united nations development programme fiji multi-country office · albeit staffed by a solitary...

1

United Nations Development Programme

Fiji Multi-Country Office

Enhancing livelihood recovery through food security in the aftermath of

natural disasters in Fiji

UNDAF Outcome 1: By 2017 the most vulnerable communities across the PICTs are more resilient with

particular focus on communities, through integrated implementation of sustainable environmental management,

climate change adaptation/mitigation, and disaster risk management.

Expected Outcome: Improved resilience of PICTs, with particular focus on communities, through integrated

implementation of sustainable environment management, climate change adaptation/mitigation and disaster risk

management

Expected Outputs: i. Livelihoods in Disaster Prone Communities with specific focus on subsistence and semi-subsistence

agriculture and food security is restored and Community Driven Emergency Employment implemented.

ii. Enhanced capacity of the Department of Agriculture and stakeholders in strengthening disaster risk

resilience and mitigation in the agriculture sector

iii. Lessons emerging from effective M & E are codified and disseminated

Implementing Partner/Executing Entity: Direct Implementation by UNDP Fiji Multi Country Office

Responsible Parties/Implementing Agencies: Ministry of Rural and Maritime Development (MRMD) and

Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF)

Agreed by (Ministry of Strategic Planning, Fiji):

Agreed by UNDP:

Overview

The agriculture sector has experienced massive financial losses due to floods and cyclones over the past 5 years

(dating back to 2008). Based on current prices, the Fiji Bureau of Statistics estimates a 27% decline in total

agriculture output from 2007 till 2010. With the sector showing signs of recovery through increase in overall output

in 2011, it was dealt a severe blow in 2012. Firstly the industry, particularly in the Western Parts of Fiji, was

decimated through the two floods in January and April 2012. Further recovery was also impacted by Tropical

Cyclone Evans which caused infrastructure and agricultural damages to the 3 provinces in the Western Division

(Nadroga, Ba and Rakiraki). The correlation between a thriving and prosperous agriculture industry to improved

standards of living for all citizens is an issue which needs to be further explored. This is particularly important for

those dependent on the sector for their livelihoods but also those that are indirectly linked such as consumers.

Abundance of food supplies allows families, particularly in the low income bracket, to meet essential needs within

their meager budgets thus allowing for surplus or disposable income to be spent on children’ education, health etc.

Conversely a decline in food supply leads to higher costs of living and related social problems. UNDP as the lead

agency for “Human Development” and Early Recovery in Post Disaster situations is well placed to offer assistance

through the Government of Fiji focusing on 2 key areas: i) Assisting in livelihoods recovery by focusing on

improvement in food security methods for vulnerable communities affected by natural disasters and ii) Enhancing

capacity in the Dept. of Agriculture to address disaster risk mitigation and providing support to vulnerable

communities to improve resilience to climate change and natural disasters.

Estimated annualized budget: USD370,000

Total resources required USD370,000

Total allocated resources:

Regular USD180,000 Other:

o BCPR USD150,000 o GoF USD40,000

Unfunded budget: Nil

In-kind Contributions

Programme Period: 2013 - 2017

CPAP Programme Component: Outcome 1

Atlas Award ID: ______________

Start date: 1 May 2013 End Date 30 April 2015 PAC Meeting Date ______________

2

I. SITUATION ANALYSIS

Context:

The Republic of Fiji Island consists of 322 Islands with a total population of 837,271 people

(2007 Census). The most populated islands are Viti-Levu and Vanua-Levu. Fiji is endowed

with forest, mineral and fish resources, and is one of the more developed of the Pacific Island

economies, though still with a large subsistence sector.

Agriculture in particular plays an important part in Fiji’s overall development. It provides

food and income security, promotes community development in rural areas, generates income

to approximately 65 percent of the total

population and creates foreign exchange

earnings for the country. The sector,

characterized by the once dominant sugar

industry, has experienced major decline in

the past decade, with the expiry of land

leases and natural disasters as major

contributing factors. Their impact can be

seen through the decline in the total

commercial agricultural output from 2007

to 2010 (refer green line as per Graph 1).

While overall output in the sector started to

increase in 2011, the double impact of the

floods in January and March, 2012 and

Tropical Cyclone Evan in December will

contribute to another year of decline. This

in turn seriously undermines all the efforts

made by the Government and stakeholders

after 2010.

A UNDP sponsored study1, commissioned in the aftermath of the 2009 floods to develop a

disaster risk management (DRM) strategy for the agriculture sector, confers; “circumstantial

evidence suggests that natural disasters in Fiji particularly those caused by cyclones and

heavy rainfall, can no longer be regarded as exceptional one-off events”. The report further

makes recommendations to: i) build the DRM capacity of the Department of Agriculture

(DoA) and ii) to assist high risk rural communities implement strategies to mitigate the

impact of natural disasters on livelihoods and food security. With the turn of events in

2012, the importance of integrating disaster risk management into all aspects of agriculture

sector cannot be understated and in fact needs to be pursued within all possible means.

In terms of response to the 2010 study, the DoA has taken a number of

recommendations on board, chief amongst which is the establishment of the Disaster

Coordinating Unit (DCU) within Economic Planning and Statistics Division of the DoA,

albeit staffed by a solitary staff member who simultaneously manages other portfolios. The

formulation and implementation of a DRM Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) is the

second initiative that has been undertaken following the study. Further the Land and Water

1 Atkinson, G (2010)

Graph 1: Source: Fiji Bureau of Statistics (2011)

3

Resources Management Unit (LWRM) within the DOA has collaborated extensively with

Pacific Adaptation to Climate Change (PACC)2 in implementing programmes targeted at

improving food security in low lying coastal communities vulnerable to floods and saltwater

intrusion. The PACC project has also supported the planting of disaster resistant crop

varieties which is currently being trialed in 2 locations of the main island of Viti Levu.

In terms of supporting livelihoods recovery in post disaster situations, UNDP through

an allocation from its Bureau of Conflict Prevention and Recovery (BCPR) and cost-sharing

from AusAID, implemented Cash-for-Work (CFW) Programme, following the 2012 Floods

targeting 27 affected communities in the Rakiraki and Nadi Districts. The main focus of this

CFW was to assist in cleaning up and planting of crops to supplement food security and

livelihoods. In terms of the latter, a total of 22 hectares of land was cultivated and an assorted

variety of vegetables and fruits were grown and later harvested for domestic consumption and

retail. However an assessment conducted in December 2012 i.e. after Cyclone Evan, in the

CFW sites showed that nearly all of the farms supported under the programme suffered

extensive damage and majority of the beneficiaries did not have the capacity or the resources

to re-establish their farms without some means of external support. On the brighter side, a

minority (5 of the 27 communities) were able to generate some form of resilience as savings

accumulated from the sale of harvested crops prior to TC Evan was invested into the

rehabilitation of farms3.

