Mid term review of the recovery phase of the PRCS-IFRC 2010 Pakistan Monsoon Flood Operations
TERMS OF REFERENCE
Mid term review of the recovery phase of the PRCS-IFRC
2010 Pakistan Monsoon Flood Operations
1. SUMMARY
Purpose – This mid term review will determine the progress against the stated objectives of the recovery phase of the 2010 monsoon flood response in Pakistan. It will assess the relevance and timeliness of the recovery approach adopted, and make recommendations to further improve the delivery of recovery assistance to ensure the overall impact of the response and meet accountabilities to both beneficiaries and donors. The review will also contribute to learning for the Pakistan Red Crescent Society (PRCS) and the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) on the design and delivery of recovery assistance as part of responding to disasters in Pakistan.
Audience – PRCS, IFRC, Partner National Societies and other Red Cross Red Crescent Movement Partners
Commissioners – The IFRC Asia Pacific (AP) Zone Disaster Management Unit will be funding the review.
Reports – The evaluation team leader will report to the AP Zone Head of Disaster Management Unit and the IFRC Head of Delegation in Pakistan.
Duration – 23 days
Timeframe – From mid January 2012
Location: Islamabad, with field work in three provinces - Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KPK), Punjab and Sindh
2. BACKGROUND
The IFRC/PRCS Pakistan Monsoon Floods Operation was launched in July 2010 following the worst floods to hit the Pakistan since 1929. The operation aims to support the PRCS to assist up to 130,000 families (approximately 910,000 people) for a total of 24 months, and expects to be completed by early August 2012. Resources for the operation are being made available through the IFRC’s Revised Emergency Appeal which seeks CHF 130,673,677 (USD 133,873,000 or EUR 97,968,800) in cash, kind, or services. As of end August 2011, the appeal is 71% covered in cash and kind, and 77% covered including contributions in the pipeline. The relief phase of the operation covered the first six months. Following an intensive assessment and planning process, efforts are now focused on the longer term recovery of the flood-affected areas.
The floods, triggered by torrential monsoon rains, covered vast parts of Baluchistan, Punjab, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KPK), Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), Pakistan Administered Kashmir (AJK), Gilgit Baltistan (GB), and Sindh. An estimated 20 million people were affected, prompting a large scale government and international humanitarian response. The northern province of KPK was initially the worst affected. However, the southern provinces of Punjab and Sindh experienced prolonged flooding, with hundreds of thousands of people fleeing their homes and evacuating the cities in August and September 2010 as onrushing floodwaters swept away homes, crops and livestock. At the end of October 2010, more than a million displaced people remained in temporary facilities in Sindh alone. Today, the flood waters in most places have receded and the majority of affected people have returned home.
As of 2 February 2011, figures by the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) in Pakistan showed the following loss of lives and property:
NDMA Update: 2 February 2011
Summary of damage Punjab Sindh KPK* Balochistan AJ&K GB Total
Deaths 110 411 1,156 54 71 183 1,985
Injuries 262 1,235 1,198 104 87 60 2,946
Houses damaged 497,700 876,249 284,990 75,596 7,106 2,830 1,744,471
* Including Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA)
The floods also damaged or destroyed medical facilities, as well as education facilities, power and transmission lines, telecommunication networks and industrial infrastructure. Significantly, almost two million hectares of farmland were also destroyed. This represents a tenth of the nation’s agricultural area – threatening severe food shortages and long-term repercussions in a country where agriculture accounts for 20 per cent of its GDP . The disaster led to massive relief and recovery needs among the affected people including: food, health and care, safe water, access to improved sanitation and shelter.
The IFRC’s emergency appeal is part of the large scale international humanitarian response to try and address the needs of sections of the affected communities, working through and with the PRCS.
By 31 July 2011, after one year of concerted efforts in relief and early recovery programming, PRCS/IFRC has reached at least 1,602,832 people (228,976 families) across the five provinces most affected by the floods. This represents more than half of the Red Cross Red Crescent Movement’s current reach of 3.03 million people.
Sector Achievements (families reached)
Relief food and non food including emergency shelter 228,976
Shelter (winterised transitional shelter during relief phase) 6,393
Shelter (recovery) 18
Health and care (relief) 133,689
Health and care (recovery) 60,016
Water and sanitation (relief) 31,300
Water and sanitation (recovery) 1,835
Livelihoods (winter vegetable seeds during relief phase) 2,000
Livelihoods (recovery/provision of seeds and fertilizers) 31,214
By the end of the relief phase, huge needs remained in Sindh KPK, and Punjab, with the government of Pakistan and humanitarian organisations working to consolidate longer-term recovery plans to address a wide range of issues including malnutrition, health epidemics, poor sanitation and loss of homes and livelihoods. While the majority of affected people had returned home, almost 500 camps were still operational in Sindh in January 2011 .
At the end of January 2011, the PRCS and IFRC concluded a month-long integrated vulnerability and capacity assessment of some of the affected populations. Findings from the assessments were fed into recovery planning across all sectors, and an integrated recovery plan has been put into place that aims to rebuild communities that are safer and more resilient to disasters. The integration approach includes a sequencing of recovery activities in the same communities managed by village committees. To strengthen its capacity to implement this plan, particularly in areas where it did not have existing technical resources, such as livelihoods and shelter, the National Society undertook an extensive human resource recruitment exercise.
