Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
1. H
azar
d
2. L
ocat
ion
of C
omm
unity
A
ccor
ding
to
Haz
ard
Map
(C
heck
the
app
ropr
iate
col
umn)
3. H
isto
rica
l Dat
a
Low
H
azar
d Z
one
Med
ium
H
azar
d Z
one
Hig
h H
azar
d Z
one
Year
s of
O
ccur
renc
eFr
eque
ncy
/ R
etur
n Pe
riod
Cat
egor
y /
Inte
nsity
Dur
atio
n
Eart
hqua
ke
Tsu
nam
i
Floo
d
Stor
m/C
yclo
ne
Land
slide
Dro
ught
Volc
ano
Fire
Oth
ers
Tota
l No.
of H
azar
ds
unde
r ea
ch z
one
1. H
azar
d2.
Che
ck if
com
mun
ity is
pr
one
to t
he h
azar
d
3. H
isto
rica
l Dat
a
Year
s of
O
ccur
renc
eFr
eque
ncy
/ R
etur
n Pe
riod
Cat
egor
y /
Inte
nsity
Dur
atio
n
Eart
hqua
ke
Tsu
nam
i
Floo
d
Stor
m/C
yclo
ne
Land
slide
Dro
ught
Volc
ano
Fire
Oth
ers
32
1. H
azar
d*
2. H
isto
rica
l Dat
a
Year
s of
O
ccur
-re
nce
Num
ber
of D
eath
s
Num
ber
ofA
ffect
ed
Fam
ilies
Hou
ses
Scho
ol b
uild
ings
Hos
pita
lsR
oads
Agr
icul
ture
Num
ber
Econ
omic
D
amag
eN
umbe
rEc
onom
ic
Dam
age
Num
ber
Econ
omic
D
amag
eEc
onom
ic
Dam
age
Econ
omic
D
amag
e an
d lo
ss
Eart
hqua
ke
Tsu
nam
i
Floo
d
Stor
m/C
yclo
ne
Land
slide
Dro
ught
Volc
ano
Fire
Oth
ers
Soci
o-Ec
onom
ic D
ata
(Cur
rent
)
Tota
l Po
pula
tion
Popu
latio
n un
der
5 Ye
ars
Popu
latio
n ov
er 6
5 Ye
ars
Ave
rage
No.
of
Fam
ily
Mem
bers
Hum
an
Dev
elop
men
t In
dex
(HD
I)
Educ
atio
n En
rollm
ent
Rat
e
Pove
rty
Rat
e
Ave
rage
Fa
mily
In
com
e
Sour
ces
of F
amily
In
com
e
Cri
tical
In
fras
truc
ture
s an
d Ec
onom
ic
Ass
ets
54
Soci
o-C
ultu
ral
Con
side
red
Vuln
erab
le G
roup
sPu
t a
chec
k (o
btai
n nu
mbe
rs, i
f you
can
)Q
uest
ions
for
Prac
tices
Ans
wer
s
Wha
t pr
actic
es g
ener
ally
mak
e th
e co
mm
unity
mem
bers
vul
nera
ble
to t
he h
azar
ds a
ffect
ing
the
area
whi
ch a
re id
entifi
ed in
Wor
kshe
et 1
a?
Chi
ldre
nW
hat
prac
tices
mak
e w
omen
and
chi
ldre
n pa
rtic
ular
ly v
ulne
rabl
e to
th
e ha
zard
s af
fect
ing
the
area
whi
ch a
re id
entifi
ed in
Wor
kshe
et 1
a?W
omen
HIV
/AID
S
Wha
t pr
actic
es m
ake
othe
r gr
oups
(PW
Ds,
HIV
/AID
S, el
derly
, etc
.) pa
rtic
ular
ly v
ulne
rabl
e to
the
haz
ards
affe
ctin
g th
e ar
ea w
hich
are
id
entifi
ed in
Wor
kshe
et 1
a?Pe
ople
with
Disa
bilit
ies
Ethn
ic G
roup
s (Id
entif
y)
Envi
ronm
ent
Wha
t pr
actic
es m
ake
the
envi
ronm
ent
or n
atur
al r
esou
rces
vul
nera
ble
to n
atur
al d
isast
ers?
Oth
ers
Wha
t pr
actic
es m
ake
infr
astr
uctu
res,
publ
ic s
ervi
ces
and
econ
omic
as
sets
vul
nera
ble
to n
atur
al d
isast
ers?
