GFDRR is able to help developing countries reduce their vulnerability to natural disasters and adapt to climate change, thanks to the continued support of its partners: ACP Secretariat, Arab Academy, Australia, Bangladesh, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Colombia, China, Denmark, Egypt, European Union, Finland, France, Germany, Haiti, India, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Malawi, Mexico, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Spain, South Africa, South Korea, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States, Vietnam, Yemen, IFRC, UNDP, UN/International Strategy for Disaster Reduction and The World Bank.

10th Meeting of the

Consultative group

May 9th, 2011Geneva, Switzerland

Evidence of GFDRR Impact in Priority CountriesBy: Michel Matera, GFDRR Track II Team Leader

Ayaz Parvez, GFDRR Results Management Specialist

Contents

Three Part Presentation

1. GFDRR Impact Highlights in Priority Countries

2. Overall GFDRR Results Evaluation

3. Recommendations, Proposals and Way Forward

Part 1: GFDRR Impact Highlights

Mainstreaming DRM in Priority Countries

• Rationale: The Hyogo Framework for Action 2005–2015 called upon international organizations to ‘integrate DRR considerations into development assistance frameworks.

• How? Corporate Review is one entry-point for mainstreaming DRR/CCA intoWB Country Strategies and Operations. GFDRR provides advice through anexisting WB institutional/corporate function (SDN Corporate Review).

• Challenges:

• Use the GFDRR focal points in 31 priority countries to proactively engage with governments before CAS is prepared and to provide input for Review.

• Linking the agendas of DRR and CCA more consistently.

• Making "Natural Hazards, UnNatural Disasters: The Economics of Effective Prevention“ the analytical framework for Corporate Review

Corporate Review of Country Strategies and Operations

Current Status and examples

LCR: The strategy for the Organization of Eastern Caribbean States (FY10-FY14) identifies reducing vulnerability to natural disasters as one of the key regional challenges.

• Strategic pillars or co-pillars: • DRR: 15 CASs

• CCA: 9 CASs

• Sectoral/cross-cutting issue: • DRR: 40 CASs

• CCA: 29 CASs

• Challenge/Risk: • DRR: 54 CASs

• CCA: 31 CASs

AFR: The Lesotho CAS (FY10-FY14) recognizes that climate change is likely to have a negative impact on agriculture and the quality of water.

MNA: A key strategic objective of the Yemen CAS (FY10-FY13) is to help manage natural resources scarcity and natural risks.

ECA: A strategic objective of the Albania CPS (FY11-FY14) is to reduce the country’s vulnerability to climate change.

SAR: The Bhutan CPS (FY11-FY14) considers climate change a cross-sectoral issue, and accounts for climate resilience through anticipated investments in climate change preparedness.

EAP: The Tonga CPS (FY11-FY14) anticipates to mainstream DRR and CCA into infrastructure planning and management.

Distribution of MDTF priority country resources 2006 - 10

7

Understand disaster risks and improve access to

information

Develop innovative tools and implement

pilot interventions

Engage key actors and organize

government structures

Crea

ting

the

cond

ition

s fo

r D

RR a

nd C

CA M

ains

trea

min

g

8

A comprehensive approach to DRM and CCA…

Understanding disaster risks and improving access to information

9

Successful implementation of the 1st phase of the Central American Probabilistic Risk Assessment (CAPRA).

Partnership with the Government of Guatemala to assist the country’s 333 municipalities to make informed decisions about land use planning while including disaster risk reduction measures.

Nepal Hazard Risk Assessment that includes detailed hazard risk maps, detailed assessments of different risk exposure, hazard by hazard and initial recommendations for risk-reducing interventions in key at-risk areas.

Indonesia Risk in a Box: Web based tool that models impacts of different hazard events on population or infrastructure. Open source software.

Development of Ghana Flood Hazard Assessment to inform the National Strategy for Disaster Prevention and development plans for the growth and development of the North.

Engage key actors and organize government structures

10

Launch of Lao PDR National Disaster Risk Management Strategy Project(2010-2012) to operationalize the Strategic Plan on Disaster Risk Management (SPDRM).