In the aftermath of TC Evan (December 2012) the Government of Fiji (GoF) asked

that a Humanitarian Action Plan (HAP) be prepared to identify urgent disaster response needs

and immediate rehabilitation activities.

Through the HAP the GoF has requested UNDP assistance to the Food Security

cluster (which is internally led by Department of Agriculture) and in particular to support the

re-establishment of livelihoods for communities that suffered extensive damages. The GoF

has expressed support for the use of the CFW model in supplementing livelihoods.

Additionally, this proposal conforms to Fiji Government’s overall policy objectives in the

area of Food Security and Agricultural Development which states that “….Fiji is served by a

thriving agriculture sector that sustains Fiji’s food security and sets a strong platform for

commercial agricultural development”4. One of the related strategies under this policy

objective is to build capacity at the community level for commercial agriculture by

coordinating the efforts of relevant ministries and departments. Further one of the strategies

under the Disaster Risk Reduction and Mitigation policy area is to “promote and strengthen

food security programme to enhance community based disaster reduction initiatives”5 The

GoF has also given its endorsement to the United Nations Development Assistance

Framework (UNDAF) for the Pacific Region 2013 – 2017, and the Fiji Country Results

Matrix. This project document is also in alignment with Outcome 1 of the UNDAF titled

“Environmental Management, Climate Change and Disaster Risk Management.”

In addition to the HAP, the Government requested that a longer-term recovery framework

be developed based on a Post Disaster Needs Assessment (PDNA) methodology. Albeit

focused on assessing damages and losses to the economy, the TC Evan PDNA – which is in

2 Pacific Adaptation to Climate Change (PACC) is a multi donor Regional Programme funded by AuSAID and GEF which is implemented by the Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme. For more information, refer http://www.sprep.org/pacc-home

3 Refer 2012 Annual Report of the Fiji Floods Livelihoods Recovery Project 4 ROADMAP FOR DEMOCRACY AND SUSTAINABLE SOCIO-ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 2009-2014 refer Page 84 5 As above refer Page 140

4

available in draft form as of writing this – highlighted the following in the realm of social

impact:

The Agriculture sector (and the crops sub-sector in particular) was hard hit. The

assessment highlighted the significant social impact borne by the population at large –

particularly those whose livelihood depends heavily on subsistence or semi-

subsistence agriculture and sale of produce.

While livelihoods have been heavily impacted in the Western division, the majority of

households are making good progress in recovery, assisted by the provision of basic

food rations.

The PDNA revealed that within the Agriculture sector – the hardest hit productive

sector – men make up 96% of “official” farmers. However, this is likely to mask

women’s presence in the sector which is concentrated in subsistence farming and

unpaid farm labour (women are 29% of unpaid farm laborers). Therefore, in order to

ensure gender inclusivity, recovery strategies must focus on the household level and

its strong connection with subsistence farming.

Food security and income earning opportunities are a key concern for two

populations: 1) farm laborers; 2) residents of the Yasawa islands whose subsistence

crops were devastated. Recovery efforts must necessarily focus on these affected

communities, as noted above.

A strong sense of social cohesion and community-driven recovery was found.

Community groups, and specifically youth, worked together for days and weeks to

clear communities of debris and rebuild homes and community assets. These must be

leveraged further as a means of expediting recovery and reconstruction.

Community driven emergency employment activities – including Cash for Work -

could be considered as a means of providing income earning opportunities to

households that are poor or at risk of falling into poverty. Such programs should be

simple, targeted and based on the experiences of current CFW programs. Additionally,

individuals and households currently benefitting from social welfare assistance could

be considered for additional, temporary social welfare benefits – including cash

transfers - to help them deal with the costs of disaster recovery.

It must be emphasized that the TC Evan PDNA looks at damages, losses, reconstruction,

and recovery from an aggregate, national perspective. Its social impact component collected

needs evidence within small-scale and subsistence farmers in the affected areas across the

country, but does not necessarily identify specific locations, communities or individuals as

recipients of recovery assistance. Therefore, this proposal is (a) consistent with the PDNA

overall findings and (b) motivated by the existing considerable expertise within UNDP

around food security recovery activities fielded in response to the context of the 2012 floods.

Lessons Learned

The following lessons learned from the UNDP supported interventions in 2009 and

2012 have been taken into account and have been integrated, to the extent possible, into the

current project design.

Fiji Early Recovery Response Project 2009-20116 Lessons Learned/Recommendations What has happened since/How will it be

addressed in this project?

i) A disaster management plan including standard

operation procedure and effective coordination

A Disaster Risk Management Strategy has been

developed and recommendations adopted into

6 Refer Final Terminal Report of the Fiji Early Recovery Response Project 2009

5

Lessons Learned/Recommendations What has happened since/How will it be


mechanism of the Department of Agriculture

(DOA) as well as with relevant agencies

particularly the National Disaster Management

Office (NDMO) is critical to provide assistance

to the affected people in an effective and timely

manner.

the DoA Annual Corporate Plan.

Standard Operating Procedure has been drafted

as a “living document” thus updated as new

information comes on board.

o Under Output 2 of the project, include

an activity to streamline and integrate

the SOP into all aspects of DoA’s

operations.

ii) Timely submission of comprehensive and

qualitative damage assessment report in the

agricultural sector by the DOA and its

endorsement by the cabinet is essential to

expedite securing funds by the NDMO for

humanitarian assistance.

Agriculture assessments in post disaster

situations have become critical as it is used by

NDMO to determine the supply of food rations

in affected areas.

Damage, Loss and need assessment template

was drafted by FAO consultant and partly

adopted in the assessment in the post 2012

floods. Currently, a PDNA (Post Disaster

Needs Assessment) is being completed with

technical support from WB, SPC and other UN

agencies to gauge more comprehensive needs in

the post the Cyclone Evan.

o Under Output 2, include activity to

streamline post disaster assessments

and use Information Technology to

collate, analyze and submit damage

assessment reports in a timely basis.

iii) The Socio-economic study in the Central and

Western division has provided the DOA with

detailed information on impacts on households

and private businesses in the affected areas for

Government’s future development programme

and advocacy tool for flood mitigation and

management. Particularly, it is recommended

for the DOA to review the questionnaires and

tools used in the study to enable them to

conduct its timely assessments.

