Sri Lanka Tsunami Aid Coordination Tools

Good Practice Note Sri Lanka Tsunami Aid Coordination Tools From DAD Data Quality Assurance to Data Utilization and Improved District Planning UNDP / RADA Sri Lanka, June 2006 This paper outlines some practices and information management tools developed in Sri Lanka, for consideration by other countries and inclusion in the regional Aid Coordination Toolkit. Table of Contents 1. Coordination Overview 1 2. DAD as Information Management Instrument 4 3. Managing reporting and non-reporting agencies 4 4. DAD Data Quality Assurance and Score Card System 6 5. DAD Reporting Tool and Data Report Series 7 6. DAD and field implementation data 8 7. Improved District Planning and coordination 10 ANNEX 1 Technical Update No. 1 11 ANNEX 2 Technical Update No. 3 12 1. Coordination Overview Immediately after the disaster, at the national level, the Centre for National Operations (NCO) was formed under the President s secretariat to oversee and monitor emergency programmes and liaise with relevant parties to endure effective implementation of the relief and recovery phase. The NCO was instrumental in ensuring that government supported immediate coordination needs for in particular relief, but also recovery measures. The reconstruction programmes were coordinated by the Task Force for Rebuilding the Nation (TAFREN) and the Task Force for Logisitcs and Law and Order (TAFLOL), to ensure that the relief effort is successful and that social justice is done with respect to the affected people. The post-tsunami reconstruction and development programme was coordinated through a number of government task forces, which are now merged into the new Reconstruction and Development Authority (RADA) under the President s Office. The main componenet of RADA is the former Taskforce for Rebuilding the Nation (TAFREN) that was created as the primary coordination body for reconstruction programmes. Its main activities was to coordinate, facilitate and assist implementing organizations, coordinate donor assistance and fund raising activities, to expedite the procurement process, and to build capacity in government implementing agencies. Initially TAFREN had a flat organizational structure that included public and private sector officials and counted on international support. A new structure to more effectively manage the rebuilding exercise was introduced in September 2005 when TAFREN reorganized itself focusing on four thematic areas namely: 1. Getting people back into homes 2. Restoring Livelihoods 3. Health Education and Protection for All 4. Upgrade National Infrastructure 1

With the new President inaugurated after the elections 17 November 2005, RADA was created as a government agency by presidential decree. RADA was built on TAFRENs coordination role and capacity, but with an expanded scope of mandate meant to be approved by parliament the following year. The bill for RADAs mandate has been drafted and approved by the Attorney Generals Office, but at this moment, not yet passed by cabinet and parliament. The draft bill makes RADA an authority under the President s Office with powers over all government institutions operating in areas declared as affected by man-made or natural disasters. Since government have had to rely heavily on external resources to implement the Tsunami recovery and reconstruction programme, a large number of organisations are involved in implementing the programmes in all key sectors. A major challenge has been to ensure that all s comply with policy directives and certain principles of implementation. Thus the Guiding Principles of recovery and reconstruction were laid-down in consultation with the development s. The implementation of these may have been uneven across regions as well as across sectors due to practical difficulties, in particular in relation to equity among regions, ethnic groups and sectors which remain critical and is closely monitored. And while developing a disaster management and early warning system is making good progress, and progress on issues such as subsidiarity, consultation, transparency and accountability can be noted, significant challenges remain specifically in regard to communication and coordination. A sound integration of Tsunami initiatives with national development objectives and peace process is necessary in order to maximize the impact of Tsunami-related interventions. Since Government has committed itself to develop a National Development Strategy (not a PRSP, but similar), in particular the UN and IFIs has been keen on taking part in the national planning process and has put pressure on Ministry of Finance to accept a new national coordination mechanism were there is scope for advise from UN specialized agencies and IFIs. This is particularly due to the joint UN planning cycle producing the four-year UN Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF). These discussions have been difficult, and it seems that the reason is that the ambitions and objectives of two parties differ; while the UN and IFIs want to align their programmes with government priorities and be able to give direction to the government, the Government sees the National Development Strategy as the roll-out of the President s election programme, already and quite detailed description of promises in all key sectors. It is a promise made to the electorate, and the National Development Strategy is its instrument of implementation. Therefore, foreign involvement is met with scepticism and reluctance. After much back and forth, the UN and IFIs have agreed with the Ministry of Finance on seven Sector Working Groups, which provides the international community an opportunity to influence the National Development Strategy, and thereafter align with its implementation. It is worth noting that RADA has not been involved in setting up the proposed mechanism, even though it will also comprise Tsunami recovery. The inter-ministerial collaboration on coordination issues is in general seen as problematic, both by UN advisors and government officials involved. Implementing s and donor countries are continuously complaining about multiple request for same information from different government institutions. Ultimately, the facilitation of a one-stop-shop reporting and registration mechanism for agencies is seen as a goal shared by most parties. To get to that stage seems to be likely to take more than a year from now, even if the process is accelerated, i.e. through the established UICT Integration Working Group, which aims to coordinate integration of already existing government information management systems. Lack of community participation in tsunami recovery programs was one critical area of concern for some time. The initiative taken by RADA to formulate District Recovery Plans and Divisional Livelihood Development Plans has received a large number of positive remarks within the Tsunami affected divisions by community leaders and organizations. The main comments are that the plans 2

