Upload
others
View
0
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
United Nations Development Programme
Fiji Multi-Country Office
Enhancing livelihood recovery through food security in the aftermath of
natural disasters in Fiji
UNDAF Outcome 1: By 2017 the most vulnerable communities across the PICTs are more resilient with
particular focus on communities, through integrated implementation of sustainable environmental management,
climate change adaptation/mitigation, and disaster risk management.
Expected Outcome: Improved resilience of PICTs, with particular focus on communities, through integrated
implementation of sustainable environment management, climate change adaptation/mitigation and disaster risk
management
Expected Outputs: i. Livelihoods in Disaster Prone Communities with specific focus on subsistence and semi-subsistence
agriculture and food security is restored and Community Driven Emergency Employment implemented.
ii. Enhanced capacity of the Department of Agriculture and stakeholders in strengthening disaster risk
resilience and mitigation in the agriculture sector
iii. Lessons emerging from effective M & E are codified and disseminated
Implementing Partner/Executing Entity: Direct Implementation by UNDP Fiji Multi Country Office
Responsible Parties/Implementing Agencies: Ministry of Rural and Maritime Development (MRMD) and
Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF)
Agreed by (Ministry of Strategic Planning, Fiji):
Agreed by UNDP:
Overview
The agriculture sector has experienced massive financial losses due to floods and cyclones over the past 5 years
(dating back to 2008). Based on current prices, the Fiji Bureau of Statistics estimates a 27% decline in total
agriculture output from 2007 till 2010. With the sector showing signs of recovery through increase in overall output
in 2011, it was dealt a severe blow in 2012. Firstly the industry, particularly in the Western Parts of Fiji, was
decimated through the two floods in January and April 2012. Further recovery was also impacted by Tropical
Cyclone Evans which caused infrastructure and agricultural damages to the 3 provinces in the Western Division
(Nadroga, Ba and Rakiraki). The correlation between a thriving and prosperous agriculture industry to improved
standards of living for all citizens is an issue which needs to be further explored. This is particularly important for
those dependent on the sector for their livelihoods but also those that are indirectly linked such as consumers.
Abundance of food supplies allows families, particularly in the low income bracket, to meet essential needs within
their meager budgets thus allowing for surplus or disposable income to be spent on children’ education, health etc.
Conversely a decline in food supply leads to higher costs of living and related social problems. UNDP as the lead
agency for “Human Development” and Early Recovery in Post Disaster situations is well placed to offer assistance
through the Government of Fiji focusing on 2 key areas: i) Assisting in livelihoods recovery by focusing on
improvement in food security methods for vulnerable communities affected by natural disasters and ii) Enhancing
capacity in the Dept. of Agriculture to address disaster risk mitigation and providing support to vulnerable
communities to improve resilience to climate change and natural disasters.
Estimated annualized budget: USD370,000
Total resources required USD370,000
Total allocated resources:
Regular USD180,000 Other:
o BCPR USD150,000 o GoF USD40,000
Unfunded budget: Nil
In-kind Contributions
Programme Period: 2013 - 2017
CPAP Programme Component: Outcome 1
Atlas Award ID: ______________
Start date: 1 May 2013 End Date 30 April 2015 PAC Meeting Date ______________
2
I. SITUATION ANALYSIS
Context:
The Republic of Fiji Island consists of 322 Islands with a total population of 837,271 people
(2007 Census). The most populated islands are Viti-Levu and Vanua-Levu. Fiji is endowed
with forest, mineral and fish resources, and is one of the more developed of the Pacific Island
economies, though still with a large subsistence sector.
Agriculture in particular plays an important part in Fiji’s overall development. It provides
food and income security, promotes community development in rural areas, generates income
to approximately 65 percent of the total
population and creates foreign exchange
earnings for the country. The sector,
characterized by the once dominant sugar
industry, has experienced major decline in
the past decade, with the expiry of land
leases and natural disasters as major
contributing factors. Their impact can be
seen through the decline in the total
commercial agricultural output from 2007
to 2010 (refer green line as per Graph 1).
While overall output in the sector started to
increase in 2011, the double impact of the
floods in January and March, 2012 and
Tropical Cyclone Evan in December will
contribute to another year of decline. This
in turn seriously undermines all the efforts
made by the Government and stakeholders
after 2010.
A UNDP sponsored study1, commissioned in the aftermath of the 2009 floods to develop a
disaster risk management (DRM) strategy for the agriculture sector, confers; “circumstantial
evidence suggests that natural disasters in Fiji particularly those caused by cyclones and
heavy rainfall, can no longer be regarded as exceptional one-off events”. The report further
makes recommendations to: i) build the DRM capacity of the Department of Agriculture
(DoA) and ii) to assist high risk rural communities implement strategies to mitigate the
impact of natural disasters on livelihoods and food security. With the turn of events in
2012, the importance of integrating disaster risk management into all aspects of agriculture
sector cannot be understated and in fact needs to be pursued within all possible means.
In terms of response to the 2010 study, the DoA has taken a number of
recommendations on board, chief amongst which is the establishment of the Disaster
Coordinating Unit (DCU) within Economic Planning and Statistics Division of the DoA,
albeit staffed by a solitary staff member who simultaneously manages other portfolios. The
formulation and implementation of a DRM Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) is the
second initiative that has been undertaken following the study. Further the Land and Water
1 Atkinson, G (2010)
Graph 1: Source: Fiji Bureau of Statistics (2011)
3
Resources Management Unit (LWRM) within the DOA has collaborated extensively with
Pacific Adaptation to Climate Change (PACC)2 in implementing programmes targeted at
improving food security in low lying coastal communities vulnerable to floods and saltwater
intrusion. The PACC project has also supported the planting of disaster resistant crop
varieties which is currently being trialed in 2 locations of the main island of Viti Levu.
In terms of supporting livelihoods recovery in post disaster situations, UNDP through
an allocation from its Bureau of Conflict Prevention and Recovery (BCPR) and cost-sharing
from AusAID, implemented Cash-for-Work (CFW) Programme, following the 2012 Floods
targeting 27 affected communities in the Rakiraki and Nadi Districts. The main focus of this
CFW was to assist in cleaning up and planting of crops to supplement food security and
livelihoods. In terms of the latter, a total of 22 hectares of land was cultivated and an assorted
variety of vegetables and fruits were grown and later harvested for domestic consumption and
retail. However an assessment conducted in December 2012 i.e. after Cyclone Evan, in the
CFW sites showed that nearly all of the farms supported under the programme suffered
extensive damage and majority of the beneficiaries did not have the capacity or the resources
to re-establish their farms without some means of external support. On the brighter side, a
minority (5 of the 27 communities) were able to generate some form of resilience as savings
accumulated from the sale of harvested crops prior to TC Evan was invested into the
rehabilitation of farms3.
In the aftermath of TC Evan (December 2012) the Government of Fiji (GoF) asked
that a Humanitarian Action Plan (HAP) be prepared to identify urgent disaster response needs
and immediate rehabilitation activities.
Through the HAP the GoF has requested UNDP assistance to the Food Security
cluster (which is internally led by Department of Agriculture) and in particular to support the
re-establishment of livelihoods for communities that suffered extensive damages. The GoF
has expressed support for the use of the CFW model in supplementing livelihoods.
Additionally, this proposal conforms to Fiji Government’s overall policy objectives in the
area of Food Security and Agricultural Development which states that “….Fiji is served by a
thriving agriculture sector that sustains Fiji’s food security and sets a strong platform for
commercial agricultural development”4. One of the related strategies under this policy
objective is to build capacity at the community level for commercial agriculture by
coordinating the efforts of relevant ministries and departments. Further one of the strategies
under the Disaster Risk Reduction and Mitigation policy area is to “promote and strengthen
food security programme to enhance community based disaster reduction initiatives”5 The
GoF has also given its endorsement to the United Nations Development Assistance
Framework (UNDAF) for the Pacific Region 2013 – 2017, and the Fiji Country Results
Matrix. This project document is also in alignment with Outcome 1 of the UNDAF titled
“Environmental Management, Climate Change and Disaster Risk Management.”
In addition to the HAP, the Government requested that a longer-term recovery framework
be developed based on a Post Disaster Needs Assessment (PDNA) methodology. Albeit
focused on assessing damages and losses to the economy, the TC Evan PDNA – which is in
2 Pacific Adaptation to Climate Change (PACC) is a multi donor Regional Programme funded by AuSAID and GEF which is implemented by the Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme. For more information, refer http://www.sprep.org/pacc-home
3 Refer 2012 Annual Report of the Fiji Floods Livelihoods Recovery Project 4 ROADMAP FOR DEMOCRACY AND SUSTAINABLE SOCIO-ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 2009-2014 refer Page 84 5 As above refer Page 140
4
available in draft form as of writing this – highlighted the following in the realm of social
impact:
The Agriculture sector (and the crops sub-sector in particular) was hard hit. The
assessment highlighted the significant social impact borne by the population at large –
particularly those whose livelihood depends heavily on subsistence or semi-
subsistence agriculture and sale of produce.
