Request for Proposals
Household Food Consumption Indicators Study Data Analysis Consultancy
Food and Nutrition Technical Assistance III Project (FANTA)
RFP Date of Issuance: August 9, 2013
Due date for Application: 26 August, 2013 by 5:00pm GMT
Availability: September 9, 2013 – February 28, 2014 (up to 78 days)
Place of Performance: Remote work
Interested parties should send the following documents via email to Laura M. Glaeser, the Technical Manager for this consultancy, at
· Curriculum Vitae
· FHI 360 Biodata Form
· Proposed daily rate
· A letter of interest identifying how the consultant plans to reach the deliverables of this Request as well as what experience/education/skills they bring to the consultancy.
1. Objective
The objective of this consultancy is to assist FANTA in an exploratory analysis of the relationships among select household food consumption indicators (based on available secondary data) and between these indicators and a common scale established to classify the severity of acute food insecurity.
It is anticipated that the study findings will be published for public reference and will inform stakeholder discussions to improve the accuracy of acute food insecurity severity classifications.
Under the general direction of the Technical Manager identified above, the selected Household Food Consumption Indicators Study Data Analysis Consultant will be responsible for:
· Conducting a desk review of pertinent secondary information
· Developing a data analysis protocol and analyzing previously collected data, as well as any other available data that may be of use
· Writing up findings, results, and recommended next steps for key stakeholders based on this analysis
· Participating in a consultation regarding the applicability of non-HEA study findings to HEA outcome analysis findings and the broader IPC Acute Food Insecurity Reference Table for Household Classification
2. Background
FANTA and the USAID-funded Famine Early Warning Systems Network (FEWS NET), in technical consultation with the Food Insecurity Phase Classification’s (IPC’s) Global Support Unit (GSU) and the United Nations World Food Programme (WFP), are undertaking a collaborative research initiative to study the relationships between several of the household food consumption indicators the IPC’s Acute Food Insecurity Reference Table for Household Group Classification employs, and how these indicators’ ranges relate to one another and to the table’s five levels of food insecurity severity.
The IPC is a set of protocols that aims to provide food security technicians and decision-makers with timely, reliable, comparable, and accessible information on food security conditions and outcomes at the household and/or area (e.g., livelihood zone, administrative unit) level. The protocols consist of several resources, including an analytical framework for classifying the severity of acute food insecurity and tools for integrating and classifying existing food security information at national and sub-national levels according to a standard scale.
One such tool is the Acute Food Insecurity Reference Table for Household Group Classification. This table provides a general description, reference outcomes, and priority response objectives for five phases (Phase 1 – No Acute Food Insecurity, Phase 2 – Stressed, Phase 3 – Crisis, Phase 4 – Emergency, Phase 5 – Catastrophe) of acute food insecurity at the household level[1]. This table facilitates classification of acute food insecurity severity for a given geographic area or livelihood zone into one of the aforementioned phases using information on household outcomes (e.g., food consumption and livelihood change) and contributing factors (e.g., food availability, access, utilization, stability; and hazards and vulnerability).
This research initiative focuses specifically on the household outcomes portion of this table and, within that, several of the indicators used to classify household food consumption[2] including: the household hunger scale[3] (HHS) – measured directly or derived from Household Food Insecurity Access Scale[4] (HFIAS) data, the household dietary diversity score[5] (HDDS), the coping strategies index[6],[7] (CSI), the food consumption score[8] (FCS), and outcome analysis from the household economy approach[9],[10] (HEA). In particular, this study seeks to examine how the ranges of food insecurity severity each indicator measures relate to one another and to the phases of severity set out in the IPC. The findings of this study will improve our understanding of the relationships among household food consumption indicators and will contribute to stakeholder discussions to improve the accuracy of classification of acute food insecurity severity.