Colombia Country Disaster Risk Management Analysis (CCDRMA) will provide the Government with an analytical basis for decision-making on how best to improve institutional structures and policies for Disaster Risk Management.

Technical Building Evaluation Unit (TBEU) in Haiti fully operational. Over 250,000 buildings have been evaluated by closing of Phase 1 of the project.

DRM specialists in core countries to strengthen partnerships and coordination efforts (20 recruited)

11

EDRR launch provided an opportunity for

Government dialogue led by Planning and Finance Ministries

Indonesia

Nepal

Cambodia

Philippines

Pakistan

EDRR: an opportunity for Government dialogue led by Planning and Finance Ministries to integrate DRM in all sectors of development

Develop innovative tools and implement pilot interventions

Interventions cover weather and climate forecasting, disaster risk financing, safe building among other areas: The Kyrgyz Republic Disaster Risk Management

Program was recently approved to support the modernization of the National HydrometeorologicalService

Strengthening ICPAC as a regional Centre of Excellence for disaster risk reduction, weather and climate services in the Greater Horn of Africa Region

Using High Resolution Satellite Data for the Identification or Urban Disaster Risk publication

Develop innovative tools and implement pilot interventions

Advise on building standards and codes in Haiti Reconstruction, and build governmental capacity to oversee and enforce Safe School pilot project in El Salvador Disaster Risk Financing Strategy based on a detailed

assessment of the existing risk financing system in the Philippines, where a Catastrophe Deferred Draw Down Option (CAT-DDO) has been prepared

GFDRR is able to help developing countries reduce their vulnerability to natural disasters and adapt to climate change, thanks to the continued support of our partners: ACP Secretariat, Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Denmark, European Commission, Finland, France, Germany, India, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States, UN International Strategy for Disaster Reduction, and the World Bank.

13

GFDRR is able to help developing countries reduce their vulnerability to natural disasters and adapt to climate change, thanks to the continued support of our partners: ACP Secretariat, Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Denmark, European Commission, Finland, France, Germany, India, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States, UN International Strategy for Disaster Reduction, and the World Bank.

Responding to the climate change challenge

GFDRR is now integrating in the Bank’s climate change agenda, from joint adaptation products to Durban building blocks. Key outputs are:

Country adaptation profiles (e.g. Mozambique)

Financing CCA-related analytical, advisory, and technical assistance

Strengthening climate and weather information services and early warning systems, with a focus on Africa

14

Part 2: Overall GFDRR Results Evaluation

Mainstreaming DRM in Priority Countries

The Road to GFDRR’s Results Agenda

Results Monitoring System (RMS) for

the Results Framework (RF) -Outcome Based

Results Based Management

System (RBMS) -Output Based

•Launch of the Results Based Management System (RBMS)

After GFDRR Inception - Early

2007

•Identified opportunities for improvement through a RF

Independent Evaluation - Jan,

2010

•Preliminary RF approach endorsed by RMC and CG

8th CG Meeting & 10th RMC Meeting -May, 2010 (Kyoto)

•CG’s go-ahead for operationalization of RF

11th RMC Meeting - Sep Alexandria; 9th CG

Meeting Oct, Washington, DC (2010)

Update on revised RF and draft ROAP

circulated to CG & RMS - Nov, 2010

•Launch of Results page: www.gfdrr.org/results

GFDRR Partnership Strategy – 2009

•Results-focus reiterated by monitoring against evidence-based indicators

Development of first RF - Jan-May, 2010

•Note delivered to CG on RF approach

Donor & World Bank Peer Review Process

- Jul-Sep, 2010

•Comments from Donors & other WB M&E experts incorporated

Operationalization and Roll-Out - Nov 2010 - May 2011

•First Results Monitoring Report – based on intermediate outcomes

1

2 4

3

6

7

8 10

5

•UNISDR•DFID

Inception of Results Dialogue with Donors &

Partners - Nov, 2010

9

GFDRR’s Results Agenda is a Result of CG Leadership ,Vision and Encouragement

•DFID PCR•RMS 1.0•Rules Setting Committee•Track II – Substantial Progress• Track I & III- Full Swing•Results Evaluation – CG