While livelihoods have been heavily impacted in the Western division, the majority of
households are making good progress in recovery, assisted by the provision of basic
food rations.
The PDNA revealed that within the Agriculture sector – the hardest hit productive
sector – men make up 96% of “official” farmers. However, this is likely to mask
women’s presence in the sector which is concentrated in subsistence farming and
unpaid farm labour (women are 29% of unpaid farm laborers). Therefore, in order to
ensure gender inclusivity, recovery strategies must focus on the household level and
its strong connection with subsistence farming.
Food security and income earning opportunities are a key concern for two
populations: 1) farm laborers; 2) residents of the Yasawa islands whose subsistence
crops were devastated. Recovery efforts must necessarily focus on these affected
communities, as noted above.
A strong sense of social cohesion and community-driven recovery was found.
Community groups, and specifically youth, worked together for days and weeks to
clear communities of debris and rebuild homes and community assets. These must be
leveraged further as a means of expediting recovery and reconstruction.
Community driven emergency employment activities – including Cash for Work -
could be considered as a means of providing income earning opportunities to
households that are poor or at risk of falling into poverty. Such programs should be
simple, targeted and based on the experiences of current CFW programs. Additionally,
individuals and households currently benefitting from social welfare assistance could
be considered for additional, temporary social welfare benefits – including cash
transfers - to help them deal with the costs of disaster recovery.
It must be emphasized that the TC Evan PDNA looks at damages, losses, reconstruction,
and recovery from an aggregate, national perspective. Its social impact component collected
needs evidence within small-scale and subsistence farmers in the affected areas across the
country, but does not necessarily identify specific locations, communities or individuals as
recipients of recovery assistance. Therefore, this proposal is (a) consistent with the PDNA
overall findings and (b) motivated by the existing considerable expertise within UNDP
around food security recovery activities fielded in response to the context of the 2012 floods.
Lessons Learned
The following lessons learned from the UNDP supported interventions in 2009 and
2012 have been taken into account and have been integrated, to the extent possible, into the
current project design.
Fiji Early Recovery Response Project 2009-20116 Lessons Learned/Recommendations What has happened since/How will it be
addressed in this project?
i) A disaster management plan including standard
operation procedure and effective coordination
A Disaster Risk Management Strategy has been
developed and recommendations adopted into
6 Refer Final Terminal Report of the Fiji Early Recovery Response Project 2009
5
Lessons Learned/Recommendations What has happened since/How will it be
addressed in this project?
mechanism of the Department of Agriculture
(DOA) as well as with relevant agencies
particularly the National Disaster Management
Office (NDMO) is critical to provide assistance
to the affected people in an effective and timely
manner.
the DoA Annual Corporate Plan.
Standard Operating Procedure has been drafted
as a “living document” thus updated as new
information comes on board.
o Under Output 2 of the project, include
an activity to streamline and integrate
the SOP into all aspects of DoA’s
operations.
ii) Timely submission of comprehensive and
qualitative damage assessment report in the
agricultural sector by the DOA and its
endorsement by the cabinet is essential to
expedite securing funds by the NDMO for
humanitarian assistance.
Agriculture assessments in post disaster
situations have become critical as it is used by
NDMO to determine the supply of food rations
in affected areas.
Damage, Loss and need assessment template
was drafted by FAO consultant and partly
adopted in the assessment in the post 2012
floods. Currently, a PDNA (Post Disaster
Needs Assessment) is being completed with
technical support from WB, SPC and other UN
agencies to gauge more comprehensive needs in
the post the Cyclone Evan.
o Under Output 2, include activity to
streamline post disaster assessments
and use Information Technology to
collate, analyze and submit damage
assessment reports in a timely basis.
iii) The Socio-economic study in the Central and
Western division has provided the DOA with
detailed information on impacts on households
and private businesses in the affected areas for
Government’s future development programme
and advocacy tool for flood mitigation and
management. Particularly, it is recommended
for the DOA to review the questionnaires and
tools used in the study to enable them to
conduct its timely assessments.
As per above.
iv) Formulation of the DRM strategy by the
consultant as well as wider-consultation of the
strategy with key stakeholders at regional,
national and sub-national through the 2 day
workshop has enabled the DOA to draft action
plan for improved disaster response and
preparedness in terms of coordination
arrangement, information management and
Community-based DRM. The DOA has just
formulated the department’s Annual Corporate
Plan 2012 and was able to incorporate some
DRM strategy as follows;
Establishment of a Disaster Coordinating
Unit (DCU) within Economics Planning
and Statistics Division to strengthen
coordination and facilitate disaster
preparedness and response
Follow-up multi-stakeholders workshop on
disaster preparedness for the agriculture
sector in Fiji.
The DCU has been established within the
EPSD however the roles and functions are
shared with the Economic Planning Officer.
o Provide funding for an Economic
Planning officer to handle the
implementation of the Disaster
Response Action Plan as well as
related functions. Post to be absorbed
into Ministry’s core functions after
expiry of project funding.
The DOA further needs to look at the following:
Assigning the permanent DCU manager
As above
6
Lessons Learned/Recommendations What has happened since/How will it be
addressed in this project?
who plays a coordination and overseeing
role along with (semi) permanent assistant
staff in order to take the lead in
implementing the action plan and
strengthen coordination mechanism within
the department and also with external
partners such as NDMO, DOW, NGOs
including women organizations
Discussion across the various divisions
within the DOA, to incorporate the action
plan, particularity formulation of disaster
management plan; coordination
arrangement with stakeholders such as
NDMO, DOW, NGOs including women
organizations; and assessment template
including the usage of agricultural census,
hazard and land use capability map into
department’s programmes and activities. It
will include resources and its expected
implementation dates.
Currently the Principal Agriculture Officers
based in the 3 Divisions are responsible for
coordinating disaster response however
emphasis must also be on Disaster Risk
Reduction.
o To be addressed through workshops
and other knowledge/capacity building
initiatives undertaken by the project.
Fiji Floods Livelihoods Recovery Project 2012 Best Practice/Recommendations What has happened since/How will it be
addressed in this project?
1. Situation Analysis and Impact and Needs
Assessment
Good Practice
• Scoping mission and planning consultation with
local authorities and key stakeholders
• Formulation of simple impact and needs survey
form
• Community outreach
• Administration by a multi-sector team
Recommendations
• Communication with target communities
• Survey data processing and analysis
Consultation on the design of CFW including
identification of target areas have been initiated
through scoping mission while correlating the
findings of assessment carried out on the ground.
A multi-sector integrated team (comprising
Local administration, Agriculture, Cooperative,
Women, Youth, and Labour Reps) at the
divisional and district level has been formed.
The district level integrated team will liaise with
communities, where the simple information flyer
formulated will be utilized.
Survey/assessment data will be analyzed on the
basis of participant selection criteria
1. Selection of Right Participants and Equal
Opportunities for CFW
Best Practice
Set up criteria (e.g. 1 per family, preferably
women, vulnerability)
Recommendations from Dept. of Agriculture &
National Employment Centre
Information dissemination using simple
information flyers
Involvement of community leaders from both i-
taukei and Indo-Fijians
Recommendations:
o Reaching more the vulnerable and people with
disabilities
o Participation of Indo-Fijian
o Timely dissemination of information
o Community Ownership (engagement of
Tailoring of CfW to suit individual needs is not
feasible and as proven in the Post TC Evans
follow-up monitoring of the CFW sites 2012,
less likely to sustain in the event of natural
disasters. Beneficiaries working collectively in
groups are more united and are able to tackle
issues that lead to greater resilience of the
communities.
o The project will make a concerted effort
to identify individuals who are willing
to work together in a group. Initial
assessments have been carried out using
information from the Ministry of
Women, Ministry of Youth and
Department of Cooperatives to identify
the appropriate groups to work under
the cash for work.
o In line with Fiji Govt. policy direction,
7
Best Practice/Recommendations What has happened since/How will it be
addressed in this project?
community leaders) there will be no distinction (during the
selection of beneficiaries) between i-
taukei and Indo-Fijian as everyone is
considered a Fijian.
o Similarly project reporting will refrain
from using the racial categorization of
Indo-Fijian and I-Taukei.
o However, there is a recognition that all
efforts must be taken to address the
needs of each ethnic group.
2. Women’s Participation
Best Practice
Participation of single mothers& widows
Participation of unemployed youth and vulnerable
men
Identify work type/working condition taking
account of women’s needs/concerns
Shortened and flexible working hours (5 hrs)
Understanding and support from community &
family
Put in place mechanism for counseling & social
support services in partnership with Empower
Pacific
Recommendations
To be replicated in this project phase.