are comprehensive, identifying duplications and gaps, and projects and activities are identified with the direct involvement of all local stakeholders, including the communities, business leaders, government, banks, INGOs and donor organizations. The ICT Integration Working Group is established to coordinate integration of already existing government information management systems. These systems have been identified in two broad categories, or what have been labelled thrust areas. The first is development planning systems containing project data, while the other is public registries containing personal data. A workshop was organised in April 2006 where all the various systems were presented, and the way forward with system integration was discussed. The recommendations from the workshop suggested a steering committee was established for each of the thrust areas, composed of the government agencies with the relevant information systems. The role of RADA as a coordination body under the President is focused on facilitating and supporting ministries in implementing programmes planned and provide policy guidance to ensure that all agencies are operating according to the same principles and objectives. In the Disaster Management Cycle, RADA has a lesser role in the prevention of disaster, but rather in giving policy direction and planning to mobilizing resources for programmes implemented by government or external agencies. Thereafter, RADA will monitor and facilitate coordination of the programmes, and make policy adjustments as necessary to accelerate the process. The RADA Donor Coordination Unit that supports agencies to report to DAD is also providing a broader coordination support role for Tsunami recovery: 1. Maintaining the coordination mechanism, ensuring regular meetings takes place and report / communicate vertically on specific issues to seek resolution and support execution of such resolutions. 2. Monitoring and analyse Aid Flows within each sector through DAD, and provide regular information products that informs all parties who does what where, with what outputs and to what costs, in order to avoid duplication of efforts and forgotten / unmet needs. 3. Assess the unmet funding requirements within each sector. Based on prioritization of sectors, support programme areas in identifying new projects and funding sources. Due to the ambitions of the DAD system and the level of support required for agencies to report, the unit has given priority to project tracking over the broader coordination support it also should provide within RADA. Since the DAD is now more established, the priorities of the unit may change to support a more efficient coordination mechanism. One of the problems in coordination, is that the meetings occurs on an ad-hoc basis with the scope of solving immediate problems arising or immediate tasks at hand. It is a challenge to get the coordination mechanism to work systematically and in a structured manner. The functionality of the coordination meetings varies according to the agencies and persons involved. Another key issue has been the vertical information flow from central level to the district authorities. Weak information management and unclear directives from various institutions to district authorities with little capacity has been a major cause of coordination problems. The weak capacity of district authorities are now being addressed though UNDP and ILO capacity development support, and remains of high priority. 3

