BASELINE SURVEY REPORT

Multi-Sectoral Humanitarian Response South

Sudan (720BHA23GR00097)

Funded by

BUREAU FOR HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE (BHA)

July 2023

0
Table of Contents
Tables ........................................................................................................................................................................................................ i
Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................................................................ 1
1. Introduction................................................................................................................................................................................... 2
2. Methodology ................................................................................................................................................................................. 3
2.1. Quantitative household survey and sample design ................................................................................................................. 3
2.2. Desk Review ........................................................................................................................................................................ 3
2.3. Limitations and Mitigation Measures ............................................................................................................................... 3
3. Detailed Findings........................................................................................................................................................................... 3
3.1 Socio-Demographics Characteristics of the Study Population ................................................................................................. 4
3.2 Key findings by sectors: ............................................................................................................................................................... 5
3.2.1. Protection: .......................................................................................................................................................................... 5
3.2.2. Humanitarian Coordination, Information Management, and Assistance (HCIMA): ..................................................... 6
3.2.3. Shelter and Settlement ...................................................................................................................................................... 6
3.2.4. Economic Recovery Sector: ................................................................................................................................................ 7
4. Programmatic Implications ..............................................................................................................................................................10
5. Conclusions and Recommendations ...............................................................................................................................................10
6. Required Annexes .............................................................................................................................................................................11
Annex 1: Indicator Tracking Table .......................................................................................................................................................11
Annex2: Indicator Estimates Table ......................................................................................................................................................11

Tables
Table 1: Summary of the project ................................................................................................................ 2
Table 2: Age of survey respondents of Protection, HCIMA, and shelter/settlement .................................. 4
Table 3: Age of the household heads interviewed for economic recovery sector target areas .................. 4
Table 4: Are you currently engaged in any small business .......................................................................... 7
Table 5: Estimation of your current total family income per month ........................................................... 8
Table 6:Has USAID provided any support to start a new livelihood ............................................................ 8
Table 7:Current primary livelihoods for the households............................................................................. 9
Table 8: Is your household engaged in any savings or lending schemes ..................................................... 9
Table 9: The outcome indicators under the economic recovery sector were captured as follows: ............ 9

Figure 1: Perception of knowledge for reporting violence .......................................................................... 5

Figure 2: Type of businesses that household respondents engaged in ....................................................... 7

i
Executive Summary

Danish Refugee Council (DRC) intends to implement a multi-sectoral humanitarian response in South Sudan
targeting, Upper Nile and Unity States including countrywide-for emergency responses. The interventions will run
from May 1, 2023 to October 31, 2024. DRC, through past programming, has learned that individuals and
communities often experience multiple cycles of displacement in addition to conflict, slow economic recovery, and
climate shocks, which generate complex and interrelated assistance needs. DRC programming is aimed at providing
a multi sectoral responses in target locations to contribute to a reduction in protection risks experienced by
displacement-affected communities. The project targets a total of 212,691 individuals (185,698 IDPs). DRC will
leverage gains from providing lifesaving emergency assistance, such as shelter and GBV assistance, to needy persons
by supporting income-generating activities. DRC prioritizes integrated, holistic programming, and depending on
need and coverage from other humanitarian partners. Through this intervention, DRC will implement multiple
sectors such as protection, shelter/settlement, economic recovery and market systems, and humanitarian,
coordination, assistance, and information management, all of which together work to support a reduction in
protection risks and vulnerabilities.

Baseline studies often represent the most in-depth and recent study of the target and DRC will use the baseline
study results to review the activity design and refine implementation as necessary. The purpose of the baseline was
to gather data that serves as the starting point for measuring the performance of outcome indicators and to make a
comparison at the end of the project duration. The baseline also collected non-indicator information to describe the
prevailing conditions of the target communities. The survey was done through individual household surveys and a
desk review of the final evaluation report or end-line report of the previous BHA Award No: 720BHA21GR00212. The
household survey was conducted with 154 sampled respondents drawn from targeted registered economic recovery
project beneficiaries across target locations, including Rubkona and Guit counties. The households were selected
using simple random sampling method.

For sectors such as protection, shelter/settlement, humanitarian coordination, information management, and
assessment (HCIMA), the findings from end line survey of the previous BHA Award were used as the baseline values
because the current Award implements similar activities and targets the same people in the same location as the
previous Award. This approach included reviewing the final evaluation report and BHA ITT report of the previous
Award.

