Cpra English en
Cpra English en
Cpra English en
This indicates an
example from the field
2
Introduction
The Child Protection Working Group (CPWG) is the global level forum for coordination on child protection in
humanitarian settings. The group brings together NGOs, UN agencies, academics and others under the shared
objective of ensuring more predictable, accountable and effective child protection responses in emergencies. In
the humanitarian system, we constitute ‘an area of responsibility’ within the Global Protection Cluster.
All the organizations within the CPWG are committed to providing and supporting effective, well-coordinated child
protection responses, based on a robust and timely assessment of needs and capacities. We want to encourage
the use of consistent assessment processes across the child protection sector, based on coherent methods and
a systematic approach to data collection.
The CPWG members have therefore collaborated in developing the Child Protection Rapid Assessment
Toolkit. It has been piloted in over 20 emergency-affected contexts and incorporates changes based on extensive
field-testing.
Where agencies use the same assessment tool, the resources required are minimized, more ground can be
covered, data is comparable across locations and time, and the results are more persuasive to planners, funders
and other decision-makers. For these reasons, each CPWG member agency has committed to using the Child
Protection Rapid Assessment Toolkit rather than agency-specific assessment tools for child protection,
wherever possible.
Acknowledgements
Significant time, resources and technical support have been dedicated to writing this toolkit. The following organizations
provided the necessary institutional and financial support needed to make this work possible: ACAPS, Child Fund
International, Columbia University, Plan International, Save the Children, World Vision International, UNHCR, UNICEF,
Gender Standby Capacity (GenCap), War Child and the Child Protection Working Group. The following individuals
had a significant role in the formation and finalization of this tool: Alastair Ager, Catherine Barnett, Wayne Bleier, Neil
Boothby, Patrice Chataigner, Sophie De Coninck, Ayda Eke, Hanna-Tina Fischer, Shelley Gornall, Jennifer Keane, Hani
Mansourian, Heather Macleod, Amanda Melville, Minja Peuschel, Sabine Rakotomalala, Janis Ridsdel, Monika Sandvik-
Nylund, Lindsay Stark, and Katharine Williamson.
Part 1: a guide to CPRA provides an action plan with 6 key phases, giving guidance for tasks in each phase.
Part 2: sample tools provides five key tools for CPRA.
Part 3: data management tool provides a sample database, featuring on the spot, basic analysis of the data.
4
• Follow the steps as set out
• M ake sure that you have information management (IM) support in place throughout the process
• If you are doing an inter-agency CPRA, you can request for technical briefing from the global CPWG.
(Please note that technical support is only available for inter-agency assessments.)
• P lease send reports and any feedback to cpwg.net, the CPWG assessment focal point,
or to the CPWG Coordinator at [email protected]
Assessments in emergencies
Following any emergency of significant scale, a child protection assessment will usually be conducted in the
context of coordinated assessments organized through the humanitarian cluster system. The IASC Needs
Assessment Task Force suggests a framework that identifies three phases in the emergency assessment
processes – these are generally applicable to all emergencies, whether large- or smaller-scale.i These are:
Phase I – Preliminary scenario definition. This phase should happen within 72 hours of the onset of the
emergency and does not include sector-specific questions. This phase is normally led by OCHA;ii
Phase II – Multi-Cluster/Sector joint assessment. This phase should take place within the first two weeks of the
onset and looks into top priority sector issues. This phase is also often led by OCHA;iii
Phase III – Cluster/Sector-specific assessments. This phase addresses more detailed and in-depth sector-
specific questions and takes place during the third and fourth week following the onset of an emergency. This
phase is normally led by cluster lead agencies, such as UNHCR and UNICEF.
It can also act as a stepping-stone for a more comprehensive process of assessing the impacts of the
emergency on children, as well as situation monitoring. This rapid assessment should not be confused with nor
take the place of more comprehensive assessments or a surveillance system.
Objectives of a CPRA
A CPRA provides a basis for defining child protection needs and existing support mechanisms in the immediate
aftermath of a rapid-onset emergency. The objectives of a CPRA are to determine:
> c reating an evidence-base for advocacy with stakeholders (armed groups, government etc.)
> providing some knowledge of where the main information gaps are.
The CPRA Toolkit can be used to add a child protection component to other coordinated multi-sectorial rapid
assessment. It can also be the basis for a multi-sectorial rapid assessment with other sectors adding their
respective questions. However, CPRA is best suited for a stand-alone process in the absence of any other
humanitarian assessments.
The short timeframe of the CPRA ensures that priority sector-specific information is available rapidly to inform
preliminary response. Following this rapid assessment phase, a more comprehensive and in-depth child
protection assessment may be necessary. The existing Inter-Agency Child Protection Assessment Resource kit
is the primary resource for a more comprehensive child protection assessment processv.
6
Part
CPRA Toolkit A guide to CPRA
Suggested timeline
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Form assessment coordination body
Agree on roles and responsibilities
Agree on lead agency
8
Suggested timeline
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Sensitive information
It is your responsibility to ensure the confidentiality of the information you have been entrusted with.
Confidentially means “the restrictive management of sensitive information (e.g. names, incidents, locations,
details, etc.) that has been collected before, during and after child protection assessments.”
Sensitive information must be protected and shared only with those people (service providers, family, etc.) who
need the information for the best interest of the child. Shared information should be stripped of any details of the
source, unless required to ensure appropriate action (with written consent from the source). For more on data
confidentiality, please see Standard 5 of ‘Minimum Standards for Child Protection in Humanitarian Responsevii.’
Informed consent is an integral part of any assessment activity that involves direct acquisition of information
from people regardless of their age. Informed consent is “the voluntary agreement of an individual who has the
capacity to give consent, and who exercises free power of choiceviii.”
Tool 2: Key informant interview (in Part 2) includes an example of an oral informed consent. Please note if you
intend to use a key informant’s name in your reports, a written consent is necessary. Based on the context and
background, the assessment team may decide that written consent is necessary for all KIIs irrespective of the
use of name. In such cases, special written consent forms should be included in all KI questionnaires.
10
Responding to urgent situations
An ethical approach to assessment also requires a commitment to respond to urgent situations. This means
responding appropriately when a child’s life and/or wellbeing is in immediate danger. For more details on this,
please refer to the ‘define urgent action’ section on page 18 of this guide.
Sensitive questions
Sensitive questions, (such as the ones flagged ( ) in Tool 2: Key informant interview), should only be asked
by well-trained interviewers. If assessors do not have a strong background or adequate training in CP, these
questions should not be asked. It is important to speak with local people or those with an in-depth knowledge
of the protection situation in the country or context so that:
• y ou know whether and to what degree flagged issues may be sensitive or politicized
• you can decide whether these issues should be included, based on the known capacity of the assessors
• you can adapt the tools to ensure that appropriate terminology and language is used in assessing these
sensitive issues.
A CPRATF provides a mechanism for sharing resources. It strengthens the quality and legitimacy of the CPRA,
because there is wider ownership of the process and results. While involving governments is not always
possible, it is highly recommended when and where possible. Involvement of the protection cluster lead is also
highly desirable.
12
Part 1 – Step 1
Financial and human resources together with logistical needs are often a determining
factor in the scope of the assessment. Coming up with a rough calculation of
resource needs earlier in the process will ensure more realistic planning and smoother
implementation.
See Part 1 - Assessments in emergencies for a brief overview of the stages of the multi-sectorial
assessment process.
In March 2012, Burkina Faso faced an influx of refugees from Mali. The child protection
coordination group decided that a rapid assessment was necessary to determine
the protection needs of refugee children. However, the available financial and human
resources would not cover the needs of a full blown assessment in all affected areas.
To solve this, all participating agencies agreed to contribute at least one vehicle and
one dedicated staff member for the data collection period. This made the assessment
possible despite limited funds.
Deciding on context-specific WWNK is the foundation of any CPRA. The list of WWNKs below was
developed in a broad consultation with global and field level CPWG members. Use this list to agree a context-
specific WWNK with your CPRATF.
d) Sexual violence
11. Specific risks of sexual violence for girls and boys
12. How different forms of sexual violence are viewed by families (including youth/children), community leaders
and government counterparts, and how this is normally dealt with.
13. Availability and accessibility of essential sexual violence response services for children (especially health and
psychosocial services)
14 Common harmful practices (domestic and/or societal).
14
Part 1 – Step 2
h) Child labour
21. Existing patterns and scale of the worst forms of child labour
22. Likely increase in children’s exposure to worst forms of child labour as a result of the emergency
23. Likely new worst forms of child labour that could emerge as a result of the emergency
As a first step, find out if a desk review has already been done that can simply be updated for your purposes.
If not, plan to do it before the various assessment tools are finalized, as it will help you formulate questions and
answer options.
A DR usually includes pre- and post-onset data (i.e. from before and after the crisis/emergency). Here are
some secondary sources that you could use: Previous assessment reports; Child protection systems mapping;
Final reports or evaluation reports of major CP projects; Demographics and Health Survey; UNICEF MICS;
Report and Alternative Report to the Committee on the RC; Save the Children Child Rights Situation Analysis;
US Dept. State TIP Report; SRSG CAAC Report on Children and Armed Conflict.
A step-by-step guide to generating a desk review has been developed by the CPWG. This guide can be found
on the assessment page of the CPWG website (http://cpwg.net/assessment/).
If you need help in conducting desk review, contact the CPWG for support.
Do not sacrifice quality for quantity. When resources are scarce, do less, but do it well.
Sometimes visiting fewer sites using systematic sampling will produce more accurate
results than visiting more sites that are not systematically selected.
Sampling methodology
Sampling is needed because usually you cannot access every single person to ask them questions about the
emergency that has affected them. It would be physically impossible and too costly and time consuming. If, for
example, you want to find out how people have been affected by a flood somewhere, you need to choose a
sample of that population.
