10th meeting of the consultative groupvietnam, yemen, ifrc, undp, un/international strategy for...
TRANSCRIPT
GFDRR is able to help developing countries reduce their vulnerability to natural disasters and adapt to climate change, thanks to the continued support of its partners: ACP Secretariat, Arab Academy, Australia, Bangladesh, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Colombia, China, Denmark, Egypt, European Union, Finland, France, Germany, Haiti, India, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Malawi, Mexico, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Spain, South Africa, South Korea, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States, Vietnam, Yemen, IFRC, UNDP, UN/International Strategy for Disaster Reduction and The World Bank.
10th Meeting of the
Consultative group
May 9th, 2011Geneva, Switzerland
Evidence of GFDRR Impact in Priority CountriesBy: Michel Matera, GFDRR Track II Team Leader
Ayaz Parvez, GFDRR Results Management Specialist
Contents
Three Part Presentation
1. GFDRR Impact Highlights in Priority Countries
2. Overall GFDRR Results Evaluation
3. Recommendations, Proposals and Way Forward
Part 1: GFDRR Impact Highlights
Mainstreaming DRM in Priority Countries
• Rationale: The Hyogo Framework for Action 2005–2015 called upon international organizations to ‘integrate DRR considerations into development assistance frameworks.
• How? Corporate Review is one entry-point for mainstreaming DRR/CCA intoWB Country Strategies and Operations. GFDRR provides advice through anexisting WB institutional/corporate function (SDN Corporate Review).
• Challenges:
• Use the GFDRR focal points in 31 priority countries to proactively engage with governments before CAS is prepared and to provide input for Review.
• Linking the agendas of DRR and CCA more consistently.
• Making "Natural Hazards, UnNatural Disasters: The Economics of Effective Prevention“ the analytical framework for Corporate Review
Corporate Review of Country Strategies and Operations
Current Status and examples
LCR: The strategy for the Organization of Eastern Caribbean States (FY10-FY14) identifies reducing vulnerability to natural disasters as one of the key regional challenges.
• Strategic pillars or co-pillars: • DRR: 15 CASs
• CCA: 9 CASs
• Sectoral/cross-cutting issue: • DRR: 40 CASs
• CCA: 29 CASs
• Challenge/Risk: • DRR: 54 CASs
• CCA: 31 CASs
AFR: The Lesotho CAS (FY10-FY14) recognizes that climate change is likely to have a negative impact on agriculture and the quality of water.
MNA: A key strategic objective of the Yemen CAS (FY10-FY13) is to help manage natural resources scarcity and natural risks.
ECA: A strategic objective of the Albania CPS (FY11-FY14) is to reduce the country’s vulnerability to climate change.
SAR: The Bhutan CPS (FY11-FY14) considers climate change a cross-sectoral issue, and accounts for climate resilience through anticipated investments in climate change preparedness.
EAP: The Tonga CPS (FY11-FY14) anticipates to mainstream DRR and CCA into infrastructure planning and management.
Distribution of MDTF priority country resources 2006 - 10
7
Understand disaster risks and improve access to
information
Develop innovative tools and implement
pilot interventions
Engage key actors and organize
government structures
Crea
ting
the
cond
ition
s fo
r D
RR a
nd C
CA M
ains
trea
min
g
8
A comprehensive approach to DRM and CCA…
Understanding disaster risks and improving access to information
9
Successful implementation of the 1st phase of the Central American Probabilistic Risk Assessment (CAPRA).
Partnership with the Government of Guatemala to assist the country’s 333 municipalities to make informed decisions about land use planning while including disaster risk reduction measures.
Nepal Hazard Risk Assessment that includes detailed hazard risk maps, detailed assessments of different risk exposure, hazard by hazard and initial recommendations for risk-reducing interventions in key at-risk areas.
Indonesia Risk in a Box: Web based tool that models impacts of different hazard events on population or infrastructure. Open source software.
Development of Ghana Flood Hazard Assessment to inform the National Strategy for Disaster Prevention and development plans for the growth and development of the North.
