Evidence database

Evidence of the effectiveness of anticipation is important for several reasons. Firstly, the selection and design of effective early actions is pivotal for implementation success. Secondly, evidence enables advocates and practitioners to demonstrate the impact of this emerging approach to humanitarian action. Thirdly, sharing and learning from each other’s successes and failures will help the anticipation community maximize its impact.

This database complements the Early Action Database by collating evidence on the effectiveness of (potential) early actions. Its primary purpose is to help practitioners evaluate and compare early actions based on existing data. As anticipation is a relatively new concept, evidence from anticipatory humanitarian programs may be lacking for many actions. For this reason, to the extent possible, the database also includes evidence from Development, Disaster Risk Reduction, and Humanitarian Response interventions/actions that could be adapted to the anticipatory context (see the implementation context filter). This way, practitioners can still learn from what is known about specific interventions in non-anticipatory contexts.

While the database is primarily meant to inform the selection and design of anticipatory actions, as the evidence specific to anticipation grows, it may also help advocates build arguments for early action, and help Monitoring, Evaluation, Accountability and Learning experts more easily identify and share studies relevant to their work.

Growing this database is a community effort. If you know of a study/evidence not reflected in the database, please contact Arielle Tozier de la Poterie.

After you use the database, please submit your feedback here to help us improve the database’s design and utility in the future.

Study Title

Evaluation of the Flood Early Action Protocol (EAP): Quantitative Impact Assessment of the 2020 EAP Activation

Country / Region
Bangladesh, Asia
Hazard
Flood
Early action
Unconditional cash
Action purpose(s)
Save lives
Sector(s)
HEALTH, EARLY WARNING
Implementation context
Anticipatory Action
What the evidence says
The FbF intervention appears to have been effective in enabling vulnerable households to evacuate the flood area where needed: 27% of FbF beneficiaries reported that they evacuated adults after receiving an early warning, vs 11% (+16%) of respondents among the comparison group.

Number of direct beneficiaries
3789 households
Research approach
Quantitative
Research methods
Quasi-experimental
Propensity score matching
Study type
Impact assessment
Publication Type
Monitoring report
Year of publication
2021
Additional details
The EAP for floods was activated on 25 June 2020. BDRCS reached 3,789 households in 10 Unions under 3 districts with an unconditional multi-purpose cash grant of 4,500 Bangladeshi Taka (BDT) (about 53$). A vulnerability score for each household was computed using five criteria: quality of housing structure; level of inundation during previous floods; number of dependents in the family (children, elderly, or disabled); family structure (female-headed, widowed, divorced etc.); livelihood strategies.
90% of beneficiaries reported spending the cash grants on food, 34% on livestock, 29% on health and 24% on evacuation.
Read study

Study Title

Food Aid and Informal Insurance

Country / Region
Africa, Ethopia
Hazard
N/A
Early action
Food
Action purpose(s)
Meet basic needs, Mental health/well-being
Sector(s)
HEALTH, NUTRITION
Implementation context
Emergency Response
What the evidence says
The study finds that food aid helps to smooth consumption, even when poorly targeted to those most in need, as people informally share within communities.

Research approach
Quantitative
Research methods
Empirical model
Study type
Impact assessment
Publication Type
Other non-peer reviewed publication
Year of publication
2003
Additional details
Paper uses a sample of 1450 households from 1994-1995 Rural Household Survey.
Read the study

Study Title

Household-level effects of providing forecast-based cash in anticipation of extreme weather events: Quasi-experimental evidence from humanitarian interventions in the 2017 floods in Bangladesh (2017)

Country / Region
Bangladesh, Asia
Hazard
Flood
Early action
Unconditional cash
Action purpose(s)
Reduce health impacts
Sector(s)
HEALTH
Implementation context
Anticipatory Action
What the evidence says
There was no statistically significant difference in illness between intervention and comparison groups in Bangladesh following the flood.