Sampling simplifies our work. However it does have some limitations. Any analysis of an emergency based
on information collected from a sample of the population will inevitably have inaccuracies. It will provide an
estimate of the reality. The level of accuracy relates to the type of sampling used and the sample size.
Purposive sampling is often used in post emergency settings. It is well suited to situations where there are
time and resource pressures. In this method units of measurement are purposefully selected, based on a set of
defined criteria (more on this below). It gives a measure and sense of the scale and priorities that is approximate
enough to enable initial rapid prioritization and planning. It can also provide preliminary insight into how the
emergency has impacted differently on the different categories of affected groups chosen for the sample.
A unit of measurement is the level at which something is measured, e.g. an individual, a class, a school, a
country, etc. For the purposes of a CPRA, the unit of measurement is at a community (rather than individual or
household) level. For simplicity, each unit of measurement under CPRA is called a ‘site.’
A site should be a distinct community with a formal, legal, customary, geographical or other pragmatic
boundary allowing an estimate of its population. The exact definition of what constitutes a site needs to be
determined by the CPRATF for each and every scenario. This will depend on the geographical spread of the
emergency, populations affected, results of the previous assessments (if any), and available resources. The main
parameters of selecting a site are as follows:
> In a non-camp setting, the smallest administrative unit (such as a village or a population grouping) can be
taken as a distinct site.
> In camp settings, each camp can be taken as a site.
> If populations with distinct characteristics (such as language, ethnicity, place of origin, status, etc.) live
together in one site, and you believe that these characteristics are likely to have an impact on how each
group is affected by the emergency, these locations should be divided into multiple sites along the lines of
those distinct characteristics regardless of their sizexiii.
16
Part 1 – Step 2
displaced populations; IDPs within a host community versus on their own; mountainous versus coastal areas,
ethnic or tribal differences or anything else that may be a reason for difference in the state of needs and
capacities of the population.
Imagine a situation where a cyclone has affected two regions in country X. You know that:
Æ Based on this information, we can define four distinct scenarios: X1A, X1B, X2A, and X2B.
The sample frame below summarizes the information about the example of the cyclone-affected regions from
step 1:
Displaced pop. (X1A) Non-displaced (X1B) Ethnic group A (X2A) Ethnic group B (X2B)
Site 1 x
Site 2 x
Site 3 x
Site 4 x
.
:
Site 96 x
Total 18 25 34 19
An appropriate coding system should be developed to identify each of the locations. For example if the site
is mountainous and holds a group of displaced population, you can use the first words of mountainous and
displaced and a number to form the code: e.g. MD01, MD02, MD03, etc. Alternatively the coding can be
based on the official district and zone delineation that the government uses.
If only one scenario is being considered in a given context, then a minimum of 30 sites is recommended as
the sample grid. If the number of sites in each scenario is smaller or equal to the recommended minimum, all
accessible sites may be visitedxv.
Æ In the example used above, our sample grid will include at least 15 sites in each of the four sub-regions. This
means that we will be visiting 60 sites.
1. Criteria for what constitutes an urgent action case. This must be determined by CPWG actors based
on the local context, but could include issues such as unaccompanied children living on the street;
active recruitment or abduction of children, ongoing sexual violence, etc.
2. A clear referral pathway/standard operating procedure
3. Roles and responsibilities.
An effective urgent action procedure will look like a developed referral pathway that can
be easily followed by assessment teams in the field.
In practice, KIs are often selected by assessment teams upon arrival at a site. But if you have time, contact key
resources with knowledge of the population and the context in question (not just people in authority) during the
planning phase. This will help you define the best possible criteria for the selection of KIs. In choosing the key
informants, consider whether:
> T hey have significant knowledge of the situation of the population of interest
> They will be able to understand the questions
> Their personal experience is representative of the community. (If not, consider whether this will affect
their answers. For example, having a higher level of education than other community members may not
meaningfully affect answers regarding their experience or the impact of the disaster, but being a member
of a dominant group might.)
> They have an ‘agenda’ that shapes their answers. While everyone has a personal agenda, biases should
be taken into consideration in the selection and analysis.
18
Part 1 – Step 2
The number of key informants to be interviewed in each site is dependent on the number of sites in your
sample, your resources and time, and the homogeneity of each site . A minimum of 3 key informants
interviews are recommended for each sitexvi. In a site that is exceptionally large (e.g. larger than 3000),
additional KIs should be identified and interviewed.
> A
t least two of the KIs work directly with children in some capacity on a day-to-day basis, e.g. teacher,
community caregiver, etc.
> A
t least one of the KIs should hold some overall responsibility for the population, e.g. a local chief, camp
manager, religious leader, etc.
> T
here are a balanced number of women and men.
Representation of men and women is very important. Women sometimes are aware of certain realities in the
community that men are not and vice versa. For example, men, especially if they hold positions of leadership,
might be in a better position to provide information on the demographics and security situation of the area.
Women’s particular contribution in humanitarian crisis in caring for children (among other groups) makes them
especially knowledgeable on existing risks, needs and capacities.
It is recommended that you conduct interviews individually with each KI. Individual interviews are easier to
handle and may introduce less bias, as peer pressure and/or fear of disagreement with other members of the
community are less of an issue. This is particularly relevant for interviews conducted with female KIs. Women
may be less used to speaking and expressing their views in public. If you face time and resource constraints
(or other considerations), you can arrange to interview a group of key informants. Find a venue with sufficient
privacy for interviews, being careful to be culturally appropriate. In most contexts, it is advisable if a female
assessor interviews a female KI.
KI interview records (grouped together for each site) should be compiled into one report, together with direct
observation data. There should therefore be one report per site ready for the next stage - data analysis.
Adapting the tools to make them appropriate to the context where you are conducting a CPRA is vital. Consider
such issues as the type and scale of emergency; language diversity; ethnicity; tribal and religious affiliations; pre-
existing child protection concerns; access and security limitations; WWNKS; local capacity etc. This process
will ensure that the questions asked suit the specific emergency context you are working in. It will also ensure
that the questions asked are understandable (and translated as required), culturally appropriate and gender
sensitive.
In the process of adapting the toolkit, try to maintain the general structure and content. Too much change, for
example in the data management tool, may render it not fit for purpose. This would then add to the burden of
data management and analysis.
Tools should ideally be translated by assessors and team leaders after they are trained. This process ensures
a deeper understanding of the questions and the intentions behind them. Some local languages do not
have a developed written tradition. In such cases, you may want to run ‘an oral translation session’ with the
assessment team to agree on best translation for all key terms. Where local teams are unable to translate
the tools, a professional translator should be recruited. This is best done before the training so that the
nuances of the questions in the local language can then be discussed and refined with the assessment team.
Key terminologies should be discussed and agreed upon in the group prior to translation and data collection.
If the CPRA is going to be conducted in multiple locations in the same country or region, but dealing with the
same population and/or protection issues, it is best to use the same methodology and tools. This makes it
possible to have a broader view.
Please note that the CPRA Toolkit bases rapid assessment on three key methods – desk review, key
informant interviewing and direct observation. It does not include focus group discussions or interviews
with children. Focus group discussions (FGDs) are recognized as an effective qualitative methodology, but
they are generally not encouraged in this phase. Regarding children, in most cases it is unlikely that trained
staff is available to conduct such highly sensitive interviews. While children’s participation can contribute to a
better understanding of the situation of children in a post emergency context, inexperienced assessors may
unintentionally put children in harm’s way.
20
Part 1 – Step 3
FGDs require a high level of expertise plus significant amounts of time for analysis of
the information they produce. If experienced staff is available, FGDs may be used as a
complementary source of data. But it is crucial that staff strictly follow guidance on this
methodologyxvii.
Direct interviews with children are discouraged for a CPRA, unless highly skilled
assessors are available. If assessors experienced in dealing responsibly with children are
available, adolescents of 15 to 17 years of age of age could be interviewed as key
informants. For younger children, other methodologies might be more appropriatexviii.
> Y
ou may want to limit possible answers to a question by setting a time period. For example, question 1.3
in Tool 2: Key Informant Interview (sample questions) asks the country team to define ‘a limited recall
period.’ Narrowing the question down like this can help respondents provide a more accurate response.
This can help in making analysis more meaningful.
> E
ven if the tools have been adapted to a specific context during the preparedness phase, they should
always be reviewed before being used to make sure they are appropriate. We suggest at a minimum
doing a short simulation of the tools with CPWG members familiar with the local context.
> C
hanges to the tools are discouraged, once teams are deployed. If changes really are necessary, they
should be kept to an absolute minimum. Where they are needed, they should be communicated to
all teams through a centralized coordination mechanism. (But be aware changes may render the
information gathered unusable. Often when communication is poor, the capacity of teams to understand
and implement the change(s) is compromised. It is likely that changes will be inappropriately or unevenly
applied.)
Ideally Tool 2: Key informant interview (sample questions) has been adapted as a preparedness measure
before an emergency. Adapting it has three purposes:
1. so that the questions are relevant to the specific emergency context.
2. so that the questions are understandable (translated as required, culturally appropriate and
gender sensitive).
3. so that best answer options for multiple-choice questions and best categories for
coded-category questions can be worked out.
Multiple-choice questions: For these questions you need to create an initial list of choices, field-test the tool and
refine and limit the options based on a sound knowledge of the context.
Coded-category questions: For these questions you need to create categories of possible answers and allow
the assessor or the team leader to decide which category the answers belong to. (More information on the
coded-category approach is provided below.)
Multiple-choice questions are more appropriate in situations where you more or less know all possible answers
that might be given by a key informant. Coded-category questions, on the other hand, are best when there are
either too many possible answer options or it is hard to anticipate the precise answers you might receive to a
given question.
