...
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
...