evaluation of - unicef.org · bihar, one of the most disaster prone states of india, faced severe...

Evaluation of UNICEF’s Community Based Disaster Risk Reduction and School Safety Programme, Bihar, India (2011-2016)

FINAL EVALUATION REPORT

Submitted By:

September 2017

IPE GLOBAL LIMITED IPE Global House, B - 84, Defence Colony, New Delhi - 110 024, India www.ipeglobal.com

i i


Final Evaluation Report

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ............................................................................................... iv

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................. 1

1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 1 Background .............................................................................................................................. 1

1.1.1 Kosi Floods .................................................................................................................... 2 Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) in Bihar .................................................................................... 2

................................................................................................................................................ 3 Government of Bihar’s DRR Initiatives .................................................................................... 3 UNICEF’s support to DRR Initiatives ........................................................................................ 5

1.4.1 Community Based Disaster Risk Reduction Programme (CBDRR) ................................ 6 1.4.2 School Safety Programme ............................................................................................. 6 1.4.3 CBDRR-SSP Theory of Change ....................................................................................... 7

2 EVALUATION PURPOSE, OBJECTIVES, SCOPE & METHODOLOGY ........................................... 10 Purpose.................................................................................................................................. 10 Objectives .............................................................................................................................. 10 Scope 10 Approach ............................................................................................................................... 11 Methodology ......................................................................................................................... 11 Ethical Considerations ........................................................................................................... 15 Limitations ............................................................................................................................. 16

3 RELEVANCE OF CBDRR-SSP .................................................................................................. 17 Alignment of Activities and Outputs of CBDRR–SSP to its goals ........................................... 17 Design of the CBDRR ............................................................................................................. 24 Participation and inclusion of children, women and marginalized groups ........................... 26 Relevance and validity of the Objectives of the SSP ............................................................. 27 Alignment of DRR approach of BSDMA with the CBDRR-SSP ............................................... 28 Alignment of the CBDRR-SSP with global frameworks on DRR ............................................. 31

4 EFFECTIVENESS OF CBDRR-SSP ............................................................................................ 36 Effectiveness of CBDRR programme processes .................................................................... 36 Effectiveness of Training ....................................................................................................... 39 Risk Informed Action undertaken by the communities and individuals at the village level . 41 Assessment of Results Framework ........................................................................................ 42 Factors influencing achievements or non-achievements of stated results .......................... 48 Disaster Risk Reduction after the Introduction of CBDRR Programme ................................. 49

5 KNOWLEDGE ATTITUDE AND PRACTICES (KAP) .................................................................... 51 Practices ................................................................................................................................ 51

5.1.1 Training ....................................................................................................................... 51 5.1.2 Disaster Preparedness and Risk Reduction................................................................. 51 5.1.3 Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) ..................................................................... 53

Knowledge ............................................................................................................................. 55 5.2.1 About School Safety Programme (SSP) ....................................................................... 55 5.2.2 Natural and Manmade Disasters ................................................................................ 56 5.2.3 Disaster Response ....................................................................................................... 57 5.2.4 Knowledge about WASH ............................................................................................. 57

Attitudes ................................................................................................................................ 58 5.3.1 Towards SSP and Disaster Preparedness .................................................................... 58 5.3.2 Towards WASH ........................................................................................................... 59

ii ii



6 SUSTAINABILITY AND SCALABILITY OF CBDRR-SSP ............................................................... 61 Sustainability of CBDRR and SSP ........................................................................................... 61

6.1.1 Sustainable components within CBDRR...................................................................... 61 6.1.2 Sustainable components within SSP ........................................................................... 63

Factors Influencing the Sustainability of CBDRR – SSP .......................................................... 64 Exit Strategy .......................................................................................................................... 66

6.4 Approaches and Strategies for Scaling-up ............................................................................ 67 Examples of positive community engagement from CBDRR-SSP ......................................... 68

7 CBDRR-SSP FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF GENDER AND EQUITY ............................................. 70 Design and Delivery of the Programmes ............................................................................... 70 Implementation of CBDRR-SSP ............................................................................................. 72

8 CONCLUSIONS AND LESSONS LEARNT.................................................................................. 74

9 RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................................................................................... 77

10 CASE STUDIES ..................................................................................................................... 82 Creating Change agents, Middle School, Tumaul .................................................................. 83 Promoting Transformative Change, Khormadanpur ............................................................. 87 Malkoshikapur: Women Lead the Way in Disaster Risk Reduction ...................................... 92

ANNEX 1: TERMS OF REFERENCE .................................................................................................. 1

ANNEX 2: EVALUATION MATRIX ................................................................................................. 14

ANNEX 3: CBDRR-SSP PROGRAMME PROCESSES ......................................................................... 17

ANNEX 4: ETHICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE APPROVAL ON TOOLS ................................................... 19

ANNEX 5: LIST OF MEETINGS ATTENDED ..................................................................................... 21

ANNEX 6: LIST OF PERSONS INTERVIEWED .................................................................................. 24

ANNEX 7: LIST OF DOCUMENTS REVIEWED (As per ToR) .............................................................. 42

ANNEX 8: BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................................................................................... 44

iii iii



LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.1: Map depicting Flood Zones in Bihar (Not to scale) ............................................................... 1 Figure 1.2: Evolution of disaster management measures in Bihar ......................................................... 4 Figure 3.1: Relevance of the CBDRR Programme according to Officials (Key Responses n=12) .......... 20 Figure 3.2: Process of making School Safety Plans ............................................................................... 21 Figure 3.3: Differences Experienced after Implementation of School Safety Programme ................... 22 Figure 3.4: Skills learnt by students as reported by HM and SSFT ........................................................ 23 Figure 3.5: Relevance of the SSP Programme according to Officials .................................................... 28 Figure 4.1: Trainings under SSP as per SDMCs (n=12) .......................................................................... 41 Figure 5.1: Participation of Students in Training .................................................................................. 51 Figure 5.2: Participation of Students in Hazard Hunts .......................................................................... 52 Figure 5.3: Skills Learnt during Mock Drills as per Distribution by Gender (%) .................................... 52 Figure 5.4: Skills Learnt during Mock Drills as per Distribution by Inclusion in School (%) .................. 53 Figure 5.5: Use of Toilet in School ........................................................................................................ 54 Figure 5.6: Test if Water is Polluted ...................................................................................................... 54 Figure 5.7: Awareness on Activities conducted by SDMC as per Distribution by Gender (%) .............. 55 Figure 5.8: Awareness on Activities conducted by SDMC as per Distribution by Inclusion in School (%) .............................................................................................................................................................. 55 Figure 5.9: Disasters that can Affect School/ Community as per Distribution by Gender (%) ............. 56 Figure 5.10: Disasters that can Affect School/ Community as per Distribution by Inclusion in School (%) ......................................................................................................................................................... 56 Figure 5.11: Handwashing Behaviour as per Distribution by Gender (%) ............................................ 58 Figure 5.12: Handwashing Behaviour as per Distribution by Inclusion in School (%)........................... 58 Figure 5.13: Attitude towards SSP and Disaster Preparedness among all Students (%) ...................... 59

LIST OF BOXES

Box 1.1: Global Frameworks on DRR ...................................................................................................... 3 Box 1.2: UNICEF DRR Initiatives in India ................................................................................................. 5 Box 2.1: Obligations to Participants ...................................................................................................... 15 Box 3.1: All the 12 VDMCs who were consulted during the field-visit were making annual DRR plans .............................................................................................................................................................. 18 Box 3.2: Selection Criteria for VDMC Membership .............................................................................. 19 Box 3.3: Supporting Activities of VDMC as identified by ANMs and AWWs ........................................ 20 Box 3.4: Mukhyamantri School Safety Programme (MSSP).................................................................. 28 Box 3.5: Approaches to Implementing the DRR Roadmap ................................................................. 29 Box 3.6: RVP Focus Areas ...................................................................................................................... 30 Box 4.1: Flood Preparedness in Malkoshikapur Village, Supaul ........................................................... 50

iv iv



ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

AEC Acute Encephilitis Syndrome

ANM Auxiliary Nurse Midwife

AWW Anganwadi Worker

BDO Block Development Officer

BEO Block Education Officer

BSDMA Bihar State Disaster Management Authority

CAP Community Action Plan

CBDRR Community Based Disaster Risk Reduction

CCA Climate Change Adaptation

CPC Child Protection Committee

CRC Cluster Resource Centre

CSO Civil Society Organisation

CWD Children With Disabilities

DA District Administration

DDMA District Disaster Management Authority

DDMP District Disaster Management Plans

DIET District Institute of Education and Training

DEO District Education Officer

DM District Magistrate

DNA Disaster Needs Assessment

DoE Department of Education

DRR Disaster Risk Reduction

EBC Extremely Backward Classes

ECHO European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations

FGD Focus Group Discussion

GoB Government of Bihar

GoI Government of India

GP Gram Panchayat

HFA Hyogo Framework for Action

ICDS Integrated Child Development Services

IDI In-Depth Interviews

IEC Information, Education and Communication Material

IEC Institutional Ethics Committee

IRB Institutional Review Board

KAP Knowledge Attitude and Practice

KII Key Informant Interview

MGNREGA Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act

MoM Minutes of Meetings

MSSP Mukhyamantri School Safety Programme

NDRF National Disaster Response Force

NGO Non-Government Organisation

OBC Other Backward Classes

PMAY Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana

PMGSY Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana

v v



PRA Participatory Rural Appraisal

PRI Panchayati Raj Institutions

PWD Persons With Disabilities

RVP Resilient Village Programme

SC Scheduled Caste

SDMC School Disaster Management Committee

SMC School Management Committee

SSA Sarva Shiksha Abhiyaan

SSFT School Safety Focal Teacher

SSP School Safety Programme

ST Scheduled Tribe

ToR Terms of Reference

ToT Training of Trainers

UMS Upgraded Middle School

UNEG United Nations Evaluation Guidelines

UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund

VDMC Village Disaster Management Committee

VDMP Village Disaster Management Plans

WASH Water Sanitation and Hygiene

Section I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 ES-1



EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Introduction

Bihar, one of the most disaster prone states of India, faced severe floods in five districts (Supaul,

Saharsa, Madhepura, Araria and Purnia) due to a breach in embankment of river Kosi in the year 2008.

The flood affected over 5.3 million people in northern Bihar, many of them children. To support the

Government of Bihar (GoB), United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) in association with the European

Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations (ECHO) began flood recovery programme in 68

villages of the five districts in Bihar.

After initially focusing on flood recovery and rehabilitation, there was a need to build resilience among

communities to better deal with disasters, and in 2011, UNICEF Bihar Office made a strategic shift

wherein it initiated efforts to facilitate communities to access resources from Government

programme/schemes or other sources to implement their own DRR plans. The programme was scaled-

up to cover 230 villages in six districts, namely Darbhanga, Sitamarhi, Madhubani, Samastipur, East

Champaran and Supaul. Furthermore, a School Safety component (in 155 middle schools) was

organically coalesced in 2011 with the programme to further children's participation in risk reduction

efforts at community level and to ensure that the risks faced by them in schools were actively

addressed.

By the beginning of 2013, a group of highly motivated individuals were selected as Disaster Risk

Reduction (DRR) Catalysts to develop leadership within at-risk communities to ensure sustainability.

Within a year, partnership agreements were in place within Block (sub-district) and District

Administration. Following this, the administration initiated the scaling up of the CBDRR programme

covering all the villages in the 15 intervention blocks of six districts. By December 2015, the CBDRR

pilot intervention villages were handed over to DRR Catalysts and community institutions with

reduced facilitation support from implementing NGO partners.

By 2017, the CBDRR-SSP had reached over 1,122 villages and 3,318 schools in six intervention districts,

and the next round of scaling up the programme is underway. Further, the SSP has been recognised

by the GoB, and the “Mukhyamantri School Safety Programme (MSSP)” was launched in July 2016 to

cover 73,000 schools in Bihar.

Purpose and Objectives of the Evaluation

The purpose of the evaluation was to assess and draw lessons from CBDRR-SSP initiative in Bihar

(2011-2016) assessing its relevance, effectiveness sustainability, and gender and equity. The

evaluation took place from June 2016 to July 2017.

Specific objectives of the evaluation included:

i. Conducting knowledge, attitude and practices (KAP) test with a select sample of adolescent

students in the six districts, as part of the effectiveness criterion.

ii. Assessing the CBDRR-SSP against the Sendai Framework for DRR (2015).

iii. Documenting three in-depth case studies of three villages to understand the processes these

villages underwent to be disaster resilient.

iv. Identifying best practices and documenting lessons learnt from the CBDRR programme,

including;

Key factors and best practices contributing to the programmes successes or failures.

2 ES-2



Lessons learnt that can be externally applied, including recommendations.

Approaches and better strategies for scaling-up CBDRR programme.

Brief Methodology

In addition to secondary literature review, the evaluation relied on a qualitative data collection

exercise from sampled schools and villages. This included 51 Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) with DRR

Catalysts, NGO partners and different stakeholders at the village and school levels. In addition, the

evaluation team conducted 74 Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) at the village, school, block, district and

state level, along with a KAP survey with 270 school students.

Key Findings

The findings, as per the evaluation sub-questions under each OECD-DAC criteria, are enumerated

below:

Relevance

The CBDRR programme is meeting its envisioned objectives through its activities and desired

outputs in the context of Building Disaster Resilient Communities. Communities have been trained

and capacitated to make their own plans, and interact with duty bearers at the village, sub-district

and district levels. Similarly, through SSP, children, teachers and school administration see the

relevance of a DRR focused programme and are proactively participating to make it a success.

From a design perspective, the programme is appropriate for its target audience, i.e. the

community members including at-risk men, women and children in disaster prone areas.

While the plans made by the School Disaster Management Committee (SDMC) reflect the needs

and ensure participation of different groups and children, the Village Disaster Management

Committees (VDMCs) need to be strengthened to ensure that there is greater inclusion of women

and children in the planning process.

CBDRR - SSP remains valid since its first implementation and throughout its duration, specifically

because the intervention areas remain extremely prone and vulnerable to disasters. Stakeholders

across all levels understood and articulated the need for such a programme.

The programme’s activities and outputs largely align to the priorities of both the Hyogo and the

Sendai frameworks, and have contributed towards the development and execution of GoB’s DRR

roadmap.

Effectiveness

There are several processes and interaction points (such as monthly review meetings), through

which the progress of the Village Disaster Management Plan (VDMP) is tracked. These processes

are followed to spread awareness on issues of common interest, such as, cleanliness, safe drinking

water, immunization, etc.

Strong evidence of risk informed actions such as improving critical infrastructure includes – raising

of plinth levels; make-shift bamboo bridges; village-level flood shells; new roads; raised hand-

pumps and inculcating the practice of washing hands with soap.

Major factors that influenced the achievement of positive results included — support from UNICEF

3 ES-3



and NGOs; commitment of DRR catalysts1, VDMCs, and School Safety Focal Teachers2; acceptance

and support from the community; and support from government officials.

Since the programme initiation, there is a marked change in the attitude of the community

towards disasters. Communities are more informed and aware of the causes of disasters, ways to

deal with them and of the government schemes that can be leveraged to improve the disaster

preparedness in the villages.

Sustainability

CBDRR-SSP has demonstrated strong components of sustainability (such as increased knowledge

and preparedness towards disasters) due to support received from UNICEF and NGOs.

An implicit exit strategy has been embedded in the framework of both the programmes. This

includes developing DRR Catalysts, grading of villages and schools, and saturation of existing

programme blocks.

The CBDRR-SSP is being scaled-up by UNICEF as well as the GoB. There are activities and timelines

defined in the DRR roadmap to support the implementation of the CBDRR and SSP, as a part of

the Resilient Village Programme (RVP) and Mukhya Mantri School Safety Programme (MSSP). The

MSSP has also been scaled up to 73,000 schools across the state.

Gender and Equity Assessment

The CBDRR-SSP focuses on building the capacities of vulnerable communities and children on

disaster risk reduction so that their capacity to deal with future disasters is strengthened. The

programme remains equitable and the evaluation team did not encounter any instances of

discrimination and/ or differential treatment experienced by any of the groups in the sample

villages/ schools.

The framework of CBDRR has been inclusive in building capacities of communities to plan for

disasters by promoting their rights and equity through DRR actions. Further, the formation of the

VDMC is a voluntary process with representation from different sections of the society.

The evaluation found encouraging examples of women championing the DRR cause. However, the

overall, the findings suggest that women (non-VDMC members) and children are not engaged to

their full potential in the DRR planning process. While there was representation of women as a

part of VDMCs, women were not aware how they could engage in or contribute towards the DRR

planning process undertaken by the VDMCs.

Lessons Learnt

a) Leveraging of resources from government schemes/ programmes and interaction with government

and frontline functionaries continues to be the mainstay of programme impact.

The efforts of UNICEF and implementing NGO partners with respect to involving and interacting

with government officials at block and district levels to leverage entitlements from programmes,

must continue to sustain the programme.

b) UNICEF’s advocacy efforts and technical support have resulted in strong acceptance of the

1 DRR catalysts have been identified by the VDMCs and implementing NGO partners. These are motivated individuals who are working towards sustaining the programme. They support and lead all the VDMC activities at the village level. 2 A teacher identified at the school level to support children in undertaking DRR activities at the school level. S/he ensures that children are participating in making school level disaster management plans.

4 ES-4



programme by GoB.

UNICEF has provided high-level technical assistance to the state of Bihar in the form of training of

trainers, capacity-building modules, DRR process documents, etc. These efforts must continue for

the effective scaling-up of the programme.

c) Including women in the planning process is of utmost importance

While the programme has been raising awareness among women, including them in the process of

planning is equally important. This means including also women who are non-members and are a

part of the village community. Their issues pertaining to disasters are best addressed when women

take charge, and play a leading role in the DRR planning of the villages.

d) Periodic analysis of CBDRR-SSP monitoring data is critical

Regular analysis for tracking progress and taking mid-course corrections of the programme is

important. This will ensure that both the block and district administrations understand &

contribute towards the DRR requirements along with providing the necessary support.

e) Role of Mukhiya is critical for DRR planning process at the school and village levels

The Mukhiya’s role has emerged as critical for the effectiveness and sustainability of the

programme and should be included in the DRR planning and execution. The DRR activities in villages

and schools get fast tracked wherever there is continued support received from the Mukhiya.

f) Strategic geographical selection of villages and schools

The programme should continue its approach of geographic targeting (based on vulnerabilities to

disasters) so as to provide the required support and intervention to build DRR capacities.

Recommendations

UNICEF

a) Continued Technical Assistance to the Government of Bihar (GoB) for Disaster Risk Reduction

Given the nascent stage of MSSP & RVP, there is a need for continued technical assistance for

some period. Therefore, UNICEF should continue its engagement with the GoB. The technical

assistance should include: orientation of nodal departments on the DRR roadmap; training

modules on MSSP & RVP; training of trainers on MSSP & RVP; process documentation; preparing

policy briefs on DRR and any other activity identified in consultation with the GoB.

b) Sustained Efforts to Increase Involvement of Women and Children in the DRR Planning Process

Despite existing socio-cultural challenges faced by women in decision making and engaging with

public life, women have repeatedly demonstrated great ability in contributing towards dealing

with disasters. Therefore, keeping in mind the existing challenges, for all future programming

activities, greater efforts are a required for including women and children in the village disaster

management plan preparation. Examples can be drawn from positive case studies and

experiences.

c) Training and Deployment of Children as DRR Sentinels

DRR Sentinels is an innovative approach that fosters children (13-15 year olds), in groups and as

individuals, to work towards making their lives safer and their communities more resilient to

5 ES-5



disasters. Children should be trained and deployed as DRR Sentinels in the village – children tend

to take a comprehensive and holistic approach to perceiving disasters risks. They can act as the

eyes and ears of their village during cases of emergency, such as, fire, drowning, other accidents,

etc. and inform elders about any mishap for affirmative action.

d) Increase Involvement of Mukhiyas (Elected Gram Panchayat Head)

Greater emphasis is required to secure the ownership of the CBDRR & SSP programmes by the

Mukhiyas. All villages in a gram panchayat should have the capacity, orientation and training to

reduce risks due to disasters.

e) Greater Involvement of Anganwadi Workers (AWW) and Auxiliary Nurse Midwives (ANMs) in DRR

Planning Process

More efforts are required for involving the AWWs and ANMs in the DRR planning process.

f) Horizontal vs Vertical Spread of the CBDRR Programme

UNICEF should adopt the strategy of including all villages in a gram panchayat for the CBDRR

programme rather than focusing on one or two villages. This will lead to greater involvement of

the Mukhiya as the programme will have a direct benefit for the entire gram panchayat.

g) Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning (MLE) Processes

While the M&E processes have worked well for programme requirements, these should be

supplemented by an equally robust system of documentation of field level activities. The efforts

need to be further augmented to share the experiential and programmatic learning on a regular

basis with other stakeholders intending to implement similar programmes.

Recommendations for GoB

a) Integration of School Safety Programme Reporting with Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (Education for All)

Formats

GoB should explore the possibility of integrating the SSP in SSA reporting formats. This can be

conceptualized and taken forward as a part of the scaling-up exercise undertaken through the

MSSP. This will allow the GoB to systematically review and address the DRR issues at the school

level.

b) Roadmap Implementation Support Unit (RISU)

Given the infancy of the RISU, it is recommended that GoB should continue its engagement with

UNICEF, Bihar for providing technical support to the unit. This support should continue until such

time that sufficient capacity has been built to fulfill its mandate.

c) Donor Harmonization

A donor coordination committee can be set up at the state level to minimise duplication of work

and optimize resources are being pooled in for DRR activities.

d) Resilient Village Programme (RVP)

Bihar State Disaster Management Authority (BSDMA) should continue to engage with partners to

provide technical assistance for drafting plans and implementation strategy for RVP. The plan of

action must have clearly defined timelines by which every village in Bihar becomes disaster

6 ES-6



resilient.

e) Convergence with Line Departments

A coordination committee with representation from every line department needs to be set-up at

the State and district levels. These committees should meet every month to discuss the activities

being undertaken towards disaster risk reduction.

Section II

EVALUATION REPORT

1 1



1 INTRODUCTION

Background

Bihar being one of the most populous states in India comprises nearly 8.53 percent of the country’s

population4. During the last few years, the state has focused on all round development and the

Government of Bihar (GoB) has taken several initiatives in the areas of governance, institutional

reforms, infrastructure development, improved public services, etc. Though the state has shown

remarkable progress, it is still one of the poorest states with 42 percent of the population living below

the poverty line as compared to the national average of 28 percent5. The state has 88.7 percent of the

total population residing in rural areas, which depend extensively on agricultural production and

livestock6. The sex ratio in Bihar is 918 and a large gender gap exists in literacy level with literacy rates

at 71.2 percent for males against 51.5 percent for females 7.

The high rate of poverty has resulted in severe social, economic and political issues in Bihar. For

example, massive migration is rampant due to limited livelihood opportunities within the state.

Women face barriers such as purdah, the practice of female seclusion using a veil, which results in

limited mobility and decision-making by women. Additionally, there are widely prevalent customs and

patriarchal mind-sets that discourage open interactions between men and women in the villages. Poor

3 National Disaster Management Authority (n.d.).. Retrieved from Bihar SDMA Office: http://ndma.gov.in/en/bihar-sdma-office 4 Government of Bihar, World Bank. (2010). Bihar Kosi Floods (2008) Needs Assessment Report. The World Bank.

India, K. C. (2013). Knowledge, Attitude and Practice on School Safety Programme. Retrieved from

https://www.humanitarianresponse.info/system/files/documents/files/kap_in_bihar_practice.pdf 5 Ibid 6 World Bank. (n.d.). Indian Agricultural Issues and Priorities. Retrieved from

http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2012/05/17/india-agriculture-issues-priorities 7 Ibid

Figure 1.1: Map depicting Flood Zones in Bihar (Not to scale)

2 2



hygiene practices, such as, open defecation and poor health seeking behaviour pose further

challenges to the general wellbeing of the population. The situation is exacerbated by limited

understanding of the population about their entitlements to the various government schemes

pertaining to health, nutrition, education, social protection and economic empowerment.

Along with the above-mentioned barriers, the vulnerability of the people is compounded by the high

prevalence of disasters that depletes the state’s resources, agricultural production and people’s

capacity to cope. A combination of the geographical and socio-economic factors makes the state of

Bihar particularly vulnerable during disasters.

Floods are the recurrent natural disasters in Bihar and pose threat to life and property in the state.

Figure 1.1 highlights the flood prone zones in Bihar, and as evident, most regions of the State have

been adversely affected. Out of the 38 districts in Bihar, 28 districts are prone to major floods8 with

marked occurrences during 2004, 2007, 2008, 2011 and 20139. Another recurring disaster in Bihar is

earthquake with 7 out of 38 districts falling under seismic zone V, 21 districts under zone IV and the

remaining falling under seismic zone III10. The state is prone to other natural hazards such as droughts,

cyclonic storms, fire, hailstorms, lightning, heat wave, and cold wave that affect communities at large

and hence requires continuous efforts and investment in rebuilding and rehabilitation.

1.1.1 Kosi Floods

Amongst the many recurring disasters in the state, an incident that devastated several districts of

Bihar was the flooding of Kosi River in 2008. The river breached its eastern embankment on the 18th

of August 2008 about 13 kms. upstream of the Kosi Barrage in Nepal and flooded districts within its

catchment area in Bihar. This led to major flooding in Bihar, which affected around 33.29 lakh people11.

It resulted in loss of lives, livestock, farm assets, working capital and led to a momentous decline in

the agricultural production base.

Among the northern districts, Supaul, Saharsa, Madhepura, Araria and Purnia were severely affected.

These districts have generally been vulnerable with poor development indicators in health, nutrition,

literacy and economic status and hence found it increasingly difficult to cope with the challenges

posed by the floods.

Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) in Bihar

After the large-scale floods, which occurred in 2007, the Bihar State Disaster Management Authority

(BSDMA) was set up, under the provisions of the Disaster Management Act, 2005.12 However, the

government faced severe resource constraints in meeting the demand of the affected population in

the 2008 Kosi floods, as considerable resources were already utilized in the previour year. In 2008,

the Government of Bihar (GoB) responded with relief and rehabilitation in the flood affected areas. It

set up 360 relief camps within schools and colleges, and installed tents for evacuees13. Understanding

8 Government of Bihar,. (n.d.). Bihar State Disaster Management Authority. Retrieved from http://bsdma.org/Home.aspx 9 Government of Bihar, (2015). Roadmap for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030. Retrieved from

http://www.disastermgmt.bih.nic.in/Circulars/Draft_Bihar_DRR%20Roadmap.pdf 10 Ibid. 11 Government of Bihar, (2015). Roadmap for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030. Retrieved from

http://www.disastermgmt.bih.nic.in/Circulars/Draft_Bihar_DRR%20Roadmap.pdf 12 Ibid. 13 Government of Bihar, World Bank. (2010). Bihar Kosi Floods (2008) Needs Assessment Report. The World Bank.

India, K. C. (2013). Knowledge, Attitude and Practice on School Safety Programme. Retrieved from

https://www.humanitarianresponse.info/system/files/documents/files/kap_in_bihar_practice.pdf

3 3



the urgency of the situation, development partners including UNICEF, UNDP, the World Bank, and

European Commission initiated immediate emergency response to the floods to support the

government. UNICEF with financial assistance of Directorate-General for European Civil Protection

and Humanitarian Aid Operations (ECHO) implemented a flood recovery programme in 68 villages of

the five flood affected districts. The recovery programme started in September 2008 and completed

by March 201014. UNICEF further raised funds in support of the early recovery programme and spent

around 9 million dollars in humanitarian response15.

In 2014, GoB and BSDMA, developed the State Disaster Management Plan (SDMP) for Bihar, which

was approved by the Government of Bihar in the year 2014. The plan would assess the vulnerability

of different areas within each district and devise measures for disaster mitigation16. In addition to

GoB’s DRR interventions focused on flood preparedness and emergency response, in 2011, the Bihar

field office of UNICEF, made a strategic shift in addition to flood recovery tofocusing on facilitating

communities to access resources from Government programmes/schemes to implement their own

(Community based) Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) programmes.

Government of Bihar’s DRR Initiatives

As discussed, GoB has taken several initiatives to respond to the growing needs of disaster

prone/affected regions in the state, and has been extensively supported by several development

partners including UNICEF. For example, the SDMP was developed from the perspective of a new

paradigm in the disaster management approach that is prevention, mitigation and preparedness.

Further, based on the new guidelines of the Sendai framework and lessons learnt from the Third UN

World Conference for Disaster Risk Reduction, GoB developed the Disaster Risk Reduction Roadmap

for 2015-2030. The roadmap has been developed in line with the four priorities of Sendai framework

namely: a) understanding the disaster risk, b) strengthening disaster risk governance, c) investing in

disaster risk resilience, and d) enhancing disaster preparedness to build back better. UNICEF played a

key role in developing the roadmap for the state.

Box 1.1: Global Frameworks on DRR

The Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA)17 was the global charter for disaster risk reduction efforts

between 2005 and 2015. Its goal was to substantially reduce disaster losses by 2015 - in lives, and in

the social, economic, and environmental assets of communities and countries. Post the adoption of

HFA, there has been reduction of disaster risk, enhancement of capacities for disaster risk

management, and development of policies/programmes for disaster mitigation at local, national,

regional and global levels. However, its implementation highlighted some gaps in addressing critical

disaster risk factors. These gaps indicated a need to develop an action-oriented framework. On 18

March 2015, UN Member States adopted the Sendai Framework18 for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-

2030, the successor instrument to the HFA.

14 UNICEF. (2016, April). Terms of Reference - Evaluation of CBDRR-SSP. UNICEF. 15 Ibid. 16 ibid. 17 Unisdr. (2005). Hyogo Framework for Action. Retrieved from https://www.unisdr.org/2005/wcdr/intergover/official-doc/L-docs/Hyogo-framework-for-action-english.pdf 18 United Nations, (2015). Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction. Retrieved from http://www.preventionweb.net/files/43291_sendaiframeworkfordrren.pdf

4



Figure 1.2: Evolution of disaster management measures in Bihar

5



5 5



UNICEF’s support to DRR Initiatives

UNICEF has supported DRR efforts from a social and behaviour change perspective, ensuring that

children and vulnerable groups understand the simple and practical actions required to protect lives

in the case of disasters. Along with the GoB, the development partners too have been working on

disaster risk reduction in the state. Post Kosi floods, UNICEF shifted its disaster response strategy from

relief and rehabilitation to disaster risk reduction and preparedness. While the immediate goal of

UNICEF was to take relief and rehabilitation measures, it was important to reduce the vulnerability of

the communities living in multi hazard prone districts in Bihar by creating leadership for disaster risk

reduction. The aim was to address the disaster risk and vulnerabilities in the six disaster prone districts

of Bihar, using the knowledge and strength of the communities, as well as, resources from the

government programmes and schemes.

Box 1.2: UNICEF DRR Initiatives in India

DRR initatiaveshave been taken-up by UNICEF in other states of India - West Bengal in 2000, Assam

in 2009, and Madhya Pradesh (MP), which enabled UNICEF to transfer some of its learning in Bihar.

UNICEF’s CBDRR programme implemented along with the Government of West Bengal led to

sustained joint action for disaster risk reduction and the strengthening of the civil defence

department. The department played a major role in enhancing response preparedness, and

strengthening of institutions for sustaining the capacity development efforts in West Bengal.

The UNICEF led CBDRR in MP reached out to 250 villages in 10 selected districts. The project

envisaged preparation of VDMPs and District Disaster Management Plans (DDMP) to enable district

administration to undertake disaster risk reduction measures. These learnings have helped the

CBDRR-SSP programme in Bihar in initiating and improving its interventions.

The Community Based Disaster Risk Reduction (CBDRR) Programme and the School Safety Programme

(SSP) were initiated in the year 2011 to prepare the communities, including children, to deal with

disasters and associated risks in a more informed manner. UNICEF along with the NGO partners

facilitated the process of building community networks and making DRR plans to help build skills and

forge linkages with the government. Further, children in schools were provided with the knowledge

related to disasters and disaster preparedness and were mobilized to develop plans that would make

their schools disaster resilient.

The NGO partners liaise with the government officials and functionaries to support communities in

leveraging resources, especially from the District Administration and the Education Department. They

conduct capacity building activities that focus on disaster preparedness and disseminate information

on various government schemes. Further, technical assistance is provided through trainings with

school teachers and block (sub-district) level education functionaries at the Block Resource Centre

(BRC). In addition to this, their capacities have also been built to systematically integrate DRR into

their working framework.

The following table lists the NGO partners in each of the programme districts:

CBDRR-SSP NGO Partners in Bihar, India

S. No Name of the NGO District

1. Ghoghardiha Prakhand Swarajya Vikas Sangh (GPSVS) Supaul

2. Bihar Sewa Samiti (BSS) Darbhanga and Madhubani

6 6



3. Samajik Chetna Kendra (SCK) Madhubani

4. Samajik Shodh Evam Vikas Kendra (SSEVK) East Champaran

5. Centre for All Round Development (CARD) Samastipur

6. Grameen Development Services (GDS) Sitamarhi

1.4.1 Community Based Disaster Risk Reduction Programme (CBDRR)

UNICEF initiated the CBDRR programme in 2011 in 68 villages in five flood prone districts- Supaul,

Saharsa, Madhepura, Araria and Purnia, and progressively expanded to 255 villages in six multi hazard

prone districts- East Champaran, Darbangha, Madhubani, Samastipur, Sitamarhi and Supaul. The

programme has been further expanded upto 1,122 villages in the existing six disricts, as a part of scale

up activities started in 2015.

Under the CBDRR programme, communities are engaged in undertaking annual ‘risk aware planning’

as per the prioritized risks for the year and their capacity to follow-up on the plan. The participatory

planning process unfolds through (a) community mobilization (including men and women in

community and children in schools), and (b) organization and capacity building (to undertake DRR

planning to reduce disaster risk through local action).

According to the TOR, the objectives of CBDRR are as follows:

People at-risk of disasters have their own annual DRR plan at village and school level;

The DRR Plan is in the hands of capable local people to follow it up with the duty bearers

and others;

Government and people come together to implement risk informed development

priorities of the people.

UNICEF and NGO partners have over the years focused on developing institutions within the

community such as the Village Disaster Management Committee (VDMC), and training members for

the purpose of annual planning, review and presentation of the DRR plans within the Gram Sabhas19.

Other major stakeholders in this planning exercise include children, women, men, thematic task

forces, DRR catalysts, Panchayati Raj representatives and Frontline Workers at the village level.

Through a consultative process, they play a critical role in action planning to ensure disaster

preparedness. There are specific issues such as - flood preparedness, fire safety measures, protection

from seasonal diseases (e.g. diarrhea) etc. that are discussed with target groups including women and

children within the village, in addition to building of toilets, raising of handpumps etc. Further, these

village level individuals contribute in seasonal preparedness activities and participate in Aam Sabhas

that are village level open meetings.

The block and district level officials act as enablers of the two programmes by taking prompt action

on specific requests from the villages.20

1.4.2 School Safety Programme

Along with the CBDRR programme, a School Safety Programme (SSP) was initiated (on pilot basis) in

155 schools in East Champaran, Darbangha, Madhubani, Samastipur, Sitamarhi and Supaul, with an

objective to equip children with the necessary knowledge and practical skills to deal with disasters

and making their behavioral spaces safe. The programme since 2015 has been scaled-up to a total of

19 A meeting of all the adults (18+), who live in the area covered by the Panchayat (a cluster of villages and habitations) 20 More information on the process is provided in Annex 3

7 7



3,318 schools, and includes implementation activities being undertaken in an additional district of

Vaishali.

Drawing from CBDRR, SSP21 includes planning at school level where children22 participate to learn and

plan for DRR in the schools. The programme envisages a sustainable life cycle supported by a

dedicated community of actors inclusive of staff and children. Through regular trainings and the use

of innovative and participatory teaching practices, children have gained the capacity and confidence

to conduct DRR focused activities. Children have been given the responsibility to identify the possible

risks/ hazards within their school premises, which has resulted in a shift in the approach by looking at

risks from a child’s perspective. Further, the SSP has been built on the success of existing bodies within

the school community, such as the Bal Sansad, Meena Manch, and School Management Committee

(SMC) instituted under Sarva Shikshha Abhiyan (SSA)23, and provided them with an effective

mechanism for dealing with disasters.

As part of SSP, linkages of schools are established with appropriate service providers for sustained

capacity, service provision and safety audits. The focus is to organise meetings/ consultations with

local service providers including police, civil defence, fire stations, and medical and other emergency

service providers like National Disaster Response Force (NDRF) / State Disaster Response Force (SDRF).