While an integrated recovery plan was only put in place in January 2011, recovery planning had featured right from the start of the IFRC/PRCS response to the floods. It started with the inclusion of an early recovery specialist in the FACT team who proposed the option of using Cash Transfer Programming (CTP) following the FACT assessments of the affected communities and their needs. Recovery activities were included in the first Plan of Action (PoA) in August 2010. Recommendations from the Transitional Planning and Assessment Team (TPAT), led by recovery coordinator and deployed to assess and develop appropriate recovery interventions for health, watsan, shelter and livelihoods, were incorporated into the revised PoA which was then presented in Doha in late Sept 2010. A Recovery Framework was also developed to provide guidance for a common Federation-wide integrated recovery approach to promote an efficient and coherent recovery assistance to meet the needs of the flood-affected population. Field assessments in December and January 2011 led to the preparation of Implementation Framework for PRCS - IFRC Flood Recovery Activities of April 2011 and including the identification of six worst affected districts in the provinces of KPK, Punjab and Sindh where an integrated recovery response would be focused. This was followed by the preparation of provincial recovery plans for KPK, Punjab and Sindh and the finalisation of a detailed logframe to guide the integrated recovery approach and provide the basis for detailed monitoring.
However, there have been a number of challenges, including the following:
• Despite the capacity of the PRCS to providing a comprehensive disaster response, staff capacity limited their full involvement in the development of recovery plans, building on the gains of a major relief phase response and learning from previous disaster responses;
• The limited involvement of provinces in the initial planning affected the level of ownership and required a second stage of provincial consultation of the NHQ approved recovery plan which took time. This important step resulted in provincial recovery plans and budgets with the necessary ownership;
• Agreeing staff needs to deliver the recovery operation and subsequent staff recruitment was time consuming and added to start up delays;
• Various factors resulted in a high level of delegate turnover which affected continuity and resulted in loss of institutional knowledge and memory;
• Weak linkages and external networking with other agencies supporting recovery efforts undermined access to relevant best practices and lesson learning;
• Immigration restrictions and recruitment more generally have challenged the programme’s ability to start up of the recovery phase.
During the period to be reviewed, the IFRC secretariat commissioned a Real Time Evaluation (RTE) from October to November 2010 to assess the ongoing IFRC/PRCS response to the floods. Findings from the RTE, which looked specifically at the efficiency and effectiveness of management and coordination, including related internal processes and systems, were used to inform the ongoing flood response. A RDRT evaluation has also been conducted in March, commissioned by the IFRC South Asia Regional Office. The Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC) also commissioned an Inter-Agency RTE of the international humanitarian community’s response to the floods from January to March 2011 to assess the current response to date and provide real time feedback and input into ongoing decision making. In July 2011, an external evaluation of the relief phase of the IFRC/PRCS response was undertaken for the purpose of accountability and learning. A final report for this evaluation has been published.
3. PURPOSE AND SCOPE
3.1 Purpose
The purpose of this review of the recovery phase of the Pakistan Monsoon Flood Operations is to examine the progress achieved towards the stated objectives with regards to relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, impact and sustainability. It will also look at the timeliness and appropriateness of the recovery planning and delivery approach and process to assess its contribution to achieving the recovery objectives. The review will include the identification of lessons, current good practices, challenges to overcome and recommendations to strengthen the delivery and overall impact of the recovery assistance during the remainder of the operation. The learning from this review will be used to improve the design and delivery of future recovery interventions of the PRCS and the wider Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement.
The key audience of the review findings are the PRCS, IFRC and other Red Cross and Red Crescent (RCRC) stakeholders.
3.2 Scope
This review will examine the early recovery and recovery phases of the PRCS/IFRC Pakistan Monsoon Flood Operations up to October 2011 to for which CHF 64 million has been spent out of a total of CHF 94 million pledged. While some initial early recovery activities took place during the early stages of the disaster response, the main recovery phase of the operation started in February 2011 with the closure of the relief phase.
The review will assess to what extent is the recovery phase of the flood response is achieving the expected objectives outlined in the PoA of October 2010 and the Implementation Framework for PRCS - IFRC Flood Recovery Activities of April 2011. It will encompass all geographical areas where recovery activities are being undertaken; principally the provinces of KPK, Punjab and Sindh including the six districts identified for the integrated delivery of sectoral assistance. The review will cover all technical sectors of intervention, including health, watsan, shelter, livelihoods and organisational development and capacity building support provided to the PRCS at national and provincial level.
4. Evaluation Objectives, Criteria and Key Questions
4.1 Objectives
I. To examine the extent to which the operation has and is achieving its goal, objectives and expected results related to the approved PoA of October 2010, the Implementation Framework for PRCS - IFRC Flood Recovery Activities of April 2011, and the agreed provincial recovery plans for KPK, Punjab and Sindh.
II. To assess key achievements and current challenges of the recovery programme and provide specific recommendations for improving current operations and the timeliness of delivery. Review current timelines for programme completion and recommend if adjustments are required.
III. To review the recovery planning process and field operationalisation; the elements, tools used and processes followed to assess their contribution to achieving the recovery objectives and delivery of recovery assistance to date.
IV. Articulate lessons and recommend good practice to inform the future delivery of recovery programming of the PRCS and the wider RCRC Movement as a whole.