1. C
ompo
nent
s fo
r Ana
lysi
s2.
Info
rmat
ion
/ Que
stio
ns3.
Ans
wer
s
Inst
itutio
nal
Arr
ange
men
ts
Is th
ere
an in
stitu
tion
that
is in
-cha
rge
of d
isast
er m
anag
emen
t an
d cl
imat
e ch
ange
ada
ptat
ion
at
the
prov
ince
/dist
rict
and
com
mun
ity le
vels?
Wha
t is
it ca
lled?
Wha
t is
its c
ompo
sitio
n? D
escr
ibe
its s
truc
ture
s an
d fu
nctio
ns, in
clud
ing
wor
king
with
oth
er in
stitu
tions
to
casc
ade
polic
y, if
rele
vant
.
Des
crib
e th
e st
reng
ths
and
limita
tions
of t
he in
stitu
tions
with
reg
ard
to d
isast
er m
anag
emen
t (r
espo
nse/
relie
f, re
habi
litat
ion,
rec
onst
ruct
ion,
pre
pare
dnes
s, pr
even
tion
and
miti
gatio
n) a
nd
clim
ate
chan
ge a
dapt
atio
n.
Law
s, Po
licie
s, R
egul
atio
ns
Are
the
re e
xist
ing
law
s, po
licie
s, an
d re
gula
tions
gov
erni
ng d
isast
er m
anag
emen
t, in
clud
ing
risk
redu
ctio
n, a
nd c
limat
e ch
ange
ada
ptat
ion
from
the
nat
iona
l to
the
loca
l (pr
ovin
ce/ d
istric
t, co
mm
unity
)? D
escr
ibe
them
.
Des
crib
e th
e le
vel o
f im
plem
enta
tion
at t
he lo
cal (
prov
ince
/dist
rict)
and
com
mun
ity le
vel.
Disa
ster
Risk
M
anag
emen
t (D
RM
) Pl
ans
Are
the
re d
isast
er r
isk m
anag
emen
t an
d ad
apta
tion
plan
s at
the
pro
vinc
e/di
stric
t an
d co
mm
unity
le
vels?
Des
crib
e th
e D
RM
Pla
n. Is
it a
pre
pare
dnes
s pl
an, a
con
tinge
ncy
plan
, or
a m
itiga
tion
plan
– o
r do
es it
cov
er a
ll th
ese?
(Yo
u m
ay w
ant
to a
sk g
over
nmen
t of
ficia
ls de
alin
g w
ith s
ecto
rs if
the
y ha
ve in
tegr
ated
in t
heir
deve
lopm
ent
plan
ele
men
ts o
f DR
R a
nd C
limat
e C
hang
e A
dapt
atio
n).
Des
crib
e th
e C
CA
Pla
n, if
the
re is
one
.
Des
crib
e th
e ex
tent
of t
he p
lans
’ cov
erag
e of
haz
ards
and
vul
nera
bilit
ies
alre
ady
iden
tified
and
th
e le
vel o
f im
plem
enta
tion.
Iden
tify
gaps
and
cha
lleng
es in
the
impl
emen
tatio
n.
76
1. C
ompo
nent
s fo
r Ana
lysi
s2.
Info
rmat
ion
/ Que
stio
ns3.
Ans
wer
s
Early
War
ning
Sy
stem
Is th
ere
an e
arly
war
ning
sys
tem
at
the
prov
ince
/dist
rict
and
com
mun
ity le
vel?
Is it
func
tiona
l?
Do
peop
le u
nder
stan
d th
e sy
stem
? Why
or
why
not
?
Has
the
sys
tem
hel
ped
decr
ease
inci
denc
e of
dea
th d
ue t
o di
sast
ers
since
its
esta
blish
men
t?
Why
or
why
not
?
NG
Os
and
Com
mun
ity-
base
d O
rgan
izat
ions
Are
the
re N
GO
s an
d co
mm
unity
-bas
ed o
rgan
izat
ions
in t
he a
rea?
Nam
e th
em.
Wha
t w
ork
do t
hey
do in
the
are
a? D
o th
ey in
tegr
ate
DR
R a
nd C
limat
e C
hang
e A
dapt
atio
n in
th
eir
wor
k?