Number of direct beneficiaries
1039 households
Research approach
Mixed-methods
Research methods
Quasi-experimental; Focus group discussions; Key informant interviews
Study type
Impact assessment
Publication Type
Peer reviewed journal
Year of publication
2019
Additional details
Small sample size: 410 households total. 16 focus group discussions and 16 Key informant interviews. Cash was distributed between 3 and 7 days before the flood peak.
Read the study

Study Title

Household-level effects of providing forecast-based cash in anticipation of extreme weather events: Quasi-experimental evidence from humanitarian interventions in the 2017 floods in Bangladesh (2017)

Country / Region
Bangladesh, Asia
Hazard
Flood
Early action
Unconditional cash
Action purpose(s)
Mental health/well-being
Sector(s)
HEALTH
Implementation context
Anticipatory Action
What the evidence says
Households who received anticipatory cash in Bangladesh were statistically less likely to be miserable, unhappy, anxious or depressed in the seven days before the survey. This finding was based on a rudimentary scale, and should therefore not be over interpreted, but was corroborated by focus group data in which non-beneficiaries were more likely to express anxiety.

Number of direct beneficiaries
1039 Households
Research approach
Mixed-methods
Research methods
Quasi-experimental; Focus group discussions; Key informant interviews
Study type
Impact assessment
Publication Type
Peer reviewed journal
Year of publication
2019
Additional details
Small sample size: 410 households total. 16 FGDs and 16 Key informant interviews.
Read the study

Study Title

Household-level effects of providing forecast-based cash in anticipation of extreme weather events: Quasi-experimental evidence from humanitarian interventions in the 2017 floods in Bangladesh (2017)

Country / Region
Bangladesh, Asia
Hazard
Flood
Early action
Unconditional cash
Action purpose(s)
Food security/nutrition
Sector(s)
FOOD SECURITY & LIVELIHOODS
Implementation context
Anticipatory Action
What the evidence says
Survey results from Bangladesh indicate a positive impact on the availabilty of nutritious food during the flood period. Households receiving assistance were less likely to have to eat only rice (71 percent as comparted to 95 percent) and for a fewer number of days than non-beneficiaries.

Number of direct beneficiaries
1039 Households
Research approach
Mixed-methods
Research methods
Quasi-experimental
Focus group discussions
Key informant interviews
Study type
Impact assessment
Publication Type
Peer reviewed journal
Year of publication
2019
Additional details
Small sample size: 410 households total. 16 FGDs and 16 Key informant interviews.
Read the study

Study Title

Household-level effects of providing forecast-based cash in anticipation of extreme weather events: Quasi-experimental evidence from humanitarian interventions in the 2017 floods in Bangladesh (2017)

Country / Region
Bangladesh, Asia
Hazard
Flood
Early action
Unconditional cash
Action purpose(s)
Reduce number/quantity of new loans
Sector(s)
FOOD SECURITY & LIVELIHOODS
Implementation context
Anticipatory Action
What the evidence says
Households receiving anticipatory assistance were statistically less likley to accrue new debts during and immediately after the flood. 42 percent of Bangladeshi households receiving anticipatory cash took out new loans during or after the flood, as compared to 60 percent of non-recipients. The total value of the loans were also significantly larger among non-beneficiary households. Households who did not receive anticipatory cash were more likely to borrow from banks or moneylenders at high interest rates.

Number of direct beneficiaries
1039 Households
Research approach
Mixed-methods
Research methods
Quasi-experimental; Focus group discussions; Key informant interviews
Study type
Impact assessment
Publication Type
Peer reviewed journal
Year of publication
2019
Additional details
Small sample size: 410 households total. 16 FGDs and 16 Key informant interviews.
Read the study

Study Title

Household-level effects of providing forecast-based cash in anticipation of extreme weather events: Quasi-experimental evidence from humanitarian interventions in the 2017 floods in Bangladesh (2017)

Country / Region
Bangladesh, Asia
Hazard
Flood
Early action
Unconditional cash
Action purpose(s)
Reduce negative coping strategies, Prevent loss of income/livelihood/livestock
Sector(s)
FOOD SECURITY & LIVELIHOODS
Implementation context
Anticipatory Action
What the evidence says
According to survey results (data collected after second flood peak), the majority of Bangladeshi households in intervention and non-intervention groups sold their assets. However, qualitative focus groups (held before a second flood peak) indicated that intervention communities were less likely to have sold assets such as cookstoves and livestock.