If you have limited knowledge of the local context or field-testing of the tool has not been
possible, make sure that even for close-ended multiple-choice questions, you record all
‘other’ options offered by the respondents.
Using coded-category answers, you limit the possible answers to an open-ended question. This makes data
management and analysis easier. While these kinds of questions are slightly more complicated because they
require a certain level of immediate analysis on the part of the interviewer (i.e. when s/he decides how the
answer should be categorized), they are more respectful of the respondent’s opinion.
If you are using coded-category questions, try to keep your categories somewhat general. There may be many
possible answers, but the idea behind a coded-category question is to limit such options to broader, mutually
exclusive categories.
22
Part 1 – Step 3
> W e may have very little idea of what the ‘real’ answer(s) could be.
> W e may eliminate the possibility of discovering critical information or may affect answers by ‘leading’.
Not allowing respondents freedom in their answers may also be perceived as disrespectful and/or less
empowering to those participating in the assessment.
> Including too many answer options with the hope that the ‘real’ answer will be captured can also lead to
confusion and inaccuracy in recording and interpreting the response.
Direct observation is done systematically for the CPRA, and is carried out by trained assessors. It is particularly
useful in knowing about behavioural patterns within a population, the hazards on a site, the physical conditions
of facilities etc. Its main purpose in a CPRA is to validate the data collected in each site through triangulationxix.
DO results are compiled together with the KIIs for analysis.
In adapting this tool, aim at capturing those types of questions that are hard to ask or are too sensitive to
ask. For example, if you believe that child labour is a concern in this community, but the community does not
recognize it or for cultural reasons does not acknowledge it, you may want to include detailed questions about
child labour in the DO rather than in the KI interview. Be careful, however, not to include topics and issues that
are not easily observable, such as domestic abuse, child-headed households, sexual violence, etc in the DO
checklist.
Tool 3: Direct observation (sample prompts) includes two methods of observation – structured and
unstructured.
• In structured observation, the observer is looking for a specific thing, such as a particular behaviour, an
object or an event. Assessors usually use a checklist for this type of observation as a prompt and as a
recording tool.
• In unstructured observation, the observer is looking at how things are done and what things exist.
Assessors usually use a set of open-ended questions to guide this type of observation.
You should aim to produce a single report that reflects all the data collected in each site. This report includes
information from the KIIs, DO and informal observation of team members. It triangulates the data and
summarizes findings for subsequent analysis. The process for doing this is explained in Tool 5.
The site report should match the areas you cover in your KIIs and your DO tool. You will need to look at the
sample headings and questions and select the ones (or add others) that match your CPRA.
The site report is an integral part of the CPRA tool. The methodology will be incomplete if
this component is left out.
Urgent action reports are used when an individual case comes to the attention of the assessor. The CPRATF
is responsible for defining the criteria for urgent action and establishing a well-defined procedure for referral
services. Cases are not to be actively sought during the assessment (though may be sought through separate
response activities). For more details, see the section on urgent action procedure on page 11.
The data management tool is an Excel database which facilitates the management of data collected from the
field. It has 4 sections:
A short guide provides an introduction explaining how it can be adapted and used.
Sheet 1: Data entry provides an easy-to-use template that matches the KII tool and DO tool. All answers are
coded in the form of a drop down menu which facilitates data entry.
Sheet 2: Analysis provides basic analysis of the data entered into sheet 1 (data entry) in tables.
Sheet 3: Graphs provides a visual version of the analysis shown in sheet 2 (analysis) in graphs.
The data management tool needs to be adapted based on the changes made to the tools in Part 2 of the
toolkit. The data management tool will therefore be the last in the process of adaptation.
With IM technical support, this database can be used to do more advanced data analysis
than described here.
24
Step
4 Recruiting and training
assessment teams (weeks 2-3)
Step 4
You are likely to be faced with difficult choices in selecting assessors because of the particular constraints
in a post-emergency context. These constraints may be about technical issues, such as knowledge of child
protection; security concerns; ethnicity and religion; and logistical issues, such as distance to travel and
language. CPWG members are encouraged to keep a roster of screened candidates during the preparedness
process to try to offset these difficulties.
Everything else, such as knowledge of protection and child protection issues, contextual knowledge, sensitivity,
etc. is a plus. If assessors don’t have this kind of knowledge and experience, you can arrange additional training
to cover these areas.
Team leaders, however, are required to have prior child protection and assessment experience. They
coordinate the activities of the assessors in the field and give them technical and logistical support. They also
conduct assessment interviews themselves.
They are also responsible for making a data collection plan to monitor the progression of data collection
activities. The plan is a simple list of when and what data collection activities will take place in each site and
by whom. This plan is crucial to ensuring efficient use of time and resources. The team leader will also be
responsible for conducting debriefing sessions with their assessment teams at the end of each working day.
Daily debriefing sessions are one of the most important responsibilities of a team leader
and are at the core of an efficient data management process. It is during these sessions
that site reports are compiled.
Team leaders may find on-site supervisory observation of interviews useful. These could be random for monitoring
purposes or targeted to support struggling assessors. Clear and honest feedback should be given to assessors
on both positive and negative performancexx. Frequent check-ins throughout the day (by cellular phone, radio, or
other technology) to monitor the whereabouts and safety of team members should also be carried out. It may be
necessary to debrief individual assessors after particularly sad or difficult interviews or site visits.
Sex, age, ethnicity, religion, other socio-cultural identity or affiliations could have a direct
impact on the information received from key informants. Try to balance teams in all these
aspects as best as possible.
> E ach team should include at least one team leader who will be the lead in the field.
> T he number of assessors in each field team depends on: the number of assessors available; number
of team leaders available; and number, location and size of sites to be assessed. The recommended
number is two assessors and one team leader per team. As a general rule of thumb, there should be no
more than six assessors per team leader.
> E ach team should have female and male assessors to maximize access to all groups and ensure quality
of data collection.
> Try to have a dedicated assessment focal point with IM technical expertise that team leaders can call on,
if need be.
Each team member should be assigned a code which includes reference to the sex
of assessors. In analyzing the data later, this will enable you to do cross analysis with
gender as a confounding factor (if this is applicable).
Training must be done before the assessment phase begins. Ideally the training should target gaps in
knowledge and skills and include:
✓ some background information on the emergency and the child protection issues of boys and girls of
different ages (this can be partly based on the desk review);
✓ key child protection definitions and principles;
✓ ethical considerations;
✓ an orientation on the assessment tools, including simulation/role-playing to practice using the
actual tools;
✓ roles and responsibilities of team members,
✓ reporting and debriefing requirements;
✓ logistics of data collection; and
✓ security.
26
Part 1 – Step 4
The timeframe for the training should be realistic. Participants may be travelling very long distances and it is not
considerate to over-pack the agenda and end late. The recommended length of the training for assessors is
three days.
Do not sacrifice quality for quantity. If pressed for time or resources, try to stick to
a smaller number of well-trained assessors. Conducting an assessment with fewer
assessors with better skills is likely to result in more reliable information than having lots
of under-prepared assessors.
A field test (or when not possible, a mock field-test) should be included in the training. During a field test,
assessors have the opportunity to practice using of the adapted tools in a semi-real context. It is recommended
at this stage that groups of two or three assessors conduct a KII together so that they can give each other
constructive feedback. This hands-on experience is also valuable in finalizing the tools. You should therefore
reserve at least half a day for debriefing and finalizing the tools after the field test.
Before starting the data collection process, consider the operational requirements for
data management.
Ask the following questions early enough to find solutions to possible constraints:
• Are computers available for data entry?
• Do partners have access to necessary software (Word and Excel)?
• How will the collected data be submitted to the data entry focal point?
• Is translation required, and if so, at what stage of the data management process?
Collect data
It is recommended that resources be concentrated on one site at a time, until data collection in that particular
site is completed. For example, if a team consists of a team leader and three assessors, instead of spreading
the team to three sites, they should all concentrate on collecting the data from the same site and then move on
to the next site. This enables the team to compile site reports on a daily basis while the conversations with key
informants and observations are still fresh in assessor’s mind.
Triangulation is the process of comparing data collected through different methods, by different people and from
different sources. This is the main form of a validity check in a CPRA. Finding similar information across different
sources and methods, from both primary and secondary sources, allows for increased confidence in the results.
Triangulation becomes ever more important if collecting data from a small sample which is often the case in a
rapid assessment setting.
Typically this will mean the team looks for the most common response to a question and records that answer in
the report for that site. For example, if all three KIs say that latrines do not have locks and in direct observation
this is confirmed, then the report will obviously state that latrines in this site are without locks. If one KI says that
the latrines don’t have locks, a second KI says they do and the third one doesn’t know, then the information
from the direct observation should determine what the appropriate response should be in the site report.
28
Part 1 – Step 5
It is however not always just a matter of taking the most frequent response. Sometimes, when there are different
responses from different sources, the team will need to weigh the credibility of the evidence. For example, if
two male key informants report that sexual violence against girls never happens in the community but a female
teacher reports that it is fairly common, then the team may use the female teacher’s response in the site report
as the most reliable. Or if three key informants have reported that children are not associated with armed
groups, but the team has passed by a military checkpoint operated by children, the site report will rely on the
observation of the team rather than the response of the KIs regardless of its frequency. In such circumstances,
the team must record the reasons for making this judgment in the site report.
For questions that allow more than one response to be selected, the responses of key informants need to be
recorded in the site report in the order of their judged ‘importance.’ To do this the team will usually look at the
most common responses from the different sources. But as in the example above a single response about a
crucial protection risk may warrant that being recorded as important for the site as a whole.
