Mid-Term Evaluation of Building National and Local Capacities for Disaster Risk Management in Rwanda

Report Cover Image
Evaluation Plan:
2013-2018, Rwanda
Evaluation Type:
Mid Term Project
Planned End Date:
04/2017
Completion Date:
11/2017
Status:
Completed
Management Response:
Yes
Evaluation Budget(US $):
29,861

Share

Document Type Language Size Status Downloads
Download document FinalIndependentMTE-MIDIMAR-UNDP-9Mar2017-final.pdf report English 1650.98 KB Posted 2490
Download document TOR Mid term evaluation MIDIMAR Final.pdf tor English 493.08 KB Posted 1295
Title Mid-Term Evaluation of Building National and Local Capacities for Disaster Risk Management in Rwanda
Atlas Project Number: 00075418
Evaluation Plan: 2013-2018, Rwanda
Evaluation Type: Mid Term Project
Status: Completed
Completion Date: 11/2017
Planned End Date: 04/2017
Management Response: Yes
Focus Area:
  • 1. Democratic Governance
  • 2. Crisis Prevention & Recovery
  • 3. Others
Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2018-2021)
  • 1. Output 5.4. Preparedness systems in place to effectively address the consequences of and response to natural hazards (e.g. geo-physical and climate related) and man-made crisis at all levels of government and community
SDG Goal
  • Goal 1. End poverty in all its forms everywhere
  • Goal 13. Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts
SDG Target
  • 1.5 By 2030, build the resilience of the poor and those in vulnerable situations and reduce their exposure and vulnerability to climate-related extreme events and other economic, social and environmental shocks and disasters
  • 13.2 Integrate climate change measures into national policies, strategies and planning
Evaluation Budget(US $): 29,861
Source of Funding: Core resources
Evaluation Expenditure(US $): 29,861
Joint Programme: Yes
Joint Evaluation: Yes
  • Joint with UN Agencies
Evaluation Team members:
Name Title Nationality
Brenda C Langdon Ms
GEF Evaluation: No
Key Stakeholders: MIDIMAR, Districts
Countries: RWANDA
Comments:

This is the Mid-Term Project Evaluation of the project -Building National and Local Capacities for Disaster Risk Management in Rwanda. This project evaluation was completed well in March 2017. It was not on the ERC Evaluation plan 2017. So, now it is considered and inserted in ERC Evaluation plan 2017.

Lessons
Findings
1.

The project is well-aligned with national priorities.

The project is well-aligned with national priorities. The overall governance structure and programmatic priorities of the UN System at country level in Rwanda, as expressed in its UNDAP 2013-2018, both vertically and horizontally, with national priorities and plans, is explicitly linked to the government’s priorities as expressed in the national Economic Development and Poverty Reduction Strategy, EDPRS, 2013-2018. Likewise, the UN’s contributions to Disaster Risk Reduction and Management are wellaligned with the national vision of building a “disaster resilient nation” and its related mainstreaming across a wide expanse of priority sectors ranging from agriculture to education to environment and natural resources, and infrastructure, among others, as expressed in sections 6.58 and 6.59 of the EDPRS II. 


Tag: Disaster risk management Disaster Risk Reduction Relevance National

2.

The project supports the UNDP global mandate.

There is a high degree of correlation between the UNDP Global Mandate as expressed in its Strategic Plan 2014-2017 Area of Work 3. Building Resilience and the UNDP Rwanda Disaster Preparedness Response, and Recovery activities in the following projects: 1) “ Building Local and National Capacities for Disaster Risk Reduction in Rwanda” project, 2) “Preparedness for Resilient Recovery” funded by the Government of Japan, 3) “Enhancing Human Security and Resilience-Building in Rwanda” funded by the UN Trust Fund for Human Security” and ) 4) the Restoration of Critical Community Infrastructure and Emergency Off-Farm Livelihoods” funded by CERF as a joint programme response to landslides in Gakenke District in 2016.


Tag: Resilience building Relevance Policies & Procedures UNDP Management

3.

The project has been successful in providing normative policy support.

The role of the “Building Local and National Capacities for Disaster Risk Reduction in Rwanda” project has provided normative policy support in the implementation of global agreements, norms and standards, such as the Hyogo Framework for Action, and the MDGs. The need for normative policy support will continue, as the Sustainable Development Goals and the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction become fully operational, provide more global coherence regarding health, development and climate change, and put resilience and human security at the center of the development agenda. This is an evolving and ongoing process. 


Tag: Resilience building Relevance Rule of law Mainstreaming, Acceleration and Policy Support (MAPS)

4.

The project has an appropriate balance of upstream/downstream activities.

The project is directed at strengthening the synergies across the development and humanitarian sectors, and realizes that risk reduction is ultimately oriented at building resilience, sustaining and preventing the reversal of development gains. While main tenets of the project are focused upstream on various types of integrated policy support for national and district governments, the project also provides direct support and service delivery to districts and communities affected by disasters. The disaster risk reduction work, in ten of Rwanda’s 30 very well-structured districts, is well-aligned to district development and multi-sectoral plans. 


Tag: Relevance National Regional Vulnerable

5.

The project has assimilated Rwanda’s “homegrown solutions” comprehensively, demonstrating a good integration of local knowledge and practices.