3. Identification of Work & Formulation of Work
plan
Best Practice
Orientation & Community led formulation of work
plan
Working as a group
Mixture of community and individual work
Establishment of Community nursery
Recommendations
o Measurable task (task/output-based payment)
o Integrate/adapt DRR measures/practice
To be replicated.
Set Group Targets and allowing group leaders to
take responsibility for the output of group
members.
DRR measures will be integrated using the
experience of DoA’s LWRM Unit and the
PACC Project.
4. CFW implementation arrangement
Best Practice
Provision of work tools, materials, safety
equipments & Training of Occupational Health and
Safety and First Aid Kit
Weekly payment arrangement in partnership with
ANZ Rural Bank team
Recommendations
o Timely procurement & distribution of inputs
o Ensure injuries and accident protection
o Timely and smooth cash payment
To be replicated within available budgetary
provisions.
Similar model of payment via bank will be
followed. Other option will be to direct deposit
funds into the existing community group’s bank
account (e.g. cooperative group account).
Will be addressed within all possible means.
5. Project Monitoring
Best Practice
Orientation and engagement of team
leaders/supervisors & Gov officials
Recommendations
o Logistics
An integrated team has been identified in the
Western Division and smaller cells of the larger
district level team have been established.
Input from Govt. agencies may be required as
not all logistical needs can be sourced by project.
8
Best Practice/Recommendations What has happened since/How will it be
addressed in this project?
o Monitoring by technical agencies The integrated team which includes technical
agencies will be empowered and capacitated to
undertake monitoring.
6. Skill development and disaster awareness raising
Best Practice
Agriculture training
Financial training
Information session of Income Generation
Programme (loan scheme) by Empower Pacific
Recommendations
o Incorporation of disaster awareness raising
activities
To be replicated in partnership with DoA and
Empower Pacific
To be conducted in partnership with NGOs
working in DRR and NDMO.
7. Review
Best Practice
- Focus Group Discussion to measure the impacts
and gain feedback
- Sharing results & experience among team leaders
and the integrated team through workshop
Recommendations
To be replicated with the integrated team at the
district level taking lead roles.
Workshop to be included as part of activities
under output 1.
8. Government Ownership and Capacity building
Best Practice
Formation of a multi-sector team
Planning and de-briefing/lessons learnt meeting
Formulation of practical tools (e.g. Operational
Manual, reporting templates, information flyer)
Drafting Operation Guidance Note on Emergency
Employment (CFW)
Recommendations
o Continuous engagement & ownership of
stakeholders
o Minimize UNDP direct implementation of CFW
In process, a multi sector Integrated Team has
been identified for the Western Division based
out of the Commissioner Western’s Office.
Will be addressed during implementation and
oversight of the Ministry of Strategic Planning.
Change of modality from DIM to national
implementation.
II. STRATEGY
Incorporating the lessons learned (as summarized above) from the two previous
projects supported by UNDP, and building on the additional needs evidence emerging from
the TC Evan PDNA process, this project will ensure that sustainability and resilience related
issues at the community level are addressed. The response strategy therefore must necessarily
address how communities can sustain their livelihoods and build their resilience around
natural disasters with particular consideration for the Agriculture sector. The resulting
activities supported under this project will be carried out with these motives in mind.
Additional assistance, either technical and/or financial, will be required from relevant
government ministries and departments. It is also important to note that the initial scope of
this project (in terms of geographical coverage) is concentrated mainly in one of the 3
provinces located in the Western Division (i.e., the Ba Province) given that the agriculture
sector in the Western Division was most affected.
The Ba Province, on its own, accounts for 70 % of total damage in the Western
Division, according to the DOA’s initial crop damage assessment carried out after TC Evan.
9
(Subsequently, the PDNA has confirmed that the population in the Western division was the
most affected. Here, 6.3 percent of primarily7 affected population is farmers who lost their
source of livelihoods to the Cyclone; and 26 percent of those secondarily affected suffered
significant loss in agricultural production and personal income. Further, as part of the PDNA
process, UNDP and the Agriculture Department conducted a rapid survey among 250 market
vendors (51% women and 49% men) at seven main markets across the country. The survey
provided a further indication of the severity of TC Evan impact on livelihoods. The survey
highlighted that across all these markets 83% of vendors suffered losses; 77% lost stock
(produce); only 21% received assistance in some form (from the community, Government,
etc.); 31% incurred “debt” (loosely defined), thus putting exposing them financially; and 85%
expected recovery to take more than 2 weeks, and up to 6 months. These aggregate numbers
therefore provide further evidence of the need for livelihood interventions targeting the
agricultural sector. What is more, the small sample of 30 respondents in Ba appeared to have
suffered comparatively more: 100% suffered losses and stock; 83% are financially worse off
due to debts and obligations; and 90% expected recovery to take at least 2 months.)
The Nadroga and Ra province, which also fall in the Western Division, will be
included later subject to funding availability. Also while the aim is to integrate the activities
at the national level, it will be difficult to upscale the project without significant boost in the
budget. Thus assistance offered under the project will not be extended to communities in the
Northern and the Central Eastern Divisions, some of whom are also vulnerable to natural
disasters.
Based on the above considerations, the following strategies have been developed:
i) Focus on select districts in Ba Province with possibility to replicate in other areas
The project will initially pilot its community driven emergency employment activities
in select communities located in 4 districts (Ba, Nadi, Tavua and Lautoka/Yasawa) that fall
under the Ba Province. Expansion to other communities within the Ba Province and to other
districts in the Nadroga and Ra Provinces (who with Ba are geographically placed in the
Western Division) will be subject to funding. Commitment on the part of relevant authorities
at the national, divisional, provincial, and district levels is also critical. This commitment
includes, but not confined to: a) collaborating with UNDP to provide effective oversight and
support in the implementation of the project; b) Linkage with DoA’s activities as specified
under its Annual Corporate Plan (Refer iii below) will also be a major criterion for expansion
of the project, iii) Provision of technical support from within the Ministry/Department’s
budget allocation on the understanding that the proposal will pick up additional costs related
to site monitoring and travel to remote areas.
ii) Community groups identified as primary beneficiary for assistance under the
Livelihoods Restoration component.
Organizing project activities to suit individual needs at the community level is a
costly logistical undertaking but one that inevitably proves futile (from a sustainability point
7 Primary Affected – includes those persons living in the affected areas whose assets have been destroyed; dead and ill persons; Secondary Affected – includes persons living in the affected area that have sustained losses in production and income; and Tertiary Affected – those persons living outside of the affected areas that are sustaining higher costs of services as a result of the cyclone (Transport, Water, Sanitation and Electricity). Source (Fiji TC Evan PDNA 2013)
10
of view) in the event of large scale damage and destruction following natural disasters. Thus
the project will ensure that assistance will be targeted at community groups comprising of
selected women, youth and cooperatives as opposed to individuals within the community.
Working together and smarter to minimize the impact of disasters will be a key motto in the
implementation of the project. Initial assessment have been carried out to ensure that the
“right” groups are identified and satisfy some basic criteria as articulated below:
Most affected areas (in terms of agricultural damage)
Preferably women and youth
Cooperative group(registered with Dept of Coop) & other Community-based
Organisations who are willing to form a group (either registered with Dept of Women
or Dept of Youth)
One member per family
Age over 18 (over 16 for school leavers)
Willing to work under the CFW programme
Have land arrangement for CFW programme with some farming/fisheries experience
Priority is given to people with disability or those who have a family member with
disabilities.
With gender balance in mind, the project will ensure that women and girls be given
priority in terms of participation and selection of beneficiaries.
iii) Cost sharing and integration of project activities within the DoA Corporate Plan
The project will require the DoA to provide technical and financial support funded
from within its own budgetary sources as well as make necessary financial provisions to fully
integrate DRM into its future budget strategy. Initially the DoA must commit to providing
seedlings and other agricultural implements as allowed within it cyclone relief funding. At a
later stage, the DOA must commit to absorbing the position of the Economic Planning
Officer within the Disaster Coordinating Unit when the funding provided under this proposal
has lapsed.
iv) Gender inclusive focus at household farming level – as evidenced in the PDNA
Based on the PDNA findings, the strategy to include substantial engagement and
benefits for women under this project should have an explicit focus on the household level
where subsistence farming has a much greater presence of women than the
official/commercial farming sector. This also has strong implications for family well-being
and food security. The PDNA pointed to one area of opportunity to improve resilience on this
level, which is household poultry farming. 64% of the damage to livestock sector post TC
Evan was to sheds for chicken and ducks. With the notion that most females stay at home,
the project will look into ways that will enhance their capacity to raise poultry in a disaster
resistant manner.
v) Build on cost-effective best practices around community-driven disaster
resilience agriculture
The PDNA also detected vulnerabilities in the agricultural sector which point to
opportunities to improve the resilience of the sector in the event of future cyclones. One of
11
these would be site-specific approaches to elevate crops, as water logging is often the cause
of crops rotting in the ground after a cyclone or flood. Another area highlighted in the PDNA
is the pre-positioning of seeds and fast-track access to optimal seed varieties to accelerate re-
planting. A third area to improve resilience in this sector is support for seedlings and the
establishment of nurseries to accelerate re-planting after a disaster.