Number of direct beneficiaries
1039 Households
Research approach
Mixed-methods
Research methods
Quasi-experimental
Focus group discussions
Key informant interviews
Study type
Impact assessment
Publication Type
Peer reviewed journal
Year of publication
2019
Additional details
Small sample size: 410 households total. 16 FGDs and 16 Key informant interviews.
Read the study

Study Title

Household-level effects of providing forecast-based cash in anticipation of extreme weather events: Quasi-experimental evidence from humanitarian interventions in the 2017 floods in Bangladesh (2017)

Country / Region
Bangladesh, Asia
Hazard
Flood
Early action
Unconditional cash
Action purpose(s)
Save lives
Sector(s)
HEALTH
Implementation context
Anticipatory Action
What the evidence says
86 percent of recipient households in Bangladesh evacuated their homes before the flood, as compared to 76 percent in non-intervention communities.

Number of direct beneficiaries
1039 Households
Research approach
Mixed-methods
Research methods
Quasi-experimental
Focus group discussions
Key informant interviews
Study type
Impact assessment
Publication Type
Peer reviewed journal
Year of publication
2019
Additional details
Small sample size: 410 households total. 16 FGDs and 16 Key informant interviews.
Read the study

Study Title

Household-level effects of providing forecast-based cash in anticipation of extreme weather events: Quasi-experimental evidence from humanitarian interventions in the 2017 floods in Bangladesh (2017)

Country / Region
Bangladesh, Asia
Hazard
Flood
Early action
Unconditional cash
Action purpose(s)
Meet basic needs
Sector(s)
FOOD SECURITY & LIVELIHOODS
Implementation context
Anticipatory Action
What the evidence says
Households in Bangladesh receiving cash before the flood were more likely to buy food and reinforce their homes. Only seven percent of recipients took no early actions before the flood, as compared to 20 percent in the comparison group.
Recipients of cash in Bangladesh spent the money on the following:
92% spent a portion of their cash grant on food;
65% used FbF money to pay for health expenses;
45% bought non-food items (NFIs) such as soap, jerry- cans, buckets or clothing;
35% spent some FbF cash towards evacuation costs, including boat transport and hiring labor to help move household items or livestock;
90% reported spending most of the money before the flood peak.

Number of direct beneficiaries
1039 Households
Research approach
Mixed-methods
Research methods
Quasi-experimental; Focus group discussions; Key informant interviews
Study type
Impact assessment
Publication Type
Peer reviewed journal
Year of publication
2019
Additional details
Small sample size: 410 households total. 16 FGDs and 16 Key informant interviews.
Read the study

Study Title

Impacts of forecast-based financing on herder households protecting from the dzud in Mongolia (2020)

Country / Region
Asia, Mongolia
Hazard
Dzud
Early action
Unconditional cash, Animal care kits
Action purpose(s)
Reduce negative coping strategies, Reduce number/value of new loans, Prevent loss of income/livelihood/livestock, Prevent loss of assets
Implementation context
Anticipatory Action
What the evidence says
This study compared the impact of anticipatory actions taken separately by Mongolia Red Cross Society (MRCS) and FAO to MRCS emergency response and a control group who received no aid.
The study calculated the following benefit-cost ratios for these three interventions:
- 1.05 for MRCS
- 1.26 for FAO
- 1.71 for DREF.
This means that for every US dollar invested by in anticiaption or response by MRCS and FAO beneficiary households received a benefit of US$ 1.05, US$ 1.26, and US$ 1.71. The survey did not collect any data on the amount of milk produced, therefore the current benefit estimates could not include income from milk. These estimates were stable in sensitivity analyses (best and worst case scenario simulation) with an exception for MRCS.