Engage key actors and organize government structures
10
Launch of Lao PDR National Disaster Risk Management Strategy Project(2010-2012) to operationalize the Strategic Plan on Disaster Risk Management (SPDRM).
Colombia Country Disaster Risk Management Analysis (CCDRMA) will provide the Government with an analytical basis for decision-making on how best to improve institutional structures and policies for Disaster Risk Management.
Technical Building Evaluation Unit (TBEU) in Haiti fully operational. Over 250,000 buildings have been evaluated by closing of Phase 1 of the project.
DRM specialists in core countries to strengthen partnerships and coordination efforts (20 recruited)
11
EDRR launch provided an opportunity for
Government dialogue led by Planning and Finance Ministries
Indonesia
Nepal
Cambodia
Philippines
Pakistan
EDRR: an opportunity for Government dialogue led by Planning and Finance Ministries to integrate DRM in all sectors of development
Develop innovative tools and implement pilot interventions
Interventions cover weather and climate forecasting, disaster risk financing, safe building among other areas: The Kyrgyz Republic Disaster Risk Management
Program was recently approved to support the modernization of the National HydrometeorologicalService
Strengthening ICPAC as a regional Centre of Excellence for disaster risk reduction, weather and climate services in the Greater Horn of Africa Region
Using High Resolution Satellite Data for the Identification or Urban Disaster Risk publication
Develop innovative tools and implement pilot interventions
Advise on building standards and codes in Haiti Reconstruction, and build governmental capacity to oversee and enforce Safe School pilot project in El Salvador Disaster Risk Financing Strategy based on a detailed
assessment of the existing risk financing system in the Philippines, where a Catastrophe Deferred Draw Down Option (CAT-DDO) has been prepared
GFDRR is able to help developing countries reduce their vulnerability to natural disasters and adapt to climate change, thanks to the continued support of our partners: ACP Secretariat, Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Denmark, European Commission, Finland, France, Germany, India, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States, UN International Strategy for Disaster Reduction, and the World Bank.
13
GFDRR is able to help developing countries reduce their vulnerability to natural disasters and adapt to climate change, thanks to the continued support of our partners: ACP Secretariat, Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Denmark, European Commission, Finland, France, Germany, India, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States, UN International Strategy for Disaster Reduction, and the World Bank.
Responding to the climate change challenge
GFDRR is now integrating in the Bank’s climate change agenda, from joint adaptation products to Durban building blocks. Key outputs are:
Country adaptation profiles (e.g. Mozambique)
Financing CCA-related analytical, advisory, and technical assistance
Strengthening climate and weather information services and early warning systems, with a focus on Africa
14
Part 2: Overall GFDRR Results Evaluation
Mainstreaming DRM in Priority Countries
The Road to GFDRR’s Results Agenda
Results Monitoring System (RMS) for
the Results Framework (RF) -Outcome Based
Results Based Management
System (RBMS) -Output Based
•Launch of the Results Based Management System (RBMS)
After GFDRR Inception - Early
2007
•Identified opportunities for improvement through a RF
Independent Evaluation - Jan,
2010
•Preliminary RF approach endorsed by RMC and CG
8th CG Meeting & 10th RMC Meeting -May, 2010 (Kyoto)
•CG’s go-ahead for operationalization of RF
11th RMC Meeting - Sep Alexandria; 9th CG
Meeting Oct, Washington, DC (2010)
Update on revised RF and draft ROAP
circulated to CG & RMS - Nov, 2010
•Launch of Results page: www.gfdrr.org/results
GFDRR Partnership Strategy – 2009
•Results-focus reiterated by monitoring against evidence-based indicators
Development of first RF - Jan-May, 2010
•Note delivered to CG on RF approach
Donor & World Bank Peer Review Process
- Jul-Sep, 2010
•Comments from Donors & other WB M&E experts incorporated
Operationalization and Roll-Out - Nov 2010 - May 2011
•First Results Monitoring Report – based on intermediate outcomes
1
2 4
3
6
7
8 10
5
•UNISDR•DFID
Inception of Results Dialogue with Donors &
Partners - Nov, 2010
9
GFDRR’s Results Agenda is a Result of CG Leadership ,Vision and Encouragement