Further, the SSP was recognized by the GoB, and triggered the launch of “Mukhyamantri School Safety

Programme (MSSP)” to cover over 73,000 schools in Bihar, launched in line with the Bihar State DRR

Roadmap.

1.4.3 CBDRR-SSP Theory of Change24

The theory of change of the CBDRR-SSP programme is based on a simple model. The situation in the

villages affected by floods was not conducive to develop a complex and elaborate programme delivery

model. The villages had just recovered from the floods and the community needed to be mobilized to

a shared cause. There was a need to change the perception of the community about itself and convert

them from relief seekers to agents of change. Any complexities in the programme design would have

made its acceptance difficult and time taking. Accordingly, the UNICEF programme team designed a

simple theory of change and a corresponding easy to accept and adopt CBDRR-SSP.

The CBDRR-SSP aims at bringing the communities and government together for addressing disaster

risk and climate change issues through developmental actions. The programme has been designed

under the context of some pre and post conditions. The underlying theory behind the programme is

that men, women and children have the capacity to undertake risk analysis and prioritize risks to take

planned actions for disaster risk reduction in coordination with local governance mechanisms

(panchayat, frontline workers, block and district administration). The pre-conditions comprising of a

set of inputs and processes lead to the expected outcomes. It includes (i) active and responsible

participation of NGO partners, the community and children; and (ii) preparation of social mobilization

strategy and inclusive processes that address social and gender inequity issues. The other key pre-

condition, which determines the success of the programme, is the change of attitude of community

from fatalism to creators of opportunities for disaster risk reduction. To make the efforts sustainable,

21 The broad contours of the programme are provided in Annex 3 22 Children between age group of 11-15, studying in classes 6, 7 and 8 23 Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) is Government of India's flagship programme for achievement of Universalization of Elementary Education (UEE) in a time bound manner, as mandated by 86th amendment to the Constitution of India making free and compulsory Education to the Children of 6-14 years age group, a Fundamental Right. 24 The “Theory of Change” diagram has been provided by UNICEF, Bihar

8 8



pre-conditions comprise of designing village level learning platforms to build DRR perspectives, learn

the DRR implementation and track the results.

These pre-conditions collectively lead to the outcome, which is a community linked with the

government to jointly tackle disasters and reduce related risks. The community is better informed, has

access to resources and there is perceptible commitment to the common cause, that is, disaster

resilient villages. Post the achievement of outcomes, the communities are expected to keep fulfilling

a set of post conditions, such as, regular risk analysis, protection of development gains, and usage of

local knowledge, fortitude and resources for attaining the impact of CBDRR-SSP. The ultimate impact

of the programme is the improved safety and security of men, women and children from disasters.

The CBDRR-SSP theory of change diagram is presented below.

9



10 10



2 EVALUATION PURPOSE, OBJECTIVES, SCOPE & METHODOLOGY

Purpose

The purpose of the evaluation is to draw lessons from the CBDRR-SSP initiative in Bihar based on the

OECD-DAC criteria of: relevance, effectiveness, sustainability, and gender equity. The evaluation aims

to provide useful insights and learning, which would enable UNICEF, GoB and implementing partners

to devise a strategy for scaling up and adapting the CBDRR and SSP interventions. Moreover, it would

support UNICEF to strengthen its key advocacy issues around CBDRR and designing similar

programmes for other parts of the country. At the GoB level, it would help inform the DRR roadmap

and support its implementation. Further, government, NGOs and other stakeholders will benefit from

the evaluation and use the findings for designing any future DRR interventions.

Objectives

Following the presentation of the inception report to the Evaluation Reference Group25, the objectives

of the evaluation remain unchanged from the Terms of Reference (ToR) and are as follows:

a) Assess the relevance, effectiveness and sustainability of the bottom-up approach for risk

informed development planning and implementation through CBDRR-SSP at village, school,

community and government level in all the six intervention districts of Bihar;

b) As part of the effectiveness criterion, conduct a knowledge, attitude and practices (KAP) test

with a select sample of adolescent students in the six districts;

c) Assess CBDRR-School Safety programme against the Sendai Framework for DRR (2015);

d) Document three in-depth case studies to understand the processes it underwent to be

disaster resilient;

e) Identify and document lessons learnt and best practices of the programme:

Key factors and best practices contributing to the programmes successes or failures;

Lessons learnt that can be externally applied and provide recommendations;

Scaling-up approaches and better strategies for scaling-up CBDRR programme.

Scope

The evaluation focused on the OECD-DAC criteria of relevance, effectiveness, and sustainability of the

programme strategies and activities in enhancing the resilience of the at-risk communities, especially

children and women. Additionally, it has attempted to understand how the programme is being

perceived by the government functionaries at the block, district and state levels. The criteria of impact

and efficiency have not been covered under this evaluation. The criterion of efficiency was deliberately

kept out of the purview of the evaluation because an independent study for that purpose was

conducted in the year 201326. Impact as a criterion was also not included because the evaluation was

being carried out ex-post, without the requisite comparable baseline data to assess impact rigorously.

Further, the CBDRR-SSP was designed to promote risk preparedness and build resilience in the

community against the vagaries of natural hazards. Therefore, the evaluation was restricted to

measuring the outcomes of the programmes against these three parameters.

25 For every evaluation, an independent Evaluation Reference Group (ERG) consisting of UNICEF and non-UNICEF experts is constituted by UNICEF India. The ERG serves as an advisory body which supports the evaluation by a) providing strategic direction and technical inputs, b) monitoring progress and quality, c) supporting dissemination of findings, as applicable, and d) bringing critical issues to the notice of the UNICEF Evaluation Manager. 26 An efficiency study was conducted by Knowledge Community on Children in India, which has been referenced in Section 4.4

11 11



The fieldwork was carried out in six districts of Bihar (Supaul, Madhubani, Darbhanga, Samastipur,

Sitamarhi and East Champaran), and covered the period of 2011-16. The evaluation was conducted

from June 2016 to July 2017.

The Terms of Reference clearly specified the scope of evaluation, which is reiterated below:

a) The areas covered in the evaluation are CBDRR-SSP models, progress trajectory (how the

programme graduated from one level to another level), implementation strategy/programme

perspective, programme processes, community institutions, Task Forces, DRR Catalysts, DRR

plan, monitoring mechanisms, leveraging & linkages with GP, school administration at various

levels, service providers, scaling-up approach, results achieved so far in terms of resilience

building, system change for DRR (i.e. risk informed GP plans/School Development plans).

b) CBDRR-SSP evaluated against Sendai Framework for DRR.

Approach

The evaluation followed a structured approach (refer to Annex 2 for key evaluation questions) to meet

the objectives. The overall approach was as follows:

a) Consultative and Participatory:

The team regularly consulted with UNICEF to meet the evaluation objectives. Further, it maintained

close contact with the state, district and block level implementation agencies (a detailed list has been

given in section 2.5), community members including women, marginalized groups etc. to develop a

deeper understanding of CBDRR-SSP. This consultative process helped in meeting the expectation of

the implementing stakeholders. In addition, the stakeholders played a critical role in the design and

implementation of the evaluation. The design of evaluation tools was guided by the UNICEF DRR and

evaluation team. The implementation of the evaluation was supported by UNICEF’s NGO partners,

who assisted the evaluation team to reach remote schools and villages in the interior regions of the

Bihar.

b) Gender sensitive and inclusive:

During the course of the evaluation, a socially inclusive and gender sensitive methodology was

followed. Through the FGDs and Key Informant Interviews (KIIs), perspectives of various community

members from within different villages were taken. These included separate discussions with

women’s groups to understand their role in the DRR planning and execution. The school level KAP

surveys also ensured the representation of both girls and boys from different age groups and social

categories.

Further, to ensure gender sensitivity in execution of the assignment, the evaluation team had a mix of

female and male members. The core team had two female members out of four and field team

comprised of three female members out of eight. As the evaluation involved engagement with the

vulnerable and marginalized communities, the team was careful about the local context, and at the

same time, was committed to inclusion of disadvantaged social groups such as scheduled castes (SCs)

and scheduled tribes (STs), women and girls, and persons with disabilities.

Methodology

The evaluation methodology followed a logical sequence of inter-related steps.

12 12



Secondary Information Review

The evaluation team reviewed available literature, reports and other data sources to understand the

context of the programme.

Scoping Visit & Zero Pilot of Tools

The team conducted an initial meeting with the Evaluation Manager and the DRR Specialist at the

UNICEF office and undertook a scoping visit to Bihar. The evaluation team met the Chief of Field Office,

the DRR Officer and the evaluation officer from UNICEF and the NGO partners. The team undertook a

field visit to Samastipur and visited two villages (Salaha & Basuari) and one school (Middle School

Jitwaria). In the village and school, the team interacted with the VDMC members, DRR Catalysts, SDMC

members, School Safety Focal Teacher, DRR Champions, children and adolescents.

During the scoping visit, the draft evaluation questionnaire was tested on a pilot basis with the

community. This exercise enabled the evaluation team to better understand the programme and

helped in finalising the tools. Subsequently, a brief report on the scoping visit was submitted to

UNICEF.

Sampling

To execute this assignment, purposive and convenience sampling technique was used to select the

blocks, villages and schools. Purposive sampling ensured that the perspectives of the key stakeholders

at all levels can be decisive in explaining how the programme has been implemented. Further, data

was collected from respondents who are typically available at the school and village levels, making it

convenient. The select sample and respondents for data collection purpose has been explained

below:-

a) Selection of blocks, villages and schools

The villages and schools were selected based on the following set of indicative criteria:

Village population size - large/medium/small

Risk profile/level based on categories of disasters – low/medium/high

Programme implementation performance as per Bihar Field Office

Self-graded villages and schools (A= Excellent, B= Very Good, C= Average, D= Needs

Improvement)

The final list of selected districts, blocks, villages and schools is as follows:

S.

No. District Block Villages Schools

1 Supaul Basantpur Banelipatti MS Hriday Nagar

MS Bhagwanpur 2

Chhatapur Matiyari MS Mahdipur

2 Darbhanga Ghanshyampur Ashma MS Godhail

MS Tumaul

Kiratpur Chhilkora MS Kiratpur

3 Madhubani Madhepur Bhargama MS Bheja

MS Pachhi

Bisfi Tisi UMS Baingra

13 13



S.

No. District Block Villages Schools

4 Sitamarhi Runnisaidpur Raipur MS Sirkhariya

Koriyahi MS HajipurBasant

Belsand MS Ibrahimpur

5 East Champaran Banjaria Kukurjhari MS Gokhula

MS Jatwa

Motihari Jhitkahiya Mukhia MS Jhitkahiya

6 Samastipur Kalyanpur Dariyapar MS Jitwariya

Akauna MS Sormar

MS Lachrampur

b) Sample size & its distribution against categories of respondents

The selected respondents for Focus Group Discussions (FGDs), Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) and

Knowledge, Attitude and Practice (KAP) surveys is as follows:

S.

No. Respondents FGDs KIIs

KAP

Survey

No. of

Districts

Total

Sample

1 Village Disaster Management

Committee(VDMC)

2

6 12

2 School Disaster Management

Committee (SDMC)

2

6 12

3 Implementing NGO Partners 1

1

4 Children (10-15 years) 2

6 12

5 Women (18-35 years) 2

6 12

6 DRR Catalysts

4

6 24

7 Gram Pradhan – Mukhiya

2

6 12

8 Anganwadi Worker (AWW)

2

6 12

9 Auxiliary Nurse Midwife (ANM)

2

6 12

10 School Safety Focal Teachers

2

6 12

11 School Principals/ Head Masters

1

6 6

12 Block Education Officer

1

6 6

13 Block Development Officer

1

6 6

14 District Magistrate

1

3 3

15 District Education Officer

1

3 3

16 Two State Level Representatives 2

17 Adolescents in School (age group of

10-15)

45 6 270

The list of respondents provided in the ToR were discussed during inception phase and following

changes were suggested—

Conduct 2 FGDs with DRR catalysts instead of the originally proposed KIIs;

Undertake 2 KIIs with state representatives.

These were based on the recommendations of the Bihar Field Office, as it was felt that conducting

FGDs with DRR catalysts would be beneficial and draw more insights. This was corroborated

during the FGD sessions with DRR catalysts, who were able to add value to the discussion in a

14 14



larger platform.

Further, in the final sample, two state representatives were interviewed. This helped in

understanding the strategies for scaling-up followed by the Bihar State Disaster Management

Authority (BSDMA).

Designing of Evaluation Tools

Based on insights from the scoping visit, the team developed draft evaluation tools. Further, the key

evaluation questions given in the ToR along with the outcomes of pilot testing also supported the

designing of the FGDs checklist, KII tools and the KAP questionnaires. In addition, the following

standard guidelines were referred to draft the evaluation tools:

CBDRR-SSP Evaluation Framework document

CBDRR-SSP Theory of Change Sendai Framework

United Nations Evaluations Guidelines (UNEG) document

Approval of Evaluation Protocol and Tools by UNICEF and the Institutional Review Board (IRB)

The evaluation design and the evaluation tools were reviewed and approved by UNICEF, the

Evaluation Reference Group (ERG) and the Independent Evaluation Committee (IEC) of Ekjut; a civil

society organization in Jharkhand.

Translation and Piloting of Evaluation Tools

The approved tools were translated into Hindi and re-translated into English to retain the exact

meaning of the questions. The translated tools were piloted in a village that was not a part of the final

sample. The process ensured that there were no redundancies in the questions and the language and

flow of questions were appropriate. Based on the piloting, the tools were modified and finalized.

Training of Evaluation Team

The Team Leader and the Evaluation Expert trained the team members on the final tools. The two-

day training was organized at IPE Global’s Patna office and following sessions were conducted:

The basic concepts of DRR

Background of the UNICEF CBDRR & SSP

FGD Guides, KII Questionnaires and KAP Survey

Fieldwork

Following the training of enumerators, the evaluation team including the Evaluation Expert, Gender

& Qualitative Specialist and a Research Associate led by the Team Leader initiated the fieldwork. The

team was split into two sub-teams and each team was responsible to undertake the FGDs, KIIs and

KAPs in respective sample villages. The team of experts and enumerators completed all the data

collection at the village and school level (Annex 5). The core experts undertook/ supervised the FGDs

and KIIs and initiated the KAPs, which was and supervised throughout the duration of the fieldwork.

Analysis of the Primary Data

Majority of the collected data being qualitative in nature was cleaned, coded, validated and analyzed

15 15



against the parameters of relevance, effectiveness, sustainability and gender equity using

spreadsheet.

Ethical Considerations

The evaluation was guided by the United Nations Evaluation Guidelines (UNEG)27 and received ethical

approval from an Independent Ethics Committee linked to Ekjut, a local civil society organisation in

Jharkhand (Annex 4). The design of the evaluation incorporated a clear human rights, equity and

gender perspective. The team integrated the aforementioned dimensions into the execution of the

assignment, such as inclusion of girls, women and excluded communities, and analysed the effects of

the CBDRR-School Safety Programme on such groups.

To ensure impartiality, the evaluation team took into account the views of all stakeholders. As

requested by UNICEF, the data was disaggregated by gender and Scheduled Caste (SC)/ Other

Backward Classes (OBC)/ Extremely Backward Classes (EBC) status to determine whether the

intervention yielded more positive or negative effects on one group or the other. Children were one

of the key stakeholders in the evaluation process and the questionnaire & observation involved them.

Thereby, appropriate informed consent (from participating schools) and assent (from children

themselves) was collected prior to engaging them in the evaluation activities. In addition, the

evaluation team, based on the feedback from UNICEF, adjusted the FGDs with children to be more

child-friendly with respect to the duration and ways of engagement. The compendium on Ethical

Research Involving Children (ERIC)28 was refered to ensure that the evaluation design and protocol

incorporated respect for the dignity, well-being and rights of all children, irrespective of the context.

The UNEG norms29 and standards30 were observed throughout the engagement with respondents and

other evaluation stakeholders. The team ensured the confidentiality and security of sensitive

information derived from the FGDs, KIIs and KAPs and prior consent was taken from each stakeholder

before interacting with them.

The evaluation team ensured that the methods applied in the evaluation of the CBDRR-SSP caused no

physical or psychological harm to the participants. The team strictly followed the obligation of

evaluations, that is, independence, impartiality, credibility, no conflict of interest, honesty and

integrity, and accountability. The evaluators observed the obligations towards the participants

including respect for Dignity and Diversity, Rights, Confidentiality, and Avoidance of Harm.

The four obligations to participants are further elaborated as follows:

Box 2.1: Obligations to Participants

RESPECT FOR DIGNITY AND DIVERSITY

Respect differences in culture, local customs, religious beliefs and practices, personal

interaction, gender roles, age and ethnicity

Consult locally when planning the research and developing protocols

Optimize demands on the respondents’ time, and respect people’s right to privacy

Ensure that opinions and answers provided by the adolescents and children are respected

27 United Nations, U. (n.d.). UNEG Ethical Guidelines for Evaluations. Retrieved from www.uneval.org/document/download/548 28 United Nations Office of Research,. (n.d.). Compendium of Ethical Research Involving Children. Retrieved from Compendium of Ethical

Research Involving Children 29United Nations, (n.d.). UNEG: Norms for Evaluation in the UN System. Retrieved from www.unevaluation.org/document/download/2601 30United Nations, (n.d.). UNEG Standards for Evaluation in the UN System. Retrieved from www.unevaluation.org/document/download/2601

16 16



RIGHTS

The participants will be treated as autonomous agents and will be given the time and

information to decide whether or not they wish to participate

They reserve the right to taking independent decision without any pressure or fear of penalty

for not participating

Care will be taken to ensure that relatively powerless, ‘hidden’, or otherwise excluded groups

are represented

CONFIDENTIALITY

Respect people’s right to provide information in confidence and making the participants aware

of the scope and limits of confidentiality

Ensure utmost care and sensitivity towards adolescents’ children’s right to privacy and ensure

that their information remains confidential

Securely store, protect and dispose of information/data that has been collected

AVOIDANCE OF HARM

Evaluators shall seek to minimize risks to, and burden on, those participating in the evaluation

Employ strategies to minimize distress for all participants, especially adolescents and children

participating in the research

Take measures to ensure that harm is not caused to adolescents, children, families or

communities31

Limitations

Some of the limitations experienced during the course of the evaluation included:

i. Size of the sample The evaluation team visited 12 villages and 18 schools. Given the small size of the sample, it is

important to note that the results are specific to the selected villages and schools and may not

uniformly apply to the entire programme implementation area.

ii. Data gaps in triangulation of findings To the extent possible, the evaluation team triangulated the findings using the different information

sources - KIIs/FGDs with key stakeholders and review of programme documents. However, some

findings, which were ex post facto, such as, different children in one school reporting different

schedules for mock drills and hazard hunts during KAP did not leave room for a field based

revalidation/ triangulation.

iii. Duration of interactions with the district & state officials As per the evaluation design, the team had to conduct structured interviews with the district and state

level officials. However, due to prior engagement and their busy schedules, some of interviews did

not follow a structured approach and used a discussion method, which did not yield specific insights

expected.

31 ibid

17 17



3 RELEVANCE OF CBDRR-SSP

This section explores the relevance of the CBDRR-SSP programme.

Relevance Description

Key Evaluation

Question

To what extent are the objectives of the CBDRR – School Safety programme

intervention still valid?

Secondary

Evaluation Questions

Are the activities and outputs of CBDRR – School Safety programme consistent

with overall goal and attainment of the objectives?

Is the design of the CBDRR intervention appropriate to reach the target

population?

Do the DRR plans reflect the needs and participation, and opportunities of

children, women and marginalized groups from a gender and equity perspective?

To what extent the objectives of the School Safety programme were valid when

it was first implemented or throughout the duration of implementation?

Are the objectives of the CBDRR – School Safety programme consistent with the

Sendai Framework for DRR?

Additional Question Do the CBDRR-SSP objectives, match with the DRR approach of DRR Bihar and other

stakeholders?

Methodology used

to assess relevance

Reviewing existing literature on DRR activities: The team thoroughly reviewed

the existing literature on DRR activities carried out at national as well as the state

levels. The literature ranged from official directives to UNICEF programme

documents.

Reviewing the Theory of Change: The theory of change shared was reviewed and

used to design the evaluation tools for analysing the outcomes and objectives of

the programme.

Using perceptions of stakeholders and observations from the field.

Alignment of Activities and Outputs of CBDRR–SSP to its goals

The overall goal of both the programmes is to “Build Disaster Risk Resilient Communities”. In order to

meet the goal, both the programmes have clear objectives. For evaluating the relevance of the

programmes vis-à-vis the objectives and goal, the evaluation team analysed each of the objectives and

the expected activities and outputs corresponding to it.

Objectives of CBDRR Programme

a) People at-risk of disasters have their own annual DRR plan

As per the conceptualized programme design, risk reduction planning is conducted at the village level

with the intended output of creating village disaster management plans. These plans are developed

with an understanding and motivation to make the community safe from disasters. This is expected

to be an inclusive process involving the village members - represented by the Village Disaster

Management Committee (VDMC), village Mukhiya and frontline workers. During the process,

discussions are conducted to prepare a budget, assess availability of resources from government

schemes and identify ways to leverage community time and collective efforts.

The team found that all the 12 villages were conducting this planning activity. The VDMCs over the

years have evolved to become strong representative community institutions. They not only conduct

planning activities, but also independently interface with block and district level officials with minimal

support from implementing NGO partners. While there are no strict rules pertaining to the tenure of

18 18



the VDMCs and they are more or less permanent community institutions, the membership is flexible.

When a member drops out, a new member replaces her/him in consultation with the community.

With regard to the composition of members, on an average there were five female members per

VDMC out of the ones sampled, children are not included as members.

Composition of members in the sampled VDMCs

Sno. District Village Women

Members

Total

1 Supaul Banelipatti 10 18

2 Supaul Matiyari 6 20

3 Madhubani Bhadgama 1 11

4 Madhubani Tisi 4 11

5 Darbhanga Asma 5 18

6 Darbhanga Chikkora 4 11

7 Samastipur Akona 0 6

8 Samastipur Dariyapar 0 11

9 Sitamarhi Kotihari 21 22

10 Sitamarhi Raipur 9 16

11 E. Champaran Kukurjhari 3 14

12 E. Champaran Jhitkahiya 2 13

Overall, the VDMCs were taking the lead in

identifying and prioritizing disaster-

associated risks, for example, low hand

pumps, low lying houses, poor road

connectivity, lack of bridges, and other

infrastructural issues in the village. They

were completing the risk reduction

planning formats, which is a record (since

2011-12) that the VDMCs maintain of all the

disaster risk associated activities that have

been conducted at the village level thus far.

Further, these VDMCs were meeting

regularly (at least once a month) to update

their plans continually.

Further, under the programme, thematic task forces

have been constituted in every village. Some of these

thematic areas are Health and Nutrition, Water

Sanitation and Hygiene, Child protection and

Environment and Climate Change. The membership of

these task forces varies from four to six members. Their

primary responsibilities are to increase awareness on

their thematic areas among the community, identify

areas of action, and inform the VDMCs accordingly.

These task forces have also contributed to the

increased awareness on addressing disasters and

Box 3.1: All the 12 VDMCs who were consulted during the field-visit were making annual DRR plans

Plans are made by discussing and understanding the

kinds of problems/issues that people are facing

These plans are made by seeking consent and

approval from people in the Gram/Ward Sabha

Maps are made to identify threats and

vulnerabilities during Aam Sabhas

These plans are then given to the Mukhiyas to be

included in the Village Development Plans

People are given advice on how to deal with

disasters at individual level during these interactions

A task force member demonstrating how to use bottles to float during floods

19 19



underlying risks among the programme villages.

b) The DRR Plan is supported by

committed community

members with DRR

perspective to follow it up

with duty bearers and others

To meet the stated objectives, and

effectively prepare and implement the

VDMP, VDMCs have been formed in each

of the programme villages. The VDMC

comprises of people selected by the

village community based based on

specified selection criteria (Box 3.2).

The VDMCs aim to address issues and problems that help the entire village without exhibiting any

discriminatory attitudes towards the people in the community/ village.

The findings from the field demonstrate strong presence of the VDMCs. The members have been

proactive in conducting the DRR planning exercise and ensuring the implementation of planned

activities. They have been able to engage with frontline workers (AWWs and ANMs) and duty bearers

including PRI members. In 9 out of 12 villages, the team found that these plans were discussed in detail

with the larger village community during aam sabhas. The VDMC members had the clear knowledge,

vision and thoroughness to make effective plans based on their own experience of living in a disaster

prone area, and their capacities, which have been built through the programme.

However, in the remaining cases it appeared that the VDMCs were experiencing difficulty in

conducting open meetings due to possible scepticism among the communities. For example, in Raipur

village (Sitamarhi) and Banjaria (East Champaran), the non-members from the villages discussed how

they felt that the VDMCs were only working for their benefit. A possible cause for this is that there

have been limited efforts in trying to sensitise the village population to understand the programme

and any of the VDMC members are not incentivized monetarily. These apprehensions also emerge

due to the slow process of behaviour change, a challenge all community based programmes

experience.

Despite resistance in some cases, the VDMCs have ensured that the prioritized action plan is taken to

the block and district level depending on the nature of activity. This was triangulated during the team

interactions with the officials, who clearly saw the need for such a programme and were regularly

interacting with VDMC members, especially the DRR catalysts. It is essential to note that the NGO

implementing partners have a facilitator’s role in taking these plans to higher authorities for approval.

These NGO partners have the desired motivation and leadership to support VDMCs in building disaster

resilient communities and villages.

c) Government and people come together to implement risk informed development priorities

of the people

Box 3.2: Selection Criteria for VDMC Membership

Highly self-motivated individuals with an inclination for

developmental activities for the benefit of their community.

Person’s availability in the village

Person having a good standing and acceptability in the

community

Person having experience in helping the community during

disasters as well as skills to handle disaster/emergency

situations

Thematic Task Force members being chosen for a particular

team should have some previous experience or interest in the

team’s area(s) of specialization.

20 20



One of the main activities envisioned by the

programme is mainstreaming the VDMPs conceived at

the village level. This involves organising ward and aam

sabhas, where these plans are discussed and approvals

sought. Further, a key role played by the VDMC

members is to support the frontline workers including

AWW and ANMs to address underlying risks such as

malnutrition, need for immunization, and promoting

sanitation and hygiene.

The evaluation findings suggest that the government

representatives as well as functionaries are being engaged to address risk-informed development

priorities of the people. This is done through community meetings at the village and ward levels. The

VDMCs reported that they regularly interact and engage with Panchayat representatives at the GP

level. This was triangulated during discussions with officials who also felt that the programme was

relevant.

Another level of interaction between the community members and the government is during

emergencies. There were instances recounted by the block and districts level officials, where the

people have extended their support.

This was especially common during seasonal floods and during breach of embankments. The NGO

implementing partners had a strong role to play in trying to bridge the gap between the government

and the community.

Overall, the CBDRR programme is meeting its envisioned objectives through its activities

and desired outputs in trying to Build Disaster Resilient Communities. The evidence

suggested that the communities have been capacitated to make their own plans and

interact with duty bearers at the local level.

Figure 3.1: Relevance of the CBDRR Programme according to Officials (Key Responses n=12)

2

2

10

5

10

Prioritize issues

Collect funds for implementation of plan

Prepare a list of works

Make village maps

Have discussions with other VDMC membersand villagers

Box 3.3: Supporting Activities of VDMC as identified by ANMs and AWWs

Identification of malnourished children

Support in organising the Village Health

Sanitation and Nutrition day.

Organise discussions around health and

nutrition focused activities

Ensure that pregnant women and

children receive supplementary nutrition

from AWW centres

“The NGOs along with the community members

act as the quick response team in case of

disasters, and accidents like drowning, snake

bites, etc. They play a major role in getting the

victim to the hospital” - BDO in Madhubani

“They warn us about disasters

immediately. They help in distributing

relief. They help in raising awareness” -

BDO in East Champaran

21 21



Objectives of SSP

a) Risks faced by children and teachers in schools during disasters are identified and

incorporated in the School Safety Plan

The activities to meet the SSP objectives have been clearly identified. The school community is

organized into School Disaster Management Committee (SDMC) with members from the Vidhyalay

Suraksha Samiti (VSS), a designated Sarva Shiksha Abhiyaan (SSA) body, Bal Sansad (BS) and Meena

Manch (MM). While the BS and MM are children from the school, the VSS is headed by the ward

members, and is expected to participate in SDMC meetings.

Following the formation of the SDMC, risks and vulnerabilities are identified by SDMC members

through Hazard Hunts. The children are oriented and split into groups to identify dangers in and

around schools. Once the dangers are identified, they are documented and discussed. The discussions

on the vulnerabilities are followed by the creation of a School Safety Plan, where there is

categorization and prioritization of risks. Once developed, this plan is submitted to the school

headmaster.

Figure 3.2: Process of making School Safety Plans

The evaluation findings indicate that all the schools visited had an updated plan, where the hazards,

threats and vulnerabilities had been identified and prioritized. They were able to identify clear focus

areas. For example, broken toilets, hand pumps, broken railings and lack of general cleanliness and

hygiene were common issues identified by them. The children, who were members of SDMC, were

able to lay out the process of how these school safety plans are further included in the school

development plans. Therefore, not only the risks in schools were identified but also, the disaster risks

reduction process was being led by children themselves.

b) The school community is organized to work with different stakeholders for addressing the

identified risks

The planned activities for implementing the School Safety Plans include:

Organizing meetings to share SSP with all the students, teachers, VSS and PRI;

VSS and PRIs negotiate with service providers;

Periodic maintenance of safety equipment.

22 22



The evaluation finds that all the 12 SDMCs reviewed were regularly meeting and undertaking activities

at the school level, where all the students and the school safety focal teachers participated. However,

there were limited instances where ward members were proactively engaging in the disaster planning

process. Further, interactions with the headmasters highlighted that greater efforts were required to

sensitize local bodies, especially PRIs in order to ensure their support in reducing risks at the school

level.

On the other hand, the BEOs and DEOs were supportive of the programme. This has been possible

due to the regular interactions and liaising of the implementing NGO partners with the block and

district officials.

c) Mitigation measures are taken to address identified structural and non-structural risks so

as to create much safer and resilient conditions for children and teachers

As per the design, once the plans are made, the SDMC including members from the ward members

are expected to negotiate with the BEO/DEO to address structural and non-structural risks faced by

the children.

Overall, mitigation measures are being undertaken at the school level but handholding support to

ensure access to resources and entitlements is required. In all the instances where the school has

witnessed significant changes, the NGO implementing partners have had a major role to play. For

example, in Middle School Tumaul32 in Darbhanga district, the NGO partner (Bihar Sewa Samiti) has

supported the installation of taps, which are at a convenient height for students. Further, they have

supported in linking the school with the District Administration for introducing infrastructural changes

including getting funds approved (approx. INR 18,00,000/-) for two additional school buildings.

d) Strengthening of the capacity, knowledge and awareness of all children and teachers in

order to address non-structural risks and the dos and dont's of various disasters

As a part of the programme, there are continuous capacity building, knowledge and awareness

32 Please refer to case study- Creating agents of change (Section 10.2)

Bef

ore

SSP

(2

01

1)

1. Not enough importance given to repair work

2. Limited practice of washing hands with soap

3 . Limited knowledge about disasters A

fte

r SS

P (

20

12

)

1. Now there are focused ways of dealing with disasters-hazards hunts, SDMP

2. Children now wash their hands with soap

3. Children are very enthusiastic about learning about disasters

Figure 3.3: Differences Experienced after Implementation of School Safety Programme

"We have given the application to the Mukhiya several times to fill the holes in the ground and raise

the structures. However we have not received any help or support from him. I have also told him

several times that children from classes 1-4 sit outside, and how there needs to be a room made for

it but nothing has happened" - Headmaster

23 23



activities conducted for teachers and children to address risk (structural and non-structural). This is

done through trainings and identifying peer educators amongst the students. Regular mock drills are

conducted in schools where children learn about the ways to deal with disasters. This is supplemented

with regular life-skills building activities including street plays, drawing competitions, quizzes,

essay/slogan writing and demonstrations.

Through interactions with the students, focal teachers, headmasters, BEOs and DEOs, it was evident

that children are regularly practicing and being trained on life-saving skills including mock drills. This

has been one of the biggest successes of the programme, as across all respondents, there was clear

mention of all the associated activities and subjects covered during the trainings. This includes basic

awareness on disasters, how to deal with them (mitigation measures), fire safety, water quality

monitoring and first aid.

Figure 3.4 depicts the key life skills learnt by the students as reported by the 12 SSFTs and 6

headmasters. The common responses included knowledge on what to do during disasters (stop, drop,

roll during fires; duck, cover, hold during earthquakes), how to maintain cleanliness and hygiene, first

aid skills including CPR and making stretchers, and basic road safety skills.

e) Linkage of schools with appropriate service providers established for sustained capacity

building, service provision and safety audits

The programme relies on the ownership and proactive role of the Department of Education (DoE) and

School Management including the Headmaster. This allows for effective implementation of the

programme because of different bodies working together to ensure school safety.

In the schools, the BEOs and DEOs understood and reinforced the importance and relevance of such

a programme. There was clear and consistent support extended from all functionaries of the DoE to

conduct trainings and build capacities of stakeholders, primarily of the children and teachers. These

trainings have been technically supported by all the NGO implementing partners, across the

programme districts (especially at the Block Resource Centre (BRC) level).

The officials discussed about how regular safety audits were conducted by them. They are regularly

Figure 3.4: Skills learnt by students as reported by HM and SSFT

24 24



visiting schools. However, clear monitoring mechanisms to assess the programme are currently not in

place to support the officials while conducting these audits.

Overall, the SSP is meeting its envisioned objectives through its activities and desired outputs.

Children, teachers and school administration see the relevance of this programme and proactively

participate to make it a success. However, there are some challenges that emerge while liaising and

interfacing with local PRIs, which needs more focus, especially while scaling up the programme. Like

the CBDRR programme, the SSP is moving towards its goal of building disaster resilient communities

despite the highlighted challenges.

Design of the CBDRR

This section examines the design of the CBDRR intervention and its reach. It starts with a brief

discussion on the design of the CBDRR programme followed by a discussion on how, if at all, has the

programme reached the target population. ‘The at risk communities’ living in the villages have been

identified as the primary target population. This includes at risk men, women and children from socio-

economially marginalized sections of the society.

Overview of the CBDRR Design

The programme is designed to conduct risk awareness planning, as per the needs of the community

and the risks that they identify. This is a participatory process, which unfolds through community

mobilization and formation of VDMCs. Following this, the communities are supported to acquire

necessary knowledge and skills to prepare DRR plans and help build linkages to access entitlements.

The DRR plan determines the pathway for change and move towards preparedness and risk sensitive

development.

Design Principles that ensure Reach

a) Participatory and bottom-up approach

The programme by design and approach is participatory in nature. Right from identification of the

programme area to the way communities are mobilized, the NGO partners ensure that the community

members are continually engaged and included. For example, in order to form VDMCs, meetings are

conducted with key stakeholders including PRIs, frontline workers and community elders and leaders.

Further, it is expected that the VDMC has representation from different groups in the village and

remains inclusive and non-discriminatory.

b) Community and people centric

The CBDRR programme is embedded within the community, and the people’s understanding and

experience of dealing with disasters. People in the programme areas are vulnerable to different types

and severity of disasters. The model fundamentally believes that people at risk have a strong interest

in using their own capacities and volunteerism to improve their lives and becoming disaster resilient.

This is reflected in the way the village disaster management plans are made, which account for

differences and similarities within the village while dealing with disasters.

c) Leveraging resources

The programme aims at leveraging resources and schemes through existing government programmes.

It does not involve a grant or an aid based approach towards building disaster resilience hence

equitably including target communities. It motivates and encourages people to articulate their rights

25 25



in order to become disaster resilient and increase accountability among government officials.

d) Engaging and targeting multiple stakeholders

The belief and foundation of the programme is that disasters affect everyone. Therefore, the

programme intends to impact everyone who is a part of the village community and eco system.

However, special attention is paid to the needs of women and children. In addition to focusing on

immediate disaster risks, underlying risks such as malnutrition, birth registration and WASH related

risks are addressed.