Progress Since Last CG (Nov 2010 – May 2011)

11

GFDRR Contribution

to DRR Mainstreaming

DRR Mainstreaming in National

Development Policies & Country

Partnership Strategies

Strategic Relevance & Financial

Efficiency of GFDRR's DRR

Mainstreaming Portfolio

World Bank DRR Portfolio Analysis -

based on its relevance to HFA

priority areas

The GFDRR Results Evaluation Methodology for the DRR Mainstreaming Indicator – The Contribution Based

ApproachLe

vel o

f Ach

ieve

men

t of D

RR

Mai

nstr

eam

ing

2006 2010

12

3

1

2

3

Country Performance

on DRR Mainstreaming

HFA Monitor based Self

Assessments

DRR Mainstreaming

in National Development

Policies (PRSPs)

DRR Allocation in Country

Developmental Budget

Other Development Partner Contributions

DRR Mainstreaming in Country ABC

Data from the Query Builder

A Big ThankYouto UNISDR

Beneficiary

GFDRR Priority Countries

GFDRR PRSP Contribution

GFDRR CAS Contribution

GFDRR Perspective - DRR Mainstreaming Projects in

GFDRR Portfolio

WB Perspective - DRM Projects with

Mainstreaming Topics in WB Portfolio

HFA Scores

DRR Allocation in Country

Developmental Budget?

GFDRR Score 2010

Country Score 2010

Country Target

GFDRR Target

Bangladesh Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

GFDRR Contribution Towards Policy/Strategy Documents

Track II Program Outcome Indicator for DRR Mainstreaming

GFDRR & WB Perspective - Means Adopted for Converting Outputs into Outcomes

Final Scores TargetsCountry/UN ISDR

Perspective

Walk through of the Results Model

Indicator values are an aggregated, weighted, relative, composite function of several qualitative and quantitative inputs whose relative weights are decided by GFDRR’s internal Results Governance Mechanism

GFDRR ContributionCountry Performance

(Also Includes DRR Mainstreaming in PRSPs)

GFDRR Contribution

Towards Mainstreaming DRR in PRSPs

GFDRR Contribution

Towards Mainstreaming

DRR in CASs

GFDRR DRR

Mainstreaming

Portfolio

World Bank DRR

Portfolio

Country Self Reporting on Selected Core HFA Monitor

Indicators

DRR Allocation in

Country Development

al Budget

Weighted, Composite Rule Based Scoring

for GFDRR Contribution &

Country Performance

Rule Based Target Setting

GFDRR Program Target Setting for Implementation Progress and Developmental Impact over 10-year period (2006-16)

YearNo of Years

Cumulative Performance Targets based on Equal Distribution across all

program years

Program Quarters

Cumulative Performance Targets based on Differential Distribution across all

program years

Target Setting Criteria

GFDRR Program Start Year - 2006

2007 1 10%2.5 Years

(2009)10%

Ist Quarter (Slow Progress)2008 2 20%

2009 3 30%

2nd Quarter (Progress picks up by a factor of 2 over the first quarter)

2010 4 40%

2011 5 50%

5 Years (2011) - Present

Evaluation Year

30%

2012 6 60%

7.5 Years (2014)

70%

3rd Quarter (Progress picks up by a factor of 2

over the second quarter)

2013 7 70%

2014 8 80%

2015 9 90%10 Years (2016)

100%4th Quarter (Progress picks up by 75% over

the third quarter)2016 10 100%

1. Target Using a Linear Yearly Distribution – 50%2. Target Using a Differential Yearly Distribution – 30%

Target Setting Process for the Program Period

Highlights of Key Results from Track II

While GFDRR has made significant progress on certain fronts (institutionalization of risk assessment tools), it is evident that more emphasis needs to be placed towards advancing other initiatives (safe schools and hospitals)