Triangulating the data at site level is a real strength of the site report. The assessment team has the opportunity
to use several sources of information to ensure the validity of a response. However, it is important to remind the
assessors that they should not allow their personal opinions to influence their judgment. The daily debriefing
session should be like a courtroom, where the assessors are judges who are observing the evidence (based
on interviews, direct observations and urgent action cases) and passing a fair judgment accordingly. For more
information on triangulation in CPRA, see section ‘interpret the data’ on page 31.
Stage 1 - The most important part of data cleaning is done in the field during daily debriefing sessions. During
these sessions, the team leader and assessors go through completed KII and DO forms and look for responses
that are unclear and need correcting or further clarification before the site report is compiled.
Unless a team leader verifies and signs data collection forms, they cannot be considered
a valid source of information.
Stage 2 - The next part of data cleaning happens at the data-entry point. During data entry, site reports should
be checked for errors and missing elements.
For example, a sex variable has two attributes, male (M) and female (F). If someone has written ‘N’ instead of
‘M,’ this is an error and needs to be corrected. A less obvious error would be if the answer ‘yes’ is recorded for
a multiple-choice question. In this situation the team would need to find out the choices provided in that specific
site.
No matter how carefully assessors collect and record the data and how diligently
encoders enter the data into the database, mistakes happen. Most errors can be detected
and removed by simple checks.
If possible reports should be transmitted via fax, email or other means to an agreed data entry focal point at the
end of each day. This will allow for simultaneous data entry and analysis. This saves time and also allows the
data entry team to follow up where necessary, while teams are still in the field.
30
Step
6 Data analysis, interpretation and
report writing (weeks 4 and 5)
Step 6
Data analysis is the process of making sense of the collected data. In other words, it is bringing together
individual data points (e.g. an answer to a question) to tell the ‘story’ of the situation. It is through data analysis
that we translate the ‘raw’ data from different sources into understandable pieces of information. Through
interpretation, generated information will be contextualized with the aim of feeding into programming and
advocacy processes.
To effectively respond to the needs of affected girls and boys and distinct age groups, gender and age
sensitivity needs to be present throughout the CPRA process. As previously highlighted, whenever possible,
sex and age disaggregated information should be collected and analyzed. Without a sex and age sensitive
approach to analysis and interpretation, the produced data will not generate its optimal programmatic value.
Since our unit of measurement is ‘the site,’ our unit of analysis will also be ‘the site.’
Therefore the analysis is done based on site reports and not individual interviews.
An analysis of CPRA data is best presented using descriptive statisticsxxii. The most basic—and for our
purposes often most useful—type of descriptive analysis is frequency analysisxxiii. As long as you enter the data
into your data management tool, you will automatically get all the basic frequency analysis in the form of tables
and graphs.
However, more complex frequency analysis is also possible using the data from the CPRA process. The
most important is cross-tabulation. Cross-tabulation is a multivariate statistical analysis that builds on basic
principles of frequency analysis. Cross-tabulation “allows us to examine frequencies of observations that belong
to specific categories on more than one variablexxiv.” For example, where basic frequency analysis tells you that
X% of respondents expressed concern regarding family separation, cross-tabulation can tell you how many
female versus male respondents expressed concern regarding family separation.
It is not recommended that this data is used for more advanced statistics involving inferential analysisxxv.
Interpreting the data is done collaboratively. This can be achieved by organizing a workshop for CPRATF
partners. In the workshop CPRATF members ensure that the data is accurate – i.e. within acceptable ‘good
enough’ boundaries, and jointly work on all the data to draw conclusions on which to formulate programmatic
Process
Data is triangulated again for the last time (remember that site reports are already based on triangulated data).
Triangulation here draws principally on the analysis of site reports and the desk review. If, for example, for 85%
of the sites there is no report of child recruitment, but the desk review indicates a report by the protection
cluster showing high rates of child recruitment into armed forces and groups in the area, we may be uncertain
as to the real situation. In this case, a third source of information could be identified and used for validation.
Information could be drawn from secondary sources (such as NGO reports), or from primary sources (such as a
separate assessment specifically on the issue of children associated with armed forces or armed groups ).
Here is an example. This is a frequency analysis of the age distribution of separated children in flood- affected
areas. It represents KIs answers to the question: “In your opinion, which age group represents the majority of
separated children?”
All ages
under 5 5 to 14 15 to 18 are equally don’t know
affected
Frequency 3 10 3 2 1
Based on the summarized data, you could claim that the majority (53%) of assessed sites reported that most
separated children fall in the age group of 5 to 14 and therefore our response should be focused on this age
group. However, by adding contextual knowledge, you may realize that this age group is being sent to their
relatives outside of the flood-affected areas for protection. Therefore, your priority at-risk group may not be the
5-14 age group, but the under 5s or 15-18 year olds.
If a desk review includes some information on separated children, you could also use other data to triangulate
with this finding. For example if the NATF multi-cluster rapid assessment report claims that 70% of separated
children are under 5, then there is a clear inconsistency between these findings. If this happens, and you are not
able to find any other sources of data that contradict your findings, you can still consider your figure valid, but
need to document this discrepancy in the final report.
It is important to acknowledge in our reports that the assessment results are NOT
representative of the total population. This is always the case when purposive sampling
is used. To make this clear in our reporting, findings should be described as follows:
“Of 75 sites assessed, 80% reported separated children,” rather than “80% of children
are separated.”
32
Part 1 – Step 6
After the analysis and interpretation phases, it is important to write up and share the results of the CPRA with
other actors. Ideally, a mini-workshop should be organized to discuss the main findings and their significance.
This will not only enrich the learning from the data, but also ensures buy-in and wider use of the results.
You may want to consider different assessment ‘products’ for different audiences, including:
ii For more on the preliminary scenario definition, see Multi-Cluster/Sector Initial Rapid Assessment (MIRA)
manual (http://www.humanitarianinfo.org/iasc/pageloader.aspx?page=content-subsidi-common-default&sb=75)
iii Multi-Cluster/Sector Initial Rapid Assessment (MIRA), developed by the inter agency Needs Assessment Task
Force (NATF), has a component that is recommended for use for multi-sectorial rapid assessments.
vi Adapted from “Ethical Considerations for the IA Emergency Child Protection Assessment.”
ix If there is no IM capacity within the CPWG, seek IM support from OCHA or from other clusters or agencies that
may be conducting similar activities. Also explore the possibility of using the same sampling fame being used
for other assessments.
x Anecdotal evidence suggests one of the main barriers to timely distribution and use of assessment information
is disagreement on how to share the results with others. It is preferable to agree on the parameters of results
sharing at the outset. A more formal sign-off process can also be complemented by the release of preliminary
results or a briefing note.
xi Disaggregation means separating data based on a given variable, often to check if and how that variable
determines differences. In the case here, this refers to the experience of males and females and between
younger and older people.
xii Secondary data is a type of data that is derived from a source other than the primary source. For example, if we
use the data collected routinely by government ministries on the situation of children in a given region, we are
using secondary data. For more guidance on technical issues regarding data information management, please
see the
CPWG Technical Guide to Child Protection Assessment.
xiii The idea here is to make sure that the KIs interviewed can credibly speak to the experience of the population
they are representing.
34
xiv Spreadsheets can be obtained through the CPWG technical helpdesk: http://cpwg.net/advice-support/
xv For more background on sampling and sampling sizes, please see Michael Bamberger, Jim Rugh and Linda
Mabry (2006) Real World Evaluation, Sage: chapter 14.
xvi A homogenous site is a site where a majority of the population represents similar identities, such as socio-
economic background, ethnicity, religion and language.
xvii http://cpwg.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/ARC-ModF3-3-H8-2009.pdf
xviii www.cpcnetwork.org/admin/includes/doc_view.php?ID=375
xix Triangulation of data is the process of comparing data collected through different methods, by different people
and from different sources.
xx Constructive feedback means that a person gives two or three positive comments before pointing out an area
that requires improvement. Improvement areas should be supported by examples.
xxi A generic training package has been developed by the Child Protection Working Group and is available at
www.cpwg.net/resource/
xxii Descriptivestatistics describe a set of data in quantitative measurements. This form of statistics employs
techniques of organizing and then summarizing raw data.
xxiii Frequency analysis is the determination of the number of times a phenomenon has been repeated. In the case
of an assessment, frequency analysis determines the number of time a response has been cited during the data
collection.
xxiv http://www.statsoft.com/textbook/basic-statistics/#Crosstabulationa
xxv Inferential
statistics are used to make predictions based on a representative sample of the larger population.
The CPRA methodology does not identify a sample of this kind.
In a desk review you are accessing information from before and after the emergency:
Before (pre-emergency)
This includes basic statistics on the situation of children in the country and other data about critical child protection
issues that may have been exacerbated by the emergency. Where available, it may also include information about
previous emergencies and their impact on child protection. Key sources for information on child protection include:
• n ational governments’ social services
• the national statistical bureaus
• m ultilateral and bilateral donor organizations
• u niversities, research centres and think tanks
• U N agencies including OCHA and/or the humanitarian information centre if present
• N GOs
• n ational, regional, or global databases.
After (post-emergency)
This information is essential to determine the most affected regions and populations/vulnerable groups in order
to choose sites for the CPRA. This will also help you identify the most pressing questions that need to be
answered in the assessment. Key sources for information on child protection include:
• M inistry of Social Affairs (or equivalent)
• U N agencies, including OCHA and/or the humanitarian information centre
• Inter-agency needs assessment task force (NATF)
• International and local NGOs with people on the ground in the affected areas.
38
Part 2 – Tool 1
40
Part 2 – Tool 1
Please note there are three points in the interview process (q 1.1.2, q 1.4.1 and q 3.2) where KIs are asked a
second question, “How do you know this?” This second question is not numbered. The purpose of this question is
to provide the assessor with means to gauge the credibility of the respondent’s responses.
Remember that Tool 2 should not be used for focus group discussions or for interviewing young children.
