In protracted emergencies and if deemed necessary by the HCT (if there is a data gap, especially prior to the HNO process), the clusters may jointly undertake a Multi-Sector Needs Assessment (MSNA). The MSNAs are more detailed/granular versions of the MIRA and are led by OCHA (usually with REACH support). They are based on joint data collection, on one methodology with one sampling, one joint questionnaire and one team - commonly, the MSNA process is endorsed at HCT level and the technical design process (each sector will ensure data is collected on their respective key indicators, as practically possible), multi-partner data collection and a joint analysis of results is coordinated through the ICCG – or the inter-sector AAWG, if established.
MSNAs can support country-level and sector-specific strategic decision-making by providing comparable data across all relevant crisis-affected areas, population groups and sectors. They aim to identify critical needs according to geographic areas and sectors, assessing the most important issues and their underlying factors, the on-going humanitarian response and identifying information gaps and needs. MSNAs have been used increasingly in protracted crises since 2016, in line with the Grand Bargain commitments to improve joint and impartial needs assessments (see 1.3) – currently, they take place in around one third of countries with active FSCs.
What is the role of the FSC Coordinator? In terms of general process, the main activities follow those highlighted in 6.2 and 6.3 and both the FSC Coordinator and the IMO (also through the IMWG) will be actively involved in the MSNA process.
Working closely with the IMO, the CLAs and cluster partners, the Coordinator should consider the following:
- Assessment Calendar: Work with the ICCG to plan the schedule for needs assessments to ensure optimisation of resources (i.e. where possible, avoid sectoral or agency assessments and MSNAs taking place at the same time).
- Role in Design and Planning Process, Analysis and Dissemination: Review the MSNA TOR, methodology, sampling, questionnaire and ensure the MSNA design incorporates the minimum food security specific information required and that it is analysed correctly:
- Data collection should include core food security indicators – usually the HEA (income, expenditure), FCS, HHS, access to market, rCSI, livelihood CSI, focus on agriculture activities (see Annex II – additional indicators can be added as required).
- Technical guidance on the design, collection, sampling, cleaning, analysis and reporting of food security indicators in the MSNA is shared (technical staff from the FSC NAWG or WFP RAM for example, can support with this).
- The FSC Coordinator and IMO are actively involved in the data analysis, report writing and dissemination.
- MSNA are used as secondary data for the IPC/CH when sectoral food security assessments are available.
- When and why are MSNAs useful?
- When are MSNAs not useful?
- If there is no data gap and an MSNA will overlap with an in-depth food security specific assessment. An MSNAshould not replace the food security specific assessment:
- There is a push for multi-sector assessments and/or analysis to determine needs. While the FSC should promote joint multi-sectoral analysis and ensure that the FSC participates in such initiatives, the added value of joint multi-sector assessments (with limited food security information) is less evident in the presence of in-depth sectoral assessments. The existence of multi-sector assessments should not replace the CLAs’ (and the FSC’s) own assessment capacity and responsibilities.
- During the HNO process, the Coordinator should ensure FSC PIN calculations are done by the FSC based on established methodologies and should not accept OCHA or any third party to calculate the FSC PIN based on MSNA data.
- However, if an MSNA is planned, it makes sense to encourage that data collection includes food security indicators (even if an EFSA has been planned/recently completed). The added value of a joint MSNA is the ability to cross tabulate, make statistics between WASH and nutrition (this is not always possible with an EFSA, for example).
- If there is no data gap and an MSNA will overlap with an in-depth food security specific assessment. An MSNAshould not replace the food security specific assessment:
- When data collection and analysis are done by non-food security experts.
Examples: Joint Multi-Sector Needs Assessment (J-MSNA) Preliminary Findings and Factsheets, Rohingya Crisis (ISCG MSNA TWG, 2020). See more MSNA examples from REACH here.
Support: The Coordinator can lean on in-country resources including the FSC NAWG (or similar TWG) and technical CLA support units available. In case in country resources are limited, contact the gFSC (gFSC Help Desk).
Guidance: No IASC guidance on MSNA is currently available although a specific MSNA framework is under technical review at the time of writing (check with GST for updates). Generally, the MSNA process builds on the IASC MIRA but with an expanded focus in terms of primary data collection and sampling. In the MSNA, data collection is done at HH level (usually), which allows for the collection of key sectoral indicators such as FCS, HHDS and CSI etc. and any others that might be relevant in the particular country context (the MIRA, in contrast, incorporates mainly focus groups, key informants including local authorities).
For additional resources, the GST has various examples of MSNA questionnaires (especially for the food security section).
Other Resources on MSNAs: See brief on Mainstreaming Multi-Sector Needs Assessments and Analysis in the Humanitarian Program Cycle (REACH, July 2021). See the results from the 2020 MSNA external evaluation: Technical Review of 2020 MSNAs in Protracted Crises (June 2021).
TIP: In some cases, food security assessments are expanded to also cover other sectors. However, these are different from standard MSNAs as the full extent of FSL info is available. Examples includes the Refugee influx Emergency Vulnerability Assessment III (REVA), Cox’s Bazaar (Multi-Agency, 2020) and the Food Security and Nutrition Monitoring Report (FSNMS), South Sudan (Multi-Agency).