Rwanda’s “homegrown solutions” were adopted in 2006 and are often associated with its tremendous momentum in development. One example is “Imihigo” V. Findings 26 which means to “vow to deliver”, a pre-colonial cultural practice in Rwanda where an individual sets targets or goals to be achieved within a specific period. Development project results are incorporated into the performance plans of key government stakeholders, who are held personally responsible for their accomplishment and drive the process. Another example is “Umuganda” or ‘coming together in common purpose to achieve an outcome’. In traditional Rwandan culture, members of the community would call upon their family, friends and neighbors to help them complete a difficult task; the process is now institutionalized countrywide and forms the basis of self-help. A third example is “Ubudehe,” the poverty classification system previously described. “Gacaca” or the community courts, are used to resolve conflicts (especially related to the post-genocide period).


Tag: Resilience building Relevance Integration Programme Synergy

6.

The project exhibits strong evidence of an explicit effort to promote gender equality and the empowerment of women

and would correspond to a gender marker of “2” in the UNDP system, wherein activities that have gender equality as a significant objective are rated, but gender equality is not the explicit focus. Gender equality is evident at both the institutional level, where women occupy such leadership positions as Minister of Disaster Management and Refugee Affairs (MIDIMAR) and Director of the Special Project Implementation Unit and Early Warning Systems Specialist at the key national implementation level, as well as in Districts, where women occupy such positions as Deputy Vice-Mayor for Social Affairs, Social Protection Officer and Security Officer, among others. The UNDP office itself has achieved over 50% representation of women, including at management levels (drivers excepted), including both the Programme Specialist overseeing this project and Technical Advisor for Disaster Risk Reduction. Female-headed households, who tend to be among the poorest, are among the key participants and gender is mainstreamed. In collaboration with a strong district government, the UN Joint Programme in Gakenke has gone to great lengths to ensure that benefits of the disaster response, including cash for work, cash grants, food for work and housing, among others, benefit women and elicit their full involvement in decision-making. Despite these efforts, women still experience patriarchal attitudes, higher levels of poverty, lower levels of education and less access to livelihoods and markets, so gender requires sustained, long-term efforts as a cross-cutting strategy, as represented in the UN’s ongoing five year plans beyond 2018. In Rwanda, this is especially true in the least geographically accessible areas. The systematic collection of gender-disaggregated data, while improving, could be further strengthened.


Tag: Relevance Gender Equality Women's Empowerment

7.

 The project is appropriately directed at vulnerable groups.

The UNDP project builds very successfully on the government’s system of ubudehe by which people participate in classifying each household by the level and type of poverty in which they live, and capturing it in the national data base. UNDP directs its efforts primarily to those in Categories 1 and 2, or those directly impacted by disasters, who lose their assets. This is concordant with Rwanda’s Human Development priorities. Illustratively, in Gakenke, among the 80,784 registered households, 8.4% (9,598) fell in Category 1, and 39.5% (31,208) in Category 2. The poorest, in Category 1, do not own houses, and can barely afford daily subsistence. The poor, in Category 2, have or rent a dwelling, but rarely have fulltime employment, and work as daily laborers or subsistence farmers. Category 3 includes those with small and medium enterprises, or excess cash crops, and houses. Category 4 includes those who own larger scale businesses, are NGO or government employees, or public servants. 


Tag: Relevance Inequalities Vulnerable

8.

The project on whole does not adopt a human-rights based approach, but its recent CERF and UN Trust Fund for Humanity Security components show advancement.

While the UNDP activities support the attainment of human rights for groups experiencing the greatest humanitarian needs, including survivors of disasters and indirectly, refugees, and draw upon participation and voice, there was no clear evidence of an explicit human rights based approach in place aimed at determining causality and to inform V. Findings 27 programme design from the inception of the project. At the end of 2016, the projects were exploring a human security approach that acknowledges the interlinkages between security, development and human rights; this might influence their future articulation. Human rights-based approaches are normatively based on international human rights standards, and emphasize accountability, equality, empowerment and participation. They are the operational expression of the link between development and human rights. They utilize “change language” and put changes in the lives of project participants at the impact level. For example, “26,000 people living in disaster-affected sectors will have access to clean water and hygiene by June 2017” or “1,425 households living in disaster-affected sectors who lost their homes will have disaster-resilient shelter by June 2017” are HRBA outcomes. HRBA approaches are generally used in tandem with results-based management, which is discussed under efficiency.


Tag: Relevance Human rights Security

9.

The theory of change expressed in the relevant sections of the UNDAP Results and Resources Framework is limited and would benefit from strengthening.

The theory of change expressed in the relevant sections of the UNDAP Results and Resources Framework and initial five-year project document and their respective hierarchy of results is limited and would benefit from strengthening. In specific, the outcomes are not well-elaborated, nor are the outcome level indicators “smart.” Means of verification are likewise often absent. A ‘theory of change’ should address causality and explain how activities are understood to produce a series of results that contribute to achieving the final intended impacts. It is essentially a hierarchy. A theory of change approach guides strategic planning or programme/policy planning to identify the current situation (in terms of needs and opportunities), the intended situation and what needs to be done to move from one to the other. This can help to design more realistic goals, clarify accountabilities and establish a common understanding of the strategies to be used to achieve the goals.


Tag: Relevance Theory of Change

10.

Many of the indicators and means of verification in the UNDAP RRF are weak in sections related to this project and the necessary logic flow and results hierarchy are not manifest.

