strategy for resilient development practice - world vision institut

Strategy for Resilient Development Practice

FY11 – FY13 A joint initiative by World Vision Global Centre Teams for Disaster Risk Reduction & Community Resilience and Natural Environment & Climate Issues

Richard Rumsey – Director, DRR & CRChristopher Shore – Director, NE & CI November 2010

Table of Contents

1. Executive Summary

2. Introduction

3. Purpose and Scope of Strategy

4. Landscape Analysis

5. Performance Review

6. SWOR, Context Review Summary & Rationale

7. Call and Aspiration

8. Goal Statement

9. Preferred Futures and Strategic Objectives

a. Preferred Future 1 – The Programming Context b. Preferred Future 2 – The WV Organisational Context c. Preferred Future 3 - The External Policy & Market Context

10. Strategy Implementation a. Key operational and organisational approaches b. Operating Model (Community of Practice) c. Systems Requirements d. Staffing Requirements e. Management Requirements f. Monitoring framework and process

11. Annexes

a. Annex A – Lavell A, (2010), World Vision, Regional Community Resilience Project: Lessons Learned Survey

b. Annex B – Community Resilience Strategic Objectives Performance Review c. Annex C – Detailed Landscape Review

of 24 World Vision International Strategy for Resilient Development Practice

1. Executive Summary

Innovation is by definition risky. It looks ahead or beyond and proposes a new way of working or thinking. Innovation in strategy is doubly risky, as it not only calls for new ways of working and thinking, but often for different paradigms required to accomplish significant goals. In an effort to concentrate and multiply resources, reduce conceptual complexity for our staff, and increase the pace of change which improves child well-being, a combined and simplified strategy is being proposed. This innovative strategy for Resilient Development Practice is a seamless approach which allows both the Disaster Risk Reduction and Community Resilience (DRR/CR) programming and communities, as well as the Climate Change Adaptation programming and community to advance our ministry from a common understanding and common strategic platform. The DRR/CR and Climate Change groups are already working closely together, and share a common passion for increasing World Vision’s focus on resilience as a key outcome of our work and ministry, and on systematically addressing the drivers of risk and vulnerability. Central to World Vision’s ministry framework is the objective of building and sustaining the resilience of children, families, communities, and nations. Resilience allows these people and groups to manage and cope with shocks and forces which otherwise negatively impact them, often leading to reversals in human development and negative impacts on child well-being. Disaster risk reduction (DRR) seeks to systematically improve well-being by identifying and managing hazards and vulnerabilities while systematically increasing capacity. This is the process of building resilience. The new or newly understood phenomenon of climate change is forcing World Vision and the entire relief and development “industry” to rethink risk and vulnerability, as major parts of the external context for development and well-being that we have relied upon as being stable – such as the weather to be expected around planting season or the level of the sea – are now dynamic and changing quickly. The impacts of climate change create an unprecedented era of risk that requires immediate attention to resilience building if we intend to foster the sustainable well-being of children and their communities. At the same time, World Vision’s embrace of disaster risk reduction and community resilience has deepened and provides us with a conceptual framework for not only proactively addressing risks and hazards, but also the necessity of actively building resilience. Neither resilience building nor risk reduction, nor climate change response are sectoral interventions. All of these are strategic and cross-cutting in nature, and inform all of WV’s programming work across all lines of Ministry, at all levels (community, national, regional and global) and in most sectors. This becomes increasingly important as climate change increases risk and vulnerability throughout the globe. WV already undertakes or supports a great number of programmes/projects which build Community Resilience, from advocacy and peace-building to economic development, to water and sanitation to life skills to agriculture. The critical contribution that the Resilient Development Practice Strategy makes is that it holds the agency accountable to effect quality objectives for ensuring that our work has a lasting, transforming, impact on the well-being of the children and communities with whom we work. This accountability is necessary for two significant reasons:


• It is relatively easy to implement humanitarian and development work without intentional regard for whether a community is developing the necessary resilience over time to adapt to and overcome vulnerabilities, shocks, hazards and risk on its own, and;

• It is also easy to neglect the more difficult work of helping build the community’s capacity and develop the enabling environment that will allow the community to flourish and experience sustained well-being and fullness of life, no matter what shock may come.

At its heart, the strategy is simple: Reduce risk and vulnerability and build resilience. Do this programmatically, unlock the WV organisational capacity to support this, and build the needed external relations, policy frameworks and resource streams. This innovative strategy is focused on the achievement of child well-being outcomes, addressing the underlying drivers of risk and vulnerability which undermine the sustainability of development gains. The goal the strategy seeks to achieve is:

• Contributing to the sustained well-being of children by addressing the drivers of risk and vulnerability and systematically building resilience in a changing climate.

The preferred futures include:

1. The programming context - Community, national, regional and global level programming will be strengthened though approaches and adaptive strategies that effectively reduce disaster risk and the impacts of climate change, and build resilient communities such that development gains are retained and grown sustainably for future generations.

2. The WV organisational context - Adaptive organisational capacities and systems are operationalised to provide professional and strategic development practice that is responsive to the continually changing external context.

