The Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) is a common global scale for classifying the severity and magnitude of food insecurity and malnutrition. It is the result of a partnership of various organizations at global, regional and country levels dedicated to developing and maintaining the highest possible quality in food security and nutrition analysis. IPC is increasingly the international standard for classifying food insecurity and malnutrition.
IPC is a “big-picture” classification focusing on providing information that is consistently required by stakeholders around the world for strategic decision-making. Nuanced information may also be needed to inform particular decisions or answer certain questions. The IPC provides the essential information needed in a wide range of contexts and does so in consistent, comparable and accountable ways.
Within the inherently complex, multidisciplinary and cross-sectoral fields of food security and nutrition, there was a widespread need for an analytical approach that was robust and transparent, comparable and applicable across locations, and relevant for decision-making. To meet this challenge, IPC has become a global reference for classification of food insecurity (and increasingly for acute malnutrition) because it is:
IPC makes the best use of the evidence available and does so through a transparent, traceable, and rigorous process. Evidence requirements to complete classification have been developed considering the range of circumstances in which evidence quality and quantity may be limited, while ensuring adherence to minimum standards. To ensure the application of IPC in settings where access to collect evidence is limited or non-existent, specialized parameters have been developed. IPC provides a structured process for making the best assessment of the situation based on what is known, and presents the limitations to its classifications as part of the process.
There are three IPC Scales: Acute Food Insecurity, Acute Malnutrition and Chronic Food Insecurity. Each scale classifies a specific condition that is linked to particular responses.
IPC consists of four functions, all of which to be followed to conclude classification and to generate IPC information products. Each function has a specific purpose and a set of protocols to guide analysts. The completion of all protocols is fundamental to the IPC as they ensure that analyses are rigorous, neutral and accountable. The Four Functions include:
All three scales follow exactly the same protocols within the functions but contain adapted tools and procedures to allow analysts to untangle the different conditions. By sharing the same protocols, IPC promotes the application of multiple scales in the same country.
The IPC process begins with the formation of an in-country Working Group (referred to as the IPC Technical Working Group, or TWG), usually hosted by the government and comprised of relevant national stakeholders, usually including representatives of the government, UN agencies and non-governmental organizations (NGOs). These TWGs can be either new groups or embedded within existing coordination structures. The TWGs are the foundation of country-level implementation, and are crucial for ensuring the consistency, sustainability and use of IPC.
Since its introduction in 2004, IPC has become the internationally accepted reference for analysis of food security and, increasingly, for acute malnutrition crises. As such, IPC holds considerable advantages for both analysts and decision-makers alike, including:
- Setting a common global standard for food security, malnutrition and famine classification:
- Creating a platform for building evidence-based consensus among key stakeholders:
- Implementing a process that consolidates wide-ranging evidence into knowledge for taking action towards food security and nutrition:
The IPC is designed to provide evidence-based analysis to guide strategic decision-making, providing decision-makers with clear, well-presented information on food security and nutrition situations in a reliable, consistent and accessible form. IPC provides a general classification of the severity and magnitude of food insecurity and acute malnutrition, and identifies key characteristics and drivers.
IPC follows a rigorous and globally comparable approach, and has proven to be valuable for awareness-raising and advocacy and to inform strategic response planning in the fields of food security and nutrition, as in the case of Humanitarian Needs Overview and Response Plans. IPC responds to six key questions of how severe, how many, when, where, why and who, as well as identifies key characteristics of the situation.
IPC provides decision-makers with an analysis of fundamental aspects of a current or projected situation. As such, although IPC supports response analysis by providing invaluable information on the complex food security and nutrition conditions, following stages of response planning and implementation should also consider other issues, such as operational and financial constraints.
Furthermore, although IPC provides general estimates of the size of food insecurity and malnutrition to support more strategic response analysis, the scope, methods, purpose and meaning of the numbers are not to be used to monitor and evaluate response and achievement of development goals. Instead, monitoring and evaluation systems which have the overall objectives to assess achievements based on a precise detection of changes on certain key indicators should be used to assess impact and achievements. IPC Acute Food Insecurity analysis may identify areas that would probably be in at least one Phase worse in the absence of received or planned humanitarian food assistance. The identification of these areas has the objective to raise awareness of decision-makers about the presence of significant humanitarian food assistance which may be or will be affecting Phase classification.
The situation analysis provided by IPC and the consequential and circular stages of response analysis, planning, implementation, and monitoring and evaluation are all indispensable for more strategic, responsible and timely action.
IPC and the Key Stages of the Analysis-Response Continuum:
IPC Situation Analysis: Identifies fundamental aspects of current or projected situation (e.g. severity, magnitude, nature and drivers). IPC provides invaluable and rigorous evidence-based information consistently needed for response analysis.
Response Analysis: Identifies where assistance should be continued, scaled up or down, terminated or initiated and what are the most effective and efficient responses. Although based on situation analysis, it also considers other issues, such as operational, logistical, financial and security constraints and opportunities, as well as analysis of the most appropriate modalities for response.
Response Planning: To identify and put in place operational requirements and systems to enable an effective and efficient response. These include logistics, financing, institutional partnerships, advocacy and training.
Response Implementation: To implement multiple operational modalities towards an effective and efficient response.
Monitoring and Evaluation: To determine degrees of desired impact and/or achievements towards goals of policy, programme and/or project outputs and overall impact; and to inform adjustments in the response as necessary.
At the country and professional levels, IPC holds a number of advantages, including:
Finally, both at country and professional levels, IPC is accessible, free and easy to use. Understanding of IPC is supported by a range of structures, including support provided by the GSU, IPC partner organizations and the global and regional networks of IPC certified trainers/facilitators.
The IPC Analysis Cycle includes four inter-linked stages that need to be followed for each IPC analysis in order to produce high-quality products and effectively communicate results. An analysis cycle, excluding planning and lessons learning, usually takes between one and three months, although chronic food insecurity classifications may take longer depending on the analysis coverage and other parameters.
The difference is determined by the percentage of people facing the conditions related to IPC phase 5.
A geographical area (e.g. county) is attributed and mapped in a specific IPC phase when at least 20 percent of the population in this area is experiencing the conditions related to that IPC phase or higher phases.
If households in a given area are experiencing catastrophic conditions of IPC phase 5 (i.e. extreme food gaps and significant mortality which is directly attributable to outright starvation or to the interaction of acute malnutrition and disease), these households are classified in IPC Phase 5 “Catastrophe”.
If at least 20 percent of the households in a given area are facing IPC Phase 5 “Catastrophe” conditions, this area (e.g. county) is also classified and mapped in IPC Phase 5 Famine and a Famine is declared in this area.
Therefore, at least 20% of the households should be experiencing IPC Phase 5 conditions to classify the whole area in IPC Phase 5 Famine and declare a Famine.
IPC was created precisely to supersede potential political interferences through technical neutrality, and, if necessary, to shine a light on the political dimensions (at both national and international levels) that may obfuscate the severity of food insecurity situations.
IPC provides parameters which are based on international standards to analyse the severity of food insecurity from none to famine levels. These parameters have been commonly agreed by all partners and are followed in all countries using IPC protocols to ascertain the severity of the situation based on these parameters and data available.
This is particularly challenging in countries affected by conflict where some areas are not accessible and quality data are not always available. For this reason, an independent committee of global experts, called the IPC Famine Review Committee (FRC), can be activated to support the IPC country team of food security and nutrition specialists as an additional quality assurance and validation step for the IPC conclusions. The activation of the IPC FRC is also meant to further ensure technical independence of the analysis from potential political influence.
Join our mailing list