•DFID PCR•RMS 1.0•Rules Setting Committee•Track II – Substantial Progress• Track I & III- Full Swing•Results Evaluation – CG
Progress Since Last CG (Nov 2010 – May 2011)
11
GFDRR Contribution
to DRR Mainstreaming
DRR Mainstreaming in National
Development Policies & Country
Partnership Strategies
Strategic Relevance & Financial
Efficiency of GFDRR's DRR
Mainstreaming Portfolio
World Bank DRR Portfolio Analysis -
based on its relevance to HFA
priority areas
The GFDRR Results Evaluation Methodology for the DRR Mainstreaming Indicator – The Contribution Based
ApproachLe
vel o
f Ach
ieve
men
t of D
RR
Mai
nstr
eam
ing
2006 2010
12
3
1
2
3
Country Performance
on DRR Mainstreaming
HFA Monitor based Self
Assessments
DRR Mainstreaming
in National Development
Policies (PRSPs)
DRR Allocation in Country
Developmental Budget
Other Development Partner Contributions
DRR Mainstreaming in Country ABC
Data from the Query Builder
A Big ThankYouto UNISDR
Beneficiary
GFDRR Priority Countries
GFDRR PRSP Contribution
GFDRR CAS Contribution
GFDRR Perspective - DRR Mainstreaming Projects in
GFDRR Portfolio
WB Perspective - DRM Projects with
Mainstreaming Topics in WB Portfolio
HFA Scores
DRR Allocation in Country
Developmental Budget?
GFDRR Score 2010
Country Score 2010
Country Target
GFDRR Target
Bangladesh Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
GFDRR Contribution Towards Policy/Strategy Documents
Track II Program Outcome Indicator for DRR Mainstreaming
GFDRR & WB Perspective - Means Adopted for Converting Outputs into Outcomes
Final Scores TargetsCountry/UN ISDR
Perspective
Walk through of the Results Model
Indicator values are an aggregated, weighted, relative, composite function of several qualitative and quantitative inputs whose relative weights are decided by GFDRR’s internal Results Governance Mechanism
GFDRR ContributionCountry Performance
(Also Includes DRR Mainstreaming in PRSPs)
GFDRR Contribution
Towards Mainstreaming DRR in PRSPs
GFDRR Contribution
Towards Mainstreaming
DRR in CASs
GFDRR DRR
Mainstreaming
Portfolio
World Bank DRR
Portfolio
Country Self Reporting on Selected Core HFA Monitor
Indicators
DRR Allocation in
Country Development
al Budget
Weighted, Composite Rule Based Scoring
for GFDRR Contribution &
Country Performance
Rule Based Target Setting
GFDRR Program Target Setting for Implementation Progress and Developmental Impact over 10-year period (2006-16)
YearNo of Years
Cumulative Performance Targets based on Equal Distribution across all
program years
Program Quarters
Cumulative Performance Targets based on Differential Distribution across all
program years
Target Setting Criteria
GFDRR Program Start Year - 2006
2007 1 10%2.5 Years
(2009)10%
Ist Quarter (Slow Progress)2008 2 20%
2009 3 30%
2nd Quarter (Progress picks up by a factor of 2 over the first quarter)
2010 4 40%
2011 5 50%
5 Years (2011) - Present
Evaluation Year
30%
2012 6 60%
7.5 Years (2014)
70%
3rd Quarter (Progress picks up by a factor of 2
over the second quarter)
2013 7 70%
2014 8 80%
2015 9 90%10 Years (2016)
100%4th Quarter (Progress picks up by 75% over
the third quarter)2016 10 100%
1. Target Using a Linear Yearly Distribution – 50%2. Target Using a Differential Yearly Distribution – 30%
Target Setting Process for the Program Period
Highlights of Key Results from Track II
While GFDRR has made significant progress on certain fronts (institutionalization of risk assessment tools), it is evident that more emphasis needs to be placed towards advancing other initiatives (safe schools and hospitals)
Highlights of Key Results from Track II
•GFDRR has satisfactorily contributed towards the DRR mainstreaming objective of ‘ensuring that DRR is a national and local priority with a strong institutional basis for implementation’ in 84% of the number of priority countries
•39% of GFDRR’s priority countries have made significant progress towards this DRR mainstreaming objective -compared to only 6% in 2006
•A near doubling of GFDRR priority countries that now have budgets for DRR initiatives – from 34 % in 2006 to 66 % in 2010
It appears that GFDRR has satisfactorily achieved the mainstreaming targets envisaged by it for the program period 2006 -2010
Country level DRM Mainstreaming Results
Rule based thresholds applied to the aggregated, weighted, relative, composite scores to
derive Results
Summary of FindingsOther Track II Indicators and Benchmarks
2006-10
According to early estimates the GFDRR portfolio is beginning to deliver CCA/CRM mainstreaming results in around 26% of its priority countries.
