community-based disaster risk management criticalguidelinesndma.gov.pk/publications/cbdrm...
Post on 28-Apr-2018
230 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
The Partnerships for Disaster Reduction - South East Asia Phase 3 (PDRSEA3) program is jointly implemented by (ADPC) and the UNESCAP with funding support from the European Commission Humanitarian Aid Department (ECHO) under its ‘Fourth DIPECHO Action Plan for Southeast Asia’. The one-year project, which commenced in February 2005, aims to establish an improved, enabling environment for CBDRM through promoting ownership in national programs and local entities, enhancing the capabilities of CBDRM practitioners and the expansion of new and strengthening of existing partnerships in Southeast Asia particularly in the target countries Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao PDR, Timor Léste and Vietnam.
The Asian Disaster Preparedness Center (ADPC), established in 1986 is a regional, inter-governmental, non-profit organization and resource center based in Bangkok. ADPC is Thailand mandated to promote safer communities and sustainable development through the reduction of the impact of disasters in response to the needs of countries and communities in Asia and the Pacific by raising awareness, helping to establish and strengthen sustainable institutional mechanisms, enhancing knowledge and skills, and facilitating the exchange of information, experience and expertise.
Asian Disaster Preparedness Center (ADPC)P.O. Box 4, Klong Luang, Pathumthani 12120, ThailandTel.: (66-2) 516-5900 to 5910 Fax: (66-2) 524-5360E-mail: mailto:adpc@adpc.netWebsite: www.adpc.net
United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and Pacific is the regional arm of the United Nations Secretariat for the Asian and Pacific regions, located in Bangkok, Thailand. UNESCAP is committed to materialize the visions of the United Nations Millennium Declaration, which was adopted by the UN General Assembly in September 2000. The current PDR-SEA project is being implemented jointly by UNESCAP and ADPC at the regional level.
For more information, please contact:UNESCAPUnited Nations Building, Rajadamnern Nok Avenue, Bangkok 10200, ThailandTel.: (66-2) 288-1450Fax: (66-2) 288-1059Website: http://www.unescap.org/
The European Commission Humanitarian Aid Department (ECHO) oversees and coordinates the European Union’s humanitarian operations in non-member countries, in partnership with non-governmental organizations, specialized agencies of the United Nations, and other international bodies. DIPECHO is the Disaster Preparedness program set up by ECHO in 1996 to prevent and prepare for natural disasters.
For more information, please contact:European Commission Humanitarian Aid Office200 rue de la loi B-1049 Brussels, BelgiumTel.: (32 2) 295 4400Fax: (32 3) 295 4572E-mail: echobangkok@ECHO-Bangkok.org
viCRITICAL GUIDELINES OF CBDRM
For more information on this publication and to order a copy, write to:
Vicky Puzon-DiopenesInformation ManagerPartnerships for Disaster Reduction - Southeast Asia (PDRSEA)Asian Disaster Preparedness CenterPO Box 4, Klong Luang, Pathumthani 12120, ThailandTel: +66 2 516 5900 to 10, Ext 408Fax: +66 2 524 5360Cell: +66 7 052 4216Email: vicky@adpc.netURL: www.adpc.net
© ADPC 2006Bangkok, Thailand
Design and Layout: Lowil fred Espada
CRITICAL GUIDELINESCommunity-based Disaster Risk Managment
Published by the Asian Disaster Preparedness Center through its Partnerships for Disaster Reduction - Southeast Asia Phase 3 (PDRSEA3) Project jointly implemented by ADPC and UNESCAP with funding support from DIPECHO
This booklet on “Critical Guidelines of CBDRM” was drafted by Ian Davies and Zubair Murshed through a consultative process with stakeholders and particularly as a result of the “Regional Workshop on Standards of Community Based Disaster Risk Management” held on 24-27 January 2006 in Bangkok Thailand.
i
The Asian Disaster Preparedness Center celebrates its 20 year anniversary in 2006. I would
like to take this opportunity to express my sincere appreciation to all its partner institutions,
national governments, numerous UN organizations and other international organizations for their
collaboration and support to ADPC during the past two decades. The work of all stakeholders in
disaster management, including ADPC staff and alumni have contributed to making communities
and countries better prepared, safer, and more resilient in face of disasters. ADPC is proud to
have been a pioneer in some of the significant changes-in paradigm, concepts, and practices
paving the way to reduction of the impacts of natural disasters.
ADPC was established in 1986 under late Colonel Brian Ward’s illustrious leadership to address
the disaster management needs of countries in Asia. In its twenty years ADPC responded
dynamically to the paradigm shift in disaster management, readily and actively adjusting its
operational strengths to address the evolving developments in disaster risk management by
structuring its technical focus on climate risk management, disaster management systems, urban
disaster risk management and public health in emergencies. This vigorous and comprehensive
approach is further reinforced by ensuring that ADPC’s projects and programs enhance institutional
capacities, apply community-based disaster risk management practices, and promote and
support mainstreaming of disaster management into the development processes. These activities
complement ADPC’s involvement in building national and provincial disaster management systems,
identifying disaster risk management needs, and developing strategic solutions. ADPC’s standing
and twenty years of experience in the region is confirmed by the substantive encouragement and
support from various multi-lateral and bi-lateral development and donor agencies; as manifested
in the implementation of our extensive array of projects and programs.
preface
20 years of commitment to safer communities andsustainable development through disaster reduction
iiCRITICAL GUIDELINES OF CBDRM
As it moves forward beyond its twenty years of operations, ADPC will continue to build upon its
operational and technical strengths and to evolve in its role as a regional resource center, and
to act as a regional early warning center. ADPC will further pursue operational partnerships and
collaborations with all stakeholders in disaster risk management into sustainable development
policies and practices throughout the Asia and Pacific regions.
In closing, permit me to express my gratitude to our staff and consultants who have shared
commitment, dedication and loyalty to ADPC’s goals and mission.
As its Executive Director, it is my honor to be part of this fine organization. I am confident that
ADPC will continue to be responsive to the priorities of our key stakeholders in governments and
the international community overcoming challenges to serve the region and beyond.
Message From Dr. Suvit YodmaniExecutive Director, Asian Disaster Preparedness Center
contents
iii
contents
i Preface
iii Contents
01 Introduction
one.GENERAL GUIDANCE
08 BACKGROUND 08 Purpose and Scope
09 Key Activities
12 SOURCE MATERIALS12 Purpose and Scope
14 PRINCIPLES OF PERFORMANCE AND OUTCOME INDICATORS
15 Proposed Principles, Based on the Four Levels
15 Level 1: Ethical Principles
16 Level 2: Strategic Principles
16 Level 3: Tactical Principles
17 Level 4: Implementation Principles
18 KEY DEFINITIONS
20 ELEMENTS OF RISK REDUCTION 20 Structural and Non-structural Measures
ivCRITICAL GUIDELINES OF CBDRM
22 A RESILIENT COMMUNITY22 Aim of Resilience
22 The Nature of Resilient Communities
25 Indicators of a Resilient Community
two.GUIDELINES FOR GOOD PRACTICE IN COMMUNITY-BASED DISASTER RISK MANAGEMENT
28 PROCESS INDICATORS28 Process 1. Undertake Groundwork for CBDRM
30 Process 2. Select Communities for CBDRM Through Risk Assessment
36 Process 3. Build Rapport and Understand the Community
38 Process 4. Participatory Disaster Risk Management Planning
41 Process 5. Community- managed Implementation of Risk Reduction Measures
44 Process 6. Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation
46 OUTCOME INDICATORS46 Outcome 1. Community-based Organization (CBO)
48 Outcome 2. Community Disaster Risk Reduction Fund
50 Outcome 3. Community Hazard, Vulnerability, Capacity Map (HVCM)
51 Outcome 4. Community Disaster Risk Management Plan
52 Outcome 5. CBO Training System
53 Outcome 6. Community Drills System
54 Outcome 7. Community Learning System
55 Outcome 8. Community Early Warning System
56 REFERENCES
APPENDIX58 1. Terminology Proposed by UNISDR
61 2. List of Participants Attended in the ADPC Regional Workshop on Standards of CBDRM
introduction
1
introduction
The importance of community-based approaches has been recognized since long in promoting a culture of safety through reducing local vulnerabilities and building capacities. These approaches have been practiced by various community groups, national and international organizations and government departments, in some cases, for over two decades now.
The practice of community-based approaches has remained diverse due to a host of factors. They include the organizational mandates of the concerned organizations, socio-cultural context of the communities, levels of economic development of communities, political structures in a country and multiplicity in funding cycles of donor organizations. This diversity has raised concerns about the quality in practice and the need for promoting good practices.
Another key trend in the recent years has been the efforts by NGOs, UN and other international organizations to mobilize government support for CBDRM in policy, planning and programming. This is sometimes also known as integration of CBDRM. In this regard the organizations have adopted various approaches including national and local advocacy, capacity building, integrating risk factors into development planning and joint implementation of CBDRM activities with government departments. These efforts to gain governmental support have also necessitated the need for common national frameworks about community-based approaches so as to convince the authorities. The development organizations find it difficult to mobilize support from the authorities in the absence of a common reference point. The ADPC’s own experience under the Partnerships for Disaster Reduction South East Asia (PDRSEA3) program demonstrated the need for development of regional guidelines.
The development of minimum standards in other disciplines like the humanitarian sector, as well have played a catalytic role in creating a demand within the disaster risk reduction community to formulate minimum standards for practice in the area of community-based disaster risk management.
2CRITICAL GUIDELINES OF CBDRM
In an effort to address the above issues, the initiative on drafting of Critical Guidelines of Community-based Disaster Risk Management was undertaken by the ADPC and the UNESCAP under the jointly implemented Partnerships for Disaster Reduction South East Asia (PDRSEA3) project.
It is expected that the availability of these Critical Guidelines will enable development practitioners to follow common principles, processes and approaches in the identification, design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of community-based projects on disaster risk management, thus contributing to the improvement in practice.
The Critical Guidelines were developed through a consultative process. Professor Ian Davis and Mr. Zubair Murshed, program manager PDRSEA3 prepared the first draft of the guidelines. In developing this draft inputs were provided by Mr. Loy Rego, Director DMS team, and Mr. Shesh Kanta Kafle, Training Manager PDRSEA3, among others. The draft was subjected to a review by CBDRM practitioners from about 10 countries. Based upon the recommendations from the workshop the draft was further revised and finalized by Ian Davis and Zubair Murshed.
The Regional Workshop in Bangkok in January 2006 proved invaluable in reviewing the first draft of the guidelines and providing recommendations in establishing the function, format and focus of these guidelines. The text of this document is the product of these discussions and agreements. The workshop was attended by about 25 leaders drawn from regionally based international, national and local NGO’s to discuss the first draft of these guidelines and seek confirmation over the overall directions. The ADPC is grateful to all these individuals who spent their valuable time in the review. They included Frank Elvey (Timor Léste), Chandra Lukitasari (Indonesia), Banu Subagyo (Indonesia), Bernie O’Neill (Cambodia), Keo Chanthalangsy (Lao PDR), Moloy Chaki (Bangladesh), Paul Venton (UK), Emmeline Managbanag (Philippines), Rene Jinon (Thailand), Krishna Karkee (Nepal), Uzma Hoque (Thailand), Pablo Taebola (Thailand), David Sandilands (Vietnam), Christel Rose (Thailand), Joseph Chung (Thailand), Danilo Atienza (Indonesia), Leigh Vickery (Lao PDR), Raul de la Rosa (Timor Léste), Delna de Jesus (Timor Léste), Ngo Cong Chinh (Vietnam), Supaporn Khrutmuang (Thailand), Wantanee Kongomboon (Thailand), Edlin S.Lumanog (Thailand), Muhibuddin Bin Usamah (Thailand), and Le Huu Ti (Thailand). ADPC is grateful to UNDP India for providing funding support for this workshop.
The consultative process followed in the development of the guidelines helped establish a minimum consensus amongst the practitioners in establishing benchmarks for the CBDRM practice, which is an encouraging development towards improvement of quality in the CBDRM practices. These critical guidelines are by no means exhaustive. This output should be considered as ‘work in progress’, which has been formulated upon the basis of experiences of participating organizations and individuals. Other individuals and organizations may have different experiences. The application of these guidelines in the field should allow further refinement.
The document is divided into two parts. The first part titled as General Guidance describes the background, source materials and principles if performance and outcome indicators, key definitions, elements of risk reduction, and the concept of resilient community. The second part is titled as “Guidelines for good practice in community-based disaster risk management”. It is divided into two sections. The first section is about Process Indicators, while the second is about Outcome Indicators. The Process Indicators discuss six process steps in the implementation of CBDRM programs and projects. For each process step, i) aim, ii) steps in this process, iii) key outcome indicators, vi) and guidance notes to implement CBDRM are discussed. The purpose of the first section is to describe the essential elements of a good CBDRM process. The purpose of the second section is to discuss the expected outcomes of a good CBDRM process. The Outcomes are about institutional arrangements and product outputs that a CBDRM program/project must endeavor to establish in the local community in order to ensure the continuity of community initiatives for
introduction
3
disaster risk reduction after the completion of externally sponsored development initiatives. These Outcome Indicators can also serve as markers to gauge the success of an externally supported CBDRM process in developing capacity of local community to achieve sustainable development. If an externally supported process was able to establish the institutional arrangements described in the outcome indicators, that initiative could be described as a successful initiative, an otherwise assessment would mean more efforts were required to develop community capacity. The ADPC and UNESCAP are grateful to DIPECHO South East Asia for the generous support provided for implementation of the PDRSEA3 program and two previous phases of the program since 2001. These Critical Guidelines have been prepared under the third phase of the PDRSEA, primarily for users in the South East Asian region. The PDRSEA 3 was jointly implemented by the ADPC and the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (UNESCAP).
6CRITICAL GUIDELINES OF CBDRM
”“If you cannot measure results, if you cannot show what you’ve done, other partners will be found. Why is that? Doing good is not enough. We have to show what kind of good we’re doing, in which sectors, in which communities, and whether the good has bad consequences, or bad side effects, that no one anticipated.
Andrew Natsios, USAID (2003)
”“
Evaluation reports (of disaster assistance) were so consistent in their criticism of agency monitoring and evaluation practices that a standard sentence could almost be inserted into all reports along the lines of: It was not possible to assess the impact of this intervention because of the lack of adequate indicators, clear objectives, baseline data and monitoring.
ALNAP, (2003)
”“
Countries that develop policy, legislative and institutional frameworks for disaster risk reduction and that are able to develop and track progress through specific and measurable indicators have greater capacity to manage risks and to achieve widespread consensus for engagement in and compliance with disaster risk reduction measures across all sectors of society.
Para 16
Performance Indicators
1. general guidance
7
Mainstreaming DRR into Government and NGO Sectors, Development Plans and Actions
”“
Staff ‘ownership’ of both risk reduction and the process of mainstreaming itself is key to attaining ‘full integration’…Organizations are run by people and hence mainstreaming risk reduction will be totally dependent on enthusiastic and well- informed staff continually promoting it. If staff ‘own’ risk reduction as their responsibility, it has an excellent chance of becoming sustainable within the organization.
Sarah la Trobe and Ian Davis (2005)
”“An integrated, multi-hazard approach to disaster risk reduction should be factored into policies, planning and programming related to sustainable development, relief, rehabilitation, and recovery activities in post-disaster and post-conflict situations in disaster-prone countries.
Hyogo Framework of Action (2005) Priorities for Action p.9
”“An ability to recover quickly from or adjust easily to misfortune, change or disturbance…The capacity of a system, community or society to resist or to change in order that it may obtain an acceptable level in functioning and structure.
International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (2002)
Resilient Communities
8CRITICAL GUIDELINES OF CBDRM
background
Purpose and Scope
These Guidelines have been devised to improve the quality and overall effectiveness of Community-based Disaster Risk Management (CBDRM). The guidelines are intended for officials in local governments, NGO’s, civil society organizations and community leaders as they devise CBDRM projects and programs. The guidelines are concerned with general principles, defining an approach and strategies to provide a framework for tasks that will need to take place at the local level. Thus the guidelines are more a ‘nutritional guide’ rather than a ‘cook book’. The reason for this focus concerns the variability and cultural diversity of local communities that require locally specific indicators to match any local situation.
The aim of this document is to provide a series of practical, simple and relevant templates that can be developed and adapted for use at specific local levels. Eventually these templates may become accepted international tools to measure the quality of performance and outcomes through appropriate indicators for use at the family and community level. It is expected that the availability of a series of indicators will enable development practitioners to be able to follow common principles, processes and approaches in the identification, design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of community-based projects on disaster risk management.
The guidelines are in line with the Hyogo Framework of Action (HFA), which was adopted in January 2005 at the World Conference on Disaster Reduction (WCDR) in Kobe, Japan 168 Governments as a ten year plan to make the world safer from natural hazards. The Hyogo Framework has extensive cross-cutting reference to the importance of CBDRM. The following specific aspects of the Hyogo Framework support the focus of these guidelines.
Strategic Goal 12 (b) The development and strengthening of institutions, mechanisms and capacities at all levels, in particular at the community level, that can systematically contribute to building resilience to hazards.
Priorities for Action 1. Ensure that disaster risk reduction is a national and a local priority with a strong institutional basis for implementation.
1. general guidance
9
Key Activities Community participation Promote community participation in disaster risk reduction through the adoption of specific
policies, the promotion of networking, the strategic management of volunteer resources, the attribution of roles and responsibilities, and the delegation and provision of the necessary authority and resources
National and local risk assessments Develop systems of indicators of disaster risk and vulnerability at national and sub-national
scales that will enable decision-makers to assess the impact of disasters on social, economic and environmental conditions and disseminate the results to decision-makers, the public and population at risk
The above statements effectively capture the focus of this project with a series of key clauses:• ‘Strengthen the community level’• ‘Ensure that DRR is a local priority’• ‘Promote community participation in DRR’• ‘Develop indicators of disaster risk and vulnerability…to assess the impact of disasters on
social, economic and environmental conditions’• ‘Disseminate the results to population at risk’
A draft of the Guidelines was prepared by Ian Davis and Zubair Murshed. In January 2006 a consultation was held in Bangkok amongst 25 leaders drawn from regionally based international, national and local NGO’s to discuss the first draft of these guidelines and seek confirmation over the overall direction. Their names are set out in Appendix 2 of this document. This workshop proved very useful in establishing the function, format and focus of these guidelines. The text of this document is the product of these discussions and agreements. The participants in this consultation agreed on the following issues and these agreements have been incorporated into the text:
i. Focus of Project• the title of this project should use the term ‘Guidelines’ rather than ‘Standards’ since the
term ‘standards’ is too finite and precise for its purpose in this project.
• This form of guidelines is important to enable CBDRM to move forward.
• the over arching focus of this project is to build resiliency to enable local communities to resist hazard impact, to bounce back after disasters and to adapt and change to ensure effective recovery.
ii. Scope of Project• The guidelines will be applicable for all disaster phases: pre, during and post disaster.
• The intention should be to develop indicators of ‘good practice’ rather than ‘best practice’.
iii. Audience of Project • The target users and primary audience are NGOs, civil society organizations, and
local government officials who may belong to commune, sub-district, municipal or district governments. Others will be considered as secondary users. Therefore the guidelines have been developed from the perspective of NGOs, civil society organizations and local government officials.
10CRITICAL GUIDELINES OF CBDRM
”“
• Institutionalization or mainstreaming risk assessment and disaster risk reduction into all appropriate sectors of society is an important stage in the development of CBDRM. Therefore, there is a priority need to include the local government officials as the primary target groups.
iv. Detailed Observations• Different countries as well as different communities within the countries are at different
stages in terms of their understanding of hazards, risks, and in the development of CBDRM. In addition there is wide cultural diversity with variable political, social and economic systems, Therefore, the Critical Guidelines will be developed in the form of a “template or nutrition guide” The users are encouraged to apply this template to create local guidance notes or assessment tools.
The Hyogo Framework for Action gives emphasis to the need for specific actions given local variable patterns:
Recognize the importance and specificity of local risk patterns and trends; decentralize responsibilities and resources for disaster risk reduction to relevant sub-national or local authorities, as appropriate
Hyogo Framework for Action (2005) Priories for Action p.12
• Terminology can be confusing at times due to the language problems, therefore the emphasis should be understanding the “concepts” rather than debating specific terms.
(UNISDR have developed an extensive disaster terminology that can be seen on their web site isdr@un.org . In Appendix 1. a selection of definitions that relate to the scope of this project have been included)
• The term CBDRM will be kept intact in order to avoid adding another acronym; since essentially the practice does not differ significantly under various terms.
• The language of the document will be simplified as much as possible to make certain that the advice is both practical and usable. This is particularly important in view of the many potential audiences of these Guidelines.
• The document’s length will be kept shorter.
• Qualitative indicators are of more value than quantitative since they are much easier to identify and measure and are likely to be more useful in developing effective programs.
• These guidelines should not be specifically attached to the ADPC publication: ‘ Community-based Disaster Risk Management, Field Practitioners’ Handbook’ rather these Guidelines should be capable of being related to the various sets of field based manuals that are currently available.
12CRITICAL GUIDELINES OF CBDRM
source materials
Purpose and Scope
In developing these guidelines it has been important to avoid any temptation to reinvent wheels, so it has been particularly useful to be able to refer to and build from recent parallel work on the quest for indicators to measure the effectiveness of risk reduction. The following studies have enriched this publication
ALNAP• An organization of European based NGO’s “Active Learning Network for Accountability and
Performance in Humanitarian Action” (ALNAP) has played a key role in the development of learning, accountability and quality across the humanitarian sector (ALNAP, 2002).
ALNAP publish annual reviews of evaluations of Humanitarian Action. These reports discuss learning at field levels. Available from www.alnap.org or alnap@odi.org.uk
Davis, Ian• Material from two papers developed by the author in 2003 and 4 has been adapted for this
text: “The Effectiveness of Current Tools for the Identification, Measurement, Analysis and Synthesis of Vulnerability and Disaster Resilience” (2003) Program of Indicators for Disaster Risk Management, National University of Colombia, Manizales. Available from http://idea.unalmzl.edu.co
“The application of performance targets to promote effective earthquake risk reduction strategies” to the 13th International Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver August 2004 (DAVIS, 2004).
Hilhorst, Dorothea• A particularly useful overview of the use and misuse of standards and indicators in the disaster
field has been written by Dr. Dorothea Hilhorst, who works in Disaster Studies in Wageningen University, Netherlands Hilhorst, D. 2002 Being Good or Doing Good? Quality and Accountability of Humanitarian
NGO’s Disasters 26(3): 193-212 (Thea.Hilhorst@alg.asnw.wau.nl)
1. general guidance
13
Humanitarian Policy Network (HPN)• “Measuring the impact of humanitarian aid. A review of current practice” (2004) Hofmann
Charles-Antoine, Roberts Les; Shoham Jeremy and Harvey Paul Humanitarian Policy Group (HPG) Overseas Development Institute (ODI): London
• “Disaster Risk Reduction Mitigation and preparedness in development and emergency programming” (2004) Twigg, John Chapter 18 Monitoring and Evaluation pp 337-365 Humanitarian Policy Group No.9 Overseas Development Institute (ODI): London. Available from www.odi.org.uk/ hpg and www.odihpn.org
Inter-American Development Bank• In addition the Inter-American Development Bank (IADB) and Universidad Nacional de
Colombia have collaborated on a vital project: “The Effectiveness of Current Tools for the Identification and Synthesis of Vulnerability and Disaster Risk.” (CARRENO, 2005; DAVIS, 2003; IADB, 2003; LAVELL, 2003)
This project was finalized in 2005 with the publication of “Indicators of Disaster Risk and Risk
Management” Summary Report and Main Technical Report. (CARDONA 2005). Available from http://idea.unalmzl.edu.co
ProVention Consortium • “Measuring Mitigation Methodologies for assessing natural hazard risks and the net benefits of
mitigation” (2004) A Scoping Study Benson Charlotte and Twigg John ProVention Consortium Secretariat: Geneva. Available from www.proventionconsortium.org
SPHERE• Sphere Project 1998 Humanitarian Charter and Minimum Standards in Disaster Response the
Sphere Project, Geneva, (SPHERE, 1998). Available from www.sphereproject.org/handbook/index.htm
Tearfund• The Tearfund Project on the “Development of performance indicators of risk reduction”
(TEARFUND, 2003 and 2004). Available from http: www.tearfund.org
• The Tearfund Project “Mainstreaming disaster risk reduction, a tool for development organizations” (LA TROBE AND DAVIS 2005)
• The Tearfund Project: “Reducing risk of disaster in our communities” Roots Guide No.9. (VENTON AND HANSFORD, 2006)
14CRITICAL GUIDELINES OF CBDRM
principles of performanceand outcome indicators
Practitioners and officials need sets of principles to guide their actions. Principles provide frameworks for planning and action so that if the circumstances faced by them differ from those implied by indicators then they can use the principles to design their own tools for CBDRM.
One of the key sets of principles for humanitarian agencies is contained in the Red Cross Code of Conduct (The Sphere Project Humanitarian Charter and Minimum Standards in Disaster Response (2004) Code of Conduct pp. 315- 324 Oxfam: Oxford)
Therefore no attempt has been made in the proposals set out below to duplicate this code that has now been widely accepted and signed by International and National NGOs. Therefore the following principles are a specific outworking of the Code of Conduct within the CBDRM environment.
In the past sets of principles contain a random mix of tactical concerns intermixed with those concerned with values and strategy. We believe that there is a value in disaggregating them into an orderly set of interdependent categories. Therefore an attempt has been made to separate them into four categories that can best be described as a pyramid, where each level sits on the foundation of those below.
Level 4.Implementation principles
Level 3.Tactical principles
Level 2.Strategic principles
Level 1.Ethical, Core Value principles
Figure 1. The pyramid of principles
1. general guidance
15
Level 1: Ethical, Core Value Principles relate to the underlying shared beliefs and concerns of the organization and of its mandate as it seeks to undertake CBDRM. Using a food metaphor Level 1 would relate the ethics of food production. (Such as a human rights based approach to CBDRM)
Level 2: Strategic Principles that concern the policy direction of CBDRM that will be informed and be based on the ethical principles. Using a food metaphor Level 2 would be a nutrition guide. (Such as what actions to consider taking-why, where and with what expected consequences?)
Level 3: Tactical Principles that concern the practical outworking of the strategic principles. Using a food metaphor Level 3 would be a cookbook. (Such as how to adopt the agreed strategy, considering staffing / financial implications etc.)
Level 4: Implementation Principles that are related to all the preceding levels: core values, strategy and tactics. Using a food metaphor Level 4 would be eating the meal as well as congratulating the cook or writing a letter of complaint to the restaurant! (Such as actions taken as well as their monitoring and evaluation)
PROPOSED PRINCIPLES, BASED ON THE FOUR LEVELS
Level 1: Ethical Principles
PRINCIPLE 1. (Ethics) Observe Basic Rights People have basic rights that are to be respected and observed in undertaking CBDRM. These include the right to:• safety;• be listened to;• be consulted over any issue that may affect their well-being or future;• receive appropriate assistance following disaster impact.
PRINCIPLE 2. (Ethics) Share Information concerning those ‘at-risk’ If anyone or any organization undertakes local risk assessment and discovers that a given community is at risk, then they have an ethical responsibility to share this information and disseminate it to the individual families and community in question. They also have an additional responsibility to share this with the wider community living in the area.
PRINCIPLE 3. (Ethics) Share Assessment InformationNGOs will agree to share the results of their risk assessments or post-disaster damage/ needs and capacity assessments with any other organization, such as local governments and other NGO’s that may need the data to reduce disaster risks or aid recovery.
PRINCIPLE 4. (Ethics) Collaborate rather than CompeteGiven a common overriding desire to serve the needs of the poor and vulnerable, NGO’s undertaking CBDRM agree to collaborate with other NGO’s or local governments, rather than compete with them. This positive commitment will be expressed in the following areas:• avoiding competition to secure projects;• poaching key staff from an adjacent agency/ organization;• publicity in relation to fund-raising policies;• sharing relevant knowledge and information;• avoiding assessments where these have already taken place;• providing mutual support.
16CRITICAL GUIDELINES OF CBDRM
Level 2: Strategic Principles
PRINCIPLE 5. (Strategy) Strategic ConsiderationsBefore embarking on CBDRM, a given organization, (whether government or NGO) will build into the project design:• a set of indicators to measure effectiveness; • clear objectives; • baseline data; • monitoring and evaluation procedures.• Exit strategy
PRINCIPLE 6. (Strategy) Trust vs Control In measuring the effectiveness of CBDRM it is vital to secure a fine balance between trust and control. Excessive controls in the form of performance and outcome indicators and a lack of involvement of key stakeholders in the formulation of indicators will significantly erode trust.
PRINCIPLE 7. (Strategy) Ensuring Staff Commitment and Competence Agency and Government officials who implement CBDRM projects and programs need to be fully convinced that performance and outcome indicators are necessary, and that they can significantly improve the efficiency and quality of risk reduction measures. Training will be required to support this process.
Level 3: Tactical Principles
PRINCIPLE 8. (Tactical) Tactical ConsiderationsTo be effective, performance and outcome indicators need to satisfy a range of demands. Effective indicators are:
• transparent; • nationally comparable; • relevant;
• robust; • sustainable; • time framed;
• representative; • measurable; • easily understood.
• replicable; • achievable;
PRINCIPLE 9. (Tactical) Baseline DataFor each performance indicator, a baseline is necessary. This is crucial in measuring progress toward an intermediate result or satisfying an objective. Depending on the type of performance indicator being measured, the baseline data can be a point-in-time observation or a cumulative or an average value over a period of time. (Adapted principle from USAID, 2004).
PRINCIPLE 10. (Tactical) Measuring Quantifiable and Non-Quantifiable IndicatorsThere is a strong bias in performance indicators towards tangible, measurable and quantifiable elements (such as building a safe dwelling) thus neglecting the measurement of intangible and less visible aspects (such as strengthening risk perception). Therefore alternative ways are needed to maintain standards for non-quantifiable measures.
PRINCIPLE 11. (Tactical) Measuring Minimum Requirements Performance indicators should specify the minimum requirements to make risk reduction effective. The aim of any indicator is not to indicate best practice, but to ensure that the competency of personnel, effectiveness of procedures, quality of measures etc. do not fall below standards of general acceptability. (Adapted principle from ALEXANDER, 2003. p.114)
1. general guidance
17
PRINCIPLE 12. (Tactical) Relevance of IndicatorsEach indicator should define the conditions to which it applies. Performance or Outcome Indicators are not expected to universally apply to all situations. Therefore it is important to specify where the standard is valid and where it does not apply. (Principle from ALEXANDER, 2003. p.114)
PRINCIPLE 13. (Tactical) Updating of indicators within a context of dynamic change Performance Indicators and Standards relate to risk assessment, planning, implementation and monitoring and evaluation. All these processes relate to dynamic patterns of continually changing hazards, vulnerabilities and capacities. Therefore indicators and standards will need to be regularly updated in this dynamic context.
PRINCIPLE 14. (Tactical) MainstreamingActions taken to implement CBDRM should aim to be integrated into normal development policies, planning, programming and practice related to sustainable development, relief, rehabilitation, and recovery activities in pre and post-disaster situations.
Level 4: Implementation Principles
PRINCIPLE 15. (Implementation) Cultural Adaptation of IndicatorsAll performance and outcome indicators need to be considered, and if necessary revised and adapted to suit the social, cultural, economic and environmental variables within local cultural contexts.
