Channel Research Need Analysis, Review and Design of DG ...ec.europa.eu/echo/files/evaluation/2012/DRR_ClimateChange.pdf · Analysis, Review and Design of DG ECHO’s Training in

Channel Research

Need Analysis, Review and Design of DG ECHO’s Training

in Disaster Risk Reduction and Climate Change Adaptation

Final Report 16 May 2012

Bobby Lambert

Buddhadasa Weerasinghe

Maria Bak Goulsara Pulatova

Andre Kahlmeyer

Cost of the report in € 105.380,00

The contract number: ECHO/ADM/BUD/2011/01207

The report has been financed by and produced at the request of the European Commission. The comments contained herein reflect the opinions of the consultant only.

Table of Contents

Glossary ...................................................................................................................................... 3

1 Executive Summary ............................................................................................................. 1

1.1 Background, purpose and outputs ................................................................................................................................. 1

1.2 Main activities of the review ......................................................................................................................................... 1

1.3 Summary of conclusions ............................................................................................................................................... 1

1.4 Summary of recommendations ..................................................................................................................................... 2

2 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 3

2.1 Purpose, objectives key questions and outputs ............................................................................................................. 5

2.2 Approach and Methodology .......................................................................................................................................... 6

3 Findings ................................................................................................................................ 8

3.1 DRR training within broader DRR and HR frameworks .............................................................................................. 8

3.2 Policy and strategy issues raised ................................................................................................................................... 9

3.3 Overall HR and training issues relating to DRR ......................................................................................................... 11

3.4 DRR Training strategy ................................................................................................................................................ 12

3.5 A suitable training programme on DRR for DG ECHO ............................................................................................. 20

3.6 How should ECHO-DRR training be delivered? ........................................................................................................ 23

3.7 Updating the training packages ................................................................................................................................... 26

3.8 Dissemination of training amongst other stakeholders ............................................................................................... 27

4 Conclusions and recommendation ..................................................................................... 28

4.1 Conclusions ................................................................................................................................................................. 28

4.2 Recommendations ....................................................................................................................................................... 29

5 Appendices ......................................................................................................................... 30

5.1 Appendix A. Review of Training Materials ................................................................................................................ 30

GLOSSARY

ADPC Asian Disaster Preparedness Centre

CBDRM Community Based Disaster Risk Management

CBDRR Community Based Disaster Risk Reduction

CCA Climate Change Adaptation

DEVCO European Commission Directorate-General Development Cooperation - Europeaid

DG ECHO European Commission Directorate-General Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection

DIPECHO Disaster Preparedness Programme of ECHO

DO Desk Officer

DRR Disaster Risk Reduction

ECHO European Commission Directorate-General Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection

EEAS European External Action Service

EU European Union

FAO Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations

GAR Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction

HIV/AIDS Human Immunodeficiency Virus/Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome

HPN Humanitarian Practice Network (of ODI)

HR Human Resources

IPCC International Panel on Climate Change

LRRD Linking Relief, Rehabilitation and Development

NEPAD New Partnership for Africa’s Development

ODI Overseas Development Institute

PA Programme Assistant

PO Programme Officer

RSO Regional Support Office

SSO Specialist Support Office

SSS Specialist Support Staff

SST Specialist Support Technical Adviser

TA Technical Adviser

UN-HABITAT United Nations Human Settlement Programme

UNDP United Nations Development Programme

UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund

UNISDR United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction

Analysis, Review and Design of DG ECHO’s Training in Disaster Risk Reduction and Climate Change Adaptation

Final Report page 1

1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.1 Background, purpose and outputs

1. The concept and practice of DRR has been evolving rapidly in recent years. Added impetus has been given by the additional risks associated with climate change. DG ECHO has given a high priority to DRR, investing almost €400 million in the last 10 years.

2. DG ECHO has recognised that the practice of implementing DRR has been in the absence of a structured policy framework. Similarly, DG ECHO has recognised the need to provide its staff with guidance and support. Consequently, along with the development of policy, strategy and an implementation framework, DG ECHO commissioned this review of DRR training.

3. The overall objective of this review is to improve DRR knowledge within DG ECHO through the design and development of integrated training and to produce recommendations for disseminating this expertise amongst relevant DG ECHO partners.

4. The two main outputs are this report and a set of training materials.

1.2 Main activities of the review

5. The review was conducted in the period September 2011 to April 2012 and involved:

• An inception meeting in Brussels

• Visits to the Brussels and Nairobi offices involving detailed discussions with DG ECHO staff and partners

• A questionnaire survey

• The development of training materials and the piloting of two training workshops, one in Nairobi and one in Brussels.

• Drafting and presenting a report.

1.3 Summary of conclusions

6. The following is a summary of the main conclusions of the review: 1. Staff capacity is one of a number of components in improving DRR practice within

ECHO. 2. Training for ECHO staff on DRR should be integrated and in balance with more

general training in humanitarian practice. 3. The training strategy should target field and HQ staff with the most direct involvement

in humanitarian operations. 4. Partners should be involved as participants and contributors to the training.

5. The focus of the training strategy should be on the integrated component of ECHO’s DRR work.

6. The aim of the training is to provide staff with a good basic knowledge of concepts and how to apply them in practice in their day-to-day work.

7. The training should be based on a sound understanding of risk.


Final Report page 2

8. DG ECHO staff members need a good general understanding of climate change and how adaptation links to DRR.

9. Provide training on the full range of risks affecting DG ECHO’s work.

10. The interplay between DRR and the linkage between relief, recovery and development (LRRD) has to be incorporated into staff capacity development.

1.4 Summary of recommendations

1.4.1 Training programme 1. Conduct a series of regular 2-day workshops to be rolled out over a sustained period

(suggested as 5 years) for field and HQ staff, including partners.

2. Complement the regular workshops with specially adapted and targeted “just-in-time” training for selected humanitarian responses.

3. Complement the workshops by in-house technical support providing specific briefing and on-the-job training.

4. Provide basic induction to all ECHO staff. 5. In due course, consider integrating DRR training into a more general training in

humanitarian practice.

1.4.2 Delivery 6. Deliver the training using external consultants, monitored and supported by in-house

technical expertise and in-house training management.

1.4.3 Monitoring and evaluation 7. Conduct periodic reviews and evaluations of the training.

1.4.4 Content of training 8. Provide staff with a good general understanding of risk, which can be applied to all

forms of hazards.

9. Provide staff with information on ECHO’s general policy and practice on DRR. 10. Train all operational ECHO staff in the basics of integrating DRR into humanitarian

operations. 11. Include in the training guidance on how DRR may be promoted through ECHO

regular work practices,


Final Report page 3

2 INTRODUCTION

7. The concepts and practice of Disaster Risk Reduction has developed considerably in recent years. The 2009 EU strategy paper1 refers to an increase in the number and intensity of disasters and the need to adopt a risk reduction approach. This has been given added impetus by the evidence that climate change may be contributing to the causes of disaster. Finally, there is recognition that Disaster Risk Reduction can be a good investment, with Commissioner Georgieva recently commenting that “for every 1 € invested in prevention can save up to 7 € in reconstruction cost”2

8. Within this broad framework, DRR3 is a priority for DG ECHO, which has invested more than €388 over the last 10 years4. The approach to DRR is informed by the European Consensus on Humanitarian Aid, EU Strategy on DRR and the Hyogo Framework for Action (see Figure 1 below).

9. To date, although there has been considerable development in knowledge on this topic within DG ECHO, as indicated in a recent internal issues paper5 there is now a need to set this knowledge within a clear policy framework and then put it into practice. This is the basis of concurrent work being undertaken within DG ECHO, developing policy and an associated implementation plan.

10. As has been highlighted in a previous evaluation6, putting the policy into practice requires staff with a good understanding of the key concepts and an ability to apply these in their regular work.