As per above.

iv) Formulation of the DRM strategy by the

consultant as well as wider-consultation of the

strategy with key stakeholders at regional,

national and sub-national through the 2 day

workshop has enabled the DOA to draft action

plan for improved disaster response and

preparedness in terms of coordination

arrangement, information management and

Community-based DRM. The DOA has just

formulated the department’s Annual Corporate

Plan 2012 and was able to incorporate some

DRM strategy as follows;

Establishment of a Disaster Coordinating

Unit (DCU) within Economics Planning

and Statistics Division to strengthen

coordination and facilitate disaster

preparedness and response

Follow-up multi-stakeholders workshop on

disaster preparedness for the agriculture

sector in Fiji.

The DCU has been established within the

EPSD however the roles and functions are

shared with the Economic Planning Officer.

o Provide funding for an Economic

Planning officer to handle the

implementation of the Disaster

Response Action Plan as well as

related functions. Post to be absorbed

into Ministry’s core functions after

expiry of project funding.

The DOA further needs to look at the following:

Assigning the permanent DCU manager

As above

6

Lessons Learned/Recommendations What has happened since/How will it be


who plays a coordination and overseeing

role along with (semi) permanent assistant

staff in order to take the lead in

implementing the action plan and

strengthen coordination mechanism within

the department and also with external

partners such as NDMO, DOW, NGOs

including women organizations

Discussion across the various divisions

within the DOA, to incorporate the action

plan, particularity formulation of disaster

management plan; coordination

arrangement with stakeholders such as

NDMO, DOW, NGOs including women

organizations; and assessment template

including the usage of agricultural census,

hazard and land use capability map into

department’s programmes and activities. It

will include resources and its expected

implementation dates.

Currently the Principal Agriculture Officers

based in the 3 Divisions are responsible for

coordinating disaster response however

emphasis must also be on Disaster Risk

Reduction.

o To be addressed through workshops

and other knowledge/capacity building

initiatives undertaken by the project.

Fiji Floods Livelihoods Recovery Project 2012 Best Practice/Recommendations What has happened since/How will it be


1. Situation Analysis and Impact and Needs

Assessment

Good Practice

• Scoping mission and planning consultation with

local authorities and key stakeholders

• Formulation of simple impact and needs survey

form

• Community outreach

• Administration by a multi-sector team

Recommendations

• Communication with target communities

• Survey data processing and analysis

Consultation on the design of CFW including

identification of target areas have been initiated

through scoping mission while correlating the

findings of assessment carried out on the ground.

A multi-sector integrated team (comprising

Local administration, Agriculture, Cooperative,

Women, Youth, and Labour Reps) at the

divisional and district level has been formed.

The district level integrated team will liaise with

communities, where the simple information flyer

formulated will be utilized.

Survey/assessment data will be analyzed on the

basis of participant selection criteria

1. Selection of Right Participants and Equal

Opportunities for CFW

Best Practice

Set up criteria (e.g. 1 per family, preferably

women, vulnerability)

Recommendations from Dept. of Agriculture &

National Employment Centre

Information dissemination using simple

information flyers

Involvement of community leaders from both i-

taukei and Indo-Fijians

Recommendations:

o Reaching more the vulnerable and people with

disabilities

o Participation of Indo-Fijian

o Timely dissemination of information

o Community Ownership (engagement of

Tailoring of CfW to suit individual needs is not

feasible and as proven in the Post TC Evans

follow-up monitoring of the CFW sites 2012,

less likely to sustain in the event of natural

disasters. Beneficiaries working collectively in

groups are more united and are able to tackle

issues that lead to greater resilience of the

communities.

o The project will make a concerted effort

to identify individuals who are willing

to work together in a group. Initial

assessments have been carried out using

information from the Ministry of

Women, Ministry of Youth and

Department of Cooperatives to identify

the appropriate groups to work under

the cash for work.

o In line with Fiji Govt. policy direction,

7

Best Practice/Recommendations What has happened since/How will it be


community leaders) there will be no distinction (during the

selection of beneficiaries) between i-

taukei and Indo-Fijian as everyone is

considered a Fijian.

o Similarly project reporting will refrain

from using the racial categorization of

Indo-Fijian and I-Taukei.

o However, there is a recognition that all

efforts must be taken to address the

needs of each ethnic group.

2. Women’s Participation

Best Practice

Participation of single mothers& widows

Participation of unemployed youth and vulnerable

men

Identify work type/working condition taking

account of women’s needs/concerns

Shortened and flexible working hours (5 hrs)

Understanding and support from community &

family

Put in place mechanism for counseling & social

support services in partnership with Empower

Pacific

Recommendations

To be replicated in this project phase.

3. Identification of Work & Formulation of Work

plan

Best Practice

Orientation & Community led formulation of work

plan

Working as a group

Mixture of community and individual work

Establishment of Community nursery

Recommendations

o Measurable task (task/output-based payment)

o Integrate/adapt DRR measures/practice

To be replicated.

Set Group Targets and allowing group leaders to

take responsibility for the output of group

members.

DRR measures will be integrated using the

experience of DoA’s LWRM Unit and the

PACC Project.

4. CFW implementation arrangement

Best Practice

Provision of work tools, materials, safety

equipments & Training of Occupational Health and

Safety and First Aid Kit

Weekly payment arrangement in partnership with

ANZ Rural Bank team

Recommendations

o Timely procurement & distribution of inputs

o Ensure injuries and accident protection

o Timely and smooth cash payment

To be replicated within available budgetary

provisions.

Similar model of payment via bank will be

followed. Other option will be to direct deposit

funds into the existing community group’s bank

account (e.g. cooperative group account).

Will be addressed within all possible means.

5. Project Monitoring

Best Practice

Orientation and engagement of team

leaders/supervisors & Gov officials

Recommendations

o Logistics

An integrated team has been identified in the

Western Division and smaller cells of the larger

district level team have been established.

Input from Govt. agencies may be required as

not all logistical needs can be sourced by project.

8

Best Practice/Recommendations What has happened since/How will it be


o Monitoring by technical agencies The integrated team which includes technical

agencies will be empowered and capacitated to

undertake monitoring.

6. Skill development and disaster awareness raising

Best Practice

Agriculture training

Financial training

Information session of Income Generation

Programme (loan scheme) by Empower Pacific

Recommendations

o Incorporation of disaster awareness raising

activities

To be replicated in partnership with DoA and

Empower Pacific

To be conducted in partnership with NGOs

working in DRR and NDMO.

7. Review

Best Practice

- Focus Group Discussion to measure the impacts

and gain feedback

- Sharing results & experience among team leaders

and the integrated team through workshop

Recommendations

To be replicated with the integrated team at the

district level taking lead roles.

Workshop to be included as part of activities

under output 1.