PRINCIPLE 16. (Implementation) Side-EffectsWithin the implementation of CBDRM, indicators are needed as well as monitoring measures to assess whether any negative unexpected side effects are taking place. Officials need to be aware of possible examples and be able to take speedy evasive action to minimize any adverse consequences.
18CRITICAL GUIDELINES OF CBDRM
key definitions
(See Appendix 1 for additional definitions from UNISDR)
Vulnerability CriteriaHuman Vulnerability describes the ‘characteristics of a person of group and their situation that influence their capacity to anticipate, cope with, resist and recover from the impact of a natural hazard.’ (WISNER, et al 1994 p.11) Vulnerability can also apply to other sectors: physical, economic, and environmental sectors. Therefore ‘vulnerability criteria’ indicates how the scale and extent of the varied forms of vulnerability can be assessed, judged or evaluated.
Vulnerability contains two elements: exposure and susceptibility.
“Exposure is determined by where and how people live and work relative to the hazard. Susceptibility takes into account those social, economic, political, psychological and environmental variables that intervene in producing different impacts amongst people with similar levels of exposure.”
(DFID, 2004 p.15)
Outcome IndicatorsIndicators always point to something. In this context specific indicators, or signals need to precisely defined. They may relate to two forms of outcome:
Firstly, the impact of a hazard, or potential hazard on a given situation; and Secondly, the impact of the implementation of a given risk reduction measure, program or
project on the protection of people or property.
Performance Indicators A performance indicator is an aspect of a project or program that can be used to measure progress and the success of the program.
1. general guidance
19
Quantitative Performance Indicators
“Performance indicators can be measured quantitatively or qualitatively. Quantitative measures answer questions such as “how many?” “how much?” and “what percent?” Examples of quantitative information are data from food delivery records, health clinic records, and death records”.
(USAID, 2004)
Qualitative Performance Indicators
“Qualitative measures are subjective (e.g., changes in people’s attitudes, perceptions and well being, etc.) and therefore require indirect methods to quantify. These indirect methods include interviews, focus group discussions and rapid assessments”.
(USAID, 2004)
Evaluation
“The process of determining the merit, worth or value of something or the product of that process”
(SCRIVEN, 1991 p.139)
A systematic and impartial examination of risk reduction measures in order to draw lessons to improve policy and practice and enhance accountability.• it is commissioned by or in cooperation with the organization(s) whose performance is being
evaluated;• it is undertaken either by a team of non-employees (external evaluation) and employees (internal
evaluation from the commissioning organization and/or the organization being evaluated;• it assesses policy and practice against recognized criteria (efficiency, value for money,
effectiveness, timeliness, coordination, impact, connectedness to other sectors and the development process, relevance, appropriateness, coverage, coherence and levels of protection from hazards)
• it articulates findings, draws conclusions and makes recommendations(Adapted from ALNAP, 2002, p.201)
Participatory EvaluationAn evaluation process in which stakeholders play an active part in the design of the process, in its undertaking and in the development of the findings, conclusions and recommendations.
Risk Reduction MeasuresA collective expression that encompasses structural and non-structural protection measures. These are often described as mitigation and preparedness but there is no precise division between these terms
“These are various activities, projects and programs that the communities may identify after assessing and analyzing the risks that they face. These measures are specifically intended to reduce the current risks and prevent future risks to the community”
(ABARQUEZ and MURSHED, 2004 p.6)
20CRITICAL GUIDELINES OF CBDRM
elements of risk reduction
A circular chain is suggested below as a useful metaphor of an effective risk reduction strategy. The reasons for this representation are:1. Each element in the chain has to be strong, since much is demanded from it to contribute to
the demanding function of protecting lives, livelihoods and property. A single weak element in a risk reduction strategy, such as a poorly devised and unenforced building code, can constitute a major source of failure.
2. A chain is made up of a collection of interdependent links, in the same manner as CBDRM.3. A chain is only as strong as its weakest link. In the same manner disaster risk management
requires ALL its elements to perform effectively. If one fails the entire safety strategy is put at-risk. This is why performance indicators are needed to measure the quality of each element as well as their linkages.
The elements in the chain that relate to CBDRM this seismic protection model are as follows:
Structural Measures• Building Measures, Non-Engineered Structures• Protection of lifelines, or critical facilities (such as local schools, health centers and buildings
of public assembly such as mosques, temples or churches.)
Non-Structural Measures• Public awareness• Training • Preparedness Plans• Community insurance protection
1. general guidance
21
non-structural measures
structural measures
building measures - retrofit building measures
non-engineered structures
protection of ‘lifelines’
land-use planning controls
codes of practice building
by-laws
public awareness
trainingeducation
building safe communities
insurance
development of national disaster
management systems
preparedness plans
building measures
- new building
Figure 2. The Chain Model: Links between risk reduction measures in earthquake protection
22CRITICAL GUIDELINES OF CBDRM
a resilient community
Aim of Resilience
The aim of CBDRM is to create resilient people living within resilient communities within resilient environments within resilient countries. This is achieved by reducing the: 1. Probability of failure through risk reduction measures;2. Consequences of failure, in terms of fewer lives lost, fewer injuries and reduced direct and
indirect damage;3. Time needed for recovery; and the4. Patterns of vulnerability that can develop during the process of reconstruction.
The Nature of Resilient Communities
A resilient community is one that has certain capacities in three phases: Phase 1. The ability to absorb the shocks of hazard impact, so that they do not become
disasters (thus to reduce the probability of failure); Phase 2. The capacity to bounce back during and after disaster (thus to reduce the consequences
of failure); Phase 3. The opportunity for change and adaptation following a disaster (thus to reduce the
time needed for recovery as well as patterns of vulnerability).
Phase 1: The ability to absorb the shocks of hazard impact (Pre-Disaster)Ways have to be found to ensure that a community is strengthened, becoming less fragile and less susceptible to disaster impact. Vulnerability is intimately related to social processes in disaster prone areas and is usually related to the fragility, susceptibility or lack of resilience of the population when faced with different hazards. In addition, ways have to be found to assist a community to survive despite receiving the impact of severe natural hazards. It is important to note the range of elements of a society needs to withstand:
“Local resiliency with regard to disasters means that a locale is able to withstand an extreme natural event without suffering devastating losses, damage,
1. general guidance
23
diminished productivity, or quality of life without a large amount of assistance from outside the community”
MILETI, (1999).
Characteristics of resilience before a disaster
Societies anticipate and reduce disaster impact by adopting many approaches: • using traditional experience and knowledge (coping mechanisms);• preparing for any possible hazard by having emergency kits or supplies, (buffer
stocks) ready for the event;• having family or community disaster plans as well as adaptive behavior,
(strengthening houses, providing emergency protection of doors and windows from high winds, etc.);
• organizing training courses in first aid, etc.; • temporary evacuation before an impending flood or cyclone of volcanic eruption;• permanent relocation of the community away from unsafe sites
Phase 2: The capacity to bounce back during and after disaster (Post-disaster, immediate relief phase)Ways have to be found to deal with the unexpected and recover rapidly: “The capacity to cope with unanticipated dangers after they have become manifest, learning to bounce back” (WILDAVSKY, 1991:77). Specific factors need to be identified that enable societies to become resilient:
“People continually adapt to crisis, coming up with creative solutions. They prioritize livelihoods and household assets rather than the quick fix. Supporting resilience means more than delivering relief or mitigating individual hazards. Local knowledge, skills, determination, livelihoods, cooperation, access to resources and representation are all vital factors enabling people to bounce back from disaster”
(IFRC/RC, 2004:1).
Characteristics of resilience during and after a disaster
Themes need to be addressed such as integrating recovery plans to link social, physical and economic recovery; following a disaster recovery plan; recognizing the importance of securing a prepared community who know what to do to recover; and taking actions to reduce future vulnerability. Societies cope during and after a disaster by:• drawing on the support of their community;• taking stock to determine what they have and what or who is missing;• restoring communications to facilitate aid distribution;• mitigating future risks (both psychological as well as material threats);• recognizing that physical recovery work can combine bereavement therapy with a
possible income source; and• regarding the entire experience as a learning process.
24CRITICAL GUIDELINES OF CBDRM
Phase 3: The opportunity for change and adaptation following a disaster (Post-Disaster, longer-term recovery phase)The opportunity to change, adjust and adapt following a disaster is to find creative ways to increase the resilience of everyone and everything. This will therefore include all actors, communities and their leaders, social systems, local administration, disaster planning and diversified livelihoods. The demanding challenge is to build them into the recovery process by learning the hard lessons gained from failure:
“The capacity to adapt existing resources and skills to new systems and operating conditions”
(COMFORT, 1999:21)
Characteristics of resilience after a disaster
The following concerns need to be addressed during the recovery process, together they will build far more resilient communities:• devise a community recovery plan that links social, physical, economic and
environmental recovery;• regard physical recovery work as bereavement therapy and a possible income
source and the entire reconstruction experience as a learning process;• draw on support of their community by being adaptable, flexible and patient;• where possible ensure that there is local purchase or reconstruction goods using
local labor to re-vitalize the damaged local economy;• recognize the value of a prepared community who know what to do to recover; • take actions to reduce future vulnerability as the recovery proceeds.
“People continually adapt to crisis, coming up with creative solutions...IFRC/RC, 2004:1
1. general guidance
25
Indicators of a Resilient Community
Resilience is a moving target, and realistically it may not be possible for communities to achieve absolute resilience against hazards or other risk factors. However, communities can still achieve certain level of development, and they can establish institutional arrangements that would enhance their resilience. In order to assess whether a community has achieved a certain level of resilience, we will need to establish some indicators, which if existed would mean that the community had achieved a minimum level of resiliency. A set of indicators is given as below. This set of indicators is by no means comprehensive. You might like to identify more indicators relevant to your local area and community.
• A Community organization;• A DRR and DP plan;• A Community Early Warning System;• Trained manpower: risk assessment, search and rescue, medical first aid, - relief distribution,
masons for safer house construction, fire fighting• Physical Connectivity: roads, electricity, telephone, clinics• Relational connectivity with local authorities, NGOs, etc• Knowledge of risks and risk reduction actions• A Community Disaster Reduction Fund to implement risk reduction activities• Safer House to withstand local hazards• Safe source/s of livelihoods
“People continually adapt to crisis, coming up with creative solutions...IFRC/RC, 2004:1
28CRITICAL GUIDELINES OF CBDRM
pr
oces
s ind
icato
rs
PR
OC
ES
S 1
Ste
ps
in t
his
Pro
ce
ss
Key
Ou
tco
me
Ind
icat
ors
(me
asu
rin
g ch
an
ge
in in
divi
du
als
an
d co
mm
unity
life
)
Gu
idan
ce
No
tes
to I
mp
lem
ent
CB
DR
M(c
ert
ain
not
es
have
be
en
de
sig
nat
ed
as
‘cro
ss-c
utt
ing’
, with
a
pp
licat
ion
to a
ll p
roce
sse
s . T
he
se n
ote
s a
re s
et in
bo
ld t
ype)
UN
DE
RTA
KE
G
RO
UN
DW
OR
K F
OR
C
BD
RM
• T
he a
im o
f the
firs
t pr
oces
s is
und
erta
ke
esse
ntia
l gro
undw
ork
to
with
in G
over
nmen
t for
C
BD
RM
to o
ccur
and
flo
uris
h.•
The
se c
ondi
tions
incl
ude
a po
litic
al, a
dmin
istr
ativ
e an
d fin
anci
al e
nviro
nmen
t w
ithin
nat
iona
l and
loca
l go
vern
men
ts.
The
follo
win
g pr
oces
ses
are
set o
ut in
the
rou
gh s
eque
nce
in w
hich
the
y ar
e lik
ely
to o
ccur
.B
efo
re s
ust
ain
able
CB
DR
M c
an o
ccu
r it
is
es
sen
tial
to
bu
ild
po
liti
cal
co
mm
itm
en
t (‘
bu
y-
in’)
fro
m t
he
go
vern
me
nt.
Pro
ce
ss
1 d
esc
rib
es
a p
os
sib
l e t
em
pla
te f
or
secu
rin
g s
uch
su
pp
or t
.
Bo
t to
m-u
p P
roc
es
sS
ince
CB
DR
M is
ess
ent ia
lly a
bot
tom
-up
proc
ess,
it
follo
ws
that
any
pro
gres
s w
ill r
equi
re lo
cal
stak
ehol
ders
to in
itiat
e an
d m
aint
ain
pres
sure
on
the
ir go
vern
men
t, ra
ther
tha
n ex
pect
tha
t the
in
stitu
tiona
lizat
ion
will
nat
ural
ly e
volv
e fr
om t
he to
p.
Ro
le o
f C
en
tra
l Go
vern
me
nt
Lat
er t
he c
ent r
al g
over
nmen
t will
nee
d to
pla
y a
key
role
in d
evel
opin
g le
gisl
atio
n, a
lloc a
ting
reso
urce
s su
ch a
s te
chni
cal e
xper
tise
and
finan
ce a
nd s
eeki
ng
to d
evel
op u
nifo
r m s
tand
ards
thr
ough
out t
he c
ount
ry.
Dev
olv
e P
ow
er
to l
oc
al l
eve
lsIt
is li
kely
to b
e re
lativ
ely
easy
tas
k to
cre
ate
the
cond
ition
s ne
ede
d fo
r C
BD
RM
whe
re g
over
nmen
ts
have
dev
olve
d p
ower
s to
loca
l aut
hori
ties.
1.
Coa
litio
ns o
f com
mitt
ed lo
cal
stak
ehol
ders
are
form
ed a
nd
they
are
the
driv
ing
forc
e be
hind
th
e ne
ed fo
r C
BD
RM
, and
exe
rt
pres
sure
on
gove
rnm
ent t
o de
volv
e po
wer
to lo
cal l
evel
s.
A c
onso
rtiu
m o
f loc
al s
take
hold
ers
in a
reas
of h
igh
risk
exi
sts
and
mai
ntai
ns p
ress
ure
on g
over
nmen
t
2.
Res
pond
ing
to th
is p
ress
ure
the
gove
rnm
ent i
s co
mm
itted
to
the
devo
lutio
n of
pow
ers
to
loca
l com
mun
ities
. As
part
of
devo
lvin
g po
wer
and
aut
horit
y,
all t
he p
roce
sses
out
lined
in
thes
e gu
idel
ines
are
bui
lt in
to th
e N
atio
nal D
isas
ter
Law
sup
port
ed
by N
atio
nal D
isas
ter
Legi
slat
ion.
The
Gov
ernm
ent h
as d
evol
ved
pow
ers
to lo
cal g
over
nmen
t and
th
roug
h th
em to
loca
l com
mun
ities
. T
he d
evol
utio
n p
olic
y is
set
out
in
curr
ent l
egi
slat
ion.
3.
A d
ecis
ion
is m
ade
conc
erni
ng
the
scal
e of
com
mun
ity
sele
ctio
n, c
onsi
derin
g ho
w m
any
com
mun
ities
to a
ddre
ss a
nd th
e ov
eral
l loc
atio
n of
com
mun
ities
be
ing
cons
ider
ed fo
r se
lect
ion.
T
his
deci
sion
is d
eter
min
ed b
y av
aila
ble
reso
urce
s of
ass
istin
g gr
oups
.
Dec
isio
ns a
re t
rans
late
d in
to
impl
emen
tatio
n st
rate
gies
.
4.
Bud
get s
uppo
rt is
ass
ured
. T
his
com
mitm
ent i
s gi
ven
befo
re P
roce
ss 2
com
men
ces.
(s
ee c
ross
-cut
ting
issu
e in
the
Gui
danc
e N
otes
col
umn)
Bud
gets
hav
e be
en fo
rmul
ate
d to
su
ppor
t loc
al a
ctio
n an
d fin
ance
is
now
ava
ilabl
e at
the
loca
l lev
el.
5.
Pat
tern
s of
aut
horit
y to
ove
rsee
C
BD
RM
hav
e be
en a
gree
d w
ith lo
cal l
eade
rs/ c
oord
inat
ors
appo
inte
d
Lead
ers /
co
ordi
nato
rs a
re in
pla
ce
to o
vers
ee C
BD
RM
with
in t
he
Nat
iona
l gov
ernm
ent.
Loc
al le
ader
s/
c oor
dina
tors
for
CB
DR
M h
ave
been
ap
poi
nte
d at
spe
cific
loca
l lev
els
by
loca
l gov
ernm
ents
.
CR
OS
S-C
UT
TIN
G I
SS
UE
S
1.
Cul
ture
D
iffer
ent c
ount
ries
are
at d
iffer
ent s
tage
s in
te
rms
of h
azar
ds, r
isks
, and
dev
elop
men
t of
CB
DR
M. T
here
fore
, the
se C
ritic
al G
uide
lines
are
de
velo
ped
to b
e ad
apte
d to
spe
cific
con
text
s. T
his
is e
ssen
tial w
hen
reco
gniz
ing
the
rich
cultu
ral
dive
rsity
of c
ount
ries
in te
rms
of p
oliti
cal,
soci
al
and
econ
omic
sys
tem
s.2.
A
udie
nce
N
GO
s an
d Lo
cal g
over
nmen
t offi
cial
s ar
e th
e pr
imar
y us
ers.
Oth
ers
will
be
cons
ider
ed a
s se
cond
ary
user
s. T
here
fore
the
indi
cato
rs a
re to
be
see
n fr
om th
e pe
rspe
ctiv
e of
NG
Os
and
Loca
l go
vern
men
t offi
cial
s3.
F
inan
ce
Bud
get s
uppo
rt is
a c
omm
on th
eme
to s
uppo
rt a
ll th
e pr
oces
ses
outli
ned
in th
ese
guid
elin
es. T
his
prov
isio
n is
link
ed to
the
prio
rity
impo
rtan
ce o
f le
gisl
atio
n th
at e
stab
lishe
s th
e N
atio
nal D
isas
ter
Pla
n si
nce
this
pla
ces
a le
gal o
blig
atio
n on
go
vern
men
t to
enab
le C
BD
RM
to ta
ke p
lace
, with
fin
anci
al s
uppo
rt.
2. guidelines for good practice in community-based disaster risk management
29
pr
oces
s ind
icato
rs
PR
OC
ES
S 1
Ste
ps
in t
his
Pro
ce
ss
Key
Ou
tco
me
Ind
icat
ors
(me
asu
rin
g ch
an
ge
in in
divi
du
als
an
d co
mm
unity
l ife
)
Gu
idan
ce
No
tes
to I
mp
lem
ent
CB
DR
M(c
ert
ain
not
es
have
be
en
de
sig
nat
ed
as
‘cro
ss-c
utt
ing’
, with
a
pp
licat
i on
to a
ll p
roce
sse
s. T
he
s e n
ote
s a
re s
et in
bo
ld t
ype)
UN
DE
RTA
KE
G
RO
UN
DW
OR
K F
OR
C
BD
RM
• T
he a
im o
f the
firs
t pr
oces
s is
und
erta
ke
esse
ntia
l gro
undw
ork
to
with
in G
over
nmen
t for
C
BD
RM
to o
ccur
and
flo
uris
h.•
The
se c
ondi
tions
incl
ude
a po
litic
al, a
dmin
istr
ativ
e an
d fin
anci
al e
nviro
nmen
t w
ithin
nat
iona
l and
loca
l go
vern
men
ts.
The
follo
win
g pr
oces
ses
are
set o
ut in
the
rou
gh s
eque
nce
in w
hich
the
y ar
e lik
ely
to o
ccur
.B
efo
re s
ust
ain
able
CB
DR
M c
an o
ccu
r it
is
es
sen
tial
to
bu
ild
po
liti
cal
co
mm
itm
en
t (‘
bu
y-
in’)
fro
m t
he
go
vern
me
nt.
Pro
ce
ss
1 d
esc
rib
es
a p
os
sib
le t
em
pla
t e f
or
secu
rin
g s
uch
su
pp
ort
.
Bo
tto
m-u
p P
roc
es
sS
ince
CB
DR
M is
ess
entia
lly a
bot
tom
-up
proc
ess,
it
follo
ws
that
any
pro
gres
s w
ill r
equi
re lo
cal
stak
ehol
ders
to in
itiat
e an
d m
aint
ain
pres
sure
on
the
ir go
vern
men
t, ra
ther
tha
n ex
pect
tha
t the
in
stitu
tiona
lizat
ion
will
nat
ural
ly e
volv
e fr
om t
he to
p.
Ro
le o
f C
en
tra
l Go
vern
me
nt
Lat
er t
he c
ent r
al g
over
nmen
t will
nee
d to
pla
y a
key
role
in d
evel
opin
g le
gisl
atio
n, a
lloc a
ting
reso
urce
s su
ch a
s te
chni
cal e
xper
tise
and
finan
ce a
nd s
eeki
ng
to d
eve l
op u
nifo
rm s
tand
ards
thr
ough
out t
he c
ount
r y.
Dev
olv
e P
ow
er
to l
oc
al l
eve
lsIt
is li
kely
to b
e re
lativ
ely
easy
tas
k to
cre
ate
the
cond
ition
s ne
ede
d fo
r C
BD
RM
whe
re g
over
nmen
ts
have
dev
olve
d p
ower
s to
loca
l aut
hori
ties.
1.
Coa
litio
ns o
f com
mitt
ed lo
cal
stak
ehol
ders
are
form
ed a
nd
they
are
the
driv
ing
forc
e be
hind
th
e ne
ed fo
r C
BD
RM
, and
exe
rt
pres
sure
on
gove
rnm
ent t
o de
volv
e po
wer
to lo
cal l
evel
s.
A c
onso
rtiu
m o
f loc
al s
take
hold
ers
in a
reas
of h
igh
risk
exi
sts
and
mai
ntai
ns p
ress
ure
on g
over
nmen
t
2.
Res
pond
ing
to th
is p
ress
ure
the
gove
rnm
ent i
s co
mm
itted
to
the
devo
lutio
n of
pow
ers
to
loca
l com
mun
ities
. As
part
of
devo
lvin
g po
wer
and
aut
horit
y,
all t
he p
roce
sses
out
lined
in
thes
e gu
idel
ines
are
bui
lt in
to th
e N
atio
nal D
isas
ter
Law
sup
port
ed
by N
atio
nal D
isas
ter
Legi
slat
ion.
The
Gov
ernm
ent h
as d
evol
ved
pow
ers
to lo
cal g
over
nmen
t and
th
roug
h th
em to
loca
l com
mun
ities
. T
he d
evol
utio
n p
olic
y is
set
out
in
curr
ent l
egi
slat
ion.
3.
A d
ecis
ion
is m
ade
conc
erni
ng
the
scal
e of
com
mun
ity
sele
ctio
n, c
onsi
derin
g ho
w m
any
com
mun
ities
to a
ddre
ss a
nd th
e ov
eral
l loc
atio
n of
com
mun
ities
be
ing
cons
ider
ed fo
r se
lect
ion.
T
his
deci
sion
is d
eter
min
ed b
y av
aila
ble
reso
urce
s of
ass
istin
g gr
oups
.
Dec
isio
ns a
re t
rans
late
d in
to
impl
emen
tatio
n st
rate
gies
.
4.
Bud
get s
uppo
rt is
ass
ured
. T
his
com
mitm
ent i
s gi
ven
befo
re P
roce
ss 2
com
men
ces.
(s
ee c
ross
-cut
ting
issu
e in
the
Gui
danc
e N
otes
col
umn)
Bud
gets
hav
e be
en fo
rmul
ate
d to
su
ppor
t loc
al a
ctio
n an
d fin
ance
is
now
ava
ilabl
e at
the
loca
l lev
el.
5.
Pat
tern
s of
aut
horit
y to
ove
rsee
C
BD
RM
hav
e be
en a
gree
d w
ith lo
cal l
eade
rs/ c
oord
inat
ors
appo
inte
d
Lead
ers/
co
ordi
nato
rs a
re in
pla
ce
to o
vers
ee C
BD
RM
with
in t
he
Nat
iona
l gov
ernm
ent.
Loc
al le
ader
s/
coor
dina
tors
for
CB
DR
M h
ave
been
ap
poi
nte
d at
spe
cific
loca
l lev
els
by
loca
l gov
ernm
ents
.
CR
OS
S-C
UT
TIN
G I
SS
UE
S
1.
Cul
ture
D
iffer
ent c
ount
ries
are
at d
iffer
ent s
tage
s in
te
rms
of h
azar
ds, r
isks
, and
dev
elop
men
t of
CB
DR
M. T
here
fore
, the
se C
ritic
al G
uide
lines
are
de
velo
ped
to b
e ad
apte
d to
spe
cific
con
text
s. T
his
is e
ssen
tial w
hen
reco
gniz
ing
the
rich
cultu
ral
dive
rsity
of c
ount
ries
in te
rms
of p
oliti
cal,
soci
al
and
econ
omic
sys
tem
s.2.
A
udie
nce
N
GO
s an
d Lo
cal g
over
nmen
t offi
cial
s ar
e th
e pr
imar
y us
ers.
Oth
ers
will
be
cons
ider
ed a
s se
cond
ary
user
s. T
here
fore
the
indi
cato
rs a
re to
be
see
n fr
om th
e pe
rspe
ctiv
e of
NG
Os
and
Loca
l go
vern
men
t offi
cial
s3.
F
inan
ce
Bud
get s
uppo
rt is
a c
omm
on th
eme
to s
uppo
rt a
ll th
e pr
oces
ses
outli
ned
in th
ese
guid
elin
es. T
his
prov
isio
n is
link
ed to
the
prio
rity
impo
rtan
ce o
f le
gisl
atio
n th
at e
stab
lishe
s th
e N
atio
nal D
isas
ter
Pla
n si
nce
this
pla
ces
a le
gal o
blig
atio
n on
go
vern
men
t to
enab
le C
BD
RM
to ta
ke p
lace
, with
fin
anci
al s
uppo
rt.
30CRITICAL GUIDELINES OF CBDRM
PR
OC
ES
S 2
Ste
ps
in t
his
Pro
ce
ss
Key
Ou
tco
me
Ind
icat
ors
(me
asu
rin
g ch
an
ge
in in
divi
du
als
an
d co
mm
unity
life
)
Gu
idan
ce
No
tes
to I
mp
lem
ent
CB
DR
M(c
ert
ain
not
es
have
be
en
de
sig
nat
ed
as
‘cro
ss-c
utt
ing’
, with
a
pp
licat
ion
to a
ll p
roce
sse
s. T
he
se n
ote
s a
re s
et in
bo
ld t
ype)
SE
LE
CT
CO
MM
UN
ITIE
S
FO
R C
BD
RM
TH
RO
UG
H
RIS
K A
SS
ES
SM
EN
T•
The
aim
of t
he s
econ
d pr
oces
s is
to lo
cate
a
vuln
erab
le c
omm
unity
, tha
t is
als
o ve
ry p
oor,
as a
n ap
prop
riate
ven
ue fo
r ris
k re
duct
ion
actio
ns.
• T
here
fore
the
sele
ctio
n of
co
mm
uniti
es fo
r C
BD
RM
an
d ris
k as
sess
men
t ar
e in
tegr
al p
arts
of t
he
sam
e pr
oces
s, s
ince
it
is n
ot p
ossi
ble
to s
elec
t a
com
mun
ity w
ith h
igh
patte
rns
of v
ulne
rabi
lity
with
out a
sses
sing
its
risks
.•
Par
t of t
he a
sses
smen
t pr
oces
s w
ill r
evea
l loc
al
capa
citie
s th
at c
an a
ctiv
ely
supp
ort C
BD
RM
• T
he a
sses
smen
t met
hod
will
be
a fu
lly p
artic
ipat
ory
proc
ess
to d
eter
min
e th
e sc
ope
and
scal
e of
ris
ks
faci
ng a
com
mun
ity
(T
his
proc
ess
may
sel
ect
man
y co
mm
uniti
es r
athe
r th
an a
sin
gle
one,
See
G
uida
nce
Not
e)
Som
e st
eps
in t
he fo
llow
ing
proc
esse
s ar
e se
quen
tial w
hile
oth
ers
can
usef
ully
occ
ur in
par
alle
l.T
he
sele
cti
on
of
co
mm
un
itie
s fo
r C
BD
RM
is a
c
om
ple
x as
ses
sme
nt
pro
ce
ss
that
invo
lve
s a
ran
ge
of
inte
gra
ted
ac
tivi
tie
s:
1.
Haz
ard
Map
pin
g;
2.
Vu
lner
abili
ty a
nd
Cap
acit
y as
sess
men
t o
f b
enef
icia
ry c
om
mu
nit
ies
3.
Eco
no
mic
Ass
essm
ent
to m
easu
re p
ove
rty
leve
ls4.
R
evie
w o
f C
apac
ity
of
Ass
isti
ng
Gro
up
s5.
B
asic
Lo
ss E
stim
atio
n (
lives
an
d p
rop
erty
loss
sc
enar
ios)
6.
Acc
epta
nce
of
a g
iven
co
mm
un
ity
to e
ng
age
in C
BD
RM
Th
e S
ele
cti
on
of
sin
gle
or
mu
ltip
le s
ite
s?O
ne o
f the
ear
ly d
ecis
ions
is w
heth
er to
initi
ate
CB
DR
M o
n a
sing
le o
r m
ultip
le s
ites?
Thi
s de
cisi
on
will
rel
ate
to e
xten
t of f
undi
ng s
upp
ort,
the
prio
r ex
peri
ence
of C
BD
RM
and
ava
ilabl
e re
sour
ces
of
assi
stin
g gr
oups
.
If th
e en
tire
proc
ess
is n
ew t
hen
it w
ill b
e pr
uden
t for
au
thor
ities
to c
ondu
ct a
sin
gle
pilo
t pro
ject
to g
ain
expe
rien
ce r
athe
r th
an e
mba
rk o
n m
ultip
le s
ites
sim
ulta
neou
sly.
Vu
lne
rab
le C
om
mu
nit
ies
The
sel
ectio
n of
com
mun
ities
is u
nder
take
n w
ith a
fo
cus
on t
he m
ost v
ulne
rabl
e co
mm
uniti
es in
a g
iven
lo
catio
n, p
rovi
ding
pro
tect
ion
from
maj
or h
aza
rd
thre
ats.
Thi
s se
lect
ion
proc
ess
also
rec
ogn
izes
th
e op
por
tuni
ties
as w
ell a
s lim
itatio
ns o
f ass
istin
g gr
oups
.
1.
Com
mun
ity r
isk
asse
ssm
ent i
s a
requ
ired
task
in d
isas
ter
and
deve
lopm
ent l
egis
latio
n.
Legi
slat
ion
enac
ted
and
obse
rve
d in
gov
ernm
ent s
truc
ture
s an
d p
olic
y in
clud
ing
prov
isio
n fo
r C
BD
RM
2.
Gov
ernm
ent a
ppro
vals
are
in
plac
e fo
r C
BD
RM
to ta
ke p
lace
in
sele
cted
com
mun
ities
.
Gov
ernm
ent A
ppro
val f
or C
BD
RM
in
the
form
of i
nstr
uctio
ns a
nd
agre
emen
ts w
ith lo
cal g
over
nmen
t of
ficia
ls a
nd/ o
r N
GO
off
icia
ls.
3.
One
per
son
is a
ppoi
nted
to
man
age
Pro
cess
2. T
his
pers
on is
in c
harg
e of
the
Ris
k A
sses
smen
t Sys
tem
(se
e S
tep
4 be
low
).