For the economic recovery sector, the baseline survey was only conducted in Rubkona and Guit counties of Unity
state; the team could not interview the respondents in the three counties of Upper Nile State partly because of the
insecurity and restricted movement of humanitarian agencies during baseline data collection period. The baseline
findings did not also include Mayom and Koch counties of Unity state due to access issues/flooding. As such, the
project team is closely monitoring the situation in these locations where the survey did not take place, and rapid
need assessments will be conducted in these locations as soon as the context permits.

The key findings of the baseline include:

▪ The baseline study revealed that female beneficiaries constituted the majority (83%) of household survey
respondents, with males accounting for 17%. Most respondents (60%) were also adults of the age group 30-59
years (58% from Unity state and 62% from Upper Nile state). Most respondents (71%) were IDPs, followed by
host communities (24%). These were based on the previous BHA Award end-line survey report.
▪ For economic recovery target population and locations, the household survey reported that a considerable
proportion of the respondents (98.7%) were female, contrary to only a fraction of respondents (1.3%) were
male respondents. This was because the current project Award supports women's groups through DRC's
protection interventions to work through the women groups to launch new livelihood-generating activities.
Most, (66.9%) of the people interviewed reported that they are internally displaced persons, 29.2% are host
communities, and 3.9% are returnees.
▪ According to the end line report of the previous award, 77% of respondents mentioned that reporting of GBV
cases and other child protection issues has improved in the past 12 months.

1
▪ Only 43% of respondents indicated that “most girls know where to go for services and support if they experience
violence."
▪ The previous BHA Award report revealed that 14 partners participated in DRC-led joint multi-sectoral
assessments in Malakal PoC and other IDP sites in both Upper Nile and Unity States
▪ 75% of respondents rated the interventions of the multi-sectoral emergency project in addressing camp
coordination and camp management needs as having been effective.
▪ 72% of respondents mentioned living in a shelter, which they consider safe, clean, well-ventilated, and free from
harmful environmental hazards such as flooding, leaking, and overheating.
▪ 80% of shelter and settlement beneficiaries considered the settlement interventions met or exceeded their
expectations.
▪ 70% of household respondents reported having benefited from emergency NFIs, mainly the Long-lasting
insecticidal nets (LLINs) and blankets.
▪ 26.6% currently have some form of profit-making livelihood activities; this represents the proportions of
beneficiaries reporting net income from their livelihood, while up to 73.4% do not have any active businesses.
▪ 85.7% of the households reported not receiving any support to start new livelihoods, whereas 14.3% of the
respondents acknowledged having received support from DRC. Only 5.8% of them are still engaged in new
livelihoods.
▪ Only 7.8% of the households interviewed reported that they are currently engaged in savings and lending
schemes (such as VSLA), and 92.2% of their counterparts do not.

1. Introduction

DRC is implementing BHA funded "Multi-Sectoral Humanitarian Response South Sudan" project in Upper Nile
(Malakal, Fashoda, and Baliet counties), Unity (Rubkona, Guit, Koch, and Mayom counties) as well as countrywide
through Mobile Response Team (MRT). The project is expected to run from May 1, 2023, to October 31, 2024. The
project's goal is “Displacement-affected communities in South Sudan have reduced protection risks associated with
displacement and can live in safety and dignity." The project targets a total of 212,691 individuals (185,698 IDPs).
The project will implement activities in four sectors, namely: Protection, economic recovery and market systems,
shelter and settlements, humanitarian coordination, information management, and assessment (HCIMA), in four
primary overarching purposes described in the ITT (See Annex 1). The baseline measured the value of relevant
outcome indicators and intended to adjust the target (if needed) and serve as a benchmark to measure changes in
the life of beneficiaries at the end of the project (end-line survey). Using a questionnaire, the baseline data collection
was conducted from 15TH June 2023 to 19th June 2023 in Rubkona and Guit Counties of Unity State.