8. Government Ownership and Capacity building

Best Practice

Formation of a multi-sector team

Planning and de-briefing/lessons learnt meeting

Formulation of practical tools (e.g. Operational

Manual, reporting templates, information flyer)

Drafting Operation Guidance Note on Emergency

Employment (CFW)

Recommendations

o Continuous engagement & ownership of

stakeholders

o Minimize UNDP direct implementation of CFW

In process, a multi sector Integrated Team has

been identified for the Western Division based

out of the Commissioner Western’s Office.

Will be addressed during implementation and

oversight of the Ministry of Strategic Planning.

Change of modality from DIM to national

implementation.

II. STRATEGY

Incorporating the lessons learned (as summarized above) from the two previous

projects supported by UNDP, and building on the additional needs evidence emerging from

the TC Evan PDNA process, this project will ensure that sustainability and resilience related

issues at the community level are addressed. The response strategy therefore must necessarily

address how communities can sustain their livelihoods and build their resilience around

natural disasters with particular consideration for the Agriculture sector. The resulting

activities supported under this project will be carried out with these motives in mind.

Additional assistance, either technical and/or financial, will be required from relevant

government ministries and departments. It is also important to note that the initial scope of

this project (in terms of geographical coverage) is concentrated mainly in one of the 3

provinces located in the Western Division (i.e., the Ba Province) given that the agriculture

sector in the Western Division was most affected.

The Ba Province, on its own, accounts for 70 % of total damage in the Western

Division, according to the DOA’s initial crop damage assessment carried out after TC Evan.

9

(Subsequently, the PDNA has confirmed that the population in the Western division was the

most affected. Here, 6.3 percent of primarily7 affected population is farmers who lost their

source of livelihoods to the Cyclone; and 26 percent of those secondarily affected suffered

significant loss in agricultural production and personal income. Further, as part of the PDNA

process, UNDP and the Agriculture Department conducted a rapid survey among 250 market

vendors (51% women and 49% men) at seven main markets across the country. The survey

provided a further indication of the severity of TC Evan impact on livelihoods. The survey

highlighted that across all these markets 83% of vendors suffered losses; 77% lost stock

(produce); only 21% received assistance in some form (from the community, Government,

etc.); 31% incurred “debt” (loosely defined), thus putting exposing them financially; and 85%

expected recovery to take more than 2 weeks, and up to 6 months. These aggregate numbers

therefore provide further evidence of the need for livelihood interventions targeting the

agricultural sector. What is more, the small sample of 30 respondents in Ba appeared to have

suffered comparatively more: 100% suffered losses and stock; 83% are financially worse off

due to debts and obligations; and 90% expected recovery to take at least 2 months.)

The Nadroga and Ra province, which also fall in the Western Division, will be

included later subject to funding availability. Also while the aim is to integrate the activities

at the national level, it will be difficult to upscale the project without significant boost in the

budget. Thus assistance offered under the project will not be extended to communities in the

Northern and the Central Eastern Divisions, some of whom are also vulnerable to natural

disasters.

Based on the above considerations, the following strategies have been developed:

i) Focus on select districts in Ba Province with possibility to replicate in other areas

The project will initially pilot its community driven emergency employment activities

in select communities located in 4 districts (Ba, Nadi, Tavua and Lautoka/Yasawa) that fall

under the Ba Province. Expansion to other communities within the Ba Province and to other

districts in the Nadroga and Ra Provinces (who with Ba are geographically placed in the

Western Division) will be subject to funding. Commitment on the part of relevant authorities

at the national, divisional, provincial, and district levels is also critical. This commitment

includes, but not confined to: a) collaborating with UNDP to provide effective oversight and

support in the implementation of the project; b) Linkage with DoA’s activities as specified

under its Annual Corporate Plan (Refer iii below) will also be a major criterion for expansion

of the project, iii) Provision of technical support from within the Ministry/Department’s

budget allocation on the understanding that the proposal will pick up additional costs related

to site monitoring and travel to remote areas.

ii) Community groups identified as primary beneficiary for assistance under the

Livelihoods Restoration component.

Organizing project activities to suit individual needs at the community level is a

costly logistical undertaking but one that inevitably proves futile (from a sustainability point

7 Primary Affected – includes those persons living in the affected areas whose assets have been destroyed; dead and ill persons; Secondary Affected – includes persons living in the affected area that have sustained losses in production and income; and Tertiary Affected – those persons living outside of the affected areas that are sustaining higher costs of services as a result of the cyclone (Transport, Water, Sanitation and Electricity). Source (Fiji TC Evan PDNA 2013)

10

of view) in the event of large scale damage and destruction following natural disasters. Thus

the project will ensure that assistance will be targeted at community groups comprising of

selected women, youth and cooperatives as opposed to individuals within the community.

Working together and smarter to minimize the impact of disasters will be a key motto in the

implementation of the project. Initial assessment have been carried out to ensure that the

“right” groups are identified and satisfy some basic criteria as articulated below:

Most affected areas (in terms of agricultural damage)

Preferably women and youth

Cooperative group(registered with Dept of Coop) & other Community-based

Organisations who are willing to form a group (either registered with Dept of Women

or Dept of Youth)

One member per family

Age over 18 (over 16 for school leavers)

Willing to work under the CFW programme

Have land arrangement for CFW programme with some farming/fisheries experience

Priority is given to people with disability or those who have a family member with

disabilities.

With gender balance in mind, the project will ensure that women and girls be given

priority in terms of participation and selection of beneficiaries.

iii) Cost sharing and integration of project activities within the DoA Corporate Plan

The project will require the DoA to provide technical and financial support funded

from within its own budgetary sources as well as make necessary financial provisions to fully

integrate DRM into its future budget strategy. Initially the DoA must commit to providing

seedlings and other agricultural implements as allowed within it cyclone relief funding. At a

later stage, the DOA must commit to absorbing the position of the Economic Planning

Officer within the Disaster Coordinating Unit when the funding provided under this proposal

has lapsed.

iv) Gender inclusive focus at household farming level – as evidenced in the PDNA

Based on the PDNA findings, the strategy to include substantial engagement and

benefits for women under this project should have an explicit focus on the household level

where subsistence farming has a much greater presence of women than the

official/commercial farming sector. This also has strong implications for family well-being

and food security. The PDNA pointed to one area of opportunity to improve resilience on this

level, which is household poultry farming. 64% of the damage to livestock sector post TC

Evan was to sheds for chicken and ducks. With the notion that most females stay at home,

the project will look into ways that will enhance their capacity to raise poultry in a disaster

resistant manner.

v) Build on cost-effective best practices around community-driven disaster

resilience agriculture

The PDNA also detected vulnerabilities in the agricultural sector which point to

opportunities to improve the resilience of the sector in the event of future cyclones. One of

11

these would be site-specific approaches to elevate crops, as water logging is often the cause

of crops rotting in the ground after a cyclone or flood. Another area highlighted in the PDNA

is the pre-positioning of seeds and fast-track access to optimal seed varieties to accelerate re-

planting. A third area to improve resilience in this sector is support for seedlings and the

establishment of nurseries to accelerate re-planting after a disaster.