The above strategies have been factored into the development of the outputs that are
stated below with its related activities:
a) Output 1 – Livelihoods in Disaster Prone Communities with specific focus on
subsistence and semi-subsistence agriculture and food security is restored and
Community Driven Emergency Employment implemented.
The related activities under this output are as follows:
Given the substantial losses in the Agricuture sector in the Western Division (60% of
total damage and loss to the sector was in the Werstern Division) and therefore lost
income from foregone produce sales, both the TC Evan HAP and the PDNA contain
specific recovery recommendations on focused cash-for-work programmes as a stop-
gap measure to ensure some level of income until re-planted crops are ready for the
next harvest. Activities supported by the temporary employment programme would
include: community-driven farm rehabilitation; introduction of disaster resilience
practices; planting of new crops supplied by the DoA; and trialing of disaster resistant
varieties8
. A short term (2 week) community-driven temporary employment
programme would be conducted in the 4 districts most affected by Tropical Cyclone
Evan benefitting 30 – 35 community groups, and through them, some 1,000
individuals, 50% or more being women.
Training of the target beneficiarries in financial literacy and disaster risk reduction
conducted in partnership with relevant government departments and NGOs.
Agriculture skill development for the target beneficiaries conducted using expertise of
DoA officers as well as peer to peer learning through other farmers who have had
some success in addressing minimization of crop damage in disaster situations. Also
some of the activities will include testing new ideas and technologies to better manage
agricultural outputs prior to, and after the onset of natural disasters.
Workshops held in 4 districts and one at the divisional level to share best practices
and incorporate lessons learned.
b) Output 2 – Enhanced capacity within DoA to address Disaster Risk Resilience and
Mitigation in the Agriculture Sector
Related activities under this output are:
- Provision of additional support to establish database to support recovery efforts in post
disaster situations (Damage Assessments, affected areas, crop variety, seed distribution
etc).
- Revisit existing Standard Operating Procedures and disaster damage and needs
assessment methodologies and conduct training of divisional staff.
- National and divisional level workshops conducted to emphasize importance of DRR and
DRM.
8 This proposal entails collaboration with SPC/SPREP and the PACC project in accessing disaster resistant seedlings and plant varieties.
12
c) Output 3 – Lessons emerging from effective M & E are codified and disseminated.
Related Activities under this output are as follows:
An effective monitoring and evaluation (M & E) system is developed and
implemented throughout the course of the project.
A communication strategy is developed and implemented over the life of the project.
Project board meetings held on regular basis and to involve all stakeholders.
13
III. RESULTS AND RESOURCES FRAMEWORK (RRF) (2013 -2014)
UNDAF 2013-2017 Fiji Country Results Matrix
Outcome 1::
Environmental Management, Climate Change and Disaster Risk Management
By 2017 the most vulnerable communities across the PICTs are more resilient with particular focus on communities, through integrated implementation of sustainable
environmental management, climate change adaptation/mitigation, and disaster risk management. Improved resilience of PICTs, with particular focus on communities,
through integrated implementation of sustainable environmental management, climate change adaptation/mitigation, and disaster risk management
UNDP SRPD 2013 – 2017
Outcome Area 4: Improved resilience of PICTs, with particular focus on communities, through integrated implementation of sustainable
environment management, climate change adaptation/mitigation and disaster risk management Summary of Outcome Indicators (Overall)
Improved resilience of communities, through integrated implementation of sustainable environment management, climate change adaptation/mitigation and
disaster risk management
Project title: Enhancing livelihood recovery through food security in the aftermath of natural disasters in Fiji
Project ID (ATLAS Award ID):
INTENDED OUTPUTS, BASELINE
& INDICATORS
OUTPUT TARGETS (Disaggregated
by Year)
INDICATIVE ACTIVITIES
RESPONSI
BLE
PARTIES
INPUTS (US$)
OUTPUT 1: Livelihoods in Disaster Prone Communities with specific focus on subsistence and semi-subsistence agriculture and food security is restored and
Community Driven Emergency Employment implemented.
Baseline:
- 6,000 dwelling houses damaged
either partly or fully.
- 60% of Fiji’s total population
affected by TC Evan, 49% -
females.-
- F$17m in damages sustained
(crops, livestock) in the Western
Division (Ba, Lautoka, Tavua,
Nadi, Yasawa)
Targets:
2013: 30 - 35 farming/fisheries venture
groups established supporting some 1000
– 1200 individuals.
50% or more, roughly 600 beneficiaries
to be females.
2014: 30 - 35 farming/fisheries venture
groups sustained
Activity Result 1.1: Community driven
emergency employment implemented in 4
districts covering 30 -35 community
groups.
Actions:
- Undertake consultations with potential
beneficiaries/community groups.
- Selection of beneficiaries for emergency
employment
- Develop work programme for each of
MRMD as
lead
Support
provided by
the
Integrated
Team located
in the
Commission
er Western’s
Micro-Capital
Grants -
$120,000
Supplies -
$30,000
Parallel
Contribution
DOA –
USD40,000
14
INTENDED OUTPUTS, BASELINE
& INDICATORS
OUTPUT TARGETS (Disaggregated
by Year)
INDICATIVE ACTIVITIES
RESPONSI
BLE
PARTIES
INPUTS (US$)
- Job losses temporary and more
evident in Tourism and Agriculture
Sector, Farm Labourers were the
most hit.
Performance Indicator
# of community-based group benefited
with sex-disaggregated data
# of work days generated
# of DRR initiatives/measures
undertaken
# of people trained with sex and age
disaggregated data
# women and youth participants
Outcome Indicators
# of community-based farming/fishing
ventures which are able to respond to a
disaster effectively at a time of natural
disasters
Sources
- Project monitoring report
- Field visits
- the community groups including
physical measures to protect agricultural
areas, assets and facilities.
-
Office
Activity Result 1.2 – Training in Financial
Literacy and DRR/M conducted at the
community level
Actions:
- Design and undertake training with
selected groups identified.
- Develop monitoring mechanisms to
assess progress and results.
MRMD Travel and
Supplies –
USD10,000
Activity Result 1.3: Agriculture skills
development for the target beneficiaries
conducted
Actions:
- Design and undertake training and
awareness raising
- Incorporate DRR (and CCA)
practices/measure including those
arising from recent TC Evan PDNA
recommendations that focus on low-
income households
- Conduct training on best practice
methods for resilience including
nursery management.
-
MAFF Miscellaneous -
USD5,000
15
INTENDED OUTPUTS, BASELINE
& INDICATORS
OUTPUT TARGETS (Disaggregated
by Year)
INDICATIVE ACTIVITIES
RESPONSI
BLE
PARTIES
INPUTS (US$)
Activity Result 1.4: District and Divisional
Level Workshops held to identify best
practices and incorporate lessons learned
for future implementation
Actions:
- Undertake review workshop
- Document good practices and lessons
learned
- Foster inter-community engagement
around knowledge sharing ie site visits
MRMD and
MAFF Learning Costs
– USD15,000
Output 1: Sub-Total USD220,0009
OUTPUT 2: Enhanced capacity within DOA to address Disaster Risk Resilience and Mitigation in the Agriculture Sector
Baseline: (will be updated)
- DCU within EPSAD has been
established albeit with limited
capacity;
- SOP for DRM formulated;
- Limited evidence based
Disaster Assessment tools
available,
Performance Indicators
-The SOP and assessment revalidated
-# of staff trained with sex-
disaggregated data.
-Reliable assessment tools to feed into
national recovery efforts for budgeting
Targets:
2013:
- DRM Unit within ESPD
strengthened.
- Capacity of DRM Unit upgraded
through IT and release of SOPs.
2014:
- Training of Agriculture Extension
Officers carried out.
- DRM activities reviewed and
strengthened in the Annual
Corporate Plan.
Activity Result 2.1: Provision of additional
support to establish database to support
recovery efforts in post disaster situations
(Damage Assessments, affected areas, crop
variety, seed distribution etc.).
Actions:
- Prepare TOR for the DRM officer
and recruit.
- Recruit local consultant to
strengthen DRM capacity within
DOA and conduct capacity
assessment.
- Consolidate existing data and
MAFF DRM Officer –
USD30,000
Local Consultant
- USD20,000
9 Parallel contribution from DOA from DoA is not included in this total.
16
INTENDED OUTPUTS, BASELINE
& INDICATORS
OUTPUT TARGETS (Disaggregated
by Year)
INDICATIVE ACTIVITIES
RESPONSI
BLE
PARTIES
INPUTS (US$)
purposes.