Table 1: Summary of the project

Program Title Multi-Sectoral Humanitarian Response South Sudan
Activity Goal Displacement-affected communities in South Sudan have reduced protection risks
associated with displacement and can live in safety and dignity.
Geographic Coverage • Upper Nile: Malakal, Fashoda, and Baliet counties
• Unity State: Rubkona, Guit, Koch, and Mayom counties
• Countrywide- MRT
Proposed Period of Performance Duration 18 Months (01st May 2023 to 31 October 2024
Target Counties Malakal, Fashoda, Baliet in Upper Nile state
Rubkona, Koch and Mayom in Unity state
Total Number of Individuals Targeted 212,693
Evaluation Type Internal Baseline Survey
Baseline Survey Purpose To gather data that serves as the starting point for measuring the performance of
outcome indicators progress and perform comparison analysis at the end of the project.
Methodology A mixed quantitative and qualitative method will be used to gather information from
project participants in the target area.
Date of baseline data collection May and June 2023
Final report submission date to Donor: End of July 2023

2
 2. Methodology
The baseline survey used a quantitative study method and desk reviews from the end-line survey/final evaluation
report of the previous BHA Award.

2.1. Quantitative household survey and sample design

The household questionnaire was developed in consultations with the economic recovery technical coordinator to
ensure that the survey is comprehensive enough and tailored to help provide objective responses to outcome
indicators. The survey was used to interview economic recovery target beneficiaries with representative sample
sizes in the targeted locations.

The sampling frame for this study was the beneficiary list which consisted of 300 households (HHs). The sample was
drawn from targeted registered economic recovery project beneficiaries across target locations, including Rubkona
and Guit counties. Accordingly, the estimated sample size used was 154 households. These were selected using
simple random sampling and interview methods across the two counties.

The questionnaire was administered to the sampled households by trained data collectors using the Mobile
application Kobo Collect. A total of 9 data collectors (quantitative data collection) were identified and recruited, and
one day of training was provided to enumerators by the DRC MEAL team.

2.2. Desk Review

For sectors such as Protection, shelter/settlement, humanitarian coordination, information management, and
assessment (HCIMA), the findings from end line survey of the previous BHA Award were used as the baseline value.
This is because the current BHA Award implements similar activities and targets the same people in the same
locations. This approach included reviewing both the final evaluation report and BHA ITT. The study locations for the
final evaluation report included Rubkona and Guit counties in Unity State, Malakal, Baliet, and Fashoda counties in
Upper Nile State. Key attention was paid to ensuring equitable representation of sample households in each county
and enumeration areas (Payams) where the sample was distributed using the probability proportional to size
technique. Field data collection for both quantitative and qualitative data was carried out from 24th May 2023 to 31st
May 2023. Data from the HH surveys was collected electronically using a smartphone KOBO server. The total
respondents comprised 924 (83% female, 17% male) households which were higher by 14% of the initially sampled
808 respondents. The addition to the sample size increased the study's precision and confidence level. The total
number of HHs surveys that were conducted was 924 households.1

2.3. Limitations and Mitigation Measures

For the economic recovery sector, the baseline survey was only conducted in Rubkona and Guit counties of Unity
state, the team was not able to interview the respondents in the three counties of Upper Nile, partly because of the
insecurity in Upper Nile, and the restricted movement leading to suspension of normal operations of humanitarian
agencies. TheDRC team could not register project beneficiaries during baseline data collection period. The baseline
findings also did not include Mayom and Koch counties of Unity state due to access issues/flooding. As such, the
project team is keenly monitoring the situation in these locations where the survey did not take place, and some
quick needs assessments will be conducted in these locations as soon as the context permits. The results will be used
as benchmarks for activity targeting.

3. Detailed Findings
The key findings under Protection, HCIMA, and shelter/settlement baseline value are based on the last BHA Award
ITT report and end-line evaluation reports. This approach included reviewing the final evaluation and BHA ITT reports
of the previous BHA Award. However, a household survey was conducted with economic recovery target locations
as this was separate from the previous Award end-line survey report as the previous intervention did not have
livelihood activities. However, Complementary Action for Resilience Building in South Sudan (CARB), a consortium

1 DRC South Sudan, Final Evaluation Report for BHA Funded Multi-Sectoral Emergency Response in South Sudan

3
project funded by BHA (Award Number: 720BHA21CA00003), implemented livelihood activities in some locations
of the Rubkona and Guit counties.