4.2 Evaluation criteria
4.2.1 Quality
? What strategies are being been used to ensure quality, timely and relevant delivery of recovery assistance to the flood affected population? Has the integration approach adopted improved the quality of assistance being provided?
? What problems and constraints have been faced during the implementation of the operation (including issues of context etc) and how has the operation dealt with these?
? What Federation mechanisms and tools have been used to promote good practice (e.g. Code of Conduct, Sphere, BPI, emergency assessment tools, VCA etc)?
? To what extent has the Recovery Framework developed in tandem with the PoA guided the recovery phase of the flood response? How could the structure and content of similar frameworks for a recovery phase be improved based on this experience?
4.2.2 Relevance and appropriateness
? What unanticipated positive or negative consequences have arisen in the recovery phase of the operation and why?
? Were the recovery phase of the operation’s strategies and priorities in line or complement those of the authorities and other national and international humanitarian actors? If not, why?
? To what extent are the beneficiaries involved in planning, design and monitoring in the recovery operation?
4.2.3 Effectiveness
? To what extent is the recovery phase of the flood response achieving the expected objectives outlined in the PoA of October 2010 and the Implementation Framework for PRCS - IFRC Flood Recovery Activities of April 2011?
? Were decisions related to operational leadership of the recovery programming taken with view to optimising programme effectiveness? How did existing recovery capacity and current OD good practice inform these decisions?
? What indications are there that the integrated recovery approach being followed has improved the effectiveness of recovery assistance being provided to flood affected households?
? What measures are being taken to more effectively identify the most vulnerable among the affected population and developing appropriate strategies to respond to their particular circumstances and recovery needs?
? How effective has the operation been in terms of responding to the changing needs identified by the affected communities? Is it focusing on the priorities of the identified target groups? To what extent are the most vulnerable population being reached / provided with assistance relevant to their current needs? How far has gender and other cross cutting issues been understood on an ongoing basis to inform programming?
? How effective have the operation's processes been in planning, priority setting, monitoring and quality management (e.g. internal reviews and other quality assurance mechanisms). Are regular reviews being held at different stages of the operation? Are key planning documents being used and to what extent?
? What have been the factors that have helped to the recovery programme move forward and what have hindered progress?
? Is there effective coordination with other parts of the Movement / other actors including the IASC cluster system for different sector activities? How appropriate and effective are the inputs of partner organizations in the implementation of the operation? What are the lessons to be learnt for improved Federation wide recovery planning at the start of the operation?
? How timely was the sequencing in recovery planning and field implementation? How effective was the pilot project in testing implementation methods to facilitate rapid scale up? What challenges has this scale up faced and what lessons do these provide for future operations?
? How responsive has the recovery programme been to the different needs and timing required to meet the needs of different stages of recovery in the different flood-affected contexts/districts?
? To what extent are the recovery programme activities expected to strengthen the resilience of the affected population? How are these DRR components being successfully mainstreamed within the recovery activities and will these activities be sustainable?
4.2.4 Efficiency
? Are the recovery operations meeting the stated objectives in an efficient way? (e.g. were inputs used in the best way to achieve outcomes and if not why not? Was the assistance provided in a timely manner to meet community needs?)
? Were the appropriate human resources (skills, experience and seniority) available to the operation in key areas of management, coordination, technical programme design and implementation from IFRC and PRCS?
? Are other resources financial, human, physical and information resources available and are they being utilised efficiently?
? To what extent has or will the integrated approach to delivering recovery assistance increase the efficiency of the programme and what additional steps could be taken to maximise this benefit?
? Have existing coordination mechanisms optimised the delivery of recovery assistance? Have recommendations related to coordination outlined in the Recovery Framework assisted the delivery of the operation?
4.2.5 Impact
? How is the support provided to the targeted communities impacting on their well-being?
? What are some of the successes and opportunities that came out of the recovery operation? To what extent is the intervention supporting the target communities’ own problem-solving and decision-making to address their local needs? What might be the positive and negative consequences or changes in the communities as result of the support being provided?
? What important lessons have been learned which can a) improve future implementation of recovery programming in Pakistan and b) be shared with the wider RCRC Movement?
? What changes in capacity, capability, understanding and learning will be facilitated and supported within the PRCS as a result of the ongoing recovery operation? Are these appropriate and how can these be strengthened?
? How is the recovery operation expected to strengthened the capacity of PRCS and how? How could it improve the capacity of PRCS to plan, implement, monitor, report and evaluate effective recovery programmes? Is the possibly enhanced capacity going to be sustainable?
4.2.6 Accountability to Beneficiaries
? How have systems for feedback from the assisted population been developed and improved over time and are they leading to an improvement in the quality of recovery support being provided? How has beneficiary feedback been processed and responded to, and have programmes been modified as a result? What lessons can be drawn related to two way beneficiary communications?
4.2.7 Connectedness
? Has the integrated planning and design translated into adequate and effective integration across the different programmes? What are the discernable programme gains from this integration?
? To what extent is the recovery programme taking into account longer term development aspects of the communities being assisted? What are the plans for sustaining these activities once the recovery operations end? What are the plans for future sustainability and are these realistic?
? What planning is being place for transition, when the recovery operations close?