Off
icia
l app
oint
ed
to m
anag
e P
roce
ss 2
(th
is m
ay b
e th
e sa
me
pers
on w
ith r
esp
onsi
bilit
y fo
r th
e en
tire
CB
DR
M in
sel
ecte
d lo
calit
ies)
4.
A ‘s
yste
m’ i
s es
tabl
ishe
d to
m
anag
e th
e co
mm
unity
ris
k as
sess
men
t pro
cess
. Thi
s is
ba
sed
in lo
cal g
over
nmen
t an
d is
link
ed in
to a
nat
iona
l as
sess
men
t sys
tem
. The
sys
tem
co
ntai
ns a
n in
tegr
ated
set
of
acto
rs d
raw
n fr
om lo
cally
bas
ed
NG
O’s
, aca
dem
ics
in a
reas
w
here
ther
e ar
e un
iver
sitie
s,
loca
l gov
ernm
ent o
ffici
als
and
com
mun
ity le
ader
s.
Ris
k A
sses
smen
t Sys
tem
in p
lace
5.
Fun
ding
is c
omm
itted
to e
nabl
e P
roce
ss 2
to ta
ke p
lace
Thi
s fu
ndin
g is
for
the
initi
al ‘s
et-u
p pr
oces
s’ o
f ris
k as
sess
men
t, bu
t th
ere
is a
lso
a co
mm
itmen
t to
mai
ntai
n th
e pr
oces
s co
ntin
ually
. T
his
is n
eces
sary
sin
ce h
azar
ds,
vuln
erab
ilitie
s an
d ca
paci
ties
are
in a
dyn
amic
sta
te o
f con
tinua
l ch
ange
ove
r tim
e an
d re
quire
co
ntin
uous
mon
itorin
g an
d as
sess
men
t.
Fun
ding
allo
cate
dA
ss
es
sin
g V
uln
era
bil
itie
s a
nd
Ca
pa
cit
ies
In u
nder
taki
ng V
ulne
rabi
lity
Ass
essm
ent i
t is
imp
orta
nt to
als
o as
sess
Cap
aciti
es. T
hese
soc
ial
stre
ngth
s ca
n be
see
n as
the
pos
itive
ant
idot
es to
pa
tter
ns o
f acu
te v
ulne
rabi
lity.
It h
as to
be
reco
gniz
ed
that
ass
essm
ent m
ay r
evea
l an
elem
ent t
hat
com
bine
s vu
lner
abili
ty a
nd a
cap
acity
.
For
exa
mpl
e, t
he v
ulne
rabi
lity
asse
ssm
ent m
ay
reve
al t
hat t
here
are
man
y el
derl
y pe
ople
with
in a
co
mm
unity
. The
y m
ay la
ck m
obili
ty t
hat c
ould
mak
e th
em h
ighl
y vu
lner
able
whe
n ra
pid
mov
emen
t is
nee
ded
to e
vacu
ate
on a
ccou
nt o
f ris
ing
floo
d w
ater
s.
How
ever
, old
er p
eop
le m
ay h
ave
goo
d m
emor
ies
of
past
dis
aste
rs, t
hus
enab
ling
them
to c
omm
unic
ate
vita
l exp
erie
nce
to t
he y
oung
er m
embe
rs o
f the
ir co
mm
unity
. Thi
s kn
owle
dge
is a
vita
l cap
acity
.
Ex
pe
rtis
e fo
r A
ss
es
sme
nt
The
re a
re a
spec
ts o
f ris
k as
sess
men
t tha
t will
ne
ed
prof
essi
onal
exp
ertis
e in
say
flo
od
haza
rd
asse
ssm
ent o
r th
e as
sess
men
t of b
uild
ing
vuln
erab
ility
. How
ever
, if s
uch
skill
s ar
e no
t ava
ilabl
e lo
cal k
now
ledg
e ca
n p
ossi
bly
fill s
ome
of t
he g
aps.
W
hen
haza
rds
are
freq
uent
loca
l far
mer
s ca
n be
ex
pert
in d
roug
ht a
sses
smen
t, ri
verb
oat o
wne
rs m
ay
know
ab
out f
loo
ding
and
loca
l bui
lder
s m
ay k
now
so
met
hing
ab
out e
arth
quak
es.
6.
A k
ey p
olic
y de
cisi
on is
take
n to
be
sens
itive
to g
ende
r is
sues
th
roug
hout
the
prog
ram
. (se
e cr
oss-
cutti
ng is
sue
in th
e G
uida
nce
Not
es c
olum
n)
Wom
en a
ppoi
nte
d to
par
ticip
ate
in
asse
ssm
ent p
roce
ss a
nd s
elec
tion
of lo
catio
ns
7.
Com
mun
ity b
ased
trai
ning
in
Ris
k A
sses
smen
t and
C
BD
RM
is in
pla
ce fo
r of
ficia
ls
sele
ctin
g co
mm
uniti
es fo
r C
BD
RM
. Evi
denc
e of
num
bers
tr
aine
d an
d fr
om p
ost t
rain
ing
perf
orm
ance
and
mon
itorin
g of
tr
aine
es im
prov
ed p
erfo
rman
ce.
(see
cro
ss-c
uttin
g is
sue
in th
e G
uida
nce
Not
es c
olum
n)
Trai
ning
in p
lace
. Im
prov
ed
com
pete
ncie
s m
easu
red
by
indi
cato
rs
8.
A tr
ansp
aren
t met
hod
for
the
sele
ctio
n of
com
mun
ities
is
agre
ed w
ith s
take
hold
ers
and
is
then
est
ablis
hed
on th
is b
asis
.
Sel
ectio
n m
etho
d in
pla
ce
9.
Agr
eem
ents
in p
lace
for
asse
ssm
ents
to ta
ke p
lace
with
co
mm
unity
lead
ers
Agr
eem
ents
mad
e
2. guidelines for good practice in community-based disaster risk management
31
PR
OC
ES
S 2
Ste
ps
in t
his
Pro
ce
ss
Key
Ou
tco
me
Ind
icat
ors
(me
asu
rin
g ch
an
ge
in in
divi
du
als
an
d co
mm
unity
life
)
Gu
idan
ce
No
tes
to I
mp
lem
ent
CB
DR
M(c
ert
ain
not
es
have
be
en
de
sig
nat
ed
as
‘cro
ss-c
utt
ing’
, with
a
pp
licat
ion
to a
ll p
roce
sse
s. T
he
se n
ote
s a
re s
et in
bo
ld t
ype)
SE
LE
CT
CO
MM
UN
ITIE
S
FO
R C
BD
RM
TH
RO
UG
H
RIS
K A
SS
ES
SM
EN
T•
The
aim
of t
he s
econ
d pr
oces
s is
to lo
cate
a
vuln
erab
le c
omm
unity
, tha
t is
als
o ve
ry p
oor,
as a
n ap
prop
riate
ven
ue fo
r ris
k re
duct
ion
actio
ns.
• T
here
fore
the
sele
ctio
n of
co
mm
uniti
es fo
r C
BD
RM
an
d ris
k as
sess
men
t ar
e in
tegr
al p
arts
of t
he
sam
e pr
oces
s, s
ince
it
is n
ot p
ossi
ble
to s
elec
t a
com
mun
ity w
ith h
igh
patte
rns
of v
ulne
rabi
lity
with
out a
sses
sing
its
risks
.•
Par
t of t
he a
sses
smen
t pr
oces
s w
ill r
evea
l loc
al
capa
citie
s th
at c
an a
ctiv
ely
supp
ort C
BD
RM
• T
he a
sses
smen
t met
hod
will
be
a fu
lly p
artic
ipat
ory
proc
ess
to d
eter
min
e th
e sc
ope
and
scal
e of
ris
ks
faci
ng a
com
mun
ity
(T
his
proc
ess
may
sel
ect
man
y co
mm
uniti
es r
athe
r th
an a
sin
gle
one,
See
G
uida
nce
Not
e)
Som
e st
eps
in t
he fo
llow
ing
proc
esse
s ar
e se
quen
tial w
hile
oth
ers
can
usef
ully
occ
ur in
par
alle
l.T
he
sele
cti
on
of
co
mm
un
itie
s fo
r C
BD
RM
is a
c
om
ple
x as
ses
sme
nt
pro
ce
ss
that
invo
lve
s a
ran
ge
of
inte
gra
ted
ac
tivi
tie
s:
1.
Haz
ard
Map
pin
g;
2.
Vu
lner
abili
ty a
nd
Cap
acit
y as
sess
men
t o
f b
enef
icia
ry c
om
mu
nit
ies
3.
Eco
no
mic
Ass
essm
ent
to m
easu
re p
ove
rty
leve
ls4.
R
evie
w o
f C
apac
ity
of
Ass
isti
ng
Gro
up
s5.
B
asic
Lo
ss E
stim
atio
n (
lives
an
d p
rop
erty
loss
sc
enar
ios)
6.
Acc
epta
nce
of
a g
iven
co
mm
un
ity
to e
ng
age
in C
BD
RM
Th
e S
ele
cti
on
of
sin
gle
or
mu
ltip
le s
ite
s?O
ne o
f the
ear
ly d
ecis
ions
is w
heth
er to
initi
ate
CB
DR
M o
n a
sing
le o
r m
ultip
le s
ites?
Thi
s de
cisi
on
will
rel
ate
to e
xten
t of f
undi
ng s
upp
ort,
the
prio
r ex
peri
ence
of C
BD
RM
and
ava
ilabl
e re
sour
ces
of
assi
stin
g gr
oups
.
If th
e en
tire
proc
ess
is n
ew t
hen
it w
ill b
e pr
uden
t for
au
thor
ities
to c
ondu
ct a
sin
gle
pilo
t pro
ject
to g
ain
expe
rien
ce r
athe
r th
an e
mba
rk o
n m
ultip
le s
ites
sim
ulta
neou
sly.
Vu
lne
rab
le C
om
mu
nit
ies
The
sel
ectio
n of
com
mun
ities
is u
nder
take
n w
ith a
fo
cus
on t
he m
ost v
ulne
rabl
e co
mm
uniti
es in
a g
iven
lo
catio
n, p
rovi
ding
pro
tect
ion
from
maj
or h
aza
rd
thre
ats.
Thi
s se
lect
ion
proc
ess
also
rec
ogn
izes
th
e op
por
tuni
ties
as w
ell a
s lim
itatio
ns o
f ass
istin
g gr
oups
.
1.
Com
mun
ity r
isk
asse
ssm
ent i
s a
requ
ired
task
in d
isas
ter
and
deve
lopm
ent l
egis
latio
n.
Legi
slat
ion
enac
ted
and
obse
rve
d in
gov
ernm
ent s
truc
ture
s an
d p
olic
y in
clud
ing
prov
isio
n fo
r C
BD
RM
2.
Gov
ernm
ent a
ppro
vals
are
in
plac
e fo
r C
BD
RM
to ta
ke p
lace
in
sele
cted
com
mun
ities
.
Gov
ernm
ent A
ppro
val f
or C
BD
RM
in
the
form
of i
nstr
uctio
ns a
nd
agre
emen
ts w
ith lo
cal g
over
nmen
t of
ficia
ls a
nd/ o
r N
GO
off
icia
ls.
3.
One
per
son
is a
ppoi
nted
to
man
age
Pro
cess
2. T
his
pers
on is
in c
harg
e of
the
Ris
k A
sses
smen
t Sys
tem
(se
e S
tep
4 be
low
).
Off
icia
l app
oint
ed
to m
anag
e P
roce
ss 2
(th
is m
ay b
e th
e sa
me
pers
on w
ith r
esp
onsi
bilit
y fo
r th
e en
tire
CB
DR
M in
sel
ecte
d lo
calit
ies)
4.
A ‘s
yste
m’ i
s es
tabl
ishe
d to
m
anag
e th
e co
mm
unity
ris
k as
sess
men
t pro
cess
. Thi
s is
ba
sed
in lo
cal g
over
nmen
t an
d is
link
ed in
to a
nat
iona
l as
sess
men
t sys
tem
. The
sys
tem
co
ntai
ns a
n in
tegr
ated
set
of
acto
rs d
raw
n fr
om lo
cally
bas
ed
NG
O’s
, aca
dem
ics
in a
reas
w
here
ther
e ar
e un
iver
sitie
s,
loca
l gov
ernm
ent o
ffici
als
and
com
mun
ity le
ader
s.
Ris
k A
sses
smen
t Sys
tem
in p
lace
5.
Fun
ding
is c
omm
itted
to e
nabl
e P
roce
ss 2
to ta
ke p
lace
Thi
s fu
ndin
g is
for
the
initi
al ‘s
et-u
p pr
oces
s’ o
f ris
k as
sess
men
t, bu
t th
ere
is a
lso
a co
mm
itmen
t to
mai
ntai
n th
e pr
oces
s co
ntin
ually
. T
his
is n
eces
sary
sin
ce h
azar
ds,
vuln
erab
ilitie
s an
d ca
paci
ties
are
in a
dyn
amic
sta
te o
f con
tinua
l ch
ange
ove
r tim
e an
d re
quire
co
ntin
uous
mon
itorin
g an
d as
sess
men
t.
Fun
ding
allo
cate
dA
ss
es
sin
g V
uln
era
bil
itie
s a
nd
Ca
pa
cit
ies
In u
nder
taki
ng V
ulne
rabi
lity
Ass
essm
ent i
t is
imp
orta
nt to
als
o as
sess
Cap
aciti
es. T
hese
soc
ial
stre
ngth
s ca
n be
see
n as
the
pos
itive
ant
idot
es to
pa
tter
ns o
f acu
te v
ulne
rabi
lity.
It h
as to
be
reco
gniz
ed
that
ass
essm
ent m
ay r
evea
l an
elem
ent t
hat
com
bine
s vu
lner
abili
ty a
nd a
cap
acity
.
For
exa
mpl
e, t
he v
ulne
rabi
lity
asse
ssm
ent m
ay
reve
al t
hat t
here
are
man
y el
derl
y pe
ople
with
in a
co
mm
unity
. The
y m
ay la
ck m
obili
ty t
hat c
ould
mak
e th
em h
ighl
y vu
lner
able
whe
n ra
pid
mov
emen
t is
nee
ded
to e
vacu
ate
on a
ccou
nt o
f ris
ing
floo
d w
ater
s.
How
ever
, old
er p
eop
le m
ay h
ave
goo
d m
emor
ies
of
past
dis
aste
rs, t
hus
enab
ling
them
to c
omm
unic
ate
vita
l exp
erie
nce
to t
he y
oung
er m
embe
rs o
f the
ir co
mm
unity
. Thi
s kn
owle
dge
is a
vita
l cap
acity
.
Ex
pe
rtis
e fo
r A
ss
es
sme
nt
The
re a
re a
spec
ts o
f ris
k as
sess
men
t tha
t will
ne
ed
prof
essi
onal
exp
ertis
e in
say
flo
od
haza
rd
asse
ssm
ent o
r th
e as
sess
men
t of b
uild
ing
vuln
erab
ility
. How
ever
, if s
uch
skill
s ar
e no
t ava
ilabl
e lo
cal k
now
ledg
e ca
n p
ossi
bly
fill s
ome
of t
he g
aps.
W
hen
haza
rds
are
freq
uent
loca
l far
mer
s ca
n be
ex
pert
in d
roug
ht a
sses
smen
t, ri
verb
oat o
wne
rs m
ay
know
ab
out f
loo
ding
and
loca
l bui
lder
s m
ay k
now
so
met
hing
ab
out e
arth
quak
es.
6.
A k
ey p
olic
y de
cisi
on is
take
n to
be
sens
itive
to g
ende
r is
sues
th
roug
hout
the
prog
ram
. (se
e cr
oss-
cutti
ng is
sue
in th
e G
uida
nce
Not
es c
olum
n)
Wom
en a
ppoi
nte
d to
par
ticip
ate
in
asse
ssm
ent p
roce
ss a
nd s
elec
tion
of lo
catio
ns
7.
Com
mun
ity b
ased
trai
ning
in
Ris
k A
sses
smen
t and
C
BD
RM
is in
pla
ce fo
r of
ficia
ls
sele
ctin
g co
mm
uniti
es fo
r C
BD
RM
. Evi
denc
e of
num
bers
tr
aine
d an
d fr
om p
ost t
rain
ing
perf
orm
ance
and
mon
itorin
g of
tr
aine
es im
prov
ed p
erfo
rman
ce.
(see
cro
ss-c
uttin
g is
sue
in th
e G
uida
nce
Not
es c
olum
n)
Trai
ning
in p
lace
. Im
prov
ed
com
pete
ncie
s m
easu
red
by
indi
cato
rs
8.
A tr
ansp
aren
t met
hod
for
the
sele
ctio
n of
com
mun
ities
is
agre
ed w
ith s
take
hold
ers
and
is
then
est
ablis
hed
on th
is b
asis
.
Sel
ectio
n m
etho
d in
pla
ce
9.
Agr
eem
ents
in p
lace
for
asse
ssm
ents
to ta
ke p
lace
with
co
mm
unity
lead
ers
Agr
eem
ents
mad
e
32CRITICAL GUIDELINES OF CBDRM
PR
OC
ES
S 2
cont
inua
tion
10. R
isk
and
Cap
acity
Ass
essm
ent
take
s pl
ace
in fu
ll co
oper
atio
n w
ith c
omm
uniti
es to
gat
her
data
on
the
follo
win
g:
In u
nder
taki
ng s
ocia
l vul
nera
bilit
y an
d ca
paci
ty
asse
ssm
ent i
t is
imp
orta
nt to
de
-pro
fess
iona
lize
the
proc
ess.
(T
hus,
mid
wiv
es, l
ocal
rel
igio
us le
ader
s an
d sc
hool
teac
hes
can,
whe
n tr
aine
d m
ake
exce
llent
as
sess
ors
sinc
e th
ey m
ay h
ave
the
conf
iden
ce o
f the
lo
cal c
omm
unity
)
Vu
lne
rab
ilit
y A
ss
es
sme
nt
Cri
teri
aV
ulne
rabi
lity
asse
ssm
ent i
s a
mul
ti-le
vel t
ask
that
co
nsid
ers
dive
rse
scal
es o
f vul
nera
bilit
y. T
hese
ra
nge
from
ro
ot c
ause
s of
vul
nera
bilit
y (s
uch
as
a la
ck o
f go
od
gove
rnan
ce, o
r no
pub
lic a
cces
s to
pol
itica
l pow
er),
to d
ynam
ic p
ress
ures
(su
ch a
s ur
bani
zatio
n or
pop
ulat
ion
grow
th)
that
tra
nsla
te
thes
e ca
uses
into
uns
afe
cond
ition
s (s
uch
as a
lack
of
ear
ly w
arni
ngs
of im
pend
ing
haza
rds
or u
nsaf
e d
wel
lings
).S
peci
fic lo
cal p
atte
rns
of v
ulne
rabi
lity
are
iden
tifie
d,
incl
udin
g vi
tal l
inks
bet
wee
n ro
ot c
ause
s, p
ress
ures
an
d un
safe
con
ditio
ns. U
nsaf
e co
nditi
ons
reve
ale
d in
thi
s pr
oces
s be
com
e ta
rget
s fo
r ac
tion
in C
BD
RM
. D
ata
is s
ecur
ed
conc
erni
ng t
he fo
llow
ing
:•
Ele
men
ts a
t R
isk
E
stab
lishi
ng w
hat t
he im
pact
of t
he h
azar
d co
uld
have
on
whi
ch e
lem
ents
of a
giv
en s
ocie
ty (
mai
nly
base
d on
fact
ual i
nfor
mat
ion
gain
ed fr
om p
eopl
e’s
past
exp
erie
nce)
• V
uln
erab
le C
on
dit
ion
s
Est
ablis
hing
why
the
elem
ents
are
at r
isk
• P
ress
ure
s
Est
ablis
hing
who
or
wha
t is
crea
ting
the
vuln
erab
le c
ondi
tions
and
how
this
is ta
king
pla
ce.
• U
nd
erly
ing
Cau
ses
E
stab
lishi
ng w
hy v
ulne
rabl
e co
nditi
ons
are
crea
ted
or ig
nore
d by
the
pres
sure
s.
a.
Evi
denc
e of
the
haza
rd th
reat
(t
he n
atur
e of
the
haza
rd/
seve
rity/
freq
uenc
y/ d
urat
ion/
sp
ecifi
c lo
catio
n)
Loca
l ha
zard
map
s co
mpl
ete
d
b.
Evi
denc
e of
the
vuln
erab
ility
of
hig
h ris
k gr
oups
with
in th
e co
mm
unity
(pe
rcen
tage
of
high
-ris
k gr
oups
etc
.)
Gro
ups
iden
tifie
d
c.
Evi
denc
e of
pov
erty
with
in th
e co
mm
unity
(ce
nsus
dat
a an
d re
gist
er o
f pov
erty
ass
ista
nce
gran
ts e
tc.)
Hig
h p
over
ty le
vels
iden
tifie
d an
d m
appe
d. L
inks
bet
wee
n vu
lner
abili
ty
and
pov
erty
cor
rela
ted
d.
Evi
denc
e th
at th
e co
mm
unity
w
ishe
s to
fully
par
ticip
ate
in
CB
DR
M. (
Thi
s in
clud
es a
w
illin
gnes
s to
par
ticip
ate
in
task
forc
es in
volv
ed in
ris
k re
duct
ion
activ
ities
etc
.)
Agr
eem
ent m
ade
e.
Evi
denc
e of
the
num
ber
of
emer
gent
com
mun
ity le
ader
sLe
ader
s se
lect
ed
f. Ta
ngib
le e
vide
nce
of th
e nu
mbe
r of
peo
ple
who
will
be
in s
afer
con
ditio
ns a
s a
resu
lt of
the
risk
redu
ctio
n m
easu
res
Num
bers
cal
cula
ted
and
rela
ted
to m
aps
indi
catin
g lo
catio
ns o
f pr
otec
ted
com
mun
ities
g.
Tang
ible
evi
denc
e of
the
prot
ectio
n of
pro
pert
y w
ithin
th
e co
mm
unity
as
a re
sult
of
risk
redu
ctio
n m
easu
res
Loca
tion
of p
rope
rty
calc
ulat
ed
and
rela
ted
to m
aps
indi
catin
g th
eir
loca
tion.
h.
Dat
a co
ncer
ning
acc
essi
bilit
y of
the
com
mun
ity to
ass
istin
g bo
dies
Info
rmat
ion
avai
labl
e•
Un
der
lyin
g V
alu
es a
nd
Bel
ief
Sys
tem
s
Con
side
ring
wha
t bel
iefs
enc
oura
ge, i
gnor
e or
ch
alle
nge
the
unde
rlyin
g ca
uses
of v
ulne
rabi
lity.
B
ased
on
VE
NT
ON
and
HA
NS
FO
RD
, (20
06)
Ev
ide
nc
e n
ee
de
d f
or
Sit
e S
ele
cti
on
T
he a
sses
smen
t dat
a is
mai
nly
quan
titat
ive
but
ther
e ar
e as
pect
s th
at a
re q
ualit
ativ
e, s
uch
as
the
asse
ssm
ent o
f ris
k pe
rcep
tions
as
part
of
vuln
erab
ility
ass
essm
ent o
r th
e id
entif
icat
ion
of
lead
ersh
ip p
oten
tial w
ithin
the
com
mun
ity.
CR
OS
S-C
UT
TIN
G I
SS
UE
S
1.
Tra
inin
g at
the
Com
mun
ity L
evel
E
ach
of th
e pr
oces
ses
requ
ires
com
mun
ity b
ased
tr
aini
ng. T
his
may
in p
art b
e fu
sed
with
the
trai
ning
of
sta
ff fr
om th
e as
sist
ing
grou
ps. T
hrou
ghou
t th
ese
guid
elin
es r
efer
ence
s ar
e m
ade
to th
is
trai
ning
act
ivity
in th
e ‘p
roce
ss to
be
follo
wed
’ set
in
the
colu
mn
desc
ribin
g pe
rfor
man
ce in
dica
tors
. H
owev
er, i
t is
vita
l to
reco
gniz
e th
at a
ll th
e tr
aini
ng
desc
ribed
can
take
pla
ce w
ithin
sep
arat
e m
odul
es
in th
e sa
me
cour
se.
2.
Gen
der A
war
enes
s an
d A
ctio
n
Evi
denc
e of
dis
aste
r im
pact
has
rep
eate
dly
draw
n at
tent
ion
to th
e vu
lner
abili
ty o
f wom
en a
nd s
mal
l ch
ildre
n, o
ften
in th
eir
care
. Add
ition
ally
, wom
en
play
a d
omin
ant r
ole
in li
velih
ood
secu
rity
in m
any
soci
etie
s. T
here
fore
eac
h of
the
proc
esse
s w
ill
need
to r
ecog
nize
the
sign
ifica
nce
of g
ende
r aw
aren
ess,
as
wel
l as
spec
ific
prov
isio
n fo
r w
omen
and
sm
all c
hild
ren
in a
sses
smen
t, pl
anni
ng a
nd im
plem
enta
tion.
i. D
ata
conc
erni
ng s
taff
secu
rity
Info
rmat
ion
avai
labl
e
11. C
omm
unity
ris
k as
sess
men
t is
und
erta
ken
with
the
dire
ct
invo
lvem
ent o
f com
mun
ity
mem
bers
, and
oth
er
stak
ehol
ders
.
Ful
l co
oper
atio
n to
ok p
lace
12. P
erce
ptio
ns o
f mul
tiple
gro
ups
in th
e co
mm
unity
mus
t be
cons
ider
ed a
bout
the
risks
and
ris
k re
duct
ion
mea
sure
s.
Info
rmat
ion
gath
ere
d fr
om r
isk
asse
ssm
ent
13. L
ocal
kno
wle
dge
abou
t pas
t ha
zard
s, v
ulne
rabl
e gr
oups
, an
d ca
paci
ties
and
copi
ng
mec
hani
sms
is ta
ken
into
ac
coun
t in
the
cond
uct o
f ris
k as
sess
men
t.
Info
rmat
ion
gath
ere
d fr
om r
isk
asse
ssm
ent
14. R
isk
asse
ssm
ent i
nteg
rate
s th
e re
sults
of s
cien
tific
kno
wle
dge,
se
cond
ary
data
and
com
mun
ity
perc
eptio
ns.
Info
rmat
ion
gath
ere
d fr
om r
isk
asse
ssm
ent
15. A
bas
elin
e is
det
erm
ined
for
each
lo
catio
n. T
his
will
be
obta
ined
fr
om th
e pa
rtic
ipat
ory
risk
asse
ssm
ent e
xerc
ise
desc
ribed
in
this
pro
cess
. Bas
elin
es w
ill
be a
qua
litat
ive
and
quan
titat
ive
reco
rd o
f the
sta
tus
of th
e co
mm
unity
and
its
loca
tion
prio
r to
CB
DR
M ta
king
pla
ce. T
his
is
esse
ntia
l in
orde
r to
mea
sure
pr
ogre
ss.
Bas
elin
e S
urve
y co
mpl
ete
d.
Typi
cally
thi
s ca
n in
clud
e:•
Link
s be
twee
n vu
lner
abili
ty a
nd
pove
rty
are
dete
rmin
ed.
• P
over
ty c
ondi
tions
rev
eale
d in
th
is p
roce
ss a
re ta
rget
s fo
r ac
tion
in C
BD
RM
• S
peci
fic lo
cal c
apac
ities
(in
clud
ing
com
mun
ity le
ader
s)
are
iden
tifie
d.
• C
omm
unity
str
engt
hs r
evea
led
in
this
pro
cess
bec
ome
vita
l hum
an
reso
urce
s fo
r ac
tion
in C
BD
RM
2. guidelines for good practice in community-based disaster risk management
33
PR
OC
ES
S 2
cont
inua
tion
10. R
isk
and
Cap
acity
Ass
essm
ent
take
s pl
ace
in fu
ll co
oper
atio
n w
ith c
omm
uniti
es to
gat
her
data
on
the
follo
win
g:
In u
nder
taki
ng s
ocia
l vul
nera
bilit
y an
d ca
paci
ty
asse
ssm
ent i
t is
imp
orta
nt to
de
-pro
fess
iona
lize
the
proc
ess.
(T
hus,
mid
wiv
es, l
ocal
rel
igio
us le
ader
s an
d sc
hool
teac
hes
can,
whe
n tr
aine
d m
ake
exce
llent
as
sess
ors
sinc
e th
ey m
ay h
ave
the
conf
iden
ce o
f the
lo
cal c
omm
unity
)
Vu
lne
rab
ilit
y A
ss
es
sme
nt
Cri
teri
aV
ulne
rabi
lity
asse
ssm
ent i
s a
mul
ti-le
vel t
ask
that
co
nsid
ers
dive
rse
scal
es o
f vul
nera
bilit
y. T
hese
ra
nge
from
ro
ot c
ause
s of
vul
nera
bilit
y (s
uch
as
a la
ck o
f go
od
gove
rnan
ce, o
r no
pub
lic a
cces
s to
pol
itica
l pow
er),
to d
ynam
ic p
ress
ures
(su
ch a
s ur
bani
zatio
n or
pop
ulat
ion
grow
th)
that
tra
nsla
te
thes
e ca
uses
into
uns
afe
cond
ition
s (s
uch
as a
lack
of
ear
ly w
arni
ngs
of im
pend
ing
haza
rds
or u
nsaf
e d
wel
lings
).S
peci
fic lo
cal p
atte
rns
of v
ulne
rabi
lity
are
iden
tifie
d,
incl
udin
g vi
tal l
inks
bet
wee
n ro
ot c
ause
s, p
ress
ures
an
d un
safe
con
ditio
ns. U
nsaf
e co
nditi
ons
reve
ale
d in
thi
s pr
oces
s be
com
e ta
rget
s fo
r ac
tion
in C
BD
RM
. D
ata
is s
ecur
ed
conc
erni
ng t
he fo
llow
ing
:•
Ele
men
ts a
t R
isk
E
stab
lishi
ng w
hat t
he im
pact
of t
he h
azar
d co
uld
have
on
whi
ch e
lem
ents
of a
giv
en s
ocie
ty (
mai
nly
base
d on
fact
ual i
nfor
mat
ion
gain
ed fr
om p
eopl
e’s
past
exp
erie
nce)
• V
uln
erab
le C
on
dit
ion
s
Est
ablis
hing
why
the
elem
ents
are
at r
isk
• P
ress
ure
s
Est
ablis
hing
who
or
wha
t is
crea
ting
the
vuln
erab
le c
ondi
tions
and
how
this
is ta
king
pla
ce.
• U
nd
erly
ing
Cau
ses
E
stab
lishi
ng w
hy v
ulne
rabl
e co
nditi
ons
are
crea
ted
or ig
nore
d by
the
pres
sure
s.
a.
Evi
denc
e of
the
haza
rd th
reat
(t
he n
atur
e of
the
haza
rd/
seve
rity/
freq
uenc
y/ d
urat
ion/
sp
ecifi
c lo
catio
n)
Loca
l ha
zard
map
s co
mpl
ete
d
b.
Evi
denc
e of
the
vuln
erab
ility
of
hig
h ris
k gr
oups
with
in th
e co
mm
unity
(pe
rcen
tage
of
high
-ris
k gr
oups
etc
.)
Gro
ups
iden
tifie
d
c.
Evi
denc
e of
pov
erty
with
in th
e co
mm
unity
(ce
nsus
dat
a an
d re
gist
er o
f pov
erty
ass
ista
nce
gran
ts e
tc.)