Number of direct beneficiaries
1000 MRCS anticipatory action; 450 total for FAO anticipatory action; 1750 total for MRCS response
Research approach
Quantitative
Research methods
Return on Investment
Study type
Impact assessment
Publication Type
Monitoring report
Year of publication
2021
Additional details
This study compared the impact of anticipatory actions taken separately by Mongolia Red Cross Society (MRCS) and FAO to MRCS emergency response and a control group who received no aid. The Mongolian Red Cross Society (MRCS) and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) triggered their FbF/AA mechanisms in January 2020 to anticipate and mitigate dzud impacts that year. Both agencies delivered unconditional cash grants (approx $84 from MRCS and $96 from FAO) and animal care kits to 1,450 of the most vulnerable herders across a total of 12 provinces and 83 soums. There were differences between the animal care kits distributed by each organization. See the full report for details. In addition, MRCS mounted an emergency response in March 2020, providing an additional l 1,750 households with the same bundle of cash and animal cares kits as distributed before the event.
The study used the following sample sizes:
- 202 households (of 1000 total) for MRCS intervention site;
- 150 households (of 450 total) for the FAO intervention site;
- 201 households (of 1750 total) for the DREF intervention site.
- 201 control households, which were similarly vulnerable and dzud-affected households but did not receive any FbF assistance.
MRCS beneficiaries received approximately USD 84 before (January) or after (mid-March) the event. FAO households received USD 96 before the event (early March)

Study Title

Impacts of forecast-based financing on herder households protecting from the dzud in Mongolia (2020)

Country / Region
Asia, Mongolia
Hazard
Dzud
Early action
Unconditional cash, Animal care kits
Action purpose(s)
Prevent loss of income/livelihood/livestock
Sector(s)
FOOD SECURITY & LIVELIHOODS
Implementation context
Anticipatory Action
What the evidence says
This study compared the impact of anticipatory actions taken separately by Mongolia Red Cross Society (MRCS) and FAO to MRCS emergency response and a control group who received no aid.
FAO anticipatory actions reduced the number of animals in poor health by nearly 7%, whereas MRCS' early actions increased the number of animals with deteriorating health by 7%. The analysis found no difference in the mortality of sheep compared to the control group. MRCS early actions increased offspring survival by 5%, but no impact was found for FAO early actions.
Both groups of anticipatory action beneficiaries produced less cashmere than the control group (4kg less on average for MRCS and 8Kg less on average for FAO). MRCS beneficiaries reported obtaining prices up to 2% higher for their cashmere than other groups.

Number of direct beneficiaries
1000 MRCS anticipatory action; 450 total for FAO anticipatory action; 1750 total for MRCS response
Research approach
Quantitative
Research methods
Inverse probability weighting regression
Propensity score matching (PSM)
Quasi-experimental
Study type
Impact assessment
Publication Type
Monitoring report
Year of publication
2021
Additional details
This study compared the impact of anticipatory actions taken separately by Mongolia Red Cross Society (MRCS) and FAO to MRCS emergency response and a control group who received no aid. The Mongolian Red Cross Society (MRCS) and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) triggered their FbF/AA mechanisms in January 2020 to anticipate and mitigate dzud impacts that year. Both agencies delivered unconditional cash grants (approx $84 from MRCS and $96 from FAO) and animal care kits to 1,450 of the most vulnerable herders across a total of 12 provinces and 83 soums. There were differences between the animal care kits distributed by each organization. See the full report for details. In addition, MRCS mounted an emergency response in March 2020, providing an additional l 1,750 households with the same bundle of cash and animal cares kits as distributed before the event.
The study used the following sample sizes:
- 202 households (of 1000 total) for MRCS intervention site;
- 150 households (of 450 total) for the FAO intervention site;
- 201 households (of 1750 total) for the DREF intervention site.
- 201 control households, which were similarly vulnerable and dzud-affected households but did not receive any FbF assistance.
MRCS beneficiaries received approximately USD 84 before (January) or after (mid-March) the event. FAO households received USD 96 before the event (early March)

Study Title

Impacts of forecast-based financing on herder households protecting from the dzud in Mongolia (2020)

Country / Region
Asia, Mongolia
Hazard
Dzud
Early action
Unconditional cash, Animal care kits
Action purpose(s)
Reduce negative coping strategies, Reduce number/value of new loans, Prevent loss of assets
Sector(s)
FOOD SECURITY & LIVELIHOODS
Implementation context
Anticipatory Action
What the evidence says
The study found that both anticiaptory programs and the emergency response were effective in preventing vulnerable herder households from making destituion sales of valuable assets. Beneficiaries of MRCS anticipatory action were 17% less likely to engage in this behavior and FAO beneficiaries were 43% less likely (than the control group). Beneficiaries of MRCS response were 20% less likely than the control group. Those receiving anticipatory aid from MRCS sold 8% more sheep, suggesting either increased destitution sales or proactive sales before expected price decreases.
MRCS beneficiaries were also more likely to forego consumption.
Beneficiary groups borrowed at the same rate as the control groups, but those receiving anticipatory cash from MRCS borrowed an average of $USD 132 less than others (nearly 60% of the value of the cash transfer).
Beneficiaries of MRCS response aid had food consumption scores 3.5 point higher than the control group, while FAO beneficiares of early action were 3 points below.

