 Welcome to my presentation and also receiving greetings from Malawi. I'm presenting this experience of social mapping in context of emergency. After the introduction, I'll take you through the definition of social mapping, how we went through the experience and also our recommendation. Normally we say we work for the beneficiaries, but do we work with the beneficiaries in emergency if the answer is no? Why? Is it because we judge them that they have nothing to contribute or they are completely traumatized? But we need to start with believing that even in dangerous or emergencies that can erupt, the community do not remain with the nothing. They have also the capacity to give important information for our intervention. The experience that I'm going to share or the methodology that we are going to share is not new. It has been used in several contexts, like in normal context, but what is new today is using the methodology in the context of emergency. In 2014, we found ourselves in the floods, like in Malawi, that's in Sanje. It was a very difficult context. You know, those people who are already involved in emergency, it is always difficult when you get quick information that you need to go and react. And we felt the best intervention or the best way to understand the context or to engage the beneficiaries is to use social mapping. And when we used in this area, it worked and we extended the experience to seven other projects. We had, like Koraera Inigeno and the Koraera plus the oral vaccination campaign, like one leg chila, also the displacement of people like from the neighboring country. In both areas, it was also successful. Latest, we also introduced geographical information system as a matter of improving communication with the other external stakeholders. What is social mapping? Social mapping is a participatory methodology that helps to visualize the location of the households, distribution of different people together with the social structures existing in the area, including groups and organizations. This you use simple available tools like the stones just to allocate the areas. For example, you can ask the people to allocate where is their health facility. They will go and locate where is the school. They will go and locate. And you also use simple stick so that they draw like the rivers, the boundary for the area. These locations, if they are visualized, they also promote them to give ideas, their feelings for the areas where they are living. You also use just a simple ground. From what you have drawn on the ground, you transfer to a paper. Just a simple paper. This also helps to work as a reference document. How did we do it? Mostly as a facilitator, you are supposed to prepare questions that should help to identify the risks, the roles and the expected deliverables. It can be from the beneficiaries and also you as a partner. After that, you elect the representative. They can be male only or women only or men and women. That is depending on the context of what you want to discover in the area. Later, next step, you invite the people so that they do the exercise of visualizing the risk prone area. As I've already said, you normally, it's a participatory, you evolve each and every person in the area for the group so that they identify the areas. Example like, as you can see, they are women. She is coming from where she can point like where is the water source. Common question can be where is the water source? They will go and point. There can be several types of water sources and the next question can be where do you drink? And they will go and also point the specific area where they drink. For example, in this context, we found that they had boho but they could not use the boho because it was saute and they are opting to use the lake water or the river water. Within the discussion, we found that they knew the risk that they were taking but they had no option and they knew that maybe they could get the infection and that also helped us to know what we can do and they also mentioned their experience that we once used powdered water gut and in that way, we knew that okay, they know how to use the water gut and we can just reinforce. This process, as we said, is participatory. It helped also to identify some misconceptions and within there, they could clarify and if there are also some misconceptions that needs to be worked on, you could also mark them. Usually, this is the way how we normally receive the information for the context. This is not a lake. This is the river. This is flooding area. Down there, there are roads, there are houses but if you can receive this type of information, how can you know what is on the ground? The only way to understand the context as a new person for that area it means you are supposed to go down and meet with the beneficiaries so that they should share what is there. So through the experience of the social mapping, this is the outcome of the information that we got from the beneficiaries. You can see now we saw the roads, rivers and within the process we are located like the critical isolated affected area as you can see like there, this is where the people were more living but this is a new river, this was the old river but this was just a new river because of the flood and this is also an old river. So people completely cut off. We identified the high risk community, we prioritized the needs together with them and we had to know what we can do and they also know what they could also contribute. They gave ideas, they gave space, they also gave like also human resource support and we identified strategic positions that's both for medical related activities and also logistic related activities. When I say logistic related activities like distribution of food and food items we used like schools and other structures in the site. It was very interesting that there was a strong community ownership and together with them we managed to reach 70,000 beneficiaries with different types of activities like medical and non-medical. For the non-medical items we distributed almost 26,000 mosquito nets, 7,000 order treatment kits, 5,000 shelters and also clothes. Because of their participation, because of their involvement there was that strong reinforced transparency and accountability. It is a simple, low cost approach and it really helped us to understand the local context and their needs and this also promoted confidence for the people to contribute. We were really, they were really our partners, we were our true partners in the process. As we said, this is in emergency related context. What we added there is, as I said, geographical information system which they added to, it was just like a smartphone to identify the other area so that we share the information to specific individuals or organizations. With our experience we are also asking the house that please MSF Responsive Action should avoid killing existing innovative things in the areas that we work with. We need to consider scaling up like the listening and soliciting support from the beneficiaries. Like in this context we could not use our cars because it was not possible to bring the cars in that area. We used their sources. MSF has already asked, is already calling for the change and this is our time to change now. And also may I ask you again that we should join the UK MSF Director who presented yesterday. She also talked about the action. We need to act now. Like us through our experience we believe now in involving and engaging the community. We have used it. I believe now if it is a release it is your time to take this stick so that you continue this experience on the ground. It's not about trial but we need to act now. I think I should last by also appreciating all the support from the beneficiaries, the Minister of Health, the major team but also the leadership for that context that accepted us to say yes we can do it. We know in the other context if the leaderships are blocking it is always difficult to do what people can do. Thank you very much for your attention.