Hig
h p
over
ty le
vels
iden
tifie
d an
d m
appe
d. L
inks
bet
wee
n vu
lner
abili
ty
and
pov
erty
cor
rela
ted
d.
Evi
denc
e th
at th
e co
mm
unity
w
ishe
s to
fully
par
ticip
ate
in
CB
DR
M. (
Thi
s in
clud
es a
w
illin
gnes
s to
par
ticip
ate
in
task
forc
es in
volv
ed in
ris
k re
duct
ion
activ
ities
etc
.)
Agr
eem
ent m
ade
e.
Evi
denc
e of
the
num
ber
of
emer
gent
com
mun
ity le
ader
sLe
ader
s se
lect
ed
f. Ta
ngib
le e
vide
nce
of th
e nu
mbe
r of
peo
ple
who
will
be
in s
afer
con
ditio
ns a
s a
resu
lt of
the
risk
redu
ctio
n m
easu
res
Num
bers
cal
cula
ted
and
rela
ted
to m
aps
indi
catin
g lo
catio
ns o
f pr
otec
ted
com
mun
ities
g.
Tang
ible
evi
denc
e of
the
prot
ectio
n of
pro
pert
y w
ithin
th
e co
mm
unity
as
a re
sult
of
risk
redu
ctio
n m
easu
res
Loca
tion
of p
rope
rty
calc
ulat
ed
and
rela
ted
to m
aps
indi
catin
g th
eir
loca
tion.
h.
Dat
a co
ncer
ning
acc
essi
bilit
y of
the
com
mun
ity to
ass
istin
g bo
dies
Info
rmat
ion
avai
labl
e•
Un
der
lyin
g V
alu
es a
nd
Bel
ief
Sys
tem
s
Con
side
ring
wha
t bel
iefs
enc
oura
ge, i
gnor
e or
ch
alle
nge
the
unde
rlyin
g ca
uses
of v
ulne
rabi
lity.
B
ased
on
VE
NT
ON
and
HA
NS
FO
RD
, (20
06)
Ev
ide
nc
e n
ee
de
d f
or
Sit
e S
ele
cti
on
T
he a
sses
smen
t dat
a is
mai
nly
quan
titat
ive
but
ther
e ar
e as
pect
s th
at a
re q
ualit
ativ
e, s
uch
as
the
asse
ssm
ent o
f ris
k pe
rcep
tions
as
part
of
vuln
erab
ility
ass
essm
ent o
r th
e id
entif
icat
ion
of
lead
ersh
ip p
oten
tial w
ithin
the
com
mun
ity.
CR
OS
S-C
UT
TIN
G I
SS
UE
S
1.
Tra
inin
g at
the
Com
mun
ity L
evel
E
ach
of th
e pr
oces
ses
requ
ires
com
mun
ity b
ased
tr
aini
ng. T
his
may
in p
art b
e fu
sed
with
the
trai
ning
of
sta
ff fr
om th
e as
sist
ing
grou
ps. T
hrou
ghou
t th
ese
guid
elin
es r
efer
ence
s ar
e m
ade
to th
is
trai
ning
act
ivity
in th
e ‘p
roce
ss to
be
follo
wed
’ set
in
the
colu
mn
desc
ribin
g pe
rfor
man
ce in
dica
tors
. H
owev
er, i
t is
vita
l to
reco
gniz
e th
at a
ll th
e tr
aini
ng
desc
ribed
can
take
pla
ce w
ithin
sep
arat
e m
odul
es
in th
e sa
me
cour
se.
2.
Gen
der A
war
enes
s an
d A
ctio
n
Evi
denc
e of
dis
aste
r im
pact
has
rep
eate
dly
draw
n at
tent
ion
to th
e vu
lner
abili
ty o
f wom
en a
nd s
mal
l ch
ildre
n, o
ften
in th
eir
care
. Add
ition
ally
, wom
en
play
a d
omin
ant r
ole
in li
velih
ood
secu
rity
in m
any
soci
etie
s. T
here
fore
eac
h of
the
proc
esse
s w
ill
need
to r
ecog
nize
the
sign
ifica
nce
of g
ende
r aw
aren
ess,
as
wel
l as
spec
ific
prov
isio
n fo
r w
omen
and
sm
all c
hild
ren
in a
sses
smen
t, pl
anni
ng a
nd im
plem
enta
tion.
i. D
ata
conc
erni
ng s
taff
secu
rity
Info
rmat
ion
avai
labl
e
11. C
omm
unity
ris
k as
sess
men
t is
und
erta
ken
with
the
dire
ct
invo
lvem
ent o
f com
mun
ity
mem
bers
, and
oth
er
stak
ehol
ders
.
Ful
l co
oper
atio
n to
ok p
lace
12. P
erce
ptio
ns o
f mul
tiple
gro
ups
in th
e co
mm
unity
mus
t be
cons
ider
ed a
bout
the
risks
and
ris
k re
duct
ion
mea
sure
s.
Info
rmat
ion
gath
ere
d fr
om r
isk
asse
ssm
ent
13. L
ocal
kno
wle
dge
abou
t pas
t ha
zard
s, v
ulne
rabl
e gr
oups
, an
d ca
paci
ties
and
copi
ng
mec
hani
sms
is ta
ken
into
ac
coun
t in
the
cond
uct o
f ris
k as
sess
men
t.
Info
rmat
ion
gath
ere
d fr
om r
isk
asse
ssm
ent
14. R
isk
asse
ssm
ent i
nteg
rate
s th
e re
sults
of s
cien
tific
kno
wle
dge,
se
cond
ary
data
and
com
mun
ity
perc
eptio
ns.
Info
rmat
ion
gath
ere
d fr
om r
isk
asse
ssm
ent
15. A
bas
elin
e is
det
erm
ined
for
each
lo
catio
n. T
his
will
be
obta
ined
fr
om th
e pa
rtic
ipat
ory
risk
asse
ssm
ent e
xerc
ise
desc
ribed
in
this
pro
cess
. Bas
elin
es w
ill
be a
qua
litat
ive
and
quan
titat
ive
reco
rd o
f the
sta
tus
of th
e co
mm
unity
and
its
loca
tion
prio
r to
CB
DR
M ta
king
pla
ce. T
his
is
esse
ntia
l in
orde
r to
mea
sure
pr
ogre
ss.
Bas
elin
e S
urve
y co
mpl
ete
d.
Typi
cally
thi
s ca
n in
clud
e:•
Link
s be
twee
n vu
lner
abili
ty a
nd
pove
rty
are
dete
rmin
ed.
• P
over
ty c
ondi
tions
rev
eale
d in
th
is p
roce
ss a
re ta
rget
s fo
r ac
tion
in C
BD
RM
• S
peci
fic lo
cal c
apac
ities
(in
clud
ing
com
mun
ity le
ader
s)
are
iden
tifie
d.
• C
omm
unity
str
engt
hs r
evea
led
in
this
pro
cess
bec
ome
vita
l hum
an
reso
urce
s fo
r ac
tion
in C
BD
RM
34CRITICAL GUIDELINES OF CBDRM
PR
OC
ES
S 2
cont
inua
tion
• N
umbe
r an
d lo
catio
n of
Hig
h R
isk
Com
mun
ities
are
iden
tifie
d fo
r sp
ecifi
c m
onito
ring
and
CB
DR
M•
Tra
inin
g co
urse
s ar
e in
pro
gres
s to
equ
ip lo
cal c
omm
unity
m
embe
rs to
ass
ess
risks
and
un
dert
ake
basi
c ris
k re
duct
ion
mea
sure
s (h
ow m
any
cour
ses,
re
view
of e
valu
atio
ns, m
onito
ring
and
eval
uatio
n of
trai
ning
ef
fect
iven
ess)
• R
isk
and
capa
city
ass
essm
ent
brin
g br
ings
val
uabl
e si
de
bene
fits,
(ot
her
than
ris
k as
sess
men
t) to
the
com
mun
ity,
such
as:
- as
sess
men
t ski
lls;
- a
bette
r un
ders
tand
ing
of
com
mun
ity r
esou
rces
/ soc
ial
dyna
mic
s;-
impr
oved
lead
ersh
ip a
nd
com
mun
ity s
olid
arity
;-
enha
nced
leve
ls o
f soc
ial
mot
ivat
ion.
• E
cono
mic
vul
nera
bilit
y as
sess
men
t pro
vide
s va
luab
le
info
rmat
ion
to d
evel
op s
mal
l sc
ale
busi
ness
con
tinui
ty p
lans
to
ens
ure
that
the
mic
ro a
nd
mac
ro e
cono
mie
s ca
n su
rviv
e di
sast
er im
pact
.•
The
info
rmat
ion
gain
ed fr
om
the
risk
asse
ssm
ent,
is s
et in
an
appr
opria
te fo
rmat
to a
ssis
t in
the
deve
lopm
ent o
f effe
ctiv
e ris
k
re
duct
ion
mea
sure
s.
• R
isk
asse
ssm
ent d
ata
is lo
cate
d in
a s
ettin
g w
here
it w
ill n
ot b
e lo
st.
• R
isk
asse
ssm
ent d
ata
is fu
lly
back
ed u
p so
that
if d
ata
is
mis
laid
an
alte
rnat
ive
sour
ce is
av
aila
ble.
• R
isk
data
is p
oste
d in
a s
impl
e ac
cess
ible
form
at in
pub
lic a
reas
so
that
the
entir
e po
pula
tion
can
see
who
or
wha
t is
‘at-
risk’
(fo
r ex
ampl
e flo
od le
vels
are
mar
ked
on te
legr
aph
pole
s, r
isk
map
s ar
e si
ted
on n
otic
e bo
ards
in k
ey
build
ings
suc
h as
sch
ools
, pol
ice
stat
ions
, mos
ques
, chu
rche
s et
c.)
2. guidelines for good practice in community-based disaster risk management
35
PR
OC
ES
S 2
cont
inua
tion
• N
umbe
r an
d lo
catio
n of
Hig
h R
isk
Com
mun
ities
are
iden
tifie
d fo
r sp
ecifi
c m
onito
ring
and
CB
DR
M•
Tra
inin
g co
urse
s ar
e in
pro
gres
s to
equ
ip lo
cal c
omm
unity
m
embe
rs to
ass
ess
risks
and
un
dert
ake
basi
c ris
k re
duct
ion
mea
sure
s (h
ow m
any
cour
ses,
re
view
of e
valu
atio
ns, m
onito
ring
and
eval
uatio
n of
trai
ning
ef
fect
iven
ess)
• R
isk
and
capa
city
ass
essm
ent
brin
g br
ings
val
uabl
e si
de
bene
fits,
(ot
her
than
ris
k as
sess
men
t) to
the
com
mun
ity,
such
as:
- as
sess
men
t ski
lls;
- a
bette
r un
ders
tand
ing
of
com
mun
ity r
esou
rces
/ soc
ial
dyna
mic
s;-
impr
oved
lead
ersh
ip a
nd
com
mun
ity s
olid
arity
;-
enha
nced
leve
ls o
f soc
ial
mot
ivat
ion.
• E
cono
mic
vul
nera
bilit
y as
sess
men
t pro
vide
s va
luab
le
info
rmat
ion
to d
evel
op s
mal
l sc
ale
busi
ness
con
tinui
ty p
lans
to
ens
ure
that
the
mic
ro a
nd
mac
ro e
cono
mie
s ca
n su
rviv
e di
sast
er im
pact
.•
The
info
rmat
ion
gain
ed fr
om
the
risk
asse
ssm
ent,
is s
et in
an
appr
opria
te fo
rmat
to a
ssis
t in
the
deve
lopm
ent o
f effe
ctiv
e ris
k
re
duct
ion
mea
sure
s.
• R
isk
asse
ssm
ent d
ata
is lo
cate
d in
a s
ettin
g w
here
it w
ill n
ot b
e lo
st.
• R
isk
asse
ssm
ent d
ata
is fu
lly
back
ed u
p so
that
if d
ata
is
mis
laid
an
alte
rnat
ive
sour
ce is
av
aila
ble.
• R
isk
data
is p
oste
d in
a s
impl
e ac
cess
ible
form
at in
pub
lic a
reas
so
that
the
entir
e po
pula
tion
can
see
who
or
wha
t is
‘at-
risk’
(fo
r ex
ampl
e flo
od le
vels
are
mar
ked
on te
legr
aph
pole
s, r
isk
map
s ar
e si
ted
on n
otic
e bo
ards
in k
ey
build
ings
suc
h as
sch
ools
, pol
ice
stat
ions
, mos
ques
, chu
rche
s et
c.)
36CRITICAL GUIDELINES OF CBDRM
PR
OC
ES
S 3
Ste
ps
in t
his
Pro
ce
ss
Key
Ou
tco
me
Ind
icat
ors
(me
asu
rin
g ch
an
ge
in in
divi
du
als
an
d co
mm
unity
life
)
Gu
idan
ce
No
tes
to I
mp
lem
ent
CB
DR
M(c
ert
ain
not
es
have
be
en
de
sig
nat
ed
as
‘cro
ss-c
utt
ing’
, with
a
pp
licat
ion
to a
ll p
roce
sse
s. T
he
se n
ote
s a
re s
et in
bo
ld t
ype)
BU
ILD
RA
PP
OR
T A
ND
U
ND
ER
STA
ND
TH
E
CO
MM
UN
ITY
•
The
aim
of t
he th
ird
proc
ess
is to
bui
ld tr
ust
and
frie
ndsh
ip w
ith a
co
mm
unity
and
from
this
ra
ppor
t to
unde
rsta
nd b
oth
thei
r ne
eds
and
capa
citie
s.
Som
e st
eps
in t
he fo
llow
ing
proc
esse
s ar
e se
quen
tial w
hile
oth
ers
can
usef
ully
occ
ur in
par
alle
l.B
uil
din
g c
on
fid
en
ce
wit
h t
he
sele
cte
d
co
mm
un
itie
s is
es
sen
tial
fro
m t
he
ou
tse
t o
f C
BD
RM
. T
he
pro
ce
ss
is a
ide
d w
he
n w
ork
ing
w
ith
gro
up
s w
ith
lon
g-s
tan
din
g li
nks
wit
h t
he
co
mm
un
ity
in q
ue
stio
n. I
t is
als
o v
ital
fo
r th
e re
lati
on
ship
to
be
in t
he
form
of
an in
form
al
co
ntr
act
wh
ere
th
e b
en
efi
cia
ry c
om
mu
nit
y, a
s w
ell
as
the
assi
stin
g g
rou
p k
no
ws
wh
at t
hey
can
ex
pe
ct
of
the
assi
stin
g g
rou
p a
nd
wh
at t
hey
are
ex
pe
cte
d t
o c
on
trib
ute
an
d v
ice
- ve
rsa
CR
OS
S-C
UT
TIN
G I
SS
UE
S1.
Le
ader
ship
T
he e
xam
ple
of th
e le
ader
s/ m
anag
ers
of th
e as
sist
ing
grou
p is
like
ly to
be
of p
aram
ount
im
port
ance
in d
eter
min
ing
the
leve
l of r
appo
rt a
nd
trus
t.2.
B
uild
Tru
st
Rec
ogni
ze th
e im
port
ance
of t
he li
st o
f act
ions
to
build
trus
t:•
Livi
ng in
the
com
mun
ity•
Bei
ng tr
ansp
aren
t•
Par
ticip
atin
g in
the
life
of a
com
mun
ity•
List
enin
g to
loca
l peo
ple
• To
tal i
mpa
rtia
lity
in m
aint
aini
ng c
onta
ct w
ith
varie
d ca
ste
grou
ps a
nd r
esid
ents
with
inco
me
varia
bles
• P
erfo
rmin
g lo
cal t
asks
3.
Und
erst
and
the
Com
mun
ity
Rec
ogni
ze th
e im
port
ance
of t
he fo
llow
ing
fact
ors
in c
omm
unity
dyn
amic
s. U
nder
stan
ding
:•
soci
al g
roup
s;•
cultu
ral a
rran
gem
ents
;•
econ
omic
act
iviti
es;
• ris
k pe
rcep
tions
;
1.
Fun
ding
is c
omm
itted
to e
nabl
e P
roce
ss 3
to ta
ke p
lace
Fun
ding
allo
cate
d
2.
A k
ey p
olic
y de
cisi
on is
take
n to
ach
ieve
full
tran
spar
ency
co
ncer
ning
pro
pose
d ac
tions
.
Evi
denc
e th
at p
olic
y is
impl
emen
ted
3.
All
info
rmat
ion
conc
erni
ng r
isks
to
the
loca
l com
mun
ity is
mad
e fr
eely
ava
ilabl
e, w
ith d
ata
post
ed
on p
ublic
bui
ldin
g no
tice
boar
ds
or w
ithin
pub
lic b
uild
ings
.
Dat
a is
pos
ted
4.
Key
loca
l lea
ders
are
iden
tifie
d to
pla
y vi
tal r
oles
in r
elat
ion
to e
xter
nal a
ssis
ting
grou
ps
(see
cro
ss-c
uttin
g is
sue
in th
e G
uida
nce
Not
es c
olum
n)
Lead
ers
reco
gniz
ed
5.
An
info
rmat
ion
gath
erin
g pr
oces
s is
est
ablis
hed
to e
nabl
e re
leva
nt
info
rmat
ion
to b
e co
llect
ed
to u
nder
stan
d th
e na
ture
, ne
eds
and
reso
urce
s of
targ
et
com
mun
ities
.
Pro
cess
in p
lace
, and
mon
itore
d
6.
Com
mun
ity b
ased
trai
ning
is
prov
ided
in b
uild
ing
rapp
ort a
nd
unde
rsta
ndin
g co
mm
uniti
es. A
ke
y el
emen
t of t
his
trai
ning
is in
at
titud
inal
and
beh
avio
ral c
hang
e on
beh
alf o
f bot
h th
e co
mm
unity
as
wel
l as
with
in s
taff
from
as
sist
ing
grou
ps.
Trai
ning
tak
es p
lace
, (nu
mbe
r of
co
urse
s, n
umbe
r of
pe
ople
who
at
tend
ed,
impa
ct o
f tra
inin
g on
de
velo
pmen
t of a
ttitu
dina
l and
be
havi
oral
cha
nge
eval
uate
d)
7.
Ext
erna
l ass
istin
g gr
oups
dec
ide
to li
ve w
ithin
the
com
mun
ity fo
r th
e du
ratio
n of
the
proj
ect,
and
to
part
icip
ate
in th
e da
ily li
fe o
f tha
t co
mm
unity
.
Ass
ess
num
bers
of e
xter
nal s
taff
liv
ing
with
in c
omm
uniti
es w
here
C
BD
RM
is t
akin
g pl
ace
• sp
atia
l cha
ract
eris
tics;
• vu
lner
able
hou
seho
lds
and
grou
ps
Evi
denc
e of
und
erst
andi
ng o
f the
com
mun
ity b
y as
sist
ing
grou
p st
aff i
s fo
und
in th
eir
awar
enes
s an
d re
spec
t for
loca
l tra
ditio
ns a
nd li
ving
pat
tern
s th
at m
ay e
nhan
ce o
r co
nstr
ain
risk
redu
ctio
n in
itiat
ives
.4.
E
stab
lish
Goo
d R
elat
ions
hips
E
vide
nce
of th
e le
vels
of r
appo
rt w
ill b
e ap
pare
nt
whe
n lo
cal r
esid
ents
beg
in to
take
act
ions
to
redu
ce th
eir
risks
or
thos
e of
thei
r ne
ighb
ors
or
colle
ague
s. S
uch
actio
ns d
emon
stra
te th
e sc
ale
of lo
cal l
earn
ing
grow
ing
from
con
stru
ctiv
e an
d ac
tive
rela
tions
hips
bas
ed o
n m
utua
l tru
st a
nd
genu
ine
frie
ndsh
ip b
etw
een
mem
bers
of t
he
com
mun
ity a
nd a
ssis
ting
grou
ps.
8.
Thr
ough
var
ied
mea
ns, s
eek
to
build
con
fiden
ce a
nd m
utua
l tru
st
with
com
mun
ities
whe
re C
BD
RM
is
taki
ng p
lace
.
Con
fiden
ce a
nd t
rust
are
exp
ress
ed
in v
ario
us w
ays,
incl
udin
g:
• S
ocia
l sur
veys
and
/or
com
mun
ity
mee
tings
to a
sses
s th
e le
vel
of c
onfid
ence
and
mut
ual t
rust
be
twee
n co
mm
uniti
es a
nd
exte
rnal
ass
istin
g gr
oups
.•
Exi
sten
ce o
f joi
nt ta
sk fo
rces
to
unde
rtak
e C
BD
RM
dra
wn
from
lo
cal c
omm
uniti
es a
nd e
xter
nal
assi
stin
g gr
oups
• D
evel
opm
ent o
f pub
lic s
pirit
and
w
ider
soc
ial c
once
rn th
an fa
mily
lin
ks.
• G
ood
wor
king
rel
atio
nshi
ps
betw
een
empl
oyer
s an
d em
ploy
ees.
Incr
ease
d pr
oduc
tivity
, red
uced
ab
sent
eeis
m a
nd fe
wer
dis
pute
s.•
Impr
oved
san
itary
con
ditio
ns
and
refu
se c
lear
ance
with
in th
e se
ttlem
ent.
Trai
ning
in p
lace
. Im
prov
ed
com
pete
ncie
s m
easu
red
by
indi
cato
rs
Sel
ectio
n m
etho
d in
pla
ceA
gree
men
ts m
ade
• D
evel
opm
ent o
f com
mun
ity
faci
litie
s, s
uch
as s
choo
ls a
nd
com
mun
ity b
uild
ings
.•
Com
mun
ity c
are
for
high
ly
vuln
erab
le g
roup
s-el
derly
/ di
sabl
ed/e
tc.
2. guidelines for good practice in community-based disaster risk management
37
PR
OC
ES
S 3
Ste
ps
in t
his
Pro
ce
ss
Key
Ou
tco
me
Ind
icat
ors
(me
asu
rin
g ch
an
ge
in in
divi
du
als
an
d co
mm
unity
life
)
Gu
idan
ce
No
tes
to I
mp
lem
ent
CB
DR
M(c
ert
ain
not
es
have
be
en
de
sig
nat
ed
as
‘cro
ss-c
utt
ing’
, with
a
pp
licat
ion
to a
ll p
roce
sse
s. T
he
se n
ote
s a
re s
et in
bo
ld t
ype)
BU
ILD
RA
PP
OR
T A
ND
U
ND
ER
STA
ND
TH
E
CO
MM
UN
ITY
•
The
aim
of t
he th
ird
proc
ess
is to
bui
ld tr
ust
and
frie
ndsh
ip w
ith a
co
mm
unity
and
from
this
ra
ppor
t to
unde
rsta
nd b
oth
thei
r ne
eds
and
capa
citie
s.
Som
e st
eps
in t
he fo
llow
ing
proc
esse
s ar
e se
quen
tial w
hile
oth
ers
can
usef
ully
occ
ur in
par
alle
l.B
uil
din
g c
on
fid
en
ce
wit
h t
he
sele
cte
d
co
mm
un
itie
s is
es
sen
tial
fro
m t
he
ou
tse
t o
f C
BD
RM
. T
he
pro
ce
ss
is a
ide
d w
he
n w
ork
ing
w
ith
gro
up
s w
ith
lon
g-s
tan
din
g li
nks
wit
h t
he
co
mm
un
ity
in q
ue
stio
n. I
t is
als
o v
ital
fo
r th
e re
lati
on
ship
to
be
in t
he
form
of
an in
form
al
co
ntr
act
wh
ere
th
e b
en
efi
cia
ry c
om
mu
nit
y, a
s w
ell
as
the
assi
stin
g g
rou
p k
no
ws
wh
at t
hey
can
ex
pe
ct
of
the
assi
stin
g g
rou
p a
nd
wh
at t
hey
are
ex
pe
cte
d t
o c
on
trib
ute
an
d v
ice
- ve
rsa
CR
OS
S-C
UT
TIN
G I
SS
UE
S1.
Le
ader
ship
T
he e
xam
ple
of th
e le
ader
s/ m
anag
ers
of th
e as
sist
ing
grou
p is
like
ly to
be
of p
aram
ount
im
port
ance
in d
eter
min
ing
the
leve
l of r
appo
rt a
nd
trus
t.2.
B
uild
Tru
st
Rec
ogni
ze th
e im
port
ance
of t
he li
st o
f act
ions
to
build
trus
t:•
Livi
ng in
the
com
mun
ity•
Bei
ng tr
ansp
aren
t•
Par
ticip
atin
g in
the
life
of a
com
mun
ity•
List
enin
g to
loca
l peo
ple
• To
tal i
mpa
rtia
lity
in m
aint
aini
ng c
onta
ct w
ith
varie
d ca
ste
grou
ps a
nd r
esid
ents
with
inco
me
varia
bles
• P
erfo
rmin
g lo
cal t
asks
3.
Und
erst
and
the
Com
mun
ity
Rec
ogni
ze th
e im
port
ance
of t
he fo
llow
ing
fact
ors
in c
omm
unity
dyn
amic
s. U
nder
stan
ding
:•
soci
al g
roup
s;•
cultu
ral a
rran
gem
ents
;•
econ
omic
act
iviti
es;
• ris
k pe
rcep
tions
;
1.
Fun
ding
is c
omm
itted
to e
nabl
e P
roce
ss 3
to ta
ke p
lace
Fun
ding
allo
cate
d
2.
A k
ey p
olic
y de
cisi
on is
take
n to
ach
ieve
full
tran
spar
ency
co
ncer
ning
pro
pose
d ac
tions
.
Evi
denc
e th
at p
olic
y is
impl
emen
ted
3.
All
info
rmat
ion
conc
erni
ng r
isks
to
the
loca
l com
mun
ity is
mad
e fr
eely
ava
ilabl
e, w
ith d
ata
post
ed
on p
ublic
bui
ldin
g no
tice
boar
ds
or w
ithin
pub
lic b
uild
ings
.
Dat
a is
pos
ted
4.
Key
loca
l lea
ders
are
iden
tifie
d to
pla
y vi
tal r
oles
in r
elat
ion
to e
xter
nal a
ssis
ting
grou
ps
(see
cro
ss-c
uttin
g is
sue
in th
e G
uida
nce
Not
es c
olum
n)
Lead
ers
reco
gniz
ed
5.
An
info
rmat
ion
gath
erin
g pr
oces
s is
est
ablis
hed
to e
nabl
e re
leva
nt
info
rmat
ion
to b
e co
llect
ed
to u
nder
stan
d th
e na
ture
, ne
eds
and
reso
urce
s of
targ
et
com
mun
ities
.
Pro
cess
in p
lace
, and
mon
itore
d
6.
Com
mun
ity b
ased
trai
ning
is
prov
ided
in b
uild
ing
rapp
ort a
nd
unde
rsta
ndin
g co
mm
uniti
es. A
ke
y el
emen
t of t
his
trai
ning
is in
at
titud
inal
and
beh
avio
ral c
hang
e on
beh
alf o
f bot
h th
e co
mm
unity
as
wel
l as
with
in s
taff
from
as
sist
ing
grou
ps.
Trai
ning
tak
es p
lace
, (nu
mbe
r of
co
urse
s, n
umbe
r of
pe
ople
who
at
tend
ed,
impa
ct o
f tra
inin
g on
de
velo
pmen
t of a
ttitu
dina
l and
be
havi
oral
cha
nge
eval
uate
d)
7.
Ext
erna
l ass
istin
g gr
oups
dec
ide
to li
ve w
ithin
the
com
mun
ity fo
r th
e du
ratio
n of
the
proj
ect,
and
to
part
icip
ate
in th
e da
ily li
fe o
f tha
t co
mm
unity
.
Ass
ess
num
bers
of e
xter
nal s
taff
liv
ing
with
in c
omm
uniti
es w
here
C
BD
RM
is t
akin
g pl
ace
• sp
atia
l cha
ract
eris
tics;
• vu
lner
able
hou
seho
lds
and
grou
ps
Evi
denc
e of
und
erst
andi
ng o
f the
com
mun
ity b
y as
sist
ing
grou
p st
aff i
s fo
und
in th
eir
awar
enes
s an
d re
spec
t for
loca
l tra
ditio
ns a
nd li
ving
pat
tern
s th
at m
ay e
nhan
ce o
r co
nstr
ain
risk
redu
ctio
n in
itiat
ives
.4.
E
stab
lish
Goo
d R
elat
ions
hips
E
vide
nce
of th
e le
vels
of r
appo
rt w
ill b
e ap
pare
nt
whe
n lo
cal r
esid
ents
beg
in to
take
act
ions
to
redu
ce th
eir
risks
or
thos
e of
thei
r ne
ighb
ors
or
colle
ague
s. S
uch
actio
ns d
emon
stra
te th
e sc
ale
of lo
cal l
earn
ing
grow
ing
from
con
stru
ctiv
e an
d ac
tive
rela
tions
hips
bas
ed o
n m
utua
l tru
st a
nd
genu
ine
frie
ndsh
ip b
etw
een
mem
bers
of t
he
com
mun
ity a
nd a
ssis
ting
grou
ps.
8.
Thr
ough
var
ied
mea
ns, s
eek
to
build
con
fiden
ce a
nd m
utua
l tru
st
with
com
mun
ities
whe
re C
BD
RM
is
taki
ng p
lace
.
Con
fiden
ce a
nd t
rust
are
exp
ress
ed
in v
ario
us w
ays,
incl
udin
g:
• S
ocia
l sur
veys
and
/or
com
mun
ity
mee
tings
to a
sses
s th
e le
vel
of c
onfid
ence
and
mut
ual t
rust
be
twee
n co
mm
uniti
es a
nd
exte
rnal
ass
istin
g gr
oups
.•
Exi
sten
ce o
f joi
nt ta
sk fo
rces
to
unde
rtak
e C
BD
RM
dra
wn
from
lo
cal c
omm
uniti
es a
nd e
xter
nal
assi
stin
g gr
oups
• D
evel
opm
ent o
f pub
lic s
pirit
and
w
ider
soc
ial c
once
rn th
an fa
mily
lin
ks.
• G
ood
wor
king
rel
atio
nshi
ps
betw
een
empl
oyer
s an
d em
ploy
ees.
Incr
ease
d pr
oduc
tivity
, red
uced
ab
sent
eeis
m a
nd fe
wer
dis
pute
s.•
Impr
oved
san
itary
con
ditio
ns
and
refu
se c
lear
ance
with
in th
e se
ttlem
ent.
Trai
ning
in p
lace
. Im
prov
ed
com
pete
ncie
s m
easu
red
by
indi
cato
rs
Sel
ectio
n m
etho
d in
pla
ceA
gree
men
ts m
ade
• D
evel
opm
ent o
f com
mun
ity
faci
litie
s, s
uch
as s
choo
ls a
nd
com
mun
ity b
uild
ings
.•
Com
mun
ity c
are
for
high
ly
vuln
erab
le g
roup
s-el
derly
/ di
sabl
ed/e
tc.