To explore these questions, FANTA designed this consultancy, which includes: a desk review of literature relevant to this study topic; a review of current available secondary data, which includes at least two of the aforementioned indicators; the design of an analysis protocol for the data and analysis of applicable data; a write up of findings, results, and recommended next steps based on the analysis; and participation in a consultation to discuss how analysis findings relate to the broader IPC Acute Food Insecurity Reference Table for Household Group Classification.
To date, various research collaborators have shared several cross-sectional data sets for use in this study. To be included, the collected data sets had to meet the following minimum criteria:
1. Include at least two of the aforementioned food consumption indicators
2. Include data sufficient to be representative of a given population
3. Include clearly articulated supporting information on data collection methods and protocols, and data collection instruments for reference
4. Include high quality, clean data (including removal of any personal identifiers), and notes regarding any sampling weights and design variables (e.g., cluster variables) necessary for analysis
5. Include a sample size of at least 200 for each indicator to be analyzed (see Attachments for the full data solicitation).
Data sets currently available for analysis under this consultancy include:
· Ethiopia 2012 (HDDS, CSI, FCS, HHS)
· Kenya 2010, 2012 (FCS, CSI)
· Mongolia 2008 (HDDS, HFIAS)
· Pakistan 2008, 2012 (HDDS, CSI and FCS, CSI)
· Somalia 2010, 2011, 2012 (HDDS, CSI)
· South Sudan 2012 (HDDS, HHS, CSI)
· Uganda 2011, 2012 (HDDS, CSI)
· Zimbabwe 2010, 2011, 2012 (FCS, CSI)
These data sets will be shared with the consultant selected to carry out this analysis.
3. Specific Activities
FANTA anticipates that the selected Household Food Consumption Indicators Study Data Analysis Consultant will complete the majority of activities associated with this consultancy by the end of 2013, and all associated activities by the end of February 2014. Additional information follows on the specific activities that compose this consultancy, including anticipated deliverables and associated levels of effort.
I. Desk review and synthesis write up
While this study explores relationships among select household food consumption indicators within the context of the IPC, other stakeholders have engaged in similar analyses of relationships among these and related indicators which may provide useful context for and/or inform or otherwise complement this study. Therefore, the first activity of this consultancy is to conduct a desk review of available published and gray literature on similar analyses. FANTA and FEWS NET have compiled a working bibliography of such documents, all of which the consultant will review and to which the consultant will be expected to add. From this review, the consultant will draft a synthesis of key findings. This synthesis will serve as part of the ‘background’ section of the eventual full write up of this study. It is anticipated that this desk review will inform and/or otherwise assist the selected consultant in conceptualizing a data analysis protocol for the data to be analyzed later in this consultancy. Once drafted, the selected consultant will submit the draft desk review synthesis to the Technical Manager (Laura Glaeser), who will constitute a committee to review the document. The Technical Manager will provide review committee feedback to the selected consultant, and the consultant will finalize the document, submitting the final version of the synthesis to the Technical Manager for approval.
Deliverable(s): Draft synthesis of desk review findings document (to be included in the ‘Background’ section of the full technical write up for this consultancy); estimated maximum page length: 10 pages
Estimated level of effort (LOE): 15 business days, inclusive of the review and drafting (approximately 12 business days), as well as finalization (approximately 3 business days) of the desk review synthesis
II. Confirmation of usability of collected data and identification of additional secondary data to be included in the analysis
Before analysis of the data collected for this study can begin, it is necessary to confirm that the currently available data includes the information needed to carry out the proposed analysis. The Technical Manager will therefore provide the selected consultant with the data sets collected to date for this study so that s/he can review them and gather additional information from the technical collaborators who provided them, as needed.
The desired result of this study, to the extent possible given the data available, is an analysis that addresses all four non-HEA indicators[11], using as many of the above-listed and/or subsequently collected data sets as possible. As such, in addition to analyzing the previously collected data sets, the selected consultant will be asked to identify any other data sets potentially useful to this study that s/he comes across (e.g., during the desk review in Activity I) and inform the Technical Manager of these data sets. The Technical Manager will then follow up with the data holders about the possibility of also using the identified data for this study.