The above strategies have been factored into the development of the outputs that are

stated below with its related activities:

a) Output 1 – Livelihoods in Disaster Prone Communities with specific focus on

subsistence and semi-subsistence agriculture and food security is restored and

Community Driven Emergency Employment implemented.

The related activities under this output are as follows:

Given the substantial losses in the Agricuture sector in the Western Division (60% of

total damage and loss to the sector was in the Werstern Division) and therefore lost

income from foregone produce sales, both the TC Evan HAP and the PDNA contain

specific recovery recommendations on focused cash-for-work programmes as a stop-

gap measure to ensure some level of income until re-planted crops are ready for the

next harvest. Activities supported by the temporary employment programme would

include: community-driven farm rehabilitation; introduction of disaster resilience

practices; planting of new crops supplied by the DoA; and trialing of disaster resistant

varieties8

. A short term (2 week) community-driven temporary employment

programme would be conducted in the 4 districts most affected by Tropical Cyclone

Evan benefitting 30 – 35 community groups, and through them, some 1,000

individuals, 50% or more being women.

Training of the target beneficiarries in financial literacy and disaster risk reduction

conducted in partnership with relevant government departments and NGOs.

Agriculture skill development for the target beneficiaries conducted using expertise of

DoA officers as well as peer to peer learning through other farmers who have had

some success in addressing minimization of crop damage in disaster situations. Also

some of the activities will include testing new ideas and technologies to better manage

agricultural outputs prior to, and after the onset of natural disasters.

Workshops held in 4 districts and one at the divisional level to share best practices

and incorporate lessons learned.

b) Output 2 – Enhanced capacity within DoA to address Disaster Risk Resilience and

Mitigation in the Agriculture Sector

Related activities under this output are:

- Provision of additional support to establish database to support recovery efforts in post

disaster situations (Damage Assessments, affected areas, crop variety, seed distribution

etc).

- Revisit existing Standard Operating Procedures and disaster damage and needs

assessment methodologies and conduct training of divisional staff.

- National and divisional level workshops conducted to emphasize importance of DRR and

DRM.

8 This proposal entails collaboration with SPC/SPREP and the PACC project in accessing disaster resistant seedlings and plant varieties.

12

c) Output 3 – Lessons emerging from effective M & E are codified and disseminated.

Related Activities under this output are as follows:

An effective monitoring and evaluation (M & E) system is developed and

implemented throughout the course of the project.

A communication strategy is developed and implemented over the life of the project.

Project board meetings held on regular basis and to involve all stakeholders.

13

III. RESULTS AND RESOURCES FRAMEWORK (RRF) (2013 -2014)

UNDAF 2013-2017 Fiji Country Results Matrix

Outcome 1::

Environmental Management, Climate Change and Disaster Risk Management

By 2017 the most vulnerable communities across the PICTs are more resilient with particular focus on communities, through integrated implementation of sustainable

environmental management, climate change adaptation/mitigation, and disaster risk management. Improved resilience of PICTs, with particular focus on communities,

through integrated implementation of sustainable environmental management, climate change adaptation/mitigation, and disaster risk management

UNDP SRPD 2013 – 2017

Outcome Area 4: Improved resilience of PICTs, with particular focus on communities, through integrated implementation of sustainable

environment management, climate change adaptation/mitigation and disaster risk management Summary of Outcome Indicators (Overall)

Improved resilience of communities, through integrated implementation of sustainable environment management, climate change adaptation/mitigation and

disaster risk management

Project title: Enhancing livelihood recovery through food security in the aftermath of natural disasters in Fiji

Project ID (ATLAS Award ID):

INTENDED OUTPUTS, BASELINE

& INDICATORS

OUTPUT TARGETS (Disaggregated

by Year)

INDICATIVE ACTIVITIES

RESPONSI

BLE

PARTIES

INPUTS (US$)

OUTPUT 1: Livelihoods in Disaster Prone Communities with specific focus on subsistence and semi-subsistence agriculture and food security is restored and

Community Driven Emergency Employment implemented.

Baseline:

- 6,000 dwelling houses damaged

either partly or fully.

- 60% of Fiji’s total population

affected by TC Evan, 49% -

females.-

- F$17m in damages sustained

(crops, livestock) in the Western

Division (Ba, Lautoka, Tavua,

Nadi, Yasawa)

Targets:

2013: 30 - 35 farming/fisheries venture

groups established supporting some 1000

– 1200 individuals.

50% or more, roughly 600 beneficiaries

to be females.

2014: 30 - 35 farming/fisheries venture

groups sustained

Activity Result 1.1: Community driven

emergency employment implemented in 4

districts covering 30 -35 community

groups.

Actions:

- Undertake consultations with potential

beneficiaries/community groups.

- Selection of beneficiaries for emergency

employment

- Develop work programme for each of

MRMD as

lead

Support

provided by

the

Integrated

Team located

in the

Commission

er Western’s

Micro-Capital

Grants -

$120,000

Supplies -

$30,000

Parallel

Contribution

DOA –

USD40,000

14


& INDICATORS


by Year)


RESPONSI

BLE

PARTIES

INPUTS (US$)

- Job losses temporary and more

evident in Tourism and Agriculture

Sector, Farm Labourers were the

most hit.

Performance Indicator

# of community-based group benefited

with sex-disaggregated data

# of work days generated

# of DRR initiatives/measures

undertaken

# of people trained with sex and age

disaggregated data

# women and youth participants

Outcome Indicators

# of community-based farming/fishing

ventures which are able to respond to a

disaster effectively at a time of natural

disasters

Sources

- Project monitoring report

- Field visits

- the community groups including

physical measures to protect agricultural

areas, assets and facilities.

-

Office

Activity Result 1.2 – Training in Financial

Literacy and DRR/M conducted at the

community level

Actions:

- Design and undertake training with

selected groups identified.

- Develop monitoring mechanisms to

assess progress and results.

MRMD Travel and

Supplies –

USD10,000

Activity Result 1.3: Agriculture skills

development for the target beneficiaries

conducted

Actions:

- Design and undertake training and

awareness raising

- Incorporate DRR (and CCA)

practices/measure including those

arising from recent TC Evan PDNA

recommendations that focus on low-

income households

- Conduct training on best practice

methods for resilience including

nursery management.