5. Methodology
The review will use a triangulation of the following methodologies:
i) Desk research and secondary data review of key documents:
These include assessments, plans, logframes, completed reviews/evaluations, progress reports, mission reports and other relevant documents prepared by the PRCS and IFRC, and other relevant secondary data produced by other RCRC and external partners involved in the provision of assistance to the flood affected population.
ii) Key informant interviews / group interviews as appropriate:
These will include:
- key PRCS staff / volunteers;
- relevant IFRC staff in Islamabad, Delhi , Kuala Lumpur and Geneva;
- other RCRC partners;
- key external stakeholders supporting the flood recovery process (government, local and international humanitarian agencies); and
- key PRCS/IFRC/PNS staff who have left the response operation.
Key interviews with stakeholders Islamabad and PRCS provincial and district branches will allow a focus on the internal systems and the management and coordination of the recovery operation.
iii) Field visits to selected provincial sites to gather information directly from assisted local communities.
6. Deliverables (or outputs)
The following outputs are expected from the review team:
• Debriefing: to share the broad findings of the review team with staff and volunteers in the field, including PRCS and other relevant stakeholders, and note their comments.
• Draft report: The results of the review will be presented in a draft report for comment by the PRCS and the IFRC. The report should focus on delivering clear lessons for the remainder of the operation and for the wider Federation.
• Final report: This report should be no longer than 30 pages in a readable and visual format, with an executive summary of no more than five pages. All additional materials will be provided as annexes to the report. All information and analysis should be gender disaggregated to the extent possible.
The report should be structured in line with the review categories above, present its findings and then lessons and recommendation for the future. A timeline of events in the operation should also be drawn up to support the report.
7. Proposed Timeline
The review team will be recruited by mid January 2011. The review will be undertaken from late January 2012 and finalized not later than early March 2012. The initial findings of the review mission will be shared by mid March 2012.
Draft outline of schedule:
Time Task Location
3 days Desktop study Islamabad/Delhi/Kuala Lumpur
4 days Interviews Islamabad/Delhi/Kuala Lumpur/Geneva
10 days Field work Pakistan - KPK, Sindh, Punjab
1 day PRCS and IFRC briefing Islamabad/Kuala Lumpur
3 days Compilation of draft report Islamabad/Kuala Lumpur
2 days Compilation of final report
8. Evaluation Quality & Ethical Standards
The reviewers should take all reasonable steps to ensure that the evaluation is designed and conducted to respect and protect the rights and welfare of people and the communities of which they are members, and to ensure that the review is technically accurate, reliable, and legitimate, conducted in a transparent and impartial manner, and contributes to organizational learning and accountability. Therefore, the review team should adhere to the evaluation standards and specific, applicable practices outlined in the IFRC Framework for Evaluation:
http://www.ifrc.org/Global/Publications/monitoring/IFRC-Framework-for-Evaluation.pdf.
The IFRC Evaluation Standards are:
i) Utility: Evaluations must be useful and used.
ii) Feasibility: Evaluations must be realistic, diplomatic, and managed in a sensible, cost effective manner.
iii) Ethics & Legality: Evaluations must be conducted in an ethical and legal manner, with particular regard for the welfare of those involved in and affected by the evaluation.
iv) Impartiality & Independence; Evaluations should be impartial, providing a comprehensive and unbiased assessment that takes into account the views of all stakeholders.
v) Transparency: Evaluation activities should reflect an attitude of openness and transparency.
vi) Accuracy: Evaluations should be technical accurate, providing sufficient information about the data collection, analysis, and interpretation methods so that its worth or merit can be determined.
vii) Participation: Stakeholders should be consulted and meaningfully involved in the evaluation process when feasible and appropriate.
viii) Collaboration: Collaboration between key operating partners in the evaluation process improves the legitimacy and utility of the evaluation.
It is also expected that the evaluation will respect the seven Fundamental Principles of the Red Cross and Red Crescent: 1) humanity, 2) impartiality, 3) neutrality, 4) independence, 5) voluntary service, 6) unity, and 7) universality. Further information can be obtained about these principles at:
www.ifrc.org/what/values/principles/index.asp
9. Composition of Review Team & Qualifications
The team will comprise:
• An experienced, independent recovery specialist (team leader)
• A designated member of the PRCS
• A Federation disaster manager with recovery expertise.
Team members should between them have the following skills and experience:
• Have a background in disaster response including recovery and risk reduction;
• Be familiar with carrying out operational reviews/evaluations;
• Have experience of working at community level gathering beneficiary feedback through a variety of methodologies (and including gender vulnerability expertise);
• Have experience in facilitating lessons learned meetings/workshops involving different stakeholders;
• Sensitive to the complexities and constraints associated with IFRC/NS mandate
• Possess analytical and communication skills
• Demonstrate experience in the use of both qualitative and quantitative methodologies
• Knowledge and experience of working in Pakistan.
10. Application Procedures
Interested candidates for the external recovery specialist position should submit their application by the 9th January 2012 to Nigel Ede (nigel.ede@ifrc.org), the Asia Pacific Disaster Management Unit Focal Point and copy Mary Singaram (mary.singaram@ifrc.org). For applications to be considered they should include all of the following:
1. An expression of interest which includes the proposed review methodology a the proposed work plan and timeframe, all meeting the requirements of these ToR;
2. Cover letter clearly summarising the applicant’s experience as it pertains to this assignment, the daily fee rate, the proposed start date and contact details of three professional referees;
3. Curriculum Vitae (CV).
Applicants may be required to provide examples of previous written work similar to that described in this ToR. Application materials are non-returnable and we thank you in advance for understanding that only short-listed candidates will be contacted.
