# of people reached through anticipatory actions
This indicator looks at the number of people that have been reached through activities that are the result of the triggers that are identified and set by the communities and/or by the implementing organization to reduce the risk and damage of the hazards happening. Therefore, any pre-planned activity based on a likelihood of a hazard/scenario that is responded to by SCI and the community would be considered under this. Accordingly, the number of people who had no or reduced impact due to the anticipatory action would be counted under this indicator.
For the implementing office to be able to monitor against an anticipatory action, the office needs to have either community-based or internal emergency preparedness plans against certain hazards/risks based on scenarios. If the hazard is not anticipated, and the potential response and response pathway are not documented in advance to show action steps based on the likelihood of a hazard, this cannot be counted as an anticipatory action activity.
Calculation: Number of individuals reached through Anticipatory Action programming
Data Collection Method/Tool: Routine Monitoring
Data Source: Activity Reports,
Who Collects: Save the Children, Community Members, or Implementing Partners
From Whom: Individuals who are reached through anticipatory action activities
Frequency of Collection: Data will be collected every month.
Frequency of Reporting: Data will be reported quarterly or biannually
How to count and aggregate: Sum unique values across reporting periods. If possible, the data management can be done per hazard type / anticipatory activity, as it will give a better insight into the activities and the context of the implementing office.
Baseline Value Info: Baseline value is not required.
However, there is one particular nuance to keep in mind. During the analysis of the individuals reached through activities, the baseline values can hold data value in terms of comparing how organizations have expanded their anticipatory action capabilities. Yet, this can be done only if the baseline data/reach value for this indicator can be managed and reported as per specific locations, per hazard, and per activity type. This information can be triangulated with financial data to understand whether responses have any relevance for value-for-money evaluations. Because one of the underlying assumptions of anticipatory action is that it reduces the implications of the hazards on communities and the organization due to the early action, and sometimes this value can be monitored more concretely based on financial implications to households, individuals, or the organization.
Indicator Prioritisation
Level of Indicator
Indicator Context Type
Theme
Sub Theme
Cross-Cutting Themes
Context
Frequency of Data Collection
Unit of Measure
Data Format
Direction of Desired Change
Number of Decimal Points
Indicator is Rounding
Nature
Recommended Disaggregations
In the anticipatory action approach, the decision on taking an action is based on set triggers that have already been agreed upon based on empirical or widely available anecdotal evidence. This could be a weather forecast warning of flash floods, or the local knowledge that already has different methods to monitor the situation in advance. Both methods can be utilized as part of the trigger mechanisms.
- Anticipatory Action: Anticipatory action can help save lives, reduce human suffering, offset some of the economic impacts of disasters, improve the effectiveness of emergency preparedness, response, and recovery efforts, and reduce reliance on ad hoc, slow, and costly humanitarian aid after a disaster.
- Emergency Preparedness Plan (EPP): A mandatory document to support general preparedness to multiple risks (SCI Emergency Preparedness Procedure)
- Trigger: This term refers to a pre-determined threshold or set of conditions that, once met or exceeded, initiate the implementation of anticipatory actions. These triggers are based on early warning systems and data analysis to forecast potential emergencies or crises, such as natural disasters, food insecurity, or conflict.
To further provide a concrete example, in this scenario, the organization knows that the upcoming rains will likely have significant implications due to their intensity and lead to flash floods in implementation areas. The likelihood is based on the evidence coming from the weather forecasts, and such instances happen every year in a particular region. This region is also devoid of any vegetation that can reduce the impact. Considering that this issue happens every year, and we have access to technology to monitor the weather, the intensity of the rains that are expected triggers the anticipatory action response. Accordingly, the staff builds trenches and secondary walls made of sandbags to protect the facilities to reduce the physical damage to our facilities, but also the organization relocates some of its staff to mitigate any potential damage to them. On the side, the organization also activates the cash response to support households in preparing for the upcoming flooding and make preparations in their households. Accordingly, this indicator would count the number of individuals who benefited from the early action taken by the organization based on a realized trigger under Anticipatory Action plans.
Important! Monitoring of triggers is the responsibility of the entire organization, which includes program operations, PDQ, and other departments. Whereas the monitoring of the activity as a result of the trigger goes under the responsibility of the MEAL department