3. The external policy and market context - Strategic partnerships are in place that enhance the resiliency of development practice globally, influence and shape macro policies that protect people so that they are not at risk and mobilise innovative resource streams to shape an effective and enabling environment for sustainability of development gains.

There are three primary systems requirements for the effective implementation of this strategy and are as follows: i. A community level vulnerability monitoring system that enables effective collation and

dissemination of vulnerability data in order to influence programming strategies. This would potentially be based on GIS technology;

ii. A process and system for dynamic context monitoring at the macro level (National) that monitors, collates, analyses, summarises and disseminates "accessible and usable" information for effective senior management decision making at NO level for appropriate risk mitigation actions;

iii. Integrated macro risk assessment systems that becomes an integral part of the Regional & National Office landscape assessment with clear linkages to the development of appropriate NO strategies and adaptive organisational practices.


In order to implement this strategy a range of staff functions will be necessary. The aim is for the respective Communities of Practice and existing management functions around the organisation to provide staffing for this strategy. However, a number of key Global Centre and Regional functions / capacities will be vital to ensure coordination, external representation and effective implementation of this strategy. Overall management of the strategy will be the responsibility of the respective Global Centre work teams for DRR/CR and NE&CI. The GC work teams will be supported and guided by the respective CoP Executive and advisory teams formed from both internal and external stakeholders. Operational ownership, management and implementation of the strategy will inevitably require the involvement of managers and practitioners at all levels of the organisation. The GC work teams effectively act as a catalyst and coordinator for strategy implementation whilst the Communities of Practice and formal management structures of the organisation largely own the implementation. The Resilient Development Practice Strategy has multiple stakeholders and the potential to affect the work of numerous sectors and all lines of ministry; it therefore requires a Partnership-wide process to effectively monitor its implementation and impact at all levels, and to sufficiently analyse and apply the learning from this monitoring. Specific monitoring indicators will be created in collaboration with stakeholders across the partnership during the months immediately following the publication of this strategy document.


2. Introduction

Resilient Development Practice is arguably the best way of achieving sustained child well-being. Reducing risk and vulnerability, adapting appropriately to the impacts of climate change, avoiding and reducing disasters, and building resilience is therefore not an add-on that needs to be mainstreamed into development practice. Rather, it is in fact the very essence of sustainable, development itself.

At the heart of this strategy is a strong focus on firstly protecting development gains from being eroded and secondly on taking advantage of the multiple development opportunities that arise during times of change and crisis. In addition, the strategy focuses on promoting resilience building measures both within our development practice as well as within our organisation. In recognition of the continually changing and volatile external context this strategy attempts to address on the one hand the intrinsic tensions that exist between the need for heightened mechanisms of impact measurement linked to donor and public accountability and the increasing bureaucratic burden this places on development practitioners; and on the other hand, the drive for greater degree of flexibility to demonstrate impact and resilience in increasingly vulnerable communities thus requiring far more adaptive organizational capacities and innovative development practices. Much has been discussed about the level of synergy between approaches to Disaster Risk Reduction and those of Climate Change Adaptation/Mitigation. It is clear that whilst Disaster Risk Reduction encompasses a much broader portfolio of risk scenarios than those that are purely climate enhanced, there is significant overlap both conceptually and practically in the approaches and tools required to both understand and reduce the impact of broader risk scenarios that are brought on by man made and natural hazards as well as those that are Climate Change induced risk factors. Climate change and its effects are relatively new phenomena which, similar to other hazards also threaten to undermine development by eroding and degrading the physical and economic drivers of child well-being and exacerbating existing vulnerabilities. Using the language of DRR and CR, the negative effects of climate change are creating new hazards or are increasing existing hazards (such as rising sea levels, more intense storms, changing precipitation patterns) and which in turn create new vulnerabilities. Climate change programming seeks to strengthen programming by enabling it to withstand the predicted effects of climate change through an approach that includes end-to-end adaptation, mitigation and advocacy. Neither resilience building nor risk reduction are sectoral interventions. Both are strategic and cross-cutting in nature, and both inform all of WV’s programming work across all lines of Ministry, at all levels (community, national, regional and global) and in most sectors. This becomes increasingly important as climate change increases risk and vulnerability throughout the globe. Therefore, in an effort to concentrate and multiply resources, reduce conceptual complexity for our staff, and increase the pace of change which improves child well-being, World Vision’s Disaster Risk Reduction and Community Resilience (DRR/CR) Director and Natural Environment and Climate Issues Director are proposing the use of a combined and simplified strategy. Support Offices including WVA have also played key roles through, strategic guidance, funding and the provision of technical support for DRR/CR and climate change initiatives in WV.