Mid term review of the recovery phase of the PRCS-IFRC
2010 Pakistan Monsoon Flood Operations
1. SUMMARY
Purpose – This mid term review will determine the progress against the stated objectives of the recovery phase of the 2010 monsoon flood response in Pakistan. It will assess the relevance and timeliness of the recovery approach adopted, and make recommendations to further improve the delivery of recovery assistance to ensure the overall impact of the response and meet accountabilities to both beneficiaries and donors. The review will also contribute to learning for the Pakistan Red Crescent Society (PRCS) and the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) on the design and delivery of recovery assistance as part of responding to disasters in Pakistan.
Audience – PRCS, IFRC, Partner National Societies and other Red Cross Red Crescent Movement Partners
Commissioners – The IFRC Asia Pacific (AP) Zone Disaster Management Unit will be funding the review.
Reports – The evaluation team leader will report to the AP Zone Head of Disaster Management Unit and the IFRC Head of Delegation in Pakistan.
Duration – 23 days
Timeframe – From mid January 2012
Location: Islamabad, with field work in three provinces - Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KPK), Punjab and Sindh
2. BACKGROUND
The IFRC/PRCS Pakistan Monsoon Floods Operation was launched in July 2010 following the worst floods to hit the Pakistan since 1929. The operation aims to support the PRCS to assist up to 130,000 families (approximately 910,000 people) for a total of 24 months, and expects to be completed by early August 2012. Resources for the operation are being made available through the IFRC’s Revised Emergency Appeal which seeks CHF 130,673,677 (USD 133,873,000 or EUR 97,968,800) in cash, kind, or services. As of end August 2011, the appeal is 71% covered in cash and kind, and 77% covered including contributions in the pipeline. The relief phase of the operation covered the first six months. Following an intensive assessment and planning process, efforts are now focused on the longer term recovery of the flood-affected areas.
The floods, triggered by torrential monsoon rains, covered vast parts of Baluchistan, Punjab, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KPK), Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), Pakistan Administered Kashmir (AJK), Gilgit Baltistan (GB), and Sindh. An estimated 20 million people were affected, prompting a large scale government and international humanitarian response. The northern province of KPK was initially the worst affected. However, the southern provinces of Punjab and Sindh experienced prolonged flooding, with hundreds of thousands of people fleeing their homes and evacuating the cities in August and September 2010 as onrushing floodwaters swept away homes, crops and livestock. At the end of October 2010, more than a million displaced people remained in temporary facilities in Sindh alone. Today, the flood waters in most places have receded and the majority of affected people have returned home.
As of 2 February 2011, figures by the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) in Pakistan showed the following loss of lives and property:
NDMA Update: 2 February 2011
Summary of damage Punjab Sindh KPK* Balochistan AJ&K GB Total
Deaths 110 411 1,156 54 71 183 1,985
Injuries 262 1,235 1,198 104 87 60 2,946
Houses damaged 497,700 876,249 284,990 75,596 7,106 2,830 1,744,471
* Including Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA)
The floods also damaged or destroyed medical facilities, as well as education facilities, power and transmission lines, telecommunication networks and industrial infrastructure. Significantly, almost two million hectares of farmland were also destroyed. This represents a tenth of the nation’s agricultural area – threatening severe food shortages and long-term repercussions in a country where agriculture accounts for 20 per cent of its GDP . The disaster led to massive relief and recovery needs among the affected people including: food, health and care, safe water, access to improved sanitation and shelter.
The IFRC’s emergency appeal is part of the large scale international humanitarian response to try and address the needs of sections of the affected communities, working through and with the PRCS.
By 31 July 2011, after one year of concerted efforts in relief and early recovery programming, PRCS/IFRC has reached at least 1,602,832 people (228,976 families) across the five provinces most affected by the floods. This represents more than half of the Red Cross Red Crescent Movement’s current reach of 3.03 million people.
Sector Achievements (families reached)
Relief food and non food including emergency shelter 228,976
Shelter (winterised transitional shelter during relief phase) 6,393
Shelter (recovery) 18
Health and care (relief) 133,689
Health and care (recovery) 60,016
Water and sanitation (relief) 31,300
Water and sanitation (recovery) 1,835
Livelihoods (winter vegetable seeds during relief phase) 2,000
Livelihoods (recovery/provision of seeds and fertilizers) 31,214
By the end of the relief phase, huge needs remained in Sindh KPK, and Punjab, with the government of Pakistan and humanitarian organisations working to consolidate longer-term recovery plans to address a wide range of issues including malnutrition, health epidemics, poor sanitation and loss of homes and livelihoods. While the majority of affected people had returned home, almost 500 camps were still operational in Sindh in January 2011 .
At the end of January 2011, the PRCS and IFRC concluded a month-long integrated vulnerability and capacity assessment of some of the affected populations. Findings from the assessments were fed into recovery planning across all sectors, and an integrated recovery plan has been put into place that aims to rebuild communities that are safer and more resilient to disasters. The integration approach includes a sequencing of recovery activities in the same communities managed by village committees. To strengthen its capacity to implement this plan, particularly in areas where it did not have existing technical resources, such as livelihoods and shelter, the National Society undertook an extensive human resource recruitment exercise.
