Four key lessons jump out from the research:
First, the aid response of separating family members with symptoms of Ebola had the unintended effect of discouraging honest reporting or referrals, such that the total official death count across West Africa was much lower than the true cause of death.
Second, what mattered the most in interrupting transmission was when local populations observed deaths of people they knew which led them to take seriously new changes in behavior (not touching the bodies of people wiht Ebola). This was the essential change that had to occur.
Third, much of the efforts overall by aid agencies had less of an effect in “bending the curve” of the epidemic than the simple communications by the families and communities affected.
Fourth, while many health professionals died early in the outbreak, attention to protecting them, including provision of protective gowns/gloves and equipment was necessary for further work to be achieved.
Food and Nutrition:
Food aid functioned less as a nutrition intervention and more as an enabler of disease control. Its main value was making isolation and quarantine viable. Qualitative data indicated that food distributions to isolation and treatment units, facilitated by Food for Peace (FFP), improved the effectiveness of isolation, quarantine, and response actions at community-based sites of transmission. FFP food distribution played a critical role in supporting isolation and restrictions on mobility, in response to warnings from implementing partners about food shortages among quarantined communities.
