Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery Country Evaluation: Technical Evaluation Report SEPTEMBER 2015 BANGLADESH | EASTERN CARIBBEAN | ETHIOPIA | INDONESIA GLOBAL FACILITY FOR DISASTER REDUCTION AND RECOVERY COUNTRY EVALUATION Technical evaluation report September 2015 Prepared for Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery 1818 H Street NW Washington DC 20433 Prepared by ICF International 9300 Lee Highway Fairfax, VA 22031 [B] ICF International ICF International [C] Contents 1. Introducti on................................................................................... 1 BANGLADESH 1.1 Purpose and Scope of the Evaluation..........................................................1 1.2 Methodology..................................................................................................2 1.3 Roadmap for the Evaluation..........................................................................3 2. C ountr y C ase Studi es............................................................... 4 2.1 Bangladesh....................................................................................................4 2.1.1. Bangladesh Context for GFDRR Engagement................................4 2.1.2. GFDRR Results in Bangladesh.........................................................5 2.2. Eastern Caribbean (Saint Lucia and Dominica)........................................11 2.2.1. Eastern Caribbean Context for GFDRR Engagement...................11 EastERN Caribbean 2.2.2. GFDRR Results in Saint Lucia and Dominica.................................12 2.3 Ethiopia.........................................................................................................17 2.3.1. Ethiopia Context for GFDRR Engagement.....................................17 2.3.2. GFDRR Results in Ethiopia..............................................................19 2.4 Indonesia......................................................................................................23 2.4.1. Indonesia Context for GFDRR Engagement..................................23 2.4.2. GFDRR Results in Indonesia...........................................................24 3. C ross-C utti ng A nal ysi s........................................................... 31 3.1 Moving toward Impact.................................................................................31 ETHIOPIA 3.1.1. GFDRR Results................................................................................31 3.1.2. Contributing or Detracting Factors for Achieving Success...........32 3.2. Leverage and Influence...............................................................................34 3.3. Special Focus on Intermediate Outcomes.................................................36 4. C oncl usi ons and Recommendati ons............................... 38 4.1 Conclusions..................................................................................................38 4.2 Recommendations.......................................................................................39 INDONESIA ICF International [i] Appendix A. Terms of Reference..............................................................................40 Appendix B. Methodology.........................................................................................47 Appendix C. Overview of GFDRR Portfolio Evaluated.............................................57 Appendix D. Country Results Matrices.....................................................................59 Acknowledgements Appendix E. Analysis of Leverage and Influence....................................................71 Appendix F. Intermediate Outcome Mapping..........................................................74 The Evaluation Team (Mark Wagner, Jessica Kyle, Charlotte Mack, and Nikolaos Papachristodoulou from Appendix G. List of Stakeholders Consulted...........................................................78 ICF International) would like to acknowledge the many valuable contributions that supported this evaluation. Appendix H. List of Documents Consulted..............................................................83 First, we would like to thank our GFDRR Evaluation Task Manager, Ms. Vica Rosario Bogaerts, for her leadership and collegial cooperation during fieldwork to Indonesia and Ethiopia. We extend special thanks to Mr. Jack Campbell (GFDRR), Ms. Swarna Kazi (World Bank/ GFDRR focal point), and Mr. Md. Faruk Hossain (World Bank) for their support during fieldwork in Bangladesh, and to Mr. Iwan Gunawan (World Bank/GFDRR focal point) and Mr. Rinsan Tobing (World Bank) for their support during fieldwork in Indonesia, and to Mr. Walter Soer (World Bank), who was instrumental in making our field mission to Ethiopia a success. We are also grateful for the insights and feedback of GFDRR leadership at various stages throughout the evaluation, including from Mr. Francis Ghesquiere and Mr. Luis Tineo. National consultants in Indonesia (Dr. Riyanti Djalante), Bangladesh (Mr. Mohammed Taher), and Ethiopia (Mr. Taye Yadessa) were valued team members helping us understand the context for disaster risk management in their countries. Finally, we would like to thank the more than 220 individuals—including national and local governments in Bangladesh, Dominica, Ethiopia, Indonesia, and Saint Lucia, staff of bilateral and multilateral institutions, and members of academia and civil society—who provided valued time and input during interviews conducted for this evaluation. Without their willing and frank participation, this evaluation would not have been possible. [ ii ] ICF International ICF International [ iii ] Acronyms and Abbreviations BCCRF Bangladesh Climate Change Resilience Fund ICT information and communications technology BAPPENAS Ministry of National Development Planning (Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Nasional) InaSAFE Indonesian Scenario Assessment for Emergency BIG Geospatial Information Agency (Badan Informasi Geospasial) JICA Japan International Cooperation Agency BNPB National Disaster Management Agency (Badan Nasional Penanggulangan Bencana) JRDNA Joint Rapid Damage and Needs Assessment BPBD Local Disaster Management Agency (Badan Penanggulangan Bencana Daerah) LEAP Livelihood Early Assessment and Protection BUERP Bangladesh Urban Earthquake Resilience Project LEDP Livelihoods and Economic Development Program CAFF Climate Adaptation Finance Facility LGED Local Government Engineering Department CEIP-I Coastal Embankment Improvement Project LLI World Bank’s Leadership, Learning and Innovation Group CHaRIM Caribbean Handbook on Risk Information Management M&E monitoring and evaluation DaLA damage and loss assessment MoEC Ministry of Education and Culture DLNA damage, loss, and needs assessment MoSSaiC Management of Slope Stability in Communities DNCC Dhaka North City Corporation NAP-DRR National Action Plan for Disaster Risk Reduction DRFI disaster risk financing and insurance NPSDRM National Policy and Strategy on Disaster Risk Management DRM disaster risk management OpenDRI Open Data for Resilience Initiative DRMFSS Disaster Risk Management and Food Security Sector PDNA post-disaster needs assessment DRM-SPIF Disaster Risk Management Strategic Programme and Investment Framework National Program for Community Empowerment (Program Nasional Pemberdayaan PNPM Masyarakat) DRR disaster risk reduction PPCR Pilot Program for Climate Resilience DSCC Dhaka South City Corporation PSNP Productive Safety Nets Program DVRP Disaster Vulnerability Reduction Program Indonesia’s community-based approach for large-scale reconstruction ECRRP Emergency 2007 Cyclone Recovery and Restoration Project Rekompak and rehabilitation EWS early warning system RSLUP risk-sensitive land use planning FAO Food and Agriculture Organization ToR Terms of Reference GFDRR Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery TOT training-of-the-trainers GIS Geographic Information Systems TTL Task Team Leader GoB Government of Bangladesh UNDP United Nations Development Programme GoE Government of Ethiopia URP Urban Resilience Project GoI Government of Indonesia WDRP Woreda Disaster Risk Profiles HFA Hyogo Framework for Action WINRIP Western Indonesia National Roads Improvement Project All monetary values are in U.S. dollars. [ iv ] ICF International ICF International [v] Executive Summary This report presents the findings and The evaluation findings are presented below. and approval of this large investment in early 2015. are expected to benefit more than 240,000 people recommendations of an evaluation of the Global Proximity to World Bank operational staff and GFDRR combined. In Indonesia, the Western Indonesia Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery The evaluation found that GFDRR has successfully flexibility were key contributors to this success. National Roads Improvement Project will improve (GFDRR). The evaluation focuses on GFDRR activities delivered analytical products, capacity building, road sections traversing 12 districts with a total between 2008 and 2014 in five countries in four and technical assistance across all five pillars in GFDRR has been successful in identifying strategic population over 4 million, and GFDRR’s assistance regions: Bangladesh, the Eastern Caribbean (Saint Bangladesh, the Eastern Caribbean, Ethiopia, and entry points for relatively small grant contributions means the project should now strengthen disaster risk Lucia and Dominica), Ethiopia, and Indonesia. Indonesia. While the evaluation was limited in its ability to demonstrate or advance DRM activities that mitigation in the road sector. In Ethiopia, expected to assess GFDRR delivery against plan—because can inform larger-scale investment operations. The benefits associated with reductions in drought and This evaluation takes place in an evolving landscape many GFDRR grant proposals do not describe evaluation identified over $3.6 billion of investments flood impacts and losses and long-term risk reduction for climate change adaptation and disaster risk planned outputs—the evaluation generally found that ($1.4 billion World Bank commitments) with nearly efforts under the Productive Safety Nets Program IV reduction. Hence, there is a need to regularly evaluate outputs were reasonable in scope and scale given the $500 million of DRM components informed by GFDRR are valued at roughly $300 million per year. the impact of disaster management programs, funding size of the grants. across all five countries studied. GFDRR activities like GFDRR, to understand how disaster risks are have also influenced national and local government By engaging at high levels of government and effectively managed and resilient societies are built. Most activities that are under implementation or expenditures for DRM in Bangladesh, Ethiopia, and forging strong partnerships, GFDRR has increased In this context, the evaluation has two objectives: (1) completed are achieving valuable downstream results. Indonesia. its potential to achieve results at-scale. Partnership to analyze and evaluate the overall impact of GFDRR Most GFDRR activities in the five countries visited are with the World Bank, and the access that partnership activities, specifically in terms of leveraging new making valuable contributions to achieving process- Given the relatively young age of GFDRR’s portfolio, provides to key ministries, has been important to investments and influencing ongoing programs; and oriented (i.e., intermediate) outcomes. Intermediate limited evidence was found of outcomes and enable high-level engagement. The in-country (2) to generate a better understanding of how and outcomes observed include: raising disaster risk impacts achieved at-scale as of early 2015, although presence of a GFDRR focal point has also been why GFDRR has been able to contribute to making awareness at local and national levels and increasing some activities show strong potential. In particular, important for influencing World Bank investments in countries more resilient. the availability of disaster risk information; building linking GFDRR small grants with larger World Bank Bangladesh and Indonesia; in Ethiopia, the same capacity of national and local governments, as well as investment operations or broader government World Bank task team leader has led GFDRR grants In its activities, GFDRR aims to increase resilience civil society, for disaster risk preparedness, reduction, initiatives reinforces potential for downstream and the World Bank investment operations that to natural disasters by scaling up technical and and response; developing and demonstrating results and sustainability. In all countries studied, GFDRR informed, directly enabling that influence. financial support for disaster risk management innovative tools and approaches for DRM; the evaluation found that sustained engagement is (DRM), contributing toward mainstreaming DRM into strengthening policy dialogue and supporting policy needed to ensure that the intermediate outcomes Another contributor to success has been GFDRR’s development, and assisting post-disaster countries development and implementation, including around of some activities proceed toward outcomes and use of engagement strategies that reflect individual in resilient recovery. GFDRR works in several ways to disaster risk financing and insurance; and influencing impacts. Longer-term support will be especially country conditions. For example, GFDRR has taken a achieve this goal. A primary function is the provision and leveraging significant resources for DRM. needed to realize outcomes for disaster risk financing proof-of-concept and community-driven development of grants that are implemented by partners. In the five and insurance activities and technology-oriented approach in Indonesia, where DRM responsibilities countries visited for this evaluation, nearly 90 percent GFDRR has leveraged DRM resources through solutions. and budgets are decentralized. GFDRR used of grants are World Bank-executed, with the remainder support for the preparation of post-disaster needs participatory technical assistance in Dhaka executed by country governments. GFDRR grants assessments (PDNAs), technical assistance that GFDRR has contributed to incorporating or improving (Bangladesh), where local government structures and support three main activity types—capacity building, directly led to the preparation and approval of a World DRM components in many World Bank investment dynamics are very complex and require long-term analytical products, and technical assistance—across Bank investment project, and the implementation operations, which will achieve sizeable outcomes relationship building. In Ethiopia, GFDRR successfully five pillars of action: risk identification, risk reduction, of pilot projects with community support. GFDRR if successfully implemented. For example, building used the evolving social protection agenda as preparedness, financial protection, and resilient has supported PDNAs in Bangladesh, Saint Lucia, on GFDRR’s critical groundwork, the $182 million an entry-point to advance the DRM agenda. In recovery. GFDRR also provides focused technical and Indonesia. Also in Bangladesh, GFDRR actively Urban Resilience Project in Bangladesh has potential the Eastern Caribbean, GFDRR has worked most support to implementing partners on a series of leveraged investment through the Urban Resilience to increase resilience to earthquakes for the 15.5 effectively when providing support that strengthens thematic initiatives and additionally acts as a “support Project (2015–20, $182 million), where more than million people living in Greater Dhaka and Sylhet. larger World Bank initiatives (i.e., technical advice for hub” for a network of DRM specialists in the World two years of sustained technical assistance under Saint Lucia and Dominica’s Disaster Risk Vulnerability DVRP development). Bank. a $2.8 million GFDRR grant led to the preparation Programs (DVRPs)—which GFDRR helped shape— [ vi ] ICF International ICF International [ vii ] 1. Introduction Challenges to success have included lack of in-country, improved modalities for capacity The Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and 1.1 Purpose and Scope of the Evaluation readiness or capacity to use some of the technologies building (e.g., on-the-job training), and designing Recovery (GFDRR) is a multilateral partnership that The two principal purposes of this evaluation are to: piloted by GFDRR, long development periods for grants to build on and reinforce each other. supports implementation of the Hyogo Framework (1) ensure accountability by assessing GFDRR’s role some technical assistance activities, and the use 2. Prioritize interventions that link to broader initiatives for Action (HFA) in integrating disaster risk reduction as a facilitator and as a catalyzer of investments to of less-effective activities, such as one-time training and make use of GFDRR’s well-recognized and climate change adaptation into development build resilience to natural hazards; and (2) contribute events or conference attendance support. The technical expertise. All five country studies suggest plans and strategies. It provides technical and to a broader evidence base that demonstrates how observation of these particular challenges suggests that interventions that incorporate technical financial assistance to disaster-prone countries to disaster risks are effectively managed and resilient that a long-term approach is especially needed to expertise and support are more likely to have reduce their vulnerability to climate- and non-climate societies are built. To fulfill these purposes, this solidify results for certain activity types, such as the strong stakeholder engagement, show better natural disasters and works alongside a diverse evaluation has two objectives: (1) to analyze and introduction of new technologies and support for potential for contributing to results at-scale, and group of partners, including United Nations agencies, evaluate the overall impact of GFDRR activities, disaster risk financing and insurance. In addition, in achieve leverage or influence. the World Bank regional offices, and national specifically in terms of leveraging new investments Bangladesh, the evaluation observed that GFDRR governments. GFDRR’s grant-making activities 3. Improve documentation of GFDRR activities and and influencing ongoing programs; and (2) to utilized a co-financing modality ineffectively, lacking serve the organization’s five pillars of action: risk results to support further monitoring and evaluation. generate a better understanding of how and why strategic dialogue during the creation of that identification, risk reduction, preparedness, financial A challenge for this evaluation was incomplete GFDRR has been able to contribute to making arrangement and engagement during implementation. protection, and resilient recovery. documentation of GFDRR activities and results. countries more resilient. To improve future GFDRR results achievement, the To improve future monitoring and evaluation—and This evaluation takes place in an evolving landscape The evaluation focuses on GFDRR activities between evaluation makes the following recommendations: support more streamlined results reporting— for climate change adaptation and hazard risk 2008 and 2014 in five countries in four regions: GFDRR should consider improving documentation reduction when many local, national, regional, and 1. Find and pursue ways to deepen and sustain Bangladesh, the Eastern Caribbean (St. Lucia and of activities and results. international partners are advocating for natural engagement on the ground. Some options might Dominica), Ethiopia, and Indonesia. Within this hazard risk management policies in country-level include continued support for GFDRR focal points temporal and geographic scope, the evaluation seeks strategies. There is a growing demand to understand to answer the following four questions posed in the and differentiate amongst these strategies and Terms of Reference (TOR): their effectiveness at managing risk and building resilience. In particular, there is a need to evaluate the ƒƒ Does GFDRR succeed in delivering planned impact of disaster risk management (DRM) programs, analytical products and technical assistance? including the effectiveness of policies in promoting action that contributes to resilience building of ƒƒ Is GFDRR able to use these interventions countries and people. In the context of this evolving to leverage and influence new and ongoing landscape, GFDRR as a program is also changing investment programs? and growing. Evaluation of GFDRR can contribute ƒƒ Are the activities to which GFDRR contributes important learning to improve effective management achieving the outcomes intended?1 of risks. Key Concepts and Definitions The evaluation adopted the definitions that: ƒƒ GFDRR has influenced resources when the program’s activities contribute to improving the enabling environment for DRM (e.g., legal, institutional, or regulatory systems) or to integrating DRM into existing programs and budgets. ƒƒ GFDRR has leveraged resources when the program’s activities contribute to securing new funding for DRM. This evaluation question has been slightly re-phrased for clarity. The original TOR phrased this question differently: “Are these investment programs achieving the outcomes intended?” 1 However, in most cases, given the size of GFDRR’s contribution, the results of much broader World Bank investment programs would be outside the scope of GFDRR’s plausible influence and thus outside the scope of this evaluation. [ viii ] ICF International ICF International [1] ƒƒ What evidence exists that GFDRR is achieving selected the fieldwork countries based on regional The second limitation was related to the lack of a 1.3 Roadmap for the Evaluation progress against the intended impact on the diversity, significant scale and scope of GFDRR baseline or stated expectations for outputs and The remainder of the evaluation report is divided into resilience of people to natural disasters? engagement, number of years of engagement, outcomes against which evidence of progress three main chapters: This evaluation complements previous evaluations and potential for investigation of leveraging and could be measured. This issue is not unique to of the GFDRR, including a formative evaluation in influencing of investment operations. More than 200 GFDRR; other grant-making organizations working ƒƒ Chapter 2 presents the case studies for each 2010,2 followed by a global program review by the stakeholders were interviewed for this evaluation on DRM and climate change adaptation issues of the five countries: Bangladesh, Saint Lucia, World Bank’s Independent Evaluation Group in (see Figure 1). have also grappled with developing approaches for Dominica, Ethiopia, and Indonesia. These case 2012,3 and most recently, a retrospective evaluation measuring results.5 Many GFDRR grant proposals studies respond to the evaluation questions at the The evaluation team built and tested hypotheses, do not describe expected outputs or outcomes in of a sample of five countries (Guatemala, Malawi, country-level. created timelines of key milestones and activities, wrote terms that are conducive for meaningful evaluation; Nepal, Sri Lanka, and Vietnam) in 2014,4 which also back-to-office reports for country visits, and triangulated ƒƒ Chapter 3 addresses the four evaluation questions made recommendations on GFDRR’s monitoring for example, several of the Bangladesh grant information across all sources to synthesize and identify proposals—with activities ranging from conference at the cross-country level, and also presents and evaluation (M&E) framework. Building on the findings across methods. Appendix B gives more a discussion of the results of the intermediate 2014 evaluation, this evaluation considers two key support, to Damage, Loss and Needs Assessment detailed information on data collection and analysis (DLNA) development, to co-financing of the outcome indicator mapping analysis. areas of particular interest: influence/leverage and methods used in this evaluation. intermediate outcomes. The relationship between this World Bank’s Cyclone Sidr recovery project—list ƒƒ Chapter 4 provides the overall conclusions and evaluation and the 2014 evaluation is discussed at the following as the grant’s expected outcome: recommendations for the evaluation. The evaluation faced two key limitations. The first more length in Appendix B. “All organizations, personnel and volunteers In addition, a series of appendices provide supporting was related to stakeholder availability and recall, responsible for maintaining preparedness are information: particularly for grants that were administered earlier equipped and trained for effective disaster 1.2 Methodology in the evaluation time period (e.g., 2008–2010). For a preparedness and response.” As a result, it was ƒƒ Appendix A provides the original ToR for this few grants, the evaluation team was unable to identify The evaluation draws on primary and secondary not possible to assess outputs and outcomes evaluation, while Appendix B presents the any project proponents or beneficiaries to interview; sources of information and uses qualitative methods against “plan” consistently. Instead, the evaluation evaluation methodology. for several other grants, the evaluation was unable to to respond to the key evaluation questions. Data supplemented grant proposals with GFDRR triangulate evidence from project leads at the World ƒƒ Appendix C presents key information about the collection included a thorough desk review, program documewntation (including the GFDRR Bank because project beneficiaries or third-party GFDRR grants evaluated during fieldwork to interviews with GFDRR and World Bank staff, and in- Strategy and monitoring and evaluation information) stakeholders with knowledge of the grant could not be Bangladesh, Dominica, Saint Lucia, Ethiopia, and depth fieldwork in Bangladesh, Dominica, Ethiopia, along with expert judgment to make determinations identified in-country. Indonesia. Indonesia, and Saint Lucia. GFDRR purposively about reasonable expectations for results given grant activities. ƒƒ Appendices D, E, and F provide detailed evidentiary support for findings related to country-level results, leverage and influence, and Figure 1: Summary of Stakeholders Consulted intermediate outcome mapping, respectively. ƒƒ Appendix G and H list the stakeholders consulted and the documents reviewed during the course of the evaluation. See, for example, Climate-eval (2015). Good Practice Study on Principles for Indicator Development, Selection, and Use in Climate Change Adaptation Monitoring and Evaluation. 5 2 This Universalia Management Group. 2010. Evaluation of the World Bank Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery (GFDRR). Volume I – Final Evaluation Report. Available at: https://www.climate-eval.org/content/good-practice-study-principles-indicator-development-selection-and-use-climate-change. Setting baselines is challenging for DRM and 3 World Bank. 2014. Progress Report on Mainstreaming Disaster Risk Management in World Bank Group Operations. Development Committee Meeting, April 12, 2014. climate change adaptation given changing hazard profiles, in response to changing climate conditions, and the complexity and dynamism of vulnerability. Another challenge relates to 4 DARA. 2014. Evaluation Report – Retrospective Evaluation of the GFDRR Program in a Sample of Disaster-Prone Countries. April 2014. the reverse logic of DRM interventions, whereby a successful initiative helps reduce the impact of a natural hazard event. [2] ICF International ICF International [3] 2. country case studies 2.1. Bangladesh emergency response activities undertaken by various research component. Since 2011, GFDRR has started government and non-government institutions. to focus on a second agenda on urban resilience, via Key Messages for GFDRR in Bangladesh its Bangladesh Urban Earthquake Resilience Project The National Disaster Management Council and (BUERP) (Phase I and II). GFDRR has also engaged ƒƒ GFDRR has successfully delivered most of its planned outputs, including: providing technical assistance Inter-Ministerial Disaster Management Coordination with its regional thematic programs on Disaster Risk to support post-disaster recovery and reconstruction, building urban resilience, and improving research; Committee ensure coordination of disaster-related facilitating dialogue on climate change impacts and resilience; conducting analytical studies on disaster Financing and Insurance (DRFI) and the Open Data activities at the national level. At the city level, the for Resilience Initiative (OpenDRI). The figure on reduction and recovery; engaging with GFDRR’s regional thematic initiatives; and co-financing for a World Bank project. Standing Orders on Disaster gives the mandate next page shows key policy and disaster milestones, to City Corporations to lead emergency response GFDRR grants, and related World Bank investments. ƒƒ The evaluation found evidence of intermediate outcomes resulting from most GFDRR activities in Bangladesh, within their jurisdictions. City Corporation Disaster including: knowledge deepened; institutional capacity strengthened; innovative approaches and tools Management Committees have responsibilities across 2.1.2. GFDRR Results in Bangladesh developed and demonstrated; and development strategy and financing informed. the DRM cycle, from risk identification and reduction, ƒƒ GFDRR activities appear capable of delivering downstream outcomes and impacts, particularly in the areas of to emergency response and recovery.11 GFDRR’s modalities in Bangladesh have ranged preparedness and risk reduction. from analytical studies, to co-financing for ECRRP, to ƒƒ GFDRR has been particularly successful in delivering results where it has used its technical expertise, linked Bangladesh has been proactive in mainstreaming participatory technical assistance. GFDRR’s linkages to broader initiatives, and capitalized on strong stakeholder support and political demand. The presence of the DRM into development plans. The priorities of with operations at the World Bank maximized the GFDRR focal point in Dhaka has also helped deepen GFDRR’s engagement. the National Plan for Disaster Management for opportunities to work alongside projects implemented ƒƒ Half of GFDRR’s approved funding for Bangladesh from 2008–2014 was delivered as co-financing. This 2010–15 have been incorporated in high level by the World Bank and other development partners. modality did not take full advantage of GFDRR’s technical expertise, nor did it result in influence or leverage. policy and operational documents. Effective GFDRR’s engagement has deepened since the disaster management is one of the sub-goals of arrival of the focal point in late 2011 and the launch ƒƒ GFDRR’s technical assistance on urban resilience has directly led to (leveraged) the approval of a $182 million World Bank investment project. the Government of Bangladesh’s Vision 2021, while of an urban resilience agenda, while engagement the Bangladesh Perspective Plan for 2010–21, the with GFDRR’s regional thematic programs helped Sixth Five Year Plan 2011–2015 and the National bring specialized technical expertise and facilitate Sustainable Development Strategy also identify DRR knowledge exchange. 2.1.1. Bangladesh Context for GFDRR Engagement The potential for building collapse intensifies other as a priority area.12 Disaster risk context. Bangladesh is one of the risks involving earthquakes, fire, as well as heavy Outputs. Between 2008 and 2014, GFDRR has most vulnerable countries in the world to cyclones rainfall, storms, and strong winds. GFDRR programming. GFDRR has provided nine successfully delivered nearly all of its planned and floods, and is located in a seismically active grants to Bangladesh between 2007 and 2014, outputs. These include: Despite remarkable economic growth in recent years, and high-risk region. Between 1980 and 2000, totaling $6.9 million and covering all five of the GFDRR Bangladesh still faces considerable development ƒƒ Analytical studies on disaster reduction and 60 percent of about 250,000 deaths worldwide pillars (see Appendix C). GFDRR’s engagement challenges. Poverty remains prevalent, with 47 million recovery. Between 2007 and 2010, GFDRR from cyclones occurred in Bangladesh.6 Disaster has broadly followed two streams. The first stream people in poverty and 26 million people in extreme commissioned a series of analytical studies mortality, which has been particularly high, has has been guided by a joint DLNA for Cyclone Sidr poverty.9 Poverty and disaster risk are integrally under three separate grants. GFDRR prepared been reduced significantly through investment in that was led by GFDRR and the World Bank. That linked and mutually reinforcing. A 2013 report ranked a study that assessed the viability of market- coastal resilience. For example, in 1971 over 500,000 DLNA identified some priority activities that the Bangladesh among the 11 countries most at risk of based agricultural insurance in Bangladesh in individuals were killed by a cyclone and in 1991, over World Bank subsequently financed and for which disaster-induced poverty.10 2010, but the political context was such that 300,000 were killed. By comparison, Cyclone Sidr in GFDRR provided support, including the World Bank’s Emergency 2007 Cyclone Recovery and there was no engagement from the Ministries 2007 led to only 3,400 deaths.7 Bangladesh is also Institutional and policy context. Following Restoration Project (ECRRP) (2008–17, $109 million of Finance or Agriculture.13 Some other outputs susceptible to earthquakes. High population density, enactment of the Disaster Management Act of IDA resources), which GFDRR co-financed, and the were not successfully delivered. GFDRR’s grant compounded with rapid and unplanned urbanization, 2012, which outlines the country’s legal framework Coastal Embankment Improvement Project - Phase I to prepare background studies on mainstreaming have increased vulnerability to earthquake risk. for disaster management, the Department of (CEIP-I) (2013–20, $375 million World Bank and $25 disaster management into the Bangladeshi social Recent events, such as the collapse of the Rana Disaster Management was set up. The Department million Pilot Program for Climate Resilience/PPCR), for protection programs was dropped in 2010, and the Plaza in Dhaka in 2014, serve as a reminder of coordinates national disaster management which GFDRR is providing technical assistance for the studies were not finalized.14 human-induced urban disasters, and their linkage to interventions across government agencies, including structural deficiencies of buildings and infrastructure.8 the strengthening and coordination of DRR and 11 World Bank. 2015. Urban Resilience Project. Project Appraisal Document. Report No: PAD1023. 12 Government of Bangladesh. 2015. National progress report on the implementation of the Hyogo Framework for Action (2013–2015). 6 IPCC. 2007. Climate Change 2007: Working Group II: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Available at: http://www.preventionweb.net/english/hyogo/progress/reports/. 7 Government of Bangladesh. 2008. Cyclone Sidr in Bangladesh: Damage, Loss and Needs Assessment for Disaster Recovery and Reconstruction. 13 The report titled “Agricultural Insurance in Bangladesh: Promoting Access to Small and Marginal Farmers” was published in 2010. 8 World Bank. 2015. Urban Resilience Project. Project Appraisal Document. Report No: PAD1023. 14 The following products were prepared: (i) Improving Bangladesh’s Response and Recovery Activities in the Aftermath of Disasters: 9 World Development Indicators. Available at: http://data.worldbank.org/country/bangladesh. An Institutional Assessment; (ii) Improving Bangladesh’s Response and Recovery Activities in the Aftermath of Disasters: Review 10 Shepherd A., Mitchell T., Lewis K., Lenhardt A., Jones L., Scott L, and Muir-Wood R. 2013. The geography of poverty, disasters and climate extremes in 2030. Overseas of Administrative Systems; (iii) Evaluation of Safety Net Programs for the Disaster Affected People; and (iv) Bangladesh: Local Development Institute. Government Disaster Management-Social Safety Nets (DM-SSNs) Handbook. [4] ICF International ICF International [5] ƒƒ Technical assistance to support post-disaster ƒƒ Technical assistance for research. GFDRR recovery and reconstruction. GFDRR led the supported the World Bank in convening a implementation of the joint DLNA following stakeholder workshop to identify the main the 2007 Cyclone Sidr. The Government of knowledge gaps for CEIP-I, which includes a Bangladesh (GoB) and its development partners $12 million component on long-term monitoring, used the DLNA as the basis for developing research and analysis of the Bangladesh coastal recovery and reconstruction plans and programs, zone, recognizing that this is a crucial area and the World Bank subsequently financed subject to many complex natural phenomena some activities and investments identified in the that are currently not fully understood. Following DLNA—including ECRRP and CEIP-I—which the stakeholder workshop, GFDRR helped the GFDRR also supported. GFDRR also prepared Bangladesh Water Development Board to develop training guidelines and conducted a four-day the ToR for research activities under CEIP-I. training for 55 participants on the damage and loss ƒƒ Facilitation of dialogue on climate change impacts assessment (DaLA) methodology. and resilience. Prompted by the aftermath of ƒƒ Technical assistance to help build urban resilience. Cyclone Sidr, GFDRR supported a high-level GFDRR provided $2.8 million in technical conference on the impacts of climate change assistance for BUERP Phase I and II. In Phase in Bangladesh hosted by the United Kingdom I, BUERP convened a series of approximately Department for International Development 60 field investigations, focus group workshops, in London in 2008. GFDRR prepared two high level fora, Advisory Committee meetings background papers.17 More recently, GFDRR and Scientific Consortium Meetings.15 These contributed in establishing a coordination strategy events involved over 120 participants from between the Japan International Cooperation some 50 national and local-level agencies and Agency (JICA) and the World Bank to support the organizations, and provided inputs toward the GoB in its new approach for urban resilience.18 preparation of foundational documents and ƒƒ Engagement with GFDRR’s regional thematic several related outreach materials, which provide initiatives. GFDRR has engaged with its regional a step-by-step guide to conduct and develop DRFI, OpenDRI, and Resilient Infrastructure the individual components for a comprehensive programs. Outputs under the regional thematic approach that can lead to earthquake resilience.16 programs have generally supplemented activities Some 30 participants also completed a blended in the areas where specialized technical expertise (i.e., combined face-to-face and online) training has not been readily available in-country. For course on Risk-Sensitive Land Use Planning example, GFDRR staff are building an information (RSLUP). While BUERP conducted the analyses and communications technology (ICT) platform for a pilot case in Dhaka, the documents provide that can monitor progress of shelter construction a framework that could be followed for similar activities for the World Bank’s ECRRP and assessments in other cities in Bangladesh. The Multipurpose Disaster Shelters Project (2014–20, second phase of the project, which is currently $375 million). Under OpenDRI, GFDRR contributed ongoing, builds on the outputs under Phase I, to the development of a GEODASH Platform with the aim to build on the enabling environment (GeoNode based) with data for Dhaka, in established in the first phase and support the connection with BUERP. Progress on developing operationalization of sector-specific earthquake a property catastrophe risk insurance facility, to resilience strategies. The participatory approach of support the urban resilience program, has also BUERP has involved significant administrative and been advancing. coordination effort, which is often underestimated. Having a country-based focal point, supported by ƒƒ Co-financing for the World Bank’s ECRRP. GFDRR’s regional technical expertise, has enabled GFDRR’s inputs to ECRRP were in the form of the delivery of these outputs. cash contributions ($3.2 million) that were pooled 15 EMI, GFDRR, and the World Bank. 2014. Bangladesh Urban Earthquake Resilience Project – Phase 2. February 2014. 16 These documents are: (i) Dhaka Profile and Earthquake Risk Atlas (April 2014), and Earthquake Risk in Dhaka Poster and Brochure; (ii) Dhaka Earthquake Risk Guidebook, also known as the Hazards, Vulnerability, and Risk Assessment (HVRA) Guidebook (February 2014); (iii) Risk-Sensitive Land Use Planning Guidebook (February 2014), and RSLUP Brief; (iv) Information, Education, & Communication Action Plan (February 2014); (v) Training and Capacity Building Action Plan (February 2014); (vi) Legal and Institutional Arrangements (LIA) Framework Guidebook (February 2014); and (vii) Road Map for Disaster Data Sharing Platform (GEODASH) (February 2014). 17 The two background papers prepared by GFDRR are: (i) Our Vision is a Climate Resilient Bangladesh; and (ii) Procedures and Benefits of Establishing a Multi Donor Trust Fund for Bangladesh. 18 World Bank and JICA. “Coordination Strategy for Promoting Urban Resilience in Bangladesh.” September 3, 2014. Unpublished. [6] ICF International ICF International [7] with other funds. About two-thirds of GFDRR’s facilitated exchange of information on estuarine value of investing in urban resilience, as furthered Overall, GFDRR has created conditions that appear resources were used mainly for the procurement of and coastal morphology and geomorphology. evidenced by the GoB’s pledged co-financing to likely to contribute to strong outcomes and impacts, supplies to support the recovery of the agriculture ƒƒ Client capacity increased. BUERP increased URP. GFDRR’s engagements also facilitated close particularly in the areas of preparedness and risk sector, as well as consultant salaries and NGO understanding of roles and responsibilities stated coordination and strategic collaboration with JICA reduction. For example, building on GFDRR’s critical contracts. The remaining resources funded the in the Standing Orders on Disaster of the different on parallel investments in urban resilience (e.g., groundwork, the $182 million Urban Resilience improvement of existing cyclone shelters and actors involved in emergency preparedness the World Bank will finance the procurement of Project has potential to deliver impacts in the form raised earthen platforms (killas).19 All cyclone and response in Dhaka. GFDRR’s DaLA training search and rescue equipment for Fire Service and of increased resilience to earthquakes for the 15.5 shelters are multi-purpose buildings. generated support for the formation of the Disaster Civil Defense, while JICA finances the earthquake million people living in Greater Dhaka and Sylhet, due Outcomes and impacts. The evaluation found Needs Assessment Cell that was established in retrofitting of fire stations). to access to improved emergency preparedness and evidence of intermediate outcomes resulting the Department of Disaster Management through The forward-looking nature of the joint DLNA for response services. from most GFDRR activities in Bangladesh.20 Key ECRRP. Cyclone Sidr informed and influenced the preparation GFDRR’s contributions should improve the quality of intermediate outcomes to which GFDRR contributed ƒƒ Innovative approaches and solutions generated. of new government and donor development financing long-term research under CEIP-I, which has potential are the following. Figure 2 below also shows the BUERP raised awareness on the need for open by identifying key needs and priorities. More than to improve the design of risk reduction investments results of an online survey of BUERP participants access to data and information through the $1,600 million has been invested in World Bank under the project and more broadly in the country and conducted by this evaluation, which shows further preparation of the risk atlas and the creation of the projects stemming from the DLNA (see Table 1). In region. CEIP-I is expected to provide direct protection evidence of intermediate outcomes.21 GEODASH platform. turn, GFDRR has undertaken activities to improve to 760,000 people living within the polder boundaries. the quality of long-term research under one of those 22 Other ongoing activities, such as GFDRR’s DRFI, ƒƒ Knowledge deepened. BUERP increased ƒƒ Development financing informed. GFDRR’s World Bank projects (CEIP-I). GFDRR support for understanding and awareness of earthquake risk leverage in Bangladesh has been significant, show potential for progress toward tangible results,23 CEIP-1 also helped to investigate the feasibility but sustained engagement over the medium-term and RSLUP among key stakeholders in Dhaka, with GFDRR technical assistance through BUERP of World Bank financing of the Dhaka Eastern which was previously low, and as a result of the directly leading to the development of a now- is needed to ensure that the intermediate outcomes Embankment cum Bypass Road. of these activities proceed toward outcomes and preparation of foundational documents, increased approved urban resilience investment by the World availability of information about earthquake risk. Bank and the GoB. Moreover, GFDRR’s technical GFDRR’s analytical products, prepared for the impacts. GFDRR’s research activities in support of CEIP-I assistance helped the GoB realize the need and 2008 UK-Bangladesh Climate Change Conference, Some activities have already achieved impacts. The contributed to the preparation of the Bangladesh World Bank’s executing agencies24 for ECRRP used Climate Change Strategy and Action Plan and the GFDRR monies in combination with other financing Figure 2: Results of Participant Survey on BUERP Outcomes concept note for the Bangladesh Climate Change to introduce improved crop cultivation, aquaculture Did your participation in BUERP events... Resilience Fund (BCCRF)—both of which guide donor production and livestock rearing practices to cyclone 100% and government investments in climate change and affected communities, and foster new approaches to 90% DRM. The BCCRF was capitalized at $170 million. shelter construction. GFDRR co-financing for ECRRP 80% 70% Table 1. World Bank Investments with DRM Components Leveraged by GFDRR 60% 50% Program / WB Implementation World Bank Project Loan Amount GFDRR Leverage 40% Years (US$ million) 30% Through technical 20% Urban Resilience Project 182/173 2015–20 assistance 10% Through DLNA Emergency 2007 Cyclone Recovery and Restoration Project 184/184 2008–17 0% support Increase your awareness Improve your Increase your Improve your capacity Coastal Embankment Improvement Project – Phase I 400/375 2013–20 of urban earthquake risk understanding of the roles expectations for greater to prepare for and/or in Dhaka? and responsibilities of access to and sharing of respond to disasters? River Bank Improvement Program – Phase I 650/600 2014–23 different actors involved disaster-related data and Multipurpose Disaster Shelters Project 376.7/375 2014–20 in Dhaka disaster risk knowledge? preparedness and Total 1792.7/1707 responses, as started No Small extent Moderate extent Large extent in the SOD? 19 Killas are often used to sequester livestock before residents take refuge in cyclone shelters. 