• GFDRR has played a significant role in mainstreaming CCA into both PRSPs and CASs in 13% and 29% of priority countries respectively.
• A corresponding 42% and 39% of priority countries have integrated CCA into their PRSPs and CASs respectively.
Risk Assessments, both country performance and GFDRR contribution has seen a marked increase since 2006:
• 68 % of priority countries have carried out risk assessments, compared to 13 % in 2006.
• 55 % of priority countries have carried out risk assessments with GFDRR support
Early Warning Systems, 84 % (26, up from 8 in 2006) of priority countries have made investments in strengthening their early warning systems, up from 26 % in 2006. 45 % of priority countries have these systems supported by GFDRR.
23
Summary of FindingsOther Track II Indicators and Benchmarks
Disaster Risk Financing and Insurance. GFDRR has introduced or leveraged innovative work and/or knowledge products in 16 priority countries (52 %). However: • engagement of government in active dialogue on risk financing has happened in
only 7 priority countries (23 %).• GFDRR has also been able to significantly contribute in non-priority countries in
this area.
In Urban Development and DRM. 11 priority countries (35 % of total) have integrated DRM into their urban development planning, which is an increase of 2 countries from 2006.• GFDRR has significantly contributed in 3 of these priority countries (10% of total).
GFDRR has also supported 6 countries (19%) in conducting Urban Risk Assessments and 4 (13%) in flood mitigation measures.
Safe Schools and Hospitals: GFDRR has supported or developed 7 knowledge products on inter alia, Safe School and Hospitals, from which 4 were developed in priority countries.
GFDRR is able to help developing countries reduce their vulnerability to natural disasters and adapt to climate change, thanks to the continued support of our partners: ACP Secretariat, Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Denmark, European Commission, Finland, France, Germany, India, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States, UN International Strategy for Disaster Reduction, and the World Bank.
24
Highlights of Key Results from Track I & Track III
1. GFDRR has ensured significant growth and diversification of its partnership, financing base and governance structure2. GFDRR has provided timely and targeted assistance and trainings in disaster-hit countries across the globe
GFDRR is working closely with UNISDR to operationalize Track I indicators, focusing mainly on:- growth in capacity of regional organizations;- enhanced international political engagement on DRM;- increased awareness, knowledge exchange and collaboration amongst ISDR stakeholders;- enhanced donor coordination and aid effectiveness.
Thank you!
Questions?
Part 3: Recommendations, Proposals and Way Forward
Proposals for CG Considerationand Endorsement
The Way Forward and Suggested Actions for CG Review and Endorsement
GFDRR needs to further consolidate and deepen its developmental impact
GFDRR needs to increase evidence-based country dialogue to elevate DRR and climate adaptation agenda in PRSPs and other national development plans
GFDRR to deepen cooperation with sectoral ministries to support implementation of the 5 priorities of the HFA
GFDRR, with support from its donors and wide range of partners, needs to significantly scale-up its investments and efforts towards institutionalization of disaster risk reduction and climate adaptation
Results-Based Recommendations- GFDRR Portfolio Management
- Consolidation of Impact at Country Level
KEY RECOMMENDATIONS
The Benefits of GFDRR’s Results Agenda
GFDRR’s Results Agenda has Significant Strategic and Operational Implications
GFDRR Contributed Significantly "YES"
GFDRR Contributed Significantly "NO"
Country Substantial Achievement "YES"
Example Country A Example Country B
Country Substantial Achievement "NO"
Example Country C Example Country D
How can we contribute more towards the success
of these countries?