Perspectives on the reach of the programme

In order to understand the reach of the CBDRR programmes, responses from four major respondent

categories have been analysed - VDMC members, DRR catalysts, women and children. The VDMC

members and DRR catalysts, during the discussions, focused on the design aspects, which allow them

to engage with the village population. Further, they have provided examples of how the programme

has been useful in building their own capacities.

a) VDMC members

The programme has been able to engage the VDMCs in order to influence the village community at

large. VDMCs have been mobilized and capacitated in each of the villages. According to the FGDs

conducted, all the 12 VDMCs are having regular discussions with the community on issues related to

disaster risk reduction in their village. Examples of some such issues are road connectivity, toilet

construction, water, sanitation and hygiene, nutrition, fire safety measures etc. Further, for preparing

the village disaster management plans, they undertake steps such as - risk identification, risk reduction

planning, budgeting, discussion of the plans with the community, and presentation of the plans during

the aam sabha for the approval of the Panchayat. Through the programme, they have been able to

liaise with the block and district level officials.

b) DRR Catalyst:

In addition to the VDMCs promoting the need for DRR planning and preparedness, the DRR catalysts

from each programme village are sensitised and trained. They are primarity responsible for ensuring

that the VDMCS are conducting all DRR associated activities and aim to ensure sustainability of the

programme. During the FGDs, all the DRR catalysts mentioned how it was initially difficult for people

to understand the purpose of the programme. It was only after multiple meetings and discussions

were they able to accept that the CBDRR programme could enable them to reduce the effects of

disasters. It is important to note that the DRR catalysts see themselves to play a pivotal role in the

planning as well as the knowledge dissemination process ensuring reach.

c) Women:

10 out of 12 women groups with whom the FGDs were conducted knew about the existence of the

CBDRR programme and/ or VDMCs in their village. These groups highlighted that the programme has

been helpful in raising awareness on disaster preparedness, ways of improving sanitation and hygiene,

and immunization and addressing malnutrition. In the two cases, where women reported that they

did not know about the existence of VDMCs, it was because there has been lack of focused

engagement from the VDMCs as a collective in their village. Upon probing, it emerged that women

from these groups knew individuals who were VDMC members. While they had initiated and

participated in discussions on DRR associated activities, there was lack of understanding on what their

26 26



exact role was or how they can be helpful in directly addressing women related issues in the DRR

planning process.

d) Children

Children as important stakeholders of the programme are not expected to participate in the VDMC

activities. While all 12 children groups knew about the programme, they all stated that mostly adults

would attend the meetings and conduct all the DRR planning and execution work at the village level.

The findings suggest that perhaps the DRR programme did not evolve with children as the focus. While

the VDMCs recognise the importance of ensuring that children understand the significance of disaster

preparedness, there is limited focus on actively engaging them during the meetings. This could be due

to their participation in DRR at the school level.

The evaluation concludes that, from the design perspective, the programme is appropriate for its

target audience who are the community members including at risk men, women and children. The

principles of inclusion and outreach clearly emerge in the design of the programme and are

reinforced by the field findings. However, a strategic approach needs to be developed in order to

systematically engage women and children in the planning process.

Participation and inclusion of children, women and marginalized groups

The programmes are mandated to institutionalise a human rights framework into its design and

implementation. As discussed in the previous section, both the programmes have been designed

keeping in mind inclusion of and sensitivity towards children, women and socio-economic groups such

as SC, ST, EBC and OBCs. While the CBDRR primarily focuses of the village population, the SSP targets

middle school going children.

CBDRR

a) Participation of women, children and marginalized groups

During interactions with the VDMCs, women and children at the village level, it was found that the

VDMPs were made predominantly by the VDMCs in consultation with the community. With regard to

inclusion of socio-economic categories, there have not been any instances where the needs and

aspirations of different socio-economic categories were not ensured. This has happened primarily

because all the villages had a majority of SC or EBC population. This has been further elaborated in the

chapter on Gender and Equity.

With regard to women (non-VDMC members) and children, the evaluation team found that they had

a limited involvement in the preparation of VDMPs. FGDs with the 12 women groups yielded

seemingly contradictory responses. For example, on the one hand, most of the women were able to

explain the preparations that they needed to make in the event of floods, safety protocols to be

followed during cooking to avoid fires, earthquake, etc. On the other hand, when it came to

participating in the process for village disaster management planning, only half of the groups

mentioned having actively participated in it. The reason behind this contradiction is to be found in the

process of DRR planning in the village and spreading awareness on appropriate DRR behaviours. The

women were aware of the behaviours pertaining to DRR because the VDMC members keep contacting

households regarding it. Further, there are children in school who are part of the SSP. These children

discuss things learnt at school with their parents and siblings, a fact commonly emerging during the

KAP survey. This further reinforces women’s learnings from VDMC interactions.

However, with respect to DRR planning, the processes, such as, preparing the village map,

27 27



identification of risks, and inclusion in the risks and mitigation measures in the plan are steered by the

VDMCs. Although the process is transparent and all villagers, including women, children and

vulnerable groups are informed well in advance about the exercise, their participation remains largely

voluntary. Owing to the social and cultural practices prevalent in most of the villages of the study area,

which still have very limited interactions allowed between men and women, like the strong purdah

system, it becomes a challenge for women to become active participants in the planning process. The

situation is further exacerbated by the fact that, more often than not, it is the women who are

responsible for performing household chores and taking care of children and the elderly in the family.

This leaves them with little time to get involved in activities, such as, DRR planning which usually takes

several days.

SSP

a) Equitable participation of all children

In all the schools visited, it was consistently found that the children, both boys and girls, were being

equally engaged and included. Participation of children both boys and girls from different groups was

ensured in the SDMCs as well as in the making of School Safety Plans. The needs of children more or

less remained consistent across all schools, and some of the recurring issues were - construction of

toilets, repair of classrooms, and procurement of tables and chairs. However, there were some

students who stood out and were supporting others in school as peer educators. Even younger

children from grade four to five (9—12 years) were participating in mock drills and school level

activities.

b) Inclusion of issues of girls and children with disabilities (CwD) in the SDMPs

The SDMPs are prepared keeping in mind the needs of the entire school. With regard to issues of girls,

they predominantly focused on the need for separate and clean toilets, which were consistently

included in the SDMPs. As a matter of fact, this emerged as the most important demand in all SDMPs

reviewed by the evaluation team. When it came to CwD, some SDMPs mentioned construction of

ramps. Apart from this, no other specific issues concerning CwDs was included in the plans.

While the plans made by the SDMC reflect the needs and participation of different groups, the

VDMCs needs to strengthen to ensure that there is greater inclusion of women and children in the

planning process.

Relevance and validity of the Objectives of the SSP

The objectives of the School Safety Programme were conceptualized to work in tandem with and

dovetailed into the CBDRR programme. In addition to the community, it was important to proactively

target children, as ‘agents of change’. The intended outcome of the programme is to improve the

performance of non-structural as well as structural components of the intervention schools, while

reducing risk to children and teachers from natural disasters.

Relevance to School Children and Administration and Duty Bearers

Respondent Yes No

Focus Group Discussions Participants

School Safety Focal Teacher 12 -

Key Informant Interviews

Head Master 6 -

SDMC 6 -

28 28



DEO 3 -

BEO 6 -

The programme remains valid since its first implementation and throughout its duration, especially

because the intervention areas remain extremely prone and vulnerable to disasters. All stakeholders,

including children with whom the evaluation team interacted understood and articulated the need for

such a programme. This was reinforced by the school, block and district level administration. Another

important reason for the programme objectives and interventions’ validity is that there is enrolment

of new students every academic year whose capacities also need to be built to deal with disasters

effectively.

Further, the SSP is being scaled up

through and promoted by the

Mukhyamantri School Safety

Programme (Box 3.4). The state

administration along with the DoE

recognises a need for interventions

such as mock drills and training on

disasters at the school level. This

indicates a clear overlap of the SSP with

the mandates of the state

administration vis-à-vis disaster risk

reduction; making the activities,

outputs and objectives valid.

Figure 3.5: Relevance of the SSP Programme according to Officials

Alignment of DRR approach of BSDMA with the CBDRR-SSP

Overview of the BSDMA DRR Roadmap (2015-2030)

The Bihar State Disaster Management Authority has developed a DRR roadmap to support and address

Box 3.4: Mukhyamantri School Safety Programme (MSSP)

The MSSP aims to sensitize and train children and teachers on

preparedness measures, promote capacity building of officials

and implement structural and non-structural mitigation method

to make school a safe place for children. The programme is being

steered by the District Disaster Management Authorities

(DDMAs), in each and every school located in 38 districts of the

state. A state wide programme was conducted in July 2016,

which trained 20 milliion children through mock drills. Further, it

has been successful in identifying, strengthening and building

capacities of 150,000 Nodal Teachers cum Master Trainers, who

will be responsible for conducting SSP activities in 76,000 and

50,000 private schools of the 38 districts.

DEO

29 29



its DRR priorities. During the Bihar Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction (BCDRR) held in May 2015

in Patna, the GoB adopted the Bihar Disaster Risk Reduction Framework (BDRRF) to achieve its vision

of a Disaster Resilient Bihar.

The DRR Roadmap has adopted focused strategies and actions aimed at addressing the causal factors

of disaster risk. The emphasis is to consciously shift from focusing only on implementation of disaster

response, relief and recovery measures. In line with the Priority 4 of the Sendai Framework (“Build

Back Better”), the management of the residual risks has been accounted for in the Roadmap through

actions for ‘preparedness for effective response and recovery’.

In addition to this, the Roadmap is based-on 15 principles. These draw from the National Disaster

Management Act (2005) and National Disaster Management Policy (2009), the Sendai Framework for

Disaster Risk Reduction (2015) and the Patna Declaration (2015). The principle focus on (i)

safeguarding the rights of at-risk people and communities; (ii) ensuring the participation of these at-

risk communities; (iii) risk realised planning, monitoring and implementation of all development

initiatives; (iv) involving different stakeholders - NGOs, civil society organisations (CSOs), citizen

groups, village committes etc.; (v) recognising the importance of partnerships and contribution of

skills, resources and capacities by multiple stakeholders; (vi) establishing coherency and consistency

across different related policies, programmes and plans; (vii) ensuring transparency and accountability

towards citizens; (viii) undertaking disaster risk reduction actions towards resilience building; (ix) using

a dynamic approach towards disaster risk reduction planning and action; (x) accounting for how

disasters affect different people differently; (xi) protecting the rights of all citizens of Bihar to inhabit

in a safe and secure environment; (xii) doing no harm while undertaking risk reduction actions; (xiii)

recognising that investing in children and young people not only reduces risk in the present but also

secures the future by bringing about a culture of risk reduction; (xiv) undertaking disaster risk

reduction actions to strengthen preparedness for response and recovery; and (xv) ensuring that post-

disaster recovery and reconstruction be undertaken as opportunities to rebuild infrastructure,

capacities and systems to reduce long-term disaster risk.

Box 3.5: Approaches to Implementing the DRR Roadmap

In line with the principles and approach, detailed actions have been identified by the BSDMA along

with key stakeholders, level of implementation and timeline for all components. These include: 1)

resilient villages, 2) resilient livelihoods, 3) resilient basic services, 4) resilient critical infrastructure,

and 5) resilient cities.

Alignment of DRR Roadmap with UNICEF’s CBDRR-SSP

As discussed, UNICEF’s CBDRR-SSP Theory of Change recognises and adopts the Primacy of the Rights

Account for multiple hazards that affect Bihar- floods, droughts, earthquakes, fire etc. and adopt specific actions to be undertaken to address different types of hazards.

Recognise geographical diversity while undertaking disaster reduction actions.

Establish an enabling yet flexible policy environment for disaster risk reduction actions. Establish an enabling yet flexible policy environment for disaster risk reduction actions. Undertake selected actions through a project/pilot approach for effective scale up. Create an enabling environment to forge partnerships and make appropriate institutional

arrangements.

30 30



of At-Risk Communities in line with the guiding principle of the DRR roadmap. Further, the programme

also enables participation and action by at-risk communities. The village level planning acts as a key

platform for communities to contribute towards the CBDRR process. Accordingly, the communities

have the right to participate in and influence DRR related decisions.

a) Alignment of DRR roadmap with the CBDRR programme

The Resilient Village Programmes (RVP) included in the

DRR roadmap, conceptualized on the lines of UNICEF’s

CBDRR programme, has been initiated in partnership

with UNICEF, CSOs and the Gram Panchayats. This will

be undertaken across all the districts of Bihar in a

phased manner from 2015-2030. The RVP focus areas

have also been conceptualized based on UNICEF’s

VDMP planning and implementation process. The

detailed implementation plan been provided in the

DRR roadmap document where the roles and

responsibilities of nodal department/agencies

including District Disaster Management Authorities

(DDMAs) have been clearly highlighted.

In addition to providing support in drafting and

conceptualisation of the Bihar DRR roadmap, UNICEF

Bihar has also prepared a process document for the effective implementation of the Resilient Village

Programme. This document acts as a guideline to create VDMPs through community development

and capacity building activities. It will further act as an aid to strengthen policy architecture for

implementation of all DRR initiatives through policies, legal amendments and directives including

guidelines and manuals.

b) Alignment of DRR roadmap with the SSP

The DRR roadmap recognises SSP’s achievements as a part of the capacity building, public awareness

and on-going schemes and programmes for promoting DRR in Bihar. The SSP is also seen as an action

point to guide the DRR roadmap’s principle of “Investing in the future through focus on schools”. As

discussed, this is being done through the MSSP.

Similar to the CBDRR, the modalities and implementation of the SSP has been documented in the

roadmap. This includes conducting Mock drills in schools; releasing annual ‘Resilient Schools’ cards;

forming a school safety advisory at the state level to work with the education department; building

capacities of teachers on disaster management by the State Council of Education Research and

Training (SCERT) and District Institute of Education and Training (DIETs); training identified school

safety focal point teachers on school safety concepts and actions; orienting BEOs, Block Resource

Coordinators (BRCs) and Cluster Resources Coordinators (CRCs), school principals to become master

trainers; and developing a school safety kit with appropriate material for students, teachers and

education officials.

The evaluation finds that the BSDMA’s DRR roadmap has drawn from the experiential learning of the

CBDRR-SSP. UNICEF has also played a critical role in supporting the GoB to implement the planned

activities by providing technical assistance and support. For example, the VDMP process document

Box 3.6: RVP Focus Areas

Disaster risks recognition, understanding

and analysis.

Disaster risk informed Gram Panchayat

level development planning, using

participatory, comprehensive and

scientific risk analysis.

Risk reduction actions based on this

planning, with a focus on vulnerable

sections and areas.

Capacity building measures for risk

analysis, risk-informed planning and risk

reduction actions.

Actions for targeted and planned

communication for DRR.

31 31



acts as an operational guideline to implement the Resilient Village Programme.

Alignment of the CBDRR-SSP with global frameworks on DRR

In addition to programme’s alignment with the BSDMA, the evaluation team has also assessed its

relevance against the Hyogo and Sendai frameworks (Box 1.1).

Overview of Hyogo and Sendai Frameworks

The Hyogo Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction was adopted by 168 UN Member states and

implemented between 2005 and 2015. The five key priority actions, under the framework are: (i)

ensure that disaster risk reduction is a national and a local priority with a strong institutional basis for

implementation; (ii) identify, assess and monitor disaster risks and enhance early warning; (iii) use

knowledge, innovation and education to build a culture of safety and resilience at all levels; (iv) reduce

the underlying risk factors; (v) strengthen disaster preparedness for effective response at all levels.

This integrated multi-hazard approach addressed all the aspects of disaster reduction from risk

mitigation and preparedness to relief, rehabilitation, and recovery activities in disaster-prone

countries.

As discussed previously,the Sendai Framework was introduced as its successor to Hyogo. It aimed at

addressing existing challenges and preparing for the future by focusing on monitoring, assessing and

understanding disaster risk; strengthening disaster risk governance and coordination across relevant

sectors; enabling participation of relevant stakeholders at appropriate levels; investing in the

economic, social, health, cultural and educational resilience of persons, communities and countries

and the environment, as well as through technology and research; and enhancing multi-hazard early

warning systems, preparedness, response, recovery, rehabilitation and reconstruction.

CBDRR-SSP against Hyogo and Sendai Frameworks

The programme’s activities and outputs largely align to the priorities of both the frameworks. The

following table describes the supporting activities and key elements of CBDRR-SSP, which were in line

with the Hyogo and Sendai frameworks respectively.

32



CBDRR-SSP against Hyogo Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2005-2015

Priority Action Areas

(2005-2015 Hyogo

Framework )

CBDRR (2009 -2016) SSP (2009-2016)

Qualifier Description of supporting

activities against the priority

Key Elements of the

programme Qualifier

Description of supporting


Key Elements of the

programme

1 Making disaster

risk reduction a

priority

Aligned The design and implementation

involves communities to enable

understanding the risks and

consequently addressing them

as a priority.

The participatory

approaches allow

communities to

understand the

importance of disaster

risk reduction.

Aligned School Safety Programme (SSP)

design and implementation

involving the primary

stakeholders – students,

teachers and key community

representatives.

SSP’s mandate is

Disaster Risk

Reduction at school

level with school

children having the

central role.

2 Improving risk

information and

early warning

Aligned CBDRR promotes understanding

of risk and impacts; proactive

collection of information;

dissemination and alertness

towards possible disasters.

Risk identification

preparedness

measures and

proactive early warning

information collection

and dissemination.

Aligned Understanding of risk and

impacts, identification of

hazards, dissemination and

alertness towards possible

disasters.

Hazard hunt;

SDMP preparation;

Proactive warning;

information

collection and

dissemination.

3 Building a culture

of safety and

resilience

Aligned CBDRRR spreads awareness

towards Risk reduction

awareness measures and forms

self-sustained Village Disaster

Management Committee.

VDMC formation;

Risk Identification

Preparedness and

mitigation measures;

and

Mock drills

Aligned Awareness towards Risk

reduction awareness, measures.

Formation of a self-sustained

School Disaster Management

Committee, preparation of

SDMP with hazard hunt, follow

up and practising DRR mandate

at school level.

SDMC formation and

continuity;

Risk Identification;

SDMP preparation

and updation; and

Mock drills

4 Reducing the

risks in key

sectors

Partially

aligned

Risk reduction through

development of key

infrastructures such as all-

weather roads, connecting

bridges, raised plinth for the

housings, improved public

buildings such as schools at

Improved health and

nutrition practice

Improved water,

sanitation and hygiene

practice

Key Infrastructure

development – all

Aligned School Safety Programme is

largely meeting the DRR

mandate to the school

stakeholders – students,

teachers, community members

and Education officers.

Improved water,

sanitation, health,

hygiene practice

Increased attention

for development and

maintenance of

school infrastructure

33




(2005-2015 Hyogo

Framework )

CBDRR (2009 -2016) SSP (2009-2016)



Key Elements of the

programme Qualifier



Key Elements of the

programme

higher level, raising of hand

pumps, toilet blocks. Increased

awareness and improved

sanitation practice.

weather

roads(evacuation

routes), bridges /

culverts, high plinth

housings, drainage

5 Strengthening

preparedness for

response

Aligned Preparation and updation of

Village Disaster Management

Plan (VDMP), carrying out mock

drills, following the

preparedness calendar before

flood season, developing

evacuation plans, conducting

search and rescue, stockpiling of

food, making available

emergency equipment and

material, communicating and

coordinating with Block /

District officials

VDMC formation and

regular meetings;

VDMP preparation and

follow up;

Formation of Task

forces;

Regular practice, mock

drills;

Early warning

information collection

and dissemination;

Coordination with

Local officials

Aligned Preparation and updation of


Plan (SDMP); carrying out mock

drills for better preparedness;

Early warning through

communication and

coordination with local

government, dissemination

through radio messages.

SDMC formation;

SDMP preparation

and follow up;

Regular mock drills;

Early warning

information

collection and

dissemination;

Coordination with

Local education

officials

34



CBDRR-SSP against Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030


(2015-2030 Sendai

Framework)

CBDRR (2009 - 2016) SSP (2009-2016)



Key Elements of the

programme Qualifier



Key Elements of the

programme

1 Understanding

disaster risk

Aligned CBDRR design and

implementation involving the

community the facilitating

entities in understanding the

risk, and addressing risk

reduction on a priority.

Type of disasters; Underlying

causes; Generate awareness

to act on DRR –

preparedness and mitigation

Aligned School Safety Programme (SSP)

design and implementation

involving the primary

stakeholders: students, teachers

and key community

representatives.

Builds an

understanding of how

disasters and hazards

occurs through its

trainings.

2 Strengthening

disaster risk

governance to

manage disaster

risk

Aligned Formation of VDMC; Risk

identification; preparation of

VDMP; prioritise activities in

VDMP; coordinate local

government, build

relationships with Block and

District Administration.

VDMC;

VDMP;

Prioritise actions -at

community level and seek

approval at Ward sabha/

Gram sabha.

Aligned Formation of School Disaster

Management Committee;

Preparation and updation of

SDMP; Design a succession plan.

SDMC formation;

Hazard hunt;

SDMP – planning and

follow up;

Prioritize action points

at school level;

Coordination with local

government;

Education officers on

issues and actions.

3 Investing in

disaster risk

reduction for

resilience

Aligned Risk reduction through

development of key

infrastructures such as all-

weather roads, connecting

bridges, raised plinth for the

housings, improved public

buildings such as schools at

higher level, raising of hand

pumps, toilet blocks;

Increased awareness and

improved sanitation practice.

Priority Actions on VDMP -

Infrastructure development

for risk reduction,

Safe hygiene practice;

Human Resource

development – Task force,

DRR Catalyst, VDMC

members.

Aligned Risk reduction through

preparedness and mitigation

measures such as – boundary

wall, parapet walls, filling of

gorges, toilet blocks, elevation

of hand pumps, platform

construction, construction and

renovation.

Practice, mock drills;

Prioritize action points

at school level;

Actions on safe school

environment –

infrastructure

development , repair,

elevated hand pump;

Promote safe hygiene

culture.

35




(2015-2030 Sendai

Framework)

CBDRR (2009 - 2016) SSP (2009-2016)



Key Elements of the

programme Qualifier



Key Elements of the

programme

4 Enhancing

disaster

preparedness

for effective

response and to

“Build back

better”33

Partially

Aligned


Village Disaster Management

Plan (VDMP), carrying out

mock drills, following the

preparedness calendar before

flood season;

Readying with the evacuation

plans, search and rescue,

stockpiling of food, emergency

equipment and material,

communication and

coordination with district

officials;

Build Back better is a post-

disaster scenario.

Effective response –

Preparedness;

Updation of VDMP

Follow up on seasonal

preparedness calendar;

Stock piling of food,

medicine, emergency

materials;

Early Warning and

dissemination.

Partially

Aligned



Plan (SDMP), carrying out mock

drills, hazard hunts and coping

mechanism.

Updation of SDMP;

Follow up on seasonal

preparedness

calendar.

33 This situation is specific to a post disaster context and therefore was not assessed in the evaluation.

36 36



4 EFFECTIVENESS OF CBDRR-SSP

Effectiveness of the CBDRR-SSP was assessed on the basis of the following evaluation questions.

Further, this section also assesses the Results Framework against the CBDRR-SSP theory of change

presented in the introduction.

Effectiveness Description

Key Evaluation

Question

To what extent are the objectives of CBDRR– School Safety programme

achieved/likely to be achieved?

Sub Questions Are the processes (monthly meetings, annual reviews of plans, annual

Gram Sahba meetings) of the programme sufficient to bring about

active participation of the community members to create and

implement their own DRR plans? If yes, how? If no, how can the

processes be improved?

How have the communities used learnings from the training modules

to incorporate into their DRR plans? If yes, how have they done it?

How have the communities incorporate risk reduction

perspective/knowledge/skills in pre-emptive planning and action for

other types of hazards/ risks?

What are various risk informed actions ‘types’ at the level of individual,

family, community, villages, basic services and critical infrastructure?

What were the major factors influencing achievements or non-

achievements of stated results?

According to the views of the community members, to what extent has

the CBDRR programme contributed to the reduction of the number of

deaths and severity of the impact of natural and man-made hazards in

the villages where it has been implemented? What percentages of

incidents have been dealt-with by the leadership of the VDMC without

external support?

Overview of how

effectiveness was

assessed

Analysing the existing documentation on the project

Using perceptions of stakeholders and observations from the field

Using results from the Knowledge, Attitude and Practice

questionnaires

Effectiveness of CBDRR programme processes

CBDRR process

There are several processes and interaction points through which the CBDRR programme target active

participation of the communities. During, the interactions with respondents in the programme

villages, all the 12 VDMCs confirmed holding regular review meetings every month to track the

progress on the village disaster management plan. These meetings were conducted on a regular basis

with the community, to spread awareness on issues of common interest, such as, cleanliness, safe

drinking water, immunization, etc. The same was validated through the minutes of meeting (MoMs).

The village disaster management planning came across as a fairly transparent process, with the VDMC

members mentioning the sequence of activities as described in the following figure.

37 37



VDMCs emerge as the mainstay of CBDRR, and the DRR Catalysts are at the core of the planning

process, responsible for ensuring that the communities continue to be engaged with the programme.

10 out of the 12 VDMCs mentioned discussions with community as one of the key steps in preparing

Village Disaster Management Plans (VDMPs). All the sample villages visited by the evaluation team

had made their VDMPs. The plans were physically verified and the following observations can be made

in this regard:

a) Vulnerability mapping:

All villages had their vulnerability maps prepared in

consultation with the community. These maps had

very clearly defined village boundaries, roads,

landmarks and location of hamlets. Rivers, the

direction of their flow and bridges if any were also

clearly marked. The maps formed the initial step of

the village disaster management planning process. In

the map itself, the areas of high vulnerability were

earmarked. Some examples of such areas were -

hamlets that were secluded from the main

population, households that were close to a river or

water body, households with infants, persons with

disabilities, old age persons, etc.

A Village Vulnerability Map

38 38



b) Regularly updated Village Disaster Management Plans (VDMPS):

During the field visit, it was observed that the

village disaster management plans were

updated on an annual basis. If the activities

envisaged in a particular financial year

remained incomplete, they were promptly

taken up in the next year’s plans.Plans include

the action which needs to be undertaken, the

amount required and the source (government

schemes or collective action). The plans, which

were verified had the plans identified along

with the amount leveraged for each of the

activities.

Once the activities to be included in the plan

were identified, people from the VDMC and

the task forces were identified to lead the

implementation of these activities. This was

done with consensus of all persons present

during the plan preparation process. The

evaluation team observed that the people

leading on the implementation were

competent and capable. They were good at articulation of the activities mentioned in the plan,

dynamic, motivated to meet officials to expedite the planned activities and above all had a strong

voluntary spirit. They were, in many cases, the opinion leaders from their hamlets and the much

needed change agents of the programme.

Level of engagement in CBDRR processes of Mukhiyas, AWWs and ANMs

Overall, the VDMCs came across as motivated and strong institutions, ably supported by the DRR

catalysts and other important stakeholders such as mukhiya, women, children, AWW, ANM. While the

stakeholders demonstrated responsiveness towards the DRR planning process, in the case of CBDRR

programme respondents showed varied levels of engagement. The involvement of women and

children has been discussed in the relevance chapter, while the role of the Mukhiya34, AWW and ANM

is discussed below:

a) Mukhiyas

11 out of the 12 Mukhiyas interviewed were aware of the programme; the remaining one had limited

knowledge as he was newly elected. However, their involvement in the programme was mostly

confined to the annual presentation of the Village Disaster Management Plan in the aam sabha, which

was required to have the panchayat’s approval. As a result, not all proposals in the Disaster

Management Plan are taken- up by the Mukhiya, which results in the remaining DRR activities to be

pushed to the next allocation cycle. This adversely affects the villages’ DRR preparedeness. One of the

reasons of limited involvement of the Mukhiya in the DRR planning process was non-coverage of all

the villages in a panchayat under the programme. If the programme village happened to be the same

34 Elected head of the Gram Panchayat

VDMC Plan, Jhikahiya Village, East Champaran

39 39



as where the Mukhiya resided, as expected, there was greater engagement in the planning process.

In cases where the Mukhiya did not belong to the programme village there was limited involvement.

Under the Panchayati Raj, the Mukhiya is responsible for all development activities in the Panchayat.

This leaves her/him with very little time to focus on specific programmes like CBDRR. Accordingly, it is

critical that the VDMCs make added efforts to keep the Mukhiya regularly involved in the DRR planning

process.

b) AWWs

Majority of the AWWs reported to be aware of the VDMC in their respective villages and knew about

the kind of activities they were expected to be engaged in. However, when it came to the DRR planning

process, their participation was limited to sharing ideas and opinions when asked. This is further

corroborated by the response to the question on functions of the VDMC, where, only 3 out of the 12

AWWs stated that DRR planning was one of the key functions of the VDMCs.

When asked about the issues on which the VDMCs interacted with them, 10 out of 12 AWWs stated

that identification of malnourished children in the village was one of the key issues, along with,

awareness about disasters.

Thus, it is quite evident that the VDMCs interact with the AWWs on issues pertaining to their functions

and the latter are aware about the functions of the VDMC and their role in disaster preparedness.

However, their role in the DRR planning process needs strengthening, malnutrition among infants and

young children is a serious issue, which demands focused attention.

c) ANMs

ANMs are frontline health functionaries who provide primary health services at the village level. From

a DRR perspective, they play a critical role in reducing instances of seasonal epidemics, such as,

diarrhoea, dengue, malaria, etc. Further, they are responsible for immunization of children and

pregnant women. In addition to this, they provide basic clinical and referral services to the villagers.

When asked about the CBDRR programme, all ANMs reported to be aware of the programme including

the existence of the VDMC. For them the VDMC embodied a committee that was responsible for

spreading awareness about disaster preparedness and issues related to health and immunization.

Most of them reported receiving regular help from the VDMC in organizing immunization at the village

level. However, with regard to DRR planning, none of the ANMs recalled that preparing Village

Disaster Management Plans was one of the key functions of VDMCs. Likewise, they were not

particularly aware of the process followed for DRR planning at the village level and consequently did

not participate in it.

Effectiveness of Training

The training on DRR planning process may be summarized into two broad sets of activities: a) risk

assessment and analysis, and b) risk reduction planning.

Risk Assessment and Analysis

The NGO partners impart training to the community to undertake disaster risk assessment. It entails

gathering information on the various risks relevant in the context of the village and analysing them

with reference to the existing resources available to the community. The participatory nature of the

assessment helps the community to discuss hazards in an open forum and develop a vulnerability

profile of the village. It helps the community to identify and prioritize issues of village development

40 40



and the resources required for meeting the developmental needs. Participatory tools like, Hazard-

Vulnerability-Capacity Map and Seasonal Calendars are used for involving the community on risk

assessment and analysis.

Following the risk assessment, the community conducts a risk analysis of the village. The process of

analysing risks involves discussions on the intensity, frequency and seasonality of hazards and its

potential impact on the most vulnerable.35 Risk analysis helps in identifying the immediate and

underlying causes of vulnerability. At the end of the analysis, the community arrives at a consensus

on the prioritized risk statements, which become the basis for risk reduction planning.

Risk Reduction Planning

For the purpose of risk reduction planning, community members discuss and agree about the issues

that need to be addressed on priority and the action required. The funds requirement is estimated

and a budget is prepared corresponding to each of the planned activities. The source of funds is

discussed and identified. Community members are then organized into groups to perform defined

tasks within a specific timeframe.

Format for Risk Reduction Planning36

Name of the Village: GP:

Block:

Date of Planning:

Brief Profile of the Village:

S.

No.

Risk

Factor

Actions Schemes that

can be

leveraged for

this action

Responsibility Timeframe

Community Panchayat District/

Block

Official

CBOs/

CSOs

1.

Discussions with VDMCs and community members revealed that the above processes were followed

in preparing the Village Disaster Management

Plans (VDMPs). The plans included mapping of

hazard prone areas within the village, which need

attention using either village level resources or

require government support. The evaluation team

physically verified the VDMPs in all villages and

noted that they were being regularly updated.

Further, there were instances of the community

having used its own resources and knowledge in

pre-emptive planning for disasters. Some examples

of such practices as witnessed during the fieldwork

35 Community Based Disaster Risk Reduction Guidance for NGOs/ PRIs 36 VDMP Process Concept Note

A personal flood shelter in village Malkoshikapur, Supaul

41 41



were:

Majority of the new houses were being constructed with a raised plinth level37.

Make-shift bamboo bridges (Chachari Pul) were being constructed by the community for

crossing rivers/streams.

People had constructed personal flood shelters with their own expenditure.

New roads in the villages were being constructed at a raised level.

Hand pumps were being installed on a raised platform.

Hand washing with soap was being practiced to ward off infections and diseases.

Similarly, the training on identifying threats within and around the school was cited by all SDMCs.

Accordingly, changes have been made to school infrastructure like construction of toilets, raised

plinths and filling up of pot holes in the play ground. Out of the activities conducted, hazard hunts

were the most recalled activity even among students who had graduated from middle school and were

no longer participating in the School Safety Programme38.

Risk Informed Action undertaken by the communities and individuals at the village level

The CBDRR programme followed a two-pronged approach to learning and information sharing for risk

informed actions: a) structured trainings, aimed at increasing the knowledge and skills of the

community, and b) informal learnings, aimed at promoting cross-learning and awareness generation

of communities. As a result, the community came across as an informed group, which is aware about

the various disasters common in its area, the factors causing disasters and the ways to deal with them.

The community members were well-versed with the protocols to be followed for flood preparedness,

earthquake, fire, etc. “Duck-cover-hold” and “Stop-

drop-roll” were frequently cited. Similarly, to

prevent incidents of fire, the protocols to be

followed while cooking, for example, the timings to

be adhered to and the safety precautions to be

taken were frequently mentioned.

Low-smoke chulhas (earthen stoves), emergency

kits, life jackets made from discarded bottles,

washing hands with soap, were some of the other

commonly cited examples of risk informed actions

being taken by the members of the community.

37 Case studies 38 Based on the KAP survey conducted with 45 children across the 18 schools who had graduated

Figure 4.1: Trainings under SSP as per SDMCs (n=12)

3

5

5

5

12

Checking for cleanliness and hygiene

Mockdrills

Surakshit Shanivar

Chetna Satra- after morning prayers

Hazard Hunt/Identifying threats in school

A low-smoke chulha (earthen stove)

42 42



The communities across the evaluation area was aware of the importance of critical infrastructure,

such as, roads, bridges, flood shelters and their role in saving lives. The community representatives

could easily articulate on how road connectivity was a critical element in saving lives during times of

medical emergency, such as, illness, childbirth, accidents, etc. and that they were making a constant

effort towards ensuring this in the villages. Thus, in almost all the villages, communities had

contributed towards improving the roads that connected their village to the main road. Similarly, in

villages with rivers, communities had leveraged resources from the government to build bridges and

culverts39. Wherever, this was not possible, individuals from the village through their own effort had

built make-shift bamboo bridges known as chachri. In all the villages, the team came across one or

two such chachri40 bridges.

In the villages prone to floods, the community had

started constructing houses on a raised plinth.

Similarly, schools were being constructed either on

high grounds or raised plinth. An interesting

example of common sense solutions was witnessed

in village Khor Madanpur in Madhepura block of

Madhubani where the education department was

sceptical of the increased costs that would result

from raising the plinth of a new school building. A

solution was provided by the community, which

suggested decreasing the height of the ceiling

slightly to accommodate the costs of a raised plinth. Today the school is a boon for the children in

Khor Madanpur and adjoining villages.

Another critical infrastructure related practice

evident in all villages was the installing of hand

pumps on raised platforms. During floods and

immediately afterwards, finding clean drinking

water becomes the biggest challenge. Before the

CBDRR programme, every episode of flood was

followed by waterborne epidemics leading to

morbidity and even loss of lives. This was because

the community hand pumps installed in the villages

were on low-lying grounds. The flood waters

entered the hand pumps and contaminated the

water making it unsuitable for drinking. However,

after the programme, conscious efforts were made by the community to have hand pumps installed

either on raised grounds or on platforms that are high enough to avoid flood waters. In addition to

this, the communities have been trained on testing the quality of water and cleaning hand pumps with

chlorine tablets.

Assessment of Results Framework

39 Details have been presented in the case studies 40 Temporary bridge from locally available bamboo

A raised hand pump

A school with raised plinth

43 43



Having built a clear understanding of the programme processes, aims, objectives and goals in the

previous sections, this section assesses the Results Framework of the programme. Upon evaluating it

against the theory of change described previously, one notes that the framework appears more

comprehensive and has broken down the concepts described in the theory of change into clearly

defined outcomes and activities. Further, the theory of change was not revised to adequately include

complex issues of sustainability and scalability. While the theory of change reflects the broad contours

and aspirations of the programme, the results framework incorporates elements (activities, targets

and performance indicators) that have emerged as the programme interventions have evolved. It is

also essential that in order to understand the programme comprehensively, the theory of change

should be looked alongside the results framework, which has more details in terms of exact outputs

and targets that will result in achieving the desired impact of improved safety and security of men,

women and children from disasters.

Following is the Results Framework designed by the UNICEF Bihar Office to monitor the activities and

outputs under the CBDRR programme. These include:

1. DRR mainstreamed in all the GP level plans of intervention blocks of the district.

2. All the schools have school safety plan in place and the same is practiced in intervention

districts.