-

MAFF Miscellaneous -

USD5,000

15


& INDICATORS


by Year)


RESPONSI

BLE

PARTIES

INPUTS (US$)

Activity Result 1.4: District and Divisional

Level Workshops held to identify best

practices and incorporate lessons learned

for future implementation

Actions:

- Undertake review workshop

- Document good practices and lessons

learned

- Foster inter-community engagement

around knowledge sharing ie site visits

MRMD and

MAFF Learning Costs

– USD15,000

Output 1: Sub-Total USD220,0009

OUTPUT 2: Enhanced capacity within DOA to address Disaster Risk Resilience and Mitigation in the Agriculture Sector

Baseline: (will be updated)

- DCU within EPSAD has been

established albeit with limited

capacity;

- SOP for DRM formulated;

- Limited evidence based

Disaster Assessment tools

available,

Performance Indicators

-The SOP and assessment revalidated

-# of staff trained with sex-

disaggregated data.

-Reliable assessment tools to feed into

national recovery efforts for budgeting

Targets:

2013:

- DRM Unit within ESPD

strengthened.

- Capacity of DRM Unit upgraded

through IT and release of SOPs.

2014:

- Training of Agriculture Extension

Officers carried out.

- DRM activities reviewed and

strengthened in the Annual

Corporate Plan.

Activity Result 2.1: Provision of additional

support to establish database to support

recovery efforts in post disaster situations

(Damage Assessments, affected areas, crop

variety, seed distribution etc.).

Actions:

- Prepare TOR for the DRM officer

and recruit.

- Recruit local consultant to

strengthen DRM capacity within

DOA and conduct capacity

assessment.

- Consolidate existing data and

MAFF DRM Officer –

USD30,000

Local Consultant

- USD20,000

9 Parallel contribution from DOA from DoA is not included in this total.

16


& INDICATORS


by Year)


RESPONSI

BLE

PARTIES

INPUTS (US$)

purposes.

Outcome Indicators

Timely and effective disaster response

including assessment will be carried out

at a time of natural disasters

-# of budget shared for DRM/disaster

preparedness increased in department

annual corporate plan (2014)

Sources


gather other data in partnership

with regional technical agencies

Activity Result 2.2: Revisit existing

Standard Operating Procedures and

disaster damage and needs assessment

methodologies and conduct training of

divisional staff.

Actions:

- Gaps analysis of exiting procedures to

improve effectiveness of disaster

impact assessments

- Conduct training to review the existing

SOP and assessment methodologies

MAFF Supplies/travel -

USD10,000

Activity Result 2.3: National and divisional

level stakeholder workshops conducted to

emphasize importance of DRR and M.

Actions:

-Undertake workshop for national and

divisional officers

MAFF

USD30,000


OUTPUT 3: LESSONS EMERGING FROM EFFECTIVE M & E ARE CODIFIED AND DISSEMINATED Baseline:

- 3 Monitoring Visits (2012)

- 2 training reports with

recommendations implemented

incorporated in MOA Corporate

Targets: 2013:

- Project established & M&E systems

developed.

- Training of stakeholders conducted.

Activity Result 3.1:

An effective monitoring and evaluation (M

& E) system is developed and implemented

throughout the course of the project.

- Identify Key target groups with MRMD

and MAFF for questionnaire survey on

UNDP

Learning Costs –

USD20,000

17


& INDICATORS


by Year)


RESPONSI

BLE

PARTIES

INPUTS (US$)

Plan.

-

Performance Indicator:

At least 50% of the beneficiaries

implement knowledge gained in their

own communities.

Outcome Indicators:

Efficient delivery of project

activities in line with approved

annual work plan, quantified

by at least 90% delivery.

Endorsement of results and

findings by GOF and other

stakeholders.

Sources;

Project Progress report

Press releases

Project Board meeting documents

.

2014:

- Project reporting carried out

regularly.

RBM.

- Based on Feedback, develop

programme for emphasis on RBM,

including workshop for Senior and

Middle Managers and focus group

discussions of improving service

delivery.

Activity Result 3.2: Communication strategy

developed and implemented

Actions:

- Discuss communication needs amongst

project implementers and community

groups.

- Develop communications plan and

implement.

- Collate findings/best practices and

disseminate locally and internationally.

Miscellaneous –

USD8,000

Activity Result 3.3: Project Board Meetings

convened to oversee project activities. Actions:

- Develop project board meetings

schedule.

- Prepare Board Papers and circulate with

ample notice to meeting attendees.

- Minutes of meetings circulated and

decision implemented in efficient

manner.

Sub-

Contracts/Travel

– USD20,000

Project Manager

Costs – 12,000


TOTAL US$370,000

18

IV. MANAGEMENT ARRANGEMENTS

Due to the situation with the project activities anchored in 2 different government

ministries i.e., MRMD and MAFF, UNDP will undertake the implementing partner role

however will work closely (through its CPRU and JOC Teams) with the afore mentioned

ministries to provide support and disburse funding for Outputs/Activities that these ministries

will be directly responsible for. UNDP will further enter into a Letter of Agreement (LOA)

with the 2 ministries which will further spell out the conditions for the fund transfer and

reporting obligations. Project Audit will be conducted together with the UNDP Country

Office Audit performed by the UNDP Office of Audit and Performance Review.

A Project Board, (refer above diagram and Annex 1 for TOR) will be convened and

will provide oversight and overall strategic guidance over the project. The Project Board will

be chaired by the Permanent Secretary for Ministry of Strategic Planning. The UNDP

Country Partnership and Results Unit will play a key role in the implementation of the

project. The CPRU Team Leader will be providing the overall assurance role on behalf of

UNDP and the CPRU Associate will be performing the functions of the Project Manager

(TOR attached as per Annex 2).

The TOR for the DRR/M Officer to be recruited by the MAFF is attached as Annex 3.

Project Manager

UNDP CPRU

Associate

Project Board

Senior Beneficiary

Commissioner Western, PS –

MRMD and PS - MAFF

Executive

PS – Min. of Strategic

Planning

Senior Supplier

UNDP Resident

Representative

Project Assurance UNDP Country Partnership and

Results Unit (CPRU)Team Leader

Project Support

MRMD and MAFF Admin and

Finance Division, UNDP Joint

Operations Centre (JOC)

Project Organisation Structure

Nadi Team

District Officer,

Agriculture,

Cooperative, Women,

Youth I-taukei Affairs,

and Labour Reps.

Ba/Nadarivatu Team

District Officer,

Agriculture,

Cooperative, Women,

Youth I-taukei Affairs

Reps.

Lautoka/Yasawa Team

District Officer,

Agriculture,

Cooperative, Women,

Youth I-taukei Affairs

Reps.

Tavua Team District Officer,

Agriculture, Cooperative,

Women, Youth and I-taukei

Affairs Reps.