This flags up questions addressing highly sensitive issues that should only be asked by well-trained interviewers.
If assessors do not have a background in relevant areas, the assessment lead/coordinator may decide to exclude
these sections.
[…] This is an instruction for the people adapting the tool and should be deleted before training assessors or
use in the field.
[…] This shows parts that are only meant as instructions for the assessor and should not be read out to the
interviewee. For example, [don’t know] means that the response, “don’t know,” is not read out to the KI. These
should remain in the tool.
[…] This suggest that the text in the brackets should be replaced by context appropriate text. Remove brackets
once the new text is decided upon.
[define a recall period] This suggests that an appropriate time-table (i.e. recall period) should be defined for
such questions. For rapid onset emergencies, this can be the disaster itself (e.g. ‘since the earthquake) and for
protracted emergencies, this can be a number of weeks or months (e.g. ‘since 2 weeks’) or a well-known point of
time in the recent past (e.g. ‘since the New Year’ or ‘since the end of Ramadan’).
42
Part 2 – Tool 2
> Introduce yourself and your organization to respondents and explain the purpose
of the assessment;
here people are displaced, make it clear that the questions are about the
> W
situation of children where the KI currently lives (and not his/her normal home).
o NOT make any promises or raise expectations for assistance;
> D
btain informed consent;
> O
rite clearly and briefly;
> W
bserve and respect cultural principles, norms and sensitivities, particularly on
> O
gender;
here possible, try to ensure that the location of the interview allows for privacy;
> W
espect interviewees’ time. KII should not go beyond one hour;
> R
o no harm: ensure that your questions and the answers you are receiving are not
> D
putting the interviewee in danger of negative repercussions. Beware of types of
information that may be socially or politically sensitive.
Identification
Site code
Date of assessment (dd/mm/yy): _ _ _ _/_ _ _ _/_ _ _ _ (from the list of sites): _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _
Type of site: urban rural official camp makeshift camp Population estimate of the site: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
[add more context specific options eg: displaced community, non-displaced community; directly affected area,
indirectly affected area.
This is especially important if we are looking for possible differential treatment of parts of the population]
Comments:
[If ethnicity, tribal affiliation or any other distinctive attribute is relevant, they should be mentioned in this space]
___________________________________________________________________
Age group: 18-24 25-34 35-60 >60 [age categories may be revised based on the context]
Male Female
Contact details:
__________________________________________________________________
Informed consent form: [this text can be modified based on the context]
My name is ___[say interviewer’s name] and I am working with ____[name of the org./group]____.
We are conducting an assessment on the situation of children affected by [mention the emergency: e.g. earthquake, recent
attack etc.]. This interview cannot be considered a guarantee for any direct or indirect support to you or your community,
but the information you provide will help us define child protection priorities and programmes. We would like to ask you some
questions about the situation of children in this [site/community/camp, etc.]. The interview should only take [-----] minutes.
Your identity will be kept strictly confidential and will not be shown to others unless your written agreement is received to do
so. Your participation is voluntary and you can choose not to answer any or all of the questions.
[After asking each of the following questions, look at the KI and get implicit approval that s/he has understood]
• All the information you give us will remain confidential.
• Your participation in this interview is voluntary.
• You can stop answering questions at any time.
• Do you have any questions? [Note any questions from the KI in the space here]
44
Part 2 – Tool 2
[Use this page to include a list of key terms and their definitions in the local language for use by assessors.
For example: ‘separated children’, ‘unaccompanied children’, ‘categories of caregivers’, ‘violence’, ‘sexual violence’,
‘armed groups and forces’, etc.]
1.1 Are there children in this _ _ [camp/village/city, etc.]_ _ who have been separated from their usual caregivers since
the _ _ [define a recall period] _ _? Yes No [don’t know] [if NO or Don’t know, skip to 1.5]
1.1.1 [If YES to 1.1] What do you think are the main causes of separations that occurred since the _ _ [define a recall period] _
_? [tick all that apply]
1. losing caregivers/children due to medical evacuation;
2. losing caregivers/children during relocation;
3. caregivers voluntarily sending their children to institutional care;
4. caregivers voluntarily sending their children to extended family/friends;
5. caregivers voluntarily sending their children to work far from parents/usual caregivers;
isappearance of children/caregivers in the immediate aftermath of the _ _ [earthquake/attack/…]_ ;
6. d
[this only applies to rapid-onset emergencies]
7. continued disappearance of children/caregivers (i.e. more recent disappearance);
[add more context specific options]
[other (specify) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _]
1.2 [If yes to 1.1] Regarding children who have been separated from their usual caregivers since the [define a recall period]
do you think that …[read out each block separately and allow the KI to respond block by block. Do not read out “do not
know”]
1.2.1 there are more girls than boys who have been separated [or]
there are more boys than girls who have been separated [or]
no clear difference [do not know]
1.3 Do you know if there are any infants or young children under the age of [you can define a specific age group here, e.g.
under 2] who have been separated from their usual caregivers since the _ [define a recall period] _?
Yes No [don’t know]
1.4 Are there children in this _ [camp/village/city, etc.]_ who do not live with any adults (unaccompanied minors)?
Yes No [don’t know] [if NO or Don’t know, skip to 1.5.1]
46
Part 2 – Tool 2
1.4.1 [If YES to 1.4] How many How do you know this?
unaccompanied children do you think
personal observation government data
there are?
camp management word of mouth
[read out the options if necessary]
other (specify) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
1-5 6-10
11-20 21-50
>50 (specify _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ )
[Don’t know]
[if “don’t know”, skip to 1.5.1]
1.4.2 [If yes to 1.4] Do you think that …[read out each block separately and allow the KI to respond block by block. Do not
read out “do not know”]
1.5.1 Are there persons unknown to the community who have offered to take children away from this _ _ [camp/village/city,
etc.] _ _ promising jobs or better care (e.g. foreigners who want to provide care for children in another country)? Yes
No [if NO, skip to 1.5.2]
[if YES to 1.5.1] Tell us what happened: Who came? What did they want? What happened? Were children taken away?
If so, how many girls and how many boys were taken away? What is the age group of removed children?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
1.5.2 Are there members of the community who have taken or want to take children away from this community to provide
them with assistance, jobs or better living conditions?
Yes No [if NO, skip to 1.6.1]
[if YES to 1.5.2] Can you describe who this person is and what s/he promises? Has s/he taken some children already? If
so, how many girls and how many boys were taken away? What is the age group of removed children? [collect contact
information if possible] _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_____________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
1.6.1 Do you know if there is a list of children who don’t know where their [If YES to 1.6.1 or 1.6.2]
caregivers are (including their names and other details)? Who has the lists?
Yes No [don’t know] (contact info if available)
1.6.2 Do you know if there is a list of parents who don’t know where their
_____________________
children are?
Yes No [don’t know] _____________________
2.1 I want you to think about the children who are no longer with their usual caregivers, where do they live now? [Write down
the response on the left side and code it based on the category codes. The supervisors are responsible to review the coding]
2.2 If you come across a child who does not have anyone who can care for him/her, what would you do? [tick all that apply]
1. care for the child myself
2. keep the child for a short time while I find a long term solution
3. find someone in the community to care for the child
4. inform the police about the child’s situation
5. inform others (specify _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _)
6. find someone outside the community to adopt the child
7. take the child to an agency/NGO that deals with children (specify _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _)
8. do nothing (ask why _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _)
other (specify _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ )
don’t know
2.3 Are there institutions/children homes 2.3.1 [If YES to 2.3] What kind of services do they provide? [tick all that apply]
in this area that provide care for orphans Day care Residential care
or separated children? Recreational activities
Yes No Other (specify) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
[don’t know]
[If NO, skip to 3]
[thank the KI for answering the questions to the previous section and continue to the new section]
3. Dangers and Injuries; Physical Violence; and Other Harmful Practices
3.1 What are the existing risks that can lead to death or injury of children in this _ _[camp/community/etc.]_ _?
- ENV: Environmental risks at home and - CVL: Civil violence (e.g. religious, clan, election, etc)
outside (e.g. accidents, open pit latrines,
riversides, dangerous animals, etc)
48
Part 2 – Tool 2
[Write down the response on the left Age of most affected Sex of most affected
side and code it based on the category [tick all if no difference] [tick both if no difference]
codes. The supervisors are responsible
to review the codings]
3.2 Where do you think these risks are high/highest for children? [if not clear, refer the KI to the previous question]
[Tick all that apply] 1. at home 2. in camp (outside of home) 3. in school
4. on the way to school 5. at work 6. on the way to work 7. at the market
8. on the way to market other (specify) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
[don’t know] [revise/add context specific options]
3.3 Can you estimate the number of How do you know this?
deaths and serious injuries to children
personal observation government data
due to any and all of the above causes
camp management word of mouth
during the past [define a recall period]?