3. Improved access to child protection services and awareness of responsibilities amongst

key stakeholders.

4. Strengthened capacity of adolescents and youth DRR/ Climate Change Adaptation (CCA)

Champions available in intervention districts for advancing DRR/CCA issues in those

districts.

The framework also identifies key performance indicators. It provides a comprehensive overview of

the outcomes, outputs key activities, targets, performance indicators and the means of verification.

44



SNo. Output Key Activities Targets Performance Indicator(s) Means of

verification

Outcome 1: DRR mainstreamed in all the GP level plans of intervention blocks of the district

1 Risk aware GP Plans

prepared and approved

by Gram Sabha

Activity 1: Training of government field functionaries on

CBDRR roadmap.

Activity 2: Facilitation/ demonstration of risk- aware GP

planning processes.

Activity 3: District/ block level review/ learning

workshops with District/Block Authority.

Activity 4: Prepare annual Resilience Report Card for

each Village/ GP.

Activity 5: Monitoring of village DRR plans.

GP level plans

prepared, presented

in Gram Sabha and

implementation

initiated.

Risk assessment conducted

in every GP

DRR Plans are approved by

Gram Sabha in all the GPs

Copy of Order

issued by DM &

BDO for risk

assessment

Approved GP

plans

2 UNICEF’s priority areas

(underlying risks)

mainstreamed in DRR

plans of villages

Activity 1: Training of theme based Task Force,

preparation and implementation of thematic action

plans.

Activity 2: Monitoring and follow- up of Thematic action

plans (progress against baseline).

Every village has TF,

baseline and Action

Plan

Theme based Task Forces

formed and trained

Baseline Conducted

Action plan prepared by

each Task Force

Baseline report

Action plan &

achievement

reports

3 Communities understand

and practice safe

behaviours (‘do’s and

don’ts’) during disaster

situations.

Activity 1: Mass awareness campaigns using local folk

media, community radio etc.

Activity 2: Skill training to construction workers on safe

construction.

Activity 3: Evidence generation to map communities

understanding and safe behaviour practices.

Mass awareness

campaign in every

villages

Community members take

pre- flood preparedness

actions & safety

precautions for fire

accident.

Community has appropriate

knowledge of do’s & don’ts

of various disasters.

Preparedness

reports &

Photographs

KAP study report

4 DRR Catalysts fully

established and

functioning

Activity 1: Training of DRR Catalysts i.e. technical and

inspirational issues, management of VDMCs, monitoring/

tracking results.

Activity 2: Training of PRIs and service providers for DRR

mainstreaming.

Activity 3: Review meeting with DRR catalysts,

Every GP to have at-

least two DRR

Catalysts, received all

the necessary

trainings and

Every GP to have at-least

two trained DRR Catalysts

CBDRR programme is

managed by DRR Catalysts

DRR Catalysts are being

used as Resource persons

Catalysts action

plan and reports

Self- grading

reports of

Catalysts

45




verification

government official and PRIs (Quarterly)

Activity 4: Develop annual action plan for VDMC

Federation

Activity 5: Develop learning/ resource materials

providing support to

VDMCs.

Outcome 2: All the schools have school safety plan in place and practiced in intervention districts

5 Risk assessment/ hazard

hunt conducted and

incorporated in School

Development Plans of all

the schools

Activity 1: District level review/ learning workshops with

District Authority and Education department

Activity 2: Technical trainings of Block Resource Centers

(BRC), Cluster Resource Centers (CRC) and School safety

Focal Teachers on School Safety intervention

programme process, first-aid and life-saving skills with

the help of specialized agencies

Activity 3: Demonstration of SSP processes in few

selected schools – SDMC formation, development of

school safety plans and knowledge building.

Activity 4: Prepare annual Resilience Report Card for

each School.

Activity 5: Monitoring School DRR plans.

All the SDPs have

school safety

component.

School Safety

programme

incorporated in the

monthly reporting

format of CRC, BRC &

BEO.

Risk assessment through

Hazard Hunt conducted in

every school

School Development Plans

consists of actions to

address identified risks

School Safety

plans

School

Development

Plans

Resilience report

card

6 School Community

understand and practice

safe behaviours (‘do’s

and don’ts’) during

disaster situations.

Activity 1: Strengthen Peer Educator system in all the

intervention schools on regular knowledge

dissemination, mockdrills and awareness campaigns.

Activity 2: Skill training to School Safety Focal teacher

and CRC on safe behaviours.

Activity 3: Evidence generation to map school

communities understanding and safe behaviour

practices.

All the schools have

class wise Peer

Educator and

conduct weekly

activity as per

prescribed weekly

plan.

Activity calendar for mock

drills of life saving skills has

been developed and

practiced.

KAP study report

Outcome 3: Improved access to child protection services and key stakeholders aware of their responsibilities

46




verification

7 Child Protection

Committee (CPC) formed

at Block and Gram

Panchayat level and

members trained on the

CPC guidelines and

various child protection

issues.

Activity 1: Orientation of key stakeholders on CP issues

and need for CPC.

Activity 2: Formation and training of CPC at GP and block

level on CPC guidelines.

All the blocks and

GPs have capacitated

CPCs

CPC formed at Block and GP

level

Disaster Needs Assessment

(DNA) conducted at Block

level

GP & Block wise

list of CPC

members

DNA reports

8 Block and GP level Child

Protection (CP) plans

prepared and

implemented

Activity 1: Mass awareness campaign on CP issues and

child protection services/ schemes of the government.

Activity 2: Conduct block and GP level DNA/ baseline

survey.

Activity 3: Develop CP Action Plan at GP and Block level.

Activity 4: Monitoring and follow- up of CP action plan.

All the CPCs at block

and GP level have

baseline and action

plan and

implementation

initiated.

CP Action plans prepared at

Block and GP level

GP & block level

CP action plan

Outcome 4 Capacitated adolescents and youths DRR/ CCA Champions available in intervention districts for advancing DRR/CCA issues in the intervention district

9 Adolescents and youths

identified and trained as

DRR/CCA Champions

Activity 1: Identify selective DRR Catalysts and train

them to develop as champions and resource persons on

DRR/ CCA.

Activity 2: Identify adolescents and train them to

develop as champions on school safety programme.

DRR Catalysts trained

and used as resource

persons.

Adolescents trained

as school safety

champions

DRR Catalysts understand

and can explain CBDRR

roadmap.

SSP champions understand

and can explain school

safety programme

DRR Champions are used as

resource persons

List of DRR and

SSP champions

47 47



The results framework is comprehensive and covers all the relevant activities and anticipated

outcomes. The key aspects or elements of the framework include – clearly identified results, important

village level progress reports and reports generated at the block and district levels. This is supported

by the self-grading data at the level of the SDMCs and VDMCs against defined criteria. The required

support is provided to schools and villages based on this information collected.

S. No. Grading Criteria for Villages/VDMCs

1 Monthly meetings

2 Participation in meetings

3 Performance of the committee

4 Planning progress and plan for next month

5 Quality of documentation

6 Discussions in open meetings regarding objectives for the next 3 months

7 Ability to mainstream Village Development Plans with PRI

8 Meetings of the working groups and review of their plans

9 Identification of hazards and development of plans for disaster preparedness

10 Monitoring of Village Development Plans

S. No Grading Criteria for Schools/SDMCs

1 Monthly meetings

2 Attendance in meetings

3 Review and updating of the plan

4 Hazard identification

5 Discussion about plan and incorporate the plan in school development plan

6 Selection of Peer educator

7 Review of the peer educator action plan

8 Discussion and mock drill, and cultural programme

The adopted system of the tracking of results has worked well for both the programmes. The

outcomes have been regularly monitored, which can be attributed to the motivated communities and

implementing NGO partners. This has been possible due to the efforts of the UNICEF Bihar state office

and a clear prioritization of DRR as a critical area of intervention. However, more efforts can be made

to collect information that offers gender disaggrated data to assess inclusion in the VDMPs and

SDMPs.

In addition to the tracking of results through routine monitoring, the assessment conducted by the

Knowledge Community on Children in India (KCCI) in 201341 has also supported the management of

programme results. The programme has adopted some of the key recommendations like creation of

shadow SDMC members and promoting cost effective solutions like water dispensers in schools.

However, involving children with disability in the planning process and forming strategic partnerships

with the VDMCs continues to be a challenge.

Similarly, in the case of villages, there has been an increase in interaction and coordination with

government functionaries and officials. This is also clear in the way that the UNICEF Bihar office

interacts with the BSDMA, and has been able to influence government policy and leverage funds for

DRR activities. However, more efforts are needed to make ensure that influential members from the

41 India, K. C. (2013). Knowledge, Attitude and Practice on School Safety Programme. Retrieved from https://www.humanitarianresponse.info/system/files/documents/files/kap_in_bihar_practice.pdf

48 48



communities are involved in the VDMCs and SDMCs. As discussed in the KCCI report, this will allow for

better implementation and prioritization of the planned activities.

Overall, with regard to the monitoring and accountability, regular updates and progress reports are

shared with the UNICEF Bihar office from the implementing NGO partners. There is also a clear

coordination channel established with block and district offcials. In addition to this, the results

framework has strongly focused on knowledge management and documentation of lessons learnt and

processes through case studies and documents. A few case studies have also been documented in the

form of short video documentaries. These knowledge and IEC products are comprehensive and useful

for the intended audience as well as the communities that the programme works with.

Factors influencing achievements or non-achievements of stated results

Factors Influencing the Achievement of Results

There are several factors influencing the achievement of results in a long term programme such as

CBDRR-SSP. The following factors played a key role in the achievement of results in the two

programmes:

a) Support by UNICEF

UNICEF encourages a comprehensive approach to disaster risk reduction from prevention,

preparedness, mitigation to response and recovery. In Bihar, UNICEF in collaboration with its

implementing partners has introduced the CBDRR-SSP to improve localized disaster risk reduction

practices. The risk reduction includes addressing specific needs of the community, especially women

and children to enhance their capacities and participation in all aspects of the programme.

Through the programme, UNICEF supports the implementing NGOs in conducting trainings on critical

aspects of institution building at the village and school levels, and capacity building on resources such

as DRR catalysts and SSFTs. In addition to DRR, UNICEF has also been building the capacities of these

NGOs in child protection and rights, organizational management and development, climate change

and liaising with the government. As a result, support for implementing DRR associated activities has

been proactively extended by these NGOs at GP, block, district and state levels. Further, collaborative

actions with NGO partners have also supported in building research and evidence on DRR.

Moreover, UNICEF also strategically coordinates between different stakeholders including BSDMA,

District Disaster Management Authorities, and the District and Block Administrations. The

coordination activities include organizing meetings, setting up agenda for discussion and providing the

necessary technical assistance.

In order to ensure that DRR activities remain a priority, especially at the state and district levels, a

review of the CBDRR-SSP takes place during the Department of Education’s review meeting in all

programme districts. The meeting, chaired by the District Magistrate and a UNICEF district level

representative presents the progress following a discussion on action points and next steps. At the

State level, an Annual Work Plan is shared with BSDMA during GoB’s Annual DRR Planning Exercise.

Further, regular interactions take place between the BSDMA and UNICEF’s Bihar state DRR officials.

b) Mobilization and handholding support by NGOs

In all the villages, the programme faced a number of challenges initially. The community was sceptical

of the intentions of the NGO partners. It looked at them with suspicion and expected relief in the form

of material. With time, the NGO partners were able to win over the confidence of the community.

49 49



They were ably supported by the UNICEF team in the process, which conducted regular training and

handholding meetings with the community on issues related to CBDRR. “Kya Khoya Kya Paya” (During

a disaster what is it that you lost and what did you gain) – an exercise conducted with the community

was frequently cited as one of the effective examples that motivated the community to become

partners in the CBDRR process.

c) Commitment of the DRR catalysts and VDMCs at the village level and SSFT and SDMCs at

the school level

The VDMC, DRR catalyst, SDMC and SSFT are the strongest links in the CBDRR-SSP chain. They

comprise of some of the most committed and motivated individuals to be found in the village. The

system of meetings every month, keeping records of the minutes and regular follow up action taken

up by these institutions was key in the achievement of the CBDRR-SSP objectives.

d) Community support

The programmes would not have achieved the intended results, had it not been for the continuous

support received from the community. While it can be stated that the members of the community

supported the programme in varying degrees, but in the overall analysis, every village had regular

instances of people contributing to the planned activities in the form of either labour or material.

There were instances where the community had contributed cash. As a matter of fact, every VDMC

had a contingency fund which was purely contributory in nature. The corpus thus created was being

used by the community in times of emergency.

e) Support from government officials

Both CBDRR and SSP aim at making communities self-reliant in terms of dealing with disasters. An

integral part of the programmes is making the communities aware of their entitlements under the

various schemes of the government – schemes that may be leveraged for implementing their DRR plans.

It was noted that whenever the communities had demanded support from the nodal officers in terms of

funds being provided from relevant schemes, the latter had taken prompt action wherever possible. In

cases where this had not been possible, the officials had provided suitable guidance and help. For

example, in Khormadanpur village of Madhubani district the BDO supported the VDMC for 132 widows

to access financial entitlements from the “Vridhavastha Pension Scheme”.

Factors Influencing the Non-Achievement of Results

The evaluation did not find specific factors that limited the achievement of results.

Disaster Risk Reduction after the Introduction of CBDRR Programme

Prior to the CBDRR programme, the target communities considered hazards as “acts of god” against

which they could do little. Resigned to their fate, they would take action only after the disaster had

taken place. This led to loss of lives, limb and property. Implementation of CBDRR programme has

provided them with an opportunity to learn essential skills and knowledge in community based

disaster risk management. They have obtained knowledge on “how to” design and conduct activities

for reducing disaster risks and vulnerability.’ Today, there is a marked change in the attitude of the

community towards disasters. They are better informed of the government schemes that can be

leveraged to improve the disaster preparedness of their villages.

50 50



As reported by the communities, in the

case of floods, none of the sample

villages had faced any major floods

natural or manmade floods since the

Kosi experience. The individuals were

confident that with the skills learnt

under the programme, they were better

placed to deal with floods if such would

happen.

Respondents also recollected how they

had followed the protocols for

earthquake when it happened in 2015

resulted in reduced loss of assets and no

loss of lives.

However, the most noticeable change which was witnessed was in the case of fire. All villages reported

a marked reduction in the instances of fire. While there would be at least five-six accidental episodes

of fire in every village earlier, the number of such incidents had now become almost negligible, with

many villages reporting no incidents in the preceding year. The communities attributed this to the

safety protocols learnt under the CBDRR programme and have been taken preventive actions

Box 4.1: Flood Preparedness in Malkoshikapur Village, Supaul

Every household in the village had started storing food grains

for at least a couple of months as a step towards flood

preparedness. Besides this, the households also contribute to a

common granary in the village. All households have an

emergency flood kit which is an airtight waterproof bag

containing rations for a week, basic medicines, some cash &

valuables and important documents of the family. The VDMC is

in constant touch with the flood control room on Kosi barrage

to communicate flood warnings to the villagers promptly. High

grounds and flood shelters have been notified for prompt

evacuation. Every household also has improvised life jackets

made from discarded plastic bottles. This demonstrates the

change in the attitude of the community towards disasters.

51 51



5 KNOWLEDGE ATTITUDE AND PRACTICES (KAP)

The KAP survey was conducted on a sample of 270 students, (142 girls and 128 boys) in 18 schools

across six districts (3 schools in each district) of Bihar (Darbhanga, East Champaran, Madhubani,

Samastipur, Sitamarhi, and Supaul) to understand the effectiveness of SSP. The objective of this KAP

was to identify the knowledge, practices and attitudes of the adolescents under the following themes:

training received under SSP, awareness of different disasters, disaster preparedness, and water,

sanitation and hygiene.

The KAP survey provides an analysis on parameters related to the above-mentioned themes based on

gender and inclusion in school (during survey). The sample of girls and boys was based on the number

of students in-the school and those who have graduated. (the total stands at 226 and 44, respectively).

The findings provide insights on the DRR practices of the students; their knowledge on SSP and an

understanding the current attitude toward the SSP. The questionnaire was designed to avoid leading

questions.

Practices

In understanding the current practices, this evaluation looked at understanding the training provided

under SSP; the status of students participation in hazard hunts and mock drills; whether children are

being proactive in discussing safety concerns and hazards; and adopting good practices related to

handwashing and safe drinking water.

5.1.1 Training

More than 98 percent (268 of 270) of the students interviewed stated that training on SSP takes place

in their schools. Out of these, 124 stated that the frequency of the training was once a week and 36

stated it was twice a week, while 7 stated the training was held very rarely and 12 cited other timelines

(Saturday, 2-3 times a week, monthly or half-yearly) for training. Based on these differences, it is

important to adhere to the SSP training calendar to ensure uniformity of implementation across

schools.

254 of 270 students (Figure 5.1) have participated in

the training sessions. A similar scenario is present in

case of distribution by gender/ inclusion in school

with majority having received/ participated in for

the SSP trainings. It is worth noting that all the

students who have graduated from school

responded that they have participated in such

trainings. Some of the core aspects of DRR that the

students described having learnt during this training

were: type of different disasters (natural and

manmade), disaster preparedness, and risk

identification at their respective surroundings.

Additionally, they reported having learnt practical skills such as preparation of a stretcher and disaster

response during earthquake, fire, floods, lightning, and snakebites.

5.1.2 Disaster Preparedness and Risk Reduction

133 121

211

43

84

12

0

50

100

150

200

250

Girl (n=142) Boy (n=128) In-school(n=226)

Graduatedfrom school

(n=44)No Yes

Figure 5.1: Participation of Students in Training

52 52



Hazard Hunt

All the schools covered in the evaluation conduct

hazard hunts, an exercise in which the students are

asked to identify the risks within and around the

school premises. 94 per cent of the students

interviewed whether in-school (213 of 226) or

having graduated from school (41 of 44) expressed

that a hazard hunt had taken place in their

respective schools. These students clearly

articulated the process of conducting hazard hunts

and understood its purpose of identifying different

risks/vulnerabilities within and outside their schools

in order to formulate solutions and address the

same.

The involvement of the students in all steps of the process makes them adept to undertake such

activities at their home or village level, and help instill

the concepts of disaster preparedness in their

communities.

Overall, only 3 percent of the students interviewed

had no awareness of any such activity. They stated

that they were not informed about the hazard hunt

by anyone in their respective schools. Out of the 270

students, 239 (Figure 5.2) stated having participated

in the hazard hunt. Only 19 students (14 girls, 5 boys),

comprising of 16 in-school and 3 graduated students,

did not participate as they were absent on the days

when the hazard hunt was conducted.

Mock Drills

A similar scenario exists with respect to implementation of mock drills. 98 percent of the students

interviewed, of which 139 of 142 were girls and 126 of 128 were boys, were aware that mock drills on

lifesaving skills like fire, earthquake, first aid etc. take place in their respective schools. The same

proportion holds in case of distribution via inclusion in school. Overall, only 4 of 270 students stated

that their school had no mock drills, while 1 was unaware.

With respect to frequency of the mock drills, out of a total of 270, 151 stated that the mock drills were

held once a week and 22 stated it was twice a week, while 11 stated that mock drills was held very

rarely and 74 cited other timelines (Wednesday, Saturday, monthly or quarterly) for mock drills. This

difference arises as each school follows a different schedule for undertaking mock drills based on the

availability of the representatives from the implementing NGO partners.

Figure 5.3: Skills Learnt during Mock Drills as per Distribution by Gender (%)

“The hazard hunt involves identifying two types of risks - structural and non-structural. Amongst structural the key risks are whether the students wash their hands after usage of toilet, the status of cleanliness in school, and availability of sufficient classrooms to accommodate all students. As for the structural risks – lack of boundary walls, holes in the ground, low number of toilets with respect to the number of students in the school, placement of the hand pump in the centre of the ground and lack of any open elevanted sitting place.” Student from Gani Mohd. Rajkiya M S Jatwa Urdu in E Champaran

123 116

200

39

14 5

16

3

0

50

100

150

200

250

Girl (n=137) Boy (n=121) In-school(n=216)

Graduatedfrom school

(n=42)No Yes

Figure 5.2: Participation of Students in Hazard Hunts

53 53



Figure 5.4: Skills Learnt during Mock Drills as per Distribution by Inclusion in School (%)

Through participation in mock drills, 96 percent of the students were trained on lifesaving skills. This

majority exists in case of distribution by gender/inclusion in school. Some of the specialized skills

learnt during mock drills include creating a makeshift stretcher; demonstrating first aid skills and

response in case of risk (Figure 5.3 and 5.4).

More than 85 percent of the students irrespective of distribution by gender/inclusion in school learnt

the skill to stop, drop, roll and duck, cover and hold as a means of disaster preparedness. However,

only about 25 percent of the interviewed students were aware of the basic first aid skills, as reported

by them. Some of the other skills learnt during the mock drills were response to floods, response to

drowning, method of crossing the road properly, response to snake bites and avoidance of diarrhoea.

Discussion on School Safety

Around 97 per cent of the students discussed the lessons learnt on school safety with members of

their family, friends, community and teachers. This is a good practice as it will spread knowledge of

disaster preparedness among the community and make them more aware of how to deal with

disasters. The most common people with whom this information is shared by the students were their

immediate family - mother, father, brother and/ or sister, followed by their friends.

5.1.3 Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH)

Apart from instilling knowledge on disaster preparedness and risk behaviour, the SSP has been

successful in developing good practices of handwashing and safe drinking water. The interventions in

changing behaviour for handwashing have been successful with all the 270 students, irrespective of

their distribution by gender/inclusion in school having stated that they always wash their hands before

meals. Out of which 97 percent of the students used water and soap to wash their hands and less than

10 percent used other methods such as plain water, water and ash, water and mud etc.

20 2520 15

86 9387 93

20 273 3

0

20

40

60

80

100

Girl Boy

Create a stretcher

Demonstrate first aid skills

Stop, drop, roll

Duck, cover, hold

Others

Don't know

22 2517 20

89 9191 84

22 3030

20

40

60

80

100

In-school Graduated from school

54 54



In terms of use of toilet at school (Figure 5.5), there is a slight variance in the practice between girls

and boys. 89 percent of the girls reportedly use toilets in school in comparison to 79 percent of the

boys. The main reason stated was that there were no toilets for boys and they had been constructed

only for teachers and girls.

Overall 84 percent of the students stated they use the toilet in school while 16 percent do not. It is

worth noting that all the 45 students interviewed across the 3 schools in Supaul stated that they use

toilets in their respective schools. Of those who do not use the toilet, a higher proportion of students

where in-school in comparison to those who have graduated. Across all the schools interviewed, the

most common reason of non-usage of toilets was lack of cleanliness while some of the other reasons

were availability of toilets only for teachers and/or locked toilets.

A variance between students in terms of gender as well as inclusion in school was observed when

questioned on testing for water pollution (Figure 5.6). As per distribution by gender, 77 percent girls

and 82 percent boys expressed that they tested if water is polluted. Similarly, on the basis of inclusion

in school, 81 per cent of the students’ in-school and 73 percent of those who have graduated from

school tested the water for pollution. Overall, only 55 of 270 students stated that they do not test if

the water is polluted.

For testing of water, the students popularly use the H2S test to judge if the water is clean. They

mentioned filling water upto to the requisite level in the bottle and keeping it for 24 hours, in case the

water turns black, they claim it is polluted. Majority of the students were aware that boiling water and

adding bleaching powder helps purify water. Interestingly, most of the students interviewed at

127 101

189

39

15

27

37

5

0

50

100

150

200

250

Girl (n=142) Boy (n=128) In-school (n=226) Graduated from school(n=44)

No Yes

110 105

183

32

32 23

43

12

0

50

100

150

200

250

Girl (n=142) Boy (n=128) In-school (n=226) Graduated from school(n=44)

No Yes

“There is no toilet for boys. The toilets are for teachers and girls only” - Male students from Rajkiyakrit M S, Bheja School and Rajkiya Utk M S Pachahi Dakshin School in Madhubani “The toilet is mostly locked and has been opened today since they were aware that the evaluation team/NGO partners were coming to school for an assessment” – Female student from Aadarsh M S, Jitvariya School in Samastipur

Figure 5.5: Use of Toilet in School

Figure 5.6: Test if Water is Polluted

55 55



Sitamarhi mentioned following traditional practices like using guava leaves for judging water quality.

As described by the students, the process for the same involves crushing 3-4 leaves into a glass of

water and leaving it unattended for approx. 5 minutes. Post this, if the water changes its colour to

either black/red then the water is considered impure. The same was observed in a few cases in East

Champaran, Madhubani and Samastipur.

Knowledge

The survey aims to assess knowledge and awareness of the students with respect to the SSP, SDMC,

different hazards and risks and their response to different disasters.

5.2.1 About School Safety Programme (SSP)

About 96 percent of the students were aware about implementation of SSP and the SDMC in their

respective schools. This majority exists in case of distribution by gender/inclusion in school. To

examine the scope of knowledge of SDMC, these students were further questioned on the activities

undertaken by the SDMC in their schools (Figure 5.7 and 5.8).

Figure 5.7: Awareness on Activities conducted by SDMC as per Distribution by Gender (%)

Figure 5.8: Awareness on Activities conducted by SDMC as per Distribution by Inclusion in School (%)

More than 90 percent of the students irrespective of distribution by gender/inclusion in school were

aware that SDMC provides training on addressing disaster risk and develops the school disaster

management plan. However, awareness among the students with respect to SDMC helping with

Midday Meal Scheme averaged at around 65 per cent as per both the distributions; and awareness

with respect to organization of cultural activities by SDMC was more than 70 percent across all

distributions.

As reported by the students, majority of the schools had prepared disaster management plans while

the rest did not participate in the activity. These plans identify the different risks/vulnerabilities in the

school and its surroundings, list the measures necessary for reducing the prospective risk, and lay

down a schedule for making the requisite changes. Some of the most common infrastructural changes,

as a result of these plans were construction of boundary walls, elevated platforms, new toilets and

94 9892 96

67 6982 80

0

20

40

60

80

100

Girl Boy

Trainings on addressing disasterrisk

Development of school disastermanagement plan

Help with the Midday MealScheme

Conduct cultural activities

97 9194 9169

5984

70

0

20

40

60

80

100


56 56



hand pumps, repairs of broken windows and railings, and filling up holes in the ground with mud etc.

Further, to prepare for disasters the schools purchased fire extinguishers and raw materials for making

stretchers and life jackets, and prepared a first aid box with the basic medical supplies among other

things.

5.2.2 Natural and Manmade Disasters

In total, 228 of 270 students were aware that their respective schools had plans to deal with disasters,

while 24 of 270 didn’t think that their schools had any such plan and 18 of 270 students were unaware

of this exercise.

Figure 5.9: Disasters that can Affect School/ Community as per Distribution by Gender (%)

Figure 5.10: Disasters that can Affect School/ Community as per Distribution by Inclusion in School (%)

To understand the knowledge of students with respect to different types and kinds of disaster, they

were questioned on the disasters they felt could affect their school/ community and whether they

were natural/ manmade/ both. More than 80 percent of the students irrespective of distribution by

gender/inclusion in school believed that their school/ community could be affected by flood, fire or

earthquake. The least susceptible disaster as per the students is snakebites (Figure 5.9 and Figure

5.10). The students were further probed on the type of these disasters (manmade/ natural).

Type of Disasters

Fire is a Manmade

Disaster

Earthquake is a

Natural Disaster

Lightening is a

Natural Disaster

Damaged

Structures is a

Natural Disaster

Response Yes No Don't know

Yes No Don't know

Yes No Don't know

Yes No Don't know

Number 213 51 6 263 6 1 253 14 3 133

132 5

89 9482 80

94 96

47 4118 1722 27

0

20

40

60

80

100

Girl Boy

Flood Fire

Earthquake Cyclone

Snakebites Others

92 8980 8994 98

45 4118 1423

34

0

20

40

60

80

100


57 57



Overall 86 percent of the students stated that floods are natural disasters and 79 percent said fire is a

manmade disaster. More than 94 percent of the students agreed that earthquakes and lightening are

natural disasters. It seems as if the students are clear about the types of the most common disasters

affecting them.

It is interesting to note that an equal proportion

of students agreed and disagreed with the fact

that damaged structures were natural disasters.

Apart from these natural and manmade

disasters, 84 percent girls and 90 percent boys

recognized the hazards in and around their schools, which were dangerous such as blocked doors,

broken walls, snakes, etc.

5.2.3 Disaster Response

The students were able to differentiate between the various actions required in case of diverse

disasters like flood, drowning, fire and earthquake. The responses of the students in case of each of

these disasters have been tabulated below:

Type of

Disasters

Immediate Response

Floods Collect and carry necessities like important documents, dry food, water

bottles, rope, mosquito repellants, torch.

Prepare and wear a makeshift lifejacket.

Move to higher ground.

Carry a long stick to measure the water levels.

Carry halogen tablets to purify water and drink.

Maintain cleanliness of the area in order to prevent diseases.

Drowning Jump into water to save the drowning person in case you know swimming.

Start shouting for help from elders.

Throw a stick/ dupatta/ rope at the person and drag them out.

Expel water out of the drowning person, conduct CPR and take them to a

medical centre.

Fire Stop, drop and roll.

Wrap oneself in a blanket before entering the building.

Call the fire brigade.

Douse the fire with mud or water.

Cover your mouth to save yourself from inhaling harmful fumes.

Earthquake Duck, cover and hold.

Hide under a bench/ table.

Stand in the corner of a room and cover your head.

Exit the building and move to open ground.

Avoid trees and electricity poles.

5.2.4 Knowledge about WASH

A significant number of students (93 percent) displayed their knowledge of handwashing practices by

water and soap. More than 90 percent of the students recognized the need to wash their hands before

eating and after toilet use.

Disaster Type of Floods

Response Manmade Natural Both Don't

Know

Number 26 231 9 4

58 58



The knowledge about WASH is equally imbedded amongst girls and boys (Figure 5.11). However, on

the basis of inclusion in school, it was observed that a higher proportion of students who had

graduated from school were aware of the best practices related to handwashing (Figure 5.12). 267 of

the 270 of the students irrespective of distribution by gender/ inclusion in school recognized that

drinking clean water was necessary to avoid illnesses and diseases (like cholera, diarrhoea, malaria),

and stay healthy.

Figure 5.11: Handwashing Behaviour as per Distribution by Gender (%)

Figure 5.12: Handwashing Behaviour as per Distribution by Inclusion in School (%)

Attitudes

The survey seeks to understand the attitude among the students in terms of response when faced

with disasters and improvement in handwashing behaviour.

5.3.1 Towards SSP and Disaster Preparedness

Majority of students had a positive attitude towards SSP and deemed the programme highly

successful. They have helped them in identifying potential risks/ vulnerabilities, developing an in-

depth knowledge of disasters and inculcating skills for disaster response (Figure 5.13). This attitude is

currently present across all genders whether they are in-school or have graduated from schools where

SSP was implemented.

99 9891 90

25 2615

92 21

0

20

40

60

80

100

Girl Boy

Before Eating

After toilet use

After handling garbage

Before food Preparation

Don't know

Others

99 10089

98

233611

2020

20

40

60

80

100


59 59



96 percent demonstrated a positive attitude towards SSP and agreed that it has been helpful in

increasing their knowledge on disasters and lifesaving skills. Similarly, 88 percent affirmed that hazard

hunts have helped in identification of vulnerabilities within school premises. The engagement of

students with school authorities has been highly positive. 96 percent students stated that they would

inform the school immediately in case of any potential threats likes potholes, damaged walls or broken

latrines for immediate action. The students proactively follow-up with the Headmaster/ SDMCs in case

their suggestions have been excluded from the School Development Plans. They have begun

questioning the Headmaster/ SDMC on reasons for delay in taking risk mitigations measures. One of

the reasons for delays conveyed to the students was lack of funds.

5.3.2 Towards WASH

The knowledge related to importance of good hand washing practices and safe drinking water has

been well accepted by students where SSP has been implemented.

It is important to use water purification techniques (Bleaching

powder, boiling) to prevent contamination of water. Agree Disagree

Don't

Know

Gender

Girl 138 0 4

Boy 126 1 1

Inclusion in school

In-school 220 1 5

Graduated from school 44 0 0

Total 264 1 5

It is important to wash your hands with soap. Agree Disagree Don't

Know

Gender

Girl 141 0 1

Boy 123 2 3

Inclusion in school

In-school 220 2 4

Graduated from school 44 0 0

Total 264 2 4

About 264 of 270 students recognized the importance of WASH related behaviour change. Only 1 boy

who was currently in-school thought that water purification was unnecessary, and 2 boys who were

97

88

96

96

1

4

3

1

2

7

3

1

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

SSP helpful in increasing your knowledge on disasters

Hazard hunt is successful in identifying potential threatswithin the school premises

Mock drills have been helpful in increasing knowledge aboutlife saving skills

Potential threats should be brought to the notice of schoolauthorities immediately.

Agree Disagree Neither agree or disagree Don't know

Figure 5.13: Attitude towards SSP and Disaster Preparedness among all Students (%)

60 60



in-school believed that washing hands with soap was not important. It is worth noting that all the 44

students who have graduated from school recognized the importance of using water purification

techniques to prevent contamination of water and the need to wash hands with soap.

Overall the findings from the KAP suggest sufficient evidence of the success of the School Safety

Programme (SSP) in the schools present across the six districts of Bihar covered in this study. The

students in these schools have developed in-depth knowledge of different risks/vulnerabilities and

have enhanced capacities to respond to the most common disasters. The students also have

positive attitude towards disaster response and hand washing behaviour, and have adopted good

practices in their daily lives.

61 61



6 SUSTAINABILITY AND SCALABILITY OF CBDRR-SSP

This section explores the sustainability and scalability of the programme and answers the associated

evaluation questions. However, the questions on lessons learnt and recommendations have been

included in subsequent chapters- 8 and 9.

Sustainability and

Scalability Description

Key Evaluation Question To what extent will the benefits of CBDRR– School Safety programme continue

after UNICEF funding support has ceased?

Sub Questions If UNICEF were to withdraw support for this programme, what components

would be sustainable and what actions would be necessary for the outcomes

to be sustained?

What were the major factors, which influenced the achievement or non-

achievement of sustainability of the CBDRR– School Safety programme?

Which of the lessons learnt can be externally applied. Provide

recommendations (for UNICEF as well as the Bihar government) for further

application of these good practices in future CBDRR- School Safety

programmes.

What are the scaling-up approaches and possible strategies for scaling-up

CBDRR and School Safety programme in Bihar and for promoting CBDRR-

School Safety programme within Government system.

Is there an exit strategy in place at the level of UNICEF?

Overview of how

sustainability and

scalability was assessed

Analysing the existing documentation on the programmes: The team reviewed

and analysed all existing literature shared on the programme interventions.

Using perceptions of stakeholders and observations from field.

Sustainability of CBDRR and SSP

This section explores whether the components of both programmes are sustainable.

6.1.1 Sustainable components within CBDRR

a) Strong community institutions

At the community level, the DRR activities are linkely to continue if support is completely withdrawn.

Overall, in 11 out of the 12 cases, the VDMCs came across as strong institutions. They are motivated

and enthusiastic, and are following their mandated activities in spite of much reduced support from

the NGO partners. This includes making annual DRR plans, raising awareness on how to prepare for

disasters and pooling in resources. 11 out of 12 VDMCs felt that they were capable of sustaining the

programme without much external support. The one remaining VDMC believed that it would still

require handholding support from the NGO partner for some time.

b) Engagement with multiple stakeholders

A strong programme element of the CBDRR is the continuous interaction with the PRIs, frontline

workers, block and district level officials for leveraging of resources. In all the villages visited, there

were numerous instances where the VDMCs were reaching out to block and district level officials to

collaboratively work on improving village infrastructure to make it disaster resilient. They were also

participating in public forums namely ward and gram sabhas, and block and district level collective

discussions.

62 62



c) Knowledge and understanding of government schemes and programmes

Some of the major government schemes to promote development at the village level are Mahatma

Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA), Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana

(PMGSY), Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS), Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana (PMAY) etc. The

VDMCs were found to have a good understanding of the different types of government schemes and

programmes through which funds could be leveraged for implementing their DRR plans. There is

enthusiasm to continually engage with the government functionaries and demand the benefits

associated with the schemes. This enhanced knowledge allows for better implementation of DRR

plans, especially the ones dependent on government support. The knowledge and awareness has

played a critical role in VDMCs emerging as strong and committed community institutions with the

ability to sustain the programme at the village level.

d) Presence of DRR catalysts

DRR catalysts within these villages have been able to

demonstrate motivation and leadership to drive the CBDRR

programme. These individuals have experienced and dealt

with disasters themselves, and the programme relies on their

abilities and capacities to inspire and implement action on

ground. During the FGDs, the evaluation team found that

these DRR catalysts were aware of all the key programme

activities. They had an in depth and experiential

understanding of the vulnerabilities that they face, and were conducting the following activities, as

identified by them:

Ensure monthly meetings and coordination of activities.