3.1 Socio-Demographics Characteristics of the Study Population

Gender and age of survey respondents: As per the end-line survey report of the previous BHA Award (protection,
HCIMA, and shelter/settlement sectors), respondents were drawn from sampled beneficiaries residing in the project
intervention locations, both IDP camps and host communities. Female beneficiaries constituted the majority (83%)
of HHs survey respondents, with males accounting for 17%. Most respondents (60%) were adults aged 30-59 (58%
from Unity State and 62% from Upper Nile State). Other categories of beneficiaries included the elderly, children-
headed HHs, as well as households with a member/member living with disabilities or other chronic medical
conditions. Most respondents (59%) were also adults of the age group 30-59 years, followed by the age group 19-29
years (29%). Most of the respondents (71%) were IDPs, followed by host communities (24%), as summarized in Table
2 below:

Table 2: Age of survey respondents of Protection, HCIMA, and shelter/settlement

Age group Gender Resident status
Male Female Host Community IDPs Returnees

15-18 0% 2% 0% 2% 0%
19-29 3% 26% 5% 22% 1%
30-59 10% 49% 14% 43% 3%
60 and above 3% 6% 5% 3% 1%
% 17% 83% 24% 71% 5%

Marital status: Most survey respondents (88%) were married, while 5 % were single, 3% were separated, 3% were
widowed, and 1% were divorced.

For economic recovery target population and locations: The household survey reported that a considerable
proportion of the respondents (98.7%) were female, contrary to only a fraction of respondents (1.3%) who were
male respondents. This was because the current project supports women’s groups, through DRC’s protection
interventions. In light of the limited safe livelihood opportunities, the production of hygiene products is a potential
income-generating activity that also will support improving women's and young girls' ability to live in dignity.
Regarding the residence status of the respondents, 66.9% of the people interviewed reported that they are internally
displaced persons, 29.2% are host communities, and 3.9% are returnees. The majority of the people interviewed are
between the age of 30-59 years (64.9%) followed by people between the age of 19 and 24 years, constituting 30.5%
of the respondents, whereas only 1.9% and 2.6% of the respondents were people above 60 years and 15-18 years
respectively. The age category against the residence status of the respondents is illustrated in Table 3 below.

Table 3: Age of the household heads interviewed for economic recovery sector target areas
Age of the respondent Host Community IDPs Returnees Overall %
15-18 years 1.3% 1.3% 0.0% 2.6%
19-29 years 8.4% 18.8% 3.2% 30.5%
30-59 years 19.5% 44.8% 0.6% 64.9%
Above 60 years 0.0% 1.9% 0.0% 1.9%
Total 29.2% 66.9% 3.9% 100.0%

More than half of the respondents interviewed are married, 65.6%. 42.9% of these are internally displaced persons
compared to 19.5% and 3.2% for host community and returnee, respectively. Additionally, 8.4% of the respondents,
on the other hand, are divorced; internally Displaced Persons contributed the highest proportions (5.2%); 2.6% of
the respondents are single, while 23.4% are widowed.
As is the case across most of the rural communities in South Sudan, the survey revealed that 84.4% of the
respondents did not attend school, 8.4% ended up in preschool, and 7.1% of them only attained primary education.
Similarly, when asked about the categories of vulnerabilities for household heads, it was reported that a considerable

4
proportion of people interviewed are female-headed households (24.9%) and pregnant and lactating mothers
(22.7%). Elderly persons at risk and chronically ill persons at 10.4% and 7.8%, respectively

3.2 Key findings by sectors:

3.2.1. Protection:
The protection sector focuses on improving the protective environment in target locations and increasing access to
essential protection prevention and response services. The protection response is designed to: build local capacity
(including government), prevent, mitigate, or redress emerging protection risks, and support the coordination of
protection activities.

Prevention of and Response to GBV:

Under this sub-sector, the project provides GBV assistance and support to GBV survivors in Unity, Upper Nile States,
and countrywide through DRC Mobile Response Team (MRT). The final evaluation report of the previous BHA Award
revealed the project team as having facilitated various assessments during the project inception phase, which
included rapid protection assessments, camp coordination, and camp management scoping assessments, as well as
protection safety audits which informed the implementation and monitoring of project interventions. Feedback from
the previous end-line study report indicated that 77% of respondents mentioned that reporting GBV cases and other
child protection issues has improved in the past 12 months. The new BHA Award will identify the new GBV survival
in the target location and provide GBV case management services to improve the beneficiary's well-being.

