Post-Distribution Monitoring Report

Reporting time frame: July-August

Background Information

The post distribution monitoring survey was conducted in Aweil East South Counties in the
Former state of Northern Bhar el Ghazal. It was carried out between 18-25 of August, 2017.

Objective: to understand to what extent the distribution of fishing kits and vegetable kits by
World Vision, was successful and to assess the usage and effectiveness of kits distributed.

Methodology: Questions corresponding to the objective were developed, and enumerators

were trained to address questions to beneficiaries regarding the usage and effectiveness of
the kits distributed and to report on any issues/difficulties during the distribution process.

Sample size: a total of 190 beneficiaries participated over the period of 10 days; a random
sample was employed in each area of operation using a cluster sample of 95% sample
interval. This was considered cost effective considering field logistics challenges and
accessibility to some areas flooded by rain. A team of 2 project staffs supervised the data
collection process from design, training, tools pre-test and piloting, and data collection as
well.

It is also important to note that the PDM was done through household survey administered
in the areas where agricultural inputs were distributed from. For example in Aweil South,
four Payams including Nyocawany, Tieraliet, Panthou and Wathmuok were randomly
chosen and data was collected there. It is also worth mentioning that the selection of
beneficiaries in the field was random. Simple random method was employed where data
collectors could go to one Payam and interviewed specific number of households as per the
predetermined list.
Summary of Findings

95.3% of the surveyed beneficiaries stated they received the seeds on time while
4.7% reported late distribution of seeds.
98.4% of the survey beneficiaries stated they were informed and mobilized 2 days
ahead of time while a smaller number at 1.6% reported that they were not informed
as required.
73.3% reported that they were satisfied with the quantity of seeds and kits received
while 26.7% was the reported dissatisfaction rate within the two counties. Very
interestingly, a higher percentage was recorded in Aweil South at 47.6% compare to
Aweil East at 25.7% adding up to overall satisfaction rate.
99.5% of the surveyed beneficiaries over scored the satisfaction rate for the seeds
quality. Of this, 60.7% came from Aweil South while 38.8% from Aweil East.
74.2% was the highest reported percentage for the distance travel to the distribution
centres within less than an hour followed by 16.9% less than 2 hours and 9%
>2hours.
43.8% was the queuing time mentioned within a range of 15 minutes while a higher
percentage at 56.2% of the beneficiaries was reported as a maximum queuing time
within a range of 30 minutes during the distribution process.
On average, 84.4% of the interviewed beneficiaries were very satisfied with
assistance provided while the least at 1.9% were very dissatisfied.
50.9% of the surveyed beneficiaries stated that they received seeds from World
Vision last year while 49.1% mentioned that they did not receive from World Vision.
72.2% acknowledged that they received seeds from World Vision in 2017. Only
27.8% mentioned that they have never received seed/tools from World Vision on the
same year.
50.3% stated that the distribution was organized too late (32.6% from Aweil East and
17.7% from Aweil South) while 26% said it was too early (7.2% Aweil East and 18.8%
 HHs Demographics

HHs Gender Information

Of the surveyed participants, 125 of them were male participants which account for 66.1%
while 64 were female participants that stand at 33.9%.

PDM Key Findings

2.1 timing of distribution

To address the issue of appropriate distribution of seeds, figure 1 below illustrates the
timing of seeds distribution in Aweil East and South. On average, 95.3% of the surveyed
beneficiaries have acknowledged arrival of seeds on time. Looking further at the graph, it
can be seen that 2.6% reported late distribution of seeds in Aweil East. Similarly late
distribution of seed scored 2.1% in Aweil South. This is illustrated in the figure 1 below:

4.7%

2.1%
95.3%
2.6%
57.3%
38.0%

Aweil East Aweil South

Total
No 2.6% 2.1% 4.7%
Yes 38.0% 57.3% 95.3%

Yes No

2.2: Scale of mobilization and information delivery (2 days prior to distribution)

The figure below shows the scale of community mobilization and information delivery prior
to distribution of seeds; on average, 98.4% of the survey beneficiaries stated that they were
informed 2 days ahead of time across Aweil South and East. Figure 2 illustrates as below:
 .5%
1.0% 1.6%

39.8%
58.6% 98.4%

Aweil East Aweil South Total

Yes No

Based on the Survey findings, it can be concluded that the level of mobilization and
information delivery was significantly higher in Aweil South (58.6%) compare to Aweil East
at 39.8%.