20 No results beyond outputs were identified for the GFDRR grant ($79,000). “Background Studies for Improving Bangladesh’s Response and Recovery Activities in the 22 World Bank. 2013. Bangladesh - First Phase of the Coastal Embankment Improvement Project. Washington DC; World Bank. Aftermath of Disasters.” Not all outputs were finalized and the grant was dropped. 23 The agricultural insurance study has picked up attention, and a team is advancing on the preparation of a risk agriculture risk transfer facility. At the same time, the 21 This survey was disseminated to 163 participants in BUERP focus groups workshops, field investigations, high-level fora, Advisory Committee meetings, Scientific property catastrophe insurance pool is progressing. Both of these will require long gestation periods, and continued GFDRR support, to materialize. Consoritum meetings, and the RSLUP training course. Twenty-three participants responded, for a response rate of approximately 14 percent. 24 The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and Local Government Engineering Department (LGED). [8] ICF International ICF International [9] (Component B) fully funded the improvement of 33 Resilience, and GoB on Eastern Embankment cum 2.2. Eastern Caribbean (Saint Lucia and Dominica) existing cyclone shelters in Bagerhat and Barisal Bypass).The placement of the GFDRR focal point in districts and partially funded the improvement of 20 the World Bank country office is an enabling factor in existing shelters and 10 killas in Barguna and Bhola identifying and pursuing these influence opportunities. Key Messages for GFDRR in the Eastern Caribbean districts.25,26 A draft report suggests that Component ƒƒ GFDRR has delivered outputs including analytical products, resources and tools, and related technical A—which GFDRR also co-financed27—reached more In general, the presence of a GFDRR focal point assistance for DaLA and PDNA activities, supplied technical and financial assessment work supporting DVRP than 270,000 beneficiary households and reduced in-country has been a driver of deeper engagement development, and facilitated regional interactions in the Eastern Caribbean. the number of beneficiary households below the and conditions for results. The focal point has been ƒƒ Intermediate outcomes are mainly attributable to national grants, the CHaRIM regional grant, and the PDNA poverty threshold by more than 30 percent.28 able to establish good working relationships and trust regional grant with a focus on raising awareness, building capacity, and policy support. Of the four other with stakeholders, as well as provide a continuity regional grants, there was no evidence that work had commenced in two grants, and for the other two grants, Enabling and detracting factors for success. GFDRR of coordination and expertise to clients and World there was no evidence found of process-oriented outcomes resulting from the activities. has been particularly successful in delivering results Bank staff on DRM. It has also allowed GFDRR to ƒƒ Grants for which GFDRR has utilized its comparative advantages—particularly technical expertise and where it has been able to bring its technical expertise maintain its flexibility and ability to manage institutional connection to larger World Bank operations—seem likely to achieve downstream results. to bear, link to broader initiatives, and capitalize on complexity in Bangladesh. For example, much of ƒƒ Low capacity, competing demands for government staff in small island countries, and a lack of sustained strong stakeholder support and political demand. GFDRR’s success in Dhaka involved working with engagement are key risks to achieving outcomes and impacts. This is evident in the work on urban resilience in non-traditional clients other than national government ƒƒ GFDRR technical expertise was influential in the shaping the larger Disaster Vulnerability Programs (DVRP), Dhaka (i.e., through BUERP) where GFDRR can be (e.g., the Dhaka Capital Development Authority, financed by the World Bank and PPCR ($68 million in Saint Lucia and $38 million in Dominica). seen as demonstrating the importance of adopting known as RAJUK, and City Corporations). In addition, a participatory approach to increase collective a key contributor to the successful development of the ƒƒ GFDRR has leveraged resources through post-disaster assessment in Saint Lucia. understanding of risk, of identifying linkages with Urban Resilience Project was that GFDRR’s technical operations at the World Bank and other donors (e.g., assistance was co-led by the GFDRR Regional JICA), and of seizing the opportunity to garner high- Coordinator for South Asia and the GFDRR focal point 2.1.1. Eastern Caribbean Context for GFDRR system that affected Saint Lucia) leading to an level political support for BUERP after the collapse of for Bangladesh (located in Dhaka), both of whom are Engagement estimated $20 million in damages.32 Rana Plaza. World Bank operational staff. Disaster risk context. Saint Lucia and Dominica are In both countries, a large segment of the population In contrast, the DRFI work has experienced slow When GFDRR has been less successful in influencing mountainous, small island countries in the Eastern resides along the coastline, leaving infrastructure progress as a result of lack of government interest DRM resources in Bangladesh, one hindrance has Caribbean that are exposed to a range of weather- and people vulnerable to the impacts of hurricanes and demand following the development of GFDRR’s been the modality with which GFDRR engaged. related hazards, including hurricanes, tropical and tropical storms.33 In Saint Lucia, much of agricultural study in 2011. A key challenge is for Half of GFDRR’s approved funding for Bangladesh storms, storm surges, landslides, and flooding, as the infrastructure on the island was not originally GFDRR to identify and exploit opportunities where from 2008 to 2014 was delivered as co-financing well as geophysical hazards, such as earthquakes, designed to be resilient to disasters.34 Two of they exist, while still working within the constraints for ECRRP. Interviews revealed that GFDRR had tsunamis, and volcanic activity.29 Climate change also Dominica’s major economic sectors, agriculture and posed by the complex institutional environment. While limited interaction with project proponents after the affects these Caribbean countries, including shifts in eco-tourism, are closely tied to its natural environment, there was limited reception for GFDRR’s agricultural initial commitment of resources, suggesting that precipitation patterns, more intense storms, and rising making the island’s economy particularly vulnerable to insurance report in 2010, GFDRR is now re-engaging GFDRR did not give direction or have influence in sea level.30 natural disasters.35 with GoB at the government’s request, using the 2010 how its co-financing was used. As such, the co- report as a jumping-off point. financing modality did not take full advantage of Saint Lucia has experienced several tropical storms Institutional and policy context. Disaster management GFDRR’s technical expertise, nor did it in this case in the recent past, such as Tropical Storm Debbie in in Saint Lucia is governed by the National Hazard GFDRR has also been successful in identifying align with GFDRR’s strategies to mainstream DRM 1994, a Tropical Wave in 1996, Hurricane Tomas in Mitigation Policy established in 2003; the National strategic entry points for small technical assistance into development, to influence policy making and 2010, and a low-pressure trough in 2013 (often called Emergency Management Organization formed in contributions to have a wider impact, e.g., through investment at scale, or to develop or test innovative the “Christmas Rains”). The 2013 low-pressure trough 2006; and the 2007 National Disaster Management improving the quality of long-term research under approaches. Since committing to co-financing the resulted in economic damages and losses of $99.8 Plan. These policies have marked a shift from a CEIP-I. Deeper technical engagements in sectors ECRRP in 2009, GFDRR engagements have changed million, roughly 8.3 percent of the island’s GDP.31 In reactionary, disaster response approach to a more such as urban, water, and infrastructure strategically strategy to focus on pointed technical assistance, 2011, Dominica experienced flooding and landslides proactive and comprehensive disaster management position World Bank task teams to better engage which has shown to provide more strategic leverage from heavy rains which caused $100 million in perspective. Saint Lucia has made progress in government and international partners to leverage in direct areas of need. damages (20 percent of GDP). Two years later, in improving national DRM capacity through stronger funding going forward (e.g., JICA and GoB on Urban December 2013, Dominica experienced intermittent monitoring and early warning systems, improved periods of heavy rains (the same tropical depression 29 World Bank. 2014. Joint Rapid Damage and Needs Assessment: Saint Lucia Flood Event of December 24–25, 2013. 25 To put this contribution in context, the entire Component B aims to improve 457 existing cyclone shelters in total, to construct 360 new cyclone shelters, to build 30 30 Climate Change Knowledge Portal (CCKP). Available at: http://sdwebx.worldbank.org/climateportal/. killas, and construct/re-construct road, bridges, and culverts in nine districts. 31 World Bank. 2014. Joint Rapid Damage and Needs Assessment: Saint Lucia Flood Event of December 24–25, 2013. 26 LGED. 2015. Monthly Progress Report under ECRRP, Reporting Month March 2015. Grant No: TF-093588. Provided by LGED to the Evaluation Team. 32 World Bank. 2014. Regional Disaster Vulnerability Reduction Program Project III. 27 GFDRR contributed $1.96 million out of total funding of $30.96 million for Component A. 33 Climate Investment Funds. 2011. Strategic Program for Climate Resilience: St. Lucia. 28 FAO. 2014. Draft Implementation Completion and Results Report. Recovery of the Agriculture Sector and Improvement Programme under the Emergency 2007 34 World Bank. 2014. Joint Rapid Damage and Needs Assessment: Saint Lucia Flood Event of December 24–25, 2013. Cyclone Recovery and Restoration Project (ECRRP) (Component A), Project UTF/BGD/040/BGD, Submitted 24 June 2014. 35 World Bank. 2014. Regional Disaster Vulnerability Reduction Program Project III. [ 10 ] ICF International ICF International [ 11 ] emergency preparedness, and increased public 2.2.2. GFDRR Results in Saint Lucia and Dominica awareness and better capacity building for local Outputs. Between 2009 and 2014, GFDRR has decision-makers. delivered analytical products, resources and tools, In Dominica, DRM programs are governed by and related technical assistance, as well as facilitated the Emergency Powers Act, established in 1951 regional interactions in the Eastern Caribbean. and revised in 1973 and 1990. In 2006, Dominica Outputs include: developed a National Disaster Plan to guide mitigation ƒƒ Analytical products. These include a PDNA and an and response efforts.36 Disaster management in assessment of World Bank financed DRM projects Dominica is also guided by the National Climate in Saint Lucia in the aftermath of Hurricane Tomas, Change Adaptation Policy (2002), National Hurricane as well as a Joint Rapid Damage and Needs Management Plan, Disaster Preparedness Plan for the Assessment (JRDNA) following the 2013 Christmas Agriculture Sector, and Low-Carbon Climate-Resilient Rains, also in Saint Lucia. GFDRR also conducted Development Strategy.37 a national-level flood hazard assessment, which Both Dominica and Saint Lucia also participate in is currently being refined. In addition, GFDRR regional efforts related to natural hazard management. supported the development and implementation Most relevant for GFDRR has been Saint Lucia and of surveys and field manuals related to climate Dominica’s participation in a Caribbean regional change adaptation, building code compliance, program under the Pilot Program for Climate and domestic housing structural needs. This Resilience (PPCR), one of the funding windows of the work is designed to understand improvements Climate Investment Funds (CIF). that could benefit from a micro-finance approach through the Climate Adaptation Finance Facility GFDRR programming. GFDRR provides both regional (CAFF)—a credit line component of Saint Lucia’s grants and country-specific grants to the Eastern DVRP. In Dominica, GFDRR supported shelter Caribbean. Eight regional grants have been approved assessment work as part of the planning process since 2008 totaling about $3.5 million, of which six for the DVRP. have involved Saint Lucia and Dominica ($2.6 million). ƒƒ Resources and ICT tools to improve the availability Four country grants have been approved for a total and use of hazard and risk information in decision- of $922,000, two of which were implemented in Saint making. A regional GFDRR grant (Caribbean Lucia ($350,000) and one in Dominica ($522,000). Handbook on Risk Information Management/ While grants have covered all five GFDRR pillars, CHaRIM) supported the development of a the large majority of funding has been directed at methodological framework for the generation risk identification and reduction; about 10 percent and application of landslide and flood hazard has been allocated for resilient recovery—post- maps, case studies and hazard maps using disaster needs assessment (PDNA) preparation and this framework, and an on-line handbook with associated capacity building. resources and tools for producing and using hazard information for decision-making. In Country-specific grants have focused on supporting Dominica, GFDRR supported the development of targeted technical assistance alongside the spatial data infrastructure (“Dominode”), which is development of the countries’ PPCR and IDA-funded intended to be used to compile and coordinate Disaster Vulnerability Reduction Programs (DVRPs), geospatial information across ministries. In Saint as well as post-disaster assessments. GFDRR’s Open Lucia, a GFDRR grant funded the development of Data Initiative has also been engaged. Regional a hazard information database. These activities are grants have supported multi-country participation interlinked with spatial data policy development in conferences, networks, trainings, and the processes in both countries, where legislation and development of technical products. The figure on associated policies are in the process of being next page shows key policy milestones and disaster approved. events, GFDRR grants, and related World Bank investment programs. World Bank. 2014. Regional Disaster Vulnerability Reduction Program Project III. 36 GFDRR. 2013. ACP-EU for Disaster Reduction and Recovery (DRR) – Window 2 Proposal. 37 [ 12 ] ICF International ICF International [ 13 ] ƒƒ Capacity building. GFDRR has provided support foregone activities have been rolled into the MoSSaic ministries and better availability of information These funds include $15 million in IDA resources, for capacity building alongside the development Community of Practitioners grant and are currently about landslide and flood hazards that has come $17 million in emergency response resources from of most of its analytical products, resources, and being completed. The funds for this third grant (the from GFDRR support in both Dominica and Saint the World Bank’s Crisis Response Window (part tools. GFDRR supported training on a DaLA MoSSaic Caribbean Community of Practitioners) were Lucia. of the DVRP), and $10 million in reconstruction methodology for 33 participants in Saint Lucia approved in 2013, but delays related to deployment ƒƒ Client capacity increased. In Dominica, GFDRR support from the European Union (managed by following the 2013 Christmas Rains. Saint Lucian of the web-based tools and learning platform have revised and streamlined the approach for the World Bank). In the context of a small island experts attended technical training on the flood meant that trainings are now scheduled to begin seasonal assessment of shelters to better account country like Saint Lucia, this amount of funding is hazard assessment. GFDRR grants funded in August 2015 with six priority countries identified: for vulnerability and increased the capacity of significant. capacity building for government ministries Belize, Dominica, Grenada, Jamaica, Saint Lucia, and Government of Dominica to use the approach. GFDRR activities have influenced the DVRPs in and academia around the development, Saint Vincent & the Grenadines. GFDRR’s technical assistance also improved the both Saint Lucia and Dominica, as shown in Table 2 implementation, and analysis of household and capacity of the Government of Dominica to design below. In Saint Lucia, a number of recommendations business community surveys. In Dominica, Similarly, for another regional grant aimed at strengthened PDNA capacity (implemented by resilient shelters and identify and retrofit vulnerable from the above-mentioned JRDNA are now funded GFDRR supported training and technical shelters, as well as to collect, harmonize, store, under the DVRP. GFDRR support for household and assistance on the use and sharing of spatial data UNDP), although the project became effective in June 2013, delays in establishing the legal frameworks and share geospatial data. There is limited structural assessment surveys should also inform management platforms (Dominode). For CHaRIM, evidence that support for PDNA and JDRNA the design of the CAFF, which will be implemented GFDRR supported workshops and trainings to and staffing changes meant that PDNA workshops did not commence until July 2014 (first regional activities and associated analytical products have under the DVRP. In Dominica, GFDRR support for build capacity and regional collaboration in the increased capacity within ministries, with a few spatial data management and sharing platform and application of the methodological framework for workshop in Barbados). The first country workshop for 47 participants took place in July 2015, with four individuals gaining improved capacity for DRM a shelter vulnerability assessment helped to inform risk identification. planning and implementation. development of the DVRP. GFDRR’s development of additional country workshops scheduled for the ƒƒ Outreach materials. GFDRRR funded publication third quarter of 2015 (the Saint Lucia workshop is ƒƒ Innovative approaches and solutions generated. the basic structure of the GeoNode and collection of The Management of Slope Stability in scheduled for September 2015). Support for the Dominode platform has led to of existing information into a common platform will Communities (MoSSaiC) Handbook through World a nascent community of practice around using form the foundation for this DVRP component. The Bank Publications.38,39 Outcomes and impacts. In the Eastern Caribbean, geospatial information in decision-making, and second component, the shelter assessment, was ƒƒ Conference participation. GFDRR supported intermediate outcomes have primarily been there is interest in using the technology platform originally planned to be included in the DVRP, but physical planning participants and organized a associated with the national grants, the CHaRIM more widely. was ultimately de-prioritized. The work established session on donor coordination and outreach in regional grant, and the PDNA regional grant. improvements in the assessment process and For the remaining regional grants, the evaluation ƒƒ Development financing informed. GFDRR has created geo-positioning information for shelters and the 6th Caribbean Conference on Comprehensive leveraged resources through post-disaster Disaster Management. team did not observe any intermediate outcomes a data base. Based on the GFDRR-supported work, achieved; for two grants, strengthening PDNA assessment in Saint Lucia; no evidence of direct the Government of Dominica is pursuing financing For four of the nine grant proposals reviewed, some capacity and the MoSSaic Caribbean Community of leverage was found in Dominica. In Saint Lucia, through other donors. outputs are not yet completed, due partly to project Practitioners, delays have meant that activities are just GFDRR support for the disaster assessment after delays. In Saint Lucia, the focus of the vulnerability commencing, and any outcomes will accrue outside Hurricane Tomas in 2010 and for the JRDNA ƒƒ Policy/strategy informed. GFDRR supported the assessment activity was narrowed in 2014 to the the timeframe of this evaluation,41 and for the other following the 2013 Christmas Rains contributed development of an information sharing policy in housing sector to identify resilience-building actions two grants, there was no evidence found of process- to leveraging recovery and reconstruction funds. Dominica. that would be eligible for financing from the Climate oriented outcomes resulting from the grant activities.42 Adaptation Finance Facility (CAFF). This activity, Key intermediate outcomes to which GFDRR executed in partnership with Sir Arthur Lewis contributed are: Community College, is expected to be completed Table 2. World Bank Investments with DRM Components Influenced by GFDRR in August 2015. A case study for watershed ƒƒ Knowledge deepened. In Saint Lucia, capacity Program / WB Implementation management in Bois d’Orange has been postponed and understanding associated with micro-finance World Bank Project Loan Amount GFDRR Influence Years to late 2015. initiatives to support the CAFF has been improved. (US$ million) In Dominica, GFDRR facilitated exchange of Hurricane Tomas 10 2011–2014 The reconstruction priorities identified in the Under a regional grant, the publication of the knowledge related to building standards for Emergency Recovery Post-Tomas Damage Assessment influenced all MoSSaiC Handbook reportedly consumed more shelters and raised awareness on open source Project – Saint Lucia components of the HTERP. resources than anticipated, and thus, other planned information sharing platforms and their use in DVRP – Saint Lucia 68/24 2014–2019 The priorities identified in the JRDNA influenced activities were not able to be completed.40 These Dominica. There is a greater understanding among several components of the DVRP, as well as the Planned Additional 11.5/10 2015–2019 majority of the proposed AF DVRP activities. Financing DVRP – Saint Lucia DVRP – Dominica 38/17 2015–2020 Spatial data-management and -sharing for decision- 38 World Holcombe, E.A., S. Smith, E. Wright, M.G. Anderson (in press). An integrated approach for evaluating the effectiveness of landslide hazard reduction in vulnerable communities in the Caribbean. Natural Hazards. DOI: 10.1007/s11069-011-9920-7. making included in the DVRP. 39 The MoSSaiC approach was developed by researchers from the University of Bristol, and was first funded by USAID, which also supported pilot activities in Saint Lucia. None of the communities that had MoSSaiC interventions before Hurricane Tomas experienced landslides. 40 Including a Spanish version of manuscript, CHASM software, E-course, and MoSSaiC Wiki / Manage ‘Mini Manual’ / Community leaflets and posts. 41 MoSSaic Caribbean Community Practitioners ($550,000) and Strengthening Capacity in Post Disaster Needs Assessment in the Caribbean ($373,000). 42 Support and Participation in the 6th Caribbean Conference on Comprehensive Disaster Management ($110,000); and Management of Slope Stability in Communities (MoSSaiC): Handbook and Resources Publication ($150,000). [ 14 ] ICF International ICF International [ 15 ] Grants for which GFDRR has utilized its comparative technical advice during PDNA and JDRNA activities 2.3. Ethiopia advantages—particularly technical expertise and in Saint Lucia have helped to influence the larger connection to larger World Bank operations—seem scale DVRPs. Similarly, the Dominode and shelter likely to achieve downstream results. These include assessment support in Dominica improved the Key Messages for GFDRR in Ethiopia primarily the national grants designed to inform and planning process for DVRP development. For both ƒƒ GFDRR has delivered many intended outputs, including trainings and support for technical assistance influence larger-scale DVRP investments. In particular, countries the DVRPs represent significantly more and capacity building at the national, regional, and local (woreda) level. GFDRR support for DRM-related the technical expertise that GFDRR provided to the funding for DRM informed activities in these small information systems; training for PDNA, the LEAP model, and Woreda-net; pilot scale DRM at the woreda level; World Bank was influential in the shaping of the DVRP island states. and advisory services to the Government of Ethiopia (GoE) for DRM policy development have been delivered. in both countries. The DVRPs represent significantly ƒƒ Intermediate outcomes were achieved in the areas of improved availability and dissemination of disaster risk more resources than either country has had to Low capacity, competing demands for government information for Woreda Disaster Risk Profiles (WDRPs) and the LEAP model. Piloting of woreda-level DRM and address DRR previously ($68 million in Saint Lucia, staff in small island countries, and a lack of sustained new applications of the LEAP model to better connect and inform Ethiopia’s early warning system (EWS) and engagement are key risks to achieving outcomes help GoE make better decisions were successful, but further follow up is needed. and $38 million in Dominica, including both PPCR and World Bank financing). With planned follow-on funding and impacts. GFDRR’s Dominode support offers ƒƒ A few GFDRR activities show evidence of contributing to longer-term outcomes and impacts, and are aligned from the EU in the amount of $10M to be managed by an example. With the completion of GFDRR’s short- with national initiatives and priorities: improving EWSs (through upgrading the LEAP model and to a lesser the World Bank in support of further activities under term consultant’s contract, individuals in ministries degree weather reporting), supporting woreda-level disaster risk identification, reduction, and preparedness and institutions were trained to use the software, a through WDRP, and providing technical assistance to operationalize the DRM- SPIF. the DVRP in Saint Lucia. nascent community of practice was established, and ƒƒ The World Bank Productive Safety Nets Program (PSNP) has been strengthened by GFDRR contributions as Saint Lucia’s DVRP is anticipated to directly benefit available data sets were uploaded to the server. Data activities supported by earlier GFDRR grants (LEAP and WDRPs and connectivity) are now a component of the 169,000 people, reduce the vulnerability of eight sets continue to be created, but there is insufficient most recent PSNP IV, with an allocation of $32 million for DRM. schools, health centers, and emergency shelters to ability to effectively use the information for planning landslips, flooding, and other climate-related events, purposes.45 With ongoing technical assistance, policy and reduce the number of days of interrupted traffic dialogue, and outreach support, Dominode can be an 2.3.1. Ethiopia Context for GFDRR Engagement property damage in Ethiopia and have been due to these events from 20 to five.43 Dominica’s effective tool for informed decision-making. particularly harmful for urban residents. Disaster risk context. Ethiopia is exposed to numerous DVRP is expected to benefit the entire population Regional initiatives have been particularly inhibited by natural hazards, including droughts, prolonged food Institutional and policy context. In 1993, the GoE of Dominica (71,680), reduce the number of days lack of institutional and staff capacity, and a perceived insecurity, floods, fires, landslides, and earthquakes. adopted its first DRM policy, the National Policy on of interrupted traffic due to landslips, flooding, and lack of incentives to disseminate regional knowledge. The country’s most significant and recurring natural Disaster Prevention and Management. The policy’s other climate-related events from 30 to 7, and provide For regional events, the evaluation team found hazard is drought. In 2003, one of Ethiopia’s harshest main purpose was to link relief assistance with 3,000 households with uninterrupted water service in no evidence of knowledge transfer from regional droughts affected more than 12 million people. development efforts in order to mitigate the impacts of the event of a natural disaster. Successful operation grant participants to the larger country context, and Downstream impacts of drought include diminished disasters and to enhance the coping capacities of the of a spatial data management platform, early because the number of stakeholders participating in availability of water, degradation of land, reduced affected population. Disaster management through warning systems, and data collection/management regional events are limited (e.g., two per country for availability of pastureland, and diseases for livestock. the second millennium was focused primarily on infrastructure should also allow Dominica to improve CHaRIM), there is risk of knowledge being lost in the These impacts further stress rural populations as responding to drought emergencies.48,49 decision-making.44 event of staff turnover or a failure of trained staff to they lead to decreased productivity of livestock and Enabling and detracting factors for success. GFDRR pass on knowledge. GFDRR can play a role moving crops, food insecurity, scarce natural resources, The year 2007 marked a paradigm shift as Ethiopia’s interventions have been successful when technical forward to ensure that this capacity is not lost by limitation of economic growth, and malnutrition, approach to DRM moved away from relief-focused expertise and advisory support services have providing additional support. stunting, and morbidity among human populations. efforts to a more proactive, multi-sectoral, and multi- informed larger World Bank operations. In particular, This is particularly true for the majority of Ethiopia’s hazard approach. While Ethiopia has had a disaster population that reside in rural drought-prone, pastoral, management institution in the GoE since the mid- and agro-pastoral societies.46,47 1970s, in 2007, this institution was restructured as the Disaster Risk Management and Food Security Flooding is also a growing concern in Ethiopia. Flash Sector (DRMFSS) and placed under the Ministry of floods and seasonal river floods are becoming more Agriculture and Rural Development.50,51 frequent and widespread due to both natural and human-induced factors, including more significant The new DRMFSS spearheaded an updated National climate variability, land degradation and deforestation, Policy and Strategy on Disaster Risk Management and larger and denser human settlements. Major (NPSDRM). Approved in July 2013, the NPSDRM floods have resulted in significant loss of life and introduces a new institutional arrangement for the 43 World Bank. 2014. Saint Lucia - Disaster Vulnerability Reduction Project. Washington, DC; World Bank Group. Available at: http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2014/05/19627898/ 46 Climate Change Knowledge Portal. Ethiopia Dashboard, Natural Hazards. Available at: http://sdwebx.worldbank.org/climateportalb/home.cfm?page=country_profile&CC saint-lucia-disaster-vulnerability-reduction-project. ode=ETH&ThisTab=NaturalHazards. 44 World Bank. 2014. Dominica - Third Phase of the Eastern Caribbean Regional Disaster Vulnerability Reduction Program Project. Washington DC; World Bank Group. Available at: http:// 47 GFDRR. May 2014. Country Program Update. Available at: https://www.GFDRR.org/sites/GFDRR/files/region/ET.pdf. documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2014/04/19393604/dominica-third-phase-eastern-caribbean-regional-disaster-vulnerability-reduction-program-project. 48 Track 2 Proposal. Ethiopia – Disaster Risk Management Country Plan. 45 For instance, the interim server has been repurposed for its intended use and a newly acquired server has not been put on line (as of the time of the field visit in early April 2015). Further 49 International Federation of Red Cross Red Crescent Societies, 2013. Ethiopia: Country Case Study Report – How Law and Regulation Supports Disaster Risk Reduction. code development and LINUX work is needed to fully operationalize the system. Stakeholders also reported that additional training for personnel on the application and use of the 50 Track 2 Proposal. Ethiopia – Disaster Risk Management Country Plan. system and data development is needed, as well as outreach to decision-makers to create greater ownership. 51 International Federation of Red Cross Red Crescent Societies, 2013. Ethiopia: Country Case Study Report – How Law and Regulation Supports Disaster Risk Reduction. [ 16 ] ICF International ICF International [ 17 ] organization, coordination, and implementation supported linking a nutritional information system of DRM activities in Ethiopia. The Disaster Risk and the EWS in Ethiopia and improved the use and Management Strategic Programme and Investment linkage of the LEAP model to Ethiopia’s EWS. Framework (DRM-SPIF) was created as a ƒƒ Advisory services and analytical products to complement to and implementation framework for bolster DRM in Ethiopia. GFDRR has supported a the NPSDRM. DRM-SPIF identifies priority investment number of technical experts to provide advisory areas and estimates associated financing needs.52 services and capacity-building efforts to the GoE GFDRR programming. GFDRR has funded six grants and its partners. GFDRR has advised on the in Ethiopia over the period 2007 to 2014, totaling development of a new DRM policy and the DRM- $2.5 million and covering all five of GFDRR’s pillars. SPIF. GFDRR is also providing ongoing technical About half of that funding has gone toward support assistance as the GoE begins to operationalize the for Ethiopia’s Disaster Risk Management Country policy and DRM-SPIF. Plan, which has involved piloting risk identification, ƒƒ Training and technical assistance at the woreda reduction, and preparedness activities at the woreda and national level. To support many of the activities (i.e., district) level. described above, GFDRR has also provided trainings and targeted technical assistance. In general, GFDRR’s activities in Ethiopia have GFDRR has provided training for over 100 GoE focused on drought preparedness and response and staff at national and regional levels in using the ensuring food security and have been closely linked LEAP model. GFDRR has also provided training with World Bank programs (including the Productive at both the national and woreda level to produce Safety Nets Program/PSNP, which is one of the most the Woreda Disaster Risk Profiles (WDRPs), significant development programs in Ethiopia and in contingency plans, and DRM/Adaptation its fourth stage). The figure below shows the timing Plans, and for the ongoing use of Woreda-net. of key policy milestones and disaster events, GFDRR GFDRR also conducted a PDNA training and grants, and related World Bank investment programs. field application course for 66 participants from major federal, regional, and woreda government 2.3.2. GFDRR Results in Ethiopia agencies and experts from other development Outputs. Between 2007 and 2014, GFDRR has agencies, although lack of follow-up means there successfully delivered a wide range of outputs in is a risk of erosion of the capacity gained through Ethiopia at both the local and national levels. These the PDNA training. include: ƒƒ Facilitation of learning. GFDRR has also supported peer learning through two overseas study tours ƒƒ Pilot-scale support for woreda-level DRM. GFDRR for 14 participants on early warning systems and supported pilot activities focused on improving through a south-to-south knowledge exchange disaster risk identification, mitigation, and with Turkey on DRM reform policies and strategies. preparedness at the local level, in 35 woredas as Follow up to ensure that capacity and learning are described above. maintained and expanded is critical here, as well. ƒƒ Systems to improve the timeliness and Outcomes and impacts. In Ethiopia, the evaluation effectiveness of risk information. A number of found evidence that the results from GFDRR activities GFDRR’s grants supported the development, went beyond the output level to achieve intermediate improvement, and application of DRM-related outcomes in three of six grants, with two showing information systems. The DRM Country Plan grant lesser success generating intermediate outcomes supported development of Woreda-net, a digital (nutrition mapping, weather risk management interactive database of all related information that framework). For one of the grants, related to providing has improved the connectivity and information baseline vulnerability information on flood exposed exchange between woreda-level government and communities in Ethiopia, there was limited recollection the regional and national levels. GFDRR has also Disaster Risk Management and Food Security Sector, Ministry of Agriculture in Ethiopia. Disaster Risk Management Strategic Programme and Investment Framework 52 [ 18 ] ICF International ICF International [ 19 ] in the field, although the project completion report for applications of the LEAP model to better connect activities already show evidence of these results. GFDRR’s work on the LEAP model, in conjunction with this grant identifies actions that set the stage for later and inform Ethiopia’s EWS and help GoE make In particular, GFDRR activities that are aligned with the range of other partners supporting the refinement woreda risk profiling and support for the DRM-SPIF.53 better decisions. GFDRR also supported the national initiatives and priorities—such as improving and development of the tool, has increased the Key intermediate outcomes to which GFDRR has exchange of these approaches and tools through EWS (through upgrading the LEAP model and accuracy and timeliness of early warning information, contributed are: study tours and south-to-south knowledge weather reporting), supporting woreda-level disaster especially as it relates to drought by collecting exchange, which established dialogue and risk identification, reduction, and preparedness, and and tracking precipitation and crop yield data. ƒƒ Knowledge deepened. GFDRR activities raised created a structure for developing communities of providing technical assistance to operationalize the Improvements in the LEAP model have also helped awareness among woredas participating in the practice. DRM-SPIF—seem more likely to achieve downstream to make decisions related to response measures DRM Country Plan as local citizens participated results. Moving forward, continued institutional and distribution of resources more transparent and in the process to gather, assess, and synthesize ƒƒ Development financing informed. GFDRR has contributed to the inclusion of approximately strengthening, capacity building, and technical objective. risk information in the WDRP; develop scenarios assistance through GFDRR interventions will be and thresholds for the contingency plans; and $32 million of DRM components in Productive In order for these activities to be fully effective, Safety Net Program IV (PSNP IV, $2,616 million; needed to ensure sustainability of outcomes and results brainstorm and prioritize DRM and adaptation generation. At the woreda level, maintaining avenues however, more work needs to be done to push measures that will reduce local disaster risk. $600 million World Bank, 2010–2014). PSNP these outputs and activities toward sustainable IV includes $9 million for the development of for, and actively supporting, collaboration, including GFDRR activities have also contributed to greater funding for networking and identifying/supporting outcomes and ultimately toward impacts. More WDRP and DRR and contingency plans in PSNP support is required to operationalize the DRM-SPIF availability and improved dissemination of disaster woredas; these products will be linked to other champions, could help ensure long-term success. risk information. For example, the development with a focus on mainstreaming and using the DRM program components to support long-term risk PSNP-IV has potential to achieve positive DRM outputs produced under these grants for effective of the WDRPs made more disaster information reduction. PSNP-IV also includes $20 million to available. Furthermore, dissemination of disaster outcomes and impacts, due in part to GFDRR’s and long-term decision-making. This includes using strengthen Ethiopia’s EWS, including integrating contributions vis-à-vis the DRM components. PSNP- risk information and DRM/adaptation priorities in risk information became more timely and hence, the LEAP model—which GFDRR helped refine and more readily available for decision-making through IV anticipates achieving two major DRM benefits: longer-term development and financial planning. socialize—with other components into a dynamic (1) a reduction in drought and flood impacts and Supporting the further development of a more direct activities associated with the WDRP and the LEAP platform.54 model. Communication and dissemination of losses following effective early warning and triggers and transparent connection between early warning information has been improved through Woreda- In addition, the GoE-led DRM-SPIF—which GFDRR of the response system, estimated at roughly information, contingency plans, and the actual net, although there are challenges associated is helping to operationalize—has identified multi- $30–$50 million per year; and (2) long-term risk triggering of the contingency fund would also likely with the technology (e.g., Internet outages, power billion dollar investments in DRM in the coming reduction through development of risk profiles and lead to strengthened response and resilience to losses, and slow connections) and maintenance 20 years and has potential to leverage substantial risk reduction plans that will inform public works, with natural disasters, and importantly improve decision (e.g., availability of replacement parts, and access donor and government investment. national benefits estimated at roughly $250 million per makers’ trust in the systems and reliability of to trained technicians). year (assuming a 50 percent risk reduction rate).55 information. ƒƒ Policy/strategy informed. The partnership between ƒƒ Client capacity increased. GFDRR has contributed the World Bank and GFDRR in Ethiopia—using Evidence from desk review and interviews suggests Enabling and detracting factors for success. The to strengthening the capacity of Ethiopian national GFDRR’s strategic grants and the World Bank’s that a few GFDRR activities have achieved concrete evolving social protection agenda in Ethiopia, moving and local institutions for: identification of key local presence, convening power, and access to outcomes. The WDRP has led to capacity built at the from a reactive emergency response approach disaster risks and enabling conditions through national ministries (World Bank is considered an woreda level through training and development of to a more pro-active resilience and preparedness the development of the WDRP; understanding influential and trusted advisor within GoE)—has Disaster Risk Profiles, contingency plans, and DRM/ approach, as championed by the GoE, allowed ways to reduce critical disaster risk through the helped facilitate a transition in the policy dialogue Adaptation Plans. The activities piloted by the World GFDRR an entry point to influence development of development of DRM/Adaptation Plans at the and programmatic priorities toward risk reduction Bank are now being picked up for other woredas robust DRM approaches. GFDRR’s influence and its woreda level; preparation for disasters through and preparedness. This is clearly demonstrated through other funding mechanisms. GFDRR’s work relationship to the World Bank and hence, access development of contingency plans at the woreda by the shift in mandate of DRMFSS, NPSDRM, in collaboration with UNICEF on nutrition and health to larger-scale World Bank programs—most notably level; improved communication through Woreda- and DRM-SPIF to focus on DRM. GFDRR activities has helped to improve the generation and collection PSNP IV—has enabled replication of GFDRR’s net; and the potential to trigger contingency have supported this shift, including through the of malnutrition information and strengthened the innovative pilot activities, and offers opportunities funds through risk information, including outputs provision of advisory services on the development application of this information within Ethiopia’s for achieving results at-scale. This influence was of the LEAP model. Also, linking early warning of the national DRM policy. As another example, early warning system. In certain priority 1 hotspot significantly streamlined and reinforced by having the information with nutrition information has helped the GoE has fully integrated the LEAP model and woredas, the linkage between malnutrition information same Task Team Leader (TTL) for the GFDRR grant the GoE to improve the timing and response to nutrition information into the country’s EWS in part through the Nutrition Information System and the and the PSNP, facilitating the process of informing malnutrition. due to development of LEAP and the Nutrition EWS has enhanced the capacity of Ethiopia’s EWS the investment project through grant activities in a Information System through GFDRR’s grants. to understand how health information correlates with harmonized fashion. ƒƒ Innovative approaches and solutions generated. DRM. GFDRR supported development of new Some GFDRR activities show potential for contributing to longer-term outcomes and impacts, and a few 53 For the grant related to facilitating provision of baseline vulnerability information on flood exposed communities in Ethiopia, some documentation was unavailable from GFDRR, and the evaluation team was unable to make contact with the World Bank Task Team Leader despite several attempts. Interviewees in the field had little recollection of the grant activity or the executing entity. 54 World Bank, 2014. Project Appraisal Document – Productive Safety Nets Project 4. Available at: http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2014/09/11/0 World Bank, 2014. Project Appraisal Document – Productive Safety Nets Project 4. Available at: http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2014/09/11/0 55 00470435_20140911143122/Rendered/PDF/PAD10220PAD0P1010Box385319B00OUO090.pdf. 00470435_20140911143122/Rendered/PDF/PAD10220PAD0P1010Box385319B00OUO090.pdf. [ 20 ] ICF International ICF International [ 21 ] The PSNP began to form a connection with DRM preparedness and trigger contingency financing 2.4. Indonesia processes as early as 2007, under PSNP II, under adverse conditions. This is a departure from evidenced by its relationship with the DRMFSS, whose the previous approach that was more reactive and Food Security Coordination Directorate is in charge of often at a point further along the livelihood-survival Key Messages for GFDRR in Indonesia coordinating food delivery, monitoring, and household continuum than desirable. ƒƒ GFDRR has successfully delivered a wide range of outputs in Indonesia at the national and subnational asset building aspects of PSNP.56,57 Under PSNP III, levels, including: analytical studies at national and local levels; advisory services and analytical products to which was launched in 2009, there was a specific call Another useful approach has been to kick-start or pilot mainstream DRR into World Bank investments; development of a tool for contingency planning; DRM capacity to use the LEAP model as an early warning indicator. particular DRM activities that support larger initiatives building and knowledge management support; pilot-scale support for resilient recovery, risk identification, and at scale. For example, GFDRR supported the safe schools; and facilitation and dialogue at the national level. By 2014, PSNP IV allocated a portion of its funds for DRM-focused activities. GFDRR’s contribution to piloting of 35 WDRPs, contingency plans, and DRM/ ƒƒ All activities to which GFDRR has contributed in Indonesia are achieving valuable results beyond the expected this evolution has been through support for strategic Adaptation Plans, and the Woreda-net (a connectivity outputs. Key process outcomes include: innovative approaches and tools developed and demonstrated; policy platform), along with associated training and outreach dialogue strengthened; institutional capacity of government and civil society for DRR, preparedness, and initiatives that advance a specific activity or test a resources. These activities have since been replicated resilient recovery strengthened; greater availability of disaster risk information; awareness raised; and DRM concept that can help push the DRM policy dialogue in a number of other districts. mainstreamed into development planning and investments. forward. The World Bank has used the verified results of the tested activities or concepts to demonstrate the ƒƒ Many activities show potential for progress toward tangible results, but additional action is needed to ensure A lack of readiness for GFDRR-piloted technologies is that the intermediate outcomes of these activities proceed toward outcomes and impacts—and that they do so benefit and importance to the GoE. Used in this way, a key challenge in Ethiopia. The Woreda-net program at-scale. This is particularly true for GFDRR’s pilot efforts. GFDRR grants have significantly informed the design was set up to address part of this challenge (i.e., ƒƒ GFDRR activities have leveraged DRM funding in Indonesia on a pilot scale, and have influenced DRM of PSNP IV. getting timely and accurate data into a structured resource allocations by donors (notably $632 million of World Bank investment programs) and national and In particular, GFDRR grants in Ethiopia have been data system), but only a handful of woredas (out of local government departments. used to test and demonstrate the value of specific more than 700) are online, and software and hardware ƒƒ GFDRR’s strategy in Indonesia offers a strong opportunity for achieving downstream outcomes and impacts at- DRM approaches that encourage uptake by troubles can mean that data from a particular woreda scale by engaging at the national level, leveraging and building relationships with key ministries via the World DRMFSS and the broader development community. are missing for months at a time. Longer-term support Bank, and using existing project mechanisms and institutional structures. For example, GFDRR supported further refinement (including training and technology and hardware and expansion of the Livelihood Early Assessment infrastructure support) are needed to ensure that and Protection (LEAP) model, which is used by a systems are usable. 2.4.1. Indonesia Context for GFDRR Engagement half of the population lives in urban areas, primarily diverse set of Ethiopian stakeholders to encourage located in coastal zones, exposed to hazards such as Disaster risk context. Located in the Pacific “Ring of Fire,” Indonesia is the world’s largest archipelago earthquakes, tsunamis, and flooding. with more than 17,000 islands and a population of Institutional and policy context. Following the 2004 nearly 250 million. Indonesia is consistently ranked Indian Ocean Tsunami, Indonesia enacted a new among the most disaster-prone countries in the Law on Disaster Management (Law 24/2007) world.58 The country is prone to both geologic and that describes the principles, organization, hydro-meteorological hazards. Volcanic activity, and implementation of the national disaster earthquakes, tsunamis, floods, landslides, droughts, management system. The 2007 law has also been and forest fires frequently occur in Indonesia. Since further elaborated by the issuance of several 1900, more than 400 natural disasters have resulted regulations and implementing guidelines. The in more than 263,000 deaths and affected nearly framework calls for comprehensive risk reduction 30 million people.59 Over the past two decades, ten and shared responsibility between national and natural disasters (floods, earthquakes, tsunamis, local governments. This regulatory framework and wildfires) have resulted in post-disaster brought fundamental change to DRM in Indonesia costs of over $24 billion.60 Changes in climate by establishing a dedicated agency for disaster are expected to exacerbate existing hazards. management, the National Disaster Management Indonesia is highly vulnerable to climate stressors Agency (Badan Nasional Penanggulangan Bencana/ such as changing weather patterns and rising sea BNPB), and mandating the creation of disaster levels. Socioeconomic dynamics also contribute management agencies at the local government level to vulnerability. Indonesia ranks 108 (medium (Badan Penanggulangan Bencana Daerah/BPBD). development) out of 187 countries in the Human Establishing the BPBDs is an effort to formalize Development Index, and 11.4 percent of people responsibility and build resilience to natural disasters live below the country’s poverty line.61 More than at the local level. The capacity and resources of the 58 World Bank. Natural Disaster Hotspots, A Global Risk Analysis (Washington, DC: Disaster Risk Management Series, 2005). 56 World Bank, 2014. Project Appraisal Document – Productive Safety Nets Project 4. Available at: http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2014/09/11/0 59 Djalante et al. 2012. Building resilience to natural hazards in Indonesia: progress and challenges in implementing the Hyogo Framework for Action. Natural Hazards. 10.1007. 00470435_20140911143122/Rendered/PDF/PAD10220PAD0P1010Box385319B00OUO090.pdf. 60 EM-DAT 2009. International Disaster Database. Université Catholique de Louvain. Brussels. 57 International Federation of Red Cross Red Crescent Societies, 2013. Ethiopia: Country Case Study Report – How Law and Regulation Supports Disaster Risk Reduction. 61 World Development Indicators, 2013; UNDP Human Development Index 2014. [ 22 ] ICF International ICF International [ 23 ] BPBDs to carry out these responsibilities is, however, ƒƒ Analytical studies at the national and local level. often insufficient. At the national level, GFDRR prepared two studies to support the preparation of the NAP-DRR In response to the 2005 HFA, Indonesia has for 2010–12, which also informed the National developed two three-year National Action Plans for Disaster Management Plan, the government’s Disaster Risk Reduction (NAP-DRR). A 2014 National annual DRR work plan (2010–12), and the National Action Plan on Climate Change Adaptation also Medium-Term Development Plan 2010–2014. Also identifies some of the country’s main vulnerabilities at the national level, GFDRR prepared a study on to climate change and lays out short, medium, and options for advancing a national DRFI strategy long-term actions. The Government of Indonesia for Indonesia. Following the 2009 earthquakes (GoI) has also developed National Disaster in West Sumatra and Jambi, GFDRR provided Management Plans (most recently for 2015–2019). financial support for conducting a damage, loss, Indonesia has also made progress in mainstreaming and preliminary needs assessment that was used DRR into development planning. At the national as the basis for the region’s rehabilitation and level, government priorities in the Medium-Term reconstruction plan. Development Plans (Rencana Pembangunan Jangka Menengah Nasional) incorporate disaster ƒƒ Advisory services and analytical products to management. mainstream DRR into World Bank investments. In 2009, GFDRR funded consultants to prepare GFDRR programming. GFDRR has provided six a DRM strategy that was incorporated into the grants to Indonesia between 2008 and 2014, totaling World Bank’s Local Economic Development $6.2 million and covering all five of the GFDRR pillars Project in Nias (2010–12, $8.2 million). After the (see Appendix C). GFDRR’s approach evolved Nias project, mainstreaming DRR into World Bank from a more stand-alone grant-making approach investments was facilitated via the GFDRR focal to a programmatic approach after 2009. In the point positioned in the World Bank country office period 2008–2014, the majority of GFDRR’s support in Jakarta. GFDRR’s focal point participated in to Indonesia has been channeled through two project missions and provided technical advice programmatic grants—Mainstreaming DRR Phase I to improve the DRR content of the community ($1.2 million) and Phase II ($1.6 million)—and a $2.4 settlement plan process for Community-Based million grant for mainstreaming DRR into the Third Settlement Rehabilitation and Reconstruction National Program for Community Empowerment in Project for Central and West Java and Yogyakarta Urban Areas (Program Nasional Pemberdayaan Special Region (2007–15, $61 million). This Masyarakat/PNPM-Urban).62 Many sub-activities have work informed GFDRR’s integration of DRR been implemented under Phase I and II, focusing on considerations into PNPM-Urban III, as noted four areas: mainstreaming DRR, capacity building for above. GFDRR provided small grants (roughly the national and local DRM agencies, disaster risk $38,000 each) to 16 urban wards (kelurahans) financing and insurance, and area-based resilient in four cities to prepare community disaster risk development. Under this umbrella, GFDRR has action plans and implement some of the mitigation also engaged with its regional thematic programs, and preparedness measures. Through its focal including those on safe schools, OpenDRI, and DRFI. point, GFDRR also provided expert advice to the World Bank project team and the Ministry of The figure below shows key policy and disaster Public Works on the inclusion of a component milestones, GFDRR grants, and related World Bank under the Western Indonesia National Roads investment projects and programs. Improvement Project (WINRIP) (2011–17, $350 million) that provides technical assistance and 2.4.2. GFDRR Results in Indonesia capacity building support to strengthen disaster Outputs. Between 2008 and 2014, GFDRR has risk mitigation in the roads sector. The project now successfully delivered a wide range of outputs in also includes a contingency component for DRR. Indonesia at both the local and national levels. These ƒƒ InaSAFE tool. In partnership with the Australia- include: Indonesia Facility for Disaster Reduction, GFDRR [ 24 ] ICF International ICF International [ 25 ] has provided technical staff (via its Innovation demonstration plots covering 10 hectares). GFDRR Appendix D). Key process-oriented (intermediate) certified trainers (using the training-of-the-trainers Labs), facilitated engagement with government has also supported multiple smaller-scale risk outcomes are: or TOT model) on DRR under PNPM-Urban III agencies, and funded software developers for mapping efforts to fill DRM data gaps and support and training of community facilitators on livelihood the development of the Indonesian Scenario planning, including collaborative maps of nine ƒƒ Knowledge deepened. Disaster risk awareness considerations for resilient recovery. At the pilot Assessment for Emergency (InaSAFE).63 villages in Yogyakarta damaged by pyroclastic has been raised in urban communities through level, the capacity of community empowerment InaSAFE is a free and open source software flow, eight segments along the Winongo River, DRM training for PNPM facilitators and GFDRR groups in GFDRR’s pilot PNPM-Urban kelurahans tool that produces outputs that can be used for 11 villages in Bantul at risk of landslides, and direct grants to PNPM pilot kelurahans. The four to identify, reduce, and prepare for disaster risks contingency planning. 267 villages in Jakarta. As another example, participating kelurahans in Padang reported an has been strengthened. GFDRR’s engagement ƒƒ DRM capacity building and knowledge GFDRR has funded a safe school pilot project increased understanding of the hazards and of local partners—including NGOs and local management. GFDRR supported the in 180 schools in six districts and cities in three vulnerabilities among their residents, as well as universities—has both increased the capacity of operationalization of BNPB, formed in early 2008, pilot provinces: West Sumatra (Padang), West strengthened preparedness. Similar reports of those partners to engage on DRR issues, as well through the secondment of a World Bank staff. Java (Bandung) and West Nusa Tenggara (NTB) increased awareness were made for the schools as improve the results of the interventions in the In 2009, GFDRR developed a curriculum and Province (Lombok).66 Applying a community- participating in the safe schools pilot program. medium and long term through the use of advisors training module for DaLA that has now been fully driven approach, technical assistance was GFDRR’s participatory mapping activities in that are trusted by the local communities. institutionalized in Indonesia’s national training provided directly to the schools through facilitators Jakarta and Yogyakarta have contributed to ƒƒ Innovative approaches and solutions generated. center, Pusdiklat. GFDRR has also developed on structural rehabilitation and non-structural greater understanding of disaster risks and For example, in Bantul, GFDRR piloted an guidelines and training modules for community- preparedness measures. availability of disaster risk information. These approach for assessing and communicating based DRR64 that have been delivered to more ƒƒ Facilitation and dialogue at national level. To activities have generated open-source information landslide hazard risks; according to interviews than 7,000 facilitators under PNPM-Urban III, support many of the activities described above, that has informed better contingency planning with the Ministry of Public Works, this was the first which has national coverage across Indonesia’s GFDRR has also engaged in higher-level dialogue. and been shared with other agencies to support time in Indonesia that a community-based risk kelurahans. More recently, at the request of GoI, For example, to elevate the safe schools pilot development planning and resilient recovery. assessment had been conducted and that people GFDRR—in partnership with the World Bank’s program, GFDRR has participated in policy Recognition of the value of open data was also had been relocated based on the mapping. The Leadership, Learning and Innovation (LLI) group— dialogue with the Ministry of Education and Culture promoted through mapping and through the DRM national knowledge hub that GFDRR is is supporting the development of an innovative (MoEC) and BNPB regarding Indonesia’ One development and dissemination of InaSAFE, which developing with LLI offers an innovative strategy approach for national-level DRM knowledge Million Safe Schools and Safe Hospitals Initiative, has been lauded at the highest levels—including for addressing Indonesia’s challenges in training management, through facilitation with BNPB and and played a convening and technical advisory the President of Indonesia. all 340 of its local disaster management agencies production of guidelines and knowledge assets. role for BNPB in developing Regulation of Head ƒƒ Client capacity increased. GFDRR has contributed (known as BPBDs). In the longer-term, this ƒƒ Pilot-scale support for resilient recovery, risk of National Agency for Disaster Management to strengthening national and local institutional knowledge management system could improve identification, and safe schools. For many of its (BNPB) No. 4 in 2012 (Perka BNPB No. 4/2012) capacities for DRR, preparedness, and resilient the development and retention of Indonesian activities in Indonesia, GFDRR has used a “proof- on Guideline on Implementation of Safe School/ recovery. Evidence suggests improved in- disaster management staff on the “technical track” of-concept” approach that recognizes Indonesia’s Madrasa from Disaster. GFDRR also facilitated country capacity to independently conduct if it introduces a new way to value technical staff political economy and decentralized governance. the visit of the Vice Minister of MoEC to see the post-disaster assessments, supported by GFDRR outputs.67 As a further example, the InaSAFE tool Many budgetary and regulatory authorities for DRR pilot projects in Padang. As another example, training events and the adoption of the DaLA offers an opportunity to use the collected mapping are at the local level, making this a logical strategy GFDRR has engaged in discussions with module in Indonesia’s national training institute. data to support local-level contingency planning, and entry point. Using this approach, GFDRR has BAPPENAS (the Ministry of National Development GFDRR’s support for BNPB when it was newly which is a required activity for local BPBDs under piloted activities such as technical assistance Planning), and the Geospatial Information Agency formed directly contributed to building BNPB’s national regulation. InaSAFE was awarded by for safe schools and participatory mapping (Badan Informasi Geospasial or BIG) on how capacity in terms of the agency’s operational Wired, an American magazine that reports on in urban areas, and then leverages the World integrating DRR considerations into mapping, and technical expertise. As another example, emerging technologies, as one of the top 10 Bank’s convening power to attempt to scale up or using participatory techniques and open-source GFDRR contributed to the development of a “open-source rookies of the year” in 2013. There is institutionalize GFDRR’s work at the national level. data, can influence more effective use of urban livelihoods strategy in Yogyakarta that is now part interest also outside of Indonesia to adapt and use For instance, in Yogyakarta, after the 2010 eruption neighborhood upgrading funds. GFDRR has of Indonesia’s national post-disaster community- the underlying software. of Mount Merapi, GFDRR funded short-term also discussed DRFI options with the Ministry of based rehabilitation approach; previously ƒƒ Development financing informed. In Indonesia, consultants to provide expert advice related to the Finance and BNPB. the Ministry of Public Works had focused on where substantial domestic and international livelihoods and ecosystem restoration components Outcomes and Impacts. The evaluation found infrastructure, with less consideration for some funding is already committed to DRM interventions, of Indonesia’s reconstruction effort (Rekompak65) evidence that all activities to which GFDRR has of the socio-economic aspects of post-disaster GFDRR activities have not actively leveraged on a pilot scale (e.g., training community resilience contributed in Indonesia are achieving valuable rehabilitation. substantial amounts of new DRM funding. One facilitators for 16 resettlements, advising on three results beyond the expected outputs (see GFDRR has also increased the capacity of civil exception is reconstruction and rehabilitation society to contribute to DRM through the training funds leveraged through GFDRR contributions of more than 6,000 community facilitators and 350 to the West Sumatra and Jambi PDNA. However, 63 InaSAFE can be accessed at: http://inasafe.org/en/. 64 Guidelines and training modules for community-based DRR have been uploaded to the project website (www.p2kp.org in the Bahasa Indonesia version). These include PRBBK (Pengurangan Risiko Bencana Berbsis Komunitas) Guidelines, PRBBK Technical Guidelines, Training Modules for Local Government, and Training Modules for Facilitators (Stages 1 and 2). 65 Rekompak is a community-based approach for large scale reconstruction and rehabilitation pioneered in Indonesia by the Multi Donor Fund for Aceh and Nias and the Promotions along the technical track are partly determined by the volume of research that staff produce. Allowing knowledge products developed for the hub by technical 67 Java Reconstruction Fund. staff to count as research would provide an additional opportunity for those staff to use their work experiences to develop research products, as well as provide an incentive 66 Cofinanced by the Basic Education Capacity Building Trust Fund. to keep the knowledge hub populated. [ 26 ] ICF International ICF International [ 27 ] GFDRR activities have leveraged DRM funding on NAP-DRR that influenced government DRM of Public Works on DRM components for urban Many other GFDRR activities show potential for a pilot scale, suggesting that GFDRR’s work was investment from 2010 to 2014. GFDRR also neighborhood upgrading and the integration progress toward tangible results, but additional successful in helping communities see the value contributed to the incorporation of livelihoods and of livelihood considerations into post-disaster action is needed to ensure that the intermediate of increased preparedness and risk reduction. eco-settlement considerations into Indonesia’s reconstruction and rehabilitation efforts. These outcomes of these activities proceed toward In Bantul, the local government spent its own broader reconstruction and rehabilitation approach dialogues have the potential to contribute to outcomes and impacts—and that they do so at-scale. resources to do structural mitigation works as (known as Rekompak), which should influence mainstreaming DRM considerations into broader This is particularly true for GFDRR’s pilot efforts. For a result of GFDRR’s landslide risk assessment. resource allocation for future post-disaster development efforts and support the scale-up of example, GFDRR has conducted and contributed As another example, some communities and recovery. In future, GFDRR has potential through GFDRR pilot initiatives. to the participatory development of finer resolution businesses made in-kind contributions, in the form its DRM knowledge hub activity to influence how Fieldwork suggested that a few GFDRR activities at maps in Jakarta and Yogyakarta. The development of of materials, land, or labor, to supplement GFDRR the national DRM management agency spends its the pilot and local levels have achieved outcomes funding for safe schools and for community training budget, to more effectively and efficiently and impacts as of early 2015. For example, in Bantul disaster risk action plans. train local disaster agency staff. At the local level, (Yogyakarta), where GFDRR funded an innovative Mixed Results from Pilot Activities GFDRR activities have also influenced both donor GFDRR contributed to participatory risk mapping community-based assessment for landslide risk, The evaluation found mixed results from some pilot and government expenditures. Between 2009 and activities in Jakarta that enabled the local disaster nearly 90 households have been relocated to activities. These experiences offer opportunities to 2014, GFDRR influenced DRM components in risk agency (BPBD DKI) to use its budget more safer ground, and the local government has also learn lessons—as would be expected from a pilot more than $636 million of World Bank investment effectively. Before the mapping, BPDB DKI conducted structural mitigation works based on the project—and to ensure more effective interventions programs, as shown in Table 3 (see Appendix allocated logistics and human resources evenly assessment. In Padang, where GFDRR provided when scaling up. E for details). Signals also point to opportunities across villages, because it could not see risk at a pilot grants to four kelurahans, some risk reduction For example, the evaluation observed mixed results for future influence of World Bank programs. finer resolution. As a result, the agency now has measures have been taken, such as building retention in terms of the implementation of GFDRR’s advisory Building on the success of mainstreaming DRR strengthened contingency planning. walls and making drainage improvements. In many of services on post-disaster livelihood rehabilitation. through PNPM, the World Bank and the Ministry ƒƒ Policy/strategy informed. By complementing the the 180 schools participating in GFDRR’s safe schools Communities have largely restored their livelihoods of Public Works have now incorporated DRR into preparation of the NAP-DRR with facilitation and pilot, structural improvements have been financed but not primarily from the sources that were advised. Certain livelihood strategies (such as mushroom the Neighborhood Development guidelines and dialogue at the national level, GFDRR contributed through Indonesia’s education Special Allocation cultivation) were unsuccessful due to overlooking technical guidelines published in early 2014.68 The to integrating DRR into Indonesia’s National Fund (DAK), to better protect against earthquakes cultural elements of the community. Shortcomings PNPM Urban Neighborhood Development pilot Medium-Term Development Plan for 2010–2014. and other natural disasters. Some of these pilot-level were observed in the approach for supporting aims to promote urban upgrading by significantly GFDRR has also participated in dialogue with activities have had mixed results on-the-ground, tourism (e.g., little consideration of packaging or increasing the size of the grant (to about $75,000 national ministries to advance DRR efforts. For but most still seem likely to fulfill a proof-of-concept bundling of tourism trips, no available parking at the per kelurahan) and introducing spatial planning example, the GFDRR and World Bank partnership purpose (as discussed below). handicraft showrooms, insufficient consideration of and area prioritization.69 Interviews with the World has advanced the policy dialogue with the how to arrange tourism routes for maximum economic Bank also indicated that a draft Project Concept Ministry of Finance regarding DRFI options and World Bank projects informed by GFDRR activities impact). In another example, while nine of ten hectares Note (PCN) for an urban slum upgrading program the need for legal structures to support DRFI have—or have potential to—achieve positive of GFDRR’s ecosystem restoration demonstration plots outcomes and impacts. The Aceh-Nias LEDP are growing well, the evaluation found no evidence incorporated DRR considerations, building on the implementation. Through its focal point, GFDRR provided training to 3,744 farmers (totaling 44,940 of further replication or uptake and no evidence PNPM-Urban III experience. has also engaged in conversation with BNPB that ecosystem restoration principles had been and MoEC on safe schools, with BAPPENAS on farmer-training days) and 128 local and provincial GFDRR activities have also influenced national incorporated into community settlement plans. urban development, with BIG on participatory government staff that included how to integrate and local government expenditures for DRM. disaster resilience measures into agriculture.70 Under the safe schools pilot program, results in terms At the national level, GFDRR contributed to the mapping and open-source data, with the Ministry of awareness and behavioral changes have varied At project-end, 69 percent of the training groups from school to school. Achievements have been had adopted key farming and livelihood project largely determined by individual assertiveness and recommendations. The WINRIP project will improve initiative from school headmasters and committees, Table 3. World Bank Investments with DRM Components Influenced by GFDRR road sections traversing 12 districts with a total and regular rotation of headmasters has been population over 4 million; with GFDRR’s assistance, a challenge for progress toward impact. School Program / WB Loan Implementation World Bank Project the project now includes a $1 million component facilitators interviewed estimated that about half of the Amount (US$ million) Years to strengthen disaster risk mitigation in the road pilot schools still continue evacuation drills after the Aceh-Nias Livelihoods and Economic Development Program (LEDP) $8.2 / $8.2 2010–12 conclusion of the program. sector. GFDRR grants to 16 kelurahans under PNPM Community-Based Settlement Rehabilitation and Reconstruction $61 / $60 2007–15 Urban III could reduce disaster risk and improve Project for Central and West Java and Yogyakarta Special Region preparedness for 160,000 beneficiaries.71 Western Indonesia National Roads Improvement Project (WINRIP) $350 / $250 2010–13 PNPM-Urban III $217 / $150 2010–14 Total $636 / $468 70 For example, the project introduced terracing and steps to ensure proper drainage to protect against landslides, and demonstrated the importance of cleaning and maintaining irrigation channels to mitigate flooding in irrigated rice fields. According to the project completion report, these measures increased food security, mitigated against future disasters, and increased resilience. See: World Bank. 2013. Implementation Completion and Results Report (TF-096865). Available at: http://www-wds. Available at: http://www.p2kp.org/pustaka/files/Ebook_MANIS_PLPBK_FEB2014.pdf; http://www.p2kp.org/pustaka/files/Ebook_JUKNIS_PLPBK_FEB2014.pdf. 68 worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2013/06/10/000442464_20130610100340/Rendered/PDF/ICR26120P110630IC0disclosed06060130.pdf. World Bank. 2012. Rapid Appraisal of PNPM Neighborhood Development (and Poverty Alleviation Partnership Grant Mechanism). Available at: http://www-wds.worldbank. 69 71 Number of beneficiaries roughly scaled based on the population of one participating kelurahan—Lolong Belanti—which reported a daytime population of approximately org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2014/12/26/000442464_20141226142459/Rendered/PDF/934230WP0Rapid0Box385397B00PUBLIC00.pdf. 10,000 people. [ 28 ] ICF International ICF International [ 29 ] 3. Cross-Cutting Analysis these maps has increased the awareness of disaster Jakarta has developed solid, long-term relationships 3.1. Moving Toward Impact risks among involved communities, and the maps with key government agencies that have potential to have been shared with relevant local agencies and enable GFDRR to use its smaller, proof-of-concept 3.1.1. GFDRR Results government authorities. In Dominica, the stakeholders for broader planning purposes. But more activities to influence DRM thinking and actions at the GFDRR has successfully delivered outputs in national government shows increased capacity assistance is needed at the local level to link these national level. Because much of this work requires Bangladesh, the Eastern Caribbean, Ethiopia, and around geospatial data and shelter vulnerability intermediate results to outcomes like more systemic ongoing interfacing with national ministries, GFDRR’s Indonesia, and the evaluation found evidence that assessments. In Ethiopia, GFDRR’s capacity use of risk information in development planning and focal point represents a critical element for progress most activities that are under implementation or building has focused at the local (woreda) level, strengthened response to potential disasters, as well toward impact. completed are achieving valuable downstream for disaster risk identification, reduction, and as to use these experiences to influence national level results. Some key intermediate outcomes observed preparedness. In Indonesia, national capacity for guidelines. The location of GFDRR’s focal point in the World independently conducting DaLAs has increased Bank office in Jakarta has also facilitated connections across the five case study countries include: through GFDRR support, and GFDRR also played Through PNPM-Urban III, GFDRR has produced with operational World Bank staff, enabling GFDRR’s ƒƒ Knowledge deepened. GFDRR activities have a role in operationalizing the newly formed national and integrated a DRM module into the standard influence of several World Bank investment projects, raised disaster risk awareness at local and national disaster management agency. In Indonesia, training for community development facilitators, including the Project for Central and West Java and levels. In Bangladesh, GFDRR contributed to GFDRR has also increased the capacity of civil but without sustained support and incentives at Yogyakarta Special Region (CSRRP), WINRIP, and increased understanding and awareness of society to contribute to DRM through training and the local level, it is unclear whether that training will PNPM Urban III. earthquake risk among key stakeholders in pilot programs. In the Eastern Caribbean, national translate into mainstreaming DRM into development Dhaka. In Ethiopia, awareness was raised at the government capacities have been strengthened, planning in communities. As another example, GFDRR’s technical expertise and strong partnering woreda level, through pilot programs. In Indonesia, but there is a risk of capacity loss unless follow-on more dialogue is required with MoEC to mainstream are other factors that have contributed to successful awareness was raised in urban communities support is provided. DRM considerations into school retrofitting using achievement of results in Indonesia. For example, successes with InaSAFE can be partly attributed to through facilitator training on DRR, and through ƒƒ Innovative approaches and solutions generated. DAK funds (and the GFDRR pilot program as the safe school pilots. illustrative intervention). Longer term engagement the knowledge and skills contributed by GFDRR’s GFDRR has contributed to developing and is also required to strengthen the financial and Innovation Labs, as well as the strength of GFDRR’s ƒƒ GFDRR has also contributed to increased demonstrating innovative tools and approaches response capacity of the GoI and other relevant non- partnership with Australia-Indonesia Facility for availability of disaster risk information, broader for DRM. These include the InaSAFE model in governmental stakeholders. GFDRR has contributed Disaster Reduction and GFDRR’s relationship with support for open data, and more informed Indonesia, GeoNode in the Eastern Caribbean, to strengthened policy dialogue with the Ministry of BNPB to ensure national ownership. Access to the decision-making. In Bangladesh, GFDRR the LEAP model in Ethiopia, and the creation of Finance and BNPB on financial protection options, Ministry of Finance through the World Bank and contributions have been through technical the GEODASH platform with data for Dhaka, in but all of the expected outcomes stated in the grant GFDRR’s technical leadership on DRFI has enabled assistance on urban resilience, and research connection with BUERP in Bangladesh. proposal are yet to be achieved.72 progress toward results on this agenda. GFDRR’s activities in support of CEIP-I. In the Eastern ƒƒ Development financing informed. GFDRR has relationship with BNPB and disaster risk expertise, Caribbean, GFDRR has supported the leveraged and influenced significant resources for Some of this follow-on work is already planned or combined with the knowledge management development of GeoNodes and socialized the DRM. This finding is discussed at length in Section underway, suggesting good potential for future innovations of the World Bank’s LLI, have the potential tool to garner national-level support for data 3.2. outcomes and impact. to achieve valuable DRR outcomes nationwide. sharing. In Ethiopia, development of the WDRPs and Woreda-net, and improvements to the LEAP ƒƒ Policy/strategy informed. GFDRR has Enabling and detracting factors for success. GFDRR’s At the local level, the evaluation found that the model, have contributed to resiliency outcomes. strengthened policy dialogue and supported strategy in Indonesia offers a strong opportunity presence of a community champion, GFDRR’s In Indonesia, disaster risk information has been policy development and implementation, including for achieving outcomes and impacts at-scale by strategic engagement of local executing organizations made increasingly available through participatory around disaster risk financing and insurance. engaging at the national level, leveraging and (such as universities, local NGOs, and existing mapping, InaSAFE, a national risk assessment In Bangladesh and Indonesia, GFDRR has building relationships with key ministries via the World community facilitators) that can gain the trust of study, and rapid diagnostics. PDNAs in Indonesia, provided analytical products and dialogued with Bank, and using existing project mechanisms and community members, and a participatory approach Saint Lucia, and Bangladesh contributed to ministries of finance on DRFI. In Dominica, GFDRR institutional structure to gain scale (e.g., through were drivers of these successes. A co-benefit of using greater availability of information about needs and supported the development of policy around PNPM-Urban’s national network of facilitators). Using these local executing entities has been building DRM quantified financial requirements for DRM. information sharing. In Ethiopia, GFDRR provided the World Bank’s access, GFDRR’s focal point in expertise and experience in educational institutions. advisory services on development of the national ƒƒ Client capacity increased. GFDRR has contributed DRM policy and the operationalization of the DRM- toward building capacity of national and local SPIF. In Indonesia, GFDRR has frequent dialogue governments, as well as civil society, for disaster with BNPB and BAPPENAS, and also supported risk preparedness, reduction, and response. In policy changes with BIG, the Ministry of Public Bangladesh, GFDRR has improved emergency Works, and the Ministry of Education and Culture. preparedness and response capacity of Dhaka For example, “Government budget allocated to support risk-prone, poor households,” “Households and SMEs have wider, more affordable access to catastrophic 72 insurance,” “Ex-ante measures against natural disasters reduce overall disaster costs.” [ 30 ] ICF International ICF International [ 31 ] Given the relatively young age of GFDRR’s portfolio, 3.1.2. Contributing or Detracting Factors for Another contributor to success has been GFDRR’s of the technologies piloted by GFDRR. For example, limited evidence was found of outcomes and Achieving Success use of engagement strategies that reflect individual in Indonesia, local DRM agencies generally do not impacts achieved at-scale as of early 2015, although To better understand how and why GFDRR has, country conditions. For example, GFDRR has taken a have staff with sufficient GIS programming skills to some activities show strong potential. In particular, or has not, accomplished its goals the evaluation proof-of-concept and community-driven development independently use InaSAFE. Geospatial platforms in linking GFDRR small grants with larger World Bank included a cross-country analysis of observed and approach in Indonesia, where DRM responsibilities the Eastern Caribbean and the Woreda-net systems investment operations or broader government potential results based on the factors that contribute and budgets are decentralized. GFDRR used in Ethiopia similarly suffer from software, hardware, initiatives reinforces potential for downstream results to and detract from GFDRR success. Table 4 presents participatory technical assistance in Dhaka and trained user challenges. Governments in the five and sustainability. the enabling factors, while Table 5 presents the (Bangladesh), where local government structures and countries visited showed interest in these technology- challenges to success. dynamics are very complex and require long-term based tools and in two countries (Indonesia and Many World Bank investment operations to which relationship building. In Ethiopia, GFDRR successfully Ethiopia), governments acknowledged the need to GFDRR has contributed the incorporation or The evaluation found that GFDRR has engaged at used the evolving social protection agenda as invest in human capacity and have started to hire staff improvement of DRM components will achieve high levels of government, including central ministries an entry-point to advance the DRM agenda. In with necessary skills. sizeable outcomes, if successfully implemented. For and line ministries with responsibilities for DRM, which the Eastern Caribbean, GFDRR has worked most example, building on GFDRR’s critical groundwork, increases potential for achieving results at-scale. effectively when providing support that strengthens These types of obstacles to introducing new the $182 million Urban Resilience Project in Partnership with the World Bank, and the access larger World Bank initiatives (i.e., technical advice for technologies are recognized in engagement Bangladesh has potential to increase resilience that partnership provides to key ministries, has been DVRP development). strategies—for example, the World Bank’s Strategic to earthquakes for the 15.5 million people living in important to enable that high-level engagement. Engagement Framework for the Caribbean Greater Dhaka and Sylhet. Saint Lucia and Dominica’s GFDRR has worked in strong partnership with some At the local level, strong choices for executing anticipates issues related to hardware, network, and DVRPs—which GFDRR helped shape—are expected key partners, such as the World Bank, UNDP, and agencies have also contributed to results software limitations, as well as information technology to benefit more than 240,000 people combined. the European Commission in preparation of PDNAs, achievement. For example, in Indonesia, NGOs and human support capacity.73 Still, for GFDRR, the In Indonesia, the WINRIP project will improve road Australia-Indonesia Facility for Disaster Reduction local universities have been used to execute many observation of these challenges suggests that a long- sections traversing 12 districts with a total population in Indonesia, and JICA in Bangladesh. These GFDRR grants because these organizations are able term approach is needed to institutionalize the use of of over 4 million, and GFDRR’s assistance means partnerships have enhanced the scope of potential to gain community trust and engagement, which have these technologies. the project should now strengthen disaster risk results to which GFDRR is contributing. been precursors for pilot-level success. mitigation in the road sector. In Ethiopia, expected Similarly, the development period for some technical benefits associated with reductions in drought and GFDRR has been successful in identifying strategic GFDRR often operates in a country context in which assistance activities, including DRFI, is particularly flood impacts and losses and long-term risk reduction entry points for relatively small grant contributions there are weak or insufficient legal or regulatory long and requires ongoing GFDRR support. Ensuring efforts under PSNP-IV are valued at roughly $300 to demonstrate or advance DRM activities that can frameworks for DRM, lack of law or code enforcement, strong government support can help maintain million per year. inform larger-scale World Bank investment operations. insufficient or unpredictable budgets for DRM, momentum for these longer engagements; in one The in-country presence of a GFDRR focal point has and weak institutional capacity. Much of GFDRR’s country (Bangladesh), an initial lack of client demand In all countries studied, the evaluation found that been important in this regard in Bangladesh and work aims at removing these obstacles. Thus, the for DFRI slowed progress. sustained engagement is needed to ensure that the Indonesia; in Ethiopia, the same World Bank TTL has evaluation focused on challenges to GFDRR’s intermediate outcomes of some activities proceed success in translating its activities into longer-term Some GFDRR activities, such as one-time training led GFDRR grants and the World Bank investment events or conference attendance support, appear toward outcomes and impacts. In particular, longer operations that GFDRR informed, directly enabling results within these broader constraints. term support will be needed to realize outcomes for less likely to achieve long-term results. During that influence. GFDRR’s influence and leverage is Challenges were observed in most countries fieldwork, the evaluation was unable to find robust DFRI activities and technology-oriented solutions. discussed in more detail in Section 3.2 below. associated with readiness or capacity to use some evidence of enduring impacts of these types of Table 4. Enabling Factors for Success Strengths and Factors for Success Table 5. Weaknesses and Challenges to Success • Engagement at high levels of government. Weaknesses and Challenges to Success • Alignment with larger World Bank investment operations. • Lack of readiness or capacity to use technologies piloted. • Technical expertise and regional thematic programs. • Long development periods. • In-country presence of GFDRR focal points. • Staff turnover/rotations and competing demands for staff time. • Tailoring engagement strategies to country conditions. • Use of less-effective activities like one-time training events or conference attendance support. • Programmatic approach to grant-making. • Ineffective use of co-financing modality. • Strong partnerships. • Strong choices for executing agencies at the local level. World Bank. 2012. The Caribbean Region: Strategic Engagement Framework for Disaster Risk Management and Climate Resilience FY13-15. June 2012. 73 [ 32 ] ICF International ICF International [ 33 ] activities. In contrast, for example, in Indonesia, PDNAs are intended to provide a coordinated and result of GFDRR’s landslide risk assessment, and investments ($1.4 billion World Bank commitments) GFDRR was able to demonstrate the effectiveness of credible basis for recovery and reconstruction some communities and businesses made in-kind with nearly $500 million of DRM components DaLA trainings such that GFDRR’s training module planning, and for the international community to contributions to supplement GFDRR funding for safe informed by GFDRR in all five countries studied. was eventually institutionalized in the national training assist the affected country in this process, including schools and community disaster risk action plans GFDRR has been successful in identifying center, ensuring its sustainability. through providing funding. As such, PDNAs often under PNPM. strategic entry points for relatively small grant leverage emergency relief and DRM investments contributions to demonstrate or advance DRM Rotation of staff and competing demands for staff time and improve the enabling environment for DRM It is notable that leverage through the two non- activities that can inform larger-scale investment have also been challenges to achieving sustainable (influence). Through grants for PDNAs in Bangladesh, PDNA pathways was observed only in countries operations. In Indonesia and Bangladesh, GFDRR results through training, capacity building, and some Saint Lucia, and Indonesia, GFDRR—in partnership where a GFDRR focal point is stationed in-country. has also helped include zero-dollar contingency technical assistance activities. This is especially true with the World Bank, United Nations agencies, the The evaluation found the evidence for non-PDNA components in World Bank projects. These in the small island Eastern Caribbean context, where European Union and other development partners— leverage in Bangladesh and Indonesia, while no components provide an option for countries to ministries often operate with few staff. has helped develop recommendations for key actions instances of leverage were identified in Dominica and rapidly access funding for emergency response in that are frequently funded by the World Bank and Ethiopia. Particularly in Bangladesh, where technical the event of a natural disaster. Lastly, in Bangladesh, the evaluation observed that assistance had to navigate complex institutional other donors. In Bangladesh, more than $1,600 million ƒƒ Influence of government expenditures. GFDRR GFDRR co-financing was implemented in such infrastructure, the engagement of the focal point was has been committed to World Bank projects based activities have influenced national and local a way that it did not take advantage of GFDRR’s critical for success. on the PDNA that GFDRR supported after Cyclone government expenditures for DRM in Bangladesh, comparative advantages, including technical Sidr. In Saint Lucia, the JRDNA, supported by GFDRR Ethiopia, and Indonesia. Certain activities currently expertise and partnership with the World Bank. Influence. The evaluation found evidence that GFDRR after the 2013 Christmas Rains, was used to leverage ongoing in Indonesia also show potential for future In particular, lack of strategic dialogue during has influenced resources that are contributing to emergency response resources ($17 million) from the influence of national government expenditures, the creation of that arrangement, and a lack of integrating DRM into existing programs and budgets World Bank’s Crisis Response Window and planned including the DRM knowledge management hub, engagement with GFDRR during implementation, may or to improving the enabling environment for DRM funding from the EU of $10M to support the DVRP. which could influence how BNPB allocates its have contributed to an ineffective use of co-financing. (e.g., legal, institutional, or regulatory systems) in all GFDRR’s technical expertise has lent credibility to budget to train disaster management government five countries studied (see Appendix E). these assessments. staff around the country, and the safe schools pilot 3.2. Leverage and Influence Influence was generally conveyed through two GFDRR is primarily leveraging funds from the World program, which has potential to influence national GFDRR grants represent a very small portion of pathways, as shown in Table 7: either country education funding to improve structural and non- Bank and host country governments; funds from the investments needed to reduce disaster risk government resources or World Bank project funding structural resilience. other bilateral and multilateral donors were also in the five countries studied in this evaluation. was influenced. This is partly a reflection of the leveraged through PDNA support. In Bangladesh, The scope of GFDRR’s influence has varied by Strategic application of GFDRR’s grants, however, location of GFDRR focal points in World Bank offices GFDRR has actively leveraged investment through country. In Indonesia, Ethiopia, and Bangladesh, have potential to amplify results, either by directly in Indonesia and Bangladesh, as well as of the the Urban Resilience Project (2015–20, $182 million), GFDRR has been more successful in mainstreaming leveraging larger investments by partners or by execution arrangements for GFDRR grants. In the five where more than two years of sustained technical DRM into investments across sectors (transport, influencing how existing resources for resilience are countries, nearly 90 percent of grants are World Bank- assistance under a $2.8 million GFDRR grant led to community and economic development, health spent. executed, based on dollar value; the remainder are the preparation and approval of this large investment and nutrition) and into traditional development and recipient-executed (country government). Leverage. GFDRR has leveraged DRM resources in early 2015 ($173 million in World Bank loans planning, whereas in the Eastern Caribbean, GFDRR’s through three different pathways, as illustrated in Table and $9 million in co-financing from the GoB). In ƒƒ Influence of World Bank investment projects. influence has been more contained to DRM-specific 6 below (see also Appendix E). Of these pathways, Indonesia, GFDRR activities have leveraged DRM The evaluation identified over $3.6 billion of projects (the DVRPs). two leverage resources at-scale: support for PDNAs, funding on a smaller scale. For instance, the local and technical assistance that led to approval of an government in Bantul spent its own resources to investment project. do structural mitigation works in a few villages as a Table 6. Leverage Pathways Table 7. Influence Pathways Leverage Pathways Bangladesh Saint Lucia Dominica Ethiopia Indonesia Influence Pathways Bangladesh Saint Lucia Dominica Ethiopia Indonesia Support for the preparation of post- Influence of World Bank disaster needs assessments • • • investment projects • • • • • Technical assistance that directly Influence of government led to the preparation and approval • expenditures • • • of a World Bank investment project Implementation of pilot projects with community support • [ 34 ] ICF International ICF International [ 35 ] Lessons learned. Enabling factors for influencing instance, preparing a study/report, assessment, the intermediate outcome step of the results chain. In other cases, distinctions between indicators and leveraging have included the high-quality or guidelines for how to integrate DRM into For many activities, the timeframe for the evaluation were vague. For example, GFDRR contributed to technical expertise provided by GFDRR staff and their planning is unlikely to lead automatically to (2008–2014) was too short to observe contributions the development of the innovative InaSAFE tool in proximity to World Bank operations, as well as strong recommendations being institutionalized. Time and to longer-term DRM outcomes, and/or a sustained Indonesia and also helped potential users build support from community, government, and donor real resources (human and financial) are required effort is required to ensure that process-oriented capacity to implement the tool. It was unclear whether stakeholders. In particular: to make change. intermediate outcomes lead to concrete outcomes these activities should be counted as “developing” ƒƒ Where GFDRR has been less successful in and impacts. or “fostering” an innovative approach, since there ƒƒ Proximity of GFDRR to World Bank operations are separate indicators for each and no technical staff maximized the opportunity to influence and leveraging or influencing, one hindrance may Relevance to the types of results that GFDRR be the modality with which GFDRR engaged. definitions to facilitate interpretation. The phrasing leverage resources (notably World Bank projects) achieves varied among indicators. Observed of the indicators could also be improved; in M&E and to identify strategic entry points for small For example, co-financing of the ECRRP in intermediate outcomes corresponded most Bangladesh, without any accompanying strategic best practices, indicators are typically framed in grant contributions to have a broader impact. In closely to indicators related to awareness raising non-directional terms to enable measurement (e.g., Bangladesh and Ethiopia, proximity is taken one dialogue or technical assistance, did not result in (“facilitated exchange of best practice w/ clients”), discernible leverage or influence. “number of people,” “extent or degree to which,” step further. The same World Bank staff person capacity building (“implementation capacity “quality of”). serves as the TTL for the influencing/leveraging strengthened”), and influencing investments and GFDRR grant and the World Bank investment 3.3. Special Focus on Intermediate policies (“preparation of new operation informed”; Guidance could also be provided for measuring operation that the GFDRR grant leveraged/ Outcomes “existing operations informed”; “government policy/ and reporting. Indicator reference sheets could be influenced. In Bangladesh, this tautology helped The 2014 evaluation of GFDRR found that GFDRR strategy informed”). No data were found to support developed to enable common understandings of project leaders to think strategically about succeeds in delivering planned outputs and makes the achievement of other indicators, such as those how indicators are defined and measured, what how technical assistance could be linked to a valuable contribution beyond the output level— related to “design capacity strengthened” and “M&E data sources should be used, and responsibilities investments, while the World Bank’s convening but that the M&E framework’s outcome indicators capacity increased.” This is not a result of failure of for monitoring, reporting, and quality assurance. A power and access to ministries of finance and key do not adequately capture that contribution. The GFDRR interventions to achieve certain intermediate more systematic approach could be adopted for line ministries has also been a critical contributing 2014 evaluation recommended that GFDRR adopt outcomes, but rather a reflection of the mission and qualitative indicator assessment, such as scoring factor. intermediate outcomes with process-based indicators strategy of GFDRR—i.e., some of the indicators are criteria or a self-assessment method for strengthened ƒƒ An explicit objective to mainstream DRR—a key that reflect GFDRR’s role as a facilitator of progress in designed to capture intermediate outcomes that are capacity or increased awareness. The results of this element of the GFDRR mission—seems to be DRM. In response, the ToR for this evaluation called not integral to the GFDRR results chain. For example, mapping exercise also suggest that guidance on correlated with more instances of such influence. for “field-test[ing]” of new intermediate outcome none of the GFDRR interventions in the five countries how to present narrative on qualitative indicators In Indonesia, where programmatic grants had indicators. These cross-pillar indicators were examined for the evaluation were aimed at increasing would improve reporting; for example, for a capacity- an express purpose of mainstreaming DRR developed by GFDRR and draw on standardized the capacity of national counterparts to monitor and building indicator, a reference sheet might ask for into World Bank investments, the evaluation World Bank outcome indicators (see Appendix F). evaluate DRM activities, and hence no results were information on GFDRR’s capacity building inputs, the found more instances of that outcome being observed in this area. organization whose capacity was strengthened, the A comprehensive field-testing of the intermediate specific competencies that were improved, and so on. achieved (including across sectors). Much of this The mapping exercise revealed opportunities for outcome indicators would have been premature, mainstreaming was catalysed by the GFDRR focal improving the indicators for future use by GFDRR in Finally, GFDRR might consider whether it would since reference sheets (e.g., with indicator definitions, point. Similarly, in Indonesia, where programmatic monitoring and evaluation. Indicators could be more be more useful to organize intermediate outcome measurement protocols, and data requirements) grants had a stated objective to mainstream precisely worded and tailored to GFDRR’s mission. indicators by the five program pillars. While the have not yet been developed by GFDRR and thus DRR into development, evidence was found of In some cases, the intermediate outcomes observed process-based nature of many of the intermediate cannot be rigorously tested. Instead, qualitative data GFDRR contributions to this effect: at the national did not exactly map to the indicators provided. For outcomes may be similar across pillars (e.g., capacity on intermediate outcomes was gathered through level through national development plans and example, many GFDRR interventions raised disaster strengthened, knowledge deepened), for the desk review and interviews and mapped to the government education budgets, and at the local risk awareness among stakeholders; the evaluation purposes of better understanding and articulating the intermediate outcome indicators (see Appendix level through community-driven development team mapped these intermediate outcomes to the program’s results chain, it could be better to visualize F). In the absence of more detailed definitions, the planning. indicator “best practices exchanged with clients,” these intermediate outcomes in a logical framework interpretation of the indicators and the subsequent Not all GFDRR activities have successfully leveraged mapping is that of the ICF evaluation team. Several although this is not a precise articulation of what organized by pillar (e.g., similar to that presented in or influenced DRM resources. Some lessons learned observations can be made based on an analysis of GFDRR actually achieved. Other intermediate Annex I of the GFDRR Strategy for 2013–2015). include: the mapping. outcomes, such as a greater availability of disaster risk information for decision-making, did not ƒƒ Analytical work or capacity building alone may First, the qualitative research conducted for this correspond to a specific indicator.74 not be sufficient for leveraging or influencing DRM evaluation yielded evidence of progress toward resources if there is weak linkage of the grant DRM results that could be mapped against the activities to broader government or World Bank intermediate outcome indicators. Interviews with and other donor initiatives. project proponents and beneficiaries were especially ƒƒ Influencing of government resources is unlikely productive in identifying process-based results. These to happen without sustained direct engagement interviews and desk review confirmed that most of of the full range of relevant stakeholders. For the observable results of GFDRR interventions are in Although greater availability of disaster risk information did not correspond at the indicator-level, for the purposes of presenting results in this evaluation report, it was grouped with the 74 intermediate outcome “knowledge deepened.” [ 36 ] ICF International ICF International [ 37 ] 4. Conclusions and Recommendations 4.1. Conclusions 4.2. Recommendations Based on the country case studies and the cross-cutting analysis, the evaluation makes the following The evaluation makes the following recommendations to improve future GFDRR results conclusions on the four evaluation questions. achievement. Does GFDRR succeed in delivering planned analytical products and technical Recommendation #1: Find and pursue ways to deepen and sustain engagement assistance? on-the-ground GFDRR has delivered analytical products, capacity building, and technical assistance in all five countries studied. Potential for achieving downstream results would be improved by deeper and more sustained engagement. This Many GFDRR grant proposals do not describe planned outputs, and thus the evaluation was limited in its ability could be achieved through several different avenues. Continued support for GFDRR focal points in-country can to assess GFDRR delivery against plan. Limited instances of non-completion of expected outputs were observed help ensure that activities maintain momentum and advance toward outcomes at-scale. Focal points could also in Bangladesh and Ethiopia, and for a few grants in the Eastern Caribbean, evidence was not available to confirm support follow up to ensure that communities of practice, technologies, and other GFDRR-supported activities delivery of some outputs. However, on the whole, the evaluation found that outputs were successfully delivered continue to be implemented after individual grants have closed. Capacity-building modalities could also be im- and were reasonable in scope and scale given the size of the grants. proved; for instance, to avoid some of the pitfalls of one-time training events, on-the-job training could be incor- porated to improve capacity building and institutionalization. On-the-job training can also raise awareness and facilitate consensus building. At the country level, grants could be more purposefully designed to build on and Is GFDRR able to use these interventions to leverage and influence new and ongoing reinforce each other; results are stronger in countries where there is a clearer linkage and trajectory among grants (e.g., Indonesia, Ethiopia, Bangladesh). investment programs? GFDRR has leveraged DRM resources through the support for PDNAs (Bangladesh, Indonesia, Saint Lucia); technical assistance that directly led to the preparation and approval of a World Bank investment project (Ban- Recommendation #2: Prioritize interventions that link to broader initiatives and gladesh); and implementation of pilot projects that leveraged community-scale support (Indonesia). Apart from make use of GFDRR’s well-recognized technical expertise PDNA support, successful leveraging takes sustained engagement, and seems most likely to be achieved through a technical assistance modality. All five country studies suggested that activities that are linked to World Bank, government, and other donor GFDRR has been successful at influencing World Bank resources (five countries) and country government initiatives and programs are more likely to have strong stakeholder support, show better potential for contributing resources (Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Indonesia); this influence has contributed to integrating DRM into existing to results at-scale, and achieve leverage or influence. Similarly, interventions that make use of GFDRR’s compara- programs and budgets. GFDRR has been less successful at influencing other donor resources, with the notable tive advantages in the DRR community, including technical expertise and regional thematic initiatives, also show exception of JICA in Bangladesh. strong promise for achieving results. GFDRR has also been successful at improving the enabling environment for DRM through policy dialogue and support (five countries) and PDNA support. Recognized technical expertise, proximity to World Bank operations, and an explicit objective to mainstream DRR seem to be enabling factors for influence. Recommendation #3: Improve documentation of GFDRR activities and results to support further M&E Are the activities to which GFDRR contributes achieving the outcomes intended? A challenge for this evaluation was incomplete documentation of GFDRR activities and results. Project proposals Most GFDRR activities are making valuable contributions to achieving process-oriented outcomes, including sometimes lacked clear descriptions of expected outputs and outcomes; progress reports were often missing; building institutional capacity, strengthening policy dialogue, increasing availability of disaster risk information, and in some cases, it was difficult to track down grant work products or financial records. Through fieldwork mainstreaming DRR into development, and assisting in resilient disaster recovery through PDNA support. For and the on-the-ground support of the GFDRR Evaluation Task Manager, the evaluation team was able to find many activities, sustained engagement is needed to translate this progress into more tangible and sustainable sufficient documentation to come to robust conclusions for this report. However, to facilitate future M&E—and outcomes at-scale. support more streamlined results reporting—GFDRR should consider improving documentation of activities and results. The evaluation generally supports GFDRR’s movement away from its original Results-Based Management System—which was developed when GFDRR’s portfolio was much more limited—and toward linking with World Bank monitoring processes. What evidence exists that GFDRR is achieving progress against the intended impact on the resilience of people to natural disasters? Limited evidence was found of impacts achieved at-scale as of early 2015. The relatively young age of GFDRR’s portfolio and the time often required to reach impact are contributing factors to this conclusion. Some activities show potential to achieve impacts—particularly those linked to larger World Bank investment operations or broad- er government initiatives, which can strengthen the potential for downstream results and sustainability. Activities like one-time training events or conference attendance support appear less likely to achieve impact. [ 38 ] ICF International ICF International [ 39 ] appendix Appendix A. Terms of Reference in losses, using ‘proxy’ indicators of improved Leveraging strategy: The DARA evaluation confirmed performance in risk management. These indicators that the synergy between World Bank and GFDRR 4. Introduction policy reform and implement public investment measure achievements that do not depend solely has delivered results at scale, particularly in the areas that can better protect people from the natural on the Program. At country level, a broad range of of risk reduction and financial protection. A. Background hazard risks they face. In line with geographic and stakeholders will have to act (and work together) to How to best manage the growing risks that disasters thematic priorities set by its donors and partners, achieve this impact. Recommendation for the 2015 evaluation: This pose to economies and societies is a major GFDRR has supported over 50 countries since evaluation should further expand the understanding contemporary challenge for policy makers. There 2006, with the most significant engagement in 31 D. Lessons learned from the 2014 evaluation of the way GFDRR is able to influence and leverage is therefore a growing demand for evidence on the priority countries. In addition, GFDRR also manages resources for resilience. In particular, this evaluation The 2014 DARA evaluation was the first of a planned will have to assess how the close partnership effective management of risks, and resilience of special initiatives that focus on particular regions or series of independent evaluations of GFDRR. The between GFDRR and the World Bank enables the systems built. A number of global programs have specific topics, including a 74.5 million initiative of evaluation focused on five country case studies: limited sum of GFDRR resources to influence national made their own evaluation efforts, notably those the Africa, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) Group of Guatemala, Malawi, Nepal, Sri Lanka, and Vietnam. dialogues on the importance of investment DRM with working from the perspective of adaptation to climate States financed by the European Union, and a $100 The evaluation did not intend that these case studies ministries of finance and key line ministries. Moreover, change. The field of Disaster Risk Management million technical assistance and knowledge exchange constitute a large enough sample to draw conclusions the evaluation should assess whether, in absence of (DRM) has few examples of good practice in the program financed by the Ministry of Finance, Japan. on the program as a whole. GFDRR will therefore this partnership, GFDRR resources would still provide evaluation of impact. Evaluation of DRM programs Between 2007 and 2014, GFDRR’s portfolio has commission two additional evaluations (one focused a sufficient platform to promote a national policy have tended to focus on institutional and policy grown from $6.4 million in FY2007 to $279 million. on country case studies and another on two thematic dialogue and whether its recommendations would be aspects: few have considered the action that follows The GFDRR 2013-2015 strategy – Managing Disaster programs). Each evaluation is expected to build on integrated into large-scale investment programs. and its contribution to the changing resilience of Risks for a Resilient Future – sets out the five pillars and improve the analysis from the previous evaluation. countries and people. of action: 1) Risk Identification; 2) Risk Reduction; These two areas of study should guide the evaluator The DARA evaluation provided a long and detailed in responding to the general parameters described in The Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and 3) Preparedness; 4) Financial Protection; and 5) list of recommendations, which were discussed in the scope of services section below. Recovery (GFDRR) is well positioned to contribute Resilient Recovery. Central to this strategy is the need with members of the Consultative Group (CG) and to an evidence base on effective management of to gain a better evidence base understanding of the GFDRR. Of the list, two key areas on which this risks, through better understanding the impact of its effectiveness of GFDRR investments and more clearly 5. Audience and Purpose of the Evaluation evaluation will need to further explore and elaborate program. In particular, the dual focus of the program – define the pathways to resilience that the GFDRR include: how GFDRR measures its own performance A. Audience on both stimulating institutional reform and leveraging program seeks to follow. and how effective the leveraging strategy is in investment – provides an important opportunity to The findings of the evaluation will inform two key achieving results at scale. These areas are described learn what works and account for resources spent. C. Monitoring and evaluation audiences. below in more detail. Through the eight-year life of its program, GFDRR has already invested significant effort in defining and The overarching framework for the evaluation will be External: the evaluation will allow GFDRR to the GFDRR M&E framework. This framework was Measuring performance: The DARA evaluation found measuring results. The program has been the subject that GFDRR succeeds in delivering planned outputs communicate externally with the Consultative Group, of a number of independent evaluations. See Annex 1 developed in 2013 and tested by the 2014 DARA country partners, and the broader DRM community evaluation. Recently, based on the recommendations and makes a valuable contribution to the broader for overview of past evaluations. DRM performance at the national level: GFDRR about the impact of GFDRR and more generally about from this evaluation, an additional level of intermediate lessons learned regarding change processes related outcome indicators has been added. See Annex 2 for triggers policy processes, facilitates some of the B. GFDRR Program necessary conditions for risk reduction, promotes to efforts to build resilience. the current M&E framework. In line with global commitments following the government readiness, and leverages support for Internal: the evaluation will enable the GFDRR adoption of the Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA) Monitoring: GFDRR keeps track of the transformation DRM. Moving forward, the facilitation role that GFDRR Secretariat to incorporate lessons learned into its 2005 – 15, the World Bank, the United Nations and of financial resources and other inputs into products plays at country level should be better captured in the internal decision-making processes, specifically bilateral donors launched GFDRR in 2006 to deepen and services (outputs). Outputs are associated with M&E framework. related to (i) the conditions under which GFDRR- international technical and financial cooperation specific interventions supported by the GFDRR supported GFDRR interventions can make an impact and are under the direct control of the Program. Recommendation for 2015 evaluation: Acknowledging to mainstream DRR in development policies and (or not); (ii) the design and implementation of future For example, GFDRR considers the development that it was difficult to capture GFDRR’s direct strategies and build resilience in vulnerable countries. GFDRR grants; and (iii) improvements required to a prioritization assessment to support a country’s contribution to a country’s DRM performance GFDRR’s mission is to support national and local further maximize impacts. effort to reduce disaster risk as a direct output of the through the M&E framework’s outcome indicators, efforts to build resilient societies who can manage Program. this evaluation should use and field-test the newly and adapt to disaster risks, in order to reduce the B. Purpose of the evaluation developed intermediate outcome indicators. The human and economic impacts of disasters. This role Evaluation: GFDRR is also committed to assess intermediate outcome indicators have been designed GFDRR considers evaluation as a tool for will continue and evolve under the next generation the intended effects of the delivered goods to strengthen the logic of the existing framework and accountability and learning. As such, the purpose for HFA, to be discussed in Sendai in March 2015. and services. In the absence of these events to ensure that evaluations in the future would better this evaluation is to: GFDRR is a grant-making facility – not a direct actually happening (or of sufficient data on their capture GFDRR’s role as a facilitator of progress in implementer – and as such works primarily through impacts if they do occur), GFDRR is dedicated DRM performance. the World Bank and other partners to stimulate to demonstrate impact, independently of trends [ 40 ] ICF International ICF International [ 41 ] ƒƒ Ensure accountability by demonstrating that A. Methods Bank staff at HQ and Country Offices. Finally, the Firm GFDRR’s programs. These four countries will be GFDRR effectively adopts the role of a facilitator There are a range of methods that can assist with can consider targeted one-on-one or focus group selected based on the following four criteria: and acts as a catalyst to ‘crowd in’ investments for gathering and analyzing data to answer the key discussion at local level to capture data directly resilience, thereby benefitting people beyond its derived from the beneficiaries and other development ƒƒ Regional diversity: the four selected countries evaluation questions. While the Firm is free to select its should represent the GFDRR’s most active regions; direct sphere of interaction; and preferred method or mix of methods commensurate partners. ƒƒ Contribute to building the evidence base that with the level of available resources, GFDRR would ƒƒ Significant scale and scope of GFDRR Field Visits: The Firm is expected to visit 4 countries to engagement: the selected countries should have demonstrates how disaster risks are effectively encourage including the use of the following methods: conduct field research. These visits are expected to managed and resilient societies are built. benefitted from number of grants across GFDRR’s Contribution Analysis: This type of analysis would take up to 10 days. Given the timeline of the contract, pillars of action; C. Evaluation objectives allow an assessment of cause-effect relationships and the Firm may have to conduct some of the field visits simultaneously. ƒƒ Number of years of engagement: GFDRR should Based on the above mentioned purpose, the offer a credible evidence-based contribution story. have been engaged for a number of years in the objectives of the evaluation will be to: In other words, the Firm will be able to make causal four selected countries (6-7 years); claims about whether and how GFDRR interventions 8. Country Selection Objective 1: Analyze and evaluate the overall impact have contributed to observed impacts. ƒƒ Potential for investigation of leveraging and GFDRR will select four countries. Similar to the DARA influencing of investment operations: The selected of GFDRR activities, specifically in terms of leveraging Evaluation, it should not be assumed that findings new investments and influencing ongoing programs; Contextual Analysis: Since it is unlikely that GFDRR countries should have significant relevant portfolio interventions are equally effective in each and in these countries apply across the board to the to offer scope to consider this aspect. and every context, the Firm is also strongly encouraged Objective 2: Generate a better understanding of to conduct a contextual analysis of GFDRR how and why GFDRR has been able to contribute to interventions. This would require the Firm to look into making countries more resilient. inter alia stakeholder behavior, institutional capacities, 9. Evaluation Process and socio-economic trends. 6. Scope of Services 1. Inception 2. Case Studies 3. Reporting Part 1 In general, GFDRR is open to using new methods In order to meet the evaluation’s accountability as they are developed and validated as credible and appropriate for measuring impact in complex 1.1 Desk Review 2.1 Preparation country visits 3.1 Synthesizing data objective, the Firm will have to answer three key questions: environments and these methods can help answer how and why questions alongside what questions. • DARA evaluation • Review of project documents • Qualitative review ƒƒ Does GFDRR succeed in delivering planned • GFDRR strategic documents • Interview DRM focal points • Quantitative review analytical products and technical assistance? B. Data sources • GFDRR program reports • Identification stakeholders • Triangulation and validation • GFDRR stories of impact • Preparation mission agenda ƒƒ Is GFDRR able to use these interventions Desk Review: The Firm will have to carry out a to leverage and influence new and ongoing desk review of all relevant internal documents. • Logistics investment programs? GFDRR collects monitoring information related to its interventions through an online ‘Results-Based 1.2 Kick-off Meeting 2.2 HQ Interviews 3.2 Stories of Impact ƒƒ Are these investment programs achieving the outcomes intended? Management System.’ This information will be made available to the evaluator. In addition, GFDRR ƒƒ What evidence exists that GFDRR is achieving will provide all documentation related to World • Meeting with GFDRR • GFDRR Draft GFDRR review Final progress against the intended impact on the Bank development policy lending and investment Stories of Stories of • Meeting with DRM RCs • World Bank Impact Impact resilience of people to natural disasters? operations which can be directly and indirectly linked to GFDRR interventions (e.g., GFDRR staff provided Subsequently, in order to meet the learning technical support to ensure risk was factored into the 1.3 Evaluation framework 2.3 Field case studies 4. Reporting Part 2 objective, the Firm is expected to analyze the how design of the operation or GFDRR financed analytical and why behind the findings on what GFDRR has work which informed the design process). • Approach • Interviews accomplished. In this context, the evaluator will have Interviews and Focus Group Discussions: Interviews • Methodology • Triangulation to look into what factors have led to results in DRM performance at country level (including external are considered to be a key component of the • Evaluation questions • Analysis factors) and how GFDRR’s interventions relate to evaluation. As such, the Firm will be expected to these factors. develop an interview guide with research questions 1.4 Inception Report 2.4 Case Study Reports 4.1 Technical Evaluation Report which will be presented for approval as part of the GFDRR and CG review GFDRR and CG review inception report. Considering the focus of the GFDRR 7. Evaluation Methodology program on national and sub-national processes of Draft Final Case Draft Final government, the evaluator is expected to conduct Inception Inception Technical Technical This section establishes minimum design standards Report Report Studies Report Report for the evaluation. The final design for this evaluation interviews with counterparts in national and city will be developed through an inception report which government agencies. In addition, given GFDRR’s Workshop Workshop will be reviewed for quality assurance by GFDRR. position within the World Bank, the evaluator will also have to carry out a series of interviews with World Communication and Liaising with GFDRR Task Team Manager [ 42 ] ICF International ICF International [ 43 ] 10. Deliverables and Timing (v) lessons learned; and (vi) next steps. Each report Deadline: will be 2-3 pages. These reports will be shared with Inception Report: After an initial review of relevant # Deliverables Deadlines GFDRR for review and clearance. documentation, the Firm will produce an inception Phase 1 - Inception report which sets out the evaluation framework. This Technical Evaluation Report: The technical report will will include: (i) evaluation framework (overall approach focus on what GFDRR has achieved but also provide 1 Draft Inception Report TBD and risks/limitations), (ii) evaluation methodology a solid analysis of why and how GFDRR has (or has 2 Workshop TBD (data collection and data analysis methods; key not) been able to achieve results on the ground (see data sources); (iii) data collection instruments 3 Final Inception Report TBD scope of services). The primary audience will be the (questionnaires and interview guide); (iv) work plan GFDRR Secretariat. This report provide a synthesis Phase 2 – Case Studies (time line and responsibilities by evaluation phase); of the findings of the desk review, the interviews in 4 Case Studies TBD and (v) logistics. The inception report will be shared Washington and the visited countries, and other with GFDRR and the CG for review and clearance. Phase 3 - Reporting Part 1 data sources. The report will include a foreword, executive summary, and relevant annexes. The total 5 Draft Stories of Impact TBD Case Studies: Following the country visits, the Firm recommended length of the executive summary is 6 Final Stories of Impact TBD will develop a report for each country. Each report 3-4 pages. The total recommended length of the will summarize the findings of the country visit. These 7 Presentation by GFDRR Task Manager at Spring CG meeting TBD report is 35-40 pages, excluding annexes. This report reports will be shared with GFDRR, but do not require Phase 4 – Reporting Part 2 will be shared with GFDRR and the CG for review and clearance. clearance. 8 Draft technical evaluation report TBD Stories of Impact: The stories of impact will focus 9 Workshop TBD Workshops: The Firm will organize and carry out a primarily on what GFDRR has achieved. The primary workshop before finalizing the inception report and 10 Final technical evaluation report TBD audience will be the Consultative Group. Each report another before finalizing the technical evaluation will include: (i) the story of two beneficiaries75; (ii) 11 Presentation by GFDRR Task Manager at Fall CG meeting TBD report and the stories of impact. results and achievements; (iii) context; (iv) approach; Timeline: 11. Staffing Requirements B. Specific requirements December January February March April May June July The Firm has to propose a staffing plan and skill mix The Lead Evaluator should be able to demonstrate: necessary to meet the objectives and scope of the Phase 1 services. If all the required skills are not available ƒƒ Minimum of 15 years of professional experience Phase 2 within the firm, they are encouraged to make joint in evaluating multi-disciplinary projects and ventures with other firms. programs; Phase 3 ƒƒ Experience with theory of change-based Phase 4 evaluations. A. General requirements The Firm should be able to demonstrate: The team should comprise the following specialists: ƒƒ Knowledge and experience with complex ƒƒ A Resilience / Recovery Specialist with extensive quantitative and qualitative evaluations; experience in monitoring and evaluation, particularly in the fields of international ƒƒ Demonstrated experience with World Bank and development, disaster risk management, climate Trust Fund programs; change adaptation, policy influence, and ƒƒ In-depth knowledge of issues related to DRM organizational assessment; policies and operations; ƒƒ A DRM Indicators & Data Specialist who is ƒƒ Previous experience of theory-based approaches knowledgeable of the general literature and current to evaluation; issues in development evaluation, particularly ƒƒ Previous experience with the evaluation and/ related to disaster risk management and climate or operation of multi-donor programs or global change adaptation; Proven experience in field partnerships (preferred); work is required; ƒƒ Excellent written and verbal communication skills. This will need to include one direct beneficiary (for example, a government official that participating in training events) and one indirect beneficiary (for example, a representative from a 75 community that benefitted from a government program that GFDRR influenced/leveraged). This may require travel outside the country’s capital. [ 44 ] ICF International ICF International [ 45 ] ƒƒ A Communications Specialist with proven Expert Advice and Inputs, specifically: Appendix B. Methodology understanding of international development issues. S/he should have a demonstrated ability to ƒƒ Guidance on data interpretation and analysis This appendix describes the methodology and B.3. Evaluation Design and Framework communicate the results of technical evaluations ƒƒ Field Visits instruments (i.e., interview protocols) used to assess According to the Terms of Reference (ToR), the to a broader audience through a range of the results achieved by GFDRR in Bangladesh, Project Management: evaluation sought to answer the following four communication products, including but not limited Dominica, Saint Lucia, Ethiopia, and Indonesia. The questions: to impact stories, infographics, and video. The GFDRR evaluation Task Manager will be the evaluation team originally presented this methodology The Firm is encouraged to engage national DRM/ day-to-day project manager to oversight all aspects in its Inception Report. ƒƒ Does GFDRR succeed in delivering planned Resilience specialists in the countries selected. of the assignment. The GFDRR team supporting the analytical products and technical assistance? evaluation will include the GFDRR Program Manager, B.1. Evaluation Scope ƒƒ Is GFDRR able to use these interventions the Track II Team Leader, and the former evaluation 12. Project Management This evaluation focused on GFDRR activities to leverage and influence new and ongoing Task Manager. investment programs? The Client for this project is GFDRR. The Firm shall between 2008 and 2014. The geographical scope report and communicate the status and products of the evaluation was five countries in four regions: ƒƒ Are the activities to which GFDRR contributes 14. Other Bangladesh, the Eastern Caribbean (Saint Lucia and achieving the outcomes intended?76 of the project to GFDRR’s evaluation Task Manager on a weekly basis after the project’s initiation. In A. Selection Procedure And Form Of Contract Dominica), Ethiopia, and Indonesia. These countries/ regions were selected by GFDRR based on the ƒƒ What evidence exists that GFDRR is achieving addition, there will be monthly project meetings The Firm will be selected following the World Bank’s progress against the intended impact on the via teleconference. The inception report should be following criteria: Guidelines: Selection and Employment of Consultants resilience of people to natural disasters? provided at the first monthly project meeting. The by World Bank Borrowers (January 2011). ƒƒ Regional diversity: the four selected countries final deliverables will have to be cleared by the should represent the GFDRR’s most active regions; B.3.1. Relationship to 2014 Evaluation Consultative Group (CG) and GFDRR Secretariat. B. Payment schedule This evaluation was preceded by a GFDRR evaluation ƒƒ Significant scale and scope of GFDRR The Firm will be remunerated for the deliverables as engagement: the selected countries should have released in 2014: Retrospective Evaluation of the 13. Resources to be provided by the Client follows: benefitted from number of grants across GFDRR’s GFDRR Program in a Sample of Disaster-Prone GFDRR will provide the following support to the pillars of action; Countries, conducted by DARA (hereafter referred to selected Firm for the purposes of this assignment: ƒƒ 10% upon contract signature as the 2014 evaluation). The 2014 evaluation focused ƒƒ Number of years of engagement: GFDRR should on GFDRR’s work in five countries (Guatemala, ƒƒ 10% upon delivery of Inception Report have been engaged for a number of years in the Data Collection: Malawi, Nepal, Sri Lanka, and Vietnam) and was ƒƒ 30% upon delivery of Draft Evaluation Report and four selected countries (6–7 years); and also tasked with testing assumptions and making ƒƒ Original GFDRR Grant Proposals (including ToRs) Impact Stories ƒƒ Potential for investigation of leveraging and recommendations about GFDRR’s M&E framework ƒƒ Outputs ƒƒ 40% upon delivery of Final Evaluation Report and influencing of investment operations: the selected and theory of change. Impact Stories countries should have significant relevant portfolio ƒƒ Progress reports (RBMS reports, Aide-Memoirs, This evaluation sought to build on and complement to offer scope to consider this aspect. and BTORs) and Completion Reports ƒƒ 10% upon delivery of Edited Final Evaluation the 2014 evaluation, while at the same time following ƒƒ Financial reports Report And Impact Stories its own methodology and responding to a different B.2. Key Roles and Responsibilities scope of work. In broad strokes, this evaluation ƒƒ Access to key stakeholders in Washington HQ and C. Duration of assignment A consulting firm, ICF International (ICF), was selected followed a similar methodology to the 2014 evaluation; the field through a competitive process to conduct this this evaluation used primarily qualitative approaches, The duration of the contract will be for 6 months from mobilization. evaluation of GFDRR. The team was led by the Lead drawing on evidence from desk review and key Evaluator, Mr. Mark Wagner, and the Deputy Evaluator informant interviews, and using triangulation and was Ms. Jessica Kyle, joined by Ms. Charlotte Mack other data analysis methods to identify evidence- and Mr. Nikolaos Papachristodoulou as the other based findings and recommendations. Two notable core evaluators. The ICF team was responsible for differences are discussed below. performing all information-gathering and analysis and preparing the evaluation work products. The ICF Leveraging and influencing DRM resources. This team reported directly to the GFDRR Evaluation Task evaluation sought to expand the understanding of Manager, Ms. Vica Rosario Bogaerts. the way GFDRR is able to leverage and influence resources for resilience, beyond what the 2014 This evaluation question has been slightly re-phrased for clarity. The original ToR phrased this question differently: “Are these investment programs achieving the outcomes intended?” 76 However, in most cases, given the size of GFDRR’s contribution, the results of much broader World Bank investment programs would be outside the scope of GFDRR’s plausible influence and thus outside the scope of this evaluation. Through desk review, this evaluation will clarify the activities to which GFDRR has contributed and assess the results of those activities. [ 46 ] ICF International ICF International [ 47 ] evaluation found. In particular, this evaluation Intermediate outcomes. In contrast to the 2014 assessed the close partnership between GFDRR and evaluation, this evaluation is not explicitly focused on Evaluation Question Evaluation Sub-Questions Data Sources Methods the World Bank, in the context of findings on influence drawing lessons learned and recommendations about Are the activities to • What were the intended outcomes of the activities • Desk review of GFDRR Contribution and leverage. GFDRR’s entire M&E framework. This evaluation did which GFDRR con- to which GFDRR contributed? grant proposals and ToRs, and contex- field test new intermediate outcomes, which were tributes achieving the • What changes have actually been observed in the project products, progress tual analysis; The evaluation adopted the definitions that: developed by GFDRR and draw on standardized outcomes intended? behavior, activities, or actions of the relevant social reports, and completion timeline World Bank outcome indicators. The methodology actor (e.g., government institution, organization, reports creation; ƒƒ GFDRR has influenced resources when the for this field-testing is described in the sections that communities) as a result of the activities to which • Key informant interviews triangulation program’s activities contribute to improving GFDRR has contributed (i.e., Were the intended with GFDRR, World Bank, follow. the enabling environment for DRM (e.g., legal, outcomes, or other outcomes, achieved)? project implementing institutional, or regulatory systems) or to integrating • What were the reasons for success or failure in partners, government DRM into existing programs and budgets. B.3.2. Evaluation Matrix delivering the expected results? agencies and other ben- ƒƒ GFDRR has leveraged resources when the The evaluation team began by developing an • What is the likelihood for future achievement of eficiaries evaluation matrix to guide the assessment process, outcomes? program’s activities contribute to securing new • What role has the partnership between GFDRR funding for DRM.77 as provided in the table below. and the World Bank played in the achievement of results? Could GFDRR have achieved the same results in the absence of that partnership? Table B-1. Evaluation Matrix What evidence exists • Has GFDRR contributed to any activities that have • Key informant interviews Contribution that GFDRR is achiev- measurably increased the resilience of people to with GFDRR, World Bank, analysis; Evaluation Question Evaluation Sub-Questions Data Sources Methods ing progress against natural hazards? project implementing triangulation the intended impact • If so, what evidence exists of this impact? partners, government Does GFDRR suc- • Have the expected outputs been achieved? If not, • Desk review of GFDRR Triangulation on the resilience of • If not, what is the likelihood that this impact may be agencies and other ben- ceed in delivering what was delivered instead, and why? grant proposals and ToRs, people to natural achieved in the future? What else needs to hap- eficiaries planned analytical • What obstacles and challenges were faced in project products, progress disasters? pen to deliver this intended impact? • Desk review of World Bank products and techni- the preparation and delivery of the outputs? How reports, and completion project completion reports cal assistance? were these difficulties addressed? reports • Were beneficiaries satisfied with the quality of the • Key informant interviews products and technical assistance received? If with GFDRR, World Bank, not, why not? project implementing B.4. Data Collection Methods ƒƒ External documents related to the broader partners, government agencies and other ben- international and regional DRR context, such The evaluation collected information from desk review eficiaries as those by UN bodies, NGOs and research and stakeholder consultation. organizations, MDBs, bilateral programs, and other Is GFDRR able to • Has GFDRR influenced resources by improving • Desk review of ongoing Contribution entities. use these interven- enabling environments or helping governments and planned investments analysis; B.4.1. Desk Review tions to leverage and integrate DRM into existing investments? Why and and the extent to which timeline A full list of documents consulted for this evaluation is The evaluation team reviewed both internal and provided in Appendix H. influence new and how? risk is integrated creation; external documents relevant to GFDRR interventions, ongoing investment • Have GFDRR activities contributed to securing • Key informant interviews triangulation including: programs? new DRM funding (from domestic, donor, or with GFDRR, national and B.4.2. Stakeholder Input private sources)? subnational government ƒƒ Documents and data produced by GFDRR, Stakeholder input was gathered primarily via key • What types of GFDRR interventions have been counterparts, World Bank most successful in influencing or leveraging and other partners including GFDRR grant proposals and ToRs, informant interviews and focus groups, in-person investments? Why and how? project outputs, progress reports and completion in Washington, DC, and during country visits, and • What have been the most significant helping and reports, financial reports, strategic documents, via Skype or telephone when in-person interviews hindering factors to influencing or leveraging program reports, and stories of impact. were not possible. Email inquiries were also made investments? to supplement interviews or to facilitate follow up ƒƒ GFDRR monitoring information available through • What role has the partnership between GFDRR questions. and the World Bank played in leveraging and in- the Results-Based Monitoring System. fluencing new and ongoing investment programs? ƒƒ Documentation related to World Bank development A list of priority informants was developed by the Could GFDRR have achieved the same results in policy lending and investment operations that are GFDRR Evaluation Task Manager (in consultation the absence of that partnership? directly or indirectly linked to GFDRR interventions. with GFDRR and World Bank staff) and provided ƒƒ Hyogo Framework for Action reports. to the evaluation team. To ensure that a range of perspectives are represented, the evaluation team ƒƒ Relevant national/subnational development and reviewed and supplemented this list through a DRM documents and secondary data. number of channels including: reviewing GFDRR For example, GFDRR would be considered to have leveraged resources if: GFDRR contributed to piloting a successful initiative that led to wider-scale funding from the national 77 ƒƒ Previous evaluations of GFDRR. grant documentation (e.g., project outputs, progress government; or GFDRR informed national dialogues with key ministries about the importance of investment DRM and new government resources were subsequently committed; or GFDRR contributed to a post-disaster assessment that helped secure financing for resilient recovery; or GFDRR contributed to a study that formed the basis for a project that was subsequently funded. [ 48 ] ICF International ICF International [ 49 ] and completion reports) to identify stakeholder Earthquake Resilience Program (BUERP) focus Triangulation entails comparing findings across was unable to identify any project proponents or names, making inquiries with TTLs or other project groups workshops, field investigations, high-level fora, evaluation methods (as described above) and data beneficiaries to interview; for several other grants, the staff, and coordinating with our local consultants. Advisory Committee meetings, Scientific Consoritum sources (e.g., desk review, interviews in Washington evaluation team was unable to triangulate evidence meetings, and the RSLUP training course. Twenty- and visited countries, and other sources) to identify from project leads at the World Bank because Key informant interviews and focus groups were three participants responded, for a response rate of findings that can be confirmed by multiple sources or project beneficiaries or third-party stakeholders with conducted using a semi-structured interview format. approximately 14 percent. methods. Triangulation minimizes the likelihood that knowledge of the grant could not be identified in- The protocols that guided the interviews for each anecdotes will factor in to the evaluation’s findings, country. group of informants (GFDRR and World Bank staff; and also highlights which findings require further host country governments and other beneficiaries; B.5. Methods of Analysis The second limitation was related to the lack of a research for confirmation. and partners) are provided in Section B.7 below. The evaluation utilized several analytical methods baseline or stated expectations for outputs and including hypothesis building and testing; contribution outcomes against which evidence of progress Country visits were conducted by two-person teams and contextual analysis; qualitative analysis of B.6. Limitations could be measured. Many GFDRR grant proposals during March and April 2015: Ethiopia (March 2–10, stakeholder input; and intermediate outcome indicator The evaluation team is confident that the findings do not describe expected outputs or outcomes in Addis Ababa and Lasta Woreda); Indonesia (March mapping (see text box). Triangulation was also used presented in this report are valid and evidence-based. terms that are conducive for meaningful evaluation; 22–April 3, Jakarta, Yogyakarta,78 and Padang79); to synthesize and identify findings across methods. However, the evaluation faced two key limitations. for example, several of the Bangladesh grant Saint Lucia (March 23–27); Dominica (March 30–April proposals—with activities ranging from conference 1); and Bangladesh (April 4–9, Dhaka). The evaluation The first was related to stakeholder availability and support, to PDNA development, to cofinancing of Intermediate Outcome Indicator Mapping team was accompanied by national consultants in recall, particularly for grants that were administered the Cyclone Sidr recovery project—list the following Ethiopia (Mr. Taye Yadessa), Indonesia (Dr. Riyanti Interview protocols included questions that earlier in the evaluation time period (e.g., 2008–2010). as the grant’s expected outcome: “All organizations, Djalante), and Bangladesh (Mr. Mohammed Taher). attempted to elicit changes (outcomes) observed There was a risk that key informants’ would not as a result of the activities to which GFDRR has personnel and volunteers responsible for maintaining be able to remember—or remember accurately— preparedness are equipped and trained for effective More than 200 stakeholders were consulted, contributed, and also asked interviewees to identify events that happened as many as seven years ago. disaster preparedness and response.” As a result, as summarized in Table B-2 below; a full list of the important changes among those observed. ICF analyzed and categorized the responses to Institutional memory is particularly weakened by staff it was not possible to assess outputs and outcomes stakeholders consulted is provided in Appendix G. turnover. Recall can also be influenced by institutional, these questions and mapped those results to the against “plan” consistently. Instead, the evaluation proposed intermediate outcome indicators. political, or social interests. To mitigate this risk, ICF supplemented grant proposals with GFDRR program A short online survey was also disseminated to set the scene carefully with key informants (e.g., documentation (including the GFDRR Strategy and 163 participants in GFDRR’s Bangladesh Urban by identifying projects, individual staff, or activities monitoring and evaluation information) along with as specifically as possible) to improve recall, and our expert judgment to make determinations about triangulate interview evidence with other data reasonable expectations for results given grant Table B-2. Summary of Stakeholders Consulted for the Evaluation collected. For a few grants, the evaluation team activities. Non- Saint Dominica Ethiopia Bangladesh Indonesia Country Total Lucia Specific World Bank and GFDRR 1 3 7 6 4 7 28 National and Local 18 13 20 14 30 0 95 Government Development Partners 0 0 6 10 4 0 20 NGOs, Academia, and Civil Society Project 1 1 4 3 70 0 79 Implementers and/or Beneficiaries Total 20 17 37 33 108 7 222 78 In Yogyakarta, the team visited numerous project sites: Three huntap (resettlements) in the sub-districts Umbul Harjo and Glagah Harjo; the demonstration plot in the dusun Kopeng where GFDRR funded technical assistance to provide advice on the ecosystem restoration; the kelurahan Bumijo in Segment 3 along the Winongo River, an urban ward where GFDRR has funded collaborative mapping; and a huntap in Bantul district (dusun Wukirsari), where GFDRR funded participatory landslide risk mapping. 79 In Padang, the team visited five project sites: Kelurahan Lolong Belanti, one of the urban wards that have received a grant from GFDRR through PNPM, where representatives from the other three kelurahans that have received GFDRR grants were also in attendance (Bungo Psang, Lubuk Buayo, and Batang Harau); and four primary schools where either the current or former headmaster had participated in the safe schools pilot program. [ 50 ] ICF International ICF International [ 51 ] B.7. Interview Protocols 9. [If not raised in response to Question #7] Has GFDRR contributed to activities that improved the enabling Protocol for key informant interviews: GFDRR and World Bank Staff environment for DRM and/or resulted in the integration of DRM into existing programs/investments? Why and how? Please give specific examples. Date:______________________________ Name:________________________________________________________ a. Has GFDRR support helped to improve the results derived from [country’s] spending on DRM? Country:___________________________ Title:__________________________________________________________ b. Has GFDRR’s influence led to securing new DRM funding (e.g., from domestic, donor, or private sector sources)? Sex: o Male o Female Organization:__________________________________________________ 10. What were the reasons for success or failure in delivering the expected results? Interviewer(s):______________________________________________________________________________________ a. What factors were helpful in achieving these results? Introduction b. What factors hindered the achievement of these results? How were obstacles or problems addressed? ƒƒ Inform the interviewee of the overall aim of the interview, the time allotted, and that their comments will not be 11. Have there been any other effects as a result of this activity? attributed. Prompt: For example, effects on internal World Bank operations, effects on the development of other ƒƒ If appropriate, ask the interviewee to begin with a brief description of their involvement with GFDRR. projects, other DRM investments made or influenced, etc. 12. What is the extent of coordination with national and/or local governments and other partners? Guiding Research Questions for Interviews 13. To what extent are GFDRR activities complementary to and coordinated with activities of the World Bank? 1. Please describe what you think GFDRR does as a program. What does the program seek to achieve? a. What role has the partnership between GFDRR and the World Bank played in the achievement of results? 2. Has the way GFDRR operates in [country] evolved over time? If so, please describe. b. In your opinion, could GFDRR have made a similar contribution to results without its partnership with the 3. What are GFDRR’s activities or outputs in [country]? World Bank? a. Were these activities/outputs consistent with plans? If not, how and why did they change? 14. To date, have any people in [country] experienced increased resilience to natural hazards, as a result of b. Do you think that beneficiaries were satisfied with the activities/outputs? activities to which GFDRR has contributed? c. Which activities have made the biggest difference in [country]? Why? a. If so, what evidence can you provide of these impacts? 4. If GFDRR’s activity contributed to a larger output (for example, a joint product with multiple partners), what b. If not, what is the likelihood that this impact may be achieved in the future? What else needs to happen to was the value added of GFDRR’s contribution? deliver this intended impact? 5. If GFDRR funded the time of staff in [country], what were the results of that contribution? c. How and to what extent will GFDRR’s impacts be sustained in the future? (e.g., have strategies or plans 6. What was the relationship of the GFDRR activity to other World Bank activities? been developed? What support is there to implement those strategies or plans?) 7. What results (intermediate outcomes/outcomes) do you ultimately anticipate from each activity/output to 15. What lessons have you learned from GFDRR’s engagement in [country]? which GFDRR has contributed? a. How can GFDRR’s interventions be improved in future? Prompt: Organize results by GFDRR pillar. Use intermediate outcomes and outcomes from GFDRR b. What, if anything, could be done differently to improve the positioning of GFDRR to influence effective documents. Other examples include: behavioral changes like adopting new practices or changed attitudes; DRM? Are there any changes of approach or procedure that might help GFDRR to be more effective? or systemic changes like improved institutional capacity, implementation of new or revised plans or policies, 16. What would you have GFDRR focus on in [country] moving forward? Are there other areas in which GFDRR increased DRM-related investments. support could have significant impact? 8. What changes have you observed in the behavior, activities, or actions of [institution, organization, community, etc.] as a result of the activities/outputs to which GFDRR has contributed? Prompt: For example, if GFDRR contributed to a study, has the study changed the evolution or development of an existing or a new project? Or, if GFDRR helped bring stakeholders together, what effects do you observe as a result? a. What evidence can you provide of these changes?   b. Among these changes, which is the most important for improving DRM in [country]? Why? c. What future outcomes do you anticipate? What is the likelihood of achieving those? [ 52 ] ICF International ICF International [ 53 ] Protocol for key informant interviews: Host Country Governments and Other Beneficiaries Protocol for key informant interviews: Partners Date:______________________________ Name:________________________________________________________ Date:______________________________ Name:________________________________________________________ Country:___________________________ Title:__________________________________________________________ Country:___________________________ Title:__________________________________________________________ Sex: o Male o Female Organization:__________________________________________________ Sex: o Male o Female Organization:__________________________________________________ Interviewer(s):______________________________________________________________________________________ Interviewer(s):______________________________________________________________________________________ Introduction Introduction ƒƒ Inform the interviewee of the overall aim of the interview, the time allotted, and that their comments will not be ƒƒ Inform the interviewee of the overall aim of the interview, the time allotted, and that their comments will not be attributed. attributed. ƒƒ If appropriate, ask the interviewee to begin with a brief description of their engagement with GFDRR. Guiding Research Questions for Interviews 1. Were you satisfied with [the activity to which GFDRR contributed]? If not, why not? Guiding Research Questions for Interviews 2. Did [the activity to which GFDRR contributed] address a specific priority for your government [or community/ 1. Please describe what you think GFDRR does as a program. What does the program seek to achieve? country]? 2. What was GFDRR’s contribution to [larger output with partner]? 3. What changes have you observed in your [institution, organization, community, etc.] as a result of [the a. Were you satisfied with that contribution? activity to which GFDRR contributed]? b. What was GFDRR’s value added? Prompts: For example, if GFDRR contributed to a study, has the study changed the evolution or development of an existing or a new project? Or, if GFDRR helped bring stakeholders together, what 3. What results (intermediate outcomes/outcomes) do you ultimately anticipate from [the output to which effects do you observe as a result? Has GFDRR support to your [institution, organization, community, etc.] GFDRR contributed]? influenced other projects or stakeholders? If so, how? Prompt: Use intermediate outcomes and outcomes from GFDRR documents. Other examples include: a. What evidence can you provide of these changes? behavioral changes like adopting new practices or changed attitudes; or systemic changes like improved institutional capacity, implementation of new or revised plans or policies, increased DRM-related 4. Among these changes, which is the most important for improving DRM in [country]? Why? investments. a. What do you expect to be the long-term effects of [the output to which GFDRR contributed]? 4. What changes have you actually observed in the behavior, activities, or actions of [institution, organization, b. What other future outcomes do you anticipate? What is the likelihood of achieving those? community, etc.] as a result of [the output to which GFDRR contributed]? 5. [If not raised in response to Question #3] Has [the activity to which GFDRR contributed] improved the Prompt: For example, if GFDRR contributed to a study, has the study changed the evolution or development enabling environment for DRM and/or resulted in the integration of DRM into existing programs/investments? of an existing or a new project? Or, if GFDRR helped bring stakeholders together, what effects do you Why and how? Please give specific examples. observe as a result? a. Has GFDRR support helped to improve the results derived from [country’s] spending on DRM? a. What evidence can you provide of these changes? b. Has GFDRR’s influence led to securing new DRM funding (e.g., from domestic, donor, or private sector b. Among these changes, which is the most important for improving DRM in [country]? Why? sources)? c. What future outcomes do you anticipate? What is the likelihood of achieving those? 6. Were any obstacles or problems encountered in the delivery of [the output to which GFDRR contributed]? 5. [If not raised in response to Question #4] Has GFDRR contributed to activities that improved the enabling How were these addressed? environment for DRM and/or resulted in the integration of DRM into existing programs/investments? Why and 7. To date, have any people in [country] experienced increased resilience to natural hazards, as a result of [the how? Please give specific examples. activity to which GFDRR contributed]? a. Has GFDRR support helped to improve the results derived from [country’s] spending on DRM? a. If so, what evidence can you provide of these impacts? b. Has GFDRR’s influence led to securing new DRM funding (e.g., from domestic, donor, or private sector b. If not, what is the likelihood that this impact may be achieved in the future? What else needs to happen to sources)? deliver this intended impact? 6. Has GFDRR support helped to improve the results derived from [country’s] spending on DRM? c. How and to what extent will the activity’s impacts be sustained in the future? (e.g., Have strategies or a. Has GFDRR’s influence led to securing DRM funding (e.g., from domestic, donor, or private sector plans been developed? What support is there to implement those strategies or plans?) sources)? 8. What lessons have you learned from [the output to which GFDRR contributed]? How can interventions be 7. What were the reasons for success or failure in delivering the expected results? improved in future? a. What factors were helpful in achieving these results? b. What factors hindered the achievement of these results? How were obstacles or problems addressed? [ 54 ] ICF International ICF International [ 55 ] 8. Have there been any other effects as a result of this activity/output? Appendix C. Overview of GFDRR Portfolio Evaluated Prompt: For example, effects on internal World Bank operations, effects on the development of other projects, other DRM investments made or influenced, etc. Table C-1 below summarizes key information on each of the grants provided to the five countries investigated during this evaluation. 9. How effectively has GFDRR coordinated with other partners in [country] to achieve results? 10. What role has the partnership between GFDRR and the World Bank played in the achievement of results? Table C-1. Key Information on GFDRR Grants a. In your opinion, could GFDRR have made a similar contribution to results without its partnership with the World Bank? Grant Year Value Types of Activities Pillar(s) 11. To date, have any people in [country] experienced increased resilience to natural hazards, as a result of [the Bangladesh output to which GFDRR contributed]? Bangladesh Urban Earthquake Resilience Project 2012/2013– $2.8 million • Capacity building • Risk Identification a. If so, what evidence can you provide of these impacts? (BUERP) Phase I & II Ongoing • Analytical product • Risk Reduction b. If not, what is the likelihood that this impact may be achieved in the future? What else needs to happen to • Technical assistance deliver this intended impact? Coastal Embankment Improvement Project (CEIP) 2013–Ongoing $200,000 • Technical assistance • Risk Reduction Research Support c. How and to what extent will GFDRR’s impacts be sustained in the future? (e.g., have strategies or plans Support Rehabilitation in Cyclone Sidr-affected Areas 2009–2013 $3.2 million • Investments in • Resilient Recovery been developed? What support is there to implement those strategies or plans?) (ECRRP) agricultural recovery, 12. What lessons have you learned from your partnership with GFDRR in [country]? multipurpose disaster shelters, technical a. How can GFDRR’s expertise and resources be used most effectively in future? assistance b. What, if anything, could be done differently to improve the positioning of GFDRR to influence effective Climate Change and Flood Risks for Agriculture 2008–2009 $61,000 • Analytical product • Risk Identification DRM? Are there any changes of approach or procedure that might help GFDRR to be more effective? Agriculture Risk Insurance Feasibility Study 2007–2010 $125,000 • Analytical product • Financial Protection 13. What would you have GFDRR focus on in [country] moving forward? Are there other areas in which GFDRR Background Studies for Improving Bangladesh’s 2008–2010 $79,000 • Analytical product • Resilient Recovery Response and Recovery Activities in the Aftermath of support could have significant impact? Disasters Support to UK-Bangladesh Climate Change 2007–2008 $107,000 • Analytical product • Resilient Recovery Conference • Risk Reduction Capacity Building in Damage and Loss Assessment 2007–2013 $383,000 • Capacity building • Resilient Recovery (DaLA) Joint Damage, Loss, and Needs Assessment (DLNA) 2008–2010 • Analytical product • Resilient Recovery for Cyclone Sidr Eastern Caribbean (Dominica and Saint Lucia) Country Grants Hazard and Disaster Risk Assessment Framework in 2012–Ongoing $300,000 • Capacity building • Risk Identification Saint Lucia: Preparation of Vulnerability Reduction • Analytical product • Risk Reduction • Technical assistance • Financial Protection • Policy dialogue Saint Lucia Damage and Loss Assessment of 2013–2014 $50,000 • Capacity building • Resilient Recovery December 2013 Floods • Damage assessment • Analytical product Spatial data management and identification of the most 2013–Ongoing $522,000 • Capacity building • Risk Identification vulnerable schools and shelters in Dominica • Analytical product • Risk Reduction • Technical assistance St. Vincent and the Grenadines Floods and Landslides 2014 $50,000 • Capacity building • Risk Identification 2013 • Damage assessment • Analytical product Regional Grants Caribbean Risk Atlas 2009–2013 $765,000 • Analytical product • Risk Identification • Capacity building Scoping Mission and PDNA Preparation, Eastern 2010–2011 $100,000 • Damage assessment • Resilient Recovery Caribbean • Analytical product [ 56 ] ICF International ICF International [ 57 ] Grant Year Value Types of Activities Pillar(s) Appendix D. Country Results Matrices Support to Design a Climate Proofing Program for 2010–2012 $150,000 • Capacity building • Risk Identification The tables below present a matrix of achieved and potential results for each country/region. These tables are Public Infrastructure Program for Eastern Caribbean • Technical assistance • Risk Reduction part of the evidentiary base for the findings presented in the main report. Management of Slope Stability in Communities 2012–2013 $150,000 • Analytical product • Risk Identification (MoSSaiC): Handbook & Resources Publication • Risk Reduction Note that some outcomes and impacts have yet to be achieved, although the evaluation team found evidence of potential to achieve these results. These potential outcomes and impacts are shown in italics. Support and participation to the 6th Caribbean 2012 $110,000 • Capacity building • Risk Identification Conference on Comprehensive Disaster Management • Knowledge sharing • Preparedness • Risk Reduction D.1. Bangladesh Results Matrix • Financial Protection MoSSaiC Caribbean Community of Practitioners 2013–Ongoing $550,000 • Capacity building • Risk Identification • Knowledge sharing • Risk Reduction Pillar(s) Grant/Activity Outputs Intermediate Outcomes / Outcomes Impacts Strengthening Capacity in Post Disaster Needs 2012–Ongoing $373,000 • Capacity building • Resilient Recovery Risk Bangladesh • Convened six field investigations, 22 fo- • Increased understanding and awareness of earth- Potential for impacts Assessment in the Caribbean • Knowledge sharing • Preparedness Reduction; Urban cus group workshops, two high level fora, quake risk and RSLUP among key stakeholders in via the URP—this Caribbean Risk Information Programme to support the 2012–Ongoing $1.34 • Capacity building • Risk Identification Risk Earthquake four Advisory Committee meetings and Dhaka, which was previously low. investment project is Integration of DRM Strategies in Critical Sectors Million • Knowledge sharing • Risk Reduction Identification Resilience four Scientific Consortium Meetings. • Reached consensus among focus group par- anticipated to indi- Project (BUERP) • Prepared seven foundational documents ticipants on the need to act jointly to increase rectly benefit the 15.5 Ethiopia Phase I & II and several related outreach materials: resiliency to earthquake risk in Dhaka. million people living o Dhaka Profile and Earthquake Risk • Increased understanding of roles and responsibili- under the authority Ethiopia’s Disaster Risk Management Country Plan 2010–Ongoing $1.275 • Capacity building • Risk Identification Atlas (April 2014), and Earthquake Risk ties stated in the Standing Orders on Disaster of of the DNCC, DSCC, million • Analytical product • Risk Reduction in Dhaka Poster and Brochure the different actors involved in emergency pre- and Sylhet City • Technical assistance • Preparedness o Dhaka Earthquake Risk Guidebook, paredness and response (including actors outside Corporation (SCC) • Policy dialogue • Financial Protection also known as the Hazards, Vulner- the so-called DRM system). due to access to Capacity Building in Post Disaster Needs 2012–2013 $47,000 • Capacity building • Resilient Recovery ability, and Risk Assessment (HVRA) • Developed and strengthened relationships among improved emergency Assessment Guidebook (February 2014) key individuals in agencies with DRR responsibili- preparedness and o Risk-Sensitive Land Use Planning ties in Dhaka. response services. Weather Risk Management Framework using 2009–2010 $329,000 • Capacity building • Risk Identification Guidebook (February 2014), and • Raised awareness on the need for open access Weather-Based Indices • Analytical product • Preparedness RSLUP Brief to data and information through the preparation • Technical assistance • Financial Protection o Information, Education, & Communica- of the risk atlas and the creation of a GEODASH Facilitating provision of baseline vulnerability informa- 2007–2012 $344,000 • Analytical product • Risk Identification tion Action Plan (February 2014) community. tion on flood exposed communities in Ethiopia • Technical assistance o Training and Capacity Building Action • Greater availability of information about earth- • Capacity building Plan (February 2014) quake risk in Dhaka. o Legal and Institutional Arrangements • Potential for stronger institutional capacities for Implementation Support for the Ethiopia Disaster Risk 2013–Ongoing $200,000 • Technical assistance • Risk Reduction (LIA) Framework Guidebook (February DRR among key Dhaka government agencies. Management Investment Framework • Capacity building • Preparedness 2014) • Potential for greater application of risk information • Policy dialogue o Road Map for Disaster Data Sharing in public policy and investment planning. Mitigating impacts of adverse shocks on nutrition 2008–2010 $343,000 • Capacity building • Risk Identification Platform (GEODASH) (February 2014) • Investment made in risk reduction measures that and health • Analytical product • Risk Reduction • Delivered blended (i.e., combined GFDRR has helped leverage the $182 million • Technical assistance • Preparedness face-to-face and online) training course World Bank investment project, Bangladesh Urban on Risk-Sensitive Land Use Planning Resilience Project, approved on March 24, 2015. Indonesia (RSLUP). • Potential for improved performance of national/city • Developed a GEODASH platform agencies in the quality and timeliness of emer- BNPB Capacity Building 2014–Ongoing $800,000 • Capacity Building • Risk Reduction gency response. Mainstreaming DRR Phase II 2013–Ongoing $1.6 million • Capacity Building • Risk Identification Risk Coastal • Convened stakeholder workshop in in • Facilitated exchange of information on estuarine GFDRR may indi- • Technical Assistance • Preparedness Reduction Embankment Dhaka to identify the main knowledge and coastal morphology and geomorphology from rectly contribute to • Analytical Product • Financial Protection Improvement gaps for CEIP-I’s Component C3 on Long national and international experts. increased resilience Mainstreaming DRR Phase I 2007–2011 $1.2 million • Capacity Building • Risk Identification Project (CEIP) Term Monitoring, Research and Analysis • Potential for better-designed, higher-quality re to natural disasters • Technical Assistance • Risk Reduction Research of the Bangladesh Coastal Zone. search and monitoring on complex coastal system through better de- • Analytical Product • Financial Protection Support • Helped the Bangladesh Water Develop- via the improved ToR. signed future projects ment Board to develop the ToR for these • Potential to develop evidence base to inform the CEIP-I is expected Mainstreaming DRR into PNPM 2011–Ongoing $2.4 million • Capacity Building • Risk Identification research activities (Sustainable Polders design of future investments under the CEIP-I, and to provide direct • Technical Assistance • Preparedness Adapted to Coastal Dynamics). potential for sharing of lessons learned to improve protection to 760,000 • Risk Reduction coastal management more broadly; GFDRR con- people living within West Sumatra and Jambi PDNA 2009–2011 $131,000 • Analytical Product • Resilient Recovery tribution would be via improvement of the ToR. the polder boundar- Mainstreaming DRR into the World Bank’s Local 2008–2009 $50,000 • Analytical Product • Risk Reduction ies. Economic Development Project in Nias [ 58 ] ICF International ICF International [ 59 ] Pillar(s) Grant/Activity Outputs Intermediate Outcomes / Outcomes Impacts Pillar(s) Grant/Activity Outputs Intermediate Outcomes / Outcomes Impacts Resilient Support • GFDRR’s inputs to ECRRP were in the • Introduced improved crop cultivation, aquaculture GFDRR resources Resilient Support to • Prepared two background papers: (i) • Provided technical substance for the conference. Recovery Rehabilitation in form of co-financing. production and livestock rearing practices to have contributed to Recovery; UK-Bangladesh Our Vision is a Climate Resilient Bangla- • Informed the preparation of a) Bangladesh Climate Cyclone cyclone affected communities. increased resilience Risk Climate Change desh; and (ii) procedures and benefits of Change Strategy and Action Plan as well as b) the Sidr-affected • Contributed to the recovery of agriculture liveli- to natural disaster Reduction Conference establishing a Multi Donor Trust Fund for concept note for the Bangladesh Climate Change Areas (ECRRP) hoods for cyclone affected populations as a result for cyclone affected Bangladesh, for a high-level conference Resilience Fund. of Component A outputs, although it is not pos- populations. on the impacts of climate change in Ban- sible to characterize the extent of this contribution. gladesh hosted by the United Kingdom • Fully funded the improvement of 33 existing Department for International Development cyclone shelters in Bagerhat and Barisal districts in London and partially funded the improvement of 20 exist- Resilient Capacity • Delivered training guidelines and a four- • Limited evidence available regarding any ing shelters and 10 killas in Barguna and Bhola Recovery Building in day training on DaLA. capacity-building outcomes associated with the districts. Damage and delivery of this training. • Potential to improve current approach to shelter Loss • Exposure of government staff to DaLA may have construction as a result of introducing multipur- Assessment generated support for the formation of the Disaster pose buildings. (DaLA) Needs Assessment Cell, which was established • Potential for contributing to reduced risk to cyclone within the Department of Disaster Management affected population due to improved cyclone and supported by ECRRP. shelters. Resilient Joint Damage, • Led the implementation of a compre- • Contributed to greater availability of information May have contrib- Risk Climate Change • Delivered the report “Hydrological Model- • Limited evidence suggests this report informed the Recovery Loss, and Needs hensive assessment of socio-economic about needs and quantified financial requirements uted to increased Identification and Flood Risks ling for the Implication of Climate Change agricultural adaptation options under ECRRP. Assessment impact and recovery and reconstruction for DRM. resilience to natural for Agriculture on Food Security of Bangladesh: A Menu (DLNA) for needs following the 2007 Cyclone Sidr. • Analysis of the damage and loss assessment disasters as a result of Adaptation Responses.” Cyclone Sidr • Delivered the DLNA report. informed the government strategy and policy, of building disaster Financial Agriculture Risk • Delivered report which investigated the vi- • Outcomes were not achieved due to lack of follow as well as donor strategy, including World Bank resilience into the Protection Insurance ability of agricultural insurance in Bangla- up funding and the resulting discontinued engage- country and sector strategies. recovery process, or Feasibility Study desh, particularly for small and marginal ment with the GoB. • Analysis of the damage and loss assessment strengthened disaster farmers, and presented a set of options informed and influenced the preparation of new recovery planning in for the future development of agricultural government and donor development financing. Bangladesh. insurance in the country. • Helped leverage and influence financing for resil- Resilient Background • Prepared background papers and • Limited evidence is available regarding the results ient recovery, including more than $1,234 million in Recovery Studies for guidelines: (i) Improving Bangladesh’s of this grant. The grant was dropped, and not all World Bank programs. Improving Response and Recovery Activities in the outputs were finalized, suggesting limited potential Bangladesh’s Aftermath of Disasters: An Institutional for follow-on effects. Response Assessment; (ii) Improving Bangladesh’s and Recovery Response and Recovery Activities in Activities in the the Aftermath of Disasters: Review of Aftermath of Administrative Systems; (iii) Evaluation of Disasters Safety Net Programs for the Disaster Af- fected People; and (iv) Bangladesh: Local Government Disaster Management-Social Safety Nets (DM-SSNs) Handbook. Not all outputs were finalized. [ 60 ] ICF International ICF International [ 61 ] D.2. Eastern Caribbean Results Matrix Pillar(s) Grant / Activity Outputs Intermediate Outcomes/Outcomes Impacts Pillar(s) Grant / Activity Outputs Intermediate Outcomes/Outcomes Impacts Risk Identification Hazard and Disaster • Developed a hazard information database; • Limited evidence on outcomes as- Potential for indi- Risk Identification Spatial data • Incorporated vulnerability into the annual shelter • Raised awareness on open source • Potential to Risk Reduction Risk Assessment the evaluation was not able to find evidence of sociated with the hazard information rect impacts if a Risk Reduction management and assessment process­ —including questionnaires, information sharing platforms and their increase Financial Framework in Saint delivery of related outputs described the grant database. better-designed identification of the data collection and storage tools, field guides, use. resilience to Protection Lucia: Preparation of proposal. • Increased capacity of enumerators to CAFF enables most vulnerable and an inventory. • Increased capacity of representatives natural disas- Vulnerability Reduc- • Developed a specialized survey administered develop and carry out surveys. citizens of Saint schools and shelters • Provided technical assistance and capacity within the Government of Dominica to ters as a result tion to 1,500 households and field manual relation • Potential for strengthening adaptation Lucia to better in Dominica building for the development of a new amenity collect, harmonize, store, and share of improved to climate change adaptation, in support of the financing through a better-designed access adapta- component, which included an updated pre- geospatial data. information design of the CAF. CAFF. tion funding. assessment form and revised database to store • Supported the development of an infor- and decision- • Designed a survey and field manual on the • Potential for pre-emptive DRM decision- the pre-assessment information, as well as mation sharing policy within Dominica. making. structural assessment of households. making through raising awareness development of a revised methodology for con- • Potential for increasing the capacity • Potential to • Provided capacity building associated with around the infrastructure-related costs ducting the structural assessment of shelters. within Dominica to use geo-spatial increase resil- development, implementation, and analysis of of a disaster. • Developed a multi-criteria assessment meth- information in decision-making related ience to natu- the surveys. • Potential to incorporate questions on odology for prioritizing shelters for vulnerability to DRR. ral disasters climate change into the census to track reduction. • Potential for improved generation and as a result of changes over time. • Developed building standards. communication of disaster risk informa- more resilient • Provided workshops and trainings to build tion via Dominode (Risk Identification). shelters. Resilient Saint Lucia Damage • Prepared a Joint Rapid Damage and Needs • JRDNA recommendations helped the Potential to capacity. • Potential for greater application of risk Recovery and Loss Assess- Assessment. GoSL push forward certain prioritized increase resilient • Provided training for and partial development of information in public policy and invest- ment of December • Trained 33 participants on Damage, Loss, and activities. recovery as a spatial data infrastructure. ment planning (Risk Identification). 2013 Floods Needs Assessment methodology (DLNA). • JRDNA used to leverage emergency result of funds • Delivered initial capacity building on use and • Revised and streamlined the approach • Prepared an assessment of the hydrometeoro- response resources ($17 million) from for priorities sharing of spatial data management platforms. for seasonal assessment of shelters logical and geotechnical characteristics of the the World Bank’s Crisis Response identified in the • Undertook policy dialogue with GoD to develop to better account for vulnerability and storm. Window. JRDNA. a data usage and sharing policy. increased capacity of Government of • Communicated short- and long-term rec- • Some recommendations included in Dominica to use the approach. ommendations for recovery and improved the JRDNA are now funded under the • Facilitated exchange of knowledge re- resilience to the Government of Saint Lucia and DVRP. lated to building standards for shelters. technical experts within ministries. • Increased the capacity of the Govern- ment of Dominica to design resilient shelters. • Improved generation and communica- tion of disaster risk/vulnerability informa- tion for shelters (Risk Identification). • Potential for increased application of risk information in public policy and investment planning for shelters (Risk Identification). • Potential for shelters to be made safer through retrofitting or resilient construc- tion (Risk Reduction). [ 62 ] ICF International ICF International [ 63 ] D.3. Ethiopia Results Matrix Pillar(s) Grant / Activity Outputs Intermediate Outcomes/Outcomes Impacts Pillar Grant / Activity Outputs Intermediate Outcomes/Outcomes Impacts Resilient Scoping Mission and • Contributed a preliminary assessment of dam- • Preparation of PDNA informed the post- Potential to Risk identification Ethiopia Disaster Risk • Developed 35 WDRPs. • Increased capacity of government Potential for Recovery PDNA Preparation, ages and needs for 2010 Hurricane Tomas in disaster recovery project. increase resil- Management Country • Created posters of key themes tailored to officials at multiple levels to collect infor- increased Eastern Caribbean Saint Lucia. iency through Plan / Woreda Disaster each woreda. mation on disaster risk and vulnerability, resilience to • Provided a report reviewing the World Bank post-disaster Risk Profiling • Compiled a digital library of all documents. use it in DRM activities, and monitor natural disasters financed DRM projects in the aftermath of Hur- recovery project. • Developed a searchable web-based interac- changes in risk over time. through more ricane Tomas. tive database of all woreda profiles including • Facilitated awareness raising and comprehensive all raw information hazards, disasters, risks, stakeholder involvement of vulnerabili- risk informa- Risk Identification Management of • Provided resources for World Bank publication • Potential to contribute to increased dis- humanitarian responses, coping mechanisms ties and risk through data collection. Risk Reduction Slope Stability in of the MoSSaiC Handbook. semination and capacity building using tion and more and contingency plans. • Informed use of non-Bank and Govern- Communities MoSSaiC methodology, via a comple- informed deci- • Created GIS maps of key indicators based on ment of Ethiopia resources for the (MoSSaiC): Hand- mentary grant. sion-making. profiles. development of additional WDRP book and Resources • Trained regional and federal staff in data col- • Improved generation and communica- Publication lection, analysis, and management. tion of disaster risk/vulnerability informa- Risk Identification Support and • Supported the participation of stakeholders • No evidence. tion (Risk Identification). • Potential for increased application of Preparedness participation to the working on physical planning. risk/vulnerability information in public Risk Reduction 6th Caribbean • Contributed to a conference session focused on policy and investment planning (Risk Financial Conference on donor coordination and outreach. Information). Protection Comprehensive Disaster Risk Reduction Ethiopia Disaster Risk • Developed contingency plans for 35 woredas. • Increased capacity of government Potential for Management Preparedness Management Country • Developed Disaster Risk Mitigation/Adaptation officials at multiple levels to develop increased Financial Plan / Contingency and Plans for 35 woredas. contingency scenarios and identify and resilience to Risk Identification MoSSaiC Caribbean • Expected to support a training course for ~30 • Created posters of key themes tailored to prioritize DRM measures. Protection DRM Planning natural disasters Risk Reduction Community of participants from 6 countries in the MoSSaiC each woreda. • Strengthened the ability for govern- through local Practitioners methodology that will be repeated on three • Developed training manual for development ment officials to respond to a disaster contingency occasions. of Contingency Plans and DRM/Adaptation effectively and efficiently through clearly planning and Resilient Strengthening • Expected to facilitate PDNA workshops for Plans. defined roles and responsibilities. implementation Recovery Capacity in Post English speaking Caribbean countries. • Conducted training workshops for capacity • Facilitated awareness raising and of DRM plans. building. stakeholder involvement through Preparedness Disaster Needs development of contingency plans and Assessment in the DRM plans. Caribbean • Informed the PSNP IV through develop- Risk Identification Caribbean Risk • Developed methodological framework for the • Built ownership and buy-in through con- ment of contingency fund and public Risk Reduction Information generation and application of landslide and tinued engagement and capacity build- works project. Programme to flood hazard maps for use in decision-making. ing over the course of the program. • Potential for investments to be made in support the Inte- • Developed case studies on landslides and • Created a sense of empowerment and risk reduction measures (Risk Reduc- gration of DRM floods using the methodological framework—in- enthusiasm among CHaRIM par- tion). Strategies in Critical cluding field work, studies, and hazard maps. ticipants, which has a potential to help • Potential for improved performance of Sectors • Developed an on-line handbook containing facilitate longer-term impacts. national or woreda-level agencies in the resources and tools for stakeholders to use in • Stakeholders adopted hazard maps quality and timeliness of emergency decision-making. developed under this project. response options (Preparedness). • Potential for improved financial protec- • Provided capacity building in application of the • Increased regional knowledge sharing. tion against disaster through contin- methodological framework through workshops, Informants reported that CHaRIM par- gency mechanisms under the PSNP training, and technical assistance. ticipants have started to communicate (Financial Protection). outside of the workshops to support one another in their day-to-day work. Risk Identification Ethiopia Disaster Risk • Implemented Woreda-net (a satellite-based • Strengthened capacity of government Potential for • Potential to increase risk identification Preparedness Management Country network with the primary objective to provide officials to disseminate and com- increased and integrate risk consideration into Plan / Regional Con- IT services, database, Internet connection, municate disaster risk/vulnerability resilience to development decision-making. nectivity Implementa- voice service, video conferencing) in 35 wore- information. natural disasters tion das and three strategic warehouses. • Informed and improved government through local • Deployed Woreda-net supporting systems, strategy/process for disseminating and contingency software, and tools. communicating disaster risk/vulnerabil- planning and • Conducted training workshops for capacity ity improved. implementation building. • Strengthened the ability for government of DRM plans. • Conducted field work assessments. officials to respond to a disaster effec- tively and efficiently through improved communication system. • Improved generation and communica- tion of disaster risk/vulnerability informa- tion (Risk Identification). • Potential for improved performance of national or woreda-level agencies in the quality and timeliness of emergency response options (Preparedness). [ 64 ] ICF International ICF International [ 65 ] D.4. Indonesia Results Matrix Pillar Grant / Activity Outputs Intermediate Outcomes/Outcomes Impacts Pillar Grant / Activity GFDRR Outputs Intermediate Outcomes/Outcomes Impacts Resilient Capacity Building in • Developed a curriculum and training module • Disseminated best practices with Risk Reduction BNPB Capacity • Facilitated partnership with World Bank LLI to • Innovative approach developed for Potential for Recovery Post Disaster Needs for PDNA training—including HRBA, DaLA, participants. Resilient Building support request from GoI. knowledge management for DRM. increased Assessment and Recovery. Reconstruction, and Risk • Limited evidence of capacity-building Recovery • Held consultations with high-level BNPB of- • Potential for systematization of Indo- resilience to Reduction needs assessment. effects. ficials to develop a medium-term road map for nesia’s training approach for DRM and natural disasters • Conducted training and field application on • Potential for the GoE to inform policy DRM knowledge sharing. for systematization of disaster recovery through risk PDNA for 66 participants. and strategy to respond to disasters. • Contributed to drafting guidelines, templates experiences into knowledge products. reduction and • Prepared training proceedings report. and 10 samples for capturing and packaging • Potential for stronger institutional capaci- quicker resilient Preparedness Ethiopia: Weather Risk • Conducted training sessions for over 100 GoE • Developed new innovative approaches Increased DRM knowledge. ties for DRR at the local level, contingent disaster recov- Management Frame- staff at national and regional levels. to forecasting and applications for the accuracy and on successful delivery and scaling up of ery. work using Weather- • Conducted two overseas study tours for 14 GoE’s early warning system. timeliness of the trainings for BPBDs. Based Indices participants on early warning systems. • Facilitated exchange of best practices early warning • Potential for institutionalizing a merit • Further developed applications of the LEAP with clients on the use of early warning information re- system to support the development model through a pastoralist index, flood index, information and systems. lated to drought. of staff on the “technical track,” if the output for belg season and meher season, • Strengthened the capacity of the GoE knowledge management system is suc- LEAP-HEA interface tool. and development partners to use LEAP Potential for cessfully institutionalized in this way. • Funded installation of 10 weather stations. forecasting tools and methods. • Potential for avoided creation of new increased per- • Stimulated debate among partners risks and reduction of existing risks formance of the about the benefits of using science- through successful training at the local GoE in trigger- based, predictive tools. ing emergency level. • Helped to make decisions related to response measures and distribution resources. Risk Identification Mainstreaming DRR / • Prepared analytical studies to support the • Contributed to the integration of DRR of resources more transparent and Risk Reduction support to prepare the preparation of the NAP-DRR 2010–2012 into the Medium-Term Development objective – including triggering of the NAP-DRR (National Risk Assessment Study, and Back- Plan 2010–2014. contingency fund in the PSNP. ground Study on Opportunities and Chal- • Informed GOI’s annual DRR work plan Risk Identification Facilitating provision of • No evidence found. lenges in Consolidating Indonesian Planning 2010-12 by identifying priority invest- baseline vulnerability Processes related to Disaster Risk Reduction). ments. information on flood • Conducted workshops and training activities • Risk Assessment Study also informed exposed communities between GFDRR, UNDP SCDRR, BNPB, and the National Disaster Management Plan. in Ethiopia BAPPENAS on how to integrate the NAP-DRR within the Medium-Term Development Plan. Risk Reduction Implementation Sup- • Provided support to the GoE in development • Limited evidence available. Potential for • Supported a facilitator to coordinate the NAP- port for the Ethiopia of the draft DRM-SPIF. • Potential to inform future World Bank GoE to imple- DRR formulation. Disaster Risk Man- • Assisting in operationalizing the DRM-SPIF engagement on DRM in Ethiopia ment and op- agement Investment through participation in working groups and through collaborative process with GoE. erationalize new Risk Identification Mainstreaming DRR / • GFDRR focal point participated in project • Ministry of Public Works funded a study Potential for Framework development of engagement note. • Potential to increase the capacity of DRM policies in Risk Reduction mainstreaming DRR missions and provided technical advice to with its own resources to do a stocktak- increased • Conducted south-to-south knowledge ex- GoE to implement and operationalize order to address into World Bank invest- improve the DRR content of the community ing of road segments prone to disaster, resilience to change on legal frameworks for risk manage- the DRM-SPIF. disaster risk. ments settlement plan process. based on maintenance records and natural hazards ment. • GFDRR focal point provided expert consulta- hazard maps. associated with Risk Identification Mitigating impacts of • International consultants provided technical • Strengthened the capacity of the GoE Potential for tion to WINRIP World Bank project team and • Potential for influencing technical speci- implementation Risk Reduction adverse shocks on inputs to develop a NIS connected to EWS. to design and implement health moni- investments to the Ministry of Public Works on the inclusion fications for high-risk areas in transport of risk mitigation Preparedness nutrition and health • Consulted in the design and implementation of toring programs connected to EWS. be made in pre- of a component that provides technical as- sector. measures in pilot project. • Enhanced the capacity of Ethiopia’s paredness and sistance and capacity-building support to public roads. • Prepared study on local ready-to-use thera- EWS to capture health information, risk reduction strengthen disaster risk mitigation in the roads peutic food. which ultimately helps to improve measures. section. The project now also includes a com- • External consultants supported community- the timing and targeting or preven- ponent that serves as a contingency for DRR. based child growth monitoring. tion, preparedness, and response to Risk Reduction Mainstreaming DRR / • Seconded a STTA (liaison staff) to BNPB. • Contributed to operationalizing the new malnutrition. Preparedness just-in-time support to national DRM agency. • Informed GoE and other partners on operationalize BNPB new and innovative ways to respond to food shortages. Resilient Mainstreaming DRR / • Developed a curriculum and training module • The training module developed by GF- Potential for • Improved the generation and collection Recovery DaLA training for DaLA (2009). DRR has now been fully institutionalized increased resil- of malnutrition information and in- • Conducted TOT, and then second TOT by in Indonesia’s national training center, ience to natural creased its application within Ethiopia’s Indonesia master trainers. Pusdiklat. disasters. EWS. • Strengthened capacities for conducting DaLA among national and local stake- holders; DaLA can now be conducted without external support. • Potential for quicker resilient and sus- tainable disaster recovery. [ 66 ] ICF International ICF International [ 67 ] Pillar Grant / Activity GFDRR Outputs Intermediate Outcomes/Outcomes Impacts Pillar Grant / Activity GFDRR Outputs Intermediate Outcomes/Outcomes Impacts Financial Mainstreaming DRR / • Prepared a study titled “Indonesia: Advancing • Strengthened policy dialogue with na- Potential for Mainstreaming DRR / • GFDRR technical staff (in the Innovations Lab) • Helped engage technical experts, local Potential to in- Protection disaster risk financing a National Disaster Risk Financing Strategy­ — tional government on DRFI and BNPB. increased resil- InaSAFE contributed to the development of InaSAFE, governments and communities, and crease resilience and insurance Options for Consideration” (2011). • Potential for strengthened financial and ience to natural a free and open source software tool that aided in advancing their understand- to natural disas- • Consulted with Ministry of Finance and BNPB response capacity of government and disasters produces outputs that could be useful for ing on the potential impact of disasters ters as a result regarding financial protection options. private sector. contingency planning. by presenting hazard and exposure of improved Resilient Mainstreaming DRR • Funded three short-term consultants (STC) • Contributed to the incorporation of a Potential for • Facilitated engagement with BNPB and other information in a useful way. efficiency for re- Recovery / support for Mount that provided expert advice to Rekompak livelihoods and eco-settlement consid- increased resil- relevant government agencies. • Raised awareness on open sources in- source allocation Merapi reconstruction related to the livelihood component of the erations into Indonesia’s broader recon- ience to natural • GFDRR resources funded a full position for formation and open data, and their use. in contingency reconstruction and rehabilitation and helped struction and rehabilitation approach. disasters. software development. • Fostered the use of innovative free and planning and train Rekompak community resilience facilita- • Potential for more sustainable disaster open source software tools to support disaster re- tors for 16 huntap on livelihood strategies. recovery in future. contingency planning and other DRR sponse, but the • Funded an STC that provided expert advice • Nine of the 10 demonstration plots are activities at the local level. tool hasn’t been on 10 demonstration plots for ecosystem meeting the daily demand of the people • Facilitated exchange of knowledge and used for that restoration. who own them and providing market experiences in the use InaSAFE, mainly purpose yet. value of crops grown. as a result of its replication in the Philip- pines (given the regional hub), but also Risk Identification Mainstreaming DRR / • Collaborated (through an STC) with the Min- • Increased availability of information Increased resil- in Malawi and Sri Lanka. participatory risk map- istry of Natural Resources and Energy, BPBD and awareness of disaster risks via ience for about • Improved generation and communica- ping in Yogyakarta and Yogyakarta, and village officers to develop participatory mapping in Yogyakarta 90 households tion of disaster risk information (Risk Jakarta a collaborative map that could be used for and Jakarta. in Bantul. Identification). resettling nine villages affected by Merapi • Helped engage technical experts, local • Potential for greater application of risk pyroclastic flow. governments and communities, and Potential for information in public policy and invest- • Provided TA to develop a Local Climate Re- aided in advancing their understand- increased resil- ment planning (Risk Identification). silience Action Plan for Yogyakarta; based on ing on the potential impact of disasters ience via DRR in • Potential to improve performance of the results, provided TA via a local university by presenting hazard and exposure urban neighbor- national/city agencies in the quality (UGM) to prepare the report “Technical As- information in a useful way. hoods. and timeliness of emergency response sistance for Riverfront Redevelopment Design • Potential for more efficient and effective (Preparedness). Plan in the City of Yogyakarta.” use of national urban neighborhood • Conducted participatory mapping (via an upgrading funds by integrating DRR Mainstreaming DRR • Participated in policy dialogue with the • Improved the knowledge and aware- Potential to STC) on a zoning level in 8 segments of the considerations into mapping, using par- / Safe school pilot Ministry of Education and Culture (MoEC) and ness of students, teachers, and parents influence sig- Winongo River (about 50,000 people). ticipatory and open source information program BNPB. on disaster risk and preparedness; nificant capital • Prepared a landslide hazard risk map (indicat- and data techniques, including through • Performed a rapid mapping of schools that raised awareness of some government expenditures ing red, yellow, and green areas), via an STC, an SOP for participatory mapping with showed that more than 50% of schools could officials at education offices in the pilot through the DAK in 11 villages in Bantul and explained the risks the national spatial agency. be located in districts with high risks of earth- districts. (approximately to the communities. • Piloted an innovative approach; first time quakes, volcanic eruption, and landslides. • Improved the structural and non- $150 million), if in Indonesia that a community-based • Played a convening and technical advisory structural disaster preparedness of pilot it can use the risk assessment had been conducted role for BNPB in developing Regulation of schools. pilot program and that people had been relocated Head of National Agency for Disaster Man- experiences and based on the mapping. agement (BNPB) No. 4 in 2012 (Perka BNPB its convening • 69 households in Bantul were relocated No. 4/2012) on Guideline on Implementation power at the by GoI in 2011, and 19 in 2012–13; the of Safe School/Madrasa from Disaster. national level government also conducted structural • The World Bank, with funding from GFDRR to bring about mitigation works in the yellow/green ar- and the Basic Education Capacity Building stronger policies eas; the participatory map also provided Trust Fund, developed a safe school pilot and procedures the evidence base for the Head of Dis- project to assist school-managed rehabilita- for rehabilitating trict to request the usage of communal tion projects in 180 schools in six districts and schools in high- land for relocation through permission cities in three pilot provinces. risk areas. from the Governor, through Governor’s • Developed a Practical Guideline for Making Regulation 143/1087/R.1/2011 Schools Safe from Natural Disaster for School Principals and School Committees. [ 68 ] ICF International ICF International [ 69 ] Pillar Grant / Activity GFDRR Outputs Intermediate Outcomes/Outcomes Impacts Appendix E. Analysis of Leverage and Influence Risk Identification Mainstreaming DRR • Guidelines and training modules for communi- • Increased understanding of need for Potential for This appendix summarizes observed instances of leverage and influence by country, as the evidence base for Preparedness into PNPM Urban III ty-based DRR, uploaded to the project web- disaster risk preparedness and reduc- improved resil- the leverage and influence analysis. Risk Reduction site (www.p2kp.org). tion among PNPM facilitators. ience to natural • Mainstreamed DRR into the comprehensive • Potential for strengthened disaster pre- disasters, es- training for more than 7,000 PNPM facilitators paredness and risk reduction at-scale, if pecially in pilot Table E-1. Evidence of Leverage (US$ Millions) through a TOT approach. PNPM facilitators successfully apply the kelurahans. C G • Provided grant of IDR 500 million (roughly guidelines and their training at the com- World Bank Financing GFDRR Grant Value Total Project Cost DRM Component $38,000) to 16 kelurahans in four cities to munity level to integrate DRM planning prepare a community DRR action plan and into community development plans. Leveraged What enabling factors Country implement some of the measures. • Increased awareness of disaster risks in GFDRR How did GFDRR leverage Project(s) or T D W contributed to the pilot kelurahans. Grant these resources? Activities leveraging? • Strengthened capacity for disaster preparedness in pilot kelurahans. • Strengthened linkages between local communities and the local agencies for EWS in some pilot kelurahans. Technical Assistance that Directly Leads to a World Bank Investment Project • Risk reduction measures funded in Bangladesh B 2.8 Urban Resil- 182 182 173 Through BUERP, GFDRR engaged all rel- • Proximity of GFDRR to World Bangladesh some pilot kelurahans (e.g., retention Urban Earth- ience Project evant actors for urban resilience in Dhaka Bank operations wall, drainage improvements). quake Resil- (URP) and conducted analytical work that helped • GFDRR’s flexibility and abil- • Potential for strengthened response to ience Project inform the design of the now-approved ity to manage institutional disasters, especially in pilot kelurahans. (BUERP) URP by the World Bank and the GoB. complexity, including the Resilient West Sumatra and • Provided financial support for conducting • PDNA used as the basis for the Reha- Phase I & II GFDRR’s technical assistance helped the engagement with non-tradi- Recovery Jambi PDNA West Sumatra and Jambi Natural Disasters: bilitation and Reconstruction Plan. GoB realize the need and value of invest- tional clients Damage, Loss and Preliminary Needs As- • Strengthened capacity of BNPB to ing in urban resilience, as evidenced by • Strong support from stake- sessment (2009). conduct DaLA. the GoB’s $9 million pledged co-financing holders and high level politi- to URP. cal buy-in Risk Reduction Mainstreaming DRR • Prepared DRM Strategy for the LEPD (2009). • DRM strategy was incorporated into the Contributed into the World Bank’s design of LEDP in Nias. to increasing Contributions to Post-disaster Needs Assessments Local Economic Devel- • LEDP project training local and pro- resilience to Joint DLNA for B 0.4 RMIP-I, 1,610 1,610 1,534 The joint DLNA identified (i) the need for • High quality technical Bangladesh opment Project in Nias vincial governments and beneficiaries natural disasters Cyclone Sidr ECRRP, CEIP- new construction and improvement of expertise on how to integrate disaster resilience for project ben- I, Multipurpose existing multi-purpose shelters, which the • Proximity of GFDRR to World measures (including terracing and eficiaries. Disaster Shel- World Bank then financed through ECRRP Bank operations drainage to protect against landslides, ters Project and the Multipurpose Disaster Shelters and cleaning irrigation channels to Project; and (ii) the need for a river bank mitigate flooding in rice fields). improvement project which was also financed through the RMIP. Saint Lucia S 0.05 Disaster Vul- 68 68 41 A number of recommendations in the • High quality technical exper- Saint Lucia Damage nerability Re- DLNA influenced those funded in the cur- tise provided by GFDRR staff and Loss duction Project rent DVRP Program. DVRP also included • Strong support from stake- Assessment (DRVP) a $17 million Crisis Response Window IDA holders, including donors, of December Credit. and high level political buy-in 2013 Floods West Sumatra I 0.13 Not The PDNA was used as the basis for • High quality technical Indonesia and Jambi quan- the formulation of the Rehabilitation and expertise PDNA tified Reconstruction Plan. • Existing relationship with BNPB Local Scale Leverage Mainstreaming I 2.8 In-kind contri- Not In Bantul, the local government spent its • Successful demonstration of Indonesia DRR Phase butions; local quan- own resources to do structural mitigation the value of GFDRR’s pilot I & II government tified works as a result of GFDRR’s landslide risk intervention funds assessment. Some communities and busi- • Community awareness of nesses made in-kind contributions, in the disaster risk increased form of materials, land, or labor, to supple- ment GFDRR funding for safe schools and for community disaster risk action plans. [ 70 ] ICF International ICF International [ 71 ] Table E-2. Evidence of Influence (US$ Millions) C G C G World Bank Financing World Bank Financing GFDRR Grant Value GFDRR Grant Value Total Project Cost Total Project Cost DRM Component DRM Component Leveraged What enabling factors Resources What enabling factors Country Country GFDRR How did GFDRR leverage GFDRR How did GFDRR influence Project(s) or T D W contributed to the or Activities T D W contributed to the Grant these resources? Grant these resources? Activities leveraging? Influenced influencing? World Bank Projects with DRM Components Influenced Coastal 0.2 Coastal 400 400 375 GFDRR contributed to the improvement of • Proximity of GFDRR to World Bangladesh Mainstream- 0.05 Aceh-Nias 8.2 - 8.2 A DRM strategy for the LEPD funded by • Proximity of GFDRR to World Embankment Embankment the ToR guiding long-term research and Bank operations Indonesia ing DRR into Livelihoods GFDRR informed/influenced the project Bank operations Improvement Improvement monitoring, which will be carried out along- • High quality technical the World and Economic design. During implementation, local and • High quality technical exper- Project (CEIP) Project - Phase side the implementation of the CEIP-I, and expertise Bank’s Local Development provincial government and beneficiaries tise provided by GFDRR staff Research Sup- I (CEIP-I) will directly inform the design of $300 mil- Economic Program received training on how to integrate disas- • Strong support from stake- port lion of investments under the project. Development (LEDP) ter resilience measures. These measures holders Country Government Financing Influenced Project in Nias increased food security, mitigated against future disasters, and increased resilience. Mainstreaming 2.8 National level Not qualified GFDRR contributed to the NAP-DRR, • Strong relationship with Indonesia DRR Phase DRM resource which was an input to country’s medium- national ministries, including Mainstreaming 2.8 Commu- 61 61 60 The GFDRR focal point participated in • Proximity of GFDRR to World I & II allocation term development plan and influenced BNPB Indonesia DRR Phase nity- Based project missions and provided training to Bank operations government DRM allocation from 2010–14. • Proof-of-concept approach I & II Settlement improve the DRR content of the community • High quality technical exper- Rehabilitation settlement plan (CSP) process. GFDRR tise provided by GFDRR staff GFDRR piloted an approach for liveli- for Yogyakarta identified CSP good practices for DRR and • Strong support from stake- provided special assistance to learning hood restoration and eco-settlement after holders the eruption of Mount Merapi that led to villages as models that later informed community-based DRR investment under the incorporation of these concepts into the PNPM. Indonesia’s broader reconstruction and rehabilitation approach, which should Western 350 1 250 The GFDRR focal point provided expert • Proximity of GFDRR to World influence resource allocation for future Indonesia Na- consultation to the World Bank project Bank operations post-disaster recovery. tional Roads team and the Ministry of Public Works on • High quality technical exper- Improvement the inclusion of a component that provides tise provided by GFDRR staff Local level Not quantified GFDRR contributed to participatory risk • Connecting technical assis- Project (WIN- technical assistance and capacity-building DRM resource mapping activities in Jakarta that enabled tance to mandatory govern- RIP) support to strengthen disaster risk mitiga- allocation the local disaster risk agency (BPBD DKI) ment activities tion in the roads section. The project now to use their budget more effectively. Before also includes a component that serves as the mapping, BPDB DKI allocated their a contingency for DRR. logistics and human resources evenly Third National 217 - 150 GFDRR provided co-financing for the proj- • High quality technical exper- across villages, because they could not Program for ect in the form of grants to 16 pilot kelura- tise provided by GFDRR staff see risk at a finer resolution. Community hans in four cities to prepare and partially • Proximity of GFDRR to World Other Instances of Influence Empowerment implement community disaster risk action Bank operations plans. GFDRR also funded guidelines and Support to 0.1 Bangladesh 188 188 - The preparation of analytical products • High level political buy-in Bangladesh in Urban Areas • Strong support from stake- training for PNPM community facilitators on UK-Bangla- Climate provided technical substance for the • High quality technical Project (PNPM- holders and political buy-in DRM. A provisional zero dollar compo- desh Climate Change Re- conference. These products also fed into expertise Urban III) nent was added in coordination with the Change silience Fund the preparation of (i) Bangladesh Climate • Proximity of GFDRR to World multi-donor Callable Fund under GFDRR’s Conference (BCCRF) Change Strategy and Action Plan; (ii) Bank operations Track 3. UK-Bangladesh Communique on Climate Spatial data 0.522 Disaster 38 38 17 GFDRR support for spatial data manage- • Proximity of GFDRR to World Change whereby the UK committed 75 Dominica management Vulnerability ment and sharing platform and a shelter Bank operations million pounds to a multi donor trust fund and identifica- Reduction Pro- vulnerability assessment helped to inform • GFDRR support for post- (later known as BCCRF) and (iii) the con- tion of the most gram (DVRP) development of the DVRP. disaster assessment cept note for BCCRF. vulnerable Bangladesh 2.8 Coordination NA NA NA Through partnership on urban resilience • Regular communication Bangladesh schools and Urban Earth- with JICA between the World Bank, GFDRR, and between partners shelters in Dominica quake Resil- on urban JICA. • Identification of strengths and ience Project resilience comparative advantages Ethiopia’s 1.275 Productive 2,616 32 600 PSNP IV allocated a portion of their funds • GFDRR grant was managed Ethiopia (BUERP) investments Disaster Risk Safety Net for DRM focused activities. GFDRR’s by the World Bank TTL for Phase I & II Management Program IV contribution is through supporting strategic PSNP Country Plan (PSNP IV) initiatives that advance a specific activity • Political buy-in. or test a concept that can help push the • High quality technical exper- DRM policy dialogue forward. Used in tise provided by GFDRR staff this way, GFDRR grants have significantly to enhance the LEAP model informed the design of the PSNP and altered the World Bank’s relationship with the government. [ 72 ] ICF International ICF International [ 73 ] Appendix F. Intermediate Outcome Mapping Intermediate Indicators Related Intermediate Outcomes Observed Outcomes Table F-1 below presents the mapping of qualitative intermediate outcomes identified through interviews and desk review against the intermediate outcome indicators provided to the ICF evaluation team in Annex 2 of the Design capacity ToR for this evaluation. strengthened • Increased understanding • Increased capacity of • Increased capacity of • Potential for systematizing Note that some intermediate outcomes have yet to be achieved, although the evaluation team found evidence of of roles and responsibili- representatives within government officials at Indonesia’s training approach potential to achieve these results. These potential intermediate outcomes are shown in italics. ties stated in the Stand- the Government of multiple levels to collect for DRM ing Orders on Disaster Dominica to collect, information on disaster • Potential for institutionalizing of the different actors harmonize, store, and risk and vulnerability, use a merit system to support the Table F-1. Results of Intermediate Outcome Mapping involved in emergency share geospatial data it in DRM activities, and development of staff on the preparedness and • Potential for increas- monitor changes in risk “technical track,” if the knowl- response (including ac- ing the capacity within over time edge management system is Intermediate tors outside the so-called Dominica to use geo- • Increased capacity of successfully institutionalized Indicators Related Intermediate Outcomes Observed Outcomes DRM system) spatial information in government officials in this way • Potential for stronger decision-making related at multiple levels to • Potential for stronger insti- institutional capacities for to DRR develop contingency tutional capacities for DRR Bangladesh Eastern Caribbean Ethiopia Indonesia DRR among key Dhaka • Revised and stream- scenarios and iden- at the local level, contingent • Increased understanding • Raised awareness on • Facilitated awareness • Increased availability of government agencies lined the approach for tify and prioritize DRM on successful delivery and and awareness of earth- open source information raising and stakeholder information and awareness of seasonal assessment measures scaling up of the trainings for quake risk and RSLUP sharing platforms and involvement of vulner- disaster risks via participatory of shelters to better • Strengthened the ability BPBDs among key stakeholders their use in Dominica abilities and risk through mapping in Yogyakarta and account for vulner- for government officials • Improved operational capacity in Dhaka, which was • Facilitated exchange of data collection Jakarta ability and increased to respond to a disaster of BNPB through seconded Implementation previously low knowledge related to • Facilitated awareness • Raised awareness in local Client capacity capacity of Government effectively and efficiently staff capacity • Raised awareness on the building standards for raising and stakeholder and national disaster risk increased of Dominica to use the through clearly defined • Strengthened capacities for strengthened approach roles and responsibilities conducting DaLA among na- need for open access shelters in Dominica involvement through agencies around the benefits to data and information • Greater availability of development of contin- of open source information • Increased the capacity and improved communi- tional and local stakeholders; through the preparation information about land- gency plans and DRM as a means of achieving DRR of the Government of cation system DaLA can now be conducted of the risk atlas and the slide and flood hazards plans objectives (in Jakarta) Dominica to design • Strengthened capacity without external support, and creation of a GEODASH • Informed and improved • Helped engage technical ex- resilient shelters and of government officials training module developed by community government strategy/ perts, local governments and identify and retrofit to disseminate and com- GFDRR has now been fully • Greater availability of process for disseminat- communities, and aided in vulnerable shelters municate disaster risk/ institutionalized in Indone- Facilitated information about earth- ing and communicating advancing their understand- vulnerability information sia’s national training center, exchange of quake risk in Dhaka disaster risk/vulnerability ing on the potential impact of • Enhanced capac- Pusdiklat • Facilitated exchange of improved disasters by presenting haz- ity of Ethiopia’s EWS to • Strengthened disaster best practice w/ information on estuarine • Demonstrated the ard and exposure information capture early signals of preparedness in pilot PNPM clients and coastal morphology value of the LEAP tool for in a useful way disaster through health kelurahans and geomorphology data-informed decision- • In pilot schools, improved the information • Strengthened linkages be- from national and inter- making knowledge and awareness tween local communities and Knowledge national experts of students, teachers and the local agencies for EWS in • Joint DLNA contributed parents on disaster risk and some pilot PNPM kelurahans deepened to greater availability of preparedness; delivered new M&E capacity information about needs knowledge on structural and increased and quantified financial non-structural aspects requirements for DRM • In pilot PNPM kelurahans, increased understanding of the hazards and vulnerabilities among their residents, as well as strengthened prepared- ness Facilitated exchange of best practice w/ partners Disseminated • Facilitated exchange of best practices knowledge and experiences in the use InaSAFE, mainly as a result of its replication in the Philippines (given the regional hub), but also in Malawi and Sri Lanka [ 74 ] ICF International ICF International [ 75 ] Intermediate Intermediate Indicators Related Intermediate Outcomes Observed Indicators Related Intermediate Outcomes Observed Outcomes Outcomes Innovative New innova- • Introduced improved • Further refined, de- Government • GoB committed $9 • More efficient allocation of approaches & tive approach crop cultivation, aquacul- veloped, and tested expenditure million in cofinancing BPBD DKI Jakarta disaster solutions fostered ture production and LEAP model, which informed for the Urban Resilience response budget, based on generated livestock rearing prac- enabled the model Project, based on the GFDRR-supported participa- tices to cyclone affected to be more accurate, results of GFDRR techni- tory mapping communities operational, timely, and cal assistances • Potential to improve cur- better integrated into Policy/ strategy Government • Initiated and strength- • Supported the develop- • Contributed to the integration rent approach to shelter the government’s risk informed policy/ strategy ened policy dialogue on ment of an informa- of DRR into the Medium-Term construction as a result management framework informed DRFI tion sharing policy in Development Plan 2010-2014 of introducing multipur- (early warning) • Provided policy advice Dominica • Informed GOI’s annual DRR pose buildings on the procedures and work plan 2010-12 by identify- New innova- • Innovative approach devel- benefits of establishing a ing priority investments tive approach oped for knowledge hub for multi-donor trust fund for • Initiated and strengthened developed DRM Bangladesh (BCCRF) policy dialogue on DRFI • Innovative approach • Analysis of the Cyclone • Contributed to the incorpo- developed and utilized for Sidr DaLA informed the ration of a livelihoods and community-based landslide government strategy and eco-settlement considerations risk assessment in Bantul policy, as well as donor into Indonesia’s broader re- • Developed and encouraged strategy, including World construction and rehabilitation the use of innovative free and Bank country and sector approach open source software tool strategies • Contributed to the develop- (InaSAFE) to support con- ment of an SOP for participa- tingency planning and other tory mapping by BIG DRR activities • West Sumatra and Jambi PDNA that GFDRR supported Development Preparation of • Reached consensus • Rapid assessment of • Informed the PSNP IV • DRM components planned was used as the basis for the financing new operation among focus group damages and needs through development of for Indonesia National Urban Rehabilitation and Recon- informed informed participants on the need from St Lucia’s Decem- contingency fund and Slum Upgrading Program struction Plan to act jointly to increase ber 2013 events helped public works project, (currently in draft PCN form) resiliency to earthquake mobilize funds for and LEAP model inte- Public debate risk in Dhaka disaster recovery under gration stimulated/ initi- • Analysis of Cyclone Sidr the World Bank’s Crisis ated damages and losses Response Window Contributed • Developed and strength- • Facilitated regional • Stakeholders engaged via informed and influenced • Preparation of PDNA for to stakeholder ened relationships collaboration on the use participatory mapping in the preparation of new 2010 Hurricane Tomas involvement among key individuals of hazard information in Yogyakarta and Jakarta government and donor in St Lucia informed the in agencies with DRR spatial and infrastruc- • Stakeholders engaged via development financing post-disaster recovery responsibilities in Dhaka ture decision-making PNPM pilot kelurahan grants project and community planning and Existing opera- • Potential for better- • Developed and • Provided a DRM strategy that socialization tions informed designed, higher-quality implemented household was incorporated into the Development • See above research and monitoring surveys on climate design of LEDP in Nias on complex coastal sys- change adaptation • Advised on the inclusion of community/ part- tem under CEIP; GFDRR and structural assess- DRR components in WINRIP ner policy/ strat- contribution is improved ment that can inform • Mainstreamed DRR into egy informed ToR guiding this effort the development of PNPM-Urban; DRM now in- Bank coun- • GFDRR focal point informed a Climate Adaptation corporated into Neighborhood try strategy the DRM related components Finance Facility (DVRP) Development guidelines and informed of the World Bank’s country in St Lucia technical guidelines partnership strategy Mobilization • Coordinated with JICA • Informed use of non- • Pilot scale leverage observed Bank sec- of non-Bank regarding urban resil- Bank and Government in Safe School pilots and in tor strategy resources ience technical assis- of Ethiopia resources Bantul relocation informed informed tance and investments for the development of additional WDRP • Contributed to improving the LEAP model, after which other develop- ment partners and the Government have picked up and contin- ued the model improve- ment and expansion process [ 76 ] ICF International ICF International [ 77 ] Appendix G. List of Stakeholders Consulted Institution Name The table below lists the stakeholders consulted for this evaluation. Bangladesh Water Development Board (Project Director, CEIP) Md. Sarafat Hossain Khan Table G-1. Stakeholders Mohammed Anis Shahpar Selim Institution Name Steven Rubinyi World Bank Francis Ghesquiere Swarna Kazi Luis Tineo Winston Yu (via email) GFDRR Vica Rosario Bogaerts Maria Sarraf (via email) Jack Campbell Dominica Country Visit Niels B. Holm-Nielsen (GFDRR Regional Coordinator for Latin America and the Caribbean) Dominica Water & Sewer Company (DOWASCO) Magnus Williams World Bank Marc Forni (GFDRR Regional Coordinator for South Asia) Forestry Division: Ministry of Africulture and Fisheries Bradley Guye Jolanta Kryspin-Watson (GFDRR Regional Coordinator for ICT Department Jermaine Jean-Pierre East Asia and the Pacific) (via email) Kendell Barrie Daniel Clarke Land and Surveys Division: Ministry of Housing, Lands, and Water World Bank/GFDRR DRFI Program Nick LaRocque Olivier Mahul Resources Vivian Eugene Bangladesh Country Visit Ministry of Social Services, Community Development, and Gender Affairs John Fontaine Dan Ayliffe Don Corriette United Kingdom Department for International Development (DFID) Office of Disaster Management Helen O’Connor Mandella Christian Dr. A. Razzak Peace Corps Rebecca Sweetland Dhaka North City Corporation (DNCC) Dr. Tariq Bin Yousuf Andrea Marie PCU: Ministry of Environment and Health Kazi Hasiba Jahan Collin Guiste Dhaka South City Corporation (DSCC) Md. Sirajul Islam Physical Planning Division Lyn Baron European Commission Abdul Awal Public Works: Ministry of Public Works and Ports Kendell Johnson Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) Nur Khondaker Nicholas James Callender Md. Anisuzzaman Chowdhury World Bank Bradley Michael Lyon Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) Naoki Matsumara Zoe Elena Trohanis Rajdhani Unnayan Katripakhha (RAJUK) Abdul Latif Helaly Ethiopia Country Visit Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC) Farid Hasan Ahmed Dr. Woldehanna Kinfu Md. Khurshid Alam CordAid United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) Ton Haverkort Mohammad Sifayet Ullah DRM Consultant for the World Bank Sarah Coll-Black Comprehensive Disaster Management Programme II (CDMP II) Peter Medway Ato Mitiku Kassa Md. Abdur Rashid Khan Ato Muluneh Woldemariam Local Government Engineering Department (LGED) Mohammad Atikul Islam Mr. Tadesse Bekele Sheikh Anisur Rahman DRMFSS Mr. Tesfaye Dr. Mohammad Abdul Wazed Ministry of Disaster Management and Relief Ms. Engdawork Minass Md. Hasanuzzaman Ms. Zenith Ministry of Finance Rownaq Jahan Engr. Md. Nazrul Islam Ministry of Planning Md. Mojibur Rahman M. Kamran Jacob Save the Children Md. Mohiuddin Md. Mostak Hussain [ 78 ] ICF International ICF International [ 79 ] Institution Name Institution Name Beletu Tefera Kate Chapman Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team (HOT) Yonas Daniel Yantisa Akhadi Dejene Mebratu Focus group with Edrian Edward, approximately 4 neigh- Kelurahans Batang Harau, Bungo Pasang, Lolong Belanti, and Lubuk borhood volunteers, about 5 facilitators at the village level, DRMFSS-Emergency Coordination Centre (ECC) Almaz Daniessie Buaho Murni, SPT, and approximately 6 members of the LKM Tamrat Tsefaye Tommy Susanto Mebrat Senusi KOGAMI Patra Rina Dewi Tesfaye Cheminet Province ECHO Yohannes Regassa Doma F.P. Desta Mamo Local Agency for Disaster Management (BPBD), Yogyakarta Dwiarto S LASTA Woreda Administration Molla Tsegaye Gatot Saptadi Zelalem Berhanu Heny Hursilowait Girma Berhana LASTA Woreda Department. of Ag and Woreda-net rep. Ministry of Education Gogot Suharwoto Tatek Berheen Bhramantyo Isdijoso Ato Biarata Lelese Yalew Ministry of Finance Ministry of Health Fajar Hasri Ramadhana Birara Melese Didiet Akhdiat Adam Bailes UNICEF Ministry of Public Works Eki Arsita Fikre Negussie Ibu Mita United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) Dillip Dumar Bhanja Dody Ruswandi and two deputies USAID Jason Taylor National Agency for Disaster Management (BNPB) Pak Suhiharto Ahmed Alkadir School headmasters Mariyetmi, Sawiri, and Badrial, and Asmita Tiwari 3 additional current/former headmasters. Also met with Padang Elementary Schools teachers, facilitators, and head of neighborhood security in Bradley Lyon one village. World Bank Michel Matera PNPM Meri Amelia, SE and two other senior facilitators Ahmed Mohammed PT. Reasuransi Maipark Indonesia Prof. M.T Zen (ITB) Wolter Soer Arif Budi Wahyono Ezgimelese Tecleab Rekompak Pak Sutomo World Food Program Hakan Tongul Wiji Utomo Mr. Teshome Erkneh Rekompak; Universitas Islam Indonesia (UII) Ibu Hanin Indonesia Country Visit Ardialisman Safe School Pilot Program facilitators Sepris Yonaldi Dr. Charlotte Morgan Australia-Indonesia Facility for Disaster Reduction (AIFDR) Yuni Martini Dr. David Robinson Dr. Trias Adhitya Pak Kuswiyanto Universitas Gadjah Mada (UGM) BAPPENAS Prof. Sumardi Rudy Pakpahan United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) Kristanto Sinandang Idham Mugabe United Nations for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (UNOCHA) Faizal Thamrin Pak Basuki Universitas Gadjah Mada (UGM) / Rekompak Makhmudun Ainuri BPBD DKI Jakarta Pak Masadi Universitas Islam Indonesia (UII) Dr. Sri Aminatun Rian Sarsono Dr. Paulus Bawole Bambang Surya Putra Universitas Kristen Duta Wacana (UKDW); Consultant to World Bank Tri Dwi Budi Rianto Bakri Beck DRR Indonesia (formerly BNPB) University of Andalas Dr. Fauzan Sugeng Triutomo Government of City of Yogyakarta Danang Subagyo [ 80 ] ICF International ICF International [ 81 ] Institution Name Appendix H. List of Documents Consulted George Soraya H.1. GFDRR Program and External GFDRR. 2014. Annual Report 2013 – Inroads to Iwan Gunawan Resilience. World Bank Documents Risye Dwiyani African, Caribbean and Pacific Group (ACP), GFDRR, GFDRR. 2014. Managing Disaster Risks for a Resilient Abigail Baca and the European Union (EU). 2014. The Future: A Work Plan for the Global Facility for Approximately 15 community leaders (lurah) and residents. ACP-EU Natural Disaster Risk Reduction Yogyakarta: Site visits to 3 Merapi huntap and kelurahan Bumijo on the Disaster Reduction and Recovery, 2015– Accompanied by Trias Adhitya, Arif Budi Wahyono, Pak Winongo River Sutomo, and Wiji Utomo Program, 2011–2013 Progress Report. 2017. Saint Lucia Country Visit Annual Review: Core Support to the Global Facility for GFDRR. 2014. Managing Disaster Risks for Resilient Disaster Reduction and Recovery. Report No. Development. April 2014. Central Statistics Office: Ministry of Finance, Economic Affairs, Planning 202459-101. October 2011–July 2014. Edwin St. Catherine and Social Security GFDRR. 2014. Update on M&E Framework – Calus Monchery Australian Government. 2012. Australian Multilateral Implementation of GFDRR Monitoring and Ministry of Finance and Economic Affairs Assessment: The Global Facility for Disaster Evaluation Framework: Update – 15th Cheryl Mathurin Reduction and Recovery (GFDRR). March Consultative Group Meeting. Anseworth Charlemagne 2012. Lydia Glasgow Global Network of Civil Society Organizations for Ministry of Infrastructure, Port Services, and Transport Mary Augustin DARA. 2014. Evaluation Report – Retrospective Disaster Reduction. 2013. Views from the Evaluation of the GFDRR Program in a Frontline: Beyond 2015. Rachel Skeele Sample of Disaster-Prone Countries. April Renata Philogene-Mckie 2014. Independent Evaluation Group. 2012. Global Program Ministry of Physical Development David Alphonse and team Review: The Global Facility for Disaster GFDRR, Overseas Development Institute (ODI). 2013. Reduction and Recovery. Global Program National Emergency Management Organization Office of the Prime Minister Ivaline Joseph Financing Disaster Risk Reduction: A 20-year Review. Volume 6, Issue 2. September 2012. story of international aid. Prepared by Jan Organization for Eastern Caribbean States Chamberlin Emanuel United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Kellett and Alice Caravani. September 2013. Sir Arthur Lewis Community College Thomas Bouloque Reduction. 2005. Summary of the Hyogo Chrispin D’Auvergne GFDRR. 2012. Country Updates: GFDRR Framework for Action 2005–2015: Building Sustainable Development and Environment; Division: Ministry of Engagement in 29 Focus Countries (2007– the Resilience of Nations and Communities to Dawn Pierre-Nathaniel Sustainable Development, Energy, Science, & Technology 2012). October 2012. Disasters (Hyogo Framework). Susanna de Beauville-Scott Water Resource Management Agency: Ministry Of Sustainable Farzana Yusuf GFDRR. 2012. The Sendai Report – Managing United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Development, Energy, Science, and Technology Michael Andrew Disaster Risks for a Resilient Future. Reduction. 2007. Hyogo Framework for Action 2005–2015: Building the Resilience of World Bank Tiguest Fisseha GFDRR. 2013. Annual Report 2012 – Towards a Nations and Communities to Disasters. Resilient Future. Universalia Management Group. 2010. Evaluation of GFDRR. 2013. Managing Disaster Risks for a Resilient the World Bank Global Facility for Disaster Future: A Strategy for the Global Facility for Reduction and Recovery (GFDRR). Volume Disaster Reduction and Recovery, 2013– I – Final Evaluation Report. 2015. World Bank. 2014. Progress Report on Mainstreaming GFDRR. 2013. Partnership Charter: Committed to Disaster Risk Management in World Bank Reducing Vulnerabilities to Hazards by Group Operations. Development Committee Mainstreaming Disaster Reduction and Meeting. April 12, 2014. Recovery in Development Strategies. May 2013. H.2. Bangladesh Documents GFDRR. 2013. Promoting evidence-based DRM Abdul Wazed, M. 2013. National progress report on Investments – A GFDRR Theory of Change, the implementation of the Hyogo Framework Draft II. Prepared by Paula Silva Villanueva. for Action (2011–2013). Ministry of Disaster May 2013. Management and Relief. Government of Bangladesh. April 2013. [ 82 ] ICF International ICF International [ 83 ] Abdul Wazed, M. 2014. National progress report on Earthquakes and Megacities Initiative, World Bank, World Bank. 2010. Project paper on a proposed World Bank. 2011. Grant Reporting and Monitoring the implementation of the Hyogo Framework GFDRR. 2014. Training and Capacity additional credit in the amount of SDR Completion Report, GFDRR: Bangladesh for Action (2013–2015) – Interim. Ministry Building Action Plan. Bangladesh Urban 49.4 Million (US$75 Million Equivalent) Dala Training (Track III TA – Training). of Disaster Management and Relief. Earthquake Resilience Project. February including SDR 32.7 Million (US$49.7 Million Assignment: TF092732. Government of Bangladesh. October 2014. 2014. Equivalent) in Pilot Crisis Response Window (CRW) Resources and SDR 16.7 Million Zhu, X. 2008. Letter to Mr. Md. Aminul Islam Bhuiyan. Earthquakes and Megacities Initiative, World Bank, Earthquakes and Megacities Initiative. 2013. Final (US$25.3 Million Equivalent) IDA Resources Bangladesh Cyclone 2007: Damage and GFDRR. 2014. Dhaka Earthquake Risk Project Management Structure Report. to the People’s Republic of Bangladesh Needs Assessment Mission January 11–30, Guidebook. Bangladesh Urban Earthquake Submitted to The World Bank – South Asia for Emergency 2007 Cyclone Recovery & 2008. January 2008. Resilience Project. February 2014. Group. Prepared by Fouad Bendimerad, Restoration Project. Report No. 54514-BD. Ph.D., P.E., and Jerome B. Zayas, M.A. September 2010. H.2.1.2. Support Rehabilitation in Cyclone Sidr- Earthquakes and Megacities Initiative, World Bank, March 2013. affected Areas GFDRR. 2014. Dhaka Profile and Earthquake World Bank. 2013. Project Paper on a Proposed Risk Atlas. Bangladesh Urban Earthquake GFDRR, Climate Investment Funds, and Climate Amendment to the Agreement between the People’s Additional Credit in the amount of SDR Resilience Project. April 2014. Change Team. 2011. Vulnerability, Risk Republic of Bangladesh and the Food 91.1 Million (US$140 Million Equivalent) Reduction, and Adaptation to Climate and Agriculture Organization of the United to the People’s Republic of Bangladesh Earthquakes and Megacities Initiative, World Bank, Change – Bangladesh. Nations concerning the carrying out of for Emergency 2007 Cyclone Recovery & GFDRR. 2014. Dhaka Profile and Earthquake consultant’s services financed by the Restoration Project Additional Financing II. Risk Atlas Poster. Bangladesh Urban GFDRR. 2012. Disaster Risk Management in South International Development Association. FAO Report No: 80847-BD. November 2013. Earthquake Resilience Project. February Asia: A Regional Overview. December 2012. Project/UTF/BGD/040/BGD. 2011. 2014. World Bank. 2014. Bangladesh Country Snapshot. GFDRR. 2014. Bangladesh Country Program Update. Appendix to the Amendment to the Agreement Report No. 91624. October 2014. Earthquakes and Megacities Initiative, World Bank, May 2014. between the People’s Republic of GFDRR. 2014. Dhaka Profile and Earthquake Bangladesh and the Food and Agriculture Risk Atlas Brochure. Bangladesh Urban GFDRR. 2014. Bangladesh Overview Spreadsheet. H.2.1. Grant Documentation Organization of the United Nations Earthquake Resilience Project. February November 2014. concerning the carrying out of consultant’s H.2.1.1. Joint Damage, Loss, and Needs Assessment 2014. (DLNA) for Cyclone Sidr services financed by the International World Bank. 2003. Memorandum of the President of Development Association. FAO Project/UTF/ Earthquakes and Megacities Initiative, World Bank, the International Development Association Annex 1: Pictorial view of Boro Seed & Fertilizer BGD/040/BGD. 2011. GFDRR. 2014. Information, Education & and the International Finance Corporation Distribution (Mathbaria). Food and Agriculture Communication: Action Plan. Bangladesh to the Executive Directors on a Country Organization. Assignment: TF093587 and GFDRR. 2014. Update on Denmark contribution for Urban Earthquake Resilience Project. Assistance Strategy Progress Report for the TF093588. sustainable recovery from cyclone Sidr in February 2014. People’s Republic of Bangladesh. Report No. Bangladesh. 25886-BD. June 2003. Annex 2: Animals & Birds forced into prolonged Earthquakes and Megacities Initiative, World Bank, quarantine in Khulna. Food and Agriculture Goldstein, E. 2010. Letter to Mr. M Musharraf Hossain GFDRR. 2014. Legal and Institutional World Bank. 2006. International Development Organization. Assignment: TF093587 and Bhuiyan. Bangladesh: Emergency 2007 Arrangements (LIA) Framework Guidebook. Association International Finance TF093588. Cyclone Recovery and Restoration Project Bangladesh Urban Earthquake Resilience Corporation, Country Assistance Strategy for (TF093588): Amendment to the GFDRR Trust Project. February 2014. the People’s Republic of Bangladesh for the GFDRR. 2010. Disaster Damage, Loss and Needs Fund Grant Agreement. August 2010. period Fiscal Year 2006–2009. Report No. Assessment: Training Guidelines. Prepared Earthquakes and Megacities Initiative, World Bank, 35193. April 2006. for the Government of Bangladesh. Hossain, T. 2011. Email Correspondence with Masood GFDRR. 2014. Road Map for Disaster Ahmaad and Reefat Sultana. Bangladesh Data Sharing Platform. Bangladesh Urban World Bank. 2008. International Development Venkateshwaran Chandran. 2008. Email Emergency 2007 Cyclone Recovery and Earthquake Resilience Project. February Association project paper on a proposed Correspondence with Arun Kumar Restoration Project (P111272). October 2011. 2014. credit in the amount of SDR 69.3 Million Gopinathan. TF091415 – CO – Request to (US$109 Million Equivalent) to the People’s release interim budget. January 2008. Manikath, V. M. 2013. Email Correspondence with Earthquakes and Megacities Initiative, World Bank, Republic of Bangladesh for the Emergency Masood Ahmad. TF093587 – HRBF – GFDRR. 2014. Risk-Sensitive Land Use 2007 Cyclone Recovery and Restoration World Bank. 2008. Proposal – Bangladesh: Capacity Clarification – Extension Request of the Planning Guidebook. Bangladesh Urban Project (ECRRP). Report No. 42888-BD. Building in Damage and Loss Assessment. Closing Date for the TF093587. Earthquake Resilience Project. February August 2008. Doekle Geert Wielinga, Proponent. 2014. Prashant. 2011. Email correspondence with Anne World Bank. 2010. International Development World Bank. 2008. Proposal – Bangladesh: Olesen. Final Financing Report on DANIDA Earthquakes and Megacities Initiative, World Bank, Association, International Finance Comprehensive Assessment of Socio- Grant for Bangladesh recovery post-cyclone GFDRR. 2014. Towards an Urban Earthquake Corporation, Country Assistance Strategy for economic Impact and Recovery and Sidr – for clarification. Resilient Bangladesh: Risk Sensitive Land the People’s Republic of Bangladesh for the Reconstruction Needs. Doekle Geert Use Planning, Building the Earthquake Period Fiscal Year 2011 through 2014. Report Wielinga, Proponent. Uprety, K. 2009. Bangladesh: GFDRR Trust Fund Resilience of Dhaka. February 2014. No. 54615-BD. July 2010. Grant Agreement. TF093588. April 2009. [ 84 ] ICF International ICF International [ 85 ] World Bank. 2008. Proposal – Bangladesh: Support Government of Bangladesh Disaster Management World Bank. 2009. GFDRR Progress Report: GFDRR. 2008. Email correspondence with Masood Rehabilitation in Cyclone Sidr-affected areas Bureau. 2007. Endorsement – Improving Improving Bangladesh’s Response and Ahmad. Bangladesh 2007 Cyclone Sidr: through UP Block Grant System. Doekle Bangladesh’s response and recovery Recovery Activities in the Aftermath of Damage and Needs Assessment Mission. Geert Wielinga, Proponent. activities in the aftermath of disasters. Disasters (ID 1472). May 2009. January 2008. November 2007. World Bank. 2010. Bangladesh Emergency 2007 World Bank. 2009. GFDRR: Improving Bangladesh’s Government of the United Kingdom and Government Cyclone Recovery and Restoration Project Jabin, M. M. 2009. Letter to Xian Zhu. Support for Response and Recovery Activities in the of Bangladesh. 2008. UK-Bangladesh (P111272) Progress Report. April 13, 2010. World Bank finance for 100 days employment Aftermath of Disasters – Implementation Communiqué on Climate Change. Royal generation program. Status. June 2009. Geographic Society, London. September 10, World Bank. 2010. Bangladesh Emergency Cyclone 2008. Recovery and Restoration Project (ECRRP). Khandker, S. R., Baqui Khalily, M.A., and Samad, World Bank. 2012. Grant Reporting and Monitoring Implementation Review Mission Aide H. A. 2010. Seasonal and Extreme Poverty Report, GFDRR Track II: Bangladesh Government of the United Kingdom and Government Memoire. August 22–August 31, 2010. in Bangladesh: Evaluating an Ultra-Poor Improving Response and Recovery Activities of Bangladesh. 2008. Objectives for the UK/ Microfinance Project. The World Bank in the Aftermath of Disasters. Assignment: Bangladesh Climate Change Conference: World Bank. 2011. Bangladesh Emergency 2007 Development Research Group. June 2010. TF091679. Bangladesh Facing the Challenge. Royal Cyclone Recovery and Restoration Project Geographic Society, London. September 10, (P111272) Progress Report. February 20, Meutia, R. 2009. Email correspondence with Gertrude World Bank. 2012. Grant Reporting and Monitoring 2008. 2011. Cooper. Deadline Extension and Revised Report, GFDRR: Bangladesh Improving Implementation Program – TF091678 (1472). Response and Recovery Activities in Government of the United Kingdom and Government World Bank. 2011. Bangladesh Emergency Cyclone December 2009. the Aftermath of Disasters. Assignment: of Bangladesh. 2008. Draft Detailed Recovery and Restoration Project (P111272). TF091678. Agenda for the UK/Bangladesh Climate Implementation Review Mission Aide Pazmino, N. and Khan, A. 2012. Bangladesh: Local Change Conference: Bangladesh Facing Memoire. April 25–May 4, 2011. Government Disaster Management – Social H.2.1.4. Climate Change and Flood Risks for the Challenge. Royal Geographic Society, Safety Nets (DM-SSNs) Handbook. June Agriculture London. September 10, 2008. World Bank. 2013. Bangladesh Emergency 2007 2012. Cyclone Recovery and Restoration Project GFDRR. 2008. Email correspondence with Christoph World Bank. 2008. Draft Paper on Multi-Donor Trust (P111272) Progress Report. April 20, 2013. Power and Participation Research Centre. Recession Pusch. Award Letter for Project 1606. August Funds. Prepared for the Department of Study in the Context of Bangladesh – 2009. 2008. international Development. H.2.1.3. Background Studies for Improving Bangladesh’s Response and Recovery Activities in Rahman, H. Z. and Ahmend, S. 2010. Resilience GFDRR. 2010. Track II Project Completion Form – World Bank. 2008. Proposal – An International the Aftermath of Disasters amidst Uncertainty – Global Recession and Climate change and future flood risks in Conference on Climate Change, Natural the Bangladesh Economy: A PPRC Study at Bangladesh. July 2010. Disasters and Cyclone Sidr. Doekle Geert Alam, M. 2009. Email correspondence with Sunita Macro, Meso and Micro Levels. Power and Wielinga, Proponent. Vanjani. TF091678 and action pls. Participation Research Centre. Reviewer comments and Responses to “Implications of Climate Change Risks on Food Security in Zhu, X. 2008. Letter to Mr. Stefan Frowein. BRAC Development Institute. 2010. Evaluation of Rangachari, R. 2009. Email correspondence with Bangladesh.” 2009. Bangladesh 2007: Joint Damage, Loss and Safety Net Programs for the Disaster of Judy Ka-Yuk Lai. TF091679 – GFDRR – Needs Assessment Mission. February 20, Affected People. May 2010. Update in SAP – Request for Extension to Reviewer comments on “Hydrological Modelling for 2008. October 31, 2009. June 2009. the Implication of Climate Change of Food BRAC Development Institute. 2010. Improving Security of Bangladesh.” 2009. Bangladesh’s Response and Recovery Rector, I. 2007. Letter to Shaikh S. Ahmed. H.2.1.6. Agriculture Risk Insurance Feasibility Activities in the Aftermath of Disaster: An Comprehensive Disaster Management World Bank. 2008. Proposal – Climate change and Study Institutional Assessment. May 2010. Programme. November 2007. future flood risks in Bangladesh. Winston Yu, GFDRR. 2008. Agricultural Insurance: Innovative Proponent. Models and Challenges for Bangladesh, BRAC Development Institute. 2010. Improving Thakur, V. 2009. Email correspondence with Increasing Access to Rural Finance in Bangladesh’s Response and Recovery Steve Commins. GFDRR – Request for H.2.1.5. Support to UK-Bangladesh Climate Change Bangladesh: the Forgotten “Missing Middle.” Activities in the Aftermath of Disaster: Review replenishment: TF091678 – Bangladesh Conference Study Dissemination Workshop. September of Administrative Systems. May 2010. Improving Response and Recovery Activities Frowein, S. 2008. Letter to Mr. Xian Zhu. Joint 2008. in the Aftermath of Disasters. August 2009. Consultant Terms of Reference. Bangladesh: Damage, Loss and Needs Assessment GFDRR. 2008. Back to Office Report – Bangladesh: Improving Bangladesh’s Response and World Bank. 2009. GFDRR Progress Report: Mission. February 10, 2008. Agricultural Risk Insurance Study, Mission: Recovery Activities in the Aftermath of Improving Bangladesh’s Response and GFDRR. 2008. Email correspondence with Maria September 7-17, 2008. October 2008. Disasters. 2009. Recovery Activities in the Aftermath of Sarraf. Bangladesh: An International Disasters. October 2009. GFDRR. 2008. Bangladesh: Agricultural Risk GFDRR. 2012. Completion Report – Bangladesh: Conference on CC, Natural Disaster & Insurance Feasibility Study Concept Note. Improving Response and Recovery Activities Cyclone SIDR (TF091442, P110475) Activity April 2008. in the Aftermath of Disasters. February 2012. Closing Report. November 2008. [ 86 ] ICF International ICF International [ 87 ] GFDRR. 2009. Back to Office Report – Bangladesh: GFDRR. 2013. Email correspondence with Vineetha GFDRR. 2014. Email correspondence with Marc S. World Bank. 2001. International Bank for Agricultural Risk Insurance Study: 2nd Menon Manikath and Marc Forni. TF011882 Forni. Award under GFDRR Track II Australia Reconstruction and Development, the Mission, March 15-26, 2009. April 2009. – GFDRR – Extension of closing date - SDTF for Bangladesh – Disaster Risk International Development Association, and Bangladesh Urban Earthquake Resilience Financing and Insurance Program (DRFI) – the International Finance Corporation to the GFDRR. 2009. Response to Comments on Project. September 2013. USD 1,000,000 (Proposal ID 5375). Executive Directors on a Country Assistance Bangladesh: Agricultural Insurance in Strategy of the World Bank Group for the Bangladesh – Promoting Access to Small GFDRR. 2013. Statement of Membership Obligations Track 2 Proposal. 2014. Capacity Building for Eastern Caribbean Sub-region. Report No. and Marginal Farmers Decision Meeting. for Bangladesh Urban Earthquake Resilience Managing Storm Surge, Saline Intrusion and 22205-LAC. September 2001. Project December Mission. December 2013. Climate Change in Coastal Bangladesh. GFDRR. 2012. Track II Project Completion Form – Marc S. Forni, Proponent. World Bank. 2005. International Bank for Bangladesh: Agricultural Risk Insurance GFDRR. 2014. Addressing High Seismic Risk in Reconstruction and Development, the Study. May 2012. Bangladesh. World Bank. 2014. Aide Memoire: Coastal International Development Association, and Embankment Improvement Project, the International Finance Corporation Country GFDRR. Email Correspondence with C.Y. Ollero. GFDRR. 2014. Bangladesh Urban Earthquake Implementation Review Mission April 27 to Assistance Strategy for the Organization of BTOR for Project 1459. October 2008. Resilience Project Overview – Phase 1 and May 8, 2014. Eastern Caribbean States for the period of Phase 2. May 2014. GFDRR. Email Correspondence with Tharadol FY06-09. Report No. 33118 -LAC. September World Bank. 2013. Bangladesh - First Phase of the Meechinsud. Award Letter for Project 1460, GFDRR. 2014. Bangladesh Urban Resilience Project 2005. Coastal Embankment Improvement Project. 1479, 1493, and 1459. August 2008. Presentation. Presented by Marc Forni. Washington DC; World Bank. Available at: World Bank. 2008. International Bank for http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/ Reconstruction and Development, the World Bank. 2008. Track 2 Proposal – Bangladesh: South Asia Region Disaster Risk Management Team. en/2013/05/17819238/bangladesh-first- International Development Association, Agricultural Risk Insurance Feasibility Study. Bangladesh Earthquake Risk Mitigation phase-coastal-embankment-improvement- and the International Finance Corporation Olivier Mahul, Proponent. Program. May 23, 2012. project. Progress Report on the Country Assistance H.2.1.7. Bangladesh Urban Earthquake Resilience World Bank. 2012. Proposal – Bangladesh Urban Strategy for the Organization of Eastern Project (BUERP) Phase I & II Earthquake Resilience Project – Phase 1. H.3. Eastern Caribbean Documents Caribbean States. Report No. 43478-LAC. Marc S. Forni, Proponent. June 2008. Earthquakes and Megacities Initiative. 2013. Final Climate Investment Funds. Low-Carbon Climate- Project Management Structure Report. World Bank. 2013. Proposal – Bangladesh Urban Resilient Development Strategy 2012–2020. World Bank. 2009. International Bank for Prepared by Fouad Bendimerad, Ph.D., P.E. Earthquake Resilience Project – Phase 2. Dominica. Reconstruction and Development, and Jerome B. Zayas, M.A. March 2013. Marc S. Forni, Proponent. International Finance Corporation Country Dominica Ministry of Agriculture & Forestry. 2014. Partnership Strategy for the Dominican GFDRR. 2012. Email correspondence with Marilia World Bank. n.d. Project concept note on a proposed Draft Concept of the Dominica Disaster Republic for the period of FY10-FY13. Report Magalhaes and Marc Forni. Award under credit in the amount of $207. 59 (US$M) Vulnerability Reduction Project (DVRP) – No. 49620-DO. August 2009. GFDRR Track II for Bangladesh Urban for a Bangladesh Urban Resilience Project Forestry Component. Earthquake Resilience Project – Phase 1. (P149493). World Bank. 2010. International Bank for French, D. 2011. National progress report on the February 2012. Reconstruction and Development, the implementation of the Hyogo Framework for H.2.1.8. Coastal Embankment Improvement Project International Development Association, GFDRR. 2013. Back to Office Report – Bangladesh Action (2009-2011). National Emergency (CEIP) Research Support and the International Finance Corporation, Urban Earthquake Resilience Project, Management Organization (NEMO). HFA Regional Partnership Strategy for the December 15-20, 2013 Mission. December Bangladesh Water Development Board. 2014. Monitor Update. August 2011. Organization of Eastern Caribbean States 2013. Request for Expressions of Interest (EOI) for GFDRR. 2013. Bringing Scale to Disaster Risk (OECS) for the period 2010-2014. Report No. Research Activities for Long Term Monitoring, Management: the Eastern Caribbean. 53762-LAC. May 2010. GFDRR. 2013. Email correspondence with Chunxiang Research and Analysis of Bangladesh Zhang. Award under GFDRR Track II for Coastal Zone (Sustainable Polders Adapted Prepared by Niels Holm-Nielsen, Lead World Bank. 2011. Project appraisal document on Bangladesh Urban Earthquake Resilience to Coastal Dynamics) under CEIP-I. February Disaster Risk Management Specialist. a proposed credit in the amount of SDR Project – Phase 2 - US$800,000 (GFDRR 2014. 6.2 Million (US$10 Million Equivalent) GFDRR. 2014. Eastern Caribbean Overview RBMS Proposal ID: 5068). September 2013. with proposed co-financing from CIF in GFDRR. 2013. Email correspondence with Chunxiang Spreadsheet. December 2014. the amount of PPCR Grant US$8 Million GFDRR. 2013. Email correspondence with Jack Zhang and Marc Forni. Award under GFDRR GFDRR. 2014. Project Highlights – Planning for an Strategic Climate Fund Loan US$8.2 Million Campbelle and Marc Forni. Top-up approval Track II for Capacity Building for Managing Uncertain Future in the Eastern Caribbean, to Grenada and on a proposed credit in the for TF01182 ($800k) – Bangladesh Urban Storm Surge, Saline Intrusion and Climate Regional Collaboration to Build Climate amount of SDR 6.9 Million (US$10.92 Million Earthquake Resilience Project Phase II. Change in Coastal Bangladesh – USD Resilience. Produced and edited by Brad Equivalent) with proposed co-financing August 2013. 200,000 (GFDRR RBMS Proposal ID 5122). Lyon and Christina Irene, The World Bank. from CIF in the amount of PPCR Grant US$7 December 2013. Million, Strategic Climate Fund Loan US$3 [ 88 ] ICF International ICF International [ 89 ] Million to Saint Vincent and the Grenadines World Bank. 2014. International Development World Bank. 2012. Grant Reporting and Monitoring H.3.1.3. Support and Participation to the 6th for Regional Disaster Vulnerability Reduction Association project paper on a proposed Completion Report, GFDRR: Caribbean Early Caribbean Conference on Comprehensive Disaster Projects in support of the first phase of additional financing credit in the amount of Recovery & Damage Assessment (Track III Management the Eastern Caribbean Regional Disaster SDR 23.1 Million (US$35.6 Million Equivalent) TA). Assignment: TF098236. World Bank. 2012. ACP-EU for Disaster Reduction Vulnerability Reduction Program. Report No. including a credit in the amount of SDR 10.8 and Recovery (DRR) – Window 1 Proposal 61650-LAC. May 2011. Million (US$19.0 Million Equivalent) from the World Bank. 2014. Implementation completion and results report on a credit in the amount of – Support and participation to the 6th Crisis Response Window Resources and a Caribbean Conference on Comprehensive World Bank. 2012. International Bank for Proposed Additional Financing Grant from SDR 3.3 million (US$5 million equivalent) Reconstruction and Development, the to the Government of Saint Vincent and Disaster Management. Niels B. Holm-Nielsen, the Strategic Climate Fund Pilot Program for Proponent. International Development Association, Climate Resilience in the amount of US$5.0 the Grenadines for a Hurricane Tomas and the International Finance Corporation Million to Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Emergency Recovery Project. June 2014. World Bank. 2013. Support and participation Progress Report on the Regional Partnership for the Regional Disaster Vulnerability Report No. ICR00003178. to the 6th Caribbean Conference on Strategy for the Organization of Eastern Reduction Project. April 2014. Comprehensive Disaster Management Caribbean States for the period 2010-2014. H.3.1.2. Management of Slope Stability in Progress Report. January 2012–June 2012. Report No. 66577-LAC. April 2012. H.3.1. Grant Documentation for Multiple Country Communities (MoSSaiC): Handbook and Resources Projects Publication World Bank. 2013. Support and participation World Bank. 2012. The Caribbean Region: Strategic to the 6th Caribbean Conference on Engagement Framework for Disaster Risk Anderson, M. and Holcombe, E. 2013. Community- H.3.1.1. Scoping Mission and PDNA Preparation, Based Landslide Risk Reduction: Managing Comprehensive Disaster Management Management and Climate Resiliency FY13- Eastern Caribbean Progress Report. July 2012–December 2012. 15. Disasters in Small Steps. Report No. 74917. Holme-Nielsen, N. B. 2011. Back to Office Report: De Graff, J., Anderson, M., and Holcombe, E. 2013. World Bank. 2015. Caribbean: Support and World Bank. 2014. International Bank for Saint Lucia Hurricane Tomas Emergency Landslide Risk Reduction – Complementary participation to the 6th Caribbean Conference Reconstruction and Development, the Recovery Project (P125205) Appraisal Routes to Learning. on Comprehensive Disaster Management International Development Association, the Mission, November 29–December 17, 2010. February 2011. (EU/ACP - Window I). Assignment: TF011303. International Finance Corporation, and the January 2015. GFDRR. 2012. Institutional Capacity and Consensus Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency, World Bank. 2010. Email correspondence with Building for Disaster Risk Reduction, Regional Partnership Strategy for the Ghadeer Fouad Ashram and Niels B. Holm- Implementation Results and Good Practices, H.3.1.4. MoSSaiC Caribbean Community of Organization of Eastern Caribbean States Nielsen. Award under GFDRR Track III for Reporting Period July 1, 2012 to December Practitioners (OECS) for the period FY15-19. Report No. Scoping Mission and PDNA Preparation. 31, 2012. World Bank. 2013. ACP-EU for Disaster Reduction 85156-LAC. October 2014. Eastern Caribbean (ID 3708). GFDRR. 2013. Track II Project Completion Form and Recovery (DRR) – Window 1 Proposal. World Bank. 2014. International Development World Bank. 2010. Grant Funding Request – MoSSaiC Caribbean Community of – Management of Slope Stability in Association project appraisal document on Caribbean Early Recovery & Damage Practitioners. Niels B. Holm-Nielsen, Communities (MoSSaiC): Handbook and proposed credits in the amount of SDR 26.6 Assessment (GFDRR: Track III TA), GFR Proponent. Resources Publication. Million (US$41 Million Equivalent) including 6945. November 2010. US$17 Million equivalent in Crisis Response Holcombe, E., Holm-Nielsen, N., and Anderson, M. World Bank. 2013. Email correspondence with Window Resources and proposed co- World Bank. 2010. Saint Lucia Hurricane Tomas 2012. Improving Urban Neighborhoods for Chunxiang Zhang and Tiguist Fisseha. financing from the Strategic Climate Fund in Emergency Recovery Project (P125205) Award under GFDRR ACP -EU NDRR the Poor Community-Based Landslide Risk a Grant in the amount of US$12 Million and a Appraisal Mission. December 14–17, 2010. Program – Window 1 for MoSSaiC Caribbean Reduction. loan in the amount of US$15 million to Saint Community of Practitioners (RBMS Proposal World Bank. 2010. Saint Lucia Hurricane Tomas ID: 5025) – USD 550,000. Lucia for a Disaster Vulnerability Reduction World Bank. 2012. Proposal – Management of Preliminary Assessment of Damages. Project. Report No. 87044-LC. May 2014. Slope Stability in Communities (MoSSaiC): November 2010. Handbook and Resources Publication. Niels H.3.1.5. Strengthening Capacity in Post Disaster World Bank. 2014. International Development World Bank. 2010. Saint Vincent & the Grenadines B. Holm-Nielsen, Proponent. Needs Assessment in the Caribbean Association project appraisal document Proposed Disaster Vulnerability Reduction on a proposed credit in the amount of SDR World Bank. 2014. Grant Reporting and Commonwealth of Dominica Ministry of Finance, Project (P117330) Technical Mission Government of Antigua and Barbuda, 11 Million (US$17 Million Equivalent) with (November 4–19, 2010) and Hurricane Monitoring Completion Report, LCR proposed co-financing from the Strategic Region: Management of Slope Stability in Saint Christopher and Nevis, Government Tomas Emergency Recovery Loan Climate Fund Grant in the amount of Communities (MoSSaiC): Handbook and of Barbados, Government of Grenada, Preparation Mission (November 5–12, 2010) US$12 Million and Strategic Climate Fund Resources Publication (GFDRR Track II TA Government of Saint Lucia, and Government Aide Memoire. Loan in the amount of US$9 Million to the Core). November 2014. of St. Vincent and the Grenadines. 2012. Commonwealth of Dominica for a Disaster World Bank. 2011. Saint Lucia Review of World Letters of endorsement addressed to Vulnerability Reduction Project in Support Bank-Financed Disaster Risk Management Michelle Gyles-McDonnough of the UNDP. of the Third Phase of the Eastern Caribbean Projects in the Aftermath of Hurricane Tomas. Regional Disaster Vulnerability Reduction Assessment of Selected Structural and Non- Program. Report No. PAD659. April 2014. structural Disaster Mitigation Activities. [ 90 ] ICF International ICF International [ 91 ] GFDRR. 2011. ACP-EU Natural Disaster Risk World Bank. 2013. Hand-Over Note Caribbean World Bank. 2012. Saint Lucia Proposed Regional Legrottaglie, Alessandro. 2014. Letter to Rosamund Reduction Program – Strengthening Capacity Risk Information Programme to support Disaster Vulnerability Reduction Project Edwards. Dominica: Disaster Vulnerability in Post Disaster Needs Assessment (PDNA) the Integration of DRM Strategies in Critical Identification and Collection of Existing Reduction Project (P129992) & Pilot Program in the Caribbean Stage II Application. Sectors (TF013668). Hazard and Risk Information. September for Climate Resilience Notice of Pre-Appraisal 2012. Mission, January 27th–31st, 2014; February World Bank. 2012. ACP-EU for Disaster Reduction World Bank. 2014. Email correspondence with 3rd–7th, 2014. January 13, 2014. and Recovery (DRR) – Window 3 Proposal Melanie Simone Kappes. BTOR: Caribbean World Bank. 2013. Progress Report: Hazard and – Strengthening Capacity in Post Disaster Risk Information Programme (TF013668) Disaster Risk Assessment Framework in Saint Pita, G. 2014. Vulnerability ranking of shelters in the Needs Assessment in the Caribbean. Justin Kick-off Workshops - May 19–30, 2014. July Lucia: Preparation of Vulnerability Reduction Commonwealth of Dominica – Preliminary Taylor Locke, Proponent. 2014. – Window 2. Report. World Bank. 2014. Email correspondence with World Bank. 2014. Contract Short Term GIS World Bank. 2013. ACP-EU for Disaster Reduction H.3.1.6. Caribbean Risk Information Programme Consultancy for Saint Lucia. to Support the Integration of DRM Strategies in Melanie Simone Kappes. BTOR: Caribbean and Recovery (DRR) – Window 2 Proposal – Critical Sectors Risk Information Programme (TF013668) World Bank. 2014. Disaster Vulnerability Reduction Spatial data management and identification Kick-off Workshop in Belize-June 23–26, Project (P127226) Structural Vulnerability of the most vulnerable schools and shelters in GFDRR. 2014. Caribbean Handbook on Risk 2014. July 2014. Dominica. Assessment of Residential Buildings Scoping Information Management (CHaRIM) Mission November 17–22, 2014. Aide- Background and Overview of the Initiative. World Bank. 2014. SMO recommendation to Anna Memoire. World Bank. 2013. Email correspondence with Snorre Wellenstein on behalf of Fernando Ramirez Wagge and Tiguist Fisseha. Endorsement of GFDRR. 2014. Caribbean Risk Information Objectives Cortes. World Bank. 2014. Hazard and Disaster Risk Spatial Data Management and Identification and Schedule for Kick-off Workshops. Assessment Framework in Saint Lucia (EU- of the most Vulnerable Schools and Shelters H.3.2. Grant Documentation for Single Country ACP) & Disaster Vulnerability Reduction in Dominica. January 2013. GFDRR. 2014. Caribbean Risk Information Projects Project (DVRP) Structural Inspection/Survey Programme to support the Integration of World Bank. 2013. Email correspondence with Victoria of the Housing Sector. October 15, 2014– DRM Strategies in Critical Sectors - Window H.3.2.1. Hazard and Disaster Risk Assessment February 28, 2015. Inez Salinas and Nicholas James Callender. 1 (TF013668) Implementation Results and Framework in Saint Lucia: Preparation of Dominica Grant Extension Request: Spatial Good Practices, Reporting Period July 1, Vulnerability Reduction World Bank. 2014. Saint Lucia Proposed Regional Data Management and Identification of the 2012 to December 31, 2012. Disaster Vulnerability Reduction Project most Vulnerable Schools and Shelters in World Bank. 2012. ACP-EU for Disaster Reduction Terms of Reference Structural Vulnerability Dominica (TF013867). December 2013. University of Twente, Faculty ITC and University of and Recovery (DRR) - Window 2 Proposal Assessment Specialist. July 15, 2014– the West Indies. 2013. Technical Proposal – Hazard and Disaster Risk Assessment September 15, 2015. World Bank. 2014. Email correspondence with - Selection 1096478 / Development of a Framework in Saint Lucia: Preparation of Nicholas James Callender. BTOR: Dominica handbook for hazard, vulnerability and risk Vulnerability Reduction. H.3.2.2. Saint Lucia Damage and Loss Assessment DVRP (P129992) Pre-Appraisal mission; assessment for decision-making for the of December 2013 Floods GFDRR-ACP Grant (TF013867) Supervision Caribbean. World Bank. 2012. Email correspondence with Anne Mission - January 27–31, 2014, February 3–7, Anglio and Patricia Acevedo. TF013366 GFDRR. 2014. Saint Lucia Damage and Loss 2014. University of Twente, Faculty ITC and University of the – GFDRR – Hazard and Disaster Risk Assessment of December 2013 Floods West Indies. 2014. Report of the workshops Assessment Framework in Saint Lucia: (TF017470). Implementation Results and World Bank. 2014. Email correspondence with in Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Preparation of Vulnerability Reduction - Good Practices, Reporting Period: January 1, Niels B. Holm-Nielsen and Robert Anthony. Grenadines, Dominica, Grenada and Belize: Extension of Closing Date to April 30, 2015. 2014–June 30, 2014. GFDRR-ACP TF for Dominica: Scaling Up. Possible use cases, people met and follow- June 2014. November 2014. up ideas. Government of Saint Lucia and World Bank. 2014. World Bank. 2012. Email correspondence with Marilia Saint Lucia Flood Event of December 24–25, World Bank. 2014. International Development World Bank. 2012. Email correspondence with Magalhaes and Tiguist Fisseha. Award 2013: Joint Rapid Damage and Needs Association project appraisal document Chunxiang Zhang and Fernando Ramirez under GFDRR ACP-EU Program – Window Assessment. on a proposed credit in the amount of SDR Cortes. Award under GFDRR ACP -EU NDRR 2 for Hazard and Disaster Risk Assessment 11 million (US$ 17 million equivalent) with Program – Window 1 for Caribbean Platform Framework in Saint Lucia: Preparation of H.3.2.3. Spatial data Management and Identification proposed co-financing from the Strategic for Regional Disaster Risk Information to Vulnerability Reduction. March 2012. of the Most Vulnerable Schools and Shelters in Climate Fund grant in the amount of US$ Support DRM Strategies (RBMS Proposal ID: Dominica 12 million and Strategic Climate Fund 4574). World Bank. 2012. Saint Lucia Proposed Regional GFDRR. 2013. Prioritization of Shelters for Vulnerability loan in the amount of US$ 9 million to the Disaster Vulnerability Reduction Project Terms Reduction Measures Technical Note from the Commonwealth of Dominica for a Disaster World Bank. 2013. Handbook for the assessment of Reference Identification and Collection of Multi-Criteria Evaluation (MCE) Workshop Vulnerability Reduction Project in support of landslide and flood hazards and risks to Existing Hazard and Risk Information. April – Identification of Criteria and Indicators of the third phase of the Eastern Caribbean support development processes. 2012. Relevant for the Prioritization of Shelters for Regional Disaster Vulnerability Reduction Vulnerability Reduction. August 15th, Fort Program. April 2, 2014. Report No. PAD659. Young Hotel, Roseau, Dominica. [ 92 ] ICF International ICF International [ 93 ] World Bank. 2014. Progress Report Spatial Data GFDRR. 2015. Stories of Impact – Safeguarding World Bank. 2008. International Development World Bank. 2013. International Development Management and Identification of the most Against Disasters in Ethiopia. Association Country Assistance Strategy for Association project appraisal document on Vulnerable Schools and Shelters in Dominica the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia. a proposed credit in the amount of SDR 71.8 (TF013867). Government of Ethiopia, USAID. 2009. The Report No. 43051-ET. April 2008. Million (US$110 Million Equivalent) and a Livelihoods Integration Unit – Uses of the proposed grant in the amount of SDR 34.4 Baseline Information and Analysis. World Bank. 2008. Project appraisal document on a Million (US$ 6.6 Million Equivalent) to the H.4. Ethiopia Documents proposed credit in the amount of SDR 14.2 Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia for a Fanta, Taddesse. 2015. National progress report Government of Ethiopia, USAID. 2011. The Million (US$23.4 Million Equivalent) and a Pastoral Community Development Project II. on the implementation of the Hyogo Livelihoods Integration Unit – An Atlas of proposed grant in the amount of SDR 34.4 Report No. PAD568. November 2013. Framework for Action (2013-2015). Ministry Ethiopian Livelihoods. July 2011. Million (US$ 6.6 Million Equivalent) to the of Agriculture Disaster Risk Management and Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia for a World Bank. 2013. National Policy and Strategy Government of Ethiopia, World Food Programme. Food Security Sector. HFA Monitor Update. Pastoral Community Development Project II. on Disaster Risk Management. Federal 2012. Innovative Climate Risk Management January 2015. Report No. 43472-ET. May 2008. Democratic Republic of Ethiopia. July 2013. for Food Security. Livelihoods, Early GFDRR. 2014. Ethiopia Country Program Update. Assessment and Protection (LEAP). May World Bank. 2008. Project appraisal document on a World Bank. 2013. Restructuring Paper on a May 2014. 2012. proposed credit in the amount of SDR 27.4 proposed project restructuring of Tana Million (US$ 45 Million Equivalent) to the and Beles Integrated Water Resources GFDRR. 2015. Ethiopia Overview Spreadsheet. International Federation of Red Cross and Red Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia for a Development Project approved on May 29, February 2015. Crescent Societies. 2013. Ethiopia: Country Tana and Beles Integrated Water Resources 2008 to the Federal Democratic Republic of Case Studies – How Law and Regulation Development. Report No. 43400-ET. May Ethiopia. Report No. 79530. July 2013. GFDRR. 2015. Comments GFDRR and Nutrition Supports Disaster Risk Reduction. April 2013. 2008. Project. Prepared by Vica Bogaerts. March World Bank. 2014. International Development 2015. Kassa, Mitiku. 2012. National progress report on the World Bank. 2009. Project appraisal document on a Association and International Finance implementation of the Hyogo Framework proposed grant in the amount of SDR 223.5 Corporation and Multilateral Investment GFDRR. 2015. Comments on GFDRR and PSPN4. for Action (2011–2013) – Interim. Ministry of million (US$ 350 million equivalent) and a Guarantee Agency Country Partnership Prepared by Vica Bogaerts. March 2015. Agriculture Disaster Risk Management and proposed credit in the amount of SDR 83.1 Strategy Progress Report for the Federal Food Security Sector. HFA Monitor Update. GFDRR. 2015. Key Informant Interview with Asmita million (US$ 130.0 million equivalent) to the Democratic Republic of Ethiopia for the October 2012. Tiwari of GFDRR. Interview performed by Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia period FY12 to FY16. Report No. 90893-ET. Charlotte Mack, ICF International on February Ministry of Agriculture. 2014. Disaster Risk for a Productive Safety Net APL III Project in October 2014. 23, 2015. Management Strategic Programme and support of the third phase of the Productive Safety Net Program. Report No. 48633-ET. World Bank. 2014. International Development Investment Framework. Disaster Risk GFDRR. 2015. Key Informant Interview with Michel September 2009. Association project appraisal document on a Management and Food Security Sector, Materi of GFDRR. Interview performed by proposed credit in the amount of SDR 391.9 Ministry of Agriculture. Charlotte Mack, ICF International on February World Bank. 2010. International Development Million (USD 600 Million Equivalent) to the 23, 2015. Save the Children Sweden. 2011. Views from Association Country Assistance Strategy Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia for the Frontline, Country Report – Ethiopia. Progress Report for the Federal Democratic a Productive Safety Net Project. Report No. GFDRR. 2015. Key Informant Interview with Wolter November 2011. Republic of Ethiopia. Report No. 55931-ET. PAD1022. September 2014. Soer of GFDRR. Interview performed by September 2010. Charlotte Mack, ICF International on February The Productive Safety Net Program (PSNP). 2010. H.4.1. Grant Documentation 18, 2015. Designing and Implementing a Rural Safety World Bank. 2010. Project appraisal document on a Net in a Low Income Setting – Lessons proposed credit in the amount of SDR 71.8 H.4.1.1. Ethiopia’s Disaster Risk Management GFDRR. 2015. Notes on Ethiopia’s National Policy Learned from Ethiopia’s Productive Safety Net Million (US$ 108.4 Million Equivalent) in pilot Country Plan and Strategy on Disaster Risk Management, Program 2005–2009. Report No. 70139. CRW resources and a proposed grant in the GFDRR. 2010. Proposal – Ethiopia Disaster Risk July 2013. Prepared by Charlotte Mack, ICF amount of SDR 27.5 Million (US$ 41.6 Million Management Country Plan. Walter Soer, International. February 2015. World Bank. 2003. Memorandum of the President of Equivalent) in pilot CRW Resources to the Proponent. the International Development Association Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia for GFDRR. 2015. Notes on other disaster risk to the Executive Directors on a Country an Agricultural Growth Project. Report No. GFDRR. 2013. Email correspondence with Asmita management programs in Ethiopia. Prepared Assistance Strategy for the Federal 53290-ET. September 2010. Tiwari. TF011209 - GFDRR - CTRTF’s by Charlotte Mack, ICF International. Democratic Republic of Ethiopia. Report No. comments / clearance – Extension of the February 2015. 25591-ET. March 2003. World Bank. 2012. International Development Closing Date of Ethiopia: Disaster Risk Association and International Finance GFDRR. 2015. Notes on the national context of Management Country Plan (Phase I) Project World Bank. 2006. International Development Corporation and Multilateral Investment Ethiopia’s Disaster Risk Management. (P129151) - Grant No. TF011209. Association Interim Country Assistance Guarantee Agency Country Partnership Prepared by Charlotte Mack, ICF Strategy for the Federal Democratic Republic Strategy for the Federal Democratic Republic GFDRR. 2013. Email correspondence with Guang International. February 2015. of Ethiopia. Report No. 35142-ET. May 2006. of Ethiopia. Report No. 71884-ET. August Zhe Chen and Wolter Soer. Extension of 2012. closing date for the Ethiopia Disaster Risk [ 94 ] ICF International ICF International [ 95 ] Management Country Plan (Phase I) Project Woldemariam, M. 2014. Letter to Addis Ababa World Bank. 2014. Grant Reporting and Monitoring H.4.1.4. Facilitating provision of baseline P129151. June 2013. World Bank Office on behalf of Government Report, Ethiopia: Capacity Building in Post vulnerability information on flood exposed of Ethiopia Ministry of Agriculture. Disaster Needs Assessment (GFDRR: ACP/ communities in Ethiopia GFDRR. 2013. Terms of Reference Draft: Technical Acknowledgement of your imperative EU W3). Assignment: TF012677. Support for the facilitation and coordination Disaster Preparedness and Prevention Agency contribution for IDDR 2014. November 2014. (DPPA) of the Government of Ethiopia. 2007. of a DRM SPIF Consultation Workshop. July H.4.1.3. Weather Risk Management Framework 2013. Confirmation to a Project Proposal, “Towards H.4.1.2. Capacity Building in Post Disaster Needs Using Weather-Based Indices Reduction of Flood Risks and Disasters in GFDRR. 2014. SMO: Ethiopia March 3rd to 13th Assessment Coulter, L. 2010. The LEAP-HEA Interface Tool Final Ethiopia.” August 2007. 2014 – Support to Disaster Risk Management GFDRR. 2012. ACP-EU for Disaster Reduction and Report. Prepared by the Food Economy Activities in Ethiopia. February 2014. Recovery (DRR) - Window 3 Proposal. Group for the World Food Programme. July Fafo Institute for Applied International Studies. 2010. Ethiopia: Capacity Building in Post Disaster 2010. Facilitating provision of baseline vulnerability Government of Ethiopia and the World Bank. 2013. Needs Assessment. Wolter Soer, Proponent. information on flood exposed communities in Joint Review & Implementation Supervision ENEA (Italian National Agency for New Technologies, Ethiopia Mission Aide Memoire. March 29 to Mission Ethiopia – Disaster Risk Management GFDRR. 2012. Email correspondence with Chunxiang Energy). 2010. Updates on Log-Model April 10, 2010. Country Plan (Phase I) Project Grant No. Zhang and Wolter Soer. Award under GFDRR Design for the Early Assessment of Drought- TF011209, 13th-15th March 2013. Aide ACP -EU NDRR Program – Window 3 - related Livelihood Protection Needs in Fafo Institute for Applied International Studies. 2010. Memoire. Ethiopia: Capacity Building in Post Disaster Ethiopia. July 2010. Facilitating provision of baseline vulnerability Needs Assessment (Proposal ID 4712). information on flood exposed communities Government of Ethiopia Disaster Risk Management GFDRR. 2008. Award Letter for Project 1725. August in Ethiopia Mission Report. October 17– and Food Security Sector. 2010. Livelihood GFDRR. 2012. Email correspondence with Doekle 2008. November 15, 2009. – Early Assessment – Protection [LEAP] in Wielinga and Chalida Chararnsuk. Final SoE Ethiopia, Project Grant Proposal. for Ethiopia. September 2012. GFDRR. 2008. Email correspondence with Kenichi Fafo Institute for Applied International Studies. 2010. Ohashi and William Wiseman. Endorsement Facilitating provision of baseline vulnerability Government of Ethiopia Disaster Risk Management GFDRR. 2012. Email correspondence with Vineetha of a GFDRR Proposal for Ethiopia: Weather information on flood exposed communities in and Food Security Sector. 2010. Contingency Menon Manikath and Wolter Soer. TF012677 - Risk Management Framework using Weather- Ethiopia Bi-annual Progress Report. January Planning in Ethiopia, Project Grant Proposal. GFDRR - Extension of closing date - Ethiopia Based Indices. June 2008. 2010. Capacity Building in PDNA. October 2012. Government of Ethiopia Disaster Risk Management GFDRR. 2008. Ethiopia: Weather Risk Management Fafo Institute for Applied International Studies. 2010. and Food Security Sector. 2010. Wereda GFDRR. 2012. Ethiopia – Disaster Risk Management Framework using Weather-Based Indices Facilitating provision of baseline vulnerability Disaster Risk Profiling in Ethiopia, Project Terms of Reference, Capacity Building in Post Budget. information on flood exposed communities in Grant Proposal. Disaster Needs Assessment. Ethiopia Mission Aide Memoire. April 26–May GFDRR. 2008. Proposal – Ethiopia: Weather Risk 10, 2010. Hundes, M. 2012. Letter to Wout Soer on behalf GFDRR. 2012. Ethiopia Post Disaster Needs Management Framework using Weather- of Government of Ethiopia Ministry of Assessment (PDNA) Training and Capacity- Based Indices. GFDRR. 2007. Towards Reduction of Flood Risks Agriculture. Support to the Conduct of the Building Workshop Proceedings. June and Disasters in Ethiopia, Project Proposal. International Day for Disaster Reduction 11th–19th, 2012. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Government of Ethiopia, Ministry of Agriculture and Disaster Preparedness and Prevention 2012. August 2012. Rural Development. 2008. Confirmation of Agency (DPPA) of the Government of GFDRR. 2012. Revised Ethiopia PDNA Budget endorsement of the “Ethiopia: Weather Risk Ethiopia in collaboration with Fafo Institute for Pawlowska, A. 2012. Letter to Ato Sufian Ahmed. Spreadsheet. June 2012. Management Framework using Weather- Applied International Studies, Oslo, Norway. Ethiopia: Global Disaster Facility for Disaster Based Indices” Proposal. Reduction and Recovery Grant for the GFDRR. 2013. Email correspondence with Jingying GFDRR. 2008. Detailed Budget for Ethiopia. Ethiopia Disaster Risk Management Country Yang. Inquiry regarding old TFs GRMs. World Bank. 2008. Livelihoods – Early Assessments Plan (Phase I) Project Grant No. TF011209. November 2013. – Protection (LEAP): LEAP Livelihood Stress GFDRR. 2008. Email correspondence with Ian April 2012. and Livelihood Protection Cost Index. A Short Bannon. Award Letter for Project 1474, 1478, United Nations Economic Commission for Africa User Guide 1470, 1461, 1496, 1466, and 1464. August United Nations International Strategy for Disaster (ECA). 2012. Capacity Development 2008. Reduction, GFDRR. 2010. Stage 2 Workshop on Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) World Bank. 2011. Grant Reporting and Monitoring Application for GFDDR Track II Support. and Disaster Risk Management (DRM) for Report, Ethiopia: Weather Risk Management GFDRR. 2008. Proposal – Facilitating provision of Wolter Soer, Proponent. the staff of the African Union Commission Framework Using Weather-Based Indices baseline vulnerability information on flood (AUC), the Regional Economic Communities (GFDRR Track II-TA). March 2011. exposed communities in Ethiopia. United Nations International Strategy for Disaster (RECs), River Basin Organizations (RBOs), Reduction. 2011. Integrated Safeguards Specialized Institutions and ECA. June 25 to Data Sheet Appraisal Stage. Report No. 29, 2012. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. ISDSA354. [ 96 ] ICF International ICF International [ 97 ] Tessema, Y. 2009. Letter to Anne Lene Dale GFDRR. 2009. Email correspondence with Andrew H.4.1.6. Mitigating Impacts of Adverse Shocks on Triutomo, S. 2009. National progress report on the Sandstein. Ethiopia: GFDRR TF Grant No. Sunil Rajkumar and Kremena Ionkova. Nutrition and Health implementation of the Hyogo Framework for 093300 – GFDRR Grant for the Facilitating Financing of Action Plan on Strengthening GFDRR. 2013. Email correspondence with Chunxiang Action (2007–2009). National Agency for Provision of Baseline Vulnerability Information Nutrition Surveillance at the Community Level Zhang and Asmita Tiwari. Award under Disaster Management (BNBP). HFA Monitor on Flood Exposed Communities in Ethiopia for Early Warning, Email, 24 August 2009 - GFDRR Track II for Implementation Support Update. June 2009. Project Disbursement Letter. TF092339. August 2009. for the Ethiopia Disaster Risk Management Triutomo, S. 2010. National progress report on the United Nations International Strategy for Disaster GFDRR. 2009. Email correspondence with Yuki Isogai Investment Framework (GFDRR RBMS implementation of the Hyogo Framework for Reduction and GFDRR. Stage 2 – Detailed and Trond Vedeld. Extension of Project: Proposal ID 5020). June 2013. Action (2009-2011) - Interim. National Agency Application for GFDRR Track II. Tewodros Progress Report: Mitigating impacts of GFDRR. 2013. Proposal – Implementation Support for Disaster Management (BNBP). HFA Kebede, Proponent. adverse shocks on nutrition and health (ID for the Ethiopia Disaster Risk Management Monitor Update. October 2010. 1478). Investment Framework. World Bank. 2009. Email correspondence with Triutomo, S. 2013. National progress report on the Henrike Brecht. Trust Funds closing on GFDRR. 2009. Mitigating Impacts of Adverse Shocks GFDRR. 2013. Revised Ethiopia DRMN Budget implementation of the Hyogo Framework for 6/30/2009 (GFDRR portfolios) – Ethiopia TF on Nutrition and Health, Ethiopia Progress Spreadsheet. June 2013. Action (2011–2013). National Agency for 091363. August 2009. Report. January 2009. Disaster Management (BNBP). HFA Monitor Government of Ethiopia Disaster Risk Management Update. May 2013. World Bank. 2009. Ethiopia: flood vulnerability GFDRR. 2009. Terms of Reference for an Analyst to and Food Security Ministry of Agriculture. database (1470). July 2009. be Part of a Consultant Team. 2012. Disaster Risk Management Strategic World Bank. 2003. Memorandum of the President Programme and Investment Framework. of the International Bank for Reconstruction World Bank. 2009. Letter to Anne Lene Dale GFDRR. 2009. Terms of Reference for an Assistant and International Development Association, Sandstein. GFDRR Grant for the Facilitating Analyst to be Part of a Consultant Team. International Finance Corporation and the provision of baseline vulnerability information H.5. Indonesia Documents Multilateral Investment Guarantee to the on flood exposed communities in Ethiopia. GFDRR. 2009. Terms of Reference for Senior Analyst Djalante, R., Thomalla, F., Sinapoy, M., and Executive Directors on a Country Assistance Grant Number TF093300. May 2009. (Team Leader) of a Consultant Team. Carnegie, M. 2010. Building resilience to Strategy for Indonesia. Report No. 27108- GFDRR. 2010. Track II Project Completion Form – natural hazards in Indonesia: progress and IND. October 2003. World Bank. 2011. Grant Reporting and Monitoring, Ethiopia: Vulnerability Information on Flood Mitigating Impacts of Adverse Shocks on challenges in implementing the Hyogo Framework for Action. Natural Hazards. World Bank. 2008. Investing in Indonesia’s Institutions. Exposed Communities. Assignment: Nutrition and Health. Journal of the International Society for the International Bank for Reconstruction and TF091363. March 2011. Development and the International Finance GFDRR. 2014. Grant Reporting and Monitoring, Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards. Ethiopia: Nutrition Project (GFDRR: Track II- Published online February 2012. Corporation Country Partnership Strategy World Bank. 2013. Grant Reporting and Monitoring, TA). Assignment: TF092339. FY09-12 for Republic of Indonesia. Report Ethiopia: Vulnerability Information on Flood GFDRR. 2009. Disaster Risk Management Programs No. 4485-IND. July 2008. Exposed Communities. Assignment: Isogai, Y. 2009. Study on Nutrition-Related Market: for Priority Countries, East Asia and Pacific. TF093300. November 2013. World Bank. 2010. Project appraisal document on a Ready to Use Therapeutic Food and Corn Soya Blend. March 2009. GFDRR. 2014. Indonesia Country Program Update. proposed loan in the amount of US$ 149.98 World Bank. 2014. Grant Reporting and Monitoring, May 2014. million to the Republic of Indonesia for Ethiopia: Vulnerability Information on Flood Saldanha, L. 2009. Strengthening Nutrition the third National Program for Community Exposed Communities. Assignment: GFDRR. 2014. Indonesia Overview Spreadsheet. Information/Surveillance for Early Warning Empowerment in Urban Areas. Report No. TF093300. November 2014. November 2014. within the Framework of the National Nutrition 52915-ID. March 2010. Program (Draft 0). August 2009. H.4.1.5. Implementation Support for the Ethiopia Jati, R. 2014. National progress report on the World Bank. 2012. Indonesia Disaster Risk Disaster Risk Management Investment Framework Saldanha, L. and Fracassi, P. Nutrition surveillance in implementation of the Hyogo Framework for Management – Engagement Note. GFDRR. 2008. Mitigating impacts of adverse shocks Ethiopia: Summary scenarios and options. Action (2013–2015). National Agency for Disaster Management (BNBP). HFA Monitor World Bank. 2013. Country Partnership Strategy for on nutrition and health, Detailed Budget. United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Update. December 2014. Indonesia, FY2013-2015. Report No. 76501. GFDRR. 2008. Proposal - Mitigating impacts of Reduction, GFDRR. 2007. Stage 2 Application for GFDDR Track II Support. Ministry of National Development Planning. 2011. World Bank. 2013. Strong, Safe, and Resilient: A adverse shocks on nutrition and health. Andrew Sunil Rajkumar, Proponent. Indonesia’s Experiences in Disaster Risk strategic policy guide for Disaster Risk Andrew Sunil Rajkumar, Proponent. Reduction Investment Accounting in National Management in East Asia and the Pacific. GFDRR. 2008. Terms of Reference for Private Sector Budget. Prepared by Dr. Suprayoga Hadi. Abhas K. Jha and Zuzana Stanton-Geddes Development Specialist to Stimulate and Presented at the Workshop on the Tracking (Eds.). Facilitate Local Production of Therapeutic of DRR and Recovery Investment Data with International Aid. Helsinki, Finland. April World Bank. 2014. Disaster Risk Management Foods. 13–14, 2011. Overview, East Asia and Pacific. October 2014. [ 98 ] ICF International ICF International [ 99 ] World Bank. 2014. International Bank for GFDRR, UNDP, Safer Communities through Disaster GFDRR. 2009. Indonesia GFDRR – Planned Pribadi, K. S. 2009. Disaster Risk Analysis Method. Reconstruction and Development and the Risk Reduction (SC-DRR), BAPPENAS. 2010. Expenditure for August–September 2009. Workshop Risk Assessment. Hotel Novotel, International Finance Corporation Country Rencana Aksi Nasional Pengurangan Risiko Bandung, June 1, 2009. Partnership Strategy Progress Report for the Bencana 2010–2012. GFDRR. 2010. Back to Office Report, Indonesia: Republic of Indonesia FY13-15. Report No. NLTA Developing Catastrophe Insurance Sengara, I. W. 2011. Center for Disaster Mitigation 85500-ID. May 2014. GFDRR. 2008. Email correspondence with Josef Framework for Disaster Risk Financing Presentation. Lloyd Leitmann. GFDRR Track II [EAP] Strategy for Indonesia. Mission to Jakarta, Indonesia – Mainstreaming Disaster Risk Indonesia May 11–15, 2010. Sengara, I. W. 2011. National Risk Assessment Study. H.5.1. Grant Documentation Reduction. August 2008. GFDRR. 2010. Email correspondence with Henrike World Bank. 2010. Indonesia’s Risk to Natural H.5.1.1. Mainstreaming DRR in Indonesia Phase I Disasters. Analytical work to support the GFDRR. 2008. Mainstreaming DRR in Indonesia: Brecht, Michel Matera, and Marilia BAPPENAS, ISDR, GFDRR. Steering Committee GFDRR Progress Report and Updated Work Magalhaes. Indonesia RA and National Plan Formulation of National Action Plan for DRR Meeting No. 2: Mainstreaming Disaster Risk Program 2008-2009. for DRR. December 2010. 2010–2012. Reduction in Indonesia Provisional Agenda. Jakarta. July 3, 2008. GFDRR. 2008. Proposal – Mainstreaming DRR in GFDRR. 2010. Email correspondence with Iwan H.5.1.2. Mainstreaming DRR in Indonesia Phase II Indonesia. Josef Lloyd Leitmann, Proponent. Gunawan. Extension of TF091227 and BAPPENAS, ISDR, GFDRR. Steering Committee Beck, Bakri. 2013. Indonesia Experience in the Role transfer of fund for next quarter. February Meeting No. 3: Mainstreaming Disaster Risk GFDRR. 2008. Terms of Reference: Study to update of Recovery in DRR and Institutionalization of 2010. Reduction in Indonesia Meeting Minutes. the assessment of Indonesia’s priority Recovery. Jakarta. February 3, 2009. natural hazard and the associated national GFDRR. 2010. Financial Protection of the State of Deltares. 2012. FMH Disaster Scenario Preparation: economic risks to support the formulation of Indonesia against Natural Disasters Options BAPPENAS, ISDR, GFDRR. Steering Committee Jakarta Disaster Preparation. DKI Flood the new National Action Plan for Disaster Risk for Consideration for a Sovereign Disaster Meeting No. 3: Mainstreaming Disaster Risk Team. Reduction (2009–2014). Risk Financing Policy Presentation. Jakarta. Reduction in Indonesia Provisional Agenda. May 14, 2010. GFDRR. 2008. Draft Terms of Reference Short- Jakarta. February 3, 2009. GFDRR. 2009. Back to Office Report, Indonesia: Term Consultant for IMDFF-DR Secretariat NLTA Developing Catastrophe Insurance GFDRR. 2010. Indonesia GFDRR – Planned BAPPENAS. 2009. Training of Trainers (TOT) Damage Windows II of World Bank Trust Fund. Framework for Disaster Risk Financing Expenditure for March–June 2010. and Loss Assessment (DaLA) Methodology. Strategy for Indonesia. Mission to Jakarta, GFDRR. 2010. Email correspondence with Iwan January 2009. Indonesia June 29–July 3, 2009. GFDRR. 2012. Grant Reporting and Monitoring Gunawan and Ina Pranoto. (TF098020) Report, Indonesia: Mainstreaming Disaster Center for Disaster Mitigation. 2009. Progress BTOR: Preparatory Planning for GFDRR GFDRR. 2009. Catastrophe Risk Financing Risk Reduction. Report: Study to Update the Assessment Phase II with BNPB, October 13–17, 2010. in Indonesia, Issues for Discussion of Indonesia’s Priority Natural Hazard and Presentation. Jakarta. June 28–July 3, 2009. Institute for Research and Community Services – GFDRR. 2010. Email correspondence with Julia the Associated National Economic Risks to Universitas Gadjah Mada (UGM). 2009. Lendorfer. GFDRR Award: Mainstreaming Support the Formulation of the New National GFDRR. 2009. Description of Updated Results TF- Background Study on Opportunities and Disaster Risk Reduction in Indonesia – Phase Action Plan for Disaster Risk Reduction 091227 – Mainstreaming DRR in Indonesia. Challenges in Consolidating Indonesian II. July 2010. (2009–2014). June 2009. Planning Processes Related to Disaster Risk Reduction Final Report. GFDRR. 2011. Email correspondence with Judy Ka Center for Disaster Studies. 2011. Team GFDRR. 2009. Email correspondence with Abhas Yuk Lai. TF098020 – Request to revise grant Socioeconomic Vulnerability Analysis K. Jha. Next Steps in Indonesia Program, Lembaga Penelitian dan Pengabdian Pada allocation. December 2011. Working Progress. 01 September 2009. TF091227. September Masyarakat (LPPM) Universitas Gadjah 2009. Mada (UGM) - Yogyakarta. 2009. GFDRR. 2010. Concept Note: Incorporating Disaster Risk Index Method. 2011. Background Study on Opportunities and Resilience in School Rehabilitation Programs. GFDRR. 2009. Email correspondence with Judy Challenges in Consolidating Indonesian GFDRR, UNDP Indonesia, Republic of Indonesia. Ka Yuk Lai. Handover Note: Disaster Planning Processes Related to Disaster Risk GFDRR. 2010. East Asia and the Pacific Disaster 2009. Draft Curriculum Damage and Loss Management Coordination. July 2009. Reduction. Risk Management Team Senior Disaster Risk Assessment. January 2009. Management Specialist Terms of Reference. GFDRR. 2009. Email correspondence with Vasundhra National Agency for Disaster Management (BNPB). GFDRR, UNDP, Safer Communities through Disaster Thakur. Update and budget of activities Annex 1 of Disaster Management Plan. 2010. GFDRR. 2011. Back-to-office Report Yogyakarta July Risk Reduction (SC-DRR), Ministry of National Aug–Sept 2009, 10 August 2009 – TF091227 12–15, 2011. Sri Probo Sudarmo, Djumadi Development Planning (BAPPENAS) of the (Indonesia). August 2009. National Agency for Disaster Management (BNPB). Ahmad Workshop on Bantul Landslide Study. Republic of Indonesia. 2010. National Action Disaster Management Plan. 2010. Plan for Disaster Risk Reduction 2010–2012. GFDRR. 2009. FONDEN: National Disaster Fund in GFDRR. 2011. Disaster Response Procedure. Mexico. National Agency for Disaster Management (BNPB). Foreword and Table of Contents of Disaster Management Plan. 2010. [ 100 ] ICF International ICF International [ 101 ] GFDRR. 2011. Email correspondence with Iwan Republic of Indonesia. 2010. Rencana Nasional GFDRR. 2014. Implementation Results & Good World Bank. 2013. Request NOL for Technical Gunawan. Back-to-Office Report: Mission to Penanggulangan Bencana 2010–2014. Practices, Reporting Period January 1, Guidelines of GFDRR in PNPM Urban. May attend UN-ISDR Asia Partnership Meeting, 2014–June 30, 2014. Institutional Capacity 2013. Thailand, 6–8 September 2011. Talking Points for Deputy for Rehabilitation and and Consensus Building for Disaster Risk Reconstruction BNPB. 2013. Reduction. World Bank. 2014. Indonesia: Indonesia: National GFDRR. 2011. Email correspondence with Iwan Program for Community Empowerment in Gunawan. SMO: Coordination meetings on Talking Points: Indonesia Experience in the Role of GFDRR. 2014. Indonesia: National Program for Urban Areas (PNPM Urban) and Additional Merapi reconstruction and Bantul Landslide Recovery in DRR and Institutionalization of Community Empowerment in Urban Areas Financing (Ln. 7504-IND; Cr. 4384-IND; Mitigation, Yogyakarta, 12–15 July 2011. Recovery. 2013. 4 November 2013. Brussels, (PNPM Urban) and Additional Financing Ln. 7664-IND); PNPM Urban III (Ln. 7886- Belgium. (Ln. 7504-IND; Cr. 4384-IND; Ln. 7664-IND); IND); PNPM Urban 2012-2015 (Ln. 8213- GFDRR. 2012. Draft Terms of Reference Background PNPM Urban III (Ln. 7886-IND); PNPM Urban IND, TF012192); and GFDRR (TF098870). Study on Local Risk Assessment and Local World Bank. 2012. Attendance List for VC-GDLN 2012-2015 (Ln. 8213-IND, TF012192); and Technical Notes of Implementation Support Risk Financing for the 5th Asian Ministerial Learning from Mega Disaster Risk Information GFDRR (TF098870). Aide Memoire. May 19– Mission. May 19–June 21, 2014. Conference on DRR. and Risk Financing. May 10, 2012. World June 21, 2014. Bank Office, Jakarta. World Bank. 2014. Indonesia: Indonesia: National GFDRR. 2012. Email correspondence with Vica Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Indonesia. 2013. Program for Community Empowerment in Rosario Bogaerts and Judy Ka Yuk Lai. Top- World Bank. 2012. GFDRR Contribution to 5th Letter to Yogana Prasta on GFDRR Grant Urban Areas (PNPM Urban) and Additional up for 5th AMCDRR. September 2012. AMCDRR. No. TF098817-ID Disaster Risk Management Financing (Ln. 7504-IND; Cr. 4384-IND; World Bank. 2012. Checklist for WBOJ Disaster Program for the Third National Program Ln. 7664-IND); PNPM Urban III (Ln. 7886- GFDRR. 2012. Term of Reference (ToR) Background Response. Community Empowerment in Urban Areas IND); PNPM Urban 2012-2015 (Ln. 8213- Study on Local Risk Assessment and Risk Project. May 6, 2013. IND, TF012192); and GFDRR (TF098870). Financing to support the 5th AMCDRR Short World Bank. 2012. Procedure for WBOJ Response to Management Implementation Support Term Consultant - Individual Research. Ministry of Public Works for the Republic of Indonesia. Disaster Emergency Draft. Mission. May 19–June 21, 2014. 2013. Request NOL for Annual Work Plan GFDRR. 2012. Email correspondence with Iwan World Bank. 2013. Request to National Agency for (AWP Revised) of Disaster Risk Management World Bank. 2014. Input to the draft of the World Bank Gunawan. RBMS update on your time – TF Disaster (BNPB) for a Meeting with Gambian Program (DRM) for the Third National Implementation Completion and Results 098880. Delegation – Disaster Risk Management Program for Community Empowerment in PNPM Urban III (IBRD-7866). April 2014. GFDRR. 2012. Jakarta Community Mapping for Study Tour in Indonesia. 15–19 April 2013. Urban Areas Project under TF 098817-ID. World Bank. 2014. P124674; Ln. 8213-IND National Disaster Preparedness using OpenStreetMap World Bank. 2014. Grant Reporting and Monitoring Republic of Indonesia. 2013. Grant No. TF098817- Community Empowerment Program in Urban Progress Brief as of April 11, 2012. Report, East Asia Pacific: Disaster Recovery ID Disaster Risk Management Program for Areas (PNPM Urban). Request NOL for MIS GFDRR. 2012. Preparation for Inclusion of School Management Specialists (GFDRR: Track II TA the Third National Program for Community Glossary for GFDRR and SELARAS Program. Retrofitting in DAK for Education 2011. Core). Empowerment in Urban Areas Project February 2014. Performance Indicators. GFDRR. 2013. Email correspondence with Vineetha H.5.1.3. Mainstreaming DRR into PNPM World Bank. 2014. Indonesia: Disaster Risk Menon Manikath and Iwan Gunawan. GFDRR World Bank. 2010. Project appraisal document on a Management Program for the Third National GFDRR. 2011. Proposal – GFDRR Mainstreaming proposed loan in the amount of US$149.98 Program for Community Empowerment in – Extension of Closing Date to 31 December Disaster Risk Reduction in Indonesia – Phase million to the Republic of Indonesia for the Urban Areas Annex. 2015. March 2015. II. Third National Program for Community GFDRR. 2013. Rally PRB Draft Pamphlet Agenda. Empowerment in Urban Areas. March 2010. H.5.1.4. West Sumatra and Jambi PDNA GFDRR. 2012. Proposed Annual Budget DRM Gunawan, I. 2014. Bringing Scale to DRM: GFDRR Program for PNPM Urban III – GFDRR. World Bank. 2011. IBRD: Ln. 7504-IND; Ln. 7886-IND; BNBP, BAPPENAS, and the Provincial and District/ Interventions in Indonesia. World Bank Cr. 4384-IND. GFDRR Grant Co-financing of City Governments of West Sumatra and GFDRR. 2013. GFDRR PNPM III Proposal – RETF. Jambi, and international partners. 2009. Jakarta. PNPM Urban III (Ln 7866-IND). November George Soraya, Proponent. West Sumatra and Jambi Natural Disasters: 2011. Kurniawan, L. 2013. Talking Points for Side Event: Damage, Loss, and Preliminary Needs GFDRR. 2013. Indonesia: National Program for Sharing Experiences on Safer School World Bank. 2013. Ln. 7504-IND; Cr. 4384-IND; Assessment. October 2009. Community Empowerment in Urban Areas Initiatives around the World. May 21, 2013. Ln. 7664-IND; Ln. 7886-IND; Ln. 8213- (PNPM Urban) and Additional Financing GFDRR. 2007. Proposal – Indonesia: Post Disaster IND. National program for Community Nugroho, S. 2014. Talking Points for Side Event, (Ln. 7504-IND; Cr. 4384-IND; Ln. 7664-IND); Needs Assessment. Empowerment in Urban Areas (PNPM Ready-to-use-data: Getting risk information to PNPM Urban III (Ln. 7886-IND); PNPM Urban): Selection of Kelurahan for Locations where it is needed. Urban 2012-2015 (Ln. 8213-IND, TF012192); GFDRR. 2010. Integrated Safeguards Datasheet of GFDRR Program for FY 2013. and GFDRR (TF098870). Aide Memoire. Appraisal Stage. February 2010. Rekompak Supervision Mission, September 26-29, November 11 – December 23, 2013. 2011, Initial Findings. 2012. [ 102 ] ICF International ICF International [ 103 ] H.5.1.5. BNPB Capacity Building H.5.1.6. Mainstreaming DRR into the World Bank’s GFDRR. 2013. Just in Time Support for Capacity Local Economic Development Project in Nias Building of National and Sub-national DRM GFDRR. 2008. Award letter for Project 1691. Agency: Budget Estimation for FY14-15. GFDRR. 2008. Nias – Mainstreaming DRR into Local GFDRR. 2014. Email correspondence with Chunxiang Economic Development. Zhang. Award under GFDRR Track II for Just-in-time Support for Capacity Building World Bank. 2009. Disaster Risk Management of National and Sub-national DRM Agency Strategy: Nias Livelihoods and Economic - US$800,000 (GFDRR RBMS Proposal ID Development Program. April 2009. 5153). Republic of Indonesia National Agency for Disaster Management. 2012. Lessons from Major Disaster for Indonesia. [ 104 ] ICF International