The survey also assessed the general community perception of knowledge among girls participating in safe spaces
activities on where to access protection services. From the findings, only 43% of respondents indicated that "most
girls know where to go for services and support if they experience violence." Other responses are captured in the
chart below:

Perception on girls knowledge on where to report if experience violence

50% 43%
40%
28%
30%
18%
20%
11%
10%

0%
Overall

Most girls know where to go for services and support if they experience violence
Only a few girls know where to go for services and support if they experience violence
Most girls DO NOT know where to go for services and support if they experience violence
Don’t know/not sure

Figure 1: Perception of knowledge for reporting violence

Protection Coordination, Advocacy, and Information:

The findings of the final evaluation report of the previous Award revealed key activities under general Protection,
including the following: protection monitoring (assessments), capacity building and training of local protection
structures, networks, and partners, making protection referrals, as well as conducting protection advocacy work. In
addition, the project supported individuals through Individual Protection Assistance (IPA) through cash and in-kind
support.

The end-line study also indicated that women protection groups who participated in women and girls-friendly spaces
benefitted from vocational training in dressmaking/ tailoring and were already skilled in sewing bed sheets. They
indicated their willingness to participate in the new project Award in other vocational training activities, especially

5
those related to baking (bread making). They added that recipients received cash-based individual protection
assistance well and contributed to the economic strengthening and resilience of the targeted individuals. Some IPA
beneficiaries have used the cash support to establish income-generating activities, including the bread-baking
business in Kodok County of Upper Nile state. It is good to replicate these practices in other target locations to
benefit more beneficiaries for the new Award

Key Outcome Indicators

The outcome indicators under the protection sector were captured as follows:
Outcome indicators LOA Target Baseline Comments
value
% of women who report an increase in well-being after 60% 0% The project Award will identify and
receiving GBV case management services (Custom Outcome) target new GBV survivors.
% of beneficiaries who report IPA helped them address their 70% 0% The project Award will identify and
protection concern (Custom Outcome) target new beneficiaries

3.2.2. Humanitarian Coordination, Information Management, and Assistance (HCIMA):

The purpose of HCIMA is to ensure effective coordination, information management, and assistance is provided to
displacement-affected communities in and out of camp-like settings in a conflict-sensitive way that supports
transition out of emergency status.

Coordination: The previous BHA Award report revealed that 14 partners participated in DRC-led joint multi-sectoral
assessments in Malakal PoC and other IDP sites in Upper Nile and Unity States. The coordination aspects of the
project aimed at enhancing the coordination mechanisms through consistent engagement with relevant
stakeholders, including local authorities, community governance structures, and humanitarian partners, and
strengthening community governance structures through capacity-building initiatives.

Information Management: proper information dissemination to the target communities on settlement sites,
including wide dissemination of reports, improves access and coordination to basic services in the target sites.
According to the end-line survey report, 78% of household respondents were satisfied with the services.
Subsequently, 75% of respondents also rated the interventions of the multi-sectoral emergency project in addressing
camp coordination and camp management needs as having been effective. When asked to rate the project's
performance in advancing access to relevant information for informed decision-making, 75% of respondents rated
the project as effective. The baseline values for HCIMA indicators are provided under BHA ITT of Annex 1.

3.2.3. Shelter and Settlement

The sector's objective is to provide essential, secure, private, habitable, safe living spaces, and lifesaving NFIs are
provided to new and long-term displacement-affected communities to allow households to resume critical social
and livelihoods activities and reduce the severity and prevalence of protection-associated risks caused by lack of
shelter.

The previous BHA Award end-line report confirmed that most targeted vulnerable households in Fashoda/Kodok
and Malakal POC sites benefitted from cash assistance to meet their basic shelter needs. The cash interventions also
supported target communities in resuming critical social and livelihood activities. During the end-line evaluation,
shelter beneficiaries were asked a follow-up question on the state of their current shelter, of which 72% of
respondents mentioned currently living in the shelter which they considered as safe, clean, well-ventilated, and free
from adverse environmental hazards such as flooding, leaking and overheating.

When asked about their perception of the quality of shelter they lived in, 80% of shelter and settlement beneficiaries
considered the settlement interventions met or exceeded their expectations. This was the same as the LOA indicator
target the current Award as indicated in table below and required revising of LOA target. Findings from the HHs
survey captured 645 sampled HHs (70%) as having benefited from emergency NFIs, mainly the Long-lasting
insecticidal nets (LLINs) and blankets.