This is of relevance as the project itself lacks clear articulation and indicators at the goal and purpose levels and thus is dependent on the UNDAP, as stated in the evaluation strategy for the 2015 UN Trust Fund for Human Security proposal. While the logic in the UNDAP Results and Resources Framework identifies outcomes such as 3B1. “Reduced negative impact and improved recovery of populations due to humanitarian crises” the outcome indicators (% of population above the HH poverty level), is in fact, barely related and would not be a valid measure of either reduced negative impact or improved recovery. Moreover, the outcome is an impact related to changes in human fulfilment of rights. The outcomes should in fact, reflect changes in the performance of duty bearers, institutions and services, and the outputs should reflect related changes in capacity. With some tweaking and using a broader concept of capacity development, as the Government of Rwanda does, the project could reconceptualize Outputs 1 and 5 as outcome level results, and subsume Outputs 2 ,3 and 4 as outputs under Output/Outcome 1. See Recommendation 5. The output indicators (national preparedness and response strategy in place, yearly updated disaster map in place, etc.) could in fact become institutional outcome indicators, but need to be enhanced in terms of their SMART formulation. It is noted, however, that more recent project components, such as the CERF project for Gakenke and the UNTFHS joint programme, both initiated in 2016, demonstrate better logic.


Tag: Relevance Monitoring and Evaluation

11.

The project has had mixed success in attaining its planned outputs and outcomes in accordance with its 2013-2018 Project Document and its Results Framework.

On the positive side, MIDIMAR, with the project’s assistance, has had substantial success in achieving many of the pillars of the Hyogo Framework for Action in all its five priority areas and related indicators, which is very significant for a government V. Findings 28 ministry founded in 2010. The Hyogo Framework for Action “Building the Resilience of Nations and Communities in Disasters” was endorsed by the UN General Assembly in 2005. The framework, which represents a global consensus on the priorities for disaster risk reduction and management, is built around five key actions: 1. Ensure that disaster risk reduction is a national and a local priority with a strong institutional basis for implementation. 2. Identify, assess and monitor disaster risks and enhance early warning. 3. Use knowledge, innovation and education to build a culture of safety and resilience at all levels. 4. Reduce the underlying risk factors. 5. Strengthen disaster preparedness for effective response at all levels.


Tag: Effectiveness Project and Programme management Capacity Building

12.

The lack of a capacity assessment and a capacity development plan are substantial weaknesses in a capacity development project.

The overall strategy of the five-year project describes capacity a relatively holistic manner across the three tiers of an enabling environment, organizational and individual capacities, and a variety of related outputs are described in the narrative. One of the key, preliminary output targets entailed conducting a DRR capacity development plan to undertake a baseline capacity assessment of MIDIMAR, the NPDRR and DDMC’s and SDMC’s in 2013. The work was delayed for nearly two years due to recruitment and procurement delays, and when it was undertaken, in 2015, by a firm named GreenWise, it was submitted late and was deemed that the technical quality of the report was unsatisfactory in a joint review process. Therefore, there is little evidence that a systematic capacity assessment and capacity development plan were ever adopted, both of which are fundamental to a capacity development project. Without them, strong evidence-based decision-making is difficult to achieve.


Tag: Effectiveness Project and Programme management Capacity Building

13.

The real impact of this project is that of a disaster risk governance initiative that is aligned with the priority actions in the Hyogo Framework, although it was not conceptualized per se.

The project has more characteristics of a disaster risk governance initiative rather than as a capacity development initiative, as its mandate has been focused on strengthening institutional systems and legal and policy mechanisms to govern the reduction and management of disaster risk, as well as supporting the foundational processes and facilitating effective implementation. Part of this may be attributable to the funding difficulties described under Efficiency, below


Tag: Disaster risk management Disaster Risk Reduction Effectiveness Local Governance Public administration reform

14.

The achievement of this impact has been positively influenced by the strategic positioning of a Technical Advisor in MIDIMAR.

In the words of a national government stakeholder, the joint programming approach has greater facilitated the government’s access to the UN; in the past, it was a V. Findings 29 perplexing array of institutions with differing mandates. The positioning of the Technical Advisor in MIDIMAR has greatly facilitated communication and coordination, both in the eyes of national stakeholders and other UN agencies.


Tag: Effectiveness Strategic Positioning

15.

The disaster response to the landslides in Gakenke, Muhanga and Ngororero Districts beginning in May 2016 was timely, effective and comprehensive.

The response by MIDIMAR and other government agencies occurred within 24 hours of notification, and comprehensive assistance was preceded by rapid assessments, in alignment with district authorities, five UN agencies, international and national NGOs and key donors. The disasters caused 54 deaths, 38 injuries, the destruction of more than 3,500 hectares of agricultural crops and the destruction of 2,317 houses, rendering 13,500 people (including children) homeless. This resulted in serious food insecurity and a lack of income in the next three months for about 4,000 families (or approximately 23,200 individuals). Key interventions included the immediate resettlement of families in dangerous zones to temporary shelter, distribution of food to affected people (maize, beans, vegetable oil and salt), as well as non-food assistance, repair and rehabilitation of 18 damaged community bridges, rehabilitation of water supply systems, restoration of marshlands through Cash for Work, temporary and permanent disaster-resilient housing, and alternate livelihoods, among other activities. There was substantial evidence of adopting the principles of “Building Back Better” in the response; through the construction of high quality, disaster resilient bridges and houses, which employ available green technologies, locally available materials and strong engineering standards.


Tag: Crisis Response Disaster Recovery Natural Disaster Recovery Effectiveness

16.

The area of health needs significant reinforcement at the district and local levels in terms of integration into the Disaster Management platform.