Do
NG
Os
wor
king
in t
he a
rea
colla
bora
te w
ith o
ne a
noth
er? I
dent
ify t
he r
elat
ions
hips
.
Cap
acity
Bu
ildin
g
Wha
t ca
paci
ty b
uild
ing
initi
ativ
es h
ave
been
pro
vide
d to
the
gov
ernm
ent
disa
ster
man
agem
ent
in-c
harg
e at
the
pro
vinc
e/di
stric
t an
d co
mm
unity
leve
ls? W
hat
wer
e th
ese
capa
city
bui
ldin
g ac
tiviti
es, a
nd w
hen
wer
e th
ey h
eld?
Wha
t ca
paci
ty b
uild
ing
initi
ativ
es h
ave
been
pro
vide
d to
the
CBO
s? W
hat
wer
e th
ese
capa
city
bu
ildin
g ac
tiviti
es, a
nd w
hen
wer
e th
ey h
eld?
Who
con
duct
ed t
hem
? Did
the
y in
clud
e cl
imat
e ch
ange
issu
es?
Wha
t di
sast
er m
anag
emen
t an
d cl
imat
e ch
ange
ada
ptat
ion
activ
ities
hav
e co
mm
uniti
es
part
icip
ated
in? W
hen
wer
e th
ese
held
? Who
con
duct
ed t
hem
?
1. R
esul
ts o
f Haz
ard
Ana
lysi
s2.
Res
ults
of V
ulne
rabi
lity
Ana
lysi
s3.
Res
ults
of C
apac
ity A
naly
sis
4. R
ecom
men
datio
ns t
o m
itiga
te, p
repa
re fo
r, an
d re
spon
d to
dis
aste
r im
pact
s
• W
hat
singl
e or
mul
tiple
haz
ards
is t
he
com
mun
ity fa
ced
with
? Whi
ch a
re m
ost
signi
fican
t? R
efer
ring
to o
ccur
renc
e,
freq
uenc
y/re
turn
per
iod,
inte
nsity
and
du
ratio
n as
wel
l as
expo
sure
of a
ffect
ed
fam
ilies,
how
do
thes
e ha
zard
s co
mpa
re?
• In
dica
te z
one
leve
l or
signi
fican
ce o
f the
ha
zard
(s)
that
the
com
mun
ity is
vul
nera
ble
to.
• Is
ther
e ev
iden
ce o
f cha
ngin
g tr
ends
in t
he
haza
rds,
or a
re n
ew h
azar
ds e
mer
ging
?
• W
hat
are
the
top
five
vuln
erab
ilitie
s of
the
com
mun
ity?
• Ex
plai
n th
e vu
lner
abilit
ies
in
rela
tion
to t
he id
entifi
ed h
azar
ds
affe
ctin
g th
e co
mm
unity
, and
ho
w t
hese
mak
e th
e co
mm
unity
su
scep
tible
to
thos
e ha
zard
s.
• W
hat
are
the
top
five
capa
citie
s av
aila
ble
in t
he c
omm
unity
? •
Expl
ain
thei
r re
latio
nshi
ps a
nd
how
the
y in
crea
se t
he r
esilie
nce
of t
he c
omm
unity
. •
Iden
tify
the
top
five
wea
knes
ses
– ho
w d
o th
ey c
ontr
ibut
e to
co
mm
unity
vul
nera
bilit
ies?
• G
iven
the
Haz
ard
Vuln
erab
ility
Cap
acity
Ass
essm
ents
out
lined
in
Wor
kshe
et 3
, iden
tify
the
mos
t pr
essin
g as
sista
nce
need
ed t
o re
duce
the
vu
lner
abilit
ies
and
incr
ease
the
ca
paci
ties
of t
he c
omm
unity
.
Ans
wer
s
98
Hazard Element
Information / QuestionsAnswers
(based on PRA activities)
Hazard*
Name and briefly describe the hazard(s) affecting or threatening the community.
Location
Where are the specific locations in the community that the hazards affect or threaten?
History and future
Identify the years in which the hazard affected the community, and its impacts (number of deaths, number of affected families)
FrequencyWhat is the likelihood of the hazard event? How often does it occur?
Intensity
What was the magnitude, scale of the hazard? (e.g. Richter scale, MMI scale, Beaufort scale or wind speed, flood depth)
Duration
Length of time of occurrence
Forewarning
What is the time gap between warning and impact?What are the warning signs and signals for each hazard affecting the community?