6
Key Outcome Indicators
The outcome indicators under the shelter and settlement sector were captured as follows:
Outcome indicators LOA Target Baseline Comments
value
Number and percent of households meeting emergency NFI 80% 0% This is for people affected by new
needs of identified settlement(s) through the use of displacement, including host community, IDP,
cash/vouchers returnees.
Number and percent of individuals reporting satisfaction with 80% 0% Same as above
the quality of the NFIs received
Percent individuals receiving shelter assistance out of the total 100% 0% Same as above
number of residents in identified settlement(s)
80% 80% Source: End-line survey report of previous BHA
Percent of settlement beneficiaries who believe settlement Award.
interventions met or exceeded expectations The original LOA target needs to be revised
from 80% to 85%
Amount and percent of the activity budget spent on goods and 80% 0%
services produced/procured in the country

3.2.4. Economic Recovery Sector:

The sector objective is to ensure that displacement-affected communities have an improved ability to undertake
income-generating activities, access financial services, and strengthen market systems, reducing the severity and
probability of protection risks.

a) Livelihood Restoration: The baseline study revealed that only 26.6% currently have some form of profit-making
livelihood activities; this represents the proportions of beneficiaries reporting net income from their livelihood,
while up to 73.4% do not have any active businesses.

Table 4: Are you currently engaged in any small business

Are you presently engaged in any small business? Host Community IDPs Returnees Total
No 15.6% 54.5% 3.2% 73.4%
Yes 13.6% 12.3% 0.6% 26.6%
Total 29.2% 66.9% 3.9% 100.0%

It was further investigated and found that of those who currently own small businesses, the majority are engaged in
fishing (36%), followed by vegetables and crop sales at 22%, hairdressing, and livestock production and sales, each
accounting for 12% of the respondents while tailoring only at 2%. Other small businesses mentioned in this study
include petty trade, brewing, etc., as shown below;

Fish processing and sale 36.6%

Vegetable and crop sales 22.0%

Other (specify) 14.6%

Livestock production and sales 12.2%

Hair dressing 12.2%

Tailoring 2.4%

0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0% 30.0% 35.0% 40.0%

Figure 2: Type of businesses that household respondents engaged in

7
The survey also revealed that the average total income of the households interviewed after deducting all business
operational expenses from this small business every month is 10,221.95 South Sudanese Pounds (SSP). The
household with the highest total income recorded 60,000 SSP per month.

Further, when asked how the status of their household income has been in the past 12 months, more than half of
the respondents (51.2%) were quick to respond that their income has decreased significantly, while only 11% of
them reported that their income increased and income for 37% of the respondents stayed the same, the survey
revealed.

Finally, up to 26.6% of the respondents reported that their estimated monthly family income is less than 5,000 SSP,
and 17.5% mentioned that it falls between 5001 and 10,000 SSP. Only a tiny portion (1.3%) of the respondent
reported that their estimated monthly income is more than 60,000 SSP, while a record 44.1% of the households
interviewed/respondents do not accrue any income per month; the result is even worse for the Internally Displaced
Persons (IDPs) who account for 32.5% of the respondents with no current total family income per month as indicated
table 5 below.

Table 5: Estimation of your current total family income per month

Can you give us an estimation of your current total family Host Community IDPs Returnees Total
income in SSP per month?
10,001 to 30,000 3.9% 4.5% 0.6% 9.1%
30,001 to 60,000 0.6% 0.6% 0.0% 1.3%
5,001 to 10,000 5.2% 11.7% 0.6% 17.5%
Less than 5,000 9.1% 16.9% 0.6% 26.6%
More than 60,000 0.6% 0.6% 0.0% 1.3%
None 9.7% 32.5% 1.9% 44.2%
Total 29.2% 66.9% 3.9% 100.0%

b) New Livelihoods Development: The respondents were also asked whether DRC South Sudan, with a previously
BHA-funded project, has provided them with any support to start a new livelihood activity in the past; an
overwhelming proportion (85.7%) of them reported that they did not receive any support to create new
livelihoods, this result is contrary to the respondents who agreed to have received support from DRC project
activities, only less than a quarter (14.3%). The major support received included cash/money transfers, in-kind
support, and NFIs. However, even of those who received this support, only 5.8% of them are still engaged in these
new livelihoods; the data from the surveys show meanwhile the rest are no longer engaged in any of these
livelihood activities.