11. Currently there is no formal structured programme of training in DRR for all of DG ECHO staff. However, as earlier surveys have shown and this study has similarly found, staff members are keen to learn, provided the learning is action-oriented and focused clearly on the practicalities of their work.

12. As illustrated below in Figure 2, DRR in DG ECHO is composed of two major strands, targeted and integrated interventions. The targeted interventions include DIPECHO, Ad hoc projects and Drought Risk Reduction and include projects that are focused primarily on Disaster Risk Reduction measures. Integrated interventions include risk-informed (or “risk-smart”) interventions and specific actions within sectors, whereby activities within regular humanitarian operations are designed to incorporate risk reduction considerations.

1 EU Strategy for supporting Disaster Risk Reduction in Developing Countries, Brussels 23.2.2009 COM (2009) 84 final

2 Policy Priorities – Development Committee European Parliament – May 2011

3 In this document, unless otherwise explained, for the sake of brevity, all references to DRR include CCA.

4 DRR Issues Paper, Brussels Dec 2011 (Internal)

5 Ibid

6 Evaluation of disaster risk reduction mainstreaming in DG ECHO’s humanitarian action, Aguaconsult, June 2008


Final Report page 4

13. In line with the above, the specifications of the Terms of Reference, and reinforced by the responses received during field visits and discussions with ECHO staff, the focus of this training strategy is on mainstreaming or integrating DRR into regular ECHO humanitarian operations.

Figure 2: DRR in DG ECHO (courtesy of ET)

Figure 1: DG ECHO Disaster Risk Reduction Framework 2012-2015 (courtesy of ET)


Final Report page 5

2.1 Purpose, objectives key questions and outputs

14. As indicated in the Terms of Reference, the overall objective of this review is to improve DRR knowledge within DG ECHO through the design and development of integrated training and to produce recommendations for disseminating this expertise amongst relevant DG ECHO partners. The specific objectives are:

• To define a suitable training approach for DG ECHO staff (HQ and field) and, within this approach, to elaborate a working framework and formulation of integrated training packages, based on an assessment of ECHO needs.

• To have a general and in-depth assessment of the training material available produced by humanitarian and development actors.

15. The review envisaged two main outputs:

• A report

• A set of training materials

16. The review has considered the following questions set out in the ToR:

• What are the specific needs of ECHO staff in terms of DRR training?

• What themes should the training cover?

• What would be a suitable training programme for DG ECHO? Should there be different training approaches according to staff experience and/or needs?

• How should ECHO-DRR training be delivered? (in-house, through external consultants, in partnership with others, etc)

• How the training sessions should be organised, when and where? (at HQ? on the field? at regional seminars? for all newcomers?)

• How can the update of the training strategy and package(s) with practical tools be ensured?

• How and to what extent could this training strategy, packages and tools be disseminated among other stakeholders (e.g. other EU services, partners and actors)?


Final Report page 6

2.2 Approach and Methodology

2.2.1 Process and main activities 17. In line with the Terms of Reference, the following process has been adopted

• Initial desk review and analysis: this included a preliminary review of training materials available, previous evaluations and an in-house training needs survey.

• An initial briefing meeting with DG ECHO staff on 20 September 2011.

• Training needs assessment: This involved face-to-face meetings and interviews, a questionnaire survey and follow-up telephone discussions as required.

• Visits were conducted to the Nairobi and Brussels office for in-depth discussions with a range of staff in ECHO and partner agencies. Visits were originally considered for other ECHO offices (Bangkok, Haiti, Pakistan and Vietnam). However after discussions with these offices it was agreed that they were not appropriate, either because of the lack of relevant staff or because staff were too busily engaged in responses to engage meaningfully with visiting consultants.

• Regular liaison with DG ECHO, notably through Aides Mémoires, face-to-face briefings in Brussels and Nairobi, regular emails and occasional telephone discussions.

• The development of training materials: it was agreed early on that this would be enhanced by the piloting of workshops in Nairobi and Brussels and that the time allocated to field visits could be used for this purpose.

• Drafting, circulation and finalisation of the report. Many of the main findings of the report were flagged in the Aides Mémoires.

• A debrief meeting at which the final report will be presented.

2.2.2 Key outputs 18. The main outputs of the project were:

• An inception note, submitted at the start of the project.

• Aides Mémoires, 5 in total, covering visits and workshop reports.

• Two pilot workshops, one in Nairobi and one in Brussels.

• A set of training materials, to support the delivery of further workshops.

• A final report.

2.2.3 Constraints 19. The constraints were faced during this review are discussed briefly below.

20. There was a low rate of response to the questionnaire survey. This survey was issues to all ECHO staff (DO, TA, PO and PA) but only 29 responses were received, despite several reminders being issues. This was mitigated to some extent by the good response by participants during the field visits. It was also mitigated by the development and piloting of the workshops.

21. Only one of the planned three field visits was undertaken, to Nairobi. This was because of the difficulties of identifying offices willing to host such visits, either because they had not sufficient relevant staff in post to make a visit meaningful or because they were too


Final Report page 7

busy dealing with an ongoing crisis. This was mitigated to some extent by the very positive reception in the Nairobi office and the detailed discussions with both ECHO staff and those of its partners. In addition an additional visit was made to the Brussels office to follow up with selected desk officers and others.

2.2.4 Review of other training 22. During the course of this project, a review of other training in DRR was conducted with a

view to identifying what lessons could be learned for the design of ECHO’s training and what materials might be suitable for use or could be readily adapted.

23. This review looked at specific training materials supplied by DG ECHO, other sources of material, such as the Prevention web-site. In addition the consultants drew on their own substantial and recent experience in providing training in DRR for a wide range of clients, including UNICEF, ADPC and UNDP.

24. A great deal of training and educational material on DRR has been prepared by a wide range of actors. For example, the Education Materials section of the Prevention web-site has a listing of some 2,000 items extending over 40 pages. Much of this material is designed for very specific locations or target groups. In addition to this training material, there is a growing body of published information and knowledge on DRR and CCA (from UNISDR, IPCC etc.). Given the huge amount of material available, the following approach was adopted:

• Carry out a preliminary review of materials available

• Identify specific training needs and design

• Research existing materials

• Develop specific content to meet the training needs of ECHO staff

Further details are given in the Appendix to this report.


Final Report page 8

3 FINDINGS

3.1 DRR training within broader DRR and HR frameworks

25. DG ECHO’s move towards being a strategy driven donor underlines the need to have clear policies and strategies in place for its various activities, including DRR.

26. ECHO’s DRR training strategy is located within two broad areas of policy within ECHO: the DRR policy area and the HR policy area, notably on staff development and training.

27. Within ECHO’s Disaster Risk Reduction framework, training is a component contributing to DRR capacity development, itself a component of a more general DRR implementation strategy. The development of DG ECHO’s DRR policy and strategy will facilitate the development of training and learning support in this area in two ways:

• Providing a policy framework for the development of a training / learning support approach;

• Forming part of the content of the training during which ECHO staff and partners can learn about ECHO’s policy and strategy on DRR

28. As indicated in Figure 3 below, DRR training also needs to linked to ECHO’s overall HR policy and strategy, particularly its capacity development and training strategy. ECHO has recently moved to strengthen staff training capacity, for example through the provision of staff induction training. However, there is as yet no regular and systematic provision of training in humanitarian action. The piloting of this DRR training may yield insights that can guide thinking on this.