19

V. MONITORING FRAMEWORK AND EVALUATION

In accordance with the programming policies and procedures outlined in the UNDP User

Guide, the project will be monitored through the following:

Within the annual cycle

On a quarterly basis, a quality assessment shall record progress towards the

completion of key results, based on quality criteria and methods captured in the

Quality Management table below.

An Issue Log shall be activated in Atlas and updated by the Project Manager to

facilitate tracking and resolution of potential problems or requests for change.

Based on the initial risk analysis submitted (see annex 1), a risk log shall be activated

in Atlas and regularly updated by reviewing the external environment that may affect

the project implementation.

Based on the above information recorded in Atlas, Bi-Annual Progress Reports (B-

APR) shall be submitted by the Project Manager to the Project Board through Project

Assurance, using the standard report format available in the Executive Snapshot.

A project Lesson-learned log shall be activated and regularly updated to ensure on-

going learning and adaptation within the organization, and to facilitate the preparation

of the Lessons-learned Report at the end of the project

A Monitoring Schedule Plan shall be activated in Atlas and updated to track key

management actions/events

Annually

Annual Review Report. An Annual Review Report shall be prepared by the Project

Manager and shared with the Project Board and the Outcome Board. As minimum

requirement, the Annual Review Report shall consist of the Atlas standard format for

the QPR covering the whole year with updated information for each above element of

the QPR as well as a summary of results achieved against pre-defined annual targets

at the output level.

Annual Project Review. Based on the above report, an annual project review shall

be conducted during the fourth quarter of the year or soon after, to assess the

performance of the project and appraise the Annual Work Plan (AWP) for the

following year. In the last year, this review will be a final assessment. This review is

driven by the Project Board and may involve other stakeholders as required. It shall

focus on the extent to which progress is being made towards outputs, and that these

remain aligned to appropriate outcomes.

Terminal/Final

A final (or terminal) report shall be compiled by the Project Manager and will be

reviewed by the Project Board, three months before the scheduled completion of the

project.

Should the Project Board decide or make a specific demand for a project evaluation,

an independent evaluation will be conducted with costs met from project savings or

additional funding provided by UNDP.

20

1. QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR PROGRAMME ACTIVITY RESULTS

Output 1: Livelihoods in Disaster Prone Communities with specific focus on subsistence and semi-subsistence agriculture and food security is restored and Community Driven Emergency Employment implemented.

Activity Result 1.1 Community driven emergency employment implemented in 4 districts covering 30 -35 community groups.

Start Date: Mar 2013 End Date: Apr 2013

Purpose To identify and engage 30 – 35 community-based groups routinely affected by natural disasters and to stabilize their livelihoods of affected people, esp. women, youth and other most vulnerable groups;

Description

1.1.1 - Undertake consultations with potential beneficiaries/community groups. 1.1.2 - Selection of beneficiaries for emergency employment 1.1.3 - Develop work programme for each of the community groups including physical measures to protect agricultural areas, assets and facilities.

Quality Criteria (How/with what indicators the quality of the activity result will be measured?)

Quality Method (Means of verification. what method will be used to determine if quality criteria have been met?)

Date of Assessment (When will the assessment of quality be performed?)

Livelihoods and disaster assessment reports (with sex and age disaggregated data) made available and shared with stakeholders for participatory planning;

Programme Progress Report; Site assessment; Field trips to project areas; Government reports; Consultancy reports; Weekly monitoring report which

aggregate daily monitoring Monitoring and Review report

Quarterly, annually and at the completion of the CFW;

Number of community-based group received temporary incomes with sex and age disaggregated data including vulnerability defined as selection criteria

At least 70% direct beneficiaries are women

At least 40% direct beneficiaries are youth

% of the vulnerable groups who directly benefited

At least 80% of targeted Community-based groups resume or establish viable small/micro enterprises due to programme support

Number of work days generated

At least 60 % of the Community-based groups can initiate rehabilitation of small enterprises effectively at a time of moderate natural disasters

Activity Result 1.2 Training on Financial Literacy and DRR/M conducted at the community level


Purpose To build the basic capacity of communities in financial literacy and implementing DRR/M To

Description

1.2.1 Design and undertake training with selected groups identified.

1.2.2 Develop monitoring mechanisms to assess progress and results. Quality Criteria Quality Method Date of Assessment

Number of people trained with sex and age disaggregated data including vulnerability defined as selection criteria

Programme progress reports; Field visits; Training reports

Quarterly, annually and at the completion of the training;

Number of people targeted by awareness raising activities with sex and age disaggregated data

Number of groups which are able to receive a loan from Income Generation Programme run by Empower Pacific (Not sure if a group loan scheme is currently available, but

21

worth negotiating with EP)

Activity Result 1.3 Agriculture skill development for the target beneficiaries conducted


Purpose To build agriculture skills/knowledge of communities on sustainable and disaster resilient practice; To promote DRR/CCA measure;

Description 1.3.1 Design and undertake training and awareness raising 1.3.2 Incorporate DRR (and CCA) practices/measure including those arising from recent TC Evan PDNA recommendations that focus on low-income households 1.3.3 Conduct training on best practice methods for resilience including nursery management);

Quality Criteria Quality Method Date of Assessment

Number of people trained with sex and age disaggregated data including vulnerability defined as selection criteria

Programme progress reports;

Field visits; Training reports

Quarterly, annually and at the completion of the training;

Number of DRR/CCA measures put in place for prevention of losses from disaster hazards and adverse impacts of CC

Activity Result 1.4 District and Divisional level Workshops held to increase local support capacities and identify and incorporate lessons learned for future implementation

Start Date: Apr 2013 End Date: May 2013

Purpose To build local government capacities in supporting community enterprise; To review CFW programme by correlating the results and impacts of the programme and discuss on the challenges and issues during the programme; To capture good practices and lessoned learned for sharing with key stakeholders.

Description 1.4.1 Undertake review workshop 1.4.2 Document good practices and lessons learned 1.4.3 Foster inter-community engagement around knowledge sharing i.e. site visits


Number of beneficiaries and government representatives participated in the workshop with sex and age disaggregated data

Programme progress reports;

Workshop report; On site visits Lessons leant report

At the completion of the workshop

Good practices and lessons learned effectively documented

Output 2: Enhanced capacity within DoA to address Disaster Risk Resilience and Mitigation in the Agriculture Sector

Start Date: 2013 End Date: 2014

Activity Result 2.1 Extract and or modification of existing datasets under the FASS to support recovery efforts in post disaster situations (Damage Assessments, affected areas, crop variety, seed distribution etc.).

Purpose To strengthen national capacities to support DRR/M activities within MAFF and improve responsiveness in post disaster situations.

Description 2.1.1 Recruit a DRR/M officer who will be a full-time staff based in Economic Planning and Statistics Division; 2.1.2 Provide technical and coordination support to the function of the EPSD unit.