2. DAD as Information Management Instrument RADA utilize a number of information management tools to make its work more efficient. Somce of the tools are internally used by the various programme units, while the Development Assistance Database (DAD) is a publicly accessible system involving all major s. The Development Assistance Database (DAD) is an Aid Coordination tool aiming at tracking resources and results in order to facilitate coordination and enhanced decision-making. The immediate objectives and outcomes of the Development Assistance Database (DAD) are: 1. Impose transparency and accountability on all parties involved in delivering aid assistance to disaster recovery. Transparency by making data on project funding activities and outputs publicly available to all s and beneficiaries. Accountability by holding organisations as legal entities responsible for managing funds spent for its intended purpose. 2. Track and monitor the flow of funds and resources from source to implementation, the project activities undertaken and its outputs. 3. Analyse aid flows, activity and outputs, and make data analysis easily available in formats practical and user friendly for all s to use for programming and coordination purposes. The DAD record projects and tracks funding across three levels for each project; - Funding Agency (i.e. bilateral donor) - 1st level Partner (i.e. UN Agency) - 2nd level Partner (i.e. NGO / Contractor) All data in DAD is reported online through the web application by the reporting agencies funding or implementing the project reported. The reporting agency (shown as Data Source in the Project records) are responsible for the data reported. Currently, agencies are only required to report Tsunami-related projects, and only agencies with a significant project portfolio (above USD 1 mill) are requested to report. The DAD also has a module for the Donor-driven Housing Programme, in which RADA District Engineers report progress on each construction site and housing project. A Module for Organisation Profiles is under development. The DAD Stakeholder Group is an advisory committee comprising representatives of the UN Country Team, the Bilateral Donor Group, the NGO Forum, and the Communications / Media Group. The DAD Stakeholder group is a sounding board for DAD developments, usage and analysis, and aims to help RADA address concerns and adjust DAD requirements in line with user demand. For the DAD users RADA produces a Technical Update series, which publishes information and analysis about the quantity and quality of data entered. All DAD pre-made reports are available in the Web Portal, accessible using the menu to the left. Should you want to design your own report or browse DAD online, use the link under. 3. Managing reporting and non-reporting agencies Data quantity is monitored in the Agency Monitoring Directory, that brings together agency data from a multitude of sources (i.e. UN, Ministry of Finance, NGO Secretariat / Ministry of Social Services). In the directory, all agencies are given an internal focal point among the aid coordination 4

officers, who are responsible for updating and maintaining the data in their designated agencies. Currently there are approximately 600 agencies in the directory. Monitoring of all agencies, reporting and non-reporting. Reports within the Monitoring Directory should be made with regards to how many non-reporting agencies there are per agency type, and how much outstanding pledges are not committed in the DAD. This analysis, together with estimates of activities volume, should guide the prioritisation of agencies, as recorded in one of the columns in the directory. The agencies are prioritized (from 1-5), giving first priority to agencies with assumed project portfolio above USD 1 mill. The following steps are taken for prioritized agencies that are not reporting to DAD: 1. Agency is requested to identify DAD Data focal Point 2. DAD Data Focal points are trained / briefed in how to enter and manage their data in DAD. 3. Respective RADA Aid Coordination Officers provide technical support as needed for agency to manage their data and keep it up-to-date. This also includes addressing broader coordination issues related to implemented programmes. For reporting agencies, the Aid Coordination Officers are: 1. Screening for Agency commitments that are still not reflected in DAD. 2. Monitor the data quality of Agency data reported to DAD, and provide support to improve the quality of key data fields (see next chapter). 3. Ensure no duplicate records are recorded by s and funding agencies on the same project, and that these agencies communicate as to ensure the best possible reporting. 4. Regularly follow-up to address and record coordination-related issues, complaints and suggestions taken up by agency. 5

4. DAD Data Quality Assurance and Score Card System Data quality is monitored through the Data Quality Score Card system. This is an MS Access report that queries the back-end tables of the DAD database. The report gives each project record a score for reporting on a number of prioritized data fields. The average Data Quality Score per agency is imported to the Agency Monitoring Directory for easy reference and follow-up, in particular on agencies with a low score. Data Quality Score per Agency and Project, with scores per key data fields The total average score for agencies dedicated to each Aid Coordination Officer, is also recorded and indicates performance of data quality support provided. This creates a level of healthy competition internally in the unit, and ensures that there are no big discrepancies and agencies left behind (which will pull down the score for an officer dramatically). These scores are a reference for weekly internal meetings, and how agencies are prioritised for follow-up. The changes to the overall Data Quality Scores is recorded and mapped out in the chart under. This gives a comprehensive picture of the quality of the dataset, and the improvement made of all the reporting agencies over time. Date Project Descripti on Timeline Gov.cou nter-part Disb. Expendit ure funding agency 1stlvl 2ndlvl sector district outputs Overall Data Quality Score 27.2 89% 27%* 69% 79% 42% 96% 100% 45% 95% 94% 60% 71% 29.3 90% 74% 72% 77% 47% 96% 100% 50% 95% 94% 60% 75% 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 6.02 13.2 20.2 27.2 29.3 20% 10% 0% Project Desc Timeline Gov.count er-part Disb. Exp. funding agency 1stlvl 2ndlvl sector district outputs Overall Data Quality Score (Annex 1) The overall Data Quality analysis, provides an understanding of how representative aggregate figures are, in particular for financial reports and analysis. If only 20% of projects have reported expenditure, 6