Outcome Indicators
Timely and effective disaster response
including assessment will be carried out
at a time of natural disasters
-# of budget shared for DRM/disaster
preparedness increased in department
annual corporate plan (2014)
Sources
- Project monitoring report
gather other data in partnership
with regional technical agencies
Activity Result 2.2: Revisit existing
Standard Operating Procedures and
disaster damage and needs assessment
methodologies and conduct training of
divisional staff.
Actions:
- Gaps analysis of exiting procedures to
improve effectiveness of disaster
impact assessments
- Conduct training to review the existing
SOP and assessment methodologies
MAFF Supplies/travel -
USD10,000
Activity Result 2.3: National and divisional
level stakeholder workshops conducted to
emphasize importance of DRR and M.
Actions:
-Undertake workshop for national and
divisional officers
MAFF
USD30,000
Output 2: Sub-Total USD90,000
OUTPUT 3: LESSONS EMERGING FROM EFFECTIVE M & E ARE CODIFIED AND DISSEMINATED Baseline:
- 3 Monitoring Visits (2012)
- 2 training reports with
recommendations implemented
incorporated in MOA Corporate
Targets: 2013:
- Project established & M&E systems
developed.
- Training of stakeholders conducted.
Activity Result 3.1:
An effective monitoring and evaluation (M
& E) system is developed and implemented
throughout the course of the project.
- Identify Key target groups with MRMD
and MAFF for questionnaire survey on
UNDP
Learning Costs –
USD20,000
17
INTENDED OUTPUTS, BASELINE
& INDICATORS
OUTPUT TARGETS (Disaggregated
by Year)
INDICATIVE ACTIVITIES
RESPONSI
BLE
PARTIES
INPUTS (US$)
Plan.
-
Performance Indicator:
At least 50% of the beneficiaries
implement knowledge gained in their
own communities.
Outcome Indicators:
Efficient delivery of project
activities in line with approved
annual work plan, quantified
by at least 90% delivery.
Endorsement of results and
findings by GOF and other
stakeholders.
Sources;
Project Progress report
Press releases
Project Board meeting documents
.
2014:
- Project reporting carried out
regularly.
RBM.
- Based on Feedback, develop
programme for emphasis on RBM,
including workshop for Senior and
Middle Managers and focus group
discussions of improving service
delivery.
Activity Result 3.2: Communication strategy
developed and implemented
Actions:
- Discuss communication needs amongst
project implementers and community
groups.
- Develop communications plan and
implement.
- Collate findings/best practices and
disseminate locally and internationally.
Miscellaneous –
USD8,000
Activity Result 3.3: Project Board Meetings
convened to oversee project activities. Actions:
- Develop project board meetings
schedule.
- Prepare Board Papers and circulate with
ample notice to meeting attendees.
- Minutes of meetings circulated and
decision implemented in efficient
manner.
Sub-
Contracts/Travel
– USD20,000
Project Manager
Costs – 12,000
Output 3: Sub-Total USD60,000
TOTAL US$370,000
18
IV. MANAGEMENT ARRANGEMENTS
Due to the situation with the project activities anchored in 2 different government
ministries i.e., MRMD and MAFF, UNDP will undertake the implementing partner role
however will work closely (through its CPRU and JOC Teams) with the afore mentioned
ministries to provide support and disburse funding for Outputs/Activities that these ministries
will be directly responsible for. UNDP will further enter into a Letter of Agreement (LOA)
with the 2 ministries which will further spell out the conditions for the fund transfer and
reporting obligations. Project Audit will be conducted together with the UNDP Country
Office Audit performed by the UNDP Office of Audit and Performance Review.
A Project Board, (refer above diagram and Annex 1 for TOR) will be convened and
will provide oversight and overall strategic guidance over the project. The Project Board will
be chaired by the Permanent Secretary for Ministry of Strategic Planning. The UNDP
Country Partnership and Results Unit will play a key role in the implementation of the
project. The CPRU Team Leader will be providing the overall assurance role on behalf of
UNDP and the CPRU Associate will be performing the functions of the Project Manager
(TOR attached as per Annex 2).
The TOR for the DRR/M Officer to be recruited by the MAFF is attached as Annex 3.
Project Manager
UNDP CPRU
Associate
Project Board
Senior Beneficiary
Commissioner Western, PS –
MRMD and PS - MAFF
Executive
PS – Min. of Strategic
Planning
Senior Supplier
UNDP Resident
Representative
Project Assurance UNDP Country Partnership and
Results Unit (CPRU)Team Leader
Project Support
MRMD and MAFF Admin and
Finance Division, UNDP Joint
Operations Centre (JOC)
Project Organisation Structure
Nadi Team
District Officer,
Agriculture,
Cooperative, Women,
Youth I-taukei Affairs,
and Labour Reps.
Ba/Nadarivatu Team
District Officer,
Agriculture,
Cooperative, Women,
Youth I-taukei Affairs
Reps.
Lautoka/Yasawa Team
District Officer,
Agriculture,
Cooperative, Women,
Youth I-taukei Affairs
Reps.
Tavua Team District Officer,
Agriculture, Cooperative,
Women, Youth and I-taukei
Affairs Reps.
19
V. MONITORING FRAMEWORK AND EVALUATION
In accordance with the programming policies and procedures outlined in the UNDP User
Guide, the project will be monitored through the following:
Within the annual cycle
On a quarterly basis, a quality assessment shall record progress towards the
completion of key results, based on quality criteria and methods captured in the
Quality Management table below.
An Issue Log shall be activated in Atlas and updated by the Project Manager to
facilitate tracking and resolution of potential problems or requests for change.
Based on the initial risk analysis submitted (see annex 1), a risk log shall be activated
in Atlas and regularly updated by reviewing the external environment that may affect
the project implementation.
Based on the above information recorded in Atlas, Bi-Annual Progress Reports (B-
APR) shall be submitted by the Project Manager to the Project Board through Project
Assurance, using the standard report format available in the Executive Snapshot.
A project Lesson-learned log shall be activated and regularly updated to ensure on-
going learning and adaptation within the organization, and to facilitate the preparation
of the Lessons-learned Report at the end of the project
A Monitoring Schedule Plan shall be activated in Atlas and updated to track key
management actions/events
Annually
Annual Review Report. An Annual Review Report shall be prepared by the Project
Manager and shared with the Project Board and the Outcome Board. As minimum
requirement, the Annual Review Report shall consist of the Atlas standard format for
the QPR covering the whole year with updated information for each above element of
the QPR as well as a summary of results achieved against pre-defined annual targets
at the output level.
Annual Project Review. Based on the above report, an annual project review shall
be conducted during the fourth quarter of the year or soon after, to assess the
performance of the project and appraise the Annual Work Plan (AWP) for the
following year. In the last year, this review will be a final assessment. This review is
driven by the Project Board and may involve other stakeholders as required. It shall
focus on the extent to which progress is being made towards outputs, and that these
remain aligned to appropriate outcomes.
Terminal/Final
A final (or terminal) report shall be compiled by the Project Manager and will be
reviewed by the Project Board, three months before the scheduled completion of the
project.
Should the Project Board decide or make a specific demand for a project evaluation,
an independent evaluation will be conducted with costs met from project savings or
additional funding provided by UNDP.
20
1. QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR PROGRAMME ACTIVITY RESULTS
Output 1: Livelihoods in Disaster Prone Communities with specific focus on subsistence and semi-subsistence agriculture and food security is restored and Community Driven Emergency Employment implemented.
Activity Result 1.1 Community driven emergency employment implemented in 4 districts covering 30 -35 community groups.
Start Date: Mar 2013 End Date: Apr 2013
Purpose To identify and engage 30 – 35 community-based groups routinely affected by natural disasters and to stabilize their livelihoods of affected people, esp. women, youth and other most vulnerable groups;
Description
1.1.1 - Undertake consultations with potential beneficiaries/community groups. 1.1.2 - Selection of beneficiaries for emergency employment 1.1.3 - Develop work programme for each of the community groups including physical measures to protect agricultural areas, assets and facilities.
Quality Criteria (How/with what indicators the quality of the activity result will be measured?)
Quality Method (Means of verification. what method will be used to determine if quality criteria have been met?)
Date of Assessment (When will the assessment of quality be performed?)