3. Purpose and Scope of Strategy

The purpose of this strategy is to provide a set of Preferred Futures and Strategic Objectives for WVI for the next three years (FY11 – FY13) in particular for what could be called “whole organizational mainstreaming of resilient development practice”. This strategy does not outline implementation activities for all areas of ministry although it does make reference to how it would influence most areas of relief and development practice and over time would anticipate broadening its impact to encompass all humanitarian and development interventions. Currently it does not encompass the whole of Natural Environment and Climate Issues. It does not presently link to all relevant sectors and other cross cutting themes, though that is an end goal of those who have come together to propose this prototype model. What the Resilient Development Practice Strategy does do is provide a framework for developing capacity, knowledge and interventions to enhance resilience within communities and families, including reducing disaster risk, but also addressing large and small, immediate and long- term shocks, and the erosion of needed capitals1 to sustain well-being. This strategy focuses explicitly on the identification, assessment and successful adaptation of good models of practice, organisational capacities which create and maintain an enabling environment, and new and innovative strategies for resourcing and engaging externally in the policy area. The Resilient Development Practice Strategy will be supported and modelled by the DRR&CR and NE&CI work teams and communities of practice, including an explicit emphasis on viewing all complementary programming and initiatives for both communities of practice through the resilience building lens. The Natural Environment Strategy process will be linked to this approach, and both CoPs are prepared to provide technical support for Partnership entities desiring to link their own strategies and practice to a resilience building model. As such, the strategy is framed and organised as follows:

• Focused on the achievement of child well-being outcomes • Addressing the underlying drivers of risk and vulnerability which undermine the

sustainability of development gains. • Framed and Organised around three “operational contexts”:

a. The Programming Context – i.e. enhanced programme quality and effectiveness

that promotes resilient development practice.

b. The WV Organisational Context – i.e. enhanced organisational capacities (skills, systems, strategies, structures, etc) required to support and strengthen resilient development practice.

c. The External Policy and Market Context – i.e. strategic partnerships and coalitions to influence policies and mobilise resources

• Operationalised through Communities of Practice and key National and Regional programmes The way the strategy is framed also identifies the “points of integration”2

1 Classically defined as natural, physical, financial, social, and human. At times, World Vision has expanded this to include spiritual and technological capital as well. 2 Section 10 b. Operational integration of the strategy implementation plan is demonstrated in this section


with other existing GC, RO, NO and SO strategies and enables / promotes joint ownership and operationalising at all these different levels through the existing management structures as well as through individuals and groups associated with the Communities of Practice.

Diagram 1 below gives an overview of the strategy framework and how the three operational contexts provide a primary focus for the Preferred Futures (Desired Outcomes)Later on in this document it will become clear how each of these Preferred Futures and Strategic Objectives is implemented in collaboration with other WV Partnership entities. Diagram 1 - Resilient Development Practice Strategy Framework

External Market /Policy Context

WV InstitutionalContext

ProgrammeContext

Hazards

Vulnerabil

ity

Capacitie

s

WV Operational Contexts

Preferred Futures

Preferred Future 1 Community, national, regional and global level programming will be strengthened though approaches and adaptive strategies that effectively reduce disaster risk and the impacts of climate change, and build resilience communities such that development gains are retained and grown sustainably for future generations.

Preferred Future 2Adaptive organisational capacities and systems are operationalised to provide professional and strategic development practice that is responsive to the continually changing external context.

Preferred Future 3 Strategic partnerships are in place that enhance the resiliency of development practice globally, influence and shape macro policies that protect people so that they are not at risk and mobilise innovative resource streams to shape an effective and enabling environment for sustainability of development gains.

Strategic Objectives

1. A2. B3. C4. D5. etc

Focus / Goal (linked to CWBOs)

Sustained Child

Wellbeing through the

reduction of

underlying risk factors

1. A2. B3. C4. D5. etc

1. A2. B3. C4. D5. etc


4. Landscape Analysis3 The global context is changing in such a way that future scenarios of risk and vulnerability are less likely to follow standard patterns based on past experience. Current Climate science suggests very clearly that the future will be characterised by unpredictability of climatic extremes leading to increased natural disasters, significant and varied impacts on global economics, environmental degradation, agricultural practices and food production / pricing, water availability and water resource management, people movement and conflict / security etc.

In so many cases, this increased vulnerability is a direct result of skewed or inappropriate development practices over the decades. Climate Change is just the latest resultant manifestation of such socially and environmentally exploitative development practices which poses more than ever before, a major and disproportionate threat to the world’s poorest communities. The resulting erosion of development gains presented by this situation is causing many governments and international organisations to seriously rethink their strategies for achieving the Millennium Development Goals placing far greater emphasis now on adaptation risk reduction strategies and resources.

