evidoria

← Back to browse

Good practice Imported

IOM–WFP Biometric Data-Sharing Deduplicates Aid Registries in South Sudan

South Sudan · Juba · See the South Sudan profile · See the Juba profile

Evidence: Observational / pre–post Top 83% 40/100 · Ask Evidence Copilot about this practice

WFP and IOM cross-matched biometric beneficiary records to curb duplicate aid registrations in South Sudan, exchanging data on over 100,000 people in Upper Nile and Jonglei after WFP's SCOPE platform passed 1 million registrants nationwide.

100,000+
Beneficiaries cross-matched (Upper Nile & Jonglei) (by June 2019)
700,000+
Target coverage nationwide (by late 2019 (target))
1 million
People registered on WFP SCOPE (South Sudan) (2019)
5 million
SCOPE registration target (by 2020 (plan))
IOM–WFP Biometric Data-Sharing Deduplicates Aid Registries in South Sudan

Details

Promoter
World Food Programme (WFP) and International Organization for Migration (IOM)
Period
2018–2019
Keywords
humanitarian aid, biometric identity, food security

Context

In South Sudan's protracted crisis, multiple humanitarian agencies each ran their own beneficiary lists, creating a persistent risk that the same household was registered — and assisted — more than once across parallel aid programmes.

Objectives

Cross-match biometric beneficiary records between agencies to curb duplicate or fraudulent aid registration.

Activities

In 2018 IOM and WFP signed a biometric data-sharing agreement linking IOM's BRaVE beneficiary system and WFP's SCOPE registration platform.

Results

By the first exchange announcement in June 2019, the agencies had cross-matched biometric records for more than 100,000 people in Upper Nile and Jonglei states, aiming to cover more than 700,000 people nationwide by late 2019, while WFP had separately registered 1 million people on SCOPE in South Sudan with plans to reach 5 million by 2020.

Conclusions

The only evidence available is the agencies' own joint announcement; no independent audit of how much duplicate or fraudulent aid was actually prevented has been found, and humanitarian-biometrics reviews have flagged recurring consent and data-protection concerns when biometric records are shared between agencies in active conflict settings.

Implementation
Indicative cost
Medium (€50k–€500k)
Time to results
Medium (1–3 years)
Staffing & skills
IOM operational teams running BRaVE, WFP operational teams running SCOPE

Conditions for success

  • Formal inter-agency biometric data-sharing agreement
  • Cross-agency coordination in an active-conflict operating environment

Common failure modes

  • No independent audit confirms how much duplicate or fraudulent aid was actually prevented
  • Consent and data-protection concerns when biometric data is shared between agencies in conflict settings

Commonly funded by

Philanthropic / foundation funding

Indicative funding routes for practices of this type — always check each programme's current calls and eligibility rules.

Do you run this practice? Claim it — verified implementers get a public contact pathway and can propose corrections.

Data sources

Where this practice's information was retrieved from, and when.

Attachments

Similar practices you may find useful