29. In terms of operationalising DRR within a humanitarian response, a previous evaluation7 has noted that there has been considerable progress by partners in including practical risk reduction measures in humanitarian response, but that these were seen simply as good humanitarian practice. It was also noted that explicit DRR activities are most evident in the later rehabilitation and recovery phases of the response. With respect to training it was noted that: The key determinant (for integration of DRR in humanitarian response) appears to be the attitude and familiarity with DRR concepts of both DG ECHO staff and partners

7 Evaluation of Disaster Risk Reduction Mainstreaming into DG ECHO’s Humanitarian Actions, Aguaconsult, June 2008


Final Report page 9

Figure 3: Linkage between DRR training strategy and HR

3.2 Policy and strategy issues raised

30. In the course of this review, a number of issues on policy and strategy have been raised. Although it is beyond the scope of this review to discuss these in detail, they may need to be considered in a training setting and so they are briefly noted here.

31. Recognising that operational practice has been seen to be ahead of its policy development8, the need for a clear policy has been recognised for some time. DG ECHO is now moving ahead quickly in developing this policy and an associated implementation framework.

32. The current focus of EU DRR policy, aligned closely with the Hyogo Framework, is on natural disasters; it excludes disasters arising from conflict and other man-made crises, and may also exclude disasters such as epidemics of animal disease. This raises issues when adopting a holistic multi-hazard risk-informed approach, such as that adopted by other major humanitarian actors (e.g. UNICEF and the Red Cross) and many of ECHO’s implementing partners. Some members of ECHO staff have raised concerns in this regard in the conflict scenarios faced by DG ECHO. For conflict related disasters, a pragmatic “work-around” response has been to address conflict issues in terms of vulnerability; however this has significant limitations in developing the holistic analysis needed to identify and implement an effective integrated risk reduction approach.

33. This partial approach has implications for the conduct of training workshops, particularly when linked to a community-based approach. In order to develop coherent and effective risk reduction measures, the full range of risks faced by the communities must be considered. This will almost certainly include risks that fall outside the current scope of DRR. Failure to do so can result in a flawed or partial risk analysis with negative impacts on the risk reduction measures developed. This is especially important in areas of long-term conflict, but is also true in certain urban settings where risks associated with violence or organised crime may be greater then those associated with natural hazards. This can

8 Evaluation of disaster risk reduction mainstreaming in DG ECHO’s humanitarian action, Aguaconsult, June 2008


Final Report page 10

have implications for the credibility of the approach being promoted. It also raises issues on the efficient use of resources in providing training on some risks, whilst excluding other major risks.

34. A key policy strand is that of integrating DRR into humanitarian response. The current DG ECHO strategic approach “focuses on strengthening the inclusion (wherever possible) of disaster risk reduction in all type of emergency response actions, through good programming supported by clear guidelines for each sector”9. Although conclusive data is not available and the contributions of the various components are hard to measure, estimates are that the integrated strand is the larger. A recent estimate10 suggests that in Haiti 81% of DRR contributions were integrated. The value of DRR interventions may be only indirectly related to cost: small changes in design of regular humanitarian operations may cost relatively little, yet yield great benefits in risk reduction.

35. It is worth noting that effective humanitarian response is itself a key part of reducing immediate risk to vulnerable populations who are exposed to a disaster; improving the quality of this humanitarian response is itself a key risk reduction measure. Within this context of good quality humanitarian response, a specific risk informed approach can further reduce longer-term risks. Similarly, as highlighted in the recent crisis in the Horn of Africa, actions may be taken before a conventional humanitarian response, which can greatly reduce risks.

36. Noting this, by far the larger part of DRR work takes place outside of a traditional humanitarian response. Within the EU aid programme, this means that DRR needs to be fully incorporated into its development cooperation efforts, as recognised in the EU strategy of 2009.

37. In all too many cases, there is a dangerous gap between the longer-term development efforts and humanitarian response. This was highlighted in the recent joint agency briefing by Oxfam and Save the Children11,, which calls for a shift to integrated long-term flexible programming, including undertaking preventative humanitarian work, an approach that is highly consistent with the concepts in DRR. This has implications for ECHO’s traditional approach to humanitarian action and in due course for the training of its staff.

38. In line with the EU’s strategy on DRR, there is strong linkage between DRR and CCA. As recommended by Mitchell and van Aalst12, the convergence between DRR and CCA is to be promoted. Whilst DRR needs to take into account the longer-term changes in risk caused by Climate Change, it is noted that this should be part of any sound DRR approach. For practical purposes in humanitarian action, DRR covers the key relevant issues in CCA.

39. In addition to the Hyogo Framework for Action, ECHO staff would benefit from knowledge of other approaches and concepts that have a bearing on DRR. Examples include the Sustainable Livelihoods Approach used by many of ECHO’s partners, which integrates development and disaster approaches, and the Drought Risk Management approach being promoted by UNDP in sub-Saharan Africa.

9 DG ECHO Strategic Framework to DRR/DP 26/07/2010

10 Internal draft document on DRR contributions, January 2012

11 A dangerous delay: the cost of late response to early warnings in the 2011 drought in the Horn of Africa, Oxfam and Save the Children, January 2012.

12 Convergence of Disaster Risk Reduction and Climate Change Adaptation, Review for DFID, October 2008



40. A note of caution was sounded by several interviewees about the relative weight given to Climate Change, compared to other factors that contribute to disaster. This is important in that any measures aimed at reducing risk need to be based on an objective and credible analysis of the evidence of the causes. In particular there is a need to be very cautious in assessing evidence on the occurrence, effect or impact of extreme climate events (see for example IPCC13 GAR14). By their nature, such events are rare and the dataset is often insufficient to discern definite patterns, particularly at a local level. Such caution is particularly important for operational staff tasked with critically appraising DRR activities and proposals.

41. On a similar note, as underlined by some of the partners contacted, in addition to a good general understanding of risk, the assessment of proposals will often require a good understanding of the specific technical issues involved in reducing such risk. For example, the design of cyclone resistant housing must be checked by experts in structural engineering. ECHO staff members must be aware of the need for and have access to the relevant technical expertise.

3.3 Overall HR and training issues relating to DRR

42. Within the overall strategy on DRR, DG ECHO’s developing HR strategy includes the following key elements:

• In-house specialists with DRR expertise, who help develop DG ECHO’s policy and practice on DRR and can contribute to supporting their colleagues in their DRR related work.

• Capacity development of operational staff: This can help develop a level of knowledge and skills in DRR adequate for regular operational staff (Desk Officers, Technical Advisers, Programme Officers and Administrators). This can be done through the provision of training and support to existing and new staff.

• Sensitisation of all other ECHO staff: At a minimum, all ECHO staff should be aware of its policy on DRR.

43. DG ECHO has recently strengthened its capacity in DRR by recruiting a DRR specialist. This has been very helpful in developing ECHO’s approach on DRR and has been much appreciated by its partners, as evidenced in particular by comments made to the consultants during the Nairobi field visit. It is also contributing to the development of DRR policy and practice, notably through the DRR SST in Bangkok.

44. These specialists provide inputs to DIPECHO and to colleagues in their regular work and will play a key part in the training strategy, in particular providing expertise on the technical aspects of DRR.

13 IPCC 2012 Summary for Policy Makers in Managing the risks of extreme events and disasters in advance climate change adaptation

14 Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction, 2011 UNISDR



3.4 DRR Training strategy

3.4.1 General remarks 45. The DRR training strategy looks at what sort of training should be provided to which

groups in which order of priority. It also looks at how this training should be provided, including how training on DRR complements other ECHO training.

46. The DRR training strategy proposed is for the medium term (4-5 years). However it should be reviewed regularly, at least annually in the first 2-3 years. These periodic reviews should involve the training unit and the unit responsible for DRR policy and implementation. This is particularly important right now (early 2012) as there are likely to be significant developments in ECHO on DRR policy and in on how ECHO training is organised and managed. An example would be a decision to incorporate DRR training into broader humanitarian training, see below.