Livelihoods and disaster assessment reports (with sex and age disaggregated data) made available and shared with stakeholders for participatory planning;
Programme Progress Report; Site assessment; Field trips to project areas; Government reports; Consultancy reports; Weekly monitoring report which
aggregate daily monitoring Monitoring and Review report
Quarterly, annually and at the completion of the CFW;
Number of community-based group received temporary incomes with sex and age disaggregated data including vulnerability defined as selection criteria
At least 70% direct beneficiaries are women
At least 40% direct beneficiaries are youth
% of the vulnerable groups who directly benefited
At least 80% of targeted Community-based groups resume or establish viable small/micro enterprises due to programme support
Number of work days generated
At least 60 % of the Community-based groups can initiate rehabilitation of small enterprises effectively at a time of moderate natural disasters
Activity Result 1.2 Training on Financial Literacy and DRR/M conducted at the community level
Start Date: Mar 2013 End Date: Apr 2013
Purpose To build the basic capacity of communities in financial literacy and implementing DRR/M To
Description
1.2.1 Design and undertake training with selected groups identified.
1.2.2 Develop monitoring mechanisms to assess progress and results. Quality Criteria Quality Method Date of Assessment
Number of people trained with sex and age disaggregated data including vulnerability defined as selection criteria
Programme progress reports; Field visits; Training reports
Quarterly, annually and at the completion of the training;
Number of people targeted by awareness raising activities with sex and age disaggregated data
Number of groups which are able to receive a loan from Income Generation Programme run by Empower Pacific (Not sure if a group loan scheme is currently available, but
21
worth negotiating with EP)
Activity Result 1.3 Agriculture skill development for the target beneficiaries conducted
Start Date: Mar 2013 End Date: Apr 2013
Purpose To build agriculture skills/knowledge of communities on sustainable and disaster resilient practice; To promote DRR/CCA measure;
Description 1.3.1 Design and undertake training and awareness raising 1.3.2 Incorporate DRR (and CCA) practices/measure including those arising from recent TC Evan PDNA recommendations that focus on low-income households 1.3.3 Conduct training on best practice methods for resilience including nursery management);
Quality Criteria Quality Method Date of Assessment
Number of people trained with sex and age disaggregated data including vulnerability defined as selection criteria
Programme progress reports;
Field visits; Training reports
Quarterly, annually and at the completion of the training;
Number of DRR/CCA measures put in place for prevention of losses from disaster hazards and adverse impacts of CC
Activity Result 1.4 District and Divisional level Workshops held to increase local support capacities and identify and incorporate lessons learned for future implementation
Start Date: Apr 2013 End Date: May 2013
Purpose To build local government capacities in supporting community enterprise; To review CFW programme by correlating the results and impacts of the programme and discuss on the challenges and issues during the programme; To capture good practices and lessoned learned for sharing with key stakeholders.
Description 1.4.1 Undertake review workshop 1.4.2 Document good practices and lessons learned 1.4.3 Foster inter-community engagement around knowledge sharing i.e. site visits
Quality Criteria Quality Method Date of Assessment
Number of beneficiaries and government representatives participated in the workshop with sex and age disaggregated data
Programme progress reports;
Workshop report; On site visits Lessons leant report
At the completion of the workshop
Good practices and lessons learned effectively documented
Output 2: Enhanced capacity within DoA to address Disaster Risk Resilience and Mitigation in the Agriculture Sector
Start Date: 2013 End Date: 2014
Activity Result 2.1 Extract and or modification of existing datasets under the FASS to support recovery efforts in post disaster situations (Damage Assessments, affected areas, crop variety, seed distribution etc.).
Purpose To strengthen national capacities to support DRR/M activities within MAFF and improve responsiveness in post disaster situations.
Description 2.1.1 Recruit a DRR/M officer who will be a full-time staff based in Economic Planning and Statistics Division; 2.1.2 Provide technical and coordination support to the function of the EPSD unit.
Quality Criteria Quality Method Date of Assessment
A National staff posted as a full-time EPSD staff; Number of meeting/consultation organized by the EPSD with support from the full-time DRR/M Officer;
Progress reports
Quarterly, annually
22
Activity Result 2.2 Revisit existing Standard Operating Procedures and disaster damage and needs assessment methodologies and conduct training of divisional staff.
Start Date: 2013 End Date: 2014
Purpose To streamline and integrate SOPs into all aspects of DOA’s operations; To build response and coordination capacities including assessment implementation at the all levels To integrate the CFW modality into DOA’s response strategies in post crisis situations
Description 2.2.1 Review existing DRM SOPs, assessment methodologies 2.2.2 Explore integration of temporary community employment programmes targeting women, youth and the vulnerable as part of DOA’s disaster response mechanism (e.g. SOPs) 2.2.3 Build capacity (e.g. through training) of divisional, district officers to implement the improved SOPs, assessment methodologies;
Quality Criteria Quality Method Date of Assessment
SOPs, assessment revalidated in consultation with planning officers and divisional and district officers Number of government representatives (with sex disaggregated data) trained on SOPs, assessment;
Progress reports Government media
/reports Training reports
Quarterly, annually
Activity Result 2.3 National and divisional level stakeholder workshops conducted to emphasize importance of DRR and M.
Start Date: 2013 End Date: 2014
Purpose To establish database to support recovery efforts in the post disaster (e.g. damage assessments, hazard map, crop variety, seed distribution etc); To expedite DOA’s assessment and analysis at a time of a disaster
Description 2.3.1 Consolidate the existing data and gather other data in partnership with regional technical agencies 2.3.2 Build capacity of the relevant officers in maintaining and updating the data base
Quality Criteria Quality Method Date of Assessment
Number of government representatives (with sex disaggregated data)trained on database;
Progress reports Training reports Government media
/reports On site visits
Quarterly, annually
Updated and comprehensive database made available for at a times of a disaster
Output 3: LESSONS EMERGING FROM EFFECTIVE M & E ARE CODIFIED AND DISSEMINATED
Start Date: 2013 End Date: 2014
Action Result 3.1 An effective monitoring and evaluation (M & E) system is developed and implemented throughout the course of the project.
Purpose To effective M&E system put in place throughout the project; To ensure government ownership and sustainability of the activities resumed/established under the CFW programme.
Description 3.1.1 Develop M & E system at the national, divisional and district level; 3.1.2 Provide technical and project management support by UNDP; 3.1.3 Conduct Project Board meetings on a regular basis.
Quality Criteria Quality Method Date of Assessment
Effective multi-sector integrated team formulated at the divisional and district level; Number of project board meetings conducted
Progress reports Board meeting
minutes
Quarterly, annually
Action Result 3.2 Communication strategy developed and implemented
Start Date: 2013 End Date: 2014
Purpose To disseminate information of the programme to targeted communities timely and effectively; To capture and disseminate the results and impacts of projects into the general
23
public, donors; To begin to influence government policies and strategies early on in post crisis situations; To corroborate with government communications officers effectively.
Description 3.2.1 Formulate an effective communication strategy and develop communications tools; 3.2.2 Implement the communication strategy in partnership with government communication officers and media.
Quality Criteria Quality Method Date of Assessment
Communication strategy formulated in consultation with key stakeholders, government communication officers; Number of communication tools developed; Number of media release (UNDP site, Newspaper etc)
Progress reports Government media
/reports
Quarterly, annually
Action Result 3.3 Project Board Meetings convened to oversee project activities.
Start Date: 2013 End Date: 2014
Purpose The purpose of the Board Meeting is to formalize the interaction between the Implementing Partner, the Supplier and the Beneficiary.
Description Project Board Meeting conducted regularly to update stakeholders on the progress of the project.
Quality Criteria Quality Method Date of Assessment
# of Project Board papers and minutes produced on time. # of Project Decisions implemented as consequence of project board meeting.
Progress reports Government media
/reports
Quarterly, annually
24
VI. LEGAL CONTEXT
This document together with the UNDAF Action Plan signed by the Government and UNDP
which is incorporated herein by reference, constitute together a Project Document as referred
to in the Standard Agreement on Operational Assistance (OPAS); as such all provisions of
the UNDAF Action Plan apply to this document. All references in the OPAS to “Executing
Agency” shall be deemed to refer to “Implementing Partner”, as such term is defined and
used in the UNDAF Action Plan and this document.
UNDP as the Implementing Partner shall comply with the policies, procedures and practices
of the United Nations safety and security management system.
UNDP will undertake all reasonable efforts to ensure that none of the project funds are used
to provide support to individuals or entities associated with terrorism and that the recipients
of any amounts provided by UNDP hereunder do not appear on the list maintained by the
Security Council Committee established pursuant to resolution 1267 (1999). The list can be
accessed via http://www.un.org/sc/committees/1267/aq_sanctions_list.shtml. This provision
must be included in all sub-contracts or sub-agreements entered into under this Project
Document.
25
VII. ANNEX 1- TERMS OF REFERENCE (PROJECT BOARD)
Background
The Fiji Livelihoods Recovery through enhanced Food Security is a joint project between
UNDP and the Government of Fiji. The project has 3 outputs, 2 of which are proposed to be
implemented by the Ministry of Rural and Maritime Development with the third
implemented by the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries. The Ministry of
Strategic Planning plays a pivotal role in the implementation of the programme given its
sectoral planning role and is proposed to take the executive role under the project.