Speed of onset
Find out the rapidity of hazard arrival and impact. Indicate the length of time between warning and arrival of hazard.
Secondary Hazard
What secondary impacts of the hazard have the community experienced?
Adopted and modified from ADPC (2006) and Tearfund (2004) 1. C
ateg
ory
2. In
form
atio
n / Q
uest
ions
3.
Vul
nera
bilit
y Si
tuat
ion
4. E
xist
ing
capa
citie
s to
re
duce
vul
nera
bilit
y
5. R
ecom
men
datio
ns
(Act
ions
nee
ded
to d
ecre
ase
vuln
erab
ilitie
s an
d in
crea
se
capa
citie
s)*
Haz
ard
: Flo
od
For
com
mun
ityFo
r or
gani
zatio
n
Fina
ncia
l Cap
ital
• So
urce
s of
inco
me/
livel
ihoo
ds•
Ave
rage
hou
seho
ld in
com
e•
Expe
nditu
re: it
ems
and
cost
• Sa
ving
s•
Loan
s•
Prop
ertie
s/ec
onom
ic a
sset
s (fo
r fa
rm la
nd, in
clud
e he
ctar
es o
f cul
tivat
ed a
rea
and
prod
uce)
Nat
ural
Cap
ital
• Ex
istin
g na
tura
l ass
ets,
such
as
fore
st, r
iver
s, so
il, w
ater
, etc
.
1110
1. C
ateg
ory
2. In
form
atio
n / Q
uest
ions
3.
Vul
nera
bilit
y Si
tuat
ion
4. E
xist
ing
capa
citie
s to
re
duce
vul
nera
bilit
y
5. R
ecom
men
datio
ns
(Act
ions
nee
ded
to d
ecre
ase
vuln
erab
ilitie
s an
d in
crea
se
capa
citie
s)*
Haz
ard
: Flo
od
For
com
mun
ityFo
r or
gani
zatio
n
Phys
ical
Cap
ital
• In
fras
truc
ture
(in
dica
te
num
ber)
: H
ouse
s in
haz
ard-
pron
e ar
ea, in
clud
ing
type
s su
ch a
s: ro
ads
– sc
hool
s –
hosp
itals
– el
ectr
icity
net
wor
k –
dam
– t
empo
rary
she
lter
• To
ols
& e
quip
men
t th
at
peop
le u
se fo
r pr
oduc
tive
purp
oses
Hum
an C
apita
l
Peop
le’s
• Ph
ysic
al h
ealth
• Kn
owle
dge
• Sk
ills
1. C
ateg
ory
2. In
form
atio
n / Q
uest
ions
3.
Vul
nera
bilit
y Si
tuat
ion
4. E
xist
ing
capa
citie
s to
re
duce
vul
nera
bilit
y
5. R
ecom
men
datio
ns
(Act
ions
nee
ded
to d
ecre
ase
vuln
erab
ilitie
s an
d in
crea
se
capa
citie
s)*
Haz
ard
: Flo
od
For
com
mun
ityFo
r or
gani
zatio
n
Soci
al C
apita
l
Rel
atio
nshi
ps a
nd n
etw
orks
w
ithin
the
com
mun
ity a
s w
ell
as w
ith p
eopl
e ou
tsid
e th
e co
mm
unity
. The
se in
clud
e:
• R
elat
ions
hips
• C
omm
ittee
s•
Net
wor
ks•
Cul
tura
l pra
ctic
es•
Valu
es•
Lead
ersh
ip
Sour
ce: m
odifi
ed fr
om t
he S
usta
inab
le L
ivel
ihoo
d Fr
amew
ork
1312
1. R
esul
ts o
f H
azar
d A
naly
sis
2. R
esul
ts o
f Vu
lner
abili
ty A
naly
sis
3. R
esul
ts o
f Cap
acity
Ana
lysi
s4.
Rec
omm
enda
tions
:D
RR
- m
itiga
te, p
repa
re fo
r, an
d re
spon
d to
dis
aste
r im
pact
s; C
CA
• W
hat
singl
e or
mul
tiple
haz
ards
is
the
com
mun
ity fa
ced
with
? Whi
ch
are
mos
t sig
nific
ant?
Ref
errin
g to
oc
curr
ence
, fre
quen
cy/r
etur
n pe
riod,
in
tens
ity a
nd d
urat
ion
as w
ell a
s ex
posu
re o
f affe
cted
fam
ilies,
how
do
the
se h
azar
ds c
ompa
re?