Number of direct beneficiaries
1000 MRCS anticipatory action; 450 total for FAO anticipatory action; 1750 total for MRCS response
Research approach
Quantitative
Research methods
Inverse probability weighting regression
Propensity score matching (PSM)
Quasi-experimental
Study type
Impact assessment
Publication Type
Monitoring report
Year of publication
2021
Additional details
This study compared the impact of anticipatory actions taken separately by Mongolia Red Cross Society (MRCS) and FAO to MRCS emergency response and a control group who received no aid. The Mongolian Red Cross Society (MRCS) and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) triggered their FbF/AA mechanisms in January 2020 to anticipate and mitigate dzud impacts that year. Both agencies delivered unconditional cash grants (approx $84 from MRCS and $96 from FAO) and animal care kits to 1,450 of the most vulnerable herders across a total of 12 provinces and 83 soums. There were differences between the animal care kits distributed by each organization. See the full report for details. In addition, MRCS mounted an emergency response in March 2020, providing an additional l 1,750 households with the same bundle of cash and animal cares kits as distributed before the event.
The study used the following sample sizes:
- 202 households (of 1000 total) for MRCS intervention site;
- 150 households (of 450 total) for the FAO intervention site;
- 201 households (of 1750 total) for the DREF intervention site.
- 201 control households, which were similarly vulnerable and dzud-affected households but did not receive any FbF assistance.
MRCS beneficiaries received approximately USD 84 before (January) or after (mid-March) the event. FAO households received USD 96 before the event (early March)

Study Title

Indoor residual spraying for preventing malaria

Country / Region
Various
Hazard
N/A
Early action
Indoor residual spraying
Action purpose(s)
Reduce vector borne diseases
Sector(s)
WASH, HEALTH
Implementation context
Development/DRR programs
What the evidence says
One trial found that indoor residual spraying appeared to be more protective than bed nets in areas where malaria is endemic, occurring over many months/years. In areas where malaria transmission is unstable (less frequent, and therefore the population is less likely to have developed immunity), insecticide-treated nets appear to be more protective than indoor residual spraying.

Research approach
Quantitative
Research methods
Cluster randomized controlled trials
Controlled before‐and‐after studies
Interrupted time series
Study type
Systematic review
Publication Type
Peer reviewed journal
Year of publication
2010
Read the study

Study Title

Indoor residual spraying for preventing malaria in communities using insecticide‐treated nets

Country / Region
Various
Hazard
N/A
Early action
Insecticide-treated bed nets, Indoor residual spraying
Action purpose(s)
Reduce vector borne diseases
Sector(s)
WASH, HEALTH
Implementation context
Development/DRR programs
What the evidence says
A systematic review comparing the use of a combination of indoor residual spraying and insecticide-treated nets with insecticide-treated nets alone found mixed/inconclusive evidence as to whether indoor residual spraying is better than using insecticide treated nets alone (Choi et al. 2019).

Research approach
Quantitative
Research methods
Cluster randomized controlled trials
Controlled before‐and‐after studies
Interrupted time series
Study type
Systematic review
Publication Type
Peer reviewed journal
Year of publication
2019
Additional details
The study recommends additional research to evaluate the added benefit of indoor residual spraying in communities using bed nets.
Read the study

Study Title

Insecticide space spraying for preventing malaria transmission

Country / Region
Various
Hazard
N/A
Early action
External spraying
Action purpose(s)
Reduce vector borne diseases
Sector(s)
WASH, HEALTH
Implementation context
Development/DRR programs
What the evidence says
Space spraying refers to the outdoor application of chemicals to kills mosquitoes. Only the adult mosquito population is targeted with space spraying, not the juvenile stages. This review evaluated the space spraying for malaria prevention at a population level (rather than a household level as is done with indoor residual spraying) and impacts on the vector population. It compared space spraying on its own or in combination with other control measures to doing nothing. The evidence from the four studies identified is low quality and inconclusive. The authors note that space spraying is expensive to implement on a routine basis as it requires specific equipment and experienced staff.