this should be referenced when aggregate expenditure figures are reported, and not presented as the actual situation. The Data Quality Score of each agency is presented in the DAD Technical Update Series where the agencies are ranked starting from highest data quality and most up-to-date data, to the lowest quality data and least frequent updating agency. Public listing of agencies and quality of data reported (Technical Update No. 3) Publishing the quality of data and when agencies last updated their information, creates some healthy visibility competition among the agencies. Agencies that does not take their reporting obligations seriously will be discredited, while agencies that report well will be credited, being on the top of the list for their organisation type. Thus, visibility is used as incentive to report according to expectations. The DAD Stakeholder Group has endorsed this strategy of both naming and faming and naming and shaming, ensuring that there is equal opportunity for credit and discredit. Experience shows that agencies are very sensitive to bad publicity, and are often willing to invest efforts in getting good visibility for their activities. 5. DAD Reporting Tool and Data Report Series The DAD Reporting Tool is an MS Access database file, in which back-end tables are automatically copied from the DAD database. The tool can generate a series of pre-defined reports, more complex than those which are possibly produced directly from the DAD web application. 7

DAD Reporting Tool MS Access interface, May 2006 The DAD Reporting Tool is available for download from the RADA web portal, and distributed on CD-ROM. It does not require internet access, and is thus ideal for usage in the field, and in government offices without internet facilities. The DAD Data Report Series is a compilation of reports generated from the Reporting Tool. The Report Series is a bi-monthly production of relevant data analysis and project details for each sector and district. Apart from sector and district-specific report compilation, the report series also entails a complete project directory is also produced, which contains the total volume of DAD reporting project, for easy reference and look-up. 1 Complete Project Directory 8 Sector Reports 13 District Reports CD-ROM with reports and MS Access Reporting Tool Web Portal w/integrated DAD reports,, all data report series and MS Access Reporting Tool DAD Data Report Series The report series will primarily be disseminated electronically through the DAD Reporting Tool, web portal and a CD-ROM. In addition, a printed set of hardcopy reports are distributed for relevant government ministries and district authorities, who are less likely to use the electronic version. 6. DAD and field implementation data The District Coordination and Planning System (CAPS) is an extension of DAD in the field to support and facilitate improved field coordination. CAPS is a database developed in MS Access, designed to operate at district level and to capture key data on the supply of livelihoods recovery activities at district and divisional level. The objective of the CAPS is to strengthen decentralized planning and coordination of livelihood recovery activities. 8

The CAPS allows implementing agencies to share information about their district level project activities in a systematic way with all stakeholders (implementing agencies, government actors) working in the same district and division. The data is collected through organization-specific CAPS client forms, distributed to all s active in livelihood recovery in the districts. CAPS client forms can be installed on any computer. Completed or updated client forms are returned to the district database, from where reports are produced and disseminated. Information collected by CAPS is integrated into the DAD, thereby allowing DAD to track funds and project activities from funding agency, through first and second level /contracting agency right down to the GN village cluster level. This is, however, dependent on CAPS reporting agencies referring to the DAD Project Code of the projects on which they report. CAPS Interface The 2nd edition of the DAD Data Report Series indicates whether or not CAPS information is reported for each of the projects. From the DAD District Data Report for Ampara (DAD Project Code to the left and CAPS reference to the right). 9

