantities of materials

distributed. The average household size of this distribution was approximately eight individuals.

Some of the materials distributed included one mosquito net and two blankets per household,

which is not a sufficient amount of materials for the average household size. This should be a

consideration to improve coverage in responding to needs.

Comprehensive analysis. Shelter interventions outside PoC sites and designated camps should

consider land issues and ensure they are addressed before an intervention takes place. Teams

involved in such interventions should be trained to understand issues relating to housing , land

and property rights in the local context.

3. If shelter materials are to be distributed in the future, it should be a loose-item distribution, as

before. If IDP population has the capacity, shelters should not be constructed by humanitarian

agencies, so the IDPs can construct themselves. This will help maintain and promote resiliency

of the IDPs.

4. Improve assessment methodologies through more targeted approaches. It was highlighted

through this PDM that specific items should be priority considerations for a future distribution.

Assessments should include well-defined questions and methodologies to make sure the

targeted population is adequately assisted with their needs.

Annexes Annex 1: Bentiu Town Map

Annex 2: Household Survey Questionnaire

Annex 3: Focus Group Discussion Questions

IOM Shelter & NFI UnitSouth Sudan | Bentiu | PDM | November 2016

IOM OIM

The names and boundaries on the maps in this presentation do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the Government of South Sudan or IOM. These maps are for planning purposes only. IOM cannot guarantee that these maps are error free and therefore we accept no liability for consequential and indirect damages arising from the use of these map products

Data Sources: IOM, OSM, OCHA

UNMISS

Bentiu (PoC)

Mosque Market

Suk Shavi

Hai Engaz

Z

!

!

!9

!

!

9

9

!

!9

Q

Q

Q

Q

99

9

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

Hep

Gul

Gon

Ngop

Guey

Kech

Biek

Pakur

Rokur

Hioan

Toang

Mabyit

Kayjak

Bentiu

Toykom

Thorgow

Mankuay

Nyedoor

Rubkona Market

Rubkona

Nyachom

Magabor

Chilak A

Jiekrech

Yoangany

Yoynyang

Kuerbuone

Bimruok C

Maderessa

Duel LothHai Kordapdap

Kuernyalong

New Khartoum

Kuer Nyeding

Thoktier Gang

Meshra Bentiu

Kamsa TamaninSuk Fransa

Bentiu Light Base Camp

Gema Primary SchoolSSRCDawa Primary School

Ministry of Justice

Ministry of Public Service

Ministry of Education

Bentiu Stadium

Legend

PDMs ConductedBeneficiaries Benefited (HH)

Collective Centers

Humanitarian HubPolice StationRoad NetworkRiverWetlandResidential AreasShrubMilitary CompoundStadium

9

Q

147

23

57

43

300

273

XX

Nyiupiu

Hisoura

Suk Sita

Kuerbone

Biemrouk

Dar-salam

Kalabalak

'

Shelter Post Distribution Monitoring Household Questionnaire – Bentiu and Rubkona Town

1. Introduction and Guidance

2. Basic Information

3. Beneficiary Details

1.a) Please introduce yourself and the purpose of the visit to the respondent.

1.b) Please confirm the interviewee did receive items from the distribution conducted by IOM and Concern in July 2016. If they did not, thank them for their time, but find interviewee who did receive items from the distribution. 1.c) Please confirm that the Head of Household is available for you to interview. 1.d) Please seek the consent of the interviewee before proceeding with the questionnaire. 1.e) Please explain that you are not going to provide any additional items but that the questionnaire is only to help improve distributions in the future.

1.f) Please try to keep the interview as confidential as possible to avoid bias. This may mean asking bystanders politely to move away, and/or finding a space where people are not able to overhear.

2.a) Date of Interview: Day _____________________ Month ____________________ Year ______________________

2.b) Location of interview (Collective Center): Rubkona Market

2.c) Name of enumerator (person asking questions): ________________________________________

3.a) What is your name (beneficiary name)?

3.b) What was the size of your household at the time of the distribution in July? : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14+

3.c) What is the size of your household now: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14+

3.d) Are you the head of your household? Yes No 3.e) What is your gender? (Please circle): Male Female

'

4. Effectiveness and Usefulness Details 5. Specific Items Usefulness

6. Complaint Response Mechanisms

END OF INTERVIEW PLEASE THANK RESPONDENT FOR THEIR TIME AND PARTICIPATION

4.a) When did you arrive to this location? Month __________ Year ___________

4.b) Are you living in the collective center or have you built a shelter with the materials you were given? (Please circle one) Collective Center Built a Shelter

4.c) If you are living in the collective center, why are you still there? Protection/Security concerns Other Reason ________________________________________________

4.d) If you are living in the collective center, what did you do with the items you were given? __________________________________________________________________________________

4.e) If you built a shelter, what kind of shelter have you built? (Please circle one) Tukul Rakuba Other ______________________________________________

4.f) For what other purpose have you been using the materials given to you for? __________________________________________________________________________________________

4.g) Would you say the shelter material you were given was useful? (Please circle one) Yes No Why not? __________________________________________

5.a) Out of the following items you were given, which do you use? (Please circle all that you use):

Wooden Poles Bamboos Plastic Sheets Rubber Ropes Nylon Ropes Mosquito Net Blanket

5.b) For the items that you do not use, where are they and why don’t you use them? ________________________________________________________________________________________

5.c) Is there any shelter material that you needed to receive but that you did not receive? Yes No

5.d) If yes, what shelter material did you need?

5.e.i)____________________________ How did you access this item after the distribution? Bought it Given it Borrowed/shared it Did not get Other: ____________

5.e.ii)____________________________ How did you access this item after the distribution? Bought it Given it Borrowed/shared it Did not get Other: ____________

6.a) What sort of complaints do you have from the materials you received? What would have been more useful for you?

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

6.b) What sort of complaints do you have from how the distribution was conducted?

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

6.c) Do you have any questions that we can answer?

2016 Focus Group Discussions – Bentiu and Rubkona Town

November 2016

Basic Information

Date: ______________________________________________________

Location: ___________________________________________________

Name of interviewer: _________________________________________

Beneficiary Discussion Questions

1. Overview of the situation in Bentiu/Rebkuna towns?

2. Where are you from?

3. Do you intend to stay here?

4. Are you in transit to another location? If yes, where?

5. Why are you in Bentiu Town?

6. How long will you stay?

7. If you leave, where would you like to go?

8. If you want to go, why haven’t you gone there already?

9. Are you registered in the PoC?

10. Do you have family in the PoC?

11. How many households sleep in your shelter?

12. Do you have another shelter somewhere else?

13. Do you have permission to stay here?

14. What items do you use most?

Wooden poles Bamboos Plastic sheets Rubber ropes Nylong Ropes Mosquito Nets

Blankets

15. Have you traded any of the items in the market? If so, which ones did you trade and what did you

trade them for?

16. What items did you need that you did not receive?

17. What sort of complaints do you have?