47. As part of this periodic review, an evaluation should be conducted on to assess the impact of training on the required DRR competencies of ECHO staff.

48. Within this overall strategy, specific training events should be continuously updated and refreshed and tailored for the target groups and locations. Whilst content and exercises may vary, this can be done within a standard approach to the training.

49. In line with this, the thrust of this training strategy is to ensure that all ECHO staff (field and HQ) have sufficient knowledge of DRR and CCA.

3.4.2 DRR and ECHO training – a balanced and integrated approach 50. Just as DRR is increasingly been seen as an integral part of good humanitarian practice,

training in DRR should complement and be integrated into the broader ECHO training programme. This initiative in DRR training was generally welcomed by the training department in ECHO, which saw this as a useful opportunity to develop the scope of training and to examine different approaches.

51. Whilst ECHO has recognised the need to invest further in staff training, there is a big demand on limited training resources, both financially and in terms of staff time. DRR is one of many priority areas for field staff and the planning of training in DRR should take account of these realities. The amount of time that can be devoted to a DRR workshop must therefore be balanced against the other training requirements of staff.

52. Whilst it is likely that the value of training can be enhanced through an integrated approach, it is also likely that the costs of delivering such training may be reduced. There are considerable fixed costs associated with running any training event; for a short workshop such costs form a higher proportion of the total than for a longer workshop.

53. Noting the above, there are considerable practical implications to the development of such integrated training. On the basis that “the best is often the enemy of the good”, there is a case for moving ahead with training in DRR as this can help inform the development of a broader, integrated training.

3.4.3 ECHO staff needs for DRR training 54. The needs of ECHO staff were assessed through analyses of their roles, responsibility and

tasks, through discussions with a range of staff in Brussels and in the field, and through analysis of a brief questionnaire survey.

55. From the results of the survey, the average knowledge of DRR issues was rated at level 3 or below (with 1 low and 5 high). Areas where respondents felt more comfortable were in general risk analysis, prioritisation and preparedness. Areas where respondents gave



themselves lower ratings were in risk informed planning, advocacy, climate change adaptation and the Hyogo framework. Respondents generally felt that DRR was more directly relevant to their work than CCA.

56. During the visits to Nairobi and Brussels, the feedback from discussions was that the main need is for ECHO staff to have a good functional understanding of DRR & CCA so that they can integrate DRR into their day-to-day work in regular humanitarian programmes, covering the handling of funding proposals, the monitoring of projects, scanning of the humanitarian environment and advocacy with partners (internal and external). This would draw on experiences and lessons from DIPECHO.

3.4.4 Themes in DRR training 57. The themes for training were identified based on the feedback from the survey,

discussions with respondents and the views of the consultants. They are as follows:

• A good basic knowledge of key concepts and frameworks in DRR/CCA, including the link between DRR and CCA and the effectiveness and impact of DRR

• Knowledge of how to apply DRR in humanitarian action

• An awareness of the how DRR can be brought into specific sector interventions

• An understanding of the influence of climate change at local level

• How to enhance resilience of vulnerable groups

• Community based DRR

• The link between humanitarian action and development. This was complemented by further discussions during preparations for and delivery of the pilot workshops (see section 3.4.8 below), in which the content was targeted at the specific needs of different groups within ECHO.

3.4.5 Target groups 58. In considering this question, we have examined the priority target groups for training and

how such training might be delivered. The primary target group for this training is DG-ECHO staff, with consideration also being given to how the training strategy, package and tools can be disseminated among other stakeholders.

59. Colleague staff in the EU delegations (DEVCO - Europeaid and EEAS) should be invited to the training. This is a useful method of encouraging discussion and dialogue and an excellent form of internal advocacy and mutual learning. However the focus of the training should be on ECHO’s own staff.

60. Within DG-ECHO staff, 5 main sub-groups were considered:

• Field office staff with a direct interface with projects, including Technical Advisers (TA), Programme Officers (PO) and Programme Assistants (PA)

• Head office staff who interact directly with field office staff on a range of projects, especially Desk Officers (DO)

• Regional Sector Support staff

• DIPECHO staff

• Other staff at Head Office or field offices 61. Within these groups, an analysis was carried to prioritise their needs for training

according to staff numbers, likely impact on DRR and current gaps in understanding. The



analysis, carried out by the consultants using information obtained from discussions and research, is presented below in Table 1. Four criteria were used in this analysis:

• The number of staff in each category, using actual estimates of the current numbers.

• An estimate of the direct relevance of DRR to their work, with a maximum score of 10.

• An estimate of the scope or breadth of coverage of their work. This would consider whether they focus on a small number of projects or cover a wide range, with a maximum score of 10.

• A judgment on the current gap in their technical knowledge of DRR, with score of 10 points indicating a very big gap (or low level of knowledge).

62. The overall score was computed as the product of these 4 criteria (the divisor of 1,000 is used to give manageable numbers). Whilst the analysis involves a considerable amount of qualitative judgment, the results are consistent with views expressed anecdotally to the consultants.

63. As can be seen in the table, Field Staff come out with a very high priority, followed by HQ staff such as Desk Officers, with a high priority. Consequently, the focus of effort should be on field staff (Technical Assistants, Programme Officers and Programme Assistants) and HQ staff such as Desk Officers and others with a direct link to operational programmes.

Whilst the training will be targeted on field and HQ staff, it can be open to other staff members who may also benefit from both the content and the exchanges with colleagues and partners.

Table 1: Priority groups for DRR training

3.4.6 Preferred learning styles and approaches 64. On the basis of discussions with ECHO staff and the responses to the survey, the preferred

method of learning in this area is for practical workshop based training, complemented by lectures / presentations and supported on-the-job learning. Field visits and exchanges were also considered useful. Formal courses of study and e-learning came bottom of the list amongst respondents.

Target Group Field staff HQ General staff

Criteria Max pts TA, PO, PA DO & others

A) Numbers of staff - 400 80 200

B) Relevance of DRR in their ECHO work 10 10 10 1

C) Scope of work 10 5 10 3

D) Current gap in their DRR knowledge 10 7 6 9

Score (AxBxCxD)/1000 140 48 5

Overall Priority for DRR training Very high High Low



65. In terms of workshop participation there was a clear preference to have mixed groups of ECHO staff plus partners.

66. Respondents commented that any training should be practical and focused on the day-to-way work of ECHO staff. There should be a minimum of theoretical presentations. The demand was for a participatory, tailored approach, with a strong focus on supporting learning that addresses the particular needs and realities of staff and partners, and that would be of direct and immediate help in their work. The general view was summarised by one comment:

“at the end of the training I would like to know what I need to differently in my job in relation to DRR”.

67. The training approach must give due weight to the process of preparing and conducting training so it is customised to participants needs in their particular context. This has implications on the team required to deliver the training, discussed below.

68. Discussions on the field visits and the experience of piloting workshops, conducted as part of this review, suggests that staff can devote a maximum of 2 days to such workshops.

3.4.7 Options for providing training and learning support 69. A number of options were explored for providing training and learning support to the

different target groups within ECHO, with an estimate of the likely direct impact on the development of DRR skills and knowledge in ECHO. This is summarised in Table 2 below. Figure 4 below illustrates graphically how such options might be delivered considering proximity (in time and space) to a humanitarian crisis response. It should be noted that these options may be complementary and support and reinforce each other. For example, field visits are key to monitoring how DRR is integrated into humanitarian response and to scanning the broad humanitarian environment; the value of these visits may be enhanced by the understanding developed during a training workshop. Similarly the value of training workshops will be enhanced by the presence of staff members who have undertaken regular field visits. A brief discussion of each option is given below.



