Dear Mija,
In my humble opinion I think you raise two different issues in your message. On the issue of "indicator - capacity - program", I think you want to talk about the evaluation indicators of a community-based program for acute malnutrition, and I think there are enough, and if there is a need to create some, we must base them on those that already exist. For example, I suggest that you review the document <STANDARD INDICATORS AND CATEGORIES FOR BETTER REPORTING OF CMAM, April 2015 Edition>. Now on the human resources side (quality, number of staff, etc.), I think that this is the evaluation of the community-based management of acute malnutrition itself, which will now integrate into a Conceptual framework for example, the availability and functionality of resources / inputs (personnel, equipment, etc.), the management of these inputs in the process (the appropriate use of resources according to the protocol etc.) and the results obtained at the end to assess the quality of this support. I think the same applies to Infant and Young Child Feeding, which has a standard methodology with specific recommendations in the modules for use in the community. Thank you.

Hi Mija,
I think this is important point before considering writing any nutrition proposal. CMAM programme, in particular, SAM part is different from other health consultations delivered in the health facility(HF). Appetite test alone may take one hour to examine but it does not mean to wait for one patient until he/she completed the test. I see one SAM case has one follow up card, and this card has both anthropocentric measurements and clinical examination that need time. Before 2015 in Yemen I was mobile team leader with tow nurses. One nurse plus 2 community health volunteer(CHVs) assigned in the triage area (taking all the anthropocentric measurements and doing the appetite test) and one nurse inside for filling the records/cards and me to examine the child and counsel the care giver. We were three plus two CHVs operating only for OTP-SAM