38CRITICAL GUIDELINES OF CBDRM
PR
OC
ES
S 4
Ste
ps
in t
his
Pro
ce
ss
Key
Ou
tco
me
Ind
icat
ors
(me
asu
rin
g ch
an
ge
in in
divi
du
als
an
d co
mm
unity
life
)
Gu
idan
ce
No
tes
to I
mp
lem
ent
CB
DR
M(c
ert
ain
not
es
have
be
en
de
sig
nat
ed
as
‘cro
ss-c
utt
ing’
, with
a
pp
licat
ion
to a
ll p
roce
sse
s. T
he
se n
ote
s a
re s
et in
bo
ld t
ype)
PA
RT
ICIP
AT
OR
Y D
ISA
ST
ER
R
ISK
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
P
LA
NN
ING
• T
he a
im o
f the
four
th
proc
ess
is to
pla
n a
risk
man
agem
ent s
trat
egy
and
tact
ics
thro
ugh
cons
truc
tive
dial
ogue
with
th
e se
lect
ed c
omm
unity
.
1.
The
com
mitm
ent o
f loc
al
gove
rnm
ent t
o C
BD
RM
is
assu
red,
with
ade
quat
e bu
dget
su
ppor
t in
plac
e as
req
uire
d in
di
sast
er le
gisl
atio
n.
Agr
eem
ent w
ith lo
cal g
over
nmen
t an
d F
undi
ng a
lloca
ted
CR
OS
S-C
UT
TIN
G I
SS
UE
SS
har
ed V
alu
esIt
is
imp
ort
an
t to
re
co
gn
ize
tha
t th
e p
lan
nin
g
pro
ce
ss
is n
ot
just
a m
ec
ha
nic
al s
et o
f a
cti
on
s.
It i
s b
as
ed
on
a s
ha
red
set
of
valu
es
an
d
co
nv
icti
on
s o
f th
e c
om
mu
nit
y th
at
are
a c
om
mo
n
req
uir
em
en
t a
cro
ss
all
the
pro
ce
ss
es
.
Th
us
, if
the
re a
re t
en
sio
ns
wit
hin
th
e c
om
mu
nit
y th
es
e w
ill i
nh
ibit
th
e p
lan
nin
g p
roc
es
s, o
r m
ay
eve
n p
reve
nt
pla
ns
be
ing
re
ali
zed
. Th
is s
ho
ws
the
imp
ort
an
ce
of
co
nfl
ict
reso
luti
on
init
iati
ves
an
d in
spir
ed
le
ad
ers
hip
. It
als
o e
mp
ha
size
s th
e im
po
rta
nc
e o
f tr
ain
ing
to
str
en
gth
en
att
itu
de
s a
nd
pro
mo
te b
eh
avio
r th
at
wil
l se
rve
the
en
tire
c
om
mu
nit
y, n
ot
for
the
pu
re s
elf
-in
tere
st o
f in
div
idu
al s
take
ho
lde
rs.
2.
One
per
son
is a
ppoi
nted
to
man
age
Pro
cess
4. T
his
pers
on is
in
cha
rge
of th
e P
lann
ing
Sys
tem
as
des
crib
ed b
elow
.
Man
ager
app
oint
ed
3.
A ‘s
yste
m’ i
s es
tabl
ishe
d to
un
dert
ake
the
disa
ster
ris
k m
anag
emen
t pla
nnin
g pr
oces
s.
Thi
s is
bas
ed in
loca
l gov
ernm
ent
and
is li
nked
into
a n
atio
nal
asse
ssm
ent s
yste
m. T
he p
lann
ing
syst
em is
bas
ed o
n th
e ac
tive
part
icip
atio
n of
an
inte
grat
ed s
et
of a
ctor
s dr
awn
from
loca
l NG
O’s
, ac
adem
ics
in a
reas
whe
re th
ere
are
univ
ersi
ties,
loca
l gov
ernm
ent
offic
ials
and
com
mun
ity le
ader
s.
The
invo
lvem
ent o
f the
com
mun
ity
in t
he p
lann
ing
proc
ess
is in
dica
ted
in t
he p
rese
nce
of c
omm
unity
re
pres
enta
tives
in a
ll th
e gr
oups
m
akin
g pl
anni
ng d
ecis
ions
on
risk
re
duct
ion.
4.
The
ris
k m
anag
emen
t pla
nnin
g pr
oces
s is
und
erta
ken
with
the
dire
ct in
volv
emen
t of s
take
hold
ers
and
the
affe
cted
com
mun
ity.
Pla
nnin
g co
vers
all
key
sect
ors:
so
cial
, eco
nom
ic, p
hysi
cal a
nd
envi
ronm
ent.
Soc
ial P
lann
ing
will
oft
en in
clud
e co
mm
unity
lead
ers
in t
he f
ull
plan
ning
pro
cess
. For
exa
mpl
e, t
he
lead
ers
of b
usin
ess
and
lead
ers
of
loca
l com
mun
ity o
rgan
izat
ions
suc
h as
sch
ool
s, h
ealth
cen
ters
, sp
orts
cl
ubs
and
relig
ious
org
aniz
atio
ns.
5.
Usi
ng th
e ris
k as
sess
men
t da
ta c
olle
cted
in P
roce
ss 2
a
‘sys
tem
’ is
esta
blis
hed
to
faci
litat
e pa
rtic
ipat
ory
disa
ster
ris
k m
anag
emen
t pla
nnin
g. T
his
defin
es r
oles
for
the
requ
ired
step
s
A c
ompr
ehen
sive
com
mun
ity
disa
ster
pla
n ex
ists
6.
The
se d
etai
led
plan
s fo
r ris
k re
duct
ion
are
crea
ted
in
part
icip
atio
n w
ith th
e af
fect
ed
com
mun
ities
(se
e cr
oss-
cutti
ng
issu
e in
the
Gui
danc
e N
otes
co
lum
n)
Thi
s co
mm
unity
Dis
aste
r E
vacu
atio
n P
lan
is te
ste
d ev
ery
six
mon
ths
in
a co
mm
unity
dri
ll ex
erci
se (
and
this
w
ill o
ccur
bef
ore
a flo
od
or c
yclo
ne
seas
on)
The
exi
sten
ce o
f fir
m p
lans
for
risk
re
duct
ion
insp
ires
loca
l bus
ines
s co
nfid
ence
to o
pera
te in
the
are
a.
The
fir
st s
tage
indi
cato
rs o
f the
pl
anni
ng p
roce
ss a
re t
he d
etai
led
plan
s of
bot
h st
ruct
ural
and
non
-st
ruct
ural
ris
k re
duct
ion.
The
sec
ond
stag
e in
dica
tors
of t
he
plan
ning
pro
cess
are
the
act
ual
mea
sure
s, a
nd t
heir
effe
ctiv
enes
s
7.
Com
mun
ity b
ased
trai
ning
is
prov
ided
in P
artic
ipat
ory
Dis
aste
r R
isk
Man
agem
ent P
lann
ing
Trai
ning
tak
es p
lace
, (nu
mbe
r of
co
urse
s, n
umbe
r of
pe
ople
who
at
tend
ed,
impa
ct o
f tra
inin
g on
de
velo
pmen
t of a
ttitu
dina
l and
be
havi
oral
cha
nge
eval
uate
d)
8.
All
part
ies
prop
ose
risk
redu
ctio
n m
easu
res
base
d on
the
follo
win
g:•
thei
r vi
sion
of a
pre
pare
d an
d re
silie
nt c
omm
unity
;•
thei
r ag
reem
ent t
o a
leve
l of
acce
ptab
le r
isk
(for
exa
mpl
e,
wha
t lev
el o
f flo
od p
rote
ctio
n,
from
a s
even
ty, o
ne h
undr
ed
of fi
ve h
undr
ed r
etur
n flo
od?)
• th
eir
deci
sion
con
cern
ing
the
risks
they
face
. Can
th
ey b
e pr
even
ted,
red
uced
, tr
ansf
erre
d or
live
d w
ith?
The
com
mun
ity h
as a
ccep
ted
CB
DR
M a
nd it
s im
plic
atio
ns.
Evi
denc
e of
the
ir in
volv
emen
t, co
mm
itmen
t and
gen
eral
sup
por
t ca
n be
foun
d qu
alita
tivel
y in
the
le
vel o
f com
mun
ity ‘s
piri
t’ an
d ‘o
wne
rshi
p’ o
f the
pro
ject
and
in
quan
titat
ivel
y in
suc
h fa
cts
as
• ho
w m
any
proj
ects
are
in
prog
ress
in w
hat l
ocat
ions
?•
prot
ectio
n of
spe
cific
num
bers
of
peop
le•
a sp
ecifi
c re
cord
of p
rote
cted
pr
oper
ty.
2. guidelines for good practice in community-based disaster risk management
39
PR
OC
ES
S 4
Ste
ps
in t
his
Pro
ce
ss
Key
Ou
tco
me
Ind
icat
ors
(me
asu
rin
g ch
an
ge
in in
divi
du
als
an
d co
mm
unity
life
)
Gu
idan
ce
No
tes
to I
mp
lem
ent
CB
DR
M(c
ert
ain
not
es
have
be
en
de
sig
nat
ed
as
‘cro
ss-c
utt
ing’
, with
a
pp
licat
ion
to a
ll p
roce
sse
s. T
he
se n
ote
s a
re s
et in
bo
ld t
ype)
PA
RT
ICIP
AT
OR
Y D
ISA
ST
ER
R
ISK
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
P
LA
NN
ING
• T
he a
im o
f the
four
th
proc
ess
is to
pla
n a
risk
man
agem
ent s
trat
egy
and
tact
ics
thro
ugh
cons
truc
tive
dial
ogue
with
th
e se
lect
ed c
omm
unity
.
1.
The
com
mitm
ent o
f loc
al
gove
rnm
ent t
o C
BD
RM
is
assu
red,
with
ade
quat
e bu
dget
su
ppor
t in
plac
e as
req
uire
d in
di
sast
er le
gisl
atio
n.
Agr
eem
ent w
ith lo
cal g
over
nmen
t an
d F
undi
ng a
lloca
ted
CR
OS
S-C
UT
TIN
G I
SS
UE
SS
har
ed V
alu
esIt
is
imp
ort
an
t to
re
co
gn
ize
tha
t th
e p
lan
nin
g
pro
ce
ss
is n
ot
just
a m
ec
ha
nic
al s
et o
f a
cti
on
s.
It i
s b
as
ed
on
a s
ha
red
set
of
valu
es
an
d
co
nv
icti
on
s o
f th
e c
om
mu
nit
y th
at
are
a c
om
mo
n
req
uir
em
en
t a
cro
ss
all
the
pro
ce
ss
es
.
Th
us
, if
the
re a
re t
en
sio
ns
wit
hin
th
e c
om
mu
nit
y th
es
e w
ill i
nh
ibit
th
e p
lan
nin
g p
roc
es
s, o
r m
ay
eve
n p
reve
nt
pla
ns
be
ing
re
ali
zed
. Th
is s
ho
ws
the
imp
ort
an
ce
of
co
nfl
ict
reso
luti
on
init
iati
ves
an
d in
spir
ed
le
ad
ers
hip
. It
als
o e
mp
ha
size
s th
e im
po
rta
nc
e o
f tr
ain
ing
to
str
en
gth
en
att
itu
de
s a
nd
pro
mo
te b
eh
avio
r th
at
wil
l se
rve
the
en
tire
c
om
mu
nit
y, n
ot
for
the
pu
re s
elf
-in
tere
st o
f in
div
idu
al s
take
ho
lde
rs.
2.
One
per
son
is a
ppoi
nted
to
man
age
Pro
cess
4. T
his
pers
on is
in
cha
rge
of th
e P
lann
ing
Sys
tem
as
des
crib
ed b
elow
.
Man
ager
app
oint
ed
3.
A ‘s
yste
m’ i
s es
tabl
ishe
d to
un
dert
ake
the
disa
ster
ris
k m
anag
emen
t pla
nnin
g pr
oces
s.
Thi
s is
bas
ed in
loca
l gov
ernm
ent
and
is li
nked
into
a n
atio
nal
asse
ssm
ent s
yste
m. T
he p
lann
ing
syst
em is
bas
ed o
n th
e ac
tive
part
icip
atio
n of
an
inte
grat
ed s
et
of a
ctor
s dr
awn
from
loca
l NG
O’s
, ac
adem
ics
in a
reas
whe
re th
ere
are
univ
ersi
ties,
loca
l gov
ernm
ent
offic
ials
and
com
mun
ity le
ader
s.
The
invo
lvem
ent o
f the
com
mun
ity
in t
he p
lann
ing
proc
ess
is in
dica
ted
in t
he p
rese
nce
of c
omm
unity
re
pres
enta
tives
in a
ll th
e gr
oups
m
akin
g pl
anni
ng d
ecis
ions
on
risk
re
duct
ion.
4.
The
ris
k m
anag
emen
t pla
nnin
g pr
oces
s is
und
erta
ken
with
the
dire
ct in
volv
emen
t of s
take
hold
ers
and
the
affe
cted
com
mun
ity.
Pla
nnin
g co
vers
all
key
sect
ors:
so
cial
, eco
nom
ic, p
hysi
cal a
nd
envi
ronm
ent.
Soc
ial P
lann
ing
will
oft
en in
clud
e co
mm
unity
lead
ers
in t
he f
ull
plan
ning
pro
cess
. For
exa
mpl
e, t
he
lead
ers
of b
usin
ess
and
lead
ers
of
loca
l com
mun
ity o
rgan
izat
ions
suc
h as
sch
ool
s, h
ealth
cen
ters
, sp
orts
cl
ubs
and
relig
ious
org
aniz
atio
ns.
5.
Usi
ng th
e ris
k as
sess
men
t da
ta c
olle
cted
in P
roce
ss 2
a
‘sys
tem
’ is
esta
blis
hed
to
faci
litat
e pa
rtic
ipat
ory
disa
ster
ris
k m
anag
emen
t pla
nnin
g. T
his
defin
es r
oles
for
the
requ
ired
step
s
A c
ompr
ehen
sive
com
mun
ity
disa
ster
pla
n ex
ists
6.
The
se d
etai
led
plan
s fo
r ris
k re
duct
ion
are
crea
ted
in
part
icip
atio
n w
ith th
e af
fect
ed
com
mun
ities
(se
e cr
oss-
cutti
ng
issu
e in
the
Gui
danc
e N
otes
co
lum
n)
Thi
s co
mm
unity
Dis
aste
r E
vacu
atio
n P
lan
is te
ste
d ev
ery
six
mon
ths
in
a co
mm
unity
dri
ll ex
erci
se (
and
this
w
ill o
ccur
bef
ore
a flo
od
or c
yclo
ne
seas
on)
The
exi
sten
ce o
f fir
m p
lans
for
risk
re
duct
ion
insp
ires
loca
l bus
ines
s co
nfid
ence
to o
pera
te in
the
are
a.
The
fir
st s
tage
indi
cato
rs o
f the
pl
anni
ng p
roce
ss a
re t
he d
etai
led
plan
s of
bot
h st
ruct
ural
and
non
-st
ruct
ural
ris
k re
duct
ion.
The
sec
ond
stag
e in
dica
tors
of t
he
plan
ning
pro
cess
are
the
act
ual
mea
sure
s, a
nd t
heir
effe
ctiv
enes
s
7.
Com
mun
ity b
ased
trai
ning
is
prov
ided
in P
artic
ipat
ory
Dis
aste
r R
isk
Man
agem
ent P
lann
ing
Trai
ning
tak
es p
lace
, (nu
mbe
r of
co
urse
s, n
umbe
r of
pe
ople
who
at
tend
ed,
impa
ct o
f tra
inin
g on
de
velo
pmen
t of a
ttitu
dina
l and
be
havi
oral
cha
nge
eval
uate
d)
8.
All
part
ies
prop
ose
risk
redu
ctio
n m
easu
res
base
d on
the
follo
win
g:•
thei
r vi
sion
of a
pre
pare
d an
d re
silie
nt c
omm
unity
;•
thei
r ag
reem
ent t
o a
leve
l of
acce
ptab
le r
isk
(for
exa
mpl
e,
wha
t lev
el o
f flo
od p
rote
ctio
n,
from
a s
even
ty, o
ne h
undr
ed
of fi
ve h
undr
ed r
etur
n flo
od?)
• th
eir
deci
sion
con
cern
ing
the
risks
they
face
. Can
th
ey b
e pr
even
ted,
red
uced
, tr
ansf
erre
d or
live
d w
ith?
The
com
mun
ity h
as a
ccep
ted
CB
DR
M a
nd it
s im
plic
atio
ns.
Evi
denc
e of
the
ir in
volv
emen
t, co
mm
itmen
t and
gen
eral
sup
por
t ca
n be
foun
d qu
alita
tivel
y in
the
le
vel o
f com
mun
ity ‘s
piri
t’ an
d ‘o
wne
rshi
p’ o
f the
pro
ject
and
in
quan
titat
ivel
y in
suc
h fa
cts
as
• ho
w m
any
proj
ects
are
in
prog
ress
in w
hat l
ocat
ions
?•
prot
ectio
n of
spe
cific
num
bers
of
peop
le•
a sp
ecifi
c re
cord
of p
rote
cted
pr
oper
ty.
40CRITICAL GUIDELINES OF CBDRM
PR
OC
ES
S 4
cont
inua
tion
• th
eir
own
capa
citie
s, a
s w
ell
as r
esou
rces
that
they
can
se
cure
from
out
side
thei
r co
mm
unity
•
evid
ence
is c
olle
cted
co
ncer
ning
the
exis
tenc
e an
d ef
fect
iven
ess
of p
artic
ipat
ory
disa
ster
ris
k m
anag
emen
t pl
anni
ng.
PR
OC
ES
S 5
Ste
ps
in t
his
Pro
ce
ss
Key
Ou
tco
me
Ind
icat
ors
(me
asu
rin
g ch
an
ge
in in
divi
du
als
an
d co
mm
unity
life
)
Gu
idan
ce
No
tes
to I
mp
lem
ent
CB
DR
M(c
ert
ain
not
es
have
be
en
de
sig
nat
ed
as
‘cro
ss-c
utt
ing’
, with
a
pp
licat
ion
to a
ll p
roce
sse
s. T
he
se n
ote
s a
re s
et in
bo
ld t
ype)
CO
MM
UN
ITY
- M
AN
AG
ED
IM
PLE
ME
NTA
TIO
N O
F R
ISK
R
ED
UC
TIO
N M
EA
SU
RE
S.
• T
he a
im o
f the
fifth
pr
oces
s is
to e
ffect
ivel
y im
plem
ent a
pro
gram
of
CB
DR
M w
ithin
a
sele
cted
com
mun
ity (
or
com
mun
ities
)
1.
Fun
ding
is c
omm
itted
to e
nabl
e P
roce
ss 5
. to
take
pla
ceF
undi
ng a
lloca
ted
Re
ali
stic
In
ten
tio
ns
It is
imp
orta
nt to
set
rea
listic
tar
gets
tha
t sta
nd a
re
ason
able
cha
nce
of b
eing
ach
ieve
d. T
here
fore
so
me
of t
he p
erfo
rman
ce in
dica
tors
in t
his
sect
ion
are
prop
osin
g th
at 7
5% o
f var
ious
ele
men
ts a
re
prot
ecte
d ov
er a
fiv
e ye
ar p
erio
d of
impl
emen
tatio
n,
rath
er t
han
100
%. H
owev
er, t
he m
onito
ring
of
perf
orm
ance
aft
er s
ay t
wo
year
s w
ill in
dica
te t
he
stat
e of
pro
gres
s an
d ta
rget
s m
ay t
hen
be e
xpan
ded
or c
ontr
acte
d.
CR
OS
S-C
UT
TIN
G I
SS
UE
SA
sses
smen
t B
ias
Th
ere
is
a b
ias
in t
he
us
e o
f p
erf
orm
an
ce
ind
ica
tors
th
at
co
nc
ern
s th
e e
as
e o
f m
ea
suri
ng
so
me
asp
ec
ts o
f ri
sk r
ed
uc
tio
n, (
suc
h a
s th
e c
on
stru
cti
on
of
safe
dw
ell
ing
s) in
co
ntr
ast
to
th
e d
iffi
cu
lty
in m
ea
suri
ng
le
ss
tan
gib
le m
ea
sure
s,
(su
ch
as
en
ha
nc
ed
pe
rce
pti
on
of
risk
wit
hin
a
co
mm
un
ity)
2.
One
per
son
is a
ppoi
nted
to
man
age
Pro
cess
5. T
his
pers
on
is in
cha
rge
of th
e Im
plem
enta
tion
Pro
cess
as
desc
ribed
in th
is
sect
ion.
Man
ager
app
oint
ed
3.
Com
mun
ity-b
ased
trai
ning
is
prov
ided
in C
omm
unity
Man
aged
Im
plem
enta
tion
Trai
ning
tak
es p
lace
, (nu
mbe
r of
co
urse
s, n
umbe
r of
pe
ople
who
at
tend
ed,
impa
ct o
f tra
inin
g on
de
velo
pmen
t of a
ttitu
dina
l and
be
havi
oral
cha
nge
eval
uate
d)
4.
A b
asel
ine
is d
eter
min
ed in
eac
h lo
catio
n. T
his
will
be
obta
ined
fr
om th
e ris
k as
sess
men
t ex
erci
se o
utlin
ed in
Pro
cess
2.
Bas
elin
es w
ill b
e a
qual
itativ
e an
d qu
antit
ativ
e re
cord
of t
he
stat
us o
f the
com
mun
ity a
nd it
s lo
catio
n pr
ior
to C
BD
RM
taki
ng
plac
e. T
his
is e
ssen
tial i
n or
der
to
mea
sure
pro
gres
s. (
see
the
list o
f in
form
atio
n ne
eded
in a
bas
elin
e in
Pro
cess
2 C
olum
n 2)
The
Bas
elin
e R
epor
t doc
umen
ts t
he
stat
us o
f the
com
mun
ity.
2. guidelines for good practice in community-based disaster risk management
41
PR
OC
ES
S 4
cont
inua
tion
• th
eir
own
capa
citie
s, a
s w
ell
as r
esou
rces
that
they
can
se
cure
from
out
side
thei
r co
mm
unity
•
evid
ence
is c
olle
cted
co
ncer
ning
the
exis
tenc
e an
d ef
fect
iven
ess
of p
artic
ipat
ory
disa
ster
ris
k m
anag
emen
t pl
anni
ng.
PR
OC
ES
S 5
Ste
ps
in t
his
Pro
ce
ss
Key
Ou
tco
me
Ind
icat
ors
(me
asu
rin
g ch
an
ge
in in
divi
du
als
an
d co
mm
unity
life
)
Gu
idan
ce
No
tes
to I
mp
lem
ent
CB
DR
M(c
ert
ain
not
es
have
be
en
de
sig
nat
ed
as
‘cro
ss-c
utt
ing’
, with
a
pp
licat
ion
to a
ll p
roce
sse
s. T
he
se n
ote
s a
re s
et in
bo
ld t
ype)
CO
MM
UN
ITY
- M
AN
AG
ED
IM
PLE
ME
NTA
TIO
N O
F R
ISK
R
ED
UC
TIO
N M
EA
SU
RE
S.
• T
he a
im o
f the
fifth
pr
oces
s is
to e
ffect
ivel
y im
plem
ent a
pro
gram
of
CB
DR
M w
ithin
a
sele
cted
com
mun
ity (
or
com
mun
ities
)
1.
Fun
ding
is c
omm
itted
to e
nabl
e P
roce
ss 5
. to
take
pla
ceF
undi
ng a
lloca
ted
Re
ali
stic
In
ten
tio
ns
It is
imp
orta
nt to
set
rea
listic
tar
gets
tha
t sta
nd a
re
ason
able
cha
nce
of b
eing
ach
ieve
d. T
here
fore
so
me
of t
he p
erfo
rman
ce in
dica
tors
in t
his
sect
ion
are
prop
osin
g th
at 7
5% o
f var
ious
ele
men
ts a
re
prot
ecte
d ov
er a
fiv
e ye
ar p
erio
d of
impl
emen
tatio
n,
rath
er t
han
100
%. H
owev
er, t
he m
onito
ring
of
perf
orm
ance
aft
er s
ay t
wo
year
s w
ill in
dica
te t
he
stat
e of
pro
gres
s an
d ta
rget
s m
ay t
hen
be e
xpan
ded
or c
ontr
acte
d.
CR
OS
S-C
UT
TIN
G I
SS
UE
SA
sses
smen
t B
ias
Th
ere
is
a b
ias
in t
he
us
e o
f p
erf
orm
an
ce
ind
ica
tors
th
at
co
nc
ern
s th
e e
as
e o
f m
ea
suri
ng
so
me
asp
ec
ts o
f ri
sk r
ed
uc
tio
n, (
suc
h a
s th
e c
on
stru
cti
on
of
safe
dw
ell
ing
s) in
co
ntr
ast
to
th
e d
iffi
cu
lty
in m
ea
suri
ng
le
ss
tan
gib
le m
ea
sure
s,
(su
ch
as
en
ha
nc
ed
pe
rce
pti
on
of
risk
wit
hin
a
co
mm
un
ity)
2.
One
per
son
is a
ppoi
nted
to
man
age
Pro
cess
5. T
his
pers
on
is in
cha
rge
of th
e Im
plem
enta
tion
Pro
cess
as
desc
ribed
in th
is
sect
ion.
Man
ager
app
oint
ed
3.
Com
mun
ity-b
ased
trai
ning
is
prov
ided
in C
omm
unity
Man
aged
Im
plem
enta
tion
Trai
ning
tak
es p
lace
, (nu
mbe
r of
co
urse
s, n
umbe
r of
pe
ople
who
at
tend
ed,
impa
ct o
f tra
inin
g on
de
velo
pmen
t of a
ttitu
dina
l and
be
havi
oral
cha
nge
eval
uate
d)
4.
A b
asel
ine
is d
eter
min
ed in
eac
h lo
catio
n. T
his
will
be
obta
ined
fr
om th
e ris
k as
sess
men
t ex
erci
se o
utlin
ed in
Pro
cess
2.
Bas
elin
es w
ill b
e a
qual
itativ
e an
d qu
antit
ativ
e re
cord
of t
he
stat
us o
f the
com
mun
ity a
nd it
s lo
catio
n pr
ior
to C
BD
RM
taki
ng
plac
e. T
his
is e
ssen
tial i
n or
der
to
mea
sure
pro
gres
s. (
see
the
list o
f in
form
atio
n ne
eded
in a
bas
elin
e in
Pro
cess
2 C
olum
n 2)
The
Bas
elin
e R
epor
t doc
umen
ts t
he
stat
us o
f the
com
mun
ity.
42CRITICAL GUIDELINES OF CBDRM
PR
OC
ES
S 5
cont
inua
tion
5.
Evi
denc
e is
col
lect
ed c
once
rnin
g th
e ex
iste
nce
and
effe
ctiv
enes
s of
CB
DR
M. T
his
incl
udes
the
follo
win
g:•
Mec
hani
sms
are
in p
lace
to
ens
ure
man
agem
ent o
f th
e lo
cal l
evel
ris
k re
duct
ion
mea
sure
s by
the
com
mun
ity.
• A
com
mun
ity b
ased
or
gani
zatio
n (C
BO
) is
es
tabl
ishe
d to
impl
emen
t bot
h st
ruct
ural
and
non
-str
uctu
ral
risk
redu
ctio
n ac
tions
.•
Impl
emen
tatio
n of
haz
ard
miti
gatio
n m
easu
res,
em
bank
men
ts, f
lood
div
ersi
on
chan
nels
, brid
ges,
wat
er
harv
estin
g ta
nks,
etc
.•
Impl
emen
tatio
n of
vu
lner
abili
ty r
educ
tion
mea
sure
s,
• Im
plem
enta
tion
of e
mer
genc
y pr
epar
edne
ss m
easu
res,
dr
ills,
ear
ly w
arni
ng,
evac
uatio
n, fi
rst a
id, s
earc
h an
d re
scue
etc
. •
Impl
emen
tatio
n of
rec
over
y op
erat
ions
. •
Man
agem
ent i
ssue
s in
volv
ed
here
incl
ude
iden
tific
atio
n an
d ar
rang
emen
t of
appr
opria
te in
puts
(ex
pert
s,
equi
pmen
t, in
form
atio
n,
serv
ices
, con
sulta
tions
with
st
akeh
olde
rs, e
tc.)
• Li
nks
are
in p
lace
with
cen
tral
A s
afer
env
ironm
ent i
s av
aila
ble
to
the
targ
et g
roup
s, t
heir
prop
erty
and
liv
elih
oo
ds. T
his
is m
easu
red
in t
he
follo
win
g qu
antit
ativ
e m
anne
r:•
Liv
es P
rote
cted
- A
im fo
r a
20%
red
uctio
n in
de
aths
and
ser
ious
inju
ries
over
a fi
ve y
ear
perio
d as
a
resu
lt of
effe
ctiv
e C
BD
RM
. -
Num
ber
of in
divi
dual
s an
d fa
mili
es li
ving
in a
spe
cific
nu
mbe
r of
sta
ted
loca
tions
w
hose
live
s ar
e pr
otec
ted.
- N
umbe
r of
‘hig
h-ris
k’ g
roup
s w
ho h
ave
secu
red
spec
ial
atte
ntio
n in
CB
DR
M w
ith
spec
ific
mea
sure
s fo
r th
eir
prot
ectio
n-
Str
ess
leve
ls o
f tar
get g
roup
s ar
e re
duce
d du
e to
dec
reas
ed
loss
es fr
om d
isas
ters
. Thi
s w
ill b
e in
dica
ted
in m
ultip
le
aspe
cts
of s
ocia
l life
; e.g
. re
duct
ion
in q
uarr
el, s
hout
ing
at e
ach
othe
r, re
duct
ion
in
stre
ss r
elat
ed d
isea
se e
tc.
• L
ivel
iho
od
s P
rote
cted
- A
im fo
r th
e pr
otec
tion
of 7
5%
of li
velih
oods
as
a re
sult
of
risk
redu
ctio
n m
easu
res
over
a
five
year
per
iod.
- T
he n
umbe
r of
live
lihoo
ds
prot
ecte
d-
Live
lihoo
ds s
ourc
es o
f the
ta
rget
gro
ups
stre
ngth
ened
as
a re
sult
of r
educ
tion
in
go
vern
men
t in
rela
tion
to th
e re
visi
on a
nd e
nfor
cem
ent o
f ne
w b
uild
ing
bye-
law
s an
d la
nd-u
se p
lann
ing
cont
rols
. T
hese
are
nee
ded
to c
over
pu
blic
and
com
mer
cial
bu
ildin
gs a
s w
ell a
s th
e dw
ellin
gs o
f mid
dle-
clas
s ho
me
owne
rs.
• A
sys
tem
is in
pla
ce to
sup
port
lo
w in
com
e fa
mili
es to
impr
ove
the
safe
ty o
f the
ir ho
mes
th
ough
bui
ldin
g ex
tens
ioni
sts
who
offe
r on
the
job
trai
ning
to
loca
l hom
e ow
ners
and
bu
ilder
s in
way
s to
impr
ove
the
safe
ty o
f dw
ellin
gs.
ne
gativ
e im
pact
by
disa
ster
s.-
Indi
cato
rs c
once
rnin
g ho
w th
e lo
cal e
cono
my
is p
rote
cted
, (f
or e
xam
ple-
thro
ugh
econ
omic
div
ersi
ficat
ion)
- In
com
e of
targ
et g
roup
is
incr
ease
d du
e to
avo
idan
ce o
f sh
ocks
cau
sed
by d
isas
ters
.•
Pro
per
ty P
rote
cted
- A
im fo
r a
20%
red
uctio
n of
pr
oper
ty lo
sses
ove
r a
five
year
per
iod
as a
res
ult o
f ef
fect
ive
CB
DR
M.
