Basic Needs original sector tree. Total expenditure per ... (Inter-sectoral programming). Prioritization ... fall under
1. 2. 3. 4.
>0.6 > 0.6 & < 1.2 > 1.2 & < 1.8 < 1.8
1. 2. 3. 4.
Result from average Result from average Result from average Result from average
AVERAGE
Coping Strategies
>100 JD 100 to 68 JD 68 to 28 JD < 28 JD
Not adopting Stress Crisis Emergency
Economic state
1. 2. 3. 4.
No debt 0 – 40 JD 40 – 100 JD > 100 JD
1. 2. 3. 4.
Dependency Ratio
1. 2. 3. 4.
AVERAGE
Total expenditure per capita
Total debt per capita
Basic Needs original sector tree
1. The household is not adopting coping strategies has a low dependency ratio, no debt and a high expenditure per capita 2. Somewhere between 1 and 4, with a more positive mix 3. Somewhere between 1 and 4, with a more negative mix 4. The household is resorting to implementing coping strategies, a high dependency ratio, high debt and a low expenditure per capita
• Option 2 • Too complicated and focused only on BN items • The group was more interested in seeing households’ ability to meet their overall needs, not just the needs that fall under the basic needs working group
• Focus should be on prioritisation • Leave eligibility to be determined by working group guidelines on a per-activity basis (with final determination to be made by each agency)
• Goal to end up with ranked list of beneficiaries for prioritisation • Option 1 – Nice and simple • Option 3 – Sensitive to the precariousness of the case’s situation by comparing PW to MEB
Option 3 (Original)
Predicted Welfare
Score between 1 and 2 ineligible
Predicted Expenditure MEB
Predicted Expenditure MEB
Debt Per Capita
Score between 3 and 4 eligible for prioritization
1. 2. 3. 4.
1. 2. 3. 4.
No debt 0 – 40 JD 40 – 100 JD > 100 JD
1 100 JD
Predicted Expenditure MEB
75% PW * 25% DPC
Debt Per Capita
Option 3 (New)
1.
>2.0
2.
>1.2 but less than 2.0
3.
>0.6 but less than 1.2
4.
2.0 2. >1.2 but less than 2.0 3. >0.6 but less than 1.2 4.
