Modality Selection: Where markets are functional and feasible delivery mechanisms exist, cash and voucher assistance (CVA) is recommended (market assessments will determine the market functionality). In locations where there are no markets or where markets are not fully functional, and/or limited access (i.e. “weak markets”), in-kind food distribution or a mixed modality may be the most appropriate approach. In locations where there are no or and/or limited access, in-kind food distribution or a mixed modality may be the most appropriate approach. Beneficiaries’ modality preference should also be taken into account.
Note: “Hybrid or mixed” approaches refer to one or more items being distributed in kind and the other item(s) in cash. See also the cash for work (CFW) section under 5.6.3. Though included under “Agriculture and Livelihoods Assistance”, CFW can also have a food assistance objective and be reported as such in the FSC 5W.
Food Assistance Package (food basket/kit): The size and composition of the food assistance package should be tailored to local preferences, demographic profile, nutritional requirements, operational and supply chain considerations. It should cover all food assistance (first few days of an emergency as well as a standard food ration), transfer modalities (in-kind, cash transfers or voucher transfers or mixed modalities). All partners, regardless of modality, should conform to the transfer value and composition of the food assistance package. Multi-purpose cash, based on the Minimum Expenditure Basket (MEB), is another form of food assistance (see below).
The Coordinator should consider the following (in line with Sphere standards on Food Security and Nutrition):
- Assess and monitor level of market functionality to determine whether the situation is stable or declining, and which food assistance modality is more appropriate.
- Design of food rations and nutritional quality: The following minimum nutritional requirements should be used for planning general rations and adjusted to context: 2,100 kCal per person per day with 10–12 per cent of total energy provided by protein, 17 per cent provided by fat, and minimum intake of 19 micronutrients (see more in Sphere Standards here).
TIP: The Coordinator can lean on technical colleagues from WFP or FAO or the Nutrition cluster or can also use NutVal to assess the nutritional adequacy of rations (see this training on the NutVal Calculator 4.1).
Dietary diversity should be considered: fresh food (fruits and vegetables, eggs, dairy products etc.) improves dietary diversity although the food basket will be more expensive. See also “different food basked options” below. - Familiarity and acceptability: While nutritional value is a primary consideration, the food basket commodities should be consistent with local traditions, and ideally be locally sourced and be sensitive to gender, age and disability requirements.
- Different food basket options: Some country FSCs may develop distinct food packages for immediate, short-term, and medium/longer-term food assistance or for different nutritional requirements based on the specific context. The food basket can vary also based on the family size (i.e. package for a family of 3, 5 or more members). The food package can be distributed as a dry ration or as cooked food (also known as ‘wet food’ - see the guidance on gFSC Cooked meal distributions in emergencies – practical guidance from 2020). The distribution of fresh food to provide the micronutrients is usually done through voucher programmes.
- Duration: It is advisable to agree on the duration of assistance to ensure it has a meaningful impact on improving the food security status of affected HHs as well as on ensuring a sustainable and longer-term solution.
Cash Based Transfer Value (for Food): There are several ways of calculating the transfer value for cash and voucher modalities for food. The approach may vary from country to country; this should be discussed and decided with CLAs and FSC partners’ technical staff.
The Coordinator should ensure cluster agreement on a transfer amount per HH and, working with technical programme staff, provide guidance on adjusting transfer values according to HH size (standard ration per HH or adjusted based on the number of HH members).
Calculation options:
- The transfer value can be calculated based on a gap analysis that relates to the Minimum Expenditure Basket (MEB) threshold (or to another similar threshold), i.e., gap between the "cost of needs” and households’ economic capacity to cover that cost (see the WFP guidance on transfer values here). The “cost of needs” can also be calculated based on the food expenditure as determined by Household Economy Analysis (HEA – see details in 6.4.2). It can also be calculated using the Cost of Diet (see methodology developed by SCI here). This amount should determine the amount for the food component of the MEB for a HH (see 5.6.2).
Note: The transfer value might cover, or not, the full gap up to the MEB, depending on availability of resources, objective of the programme, presence of complementary assistance, alignment with other actors (e.g. social protection schemes), etc. - When the above option is not feasible, the transfer value can be based on the cost of the food basket as distributed in the country (for each food item, the average price in markets is determined and aligned with either FAO/WFP price monitoring or the official government price index).
Regular reviews are recommended to accommodate for inflationary and devaluation / exchange rate trends (see, for example, the Good Practice Review on Cash Assistance in Contexts of High Inflation and Depreciation, CaLP, 2021).
Targeting and Criteria: Along with agreement on a food assistance package and transfer value, FSCs should also agree on common and harmonized targeting criteria (including HH size, including HH member profiles, e.g. pregnant and lactating women, young girls, children etc.) taking vulnerability levels into account. Harmonization of key targeting criteria and agreeing on clear FSC guidelines is critical (keeping in mind that vulnerability criteria may differ from one location to another and that in hard-to-reach areas, basic vulnerability criteria may be used to reduce exclusion errors).
Distribution Guidelines: It is advisable to agree on clear guidance on distribution for different modalities. The provision of services must take into account accessibility, and the diversity of needs (the ease with which all people can safely reach, understand, and use services).