Monitor VDMC activities and to educate the community.

Establish a connection between the VDMC and other villagers.

Connect VDMP to the main village development plans, help develop VDMPs.

To form a VDMC in nearby villages where there is no VDMC.

Increase awareness on government schemes in the villages.

Necessary Actions to Sustain CBDRR Programme

Necessary actions have been identified to sustain the CBDRR programme. These should be integrated

into the programme before withdrawal.

a) Rotational membership:

VDMCs and DRR catalysts are important stakeholders to that ensure that DRR can sustain in the

current programme context and geographies. However, in order to sustain the activities, it is

imperative that a practice of rotational membership be established for increased inclusion,

accountability and ownership of the programme. Three to five members should be replaced annually

in addition to observing a systematic approach of including women.

b) Developing local leadership:

In addition to this, continued capacity building of the DRR catalysts will ensure that the programme

sustains after complete withdrawal by UNICEF and implementing NGO partners. To strengthen the

capacities of the DRR catalysts, UNICEF has a “perspective plan for DRR catalysts”. It details out how

“We were identified by the VDMC since we were hard working and committed, and we could give time. We were chosen because we are not greedy. We were given technical training by UNICEF after which we were selected.” - DRR FGD

63 63



the current and new DRR catalysts are being trained in order to sustain the programme. This plan

should be implemented to ensure sustainability.

6.1.2 Sustainable components within SSP

The evaluation findings indicate that there are components that make the SSP sustainable at the

school level:

a) School Safety Focus Teachers (SSFT)

One of the main reasons for effective implementation of the SSP is the presence of the SSFT. SSFT are

teachers, who have taken the additional responsibility of conducting, monitoring and sustaining the

SSP and its associated activities. The following activities have been identified at the school level

depending on the presence and motivation of the SSFT:

b) Mock Drills

In every school visited, the children were participating in different kind of mock drills. This has made

easy using catchy slogans and phases, which work well at the community levels. ‘Duck, Cover, Hold’

and ‘Stop, Drop, Roll’ were especially popular. Children were particularly enthusiastic about

demonstrating these, when asked. These have also been taught to younger children who are in school.

c) Hazard Hunts and SDMC Plans

All schools are maintaining and updating their SDMC plans after conducting the Hazard hunts. These

activities work well with children as it allows them to stay engaged and holding the school

accountable. These activities have been able to sustain, as most students are not only aware about

the plans but have also seen the school transform in terms of the improved infrastructure (e.g.

construction of toilets, repairing of buildings and playgrounds). This is encouraging and allows children

to contribute effectively in improving their schools by identifying threats and challenges. Children who

had graduated to high schools were able to discuss the kind of changes they have witnessed. In some

cases, they are continuing to be a part of the planning exercise to support younger children.

d) Chetna Satras

This is an assembly session, where everyone in the school made aware of dealing with disasters. This

is the larger school platform where mock drills and lifesaving skills practiced. This facilitated by the

teachers and students collectively, and has come to become routine in the school, which increases its

chances to continue.

Necessary Actions to Sustain SSP

Necessary actions have been identified to sustain the SSP. These should be integrated into the

programme before withdrawal.

a) Appointing a second SSFT:

The SSFT as an individual is critical for the implementation of the SSP. It is through her/his efforts and

support that students are continuously able to make plans, conduct hazard hunts and identify threats

and disasters at the school level. While the implementing NGO partners have played a critical role in

organising trainings, moving forward it is expected that the SSFTs will manage and continue the

programme. Therefore, not only do the capacities of the existing SSFTs need to be built but the

programme should try to identify a second SSFT in the school. This is critical since the teachers are

64 64



transferable. In the event of a transfer happening, the SSP activities can be taken over by the second

SSFT.

b) Greater engagement with the community:

The findings indicate that there is little interaction between the school administration and the VDMCs.

The Bihar State Office has reinforced this, that both the programmes have independent mandates and

objectives. However, there needs to be a clear strategic vision as well as interventions to ensure

synergy between the CBDRR and the SSP. Given the fact that VDMCs are strong institutions and DRR

catalysts are highly motivated individuals, both of these community level institutions can play a critical

role in ensuring that SSP activities sustain even after complete withdrawal of UNICEF support to the

programme.

Both the programmes have key activities and objectives that can be considered sustainable as well

as community driven. However, there are few recommended actions along with existing scale- up

initiatives that can continue to sustain the on-going activities at the school and village levels. These

have been elaborated in the section on recommendations.

Factors Influencing the Sustainability of CBDRR – SSP

The following critical factors are expected to contribute towards the sustainability of both the

programmes:

CBDRR

a) Acceptance of the community

The CBDRR programme has been accepted and adopted at the community level effectively. The

community members interviewed consistently underlined the need for such a programme, as there

has been increase in knowledge and understanding of dealing with disasters. The implementing NGO

partners have played a critical role in engaging with the communities before initiating the programme.

This builds long- term trust and commitment towards reducing vulnerabilities to disasters.

b) Support received from the Block and District level officials

The block and district level officials were supportive of the programme and have enabled the

communities to leverage the resources. The requests raised by the VDMC members are process by

block officals, and required actions is undertaken to ensure that support is provided by the designated

department responsible for undertaking the task. They felt that it helped build knowledge and

understanding of dealing with disasters at the local level. Further, these capacitated community

members were able to help the block administration during disasters. There is clear acceptance of the

DRR activities conducted as a part of the programme by the District Administration. The evaluation

team received responses where, District Magistrates emphasized on the need for scaling up this

intervention across other vulnerable villages and blocks.

c) Design of the programme

As discussed, the programme is participatory, inclusive and cross cutting in addressing underlying

risks. It is grounded and institutionalized in the community and is sensitive to their experience of

disasters. Additionally, the programme understands the sustained vulnerability experienced by all

communities, and empowers them to make plans that will address their problems whilst also building

the confidence to negotiate and engage with multiple stakeholders. The design lays out a clear

65 65



roadmap to preparedness and resilience.

SSP

a) Sensitization of the DoE in order to implement the programme

The need for an initiative like the SSP has been understood by the Department of Education, and it

resonated during the interactions of the team with the DEOs and BEOs. These officials along with the

school administration have been supportive and have officially mandated for the SSP activities to be

carried out at the school level. As primary duty bearers, the District and Block Education officers were

sensitized and supported in the identification of schools, where the programme was implemented.

They suggested that as a part of their routine monitoring exercise, they assess whether the SSP

activities are being undertaken.

b) Design of the programme:

SSP by design focuses on being accountable, child-friendly, enabling and interactive. At the school

level, it has been able to ensure that students are able to act as change agents at the school as well as

the community levels. Much like the CBDRR, the SSP empowers children to identify their programme,

make their plans, and hold the school administration accountable in case their problems are not

addressed. It uses activities such as poetry, songs/dancing, street plays, quiz and essay competitions

to builds their skills. These activities have been integrated very seamlessly into the existing school

curriculum. These simple activities have been effective in enhancing the understanding and the

practice of DRR among children and school teachers.

UNICEF has adopted a plan to scale up the SSP to 16 states across the country given that the

programme has been able to demonstrate effective knowledge transfer. Children have been practicing

the learnings from the SSP, and act as change agents within schools and villages. Selected students

have also been identified for experience sharing and skills demonstration within and outside the state

of Bihar.

Both CBDRR and SSP

a) Role of UNICEF

Since their conceptualization by UNICEF, both CBDRR and SSP have received continuous technical

assistance and supportive supervision by the DRR team at UNICEF, Bihar. Additionally, the DRR team

has been engaging with state, district and block level institutions for seeking guidance, requesting

actions, and conducting policy advocacy. Some such institutions with which UNICEF officials regularly

interact are the Department of Education, the Bihar State and District Disaster Management

Authorities, District Magistrates, Block Development Officers, Block Education Officers etc. This has

not only ensured smooth implementation of both the programmes but also continuous cross-learning

between all the bodies, which are engaged in building the DRR capacities of communities and children

in Bihar.

b) Committed and motivated NGO partners

The implementing NGO partners across the six districts have demonstrated continued commitment

towards reducing disasters and associated risks. As individuals who have faced disasters and its

repercussions themselves, they are able to contextualise interventions and understand local needs.

Given their foundation in Bihar and long drawn experience of working in disaster prone areas, these

partners have been sensitive and thorough with the CBDRR-SSP processes while working with the

66 66



village communities and school children. This is reflected in the regular handholding support provided

to VDMCs and SDMCs while conducting regular meetings and preparing the relevant DRR plans.

Exit Strategy

The first phase of the CBDRR-SSP was initiated in 2009 and has continued till 2015. In this duration,

the programme has evolved to create strong community and school level institutions. Both

programmes have reached a level where systematic withdrawal from direct field implementation is

crucial to ensure sustainability of the process and its outcomes. Therefore, while not documented, an

implicit exit strategy has been embedded into the framework of both the programmes:

CBDRR

a) DRR catalysts

The DRR catalysts have been identified given their knowledge and understanding of the target

communities and their experience of living in a disaster prone area. They are often the most capable

members of a VDMC and pay pivotal role in the CBDRR process. These catalysts have been significantly

contributing towards strengthening their community institutions as well as mobilizing resource to

implement the DRR plans. Recognising their volunteering spirit, UNICEF and implementing NGO

partners build their capacities through trainings and exposure visits.

As an exit strategy, they are expected to provide the required leadership and address disaster

associated risks at the community level. 130 DRR catalysts have been positioned in the 255 villages

CBDRR programme villages. DRR catalysts have evolved as key stakeholders and now are responsible

for strengthening the VDMCs to ensure sustainability of the programme after complete withdrawal of

UNICEF.

b) Grading criterion

All the intervention villages/VDMCs are graded on the basis of their implementation performance,

which is monitored by the UNICEF Bihar state office. The withdrawal of NGO partner support from

Grade A villages has already begun, and by the end of 2017, the activities within these villages will be

managed by the DRR Catalysts.

c) Saturation of villages and blocks:

The villages within the intervention blocks are being saturated with support from block and district

administration. As a part of this strategy, capacity building of frontline workers (ANM, AWW) is being

undertaken for them to take on DRR responsibilities. For effective implementation of this intervention,

district and block level officials conduct periodic reviews to ensure that all DRR planning is being done

at the village level.

SSP

a) Grading criterion

Similar to the village, the intervention schools/SDMCs are also graded and support from all Grade A

schools will be withdrawn by 2017.

b) MSSP scale-up

As discussed, the SSP has already been included into the working mechanism of the DoE. UNICEF and

implementing NGO play a limited facilitation. The DoE acts as the nodal agency at the state level, and

67 67



UNICEF has been supported them to develop programme documents and design strategies for scaling

up the MSSP.

Approaches and Strategies for Scaling-up

Government of Bihar has developed a DRR Roadmap (2015-2030) for Bihar, emerging as one of the

first organized attempts in the world. DRR Roadmap has been developed on the framework of

‘resilience in development’. The DRR Roadmap encompasses actions on risk recognition, analysis and

risk- informed programme planning for every sector and departments delivering services for survival,

growth, development and protection of children.

One of the pillar of the DRR Roadmap i.e. ‘Resilient Village Programme’ is inspired by the lesson learnt

of the UNICEF CBDRR programme. Resilient Village Programme will cover all the 45000 villages of Bihar

in a phased manner. The components of resilient village are similar to CBDRR programme of UNICEF

viz. risk analysis at village level, develop Village Disaster Management Plan (VDMP) based on the

village level risk analysis and integrate in Gram Panchayat plans. The National Disaster Management

Guideline on ‘Community Based Disaster Management’ by NDMA (in the approval process) has also

adapted UNICEF CBDRR roadmap (model) of Bihar and has case studies from Bihar.

DRR Roadmap for 2015 - 2030 gives an opportunity to scale up the school safety programme across

the State under the title ‘Chief Minister’s School Safety Programme (CMSSP)’ (Resilient Basic Services

– actions for the Education Department). Under this programme, all 79,196 government schools of

Bihar, and subsequently private schools. The CMSS programme was launched in July, 2015 with the

state wide mock-drill. The CMSSP programme guidelines revised to include the UNICEF school safety

programme processes viz. Hazard Hunt, Safe Saturday, Peer –to – Peer education and knowledge

building plan.

Scaling up Approaches

a) CBDRR

The scope of the CBDRR programme has now been expanded to 1,122 villages in the existing six

districts by UNICEF. With the point of view of scale-up and the experience of the programme team,

new roles and responsibilities within the programme have been introduced. Government frontline

functionaries will be actively linked with VDMC management for the formulation of VDMPs. The

implementing NGO partners are expected to contribute towards capacity building and handholding in

a limited capacity. Further, there has also been on-going engagement District Administration, District

Disaster Management, BDOs and Circle Officers. BDOs have selected CBDRR nodal persons from

government cadre of Vikas Mitra. The CBDRR Nodal persons play role in organising the VDMC,

developing the VDMP and subsequently including it in village development plans.

In addition to UNICEF’s scale up activities, as discussed in the section on Relevance, the CBDRR

initiatives are also being scaled up through the efforts of GoB and the BSDMA. GoB has developed a

15 year DRR roadmap, as a policy level intervention, which has adopted and incorporated learning

from the CBDRR programme. It commits to reducing the associated risks related to the disasters, as

recognized by the GoI and GoB. The DRR team at UNICEF has played a critical role in technically

supporting GoB in developing its detailed perspective plan to make the state disaster resilient. An

implementation committee has been set up by UNICEF to support the state in conducting all DRR

68 68



activities. Further, the Resilient Village Programme (RVP) included as an action point has been drawn

out using the CBDRR programme as a model. With the objective of building capacities of communities

to become resilient through DRR planning, UNICEF has been assisting GoB in developing guidelines

and manuals for RVP.

b) SSP

SSP since 2015 has been scaled to a total of 3,318 schools across seven districts by UNICEF, as a part

of its ongoing DRR activities. The objective is to saturate the blocks and districts and support DRR

activities at the school level.

Further, the SSP has been recognized by the GoB for its achievements and contributions. Its learning

have been incorporated in the DRR roadmap, and will be scaled up through the MSSP. So far, as a part

of the MSSP scale up initiative, a school safety fortnight has been organized, where students and

teachers were trained, and government functionaries were oriented on SSP (Refer to Box 3.4).

In order to implement MSSP effectively, UNICEF along with other development partners has been

providing technical assistance, and coordination support. The UNICEF team has been working at the

state, district and block levels, and liaising with the DoE, Bihar Education Project Committed and the

SCERT. A knowledge sharing workshop was organized with GoB to discuss the modalities and

strategies that will be adopted during the implementation of MSSP. Support has also been extended

for the development of modules, guidelines and Information, Education and Communication (IEC)

materials, and monitoring of the programme.

The implementing NGO partners also continuously support capacity building activities at the cluster

and block level. Periodic block level workshops/capacity building sessions are organized with teachers

to refresh their understanding and knowledge on DRR.

Both CBDRR and SSP have demonstrated strong components of sustainability along with their

individual achievements like increasing knowledge on and preparedness towards disasters. Further,

UNICEF and implementing NGO partners as institutions have ensured that both programmes

receive the required handholding and technical support at different levels.

Examples of positive community engagement from CBDRR-SSP

The CBDRR-SSP interventions have resulted in some positive unexpected results, which were

particularly observed while conducting the case studies in the selected villages. These can act as

examples, which the programme can use while scaling-up. Additional examples can be found in other

villages and schools, which were not a part of the sample.

a) Women overcoming socio-cultural taboos

Prevalent social practices often limit women’s ability to participate in public discussions and

interactions, especially in the presence of male members. However, as observed in Malkoshikapur

village in Supaul district, the VDMC has nine female members. This is one of the few VDMCs with such

a high proportion of female members. Despite the regular set of interventions having been

undertaken in this region, women play an active role in addressing disaster-associated risks,

strengthening child protection measures, and improving the overall sanitation and hygiene of the

village. Therefore, this case study example has demonstrated that the DRR interventions have the

potential to act as a basis to mobilize women and contribute to their empowerment.

b) Collaborative action despite religious differences

69 69



In Khormandarpur village, Madhubani district, the team observed that the VDMC formation was

initially a challenge. At the time of formation, people remained apprehensive about working together.

In addition to not having the initial confidence about the planned DRR activities, both Hindu and

Muslim communities resided in the village. Through constant interaction, they were eventually able

to overcome ideological differences, and work together to improve the village. This resulted in the

construction of a bridge connecting two sections of the village that were previously inaccessible during

floods. This improved relationship between the different sections of the population was due to the

efforts of the DRR interventions.

c) Community leaders and volunteers

As reported by many of the VDMC members, a proactive role is played by them when a disaster strikes.

For instance, in Darbhanga, VDMC members from a programme village camped overnight to ensure

that the embankment does not breach due to floods. Another example was sighted in Supaul district,

where a group of traders and moneylenders provided immediate financial relief in the village during

a fire breakout. These community leaders and volunteers emerged in all the sampled villages, who

have either led by example or have played a significant role during disasters.

70 70



7 CBDRR-SSP FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF GENDER AND EQUITY

This section explores how, if at all, has the CBDRR-SSP been able to integrate Gender and Equity

considerations by analysing the programme. It presents findings answering the evaluation questions.

Gender and Equality Description

Key Evaluation Question To what extent have activities affected marginalized communities,

addressed differences in gender, and empowered both girls and boys?

Sub Questions Was the programme design and delivery equitable to different

groups and gender?

Did the programme achieve the same level of success in different

places and with different groups?

Were there any negative effects felt by any groups?

Overview of how gender

and equity was assessed

Analysing the existing documentation on the project

Using perceptions of stakeholders and observations from field

Design and Delivery of the Programmes

The section examines whether both CBDRR and SSP programmes were equitable to different groups

and gender. As per the scope of the evaluation, the design and delivery of the programme in the

context of different socio-economic groups within the village were proposed to be studied. However,

during the evaluation it was found that the CBDRR-SSP villages in the sample were mostly inhabited

by SCs and EBCs. With this knowledge and understanding, following is a discussion on the extent to

which the programme activities were equitable and gender inclusive.

CBDRR

In order to evaluate the CBDRR programme against its design and delivery to different groups and

gender, the team identified specific activities/processes, where the programme is expected to reach

out to different sections of the populations, and analysed the same based on the field findings.

a) Area identification

The NGOs are expected to identify an area based on the criteria of vulnerability and probability of

disasters. These implementing partners gather basic information from the community, and create a

consolidated village profile, which has information of the number of households and composition of

population.

In all the villages that were visited, it was found that the socio-economically deprived sections of the

population namely SC and EBC categories formed the majority of the village population. Therefore,

the villages are not only selected based on their vulnerability to disasters but also the fact that these

sections are marginalized and vulnerable due to lack of resources and connectivity. There were

instances, where the villages comprised of women led households due to excessive migration, making

a need for such an intervention all the more relevant.

b) Community mobilization

The CBDRR programme relies on community mobilization in order to ensure that communities are

better prepared for disasters and are able to develop their DRR plans. As a part of the process, it is

71 71



encouraged that the process be all-inclusive with participation from community leaders, ward

members, men, women and children. During the interactions of the team with the community

members through FGDs and KIIs, the findings indicated that the community mobilization exercise was

conducted keeping all of these principles in mind.

The VDMC members were able to recount experiences of when the programme was first started in

their area. This process was facilitated by the implementing NGO partners who were able to ensure

that the village at large is able to understand the need for such a programme.

c) Formation of VDMCs:

As discussed, the VDMC, as the core of the CBDRR intervention, is not only responsible for leading on

disaster reduction activities at the village level but also engaging different stakeholders. The FGD and

case study42 findings reinforce that the formation of the VDMC is indeed an all-inclusive process and

encourages representation from different sections of the society, including Hindus, Muslims, women,

etc. across the various socio-economic groups. These VDMC members have been selected with

consent from the entire village. Consequently, there is no discrimination or alienation experienced by

any sections in village, while becoming VDMC members. In addition to this, there were no instances

of further marginalization of any group in the villages visited.

However, it is important to note that while VDMC members are selected by the villagers and

voluntarily, there is no mandate, as a part of the programme to definitively ensure women’s

participation as members.

d) Functioning of VDMCs (including making plans and conducting risk analysis):

As discussed, the VDMCs are expected to make DRR plans and conduct risk assessment activities.

Currently, the VDMCs in the villages evaluated, are representative of the village population and have

taken on responsibility of developing and improving the village towards disaster risk reduction.

The discussions also highlighted that the VDMC members along with the village community undertake

regular risk analysis using the “Kya Khoya, Kya Paaya” exercise. In this exercise, they assess the

disasters and risks they have faced, establish the reasons for the same and examine their capacity to

deal with it. Based on this exercise, they identify the households with pregnant women, children, and

people with disability to provide additional supervision and support. This ensures that the most

vulnerable are the first to receive immediate relief and rehabilitation in case of disasters. However,

with regard to the planning process, women and children appeared to have a limited role. This has

been discussed in the previous section on effectiveness.

SSP

The SSP by design is inclusive and non-discriminatory. While there are specific children who are

selected to become a part of the SDMC based on merit and their membership in the Bal Sansad and/or

Meena Manch, all children participate in the activities. This is done through mechanisms such as

Surakshit Shanivaar and Chetna Satras. It was found that in all the schools, children are being equally

engaged and included in the activities. This was also reinforced by the school safety focal teacher and

headmaster, who said that children are not being left out on the basis of gender and/or social

42 Khormadanpur village acts as an example of how community members have been working together. During the team’s interaction, perspective plans were presented. These had been made keeping in mind the entire composition of the village. Efforts like cleaning a section of the village that needed attention, creating village task forces, and conducting regular gram sabhas have improved disaster preparedness and built resilience of the village community.

72 72



category.

However, mixed responses were received while discussing about children with disabilities (CWD) and

their inclusion. In some cases, there was no reason to even account for CWDs in the school

development plans, as there were no CWDs in school. Therefore, sensitivity vis-à-vis the issue of

disability and its inclusion in school safety planning needs to be introduced and accounted for. This

allows for an improved approach to DRR planning in schools. Further, children as agents of change will

also recognise the importance of an inclusion while planning and preparing for disasters.

Overall, both programmes have been inclusive in capacitating communities and schools to plan for

disasters. However, as a part of the CBDRR programme, more efforts can be made in order to include

women in the DRR planning process, especially to address underlying risks- malnutrition, birth

registration and WASH and related risks.

Implementation of CBDRR-SSP

As discussed in the previous section, the programme is being implemented in vulnerable villages,

which are dominated by socio-economically marginalized sections of the society. Despite selection of

A, B and C graded villages and schools; there was no particular difference in implementation of the

programme. The evaluation findings suggest that the programme after 2012 has had an intensified

engagement across all the selected villages and schools by UNICEF and the implementing NGO

partners.

Implementation of the CBDRR Programme

a) Difference in implementation across programme areas

The programme is being implemented by six different NGO partners in the districts visited. Based on

the interactions and field findings, it was found that in Runnisaidpur block of Sitamarhi district, more

efforts need to be made in order to build capacities of the VDMC. During the FGD with VDMC, the

participation was limited to just one or two members out of the ones present indicating that the

understanding of the programme was limited to only a few individuals.

However, due to the efforts of the implementing NGO partner, the village DRR plans were being

maintained, and associated activities were being undertaken. Both the children’s and women’s groups

had knowledge about the measures that needed to be undertaken for disaster preparedness and

response.

Apart from this specific instance, there was no significant geographical difference that was observed

in the implementation of activities. This was also physically verified during transect walks around the

village and triangulated during the discussions with different groups.

b) Difference in implementation across different groups

As discussed in the previous sections, there was no difference in programme implementation and

consequently no observable difference in programme achievement across the communities met. This

has been possible because the programme maintains that disasters affect all. Accordingly, there have

been no instances of differential treatment by VDMCs, DRR catalysts and NGO implementing partners

towards a specific group or category. Further, the needs of people from different habitations has also

been taken care of. For example, setting up of hand pumps in different sections of the villages and

areas wise cleanliness drives were common example cited during the interactions with the

community.

73 73



Implementation of SSP

In the schools visited, no difference in implementation was observed. The trainings by the

implementing NGO partners are conducted with the SSFT, SDMC and the shadow SDMC members. In

addition to specific trainings, school level activities include Chetna Satras, a common assembly to

discuss the importance of DRR in school, and Mock Drills. These ensure that children from the entire

school have a common and basic understanding of how to deal with disasters. The discussions with

the NGOs also highlighted that they are making equal as well as context specific efforts to ensure that

capacity of children and teachers are strengthened at the school level.

In addition to this, DRR champions from across the schools have been identified , who facilitate in

conducting trainings in school, as well as acting as resource persons while conducting block and district

level activities. These children have been a part of DRR focused exposure visits where they share their

experiences and learn about innovative ways of addressing disasters.

The SSP has been successful across all social groups. At the school level, all respondents mentioned

that no one has experienced any form of discrimination. The students from class six-eight are equally

engaged and everyone is given the opportunity to participate in all activities conducted. As mentioned,

shadow SDMC members are also trained. These are younger children, who will take over of the role

of current SDMC members once they graduate from middle school.

74 74



8 CONCLUSIONS AND LESSONS LEARNT

The evaluation has provided an independent assessment of the CBDRR-SSP, and particularly focused

on whether its processes and approaches have made the programme relevant, effective and

sustainable. As discussed, the programme performs well against the criteria of relevance,

effectiveness and sustainability. However, more efforts are needed in the areas of gender.

The findings of the evaluation indicate that the CBDRR-SSP has demonstrated its relevance in disaster

risk reduction and improve knowledge on rights and entitlements in the six intervention districts. The

evidence suggests that the programme, as a pilot, has been effective in providing a platform for

vulnerable communities for engaging with government officials and implementing NGO partners on

disaster associated risks that directly impact their lives.

Further, the VDMCs and SDMCs have the potential for improving government service delivery and

enhancing knowledge of students and community members at the school and village levels. It is also

important to note that community leadership in the form of DRR catalysts and DRR champions is a key

enabler for participatory development. While women and children can be further included in the

planning process, the model has built their capacities in dealing with disasters. The evaluation shows

that the committees are proactively participating in decision-making processes and have enhanced

implementation of the programme.

The school safety programme specifically provides evidence on the effectiveness of the model in

addressing children’s knowledge on disaster preparedness. Further, a review of the village level plans

also highlights the programme’s ability to leverage government resources. Efforts are also being made

at the block, district and state levels to integrate the disaster risk reduction model into their existing

working framework, which ensures its sustainability. This is also supported by UNICEF by scaling up

the DRR interventions in other blocks. Intensified efforts are being made across all the villages and

schools, which reflects in the findings when analysed against the period of intervention.

The CBDRR-SSP, therefore, has the potential to contribute towards addressing disaster associated risks

within the programme areas. It acts as a case study that has demonstrated the importance of advocacy

and influencing policy, leveraging and building partnerships, and overall results43 in building and

sustaining a programme. The findings also validate the envisioned Theory of Change where the

programme is moving towards its desired impact of making communities safe from disasters. Futher,

given its simple and community-led interventions and its recognition from the GoB makes a strong

case for scalability and replicability.

Conclusions

The following conclusions can be drawn from the evaluation of both the programmes:

a) Enabled communities and schools to be better prepared for disasters and build resilience

Since its implementation, the programme has progressively improved the students’ knowledge and

understanding of disasters through activities such as hazard hunts and mock drills. Regular training on

preparedness and risk reduction measures have made students aware of methods that can protect

them from floods, earthquakes and fires. At the community level, initiatives like open meetings,

formation and capacity building of village task forces (on disaster preparedness, health, nutrition,

43 UNICEF India Country Office. "UNICEF India Country Office Guidelines on Piloting and Scaling Up of Innovations and Good Practices." UNICEF, January 2013.

75 75



WASH), engagement with government officials, and facilitating gram sabhas have enabled the village

community to prepare for disasters and build resilience using the available capacities and resources.

b) Embedded within the community and people’s experience of dealing with disasters

The CBDRR programme is embedded within the community, and the people’s understanding and

experience of dealing with disasters. It is highly participatory with continuous engagement of

community members from identification of the programme area to mobilization of the community for

programme activities. For example, in order to form VDMCs, meetings are conducted with key

stakeholders that include PRIs, frontline workers and community elders and leaders. This community

driven model fundamentally believes that people at risk have a strong interest in using their own

capacities and volunteerism to improve their lives by becoming disaster resilient.

c) Empowering children to identify threats and hazards and develop plans

The SSP has been successful in empowering the children to identify the hazards in and around school,

contribute to the school development plans, and hold the school administration accountable with

support from the SSFT in case their problems are not addressed. As mentioned, this is one of the key

reasons for the scale up of SSP to 16 states on the basis of the Bihar model.

d) Strong engagement and regular interaction between NGO partners and government officials

The relationship between the key stakeholders in the government, particularly at the block level, has

been one of the key strengths of the programme. Government officials have appreciated the

programme team’s role in offering technical expertise, initiating and supporting convergence

activities. However, while there have been clear attempts to build a strong and effective relationship

with duty bearers at the local and block level, more work needs to be done in order to improve the

interactions between the implementing NGO partners and government officials at district level. The

implementing NGO partners have taken clear ownership of the DRR agenda but they need more

support in liaising and engaging with the government at district level.

e) A shift in the mind-set of the community – from fatalism to preparedness

The sustained efforts of UNICEF and NGO partners have led to a marked change in the way the

community perceives disasters. While, prior to the programme, the community would consider

disasters as an act of god and resign to their fate, today it feels confident about dealing with them.

The confidence stems from the knowledge based actions that the community has learned through

CBDRR and SSP. The continued engagement with the district and block level officials has instilled in

them a confidence about the support from administration for their efforts pertaining to disaster

preparedness.

Lessons Learnt

The evaluation has highlighted several learning that will inform the scaling up of the model in other

villages and school, and designing similar programmes.

a) Leveraging of resources from government schemes/ programmes and interaction with

government and frontline functionaries continues to be the mainstay of programme impact

The programme has made consistent efforts to improve the knowledge and awareness of the

communities to access resources from on-going government programmes. The inclusive approach of

involving officials from different levels has supported in implementation of the VDMPs and SDMPs.

Government officials have appreciated the programme team’s role in offering technical expertise and,

initiating and supporting convergence activities with the government. These advocacy efforts from

76 76



UNICEF and implementing NGO partners have been critical in sustaining the impact of the programme.

b) UNICEF’s advocacy efforts and technical support have resulted in strong acceptance of the

programme by GoB and must continue

Both, the CBDRR as well as SSP adopted by the GoB for addressing the disaster related risks for the

most-at risk communities in the state. While learning from the former have been included as the

Resilient Village Programme (RVP) in the DRR Roadmap of Bihar, the latter has already been scaled up

to cover over 73000 schools in the state in the form of Mukhyamantri School Suraksha Programme

(The Chief Minister’s School Safety Programme). UNICEF has played a critical role in the transition of

the two programmes into a state level policy. It has regularly engaged with BSDMA and the nodal

departments, such as, education, health, Public Health Engineering Department (PHED) and

Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS) for policy advocacy. It has also provided high- level

technical assistance to the state in the form of training of trainers, developing capacity building

modules, DRR process documents, etc. These efforts have resulted in the effective scaling of the

programme.

c) Including women in the planning process is of utmost importance

Women are a crucial part of the socio-cultural fabric in the villages. Despite socio-cultutal challgesthe

programme has been raising awareness among women and including them in the process of planning

is equally critical. It was also observed that their issues pertaining to disasters been best addressed

when they take charge and play a leading role in the DRR planning process of the villages. These efforts

should be made across the programme geography and a strong case in point is the Malkoshikapur

village of Supaul with a predominantly women VDMC (detailed in the case studies, Chapter 10).

d) Periodic analysis of CBDRR-SSP monitoring data is critical

While there is a monthly reporting of CBDRR-SSP activities, its regular analysis for tracking progress

and taking mid-course corrections is important. This will ensure that both the block and district

administrations understand and contribute towards the DRR requirements along with providing the

necessary support.

e) Role of Mukhiya is critical for DRR planning process at the school and village levels

The Mukhiya’s role has emerged as critical for the effectiveness and sustainability of the programme.

The DRR planning activities in villages and schools get fast tracked wherever there is continued support

received from the Mukhiya. Therefore, the role of Mukhiya should be given the due importance while

trying to sustain and scale the programme. The Khormandarpur village in Madhubani district is a good

example of how a village can turn around its infrastructure with the involvement of an active village

Mukhiya.

f) Strategic geographical selection of villages and schools

The selection of villages and schools is based on their vulnerability to disasters. The methodical

prioritization of the geographies have ensured that people who have experienced disasters now feel

confident and enabled to effectively deal with them. The programme, therefore, must continue its

approach of selecting geographies that require the necessary support and intervention to build DRR

capacities.

77 77



9 RECOMMENDATIONS

The following recommendations were formulated based on (i) discussions with various stakeholders

involved in the designing and implementation of the CBDRR-SSP, such as, community, frontline

functionaries (AWW and ANM), GoB officials, and UNICEF; (ii) analysing community perceptions; and

(iii) reviewing relevant programme documents. The recommendations have incorporated views and

perspectives of these stakeholders to provide practical suggestions, which support and improve future

programming and implementation. Consultations with the UNICEF evaluation team have helped refine

and prioritise the recommendations.

Recommendations for UNICEF

a) Continued Technical Assistance to the Government of Bihar (GoB) for Disaster Risk Reduction

[Immediate and On-going]

Given the nascent stage of MSSP and RVP and consequent need for continued technical assistance for

some period, it is recommended that UNICEF should continue its engagement with the GoB. The

technical assistance may be provided in the following areas:

Orientation of nodal departments (mentioned above) on the DRR roadmap

Training modules on MSSP & RVP

Training of trainers on MSSP & RVP

Process documentation

Preparing policy briefs on DRR

Any other activity identified in consultation with the GoB

b) Sustained Efforts to Increase Involvement of Women and Children in the DRR Planning Process -

Women DRR Champions [Immediate]

Sustained efforts are required at the community level to increase the participation of women and

children in the DRR planning process. Keeping in mind the challenges posed by the existing socio-

cultural norms which often act as inhibitors to women’s participation in decision making, for all future

programmes, greater efforts are needed for including women and children in the village disaster

management plan preparation. There should be a mechanism to track the composition of the VDMCs

to ensure participation of women members. While there this representation, a possible mandate

would ensure that women are continually engaged. Further, the DRR catalysts should identify Women

DRR Champions in every village. These may be women who are enterprising, active and opinion

leaders for other women in the village. Following their identification, they should be trained on the

DRR planning processes. Further, the VDMC should inform the Women DRR Champions in advance to

enable them to attend the planning meeting.

c) Training and Deployment of Children as DRR Sentinels [Medium Term]

Children groups (13-15 years) should be deployed as DRR Sentinels in the village. By training on risk

identification and action they can be effective in spreading awareness on DRR and other issues of

common interest, such as, cleanliness, health & hygiene, road safety etc. They can act as the eyes and

ears of their village during cases of emergency, such as, fire, drowning, other accidents, etc. and

quickly inform elders about the mishap for affirmative action. For planning purposes, they can identify

78 78



risks and inform the VDMCs on including them in the VDMP. They can also be involved for door-to-

door information drives pertaining to the DRR planning dates and time.

d) Increase Involvement of Mukhiyas (Elected Gram Panchayat Head) [Immediate]

Greater efforts and emphasis is required to secure the ownership of the CBDRR & SSP programmes by

the Mukhiyas. All villages in a panchayat should have the capacity, orientation and training to reduce

risks due to disasters. Once the Mukhiya, and by extension, the Gram Panchayat includes disaster risk

reduction as one of its priority areas in the village development plans, it would provide the much

needed fillip to disaster risk reduction efforts. For the purpose, a one day orientation of the Mukhiyas

may be organized at the block level. UNICEF should facilitate the orientation through technical inputs,

such as, module development, training calendar development, training material and documentation

support.

e) Greater Involvement of Anganwadi Workers (AWW) and Auxiliary Nurse Midwives (ANMs) in DRR

Planning Process [Immediate]

Anganwadis operate during the first half of the day. In order to ensure the AWWs’ participation in the

DRR planning process, it would be helpful to conduct DRR planning activities in the second half of the

day. Further, the AWWs need to be informed well in advance about the date of the planning exercise

and also that they should come prepared with their plans pertaining to the Anganwadis that need to

be included in the VDMP.

Similarly, efforts are needed for involving the ANMs. An ANM has several villages under her mandate.