Table 2: Impact of Training and Learning Support Options on DRR in ECHO

Target Group Field HQ Gen

Training and Learning Support Option Direct Impact on DRR in ECHO Field Workshops at regional level for TA, PO & PA

Very high

HQ Workshops in Brussels for DO and others Very

high RSO specialist support Providing briefings, on-the-job support etc. to field staff High High Just in time training Provided during a crisis response, carefully targeted

Very high

Field visits Engage with beneficiaries, for field staff High High Partner Meetings Engagement with partners, for field staff High High Guided reading A selection of up-to-date reading materials Med Med Briefing for specific posts Med Med Seminars at ECHO global and unit meetings For DO, SS and others Low Induction Basic information for all staff Low Low Low

Figure 4: Learning support options, target groups and proximity to crisis

Far from crisis

Near crisis

Close to crisis

General ECHO staff

HQ Workshops

Field Workshops

Induction materials

ECHO HQ Staff

Key Learning Support Options

Main target groups

Partner meetings

Crisis

Response

ECHO

Field Staff

Briefings

Just-in-time Training

SST specialist support

Field visits

Seminars, Global / Unit

Guided reading



Field Workshops 70. Field workshops would be conducted at regional level. These workshops are the key

component of the proposed training programme. They are aimed primarily at ECHO operational staff. Other ECHO staff, such as regional specialist support staff would also be invited to attend these workshops. They would include staff from ECHO partners, comprising some one-third of the participant numbers.

71. The number of workshops can be quickly scaled up to reach large numbers of ECHO staff and tailored to meet specific needs for each group / location. They also underpin other learning support options. For this reason they are likely to have a very high impact on the development of DRR skills and knowledge within ECHO.

72. They would be focused on the practical aspects of integrating DRR into ECHO’s regular work and should be tailored to each specific context. Bearing in mind the demands on staff time and the need for other training, the duration of these workshops is proposed as 2 days. Under this project, one such workshop was piloted in Nairobi in March 2012.

73. The goal of the workshop is to develop the capacity of DG ECHO staff to support and promote DRR in their regular humanitarian work and in their engagement with partners. In terms of specific learning objectives, by the end of the workshop participants should be able to:

(Day 1, conducted with ECHO staff and partners)

• On the basis of a shared understanding, describe and discuss basic concepts of DRR/CCA

• Appreciate and engage with the realities and challenges faced by partners in integrating DRR/CCA into humanitarian programmes

(Day 2 – ECHO staff only)

• Review the relevance of DRR in their day-to-day work with ECHO

• Identify how the current work practices may be adapted to integrate DRR/CCA in ECHO’s projects. More details are given in the specific training.

74. A full set of training materials was developed for these workshops and has been submitted to ECHO as part of this project.

Just in time training 75. There is a strong argument for providing carefully targeted “just-in-time” training during

a crisis response. Provided the training is well designed, tailored to specific needs of the crisis and fits in with other demands on their time, this is when staff can really learn and immediately apply their learning. It may also need to be combined with other priority training. Correctly done, it is likely to have a very high impact on DRR in the particular crisis. The content of this training would be drawn from currently available content developed for field workshops. To be effective, this requires a system whereby a training team can be rapidly mobilised and deployed in a timely fashion.

HQ Workshops 76. HQ workshops would be similar in structure and duration to the field workshop, with the

content tailored to the needs of HQ staff, particularly Desk Officers. This workshop aims to sensitise HQ staff, particularly desk officers, on DRR concepts and frameworks and what this means in practice for ECHO programmes and for their own work. Under this



project one such workshop was piloted in Brussels in March 2012. This content and structure of this workshop was informed by the workshop preceding it in Nairobi.

RSO DRR specialist support SST 77. The DRR expert in the Bangkok RSO is a crucial element in developing the skills and

knowledge of DRR amongst ECHO staff. This complements other functions such as the development of DRR policy and practice. However because of the demands on the time of the DRR SST, on its own this will have limited impact on the overall development of DRR skills and knowledge within ECHO staff. Additionally, as a staff post, scaling up is not easy. At least until such time as DRR is successfully integrated into ECHO programmes, it is recommended that the RSO includes a specialist DRR expert who can provide support to colleagues.

Field visits 78. ECHO should continue its practice of encouraging operational staff to engage with the

ultimate beneficiaries of its support, particularly through field visits. Such visits can help strengthen understanding of DRR, provided staff have a basis understanding of the key concepts and know what to look for. If these visits are done in conjunction with other forms of learning support, they can have a high impact on the development of DRR in ECHO.

Partner meetings 79. ECHO partners are a very important source of expertise on this topic and are keen to

engage with ECHO. The current practice of regular interaction and discussion is to be encouraged, through informal meetings and the organisation of formal events, such as seminars or focus group meetings. They may also be combined with field visits. As with field visits, if these are done in conjunction with other forms of learning support, they can have a high impact on the development of DRR in ECHO.

Briefing and on-the-job training 80. For selected staff (including DO, TA, PO, PA) taking up a new post, or encountering a

new challenge involving DRR, a briefing on DRR may be given, if possible by the DRR SST. The briefing should be tailored to their location, the project and to their level of knowledge. This would have a high impact on individual staff members. However it requires dedicated time from a specialist and does not give the interaction and exchange possible in a workshop. Consequently it is considered to have a medium impact on DRR in ECHO.

81. Briefing should include the provision of a standard pack of ECHO DRR material, including the EU Strategy on DRR, ECHO’s own policy and strategy, ECHO’s DRR information brochure and selected reference material. This would be complemented by a briefing on key current issues on DRR relevant to their post and the provision of any local documentation or guidance. There should also be an opportunity for one-to-one discussion with a DRR expert.

Guided reading 82. ECHO staff can be supported in reading selected material, similar to that discussed above

under briefing. This is a low-cost way of disseminating knowledge on the topic. It is important that the reading material is regularly updated.



Seminars at ECHO global and unit meetings 83. It is noted that such seminars already take place and it is recommended that they continue.

The content and conduct of the seminars will vary depending on the context. They would generally consist of short presentations on key current issues in DRR (by ECHO staff) and some form of facilitated discussion. As such they do not require the development of specific training materials. However they would benefit from good facilitation practice, including planning, onsite facilitation and follow-up. The output of these seminars should be recorded and considered when planning further training workshops. Similarly the seminars may consider issues arising in the training workshops.

Induction 84. DRR should be included in ECHO’s basic Induction Training for all staff. Whilst this is

likely to have a low direct impact on DRR in ECHO, it is low cost. Of necessity, due to the short time available for DRR within a general induction package and the wide range of staff taking part, this would be restricted to awareness-raising on key concepts and policies, through the provision of a short briefing note, including signposts to further reading. As far as possible, this should make use of existing ECHO information on DRR.

3.4.8 Target groups and content 85. The content of the training is based on the main themes identified through the survey of

staff (see 3.4.4 above), the analysis of participant needs conducted as part of the design of the pilot workshops in Nairobi and Brussels and the experience in piloting the workshops15. Table 3 below gives an indication of the content area for each main target group. This table is indicative and each workshop should be tailored to the needs of the participants in each context, and in line with developments in policy and practice in DRR.

Table 3: Target groups and relevance of content area

Target group Field HQ General

Main content area Relevance of content to target group

Key concepts of DRR and CCA High High Medium

Knowledge of ECHO policy High High Medium

DRR landscape – main actors, trends and current issues High High Low

Realities and challenges faced by partners in integrating DRR into humanitarian programmes High High Low

Knowledge of ECHO current practice High High Low

How to integrate DRR into regular work Very high High Very Low

How to engage with partners more effectively Very high High Very Low

15 See the reports on these pilot workshops submitted to ECHO as part of this project.



3.5 A suitable training programme on DRR for DG ECHO

3.5.1 DRR and other ECHO training 86. As discussed above in section 3.4.2, a DRR training programme should be closely

integrated with other ECHO training. In the longer term, there is a case for providing DRR training as part of a more general training on key evolving issues in humanitarian practice. However the training section does not foresee such general humanitarian training in the near future. Given that DRR is a high priority for ECHO and much can be learned from the development and rolling out of DRR training, it is recommended that a programme of training on DRR is launched.