5. Performance Review Over the past four years, WV has placed emphasis on understanding Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) and Community Resilience (CR) from a conceptual and policy analysis perspective at the Global Centre level where significant research and analysis has taken place. It has developed a cohesive policy stance informing strategic directions and built a number of global partnerships positioning it as a leader in this field. Over this time an active community of practice (CoP) was built providing a forum for learning sharing and capacity building amongst practitioners across regions and levels within the organization. In addition to this, CR/DRR functions have been established in three of the four regions where innovative pilot programmes have been developed and implemented with National Offices in LACR, AR and APR funded by WV Australia. Numerous other CR/DRR projects have and continue to be implemented through bilateral funding from Support Offices both within ADPs and as stand-alone initiatives in vulnerable communities. In various cases across WV’s development interventions, good risk reduction practice is already taking place although it is frequently not referred to as DRR but just good development practice that is appropriate to the risk context in which it operates. Some examples of this would be the building of appropriately designed schools in Bangladesh that double up as cyclone shelters in times of crisis, or mangrove planting in coastal regions of the Philippines designed to provide livelihood opportunities for fishing communities as well as providing coastal protection in the event of typhoons. Other less obvious examples may be through the provision of credit, savings, and insurance facilities to small scale farmers in regions of Africa that provide financial safety

3 For a full detailed External Landscape Analysis refer to Annex C


nets in the event of crop failure etc. All such cases can be considered as reducing vulnerability and promoting resilience but are currently not labelled as such.

Since May 2009, the function of CR/DRR has been given further prominence across World Vision through the appointment of a CR/DRR Director’s position with the responsibility to provide strategic leadership for the integration of good DRR practice into WV globally. This function relates strategically with the three main Ministry Pillars (HEA, TD and Advocacy & Justice for Children) and is of equal relevance to our research and advocacy engagements externally as it is to our long term development practice and disaster management work at a community level. As such, CR/DRR should not just to be considered as another cross cutting theme but as a strategic function without which good sustainable development outcomes are unlikely to occur. Over the same four years, WV’s Climate Change Response Initiative has launched the exploration of the risks, opportunities, threats, and challenges which the effects of climate change do and will present to WV’s programming and partner communities. As the predicted effects of climate change will undermine key physical drivers of Child Well-Being, climate change represents a significant shift in WV’s strategic external context. Understanding the effects of human activity, including WV’s own activity on the drivers of climate change, as well as the innovative partnering opportunities available to further advance climate-focused action has predominated WV’s mitigation approaches. At the same time, many of the best ways to adapt to climate change are often considered just good development practice, such as preserving or restoring forests which improve the resilience of a watershed, or building soil fertility through conservation agriculture. However, the optimal framework for understanding and planning for the expected effects of climate change is the CR/DRR framework. These two groups are already working closely together, and share a common passion for increasing World Vision’s focus on resilience as a key outcome of our work and ministry, and on systematically addressing the drivers of risk and vulnerability. Central to World Vision’s ministry framework is the objective of building and sustaining the resilience of children, families, communities, and nations. Resilience allows these people and groups to manage and cope with shocks and forces which otherwise negatively impact them, often leading to reversals in human development and negative impacts on child well-being. Disaster risk reduction (DRR) seeks to systematically improve well-being by identifying and managing hazards and vulnerabilities while systematically increasing capacity. This is the process of building resilience. A recent review of the WV Australia-funded Regional Community Resilience Programme studied the extent to which this programme had developed systems and tools for assessing risk and vulnerability at a community level as part of the ADP assessment and design processes. In addition, the review also looked at the degree to which DRR practice had been institutionalized or mainstreamed into WV’s standard practices at various levels of the organization. The review found that whilst considerable “organic development” had taken place both in terms of good programming practices, learning and organizational awareness, WV was still a long way from having a well developed and implemented strategy for managing risk and reducing vulnerability as a matter of standard practice4

4 Annex A: Lavell A, (2010), World Vision, Regional Community Resilience Project: Lessons Learned Survey


As part of the process for developing this strategy, members of the Community Resilience Community of Practice carried out a survey on the extent to which previous Community Resilience strategic objectives had been owned and implemented across the organisation. A summary of this review can be found in Annex B of this document.

6. SWOR , Context Review Summary & Rationale

Strengths (Internal) • Conceptual and practical focus on development outcomes that enhance sustained child

well-being. • A primary funding source (child sponsorship) that enables flexible and adaptable

approaches to long term development programming. • Two vibrant and active Communities of Practice across the organization at various

levels with a desire and capacity to enhance community resilience. • Considerable documented learnings from practice on DRR assessment tools and project

models. • Good agreement that climate change represents a significant change in the external

strategic context, and that it needs to be addressed. Weaknesses (Internal)

• Financially risk averse culture & increased need for financial accountability. • A widely held perception that Risk Reduction is still an “HEA function”, and not an

imperative generally applied in our development practice. • Increased processes and systems for outcome/impact measurement potentially leading

to micromanagement, limited flexibility and time consuming bureaucracy. • A primary and dominant funding mechanism and development model that assumes a

static world where incremental development takes place. • Too many competing development priorities. • Limited opportunity for cross-sectoral and cross-ministry understanding, collaborative

strategy and programming, and interaction. • Limited investment in the analysis and subsequent application of objective, dynamic

context analysis. (We identify strategic issues but often don’t take the next step of taking appropriate action.)

• The potential of becoming blinded by our own development rhetoric without clearly identifying the added value and capacity offered by WV.