Table 6:Has USAID provided any support to start a new livelihood

Has BHA provided you any support to start a recent Host IDPs Returnees Total
livelihood activity in the past Community
No 24.0% 57.8% 3.9% 85.7%

Yes 5.2% 9.1% 0.0% 14.3%

Total 29.2% 66.9% 3.9% 100.0%

Regarding the new livelihoods, it was observed that the main current primary livelihood—the one way the
households earn income or meet their basic needs and rely on most — includes food assistance (24%), gathering
natural products for sale, e.g., firewood (23.4%) and fishing (20.8%). Other primary livelihoods also mentioned in
this study included own businesses and remittances with 6.5% and casual labor (3.2%), among others, as seen in the
table below.

8
Table 7:Current primary livelihoods for the households
Current primary livelihoods —the one way you earn Host Community IDPs Returnees Total
income or meet basic needs which you rely on most?
Beer Brewing 0.6% 0.6% 0.0% 1.3%

Cash crop production 0.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.6%

Casual labor 1.3% 1.9% 0.0% 3.2%

Fishing 4.5% 15.6% 0.6% 20.8%

Food assistance 5.2% 18.2% 0.6% 24.0%

Food crop production/sells 2.6% 3.2% 1.3% 7.1%

Gathering natural products to sell 4.5% 18.8% 0.0% 23.4%

Livestock production/sells 0.6% 0.6% 0.0% 1.3%

Other (specify) 0.0% 0.6% 0.0% 0.6%

Own business 3.9% 1.9% 0.6% 6.5%

Petty trade .6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.6%

Remittance 3.2% 2.6% 0.6% 6.5%

Skilled trade/artisan .6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.6%

Small-scale mining/ mineral sells .6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.6%

Vegetable production/sells 0.0% 2.6% 0.0% 2.6%

Total 29.2% 66.9% 3.9% 100.0%

c) Financial Services: When asked whether they had access to credit or borrowing, only 24% of the respondents
admitted that they had access. In comparison, the vast majority (76%) didn’t have access to these credit services.
7.8% of the households interviewed reported that they are engaged in savings and lending schemes (such as
VSLA) supported by BHA and regularly meet, and 92.2% of their counterparts are not presently involved in any
saving schemes.

Table 8: Is your household engaged in any savings or lending schemes

Is your household engaged in any savings and lending Host Community IDPs Returnees Total
schemes (such as VSLA) supported by BHA?

No 26.6% 62.3% 3.2% 92.2%

Yes 2.6% 4.5% 0.6% 7.8%
Total 29.2% 66.9% 3.9% 100.0%

Key Outcome Indicators

Table 9: The outcome indicators under the economic recovery sector were captured as follows:
Outcome indicators LOA Target Baseline Comments
value
Percent of beneficiaries reporting net income from their 75% 26.6% The direction of change: +
livelihood
Percent of beneficiaries actively practicing their 90% 5.8% The baseline values are not zero, as some
beneficiaries previously benefited from
new livelihoods BHA/CARB interventions in Unity State's
Percent of financial service accounts/groups 65% 7.8% Rubkona and Guit counties.
supported by BHA that are functioning properly

9
4. Programmatic Implications
Based on the previous BHA Award Final report, the total beneficiaries reached by Multi-Sector Emergency Response
South Sudan project were 231,527 (187,756 IDPs). However, the current project Life of Award (LOA) Target in the
BHA ITT is 212,691 individuals (185,693 IDPs), which is lower than the baseline value particularly for protection and
shelter/settlement sectors). Thus, it needs revising total number of people targeted (individuals) for the current
Award including target for protection and shelter/settlement target.

The baseline study findings revealed that the baseline value for one of the shelter sector outcome indicators is the
same as that of the Life of Award (LOA) target in the BHA ITT. This indicator is the "percent of settlement beneficiaries
who believe settlement interventions met or exceeded expectations." This requires revising the original LOA target
upward from 80% to 85%.

The BHA Emergency Application Guideline-Indicator Handbook indicated zero baseline values for the three outcome
indicators under economic recovery sectors. However, the baseline values are not zero, as some targeted locations
and beneficiaries previously benefited from BHA/CARB interventions in the Rubkona and Guit counties of Unity state,
as shown in Table 9 above.