Highlights of Key Results from Track II

•GFDRR has satisfactorily contributed towards the DRR mainstreaming objective of ‘ensuring that DRR is a national and local priority with a strong institutional basis for implementation’ in 84% of the number of priority countries

•39% of GFDRR’s priority countries have made significant progress towards this DRR mainstreaming objective -compared to only 6% in 2006

•A near doubling of GFDRR priority countries that now have budgets for DRR initiatives – from 34 % in 2006 to 66 % in 2010

It appears that GFDRR has satisfactorily achieved the mainstreaming targets envisaged by it for the program period 2006 -2010

Country level DRM Mainstreaming Results

Rule based thresholds applied to the aggregated, weighted, relative, composite scores to

derive Results

Summary of FindingsOther Track II Indicators and Benchmarks

2006-10

According to early estimates the GFDRR portfolio is beginning to deliver CCA/CRM mainstreaming results in around 26% of its priority countries.

• GFDRR has played a significant role in mainstreaming CCA into both PRSPs and CASs in 13% and 29% of priority countries respectively.

• A corresponding 42% and 39% of priority countries have integrated CCA into their PRSPs and CASs respectively.

Risk Assessments, both country performance and GFDRR contribution has seen a marked increase since 2006:

• 68 % of priority countries have carried out risk assessments, compared to 13 % in 2006.

• 55 % of priority countries have carried out risk assessments with GFDRR support

Early Warning Systems, 84 % (26, up from 8 in 2006) of priority countries have made investments in strengthening their early warning systems, up from 26 % in 2006. 45 % of priority countries have these systems supported by GFDRR.

23

Summary of FindingsOther Track II Indicators and Benchmarks

Disaster Risk Financing and Insurance. GFDRR has introduced or leveraged innovative work and/or knowledge products in 16 priority countries (52 %). However: • engagement of government in active dialogue on risk financing has happened in

only 7 priority countries (23 %).• GFDRR has also been able to significantly contribute in non-priority countries in

this area.

In Urban Development and DRM. 11 priority countries (35 % of total) have integrated DRM into their urban development planning, which is an increase of 2 countries from 2006.• GFDRR has significantly contributed in 3 of these priority countries (10% of total).

GFDRR has also supported 6 countries (19%) in conducting Urban Risk Assessments and 4 (13%) in flood mitigation measures.

Safe Schools and Hospitals: GFDRR has supported or developed 7 knowledge products on inter alia, Safe School and Hospitals, from which 4 were developed in priority countries.

GFDRR is able to help developing countries reduce their vulnerability to natural disasters and adapt to climate change, thanks to the continued support of our partners: ACP Secretariat, Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Denmark, European Commission, Finland, France, Germany, India, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States, UN International Strategy for Disaster Reduction, and the World Bank.

24

Highlights of Key Results from Track I & Track III

1. GFDRR has ensured significant growth and diversification of its partnership, financing base and governance structure2. GFDRR has provided timely and targeted assistance and trainings in disaster-hit countries across the globe

GFDRR is working closely with UNISDR to operationalize Track I indicators, focusing mainly on:- growth in capacity of regional organizations;- enhanced international political engagement on DRM;- increased awareness, knowledge exchange and collaboration amongst ISDR stakeholders;- enhanced donor coordination and aid effectiveness.

Thank you!

Questions?

Part 3: Recommendations, Proposals and Way Forward

Proposals for CG Considerationand Endorsement

The Way Forward and Suggested Actions for CG Review and Endorsement

GFDRR needs to further consolidate and deepen its developmental impact

GFDRR needs to increase evidence-based country dialogue to elevate DRR and climate adaptation agenda in PRSPs and other national development plans

GFDRR to deepen cooperation with sectoral ministries to support implementation of the 5 priorities of the HFA

GFDRR, with support from its donors and wide range of partners, needs to significantly scale-up its investments and efforts towards institutionalization of disaster risk reduction and climate adaptation

Results-Based Recommendations- GFDRR Portfolio Management

- Consolidation of Impact at Country Level

KEY RECOMMENDATIONS

The Benefits of GFDRR’s Results Agenda

GFDRR’s Results Agenda has Significant Strategic and Operational Implications

GFDRR Contributed Significantly "YES"

GFDRR Contributed Significantly "NO"

Country Substantial Achievement "YES"

Example Country A Example Country B

Country Substantial Achievement "NO"

Example Country C Example Country D

How can we contribute more towards the success

of these countries?