This leaves her with very limited time for activities like DRR planning. However, for improved health

outcomes of the village and also to reduce instances of communicable and seasonal diseases, it is

important that her ideas find a place in the VDMP. Accordingly, the VDMC should have a discussion

with the ANM to ensure her participation in the VDMP preparation exercise. If needed, permission to

ensure her participation must be secured from the Medical Officer In-Charge.

f) Horizontal vs. Vertical Spread of the CBDRR Programme [Immediate and On-going]

One of the issues encountered by the study team during the fieldwork was the limited involvement of

Mukhiyas in the CBDRR programme. The primary reason behind this was that the programme was

specific to a village whereas, a gram panchayat headed by the Mukhiya is comprised of several villages.

Since the Mukhiya has a much larger functional mandate, it becomes difficult for her/ him to be fully

involved in CBDRR activities. Going forward, UNICEF should adopt the strategy of taking all villages in

a gram panchayat for the CBDRR programme rather than focusing on one or two villages. This will lead

to greater involvement of the Mukhiya as the programme will have a direct benefit for the entire gram

panchayat.

g) Monitoring,Evaluation & Learning Processes [Medium-Term to Long-Term]

CBDRR and SSP, both being community driven programmes have a simple model of delivery with the

community and the NGO partners working in a close village ecosystem. The monitoring processes

accordingly are simple and comprise of monthly reporting formats and annual reports submitted by

NGO partners and village self-grading reports submitted by the DRR catalysts. These are

complemented by periodic field visit reports submitted by UNICEF programme team. In addition to

this, from time to time, the UNICEF office engages external agencies to conduct case studies and

evaluations of the two programmes. While the M&E processes have worked well for programme

79 79



requirements, it is recommended that they should be supplemented by an equally robust system of

documentation of field level activities. Further, a periodic meta-analysis of the monthly reporting

formats as well as VDMC and SDMC meeting minutes should be undertaken by an external agency and

reports must be shared with UNICEF allowing to address implementation challenges and make mid-

course corrections. These reports must be shared with the government in addition to UNICEF. Shared

and discussed.

The UNICEF Bihar office has been documenting and disseminating programme achievements.

However, these efforts ought to be further augmented to share the experiential and programmatic

learning on a regular basis with other stakeholders intending to implement similar programmes. For

example, documentation of critical aspects such as the exit strategy will enable similar DRR

programmes implementation actions that have been successful for its smooth adoption by the state

government. Similarly, a more specific representation of the theory of change including activities,

outputs and outcomes from the results framework will support the interested audience to better

understand the pre-conditions, post conditions and impact stated in the theory of change.

Recommendations for GoB

a) Integration of School Safety Programme Reporting with Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (Education for All)

Formats [Immediate]

The current reporting mechanism of the School Safety Programme (SSP) to the district administration

is piggybacked on the monthly review of Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA). More often than not, the SSA

activities consume major portion of the review meeting, leaving little time for SSP. If the SSP activities

are also included in a separate column of the SSA format, they would automatically become a part of

the monthly review. However, it is to be noted that the SSA review formats are designed by the

Government of India (GoI) and would require a policy decision to include the additional column. The

GoB should explore the possibility of this integration. This can be conceptualized and taken forward

as a part of the scaling up exercise undertaken through the MSSP. This will allow the GoB to

systematically review and address the DRR issues at the school level.

b) Roadmap Implementation Support Unit (RISU) [Immediate and On-Going]

The Bihar State DRR Roadmap Implementation Support Unit (RISU) has been set up to assist the GoB

to implement strategies described in the roadmap. Currently, UNICEF is supporting the RISU by

providing technical assistance as and when required. The assistance is provided in several ways,

namely, preparing technical notes, process documents, training manuals, etc. Given the infancy of the

unit, it is recommended that GoB should continue its engagement with UNICEF Bihar for providing

technical support to the unit and exchange learnings from CBDRR-SSP. This support should continue

until such time that its capacity is sufficiently built to fulfil its mandate.

c) Donor Harmonization [Medium-Term to Long-Term]

Currently, several organizations such as UNICEF, Oxfam, Save the Children and the Bill and Melinda

Gates Foundation are working to reduce the disaster associated burden of the state. A donor

coordination committee can be set up at the state level to improve coordination and optimize

resources being pooled in for DRR activities. This will ensure that dedicated and specific activities are

undertaken, which are in line with the implementation plans indicated in the DRR roadmap. This

platform will also prove critical to promote cross-learning and data sharing.

80 80



d) Resilient Village Programme [Immediate and On-Going]

The Resilient Village Programme (RVP) strategy adopted by the state in its DRR roadmap is being

implemented across the state. It is recommended that the BSDMA continues its strategy of engaging

with partners to provide technical assistance for drafting plans and implementation strategy for RVP.

The plan of action must have clearly defined timelines by which every village in Bihar becomes disaster

resilient.

e) Convergence with Line Departments [Medium-Term to Long-Term]:

Although disaster management is the prime responsibility of the SDMA, disaster risk reduction can be

ensured only with the active participation of all line departments. A coordination committee with

representation from every line department needs to be set up at the State and district levels. At the

district level, this committee should meet every month to discuss the DRR activities. At the state level,

the frequency of these meetings can be quarterly.

Section III

CASE STUDIES

82 82



10 CASE STUDIES

Brief Description of the Case Studies

These case studies describe the strategy and its implementation within the programme. The main

strategies include reducing risk and building resilience/capacities, such as risk-informed programming,

risk assessment, mitigation, prevention, climate change adaptation, and advocacy. The team has used

stories from two villages and one school, and included the narratives and perspectives of community

members, VDMC members, students and school teachers.

The case studies reflect that the programme focuses on mobilizing and strengthening social structures

(VDMCs and SDMCs) for risk reduction, enabling and encouraging students to act as DRR change

agents, and supporting community action to reduced localized risk. These collectively aim to create a

long term sustained impact of dealing with disasters.

Emergent Themes

Each case study covers four interconnected themes that are important to discuss the outcome and

impact of the programme. The themes are as follows:

a) Capacity and Resilience Building:

This theme traces how in each story, the communities have been able to build their capacity and

resilience to deal with disasters through risk assessment and planning. It includes a background on

what their experiences were before 2008 and how have they been able to overcome vulnerabilities

and threats. Further, the different steps and measures that the communities have taken in order to

address the risks faced by them, and the kind of informed action that has been taken in order to

address the underlying risks was explored.

b) Reducing disaster risk through transformative change:

Within the programme, there is serious emphasis on how communities can evolve and transform

themselves. A large part of the anticipated change is dependent on the desire and need of the

communities to move from the notion of disaster relief to building resilience. The stories highlight

examples of ownership of schools and villages in ensuring the same. Some of these examples include;

construction of concrete bridges, improved school buildings, improved connectivity through roads etc.

These examples demonstrate the community’s ability to identify and address risks, and plan collective

active measures using a participatory and bottom up approach.

c) Undertaking action to reduce risks:

One of the common themes that emerged is the role that collective action plays in increasing and

catalyzing impact of any social initiative. Communities are able to positively change and prepare better

for disaster-associated risks. The team not only identified the community actions undertaken but the

fundamental characteristics of programme that supported the same. This is also evident in the case

of schools, where through support from the implementing partners, the teachers and students have

been able to improve school infrastructure and address risks at their level.

d) Engaging and liaising with multiple stakeholders:

Disaster risk preparedness and reduction can be achieved only if there is participation and

engagement of different stakeholders. It is imperative that there exists support and trust not only

within the communities but also within various duty bearers and service providers, especially at the

local level.

83 83



Creating Change agents, Middle School, Tumaul

Abstract

Darbangha is one of the most vulnerable and disaster prone districts in Bihar. The Upper Middle

School, Tumaul located in Ghanshyampur Block has been implementing the School Safety Programme

since 2012. This case study explores some of the implementation aspects of the programme along

with its outcomes.

India and Bihar background

The Upper Middle School (UMS), Tumaul was set up in 1952. It is an important building and resource

centre for the village. UMS, Tumaul has evolved from a lower primary to a high school with renewed

school buildings and infrastructure.

The school is situated nearly 2 kilometers away

from the Kamala River, which makes it vulnerable

to recurring seasonal floods. Hence, the students

struggle to come to the school. Further, the school

also falls in seismic zone 4, and is prone to

earthquakes. Given its proximity to the pond, the

school premise remains vulnerable to snakes.

Strategy and implementation

Prior to the implementation of the programme,

students and teachers remained unaware about

disasters as there was no focused engagement by the school on the issue of disasters. Further, the

school premise itself looked very different; the ground had massive holes and remained barren. There

was also lack of cleanliness and hygiene. There were no separate toilets for girls, and there was no

space for washing hands. These were the issues and challenges, as highlighted by the Headmaster-

Mr. Pashupati Misra and the School Safety Focal Teacher- Mr. Chintamani.

The School Safety Programme started in the school in 2011 by the implementing NGO partner Bihar

Sewa Samiti (BSS, which was supported by UNICEF, Bihar). Officials from BSS used to visit the school,

and interact with the students and the school teachers. Mr. Shyam from BSS came to the school and

started the orientation and implementation activities. These interactions were sensitive, motivating

and ensured that the students felt involved and included.

Through a series of discussions and meetings, a School Safety Focal Point Teacher was appointed in

2012 to coordinate all activities. Trainings were provided to students and SSFT, along with the

orientation of the Vidhyalay Suraksha Samitee and the School Management Committee. Students

from classes 6 – 8 including members from the Bal Sansad and Meena Manch were selected to become

a part of the SDMC. This was followed by focused trainings and activities on how disasters and risks in

the school can be identified through hazard hunts. Through this activity the students arrived at

problems that needed to be immediately addressed. This included structural issues/weaknesses, lack

of equipment in classrooms, and general lack of cleanliness and hygiene.

School Building

84 84



With deeper engagement of BSS, the activities associated with SSP were institutionalized into the

working framework of the school. This includes undertaking Chetna Satras44 during the morning

assembly at school. Also, various other activities are undertaken on different aspects of disasters to

promote the students as peer educators. In addition to this knowledge dissemination and awareness

initiative, regular cultural programmes through

Surakshit Shanivaar are conducted for improving

students understanding of local risks and hazards.

Further, through discussions, street plays, drawing

and quiz competitions, demonstrations etc.

students are continually engaged in DRR activities.

All of these activities were coordinated and

supported by the School Safety Focal Teacher.

The students have since then been trained on

preparedness measures during earthquakes,

floods and fires. Further, they also understand the

criticality of addressing structural risks like

repairing lose wires, broken windows,

malfunctioning hand pumps etc. In UMS, the

students have been regularly making their School

Disaster Management Plans, which is submitted to

the principal.

Progress, Results and analysis (from

2012 to 2016)

The programme over the years has not only

improved students’ knowledge and understanding

of disasters but also introduced sustainable measures such as improved school infrastructure. Through

regular trainings on preparedness and risk reduction measures, students are aware of necessary

structural mitigation measures that can protect them from floods, earthquakes and fires.

Since, 2012, the school has been able to leverage funds from the Gram Panchayat, School

Development Fund and MGNREGA for the following activities:

S no. Issue Funds Leveraged

1 Fire extinguishers INR 10,000

2 Kitchen shed INR 50,000

3 First Aid Kit INR 300

4 Earthquake resistant building INR 16,38,000

5 Handpump INR 28,000

6 New Taps INR 23,000

7 Toilets INR 50,000

8 Repair of toilets INR 6,000

Total INR 18,05,300

44 A dedicated session focusing on DRR activities at the school level

Students sharing knowledge related to disaster risk/preparedness

85 85



Good practice and Lessons Learned

Overall, the School Safety Programme realizes the value and contribution of students in reducing

disaster risks as participants and agents of change. It enables students to not only to deal with

disasters but also to take responsibility to spread and disseminate their knowledge among their peers,

family and the community at large. There are several good practices that emerge from the SSP:

a) Hazard Hunts:

Students have been regularly and effectively conducting

hazard hunts. The SDMC members have been trained on

the exact process which has enabled them to recount

different disaster responses and list the exact type of

threat that they have identified. They also recollected

some of the challenges that they experienced previously

like stray animals entering the school compound and

students getting injured due to the unhinged school gate.

However, now due to their efforts and the proactive role

played by the school administration, effective risk

reduction actions have been undertaken. Further, every

year the students are continually engaged and mobilized

for creating a safe learning environment.

b) SDMP:

The School Disaster Management Plans have been

effective. The records and action points are maintained

not only at the SDMC but also at the school administration

level. In Tumaul, action has been taken based on the plans that have been submitted by the students.

The school with support from the NGO is also maintaining records of the activities that need to done

and the necessary funds corresponding to each one of them.

c) Mock Drills:

An important step to building capacity of students to deal with disasters is to ensure understanding of

what it means to live in a disaster prone area. The programme uses existing knowledge and experience

of students, and the modules include scientific reasons on occurrence of disasters. The students are

very clearly able to establish the link between the causes of the disasters and the preparedness

activities that they need to undertake as a result.

Sonam, a student of UMS Tumaul very effectively described how shifting of the tectonic

plates leads to the earthquake. She followed this up with talking about how one should

‘duck, cover and hold’ while experiencing one.

The SSP has also led to a positive and useful transfer of skills among students. They are quick and

enthusiastic to demonstrate drills that they have learnt. They have learnt elementary first-aid skills

like making a stretcher and CPR.

d) Sanitation and Hygiene Practices:

The programme critically focuses on better WASH practices among students. In Tumaul, BSS has

played an important role in students adopting good WASH practices. After the implementation of

List of Hazards Identified

86 86



programme, a series of taps have been installed in school. This was managed by leveraging funds from

the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyaan (SSA) programme through the Vidhyalay Suraksha Simiti (VSS).

Consequently, students have also started washing hands before the midday meals.

e) Role of SSFT:

The SSFT plays a vital role, and manages all activities associated with the SSP, as additional

responsibility at the school level. Mr. Chintamani has been managing the activities in the school. He

regularly conducts training sessions with the children, and practices mock drills. In addition to this, he

has also been maintaining the SDMP records, and works closely with the school headmaster for

smooth implementation of the plans.

f) Role of Headmaster:

The headmaster, Mr. Pashupati Mishra is responsible

for including the issues raised by the SDMC in into the

School Development Plans. He is then expected to

follow up with PRIs, Block and District levels officials

to ensure that the School Development Plans are

taken forward. In the case of Tumaul, Mr. Pashupati

Mishra takes keen interest in ensuring that school

infrastructure is continuously improved. During his

tenure, he has strongly supported for improving the

state of hand pumps, grounds and the kitchen in the

school.

Challenges

The school has made significant progress since 2012, and has managed to ensure that students and

teachers feel safe. However, more focus needs to be given to building capacity of the school

administration to liaise and interact with the PRIs.

Replicability

The programme is easily replicable and can be scaled up to all the schools in the state. The

Government of Bihar has already adopted concepts from the same as a part of the Mukhya Mantri

Suraksha Programme. It was also found that the approach of the programme is effective as well as

valid because the capacity of the students’ need to be constantly built. Further, as observed there is

confidence and enthusiasm among the students about the SSP.

Students and teachers in the school premises

87 87



Promoting Transformative Change, Khormadanpur

Abstract

This case study explores and assesses the implementation of the Community Based Disaster Risk

Reduction Programme in the village of Khormadanpur. Since 2009, the programme has been working

towards building the capacity of the community and reducing vulnerabilities. The team identified

themes and aspects of the programme that have made it a success in this geography.

India and Bihar background

Khormadanpur is a village in Mahasingh Hasoli Gram Panchayat of Madhepur block, Madhubani

district. The village is surrounded by rivers on different sides with Gemuha on one side, a Kosi River 5

kms to the east and Kamala River 2 kms to the west. The village experiences seasonal floods and until

2007, it experienced a breach of the embankment inundating the village with flood water.

As recounted by the VDMC members, the village had severe lack of cleanliness and hygiene. This

combined with poor infrastructure and lack of connectivity added to the severity of the problems

faced. Until 2007, a collective planning exercise would determine the strategy to reach the block,

where people would travel in groups to the block. Further, the village also faced several cases of

malnutrition, diarrhoea and chickenpox due to lack of knowledge and understanding on preventive

measures. In a survey conducted by the Samajik Chetna Kendra, in 2008, a total of 46 children were

found to be malnourished. People were also unaware of the role of the frontline workers placed at

their villages. Consequently, there was limited emphasis on the importance of institutional delivery.


The Samajik Chetna Kendra, a local NGO working out of Madhubani started the Community Based

Disaster Risk Reduction (CBDRR) in 2009. A step wise process was followed, which included area

identification, mobilization of a VDMC, risk assessment and risk reduction planning and discussion and

building an understanding of the underlying risks. Through trainings, the VDMC was made aware of

their responsibilities and the necessary preparedness actions they need to undertake.

Once the VDMC was formed,

they started working towards

mobilizing their collective

resources, which is a significant

step towards creating a risk

resilient village. This was

supported by the engagement

and regular interaction with the

PRIs, and participation in the

Gram Sabha. At this platform,

they started articulating and demanding for their rights with the block and district level. With support

from duty bearers and government officials, the VDMC has continued to play a critical role in

developing the village.

Progress, Results and analysis (from 2010 to 2016)

a) Capacity and Resilience Building:

VDMC office in Khormadanpur

88 88



The formation of the VDMC was an inclusive process with representation from different sections of

the society, including Hindus, Muslims, women, children, etc. Previously, people were apprehensive

about working together, and they did not have faith in the work that was being undertaken.

Eventually, they built an understanding of how the work needed to be undertaken. This was only

possible due to the consistent efforts of the SCK through trainings, public service announcements,

meetings and discussions.

There was also improvement in community interaction, as there were clear attempts to work

together. During these interactions, perspective plans were made keeping in mind the composition of

the entire village and there subjective vulnerabilities. Initiatives like open meetings, formation and

capacity building of village task forces on preparedness, health, nutrition, WASH, engagement with

government officials, and gram sabhas ensure that the village community is moving towards reducing

disasters and building resilience using the capacities and resources available.

b) Reducing disaster risk through transformative change

The community with support from the VDMC has been working towards improved preparedness for

disasters, especially floods. Most houses have opted for raised plinth levels, even though it is more

expensive. The VDMC has made consistent efforts to spread awareness regarding this critical practice.

Further, at the onset of the monsoons every household prepares its flood safety kit, comprising a

week’s ration, important documents, valuables, medicines, etc. Together, at the village level, the

VDMC and the community ensure availability of life saving supplies, use creative methods of an Early

Warning System and other IEC materials to reduce incidents of fire, identify high structures, and

enable the community to plan and account for floods. The VDMC members are also called to assist in

flood response in the Gram Panchayat. They believe that they have been able to change their mind-

set from being relief seekers to relief providers.

The VDMC members along with the village community regularly undertake risk analysis using the “Kya

Khoya, Kya Paaya” exercise. They assess the disasters and risks that they have faced, establish the

reasons for the same and examine their capacity to deal with it Based on this exercise, they identify

households with pregnant women, children, and people with disability to provide additional

supervision and support. They are first to be evacuated and receive relief and rehabilitation.

c) Undertaking action to reduce risk

The village community, with support from the VDMC has not only been able to address clear disaster

associated risks but also discuss about issues of food security, promote institutional delivery and

leverage the VHNSC for improved health and nutrition outcomes.

The VDMC has been successful in disseminating information and linking the village population to key

schemes and programmes on the basis of interest and relevance. For food security and improved

agricultural outcomes, bore-pumps have been made, and government schemes have been leveraged

for plantation of orchards and vegetables in the highlands. Further, there is also increased promotion

to grow pulses, rice and wheat for self-consumption and sustenance. After the programme, there has

been improved sanitation and hygiene, which has reduced the risk of epidemics and diseases, and

reduced expenditure on medication. Also, 3200 bank accounts have been opened through the Jan

Dhan Yojana in the village.

In an attempt to improve and promote child protection, the VDMC has made strong efforts to stop

social evils such as child labour and child marriage, and tried to ensure literacy of all children, especially

89 89



girls. Through the Parvarish Yojana, they have also identified five children, who are being raised under

the scheme with support from the Child Development Project Officer at the District level. As a part of

this scheme, children will receive INR 1000/- every month. Moreover, there is a lot of support

extended to the elderly and persons with disabilities. For example, 132 widows have benefitted from

the “Vridhavastha Pension Scheme” in the village through the efforts of the VDMC. The members

through regular follow ups with the Mukhiya and BDO ensured that the beneficiaries received their

registration documents for the scheme and the pension on time.

At Khormadanpur, the community has also established a Disaster Relief Fund, where a collective sum

of INR 100,200 has been deposited in the Gramin Bank. The VDMC members are responsible for

managing and maintaining it. This money is used to address social needs like weddings, medical

treatments, and help perform last rights of the deceased.

The following table highlights the nature of the activities undertaken to improve village disaster

preparedness by leveraging government resources and through community contribution. A total of

approximately INR 16.4 crore has been leveraged and contributed by the community to build disaster

preparedness and resilient infrastructure in the village.

Sl.

No. Activity/Issue

Funds

contributed /

leveraged

(INR)

Source / Schemes Leveraged

1. Construction and repair of

roads

89,243,300 Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana

(PMSGY), Backward Regions Grant Fund

(BRGF), 13th Financial Commission,

Community Contribution

2. Flood Preparation (Flood

Shelter, immunization of

animals, raising of hand

pumps)

627,000 National Research Council (NRC) Public

Health Engineering Department (PHED)

3. Bridge Construction and

Repair

49,340,000 PMGSY

4. Toilet Construction 10,200,000 Community

5. Improving School

Infrastructure (Campus Filing

and Repair work)

3,250,000 Mahatma Gandhi National Rural

Employment Guarantee Scheme

(MGNREGS), Education Department

6. Compenzation of Crop

Damage

1,950,000 Agricultural Department

Total 154,610,300

d) Engaging and liaising with multiple stakeholders

In Khormadanpur, the programme has very strongly engaged and involved multiple stakeholders. The

meetings have been inclusive and there has been involvement of everyone from the village including

PRIs, frontline workers and the community members. Linkages between the duty bearers have

strengthened efforts to ensure resilience to disasters. With a strong emphasis on collective decision

making, the DRR activities/processes have successfully included the community in the overall

development of the village through risk reduction. For example, they were able to ensure that the

90 90



district officials understood the need for a bridge connecting two parts of the village. Regular follow

ups and meetings with the department and PMGSY officials including engineers ensured that the

bridge was constructed. This is also next to a school, and acts as an elevated structure during floods.

Good

practice and

Lessons Learned

e) Community

Driven:

The CBDRR programme demonstrates the importance of a holistic and community driven approach,

where it tries to address issues rooted in the social fabric of the village. In the case of Khormadanpur,

the implementation strategy has been successful in addressing several issues, which act as underlying

risks and vulnerabilities. In the village, the programme has been successful in acting as an example of

trying to improve collective decision making.

f) Relationship with the Government:

One of the key drivers of the programme in Khormadanpur is the strong relationship that the village

community, especially the VDMC, shares with duty bearers and frontline workers including the ANM

and AWW. They have been supportive in addressing underlying risks such as identifying malnourished

children and improving immunization. The technical assistance provided by the implementing NGO

partners and UNICEF in training and capacity building of the VDMC has supported in ensuring that

they are able to leverage schemes and entitlement effectively.

g) Understanding of Rights and Entitlements:

The VDMC has a good understanding of schemes and entitlements associated with social protection.

In order to conduct some of their planned DRR activities, they were able to liaise and engage with the

associated departments and leverage rights under schemes like MGREGA, PMGSY, ICDS etc.

h) Acceptance of the programme at the community level:

The VDMC members along with a few additional representatives of the community strongly reinforce

the need for such a programme, as there has been an increase in knowledge and understanding of

dealing with disasters.

Challenges

After the introduction of the CBDRR programme, the village has made progress in its DRR planning

and implementation activities. However, as reported by Kamal, the DRR Catalyst, a working with

Samajik Chetna Kendra (SCK) the implementing NGO partner, a lot more needs to be done in the

Connecting bridge in the village

91 91



village. Better infrastructural planning and support from the departments is necessary to prevent

untimely mishaps. For example, one of the connecting bridges was severely affected due to the

monsoon, causing two children to drown. This incident has triggered a need to initiate repair work

and continuous engagement with the District Authorities is underway.

Similarly, more focus needs to be given to WASH related issues. While there has been a lot of work

around addressing underlying risks, Kamal and VDMCs members believe that more can be done in the

village to improve the living conditions of the people.

Replicability

The programme is easily replicable and there have been efforts made at the local level to do the same.

Kamal and other VDMC members share information and knowledge from the programme with

members of the other villages in the Gram Panchayat. Given the simple, community oriented and low-

cost design of the programme, it can be easily scaled-up to other villages with support from

enthusiastic and motivated individuals like Kamal.

Students outside a school in Khormadanpur

92 92



Malkoshikapur: Women Lead the Way in Disaster Risk Reduction

Abstract

Malkoshikapur is a revenue village of Banellipatti Gram Panchayat (Basantpur block) in Supaul district.

Prior to the construction of the Kosi barrage in 1953, the village faced frequent floods. Of late the

incidents of flooding have greatly reduced, with the last major floods occurring in 2008 due to a breach

in the Kosi embankment. However, that does not imply that the village has been free from other

disasters. Incidents of fire were very frequent, leading to loss of property, livestock and in some cases

even lives. Waterborne diseases and malnutrition were other disasters faced by the village. Then there

were challenges posed by the existing social malpractices, such as, child marriages and child labour.

The CBDRR programme has made the villagers aware of measures to effectively deal with disasters. It

has led to a change in the mind sets of the villagers who instead of considering disasters as acts of god

are now more prepared to deal with them. Flood preparedness, early warning system, malnutrition,

child protection, and climate change have been understood by the VDMC, and related issues

incorporated in the VDMP and action has been initiated by the VDMCs with the help of Panchayati Raj

Institutions (PRIs).

Background:

Malkoshikapur is an agrarian village. The villagers are mainly subsistence agriculturists with small land

holdings. The meagre farm outputs are supplemented by incomes from livestock, poultry and other

sources. Agriculture is mainly rain fed hence the weather plays a key role in the lives of the people of

Malkoshikapur. A good monsoon means a good harvest with enough food to eat and may be even

some surplus to be sold in the local markets. However, the years of low rainfall result in distress

migration.

The rainy season also brings with it the fear of floods. Since the village is merely 12 Km from the

eastern Kosi embankment, it is always under the potential threat of flooding due to a breach in the

embankment. The river Bochha flows in the south of the village. Heavy rains result in it flooding the

paddy fields located in the south.

Prior to the CBDRR programme, the village also suffered from locally prevalent social malpractices like,

gender discrimination, child labour, child marriage, etc. Women were hardly allowed interactions with

men outside their family. All these factors resulted in Malkoshikapur being included in the CBDRR

programme.


Ghoghardiha Prakhand Swarajya Vikas Sangh (GPSVS) initiated work in the village in the year 2011.

The first and foremost challenge that the NGO partners faced was winning the confidence of the

villagers. The village had been completely devastated in the Kosi floods of 2008 and had received relief

measures under the ECHO programme. This had led the villagers into thinking that any NGO

approaching them must have some relief material to be provided. It took the NGO partner at least a

couple of months of sustained engagement with the villagers to make them realize that the

programme had no material benefits to offer. “Kya Khoya Kya Paya”45 exercise was conducted with

the villagers. Through the exercise, the villagers were engaged into an open conversation where they

remembered the losses that they had incurred in the past on account of their dependence on external

45 What was lost and what was gained during a time of disaster

93 93



relief. The exercise was followed by the NGO partner explaining to them on how the CBDRR

programme would make them self-reliant in dealing with disasters. Initially there was some reluctance

on part of the villagers, but slowly they realized that the programme was for their own benefit. The

“Kya Khoya Kya Paya” exercise was one of the critical steps in securing a buy-in from the villagers.

The second major challenge was the social taboos

that prevented women from participating in any

such programmes that involved public interactions

with males of the village. The NGO partner after a

series of interactions identified Ms. Ranjana Devi as

the DRR catalyst who took a keen interest in the

meetings. She was one of the earliest members to

join the VDMC. With her involvement, other

women also started taking interest in the

programme. Today, the Malkoshikapur VDMC

boasts of 9 women members – one of the few

VDMCs with such high proportion of females. Ranjana Devi has transformed from being a shy daughter

in law of the village into a champion of the DRR cause and was recently elected the Panchayat

Secretary in a tightly contested election.

Another challenge frequently faced by the village was the social malpractices of child marriage and

child labour. The VDMC members, supported by the Child Protection Task Force of the CBDRR

programme made consistent efforts to deal with this situation and have been able to convince several

families on deferring child marriage and putting children into school rather than expecting labour from

them.

There was also the problem of clean drinking water. It became more glaring during the Kosi floods

when all hand pumps in the village were submerged. The ECHO programme initiated the installation

of a few hand pumps on raised platforms. This was further taken up under the CBDRR programme and

a number of hand pumps have now been installed on raised platforms in the village.

Progress, Results and Analysis (2012-2016):

The progress of the CBDRR programme may be analysed across two main thematic areas:

The institutions created under the CBDRR programme; and

The key initiatives undertaken

The village has fully functional CBDRR institutions, namely, VDMC & thematic taskforces. These

institutions have prepared their DRR plan, conducted regular risk assessment and reviewed their DRR

plan. Monthly meetings are being conducted regularly by the VDMC and the proceedings are being

maintained in the form of minutes. The VDMC have received several letters of appreciation from

officials for their good work.

It is because of the efforts of the VDMC that a culture of disaster preparedness has developed in the

village and damages due to disasters have reduced greatly. There has been no major flood in the

village since 2008. Only one incident of fire was reported in the village in 2016 and that too was

controlled immediately due to the timely action of the community. To prevent village fires, the VDMC

has developed norms of fire prevention and met with the Panchayat Mukhiya and sensitized him

about it. Every year the Mukhiya issues official notice to the villagers to follow the fire prevention

VDMC Members of Malkoshikapur

94 94



norms. The VDMC and thematic taskforce monitor the village and ensure that the norms are being

followed. Additionally, upon the request of the VDMC, the Circle Officer at the block office also issues

letter to their panchayat level officials for the creation of awareness on fire prevention. In addition to

disaster preparedness, the knowledge of the community has been enhanced on nutrition, water &

sanitation, personal hygiene, etc.

The village has developed a Village Disaster Management Plan (VDMP) and incorporated it in the Gram

Panchayat plan through the Gram Sabha. It is the result of active pursuing of plans by the VDMC that

till date the village has leveraged INR 18,679,770.00 from different government schemes to improve

critical infrastructure in the village46. Following the Kosi floods of 2008, all the 152 families in the village

got displaced and suffered losses. However, after DRR planning now only 15-20 families may be

displaced. This has been made possible because most of the vulnerable families have raised their

homesteads either through the help of Panchayat or by investing own resources.

The status of water & sanitation has significantly improved in the village. In 2008 there were no raised

hand pumps, but today the village has 16 such hand pumps due to action taken by the Public Health

Engineering Department (PHED).47 The practice of disinfection of hand pumps has been started and it

is done every year at the onset of monsoon and immediately afterwards. In the aftermath of floods in

2008, there were several cases of diarrhoea in the village. However, since the creation of the Health

& Nutrition taskforce in the village which leads community awareness campaign on hand washing

practice, safe food practice, safe water storage and handling practice and controls roadside

defecation, the instances of diarrhoea have become negligible. The taskforce also orients the

community on diarrhoea management at household level through using ORS.

Gradually the cases of malnutrition among children aged 6-59 months are also reducing in the village.

This has been made possible due to the structured training given to the Health & Nutrition task force

to address the issue. Awareness raising on complete immunization is also being done by the taskforce.

Some achievements of the task forces48:

100% institutional delivery

All families practice hand washing with liquid surf or soap

32 families have smokeless earthen stoves

Child protection task force has linked 3 children with Middle School Jagearaji. Out of these

2 are boys and 1 girl.

Good practice and Lessons Learned:

As a result of the CBDRR programme, the community has started a number of good practices:

a) Flood preparedness: Every household in the village has started storing food grains for at

least a couple of months. Besides this, the households also contribute to a common

granary in the village. Food grains from the granary are provided to the poorest

households in times of need. All households have an emergency flood kit which is an

airtight waterproof bag containing rations for a week, basic medicines, some cash &

valuables and important documents of the family. The VDMC is in constant touch with the

46 GPSVS Malkoshikapur Village Profile 47 Ibid. 48 Ibid.

95 95



flood control room on Kosi barrage to communicate flood warnings to the villagers

promptly. High grounds and flood

shelters have been notified for prompt

evacuation. Every household also has

improvised life jackets made from

discarded plastic bottles.

b) Fire Safety: Every year before the

onset of the summer season, the

Panchayat Mukhiya issues a notice to

the village on fire safety protocols to

be strictly adhered to. The VDMC

members monitor the households and

check deviant behavior. As a result, fire related incidents have become negligible in the

village.

c) Smokeless Cooking: 32 households were using smokeless earthen stoves for cooking at

the time of the study. These stoves are made from locally available material, are easy to

construct and maintain, use less fire-wood and reduce the drudgery of women.

d) Hand washing with soap: All households are practicing hand washing with soap or a

solution made from washing powder.

e) Regular Monitoring of 6-59 months old children for malnutrition: The health and nutrition

task force conducts regular monitoring of children between 6-59 months of age. As a

result of the persistent efforts of the task force, the instance of malnourished children has

become negligible today.

f) Institutional Delivery: The village has 100% institutional delivery. This has been made

possible by the efforts of the Health & Nutrition task force. Women in the village are

informed about the benefits of institutional delivery and how it is important for the health

and well-being of the mother as well as the new born.

Challenges

As already discussed, the first and foremost challenge faced by the programme was to secure the

confidence and buy in from the community. It took persistent efforts and dialogue by the NGO partner

to win the confidence of the community and ensure its involvement in the programme. Given the

prevailing social taboos in the village, it was very challenging to get the women to actively participate

in the programme. The NGO partner after spending time at the village identified women who could

champion the CBDRR cause with their peers. It is the result of these efforts that the VDMC today

boasts of 9 female members out of a total of 15. Then there were challenges related to securing funds

from government schemes for the village DRR plan. The VDMC overcame this by regular follow ups

and securing cooperation from the Panchayat Mukhiya and PRI officials.

One of the top priorities for the village today is to complete the construction of the unfinished Angan

wadi Centre. Once this is done within the FY2017-18 as per the VDMP, it will ensure that women and

children in the village get all the necessary health counselling, nutrition and Early Childhood Care &

Development services within the village. This will certainly have long lasting impact on the health and

nutrition outcomes in the village.

A VDMC Member Displaying a Life Jacket

96 96



Replicability

There are several takeaways from the Malkoshikapur model. The “Kya Khoya Kya Paya” discussions

anchored by UNICEF and engaging women members from the NGO partner to secure the cooperation

and participation of community in general and women in particular are effective strategies that can

be replicated. The smokeless cooking stoves are a low cost technological innovation that may be used

in villages that are still not covered under the Ujjwala scheme of providing Liquefied Petroleum Gas

connections. A low cost individual flood shelter in the village can be replicated in other flood prone

villages. A similar model may be constructed with community contribution on a common land, e.g.,

Panchayat land to act as a flood shelter within the village. A community granary to provide food grains

to the needy in times of distress is another innovative idea that may be replicated in other villages.

