Session 12 Monitoring and Evaluation to Guide Implementation of Resilient Development

1. Session 12 Monitoring and Evaluation to Guide Implementation of Resilient Development

2. Disaster and Risk Information Sources What are DMCs saying about themselves? What are others saying about DMCs? What the Framework for Results-Based Public Sector Management says about Monitoring and Evaluation

3. What DMCs Say Bali Action Plan national reporting Hyogo Framework Agreement (HFA) national reporting on implementation IPCC national reporting MDG national reporting UNFCCC National Communication and National Adaptation Programmes of Action (NAPA) UNFCCD National Action Plan (NAP)

4. What Others Are Saying • CRED Emergency Events Database (EM-DAT) • Disaster Data Portal (DISDATA) • GLobalIDEntifier Number (GLIDE) • Global Risk Identification Programme (GRIP) • IFRC - World Disasters Report • IPCC 4th Assessment Report • ISDR Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction (GAR) • maplecroft - Climate Change and Environmental Risk Atlases • Munich RE - NATCAT SERVICE • Natural Disaster Hotspots: A Global Risk Analysis • UNDP-BCPR Global Risk Identification Programme (GRIP) • UNISDR Global Assessment Report (GAR) • UNISDR Global Report on HFA Implementation • UNOCHA UNAnnual Report of the Humanitarian/Resident Coordinator on the use of CERF Grants • USAID OFDA Annual Reports

5. What the Framework for Results-Based Public Sector Management Says Monitoring means that specific parties are responsible for checking performance against the indicators specified in planning, using defined methodologies for data processing Evaluation involves specific parties and stakeholders in assessing the achievement of the targets set in planning, using defined methodologies

6. The Key Indicator is theHFA Expected Outcome “The substantial reduction of disaster losses, in lives and in the social, economic and environmental assets of communities and countries.” This indicator is: S specific M measureable A achievable R relevant T Time-bound

7. Other Indicators generated from the HFA - 1 Strategic Goals: 1. Integration of DRR into sustainable development policies and planning 2. Development and strengthening of institutions, mechanisms and capacities to build resilience to hazards 3. Systematic incorporation of risk reduction approaches into the implementation of emergency preparedness, response and recovery programmes

8. Other Indicators generated from the HFA - 2 Priorities for Action: Political commitment and institutional (and legislative) aspects for DRR strengthened Risk identification, assessment, monitoring and early warning developed Knowledge management, education and awareness on risk reduction disseminated – accompanied by structural safety measures for school Underlying risk factors (environment, social development, land use etc) addressed Disaster preparedness and response efforts sustained Actions required by these goals and priorities can serve as components contributing to the monitoring and evaluation of the HFA Expected Outcome.

9. Defining Monitoring and Evaluation Criteria for DRR Actions Monitoring Evaluation Which population group, or what built or natural environmental element is targeted? What is the specific natural hazard involved? What is the geographic setting involved? Who are the actors involved? • Type of risk (eg. financial, economic, physical) is reduced • Risk component (event, exposure) that is modified • By whom • Where • When • At what cost • Who pays • Who benefits

10. Refining Monitoring and Evaluation Criteria for DRR Actions Monitoring Evaluation Benefits – improving policy, program and project design and implementation Logic – monitoring provides data for evaluation Challenges – how are the criteria developed for linking monitoring with evaluation? Who are the actors involved? • Understanding effective intervention components is essential to improving practice. • Joint and community-based evaluations help to understand the broad context of DRM changes and varying contributions of what is often a complicated set of actors. • Evaluating long-term impacts is crucial, but not easily funded or supported in specific disaster event contexts.

11. Refreshing Monitoring and Evaluation Criteria for DRR Actions Insights Obstacles and Opportunities Properly selected M&E criteria for community-based DRR actions should help guide implementation for greater likelihood of sustainable livelihoods. M&E criteria should reveal DRR’s role in economic sector development actions that promotes new approaches to changing old views of continuing development shortcomings. • M&E tracking the enhancement of vertical and horizontal integration of DRR efforts can lead to forging new partnerships with greater efficiencies. • M&E documenting the use rather than avoidance of market-driven approaches can enhance DRR implementation and outcomes while enjoining private enterprise participation in what has been public sector domains.

12. What are the DMCs’ experiences with monitoring and evaluation? Choose a cell(s) and discuss experiences with those parameters to monitor and evaluate DRM activities in your country .

13. Thank you