In future editions, more CAPS data, in particular on village interventions, will be presented in the Data Report Series, alongside the DAD data entered in Colombo. This may also allow for a feedback-loop, where field agency staff and district authorities give more reliable and detailed information and comments on progress of project implementation. 7. Improved District Planning and coordination The DAD District Data Reports are an integral part of capacity development of District Authorities and the development of District Recovery Plans. The DAD reports describe all Tsunami recovery funds entering the district, and all the resources available for the various organisations. This enables the district authorities to have a better understanding of the activities of all the organisations operating in the district, and where their funding came from and what outputs are expected from their resources. Thus, the District DAD reports enables vertical accountability from the national level to the district, by ensuring transparency of funds, resources and expected results. It also allows district authorities to reference and address concerns over specific project progress, providing a feedback-loop to national level. 13 District Reports DAD District Planning Support Package CD-ROM with reports and MS Access Reporting Tool The District reports also empowers district authorities to take better charge of coordination in their district, having a complete detailed inventory of all agencies and projects operating in their area of responsibility. The District Coordination Committee comprise all senior government officials and representatives of the humanitarian and development community. This committee now has a tool to look up and reference reports on progress of specific projects or agencies operating in their district. To facilitate the usage of the District DAD Data Reports, RADA is also supported by the UNDP CADREP project, which provides capacity development support to the Ministry of Public Administration and the Tsunami-affected District Authorities. The CADREP projects has recruited and deployed additional human resources to the districts, including specific functions in relation to information management, and the usage of DAD. This ensures that the reports are utilized and that on-the-job training is provided to allow the respective officials to use it. The CADREP project also supports the development of District Recovery Plans, in conjunction with the development of Divisional Livelihood Development Plans. By having a complete overview of the resources in the district, the plan may also have an impact on aid utilization, searching for complementarities and synergies between individual agency s efforts. Due to the reports, the Recovery Plans will account for all commitments in the district. By doing so, it formalizes expectations of agencies to generate the outputs that have been promised. 10

Housing Module The Tsunami permanent housing programme has two components; donor-driven housing and owner-driven housing. The ownerdriven housing programme involves cash instalments transferred to house owners through the banking system, allowing them to repair / rehabilitate their damaged houses. The donor-driven housing programme involves construction of new houses in locations outside the buffer zone, and is implemented by a wide range of organisations. All of these organisations have signed agreements with RADA for the houses they construct, and RADA District Engineers report on the progress for each project on all construction sites. Both the agreement details and the progress reports are reported and available in DAD. Date No. of construction sites No. of donor organisations No. of projects 29.3 344 253 469 Organisation Profile The Organisation Profile is under development and therefore not yet public. Collaboration with the NGO Secretariat, Ministry of Social Services and Social Welfare is initiated, which will result in all registered NGOs be presented with registration details in DAD. Reconstruction and Development Agency (RADA) donorcord@tafren.gov.lk / www.rada.gov.lk

DAD Technical Update RADA, Donor Coordination Unit The Development Assistance Database (DAD) is an online web application that allows agencies to report their projects and share information on objectives, funding sources, implementing s and progress of implementation. RADA is supporting agencies to report, and facilitate the usage of the DAD, in order to track funding resources and results and to better facilitate efficient aid coordination. It is also a platform for other modules of related datasets, such as the donor-driven housing module, and the organisation profile. Reporting and non-reporting Agencies* Volume 3 May 04 2006 DAD Reporting Agencies Multilaterals International Private Agency Type Bilaterals UN Agencies INGOs NNGOs Total / IFIs Organisations Sector Monitored** 5 2 41 16 220 34 241 559 Reporting 5 2 15 11 29 6 2 70 Non-reporting* - - 1 1 7 4 1 14 * These agencies have been invited to report to DAD because they have a significant project portfolio. They have identified DAD Focal Points and received training and support from RADA Aid Coordination Officers. Non-reporting agencies have yet to report to DAD, despite training of focal points. ** Agencies with a less significant project portfolio are not requested to report to DAD. They may still be referred to in the DAD as implementing s, but reported by other agencies. Agencies not referred to in DAD are still monitored by RADA, but outside DAD. Multi-laterals / IFIs Agency No. of Projects Reporting Data Quality Last Updated World Bank (WB) 4 Above Average February 2006 Asian Development Bank (ADB) 9 Average April 2006 European Union (EU) 23 Below Average January 2006 International Monetary Fund (IMF) 1 Below Average December 2005 European Commission Humanitarian Office (ECHO) 18 Below Average April 2006 International Organisations Agency No. of Projects Data Quality Last Updated International Federation of Red Cross (IFRC) 118 Above Average April 2006 International Organisation for Migration (IOM) 9 Above Average February 2006 Bilaterals Agency No. of Projects Reporting Data Quality Last Updated Japan Embassy 10 Above Average April 2006 United States of America Embassy 19 Above Average April 2006 Korea Embassy 3 Above Average March 2006 British High Commission (UK) 15 Above Average February 2006 Norway Embassy 11 Above Average February 2006 France 15 Average April 2006 Sweden 10 Average February 2006 Netherlands Embassy 8 Average January 2006 Canada High Commission 27 Below Average March 2006 Italy Embassy 61 Below Average February 2006 Denmark 6 Below Average February 2006 Germany Embassy 16 Below Average February 2006 Indian High Commission 2 Below Average January 2006 Switzerland Embassy 3 Below Average November 2005 Non-reporting Agency Date of Training Status Australia September 2005 - UN Agencies Agency No. of Projects Reporting Data Quality Last Updated United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) 16 Above Average April 2006 United Nations Children s Fund (UNICEF) 8 Above Average April 2006 World Food Programme (WFP) 1 Above Average April 2006 Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) 13 Above Average April 2006 United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) 5 Above Average February 2006 United Nations High Commissionaire for Refugees (UNCHR) 2 Above Average February 2006 World Health Organisation (WHO) 7 Average February 2006 International Labour Organisation (ILO) 4 Average February 2006 United Nations Human Settlement Fund (UN-HABITAT) 16 Below Average February 2006 Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) 2 Below Average January 2006 IFAD 2 Below Average November 2005 Reconstruction and Development Agency (RADA) donorcord@tafren.gov.lk / www.rada.gov.lk