3.5.2 Programme components and target groups 87. The components of the training programme, and how they relate to the various target

groups, have been described above in section 3.4. At a very basic level, the programme should ensure, through the provision of simple induction material, that all ECHO staff are aware of ECHO’s policy and practice on DRR. Building on this, all field staff should have a good functional knowledge of DRR and its links to CCA, with the Field Workshops playing a key role in this. Similarly HQ staff members, who interact directly with the technical issues on field programmes, should have a good functional knowledge, with HQ workshops helping to develop this. In addition to these workshops, briefings may be given to selected staff taking up a new post or project. Such briefings could be given by the ECHO DRR SST. In a large unfolding crisis where DRR is a key issue and staff lack capacity, consideration should be given to running highly targeted “just-in-time” training. The programme should by complemented by for field visits by technical staff, meetings with partners and seminars at global or unit meetings. As these are part of ECHO’s ongoing work, they are not included in the programme timeline below.

3.5.3 Implementation framework

Assessing needs, piloting, developing, monitoring and evaluating 88. The overall implementation should adopt the project cycle approach (see section 3.8

below). The programme should be a live and evolving entity, adapting to the changing needs of ECHO staff, and kept on course through effective monitoring and evaluation.

Number of workshops 89. The number of regular workshops required has been estimated as follows and is presented

below in Table 4. To calculate the amount of training needed, we have considered the needs of existing and incoming staff. Using an estimated turnover rate in post of 20%16 pa, there is a need to train 100 incoming field staff each year. For the purposes of this calculation, we have assumed that the programme will train 50% of existing field staff, totalling 250. Over a 5-year period this comes to 40 per annum. A similar calculation has been carried out for HQ staff. Combining these gives totals of 120 field staff and 24 HQ staff to be trained each year in the next 5 years. Once the backlog is eliminated, the amount of training will decrease to 80 and 16 respectively for field and HQ. Assuming each workshop caters for 15 staff, this translates into an annual programme over the next 5 years of 8 field workshops and 2 HQ workshops. Of these field workshops, it is forecast that 4 would be delivered as “Just-in-Time” workshops, to meet urgent needs in ongoing responses.

16 Figure obtained in informal discussions n Brussels – need to double-check



90. Such a programme requires a significant commitment of resources, financial and human. As mentioned above, there is value in exploring how this could be integrated into more general humanitarian training within ECHO.

Table 4 – Estimate of Number of Workshops required

Prioritisation 91. Given the likelihood that resources may be limited, there will be a need to prioritise. This

should be based on an analysis of humanitarian need, the likely impact on this need of effective DRR, the capacity of ECHO staff to implement DRR measures and the demand from regional or country offices.

Timeline 92. An indicative timeline for the roll-out of the training programme is given below in Figure

5. It is assumed that the programme starts in the second half of 2012 and gets into full swing in 2013. The programme includes periodic reviews and evaluations, discussed further below in section 3.7.

Figure 5: Indicative timeline for rollout of DRR training programme

Field HQNumbers.of.staff 400 80

Incoming(staffStaff.turnover.in.post,.est..% 20%New.staff.to.be.trained.annually 80 16Existing(staffPrioritised.existing.staff.to.be.training,.%.and.numbers 50% 200 40Backlog.reduction.period,.years 5Numbers.of.prioritised.existing.staff.trained.per.year 40 8Total.trainees.per.year 120 24Number.of.ECHO.staff.per.WS 15 15Number.of.workshops.per.year 8 2

Year 2012 2013 2014Month 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12

Training Options

Programme start X

Field Workshops 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

HQ workshops 1 1 1 1 1 1

Just in Time 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

M&E

Periodic reviews X X X X

Evaluation X X X

Revise programme X X X X



3.5.4 Methodology for delivery of training workshops 93. As a key component of the overall training strategy, consideration has to be given to the

methodology for delivery. This is detailed in the accompanying workshop facilitator pack, with key points outlined below.

Preparation and design 94. Allow sufficient lead-time to engage effectively with the host office to ensure good buy-in

and contextualisation of the workshop. Similarly time is needed to identify, book and engage with resource people. Participants will need good advance warning to book their time for the workshop, particularly those from partner organisations. Ideally a 6-month lead-time is recommended, with 3 months being the minimum.

95. An inception meeting should be held a minimum of 3 months in advance of the planned training. The inception meeting should include all key members of the training team and should cover the following:

• Workshop objectives and approach

• Participant profiles and learning needs

• Training team and key stakeholders to be involved

• Workshop duration and outline programme

• Dates and location

• Detailed Workshop Preparation Plan

Workshop team 96. The workshop team should have the right balance of pedagogic skills, subject matter

expertise, knowledge of the local context and target participants, a clear management structure and a good team spirit. There should be a strong commitment to supporting the participants in their learning. It should also include an efficient administrator. The roles in the team include that of workshop host, a convenor, lead facilitator, subject matter experts, and administrator. These roles are described in more detail in the accompanying facilitator pack.

Conduct of the training 97. The workshop should be run in a practical interactive manner, tailored to the participants

needs in their local context. Theory and concepts should be balanced by practical learning exercises. Formal presentations should be brief using a variety of presenters, including participants themselves. Participants will be encouraged to share experience in a safe and confidential environment.

Workshop Evaluation and follow up 98. Each workshop should be evaluated and a brief workshop report produced with

recommendations for further development. The evaluation should include an assessment of the achievement of the learning objectives of the workshop and of proposals for improvement. The evaluation should involve workshop participants and the training team. Detailed guidance on how this can be done are provided in the accompanying facilitator pack.

99. After the workshop it is expected that ECHO participants will actively follow up by integrating what they have learned on DRR into their regular work. To support this, it is recommended that ECHO contacts participants some 3-6 months after completion of the workshop to assess what further needs they have.



3.6 How should ECHO-DRR training be delivered?

100. Taking into account the parameters discussed below, the following is recommended:

• Use internal ECHO DRR specialists to provide the content on DRR policy and practice and to monitor the DRR technical content of any training;

• Where possible the internal ECHO DRR specialist should attend and contribute to the content of training workshops (DRR policy, practice and technical issues);

• The host ECHO office should be closely involved in tailoring the workshop to meet the needs of ECHO staff in the local context;

• Consider using the existing DG ECHO training structure to provide overall management of the training programme (e.g. issuing of contracts, quality control on training standards and methods etc.)

• External consultants may be used as workshop facilitators to design, develop and run the training workshops and to provide the technical inputs to the workshops, complementing the in-house DRR specialists.

• Invite partners to participate in the workshops as participants, providing selected inputs in the form of case-studies, particularly on technical issues and good practice in humanitarian response.

• Use in-house specialists to provide ongoing technical support

• Use in-house specialists to support global and unit seminars and consider using external consultants to facilitate these

3.6.1 Training workshops – who should deliver them? 101. In considering the balance between in-house experts and external consultants, a

number of parameters have been considered, illustrated in Table 5 below, and discussed further below.