As recognized by the Sendai Framework, biological hazards such as epidemics and pandemics are a key area of focus for disaster risk management. Rwanda reports on nineteen major diseases that are linked with biological threats1 ; among these, food and waterborne diseases, vector borne diseases and zoonotic diseases still pose significant threats for pandemics. Those threats are heightened by the presence of emerging and re-emerging infectious diseases in other countries, as well as globalization and air travel. It is additionally threatened by the presence of these diseases on its borders, with reported cases of Yellow Fever, Rift Valley Fever, Marburg, and Crimean Congo Hemorrhagic Fever in both DRC and Uganda. While the Ministry of Health has extensive infrastructure through its 476 health centers, 42 district hospitals and 176 approved private hospitals, a whole-of-society approach is needed in the event of an outbreak. Therefore, preparation needs to involve table top exercises and simulations, as there is not a minute to waste in the event of an outbreak.


Tag: Disaster risk management Effectiveness Health Crises Pandemic

17.

UNDP has been successful in recruiting and position high caliber technical staff.

 UNDP has been successful in positioning high caliber staff with the skill sets to provide high quality policy and programmatic advice, and to work with key stakeholders on capacity, policy and organizational development efforts in the government-led MIDIMAR effort in a climate of trust and mutual respect over a sustained implementation period. This was evident in multiple, and unsolicited stakeholder comments during key stakeholder interviews in response to questions about the project’s efficiency and utilization of resources, and included comments from key government counterparts, members of the NPDRR, and key district staff such as vice mayors. A majority of comments were centered on the role of the Technical Advisor.


Tag: Efficiency Human and Financial resources Operational Efficiency

18.

The project has not raised the levels of funds necessary to achieve its five-year scope of work with a shortfall of USD 2,521, 036 to date 

(or 41.1% of planned resources). According to the resource framework, at the 70% mark (month 42 of 60), the resources available to the project should have been approximately $6,194,889. This is derived from adding the budgets for the first three years in the Project Document, together with 50% of year 4. Comparing preliminary expenditures at USD 3,709,849 for 2013- 2016 (UNDP data as of December 20, 2016), the overall expenditures were approximately 59.9% of those planned. The project has both suffered from substantial cuts in UNDP core funding, (Regular Resources), where only 47.3% or USD 1,346,427 of the USD 2,847,198 planned for the 42-month period had been raised to date. The external resources (Category 2) raised for the project at USD 956,350 were only 35.9 % of the USD 2,665,983 planned, leading to a shortfall of USD 1,709,634 to date. 


Tag: Efficiency Resource mobilization Business Model UNDP Management

19.

The project implementation sequence was not optimal, particularly from a planning and evaluation perspective.

The project should have focused its early efforts in year one on an improved foundation for a five-year project. This would have included better baseline survey processes to improve the quality, quantity and disaggregation of data to guide subsequent policy-making, planning, implementation, monitoring and reporting. This would have allowed the project to adopt well-grounded targets and allow its impact to be measured. As mentioned previously, capacity assessments should have been undertaken. The project, in fact, had funding in this period (2013) to undertake baseline surveys, capacity development assessments and other foundational activities.


Tag: Efficiency Business Model Monitoring and Evaluation Oversight

20.

The project does not make adequate use of results-based management. 

RBM, uses “change language” instead of “action language” and emphasizes the change in the lives of participants (or the quality or coverage of a service), rather than an implementing agency’s action or activity. It is a paradigm shift that puts affected communities as the subject of the change, particularly at the impact level and is closely related to the attainment of human rights. e.g. An additional 300,000 children will have access to safe water and hygiene facilities in their schools by 2017. This is a little curious given that the UNDAP document (2013) maintains that Results-Based Management (RBM) has been central to the development of the UNDAP and will be at the heart of its implementation and monitoring and evaluation. In fact, in a debriefing session on December 5, the consultant asked the assembled colleagues (UN and Ministry) to raise their hands if they had been trained in RBM; only one of fifteen responded positively.


Tag: Efficiency Monitoring and Evaluation Results-Based Management

21.

The existence of a Single Project Implementation Unit in MIDIMAR has created an effective institutional framework to guide the process of fast track implementation of the development targets envisaged in 2020 and other strategic plans, as well as the UNDP assistance.

This management mechanism, which was adopted in Rwanda in 2011, is intended to manage ongoing projects from the UN, contributions, public financial entities, and other donors, through improved coordination and the creation of synergy, in so doing, realizing economies of scale and lowered transaction costs. Centering technical assistance in this unit allowed it to have a broad impact across projects and donors.


Tag: Efficiency Implementation Modality Operational Efficiency

22.

The work being undertaken under DRG4 in Rwanda is an early and potentially strong example of Delivering as One.

The work being undertaken under DRG4 in Rwanda is a strong example of a unified and targeted response to disaster risk management and resilience issues that cuts across sectors and pillars, with strong national leadership, context-specific solutions and the adoption of a multi-stakeholder approach that is both upstream and downstream in nature. While modest in scale and still evolving, the initiative reflects a process of integrated thinking, planning and operating, to achieve collective outcomes and offers opportunities for subsequent scale up and replicability. As such, initiatives as those undertaken in Gakenke and Ngororero districts have the potential to become excellent examples of the UN Delivering as One. While modest in scale, the initiatives reflect a process of integrated thinking, planning and operating to achieve collective outcomes.


Tag: Efficiency Joint UN Programme

23.

The project has made a very good use of technology and social media. 

Rwanda is one of Africa’s most progressive countries in the use of social media, the internet and related technologies, and broad use of available government open data is practiced. Key officials, from the President to the Minister of Youth, Minister of Health, the Office of Immigration, and the head of the Rwanda Development Board, are all avid social media users. The media is used to announce and teach about government programs and to solicit inputs from the public. MIDIMAR and the project, among other public institutions, in addition to social media, make extensive use of SMS’s sent to local leaders, NGOs, public institutions, church leaders, cooperatives and youth and women councils for early warning system alerts and reports of hazards and earthquakes. Mobile phones are distributed to the village level (50-100 households). This is an effort that has now been institutionalized by the government. 