• Is
ther
e ev
iden
ce o
f cha
ngin
g tr
ends
in
the
haz
ards
, or
are
new
haz
ards
em
ergi
ng?
• W
hat
are
the
top
five
vuln
erab
ilitie
s of
the
com
mun
ity?
• Ex
plai
n th
e vu
lner
abilit
ies
in r
elat
ion
to t
he id
entifi
ed h
azar
ds a
ffect
ing
the
com
mun
ity, a
nd h
ow t
hese
mak
e th
e co
mm
unity
sus
cept
ible
to
thos
e ha
zard
s.
• W
hat
are
the
top
five
capa
citie
s av
aila
ble
in t
he c
omm
unity
? •
Expl
ain
thei
r re
latio
nshi
ps a
nd h
ow
they
incr
ease
the
res
ilienc
e of
the
co
mm
unity
. •
Iden
tify
the
top
five
wea
knes
ses
and
disc
uss
them
as
part
of a
noth
er
para
grap
h un
der
vuln
erab
ilitie
s.
Giv
en t
he H
azar
d Vu
lner
abilit
y C
apac
ity
Ass
essm
ents
, iden
tify
the
mos
t pr
essin
g as
sista
nce
need
ed t
o re
duce
th
e vu
lner
abilit
ies
and
incr
ease
the
ca
paci
ties
of t
he c
omm
unity
.
Ans
wer
s
1. T
ool
2. R
esul
ts o
f Haz
ard
Ana
lysi
s3.
Res
ults
of
Vul
nera
bilit
y A
naly
sis
4. R
esul
ts o
f Cap
acity
Ana
lysi
s
5. R
ecom
men
datio
ns:
DR
R -
miti
gate
, pre
pare
for,
and
resp
ond
to d
isas
ter
impa
cts;
**
CC
A
Tool
1(S
ee W
orks
heet
4)
Tool
2(S
ee W
orks
heet
7)
3Sy
nthe
sis S
tate
men
ts
1514
1. LEAP Component and Output
2. Parameters for Review 3. Yes 4. No5. Recom-
mendations
Assessment Report
2.1 Does the assessment document tackle the hazards that affect the community, including their characteristics?
2.2 Does it discuss how the hazards can impact the community?
2.3 Does it explain the vulnerabilities of the community?
Data related to vulnerabilities includes:Historical data: - Number of deaths - Number of families affected - Number and economic damage
of infrastructure such as schools, hospitals, roads and agricultural assets
- Livelihoods and economic assets of communities impacted
- Properties of communities affected - Public services affected
Current socio-economic data: - Total population - Population under 5 years - Population over 65 years - Average number of family members - HDI ranking - Education enrollment rate - Poverty rate - Average family income - Sources of family income - Critical infrastructure - Community properties and
economic assets - Public services
Vulnerable Groups and Socio-cultural Practices: - Other vulnerable groups: PWDs,
HIV/AIDS, women and children - Cultural practices that make
everyone, vulnerable groups, environment, infrastructure, economic assets or public services particularly vulnerable to disaster risk
1. LEAP Component and Output
2. Parameters for Review 3. Yes 4. No5. Recom-
mendations
2.4 Does it communicate the capacities of the community?
Capacities include: - Institutional arrangements - Laws, policies, regulations - Disaster risk management plans;
climate change adaptation plans (or CCA integrated in DRM Plan)
- Early warning system - Physical capital, e.g. infrastructure - Social capital, e.g. NGOs and
community-based organizations - Human capital, e.g. community
health, knowledge, skills, and practices
- Financial capital, e.g. sources of income, assets (for farm land, indicate hectares of cultivated area and produce)
- Natural capital, e.g. natural resources such as forests, rivers, fresh water sources
2.5 Does it identify recommendations to reduce vulnerabilities and increase capacities to mitigate, prepare for, and respond to disaster impacts and climate change adaptation?
Project Design Document
2.6 Does the description of programme and/or project identify the hazards and their behavior as one of the issues confronting the community?