Table 5: Training workshop delivery - parameters considered

Delivery of training Key Parameters

In house External consultants

ECHO DRR policy Important to have this developed in-house with strong oversight of training

Can be used to deliver training on this

DRR technical content Important to have strong technical expertise in house – use for monitoring of workshop content and contributing where possible

Can be used to deliver training on this

ECHO work practices Important that this is closely monitored in- house (by DRR specialist and host office)

Can be used to run exercises on this, under supervision

Training facilitation Does not need to be done in-house Can easily be contracted out Hosting of workshops Must be done in-house, with strong

involvement by local host office Works closely with host office

Administration of workshops Best if done in-house, by local host office

Works closely with host office

Continuity Can be generated when relevant staff members stay in post

Linked to contract duration – can be high

Workload & flexibility When used alongside consultants this may be good

Allows for scaling up and scaling down of the programme

Ownership A strong in-house engagement gives good ownership

Linked to contract duration – can be high

ECHO DRR policy and how this interacts with the training. 102. There is a strong case for retaining the current system whereby the development of

DRR policy and practice is conducted within ECHO. The training workshops provide a forum to roll out this policy and practice and to hear back from staff on how it is working in practice.

DRR/CCA technical content 103. There is a strong argument for having in-house capacity on the technical issues of

DRR and CCA, to ensure quality control and adherence to consistent messages. This can be complemented by the use of external technical experts for certain activities, including the delivery of training.

ECHO work practices: 104. Reviewing ECHO work practices is a key part of the training. This requires in-house

expertise and people who are familiar with ECHO and the work practices that are developing. Ideally this in-house expertise would be sourced in the local office where the training is being run.

Training facilitation: 105. The design and facilitation of the training could be carried out in-house. However,

given the amount of training to be provided and the current constraints faced by ECHO’s training unit, this would require the hiring of additional staff. This is one aspect that can easily be done by external consultants, which gives ECHO more flexibility.

Hosting and administration of the workshops 106. This should be done in-house, by the local office. As with hosting, administration

should be done by the local office, supported by external consultants.



Continuity and ownership 107. Continuity is important in terms of maintaining and developing quality and in efficient

use of resources. In-house staff can give good continuity, provided they are assigned to the project for a significant amount of time. Good continuity can also be achieved with external consultants, provided contract durations extend over a reasonable period of time.

108. A strong sense of ownership by ECHO of the training is important. Such ownership requires an in-house champion. It is also desirable that any external consultant has a sense of ownership; as with continuity, this will be related to the duration and type of contract.

Workload and flexibility – scale and expertise 109. The development and rolling out of this programme will require scaling up and a

flexible approach. The use of external consultants can add considerable flexibility. Similarly, external consultants can bring in specific expertise not available in-house.

3.6.2 Other training options

Technical support – DRR content and ECHO policy 110. It is best if this is provided in-house. However certain aspects of DRR technical

content could be provided by external consultants, provided they work closely with in-house experts. Similarly there may be a role for external facilitation in the development of policy, but the decisions on policy must, of course, be an internal matter.

Just-in-time training 111. This could be provided by a mix of in-house and external consultants, in a similar

fashion to to the regular field workshops. However specific provision would need to be made for rapid mobilisation.

Briefings and on-the-job training 112. Delivery would be similar to the provision of technical support, discussed above. A

short briefing guide has been prepared in this project.

Induction 113. Basic information on DRR in ECHO should be a standard part of the regular staff

induction training. This information should be based on current ECHO material, and should be monitored and updated by in-house DRR experts.



3.7 Updating the training packages

3.7.1 Updating the training packages 114. The training packages can be kept up to date through a regular, continuous process of

learning from each completed workshop and tailoring for the next workshop. This would be complemented by periodic reviews and evaluations. These processes should be underpinned by designating a key focal point (“holder of the folder”) for the training and ensuring adequate continuity and ownership.

Regular continuous process 115. The training packages should continuously be updated as part of an ongoing process

involving workshop evaluation, planning and tailoring (see Figure 6 below). Each workshop should be planned for the specific context and location, with content and approach tailored to meet local needs. This should be done in close co-operation with the hosting office. For each workshop the participants needs should be carefully assessed, through discussion with the host office when planning, participant surveys prior to the course and through ongoing discussion during the course. The workshops should be evaluated and a workshop report produced identifying what worked well and how it could be run even better the next time. The process (and tools) for planning, assessment of participants’ needs and evaluating workshops are elaborated in detail in the accompanying facilitator pack.

Periodic reviews and evaluations 116. In line with updates in the training strategy, or in significant developments in policy,

the general content, approach and methodology of the training should be reviewed on a periodic basis, at least every year. Key participants in this process include those responsible for DRR policy and practice and those responsible for ECHO staff capacity development and training. An evaluation should be carried out at the end of the second year of the programme and thereafter every 3 years.

Holder of folder 117. Central to the effective working of this updating process is a workshop champion or

“holder of the folder”. This person should have responsibility for ensuring the overall quality of the training packages including updating. They should have a long-term engagement with ECHO (e.g. over 2-3 years) and could be an internal staff member or an external consultant.

Figure 6: Updating of training package



Continuity and ownership in delivery 118. A simple method of ensuring the workshops are kept up to date is to issue a contract

for delivery that extends over a significant number of workshops (minimum of 6 is suggested) and period of time (a minimum of 2 years is suggested), with provisos concerning quality of learning.

3.8 Dissemination of training amongst other stakeholders

119. In considering this issue, a number of factors should be borne in mind:

• This training package has been developed with a strong focus on the needs of ECHO staff.

• Partners are actively involved in developing their own training packages. As with this training, such training has to be tailored to their specific needs.

• There already exists a great deal of training materials – and this is growing. 120. Bearing these factors in mind, the following methods of dissemination are proposed:

• Share the full report and training packages with stakeholders, for example by publishing it on the DG ECHO website.

• Continue to engage with partners and other stakeholders by o Inviting them to participate in the training workshops

o Continuing to engage in partner meetings o Invite partners to contribute to ECHO seminars

• Share with partners the outcome of ECHO’s current DRR policy review



4 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION

4.1 Conclusions

The following are the main conclusions of this review:

1. Staff capacity is one of a number of components in improving DRR practice within ECHO. The development of staff capacity, through training and other forms of learning support, is a key component of improving DRR practice within ECHO; but it is only one component and must go hand in hand with more general development of policy and practice.

2. Training for ECHO staff on DRR should be integrated and in balance with more general training in humanitarian practice. The effective promotion of DRR requires a strong knowledge of good practice in humanitarian response. Providing training on DRR without providing training on other aspects of humanitarian response.

3. The training strategy should target field and HQ staff with the most direct involvement in humanitarian operations. These include, at the field level, Technical Advisors, Programme Officers, Programme Assistants and at HQ level Desk Officers.

4. Partners should be involved as participants and contributors to the training. Their involvement will also serve to foster exchange and dialogue with ECHO staff.

5. The focus of the training strategy should be on the integrated component of ECHO’s DRR work. This is where the largest financial input to DRR is made, where the output (or impact) on DRR is likely to be largest, and where the current gaps in knowledge are greatest.

6. The aim of the training is to provide staff with a good basic knowledge of concepts and how to apply them in practice in their day-to-day work. This can best be done through short interactive workshops. Signposts can be provided for further learning, which can be supported by in-house experts, by guided reading, field visits and regular engagement with partners.

7. The training should be based on a sound understanding of risk. DRR policy, practice and training should be based on a sound, even cautious, understanding of risk, particularly in relation to the hazards associated with climate change.

8. DG ECHO staff members need a good general understanding of climate change and how adaptation links to DRR, recognising that DRR is the main means of addressing CCA, particularly in humanitarian action.

9. In the training participants should be allowed to consider the full range of risks faced by the communities they serve. Such consideration will almost certainly include risks that fall outside the current scope of DRR. Failure to do so can result in a flawed or partial risk analysis with negative impacts on the risk reduction measures developed. Section 3.2 above gives further background to this conclusion.