• Overly conceptual and complicated programming guidance. • Absence of an overarching “theory of change” causes unnecessary complexity and

confusion when different development approaches are proposed. Opportunities (External)

• Greater focus from within the commercial sector to provide services (financial and otherwise) to vulnerable communities that reduce underlying risk factors.

• Considerable international focus and potential public and private resourcing for development partnerships and initiatives that address climate related risk factors.

• Providing leadership in the development and humanitarian sector on the application of innovative resilient development practice.


• UN, NGOs and international development sector in general is now placing more emphasis on reducing risks to disaster and the impacts of climate change.

• Large scale disasters are beginning to prompt questions of why the humanitarian and development community has not been addressing disaster risks from the media and public.

• Addressing the issue of environmental degradation could have a profound impact on the drivers of poverty and risk and as such provide considerable impact on the long term well-being of children5.

• Increased processes and systems for outcome/impact measurement. • Providing leadership in increasing the appropriateness and sustainability of development

and humanitarian investments. Risks (External)

• Rapidly changing weather patterns. • Consistent increase in disasters. • Rapid processes of urbanisation and social migration. • Massive environmental degradation and its direct and indirect effects on human well-

being. • Rapid change in humanitarian and development service providers. • Rapidly changing geo-political dynamics and centres of global power • Volatile and unstable global economic system and markets (food, fuel, financial sector)

and rapid technological change. • Consistent erosion of livelihoods and natural resource base in many developing

countries. • Impacts on social, human and spiritual capitals due to degradation of natural and financial

resources (resource based conflict, children denied education, loss of health due to malnutrition, etc…).

• Programming that is misaligned with the context and expected futures does harm to future well-being.

A recent report6 into the way humanitarian and development organizations need to position themselves for the future raises some challenging and pertinent questions for WV’s own organizational adaptability in light of these rapidly changing external factors and internal dynamics, and proposes that: “ ...Navigating these dynamics will require leadership that is comfortable with ambiguity and risk, which is obsessive about evidence and data, but is not constrained by it. We will need leadership that encourages dissent and experimentation, in organisations that are flatter, more dominated by the twin functions of ground delivery and global analysis, and less dragged down by the compliance process of financial obligations and public opinion.” Ultimately, this strategy has to live in the real world recognizing the intrinsic tensions that are going to exist between the need for heightened mechanisms for donor and public accountability and the drive for greater impact in vulnerable communities.

5 wikis.uit.tufts.edu/confluence/display/FIC/Climate+Change+and+its+Humanitarian+Impacts 6 Feinstein International Centre, Tufts University 2010: Humanitarian Horizons: A Practitioners’ Guide to the Future, p.3


7. Call and Aspiration

World Vision’s commitment to community resilience and successful adaptation to climate change is based on the reality that resilient communities are able to sustain the development gains which they have achieved, and can therefore protect, care for and nurture their children not just today, but also in the years to come. Building and/or sustaining family and child well-being, and the well-being of the most vulnerable, requires that they have the power to reduce the underlying risk factors that threaten their well-being today and in the future. Whether these risks are large or small, local or on a global scale, if they are what stands between an individual family and a prosperous future, it is central to World Vision’s Mission to ensure that they are addressed in any programming we undertake. Community resilience, including appropriate and sustainable adaptation to the changes brought about as a result of climate change, must now become an integral part of program strategies in regions and at the country level as well as in the specific areas we work, ensuring visible results at the community level through our integrated ministry strategy. Each member of the WV Partnership is dedicated to seeing children, and the most vulnerable people, living in “security and confidence” – true resilience – and experiencing “Jesus’ promise of life in all its fullness… protected, cared for… growing strong in communities free of need… where families are valued, creation preserved, and the most vulnerable live in security and confidence.” Contributing to the resilience of communities, in the face of large and small hazards and shocks, is the means to realize this aspiration. What is our role in ensuring child well-being? WV already undertakes or supports a great number of programmes/projects which build Community Resilience, from advocacy and peace-building to economic development, to water and sanitation to life skills to agriculture. The critical contribution that the Resilient Development Practice Strategy makes is that it holds the agency accountable to affect quality objectives for ensuring that our work has a lasting, transforming, impact on the well-being of the children and communities with whom we work. This accountability is necessary for two significant reasons:

• It is relatively easy to implement humanitarian and development work without intentional regard for whether a community is developing the necessary resilience over time to adapt to and overcome vulnerabilities, shocks, hazards and risk on its own, and;

• It is also easy to neglect the more difficult work of helping build the community’s capacity and develop the enabling environment that will allow the community to flourish and experience sustained well-being and fullness of life, no matter what shock may come.

The impacts of climate change create an unprecedented era of risk that requires immediate attention to resilience building if we intend to foster the sustainable well-being of children and their communities. The following Goal, Preferred Futures and Strategic Objectives attempt to address some of these internal and external dynamics through the promotion of adaptive organizational practices and capacities, external partnerships and innovative development practice that accommodates change and adapts to the ambiguity of ongoing volatile future risk scenarios.