Tag: Efficiency Communication Technology

24.

The prognosis of the project to contribute to institutional sustainability is evident and promising. 

MIDIMAR is perceived as a solid and credible institution, and is valued by its stakeholders, including other institutions on the National Platform for Disaster Risk Reduction, and by the communities it serves. It has produced a continuous stream of results, effectively and efficiently, during the implementation period. Various project components, such as District Disaster Management Officer functions, and District Development Plans that incorporate disaster risk reduction, have been replicated in non-project districts. Likewise, the Ministry has assumed financial responsibility for project components such as emergency communications that were once financed by UNDP. 


Tag: Coherence Sustainability Anti-corruption Institutional Strengthening

25.

The ability of the project to foster sustained public information and knowledge is unclear.

While attempts have been made to integrate DRR in platforms ranging from secondary school clubs to talk shows and public service announcements, these areas have been affected by budget cuts, nor is there any baseline to be able to gauge changes in knowledge and practices.


Tag: Sustainability Knowledge management

26.

The project needs to practice a continuous cycle of training and retraining to compensate for high staff/stakeholder turnover at both local and national levels if it aims to sustain capacity.

There was significant evidence of high staff turnover, both at the district and national levels. In districts, this included the election of new mayors and vice mayors in February 2016. To sustain capacity, it will be necessary to institute a continuous cycle of capacity development. The project may also wish to conduct a staff survey to try to explore such issues as perceived job insecurity, limited career growth potential or non-competitive pay and benefits, etc. that might be driving the turnover, and take related measures to improve financial and non-financial benefits and rewards. 


Tag: Sustainability Business Model Human and Financial resources

27.

The population growth rate in Rwanda, combined with its extremely high population density in rural areas, is likely to outpace resilience and risk reduction efforts in the intermediate term, unless more sustainable structural solutions are implemented.

While vulnerability and resilience are widely used concepts, they are subject to various interpretations, and there is a limited level of systematic data collection, especially with respect to resilience. The government fully recognizes this and is aggressively pursuing solutions such as secondary cities and urbanization.


Tag: Rural development Resilience building Sustainability National Demographic change Urbanization

Recommendations
1

UNDP should improve upon the use of clear and well-defined outcome and impact level results and their indicators and means of verification which are critical to a system-wide strategic approach planning, monitoring and reporting.

Human rights standards should become an integral part of sustainable development strategies and policies. In line with the SDGs and the World Humanitarian Summit, humanitarian action will need to move beyond repeatedly carrying out short-term interventions year after year, and move towards contributing to longer-term development gains or, when there are operational constraints hindering their ability to do so in specific contexts, operate in synergy with other actors who ensure these long-term development outcomes are achieved. Conversely, development actors will need to plan and act with greater urgency to help build national systems and capacities for prevention and preparedness, tackle people’s vulnerability, inequality and risk as they pursue the SDGs, including in crises settings wherever possible, by placing greater emphasis in early engagement and bold steps to reach those furthest behind.

2

UNDP should continue to provide normative policy support to MIDIMAR in the 2030 Agenda and the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction.

As a central activity, the project should continue to provide normative policy support for the implementation of the 2030 Agenda, its related Sustainable Development Goals, indicators and targets, as well as the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction. Lessons learned in Disaster Risk Reduction and Management in Rwanda can help inform the international agenda, and are of relevance to other countries in Sub-Saharan Africa.

3

The scope of any reformulated project should be commensurate with an assured and realistic level of resources available to implement it.

To do so will need a more refined pipeline analysis that combines well-defined development needs, with political will, substantive technical expertise on the part of UNDP, critical partners and solid donor support. The core elements of the project, including its central strategy, related outputs, key activities and targets should correspond to areas with a high degree of funding certainty or mature pipeline; the Project Document should be formulated around this core. While auxiliary components can be envisaged, if the related pipelines are soft, they should be offered as part of the formal programme of assistance until funding is awarded.

4

UNDP should improve the conceptual clarity of its interventions, and adopt outcomes that are better-aligned to the current and evolving body of knowledge on disaster risk governance.

“Disaster risk governance refers to the way is which public authorities, civil servants, media, private sector and civil society coordinate at community, national and regional levels to manage and reduce disaster and climate related risks. This means ensuring that sufficient levels of capacity and resources are made available to prevent, prepare for, manage and recover from disasters. It also entails mechanisms, institutions and processes for citizens to articulate their interests, exercise their legal rights and obligations and mediate their differences. The institutional, policy and legal arrangements for managing disasters and risks are key areas where DRG is concerned.”

5

UNDP should prepare for UN Sustainable Development Frameworks (UNSDF) (2018-2022) likely replacing UNDAP by strengthening staff capacity in Rights-Based Approaches, Results Based Management and joint Causality Analyses during the balance of the UNDAP.

UNSDF will need to go beyond a mere compilation of agency-specific planning and be based on the principle of moving towards “one country, one UN framework”, built on shared strategic sustainable development outcomes, common needs and root-cause analysis, risk assessment and management, and monitoring and reporting across the humanitarian, peacebuilding, human-rights and development dimensions. The UN in Rwanda is already well-positioned, but could evolve yet further in such areas as the common use of Human Rights-Based Approaches, Results Based Management, joint monitoring and evaluation systems, and the joint adoption of causality analyses, as well as more extensive, long term initiatives in joint programming demonstrate value-added synergies. Joint theories of change rooted in the Rwandan context should be adopted and reflected in the UNSDF. The period 2017-2018 could be used to advance these areas, which are especially important in advance of the iteration of a new programme framework

6

UNDP should improve upon the use of clear and well-defined outcome and impact level results and their indicators and means of verification which are critical to a system-wide strategic approach planning, monitoring and reporting. 