10. To be truly effective, DRR should span both humanitarian and development operations. The challenge that this poses to ECHO’s mandate and modus operandi, particularly in slow onset disasters, is well recognised and has been illustrated recently in the response to the Horn of Africa crisis. Humanitarian actors must be aware of the strong linkages between relief, recovery and development. This is important for DRR, particularly in efforts to reduce longer-term risks. ECHO staff must have a good grasp on this linkage and how short term humanitarian measures often have major long-term



implications for the communities served. This has implications for the selection, training and support of ECHO staff.

4.2 Recommendations

4.2.1 Training Programme 1. Conduct a series of regular 2-day workshops to be rolled out over a sustained (5 year)

period for field and HQ staff, including partners.

2. Complement the regular workshops with specially adapted and targeted “just-in-time” training for selected humanitarian responses.

3. Complement the workshops by in-house technical support providing specific briefing and on-the-job training.

4. Provide basic induction to all ECHO staff. Noting the limitations on time and breadth of other subjects to be covered, supply brief notes to be used in ECHO’s general induction training,

5. In due course, consider integrating DRR training into a more general training in humanitarian practice.

4.2.2 Delivery 6. Deliver the training using external consultants, monitored and supported by in-house

technical expertise and in-house training management. With a view to quality and efficiency of the training provided, ensure there is good continuity and ownership of the training, through suitable staff retention and duration of contracts for external consultants.

4.2.3 Monitoring and evaluation 7. Conduct periodic reviews and evaluations of the training. The reviews should be

managed jointly by ECHO’s DRR and training units and conducted at least once annually, preferably twice in the initial roll-out. Evaluations should be conducted in line with ECHO’s evaluation policy, with a recommendation that an evaluation be conducted at the end of the second year of the training programme.

4.2.4 Content of training 8. Provide staff with a good general understanding of risk, which can be applied to all

forms of hazards. 9. Provide staff with information on ECHO’s general policy and practice on DRR. This

should include discussion on trends and likely future developments. 10. Train all operational ECHO staff in the basics of integrating DRR into humanitarian

operations. Include consideration of specific DRR actions during a response and how to assess the degree to which a regular humanitarian response is risk-informed or “risk-smart”.

11. Include in the training guidance on how DRR may be promoted through ECHO regular work practices. This should include the provision of guidance to partners, assessment of proposals, monitoring of projects and advocacy with colleague organisations.



5 APPENDICES

5.1 Appendix A. Review of Training Materials

One of the requirements of this project was to conduct “a general and in-depth assessment of the training material available produced by humanitarian and development actors”

In line with this requirement, a review was conducted of training materials available that relate to DRR and CCA. The first point to note about this review is that there is a huge and growing amount and variety of training material. For example the Prevention web-site lists some 2,000 items under educational material. In addition to this educational material, there is a growing body of published information and knowledge on DRR and CCA (from UNISDR, IPCC etc.). The Prevention site lists some 4,000 documents relating to climate and disasters. Many agencies are developing their own training materials and resources. For example The IFRC web-site contains an extensive range of tools and materials, from Vulnerability and Capacity Analysis through to the role of Customs in Disaster Response. The World Bank supports a Global Facility for Disaster Risk Reduction, which includes a listing of Capacity Development events. Much of this material is designed for very specific locations or target groups. Given the huge amount of material available and the limited time available for the review, there was a need to prioritise in line with the overall objectives of this review, being the capacity development of ECHO staff. Therefore the following approach was adopted:

• Carry out a preliminary review of materials available

• Identify specific training needs of ECHO staff and how these might best be met

• Research existing materials

• Develop specific content to meet the training needs of ECHO staff This review looked at specific training materials supplied by DG ECHO, other sources of material, such as the Prevention web-site. In addition the consultants drew on their own substantial and recent experience in providing training in DRR for a wide range of clients, including UNICEF, ADPC and UNDP. This review of materials, the assessment of training needs and the experience of piloting the training for ECHO staff all confirmed that there is no shortage of material available to support training in the basic concepts and general content areas of DRR and CCA.

The table below gives an indication of the range of materials reviewed during this review.



Table A1 Overview of selected training materials in DRR and CCA

Title Organization Comment

Training courses / manuals

Mainstreaming Disaster Risk Reduction into Development (1 week training course)

ADPC Mainstreaming for development

Community-based disaster risk reduction (2 week training course)

ADPC Community based DRM

Climate change and climate risk in a changing urban environment (1 week training course)

ADPC Climate change and risk

Disaster Management (2 week training course) ADPC General Disaster Management

E-learning Community Based Adaptations to Climate Change: www.fao.org/climatechange/learning

FAO Community based DRM

Disaster Risk Reduction (1-day workshop) UNICEF DRR for practitioners

Integrating gender into community based disaster risk management

CDP Gender and disaster risk

Building Resilient Communities IIRR Community based DRM

Increasing Community Disaster Awareness IFRC Practitioner focused tool

Disaster Emergency Needs Assessment IFRC Practitioner focused tool

Introduction to Disaster Preparedness Prevention web One of a wide range of materials on prevention website

Institutional and Legal Frameworks for Disaster Preparedness and Response

OCHA Useful general background

United Nations Disaster Management Training Programme (DMTP).

UN Wide range of topics related to DRR

Handbooks / Guides / Manuals

Community Based Disaster Risk Management CBDRM – Field Practitioners’ Handbook

Community approach for practitioners

Good Practice Review of Disaster Risk Reduction- Mitigation and preparedness in emergency programming

ODI HPN Comprehensive review paper

Climate Vulnerability and Capacity Assessment Handbook

CARE Specific guidance on assessment for field preactitioners

Establishing Community Based Early Warning System

Practical Action Practitioners guide for Nepal

Linking CCA and DRR Tearfund Useful background reference

Africa Regional Strategy for Disaster Risk Reduction

African Union and NEPAD

Useful for African context

Guidelines for Participatory Local Development Planning

UN-HABITAT Mainstreaming Disaster Management into Development

Building with winds UN-HABITAT Mozambique technical guide Learning to live with floods UN-HABITAT Mozambique technical guide Advocacy for DRR - a practical guide, facilitators' guide and participants' Journal. (4-day course)

IFRC Useful material for training in advocacy

Community Based DRR for Field Practitioners – the curriculum, facilitator guide and participants

IFRC Comprehensive training kit on CBDRR



Title Organization Comment

workbook. Websites

Prevention Web material list http://www.preventionweb.net/english/professional/trainings-events/edu-materials/

Prevention Web Extensive

The e-‐‑learning tool http://www.fao.org/climatechange/learning

FAO Suitable for individuals – climate change focus

WB Institute Comprehensive DRM Learning Programme. http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/WBI/

World Bank Targeted at local government

Global Facility for Disaster Risk Reduction http://www.gfdrr.org/gfdrr/

World Bank Focus on mainstreaming DRR into development

UN DM training programme http://www.undmtp.org/

UN Disaster Management

Extensive training

IFRC http://www.ifrc.org/en/what-we-do/disaster-management/preparing-for-disaster/risk-reduction/

IFRC Gives access to IFRC’s wide range of tools and resources

RedR http://www.redr.org/

RedR Training for humanitarian practitioners

Examples of other training modules

Introduction to DRR, AusAid, 2007

Disaster Management Course. 2005

Training pack on DRR and CCA. OXFAM PVCA, 2009.

Mainstreaming DRR in development strategies, DG DEV and WB

DRR Mainstreaming into development processes. ADPC 2010

DRR mainstreaming & Financing. 2011

Regional Training Course on GIS for DRM (an introductory course). 2009

Awareness sessions for staff.

Integrating Environment and CC into a scaled up aid programme: new skills and approaches. Laos 2009

Participatory Capacities and Vulnerabilities Assessment (PCVA)

Documents

Channel Research Need Analysis, Review and Design of DG ...ec.europa.eu/echo/files/evaluation/2012/DRR_ClimateChange.pdf · Analysis, Review and Design of DG ECHO’s Training in