• Outcome
• Impact

• Survival and livelihoods protection threshold
• Food Security and Nutrition

Change in households expenditure pattern compared with pre disaster levels (or baseline level) and cover their livelihoods protection threshold This indicator uses the HEA/HES approach. The reduction of expenditure on immediate and basic needs indicates improved food security and crisis situation, proxy for stabilization of situation and recovery process. Changes in expenditure pattern include: the reduction of expenses in food, the increase of expenses in other basic needs such as education or health, the increase of expenses in livelihoods assets, the capacity to pay back debts, etc. - Includes food/cash distributions interventions - Includes livelihoods restarting interventions (reestablishment of food and income sources)

Geography/Livelihoods zone; Head of household’s gender, age, disabilities, chronic diseases, dependency ratio, and any other relevant criteria, such as urban/rural context, religious, ethnic or political identities; Wealth groups; Livelihoods group (e.g. pastoralist, farmers, traders); Period to achieve the objective;

• Increase (number)

Both secondary and primary data collection can be used according to context. Baseline/Endline. If multiyear programme depending on comparison requirements between lean season and other seasons, consider an interim reporting/evaluation Secondary data. Reliable/relevant sources from other actors, clusters or government. Data Collection methods: Secondary data analysis; Households Survey, Focus Group Discussion; Household is taken as the unit of analysis, so does not provide intra-household data, or information on inequality within the household.

• Economic Security

Significant Change. To be compared with pre-crisis baseline This indicator should consider quality of inputs acquired (food, household assets, productive assets) are the same than before (pre-crisis) Where possible use the national income survey format. If this is not available then use the HEA questionnaire format. Data should be collected for the following expenditure groups: Staple foods; Non staple foods; Household items; Water; Agricultural inputs (seeds, fertilizers, tools, pest control, sacks, livestock, fodder, labour); Clothes; Taxes; Gifts; Education; Fuel (wood, charcoal, kerosene); Medical and health; Transport; Dowry. Measure: > Change in household overall expenditure pattern relative to baseline > Change in household priority spending relative to baseline > Proportion of household expenditure spent on food relative to baseline - Needs to consider application across and contribution from various sectors. - Needs to consider linkages with food sources, expenditure pattern indicators - Levels / threshold will vary according to context Examples: % of HHs by food expenditure share categories, for example % of HHs that spend more than 75% of resources on food. Or else present a pie chart showing the % of resources going to each expenditure category before and after the shock Watch Out For! - Expenditure should include also non cash values for a better assessment. Especially for food what is actually consumed should be considered and not only what is purchased. The value of non-purchased goods is also a proxy indicator of social capital. For more details on methodology: Measuring food security using household expenditure surveys: http://www.ifpri.org/publication/measuring-food-security-using-household-expenditure-surveys This can be disaggregated to show expenditures on certain key groupings of products, such as expenditure on clothing and footwear, expenditure on food, expenditure on inputs for economic activities (e.g. fertilizer), each of which show different things. The impact pathway for getting here can be quite different - can be used for a Cash Transfer programme or a programme that specifically targets increasing agricultural production. Expenditure is a more reliable means of calculating a household's wealth, as there is less incentive to misreport than with income. However, a lot of context has to be understood to see whether it reflects a worsening or improvement of the situation. When distinguishing between urban and rural areas in particular, expenditure will not capture difference coming from own production in rural areas (of food or savings on accommodation), so caution must be exercised in some of the interpretations. The further away from the actual date of expenditure you are asking the respondent to outline their expenditure, the less accurate the response will be.