Implications for data analysis (4/4)
The findings should “tell a story”
- The NIPN approach makes use of nutrition impact pathways to unpack broad policy questions which are often related to impact. The impact pathway is a logical way to organise the various elements leading to impact (inputs – activities – outputs – outcomes – impact). A broad impact question can be split into a number of sub-questions which are more likely to be answerable with existing data, such as questions related to inputs (financial and human resources), activities (the interventions) and outputs (intervention coverage of the target population)
- The analysis of data related to the different elements of the nutrition impact pathway should not just appear as a compilation of indicators. It can tell a great story which makes the logical flow of the pathway clear, and is thus more likely to influence policy makers.
Why an agricultural nutrition-sensitive intervention has or has not resulted in an improved nutrition outcome can be explained in a clear and convincing way when analysing:
- differences in investments in these interventions over time or between population groups (inputs in human and financial resources);
- the change in the quality and frequency of implementation of the interventions over time or between population groups (if data for a proxy indicator of activity implementation are available);
- which proportion of the target population has benefited most from the intervention (coverage per income quintile for instance); and
- whether there is a change in the risk factor/determinant over time or between population groups (e.g. dietary diversity score).