2.3: Satisfaction with seeds quantity

When participants were asked about their level of satisfaction with seed quantity, their
responses are presented in figure 3 below:

26.7%

12.8%
13.9% 73.3%
47.6%
25.7%
Aweil East Aweil South Total
No 13.9% 12.8% 26.7%
Yes 25.7% 47.6% 73.3%

Yes No

From the above survey findings, it can be seen that 73.3% of the surveyed beneficiaries
mentioned total satisfaction with seed quantity. Furthermore, higher satisfaction rate can
be seen in Aweil South (47.6%) to Aweil East (25.7%).

2.4 Satisfaction with seed quality

Figure 4 below shows that the overall satisfaction rate with seed quality w as 99.5% being
good as oppose to 0.5% reported poor. Accordingly, it can also be seen that 60.6% of the
respondents interviewed in Aweil South were highly satisfied with seed quality compare to
Aweil South (38.9%).

.5%

.5%
99.5%
0.0%
60.6%
38.9%

Aweil East Aweil South Total

Poor 0.0% .5% .5%
Good 38.9% 60.6% 99.5%

Good Poor

From this we can conclude that the overall rate for satisfaction was high in Aweil South
compare to Aweil East County while the least were dissatisfied with quality of seeds in Aweil
South.

2.5: Travel distance travel to reach the distribution point

Averaged across 190 beneficiaries interviewed in both Aweil East and South, 74.2 percent
travelled less than one hour compare to distance travel between 1-2 hours at 16.9 percent
and less than two hours at 9%. At each county level, 46.6% in Aweil South reported travelled
to distribution point within less than an hour compared to 27.5% of Aweil East County.
Figure 6 below shows the presentation of the findings.

5.1% 3.9% 9.0%

7.9%
16.9%
9.0%

46.6% 74.2%
27.5%

Aweil East Aweil South Total

>1hr 1-2 hrs >2hrs

From the above, it should be noted that most respondents take shorter time to reach the
distribution point in Aweil South compare to Aweil East County. However, the overall
findings (74.2%) indicated that the distance travelled by to distribution is fairly good and at
recommended scale.

2.6 Queuing time at distribution center

Figure 8 below shows findings on the queuing time by beneficiaries at distribution centres.
On average, 56.2 percent across the two counties reported 30 minutes waiting time to
receive agricultural inputs compared to 43.8 percent reported less than 15 percent as
appropriate queuing time. Figure 7 shows the findings:
60.0% 56.2%

50.0% 43.8%
40.0%
30.8% 33.0%
30.0% 25.4%

20.0%
10.8%
10.0%

0.0%
Aweil East Aweil South Total
County
>15 minutes >30 minues

As indicated above, the trend in queuing time in both counties is linearly closed. This
indicates that though majority reported longer time spent to receive agricultural inputs
other factors like field level facilitation is undoubtedly a contri buting factor. Future PDM
exercise shall valid this findings through focus group discussions with beneficiaries and key
informant interviews with project staff.

2.7 Satisfaction_ (Sensitization and Mobilization)

In general, the majority of the beneficiaries (84.4%) were very satisfied while very few
people standing at 1.9% were very dissatisfied with sensitization and mobilization
conducted before the distribution of agricultural inputs.