8. Goal Statement

Contributing to the sustained well-being of children by addressing the drivers of risk and vulnerability in a changing climate

9. Preferred Futures & Strategic Objectives

a. Preferred Future 1 – The Programming Context

Community, national, regional and global level programming will be strengthened though approaches and adaptive strategies that effectively reduce disaster risk and the impacts of climate change, and build resilient communities such that development gains are retained and grown sustainably for future generations.

Strategic Objectives (PF1) 1.1 Strengthened and standardised community level context and programme risk

assessment developed and incorporated into IPM processes 1.2 Project models and tools developed for resilience building development interventions

and incorporated into WV policy, systems and practices including IPM Guidance for Integrated Programming.

1.3 Targeted initiatives in place to support and enhance local government and Civil Society

Organisations capacities in collaborative programming targeted to increase resilience and reduce risk in development and humanitarian practice.

1.4 DRR/climate change (including livelihoods and resilience) standards and key questions

developed for and integrated into all Sector project models. 1.5 Development and application of minimum child resilience standards and indicators. 1.6 Standardised Community level disaster preparedness and resilience building / risk

reduction action planning process developed and in operation. 1.7 New programming practices address the dynamics of the external context and lead to

changes in WV’s approach to development programming. 1.8 Enhanced programming practices for strengthening resilience during post-disaster

recovery and reconstruction phase. 1.9 Community vulnerability monitoring mechanisms developed and applied that measure

ongoing effectiveness and appropriateness of development interventions


b. Preferred Future 2 – The WV Organisational Context Adaptive organisational capacities and systems are operationalised to provide professional and strategic development practice that is responsive to the continually changing external context.

Strategic Objectives (PF2)

2.1 Strengthened action learning mechanisms, empirical research, analysis, documentation

and dissemination of emerging best community level practices in resilience building, DRR and climate change.

2.2 Mobilised and active Communities of Practice across the organization encourage

innovation, share learning and promote CR/DRR and climate change best practice. 2.3 Establish a dynamic context monitoring and disaster risk information management

systems at Community, National and Regional levels to better understand, and mitigate growing vulnerabilities and pending crises.

2.4 Established risk identification and trends mapping to underpin Regional, National and

Community level strategies for reducing disaster risk, adapting appropriately to impacts of climate change and promoting Community Resilience.

2.5 Strengthened skills and competencies at all levels in building resilience, DRR and climate

change adaptation. 2.6 Creation and application of accountability standards and mechanisms for the

incorporation of resilience building measures. 2.7 Develop in partnership with relevant departments, innovative resource allocation

mechanisms for operational budgets at GC, Regional and National levels to enable appropriate DRR / CC capacities at all levels.

2.8 Expand and improved c ore funding allocation mechanism to support adequate and

appropriate analysis, and incorporation of risk reduction, resilience building and adaptation into all development programming.

2.9 Liaise directly with other WV departments where there is a point of Strategic

Integration between Strategy for Resilient Development Practice and other WV strategies7

7 See Section 10 b. Diagram 2 on Points of Strategic and Operational Integration


c. Preferred Future 3 – The External Policy & Market Context Strategic partnerships are in place that enhance the resiliency of development practice globally, influence and shape macro policies that protect people so that they are not at risk and mobilise innovative resource streams to shape an effective and enabling environment for sustainability of development gains.

Strategic Objectives (PF3) 3.1 Effective education, communications, marketing and lobbying to cultivate donor

support and new resource streams for reducing risk, and supporting resilient development practice, particularly appropriate adaptation to Climate Change.

3.2 Building innovative commercial partnerships to enhance services and funding streams

to the vulnerable poor. 3.3 Targeted and robust external engagement and advocacy with governments and key

international institutions to link with and influence DRR and climate change policy and practice including policy harmonization

3.4 Collaborative and productive partnerships in place with external organizations8 and

key coalitions that enhance resilience focused development practice across the humanitarian and development industry.

3.5 Address underlying causes of vulnerability by highlighting areas of National and

Global governance that directly affect community resilience. 3.6 Focus on end to end advocacy initiatives that aim to monitor, document and

influence the implementation of global policy agreements at a community level (e.g. VFL)

3.7 Advocating for and with children, strengthening their participation in the DRR

process and promoting their role as agents of change. 3.8 Partnerships in place with key academic institutions to strengthen our research and

evidence gathering capacity 3.9 Approaches for engaging the general public on Climate and Risk issues and how they

impact sustainable Child Well Being.

8 UN, Bilateral and multilateral donors, Research Institutions and Think Tanks, INGOs, Commercial Companies, etc.


10. Strategy Implementation

a. Key operational and organizational approaches

Any global Ministry function faces the challenge of trying to develop and apply a common strategic approach / conceptual model with a multitude of differing contexts. By any standards this is a challenging task, perhaps in this case made even more challenging by creating a common strategy for our work. The mechanism by which a global strategy is developed, owned and implemented is therefore a critical strategic issue in itself and requires some operational parameters and organisational principles and approaches to ensure effective socialisation and implementation / ownership of DRR and climate change practice. They are summarised as follows:

Operational Parameters

• Global strategy development All of which require ongoing research and learning etc

• Standards and best practice guidance

• Project models development and promotion

• Technical resources development and dissemination

• Lead and develop capacities of CoPs

• High level quality assurance / accountability

• External relations

• Supporting resource acquisition

Organisational Approaches

• Mobilise and build on existing DRR and climate change functional and technical capacity around the organization globally.