While an integrated recovery plan was only put in place in January 2011, recovery planning had featured right from the start of the IFRC/PRCS response to the floods. It started with the inclusion of an early recovery specialist in the FACT team who proposed the option of using Cash Transfer Programming (CTP) following the FACT assessments of the affected communities and their needs. Recovery activities were included in the first Plan of Action (PoA) in August 2010. Recommendations from the Transitional Planning and Assessment Team (TPAT), led by recovery coordinator and deployed to assess and develop appropriate recovery interventions for health, watsan, shelter and livelihoods, were incorporated into the revised PoA which was then presented in Doha in late Sept 2010. A Recovery Framework was also developed to provide guidance for a common Federation-wide integrated recovery approach to promote an efficient and coherent recovery assistance to meet the needs of the flood-affected population. Field assessments in December and January 2011 led to the preparation of Implementation Framework for PRCS - IFRC Flood Recovery Activities of April 2011 and including the identification of six worst affected districts in the provinces of KPK, Punjab and Sindh where an integrated recovery response would be focused. This was followed by the preparation of provincial recovery plans for KPK, Punjab and Sindh and the finalisation of a detailed logframe to guide the integrated recovery approach and provide the basis for detailed monitoring.
However, there have been a number of challenges, including the following:
• Despite the capacity of the PRCS to providing a comprehensive disaster response, staff capacity limited their full involvement in the development of recovery plans, building on the gains of a major relief phase response and learning from previous disaster responses;
• The limited involvement of provinces in the initial planning affected the level of ownership and required a second stage of provincial consultation of the NHQ approved recovery plan which took time. This important step resulted in provincial recovery plans and budgets with the necessary ownership;
• Agreeing staff needs to deliver the recovery operation and subsequent staff recruitment was time consuming and added to start up delays;
• Various factors resulted in a high level of delegate turnover which affected continuity and resulted in loss of institutional knowledge and memory;
• Weak linkages and external networking with other agencies supporting recovery efforts undermined access to relevant best practices and lesson learning;
• Immigration restrictions and recruitment more generally have challenged the programme’s ability to start up of the recovery phase.
During the period to be reviewed, the IFRC secretariat commissioned a Real Time Evaluation (RTE) from October to November 2010 to assess the ongoing IFRC/PRCS response to the floods. Findings from the RTE, which looked specifically at the efficiency and effectiveness of management and coordination, including related internal processes and systems, were used to inform the ongoing flood response. A RDRT evaluation has also been conducted in March, commissioned by the IFRC South Asia Regional Office. The Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC) also commissioned an Inter-Agency RTE of the international humanitarian community’s response to the floods from January to March 2011 to assess the current response to date and provide real time feedback and input into ongoing decision making. In July 2011, an external evaluation of the relief phase of the IFRC/PRCS response was undertaken for the purpose of accountability and learning. A final report for this evaluation has been published.
3. PURPOSE AND SCOPE
3.1 Purpose
The purpose of this review of the recovery phase of the Pakistan Monsoon Flood Operations is to examine the progress achieved towards the stated objectives with regards to relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, impact and sustainability. It will also look at the timeliness and appropriateness of the recovery planning and delivery approach and process to assess its contribution to achieving the recovery objectives. The review will include the identification of lessons, current good practices, challenges to overcome and recommendations to strengthen the delivery and overall impact of the recovery assistance during the remainder of the operation. The learning from this review will be used to improve the design and delivery of future recovery interventions of the PRCS and the wider Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement.
The key audience of the review findings are the PRCS, IFRC and other Red Cross and Red Crescent (RCRC) stakeholders.
3.2 Scope
This review will examine the early recovery and recovery phases of the PRCS/IFRC Pakistan Monsoon Flood Operations up to October 2011 to for which CHF 64 million has been spent out of a total of CHF 94 million pledged. While some initial early recovery activities took place during the early stages of the disaster response, the main recovery phase of the operation started in February 2011 with the closure of the relief phase.
The review will assess to what extent is the recovery phase of the flood response is achieving the expected objectives outlined in the PoA of October 2010 and the Implementation Framework for PRCS - IFRC Flood Recovery Activities of April 2011. It will encompass all geographical areas where recovery activities are being undertaken; principally the provinces of KPK, Punjab and Sindh including the six districts identified for the integrated delivery of sectoral assistance. The review will cover all technical sectors of intervention, including health, watsan, shelter, livelihoods and organisational development and capacity building support provided to the PRCS at national and provincial level.
4. Evaluation Objectives, Criteria and Key Questions
4.1 Objectives
I. To examine the extent to which the operation has and is achieving its goal, objectives and expected results related to the approved PoA of October 2010, the Implementation Framework for PRCS - IFRC Flood Recovery Activities of April 2011, and the agreed provincial recovery plans for KPK, Punjab and Sindh.
II. To assess key achievements and current challenges of the recovery programme and provide specific recommendations for improving current operations and the timeliness of delivery. Review current timelines for programme completion and recommend if adjustments are required.
III. To review the recovery planning process and field operationalisation; the elements, tools used and processes followed to assess their contribution to achieving the recovery objectives and delivery of recovery assistance to date.
IV. Articulate lessons and recommend good practice to inform the future delivery of recovery programming of the PRCS and the wider RCRC Movement as a whole.
4.2 Evaluation criteria
4.2.1 Quality
? What strategies are being been used to ensure quality, timely and relevant delivery of recovery assistance to the flood affected population? Has the integration approach adopted improved the quality of assistance being provided?