Should these countries receive more attention?
How can we be more effective here? What has
worked, what has not?
How can we deepen our impact here? At what point
should we be thinking about disengagement?
A Decision Support Mechanism for the CG
The Way Forward on GFDRR Results Management
The Way Forward on GFDRR Results Management
1. Improved Data Gathering -RBMS Improvements
2. Independent On-the-Ground Validation of Results - Independent M&E Agent
- Project Level Results
- Project Level Results
Corroboration
- Country-level DRM results frameworks
Results Monitoring System as a Decision Support Tool for the CG
Selection of priority
countries
Areas for deepening GFDRR’s portfolio
in selected countries
Possibilities of GFDRR
disengagement in specific countries.
What needs to be done?
What are the
benefits?
The Role of Leadership in a Results Agenda
At the heart of it, Results-based Performance Management is an Iterative Change Management Exercise requiring Leadership Endorsement and Support
Results Management
Cycle Strategic and Operational Decisions
based on Results
Ensuring Technical (in-house and outsourced) Resources for Results
Evaluation
Institutional Change Management
Inculcating a Culture of Results based Portfolio
Management
Leading a Consultative Process with Donors and Recipients for Determining Results Indicators and Performance Benchmarks
Building Credibility & Transparency on
Program Performance
Towards a Global DRM Results Model
Some Lessons from the GFDRR Results Experience
M&E systems can be flexibly designed to simultaneously exist at the overall, sector and project levels
Focus on what needs to be essentially measured as opposed to trying to measure each and every output
RF should establish a streamlined results chain with key results and intermediate outcomes instead of outputs
Results measurement should combines qualitative and quantitative information from multiple sources to offer a ‘360 degree’ view on impact
Use a ‘contribution/partnership based results measurement approach’ for evaluating multi-donor, multi-recipient program, that measures:
GFDRR Contribution and Country Performance on a Developmental Agenda
Only hold the program accountable for outcomes that it is designed to deliver
However, links the ‘results-chain’ with international developmental standards and benchmarks, if possible, to determine country or sector performance:
Results process should promote end-user participation and complete procedural transparency, through:
Internal Results Governance & Oversight Mechanism, including a Results Rules Setting Committee that validates measurement yardsticks and performance thresholds
Consultative and collaborative involvement of all stakeholders
Third party Validation of On-ground Results
Proposals for CG Consideration
• Restructuring of RMC membership• Functional Streamlining
Improved Results Governance
Structure
• Integrated and multi-stakeholder DRM Results Frameworks at the country level
•GFDRR to arrange results dissemination and experience sharing events for CG Members
Operationalizationof Country Results
Frameworks
•Innovative way forward and a quantification methodology to be considered for adoption by GFDRR partners and donors•Quantify DRM mainstreaming progress and impacts across all
countries, using multiple international standards
Towards a Global DRM Results Model
Proposal for Restructuring of the RMC
GFDRR’s CONSULTATIVE GROUP
RESULTS MANAGEMENT COUNCIL
-Membership includes CG Members, DRR Experts and M&E Experts - from the Bank, UN ISDR, Bilateral Donors, Private Sector and Civil Society
- Functions include results validation and oversight of further development of results agenda
GFDRR's Central Results Team GFDRR's Various Track Teams and Bank's Regional and Country DRM Resources
PROPOSED GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE AND BUSINESS PROCESS RE-ENGINEERING FOR GFDRR'S RESULTS MANAGEMENT
Internal Bank and GFDRR Results Quality Assurance/Rules SettingCommittee
Periodic Reporting
Thank you!