Research approach
Quantitative
Research methods
Cluster‐randomized controlled trials
Interrupted time series
Randomized cross‐over studies
Controlled before‐and‐after
Study type
Systematic review
Publication Type
Peer reviewed journal
Year of publication
2018
Additional details
The authors suggest additional research is needed to evaluate the effectiveness of this measure.
Read the study

Study Title

Insecticide-treated bed nets and curtains for preventing malaria (Review)

Country / Region
Various
Hazard
N/A
Early action
Insecticide-treated bed nets
Action purpose(s)
Reduce vector borne diseases
Sector(s)
WASH, HEALTH
Implementation context
Development/DRR programs
What the evidence says
In the wider international cooperation setting, insecticide-treated bed nets are highly effective in reducing childhood morbidity and mortality from malaria.

Research approach
Quantitative
Research methods
Randomized controlled trials
Study type
Systematic review
Publication Type
Peer reviewed journal
Year of publication
2009
Additional details
The review examined fourteen cluster RCTs and eight individual RCTs.
Read the study

Study Title

Insecticide‐treated nets for preventing malaria in pregnancy

Country / Region
Asia, Africa, India
Hazard
N/A
Early action
Insecticide-treated bed nets
Action purpose(s)
Reduce vector borne diseases
Sector(s)
WASH, HEALTH
Implementation context
Development/DRR programs
What the evidence says
The use of insecticide-treated nets during pregnancy improves pregnancy outcomes in malaria-endemic regions of Africa.

Research approach
Quantitative
Research methods
RCT
Study type
Systematic review
Publication Type
Peer reviewed journal
Year of publication
2006
Additional details
Reviewed 5 RCTs, four in Africa one in Asia, on the use of insecticide-treated nets to prevent malaria during pregnancy. The authors' conclude that "ITNs have a beneficial impact on pregnancy outcome in malaria-endemic regions of Africa when used by communities or by individual women. No further trials of ITNs in pregnancy are required in sub-Saharan Africa. Further evaluation of the potential impact of ITNs is required in areas with less intense and Plasmodium vivax transmission in Asia and Latin America"(p. 2).
Read study here

Study Title

Is There Persistence in the Impact of Emergency Food Aid? Evidence on Consumption, Food Security, and Assets in Rural Ethiopia

Country / Region
Africa, Ethopia
Hazard
Drought
Early action
Food-for-work, Food
Action purpose(s)
Food security/nutrition
Sector(s)
HEALTH, NUTRITION
Implementation context
Emergency Response
What the evidence says
For-for-work beneficiaries had higher food consumption and food security scores, especially those with greater per-capita expenditures. They were also less likely to invest in livestock holdings and perceived their risk of famine to be lower. Food distributions had the greatest impact on poorer households, increasing food consumption but also increasing perceived risk of famine.

Research approach
Quantitative
Research methods
Propensity score matching
Difference-in-difference
Quasi-experimental
Study type
Impact assessment
Publication Type
Other non-peer reviewed publication
Year of publication
2006
Additional details
Sample of 1327 households
Read the study

Study Title

Joint Post-Distribution Monitoring (PDM) of Forecast-based Anticipatory Action Project (FbAA) (2022)

Country / Region
Asia, Nepal
Hazard
Flash Flood
Early action
Cash, Dignity kits
Action purpose(s)
Wellbeing / reduce phsychosocial stress, Reduce negative coping strategies, Reduce psychosocial stress, General Support, Security/nutrition, Food security/nutrition, Meet basic needs, Mental health/well-being
Sector(s)
HEALTH, CASH, NUTRITION
Implementation context
Anticipatory Action
What the evidence says
The result shows that FCS of beneficiaries who received cash assistance at the anticipatory response phase is higher than compared to the beneficiaries assisted at the post-shock phase. On average, households receiving cash before the shock had higher food security Food Consumption Score (51.9) than post-shock beneficiaries (48.6). This finding was found to be statistically significant at p-value 0.009.
Note that both groups had acceptable Food consumption scores: Thresholds -> Poor Food Consumption (0-21), Borderline Food Consumption (greater than 21-35) and Acceptable Food Consumption (35 Above).