? What problems and constraints have been faced during the implementation of the operation (including issues of context etc) and how has the operation dealt with these?
? What Federation mechanisms and tools have been used to promote good practice (e.g. Code of Conduct, Sphere, BPI, emergency assessment tools, VCA etc)?
? To what extent has the Recovery Framework developed in tandem with the PoA guided the recovery phase of the flood response? How could the structure and content of similar frameworks for a recovery phase be improved based on this experience?
4.2.2 Relevance and appropriateness
? What unanticipated positive or negative consequences have arisen in the recovery phase of the operation and why?
? Were the recovery phase of the operation’s strategies and priorities in line or complement those of the authorities and other national and international humanitarian actors? If not, why?
? To what extent are the beneficiaries involved in planning, design and monitoring in the recovery operation?
4.2.3 Effectiveness
? To what extent is the recovery phase of the flood response achieving the expected objectives outlined in the PoA of October 2010 and the Implementation Framework for PRCS - IFRC Flood Recovery Activities of April 2011?
? Were decisions related to operational leadership of the recovery programming taken with view to optimising programme effectiveness? How did existing recovery capacity and current OD good practice inform these decisions?
? What indications are there that the integrated recovery approach being followed has improved the effectiveness of recovery assistance being provided to flood affected households?
? What measures are being taken to more effectively identify the most vulnerable among the affected population and developing appropriate strategies to respond to their particular circumstances and recovery needs?
? How effective has the operation been in terms of responding to the changing needs identified by the affected communities? Is it focusing on the priorities of the identified target groups? To what extent are the most vulnerable population being reached / provided with assistance relevant to their current needs? How far has gender and other cross cutting issues been understood on an ongoing basis to inform programming?
? How effective have the operation's processes been in planning, priority setting, monitoring and quality management (e.g. internal reviews and other quality assurance mechanisms). Are regular reviews being held at different stages of the operation? Are key planning documents being used and to what extent?
? What have been the factors that have helped to the recovery programme move forward and what have hindered progress?
? Is there effective coordination with other parts of the Movement / other actors including the IASC cluster system for different sector activities? How appropriate and effective are the inputs of partner organizations in the implementation of the operation? What are the lessons to be learnt for improved Federation wide recovery planning at the start of the operation?
? How timely was the sequencing in recovery planning and field implementation? How effective was the pilot project in testing implementation methods to facilitate rapid scale up? What challenges has this scale up faced and what lessons do these provide for future operations?
? How responsive has the recovery programme been to the different needs and timing required to meet the needs of different stages of recovery in the different flood-affected contexts/districts?
? To what extent are the recovery programme activities expected to strengthen the resilience of the affected population? How are these DRR components being successfully mainstreamed within the recovery activities and will these activities be sustainable?
4.2.4 Efficiency
? Are the recovery operations meeting the stated objectives in an efficient way? (e.g. were inputs used in the best way to achieve outcomes and if not why not? Was the assistance provided in a timely manner to meet community needs?)
? Were the appropriate human resources (skills, experience and seniority) available to the operation in key areas of management, coordination, technical programme design and implementation from IFRC and PRCS?
? Are other resources financial, human, physical and information resources available and are they being utilised efficiently?
? To what extent has or will the integrated approach to delivering recovery assistance increase the efficiency of the programme and what additional steps could be taken to maximise this benefit?
? Have existing coordination mechanisms optimised the delivery of recovery assistance? Have recommendations related to coordination outlined in the Recovery Framework assisted the delivery of the operation?
4.2.5 Impact
? How is the support provided to the targeted communities impacting on their well-being?
? What are some of the successes and opportunities that came out of the recovery operation? To what extent is the intervention supporting the target communities’ own problem-solving and decision-making to address their local needs? What might be the positive and negative consequences or changes in the communities as result of the support being provided?
? What important lessons have been learned which can a) improve future implementation of recovery programming in Pakistan and b) be shared with the wider RCRC Movement?
? What changes in capacity, capability, understanding and learning will be facilitated and supported within the PRCS as a result of the ongoing recovery operation? Are these appropriate and how can these be strengthened?
? How is the recovery operation expected to strengthened the capacity of PRCS and how? How could it improve the capacity of PRCS to plan, implement, monitor, report and evaluate effective recovery programmes? Is the possibly enhanced capacity going to be sustainable?
4.2.6 Accountability to Beneficiaries
? How have systems for feedback from the assisted population been developed and improved over time and are they leading to an improvement in the quality of recovery support being provided? How has beneficiary feedback been processed and responded to, and have programmes been modified as a result? What lessons can be drawn related to two way beneficiary communications?
4.2.7 Connectedness
? Has the integrated planning and design translated into adequate and effective integration across the different programmes? What are the discernable programme gains from this integration?
? To what extent is the recovery programme taking into account longer term development aspects of the communities being assisted? What are the plans for sustaining these activities once the recovery operations end? What are the plans for future sustainability and are these realistic?
? What planning is being place for transition, when the recovery operations close?