- A
im fo
r th
e pr
otec
tion
of 7
5%
of a
ll w
orkp
lace
s an
d fa
ctor
ies
(ret
rofit
) ov
er a
five
yea
r pe
riod
(for
exa
mpl
e, b
uild
ing
them
on
safe
land
with
di
sast
er c
ontin
genc
y pl
ans
for
busi
ness
con
tinui
ty)
- A
im fo
r th
e pr
otec
tion
of
exis
ting
dwel
lings
(re
trof
it) a
t th
e ra
te o
f 5%
per
ann
um, o
r 25
% o
ver
a fiv
e ye
ar p
erio
d-
The
num
ber
of b
usin
ess
ente
rpris
es p
rote
cted
.•
Cri
tica
l Fac
iliti
es P
rote
cted
- P
rote
ctio
n of
all
criti
cal
faci
litie
s, s
uch
as s
choo
ls,
heal
th c
ente
rs, p
olic
e st
atio
ns
and
build
ings
of m
ultip
le
asse
mbl
y su
ch a
s m
osqu
es,
chur
ches
, cin
emas
, bas
ic
serv
ices
suc
h as
wat
er,
elec
tric
ity, t
elep
hone
s et
c.
over
a fi
ve y
ear
perio
d.-
Num
ber
of c
ritic
al fa
cilit
ies
prot
ecte
d, (
scho
ols,
pub
lic
build
ings
, wat
er s
uppl
y et
c.)
2. guidelines for good practice in community-based disaster risk management
43
PR
OC
ES
S 5
cont
inua
tion
5.
Evi
denc
e is
col
lect
ed c
once
rnin
g th
e ex
iste
nce
and
effe
ctiv
enes
s of
CB
DR
M. T
his
incl
udes
the
follo
win
g:•
Mec
hani
sms
are
in p
lace
to
ens
ure
man
agem
ent o
f th
e lo
cal l
evel
ris
k re
duct
ion
mea
sure
s by
the
com
mun
ity.
• A
com
mun
ity b
ased
or
gani
zatio
n (C
BO
) is
es
tabl
ishe
d to
impl
emen
t bot
h st
ruct
ural
and
non
-str
uctu
ral
risk
redu
ctio
n ac
tions
.•
Impl
emen
tatio
n of
haz
ard
miti
gatio
n m
easu
res,
em
bank
men
ts, f
lood
div
ersi
on
chan
nels
, brid
ges,
wat
er
harv
estin
g ta
nks,
etc
.•
Impl
emen
tatio
n of
vu
lner
abili
ty r
educ
tion
mea
sure
s,
• Im
plem
enta
tion
of e
mer
genc
y pr
epar
edne
ss m
easu
res,
dr
ills,
ear
ly w
arni
ng,
evac
uatio
n, fi
rst a
id, s
earc
h an
d re
scue
etc
. •
Impl
emen
tatio
n of
rec
over
y op
erat
ions
. •
Man
agem
ent i
ssue
s in
volv
ed
here
incl
ude
iden
tific
atio
n an
d ar
rang
emen
t of
appr
opria
te in
puts
(ex
pert
s,
equi
pmen
t, in
form
atio
n,
serv
ices
, con
sulta
tions
with
st
akeh
olde
rs, e
tc.)
• Li
nks
are
in p
lace
with
cen
tral
A s
afer
env
ironm
ent i
s av
aila
ble
to
the
targ
et g
roup
s, t
heir
prop
erty
and
liv
elih
oo
ds. T
his
is m
easu
red
in t
he
follo
win
g qu
antit
ativ
e m
anne
r:•
Liv
es P
rote
cted
- A
im fo
r a
20%
red
uctio
n in
de
aths
and
ser
ious
inju
ries
over
a fi
ve y
ear
perio
d as
a
resu
lt of
effe
ctiv
e C
BD
RM
. -
Num
ber
of in
divi
dual
s an
d fa
mili
es li
ving
in a
spe
cific
nu
mbe
r of
sta
ted
loca
tions
w
hose
live
s ar
e pr
otec
ted.
- N
umbe
r of
‘hig
h-ris
k’ g
roup
s w
ho h
ave
secu
red
spec
ial
atte
ntio
n in
CB
DR
M w
ith
spec
ific
mea
sure
s fo
r th
eir
prot
ectio
n-
Str
ess
leve
ls o
f tar
get g
roup
s ar
e re
duce
d du
e to
dec
reas
ed
loss
es fr
om d
isas
ters
. Thi
s w
ill b
e in
dica
ted
in m
ultip
le
aspe
cts
of s
ocia
l life
; e.g
. re
duct
ion
in q
uarr
el, s
hout
ing
at e
ach
othe
r, re
duct
ion
in
stre
ss r
elat
ed d
isea
se e
tc.
• L
ivel
iho
od
s P
rote
cted
- A
im fo
r th
e pr
otec
tion
of 7
5%
of li
velih
oods
as
a re
sult
of
risk
redu
ctio
n m
easu
res
over
a
five
year
per
iod.
- T
he n
umbe
r of
live
lihoo
ds
prot
ecte
d-
Live
lihoo
ds s
ourc
es o
f the
ta
rget
gro
ups
stre
ngth
ened
as
a re
sult
of r
educ
tion
in
go
vern
men
t in
rela
tion
to th
e re
visi
on a
nd e
nfor
cem
ent o
f ne
w b
uild
ing
bye-
law
s an
d la
nd-u
se p
lann
ing
cont
rols
. T
hese
are
nee
ded
to c
over
pu
blic
and
com
mer
cial
bu
ildin
gs a
s w
ell a
s th
e dw
ellin
gs o
f mid
dle-
clas
s ho
me
owne
rs.
• A
sys
tem
is in
pla
ce to
sup
port
lo
w in
com
e fa
mili
es to
impr
ove
the
safe
ty o
f the
ir ho
mes
th
ough
bui
ldin
g ex
tens
ioni
sts
who
offe
r on
the
job
trai
ning
to
loca
l hom
e ow
ners
and
bu
ilder
s in
way
s to
impr
ove
the
safe
ty o
f dw
ellin
gs.
ne
gativ
e im
pact
by
disa
ster
s.-
Indi
cato
rs c
once
rnin
g ho
w th
e lo
cal e
cono
my
is p
rote
cted
, (f
or e
xam
ple-
thro
ugh
econ
omic
div
ersi
ficat
ion)
- In
com
e of
targ
et g
roup
is
incr
ease
d du
e to
avo
idan
ce o
f sh
ocks
cau
sed
by d
isas
ters
.•
Pro
per
ty P
rote
cted
- A
im fo
r a
20%
red
uctio
n of
pr
oper
ty lo
sses
ove
r a
five
year
per
iod
as a
res
ult o
f ef
fect
ive
CB
DR
M.
- A
im fo
r th
e pr
otec
tion
of 7
5%
of a
ll w
orkp
lace
s an
d fa
ctor
ies
(ret
rofit
) ov
er a
five
yea
r pe
riod
(for
exa
mpl
e, b
uild
ing
them
on
safe
land
with
di
sast
er c
ontin
genc
y pl
ans
for
busi
ness
con
tinui
ty)
- A
im fo
r th
e pr
otec
tion
of
exis
ting
dwel
lings
(re
trof
it) a
t th
e ra
te o
f 5%
per
ann
um, o
r 25
% o
ver
a fiv
e ye
ar p
erio
d-
The
num
ber
of b
usin
ess
ente
rpris
es p
rote
cted
.•
Cri
tica
l Fac
iliti
es P
rote
cted
- P
rote
ctio
n of
all
criti
cal
faci
litie
s, s
uch
as s
choo
ls,
heal
th c
ente
rs, p
olic
e st
atio
ns
and
build
ings
of m
ultip
le
asse
mbl
y su
ch a
s m
osqu
es,
chur
ches
, cin
emas
, bas
ic
serv
ices
suc
h as
wat
er,
elec
tric
ity, t
elep
hone
s et
c.
over
a fi
ve y
ear
perio
d.-
Num
ber
of c
ritic
al fa
cilit
ies
prot
ecte
d, (
scho
ols,
pub
lic
build
ings
, wat
er s
uppl
y et
c.)
44CRITICAL GUIDELINES OF CBDRM
PR
OC
ES
S 6
Ste
ps
in t
his
Pro
ce
ss
Key
Ou
tco
me
Ind
icat
ors
(me
asu
rin
g ch
an
ge
in in
divi
du
als
an
d co
mm
unity
life
)
Gu
idan
ce
No
tes
to I
mp
lem
ent
CB
DR
M(c
ert
ain
not
es
have
be
en
de
sig
nat
ed
as
‘cro
ss-c
utt
ing’
, with
a
pp
licat
ion
to a
ll p
roce
sse
s. T
he
se n
ote
s a
re s
et in
bo
ld t
ype)
PA
RT
ICIP
AT
OR
Y
MO
NIT
OR
ING
AN
D
EV
AL
UA
TIO
N•
The
aim
of t
he s
ixth
pr
oces
s is
to m
easu
re
prog
ress
with
ris
k re
duct
ion
in o
rder
to ta
ke
actio
ns to
pro
gres
sive
ly
impr
ove
the
proc
ess
• T
he c
omm
unity
and
all
rela
ted
stak
ehol
ders
de
vise
a m
onito
ring
and
eval
uatio
n sy
stem
as
a sh
ared
task
in o
rder
to
mea
sure
pro
gres
s, a
nd
take
app
ropr
iate
act
ions
in
the
light
of e
mer
ging
fin
ding
s.
1.
Fun
ding
is c
omm
itted
to e
nabl
e P
roce
ss 6
. to
take
pla
ceF
undi
ng a
lloca
ted
2.
Mec
hani
sms
are
in p
lace
to
cont
inua
lly m
onito
r ris
ks, n
otin
g ch
angi
ng h
azar
ds, v
ulne
rabi
litie
s an
d ca
paci
ties.
Ris
k A
sses
smen
t dat
a
3.
Mec
hani
sms
are
in p
lace
to
cont
inua
lly m
onito
r th
e pl
anni
ng
proc
ess
in a
dyn
amic
sys
tem
.
Mon
itori
ng a
nd E
valu
atio
n sy
stem
s in
pla
ce
4.
Com
mun
ity b
ased
trai
ning
is
pro
vide
d in
Par
ticip
ator
y M
onito
ring
and
Eva
luat
ion.
Mon
itor
the
perf
orm
ance
of
indi
vidu
als
duri
ng t
heir
trai
ning
.
Mea
sure
enh
ance
d pe
rfor
man
ce
by s
taff
who
hav
e pa
rtic
ipat
ed
in
trai
ning
cou
rses
.
Rev
iew
the
per
form
ance
of t
he
trai
ners
and
the
tra
inin
g pr
ogr
am b
y co
nduc
ting
an in
- ho
use
eval
uatio
ns
of t
he p
erfo
rman
ce o
f sta
ff u
nder
si
mul
atio
n co
nditi
ons.
5.
Evi
denc
e is
col
lect
ed c
once
rnin
g th
e ex
iste
nce
and
effe
ctiv
enes
s of
Par
ticip
ator
y M
onito
ring
and
Eva
luat
ion.
Mea
sure
the
leve
l of e
nhan
ced
awar
enes
s an
d kn
owle
dge
of
haza
rds
and
safe
ty m
easu
res
with
in
the
com
mun
ity.
The
mon
itori
ng a
nd e
valu
atio
n of
ris
k re
duct
ion
mea
sure
s w
ill
stre
ngth
en a
ccou
ntab
ility
and
im
prov
e fu
ture
act
ions
. Thi
s w
ill
enha
nce
conf
iden
ce in
the
bus
ines
s co
mm
unity
and
in in
vest
ors
in t
he
com
mun
ity.
All
risk
re
duct
ion
proj
ects
are
de
sign
ed
with
bui
lt in
mon
itori
ng a
nd
eval
uatio
n pr
oce
dure
s
Pro
ject
eva
luat
ion
usin
g in
tern
al a
nd
exte
rnal
eva
luat
ors.
2. guidelines for good practice in community-based disaster risk management
45
PR
OC
ES
S 6
Ste
ps
in t
his
Pro
ce
ss
Key
Ou
tco
me
Ind
icat
ors
(me
asu
rin
g ch
an
ge
in in
divi
du
als
an
d co
mm
unity
life
)
Gu
idan
ce
No
tes
to I
mp
lem
ent
CB
DR
M(c
ert
ain
not
es
have
be
en
de
sig
nat
ed
as
‘cro
ss-c
utt
ing’
, with
a
pp
licat
ion
to a
ll p
roce
sse
s. T
he
se n
ote
s a
re s
et in
bo
ld t
ype)
PA
RT
ICIP
AT
OR
Y
MO
NIT
OR
ING
AN
D
EV
AL
UA
TIO
N•
The
aim
of t
he s
ixth
pr
oces
s is
to m
easu
re
prog
ress
with
ris
k re
duct
ion
in o
rder
to ta
ke
actio
ns to
pro
gres
sive
ly
impr
ove
the
proc
ess
• T
he c
omm
unity
and
all
rela
ted
stak
ehol
ders
de
vise
a m
onito
ring
and
eval
uatio
n sy
stem
as
a sh
ared
task
in o
rder
to
mea
sure
pro
gres
s, a
nd
take
app
ropr
iate
act
ions
in
the
light
of e
mer
ging
fin
ding
s.
1.
Fun
ding
is c
omm
itted
to e
nabl
e P
roce
ss 6
. to
take
pla
ceF
undi
ng a
lloca
ted
2.
Mec
hani
sms
are
in p
lace
to
cont
inua
lly m
onito
r ris
ks, n
otin
g ch
angi
ng h
azar
ds, v
ulne
rabi
litie
s an
d ca
paci
ties.
Ris
k A
sses
smen
t dat
a
3.
Mec
hani
sms
are
in p
lace
to
cont
inua
lly m
onito
r th
e pl
anni
ng
proc
ess
in a
dyn
amic
sys
tem
.
Mon
itori
ng a
nd E
valu
atio
n sy
stem
s in
pla
ce
4.
Com
mun
ity b
ased
trai
ning
is
pro
vide
d in
Par
ticip
ator
y M
onito
ring
and
Eva
luat
ion.
Mon
itor
the
perf
orm
ance
of
indi
vidu
als
duri
ng t
heir
trai
ning
.
Mea
sure
enh
ance
d pe
rfor
man
ce
by s
taff
who
hav
e pa
rtic
ipat
ed
in
trai
ning
cou
rses
.
Rev
iew
the
per
form
ance
of t
he
trai
ners
and
the
tra
inin
g pr
ogr
am b
y co
nduc
ting
an in
- ho
use
eval
uatio
ns
of t
he p
erfo
rman
ce o
f sta
ff u
nder
si
mul
atio
n co
nditi
ons.
5.
Evi
denc
e is
col
lect
ed c
once
rnin
g th
e ex
iste
nce
and
effe
ctiv
enes
s of
Par
ticip
ator
y M
onito
ring
and
Eva
luat
ion.
Mea
sure
the
leve
l of e
nhan
ced
awar
enes
s an
d kn
owle
dge
of
haza
rds
and
safe
ty m
easu
res
with
in
the
com
mun
ity.
The
mon
itori
ng a
nd e
valu
atio
n of
ris
k re
duct
ion
mea
sure
s w
ill
stre
ngth
en a
ccou
ntab
ility
and
im
prov
e fu
ture
act
ions
. Thi
s w
ill
enha
nce
conf
iden
ce in
the
bus
ines
s co
mm
unity
and
in in
vest
ors
in t
he
com
mun
ity.
All
risk
re
duct
ion
proj
ects
are
de
sign
ed
with
bui
lt in
mon
itori
ng a
nd
eval
uatio
n pr
oce
dure
s
Pro
ject
eva
luat
ion
usin
g in
tern
al a
nd
exte
rnal
eva
luat
ors.
46CRITICAL GUIDELINES OF CBDRM
ou
tcom
e ind
icato
rs
OU
TC
OM
E 1
Ste
ps
tow
ard
s th
is O
utc
om
eK
ey O
utc
om
e In
dic
ato
rs(m
ea
suri
ng
cha
ng
e in
indi
vid
ua
ls a
nd
com
mun
ity li
fe)
Gu
idan
ce
No
tes
to I
mp
lem
ent
CB
DR
M
CO
MM
UN
ITY
-BA
SE
D
OR
GA
NIZ
AT
ION
(C
BO
)•
The
aim
of t
he fi
rst
outc
ome
is to
est
ablis
h,
stre
ngth
en a
nd s
usta
in a
n or
gani
zatio
nal m
echa
nism
at
com
mun
ity le
vel t
o im
plem
ent C
BD
RM
ac
tiviti
es. T
his
CB
O
will
be
com
pris
ed u
pon
loca
l res
iden
ts in
the
com
mun
ity.
A c
omm
unity
bas
ed
orga
niza
tion
exis
ts to
pro
mot
e C
BD
RM
. The
evo
lutio
n of
thi
s or
gani
zati o
n re
quire
s th
e fo
llow
ing
actio
ns a
nd p
roce
sses
:E
xis
tin
g g
rou
ps
or
New
Gro
up
s?
Car
e sh
ould
be
take
n in
ord
er to
avo
id c
reat
ing
new
gro
ups,
unn
eces
sari
ly. F
irst
pri
ority
sho
uld
be to
str
engt
hen
the
capa
city
of e
xist
ing
grou
ps o
r or
gani
zatio
ns o
n C
BD
RM
.
For
exa
mpl
e in
the
case
of C
ambo
dia,
Lao
and
V
ietn
am m
ass
orga
niza
tions
are
pot
entia
l gro
ups;
e.g
. th
e w
omen
uni
on, y
outh
uni
on, f
arm
ers
unio
n, e
lder
ly
unio
n et
c. In
oth
er c
omm
uniti
es e
lect
ed c
omm
unity
le
ader
ship
may
exi
st. E
ffor
ts s
houl
d be
mad
e to
st
reng
then
thei
r ca
paci
ty o
n di
sast
er r
isk
redu
ctio
n.
How
ever
, exi
stin
g gr
oups
mig
ht h
ave
nar r
ow fo
cus
in-
term
s of
mem
bers
hip
or p
rogr
amm
ing
or m
ay n
ot
repr
esen
t the
mos
t vul
nera
ble
grou
ps. E
ffor
ts s
houl
d be
mad
e to
exp
and
or e
nlar
ge t
he e
xist
ing
grou
ps
in o
rder
to in
clud
e th
e m
ost v
ulne
rabl
e gr
oups
(e.
g.
elde
rly,
chi
ldre
n, p
oor
est o
f the
po
or)
and
ensu
re
gend
er r
epre
sent
atio
n.
It w
ill b
e us
eful
to d
evel
op s
ub-g
roup
s of
the
co
mm
unity
bas
ed
orga
niza
tion
for
spec
if ic
task
s;
e.g.
sea
rch
and
resc
ue, e
vacu
atio
n ,f
irst
aid
, co
mm
unic
atio
ns, e
arly
war
ning
, pub
lic a
war
enes
s,
miti
gatio
n, e
tc. I
n th
is w
ay s
kills
of d
iffer
ent s
ub-
grou
ps c
an b
e de
velo
ped
on s
peci
fic a
spec
ts.
• Id
entif
y so
cial
, rel
igio
us a
nd
othe
r na
tura
l lea
ders
in th
e co
mm
unity
. Inv
olve
them
in th
e ris
k as
sess
men
t, ac
tion
plan
ning
an
d tr
aini
ng p
roce
ss.
I ndi
cato
rs o
f eff
ect iv
enes
s ar
e as
f o
llow
s:Le
ader
s re
cogn
ize
d
• Id
entif
y an
y ex
istin
g so
cial
, ec
onom
ic, r
elig
ious
or
othe
r gr
oups
dur
ing
the
rapp
ort
build
ing
and
com
mun
ity r
isk
asse
ssm
ent s
tage
s
Gro
ups
iden
t ifie
d
• If
a gr
oup
exis
ts th
at c
an a
ssum
e C
BO
task
s th
en e
xpan
d th
e gr
oup
to e
nsur
e re
pres
enta
tion
of
vario
us v
ulne
rabl
e so
cial
gro
ups
and
enco
urag
e th
em to
form
a
smal
l sub
-gro
up to
pro
mot
e C
BD
RM
. (se
e G
uida
nce
Not
e in
C
olum
n 5)
Gro
up id
entif
ied
and
role
exp
ande
d
• In
the
abse
nce
of a
n ex
istin
g gr
oup
that
can
be
expa
nded
, fo
rm a
CB
O th
roug
h co
nsul
tatio
ns w
ith c
omm
unity
m
embe
rs. T
his
can
be d
one
durin
g th
e ris
k as
sess
men
t, ac
tion
plan
ning
or
trai
ning
ac
tiviti
es. I
t will
be
impo
rtan
t to
ensu
re th
e re
pres
enta
tion
of a
ll vu
lner
able
gro
ups
in th
e C
BO
.
New
CB
O fo
rme
d. T
he in
dica
tors
of
its e
ffec
tive
func
tioni
ng a
re:
• C
o-op
erat
ion
amon
gst t
arge
t gr
oups
is e
nhan
ced
for
colle
ctiv
e ac
tion
on d
isas
ter
risk
redu
ctio
n th
roug
h or
gani
zed
mec
hani
sms.
•
Dec
isio
ns o
n di
sast
er r
isk
redu
ctio
n ac
tiviti
es a
re m
ade
by c
onse
nsus
by
the
CB
O
mem
bers
.
T
he C
BO
man
agem
ent i
nclu
des
the
follo
win
g:-
Crit
eria
and
pro
cedu
res
for
mem
bers
hip
in th
e C
BO
are
es
tabl
ishe
d.-
Fun
ctio
ns o
f the
CB
O a
re
defin
ed.
- C
BO
is r
egis
tere
d w
ith th
e go
vern
men
t to
beco
me
elig
ible
to r
ecei
ve fu
ndin
g.-
CB
O h
olds
reg
ular
mee
tings
to
dis
cuss
dis
aste
r ris
ks,
vuln
erab
ilitie
s, a
nd id
entif
y ac
tions
for
disa
ster
ris
k m
anag
emen
t-
Tra
inin
g op
port
uniti
es
exis
t for
gro
up m
embe
rs in
va
ried
aspe
cts
of C
BD
RM
or
gani
zatio
n.-
Gen
der
& s
ocia
l rel
atio
ns
amon
gst t
arge
t gro
ups
are
base
d up
on e
qual
ity in
the
CB
O a
nd it
s su
b-co
mm
ittee
s.
- A
ssis
tanc
e re
ques
ts fr
om
targ
et g
roup
s to
the
loca
l au
thor
ities
and
oth
er a
genc
ies
are
incr
ease
d fo
r di
sast
er
prep
ared
ness
and
ris
k re
duct
ion.
2. guidelines for good practice in community-based disaster risk management
47
ou
tcom
e ind
icato
rs
OU
TC
OM
E 1
Ste
ps
tow
ard
s th
is O
ut c
om
eK
ey O
utc
om
e In
dic
ato
rs(m
ea
suri
ng
cha
ng
e in
indi
vid
ua
ls a
nd
com
mun
ity l i
fe)
Gu
idan
ce
No
tes
to I
mp
lem
ent
CB
DR
M
CO
MM
UN
ITY
-BA
SE
D
OR
GA
NIZ
AT
I ON
(C
BO
)•
The
aim
of t
he fi
rst
outc
ome
is to
est
ablis
h,
stre
ngth
en a
nd s
usta
in a
n or
gani
zatio
nal m
echa
nism
at
com
mun
ity le
vel t
o im
plem
ent C
BD
RM
ac
tiviti
es. T
his
CB
O
will
be
com
pris
ed u
pon
loca
l res
iden
ts in
the
com
mun
ity.
A c
omm
unity
bas
ed
orga
niza
tion
exis
ts to
pro
mot
e C
BD
RM
. The
evo
lutio
n of
thi
s or
gani
zatio
n re
quire
s th
e fo
llow
ing
actio
ns a
nd p
roce
sses
:E
xis
tin
g g
rou
ps
or
New
Gro
up
s?
Car
e sh
ould
be
take
n in
ord
er to
avo
id c
reat
ing
new
gro
ups,
unn
eces
sari
ly. F
irst
pr i
ority
sho
uld
be to
str
engt
hen
the
capa
city
of e
xist
ing
grou
ps o
r or
gani
zatio
ns o
n C
BD
RM
.
For
exa
mpl
e in
the
c ase
of C
ambo
dia,
Lao
and
V
ietn
am m
ass
orga
niza
tions
are
pot
entia
l gro
ups;
e.g
. th
e w
omen
uni
on, y
outh
uni
on, f
arm
ers
unio
n, e
lder
ly
unio
n et
c. In
oth
er c
omm
uniti
es e
lect
ed c
omm
unity
le
ader
ship
may
exi
st. E
ffor
ts s
houl
d be
mad
e to
st
reng
then
thei
r ca
paci
ty o
n di
sast
er r
isk
redu
ctio
n.
How
ever
, exi
stin
g gr
oups
mig
ht h
ave
nar r
ow fo
cus
in-
term
s of
mem
bers
hip
or p
rogr
amm
ing
or m
ay n
ot
repr
esen
t the
mos
t vul
nera
ble
grou
ps. E
ffor
ts s
houl
d be
mad
e to
exp
and
or e
nlar
ge t
he e
xist
ing
grou
ps
in o
rder
to in
clud
e th
e m
ost v
ulne
rabl
e gr
oups
(e.
g.
elde
rly,
chi
ldre
n, p
oor
est o
f the
po
or)
and
ensu
re
gend
er r
epre
sent
atio
n.
It w
ill b
e us
eful
to d
evel
op s
ub-g
roup
s of
the
co
mm
unity
bas
ed
orga
niza
tion
for
spec
ific
task
s;
e.g.
sea
rch
and
resc
ue, e
vacu
atio
n ,f
irst
aid
, co
mm
unic
atio
ns, e
arly
war
ning
, pub
lic a
war
enes
s,
miti
gatio
n, e
tc. I
n th
is w
ay s
kills
of d
iffer
ent s
ub-
grou
ps c
an b
e de
velo
ped
on s
peci
fic a
spec
ts.
• Id
entif
y so
cial
, rel
igio
us a
nd
othe
r na
tura
l lea
ders
in th
e co
mm
unity
. Inv
olve
them
in th
e ris
k as
sess
men
t, ac
tion
plan
ning
an
d tr
aini
ng p
roce
ss.
Indi
cato
rs o
f ef f
ectiv
enes
s ar
e as
fo
llow
s:Le
ader
s re
cogn
ize
d
• Id
entif
y an
y ex
istin
g so
cial
, ec
onom
ic, r
elig
ious
or
othe
r gr
oups
dur
ing
the
rapp
ort
build
ing
and
com
mun
ity r
isk
asse
ssm
ent s
tage
s
Gro
ups
iden
tifie
d
• If
a gr
oup
exis
ts th
at c
an a
ssum
e C
BO
task
s th
en e
xpan
d th
e gr
oup
to e
nsur
e re
pres
enta
tion
of
vario
us v
ulne
rabl
e so
cial
gro
ups
and
enco
urag
e th
em to
form
a
smal
l sub
-gro
up to
pro
mot
e C
BD
RM
. (se
e G
uida
nce
Not
e in
C
olum
n 5)
Gro
up id
entif
ied
and
role
exp
ande
d
• In
the
abse
nce
of a
n ex
istin
g gr
oup
that
can
be
expa
nded
, fo
rm a
CB
O th
roug
h co
nsul
tatio
ns w
ith c
omm
unity
m
embe
rs. T
his
can
be d
one
durin
g th
e ris
k as
sess
men
t, ac
tion
plan
ning
or
trai
ning
ac
tiviti
es. I
t will
be
impo
rtan
t to
ensu
re th
e re
pres
enta
tion
of a
ll vu
lner
able
gro
ups
in th
e C
BO
.
New
CB
O fo
rme
d. T
he in
dica
tors
of
its e
ffec
tive
func
tioni
ng a
re:
• C
o-op
erat
ion
amon
gst t
arge
t gr
oups
is e
nhan
ced
for
colle
ctiv
e ac
tion
on d
isas
ter
risk
redu
ctio
n th
roug
h or
gani
zed
mec
hani
sms.
•
Dec
isio
ns o
n di
sast
er r
isk
redu
ctio
n ac
tiviti
es a
re m
ade
by c
onse
nsus
by
the
CB
O
mem
bers
.
T
he C
BO
man
agem
ent i
nclu
des
the
follo
win
g:-
Crit
eria
and
pro
cedu
res
for
mem
bers
hip
in th
e C
BO
are
es
tabl
ishe
d.-
Fun
ctio
ns o
f the
CB
O a
re
defin
ed.
- C
BO
is r
egis
tere
d w
ith th
e go
vern
men
t to
beco
me
elig
ible
to r
ecei
ve fu
ndin
g.-
CB
O h
olds
reg
ular
mee
tings
to
dis
cuss
dis
aste
r ris
ks,
vuln
erab
ilitie
s, a
nd id
entif
y ac
tions
for
disa
ster
ris
k m
anag
emen
t-
Tra
inin
g op
port
uniti
es
exis
t for
gro
up m
embe
rs in
va
ried
aspe
cts
of C
BD
RM
or
gani
zatio
n.-
Gen
der
& s
ocia
l rel
atio
ns
amon
gst t
arge
t gro
ups
are
base
d up
on e
qual
ity in
the
CB
O a
nd it
s su
b-co
mm
ittee
s.
- A
ssis
tanc
e re
ques
ts fr
om
targ
et g
roup
s to
the
loca
l au
thor
ities
and
oth
er a
genc
ies
are
incr
ease
d fo
r di
sast
er
prep
ared
ness
and
ris
k re
duct
ion.
48CRITICAL GUIDELINES OF CBDRM
OU
TC
OM
E 2
Ste
ps
tow
ard
s th
is O
utc
om
eK
ey I
mp
act
Ind
icat
ors
(me
asu
rin
g ch
an
ge
in in
divi
du
als
an
d co
mm
unity
life
)G
uid
anc
e N
ote
s to
Im
ple
men
t C
BD
RM
CO
MM
UN
ITY
DIS
AS
TE
R
RIS
K R
ED
UC
TIO
N F
UN
D
• T
he a
im o
f thi
s se
cond
ou
tcom
e is
to e
nsur
e av
aila
bilit
y of
res
ourc
es
for
the
impl
emen
tatio
n of
com
mun
ity d
isas
ter
risk
redu
ctio
n an
d pr
epar
edne
ss m
easu
res.
Indi
cato
rs o
f eff
ectiv
enes
s ar
e as
fo
llow
s:S
ee
d M
on
eyS
eed
mon
ey w
ill b
e ne
ede
d to
sta
rt t
he f
und.
T
his
can
com
e fr
om a
n N
GO
initi
ativ
e, t
he lo
cal
gove
rnm
ent o
r fr
om p
riva
te s
ecto
r ph
ilant
hrop
y. O
r th
e C
BO
mig
ht s
eek
a lo
an f
rom
a b
ank.
Or
it co
uld
com
e fr
om t
he c
ontr
ibut
ions
.
It is
imp
orta
nt to
con
side
r th
e ca
paci
ty o
f the
co
mm
unity
org
aniz
atio
n to
abs
orb
and
man
age
the
mon
ey. T
here
fore
, pro
vidi
ng la
rge
amou
nts
of m
oney
m
ight
not
be
pro
duct
ive
at t
he s
tart
.
