Number/percentage of targeted households reduce their [damaging] coping strategies compared with <pre disaster level, or baseline level, last year -same period-, normal year>

Code: 

KRI-1-3

Result level: 

Outcome

Objective: 

Disaggregated by: 

Geography/Livelihoods zone;
Head of household gender, age, disabilities, chronic diseases, dependency ratio, and any other relevant criteria, such as urban/rural, religious, ethnic or political identities;
Wealth groups; Livelihoods group (e.g. pastoralist, farmers, traders)
Period to achieve the objective;

Direction of change: 

decrease; Decrease must be relevant.

Data source: 

Both secondary and primary data collection can be used according to context.
- Baseline/Endline. If multiyear programme consider also a mid-term evaluation.
In onset emergency, (if possible) frequency should be higher (on weekly, monthly basis) to ensure appropriateness of assistance.
- Secondary data. Reliable/relevant sources from other actors, clusters or government (e.g. assessment information, reference to a normal situation).

Unit of Measurement: Household.
If percentage:
- Numerator: Number of households that have reduced their coping strategies
- Denominator: Total number of targeted households

Data Collection methods:
Secondary data analysis;
Household surveys;
Focus Group Discussions; Key Informant Interviews.

Measurement Guidance: 

Change in Coping Strategies can be measured by the Coping Strategy Index, the Household Hunger Scale or similar hunger experience indicator.
Coping Strategy measures are context dependent.

CSI (Coping Strategy Index) comprises a series of questions about how households manage to cope with a shortfall in food, that looks at both the frequency of a coping behavior (how often is the strategy used) and severity (what degree of food insecurity do they suggest). Can be used for targeting and monitoring.

To use this indicator (due the fact that coping strategies can be measure using multiple components), it's important to define (and rank) the list coping strategies that we are going to measure over the project at the beginning of the project -assessment-, based on targeted group and context, and including relevant coping strategies related to livelihoods protection (e.g. sale of productive assets, migration, consumption of seed stock)

Measure:
> Number of coping strategies used relative to baseline
> Frequency of use of coping strategies
Decrease/reduction threshold must be defined in advance using baseline and secondary information.

- Standard CSI for food security and livelihood is preferred.
- Ranking can support assessing change and importance of coping strategy pattern.
- Expanded context-adapted CSI for livelihoods can be developed if time and means allow. Note that comparison across livelihood zones might be compromised.
- Needs to consider potential changes in seasonal coping and explanation of the same, e.g. normality vs abnormality.

Watch Out For!
- Coping strategies may vary between cultural contexts and should be verified and adapted where necessary.
- Coping strategies vary in terms of severity. Accordingly, the use of coping strategies over a long period will have a different effect on a household's ability to recover.

For more details on methodology:
Coping Strategies Index Field Methods Manual:
http://www.seachangecop.org/sites/default/files/documents/2008%2001%20TA...
Household Hunger Scale:
http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/user_upload/wa_workshop/docs/HH_Hunger_Scal...

Sector: 

Source: 

Examples: 

At the end of the program X% of targeted households (from those Y% are women-headed) in the agro-pastoralist area of Award reduce their coping strategies compared with baseline.

Tags: