This suggested performance framework aims to help National Societies translate longer-term national disaster risk reduction

  

Disaster Risk Reduction and Climate Change Adaptation National Plan/Programme

Suggested Performance Framework

December 2010

Introduction

  This suggested performance framework aims to help National Societies translate longer-term national disaster risk reduction

  

(DRR) and climate change adaptation (CCA) strategies into a logical planning framework. Depending on the specific context this

  can be considered/named a “plan” or a “programme,” so long as consistent descriptions are used within a National Society’s overall strategic planning, ensuring a logical hierarchy between plans, projects and programmes. This guidance document intentionally mirrors certain components of a logical framework matrix (“logframe”) for ease of application to the logframe development process.

  Supporting Strategy 2020

  At the highest Federation-wide strategic level, DRR and CCA suppo particularly certain expected impacts of Strategic Aims 1 and 2:

  Strategic Aim 1: Save lives, protect livelihoods, and strengthen Strategic Aim 2: Enable healthy and safe living recovery from disasters and crises Directly DRR/CCA relevant expected impacts: Directly relevant DRR/CCA expected impacts:

   Effective preparedness capacities for appropriate and timely  Reduced exposure and vulnerability to natural and response to disasters and crises man-made hazards  Reduced deaths, losses, damage and other detrimental  Greater public adoption of environmentally consequences of disasters and crises sustainable living

  Strengthening and monitoring community safety and resilience

  The ultimate goal of Red Cross Red Crescent DRR and CCA is to strengthen community safety and resilience, and DRR/CCA programming should be developed and implemented under the umbrella of the

  The current Red Cross Red Crescent definition of safe and resilient communities can be found in the Framework.

  It is however quite challenging to assess and monitor changes in overall community safety and resilience. This current performance framework does not attempt to capture this highest level of impact. The IFRC is in the process of developing a systematic approach to assess and monitor community safety and resilience at this highest level (including changes to perceptions, attitudes and behaviours), complementary to the current DRR/CCA suggested performance framework. As the approach is developed, long-term programming impacts will be measured through a globally-agreed set of indicators of community safety and resilience. It is envisioned that these indicators, while collected at the community level through participatory processes, will also be consolidated at the national, regional and global levels. This current framework therefore focuses on helping National Societies to plan and monitor activities, outputs and immediate impacts of DRR/CCA that ultimately contribute to community safety and resilience.

  Activating the Global Alliance for Disaster Risk Reduction (GADRR) This suggested performance framework directly supports national programme development under the Supporting the Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA)

  This performance framework, also with its inherent links to the Framework for Community Safety and Resilience, supports implementation of th

  How to use this document  This guidance can be used as a reference by any National Society developing a national long-term DRR and/or CCA plan.

  The National Society can adapt and selectively use parts of this guidance as most appropriate to their specific context.

   This document is not all-inclusive, and should be considered as a “menu of options.” Certain activity/sectoral areas contributing to community safety and resilience have been included only in a summary manner (for example livelihoods and health programming). These would in reality require separate performance frameworks, and are noted as such.  This suggested performance framework should be used to support the structuring of DRR and CCA programmes and projects from beginning to end. It should be used to strengthen and quantify the links between initial assessments, indicator development, baselines, activity planning, implementation, outputs, outcomes and impacts in project cycle management.

   For ease of reference the suggested performance framework has been divided by Outcomes across multiple pages, although they are all part of the same framework.  The annex of this document maps the suggested outcomes to commitments under the Framework for Community Safety and Resilience, Global Alliance for Disaster Risk Reduction and Hyogo Framework for Action.

  Overall programmatic indicators

  The following indicators will be monitored in order to track the national, regional and global scale of Red Cross Red Crescent DRR/CCA programming:

   Number of people reached (directly and indirectly) and covered by Red Cross Red Crescent DRR/CCA programming  Number of communities reached by Red Cross Red Crescent DRR/CCA programming  CHF expenditure on Red Cross Red Crescent DRR/CCA programming  Number of branches carrying out DRR/CCA activities  Number of community-based DRR/CCA programmes/projects Some of these will be captured in the Federation Wide Reporting System (FWRS).

  Global reporting on goal and outcome indicators

  In addition to the above overall programmatic indicators and eventually the indicators of safe and resilient communities, some goal and outcome-level indicators in this guidance should be monitored at the national level and reported regularly to the Federation Secretariat by all National Societies.

Indicators Goal

• – standard government or CRED data should be used)

  vocational training, income diversification, marketing, microfinance such as lending, savings & insurance, etc.) Output 1.4 Measures to improve availability of & access to food are implemented.

  1.6b % of target community members that recognise lead role of community groups in strengthening resilience

  1.6a # of active community groups with a specific role related to resilience (for example in support of Outputs 1.1-1.5) in a disaster management plan

  volunteer groups lead community resilience activities.

  child feeding, micronutrients, dietary diversity, screening & referral for acute malnutrition services, etc.) Output 1.6 New or existing community

  1.5b # of people reached by nutrition activities (e.g. infant & young

  prevention & control, family planning, safe motherhood, road safety, etc.)

  1.5a # of people reached by community-based health & first aid (CBHFA) activities (e.g. safe water, hygiene and sanitation, disease

  (programming under this output will require a more detailed framework)

  Output 1.5 Measures to improve health & nutrition are implemented.

  practices/techniques in agricultural production & animal husbandry, home gardens, community seed/grain banks, small- scale urban animal husbandry, etc.)

  1.4a # of people reached by food availability & access (e.g. improved

  (programming under this output will require a more detailed framework)

  1.3a # of people reached by income generation activities (e.g.

  Objectives

  (programming under this output will require a more detailed framework)

  marketing structures such as kiosks, workshops & food stalls, etc.) Output 1.3 Measures to enhance income generation are implemented.

  1.2a # of household shelters where an activity was carried out to make it physically safer 1.2b # of households where an activity was carried out to protect productive assets (e.g. land/crops, livestock, water sources,

  systems, public utilities, etc.) Output 1.2 Private assets are made safer against disaster hazards.

  1.1a # of community infrastructure where an activity was carried out to make it physically safer (schools, health centres, roads, watsan

  infrastructure is made safer against disaster hazards.

  Output 1.1 Small-scale community

  1a Percentage (%) of community infrastructure which meet established criteria for physical safety against local hazards 1b % of private assets which meet established criteria for safety against local hazards 1c # of people reached through income generation, food security, health & nutrition activities (aggregate of 1.3a, 1.4a, 1.5a & 1.5b)

  Urban & rural communities’ resilience to disasters is strengthened.

  G2 CHF value of physical damage caused by disasters in communities where the RCRC operates G3 CHF value of household income lost due to disasters in communities where the RCRC operates

  # of people exposed not available then simply # of disaster-related

deaths

  G1 Ratio of number (#) of disaster-related deaths to # of people exposed to disasters in communities where the RCRC operates (if

  Reduce the impacts of disasters in communities where Red Cross Red Crescent National Societies operate.

Str e n g th e n in g r e si li e n ce Outcome 1

  Communi ties’ ability to effectively prepare for & respond to disasters is improved. information sources

  Output 2.5 Communities have trained first responders.

  Objectives Indicators

  2.7b % of targeted communities with community groups with a specific role related to response in a disaster management plan 2.7c % of target community members that recognise lead role of community groups in preparedness & response

  2.7a % of targeted communities with community groups with a specific role related to preparedness in a disaster management plan

  volunteer groups are involved in local preparedness & response.

  Output 2.7 New or existing community

  2.6a % of targeted communities implementing or participating in simulation exercises 2.6b % of targeted schools implementing or participating in simulation exercises

  Output 2.6 Disaster simulation drills are successfully run on a regular basis.

  2.5a # of community members/volunteers trained in basic first aid & injury prevention 2.5b % of targeted people-reached by health-related messages for preparedness & response to disasters & epidemics 2.5c # of community members/volunteers trained in search & rescue

  2.4a % of targeted communities with warehouse capacity 2.4b % of targeted communities with sufficient emergency stocks 2.4c % of targeted communities covered by pre-agreements with transporters (individuals, companies, government, etc.)

  2b % of targeted adults which can correctly identify actions to pursue following a warning 2c % of targeted adults which participate in regular disaster simulations organised by the community

  Output 2.4 Community logistics capacity is strengthened.

  2.3a # of evacuation centres built 2.3b # of safe havens identified 2.3c % of targeted people that have access to evacuation centres and/or safe havens 2.3d CHF value of annual funds available for maintenance of evacuation centres and/or safe havens

  (ev acuation centres or “safe havens”) accessible in target communities.

  Output 2.3 Location(s) safe from hazards

  2.2a # of communities with EWS established 2.2b % of established community-based early warning systems (EWS) linked to national or regional EWS

  systems (EWS) linked to wider systems are established to monitor & alert on impending disaster & future climate risks.

  Output 2.2 Community-based early warning

  2.1a % of targeted communities that have developed a disaster management plan 2.1b % of targeted households that have developed family contingency plans 2.1c # of schools, health centres, factories & other communal centres with disaster management plans

  Output 2.1 Disaster management plans are developed by communities.

Pr e p a re d n e ss f o r re sp on se Outcome 2

  Communities’ knowledge of how to address disaster risk & climate change impacts is increased.

  risk assessment is carried out to identify & address community risks.

  Objectives Indicators

  3.4a # of school-based events about local disaster/climate hazards carried out on a regular basis

  Output 3.4 Regular school-based events about local disaster/climate hazards are carried out.

  3.3a # of households reached by public information campaigns in targeted communities

  campaigns about local disaster/climate hazards are carried out.

  Output 3.3 Regular public information

  3.2a % of community level DRR/CCA programmes which use some form of participatory assessment (e.g. VCA) at programme start 3.2b % of targeted communities that have identified & prioritised their risks 3.2c % of targeted communities which monitor & update hazard maps on an annual basis

  (disaggregated by gender) Output 3.2 Hazard, vulnerability, capacity &

  according to context) personal actions to reduce impacts of local

  3.1b % of targeted children who can identify key relevant disaster & climate change risks & potential impacts to their community

  3.1a % of targeted adults who can correctly identify key relevant disaster & climate change risks & potential impacts to their community (disaggregated by gender)

  prevalent local hazards & current & future climate change impacts is increased.

  Output 3.1 Communities’ awareness of most

  disasters (disaggregated by gender) 3c % of DRR/CCA activities that address priorities as identified by the target community

  according to context) personal actions to reduce impacts of local

  disasters (disaggregated by gender) 3b % of targeted children who can correctly identify key (defined

A w a re n e ss & kn ow le d g e Outcome 3

  National Society coordination of & advocacy for community-based DRR & CCA is strengthened.

  Output 4.3 National Society advocacy on DRR and CC is increased.

  Objectives Indicators

  4.5a % of total funding for DRR/CCA mobilised from in-country sources & mechanisms 4.5b # or CHF value of in-kind resources for DRR/CCA mobilised from in-country sources

  mobilised from domestic & national sources (including government).

  Output 4.5 Resources for DRR & CCA are

  4.4a % of national & international response coordination agreements with a clear role for the National Society 4.4b % of PNS active in DRR/CCA in country whose programmes align with National Society plans/strategies 4.4c # of DRR/CCA partnerships with National Society involvement

  & CCA are coordinated with & by the National Society.

  Output 4.4 Multi-partner interventions in DRR

  National Society

  4.3a # of meetings with government officials on DRR, CC and IDRL 4.3b # of DRR and/or CC advocacy events with National Society participation 4.3c # of specific campaigns on DRR and/or CC initiated by the

  4.2a Key messages on DRR & CC are developed and regularly updated 4.2b % of staff & volunteers trained on DRR & CC key messages 4.2c % of relevant staff & volunteers trained on issues of disaster law, including IDRL

  4a # of organisations with whom the National Society partners on DRR & CCA activities (disaggregated by Movement & external)

  volunteers are well informed on advocacy issues related to DRR and CC.

  Output 4.2 Key National Society staff &

  4.1b # of branches having clearly defined & mandated roles in Local Platforms for Disaster Risk Reduction or similar local coordination bodies

  4.1a National Society has a clearly defined & mandated role in the National Platform for Disaster Risk Reduction or a similar government-initiated coordinating body

  National & Local Platforms for Disaster Risk Reduction is increased.

  Output 4.1 National Society participation in

  4e Domestic laws adequately address international disaster response issues as described in the IDRL Guidelines

  4d Domestic laws and policies provide adequate rules for coordination, community involvement and accountability in disaster response

  4c Domestic laws and policies provide the National Society, its staff and its volunteers with all the protections, exemptions and incentives needed for effective disaster response

  4b New or revised national laws, policies & plans on DRR & CC reflect National Society key messages

C oo rd in a tion & a d vocac y Outcome 4

  National Society’s capacity to deliver & sustain DRR & CCA programming is strengthened. to the criteria in the IFRC management policy for evaluations (at

  similar), including all of the following: a) initial assessment, b)

  Objectives Indicators

  5.7a % of recovery programmes that include explicit objectives related to DRR & CCA

  incorporated in post-disaster recovery programmes.

  Output 5.7 DRR & CCA measures are

  5.6a % of non-disaster management programmes (e.g. watsan, health, etc.) that include explicit objectives related to DRR & CCA

  risk is considered & if necessary addressed in other (sectoral) programming areas.

  Output 5.6 Disaster & potential climate change

  5.5b % of branches accessing GIS mapping & climate forecasting to support contingency planning 5.5c % of National Society infrastructure that qualifies as “safe” based on local disaster-related norms

  based on type of hazard being monitored)

  5.5a % of disaster management programmes which access data from active early warning systems on a regular basis (regularity defined

  management is informed by disaster & climate risk information.

  Output 5.5 National Society disaster

  logframe or similar results-based plan, c) activity schedule, d) monitoring & evaluation plan 5.4b % of DRR projects with accountability/feedback mechanisms in place demonstrating responsiveness to community needs

  5.4a % of DRR/CCA programmes following IFRC PAD guidance (or

  mid-term & final evaluations)

  Output 5.4 DRR & CCA is supported through systematic programme cycle management.

  5.3a % of branches with contingency plans or BDRTs linked to national plans 5.3b % of branch contingency plans updated annually 5.3c Emergency fund with clear guidance on allocations exists 5.3d % of national population who can be reached by pre-positioned stocks within 72 hours

  Output 5.3 National Society preparedness for response is strengthened.

  5.2b % of emergency response-trained staff/volunteers who were actively involved in disaster operations in the last 12 months 5.2c # of staff trained as CBHFA-certified facilitators 5.2d % of CBHFA-certified facilitators who were active in the last 12 months

  Rules, legal rules, etc.)

  5.2a # of national & branch staff trained in assessment & emergency response (as relevant for context, includes RC/RC Principles and

  Output 5.2 Volunteer & staff capacity & skills for emergency response is strengthened.

  5.1b % of DRR-trained staff/volunteers who were actively involved in programming in the last 12 months

  community mobilisation)

  5.1a # of staff/volunteers trained in DRR programming (including

  sustainable DRR & CCA programming is increased.

  Output 5.1 Volunteer & staff capacity to deliver

  5c Level of change in WPNS score

  5b % of disaster response operations that are positively evaluated according to the criteria in the IFRC management policy for evaluations (real-time evaluations)

Nati on a l Soci e ty capa ci ty Outcome 5

  Annex: Mapping the performance framework to DRR commitments

Framework for Community Safety and Resilience DRR performance framework

Key Element 1: Risk-informed humanitarian response Outcomes 2 and 5 Key Element 2: Country-specific mitigation, prevention and adaptation activities Outcomes 1 Key Element 3: Sector-based programming to build across the disaster management

  

Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA) DRR performance framework

Strategic Goal 1: The integration of DRR into sustainable development policies and

  Priority for Action 4: Reduce the underlying risk factors Outcome 1 Priority for Action 5: Strengthen disaster preparedness for effective response at all

  safety and resilience at all levels Outcomes 3 and 4

  Priority for Action 3: Use knowledge, innovation and education to build a culture of

  warning Outcomes 2, 3 and 5

  Priority for Action 2: Identify, assess and monitor disaster risks and enhance early

  priority with a strong institutional basis for implementation Outcomes 4 and 5

  Priority for Action 1: Ensure that disaster risk reduction is a national and a local

  implementation of emergency preparedness, response and recovery programmes Outcomes 2 and 5

  Strategic Goal 3: The systematic incorporation of risk reduction approaches into the

  capacities to build resilience to hazards Outcomes 1 and 5

  Strategic Goal 2: Development and strengthening of institutions, mechanisms and

  planning Outcomes 1 and 5

  Outcome 5

  spectrum Outcomes 1 and 5

  Output 4: Strengthening of National Society capacities to deliver and sustain scaled up programmes in DRR.

  Outcomes 2 and 5

  Output 3: To integrate enhanced community-centred DRR measures as part of comprehensive disaster response management whenever this is applied.

  Outcomes 1, 2 and 3

  Output 2: To encourage and support expanded community-based programming to identify and tackle disaster risks.

  and strengthen national and local institutions for DRR Outcomes 4 and 5

  

Global Alliance for Disaster Risk Reduction (GADRR) DRR performance framework

Output 1: To increase community orientation in global and national DRR policies

  and CBOs Outcome 4

  Cross-cutting Component 5: Partnerships with international, governmental, NGOs

  governments Outcome 4

  Cross-cutting Component 2: Community-based disaster preparedness Outcome 2 Cross-cutting Component 3: Advocacy, education and awareness-raising Outcomes 3 and 4 Cross-cutting Component 4: A strong auxiliary relationship with local and national

  establishment of community-based early warning and prediction Outcomes 2 and 3

  Cross-cutting Component 1: Risk assessment and identification and the

  levels Outcomes 2 and 5