other (specify) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
[adjust figures below if necessary]
1-5 6-10
11-20 21-50
>50 (specify _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ )
[Don’t know]
[if “don’t know, skip to 3.3]
3.4 Are there any children in this area who have been or are committing acts of violence since _[define a recall period]_? [if
unclear to the KI, use answer options from question 3.5]
Yes No [don’t know] [If NO or “don’t know”, skip to 4]
[thank the KI for answering the questions to the previous section and continue to the new section]
4. Psychosocial Distress and Community Support Mechanisms
4.1 Have you noticed any changes in children’s behaviour since _[define a recall period]_ _?
Yes No [don’t know] [If NO or “don’t know”, skip to 4.2]
50
Part 2 – Tool 2
4.2 What do you think makes boys stressed since _[same recall period as 4.1]_ _?
[if unclear to the KI, use answer options below as examples]
[Tick all that apply, but try to guide the KI to prioritize his/her responses and tell you which ones are the most important]
1. attacks 2. kidnapping/abductions
3. trafficking 4. not being able to go back to school
5. not being able to return home 6. losing their belongings
7. being separated from their friends 8. being separated from their families
9. tension within the family 10. nightmares or bad memories
11.sexual violence 12. extra hard work;
13. lack of shelter 14. going far from home for work;
15. lack of food 16. Bullying
[Don’t know] other (specify) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
[revise/add context specific options, specially culturally relevant sources of distress]
4.2.1 If boys have problems or are stressed, who in the community can best support them? [if unclear to the KI, use answer
options as examples. Tick all that apply, but try to guide the KI to prioritize his responses and tell you which ones are the most
important]
Other (specify) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
4.3 What do you think makes girls stressed since _[same recall period as 4.1]_ _? [if unclear to the KI, use answer options
as examples. Tick all that apply, but try to guide the KI to tell you which ones are the most important]
1. attacks 2. kidnapping/abductions
3. trafficking 4. not being able to go back to school
5. not being able to return home 6. losing their belongings
7. being separated from their friends 8. being separated from their families
9. tension within the family 10. nightmares or bad memories
11. sexual violence 12. extra hard work
13. lack of shelter 14. going far from home for work
15. Lack of food 16. Bullying
[Don’t know] other (specify) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
4.3.1 If girls have problems or are stressed, who in the community can best support them? [if unclear to the KI, use answer
options as examples. Tick all that apply, but try to get to the three most important]
Other (specify) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
4.4 Have you noticed any changes in caregivers’ attitude towards their children since _[same recall period as 4.1]_ _?
Yes No [don’t know] [If NO or “don’t know”, skip to 4.5]
1. Pay less attention to children’s needs 2. Pay more attention to children’s needs;
3. Spend less time with their children 4. Spend more time with their children;
5. More aggressive towards their children 6. Show more love and affection to their children;
7. Send children away from home 8. Force children to stay inside the house if displaced;
9. Keep children from going to school 10. Ensure children’s education despite difficulties;
11. Force/encourage children to marry at young age
12. Ensure that children have access to recreational activities
[Don’t know] other (specify) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
4.5 What are the main sources of stress for caregivers in the community? [if unclear to the KI, use answer options as
examples. Tick all that apply, but try to guide the KI to prioritize his responses and tell you which ones are the most important]
[thank the KI for answering the questions to the previous section and continue to the new section]
5. Access to Services and Excluded Children
5.1 Are there people in this -[camp/village/area]- who are capable of organizing recreational and/or educational activities
for children?
Yes No [don’t know]
5.1.1 [if yes to 5.1] What kind of skills do these people have? [tick all that apply]
5.2 Are there children who have less access to services like food distributions, educational and recreational activities,
and health care?
Yes No [don’t know]
5.2.1 [If yes to 5.2] Is it more boys or more girls who are most excluded?
girls boys No difference [Don’t know]
5.3 [If yes to 5.2] What groups of children are most excluded? [Read out the answer options and guide the KI to prioritize
which groups are most excluded. Tick all that apply]
Please explain why, if possible: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
__________________________________________________________
1. children living with HIV/AIDS 2. children living with elderly 3. children from poor households
4. Children who are newly arrived 5. children with a disability 6. children living with disabled
[don’t know] caregivers
Other (specify) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
52
Part 2 – Tool 2
[thank the KI for answering the questions to the previous section and continue to the new section]
6. Access to information
6.1 What are the most important sources of information for your community now? [Tick up to three]
Other (specify) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
[thank the KI for answering the questions to the previous section and continue to the new section]
7. Child Labour
7.1 Are there any children in this community who are involved in types of work that are harsh and dangerous for them?
Yes No [don’t know] [if NO or don’t know, go to 8.1]
7.1.1 [if yes to 7.1] What types of work are these children involved in? [modify the options below based on common types
of work identified in the desk review]
Other (specify) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
7.2.1 Can you estimate the number How do you know this?
children in your community who are
personal observation government data
involved in the types of work mentioned
camp management word of mouth
above during [define a recall period]?
other (specify) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
[adjust figures below if necessary]
1-5 6-10
11-20 21-50
>50 (specify _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ )
[Don’t know]
[if “don’t know, skip to 7.2.2]
7.2.2 Do you think the number of children in this -[camp/village/area]- who are invovled in harsh and dangerous work has
increased since _[define a recall period]_ _?
Yes No [don’t know]
7.3.1 Are there new types of harsh and dangerous labour that children are engaged in that did not exist before the _
[earthquake/conflict/…]_? [if NO or don’t know, go to 7.3]
Yes No [don’t know]
7.3.2 [if yes to 7.3.1] which new types of harsh and dangerous labour have emreged since the _ [earthquake/conflict/…]_?
_________________ ____________________________________________________
__________ ___________________________________________________________
_________________________________________
[thank the KI for answering the questions to the previous section and continue to the new section]
8. Children associated with armed forces and armed groups
8.1 Do you know of children working with or being used by armed forces or groups around this -[camp/village/…]-?
E.g. children with guns, operating checkpoints, cooking or cleaning for military, etc.
Yes No [don’t know] [if NO or don’t know, go to 9.1]
8.1.1 [If YES to 8.1] During the past 8.1.2 [If YES to 8.1] Are these children
_ _[define a period] how many of these mostly boys? mostly girls ?
children have you seen around this only boys? only girls ?
-[camp/village/area]- ? no difference? [don’t know]
1-5 6-10
11-20 21-50
>50 (specify _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ )
[Don’t know]
8.2 [If YES to 8.1] Has the number of children associated with armed groups/forces increased since _ [define a recall
period] _? Yes No [don’t know] [if NO or don’t know, skip to 8.3]
8.3 [If YES to 8.1 or 8.2] Where do you think most recruitment happens? [Write down the responses on the left side and code
it based on the category codes. The supervisors are responsible to review the codlings at the end of each day]
54
Part 2 – Tool 2
[thank the KI for answering the questions to the previous section and continue to the new section]
9. Sexual Violence [use a culturally appropriate term for SV]
9.1 If you come across a child who has suffered from sexual violence, what would you do?
1. Sexual violence never happens here [if this is chosen, skip to the end part of the interview]
2. take child to caregivers 3. take child to other family members 4. take child to religious leader
5. take child to health centre 6. take child to mobile clinic
7. take child to community social worker 8. take child to teacher 9. take child to clan leader
10. report to police/community justice system 11. confront the perpetrator (the person harming the child)
12. take child to women’s association 13. take child to a traditional midwife;
14. do nothing; [Don’t know]
[other (specify)] _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
9.2 Do you think the number of sexual violence incidents has increased since _ _ [define a recall period]_ _?
Yes No [don’t know]
9.2.1 In which situations does sexual violence occur more often? [Only read out the options if the KI needs examples. Tick all
that apply] [this can also be organized with coded-category answer options]
1. while at home 2. while collecting firewood 3. while at school
4. while playing around the camp/village 5. on the way to school 6. when at workplace
7. while collecting water 8. while working in the fields 9. during population movement
10. upon arrival at the _ _ [camp/community/…]_
11. during armed attacks [change if does not apply to the context]
12. in common areas, such as around latrines/showers, etc.
[don’t know]; [other (specify)] _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ [adjust/add context specific options]
9.3.1 more girls are being targeted for sexual violence than boys [or]
more boys are being targeted for sexual violence than girls [or]
no difference [do not know]
9.3.2 mostly younger children (under 14) are targeted for sexual violence [or]
mostly older children (over 14) are targeted for sexual violence [or]
no difference [do not know]
9.4 If a child or an adolescent is a victim of sexual violence, would s/he normally seek help [if not clear, say: “is it culturally
acceptable to seek help”]?
Yes No [don’t know] [If NO or “don’t know”, skip to 9.5]
9.4.1 [if yes to 9.4] Who do girls normally turn to for help? [adjust/add context specific options]
1. mother 2. father 3. friends 4. Grandparents 5. other family members
6. religious leader 7. health worker 8. teacher 9. social worker
10. local chief [other (specify)] _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ [Don’t know]
9.4.2 [if yes to 9.4] Who do boys normally turn to for help? [adjust/add context specific options]
1. mother 2. father 3. friends 4. Grandparents 5. other family members
6. religious leader 7. health worker 8. teacher 9. social worker
10. local chief [other (specify)] _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ [Don’t know]
[thank the KI for answering the questions to the previous section and continue by saying:
“Now if you have any other points to make, please mention them in the order of importance to you.”
56
Tool
3 Direct Observation
(sample prompts)
Tool 3
Asking questions
Please note that while this method requires assessors to actually observe something, they may need to ask
around to find out information to do the DO.
For example, prompt 2 says: “Are there children living or working on the street?”
This prompts assessors to actively look for children living or working on the street. To do this they may have to ask
around to find out if this is happening. Just because something is not easily observable does not mean that it does
not exist. But unless assessors can verify what they have been told, they should not include it as an observation.
Assessors will probably get some information from key informants on the spot. When they are mapping services,
for example, it makes sense to ask a camp manager or other people familiar with the site to get to know the
whereabouts of service points and humanitarian actors on the ground. Assessors can then go and check on the
location etc.
Differences in issues affecting boys and girls should be carefully noted. For example,
when assessors visit residential institutions, they should note if services are provided for
one sex only or for both.
Identification
Identification code :
Date of observation (dd/mm/yy): _ _ _ _/_ _ _ _/_ _ _ _ DO-_ [assessor’s code] _ - _ [site code] _
Type of site: urban rural official camp makeshift camp If camp, who manages the camp? _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
[add more context specific options ex: displaced community, non- Contact info (if available): _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
displaced community; directly affected area, not-directly affected
area. This is especially important if you are looking for possible
unequal treatment of parts of the population]
_________________________________ ___________________________
_________________________________ ______
_ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___________________________
______
_ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_____
Name and contact information of all non-child protection specific government and non-governmental agencies that are
participating in emergency response. Note if any of these services are single sex.