Deliverable(s): Additional data sets, as available
Estimated LOE: 5 business days, inclusive of confirmation of existing data and identification of additional data
III. Data analysis protocol development
Assuming usability of a sufficient sub-set of the collected data sets, the selected consultant will develop a draft analysis protocol for how the data will be analyzed in this study. The draft analysis protocol should include: a description of analytic methods the selected consultant will apply to analyze available data given geographic, temporal, and indicator variety (e.g., type of correlation analysis and statistical tests proposed; discussion of whether receiver operator curve and/or specificity/sensitivity analyses can be applied; explanation of the methods that will be used to combine findings across the analysis of individual data sets to generate overall conclusions regarding how the indicators relate to one another). ‘Dummy’ tables should be included in the draft analysis protocol to complement the proposed analysis description. Once drafted, the selected consultant will submit the proposed analysis protocol to the Technical Manager, who will constitute a committee to review the document. The Technical Manager will provide review committee feedback to the selected consultant, and the consultant will finalize the document, submitting the final version of the analysis protocol to the Technical Manager for approval before beginning data analysis.
Deliverable(s): Draft data analysis protocol; estimated maximum page length: 10 pages
Estimated LOE: 15 business days, inclusive of drafting (approximately 10 business days) and finalization (approximately 5 business days) of the data analysis protocol
IV. Data analysis and findings write up
The current acute food insecurity phase classification for household groups applies cut-off values for some indicators (e.g., HDDS), uses prevalence classified in a particular category in other indicators (e.g., HHS), and measures change from a reference baseline in still other indicators (e.g., FCS, CSI, HEA). FANTA is interested in explorations of all of these elements to better understand the relationships among the indicators employed and between the indicators and the current acute food insecurity phase classification for household groups.[12] In particular, FANTA would like the selected consultant to examine:
· How the range of indicator values for continuous indicators and the defined cut-off values for categorical indicators relate to one another.
· How these relationships change if alternative indicator thresholds are used.
· From this, an exploration as to how the indicator values and defined indicator cut-off values (both current and potential) relate to the current phase cut-offs in the IPC Acute Food Insecurity Reference Table for Household Group Classification.
As with the other written deliverables in this consultancy, the selected consultant will submit the draft data analysis report to the Technical Manager, who will constitute a committee to review the document. The Technical Manager will provide review committee feedback to the selected consultant, and the consultant will finalize the document, submitting the final version of the data analysis process and findings to the Technical Manager for approval before beginning the full technical write up.
Deliverable(s): A draft report of the analytic process (e.g., methods) and findings, including all materials associated with data analysis (e.g., data tables, graphs, charts); estimated maximum page length: 30 pages
Estimated LOE: 25 business days, inclusive of data analysis and drafting (approximately 20 business days) and finalization (approximately 5 business days) of the write up
V. Full technical report write up
The end result of this analysis will be a technical report, prepared by the selected consultant, which includes: an executive summary; a background section, including a description of the existing literature on the relationships among these indicators and between these indicators and other measures of food security (a draft of which will have been completed in Activity I); the contributions of the findings of this analysis to the literature; the methodologies/protocols applied to undertake this analysis (a draft of which will have been completed in Activities III and IV); the results of this analysis (a draft of which will have been completed in Activity IV), including the limitations of these results given the heterogeneity of the data available for the study; the broad implications of this analysis for this study initiative (e.g., how the indicator values and defined indicator cut-off values relate to the current IPC phase cut-offs), related recommendations, and suggested next steps for additional data collection and analysis and/or revision of the current Acute Food Insecurity Reference Table for Household Group Classification. Once the selected consultant has drafted the full write up, s/he will submit it to the Technical Manager, who will constitute a final review committee. The Technical Manager will provide review committee feedback to the consultant, who will then finalize the write up.
Deliverable(s): Draft and final full technical write up documents; estimated maximum page length: 60 pages
Estimated LOE: 15 business days – inclusive of drafting (approximately 10 business days) and finalization (approximately 5 business days) of the write up