Section IV

ANNEXURES

1 A-1



ANNEX 1: TERMS OF REFERENCE

TERMS OF REFERENCE

Evaluation of Community Based Disaster Risk Reduction— School Safety Programme in Bihar"

UNICEF

08.03.2016

1. BACKGROUND OF THE PROGRAMME

a) Bihar is the third most populous state in India with a population of 104 million, according to

the latest 2011 Census, with males comprising 52.2% and females 47.8% of the total

population since the sex ratio stands at 918 against the national average of 943. This is also

skewed by place of residence: urban — 895 & rural — 921. The majority of the state is rural,

with 88.7% of the total population residing in rural areas while 11.3 % in urban areas. While

overall literacy rate is 63.82% in the state, there is a noticeable gender difference between

males (71.2%) and females (51.5%). Bihar's social composition reflects a unique combination

of Scheduled Caste (15.9%), Scheduled Tribe (1.3%), and Other Backward Classes/Extremely

Backward Classes (51%) of the total population. Hindus make up 82.7%, while Muslims and

other religious groups make up 16.9% and 0.4%, respectively. Work participation rate in the

State is low with only 33.4% of the population working.

b) During the recent decade, the economy of Bihar has grown steadily. As per the latest available

data for 2013-14, the Gross State Domestic Product (GSDP) at constant prices was 9.92%,

much higher than the national average. Despite such growth, the problem of low per capita

income (INR 14,268 in 2012-13) in Bihar is accentuated by the fact that there exists a wide

variation regarding per capita income across the districts. People living Below Poverty Line

comprised 33.74% (i.e. 35.8 million) in 2011-12.5 Bihar's Human Development Indicators (HDI)

is one of the lowest in India. The HDI value for Bihar has increased from 0.292 in 1999-2000,

to 0.367 in 2007-2008 as against the national average of 0.467. Agriculture sector is the

mainstay of the state's economy with 90% of the population dependent on it, contributing

22% of GSDP from 2010-2014. Poor infrastructure (roads, facilities, institutions) is a major

bottleneck in service delivery and development. The challenges of equity are also huge due to

a caste-ridden society, feudalistic societal structure and complex social stratification. The

performance of social sector indicators are still weak as per the latest available data:

Stunting in children below five years reduced from 56% in National Family Health Survey

— (NFHS 3) (2005-06) to 50% in the Rapid Survey of Children (RSOC) (2013-14),

Proportion of households practicing open defecation reduced from 83% in District Level

Household Survey (DLHS 3) 2007-08 to 75% RSOC (2013-14),

Institutional delivery was 28% in DLHS 3 (2007-08) and it increased to 65% RSOC (2013-

14),

Gains in immunization are good with 41% % of fully immunized children in DLHS 3 (2007-

08) increasing to 60% as per RSOC (2013-14),

Currently Married Women aged 20-24, who were married before age 18 in Bihar, declined

from 68% in DLHS 3 (2007-08) to 47% in RSOC (2013-14).

2 A-2



c) In addition to the low HDI, Bihar's geographic and topographical contexts make it a multi-

hazard state that is extremely vulnerable to different kinds of disasters such as flood, drought,

earthquake, fire, cyclone, heat and cold wave, which have manifested as serious disasters

from time to time. Bihar is situated in north central India and shares its border with Nepal.

This location places much of Bihar's northern plains at the base of the Himalayan mountain

range, forming a catchment area for glacial melts and making Bihar extremely vulnerable to

seasonal flooding. As a result, 76% of the population in northern Bihar live under recurring

threat of flood and 73% of Bihar’s total geographic area is flood affected. The 2008 Kosi floods

displayed this vulnerability by devastating large areas of northern Bihar and displacing over

5.3 million people, many of them children. Geologically, Bihar encompasses high levels of

seismic activity within its borders and has a history of moderate to severe earthquakes. Its

land area is covered in seismic zones IV and V (7 districts lie in seismic zone V, 21 districts in

zone IV and rest of the districts in zone III), placing it at risk for high intensity earthquakes.The

southern part of the state covering 13 districts suffers from chronic drought situation and 27

districts fall under high speed winds zone and can experience wind velocity of 47 m/s intensity.

d) The prevalence, frequency and severity of these hazards vary across the 38 districts. The

escalation of frequent disaster events in Bihar triggered by natural hazards poses a

fundamental threat to sustainable development and infrastructure improvements across the

state. Conversely, Bihar's restricted development increases its vulnerability to disasters. This

cyclical situation creates a challenging arena for disaster management and development to

occur and has resulted in unequal levels of development between Bihar and other Indian

states, with Bihar falling behind on many development indicators.

e) Disasters have avoidable as well as unavoidable (e.g. extreme weather events) impacts on

3 A-3



human settlements and various population groups depending on their exposure, capacity and

capability. They negatively impact children's and women's rights, disproportionately affect -

the poor, erode development gains and even set back progress in achieving the development

goals. Exposure to multiple hazards exacerbate already existing vulnerabilities and

inequalities; risking lives and livelihoods as a result of disasters. This calls for an immediate

need for action which ensures that disaster resilience is mainstreamed in development.

f) Community-Based Disaster Risk Reduction (CBDRR) practices operationalize localized action

for resilience building and vulnerability reduction. Overlapping and complementary practices

of preparedness, mitigation, prevention, adaptation, humanitarian response, risk reduction

etc.. are all relevant within the gamut of DRR. The fundamental premise is that any effort for

resilience building has to be driven locally, hence a 'community-based' approach finds strong

relevance for DRR. The uncertainty and variability of hazards and their impact make CBDRR

interventions a significant process to create effective DRR capability at the most relevant level.

Community Based Disaster Risk Reduction (CBDRR) — School Safety Programme in Bihar UNICEF:

g) In August 2008, heavy monsoon rains and poor maintenance of embankment caused a breach

in the Kosi river embankment, inundating hundreds of villages in northeastern Bihar covering

four districts, damaging more than 300,000 houses and destroying at least 340,000 hectares

of standing crops. UNICEF India spent over nine million USD in humanitarian response to the

Kosi floods. UNICEF with the European Union Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection

Department's (ECHO) support implemented a Flood Recovery Programme in 68 villages of five

flood prone districts in 2009 - 2010, wherein community participation was used in risk analysis

but DRR action planning was flood preparedness and response-focused only.

h) Due to this limitation, in 2011, UNICEF Bihar Field Office made a strategic shift wherein it

initiated facilitating communities to access resources from Government programme/schemes

or any other sources to implement their own DRR plans. The programme was scaled-up to

cover 230 villages in six districts, namely Darbhanga, Sitamarhi, Madhubani, Samastipur, East

Champaran and Supaul. Furthermore, a School Safety component (in 155 middle schools) was

organically coalesced in 2011 with this programme to further children's participation in risk

reduction at community level and to ensure that the risks faced by them in schools are actively

addressed. The programme is currently being implemented in collaboration with six NGO

partners.

The chronology/phases of CBDRR programme development is as described below:

i) PHASE I: 2009-10: Flood Recovery programme in 68 villages of five flood prone districts.

UNICEF and NGO partner driven, district administration in supportive role.

j) PHASE II: 2011- 2012: CBDRR programme initiated and progressively expanded to 230 villages

in six multi-hazard prone districts. School Safety component was integrated and piloting of

school safety initiated in 155 schools in CBDRR intervention villages. This was done with the

objective of getting children participation in CBDRR and also making their behavioral spaces

(school, play grounds) safe. The project was UNICEF and NGO partner driven, district

administration was in supportive role.

k) PHASE III: 2013 - 2016:

4 A-4



Strategy to develop leadership for DRR within at-risk communities rolled out in the beginning

of 2013. A group of DRR Catalysts were selected through a rigorous process from

intervention villages and they were trained on CBDRR processes.

Strategy for integrating the project with District and Block Administration was initiated and

exit plan was put in place in 2014 partnership agreements. CBDRR project in 230 villages

handed over to DRR Catalysts & community institutions by December 2015. District

administration initiated scaling-up CBDRR covering all the villages i.e. 1,157 villages in the 15

intervention community development blocks of six districts. School Safety component took

a different trajectory and scaled-up in 3,139 schools in six intervention districts in

partnership with Education Department and respective District Administration. The success

of UNICEF-supported School Safety Programme was well recognized and triggered the "Chief

Minister's School Safety Programme (MSSP)" to cover all 73,000 schools in Bihar, which was

launched in July 2015.

l) The goal of the CBDRR — School Safety programme was to reduce vulnerability of the poor

children and women living in multi-disaster prone districts in Bihar by creating leadership for

DRR where vulnerabilities exist. This empowering process enhances resilience to risks, builds

a culture of preparedness and leads to efficiency in response and recovery actions from

community, government and other stakeholders. The CBDRR-school safety programme model

in Bihar has evolved over time in response to the community's growing knowledge, skills and

experience about DRR, constantly reinforcing the lessons learnt from the practice of DRR in

the past few years. From the outset community mobilization, organization and capacity

development to undertake their own planning work for DRR has been the primary focus of

this model. UNICEF and its partners consistently support communities to acquire necessary

knowledge and skills to prepare DRR plans. The process for planning, learning and action is

built as a continuum in community and school and the model has been configured in a manner

that empowers the communities and strengthens their external linkages with duty bearers;

5 A-5



and in long run contributes to community resilience. Therefore, the primary objectives of

CBDRR were:

People at-risk of disasters have their own annual DRR plan

The DRR Plan has capable people with strong DRR perspective to follow it up with duty

bearers and others.

Government and people come together to implement risk informed development

priorities of the people.

m) Key programme interventions includes:

I. Community mobilization and organization of at-risk men, women and children though

reflective exercises built around communities' own disaster experience;

II. Build DRR perspective and capacity of women and children for participatory risk

assessment, risk prioritization, vulnerability and capacity assessment etc. to feed into DRR

planning for annual and other forms of plans and actions;

III. Skill building and guidance for the development of risk aware development planning (DRR

plan) with key stakeholders (PRIs, Schools and government) that feeds into the Gram

Panchayat plans via Gram Sabha and DRR plans implemented by leveraging action from

Government programme and schemes.

n) Over the years, efforts have been made to provide the required leadership skills and

knowledge to target communities enabling them to meet the challenges of increasing disaster

risk. Key lessons learnt is that facilitative and capacity building work on demand side can

enable DRR work by leveraging resources from Government development programme even

though the government development programme by themselves may lack DRR perspective.

CBDRR— School Safety programme has demonstrated that it is possible for people at-risk of

disasters to leverage action/resources for DRR work from the development schemes and

programme of Government India, which are aimed as entitlements of the various population

groups (infants, senior citizens, school going children) and general development needs of the

rural population.

o) UNICEF and NGO partners facilitate the process and consistently support communities to

acquire necessary knowledge and skills to prepare DRR plans and help build external linkages

to access resources to advance DRR. As part of demand-side work, UNICEF and partners

continuously invest in learning needs analysis and link the community with various

Government institutions for capacity development. While UNICEF maintains a clear sight of

community empowerment process, partners provide supportive supervision (least intrusive)

to enable various elements of the participatory process such as monthly meetings of Village

Disaster Management Committees (VDMC), risk analysis and prioritization, annual planning

and review, presentation of DRR plans in Gram Sabha, etc.

p) The DRR programme strategy is now very well understood by VDMCs, and School Disaster

Management Committees (SDMC5), and DRR Catalysts and by and large they are leading its

implementation. Their voluntary (passionate) engagement since 2011 works as a reinforcings

and balancing loop in building community as a resilient system. The bottom-up approach to

DRR planning reinforcing loop is one in which an action produces a result, which influences

more of the same action thus resulting in growth or decline. This has been able to produce

6 A-6



sustained results for all the programme villages. The diversity of results suggests that

communities are able to prioritize and strategize mix of work on primary and underlying risks,

which are essential for sustainability of DRR work. The plans have been able to bring at-risk

people/children and Government together for implementation of risk reduction work both at

village and school level. The programme is implemented with the following stakeholders:

Children, women, men, DRR Catalysts, Panchayat Raj representatives, Aganwadi Workers

(AWW), Auxiliary Nurse Midwives (ANM)/Health Workers, School Teachers, School

Principals/Head Masters, Block Education Officers, Block Resource Coordinators, Block

Development Officers, District Collectors, District Education Officers, etc.

q) A study by the KCCI UNICEF Internship Programme in 2013 found that against each dollar

spent by UNICEF on capacity building, the community is able to leverage USD 191 worth of

Government resources. Emergence of local voluntary leadership for DRR and regular

implementation of DRR Plans over the last five years are probably a sufficient evidence that a

bottom-up approach to DRR planning can be aligned with top-down social protection and

other programme of Government to reduce disaster risks.

2. OBJECTIVE:

a) 2.1: Evaluation Purpose: The purpose of the evaluation is to draw valuable lessons from

CBDRR—School Safety programme regarding overall relevance, effectiveness, and

sustainability of the strategies and the activities in enhancing resilience of the at-risk

communities, especially children and women, with an aim for up-stream advocacy to inform

State/National policies and global programming in DRR.

b) 2.2: Evaluation Objectives: Specific objectives of the evaluation are:

Assess the relevance, effectiveness and sustainability of the bottom-up approach to risk

informed development planning and implementation through CBDRR—School Safety

programme at village, school, community and government level in all the six intervention

districts of Bihar;

As part of the effectiveness criterion, a knowledge, attitude, and practices (KAP) test

would be conducted with a select sample of students in the 6 districts;

Assess CBDRR— School Safety programme against Sendai Framework for DRR (2015)

(Annexure 2: Sendai Framework for DRR);

Document 3 in-depth case studies of 3 villages to understand the processes it underwent

to be disaster resilient;

Identify/document lessons learnt and best practices of the programme:

Key factors and best practices contributing to the programme successes or failures

Lesson learnt that can be externally applied and provide recommendations

Scaling-up approaches and better strategies for scaling-up CBDRR programme.

c) 2.3: Audience and Use of the Evaluation: The findings will be used by UNICEF in developing

a strategy for furthering the agenda of resilience building within UNICEF India Country Office

for scaling-up CBDRR and School Safety interventions. Similarly, it will be useful for DRR

section in India Country Office to develop key advocacy issues. The Government of Bihar has

planned replicating CBDRR programme across the state in its DRR Roadmap for 2015-2030

7 A-7



and there are chances of its replication in other Indian states as National Guidelines on

Community Based Disaster Management by the National Disaster Management Authority.

Other stakeholders, including government and non-government agencies, will also benefit

from this evaluation and use the findings for any future CBDRR and School Safety interventions

in India and the South Asian context.

3. SCOPE OF THE EVALUATION:

This outcome and process evaluation will look at the 6 districts where CBDRR— School Safety

programme has been implemented. The timeline period of the evaluation is 2011 — 2016

(the period from CBDRR programme initiated to the present).

The areas that will be covered in the evaluation are CBDRR— School Safety programme

models, progress trajectory (how the programme graduated from one level to another level)

implementation strategy/programming perspective, programme processes, community

institutions, Task Forces, DRR Catalysts, DRR Plans, monitoring mechanisms, leveraging &

linkages with Gram Panchayat, school, administration at various levels, service providers,

scaling-up approach, results achieved so far in terms of resilience building, system change for

DRR (i.e. risk informed GP plans/School Development plans).

The evaluation team will do desk review, hold meetings with UNICEF, field visits to villages

and schools in intervention districts, hold meetings with NGO partners, communities, PRIs,

and government counterparts at various levels.

CBDRR programme should be evaluated against Sendai Framework for DRR.

a) The design of the evaluation should be guided by a human rights, equity and gender

perspective, i.e. data collection and analysis should pay close attention to how human

rights, equity and gender have been integrated into the interventions, such as the

inclusion of girls and women and excluded communities, and the effects of the CBDRR—

School Safety programme on such groups. It is expected that data will be disaggregated

by sex and SC/OBC/EBC status to determine whether the intervention yielded more

positive or negative effect on one group or the other. Children will also be key

stakeholders in the evaluation process as the questionnaire and observation will involve

them.

b) The UN Evaluation Group (UNEG) norms and standards will be observed. Furthermore

UNEG ethical considerations will be respected, particularly in relation to including the

views of adolescent groups and community members. Sensitive information may derive

from the FDGs and IDIs and the team will ensure the utmost confidentiality when

conducting such research. Interviews with stakeholders will also be done with prior

consent.

c) The three OECD-DAC evaluation criteria will be applied and proposed key evaluation

questions against each criterion are described below:

Evaluation questions:

d) Four primary evaluation questions, with their appropriate sub-questions, are annexed

(Annexure — 3: Questions matrix). The bidders will use these to decide what is feasible

8 A-8



within the given timeframe, data context and budget and is encouraged to improve the

matrix as appropriate. Since this will be primarily a qualitative evaluation hence only three

evaluation criteria i.e. Relevance, Effectiveness and Sustainability will be used. The reason

why the impact criterion is not being considered for this evaluation is because it is being

carried out ex post without the requisite data to assess impact rigorously. It would be

difficult to construct a valid and credible counterfactual group either in time (e.g. before

the project) or in space (e.g. in similar districts) after the programme has been

implemented (where the allocation of programme intervention was not randomized)

without introducing various biases. At the onset of the programme, the goal was to build

the capacity of the communities and have DRR plans in place. It did not include higher

impact level results such as reduction in deaths or property losses. Thus, it would be

difficult to now go back and measure the impact of the programme if the programme logic

did not extend itself to such high level of results.

e) As for the criterion efficiency, it is not chosen to be a part of this evaluation because a

study was carried out in 2013 which looked at the funds leveraged from Government

compared to UNICEF funds. Therefore, there is sufficient evidence that the programme

has been efficient with respect to funds leveraging. The evaluation agency will examine

three villages in-depth to understand the processes it underwent to be disaster resilient,

which would provide some aspect of efficiency in terms of funds leveraged, necessary

human resources to carry out the tasks, and the time required.

f) Furthermore, it is necessary to limit the scope of the evaluation by focusing on only three

criteria so that the task is more manageable given the time and resource constraints.

4. SUGGESTED METHODOLOGY:

a) The key methodology to be used in the evaluation: The proposed formative evaluation will be

non-experimental and will use mostly qualitative methodology for assessment of the

evaluation criteria mentioned above. The qualitative methods such as Focus Group

Discussions (FGDs), Key Informant Interviews (Klls), In-depth Interviews (IDIs), and

Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) may be used for the evaluation. Agencies are encouraged

to reflect on the context of the CBDRR-School Safety programme, and the objectives and

criteria of the evaluation, to propose other innovative methods that UNICEF should consider.

Accordingly, appropriate protocols will be developed by the evaluation team.

b) In terms of data available, the evaluation should rely on the primary sources as part of the

data collection exercise. UNICEF partners have been collecting data for the implementation

of the programme since the beginning, such as information on the DRR plans of the village,

funds leveraged from Government, meeting minutes from villages, and grading of VDMC and

SDMC. UNICEF will provide all the available data to the selected agency. There is also a

monitoring system in which partners do monthly tracking of annual targets as part of their

monthly reporting to UNICEF. These monthly reports may also provide some insights.

(Annexure — 4: List of documents for desk review)

c) Sampling Strategy: The following sample size (in six intervention districts) table is only

indicative for the purposes of bidding. Agencies are requested to either validate the

suggestion or propose an alternative approach with well-thought out explanations as to why

9 A-9



the alternative approach is more appropriate. Please note that the inclusion of primary

subjects in the data collection should take into consideration human rights, gender, and equity

aspects, ensuring that these rights holders have equal opportunities to participate. Agencies

are encouraged to share how they will ensure a representative and diverse sample.

Sl. No. Stakeholders/Target Groups FGDs Kill IDI Sample size

1 Village Disaster

Management Committee

(VDMC)

2 FGDs per

intervention dist.

12 FGDs

2 School Disaster

Management Committee

(SDMC)

2 FGDs per

intervention dist.

12 FGDs

3 Implementing NGO Partners 1 FGD 1 FGD

4 Children (10-15 years) 2 FGDs per

intervention dist.

12 FGDs

5 Women (18-35 years) 2 FGDs per

intervention dist.

12 FGDs

6 DRR Catalysts 4 per district 24 KII

7 Gram Pradhan - Mukhiya 2 per district 12 KII

8 Anganwadi Worker (AWW) 2 per district 12 KII

9 Auxiliary Nurse Midwife (ANM) 2 per district 12 KII

10 School Safety Focal

Teachers

2 per district 12 KII

11 School Principals/Head Master 1 per district 6 KII

12 Block Education Officer 1 per district 6 KII

13 Block Development Officer 1 per district 6 KII

14 District Collector 3 Districts 3 KII

15 District Education Officer 3 Districts 3 KII

d) Additionally, UNICEF would like to conduct a KAP survey with adolescents in three schools per

district (for a total of 18 schools) to gauge the level of awareness on disaster planning and

resilience. The schools should be selected depending on the level of high, medium, or low

implementation success of the schools, according to information which will be provided by

the implementing partners and UNICEF subsequently. The sample size for this KAP survey is

estimated to be 10-15 students per school for a total of 180-270 students. While the aim of

the single-difference endline KAP in the intervention districts is to get a sense of students'

knowledge, attitudes, and practices, it should be recognized that there are limitations to this

approach, such as only understanding the KAP level of these students and to not draw any

causal inference of the programme since a valid counterfactual is not chosen and many factors

could have contributed to the students' KAP.

e) The selected evaluation agency should further advise on the evaluation design,

implementation and analysis specifics. A pre-bid meeting to answer queries related to the

evaluation will be made possible to interested agencies, after which technical presentations

to UNICEF would be requested from all short-listed agencies after submission of technical and

financial bids either in UNICEF, Delhi Office or UNICEF, Bihar Office. After the selection process

is completed, the evaluation agency will develop a protocol that details sample size

estimation, sample selection procedures, select villages/schools for the evaluation, validate

10 A-10



or reconstruct the Theory of Change of the CBDRR intervention, indicators,

questionnaires/tools for data collection, survey implementation plan, data processing and

analysis plan, and dissemination plan. Additionally, it will also develop protocols for ethical

standards. The hired agency should ensure that their researchers/evaluators/ enumerators

are IRB certified or have appropriate ethics training and that they have a process to get

external IRB approval as the primary data collection will involve children.

f) Limitations of the evaluation: As this is a qualitative evaluation, contribution of the

programme in reducing the vulnerability of the population is expected to be assessed. It is not

an expectation of UNICEF that attribution would be possible due to a lack of a counterfactual.

However, the evaluation team is encouraged to explore whether it would be possible to

demonstrate an improvement in the well-being of the population in the programme area due

to the contribution of such intervention based on available data and potential methods. This

can be finalized in consultation with UNICEF after the first scoping visit to the field.

g) The availability of existing data may be a concern since there is no secondary source for data

on DRR, which is why this is framed as a qualitative evaluation. The evaluation agency should

rely on the institutional memory of staff as most of the implementing staff have remained the

same and the various qualitative techniques available at their disposal but should also be

aware of the risks that this approach may cause. Access to the communities is not a problem.

5. EVALUATION MANAGEMENT

a) A Reference Group with 5-6 members will be formed to oversee the evaluation process and

ensure compliance to UNEG Norms and Standards. It is an independent group of UNICEF and

non-UNICEF experts constituted for a specific evaluation by UNICEF India. It serves as an

advisory body which supports the evaluation by a) providing strategic direction and technical

inputs, b) monitoring progress and quality, c) supporting dissemination of findings, as

applicable, and d) bringing critical issues to the notice of the Research and Evaluation

Specialist, UNICEF Delhi, who provides oversight for all evaluations conducted at UNICEF India

and will serve as the Evaluation Manager in order to ensure quality, transparency, and

independence.

b) For local logistics, the UNICEF Bihar office will provide the necessary support to the evaluation

team, such as making introductions to certain stakeholders. Local travel logistics should be

organized by the evaluation team.

6. SCHEDULE OF TASKS & TIMELINE

a) It is proposed to complete the evaluation within 16 weeks accomplishing the key tasks as

mentioned below:

Desk review of the project documents and secondary data analysis

Meeting with key stakeholders

Tools and questionnaires development

Field testing and finalization of evaluation tools

Data collection

Data analysis and draft report preparation

11 A-11



Submission of final report and presentation

b) Annexure-5 is a Gantt chart with more details.

7. ESTIMATED DURATION OF CONTRACT: 16 weeks (1 April 2016 to 22 July 2016)

8. DELIVERABLES:

Inception report with sufficient programme background/context, evaluation purpose,

objectives & questions, detailed methodology, including analytical framework, processes,

time-line and tools within 21 days of contract signing (3 weeks) after field visits and meeting

with the Reference Group.

Audit trail 1 of comments on the draft Inception Report (to keep track of comments and how

they are being addressed).

A draft Evaluation Report by June 30 2016 accompanied by in-person presentation with the

team to the Reference Group.

Audit trail 2 of comments on the first draft report.

Power point presentation of the findings of the evaluation

A final Evaluation report with maximum 50 pages by 22 July 2016, incorporating comments

from UNICEF. The evaluation report should be in line with UNICEF-adopted UNEG Evaluation

Report Standards (Annexure 6) as it will be shared externally for quality assurance review by

UNICEF Regional Office for South Asia (ROSA) and be uploaded onto UNICEF's Research and

Evaluation Database and the Global Evaluation Reporting Oversight System (GEROS) and

become public.

Raw data, fact sheets, tables

Structure of the Inception Report

Title page

Table of contents

Acronyms

List of tables and figures

Executive summary

Introduction

Purpose of inception report and activities undertaken to develop it

Evaluation context

Programme summary and theory of change to be used in the evaluation

Evaluation purpose, objectives and scope, with deviations from the TOR and limitations of the

evaluation

Evaluation methodology and approach

Sampling methodology

Fieldwork and analysis

Ethics and UNEG standards

Evaluation process (Workplan, Governance, Communication)

12 A-12



Annexes, including protocols/questionnaires

Structure of the Evaluation Report

a) In preparing the evaluation results, the findings will be evidence based and will have clear

references to the source. The structure of the evaluation report (not more than 50 pages) could

be as follows:

Title page

Table of contents

Acronyms

Executive Summary with the purpose of the evaluation, brief methodology, key findings,

conclusions and recommendations in priority order

Introduction that includes a description of the programme intervention, Log frame/result

matrix/theory of change

Purpose of the evaluation

Key questions and scope of the evaluation with information on limitations

Approach and methodology

Findings by criteria and conclusions

Recommendations, it will be explicitly linked to the findings and with the target audience

identified

Lessons learned

b) In addition, the final report should contain the following annexes:

Terms of Reference for the evaluation

List of meetings attended

List of persons interviewed

List of documents reviewed

Any other relevant materials

9. QUALIFICATIONS & EXPERIENCE REQUIRED

This evaluation is to be conducted by an agency with 12-15 years of experience in the field of

DRR with expertise in monitoring, evaluation and documentation of DRR/humanitarian

actions, participatory planning, and risk analysis in India.

The team members must have experience doing evaluations using participatory approaches

involving children, men, and women, and analysis using qualitative and quantitative

techniques. Preference will be given to team members with at least a Master's degree in a

relevant field.

The agency will assign/make available at least three evaluation team members for the

proposed assignment with respect to gender balance.

The Team Leader should have at least Masters' degree, PhD preferred, in a relevant field and

10 years professional work experience evaluating development programmes. Preference will

be given to those with experience in evaluating humanitarian or DRR programme. The Team

13 A-13



Leader and members who should be available to work on the evaluation throughout the

evaluation process. Change of the evaluation Team Leader or members will not be accepted

without prior approval from UNICEF.

The team members should have hands on experience of conducting programme reviews,

disaster management programme and good understanding of CBDRR, School Safety,

resilience building, emergency preparedness and response, particularly experience working

with vulnerable populations such as women and children.

The team members should have experience in doing capacity building with communities as

well as evaluating such efforts.

Excellent command of written and spoken English and Hindi.

The contracted agency must comply with UNEG Norms and Standards.

Preference will be given to agencies that can provide 2 publically available evaluation reports

as part of the proposal. Preference will also be given to evaluation reports related to DRR,

humanitarian actions, or community resilience building.

10. DUTY STATION

The evaluation team will work from their base station with field travels to the CBDRR and School

Safety programme districts in Bihar.

11. OFFICIAL TRAVEL INVOLVED

Field travel to CBDRR and School Safety programme districts (6).

A-14



ANNEX 2: EVALUATION MATRIX

S.N. Questions Sub-questions How judgement is formed Expected sources/methods Criteria

1 To what extent are the

objectives of the CBDRR– School

Safety programme intervention

still valid?

Are the activities and outputs of CBDRR– School

Safety programme consistent with overall goal and

attainment of the objectives?

Is the design of the CBDRR intervention appropriate

to reach the target population?

Do the DRR plans reflect the needs and participation

opportunities of children, women and marginalized

groups from a gender and equity perspective?

To what extent the objectives of the School Safety

programme were valid when it was first

implemented or throughout the duration of

implementation?

Are the objectives of the CBDRR– School Safety

programme consistent with the Sendai Framework

for DRR?

Triangulate info from

discussions with

different groups of

people and review of

data sources

KII with men, women, girls

and boys from VDMC and

SDMC members

FGD with VDMC members

(both gender mixed groups

as well as only with men,

women, girls and boys, and

different social groups)

FGD with non-VDMC, Non-

SDMC members

PRA techniques

Relevance

2 To what extent are the

objectives of CBDRR– School

Safety programme

achieved/likely to be achieved?

Are the processes (monthly meetings, annual reviews

of plans, annual Gram Sahba meetings) of the

programme sufficient to bring about active

participation of the community members to create

and implement their own DRR plans? If yes, how? If

no, how can the processes be improved?

How have the communities used learnings from the

training modules to incorporate into their DRR plans?

If yes, how have they done it? How have the

communities incorporate risk reduction

perspective/knowledge/skills in pre-emptive

planning and action for other types of hazards/ risks?


discussions with

different groups of

people and review of

data sources

Comparison of number

and severity of types of

hazards throughout the

programme

implementation phase,

including before and

after. Compare this

Documents review

IDIs/ KIIs

Group interviews

After Action Reviews

Review of meeting minutes

Desk review of minutes of

VDMC and SDMC

Review of DRR plans

FGDs with VDMCs, SDMCs

and community

Effectiveness

A-15




What are various risk informed actions ‘types’ at the

level of individual, family, community, villages, basic

services and critical infrastructure?

What were the major factors influencing

achievements or non-achievements of stated

results?

According to the views of the community members,

to what extent has the CBDRR programme

contributed to the reduction of the number of deaths

and severity of the impact of natural and man-made

hazards in the villages where it has been

implemented? What percentages of incidents have

been dealt with by the leadership of the VDMC

without external support?

information with other

information collected

from KIIs, FGDs, etc.

3 To what extent will the benefits

of CBDRR– School Safety

programme continue after

UNICEF funding support has

ceased?

If UNICEF were to withdraw support for this

programme, what components would be sustainable

and what actions would be necessary for the

outcomes to be sustained?

What were the major factors which influenced the

achievement or non-achievement of sustainability of

the CBDRR– School Safety programme?

What are the lessons learnt that can be externally

applied and provide recommendations (for UNICEF

as well as the Bihar government) for further

application of these good practices in future CBDRR-

School Safety programmes?

What are the scaling-up approaches and possible

strategies for scaling-up CBDRR and School Safety

programme in Bihar and for promoting CBDRR-

School Safety programme within Government


discussions with

different groups of

people

Examinations of

UNICEF’s inputs in the

last 6 years (financial

and human resources)

Comparison of % of

plans being

implemented at

different junctures

Review of other scaling

up strategies that may

be applicable for DRR

context

KIIs (DRR Catalyst, Block

Development Officers)

Documents/literature

review

IDIs with NGO

partners/VDMC members

(particularly vulnerable

groups)

IDIs with UNICEF staff and

front line workers

KAP with adolescents in

three school per district

Examine three village in-

depth to understand the

processes it underwent to

be disaster resilient.

Sustainability

and Scalability

A-16




system.

4 To what extent have activities

affected marginalized

communities, addressed

differences in gender, and

empowered both girls and boys?

Was the programme design and delivery equitable to

different groups and gender?

Did the programme achieve the same level of success

in different places and with different groups?

Were there any negative effects felt by any groups?


discussions with

different groups of

people

FGDs/KIIs with vulnerable

groups, boys and girls

Interviews with project

implementing partners and

district functionaries

Equity and

Gender

17 A-17



ANNEX 3: CBDRR-SSP PROGRAMME PROCESSES

Process followed under the CBDRR programme

The process begins with mobilizing, educating and raising awareness of the community for formation

of the VDMC. The members of the VDMC are selected in an open meeting with the consent of the

entire community. The VDMC is responsible for conducting the village risk assessment and facilitating

the development of village plans (through a participatory and community based approach). The VDMC

is further responsible for coordinating and involving Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs) and other

frontline government functionaries for the effective implementation of the planned activities and

mainstreaming the village’s DRR plans within the Gram Panchayat (GP) plans through regular meetings

and interactions.

The approval of plans follows a well defined sequence of activities: once the plans are prepared by the

community, the VDMC presents it to the GP head in the Aam Sabha for approval. The approved plans

are included in the panchayat development plan and presented to the Block Development Officer

(BDO) for necessary action and releasing funds. The VDMC facilitates this process by regular follow

ups with the BDO. If the sanctioning of funds gets delayed for any reason, the VDMC promptly

escalates it to the District Collector’s office for expediting the process. The NGO partner plays the role

of a facilitator during the entire process. Following the sanctioning of funds, the VDMC and the

community join hands to work on improved infrastructure for the village. The evaluation team

encountered several examples of such infrastructure in the form of, weather proof internal roads in

the villages, flood shelters, schools and houses with raised plinths, handpumps on raised platforms,

etc.

It would be pertinent to add that the DRR planning process is steered by the DRR Catalyst. In the

beginning of 2013, a group of DRR Catalysts were selected at the village level to develop leadership

within-at-risk communities to ensure sustainability of the CBDRR programme. These individuals have

the unique quality of volunteering and leadership demonstrated at the village level, and were sincerely

contributing towards the VDMC led process of risk informed planning as well as following it up at the

GP and the block levels for effective implementation. Their strengths as identified by the programme

were (i) that these were highly motivated individuals who participate in all community based

processes; (ii) they had acceptance and respect from all community members; and (iii) they had the

critical personal experience of dealing with disasters, and understanding of the chronic

underdevelopment in the villages. Today, there are close to 130 DRR catalysts working in 255 villages.

Many among them are women and people from the vulnerable sections of the villages. They act as

one of the most significant change makers and key stakeholders in the CBDRR programme to ensure

community ownership and sustainability of the programme. (Office U. B.)49

Within a year of the selection of DRR catalysts, partnership agreements were put in place with the

block and district administration to scale-up the CBDRR programme. This was followed by the district

administration initiating a scale up of the CBDRR covering all the villages in the 15 intervention

community development blocks of six districts. By December 2015, the 255 pilot intervention villages

were handed to DRR Catalysts and community institutions.

49 Office, U. B. (n.d.). Perspective plans for DRR Catalysts 2015. UNICEF.

18 A-18



Process followed under the SSP:

The broad contours of the approach followed by UNICEF for promoting School Safety are:

a) Risks faced by children and teachers in schools are identified systematically by school level

institutions to champion the cause of school safety. For the purpose of orientation on school

safety and necessary training and capacity building, effective School Disaster Management

Committee (SDMC) is formed. Through participatory child friendly exercises like ‘Hazard hunt’50,

existing areas of vulnerability are mapped and developed into a ‘School Safety Plan’.

b) The mitigation measures to address the identified structural and non-structural risks are

documented as a ‘School Safety Plan’, which is finalized in consultation with various stakeholders

such as school management committee members, teachers and students, and reviewed

periodically. The finalized plan is negotiated through the SMC and PRIs with different service

providers and departments for timely implementation.

c) The capacity, knowledge and awareness of different actors and institutions are built to address

non-structural risks. It includes training of select students on different aspects of disasters, to

promote them as peer educators who conduct mock-drill exercises and follow up with other

children periodically. It includes conducting awareness programme for children on local hazards

and risk reduction through various methods like discussions, street plays, drawing competitions,

quiz competitions, essay/ slogan writing and demonstrations. In addition, School Safety Focal

Point Teachers are provided a series of trainings to enhance their capacity for anchoring the school

safety initiative in their respective schools. The broad areas of the training programmes for

students and teachers include, basic awareness on local disasters; their effects and mitigation

measures; first-aid; fire safety; water quality monitoring etc.

50 Hazard hunts are undertaken at the school level by SDMC members supported by the School Safety Focal techer. Children identify hazards and threats in schools, which are included in the school disaster management plan.