Cri
teri
a fo
r a
llo
ca
tio
n a
nd
dis
bu
rse
me
nt
of
fun
d
The
CB
O w
ill h
ave
to d
evel
op a
cri
teri
a ba
sed
upon
th
e lo
cal c
ondi
tions
, the
nat
ure
of t
he h
aza
rds,
th
e re
quire
men
ts o
f the
com
mun
ity m
embe
rs.
Cri
teri
a sh
ould
be
deve
lope
d th
roug
h co
nsul
tatio
n w
ith v
ulne
rabl
e gr
oups
and
CB
O m
embe
rs. F
ew
cons
ider
atio
ns to
dev
elop
cri
teri
a ar
e as
follo
win
g.
• F
und
will
be
prov
ided
to th
ose
vuln
erab
le g
roup
s w
ho m
ay n
ot b
e ab
le to
acc
ess
fund
ing
othe
rwis
e fr
om e
xist
ing
borr
owin
g m
echa
nism
s.
• F
und
will
be
used
for
haza
rd m
itiga
tion,
vu
lner
abili
ty r
educ
tion
or c
apac
ity b
uild
ing
activ
ities
.•
A r
epay
men
t pla
n w
ill b
e su
bmitt
ed b
y th
e bo
rrow
er.
• T
he lo
cal g
over
nmen
t is
com
mitt
ed to
cre
ate
a fin
anci
al
mec
hani
sm to
str
engt
hen
com
mun
ity b
ased
dis
aste
r ris
k re
duct
ion.
• F
undi
ng m
echa
nism
in p
lace
,
• A
com
mun
ity le
vel f
und
is
esta
blis
hed
to s
uppo
rt d
isas
ter
prep
ared
ness
and
res
pons
e m
easu
res;
(e.
g. p
ublic
aw
aren
ess,
co
mm
unity
ear
ly w
arni
ng s
yste
m,
drill
s an
d st
orag
e of
rel
ief i
tem
s)
Crit
eria
on
the
use
of c
omm
unity
fu
nd e
stab
lishe
d by
the
CB
O w
ith
inpu
ts fr
om th
e vu
lner
able
soc
ial
grou
ps.
• F
undi
ng m
obili
zed
by th
e C
BO
• C
omm
unity
fund
is m
anag
ed
by th
e co
mm
unity
bas
ed
orga
niza
tion.
• C
BO
ope
rate
s th
e ac
coun
t.
• C
BO
sta
ff ar
e tr
aine
d in
fund
m
anag
emen
t, be
fore
the
esta
blis
hmen
t of t
he fu
nd.
• C
riter
ia fo
r al
loca
tion
agre
ed•
Sta
ff tr
aine
d on
fina
ncia
l m
anag
emen
t
• C
omm
unity
fund
is s
uppo
rted
with
co
ntrib
utio
ns fr
om th
e vu
lner
able
an
d le
ss v
ulne
rabl
e so
cial
gro
ups,
an
d fr
om o
ther
sym
path
izer
s an
d st
akeh
olde
rs.
• R
epor
t of t
he c
omm
unity
m
embe
rs c
ontr
ibut
ions
.
• C
BO
cou
ld m
obili
ze fu
nds
on a
pe
riodi
cal b
asis
from
diff
eren
t so
urce
s or
thro
ugh
orga
nizi
ng
loca
l fun
d ra
isin
g ca
mpa
igns
.
• R
epor
ts o
n co
ntrib
utio
ns fr
om
othe
r so
urce
s
• D
ecis
ions
on
the
use
of fu
nd a
re
take
n by
the
CB
O o
n th
e ba
sis
of
a d
efin
ed c
riter
ia a
nd th
roug
h co
nsul
tatio
n w
ith v
ulne
rabl
e gr
oups
.
Cri
teri
a ag
ree
d fo
r di
sbur
sem
ent o
f fu
nds
to v
ulne
rabl
e pe
ople
.
• R
epor
ts o
n th
e fu
nd
man
agem
ent a
nd u
tiliz
atio
n ar
e di
scus
sed
with
com
mun
ity
mem
bers
.
2. guidelines for good practice in community-based disaster risk management
49
OU
TC
OM
E 2
Ste
ps
tow
ard
s th
is O
utc
om
eK
ey I
mp
act
Ind
icat
ors
(me
asu
rin
g ch
an
ge
in in
divi
du
als
an
d co
mm
unity
life
)G
uid
anc
e N
ote
s to
Im
ple
men
t C
BD
RM
CO
MM
UN
ITY
DIS
AS
TE
R
RIS
K R
ED
UC
TIO
N F
UN
D
• T
he a
im o
f thi
s se
cond
ou
tcom
e is
to e
nsur
e av
aila
bilit
y of
res
ourc
es
for
the
impl
emen
tatio
n of
com
mun
ity d
isas
ter
risk
redu
ctio
n an
d pr
epar
edne
ss m
easu
res.
Indi
cato
rs o
f eff
ectiv
enes
s ar
e as
fo
llow
s:S
ee
d M
on
eyS
eed
mon
ey w
ill b
e ne
ede
d to
sta
rt t
he f
und.
T
his
can
com
e fr
om a
n N
GO
initi
ativ
e, t
he lo
cal
gove
rnm
ent o
r fr
om p
riva
te s
ecto
r ph
ilant
hrop
y. O
r th
e C
BO
mig
ht s
eek
a lo
an f
rom
a b
ank.
Or
it co
uld
com
e fr
om t
he c
ontr
ibut
ions
.
It is
imp
orta
nt to
con
side
r th
e ca
paci
ty o
f the
co
mm
unity
org
aniz
atio
n to
abs
orb
and
man
age
the
mon
ey. T
here
fore
, pro
vidi
ng la
rge
amou
nts
of m
oney
m
ight
not
be
pro
duct
ive
at t
he s
tart
.
Cri
teri
a fo
r a
llo
ca
tio
n a
nd
dis
bu
rse
me
nt
of
fun
d
The
CB
O w
ill h
ave
to d
evel
op a
cri
teri
a ba
sed
upon
th
e lo
cal c
ondi
tions
, the
nat
ure
of t
he h
aza
rds,
th
e re
quire
men
ts o
f the
com
mun
ity m
embe
rs.
Cri
teri
a sh
ould
be
deve
lope
d th
roug
h co
nsul
tatio
n w
ith v
ulne
rabl
e gr
oups
and
CB
O m
embe
rs. F
ew
cons
ider
atio
ns to
dev
elop
cri
teri
a ar
e as
follo
win
g.
• F
und
will
be
prov
ided
to th
ose
vuln
erab
le g
roup
s w
ho m
ay n
ot b
e ab
le to
acc
ess
fund
ing
othe
rwis
e fr
om e
xist
ing
borr
owin
g m
echa
nism
s.
• F
und
will
be
used
for
haza
rd m
itiga
tion,
vu
lner
abili
ty r
educ
tion
or c
apac
ity b
uild
ing
activ
ities
.•
A r
epay
men
t pla
n w
ill b
e su
bmitt
ed b
y th
e bo
rrow
er.
• T
he lo
cal g
over
nmen
t is
com
mitt
ed to
cre
ate
a fin
anci
al
mec
hani
sm to
str
engt
hen
com
mun
ity b
ased
dis
aste
r ris
k re
duct
ion.
• F
undi
ng m
echa
nism
in p
lace
,
• A
com
mun
ity le
vel f
und
is
esta
blis
hed
to s
uppo
rt d
isas
ter
prep
ared
ness
and
res
pons
e m
easu
res;
(e.
g. p
ublic
aw
aren
ess,
co
mm
unity
ear
ly w
arni
ng s
yste
m,
drill
s an
d st
orag
e of
rel
ief i
tem
s)
Crit
eria
on
the
use
of c
omm
unity
fu
nd e
stab
lishe
d by
the
CB
O w
ith
inpu
ts fr
om th
e vu
lner
able
soc
ial
grou
ps.
• F
undi
ng m
obili
zed
by th
e C
BO
• C
omm
unity
fund
is m
anag
ed
by th
e co
mm
unity
bas
ed
orga
niza
tion.
• C
BO
ope
rate
s th
e ac
coun
t.
• C
BO
sta
ff ar
e tr
aine
d in
fund
m
anag
emen
t, be
fore
the
esta
blis
hmen
t of t
he fu
nd.
• C
riter
ia fo
r al
loca
tion
agre
ed•
Sta
ff tr
aine
d on
fina
ncia
l m
anag
emen
t
• C
omm
unity
fund
is s
uppo
rted
with
co
ntrib
utio
ns fr
om th
e vu
lner
able
an
d le
ss v
ulne
rabl
e so
cial
gro
ups,
an
d fr
om o
ther
sym
path
izer
s an
d st
akeh
olde
rs.
• R
epor
t of t
he c
omm
unity
m
embe
rs c
ontr
ibut
ions
.
• C
BO
cou
ld m
obili
ze fu
nds
on a
pe
riodi
cal b
asis
from
diff
eren
t so
urce
s or
thro
ugh
orga
nizi
ng
loca
l fun
d ra
isin
g ca
mpa
igns
.
• R
epor
ts o
n co
ntrib
utio
ns fr
om
othe
r so
urce
s
• D
ecis
ions
on
the
use
of fu
nd a
re
take
n by
the
CB
O o
n th
e ba
sis
of
a d
efin
ed c
riter
ia a
nd th
roug
h co
nsul
tatio
n w
ith v
ulne
rabl
e gr
oups
.
Cri
teri
a ag
ree
d fo
r di
sbur
sem
ent o
f fu
nds
to v
ulne
rabl
e pe
ople
.
• R
epor
ts o
n th
e fu
nd
man
agem
ent a
nd u
tiliz
atio
n ar
e di
scus
sed
with
com
mun
ity
mem
bers
.
50CRITICAL GUIDELINES OF CBDRM
OU
TC
OM
E 3
Ste
ps
tow
ard
s th
is O
utc
om
eK
ey I
mp
act
Ind
icat
ors
(me
asu
rin
g ch
an
ge
in in
divi
du
als
an
d co
mm
unity
life
)G
uid
anc
e N
ote
s to
Im
ple
men
t C
BD
RM
CO
MM
UN
ITY
HA
ZA
RD
, V
UL
NE
RA
BIL
ITY
, C
AP
AC
ITY
MA
P (
HV
CM
)•
To fo
rm th
e ba
sis
for
com
mun
ity b
ased
dis
aste
r ris
k re
duct
ion
and
com
mun
ity le
arni
ng.
Indi
cato
rs o
f eff
ectiv
enes
s ar
e as
fo
llow
s:T
he p
urp
ose
of c
omm
unity
bas
ed
map
ping
exe
rcis
e is
:i)
to r
aise
aw
aren
ess
of c
omm
unity
mem
bers
abo
ut
risks
, pre
pare
dnes
s,ii)
to
enc
oura
ge c
omm
unity
leve
l act
ion
plan
ning
, iii
) to
dev
elop
com
mun
ity c
apac
ity fo
r ris
k re
duct
ion.
The
refo
re, t
he p
artic
ipat
ion
of m
ultip
le g
roup
s is
es
sent
ial.
Ass
ista
nce
can
be s
ough
t fro
m te
chni
cal e
xper
ts
eith
er w
ithin
the
com
mun
ity o
r fr
om t
he c
omm
une,
m
unic
ipal
or
dist
rict
leve
ls in
ord
er to
mai
ntai
n te
chni
cal a
ccur
acy
of t
he H
VC
A m
aps.
• T
he g
over
nmen
t and
NG
Os
are
com
mitt
ed to
sup
port
the
prod
uctio
n of
com
mun
ity H
VC
A
map
s pe
riodi
cally
.
• Lo
cal h
azar
d m
aps
com
plet
ed•
Hig
h R
isk
Vul
nera
ble
Gro
ups
iden
tifie
d•
Hig
h po
vert
y le
vels
iden
tifie
d an
d m
appe
d. L
inks
bet
wee
n vu
lner
abili
ty a
nd p
over
ty
corr
elat
ed
• M
ore
Indi
vidu
als
and
fam
ilies
ac
tivel
y se
ek in
form
atio
n on
ha
zard
s, v
ulne
rabi
litie
s an
d di
sast
er p
repa
redn
ess
and
risk
redu
ctio
n fr
om C
BO
and
loca
l au
thor
ities
/ NG
Os.
• R
isk
Ass
essm
ent d
ata
on p
ublic
di
spla
y
• C
omm
unity
map
s, in
dica
ting
the
haza
rds,
vul
nera
bilit
ies
and
capa
citie
s to
red
uce
disa
ster
ris
ks a
nd r
espo
nd to
dis
aste
rs is
av
aila
ble.
• C
omm
unity
HV
CA
map
is
prep
ared
by
the
com
mun
ity
base
d or
gani
zatio
n w
ith th
e ac
tive
part
icip
atio
n of
diff
eren
t vul
nera
ble
grou
ps.
• H
VC
A m
ap is
pla
ced
at p
ublic
pl
aces
for
the
info
rmat
ion
of
com
mun
ity m
embe
rs; e
.g.
tem
ples
, mos
ques
, chu
rche
s,
scho
ols
etc.
• H
VC
A e
xerc
ise
is d
one
on a
pe
riodi
cal b
asis
, pre
fera
bly
befo
re
the
star
t of h
azar
d se
ason
; e.g
. m
onso
on, r
ainy
-sea
son,
El-N
iño,
dr
ough
t per
iods
etc
.
OU
TC
OM
E 4
Ste
ps
tow
ard
s th
is O
utc
om
eK
ey I
mp
act
Ind
icat
ors
(me
asu
rin
g ch
an
ge
in in
divi
du
als
an
d co
mm
unity
life
)G
uid
anc
e N
ote
s to
Im
ple
men
t C
BD
RM
CO
MM
UN
ITY
DIS
AS
TE
R
RIS
K M
AN
AG
EM
EN
T P
LA
N•
To e
nsur
e co
llect
ive
actio
n by
com
mun
ity fo
r di
sast
er
risk
redu
ctio
n th
roug
h m
obili
zatio
n of
loca
l re
sour
ces.
Indi
cato
rs o
f eff
ectiv
enes
s ar
e as
fo
llow
s:P
lan
nin
g a
s a
too
lF
ocus
of t
he e
xerc
ise
shou
ld b
e on
pla
nnin
g as
a to
ol
for
risk
re
duct
ion,
pre
pare
dnes
s an
d re
spon
se, r
athe
r th
en o
n th
e pr
odu
ctio
n of
a d
ocum
ent a
s th
e ou
tput
.
Exe
rcis
e sh
ould
pro
vide
opp
ortu
nity
to e
very
bo
dy in
th
e co
mm
unity
to s
hare
the
ir pe
rcep
tions
, con
cern
s,
and
view
s.
It is
go
od
to h
ave
a sm
all w
ritt
en p
lan,
whi
ch c
ould
be
refe
rre
d to
for
actio
n. T
he p
lan
mus
t be
avai
labl
e to
ev
eryb
ody
in t
he c
omm
unity
for
thei
r in
form
atio
n.
• Lo
cal g
over
nmen
t is
com
mitt
ed
to s
uppo
rt th
e pr
oduc
tion
of c
omm
unity
dis
aste
r ris
k m
anag
emen
t pla
ns p
erio
dica
lly.
• In
com
e of
targ
et g
roup
s is
in
crea
sed
due
to r
educ
tion
in a
nd
cont
rol o
ver
shoc
ks c
ause
d by
di
sast
ers.
• C
onsu
mpt
ion
of ta
rget
gro
ups
on r
e-pr
oduc
tive
activ
ities
is
incr
ease
d; e
.g. p
urch
ase
of
livel
ihoo
d eq
uipm
ent,
mac
hine
ry,
raw
mat
eria
ls (
cow
s, b
uffa
los,
bo
ats,
trac
tors
) •
Con
sum
ptio
n of
targ
et g
roup
s on
livi
ng fa
cilit
ies
and
need
s is
in
crea
sed;
e.g
. clo
thes
, tra
nspo
rt,
food
, TV
, frid
ge, f
ans,
air-
cons
et
c.
• C
onsu
mpt
ion
of ta
rget
gro
ups
on
child
edu
catio
n an
d fa
mily
hea
lth
is e
nhan
ced.
• F
unds
are
allo
cate
d fo
r th
e im
plem
enta
tion
of th
e pl
an.
• A
dis
aste
r ris
k re
duct
ion
and
resp
onse
pla
n is
form
ulat
ed b
y th
e co
mm
unity
bas
ed o
rgan
izat
ion.
• T
he p
lan
is d
evel
oped
with
act
ive
part
icip
atio
n of
var
ious
vul
nera
ble
grou
ps in
the
com
mun
ity.
• T
he p
lan
desc
ribes
the
haza
rds,
vu
lner
abili
ties,
and
cap
aciti
es
of d
iffer
ent g
roup
s an
d th
e co
mm
unity
as
a w
hole
.
• T
he p
lan
prov
ides
det
ails
on
risk
redu
ctio
n m
easu
res
rela
ted
to
haza
rds
and
vuln
erab
ilitie
s.
• It
prov
ides
des
crip
tion
of
resp
onsi
bilit
ies,
res
ourc
es
and
time
fram
e fo
r th
e im
plem
enta
tion
of r
isk
redu
ctio
n m
easu
res.
• R
isk
redu
ctio
n pl
anni
ng is
or
gani
zed
on a
per
iodi
cal b
asis
, pr
efer
ably
eve
ry y
ear
befo
re th
e ha
zard
sea
son.
2. guidelines for good practice in community-based disaster risk management
51
OU
TC
OM
E 3
Ste
ps
tow
ard
s th
is O
utc
om
eK
ey I
mp
act
Ind
icat
ors
(me
asu
rin
g ch
an
ge
in in
divi
du
als
an
d co
mm
unity
life
)G
uid
anc
e N
ote
s to
Im
ple
men
t C
BD
RM
CO
MM
UN
ITY
HA
ZA
RD
, V
UL
NE
RA
BIL
ITY
, C
AP
AC
ITY
MA
P (
HV
CM
)•
To fo
rm th
e ba
sis
for
com
mun
ity b
ased
dis
aste
r ris
k re
duct
ion
and
com
mun
ity le
arni
ng.
Indi
cato
rs o
f eff
ectiv
enes
s ar
e as
fo
llow
s:T
he p
urp
ose
of c
omm
unity
bas
ed
map
ping
exe
rcis
e is
:i)
to r
aise
aw
aren
ess
of c
omm
unity
mem
bers
abo
ut
risks
, pre
pare
dnes
s,ii)
to
enc
oura
ge c
omm
unity
leve
l act
ion
plan
ning
, iii
) to
dev
elop
com
mun
ity c
apac
ity fo
r ris
k re
duct
ion.
The
refo
re, t
he p
artic
ipat
ion
of m
ultip
le g
roup
s is
es
sent
ial.
Ass
ista
nce
can
be s
ough
t fro
m te
chni
cal e
xper
ts
eith
er w
ithin
the
com
mun
ity o
r fr
om t
he c
omm
une,
m
unic
ipal
or
dist
rict
leve
ls in
ord
er to
mai
ntai
n te
chni
cal a
ccur
acy
of t
he H
VC
A m
aps.
• T
he g
over
nmen
t and
NG
Os
are
com
mitt
ed to
sup
port
the
prod
uctio
n of
com
mun
ity H
VC
A
map
s pe
riodi
cally
.
• Lo
cal h
azar
d m
aps
com
plet
ed•
Hig
h R
isk
Vul
nera
ble
Gro
ups
iden
tifie
d•
Hig
h po
vert
y le
vels
iden
tifie
d an
d m
appe
d. L
inks
bet
wee
n vu
lner
abili
ty a
nd p
over
ty
corr
elat
ed
• M
ore
Indi
vidu
als
and
fam
ilies
ac
tivel
y se
ek in
form
atio
n on
ha
zard
s, v
ulne
rabi
litie
s an
d di
sast
er p
repa
redn
ess
and
risk
redu
ctio
n fr
om C
BO
and
loca
l au
thor
ities
/ NG
Os.
• R
isk
Ass
essm
ent d
ata
on p
ublic
di
spla
y
• C
omm
unity
map
s, in
dica
ting
the
haza
rds,
vul
nera
bilit
ies
and
capa
citie
s to
red
uce
disa
ster
ris
ks a
nd r
espo
nd to
dis
aste
rs is
av
aila
ble.
• C
omm
unity
HV
CA
map
is
prep
ared
by
the
com
mun
ity
base
d or
gani
zatio
n w
ith th
e ac
tive
part
icip
atio
n of
diff
eren
t vul
nera
ble
grou
ps.
• H
VC
A m
ap is
pla
ced
at p
ublic
pl
aces
for
the
info
rmat
ion
of
com
mun
ity m
embe
rs; e
.g.
tem
ples
, mos
ques
, chu
rche
s,
scho
ols
etc.
• H
VC
A e
xerc
ise
is d
one
on a
pe
riodi
cal b
asis
, pre
fera
bly
befo
re
the
star
t of h
azar
d se
ason
; e.g
. m
onso
on, r
ainy
-sea
son,
El-N
iño,
dr
ough
t per
iods
etc
.
OU
TC
OM
E 4
Ste
ps
tow
ard
s th
is O
utc
om
eK
ey I
mp
act
Ind
icat
ors
(me
asu
rin
g ch
an
ge
in in
divi
du
als
an
d co
mm
unity
life
)G
uid
anc
e N
ote
s to
Im
ple
men
t C
BD
RM
CO
MM
UN
ITY
DIS
AS
TE
R
RIS
K M
AN
AG
EM
EN
T P
LA
N•
To e
nsur
e co
llect
ive
actio
n by
com
mun
ity fo
r di
sast
er
risk
redu
ctio
n th
roug
h m
obili
zatio
n of
loca
l re
sour
ces.
Indi
cato
rs o
f eff
ectiv
enes
s ar
e as
fo
llow
s:P
lan
nin
g a
s a
too
lF
ocus
of t
he e
xerc
ise
shou
ld b
e on
pla
nnin
g as
a to
ol
for
risk
re
duct
ion,
pre
pare
dnes
s an
d re
spon
se, r
athe
r th
en o
n th
e pr
odu
ctio
n of
a d
ocum
ent a
s th
e ou
tput
.
Exe
rcis
e sh
ould
pro
vide
opp
ortu
nity
to e
very
bo
dy in
th
e co
mm
unity
to s
hare
the
ir pe
rcep
tions
, con
cern
s,
and
view
s.
It is
go
od
to h
ave
a sm
all w
ritt
en p
lan,
whi
ch c
ould
be
refe
rre
d to
for
actio
n. T
he p
lan
mus
t be
avai
labl
e to
ev
eryb
ody
in t
he c
omm
unity
for
thei
r in
form
atio
n.
• Lo
cal g
over
nmen
t is
com
mitt
ed
to s
uppo
rt th
e pr
oduc
tion
of c
omm
unity
dis
aste
r ris
k m
anag
emen
t pla
ns p
erio
dica
lly.
• In
com
e of
targ
et g
roup
s is
in
crea
sed
due
to r
educ
tion
in a
nd
cont
rol o
ver
shoc
ks c
ause
d by
di
sast
ers.
• C
onsu
mpt
ion
of ta
rget
gro
ups
on r
e-pr
oduc
tive
activ
ities
is
incr
ease
d; e
.g. p
urch
ase
of
livel
ihoo
d eq
uipm
ent,
mac
hine
ry,
raw
mat
eria
ls (
cow
s, b
uffa
los,
bo
ats,
trac
tors
) •
Con
sum
ptio
n of
targ
et g
roup
s on
livi
ng fa
cilit
ies
and
need
s is
in
crea
sed;
e.g
. clo
thes
, tra
nspo
rt,
food
, TV
, frid
ge, f
ans,
air-
cons
et
c.
• C
onsu
mpt
ion
of ta
rget
gro
ups
on
child
edu
catio
n an
d fa
mily
hea
lth
is e
nhan
ced.
• F
unds
are
allo
cate
d fo
r th
e im
plem
enta
tion
of th
e pl
an.
• A
dis
aste
r ris
k re
duct
ion
and
resp
onse
pla
n is
form
ulat
ed b
y th
e co
mm
unity
bas
ed o
rgan
izat
ion.
• T
he p
lan
is d
evel
oped
with
act
ive
part
icip
atio
n of
var
ious
vul
nera
ble
grou
ps in
the
com
mun
ity.
• T
he p
lan
desc
ribes
the
haza
rds,
vu
lner
abili
ties,
and
cap
aciti
es
of d
iffer
ent g
roup
s an
d th
e co
mm
unity
as
a w
hole
.
• T
he p
lan
prov
ides
det
ails
on
risk
redu
ctio
n m
easu
res
rela
ted
to
haza
rds
and
vuln
erab
ilitie
s.
• It
prov
ides
des
crip
tion
of
resp
onsi
bilit
ies,
res
ourc
es
and
time
fram
e fo
r th
e im
plem
enta
tion
of r
isk
redu
ctio
n m
easu
res.
• R
isk
redu
ctio
n pl
anni
ng is
or
gani
zed
on a
per
iodi
cal b
asis
, pr
efer
ably
eve
ry y
ear
befo
re th
e ha
zard
sea
son.
52CRITICAL GUIDELINES OF CBDRM
OU
TC
OM
E 5
Ste
ps
tow
ard
s th
is O
utc
om
eK
ey I
mp
act
Ind
icat
ors
(me
asu
rin
g ch
an
ge
in in
divi
du
als
an
d co
mm
unity
life
)G
uid
anc
e N
ote
s to
Im
ple
men
t C
BD
RM
CB
O T
RA
ININ
G S
YS
TE
M
• To
enh
ance
the
tech
nica
l an
d or
gani
zatio
nal
capa
bilit
y of
the
com
mun
ity
base
d or
gani
zatio
n an
d its
com
mitt
ees
on
CB
DR
M fi
rst a
id, s
earc
h an
d re
scue
, eva
cuat
ion
man
agem
ent,
relie
f op
erat
ions
man
agem
ent
and
emer
genc
y sh
elte
r m
anag
emen
t, da
mag
e an
d ne
eds
asse
ssm
ent,
and
safe
r co
nstr
uctio
n
Indi
cato
rs o
f eff
ectiv
enes
s ar
e as
fo
llow
s:S
pe
cia
lize
d a
ge
nc
ies
The
invo
lvem
ent o
f spe
cial
ize
d ag
enci
es in
the
co
mm
unity
tra
inin
g ce
nter
will
be
imp
orta
nt; e
.g. f
ire
serv
ices
, pol
ice,
Re
d C
ross
, hos
pita
ls, e
ngin
eeri
ng
inst
itute
s, r
esea
rch
cent
ers,
uni
vers
ities
in o
rder
to
dra
w u
pon
the
exp
ert k
now
ledg
e fr
om m
ultip
le
sect
ors.
The
com
mun
ity t
rain
ing
cent
er s
houl
d pr
ovid
e tr
aini
ng to
var
ious
pro
fess
iona
ls in
the
com
mun
ity to
en
hanc
e th
eir
skill
s re
gard
ing
disa
ster
ris
k re
duct
ion.
F
or e
xam
ple:
• m
ason
s’ tr
aini
ng o
n sa
fer
cons
truc
tion,
• pa
ra-m
edic
s tr
aini
ng o
n po
st-d
isas
ter
first
aid
, se
arch
and
res
cue,
• te
ache
rs’ t
rain
ing
on c
omm
unity
aw
aren
ess,
• fa
rmer
s/fis
hers
’ tra
inin
g on
ear
ly w
arni
ng e
tc.
• T
he g
over
nmen
t is
com
mitt
ed to
es
tabl
ish
a co
mm
unity
trai
ning
ce
nter
at t
he c
omm
unity
, sub
-di
stric
t or
dist
rict l
evel
s dr
awin
g up
on th
e re
sour
ces
of lo
cal N
GO
s,
acad
emic
inst
itutio
ns, g
over
nmen
t of
ficia
ls a
nd c
omm
unity
leve
l le
ader
s an
d ex
pert
s.
• C
onst
ruct
ion
of th
e co
mm
unity
di
sast
er r
educ
tion
trai
ning
cen
ter
com
plet
ed•
Sta
ff hi
red
• F
unds
are
allo
cate
d fo
r th
e co
mm
unity
trai
ning
cen
ter
for
disa
ster
ris
k re
duct
ion.
• F
unds
allo
cate
d in
loca
l go
vern
men
t bud
get
• Lo
cal g
over
nmen
t offi
cial
s ar
e tr
aine
d on
com
mun
ity b
ased
di
sast
er r
isk
redu
ctio
n an
d on
tr
aini
ng o
f tra
iner
s.
• R
epor
t of t
he tr
aini
ng
• T
rain
ing
man
uals
on
com
mun
ity
base
d di
sast
er r
isk
redu
ctio
n tr
aini
ng a
re a
vaila
ble
in th
e lo
cal
lang
uage
for
use
at th
e ce
nter
.
• C
opy
of th
e tr
aini
ng m
anua
ls
• P
erio
dica
l Tra
inin
g is
con
duct
ed
for
com
mun
ity b
ased
org
aniz
atio
n,
its s
ub-c
omm
ittee
s an
d co
mm
on
com
mun
ity m
embe
rs.
• C
opy
of th
e co
mm
unity
trai
ning
ca
lend
ar
• P
erio
dica
l rev
iew
of t
he
effe
ctiv
enes
s an
d ap
plic
atio
n of
tr
aini
ng is
con
duct
ed th
roug
h in
divi
dual
and
hou
seho
ld s
urve
ys.
• C
omm
unity
sur
vey
repo
rts
• N
ew tr
aini
ng is
des
igne
d up
on
the
basi
s of
trai
ning
nee
ds
asse
ssm
ent i
n th
e co
mm
unity
.
• C
urric
ulum
of n
ew c
ours
es
OU
TC
OM
E 6
Ste
ps
tow
ard
s th
is O
utc
om
eK
ey I
mp
act
Ind
icat
ors
(me
asu
rin
g ch
an
ge
in in
divi
du
als
an
d co
mm
unity
life
)G
uid
anc
e N
ote
s to
Im
ple
men
t C
BD
RM
CO
MM
UN
ITY
DR
ILL
S
SY
ST
EM
• T
he a
im o
f thi
s ou
tcom
e is
to
ens
ure
the
read
ines
s of
co
mm
uniti
es fo
r di
sast
er
resp
onse
.
Indi
cato
rs o
f eff
ectiv
enes
s ar
e as
fo
llow
s:C
omm
unity
leve
l dri
lls a
re t
he k
ey fo
r th
e su
stai
nabi
lity
of c
omm
unity
leve
l pre
pare
dnes
s ac
tion.
Enc
oura
ge a
nd e
mph
asiz
e th
e us
e of
loca
l res
ourc
es
for
the
cond
uct o
f dri
lls.
If p
ossi
ble
invi
te a
nd in
volv
e th
e lo
cal/c
omm
une
gove
rnm
ent o
ffic
ials
in t
he c
ondu
ct o
f com
mun
ity
drill
s.
• Lo
cal g
over
nmen
t and
com
mun
ity
orga
niza
tion
are
com
mitt
ed to
ho
ld p
erio
dica
l com
mun
ity d
rills
.