2.7 Does the PDD sufficiently explain the vulnerabilities of the community with respect to the hazards?
2.8 Does the PDD identify the community capacities and sufficiently explain their links?
1716
1. LEAP Component and Output
2. Parameters for Review 3. Yes 4. No5. Recom-
mendations
2.9 Are the different levels of objectives clearly linked to the risk assessment (hazard, vulnerability, capacity), i.e. where relevant, they intentionally and strategically reduce the vulnerabilities and increase capacities? Levels of objectives include: goal, outcomes, outputs, activities, inputs.
2.10 Does the log frame reflect intentional and strategic disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation in the community?This should include outcomes, outputs, activities and inputs sensitive to the DRR Assessment, including undertaking community-based DRR and CCA as an outcome where appropriate?
2.11 Do the indicators show a clear link with the intended goal and outcomes?
2.12 Does the log frame identify and address risks identified in the DRR Assessment that may threaten the achievement of the different levels of objectives?
2.13 Does the PDD identify potential negative impacts of the project to the community and environment? Does it articulate prevention and/or mitigation measures to address possible negative project impacts?
1. Stage 2. Information / Questions3. Answers (Explain
and provide recommen-dations, if necessary)
Prior to project implemen-tation
2.1 Are baseline data well-established to be able to track project progress and impact?
2.2 Do the indicators capture the intended results/outcomes and impact in the lives of the community? Of the vulnerable groups?
2.3 Do monitoring and evaluation tools capture DRR concerns and measures stipulated in the PDD, including their integration in the entire project cycle?
2.4 Are monitoring and evaluation tools and approaches participatory?
2.5 Do staff have the necessary understanding and capacity? Is capacity building undertaken to enable staff?
During project implemen-tation
2.6 Are the inputs (human and financial) provided as stated in the approved budget of the PDD?
2.7 Are activities and outputs delivered according to the timeline indicated in the Detailed Implementation Plan of the PDD?
2.8 Are desired outcomes resulting from the activities and outputs as indicated in the PDD?
2.9 What unintended outputs and outcomes have emerged? Are they indicated in project reports?
2.10 Are the management structures and mechanisms to ensure DRR and CCA integration and consideration of vulnerable groups carried out within the project?
2.11 Are there ongoing capacity building for staff to ensure that their needs to meet emerging challenges are addressed?
2.12 Are monitoring and evaluation tools and approaches carried out to be participatory to really understand the outcomes and impacts of the project to the lives of communities? Of vulnerable groups?
1918
Parameters for
EvaluationInformation / Questions
Answers (for the Project Evaluator and relevant
World Vision staff)*
Relevance 3 Was the project well-conceived given the risk assessments?
4 How did the project respond to the identified needs of the target community/ies?
5 How did project respond to the particular needs of vulnerable groups, e.g. children, women, elderly, PWDs, etc.
6 To what extent does it contribute to the overall programme?
Effectiveness 7 To what extent have the planned results/outcomes been achieved?
8 What has affected achievement of results/outcomes?
9 How did vulnerable groups participate in the project?
Impacts 10 To what extent has the project contributed to longer term outcomes of the programme?
11 What were unintended/unanticipated outcomes (positive and negative)?
12 Has the project enhanced the status and capacities of vulnerable groups in adapting to climate change and preparing for and responding to, and mitigating disasters?
13 Are there sex-disaggregated data available to analyze how their situation has changed?
Efficiency 14 Was the project delivered in a timely and cost-effective manner?
Sustainability 15 Is there an enabling environment that supports ongoing positive impacts?
External Utility
16 To what extent is the project replicable in another situation?
1. H
azar
d El
emen
ts2.
Info
rmat
ion
/ Que
stio
ns3.
Des
crip
tion
of t
he c
hang
es
(bas
ed o
n th
e re
sults
of W
orks
heet
5, H
azar
d A
naly
sis)
Year
1Ye
ar 2
Year
3
Haz
ard
Haz
ards
affe
ctin
g or
thr
eate
ning
the
com
mun
ity.
Loca
tion
Spec
ific
loca
tions
in t
he c
omm
unity
tha
t th
e ha
zard
s af
fect
or
thre
aten
.
His
tory
and
fu
ture
Year
s in
whi
ch t
he h
azar
d af
fect
ed t
he
com
mun
ity, a
nd it
s im
pact
s (n
o. o
f dea
ths;
no. o
f af
fect
ed fa
milie
s)
Freq
uenc
yLi
kelih
ood
of t
he h
azar
d ev
ent?
How
ofte
n do
es
it oc
cur?