Human rights standards should become an integral part of sustainable development strategies and policies. In line with the SDGs and the World Humanitarian Summit, humanitarian action will need to move beyond repeatedly carrying out short-term interventions year after year, and move towards contributing to longer-term development gains or, when there are operational constraints hindering their ability to do so in specific contexts, operate in synergy with other actors who ensure these long-term development outcomes are achieved. Conversely, development actors will need to plan and act with greater urgency to help build national systems and capacities for prevention and preparedness, tackle people’s vulnerability, inequality and risk as they pursue the SDGs, including in crises settings wherever possible, by placing greater emphasis in early engagement and bold steps to reach those furthest behind.

7

A capacity development assessment and capacity development plan are still critical to complete within the remainder of the 2013-2018 project cycle, particularly if capacity development is a core component of the 2018-2022 UNDP technical assistance.

Given access to the pool of expertise in capacity development assessment, it would probably be best if UNDP tendered this work from an established institution or individual. If properly conducted, it will also help project implementers to gain an understanding of the changes required to strengthen the enabling environment for DRR, along with increased familiarity with why and how key actors might buy into that change. Most sound capacity assessments would be organized by domains, such as 1. Governance, 2. Administration, 3. Human Resources, 4. Financial Management, 5. Organizational Management, 6. Program Management, 7. Project Performance Management, 8. Technical Capacities, each with their respective baselines and targets. An institutional-functional approach to DRR capacity development should have a clear focus on the coherence of institutional structures, clarity of mandates, rule of law, and adequacy of resources and capacities. Without such processes, the evaluability of a capacity development project is severely constrained. In lieu of strategic interventions, the project is likely to become activities-driven, and the impact of those activities largely immeasurable.

8

UNDP should develop a solid Knowledge and Practices baseline and implementation strategies in the next 18 months if public information and awareness remains a component of this project beyond 2018.

A stratified random sampling design could be utilized to design Knowledge and Practices surveys that could be self-administered among a relatively small number of participants on the basis of the project’s training modules, materials, social media and public information outreach efforts.

9

While the main impact of this project to date has been in risk governance, it is important that UNDP/MIDIMAR continue to roll out the components, such as contingency plans, and to continue to grow capacity in such areas as droughts, volcanic eruptions, earthquakes and epidemics.

Rwanda exhibits some characteristics of a conventional disciplinary fragmentation in terms of its response to disasters. For example, in 2015/16, the malaria epidemic that affected nearly two million people was the purview of the Ministry of Health, and the drought that affected nearly 200,000 people was primarily the purview of the Ministry of Agriculture. Meanwhile, the landslides that rendered nearly 6,000 people homeless were the purview of the Ministry of Disaster Management. A better practice is to enable the best synergies across multiple sectors and fields, rather than “silo-ing” the disaster risk domain as a competing scientific priority. Advancing disaster risk-related science should be viewed as catalytic and enabling, rather than competitive, and in society’s best interests. To do so will require purposefully advancing crossdisciplinary disaster risk research in line with disaster risk capacity building for both decision-makers and professionals/practitioners. These will be important themes under the Sendai Framework, and both UNDP and MIDIMAR should participate in related trainings.

10

UNDP should use Results Based Management for any future program development.

This series of “SMART” results and indicators in a way that addresses the analysis, employing a related theory of change, using change language, robust indicators and means of verification. Results-based management systems should be harmonized across UN entities.

11

The project should continue to flesh out the full and equal participation, leadership and empowerment of women and girls.

Building on an excellent foundation, UNDP should continue to invest in women as agents of change, maintaining a strong focus on gender equality results and increasing investments in gender capacity and expertise of staff across the system.

12

Preparedness for health emergencies and transboundary hazards should be mainstreamed into this project, in partnership with MINISANTE and other sectoral agencies.

This should include the incorporation of whole-of-society approaches to health emergencies in an inter-disciplinary manner and the use of tabletop and real time simulations within districts. Health workers also need to be trained in disaster risk reduction and management concepts at all levels of the system.

1. Recommendation:

UNDP should improve upon the use of clear and well-defined outcome and impact level results and their indicators and means of verification which are critical to a system-wide strategic approach planning, monitoring and reporting.

Human rights standards should become an integral part of sustainable development strategies and policies. In line with the SDGs and the World Humanitarian Summit, humanitarian action will need to move beyond repeatedly carrying out short-term interventions year after year, and move towards contributing to longer-term development gains or, when there are operational constraints hindering their ability to do so in specific contexts, operate in synergy with other actors who ensure these long-term development outcomes are achieved. Conversely, development actors will need to plan and act with greater urgency to help build national systems and capacities for prevention and preparedness, tackle people’s vulnerability, inequality and risk as they pursue the SDGs, including in crises settings wherever possible, by placing greater emphasis in early engagement and bold steps to reach those furthest behind.

Management Response: [Added: 2018/01/09] [Last Updated: 2021/01/11]

The new Country Programme Document and new DRR project document including the RRF will be formulated to respond to national priorities as defined in the Sector Strategic Plan and National Strategy for Transformation (NST) and will have better defined results and indicators.