5. Methodology
The review will use a triangulation of the following methodologies:
i) Desk research and secondary data review of key documents:
These include assessments, plans, logframes, completed reviews/evaluations, progress reports, mission reports and other relevant documents prepared by the PRCS and IFRC, and other relevant secondary data produced by other RCRC and external partners involved in the provision of assistance to the flood affected population.
ii) Key informant interviews / group interviews as appropriate:
These will include:
- key PRCS staff / volunteers;
- relevant IFRC staff in Islamabad, Delhi , Kuala Lumpur and Geneva;
- other RCRC partners;
- key external stakeholders supporting the flood recovery process (government, local and international humanitarian agencies); and
- key PRCS/IFRC/PNS staff who have left the response operation.
Key interviews with stakeholders Islamabad and PRCS provincial and district branches will allow a focus on the internal systems and the management and coordination of the recovery operation.
iii) Field visits to selected provincial sites to gather information directly from assisted local communities.
6. Deliverables (or outputs)
The following outputs are expected from the review team:
• Debriefing: to share the broad findings of the review team with staff and volunteers in the field, including PRCS and other relevant stakeholders, and note their comments.
• Draft report: The results of the review will be presented in a draft report for comment by the PRCS and the IFRC. The report should focus on delivering clear lessons for the remainder of the operation and for the wider Federation.
• Final report: This report should be no longer than 30 pages in a readable and visual format, with an executive summary of no more than five pages. All additional materials will be provided as annexes to the report. All information and analysis should be gender disaggregated to the extent possible.
The report should be structured in line with the review categories above, present its findings and then lessons and recommendation for the future. A timeline of events in the operation should also be drawn up to support the report.
7. Proposed Timeline
The review team will be recruited by mid January 2011. The review will be undertaken from late January 2012 and finalized not later than early March 2012. The initial findings of the review mission will be shared by mid March 2012.
Draft outline of schedule:
Time Task Location
3 days Desktop study Islamabad/Delhi/Kuala Lumpur
4 days Interviews Islamabad/Delhi/Kuala Lumpur/Geneva
10 days Field work Pakistan - KPK, Sindh, Punjab
1 day PRCS and IFRC briefing Islamabad/Kuala Lumpur
3 days Compilation of draft report Islamabad/Kuala Lumpur
2 days Compilation of final report
8. Evaluation Quality & Ethical Standards
The reviewers should take all reasonable steps to ensure that the evaluation is designed and conducted to respect and protect the rights and welfare of people and the communities of which they are members, and to ensure that the review is technically accurate, reliable, and legitimate, conducted in a transparent and impartial manner, and contributes to organizational learning and accountability. Therefore, the review team should adhere to the evaluation standards and specific, applicable practices outlined in the IFRC Framework for Evaluation:
http://www.ifrc.org/Global/Publications/monitoring/IFRC-Framework-for-Evaluation.pdf.
The IFRC Evaluation Standards are:
i) Utility: Evaluations must be useful and used.
ii) Feasibility: Evaluations must be realistic, diplomatic, and managed in a sensible, cost effective manner.
iii) Ethics & Legality: Evaluations must be conducted in an ethical and legal manner, with particular regard for the welfare of those involved in and affected by the evaluation.
iv) Impartiality & Independence; Evaluations should be impartial, providing a comprehensive and unbiased assessment that takes into account the views of all stakeholders.
v) Transparency: Evaluation activities should reflect an attitude of openness and transparency.
vi) Accuracy: Evaluations should be technical accurate, providing sufficient information about the data collection, analysis, and interpretation methods so that its worth or merit can be determined.
vii) Participation: Stakeholders should be consulted and meaningfully involved in the evaluation process when feasible and appropriate.
viii) Collaboration: Collaboration between key operating partners in the evaluation process improves the legitimacy and utility of the evaluation.
It is also expected that the evaluation will respect the seven Fundamental Principles of the Red Cross and Red Crescent: 1) humanity, 2) impartiality, 3) neutrality, 4) independence, 5) voluntary service, 6) unity, and 7) universality. Further information can be obtained about these principles at:
www.ifrc.org/what/values/principles/index.asp
9. Composition of Review Team & Qualifications
The team will comprise:
• An experienced, independent recovery specialist (team leader)
• A designated member of the PRCS
• A Federation disaster manager with recovery expertise.
Team members should between them have the following skills and experience:
• Have a background in disaster response including recovery and risk reduction;
• Be familiar with carrying out operational reviews/evaluations;
• Have experience of working at community level gathering beneficiary feedback through a variety of methodologies (and including gender vulnerability expertise);
• Have experience in facilitating lessons learned meetings/workshops involving different stakeholders;
• Sensitive to the complexities and constraints associated with IFRC/NS mandate
• Possess analytical and communication skills
• Demonstrate experience in the use of both qualitative and quantitative methodologies
• Knowledge and experience of working in Pakistan.
10. Application Procedures
Interested candidates for the external recovery specialist position should submit their application by the 9th January 2012 to Nigel Ede (nigel.ede@ifrc.org), the Asia Pacific Disaster Management Unit Focal Point and copy Mary Singaram (mary.singaram@ifrc.org). For applications to be considered they should include all of the following:
1. An expression of interest which includes the proposed review methodology a the proposed work plan and timeframe, all meeting the requirements of these ToR;
2. Cover letter clearly summarising the applicant’s experience as it pertains to this assignment, the daily fee rate, the proposed start date and contact details of three professional referees;
3. Curriculum Vitae (CV).
Applicants may be required to provide examples of previous written work similar to that described in this ToR. Application materials are non-returnable and we thank you in advance for understanding that only short-listed candidates will be contacted.
Post a Comment