Supplementary Feeding Program(SFP) in BINP

This document discusses about when you are making a presentation on any type of nutritional programs what kind of points need to be discussed.

1. A Presentation on Supplementary Feeding Program(SFP) in BINP

2. Feeding Program Feeding program is the most outreached solution that we could offer to our society for proper growth & maintenance. Through feeding program we can able to help those people who are suffering from food scarcity. It also help the child in developing many behaviors like socialization, sharing their foods, be kind to all & cooperation.

3. Supplementary Feeding Program(SFP) in BINP A supplementary feeding program (SFP) was implemented on the Bangladesh Integrated Nutrition Project (BINP- the first large-scale government intervention in nutrition) in response to the high rates of low birth weight and malnutrition among children and women of childbearing age.

4. Objectives/Aims/Purposes/Goals The following are specific objectives of the SFP: Reduction of severe protein-energy malnutrition (PEM) in Under 2 children by 50 percent Reduction of moderate PEM among Under 2 children by one-third Reduction of low birth weight (LBW) incidence by 50 percent Improvement in weight gain to 7.0 kg in at least 50 percent of pregnant women

5. Targeted Areas Supplementary feeding program in BINP covered 59 of a total of 464 Thanas (administrative units) in Bangladesh. The approach is being scaled up through the following National Nutrition Program (NNP) to cover 105 of the country’s 464 Thanas; further scaling up of nutrition action is planned through the recently approved Health, Nutrition, and Population Sector Program (HNPSP).

6. Program Duration This supplementary feeding program (SFP) was implemented between May 1995 and December 2002 and was followed by the National Nutrition Program (NNP), whose implementation was just begun in 2004.

7. Supplementary Nutrition per Day Beneficiary Calorie (Kcal) Protein ( grams) Growth faltered children under 2 years of age 800 20-25 Malnourished children under 2 years of age 500 12-15 Pregnant & lactating women 600 18-20

8. Supplementary Feeding Program in BINP: Success relies on For a better policy than welfare, following five conditions are met: 1. The target groups have to enroll in the program. 2. The criteria are correctly applied in selecting those to receive supplementary feeding. 3. Those selected for supplementary feeding attend sessions to receive the food. 4. There is no leakage (for example, selling of food supplements) or substitution (reducing other food intake). 5. The food is of quantity & quality to have a noticeable impact on nutritional status.

9. Identified Percentage of Participants Who Attended The SFP Subgroups Both eligible & received population for SFP Both not eligible but received population for SFP Malnourished, and g rowth faltered children under 2 years of age. Eligible Received Not Eligible Received 70% Only 30% 30% 13% Malnourished pregnant & lactating women Eligible Received Not Eligible Received 63% 53% fully(at least 95% of sachets) 50% partially(less than 95% of sachets) received 37% 37% * Source of information comes from the study by Nahar (2003) in one BINP Thana.

10. Program Evaluations All the available evidence from SFP in BINP does not show that it improved growth in children, weight gain in pregnant women, or birth weight in infants. There are numerous potential explanations for this type of negative results, including- Mistargeting (especially errors of exclusion); Sharing of supplementary food; Substitution for other foods; Inadequate ration size or incomplete participation; Palatability issues;

11. Program Evaluations Biological partitioning; Inadequate feeding practices before, during, and after illness; Infection itself; Restrictions on women’s mobility; and High work and time demands placed on women. All of these explanations, and others, are plausible and have been offered in various evaluation reports.

12. Supplementary Feeding Program in BINP: Program Disadvantages To provide better nutrition to the selective, such type of government-financed nutrition program is probably not a permanent solution. Require large amounts of time & effort. Corruption has not been entirely prevented. Lack of integration with other important local rural NGOs.

13. Supplementary Feeding Program in BINP: Program Advantages The evidence of limited impact does not mean that the SFP in BINP is not without its successes. The program has been shown in numerous studies to be effective in improving child growth and pregnancy outcomes. First, the project has raised awareness of nutrition issues amongst both government and non-government organizations. Secondly, there has been successful mobilization at the community level, with high levels of participation in growth monitoring

14. Supplementary Feeding Program in BINP: Program Advantages iii) Finally, as Sack et al. demonstrate, there have been benefits to some target groups. They present data to show that supplementary feeding for pregnant women has a beneficial impact after enrolment. OED's analysis similarly finds that supplementary feeding for children has a larger impact for children attending on a regular basis, with a still larger impact for the most malnourished children. As reported by Levinson and Rohde, there is also a significant project impact on low birth weight for children born to low-income women.

15. Conclusion Inspite of the various problems faced by the SFP in BINP and the inherent disadvantages of the program, it has been quite phenomenal in helping the low birth weight and malnourished children and women of childbearing age. A great advantage of this program is that it helps the participants from more than the well off. And added to this is the political support that can be easily garnered for this program. So, it can be implemented quite efficiently in the poorer sections of the community.

16. References This study draws primarily on the following reports and analyses: a) BINP Endline Evaluation, Final Report, September 2003 ( Karim et al. 2003) b) Thin on the Ground, 2003 (Save the Children Fund) c) Baseline Survey of NNP: Initial Results, January 2005 (ICDDR,B) d) Impact Evaluation of BINP, June 2004 (IMED, GOB) e) Maintaining Momentum to 2015, February 2005 (OED, World Bank) - Reanalysis of data from the endline evaluation report - Reanalysis of SCF data - Analysis of the 2000 Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) data f) Nahar , S. Impact of Food Supplementation on Pregnancy Weight Gain and Birth Weight in Rural Bangladesh. PhD thesis, Cambridge University, 2003. g) Sack DA, Roy SK, Ahmed T, Fuchs G. 2005. Letter to the Editor. Health Policy and Planning 20: this issue. h) Levinson FJ, Rohde JE. 2005. Letter to The Editor. Health Policy & Planning 20: this issue.