• Link with external stakeholders, (e.g. academia, operational partners) to ensure innovative and qualitative improvements of DRR/ CC functions at all WV-levels

• Learning through doing recognizing that mistakes will be made in the process.

• Strengthen operational management and capacity development responsibilities with Regional DRR and Climate Change functions.

• Develop strong evidence based practice through emphasising empirical research, analysis and feedback into better practice through Community of Practice.

• Develop the Community of Practice as the primary organisational model for shared innovation and learning as well as ownership and strategic integration.

• Focus is on building capacity of NOs and ROs who consider CR/DRR as a strategic function of good development practice.

• Focus on strategic integration with senior leadership of major Lines of Ministry (TD, A&JC, HEA) and sectoral experts.


• Community-based programming is linked and relevant to national, regional and global agendas and contexts.

• Take an appreciative enquiry approach to strategy implementation where good practice is identified, shared, built upon and replicated.

b. Operating Model (Community of Practice)

Each Preferred Future and Strategic Objective can in fact be owned and implemented across all structural levels of WV such that consistency of application and coordination on common objectives can occur. Some objectives are of course more closely associated with programme design and implementation and would therefore be more closely driven and owned at a National Office level. Others however require a collective approach and mechanisms to implementation and this is where the Community of Practice groups can be formed to own and drive a certain section of strategy Diagram 2 - In order to carry out integrated operations with other teams and offices it is necessary to firstly identify the main “points of integration” or “major areas of interface” between this strategy and the plans / functions of other teams, departments, offices, initiatives and strategies around the organisation. Diagram 2. below outlines these points of interface. Diagram 3 – Demonstrates a specific example of how joined up strategy implementation would work in practice. Points of integration with other WV strategies outlined in Diagram 2 determine Operating Model and working group membership for joint implementation of a plan. The logical flow is as follows:

1. The Preferred Future outlines the end state or desired outcome being pursued 2. A specific Strategic Objective is identified that contributes to the achievement of the

Preferred Future 3. A discussion is held around the points if integration with other WV structures,

strategies, offices and initiatives and a working group formed of relevant stakeholders or other authorised management structure is identified and a TOR developed.

4. A joint action / operational plan is developed and implemented with clarity on cost allocation and budget implications


Diagram 2 – Outlines major points of integration between RDP strategy and other WV

strategies and initiatives


Preferred Future 2: The WV

Organisation Context

Preferred Future 3:

The External Policy & Market Context

Preferred Future 1: The

Programme Context

Regional CRP /

National DRR Plans

TD Strategy

Sector/ Theme Strategies &

Project Models

Global Marketing Strategy

HEA Strategic Intent

IPE Plans, Guidance for Integrated Programming

A&JC Strategy

Global Operations Regional budgeting /strategy process

plus RWGs

Operational Audit / Global Accountability

Strategy

Integrated Capacity Building Initiative

HR & Capacity Building

plans at NO and RO

Global Capitals Strategy SO Marketing &

external engagement strategiesNO, RO & SO

Advocacy Plans

GTRN Competency Standards

Collaboration & Partnering

Strategic Intent

Community of Practice

Operational Plans / Groups

Sustained Wellbeing of Children Ministry Framework Approach

… Assuring resilient & secure households and communities

ECB and other external joint initiatives

Strategy for Resilient

Development Practice

GOSM/ ROSM /NOSM strategy processes

Points of integration with WV strategies with Ext Context components

Points of integration with WV strategies with Programme

Context components

Points of integration with WV strategies with WV Org

Context components

WV strategies with more than one point of integration with

RDP Strategy

Diagram 3 – Example of strategy implementation and joint operational planning

Preferred Future 2: The WV

Organisation Context

Preferred Future 3:

The External Policy & Market Context

Preferred Future 1: The

Programme Context

Strategic Objective 1.2 Project models and tools developed for resilience building development interventions and policy, systems and practices including IPM Guidance for Integrated Programming

Working Group TOR

Sector

HEA

NO / RO

Joint Operating

Plan1. .……..2. ………3. ………

SO

IPM

1. Preferred Future

or Desired Outcome

2. Strategic Objective

3. Operating Model

4. Plans of Action

Preferred Future 1 The Programming Context Community, national, regional and global level programming will be strengthened though approaches and adaptive strategies that effectively reduce disaster risk and the impacts of climate change, and build resilience communities such that development gains are retained and grown sustainably for future generations.



Diagram 4 – Gives an example of how both existing management structures and groups within the Community of Practice might collectively take forward one or more particular strategic objectives what a joint operational plan might look like Preferred Futures and Strategic Objectives

Global Centre Regional Office

National Offices

Support Offices

CoP Groups

Preferred Future 1 – The Programming Context Community, national, regional and global level programming will be strengthened though approaches and adaptive strategies that effectively reduce disaster risk and the impacts of climate change, and build resilience such that development gains are retained and grown sustainably for future generations.

Championed by GC DRR and CC Teams and embedded in LOM strategies

Built into Regional Strategy and capacity development plans

Piloted and Implemented in development practice through field programmes and embedded NO strategies

Resourced and supported with technical guidance and embedded into SO strategies

Coordinated by CoP Executive

Strategic Objectives

1.2 Project models and tools developed for resilience building development interventions and policy, systems and practices including IPM Guidance for Integrated Programming .

Participation in working group Integration of DRR tools and standards into IPM processes and guidance for programming

Participation in working group Pilot IPM processes incorporating DRR tools in development programmes

Participation in working group Resource and develop programmes that test and incorporate DRR tools into ADP design

Working group formed by DRR CC management and Exec Committee to combine best risk reduction programming practice to feed into IPM system globally

c. Systems Requirements There are three primary systems requirements for the effective implementation of this strategy and are as follows: iv. A community level vulnerability monitoring system that enables effective

collation and dissemination of vulnerability data in order to influence programming strategies. This would potentially be based on GIS technology.

v. A process and system for dynamic context monitoring at the macro level (National) that monitors, collates, analyses, summarises and disseminates "accessible and usable" information for effective senior management decision making at NO level for appropriate risk mitigation actions.

vi. Integrated macro risk assessment systems that becomes an integral part of the Regional & National Office landscape assessment with clear linkages to the development of appropriate NO strategies and adaptive organisational practices

d. Staffing Requirements In order to implement this strategy a range of staff functions will be necessary. As per the key operational and organisational approaches outlined in Section 10 a. the aim is for the respective Communities of Practice and existing management functions around the organisation to provide staffing for this strategy. However, a number of key Global Centre and Regional functions / capacities will be vital to ensure coordination, external representation and effective implementation of this strategy. The following functions/capacities are recommended with those that represent gaps in current capacity being highlighted in orange:

Global Centre:

1. Strategic management and executive direction 2. Information management / dissemination and CoP Coordination 3. Research and analysis functions 4. Capacity Building, people and systems development 5. Programme and project concept writers for resource acquisition 6. Monitoring and evaluation 7. External Relations and Global Advocacy coordination

Regional Office:

1. Context assessment, monitoring and analysis units 2. Technical innovation unit looking into the test and development of new project

approaches 3. Mainstreaming of global initiatives 4. Research and documentation function


5. Resilience capacity building functions 6. Programme and project concept writers for resource acquisition. 7. Monitoring & Evaluation 8. External Relations and regional partnering / collaboration

e. Management Requirements Overall management of the strategy will be the responsibility of the respective Global Centre work teams for DRR/CR and NE & CI. The GC work teams will be supported and guided by the respective CoP Executive and advisory teams formed from both internal and external stakeholders. Operational ownership, management and implementation of the strategy will inevitably require the involvement of managers and practitioners at all levels of the organisation. The GC work teams effectively act as a catalyst and coordinator for strategy implementation whilst the Communities of Practice and formal management structures of the organisation largely own the implementation.

f. Monitoring framework and process

The Resilient Development Practise Strategy has multiple stakeholders and the potential to affect the work of numerous sectors and all lines of ministry; it therefore requires a Partnership wide process to effectively monitor its implementation and impact at all levels, and to sufficiently analyse and apply the learning from this monitoring.

The objective of this monitoring is to determine the extent to which the strategy has been adopted by and is influencing the most critical programming areas, so action can be taken to build capacity for implementation or to revise the strategy, as appropriate for improved effectiveness.

Specific monitoring indicators will be created in collaboration with stakeholders across the partnership during the months immediately following the publication of this strategy document. The overall process of monitoring this strategy will be:

Strategy Year 1: Design and Test Monitoring and Evaluation Plan; Conduct Baseline

a. Determine what existing data and measurement tools/methods can contribute to monitoring the RDP Strategy, and adopt/adapt existing structures as far as possible

b. Develop additional tools/methods if required c. Perform first rounds of data collection to test the process and form a baseline

against which to measure progress toward the strategic objectives.



Strategy Year 2: Monitoring a. Collate monitoring information b. Analyze and compare with Baseline c. Communicate findings and needed course-change and strategy revision information

to Work Teams, affected stakeholders and CoP d. Develop Terms of Reference for Strategic Performance Review

Strategy Year 3: Monitoring, Strategic Performance Review

a. Collate monitoring information b. Analyze and compare with Baseline c. Conduct Key Stakeholder Interviews on Performance of the Strategy and needed

revisions d. Analyze and Report findings to the Strategy Review Working Group responsible for

revising the strategy. e. Revise Monitoring plan and relevant TORs based on this strategy period’s

experience, any revisions to the Strategy document, and relevant changes in organizational systems, structures and capacity for monitoring and analysis over the course of the 3-year strategy period.

strategy for resilient development practice - world vision institut

Documents