...
| Field Example: When using multidimensional data, use the Max value to avoid double counting | |
|---|---|
| For example, if the total population in a given district is 15,000 and there are 15,000 people in need of food assistance, 10,000 in need of WASH and 5,000 in need of NFI, it is obvious that the total number of people in need (15,000+10,000+5,000=30,000) would be greater than the actual population (See figure 13: “actual” number of people with humanitarian needs corresponds to the areas delimited by the red lines.) Given that people with needs in food security may also have needs in WASH and nutrition, an overlap of figures is extremely likely. However, the strength of correlations between needs would have to be known at the individual level in order to count populations with distinct sectoral needs, so it is difficult to ascertain exact figures without a household level representative survey. |
|
Rule #3: When using the Max value, always use the lowest level of detail in the available hierarchies
| Field Example | |
|---|---|
The Syria Multi-Sectoral Needs Assessment (MSNA) Technical Working Group chose to use the maximum people in need estimates across all sectors, at the lowest administrative level where data was available (subdistrict) and then to sum across all sub-districts to get the total number of PIN. While inter-sector overlap is not known, it is assumed that, derived at a low geographical level, the maximum PIN across sectors is still lower than the actual combined people in need figure. While the combined figure for Sub-District 1 would be 30,000 people in need and would most certainly reflect overlap, the sectoral maximum is 15,000. Therefore the definition of people in need chosen by the Technical Working Group was “people with humanitarian needs in at least one sector”. Strengths The strength of this method lies in the disambiguation effect that it favors: aggregating number of PIN across mutually exclusive categories at the lowest unit of measurement possible, and eliminating the risk of duplication. Limitations The limitations of this approach include its highly conservative mindset and the unknown number of people left over. The method is also not easy to understand without the full dataset and without a technical walkthrough for the audience. For a detailed explanation of the pro and cons of this approach. |
|
Rule #4: A sector PIN cannot be higher than the total crisis PIN, OR, avoid using top down and bottom up methodologies for the same crisis
It is important to ensure consistency throughout data, i.e., the number of people in need in one sector cannot be higher than the total number of people in need. Each upper category will be higher than the lower categories, i.e., the number of People in Need cannot exceed the number of People Affected. Remember to prioritize and analyze: not all affected people are in need of humanitarian assistance, and some will be in more urgent need than others.
Rule #5: Document how PIN estimates were produced (dimensions, attributes, definitions, etc.)
Explain your methods no matter how crude or sophisticated. Consumers of the figures need to know and potentially repeat the method and get the same result. In explaining your methods also note the limitations and uncertainties and where figures have been approximated.
Outputs/Resources
...
Text should include: Essential Reading, Additional Readings, Templates. Examples, Tutorials
...