COVID-19 Preparedness and the Continuity of Essential Humanitarian Services in Borno, Adamawa and Yobe States of Nigeria

Abstract

This article examines how existing emergency preparedness and coordination systems supported

the COVID-19 response while maintaining essential humanitarian services in Borno, Adamawa

and Yobe States of Nigeria during 2020 and 2021. Emergency operations centres, polio response

networks, humanitarian clusters and logistics systems established before the pandemic were

quickly adapted to support the response. COVID-19 was initially addressed through a separate

humanitarian appeal in 2020 but was incorporated into the regular humanitarian response plan in

2021. The pandemic placed further pressure on services already affected by conflict, displacement

and weak infrastructure. Movement restrictions, limited testing in insecure areas, misinformation,

supply disruptions and reduced face-to-face contact affected programme delivery. Humanitarian

organisations responded by adapting service-delivery approaches and expanding risk

communication. However, published evidence provided limited information on whether

community feedback influenced programme decisions. Available reports also rarely measured the

coverage of adapted services against the level of need. As a result, the evidence shows how

organisations changed their delivery methods but provides less clarity on whether essential

services continued to reach all affected populations. The findings are based on a structured

documentary analysis of 20 institutional and grey-literature sources published no later than 2021,

reviewed alongside relevant peer-reviewed studies. A single analyst coded the documents across

eight dimensions and conducted a separate verification review. Findings supported by only one

source were clearly identified. The evidence was strongest on preparedness design and

coordination, less complete on programme activities and weakest on population-level outcomes.

Drawing on the findings, the article proposes the Dual-Outcome Compound Emergency

Preparedness Framework. The framework provides a diagnostic checklist covering seven

capability areas, with each area combining one indicator for controlling disease transmission and

another for maintaining essential services. Further testing is required to assess its application in

other humanitarian settings. The central lesson is that preparedness within a protracted

humanitarian crisis must protect and measure both public health outcomes and the continuity of

essential services.