_________________________________ ___________________________
_________________________________ ______
_ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___________________________
______
_ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_____
Additional comments and/or observations: [please fill in during or after answering the questions in the DO]
[any observation of things that could affect child protection programming that are not included in the questions below should
be included here.]
58
Part 2 – Tool 3
1.1 Are there hazardous objects/locations around the site? Yes No [if NO, skip to 2]
Comments: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
1.1.1 [if yes to 1.1] open pit latrines pieces of iron and concrete deep holes/ditches
What type?
live electricity wires accessible to children barbed/razor wire
[Revise/add context specific options]
land mines / UXO/ ERW (including markings)
Other (specify) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
1.2.1 Are there clearly marked latrines for males and females? Yes No Not observable
Comments: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
1.2.2 Are there locks on the inside of latrine doors? Yes No Not observable
Comments: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Comments: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Comments: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
2.2 [if yes to 2] mostly girls [or] mostly boys [or] no observable difference
Comments: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Comments: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
3 Did you visit any existing child institutional care/boarding educational facilities in the area?
Yes No Comments: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
3.1 If yes, what type?
[adjust/add context specific options ex: boarding schools]
orphanage informal group house living with employer/in workshops
Other (specify) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ (contact info: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _)
3.2 Did you notice any child institutional care facilities/orphanages being newly built/established in the area?
Yes No Comments: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
3.2.1 [If yes to 3.2] Who is building? (collect contact info if available: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ )
government charitable organizations NGOs (specify) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
religious leaders/institutions Individuals Other (specify) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
4.1 Do you observe children in military uniforms or in outfits that symbolize association with with armed groups/forces?
Yes No Comments: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
4.2 Do you observe children who appear to be on active military duty (e.g. operating checkpoints)?
Yes No Comments: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
4.4 Do you observe children working with or being used by armed forces or groups
(e.g. cooking, cleaning, carrying things, etc.)?
Yes No Comments: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
4.5 [If answer to any of the above is yes] Do you observe more girls or boys being associated with armed forces or groups?
More girls More boys No observable difference Cannot tell
Comments: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
5. Do children appear to be involved in child labour?
Yes No Comments: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
5.1 [if yes to 5] Based on your observation, which of the following is more accurate?
5.1.1 more girls appear to be involved in heavy and/or harmful labour
[or]
more boys appear to be involved in heavy and/or harmful labour
[or]
same cannot tell
5.1.2 m
ostly younger children (under 14) appear to be involved in heavy and/or
harmful labour
[or]
m
ostly older children (over 14) appear to be involved in heavy and/or harmful
labour
[or]
same cannot tell
6. Do children appear to be involved in chores that require travelling long distances
(e.g. collecting wood, fetching water, etc.)? [observer should try to walk along such routes if security allows]
Yes No Comments: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
6.1 [if yes to 6] Based on your observation, which of the following is more accurate?
6.1.1 more girls appear to be walking long distances [or]
more boys appear to be walking long distances [or]
same cannot tell
6.1.2 mostly younger children (under 14) appear to be walking long distances [or]
mostly older children (over 14) appear to be walking long distances [orw]
same cannot tell
60
Tool
4 Urgent Action Report
(sample headings)
Tool 4
CPRA Toolkit Part 1: Define the urgent action procedure (page 11) and adapt the urgent action report
The CPWG in-country is responsible for the procedure for collecting and responding to urgent action reports
generated by a CPRA. Whenever possible, the urgent action procedure should be a comprehensive referral
pathway. At minimum, provide assessors with contact details of CP personnel available for advice and referral
of urgent cases.
The CPRATF is responsible for adapting the Tool 4: Urgent Action Report to the context. The sample headings
include key questions required to report the case, action taken, follow-up and other relevant information. It is not
likely that you will have to make many changes to this document.
Please fill in the first four sections, giving as many details as possible. In section 5, report any immediate action you
yourself have taken and indicate any follow-up required. Hand this report to your supervisor. If your supervisor is
not available, contact the CPRATF Coordinator at [contact info].
1. What happened?
2. Who? (by whom and to whom – please remember to note gender of the people involved)
3. When?
4. Where?
62
Part 2 – Tool 4
6. Other relevant information (such as contact information and name of persons involved)
As a first step, adapt the tool based on the headings and questions you have used in KIIs and DOs. Once it is
ready, the site report is used by the assessment team to compile information from each site (using a process of
triangulation). Detailed information about the process is in Part 1.
[…] This shows an instruction that should either be deleted or replaced based on the modifications to the key
informant interview.
[…] This shows parts that are meant as instructions for the site report compilation process.
Please note that when the assessment team hands in site reports for data entry, they should also include copies
of all completed documents used in the field (e.g. KII questionnaires, DO records, etc.). The CPRATF should put in
place a procedure for safe handling of all site reports and related documents.
> T
he option ‘not clear’ should be used when most or all KIs have not given an answer to the question or
when they have said, “don’t know.” ‘Not clear’ should also be ticked when there is a discrepancy between
different answers which does not allow the team to judge what the ‘real’ answer is.
> F
or some questions you can record up to three answers (plus one or two ‘others’). For these questions,
we can analyze more than one answer. For example, in question 2.1 if the category ‘FCO’ was reported
by three key informants and no other category was reported more than this, FCO will have the rank of 1. If
two categories are reported equally frequently by the KIs, based on other sources of information, the team
should decide which category should be reported with a higher rank.
If you rank any answer options to a question in a way that does not match the frequency
of the responses by KIs, please state your reasons underneath the question in the
comment section.
64
Part 2 – Tool 5
> S
econdly, look at who the respondents were and how valid their opinion might be about that particular subject.
If for credible reasons, the team believes that the KI who said “Y” seems to have better knowledge about that
subject or is more likely to have given a more valid response, then “Y” should be given a higher rank.
Example
Three key informants (KIs) - a male local chief, a male religious leader and a female teacher (with
three young daughters) – were interviewed at one particular site. In response to a question about
sexual violence, the two male KIs said: “It never happens here.” The female KI said: “It happens
very often.”
Looking at the frequency of the responses alone, the first response would receive a higher rank.
However, the assessment team may decide that, despite the higher frequency of the first response,
the second response carries more weight.
> T
hirdly, look at the evidence you have from direct observations, urgent actions and other sources. If the team’s
observations contradict the responses by KIs, try to do more investigation. If this is not possible, make a
decision among the team members whether you should trust your direct observation or the responses of the
KIs. As a general rule of thumb, give more weight to something the team has actually observed in the field.
Example
All the KIs tell you that light domestic work is the only type of child labour there is at this site.
However you have seen for yourself that many children are collecting heavy pieces of scrap metal
or were involved in difficult construction work.
In this case, you should try to work out why KIs gave you a different response to what you saw.
Sometimes cultural or political reasons are behind the answers you receive. Sometimes it is a
matter of definition (i.e. your definition of child labour might be very different from theirs). Based on
your discussions, you can either give more weight to your observations or to the response of the
KIs. Remember to explain the decision-making process in in the site report.
Make sure your personal opinion or background knowledge is not influencing the ranking
process. It is not what you think but what you OBSERVED or heard from KIs. To test
yourself, ask yourself: “Why did I decide to rank X over Y?” If the response is something
like, “Everyone knows that,” or “It is common knowledge,” it means that your opinion
is probably affecting your judgment. If the response is something like “Based on this
evidence…” or “I observed that…” then you are on the right track.
Identification
Supervisor’s code: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Date of assessment (dd/mm/yy): _ _ _ _/_ _ _ _/_ _ _ _ [if several days, date of the last interview]
Identification code (fill during data entry): SR - _ [supervisor’s code] _ - _ [site code] _ -
# of KI questionnaires consulted for this report: _ _ _ _ _ # of DO checklists consulted for this report: _ _ _ _ _
Comments: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_____________________________________________________________________
_______
Gender balance:
Assessment team: # of women in the team _ _ _ _ / total # of team members _ _ _ _
Key Informants: # of women interviewed _ _ _ _ / total # of interviews _ _ _ _
66
Part 2 – Tool 5
1.2 Which of the below options were reported about children separated from their usual caregivers?
1.2.1 there are more girls than boys who have been separated [or]
there are more boys than girls who have been separated [or]
no clear difference
not clear Comments _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
1.2.2 separated children are mainly under 5 [or]
separated children are mainly between 5 and 14 [or]
separated children are mainly older than 14 [or]
no clear difference
not clear Comments _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
1.3 Do you know if there are any infants or young children under the age of [you can define a specific age group here, e.g.
under 2] who have been separated from their usual caregivers since the _ [earthquake/attack/…] _?
Yes No Not clear
Comments: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
1.4 Are there children in this _ [camp/village/city, etc.]_ who do not live with any adults (i.e. unaccompanied children)?
Yes No Not clear Comments _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
1.4.1 How many unaccompanied children do you think there are?
1-5 6-10 11-20 21 – 50 >50 (specify _ _ _ ) Not clear
Comments: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
1.4.2 Do you think that … .
1.4.2.1 there are more unaccompanied girls than boys [or]
there are more unaccompanied boys than girls [or]
no clear difference
[not clear] Comments _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
2.3 Are institutions/children’s homes 2.3.1 What kind of services do these centers provide?
being built/newly established to care for Day care Residential care
orphans or separated children in this
Recreational activities
area?
Other (specify) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Yes No Not clear Comments _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Comments _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
68
Part 2 – Tool 5
Comments: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
3.2 Where do you think these risks are high/highest for children? [rank based on frequency and source of information.
Note the frequency in the ( . . . . . )]
I. # _ _ _ _ ( . . . . . ) II. # _ _ _ _ ( . . . . . ) III. # _ _ _ _ ( . . . . . )
IV. Other (1): _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ; (.....)
V. Other (2): _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. ( . . . . . )
Response not clear
Comments: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
3.3 Can you estimate the number of deaths and serious injuries to children due to any and all of the above causes during the
past [define a recall period]?