 

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Ensure that outcome and impact level results and indicators are clear and well defined.
[Added: 2018/01/09] [Last Updated: 2021/12/12]
UNDP, MIDIMAR 2018/06 Completed Monitoring Frameworks have been made for the projects which has revised the project indicators, specified the means of verification, reporting period and responsible agencies and has aligned the project indicators to the UNDAP outcome and output indicators. The framework/dashboard will be added in all project quarterly reports to track achievements in all project indicators. History
Engage all stakeholders during the project design and ensure that no one is left behind.
[Added: 2018/01/09] [Last Updated: 2021/12/12]
UNDP, MIDIMAR 2018/02 Completed Stakeholders were all included during the project design. History
2. Recommendation:

UNDP should continue to provide normative policy support to MIDIMAR in the 2030 Agenda and the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction.

As a central activity, the project should continue to provide normative policy support for the implementation of the 2030 Agenda, its related Sustainable Development Goals, indicators and targets, as well as the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction. Lessons learned in Disaster Risk Reduction and Management in Rwanda can help inform the international agenda, and are of relevance to other countries in Sub-Saharan Africa.

Management Response: [Added: 2018/01/09] [Last Updated: 2021/01/11]

Accepted. UNDP will continue to build national and local capacity to strengthen the resilience of communities in disaster prone areas.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Ensure that the new programme document is formulated to address capacity building for policy design and implementation.
[Added: 2018/01/09] [Last Updated: 2021/12/13]
UNDP 2018/06 Completed Since 2019, A project on strengthening disaster risk management capacity in Rwanda through the Ministry of Emergency Management (MINEMA) and Rwanda Meteorology Agency (METEO) has been ongoing. History
Ensure that the government has capacity to implement International and National development agenda and frameworks such as the Sendai Framework, the Paris Agreement of Climate Change, the 2030 Agenda and NST1.
[Added: 2018/01/09] [Last Updated: 2021/12/13]
UNDP 2017/06 Completed Since 2019, A project on strengthening disaster risk management capacity in Rwanda through the Ministry of Emergency Management (MINEMA) and Rwanda Meteorology Agency (METEO) has been ongoing. History
Monitor the achievements of the Sendai Framework indicators at central and decentralized levels.
[Added: 2018/01/09]
UNDP 2017/10 Completed New CPD RRF entails indicator which monitors the government achievement of the Sendai Framework indicators.
3. Recommendation:

The scope of any reformulated project should be commensurate with an assured and realistic level of resources available to implement it.

To do so will need a more refined pipeline analysis that combines well-defined development needs, with political will, substantive technical expertise on the part of UNDP, critical partners and solid donor support. The core elements of the project, including its central strategy, related outputs, key activities and targets should correspond to areas with a high degree of funding certainty or mature pipeline; the Project Document should be formulated around this core. While auxiliary components can be envisaged, if the related pipelines are soft, they should be offered as part of the formal programme of assistance until funding is awarded.

Management Response: [Added: 2018/01/09] [Last Updated: 2021/01/11]

UNDP will continue resource mobilization to implement the current project document and to fund the new interventions in Disaster Risk management in a realistic manner. New project document and annual workplans will be based strictly on available resources.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Ensure that partnership with potential donor such as the Government of Japan and the World Bank is strengthened.
[Added: 2018/01/09] [Last Updated: 2021/12/13]
UNDP 2018/06 Completed Continuous efforts are being made to initiate a partnership with potential donor such as the Government of Japan and the World Bank. History
Draw on existing partnership with other UN agencies to mobilize capacity and resources to support the government to cope with natural disasters.
[Added: 2018/01/09] [Last Updated: 2021/12/13]
UNDP, UNCT 2018/06 Completed Resources mobilized from UNTFHS. History
4. Recommendation:

UNDP should improve the conceptual clarity of its interventions, and adopt outcomes that are better-aligned to the current and evolving body of knowledge on disaster risk governance.

“Disaster risk governance refers to the way is which public authorities, civil servants, media, private sector and civil society coordinate at community, national and regional levels to manage and reduce disaster and climate related risks. This means ensuring that sufficient levels of capacity and resources are made available to prevent, prepare for, manage and recover from disasters. It also entails mechanisms, institutions and processes for citizens to articulate their interests, exercise their legal rights and obligations and mediate their differences. The institutional, policy and legal arrangements for managing disasters and risks are key areas where DRG is concerned.”

Management Response: [Added: 2018/01/09] [Last Updated: 2021/01/11]

Accepted. UNDP will continue to support national and local authorities and other relevant stakeholders to access and share information on disaster prevention and management. UNDP will also tap into its global and regional knowledge networks to inform the design of new programmes.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Produce and disseminate knowledge product on achievements, best practices and prevailing challenges
[Added: 2018/01/09] [Last Updated: 2021/12/13]
UNDP 2017/06 Completed Template has been made and continuously updated to track and document the achievements, best practices and prevailing challenges of the project. History
Ensure that the new project document articulate the conceptual clarity of UNDP interventions well and highlight comparative advantages in line with current and evolving knowledge on disaster risk management.
[Added: 2018/01/09] [Last Updated: 2021/12/13]
UNDP 2018/06 Completed This was undertaken with the formulation of the new project document in 2018. History
5. Recommendation:

UNDP should prepare for UN Sustainable Development Frameworks (UNSDF) (2018-2022) likely replacing UNDAP by strengthening staff capacity in Rights-Based Approaches, Results Based Management and joint Causality Analyses during the balance of the UNDAP.