International NGOs Agency No. of Projects Reporting Data Quality Last Updated Care Sri Lanka 13 Above Average March 2006 World Vision 3 Above Average April 2006 World Conservation Union (IUCN) 1 Above Average* March 2006 Christian Children s Fund (CCF) 5 Above Average March 2006 Oxfam Netherlands 12 Above Average March 2006 Plan International 1 Above Average March 2006 FORUT 7 Above Average February 2006 UMCOR 1 Above Average January 2006 YMCA 16 Above Average January 2006 Solidarite 12 Average March 2006 Comite d aide Medicale (CAM) 1 Average April 2006 Oxfam UK 1 Average April 2006 Johanniter International Assistance 4 Average March 2006 Merlin 2 Average March 2006 Practical Action (ITDG) 1 Average March 2006 GOAL 5 Average March 2006 Norwegian Refugee s Council (NRC) 10 Average February 2006 Samaritarian s Purse International Relief 7 Average January 2006 Action Contre Faime (ACF) 2 Average January 2006 Community Hope Trust Fund 9 Below Average April 2006 Oxfam Australia 2 Below Average March 2006 Basic Needs 1 Below Average March 2006 Concern Worldwide 6 Below Average March 2006 Americares 5 Below Average February 2006 Islamic Relief 1 Below Average February 2006 JCCP 22 Below Average February 2006 Save the Children 1 Below Average February 2006 Aktion Deutschland Hilft 1 Below Average October 2005 World University Service of Canada (WUSC) 1 Below Average October 2005 Non-reporting Agency Date of Training Status Action Aid March 2006 Data entry Caritas August 2005 - DRC October 2005 - HelpAge Sri Lanka August 2006 - Mercy Corps SL October 2005 Data entry SOS Children s Villages of SL September 2005 - World Relief September 2005 - National NGOs Agency No. of Projects Reporting Data Quality Last Updated Pattakannu Foundation 1 Average April 2006 People in Need 12 Below Average October 2005 Non-reporting Agency Date of Training Status Centre for Human Development October 2005 - Tamil Rehabilitation Organisation (TRO) October 2005 - National Christian Council of Sri Lanka September 2005 - Rural Development Foundation (RDF) September 2005 - Private Sector Agency No. of Projects Reporting Data Quality Last Updated Colliers Kirinda Trust 1 Above Average* March 2006 MAS Holding 1 Below Average February 2006 Non-reporting Agency Date of Training Status National Agri-Business Council September 2005 - * Top Data Quality Score Reconstruction and Development Agency (RADA) donorcord@tafren.gov.lk / www.rada.gov.lk