19 A-19



ANNEX 4: ETHICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE APPROVAL ON TOOLS

20 A-20



A-21



ANNEX 5: LIST OF MEETINGS ATTENDED

SNo. Nature of Meeting Date Location List of Participants

1. Inception Phase- Meeting at National Level with

Evaluation Specialist and Emergency Specialist

2nd June 2016 New Delhi Ms. Trang Ho Mortan

Mr. Sarabjit Singh Sahota

Mr. Alok Pattanaik

Mr. Sanjay Tripathi

Ms. Divya Hariharan

Ms. Pranita Choudhary

2. Scoping Visit- Meeting with DRR Officer and

Programme Officer

28th June 2016 Patna, Bihar Mr. Shivendra Pandeya

Mr. Banku Bihari Sarkar

Mr. Yameen Mazumdar

Mr. Alok Pattanaik

Mr. Sanjay Tripathi

Ms. Divya Hariharan

Ms. Pranita Choudhry

3. Scoping Visit- Meeting with DRR Officer and

Implementing NGO Partners

29th June 2016 Patna, Bihar Mr. Banku Bihari Sarkar

Mr. Virendra Pandey

Mr. Mukul Pandey

Mr. Ashok Kumar

Mr. Shyam Kumar Singh

Mr. Kamal Kamat

Mr. Sandeep Kumar Kaushal

Mr. ShankarChaudhri

Mr. Paras Nath Singh

Mr. Ravindra Kumar

Mr. Alok Pattanaik

Mr. Sanjay Tripathi

Ms. Divya Hariharan


A-22




4. Scoping Visit- Meetings with CARD at Samastipur 30th June – 1st June 2016 Samastipur, Bihar Mr. Paras Nath Singh

Mr. Shankar Chaudhri

Mr. Alok Pattanaik

Mr. Sanjay Tripathi

Ms. Divya Hariharan

5. Meeting with Evaluation Reference Group post

submission of Inception Report

28th July 2016 New Delhi Ms. Trang Ho Mortan

Mr. Sarabjit Singh Sahota


Mr. Alok Pattanaik

Mr. Sanjay Tripathi

Ms. Divya Hariharan

Ms. Pranita Choudhary

6. Meeting with Evaluation Consultant and DRR

Officer on evaluation tools before pilot testing

10th August 2016 New Delhi Mr. Banku Bihari Sarkar

Ms. Manveen Kohli

Mr. Alok Pattanaik

Mr. Sanjay Tripathi

Ms. Divya Hariharan


7. Ethical Review Committee meeting with Ekjut 19th August 2016 Rachi, Jharkhand Ms. Divya Hariharan

5 Members of the Ethical Review Committee

8. Meeting with DRR officer and Implementing NGO

partners to finalise sample villages and schools

1st September 2016 Patna, Bihar Mr. Banku Bihari Sarkar

Mr. Virendra Pandey

Mr. Mukul Pandey

Mr. Ashok Kumar

Mr. Shyam Kumar Singh

Mr. Kamal Kamat

Mr. Sandeep Kumar Kaushal

Mr. Shankar Chaudhri

Mr. Paras Nath Singh

A-23




Mr. Ravindra Kumar

Mr. Sanjay Tripathi

9. Meeting with DRR officer, Social Policy and

Evaluation Expert, Evaluation Consultation,

Emergency Specialist to finalise tools

18th October 2016 New Delhi Mr. Banku Bihari Sarkar

Ms. Manveen Kohli

Mr. Prabhat Kumar

Mr. Alok Pattanaik

Mr. Sanjay Tripathi

Ms. Divya Hariharan


10. Meeting with Shri Vyas ji, Vice Chairman- Bihar

State Disaster Management Authority (Conducted

as a part of fieldwork)

8th December 2016 Patna, Bihar Shri Vyas ji


Mr. Sanjay Tripathi

Mr. Alok Pattanaik

Mr. Shyam

11. Meeting with Mr. Shivendra Pandeya, State

Programme Manager- UNICEF, Bihar (Conducted as

a part of fieldwork)

8th December 2016 Patna, Bihar Mr. Shivendra Pandeya


Mr. Sanjay Tripathi

24 A-24



ANNEX 6: LIST OF PERSONS INTERVIEWED

1. State Level KIIs

SNo. Respondent Name of Respondent

1. Programme Manager- UNICEF, Bihar Mr. Shivendra Pandeya

2. Bihar State Disaster Management Authority- Vice Chairman Shri Vyas Ji

District: Supaul

SNo. Respondent Name of Respondent

1. District Magistrate Baidhyanath Yadav

2. District Programme Officer Md. Haroon

Block: Basantpur

SNo. Respondent Name

1. Block Development Officer

2. Block Education Officer Bimla Maria Lakran

Village: Banelipatti

SNo. Respondent for KIIs Name

1. Gram Mukhiya Jagdish Yadav

2. Ex. Mukhiya Veena Devi

3. Anganwadi Worker Sunita Devi

4. ANM Raj kumari

Respondents for FGDs

SNo. VDMC Members Children Women

1 Shanti Devi Ladli Kumari Amerika Devi

2 Akli Devi Nilee Kumari Puja Devi

3 Asha Devi Pardip Kumar Lila Devi

4 Sunila Devi Arvind Kumar Shanti Devi

5 Azad Kumar Yadav Sandip Kumar Chandrika Devi

6 Maha Devi Suresh Kumar Meera Devi

7 Mina Devi Birendar Kumar Tara Devi

8 Ramawati Devi Niraj Kumar Prabha Devi

9 Rita Devi Radha Kumari Vimal Devi

10 Sarita Devi Puja Kumari Monika Devi

11 Bhajju Ram Rani Kumari Mo Koushlya Devi

12 Sadaman Ram Kavita Kumari

13 Vishundev Ram Rinki Kumari

14 Parmeshwar Ram Simpi Kumari

15 Baleshwar Mehta

16 Surendra Ram

17 Naresh Paswan

18 Fullo Devi

25 A-25



Village: Matiyari

SNo. Respondent for KIIs Name

1. Gram Mukhiya Parvin Kumar Mehtar

2. Anganwadi Worker Sadhana Kumari

3. ANM Bina Kumari


SNo. VDMC Children Women

1 Sunita Devi Rakesh Kumar Chaupal Salita Devi

2 Manjula Devi Nitish Kumar Paswan Tariya Devi

3 Parmila Devi Karan Kumar Paswan Rajkumari Devi

4 Samrika Devi Atiranjan Kumar Mehta Ramshobha Devi

5 Bachandev Mandal Deepak Kumar Chaupal Sukumari Devi

6 Umesh Kumar Ray Rina Kumari Sunita Devi

7 Arjun Sharma Anu Kumari

8 Tulsi Devi Arti Kumari

9 Roshan Kumar Barbariya Rani Kumari

10 Ramdas Ray Nisha Kumari

11 Bechan Ray Manisha Kumari

12 Hansraj Singh Neha Kumari

13 Sahdev Sharma

14 Bauaalal Sada

15 Dayaram Sada

16 Santosh Kumar Ray

17 Davendra Kumar Singh

18 Lalit Kumar Mandal

19 Kirishan dev Mandal

20 Sulekha Devi

Middle School: Mohaddipur


1 Headmaster/Headmistress Lal Bahadur Yadav

2 School Safety Focal Teacher Bashudev Mehta

SDMC Members

1 Suman Kumar

2 Md. Yehamshan Khan

3 Prince Kumar

4 Deepak Kumar

5 Khushbu Khatun

6 Pooja Kumari

7 Guriya Kumari

8 Chandni Kumari

9 Aarti Kumari

10 Priya Kumari

26 A-26



Middle School: Bhagwanpur II


1. Headmaster/Headmistress Rajendra Prasad Kanth

2. School Safety Focal Teacher Shivdev Parsad Sahu

SDMC Members

1 Kishor Kumar

2 Indar Kumar

3 Sonu Kumar

4 Anjali Kumari

5 Buity Rani

6 Payal Kumar

7 Seema Kumari

8 Arti Kumari

9 Puspa Kumari

10 Jyoti Kumari

11 Ripesh Kumar

12 Kirishan Nandan Kumar

13 Ropesh Kumar

14 Dipesh Kumar

15 Shivdev Parsad Sahu

16 Kajal Kumari

17 Anshu Kumari

18 Chalchal Kumari

KAP Respondents

SNo. Lalit Narayan MahaVidhyalay,

Hridaynagar

Upgraded High School

Mahadipur

Mahavidhyalay Bhagvanpur-

2

1 Gautam Kumar Jha Akash Kumar Rajesh Kumar

2 Nisha Kumar Sanjana Kumar Arti Kumar

3 Ruchi Kumar Virbahadur Sharma Rupa Kumar

4 Gaurav Kumar Mishra Khushbu Khatun Anchal Kumar

5 Deepu Kumar Rupesh Kumar Dipesh Kumar

6 Mohit Kumar Puja Kumari Anand Bharti

7 Byuti Kumari Puja Kumari Kajal Kumari

8 Anshu Kumari Girdhar Krishna Murari Chalchal Kumari

9 Sakshi Kumar Chandni Kumar Soni Kumari

10 Nilesh Acharya Dipak Kumar Kavita Kumari

11 Raksha Kumari Prince Kumari Dharmendra Kumar

12 Milee Kumari Priya Kumari Byuti Rani

13 Alisha Kumari Niki Kumari Mamta Kumari

14 Varsha Kumari Punyanand Kumar Ram Sagar

15 Rakesh Roshan Muskan Kumar Shambu Kumar Ram

27 A-27



District: MADHUBANI

SNo. Respondent Type Name of Respondent

1. District Magistrate Girivar Dayal Singh

2. District Programme Officer Ramashray Prasad

Block: Madhepur


1. Block Development Officer Mithlesh Prasad

2. Block Education Officer Nirmal Kumar

Village: Bhargama

SNo. Respondents for KIIs Name

1. Gram Mukhiya Muntun Devi (W/O Ashok Kumar Jha)

2. Anganwadi Worker Madhumala Devi

3. ANM Malti Kumari



1 Lila Devi Gita Kumari Gulab Devi

2 Mukesh kumar Ram Rahul Kumar Shakunti Devi

3 Bachcha Mansoori Akash Kumar Sunita Devi

4 Rambhajan Paswan Bechan Kumar Sumitra Devi

5 Ganesh Prasad Ram Lalit Kumar Anar Devi

6 Chhate Lal Sada Sushil Kumar Yadav Triful Devi

7 Ramsakal Sada Ramkumar Yadav Triful Devi

8 Shiv Kumar Sada Prabhash Kumar Yadav Durgi Devi

9 Chandrakant Ram Sonu Kumar Ram Surji Devi

10 Ramvriksh Sada Amit Kumar Babita Devi

11 Sravan Kumar Ravikant Kumar Khaee Geeta Devi

12 Aarti Kumari Sumitra Devi

13 Mamta Kumari Shanti Devi

14 Mamta Kumari Bimal Devi

15 Aarti Kumari Geeta Devi

16 Aarti Kumari

Village: Tisi

SNo. Respondent for KIIs Name of Respondent

1 Gram Mukhiya Chhote Panjiyar

2 Anganwadi Worker Sunila Devi

3 ANM Anita Kumari



1 Vijay Kumar Sahani Mohammad Zaifi Sita Devi

28 A-28



2 Narayan Mukhiya Prabhat Kumar Pratima Devi

3 Ram Lalit Sharma Jitendra Kumar Mukhiya Soni Kumari

4 Ram Ganesh Mukhiya Bajrangi Kumar Khushabu Kumari

5 Nawi Hussain Arjun Kumar Sharma Puja Kumari

6 Nujahat Praveen Rasheeda Khatun Kavya Kumari

7 Banarsi Devi Deepika Kumari Gita Devi

8 Pramila Devi Sumaiya Parveen Sumitra Devi

9 Rudal Mahto Sudha Kumari Mantoriya Devi

10 Ram Vilas Mahto Reeta Kumari Sunita Devi

11 Ruksana Begam Shanti Kumari Pinki Devi

12 Farzana Parveen Parwati Devi

13 Rafat Parveen Savita Devi

14 Pritee Kumari Ramkumari Devi

Middle School: Bheja


1 Headmaster/Headmistress Ainul Haque

2 School Safety Focal Teacher Parshuram Mishra

SDMC Members

1 Lakshmi Kumari

2 Manisha Kumari

3 Radha Rani

4 Keshav Kumar Singh

5 Ashutosh Kumar Mishra

6 Shivam Kumar Pathak

7 Aakriti Kumari

8 Soni Kumari Mishra

9 Shobhaya Singh

10 Kanchan Kumari

11 Bishwash Kumar Mishra

12 Juhi Kumari

Middle School: Baingra


1 Headmaster/Headmistress Sudhir Kumar Thakur

2 School Safety Focal Teacher Manish Kumar Garg

SDMC Members

1 Ajay Kumar

2 Sahanwaj Hussain

3 Najir Hussain

4 Md. Ismil

5 Afroj Aalam

6 Md. Bali Ullah

7 Lala Babu Sah

29 A-29



8 Amna Sams

9 Fiza Naj

10 Archana Kumari

11 Rishu Kumar

12 Rahul Kumar Ray

13 Md. Najish

14 Himanshu Kumar Jha

15 Rohilt Kumar Thakur

16 Neha Parveen

17 Rubi Kumari

18 Sahbin Khatun

KAP Respondents

SNo. Utkramit Maha

Vidhyalaya, Bhaingra,

Bisfi

Rajkiya Utkramit

Mahavidhyalaya, Pachahi

(Dakshin), Madhepur

Rajkiya MahaVidhyalay,

Bheja, Madhepur

1 Mohammad Ajnabi Sah Manjit Kumar Yadav Vishwas Kumar Mishra

2 Mohammad Sanaullah Nikita Kumari Soumya Singh

3 Mohammad Mokhtar Amarjit Kumar Yadav Ramanju Kumar Mandal

4 Neha Praveen Abhishek Kumar Jha Radha Rani

5 Chotti Kumari Sanjit Kumar Shivam Kumar Pathak

6 Sultan Ahmad Ritesh Kumar Yadav Rajan Kumar

7 Kalpana Kumari Arun Kumar Sona Kumari

8 Ezaz Ahmad Saraswati Kumari Manisha Kumari Mishra

9 Rubi Kumari Bhavna Kumari Tulsi Kumari

10 Afiya Parveen Payal Kumari Prince Kumar Mishra

11 Reshma Praveen Arvind Kumar Dilkhush Kumar

12 Mohammad Alakam Muskan Kumari Santoshi Kumari

13 Lalbahadur Shah Manjit Kumar Sahni Laxman Kumar Mukhiya

14 Ajit Kumar Chalchal Kumar Sagar Kumar Mishra

15 Prabhat Kumar Ranjit Kumar Shah Priya Kumari

District: DARBHANGA


1 District Magistrate Dr. Chandrashekar Singh

2 District Programme Officer Mr. Rajnikant Praveen

Block: Ghanshayampur


1 Block Development Officer Mr. Amrinder Kumar Singh

2 Block Education Officer Mr. Pitambar Prasad

30 A-30



Village: Asma


1 Gram Mukhiya Jawahar lal Yadav

2 Anganwadi Worker Mala Kumari

3 ANM Manju Kumari



1 Ravindar Parsad Ankita Kumari Yadav Samtula Devi

2 Chedi Ram Soni Kumari Rinku Devi

3 Phuleswar Mandal Pooja Kumari Subhkala Devi

4 Baraj Mohan Sada Kaushal Kumar Sunita Devi

5 BasuDev Paswan Md Sahmad Suruti Devi

6 Mahesh Parsad Yadav Shyam Sunadar Kumar Punita Devi

7 Utam Yadav Dinesh Kumar Aruliya Devi

8 Ganga Naran Abrokh Kumar Subhkala Devi

9 Kalar Sada Viswjeet Kumar Fuliya Devi

10 Ganawr Sada Sajan Kumar Aruliya Devi

11 Boban Sakhi Raju Kumar Sunita Devi

12 Rajbind Kamat Kirishna Kumar Janki Devi

13 Ganga Sada Bodhiya Devi

14 Parmeswari Devi Sita Devi

15 Somani Devi Soniya Devi

16 Soniya Devi Sunita Devi

17 Amna Khatun

18 Noor Mohmad

Village: Chhilkora


1 Gram Mukhiya Sude Kamti

2 AnganwaDi Worker Gita Devi

3 ANM Anju Kuamri



1 Kamlesh Kumar Mukhiya Sudha Kumari Jagiya Devi

2 Dinesh Sada Punita Kumari Babda Devi

3 Jailal Yadav Soni Kumari Bisakha Devi

4 Arvinad Kumar Yadav Manisha Kumari Bunda Devi

5 Pachhu Chopal Baby Kumari Siyapati Devi

6 Bahadur Sada Janki Kumari Lalita Devi

7 Daneswar Chopal Sangita Kumari Pawan Devi

8 Gita Devi Pooja Kumari Kagiya Devi

9 Bhagiya Devi Jay Parkash Mukhiya Tara Devi

31 A-31



10 Benki Devi Rajnish Kumar Mukhiya Roshan Khatun

11 Bilayiti Sada Kanchan Kumari Sudhira Kumari

12 Rukmini Kumari Manju Devi

13 Sakunti Devi

14 Ramsakhi Devi

15 Anita Devi

16 Indarkala Devi

Middle School: Godhail


1 Headmaster/Headmistress Abdul Jabbar

2 School Safety Focal Teacher Sunil Kumar

SDMC Members

1 Adarsh Kumar Yadav

2 Rajesh Kumar

3 Md. Samim Aalam

4 Shaket Kumar Kant

5 Parmod Kumar Saw

6 Anish Kumar Yadav

7 Rahul Kumar Bharti

8 Jay Prakash Thakur

9 Asha Kumari

10 Lila Kumari

11 Radha Kumari

12 Chandni Kumari

13 Renu Kumari

14 Sonali Kumari

15 Radhika Kumari

16 Priyanka Kumari

Middle School: Kiratpur


1 Headmaster/Headmistress Aditya Kumar Tiwari

2 School Safety Focal Teacher Jiya Lal Saday

SDMC Members

1 Lonu Kumari

2 Injula

3 Durga Kumari

4 Sudha Ranjan

5 Viveka Kumari

6 Puja Kumari

7 Jay Krishan

8 Madhav Kumar Ray

9 Rajesh Kumar

32 A-32



10 Vivek Kumar

KAP Respondents

SNo. Rajkiya Madhya

Vidhyalaya Kiratpur

Utkramit Madhya Vidyalaya,

Godhail

Anugrah Smarak Rajkiya

Madhya Vidyalaya, Tumaul

1 Nishu Kumari Sumit Kumar Giri Sajan Kumar Thakur

2 Vivek Kumar Nisha Kumari Suruchi Kumari

3 Chandan Kumar Rahul Kumar Bharti Priti Kumari

4 Sarita Kumari Saurav Kumar Bharti Alok Kumar Mandal

5 Praveen Kumar Mithlesh Kumar Yadav Vikash Kumar

6 Nunu Kumari Rubi Kumari Bambam Kumar Thakur

7 Ravindra Kumar Dharmendra Kumar Giri Rohit Kumar Rana

8 Sudha Rajjan Chotti Kumari Muskan Kumari

9 Madhav Kumar Ray Jyoti Kumari Akshita Kumari

10 Puja Kumari Rakesh Kumar Bharti Gopal Kumar Singh

11 Raushan Kumar Ranjiv Kumar Raj Seema Kumar

12 Ranjan Kumar Sanjeet Kumar Mahto Raunak Singh

13 Shobhit Kumar Vijay Kumar Bharti Sonam Mishra

14 Priti Kumari Khushbu Kumari Aman Kumar Thakur

15 Rakesh Yadav RaushniKumari Sangita Kumari

District: SAMASTIPURl

Block: Kalyanpur


1 Block Development Officer Mr. Dhananjay Kumar

2 Block Education Officer Mr. Nandan Prasad

Village: Akouna


1 Gram Mukhiya Sobha Devi

2 Anganwadi Worker Sunita Devi

3 ANM Raj Kumari Devi



1 Santosh Sahni Roshan Kumar Banarsi Devi

2 Treeveni Sahni Kajal Kumari Indu Devi

3 Dev Narayan Sahni Kajal Kumari Gita Devi

4 Vijendra Sahni Nisha Kumari Ranju Devi

5 Ram Narayan Sahni Subash Kumar Anita Devi

6 Dilip Kumar Sahni Vicky Kumar Rita Devi

7 Jitendar Kumar Radhiya Devi

8 Manish Kumar Rinku Devi

9 Kirishana Kumar Bipin Devi

33 A-33



10 Sanjana Kumari Ranju Devi

11 Partima Kumari Urmila Devi

12 Puja Kumari Sunita Devi

13 Anjali Kaumari Sarita Devi

14 Anjali Kaumari Mira Devi

15 Kalpana Kumari Bachhi Devi

16 Nidhi Kumari Parwati Devi

17 Neha Kumari Babli Devi

18 Putal Devi

19 Rita Devi

20 Yashoda Devi

21 Anita Devi

22 Munni Devi

23 Munki Devi

24 Sanju Devi

25 Sima Devi

26 Khushbu Devi

27 Gulab Devi

Village: Dariyapar (Namapur)

SNo. Respondents of KIIs Name of Respondent

1 Gram Mukhiya Arpana Kumari (W/O Manoj Kumar Thakur)

2 Anganwadi Worker Aarti kumari

3. ANM Raj Kumari


1 Anil Kumar Thakur Sanjida Tarnum Nandani Devi

2 Diplal Garai Sayra Tarnum Phulo Devi

3 Ram Rajan Garai Rohi Parwin Krishana Devi

4 Ramnaresh Ray Ayesha Parween Renu Devi

5 Laxman Das Shushila Kumari Kalpana Devi

6 Radhe Shayam Panjiar Shivani Kuamri Bina Kumari (ASHA)

7 Radhe Shayam Chaodhary Kajal Kumari Arti Kumari

8 Kamlendra Kumar Vimal Kumari Vimla Devi

9 Sunail Thakur Aeti Kumari Sakuntla Devi

10 Sunail Kumar Chaodhary Saloni Kumari Madhuri Kumari

11 Krishan Kumar Rawat Renu Kumari

12 Bishnu Nrayan

13 Kesaw Narayan

14 Sawanavi

15 Nawswa Nasim

16 Busra Parveen

34 A-34



Middle School: Sormar Paran


1. Headmaster/Headmistress Renu Kumari

2. School Safety Focal Teacher Shivchandra Ram

SDMC Members

1 Priyam Priti

2 Seema Kumari

3 Rupa Kumari

4 Moni Kumari

5 Riya Priyadarshini

6 Priya Kumari

7 Jyoti Kumari

8 Munmun Kumari

9 Pragya Kumari

10 Sheha Bharti

11 Reema Kumari

12 Chandan Kumari

13 Sujeet Kumar

14 Abhishek Kumar

15 Adarsh Kumar

16 Divyanshu Shekhar

17 Divyanshu Kumar

Middle School: Jitwariya


1. School Safety Focal Teacher Rita Kumari

SDMC Members

1 Radha Kumari

2 Kajal Kumari

3 Amarjeet Kumar

4 Rahul Kumar

5 Tanu Kumari

6 Roopa Kumari

7 Jyoti Kumari

8 Alka Kumari

KAP Respondents

SNo. Rajkiya Utkramit Madhya

Vidhyalya, Lakshrampur

Adarsh Mahavidhyalaya,

Jitwaria

Utkramit Madhya Vidhyalaya,

Jitwaria

1 Tarannum Parveen Amarjeet Kumar Riya Priyadarshan

2 Savana Praveen Rahul Kumar Seema Kumari

3 Mohammad Mushtak Puja Kumari Anshu Kumari

4 Abhishek Kumar Mohini Kumari Jyoti Kumari

35 A-35



5 Naveen Kumar Chotti Kumari Niraj Kumar

6 Ruksana Khatun Bharti Kumari Ragini Kumar

7 Nagma Khatun Ayushi Kumari Satyam Kumar

8 Rupam Kumari Sharem Kumari Nisha Kumari

9 Mohsharrat Praveen Nishu Kumari Abhishek Kumar

10 Utkarsh Kumari Pallavi Bharti Adarsh Kumar Jha

11 Kundan Kumar Murali Manohar Kumar Farzana Khatun

12 Palak Kumari Nainsi Kumari Sonam Kumari

13 Priti Kumari Chandni Kumari Rupa Kumari

14 Himanshu Kumar Sonam Kumari Priti Kumari

15 Rakeela Khatun ANamika Kumari Aman Kumar

36 A-36



District: SITAMARHI

Block: Runnisaidpur


1 Block Development Officer Mr. Neeraj Anand

2 Block Education Officer Mr. Madhvendra Kumar

Village: Koriahi (Bagahi Ramnagar)

SNo. Respondents of KIIs Name

1 Gram Mukhiya Renu Devi

2 Anganwadi Worker Kamini Chaudhary

3 ANM

Respondents of FGDs


1 Chandrika Mahto Partima Kumari Kiran Devi

2 Sumitra Devi Sawran Kumar Pawan Devi

3 Koushlya Devi Santosh Kumar Gita Devi

4 Pawan Devi Yash Kumar Rita Devi

5 Lalita Devi Kajal Kumari Chinta Devi

6 Sarita Devi Sugandha Kumari Chuliya Devi

7 Rinku Devi Rakhi Kumari Lalita Devi

8 Sikilya Devi Sima Kumari Malti Devi

9 Gita Devi Rahul Kumar Mausham Kumari

10 Ramchandra Mahto Rahul Kumar Nilay Devi

11 Chulhiya Devi Rohit Kumar

12 Sarvsiya Devi Ritik Kumar

13 Rita Devi Ranjit Kumar

14 Chandri Devi Ajit Kumar

15 Siyapati Devi Sanjit Kumar

16 Paro Devi Sonu Kumar

17 Rina Devi

18 Malti Devi

19 Shail Devi

20 Sumitra Devi

21 Sunayana Devi

22 Urmila Devi

Village: Raipur


1 Gram Mukhiya Randhir Kumar Singh

2 Anganwadi Worker Bina Devi

3 ANM Ranju Kumari

37 A-37



Respondents of FGDs


1 Rampartay Ray Ram jee Sahni Prema Devi

2 Lalbabu Baitha Ram Kumar Jayaman Mosmat

3 Adhyachhlal Sahni Aarchna Kumari Banarsi Devi

4 Ram parvesh Sahni Avilasha Kumari Sumitra Devi

5 Arun Kumar Ray Ravita Kumari Gita Devi

6 Hulas Sah Suman Kumari Bachhi Devi

7 Amresh Kumar Chandni Kumari Munar Devi

8 Sihasan Devi Sanjit Kumar Shivkala Devi

9 Malti Devi Kiran Kumari Sarita Devi

10 Gaytri Devi Manish kumar Janki Devi

11 Champa Devi Jaikal Devi

12 Keshri Devi Badni Devi

13 Dulari Devi Kalewari Devi

14 Champa Devi Ranju Devi

15 Raj kali Devi Gita Devi

16 Koshalya Devi Gaytri Devi

Middle School: Sirkhiriya


1. School Safety Focal Teacher Chandar Shekar Kumar

SDMC Members

1 Mahesh Kumar R

2 Sundaram Kumar

3 Pankaj Kumar

4 Dhiraj Kumar

5 Prince Kumar

6 Priyanka Kumari

7 Runi Kumari

8 Anjali Kumari

9 Manish Kumari

10 Anu Kumari

11 Puja Kumari

12 Shalu Kumari

13 Anamika Kumari

14 Madhuri Kumari

15 Gunja Kumari

16 Sujata Kumari

17 Priya Kumari

38 A-38



Middle School: Hazipur Basant


1. Headmaster/Headmistress Radhir Kumar

2. School Safety Focal Teacher Ranendra Pratap Singh

SDMC Members

1 Rohit Kumar

2 Sashi Ranjan Kumar

3 Bikram Kumar

4 Dukhan Kumar

5 Parshuram Kumar

6 Chandan Kumar

7 Anil Kumar

8 Priti Kumar

9 Shushma Kumari

10 Dipa Kumari

11 Neha Kumari

12 Rangila Kumar

13 Kajal Kumari

14 Aarti Kumari

KAP Respondents

SNo. Rajkiya Madhya Vidyalya,

Hajipur Basant

Adarsh Madhya Vidyalya,

Sirkhiriya

Rajkiya Madhya Vidyalya,

Ibrahimpur

1 Munni Kumari Naresh Kumar Ram Shekar Kumar

2 Ajit Kumar Guddu Kumar Sati Kumari

3 Soni Kumari Kanchan Kumari Jyoti Kumari

4 Raja Kumar Shilpi Kumar Phool Kumar

5 Pankaj Kumar Deepa Kumari Ritu Kumari

6 Rahul Kumar Anisha Kumari Kamlesh Kumar

7 Sarita Kumari Mohammad Talib Madhu Kumari

8 Amit Kumar Ashish Rajjan Manika Kumari

9 Santosh Kumar Janat Khatun Ritu Raj

10 Ranjan Kumar Mamta Kumari Aarti Kumari

11 Vibha Kumar Phabili Krishna Kumar

12 Dhananjay Kumar Nitesh Kumar Shilpi Kumari

13 Lakhan Kumar Sonu Kumar Kamod Kumar

14 Ramesh Kumar Sonalika Kumari Vikki Kumar

15 Nitu Kumari Amaresh Kumar Sunita Kumari

39 A-39



2. District: EAST CHAMPARAN

Block: Banjaria


1 Block Development Officer/Circle Officer Ravi Ranjan Jamaiyar

2 Block Education Officer Wasim Ahmed/Dr. Sant Kumar Jha

Village: Kukurjari


1 Gram Mukhiya Chandradev Parsad Yadav

2 Anganwadi Worker Partima Kumari

3 ANM Ignesia Kujur

Respondents of FGDs


1 Surendra Kushwaha Minta Kumari Kiran Devi

2 Sivbalak Ray Palak Kumari Jyoti Devi

3 Raghuvir Chandra Maurya Rani Kumari Gita Devi

4 Anil Kushwaha Nipu Kumari Rita Devi

5 Misha Kumari Sachin Kumar Hiramati

6 Bipin Mahto Avisek Kumar Savita Devi

7 Dara Patel Premjeet Kumar Anarkali

8 Sudama Mahto Vishal Kumar Ramrati Devi

9 Birendar Parsad Manish Kumar

10 Amar Kishor Kushwaha

11 Dev narayan Parsad

12 Parbhunath Parsad

13 Ignesia Kujur

14 Nirmal Kumari

Village: Jhitkahiya


1. Gram Mukhiya Ragini Devi (W/O Arvind Kumar)

2. Anganwadi Worker Lalmuni Devi

3. ANM Bibha Kumari

Respondents of FGDs


1 Basi Akhtar Soni Kumari Mina Devi

2 Md Navi Ulla Anjali Kumari Goniya Devi

3 Fiyaz Ahmad Antima Kumari Koyli Devi

4 Sekh Abas Hushn E Tara Koshlay Devi

5 Kariman Ram Nibha Kumari Basmati Devi

6 Raj narayn Shahni Akhilesh Kumar Koshalya Devi

40 A-40



7 Parhlad Parsad Irsad Alam Sabita Devi

8 Siwalak Ram Radhe Shyam Kumar

9 Laxmi Sah

10 Hari shankar Sahni

11 Langar Sah

12 Noor Mohamad

13 Binda Parsad

Middle School: Jhitkahiya


1 Headmaster/Headmistress SHIVJEE PRASAD

SDMC Members

1 Akhilesh Kumar

2 Nitesh Kumar

3 Irsad Alam

4 Radhe Shyaam Kumar

5 Rakesh Kumar

6 Husan-e-Tara

7 Rukhsat Jahan

8 Amita Kumari

9 Nisha Kumari

10 Rani Kumari

11 Soni Kumari

12 Deva Kumari

13 Nisha Kumari

14 Ganesh Kumar

Middle School: Gokhula


1. Headmaster/Headmistress Aabid Hussain

2. School Safety Focal Teacher Savitari Yadav

SDMC Members

1 Sabnam Khatun

2 Nidhi Kumari

3 Tabashum Khatum

4 Jyoti Kumari

5 Brijesh Kumar

6 Ragini Kumari

7 Chanda Kumari

8 Sundarmala Kumari

9 Pushpa Kumari

10 Amit Kumar

11 Mohammad Jabi Ullah

12 Mohamad Murjiv Rahman

41 A-41



13 Ankit Kumar

14 Ranjan Kumar

15 Raja Babu Kumar

16 Ajad Aalam

17 Prakash Kumar

18 Rahul Kumar

19 Ranjan Kumar

KAP Respondents- East Champaran

SNo. Rajkiya Utkramit Madhya

Vidyalya, Gokhula, Banjaria

Gani Mohamad Rajkiya

Madhya Vidyalya, Jatwa

(Urdu), Motihari

Rajkiya Madhya

Vidyalya,Jhitakahiya Semra,

Motihari

1 Rahul Kumar Mohammad Barkat Ullah Surendra Kumar

2 Brijesh Kumar Abu Sharma Divya Kumari

3 Poonam Kumari Ruksana Khatun Nusraj Jahan

4 Karan Kumar Juganu Tara Arun Kumar

5 Rinju Kumari Jiya-ul-haq Anshu Kumari

6 Raja Kumar Sajud Aalam Sudha Kumari

7 Gulnaj BEgham Sufiya Anjum Soni Kumar

8 Rambha Kumari Mohammad Mamum Rashid Pushpa Kumari

9 Veena Kumari Mohammad Amatams Alam Rupesh Kumar

10 Manshika Kumari Mohammad Reyazul Haq Rohit Kumar

11 Farzana Khatun Khushbu Tara Alka Kumari

12 Nemat Jahan Shahbaj Alam Gufrana Khatun

13 Tabassum Khatum Nashima Khatum Nilofar

14 Sriprakash Kumar Pramod Kumar Mamta Kumari

15 Nezam Hussain Mohammad Shahabuddin Aisa Khatun

42 A-42



ANNEX 7: LIST OF DOCUMENTS REVIEWED (As per ToR)

1. CBDRR Capitalization Report 2005-2011

2. Compendium of Human Stories

3. Handout- School safety programme

4. Notes from monitoring mission of SSS

5. Perspective plan for DRR catalysts

6. Results framework

7. School safety for School children

8. School safety pack for District Authorities

9. Short document on school safety

10. Theory of Change – CBDRR

11. TOR-ERG Final

12. UNICEF- KAP study on school safety

13. UNICEF – CBDRR model in Bihar India

14. UNICEF –Leveraging resources for resilience

15. UNICEF- CBDRR Process document

16. UNICEF- Universalia Draft report review template

17. UNICEF- Universalia Inception Report Review Template

Case Studies

1. Assisting Communities in facing disasters

2. Mainstreaming disaster mitigation onto the Development Agenda

3. Addressing Malnutrition and other Vulnerabilities in Disaster Response

4. Training school children to Face disasters

5. Baingra Middle school Madhubani, Bihar

6. Bhagwanpur-2 Middle School, Birpur, Supaul, Bihar

7. Tuamul High School, Ghanshyampur, Darbhanga, Bihar

8. Case Studies of DRR Catalysts

Flyers

1. Capacity Building to capability enhancement

2. Community mobilization and organization for DRR

3. Bottom-up mainstreaming of Disaster Risk

4. Participatory planning for disaster risk reduction

43 A-43



5. Reducing underlying risk- Habitat level

6. Children & community participation in school safety

7. Partners proposal and Agreements – 2011- 2016

Technical Stories

1. Application of Inter-mediation Skills

2. Cluster partnership: impact Investment for Accelerating Disaster preparedness results

3. Bottom-up approach to DRR mainstreaming in Development

4. Dopamized programme Implementation – Kindling spirit of voluntarism

Village & School list and grading

1. List of intervention villages and Schools

2. Self-grading SDMC’s – December 2015

3. Self-grading VDMC’s –December 2015

44 A-44



ANNEX 8: BIBLIOGRAPHY

Authority, N. D. (n.d.). National Disaster Management Authority. Retrieved from Bihar SDMA Office: http://ndma.gov.in/en/bihar-sdma-office

Bank, W. (2012, May). India: Issues and Priorities for Agriculture. Retrieved from http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2012/05/17/india-agriculture-issues-priorities

Bank, W. (n.d.). Indian Agricultural Issues and Priorities . Retrieved from http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2012/05/17/india-agriculture-issues-priorities

Bihar, G. o. (2015). Roadmap for Diasaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030. Retrieved from http://www.disastermgmt.bih.nic.in/Circulars/Draft_Bihar_DRR%20Roadmap.pdf

Bihar, G. o. (n.d.). Bihar State Disaster Management Authority. Retrieved from http://bsdma.org/Home.aspx

Government of Bihar, W. B. (2010). Bihar Kosi Floods (2008) Needs Assessment Report. World Bank. India, K. C. (2013). Knowledge, Attitude and Practice on School Safety Programme. Retrieved from

https://www.humanitarianresponse.info/system/files/documents/files/kap_in_bihar_practice.pdf

Nations, U. (2015). Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction. Retrieved from http://www.preventionweb.net/files/43291_sendaiframeworkfordrren.pdf

Nations, U. (n.d.). UNEG Ethical Guidelines for Evaluations. Retrieved from www.uneval.org/document/download/548

Nations, U. (n.d.). UNEG Standards for Evaluation in the UN System . Retrieved from www.unevaluation.org/document/download/2601

Nations, U. (n.d.). UNEG: Norms for Evaluation in the UN System. Retrieved from www.unevaluation.org/document/download/2601

Office, U. B. (n.d.). Perspective plans for DRR Catalysts 2015. UNICEF. Office, U. I. (2013, January). UNICEF India Country Office Guidelines on Piloting and Scaling Up of

Innovations and Good Practices. UNICEF. Research, U. O. (n.d.). Compendium of Ethical Research Involving Children. Retrieved from

Compendium of Ethical Research Involving Children UNICEF. (2016, April). Terms of Reference - Evaluation of CBDRR-SSP . UNICEF. Unisdr. (2005). Hyogo Framework for Action. Retrieved from

https://www.unisdr.org/2005/wcdr/intergover/official-doc/L-docs/Hyogo-framework-for-action-english.pdf