5. Conclusions and Recommendations

▪ The baseline study indicated that IPA beneficiaries of the previous BHA Award had used cash support to establish
income-generating activities, including the bread-baking business in Kodok County of Upper Nile state. It is good
to replicate these practices in other target locations to benefit more beneficiaries for the ongoing BHA Award.
▪ 77% of respondents mentioned that reporting of GBV cases and other child protection issues has improved in
the past 12 months. The project will focus on supporting new GBV survivors in the target locations and provide
GBV case management services to strengthen an increased number of beneficiaries’ well-being and dignity.
▪ The baseline study revealed that proper information dissemination to the target communities on settlement
sites, including wide dissemination of reports, improves access and coordination to essential services in the
target sites. DRC needs to assess and strengthen the existing information dissemination to effectively benefit
the target groups in the target locations.
▪ 80% of shelter and settlement beneficiaries considered the settlement interventions met or exceeded their
expectations. This was the same as the LOA indicator target of 80% and required revising the target upward to
85% in BHA ITT.
▪ The project should advocate for more funding to help increase targeting and the beneficiary’s enrolment in
more sustainable economic recovery and resilience programs. This funding will be instrumental in empowering
the local communities through cash-for-business programs to help communities engage in constructive
profitable livelihood activities and produce their food; the survey revealed that only a fraction of the
communities practice livelihoods.
▪ Empowering girls and women through capacity-building support (business skills training) and investment grant
support is necessary to enhance sustainable livelihood restoration.
▪ More savings schemes needed to be introduced to the people in the targeted locations. The result showed that
only 7.8% of the households interviewed reported engaging in savings and lending schemes (such as VSLA).
▪ Targeting and promoting active engagement of women in leadership structure and capacity-building activities
at the camp/site level increases participation and provides them with an opportunity in community decision-
making processes.
▪ Most of the project targeted households in this Award are people affected by new displacement, including host
communities, IDPs, and returnees due to inter-communal violence, flooding, and Sudan influx.
▪ Based on the previous BHA Award (September 2021 to April 2023) report, the total beneficiaries reached by
Multi-Sector Emergency Response South Sudan project were 231,527 (187,756 IDPs). However, the current
project Life of Award (LOA) Target in the BHA ITT was 212,691 individuals (185,693 IDPs), which is lower than
the baseline value particularly for protection and shelter/settlement sectors). Thus, there is need for revision of
total number of people targeted (individuals) for the current Award including target for protection and
shelter/settlement target.

10
 6. Required Annexes
Annex 1: Indicator Tracking Table

BHA Indicator
Tracking Table_with baseline values 30.07.2023.xls

Annex2: Indicator Estimates Table

Indicator Level of Baseline Confidence Endline (EL) Confidence # of sample In EL, a test
reporting indicator Interval at 95% Indicator Interval at 95% units of
value level of value level of interviewed difference
Significance Significance
% of women who report increased well-being after receiving GBV Overall 0% N/A N/A N/A 0 N/A
case management services (Custom Outcome). Target 60%
% of beneficiaries who report IPA helped them address their Overall and 0% N/A N/A N/A 0 N/A
protection concern (Custom Outcome). Target 70% disaggregates
Number and percent of households meeting emergency NFI needs Overall and 0% N/A N/A N/A 0 N/A
of identified settlement(s) through cash/vouchers. Target 80% disaggregates
Number and percent of individuals reporting satisfaction with the Overall and 0% N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
quality of the NFIs received. Target 80% disaggregates
Percent individuals receiving shelter assistance out of the total Overall and 0% N/A N/A N/A 0 N/A
number of residents in identified settlement(s). Target 100% disaggregates
Percent of settlement beneficiaries who believe settlement Overall and 739 ± 5% N/A N/A 924 N/A
interventions met or exceeded expectations. Target 85% disaggregates (80%)
Amount and percent of the activity budget spent on goods and Overall 0% N/A N/A N/A 0 N/A
services produced/procured in the country. Target 80%
Percent of beneficiaries reporting net income from their livelihood Overall and 41 ± 5% N/A N/A 154 N/A
Target 75% disaggregates (26.6%)
Percent of beneficiaries actively practicing their new livelihoods Overall and 10 ± 5% N/A N/A 154 N/A
Target 90% disaggregates (5.8%)
Percent of financial service accounts/groups supported by BHA Overall and 12 ± 5% N/A N/A 154 N/A
functioning properly. Target 65% disaggregates (7.8%)

11