Transcript Slide 1
NFI PDM Feedback Areas for improvement • Question: "Are you the same person who picked up the items?“ – If the person wasn't the same, then the questionnaire was invalid – For final version, eliminated this question – Decided tot ask the monitors to ask to the person who picked up the items. If the person was not there, then just not apply the questionnaire and call another case. Areas for improvement • Terminology "fair / poor" was not that well understood by the monitors; changed to "good / medium / bad" • Question on timing: Confusing for beneficiaries and monitors for “ too early”, “on time”, “too late”, “don’t know”… Focused on: "In relation to your needs, did the assistance come...? Too early / on time / too late“ Areas for improvement • To better understand if the beneficiaries think that the contents of the kit are what they need, or if they suggest having more of one thing and less of another, ADDED these: • 19. Would you suggest any changes in the package? – Less/More – Soap ¨ Shampoo ¨ Lotion ¨ Wet Wipes ¨ Diapers ¨ – No changes ¨ • 20. Would you suggest adding or removing any other item? – Less/More – Soap ¨ Shampoo ¨ Lotion ¨ Wet Wipes ¨ Diapers ¨ – No changes ¨ Gender Commitments • Added in the beginning the option for Male / Female for the respondent • The name of respondent if different from Head of Household. • Will attempt half of PDMs to FHH or wife Sample of Results • 70 baby hygiene package assistance beneficiaries were contacted by telephone • The feedback sample represents around 18% of the total baby hygiene package assistance beneficiaries funded by PRM. Each beneficiary was asked 23 questions. Sample of Results • How long did it take you to travel to the distribution site? – Most respondents claimed having to travel less than 15 minutes to arrive to the distribution point, while 29 of them reported a longer trip, of up to 30 minutes. Four beneficiaries claimed having travelled up to one hour to reach the site. Sample of Results Sample of Results • Rate the quality of the diapers – Out of the 70 respondents, 69 respondents confirmed that the items were of “good” quality. The one beneficiary that rated the diapers’ quality as ¨poor”, explained that there was leakage. • Was the quantity of diapers enough for 4 months? – 78% of respondents reported that the quantity was enough. However, 13 stated that they were not able to cover their needs for the four months that the assistance was intended to cover. – The reasons given were that beneficiaries had more than one child in need of diapers. On the other hand, 2 households reported that the quantity had been “more than enough”. Sample of Results Sample of Results Sample of Results • What have you done with the items since you received them? – According to the results, the majority of ICMC’s beneficiaries have consumed the items provided to them. Two respondents claimed to still be using them, and no beneficiaries reported having sold, lent or exchanged the items. Sample of Results Sample of Results Prior to receiving the items distributed to you, were you able to purchase items like it on your own? – 81% of respondents claimed that they would be able to purchase similar items on their own, prior to ICMC’s assistance. – Eight coping mechanisms were mentioned in being able to purchase items on own. Sample of Results Thank you!