Roles and Responsibilities
The Project Board Mechanism is meant to bring all stakeholders (i.e., the beneficiaries, the
implementers and those that provide funds i.e., the supplier) into a common platform to
assess project progress and provide guidance on the implementation of the project and
successful accomplishment of results. The proposed structure for the Board is as per Annex
1. Specific roles of the board is outlined below:
Provide strategic guidance and advice to the Project Manager on project related
activities particularly on specific problems and issues that may have a bearing on the
progress of the achievements of the Project.
Review and approve proposed annual work plan in consultation with UNDP Fiji
Multi-Country Office.
Facilitate exchange of information nationally, regionally and internationally on
awareness of project developments, lessons learnt and best practices.
Assist in identification and securing of additional financial and technical resources
for the project activities from both national and external sources.
Help facilitate and ensure that targets identified in the annual work plans are met
within agreed timeframes and with given resource allocations and assist provide
alternative remedial solutions where the need arises.
Facilitate and mobilize government, private and civil society support for this
Project.
Undertake any other responsibilities that may be identified fby UNDP and other
project stakeholders.
Specific responsibilities in terms of organizing project board meetings are identified as
follows:
1. Pursuant to the agreements under the Local Project Appraisal Committee, the
appointed Project Manager (assisted by the UNDP Multi Country Office) will prepare
a first draft of the Project Progress Report and share this with the UNDP MCO
team for review and finalization.
2. A copy of the Project Progress Report, updated Issues and Risk Log,
Communications and Monitoring Plan and other relevant Board Papers will be shared
with the PS for Strategic Planning who will then issue an invitation to the other
stakeholders for a project board meeting to take place. A two week advance notice in
terms of setting meeting dates and submission of documents is ideal and will be
observed to the extent possible.
3. Decisions and other relevant discussions including follow up actions will be captured
in the minutes of the project board. The Project Manager takes a lead role in
formulating the minutes and sharing the same with all concerned parties.
26
4. Once the meeting minutes have been finalized, the decisions and/or action points will
be shared with the implementing partners (MAFF and MRMD) for their appropriate
action.
Timeframe for Meeting
The Project Board meeting will take place at a convenient time as agreed by the Local
Project Appraisal Committee (LPAC). Ideally this meeting will take place once every quarter
however the timeframe could be extended as mutually agreed by all parties. The venue for
the meeting will be Suva as most stakeholders are based here however there might be a need
to have some board meetings in the West so that board members can take the opportunity to
visit the project sites.
27
VIII. ANNEX 2: TERMS OF REFERENCE, DRR/M OFFICER – EPSD/MAFF
Background
The Fiji Livelihoods Recovery through enhanced Food Security is a joint project between
UNDP and the Government of Fiji. The project has 3 outputs, 2 of which are proposed to be
implemented by the Ministry of Rural and Maritime Development (MRMD) with the third
implemented by the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF). The Ministry of
Strategic Planning plays a pivotal role in the implementation of the programme given its
sectoral planning role and is proposed to take the executive role of the project.
The MAFF will be responsible for implementing the Output 2 of the project which is on
enhancing the capacity of MAFF Officers across the country in Disaster Risk Reduction and
Mitigation. The 3 principal activity results under output 2 are:
Activity Result 2.1: Utilize the Fiji Agriculture Statistics System to support recovery
efforts in post disaster situations (Damage Assessments, affected areas, crop variety, seed
distribution etc.).
Activity Result 2.2: Revisit existing Standard Operating Procedures and disaster damage
and needs assessment methodologies and conduct training of divisional staff.
Activity Result 2.3: National and divisional level stakeholder workshops conducted to
emphasize importance of DRR and M in the Agriculture Sector.
Roles and Responsibilities
The DRR/M Officer will be based in the Economic Planning and Statistics Division of the
MAFF and will report to the Division Head, i.e., the Chief Economist. The primary role of
the person will be to coordinate the activities under Output 2 in consultation and approval
with the Chief Economist. Specific responsibilities assigned to the DRR/M Officer are as
follows:
1. Familiarize with the Fiji Agriculture Statistics System with a view to extracting and/or
updating data/information to support food security through crop diversification,
sustainable land use practices and dissemination of information to farmers to minimize
crop loss/damage during disasters.
- Liaise with relevant departments within the MAFF as well as the Lands
Department to extract information on arable land, i.e., those that are currently
used in food production as well as other potential sites that could be used to
expand food production.
- Update information on current variety of staple and cash crops used in subsistence
and micro level farming as well as explore other hybrid or disaster resistant
varieties that can be used to increase yield and minimize crop damage.
- Explore options and submit proposals for expanding knowledge and information
to extension officers and communities on crop protection and increasing agro
based food production.
2. Review existing Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) in times of natural disasters and
ensure training is conducted amongst field based MAFF staff to increase knowledge and
application of the SOPs.
- Review and revise SOPS based on best practices adopted within the Agriculture
Sector both locally and overseas.
28
- Review post disaster assessment tools to ensure complementarity with
international best practices.
- Organize training for field based MAFF staff to increase familiarity and
application of SOPs during natural disasters.
3. Liaise with agriculture stakeholders and coordinate activities to stimulate learning and
application of best practices within the industry.
- Identify and engage with key partners to identify resource persons that can be
used to share knowledge with micro/small scale farmers
- Organize learning activities connecting resource persons with small/micro level
farmers.
- Collate results and monitor progress in terms of adopted changes in farming
practices.
Duration:
The DRR/M Officer position will be hired for an initial period of 1 year with extension to the
second year subject to performance. Further extension of position will be subject to
performance and availability of funding.
29
IX. ANNEX 3: TERMS OF REFERENCE, PROJECT MANAGER
Background
The Fiji Livelihoods Recovery through enhanced Food Security is a joint project between
UNDP and the Government of Fiji (GoF). The project has 3 outputs, 2 of which are proposed
to be implemented through the Ministry of Rural and Maritime Development (MRMD) with
the third implemented through the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF).
The Ministry of Strategic Planning (MSP) plays a pivotal role in the implementation of the
programme given its emphasis on sectoral planning as well as the primary liaison between
the GoF and UNDP. It is therefore proposed that the MSP will be the executive authority of
the project and will chair all board meetings.
Given the multi-ministry focus of the project, it is proposed that UNDP retains the overall
implementing partner responsibility and sub-contracts MRMD and MAFF for the specific
outputs that they will be responsible for.
The 3 project outputs are listed as follows:
Output 1 - Livelihoods in Disaster Prone Communities with specific focus on subsistence
and semi-subsistence agriculture and food security is restored and Community Driven
Emergency Employment implemented. Proposed responsible partner is MRMD
Output 2 - Enhanced capacity of the Department of Agriculture and stakeholders in
strengthening disaster risk resilience and mitigation in the agriculture sector. Proposed
responsible partner is MAFF
Output 3 - Lessons emerging from effective M & E are codified and disseminated. UNDP
will responsible for this output and will be engaging with MRMD and MAFF through the
Project Manager/Communications Specialist to facilitate activities under this output.
Roles and Responsibilities
The Project Management Role is a critical role as it is responsible for coordinating of
activities under the project, mostly related but not limited to: i) Acting as intermediary
between UNDP Joint Operations Centre and the 2 Responsible Partners (MAFF and MRMD)
in terms of preparation of payment requests and disbursement of funds, ii) Collation of
project progress report and iii) Submission of progress reports through the Executive i.e.,
MSP and onwards to the Project Board members. The Project Manager also ensures that all
stakeholders are kept abreast of the progress made by the project and important decisions
made to facilitate timely implementation. While the MRMD and the MAFF will be
responsible for activities for Outputs 1 and 2, the Project Manager will be liaising with these
ministries to ensure the following:
1. Upon the approval of the Project Document and the Annual Workplan, the Project
Manager will be responsible for organizing activities relating to the initiation of the
project.
2. The Project Manager will guide the officials of the MAFF and the MRMD to put
together the 6 monthly workplan for each of the 3 project outputs. At this point,
modes of fund disbursement, procurement of project related supplies and other
associated activities will be identified to ensure that MAFF and MRMD staff are fully
aware of their responsibilities viz. a viz. the Project Manager and who is doing what,
when and how.
30
3. Once the 6 monthly workplan has been signed and approved with the responsible
partner, the Project Manager will interact with the Joint Operations Centre of UNDP
to facilitate payments to the MAFF and MRMD as well as other idenfitied vendors
for implementation of activities as specified under the workplan.
