SOA 2/2005 Aceh – Indonesia Tsunami Response and Recovery:

a Legacy of Hope

Shared at the 10th Year Commemoration of Indian Ocean Tsunami

Colombo – Sri Lanka, 3 – 5 December 2014

2

What had happened in Aceh & Nias, Indonesia..…

26 December 2004:

• Earthquake of magnitude 9.3 Richter scale hit the western coast of Aceh and North Sumatera provinces in Indonesia on 26 December 2004 at 07.58 AM

triggered a series of devastating tsunamis along the coasts of most of the landmasses bordering the Indian Ocean

166,561 people were killed (73% of the dead and missing caused by the 26 December 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami)

120,000 houses completely destroyed, and another 70,000 houses were damaged

Over half a million people were displaced

3

How we responded: The Special Operation Appeal for Indonesia (SOA 01/05)• No national Caritas in Indonesia -CRS was asked to serve as

Facilitating Partner (FP) with endorsement from the Papal Nuncio, Indonesia’s Catholic Bishop Conference (KWI) and CI.

• FP role was to provide technical and administrative support to the various agencies participating in the SOA as requested

• The SOA document was submitted to CI in late January 2005, with a general goal was “to prevent further loss of life, contribute to rapid recovery and reconstruction of affected communities, and increase disaster preparedness capacities amongst communities and national partners”

• The SOA proposal was revised in 2006 and 2007 to reflect the changing needs of the partners and programs.

4

Partners in SOA 02/05

4

Germany

5

Another disaster hit Nias Island – N. Sumatera

28 March 2005

• An earthquake measuring 8.7 on the Richter scale hit Nias Island in North Sumatera province

• Destroyed hospitals, ports, the commercial centre of Gunung Sitoli (capital of Nias) and houses.

• 900 people were killed

• A total of 13,500 people were displaced by the December 2004 tsunami and March 2005 earthquake

6

What we have achieved: at institutional level

• Capacity building– Caritas Cordia Medan was established in March 2005

– Caritas Sibolga was established in May 2005

– Caritas Indonesia (Karina) was established in May 2006

– Provided management, technical and financial supports to start up the organizations and build capacity of their human resources. Direct accompaniment continued until 2009.

Challenge:

• CB was taken on by organizations that had no established presence in the country and hence minimal resources and frequently changing personnel.

• The tendency was to stand back and say “tell us what you need.” In reality, local partners had little idea as to what was needed and wanted to receive accompaniment.

7

Financial Management:

– Total SOA original pledge: $26 million; then revised pledge at $43 million in revised SOA February 2006 (total Catholic agencies’ response: $246 million)

– Total actual program value under SOA: $173,538,721 (2005-2009)

– Set up fund transfer mechanism through CRS, Cordaid and ICMC for further distribution/allocation to implementing partners (Caritas Switzerland, Caritas Czech, Trocaire, Secour Catholique, Caritas Austria, Caritas Italiana, Caritas Germany, Cordia Medan, Caritas Sibolga, KWI Crisis Center, Karina)

– The 3 new institutions (CORDIA, Caritas Sibolga and Karina) have established financial management policy and procedures also receive funding directly from CIMOs outside of SOA framework (bilateral).

Challenges :

• in confirmation between funding and implementing partners – time consuming, partners received funds much later, impacting progress.

8

What we have achieved: at institutional level

• Policies and System:– SOA Coordination Unit within CRS, led by staff seconded to CRS from Trocaire. In

2007, the role was handed over to CRS staff

– National Working Group/NWG (until April 2005 met weekly, then monthly):

• Cordia Medan to coordinate programs in Aceh

• Caritas Sibolga to coordinate programs in Nias

• NWG members have voting rights for decision-making and make and enforce decisions under SOA 02/05

9

What we have achieved: at operational level

• Beneficiaries– Accumulative 1,801,227 people have been assisted through SOA and Caritas

members’ emergency and reconstruction programs (temporary and permanent houses, public infrastructures construction, economic/livelihood, health, psychosocial, education, peace building and capacity building)

– 3 major institutions established: Caritas Medan (Cordia), Caritas Sibolga and Karina that benefited from direct support and accompaniment from the CIMOs in country.

– More than 100 staff of the newly established institutions participated in various capacity building programs (training, workshop, direct accompaniment).

10

Program Strategy

• Construction: carried out through a combination of external contractors for accelerated process and better quality and community groups to assure community ownership

• Integration of DRR: Original SOA outlined commitment to capacity building in DRR, but it did not progress until end of 2006program priority in regard to future disaster and risk reduction was clarified and emphasized in the 2007 revision

• Integration of capacity building and institutional strengthening for local partners including CORDIA, Caritas Sibolga and Karina (more emphasized in the revised SOA 2006)

11

Relationship with Local Government

• Strong coordination with the Aceh Reconstruction and Rehabilitation Agency (BRR), as well as District, sub – district and village government in the target areas

12

Reflection on Partnership & Coordination

• SOA 02/05 was unique given the world – wide outpouring support, while no national Caritas present.

• All Catholic agencies present in Indonesia that were prepared to respond to the Tsunami relief efforts contributed to the drafting of SOA 02/05

• The structure of the SOA Group was set up quickly (ToR for FP and WG were drafted), and the group was meeting every week in Medan, in addition to other meetings in Jakarta.

13

Challenges

• A significant rate of turnover of Caritas staff + lack in clarity of the original document inconsistent institutional understanding of how the SOA should be implemented, took much time to resolve

• Lack of clarity on project approval process frustration particularly for local partners, who until December 2005 were unable to access funds requested through the SOA.

• Partners often have further bi-lateral requirements more complex administration work for FP.

• Each partner had own focus under the broad SOA 02/05; increased focus on DRR from 2006 allowed all partners to have a common agenda

• In the beginning, capacity building with local partners was slow and DRR component was not prioritized (mostly due to strong pressure to prioritize construction and to “move people back into permanent houses”)

14

Lessons Learned

• SOA is a good system for coordination of efforts and funding mechanism by Catholic agencies in emergency, recovery and reconstruction programs more resources to help more people

• Integration of and commitment to capacity building for local Caritas are key to program quality and sustainability of the program results

• Important to have staff members for longer period to ensure stability and continuity of interventions, particularly in capacity building component (stronger and consistent understanding of the principles of SOA and how these principles are supposed to be operationalized)

• Phase-over (to national or local Caritas) and phase – out strategy need to be incorporated since the beginning allow interventions to ensure smooth and even phase – out.

• It is necessary for an SOA to have a common agenda between partners

15

????

Thank You…Terima Kasih…