Very satisfied 84.4% 135

satisfied 9.4% 15
How satisfied were you regarding Unsatisfied 4.4% 7
very 1.9% 3
unsatisfied
2.8: Assistance: last year (2016)
Assessing whether the beneficiaries received any assistance from World Vision or any other
partner last year, findings presented in figure 8 below shows that, on average, 50.9% of the
interviewed participants acknowledged having received some assistance while 49.1%
reported no assistance at all.

50.9% 49.1%

32.9%
24.6% 24.6%
18.0%

Aweil East Aweil South Total

Yes 18.0% 32.9% 50.9%
No 24.6% 24.6% 49.1%

Yes No

In general, 32.9% of the beneficiaries in Aweil South reported higher assistance level
compared to Aweil East County which is at 24.6%. This indicates that more assistance was
delivered to the people in Aweil South compare to Aweil East.

2.9 Assistance 2017

Given that World Vision and other partners have provided some assistance to thousands of
beneficiaries particularly farmers in 2017, as part of emergency response programing, a
specific question was designed to find out if the beneficiaries have received any assistance.
Accordingly, the findings for post distribution monitoring which was undertaken in Aweil
South and East revealed that 72.2% (130) of the surveyed beneficiaries acknowledged
received assistance. They findings are presented below:

Valid Frequency Valid Percent

Did you receive tools from World yes 130 72.2
Vision/partner this year? no 50 27.8
Total 180 100.0

2.10 Distribution process

Concerning the distribution process, a cross examined question was asked whether the
distribution was organized in time of planting season, on average, 50.3% stated it was
organized too late, 26% said it was too early and 23.8% mentioned that it was on time.
Across the two counties, it can be seen that in Aweil East about 72.8% mentioned that it was
too late, however in Aweil South 34% said it was organized on time.

72.8%

50.3%

34.0% 32.0% 34.0%

26.0% 23.8%
16.0%
11.1%

Too early Too late on time

County Aweil East 16.0% 72.8% 11.1%
County Aweil South 34.0% 32.0% 34.0%
County Total 26.0% 50.3% 23.8%

County Aweil East County Aweil South County Total

In general, the distribution process was rated as satisfactory at 91.9% compared to 8.1%
said they were not satisfied with the whole process as presented in the below figure.

100.0%
90.0%
80.0% 91.9%
70.0%
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0% 8.1%
0.0%
yes no
Recommendations for further actions

In future, World Vision should undertake a consultative meeting with beneficiaries

on the types of inputs to be given. In Aweil South, beneficiaries reported that some
fishing twines provided were good but they needed a small size of the twines.

Preposition of agricultural inputs to field offices prior to planting season is very

important. In Aweil East, there came out that they timing of seeds distribution was
too late. Discussions held with project staff and beneficiaries indicated that the
distribution of agricultural hand tools and some inputs was carried late June through
July. Farmers out cried that the distribution was late in general.

There is need to target both male and female household heads across the counties
of operation. The post distribution monitoring findings show that most beneficiaries
interviewed were male participants (66.1%) compare to female ones (33.9%). This
points out that there is a need to improve on beneficiaries identification criteria.

Scale up assistance to beneficiaries as the PDM findings shown that the scale of
assistance has improved significantly for the last two years (2016 to 2017). This
includes provision of agricultural inputs, advisory support visit to farmers among
others.

Queuing time. There is need to improve on time spent at the distribution points
across the counties. The 30 minutes reported as the minimum queuing time during
the distribution needs to reduce. It is therefore; recommended that 15 minutes
should be an appropriate and suitable queuing time.

Information provision. There is need to continued and increase providing

information to project beneficiaries regarding the identificati on criteria, quantity
entitlements. This can be done through field level support visits by the project staff
through frequent meeting with project beneficiaries.

Ameliorate the quality of the seeds procured (local products for example) and look
into the possibility of increasing the quantity and diversifying ( cowpeas, simsim,
groundnuts, sorghum, maize, okra, etc.).