Investigating the key indicators for evaluating post‐disaster shelter

Abstract

This study sought to identify the primary indicators for evaluating shelter assistance following natural disasters and then to develop a shelter evaluation instrument based on these indicators. Electronic databases and the 'grey' literature were scoured for publications with a relation to post-disaster shelter assistance. Indicators for evaluating such assistance were extracted from these publications. In total, 1,525 indicators were extracted from 181 publications. A preliminary evaluation instrument was designed from these 1,525 indicators. Shelter experts checked the instrument for face and content validity, and it was revised subsequently based on their input. The revised instrument comprises a version for use by shelter agencies (48 questions that assess 23 indicators) and a version for use by beneficiaries (52 questions that assess 22 indicators). The instrument can serve as a standardised tool to enable groups to gauge whether or not the shelter assistance that they supply meets the needs of disaster-affected populations.

Enhancing service delivery in humanitarian relief chains: the role of relational capital

“…Order planning, delivery link, customer service and satisfaction, Supply chain and logistics cost (Gunasekaran et al, 2004); Resources, Output and Flexibility (Beamon, 1999); Balanced Score card, e.g. Financial perspective, customer perspective, organisational perspective and innovation perspective (Bullinger et al, 2002); Financial/ non-financial measures and internal/external measures (Rana and Sharma, 2019;Avelar-Sosa et al, 2019); Supply chain operations reference (SCOR) model which focuses on four basic supply chain processes: (1) plan; (2) source; (3) make; (4) deliver (Tripathi and Gupta, 2019) Key Performance Indicators suitable for relief supply chains (Beamon and Balcik, 2008;Santarelli et al, 2015;Nath et al, 2017); Development of performance measurement systems and frameworks (e.g. Balanced Score Card, Supply Chain Operations Reference model) (Anjomshoae et al, 2017(Anjomshoae et al, , 2019Lu et al, 2016;Schiffling and Piecyk, 2014); Identification of critical success factors (Yadav and Barve, 2015;Celik et al, 2014;Oloruntoba, 2010;Beresford and Pettit, 2009); Operational performance (Santarelli et al, 2015); Self-reliance of encamped refugees performance measurement (Sch€ on et al, 2018); Response capacity of a relief supply chain performance measures (Acimovic and Goentzel, 2016); Balanced Score Card that includes financial, customer, internal business processes and learning and innovation (Anjomshoae et al, 2019); An integrated performance measurement framework (Anjomshoae, et al, 2019) Table 3.…”

Building safety in humanitarian programmes that support post‐disaster shelter self‐recovery: an evidence review

“…End of programme assessment and reporting is routine in the humanitarian sector, at multiple levels of analysis—agency, disaster, programme, sector (Buttenheim, ). Traditionally, however, these have tended to be process evaluations, focusing on programme implementation and whether or not outputs have been achieved rather than on outcomes or impacts (White, ; Nath et al, ).…”

“…Recent work has begun to address this issue. In an attempt to develop a standardised instrument, Nath et al () have created a single evaluation tool based on more than 1,500 indicators selected from the numerous tools that exist to support shelter programme monitoring and evaluation.…”

Assessing the impact of household participation on satisfaction and safe design in humanitarian shelter projects

“…In practice, organisations have too often relied on coverage, such as the number of households assisted, to gauge the impact of shelter assistance, neglecting to evaluate whether or not shelter assistance actually fulfils its intended purpose. However, numerous indicators have emerged to measure the quality of shelter project outcomes (see, for example, Nath et al, 2017).…”