The following statement is on behalf of the Disasters Emergency Committee (DEC), of which Tearfund is a member, and responds to the Guardian article “UK charities exaggerated Africa crisis, says report’ by John Vidal, 16 January 2004.
The aid agencies welcome Valid International’s independent evaluation of the Southern Africa Crisis Appeal, which is an important part of every DEC appeal.
While there are always lessons to be learned and aspects of agencies’ response that could be improved, the vast majority of the report’s findings were overwhelmingly positive.
The report concludes that the appeal was justified, the agencies response was appropriate and it was based on the best possible information. “DEC agencies contributed to prolonging lives and prevented suffering,” it says. That is the true measure of the appeal’s success.
This was the first preventative appeal the DEC has run in recent times. Instead of waiting for people to die, the agencies moved beforehand to prevent catastrophe: the UN estimated that 14 million people were at risk and some were already dying.
The agencies hope that their openness to independent evaluation will encourage the public to support future appeals in the confidence that their money will be well spent.
Ends
With regard to specific Tearfund mention in the Guardian article, Tearfund says:
The evaluation report criticises Tearfund for stating, “14 million people across Southern Africa face the prospect of starvation and disease epidemics as famine threatens the region.”
By highlighting the ‘prospect’ and ‘threat’ of famine Tearfund believes that it was accurately communicating the extent of the unfolding crisis. If agencies, including Tearfund had failed to respond there would have been substantial criticism for standing by and doing nothing as people in the region suffered.
Tearfund also believes that it acted responsibly by basing our initial assessment on figures produced by the UN World Food Programme, a responsible and well-recognised agency. However, in light of this report we will of course look carefully at how we communicate future crises.
Tearfund and its partners, the Evangelical Fellowship of Zambia and Emmanuel International in Malawi, are highlighted for examples of good practise in the evaluation.
For example, Emmanuel International's 'inputs for assets' programme ensured that beneficiaries 'received agricultural inputs like seed and fertiliser, which they would not otherwise have been able to afford, for repairing a dirt road that improved their access to market, a doubly appropriate intervention.'
Ends