1-5 6-10 11-20 21 – 50 >50 (specify) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ [response not clear]
Comments: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
3.4 Are there any children in this area who have been or are committing acts of violence?
Yes No Not clear
Comments: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
3.5 What kind of violence are children participating in?
[rank based on frequency and source of information. Note the frequency in the ( . . . . . )]
I. category code: _ _ _ _ ( . . . . . )
II. category code: _ _ _ _ ( . . . . . )
III. category code: _ _ _ _ ( . . . . . )
IV. Other (1): _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ; (.....)
V. Other (2): _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. ( . . . . . )
4.2.1 If boys have problems or stress, who in the community can best support them?
[rank based on frequency and source of information. Note the frequency in the ( . . . . . )]
I. # _ _ _ _ ( . . . . . )
II. # _ _ _ _ ( . . . . . )
III. # _ _ _ _ ( . . . . . )
IV. Other 1: # _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ( . . . . . )
V. Other 2: # _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ( . . . . . )
Response not clear
Comments: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
4.3 What do you think makes girls stressed since _[same recall period as 4.1]_ _?
[rank based on frequency and source of information. Note the frequency in the ( . . . . . )]
I. # _ _ _ _ ( . . . . . )
II. # _ _ _ _ ( . . . . . )
III. # _ _ _ _ ( . . . . . )
IV. Other 1: # _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ( . . . . . )
V. Other 2: # _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ( . . . . . )
Response not clear
Comments: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
70
Part 2 – Tool 5
4.3.1 If girls have problems or are stressed, who in the community can best support them?
[rank based on frequency and source of information. Note the frequency in the ( . . . . . )]
I. # _ _ _ _ ( . . . . . )
II. # _ _ _ _ ( . . . . . )
III. # _ _ _ _ ( . . . . . )
IV. Other 1: # _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ( . . . . . )
V. Other 2: # _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ( . . . . . )
Response not clear
Comments: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
4.4 Have you noticed any changes in caregivers’ attitude towards their children since _[same recall period as 4.1]_ _?
Yes No Not clear
Comments: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
4.4.1 What kind of changes (positive or negative) have you noticed in caregivers’ attitude towards their children?
[rank based on frequency and source of information. Note the frequency in the ( . . . . . )]
I. # _ _ _ _ ( . . . . . ) II. # _ _ _ _ ( . . . . . ) III. # _ _ _ _ ( . . . . . )
II. Other 1: # _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ( . . . . . )
III. Other 2: # _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ( . . . . . )
Response not clear
Comments: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
4.5 What are the main sources of stress for caregivers in the community?
[rank based on frequency and source of information. Note the frequency in the ( . . . . . )]
I. # _ _ _ _ ( . . . . . ) II. # _ _ _ _ ( . . . . . ) III. # _ _ _ _ ( . . . . . )
II. Other 1: # _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ( . . . . . )
III. Other 2: # _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ( . . . . . )
Response not clear
Comments: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
5. Access to Services and Excluded Children
5.1 Are there people in this -[camp/village/area]- who are capable of organizing recreational and/or educational activities
for children?
Yes No Not clear
Comments: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
5.2 Are there children who have less access to services like food distributions, educational and recreational activities, and
health care?
Yes No Not clear
Comments: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
7.2.1 Can you estimate the number children in your community who are involved in the types of work mentioned above
during [define a recall period]?
1-5 6-10 11-20 21 – 50 >50 (specify) Response not clear
Comments: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
7.2.2 Do you think the number of children in this -[camp/village/area]- who are invovled in harsh and dangerous work has
increased since _[define a recall period]_ _?
Yes No Response not clear
Comments: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
7.3.1 Are there new types of harsh and dangerous labour that children are engaged in that did not exist before the _
[earthquake/conflict/…]_?
Yes No Response not clear
Comments: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
72
Part 2 – Tool 5
7.3.2 which new types of harsh and dangerous labour have emerged since the _ [earthquake/conflict/…]_?
[extract main issues that emerged from responses and rank them based on frequency and source of information. Note the
frequency in the ( . . . . )]
I. ___________________(.....)
II. ___________________(.....)
III. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ( . . . . . )
IV. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ( . . . . . )
V. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ( . . . . . )
Response not clear
Comments: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
7.4 Do you know if the majority of children who are involved in harsh and dangerous labour:
[rank based on frequency and source of information. Note the frequency in the ( . . . . )]
I. # _ _ _ _ ( . . . . . ) II. # _ _ _ _ ( . . . . . ) III. # _ _ _ _ ( . . . . . )
IV. Other 1: # _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ( . . . . . )
V. Other 2: # _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ( . . . . . )
Response not clear
Comments: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
8. Children Associated with Armed Forces and Armed Groups
8.1 Do you know of children working with or being used by armed forces or groups around this -[camp/village/…]-? E.g.
children with guns, operating checkpoints, cooking or cleaning for military, etc.
Yes No Not clear
Comments: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
8.1.1 During the past _ _[define a 8.1.2 [Are these children, [read out the options]
period]_ _ how many of these children mostly boys? mostly girls ?
have you seen around this -[camp/ only boys? only girls ?
village/area]- ? no difference? Not clear
1-5 6-10
11-20 21-50 Comments _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Not clear
Comments _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
______________
8.2 Has the number of children associated with armed groups increased since the _ _ [earthquake/attack/…] _ _?
Yes No Not clear
Comments: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
8.2.1 How do you know this? [rank based on frequency and source of information. Note the frequency in the ( . . . . . )]
I. # _ _ _ _ ( . . . . . ) II. # _ _ _ _ ( . . . . . ) III. # _ _ _ _ ( . . . . . )
II. Other 1: # _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ( . . . . . )
III. Other 2: # _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ( . . . . . )
Response not clear
Comments: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
9.2 Do you think the number of sexual violence incidents has increased since the _ _ [emergency/attack/…]_ _?
Yes No Response not clear
Comments: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
74
Part 2 – Tool 5
9.5 Do you know of a place where people of this _ _[camp/ community/...] _ _ 9.5.1 Can children also seek help in that
can get help if they are victims of sexual violence? place?
Yes No Not clear Yes No Not clear
[collect more info if appropriate (e.g. availability of PEP kits): _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ [Comments: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _]
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _]
The source of the data for the data management tool is the site reports. The analysis this tool provides is limited
to basic frequency of response analysis. For more sophisticated analysis, please seek support from a data
analyst or the cpwg. There are three main sheets in this tool: Sheet 1 - data entry; sheet 2 - analysis and sheet
3 - graphs. Data needs to be entered ONLY in the data entry sheet. Data analysis and graphs are automatically
generated, based on the data in sheet 1.
Adaptation
This tool needs to match the headings, questions, answer options etc. you plan to use for the CPRA in your
context. It is especially important that this tool matches Tool 5: Site report (see Part 2: sample tools). If your data
management tool does not match the headings and questions in your site reports, as well as all answer options
for multiple answer questions in Tool 2: Key Informant Interview (see Part 2: sample tools) then it will not be
possible to actually process the data you have collected.
The sheets are protected to avoid unwanted changes. However, you can un-protect the sheets, by going to the
‘review’ tab and clicking on the ‘unprotect sheet’ button. If the changes you need to make are regarding the
answer options, you have two ways of doing it. (note: the answer options can be found underneath the main
table on the data entry sheet in a grey font (row 107 and below).
1. If you are only modifying or replacing an existing answer option, you simply click on the respective answer
option in the data entry sheet (grey font) and make your changes.
2. If you want to introduce a new answer option in addition to the existing ones (i.e. you need to add a row
with a new answer option): you can simply add the new answer option to the bottom of the existing list of
answer options for your respective question. In this case, you need to make modifications to the ‘analysis’
and ‘graphs’ sheets as well. See below for some explanation on how to do that.
78
Part 3 – Section 1
If you need to make modifications to ‘analysis’ and ‘graphs’ sheets because you added additional answer
options for existing questions, please follow these steps: (An example is presented to facilitate the explanation.)
Example: Imagine that during the adaptation, under question 1.1.1, you have added an option of ‘temporary
community space’. Now you need to add this to the list of existing answer options in the data management
tool.
(step 1) add the new option (“”temporary community space””) in cell AP 115.
(step 2) go to the ‘analysis’ tab Click on cell O20. Type: “=’Data entry’!AP115” (without the “ “) and press
enter.
(step 3) select cell N21 and drag it to the right to cover cell O21. Then select N22 and drag it to the right to
cover O22. This way you have copied the formulas in those two new cells (O21 and O22)
(step 4) go to the ‘graphs’ tab. Find the graph that corresponds with the question you are modifying
(Q1.1.1). Right click on the graph and choose ‘select data’. A new window will pop up that shows you
where the data for that graph is coming from. You will see a formula in the box for ‘chart data range’. You
will see that the formula is only extended to column N (look closely. there are two letter ‘N’s in that box). You
will have to change that letter N to also cover the new column that you added in step 2 and 3 above. To do
so, you simply change both letter ‘N’s to letter ‘O’ and you click ok. Please note that you cannot use the
right and left arrows in this box. You have to use your mouse to highlight the letter you want to change and
type the new letter.
If you decide to add a new question, you need to properly code it in all three sheets. If you are not sure how to
do this, contact someone who is familiar with Excel databases. If you are doing an inter-agency CPRA, you may
contact the child protection working group (CPWG) for technical support.
If you need to remove any questions, we recommend that you change the background colour of the column
related to that question to black so that it is clear that you have deleted this question and it is not a gap in data
entry. You will have to do this in both the data entry and analysis sheets.