UNSDF will need to go beyond a mere compilation of agency-specific planning and be based on the principle of moving towards “one country, one UN framework”, built on shared strategic sustainable development outcomes, common needs and root-cause analysis, risk assessment and management, and monitoring and reporting across the humanitarian, peacebuilding, human-rights and development dimensions. The UN in Rwanda is already well-positioned, but could evolve yet further in such areas as the common use of Human Rights-Based Approaches, Results Based Management, joint monitoring and evaluation systems, and the joint adoption of causality analyses, as well as more extensive, long term initiatives in joint programming demonstrate value-added synergies. Joint theories of change rooted in the Rwandan context should be adopted and reflected in the UNSDF. The period 2017-2018 could be used to advance these areas, which are especially important in advance of the iteration of a new programme framework

Management Response: [Added: 2021/01/11]

Key Actions:

6. Recommendation:

UNDP should improve upon the use of clear and well-defined outcome and impact level results and their indicators and means of verification which are critical to a system-wide strategic approach planning, monitoring and reporting. 

Human rights standards should become an integral part of sustainable development strategies and policies. In line with the SDGs and the World Humanitarian Summit, humanitarian action will need to move beyond repeatedly carrying out short-term interventions year after year, and move towards contributing to longer-term development gains or, when there are operational constraints hindering their ability to do so in specific contexts, operate in synergy with other actors who ensure these long-term development outcomes are achieved. Conversely, development actors will need to plan and act with greater urgency to help build national systems and capacities for prevention and preparedness, tackle people’s vulnerability, inequality and risk as they pursue the SDGs, including in crises settings wherever possible, by placing greater emphasis in early engagement and bold steps to reach those furthest behind.

Management Response: [Added: 2021/01/11]

Key Actions:

7. Recommendation:

A capacity development assessment and capacity development plan are still critical to complete within the remainder of the 2013-2018 project cycle, particularly if capacity development is a core component of the 2018-2022 UNDP technical assistance.

Given access to the pool of expertise in capacity development assessment, it would probably be best if UNDP tendered this work from an established institution or individual. If properly conducted, it will also help project implementers to gain an understanding of the changes required to strengthen the enabling environment for DRR, along with increased familiarity with why and how key actors might buy into that change. Most sound capacity assessments would be organized by domains, such as 1. Governance, 2. Administration, 3. Human Resources, 4. Financial Management, 5. Organizational Management, 6. Program Management, 7. Project Performance Management, 8. Technical Capacities, each with their respective baselines and targets. An institutional-functional approach to DRR capacity development should have a clear focus on the coherence of institutional structures, clarity of mandates, rule of law, and adequacy of resources and capacities. Without such processes, the evaluability of a capacity development project is severely constrained. In lieu of strategic interventions, the project is likely to become activities-driven, and the impact of those activities largely immeasurable.

Management Response: [Added: 2021/01/11]

Key Actions:

8. Recommendation:

UNDP should develop a solid Knowledge and Practices baseline and implementation strategies in the next 18 months if public information and awareness remains a component of this project beyond 2018.

A stratified random sampling design could be utilized to design Knowledge and Practices surveys that could be self-administered among a relatively small number of participants on the basis of the project’s training modules, materials, social media and public information outreach efforts.

Management Response: [Added: 2021/01/11]

Key Actions:

9. Recommendation:

While the main impact of this project to date has been in risk governance, it is important that UNDP/MIDIMAR continue to roll out the components, such as contingency plans, and to continue to grow capacity in such areas as droughts, volcanic eruptions, earthquakes and epidemics.

Rwanda exhibits some characteristics of a conventional disciplinary fragmentation in terms of its response to disasters. For example, in 2015/16, the malaria epidemic that affected nearly two million people was the purview of the Ministry of Health, and the drought that affected nearly 200,000 people was primarily the purview of the Ministry of Agriculture. Meanwhile, the landslides that rendered nearly 6,000 people homeless were the purview of the Ministry of Disaster Management. A better practice is to enable the best synergies across multiple sectors and fields, rather than “silo-ing” the disaster risk domain as a competing scientific priority. Advancing disaster risk-related science should be viewed as catalytic and enabling, rather than competitive, and in society’s best interests. To do so will require purposefully advancing crossdisciplinary disaster risk research in line with disaster risk capacity building for both decision-makers and professionals/practitioners. These will be important themes under the Sendai Framework, and both UNDP and MIDIMAR should participate in related trainings.

Management Response: [Added: 2021/01/11]

Key Actions:

10. Recommendation:

UNDP should use Results Based Management for any future program development.

This series of “SMART” results and indicators in a way that addresses the analysis, employing a related theory of change, using change language, robust indicators and means of verification. Results-based management systems should be harmonized across UN entities.

Management Response: [Added: 2021/01/11]

Key Actions:

11. Recommendation:

The project should continue to flesh out the full and equal participation, leadership and empowerment of women and girls.

Building on an excellent foundation, UNDP should continue to invest in women as agents of change, maintaining a strong focus on gender equality results and increasing investments in gender capacity and expertise of staff across the system.

Management Response: [Added: 2021/01/11]

Key Actions:

12. Recommendation:

Preparedness for health emergencies and transboundary hazards should be mainstreamed into this project, in partnership with MINISANTE and other sectoral agencies.

This should include the incorporation of whole-of-society approaches to health emergencies in an inter-disciplinary manner and the use of tabletop and real time simulations within districts. Health workers also need to be trained in disaster risk reduction and management concepts at all levels of the system.

Management Response: [Added: 2021/01/11]

Key Actions:

Latest Evaluations

Contact us

1 UN Plaza
DC1-20th Floor
New York, NY 10017
Tel. +1 646 781 4200
Fax. +1 646 781 4213
erc.support@undp.org