4. Together with the Communications Specialist, the Project Manager will undertake
routine monitoring of the project however will coordinate his/her activities with the
relevant officials of the MAFF and MRMD. The MSP will be kept abreast of all
important issues in the implementation stage and may be asked to convene an ad-hoc
board meeting as and when the need arises. The Project Board meeting will under
normal circumstances be convened 2 weeks before the six monthly workplan has
lapsed.
5. The Project Manager will collate information and prepare a first draft of the project
progress report and the subsequent 6 month workplan. These will be shared firstly
with the MAFF and MRMD before it is finalized and sent to the MSP for review and
onward forwarding to the rest of the Board Members. The format of the Project
Progress Report will be based on the standard UNDP formats but could be modified
to integrate pertinent information gathered from the field.
6. The Project Manager will assist in collating the minutes of the Board Meeting and
obtaining the signature of the Board Chair, i.e., the PS for MSP. Follow up actions
emanating from the Board Meeting will be taken into account in the approval of the
subsequent bi-annual workplan.
Duration:
The Project Manager position is parallel to the duration of the project which is initially for 2
years. However this will be reviewed and revised as and when the need arises. As the
functions of the Project Manager will not be full time, a nominal allocation of USD10,000
has been allocated under the budget for UNDP to recover costs for the appropriate person
assigned to undertake the Project Manager functions.
31
ANNUAL WORKPLAN (2013)
EXPECTED OUTPUTS and Target
And baseline, indicators including annual targets
PLANNED ACTIVITIES
List activity results and associated actions
TIMEFRAME
RESPONSIBLE PARTY
PLANNED BUDGET
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Funding Source
Budget Description
Amount in USD
MRMD - Ministry of Rural and Maritime Development MAFF – Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries DIM – Direct Implementation, BCPR – Bureau for Crisis Prevention and
Recovery TRAC – UNDP Core Funds
OUTPUT 1: Livelihoods in Disaster Prone Communities with specific focus on subsistence and semi-subsistence agriculture and food security is restored
and Community Driven Emergency Employment implemented
Baseline:
- 6,000 dwelling houses
damaged either partly or
fully.
- 60% of Fiji’s total population
affected by TC Evan, 49% -
females.-
- F$17m in damages sustained
(crops, livestock) in the
Western Division (Ba,
Lautoka, Tavua, Nadi,
Yasawa)
- Job losses temporary and
more evident in Tourism and
Agriculture Sector, Farm
Labourers were the most hit.
Performance Indicator
# of community-based group
benefited with sex-disaggregated
data
# of work days generated
# of DRR initiatives/measures
Targets:
2013: 30 - 35
farming/fisheries venture
groups established supporting
some 1000 – 1200 individuals.
50% or more, roughly 600
beneficiaries to be females.
Activity Result 1.1: Community
driven emergency employment
implemented in 4 districts covering
30 -35 community groups.
Actions:
MRMD as lead
Support
provided by the
Integrated
Team located
in the
Commissioner
western’s
Office
BCPR
Micro-
capital
Grants
Supplies
120,000
30,000
- Undertake consultations with
potential beneficiaries/community
groups.
- Selection of beneficiaries for
emergency employment and
conduct training for Team
Leaders.
- Develop work programme for
each of the community groups
including physical measures to
protect agricultural areas, assets
and facilities.
Office
Activity Result 1.2 – Training in
Financial Literacy and DRR/M
conducted at the community level
Actions:
MRMD TRAC
Travel &
supplies 10,000
32
EXPECTED OUTPUTS and Target
And baseline, indicators including annual targets
PLANNED ACTIVITIES
List activity results and associated actions
TIMEFRAME
RESPONSIBLE PARTY
PLANNED BUDGET
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Funding Source
Budget Description
Amount in USD
undertaken
# of people trained with sex and
age disaggregated data
# women and youth participants
Outcome Indicators
# of community-based
farming/fishing ventures which
are able to respond to a disaster
effectively at a time of natural
disasters
Sources
- Project monitoring report
Field visits
- Identify financial literacy
through questionnaire survey to
be completed by the Team
Leaders.
- Analyse survey and develop
appropriate programmes tailor
made to suit the communities
- Engage with NGOs and other
programmes particularly on
community loan schemes.
- Develop monitoring mechanisms
to assess progress and results
Activity Result 1.3: Agriculture skills
development for the target
beneficiaries conducted
Actions:
MAFF
Misc. 2,000
- Design and undertake training and
awareness raising
- Incorporate DRR (and CCA)
practices/measure including those
arising from recent TC Evan
PDNA recommendations that
focus on low-income households
TRAC
- Conduct training on best practice
methods for resilience including
nursery management
Activity Result 1.4: District and
Divisional Level Workshops held to
identify best practices and
incorporate lessons learned for
future implementation
MRMD &
MAFF -- --
33
EXPECTED OUTPUTS and Target
And baseline, indicators including annual targets
PLANNED ACTIVITIES
List activity results and associated actions
TIMEFRAME
RESPONSIBLE PARTY
PLANNED BUDGET
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Funding Source
Budget Description
Amount in USD
Actions:
- Undertake review workshop
- Document good practices and
lessons learned
- Foster inter-community
engagement around knowledge
sharing ie site visits
Sub Total 162,000
OUTPUT 2: Enhanced capacity of the Department of Agriculture and stakeholders in strengthening disaster risk resilience and mitigation in the
agriculture sector.
- - Activity Result 2.1: Provision of
additional support to establish
database to support recovery efforts
in post disaster situations (Damage
Assessments, affected areas, crop
variety, seed distribution etc.).
Actions:
MAFF TRAC
DRM
Officer
5,000
- Prepare TOR for the DRM officer
and recruit.
- Recruit local consultant to
strengthen DRM capacity within
DOA and conduct capacity
assessment.
- Consolidate existing data and
gather other data in partnership
with regional technical agencies
34
EXPECTED OUTPUTS and Target
And baseline, indicators including annual targets
PLANNED ACTIVITIES
List activity results and associated actions
TIMEFRAME
RESPONSIBLE PARTY
PLANNED BUDGET
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Funding Source
Budget Description
Amount in USD
Activity Result 2.2: Revisit existing
Standard Operating Procedures and
disaster damage and needs assessment
methodologies and conduct training of
divisional staff.
Actions:
MAFF TRAC Supplies/
Travel 5,000 - Gaps analysis of exiting
procedures to improve
effectiveness of disaster impact
assessments
- Conduct training to review the
existing SOP and assessment
methodologies
Activity Result 2.3: National and
divisional level stakeholder workshops
conducted to emphasize importance of
DRR and M.
Actions:
MAFF -- --
--
- Undertake workshop for national
and divisional officers
Sub Total $10,000
OUTPUT 3: Lessons emerging from effective M & E are codified and disseminated. Activity Result 3.1: An effective
monitoring and evaluation (M & E)
system is developed and implemented
throughout the course of the project.
Actions:
UNDP TRAC
Learning
costs
5,000
35
EXPECTED OUTPUTS and Target
And baseline, indicators including annual targets
PLANNED ACTIVITIES
List activity results and associated actions
TIMEFRAME
RESPONSIBLE PARTY
PLANNED BUDGET
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Funding Source
Budget Description
Amount in USD
- Identify Key target groups with
MRMD and MAFF for
questionnaire survey on RBM.
- Based on Feedback, develop
programme for emphasis on
RBM, including workshop for
Senior and Middle Managers and
focus group discussions of
improving service delivery
Activity Result 3.2: Communication
strategy developed and implemented
Actions:
TRAC Misc.
5,000
- Discuss communication needs
amongst project implementers and
community groups.
- Develop communications plan
and implement.
- Collate findings/best practices
and disseminate locally and
internationally
Activity Result 3.3: Project Board
Meetings convened to oversee project
activities.
Actions:
TRAC Contracts/
Travel 10,000
- Develop project board meetings
schedule. TRAC Project
Manager 6,000
- Prepare Board Papers and
circulate with ample notice to
meeting attendees.
36
EXPECTED OUTPUTS and Target
And baseline, indicators including annual targets
PLANNED ACTIVITIES
List activity results and associated actions
TIMEFRAME
RESPONSIBLE PARTY
PLANNED BUDGET
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Funding Source
Budget Description
Amount in USD
- Minutes of meetings circulated
and decision implemented in
efficient manner..
Sub Total 26,000
TOTAL - USD 193,000
Summary of 2013 Budget:
Funding Distribution by Output: Funding Distribution by Fund Source:
Output 1 – Community Temporary Employment generated - USD
Output 2 – DRR/M Capacity at MAFF Strengthened - USD
Output 3 – Codification of Lessons Learned - USD
BCPR– USD
TRAC - USD
- USD USD
Approved: Approved:
_______________________________
______________________________
On behalf of the UNDP On behalf of the CPAP Coordinating Agency
Mr. Knut Ostby
Resident Representative
UNDP Fiji Country Office
Date: ______________
Mr. Pita Wise
Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Strategic Planning
Date: _______________________
37