Inte
nsity
Mag
nitu
de, s
cale
(e.
g. R
icht
er s
cale
, MM
I sca
le,
Beau
fort
sca
le o
r w
ind
spee
d, fl
ood
dept
h)
Dur
atio
nLe
ngth
of t
ime
of o
ccur
renc
e
Fore
war
ning
Tim
e ga
p be
twee
n w
arni
ng a
nd im
pact
.
Spee
d of
on
set
War
ning
sig
ns a
nd s
igna
ls fo
r ea
ch h
azar
d af
fect
ing
the
com
mun
ity.
Rap
idity
of h
azar
d ar
rival
and
impa
ct. I
ndic
ate
the
leng
th o
f tim
e be
twee
n w
arni
ng a
nd a
rriv
al
of h
azar
d.
Seco
ndar
y H
azar
dSe
cond
ary
impa
cts
of t
he h
azar
d to
the
co
mm
unity
.
Ado
pted
and
mod
ified
from
AD
PC (
2006
) an
d Te
arfu
nd (
2004
)
2120
1. C
ateg
ory
2. In
form
atio
n / Q
uest
ions
Des
crip
tion
of t
he c
hang
es(b
ased
on
the
resu
lts o
f W
orks
heet
6, V
ulne
rabi
lity
and
Cap
acity
Ana
lysi
s)
Year
1Ye
ar 2
Year
3
Fina
ncia
l C
apita
l•
Sour
ces
of in
com
e/liv
elih
oods
• A
vera
ge h
ouse
hold
inco
me
• Ex
pend
iture
: item
s an
d co
st•
Savi
ngs
• Lo
ans
• Pr
oper
ties/
Econ
omic
ass
ets
Nat
ural
C
apita
l•
Exist
ing
natu
ral a
sset
s, su
ch a
s fo
rest
, riv
ers,
soil,
wat
er, e
tc.
Phys
ical
C
apita
l•
Infr
astr
uctu
re -H
ouse
s in
haz
ard-
pron
e ar
ea,
incl
udin
g ty
pes
- R
oads
- Sc
hool
s - H
ospi
tals
- El
ectr
icity
net
wor
k - D
ams
- Te
mpo
rary
she
lter
• To
ols,
equi
pmen
t th
at p
eopl
e us
e fo
r pr
oduc
tive
purp
oses
1. C
ateg
ory
2. In
form
atio
n / Q
uest
ions
Des
crip
tion
of t
he c
hang
es(b
ased
on
the
resu
lts o
f W
orks
heet
6, V
ulne
rabi
lity
and
Cap
acity
Ana
lysi
s)
Year
1Ye
ar 2
Year
3
Hum
an
Cap
ital
Peop
le’s
• Ph
ysic
al h
ealth
• Kn
owle
dge
• Sk
ills
Soci
al
Cap
ital
Rel
atio
nshi
ps a
nd n
etw
orks
with
in t
he
com
mun
ity a
s w
ell a
s w
ith p
eopl
e ou
tsid
e th
e co
mm
unity
. The
se in
clud
e:
• R
elat
ions
hips
• C
omm
ittee
s•
Net
wor
ks•
Cul
tura
l pra
ctic
es•
Valu
es•
Lead
ersh
ip
Sour
ce: m
odifi
ed fr
om t
he S
usta
inab
le L
ivel
ihoo
d Fr
amew
ork
2322
No.
Elem
ents
of R
isk
Des
crip
tion
of t
he c
hang
es
(Cop
y re
sults
of
Wor
kshe
ets
12 &
13)
Impa
cts
to p
roje
ct
(act
ual a
nd p
oten
tial)
Con
trib
utio
n of
pro
ject
Rec
omm
enda
tions
1.H
azar
d Si
tuat
ion
a. L
ocat
ion
b. H
istor
y
c. F
requ
ency
d. I
nten
sity
e. D
urat
ion
f. F
orew
arni
ng
g. S
peed
of o
nset
h. S
econ
dary
haz
ard
2.C
omm
unity
Vul
nera
bilit
y &
Cap
acity
not a
pplic
able
a. H
uman
Cap
ital
not a
pplic
able
b. F
inan
cial
Cap
ital
not a
pplic
able
c. Ph
ysic
al C
apita
lno
t app
licab
le
d. N
atur
al C
apita
lno
t app
licab
le
e. S
ocia
l Cap
ital
not a
pplic
able
24
