Humanitarianresponse Logo


Guided by the CFS programme's specific design, the evaluation framework looked to address the major methodological weaknesses identified by our structured review of the evidence base and by key findings from our first evaluation study (Ager et al., 2013; Metzler et al., 2013). Measurement tools were selected to assess impact with respect to three key areas: (a) the protection of children from risk, (b) supporting caregivers and communities in strengthening systems of child protection, and (c) the promotion of children’s psychosocial well-being (including the acquisition of skills and knowledge). Survey data were collected via mobile phones from interviews with caregivers of children between the ages of 6 and 12 years and from interviews with children aged 13 to 17 (the findings of the latter are reported in a supplement to this report). The survey was comprised of four main sections: questions drawn from the Child Protection Working Group (CPWG) Child Protection Rapid Assessment (CPRA), a pilot, brief measure of developmental assets (the B-DAP) based upon the Search Institute’s Developmental Assets Profile, a locally-derived measure of psychosocial well-being, and a vulnerability assessment. Several items of the CPRA were used to assess protection risks and vulnerabilities as well as to identify key child protection actors and resources within the community. The B-DAP was used to gauge reporting of internal and external assets that support healthy behaviours and well-being and allow children to develop and thrive into adulthood. The locally derived measure of well-being was based upon indicators of psychosocial well-being suggested by extensive ethnographic fieldwork in Uganda (CPC, 2011). This measure provided a means of assessing different outcome areas related to social and emotional well-being of children including: engagement at home, at school and in the community, social relations, problem solving skills and behaviors, self esteem, and the reduction in troubling thoughts and feelings. The vulnerability assessment screened children with respect to the following criteria: primary caregiver aged 65 or above, member of female-headed household, family with over 5 members residing more than 4 nights per week in the home, physical disability, and mental disability. A Vulnerability Index (VI) for each child was compiled by collating survey data, and children with 3 or more vulnerabilities were designated as ‘vulnerable’ for the subsequent analysis. In addition to survey interviews, participatory discussions with children, caregivers and community members were conducted to identify formal and informal systems of protection as well as further define vulnerability in the refugee context. Designation of ‘higher’ and ‘lower’ quality CFSs were made based on two assessments of quality using an abbreviated World Vision quality standards monitoring checklist
Key findings: 
CFSs were widely utilized by children Caregivers reported 73% of children between 6 and 12 having attended CFS, with similar proportions for girls (75%) and boys (71%). For most analyses that follow the comparison is between attenders and non-attenders; for others the distinction is made between frequent attenders (42%), occasional attenders (31%), and non-attenders (27%). Validation of cargiver reports of attendance with respect to a sample of 100 children listed on CFS attendance registers indicated an average attendance at 68% of available sessions for frequent attenders, 54% of available sessions for occasional attenders and less that 12% of available sessions for reported non-attenders. The vulnerability of children was not a significant predictor of their likelihood of attending a CFS. Overall, 18% of children were indicated to be vulnerable on the Vulnerability Index. 22% of children frequently attending CFSs, compared to 16% of children occasionally attending CFSs and 15% of children not attending CFSs, were designated as vulnerable on this measure. There is no evidence here of a statistically significant trend for CFSs to disproportionately reach vulnerable children, but it does suggest that CFSs were broadly accessible to such children.
Sample size: 
Assessment Report: 
Publicly Available
Assessment Questionnaire: 
Publicly Available
Assessment Data: 
Publicly Available
Assessment Date(s): 
01 Jul 2013 to 30 Jul 2013
Report completed
Unit(s) of Measurement: 
Collection Method(s): 
Population Type(s): 
Leading/Coordinating Organization(s): 
United Nations Children's Fund
Other location: 
Typhoon Haiyan - Nov 2013