Should these countries receive more attention?

How can we be more effective here? What has

worked, what has not?

How can we deepen our impact here? At what point

should we be thinking about disengagement?

A Decision Support Mechanism for the CG

The Way Forward on GFDRR Results Management

The Way Forward on GFDRR Results Management

1. Improved Data Gathering -RBMS Improvements

2. Independent On-the-Ground Validation of Results - Independent M&E Agent

- Project Level Results

- Project Level Results

Corroboration

- Country-level DRM results frameworks

Results Monitoring System as a Decision Support Tool for the CG

Selection of priority

countries

Areas for deepening GFDRR’s portfolio

in selected countries

Possibilities of GFDRR

disengagement in specific countries.

What needs to be done?

What are the

benefits?

The Role of Leadership in a Results Agenda

At the heart of it, Results-based Performance Management is an Iterative Change Management Exercise requiring Leadership Endorsement and Support

Results Management

Cycle Strategic and Operational Decisions

based on Results

Ensuring Technical (in-house and outsourced) Resources for Results

Evaluation

Institutional Change Management

Inculcating a Culture of Results based Portfolio

Management

Leading a Consultative Process with Donors and Recipients for Determining Results Indicators and Performance Benchmarks

Building Credibility & Transparency on

Program Performance

Towards a Global DRM Results Model

Some Lessons from the GFDRR Results Experience

M&E systems can be flexibly designed to simultaneously exist at the overall, sector and project levels

Focus on what needs to be essentially measured as opposed to trying to measure each and every output

RF should establish a streamlined results chain with key results and intermediate outcomes instead of outputs

Results measurement should combines qualitative and quantitative information from multiple sources to offer a ‘360 degree’ view on impact

Use a ‘contribution/partnership based results measurement approach’ for evaluating multi-donor, multi-recipient program, that measures:

GFDRR Contribution and Country Performance on a Developmental Agenda

Only hold the program accountable for outcomes that it is designed to deliver

However, links the ‘results-chain’ with international developmental standards and benchmarks, if possible, to determine country or sector performance:

Results process should promote end-user participation and complete procedural transparency, through:

Internal Results Governance & Oversight Mechanism, including a Results Rules Setting Committee that validates measurement yardsticks and performance thresholds

Consultative and collaborative involvement of all stakeholders

Third party Validation of On-ground Results

Proposals for CG Consideration

• Restructuring of RMC membership• Functional Streamlining

Improved Results Governance

Structure

• Integrated and multi-stakeholder DRM Results Frameworks at the country level

•GFDRR to arrange results dissemination and experience sharing events for CG Members

Operationalizationof Country Results

Frameworks

•Innovative way forward and a quantification methodology to be considered for adoption by GFDRR partners and donors•Quantify DRM mainstreaming progress and impacts across all

countries, using multiple international standards

Towards a Global DRM Results Model

Proposal for Restructuring of the RMC

GFDRR’s CONSULTATIVE GROUP

RESULTS MANAGEMENT COUNCIL

-Membership includes CG Members, DRR Experts and M&E Experts - from the Bank, UN ISDR, Bilateral Donors, Private Sector and Civil Society

- Functions include results validation and oversight of further development of results agenda

GFDRR's Central Results Team GFDRR's Various Track Teams and Bank's Regional and Country DRM Resources

PROPOSED GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE AND BUSINESS PROCESS RE-ENGINEERING FOR GFDRR'S RESULTS MANAGEMENT

Internal Bank and GFDRR Results Quality Assurance/Rules SettingCommittee

Periodic Reporting

Thank you!