• M
ore
coop
erat
ion
exis
ts a
t the
fa
mily
and
com
mun
ity le
vels
for
mut
ual a
ssis
tanc
e fo
r di
sast
er
resp
onse
; e.g
. ass
ista
nce
to
neig
hbou
rs; e
.g. e
vacu
atio
n,
sear
ch/r
escu
e, le
ndin
g m
oney
, sh
arin
g la
bour
for
re-c
onst
ruct
ion,
as
sist
ance
to fa
mily
mem
bers
in
food
sto
rage
, hou
se le
vel r
aisi
ng,
evac
uatio
n et
c.
• P
eopl
e fo
llow
agr
eed
proc
edur
es
and
step
s in
em
erge
ncy
situ
atio
ns; e
.g. i
mm
edia
te
evac
uatio
n af
ter
hear
ing
the
war
ning
, fol
low
ing
agre
ed r
oute
, re
achi
ng a
gree
d de
stin
atio
n et
c.•
Loss
of l
ife is
red
uced
due
to
enha
nced
em
erge
ncy
resp
onse
as
sist
ance
.
• F
unds
are
allo
cate
d by
the
loca
l go
vern
men
t and
com
mun
ity
base
d or
gani
zatio
n fo
r co
nduc
t an
d m
anag
emen
t of d
rills
.
• P
erio
dica
l com
mun
ity d
rills
are
or
gani
zed
by th
e co
mm
unity
ba
sed
orga
niza
tion.
• T
rain
the
com
mun
ity o
rgan
izat
ion
on c
ondu
ct o
f com
mun
ity d
rills
.
• C
omm
unity
dril
ls o
n ev
acua
tion,
fir
st a
id, s
earc
h an
d re
scue
are
he
ld o
n a
perio
dica
l bas
is b
y th
e co
mm
unity
bas
ed o
rgan
izat
ion.
• Lo
cal g
over
nmen
ts’ e
mer
genc
y re
spon
se s
yste
m is
exp
lain
ed to
th
e co
mm
unity
mem
bers
dur
ing
the
drill
s.
• C
omm
unity
dril
ls e
mph
asiz
e up
on th
e ne
eds
of s
peci
al
vuln
erab
le g
roup
s; e
.g. c
hild
ren,
el
derly
and
or
disa
bled
peo
ple,
or
preg
nant
mot
hers
.
• Le
sson
s le
arnt
ses
sion
s m
ust b
e he
ld a
fter
the
com
plet
ion
of d
rills
, in
ord
er to
iden
tify
area
s ne
edin
g im
prov
emen
t.
2. guidelines for good practice in community-based disaster risk management
53
OU
TC
OM
E 5
Ste
ps
tow
ard
s th
is O
utc
om
eK
ey I
mp
act
Ind
icat
ors
(me
asu
rin
g ch
an
ge
in in
divi
du
als
an
d co
mm
unity
life
)G
uid
anc
e N
ote
s to
Im
ple
men
t C
BD
RM
CB
O T
RA
ININ
G S
YS
TE
M
• To
enh
ance
the
tech
nica
l an
d or
gani
zatio
nal
capa
bilit
y of
the
com
mun
ity
base
d or
gani
zatio
n an
d its
com
mitt
ees
on
CB
DR
M fi
rst a
id, s
earc
h an
d re
scue
, eva
cuat
ion
man
agem
ent,
relie
f op
erat
ions
man
agem
ent
and
emer
genc
y sh
elte
r m
anag
emen
t, da
mag
e an
d ne
eds
asse
ssm
ent,
and
safe
r co
nstr
uctio
n
Indi
cato
rs o
f eff
ectiv
enes
s ar
e as
fo
llow
s:S
pe
cia
lize
d a
ge
nc
ies
The
invo
lvem
ent o
f spe
cial
ize
d ag
enci
es in
the
co
mm
unity
tra
inin
g ce
nter
will
be
imp
orta
nt; e
.g. f
ire
serv
ices
, pol
ice,
Re
d C
ross
, hos
pita
ls, e
ngin
eeri
ng
inst
itute
s, r
esea
rch
cent
ers,
uni
vers
ities
in o
rder
to
dra
w u
pon
the
exp
ert k
now
ledg
e fr
om m
ultip
le
sect
ors.
The
com
mun
ity t
rain
ing
cent
er s
houl
d pr
ovid
e tr
aini
ng to
var
ious
pro
fess
iona
ls in
the
com
mun
ity to
en
hanc
e th
eir
skill
s re
gard
ing
disa
ster
ris
k re
duct
ion.
F
or e
xam
ple:
• m
ason
s’ tr
aini
ng o
n sa
fer
cons
truc
tion,
• pa
ra-m
edic
s tr
aini
ng o
n po
st-d
isas
ter
first
aid
, se
arch
and
res
cue,
• te
ache
rs’ t
rain
ing
on c
omm
unity
aw
aren
ess,
• fa
rmer
s/fis
hers
’ tra
inin
g on
ear
ly w
arni
ng e
tc.
• T
he g
over
nmen
t is
com
mitt
ed to
es
tabl
ish
a co
mm
unity
trai
ning
ce
nter
at t
he c
omm
unity
, sub
-di
stric
t or
dist
rict l
evel
s dr
awin
g up
on th
e re
sour
ces
of lo
cal N
GO
s,
acad
emic
inst
itutio
ns, g
over
nmen
t of
ficia
ls a
nd c
omm
unity
leve
l le
ader
s an
d ex
pert
s.
• C
onst
ruct
ion
of th
e co
mm
unity
di
sast
er r
educ
tion
trai
ning
cen
ter
com
plet
ed•
Sta
ff hi
red
• F
unds
are
allo
cate
d fo
r th
e co
mm
unity
trai
ning
cen
ter
for
disa
ster
ris
k re
duct
ion.
• F
unds
allo
cate
d in
loca
l go
vern
men
t bud
get
• Lo
cal g
over
nmen
t offi
cial
s ar
e tr
aine
d on
com
mun
ity b
ased
di
sast
er r
isk
redu
ctio
n an
d on
tr
aini
ng o
f tra
iner
s.
• R
epor
t of t
he tr
aini
ng
• T
rain
ing
man
uals
on
com
mun
ity
base
d di
sast
er r
isk
redu
ctio
n tr
aini
ng a
re a
vaila
ble
in th
e lo
cal
lang
uage
for
use
at th
e ce
nter
.
• C
opy
of th
e tr
aini
ng m
anua
ls
• P
erio
dica
l Tra
inin
g is
con
duct
ed
for
com
mun
ity b
ased
org
aniz
atio
n,
its s
ub-c
omm
ittee
s an
d co
mm
on
com
mun
ity m
embe
rs.
• C
opy
of th
e co
mm
unity
trai
ning
ca
lend
ar
• P
erio
dica
l rev
iew
of t
he
effe
ctiv
enes
s an
d ap
plic
atio
n of
tr
aini
ng is
con
duct
ed th
roug
h in
divi
dual
and
hou
seho
ld s
urve
ys.
• C
omm
unity
sur
vey
repo
rts
• N
ew tr
aini
ng is
des
igne
d up
on
the
basi
s of
trai
ning
nee
ds
asse
ssm
ent i
n th
e co
mm
unity
.
• C
urric
ulum
of n
ew c
ours
es
OU
TC
OM
E 6
Ste
ps
tow
ard
s th
is O
utc
om
eK
ey I
mp
act
Ind
icat
ors
(me
asu
rin
g ch
an
ge
in in
divi
du
als
an
d co
mm
unity
life
)G
uid
anc
e N
ote
s to
Im
ple
men
t C
BD
RM
CO
MM
UN
ITY
DR
ILL
S
SY
ST
EM
• T
he a
im o
f thi
s ou
tcom
e is
to
ens
ure
the
read
ines
s of
co
mm
uniti
es fo
r di
sast
er
resp
onse
.
Indi
cato
rs o
f eff
ectiv
enes
s ar
e as
fo
llow
s:C
omm
unity
leve
l dri
lls a
re t
he k
ey fo
r th
e su
stai
nabi
lity
of c
omm
unity
leve
l pre
pare
dnes
s ac
tion.
Enc
oura
ge a
nd e
mph
asiz
e th
e us
e of
loca
l res
ourc
es
for
the
cond
uct o
f dri
lls.
If p
ossi
ble
invi
te a
nd in
volv
e th
e lo
cal/c
omm
une
gove
rnm
ent o
ffic
ials
in t
he c
ondu
ct o
f com
mun
ity
drill
s.
• Lo
cal g
over
nmen
t and
com
mun
ity
orga
niza
tion
are
com
mitt
ed to
ho
ld p
erio
dica
l com
mun
ity d
rills
.
• M
ore
coop
erat
ion
exis
ts a
t the
fa
mily
and
com
mun
ity le
vels
for
mut
ual a
ssis
tanc
e fo
r di
sast
er
resp
onse
; e.g
. ass
ista
nce
to
neig
hbou
rs; e
.g. e
vacu
atio
n,
sear
ch/r
escu
e, le
ndin
g m
oney
, sh
arin
g la
bour
for
re-c
onst
ruct
ion,
as
sist
ance
to fa
mily
mem
bers
in
food
sto
rage
, hou
se le
vel r
aisi
ng,
evac
uatio
n et
c.
• P
eopl
e fo
llow
agr
eed
proc
edur
es
and
step
s in
em
erge
ncy
situ
atio
ns; e
.g. i
mm
edia
te
evac
uatio
n af
ter
hear
ing
the
war
ning
, fol
low
ing
agre
ed r
oute
, re
achi
ng a
gree
d de
stin
atio
n et
c.•
Loss
of l
ife is
red
uced
due
to
enha
nced
em
erge
ncy
resp
onse
as
sist
ance
.
• F
unds
are
allo
cate
d by
the
loca
l go
vern
men
t and
com
mun
ity
base
d or
gani
zatio
n fo
r co
nduc
t an
d m
anag
emen
t of d
rills
.
• P
erio
dica
l com
mun
ity d
rills
are
or
gani
zed
by th
e co
mm
unity
ba
sed
orga
niza
tion.
• T
rain
the
com
mun
ity o
rgan
izat
ion
on c
ondu
ct o
f com
mun
ity d
rills
.
• C
omm
unity
dril
ls o
n ev
acua
tion,
fir
st a
id, s
earc
h an
d re
scue
are
he
ld o
n a
perio
dica
l bas
is b
y th
e co
mm
unity
bas
ed o
rgan
izat
ion.
• Lo
cal g
over
nmen
ts’ e
mer
genc
y re
spon
se s
yste
m is
exp
lain
ed to
th
e co
mm
unity
mem
bers
dur
ing
the
drill
s.
• C
omm
unity
dril
ls e
mph
asiz
e up
on th
e ne
eds
of s
peci
al
vuln
erab
le g
roup
s; e
.g. c
hild
ren,
el
derly
and
or
disa
bled
peo
ple,
or
preg
nant
mot
hers
.
• Le
sson
s le
arnt
ses
sion
s m
ust b
e he
ld a
fter
the
com
plet
ion
of d
rills
, in
ord
er to
iden
tify
area
s ne
edin
g im
prov
emen
t.
54CRITICAL GUIDELINES OF CBDRM
OU
TC
OM
E 7
Ste
ps
tow
ard
s th
is O
utc
om
eK
ey I
mp
act
Ind
icat
ors
(me
asu
rin
g ch
an
ge
in in
divi
du
als
an
d co
mm
unity
life
)G
uid
anc
e N
ote
s to
Im
ple
men
t C
BD
RM
CO
MM
UN
ITY
LE
AR
NIN
G
SY
ST
EM
•
The
aim
of t
his
outc
ome
is to
enh
ance
th
e un
ders
tand
ing
of
indi
vidu
als,
fam
ilies
an
d co
mm
uniti
es a
bout
ha
zard
s, d
isas
ters
, vu
lner
abili
ties,
ris
k re
duct
ion
and
prep
ared
ness
.
• C
BO
is c
omm
itted
to c
omm
unity
or
ient
atio
n bu
ildin
g on
an
on-g
oing
ba
sis.
• Ta
rget
gro
ups
follo
w h
azar
d re
silie
nt c
onst
ruct
ion
prac
tices
. •
Env
ironm
ent f
riend
ly p
ract
ices
ar
e ad
opte
d by
targ
et g
roup
m
embe
rs.
• Ta
rget
gro
up a
pply
haz
ard
resi
stan
t cro
ppin
g pr
actic
es.
• Ta
rget
gro
ups
have
sus
tain
ed
inco
me
leve
ls d
ue to
avo
idan
ce
of d
isas
ter
rela
ted
shoc
ks.
• Ta
rget
gro
ups
enjo
y he
alth
saf
ety
due
to b
ette
r hy
gien
ic p
ract
ices
in
post
-dis
aste
r si
tuat
ions
. •
Targ
et g
roup
s st
ress
leve
ls
are
redu
ced
due
to b
ette
r pr
epar
edne
ss a
nd e
ffect
ive
resp
onse
pra
ctic
es.
Targ
et G
rou
ps
It w
ould
be
imp
orta
nt to
con
side
r th
e cu
ltura
l, so
cial
and
eco
nom
ic c
onte
xt o
f the
com
mun
ity
whi
le d
evel
opin
g an
d im
plem
entin
g th
e co
mm
unity
or
ient
atio
n ca
mpa
igns
. Wha
t is
the
leve
l of e
duca
tion
of v
ario
us t
arge
t gro
ups,
Wha
t kin
d of
mo
des
of
com
mun
icat
ion
are
appr
opri
ate
to d
iffer
ent g
roup
s,
who
has
influ
ence
on
form
ing
peop
le’s
opi
nion
? T
hese
are
som
e of
the
issu
es to
be
cons
ider
ed.
Teac
hers
, rel
igio
us le
ader
s, m
ass
orga
niza
tion
repr
esen
tativ
es m
ight
be
som
e of
the
pe
ople
who
are
hi
ghly
eff
ectiv
e in
influ
enci
ng a
nd fo
rmin
g pe
ople
’s
opin
ions
.
• Lo
cal g
over
nmen
t is
com
mitt
ed to
su
ppor
t the
CB
O in
its
effo
rts
on
com
mun
ity le
arni
ng. I
t is
incl
uded
in
the
lega
l man
date
of t
he lo
cal
gove
rnm
ent.
• F
unds
are
allo
cate
d fo
r pe
riodi
cal
prod
uctio
n of
aw
aren
ess
mat
eria
ls
and
com
mun
ity o
rient
atio
n se
ssio
ns.
• R
isk
com
mun
icat
ion
mes
sage
s ar
e de
velo
ped
on th
e ba
sis
of a
n as
sess
men
t of i
nfor
mat
ion
need
s of
m
ultip
le s
ocia
l gro
ups.
• A
pre
-tes
t is
cond
ucte
d to
get
fe
edba
ck o
f tar
get g
roup
s on
the
suita
bilit
y of
mes
sage
s.
• Ta
rget
gro
up fo
cuse
d le
arni
ng
sess
ions
are
hel
d by
the
com
mun
ity
base
d or
gani
zatio
n on
per
iodi
cal
basi
s.
• C
omm
unity
HV
CA
map
is p
lace
d at
pu
blic
pla
ces
in th
e co
mm
unity
for
ever
ybod
y’s
info
rmat
ion;
e.g
. tem
ples
, m
osqu
es, s
choo
ls, c
omm
unity
ce
nter
s, h
otel
s, b
us a
nd tr
ain
stat
ions
et
c.
• Lo
cally
app
ropr
iate
com
mun
icat
ion
chan
nels
are
use
d in
the
orie
ntat
ion
build
ing
initi
ativ
es.
• Le
arni
ng s
essi
ons
prov
ide
info
rmat
ion
on d
isas
ter
risks
, vul
nera
bilit
ies
and
risk
redu
ctio
n an
d pr
epar
edne
ss
actio
ns.
2. guidelines for good practice in community-based disaster risk management
55
OU
TC
OM
E 8
Ste
ps
tow
ard
s th
is O
utc
om
eK
ey I
mp
act
Ind
icat
ors
(me
asu
rin
g ch
an
ge
in in
divi
du
als
an
d co
mm
unity
life
)G
uid
anc
e N
ote
s to
Im
ple
men
t C
BD
RM
CO
MM
UN
ITY
EA
RLY
W
AR
NIN
G S
YS
TE
M
• T
he a
im o
f thi
s ou
tcom
e is
to
con
trib
ute
to th
e sa
fety
of
com
mun
ity th
roug
h fa
cilit
atin
g pr
ecau
tiona
ry
mea
sure
s.
• Lo
cal g
over
nmen
t is
com
mitt
ed
to th
e de
velo
pmen
t of c
omm
unity
le
vel w
arni
ng s
yste
m, l
inke
d to
the
natio
nal w
arni
ng s
yste
m. F
unds
ar
e al
loca
ted
for
the
esta
blis
hmen
t of
com
mun
ity le
vel w
arni
ng
syst
em.
• In
divi
dual
s, fa
mili
es a
nd
com
mun
ity m
embe
rs ta
ke
appr
opria
te p
reca
utio
nary
act
ions
to
avo
id d
isas
ter
impa
ct.
• Ta
rget
gro
ups
com
men
d th
e po
sitiv
e ro
le o
f rel
igio
us a
nd
soci
al in
stitu
tions
in li
fe s
avin
g th
roug
h ea
rly w
arni
ng: e
.g.
tem
ples
, mos
ques
, chu
rche
s,
scho
ols
etc.
Pro
ven
Wa
rnin
g S
yste
mIn
ord
er to
ens
ure
that
the
ear
ly w
arni
ng is
eff
ectiv
e in
sav
ing
loss
es to
live
s an
d pr
oper
ty, i
t is
imp
orta
nt
that
faci
litie
s fo
r co
mm
unity
act
ion
are
avai
labl
e;
e.g.
saf
er e
vacu
atio
n ro
utes
, em
erge
ncy
evac
uatio
n fa
cilit
ies
to t
ake
refu
ge, s
earc
h an
d re
scue
team
s. In
th
e ab
senc
e of
the
se fa
cilit
ies
at t
he c
omm
unity
leve
l, th
e ea
rly
war
ning
mig
ht n
ot b
e a
pro
duct
ive
proc
ess.
A
n ea
rly
war
ning
sys
tem
hav
ing
all t
he a
bov
e ch
arac
teri
stic
s w
ould
be
a pr
oven
war
ning
sys
tem
.
• A
sys
tem
for
issu
ing
early
war
ning
to
the
com
mun
ity m
embe
rs a
bout
im
pend
ing
haza
rds
is e
stab
lishe
d un
der
the
com
mun
ity b
ased
or
gani
zatio
n in
col
labo
ratio
n w
ith
the
loca
l gov
ernm
ent.
• A
war
ning
sys
tem
is c
ompr
ised
up
on fo
llow
ing
elem
ents
. 1.
F
orec
ast o
n ha
zard
occ
urre
nce
2.
Com
mun
icat
ion
of w
arni
ng3.
A
ctio
n by
com
mun
ity m
embe
rs
• C
omm
unity
ear
ly w
arni
ng s
yste
m
is e
stab
lishe
d on
the
basi
s of
kn
owle
dge
of th
e co
mm
unity
ab
out t
he o
ccur
renc
e of
haz
ards
.
• C
omm
unity
ear
ly w
arni
ng s
yste
m
is li
nked
to th
e w
arni
ng s
yste
m
at th
e di
stric
t, pr
ovin
ce a
nd o
r na
tiona
l lev
els.
• C
omm
unity
mem
bers
are
orie
nted
ab
out t
he m
eani
ng o
f war
ning
si
gnal
s an
d m
essa
ges.
• C
hann
els
used
for
issu
ance
of
war
ning
mes
sage
s ar
e ac
cess
ible
to
diff
eren
t vul
nera
ble
grou
ps in
th
e co
mm
unity
56CRITICAL GUIDELINES OF CBDRM
references
Abarquez, I. and Murshed, Z., Community-based Disaster Risk Management, Field Practitioners’ Handbook, Bangkok, ADPC, 2004
Alexander, D., Towards the Development of Standards in Emergency Management Training and Education, Disaster Prevention and Management Vol.12 No.2 pp. 113-123, 2003
ALNAP, Humanitarian Action: Improving Performance through Improved Learning, London, Active Learning Network for Accountability and Performance in Humanitarian Action (ALNAP), 2002
Bakewell, O.with Adams, J. and Pratt, B., Sharpening the Development Process, A Practical Guide to Monitoring and Evaluation, Praxis Guide No.1, Oxford, INTRAC, 2003
Cabot Venton, C. and Venton, P., Disaster Preparedness Programmes in India. A Cost Benefit Analysis, London, Humanitarian Practice Network (HPN), 2004
Carreno, M.L., Cardona, O.D. and Burbat, A.H., Evaluation of the Risk Management Performance, Lisbon: Presentation at the International Conference to celebrate the 250th Anniversary of the 1755 Lisbon Earthquake (forthcoming), 2005
Davis I., Earthquake Mitigation Keynote Presentation, 12th Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Barbican Conference Centre, London, September 2002.
Davis I., The Effectiveness of Current Tools for the Identification and Synthesis of Vulnerability and Disaster Risk, Inter-American Development Bank and Universidad Nacional de Colombia- Sede Manizales Instituto de Estudios Ambientales (IDEA): Manizales 2003available from http://idea.unalmzl.edu.co
Davis I., The Application of Performance Targets to Promote Effective Earthquake Risk Reduction Strategies, Vancouver, Paper 2726, 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering (WCEE), 1-6 August 2004
Department for International Development (DFID) Consultant Team, White, P., et al, Disaster Risk Reduction: A Development Concern, Norwich: Overseas Development Group, School of Development Studies, University of East Anglia, 2004
reference
57
Edwards, M. and Hulme, D. (eds), Non-Governmental Organisations: Performance and Accountability, London, Earthscan/ Save the Children, 1995
Enders, J., Measuring Community Awareness and Preparedness for Emergencies. The Australian Journal of Emergency Management Vol.16 No.3 pp.52-58, 2001
Hailey, J. and Sorgenfrei, M. 2003, Measuring Success? Issues in Performance Management, Keynote Paper INTRAC’s 5th International Evaluation Conference, Measurement, Management and Accountability? The Netherlands, 31 March- 4th April 2003
Handy, C., Gods of Management, London, Arrow Books, 1995
Hilhorst, D., Being Good or Doing Good?, Quality and Accountability of Humanitarian NGO’s Disasters 26(3): 193-212, 2002
IADB, The Effectiveness of Current Tools for the Identification and Synthesis of Vulnerability and Disaster Risk, Washington, DC, The Inter-American Development Bank (IADB) and Universidad Nacional de Colombia, 2005available from http://idea.unalmzl.edu.co
Instituto de Estudios Ambientales, Disaster Risk and Risk Management, Benchmarking A Methodology based on Indicators at National Levels, Inter-American Development Bank and Universidad Nacional de Colombia- Sede Manizales Instituto de Estudios Ambientales (IDEA): Manizales, 2004
Lavell, A., Indicators for Disaster Risk Management, Inter-American Development Bank and Universidad Nacional de Colombia- Sede Manizales Instituto de Estudios Ambientales (IDEA): Manizales, 2003available from http://idea.unalmzl.edu.co
Parker I., Criteria for Evaluating the Condition of a Tropical Cyclone Warning System, Disasters, 23(3) 193-216, 1999
Scriven, M., Evaluation Thesaurus: Fourth Edition, Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1991
Tearfund, Natural Disaster Risk Reduction: The Policy and Practice of Selected Institutional Donors, Tearfund Research Project, Teddington, Tearfund, 2003
Tearfund, Mainstreaming Disaster Risk Reduction within Institutional Donors: Performance Targets and Indicators, Teddington, Tearfund, 2004
Twigg, J., Disaster Risk Reduction. Mitigation and Preparedness in Development and Emergency Programming, Good Practice Review No.9, London, Overseas Development Institute (ODI), 2004, March 2004
USAID, Managing for Results Terminology in Annex 1 and USAID/CDIE’s Performance Monitoring and Evaluation Tips, 2004available online at http://www.usaid.gov/cgi-bin/goodbye?and http://www.dec.org/usaid_eval.
Venton, P and Hansford, B., Reducing Risk of Disaster in Our Communities, Roots Guide No.9, Teddington, Tearfund, 2006
58CRITICAL GUIDELINES OF CBDRM
CapacityA combination of all the strengths and resources available within a community, society or organization that can reduce the level of risk, or the effects of a disaster.
Capacity may include physical, institutional, social or economic means as well as skilled personal or collective attributes such as leadership and management. Capacity may also be described as capability.
Capacity buildingEfforts aimed to develop human skills or societal infrastructures within a community or organization needed to reduce the level of risk.
In extended understanding, capacity building also includes development of institutional, financial, political and other resources, such as technology at different levels and sectors of the society.
DisasterA serious disruption of the functioning of a community or a society causing widespread human, material, economic or environmental losses which exceed the ability of the affected community or society to cope using its own resources.
A disaster is a function of the risk process. It results from the combination of hazards, conditions of vulnerability and insufficient capacity or measures to reduce the potential negative consequences of risk.
Disaster risk managementThe systematic process of using administrative decisions, organization, operational skills and capacities to implement policies, strategies and coping capacities of the society and communities to lessen the impacts of natural hazards and related environmental and technological disasters. This comprises all forms of activities, including structural and non-structural measures to avoid (prevention) or to limit (mitigation and preparedness) adverse effects of hazards.
appendix 1
terminology proposed by UNISDR
reference
59
Disaster risk reduction (disaster reduction)The conceptual framework of elements considered with the possibilities to minimize vulnerabilities and disaster risks throughout a society, to avoid (prevention) or to limit (mitigation and preparedness) the adverse impacts of hazards, within the broad context of sustainable development.
The disaster risk reduction framework is composed of the following fields of action, as described in ISDR’s publication 2002 “Living with Risk: a global review of disaster reduction initiatives”, page 23: • Risk awareness and assessment including hazard analysis and vulnerability/capacity
analysis; • Knowledge development including education, training, research and information; • Public commitment and institutional frameworks, including organizational, policy, legislation
and community action; • Application of measures including environmental management, land-use and urban planning,
protection of critical facilities, application of science and technology, partnership and networking, and financial instruments;
• Early warning systems including forecasting, dissemination of warnings, preparedness measures and reaction capacities.
HazardA potentially damaging physical event, phenomenon or human activity that may cause the loss of life or injury, property damage, social and economic disruption or environmental degradation.
Hazards can include latent conditions that may represent future threats and can have different origins: natural (geological, hydrometeorological and biological) or induced by human processes (environmental degradation and technological hazards). Hazards can be single, sequential or combined in their origin and effects. Each hazard is characterized by its location, intensity, frequency and probability.
Hazard analysisIdentification, studies and monitoring of any hazard to determine its potential, origin, characteristics and behavior.
Natural hazardsNatural processes or phenomena occurring in the biosphere that may constitute a damaging event.
Natural hazards can be classified by origin namely: geological, hydro meteorological or biological. Hazardous events can vary in magnitude or intensity, frequency, duration, area of extent, speed of onset, spatial dispersion and temporal spacing.
PreparednessActivities and measures taken in advance to ensure effective response to the impact of hazards, including the issuance of timely and effective early warnings and the temporary evacuation of people and property from threatened locations.
Public awarenessThe processes of informing the general population, increasing levels of consciousness about risks and how people can act to reduce their exposure to hazards. This is particularly important for public officials in fulfilling their responsibilities to save lives and property in the event of a disaster.
60CRITICAL GUIDELINES OF CBDRM
Public awareness activities foster changes in behavior leading towards a culture of risk reduction. This involves public information, dissemination, education, radio or television broadcasts, use of printed media, as well as, the establishment of information centers and networks and community and participation actions.
RiskThe probability of harmful consequences, or expected losses (deaths, injuries, property, livelihoods, economic activity disrupted or environment damaged) resulting from interactions between natural or human-induced hazards and vulnerable conditions.
Conventionally risk is expressed by the notation Risk = Hazards x Vulnerability. Some disciplines also include the concept of exposure to refer particularly to the physical aspects of vulnerability.
Beyond expressing a possibility of physical harm, it is crucial to recognize that risks are inherent or can be created or exist within social systems. It is important to consider the social contexts in which risks occur and that people therefore do not necessarily share the same perceptions of risk and their underlying causes.
Risk assessment/analysisA methodology to determine the nature and extent of risk by analyzing potential hazards and evaluating existing conditions of vulnerability that could pose a potential threat or harm to people, property, livelihoods and the environment on which they depend.
The process of conducting a risk assessment is based on a review of both the technical features of hazards such as their location, intensity, frequency and probability; and also the analysis of the physical, social, economic and environmental dimensions of vulnerability and exposure, while taking particular account of the coping capabilities pertinent to the risk scenarios.
Sustainable developmentDevelopment that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. It contains within it two key concepts: the concept of “needs”, in particular the essential needs of the world’s poor, to which overriding priority should be given; and the idea of limitations imposed by the state of technology and social organization on the environment’s ability to meet present and the future needs. (Brundtland Commission, 1987).
Sustainable development is based on socio-cultural development, political stability and decorum, economic growth and ecosystem protection, which all relate to disaster risk reduction.
VulnerabilityThe conditions determined by physical, social, economic, and environmental factors or processes, which increase the susceptibility of a community to the impact of hazards.
For positive factors, which increase the ability of people to cope with hazards, see definition of capacity
reference
61
List of participants of the Regional Workshop on CBDRM standards
name organisation email
1 Bernie O’Neill ZOA, Cambodia zoa.cam@online.com.kh
2 Banu Subagyo OXFAM, Indonesia bsubagyo@oxfam.or.id
3 Danilo Atienza Danish Red Cross, Indonesia lam@con21.dk
4 Chandra Lukitasari IIDP, Indonesia iidp@cbn.net.id
5 Keo Chanthalangsy World Vision, Lao PDR keo changthalangsy@wvi.org
6 Frank Elvey Oxfam Hong Kong, Timor Léste franke@oxfam.org.hk
7 Emmeline U Managbanag Philippines National Red Cross e_managbanag@yahoo.com
8 Delfina de Jesus Concern Worldwide, Timor Léste cd@concerneast-timor.tp
9 Raul De La Rosa Concern Worldwide, Timor Léste rpdelarosa@gmail.com
10 Ngo Cong Ching Save the Children, Vietnam chinhnc@savechildren.org.vn
11 David Sandilands Care International, Vietnam dave@care.hcm.org
12 Wantanee Kongomboon Thailand Red Cross rbwkb@redcross.or.th
13 Moloy Chaki BDPC, Bangladesh bdpc@glink.bel.com
14 Krishna Karkee CDS/AFFAN, Nepal kkarkee@hotmail.com
15 Paul Venton Tearfund ,UK paul.venton@tearfund.org
16 Leigh William Vickery Country Program, Lao PDR leighvickery@hotmail.com
17 Supaporn Khrutmuang Action Aid International, Bangkok supaporn@sea-user.org
18 Uzma Hoque UNISDR, Bangkok uhoque@unicef.org
19 Joseph Chung UNISDR, Thailand chung2@un.org
20 Christel Rose UNISDR, Bangkok rosec@un.org
21 Rene Jinon IFRC, Bangkok renedrc@sltnet.lk
22 Edlin S. Lumanog World Vision, Thailand edslumanog@yahoo.com
23 Muhibuddin Bin Usamah UDRM, Thailand muhibuddin@adpc.net
24 Pablo Taebola UNDP, Thailand
25 Prof. Ian Davis workshop facilitator i.davis@n-oxford.demon.co.uk
appendix 2
top related