Number of direct beneficiaries
WFP = 86,677
Research approach
Mixed-methods
Research methods
RCT
Study type
Impact Assessment
Publication Type
Monitoring report
Year of publication
2023

Additional details

This study seeks to compare the impact of anticipatory cash transfers and post-impact cash distributions. Results are from a survey of recipients of AA and response aid, 14 focus group discussions, and KII with relevant officials at the municipalities and/ or local government representatives of all seven municipalities visited. Audio records and notes from these qualitative discussions were transcribed, translated, coded, and segregated by themes to support the data analysis phase. Survey data collection was done in two different stages reaching out to a total of 710 surveys covering WFP’s anticipatory response (n=379) and post-shock (n=331) cash distribution. Likewise, the PDM presents findings from 277 UNFPA beneficiaries and nine out of 250 UN Women beneficiaries.

Sampling for PDM was done randomly at a single stage, whereby the total sample size consists of beneficiaries of all three agencies -- WFP, UNFPA and UN Women. Therefore, as the sample calculation was not done to specifically represent the actions of all three agencies, the agency-specific quantitative findings presented in this report are only indicative.

Visit project page

Study Title

Larvicide to prevent malaria transmission

Country / Region
Various
Hazard
N/A
Early action
Larvicide
Action purpose(s)
Reduce vector borne diseases
Sector(s)
WASH, HEALTH
Implementation context
Development/DRR programs
What the evidence says
A systematic review of 4 existing studies found that ground application of larvicide may help to reduce incidence of malaria. There are no studies covering aerial application.

Research approach
Quantitative
Research methods
Randomized controlled trials
Interrupted time series
Randomized cross‐over studies
Non‐randomized cross‐over studies
Controlled before‐and‐after studies
Study type
Systematic review
Publication Type
Peer reviewed journal
Year of publication
2019
Read the study

previous 1 2 3 next

The evidence database is still under development and is subject to change based on feedback and input from our partners.

Do you have a question?

Growing this database is a community effort. If you know of a study/evidence not reflected in the database, please feel free to contact me.

Arielle Tozier de la Poterie

Global advisor Early Action and Research

German Red Cross

Raise your Question

Teaser image by Musfarayani/IFRC

Evidence database

Results

Evaluation of the Flood Early Action Protocol (EAP): Quantitative Impact Assessment of the 2020 EAP Activation

Country / Region

Hazard

Early action

Action purpose(s)

Sector(s)

Implementation context

What the evidence says

Number of direct beneficiaries

Research approach

Research methods

Study type

Publication Type

Year of publication

Additional details

Food Aid and Informal Insurance

Country / Region

Hazard

Early action

Action purpose(s)

Sector(s)

Implementation context

What the evidence says

Research approach

Research methods

Study type

Publication Type

Year of publication

Additional details

Household-level effects of providing forecast-based cash in anticipation of extreme weather events: Quasi-experimental evidence from humanitarian interventions in the 2017 floods in Bangladesh (2017)

Country / Region

Hazard

Early action

Action purpose(s)

Sector(s)

Implementation context

What the evidence says

Number of direct beneficiaries

Research approach

Research methods

Study type

Publication Type

Year of publication

Additional details

Household-level effects of providing forecast-based cash in anticipation of extreme weather events: Quasi-experimental evidence from humanitarian interventions in the 2017 floods in Bangladesh (2017)

Country / Region

Hazard

Early action

Action purpose(s)

Sector(s)

Implementation context

What the evidence says

Number of direct beneficiaries

Research approach

Research methods

Study type

Publication Type

Year of publication

Additional details

Household-level effects of providing forecast-based cash in anticipation of extreme weather events: Quasi-experimental evidence from humanitarian interventions in the 2017 floods in Bangladesh (2017)

Country / Region

Hazard

Early action

Action purpose(s)

Sector(s)

Implementation context

What the evidence says

Number of direct beneficiaries

Research approach

Research methods

Study type

Publication Type

Year of publication

Additional details

Household-level effects of providing forecast-based cash in anticipation of extreme weather events: Quasi-experimental evidence from humanitarian interventions in the 2017 floods in Bangladesh (2017)

Country / Region

Hazard

Early action