A National staff posted as a full-time EPSD staff; Number of meeting/consultation organized by the EPSD with support from the full-time DRR/M Officer;

Progress reports

Quarterly, annually

22

Activity Result 2.2 Revisit existing Standard Operating Procedures and disaster damage and needs assessment methodologies and conduct training of divisional staff.


Purpose To streamline and integrate SOPs into all aspects of DOA’s operations; To build response and coordination capacities including assessment implementation at the all levels To integrate the CFW modality into DOA’s response strategies in post crisis situations

Description 2.2.1 Review existing DRM SOPs, assessment methodologies 2.2.2 Explore integration of temporary community employment programmes targeting women, youth and the vulnerable as part of DOA’s disaster response mechanism (e.g. SOPs) 2.2.3 Build capacity (e.g. through training) of divisional, district officers to implement the improved SOPs, assessment methodologies;


SOPs, assessment revalidated in consultation with planning officers and divisional and district officers Number of government representatives (with sex disaggregated data) trained on SOPs, assessment;

Progress reports Government media

/reports Training reports

Quarterly, annually

Activity Result 2.3 National and divisional level stakeholder workshops conducted to emphasize importance of DRR and M.


Purpose To establish database to support recovery efforts in the post disaster (e.g. damage assessments, hazard map, crop variety, seed distribution etc); To expedite DOA’s assessment and analysis at a time of a disaster

Description 2.3.1 Consolidate the existing data and gather other data in partnership with regional technical agencies 2.3.2 Build capacity of the relevant officers in maintaining and updating the data base


Number of government representatives (with sex disaggregated data)trained on database;

Progress reports Training reports Government media

/reports On site visits

Quarterly, annually

Updated and comprehensive database made available for at a times of a disaster

Output 3: LESSONS EMERGING FROM EFFECTIVE M & E ARE CODIFIED AND DISSEMINATED


Action Result 3.1 An effective monitoring and evaluation (M & E) system is developed and implemented throughout the course of the project.

Purpose To effective M&E system put in place throughout the project; To ensure government ownership and sustainability of the activities resumed/established under the CFW programme.

Description 3.1.1 Develop M & E system at the national, divisional and district level; 3.1.2 Provide technical and project management support by UNDP; 3.1.3 Conduct Project Board meetings on a regular basis.


Effective multi-sector integrated team formulated at the divisional and district level; Number of project board meetings conducted

Progress reports Board meeting

minutes

Quarterly, annually

Action Result 3.2 Communication strategy developed and implemented


Purpose To disseminate information of the programme to targeted communities timely and effectively; To capture and disseminate the results and impacts of projects into the general

23

public, donors; To begin to influence government policies and strategies early on in post crisis situations; To corroborate with government communications officers effectively.

Description 3.2.1 Formulate an effective communication strategy and develop communications tools; 3.2.2 Implement the communication strategy in partnership with government communication officers and media.


Communication strategy formulated in consultation with key stakeholders, government communication officers; Number of communication tools developed; Number of media release (UNDP site, Newspaper etc)


/reports

Quarterly, annually

Action Result 3.3 Project Board Meetings convened to oversee project activities.


Purpose The purpose of the Board Meeting is to formalize the interaction between the Implementing Partner, the Supplier and the Beneficiary.

Description Project Board Meeting conducted regularly to update stakeholders on the progress of the project.


# of Project Board papers and minutes produced on time. # of Project Decisions implemented as consequence of project board meeting.


/reports

Quarterly, annually

24

VI. LEGAL CONTEXT

This document together with the UNDAF Action Plan signed by the Government and UNDP

which is incorporated herein by reference, constitute together a Project Document as referred

to in the Standard Agreement on Operational Assistance (OPAS); as such all provisions of

the UNDAF Action Plan apply to this document. All references in the OPAS to “Executing

Agency” shall be deemed to refer to “Implementing Partner”, as such term is defined and

used in the UNDAF Action Plan and this document.

UNDP as the Implementing Partner shall comply with the policies, procedures and practices

of the United Nations safety and security management system.

UNDP will undertake all reasonable efforts to ensure that none of the project funds are used

to provide support to individuals or entities associated with terrorism and that the recipients

of any amounts provided by UNDP hereunder do not appear on the list maintained by the

Security Council Committee established pursuant to resolution 1267 (1999). The list can be

accessed via http://www.un.org/sc/committees/1267/aq_sanctions_list.shtml. This provision

must be included in all sub-contracts or sub-agreements entered into under this Project

Document.

http://www.un.org/sc/committees/1267/aq_sanctions_list.shtml

25

VII. ANNEX 1- TERMS OF REFERENCE (PROJECT BOARD)

Background

The Fiji Livelihoods Recovery through enhanced Food Security is a joint project between

UNDP and the Government of Fiji. The project has 3 outputs, 2 of which are proposed to be

implemented by the Ministry of Rural and Maritime Development with the third

implemented by the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries. The Ministry of

Strategic Planning plays a pivotal role in the implementation of the programme given its

sectoral planning role and is proposed to take the executive role under the project.

Roles and Responsibilities

The Project Board Mechanism is meant to bring all stakeholders (i.e., the beneficiaries, the

implementers and those that provide funds i.e., the supplier) into a common platform to

assess project progress and provide guidance on the implementation of the project and

successful accomplishment of results. The proposed structure for the Board is as per Annex

1. Specific roles of the board is outlined below:

Provide strategic guidance and advice to the Project Manager on project related

activities particularly on specific problems and issues that may have a bearing on the

progress of the achievements of the Project.

Review and approve proposed annual work plan in consultation with UNDP Fiji

Multi-Country Office.

Facilitate exchange of information nationally, regionally and internationally on

awareness of project developments, lessons learnt and best practices.

Assist in identification and securing of additional financial and technical resources

for the project activities from both national and external sources.

Help facilitate and ensure that targets identified in the annual work plans are met

within agreed timeframes and with given resource allocations and assist provide

alternative remedial solutions where the need arises.

Facilitate and mobilize government, private and civil society support for this

Project.

Undertake any other responsibilities that may be identified fby UNDP and other

project stakeholders.

Specific responsibilities in terms of organizing project board meetings are identified as

follows:

1. Pursuant to the agreements under the Local Project Appraisal Committee, the

appointed Project Manager (assisted by the UNDP Multi Country Office) will prepare

a first draft of the Project Progress Report and share this with the UNDP MCO

team for review and finalization.

2. A copy of the Project Progress Report, updated Issues and Risk Log,

Communications and Monitoring Plan and other relevant Board Papers will be shared

with the PS for Strategic Planning who will then issue an invitation to the other

stakeholders for a project board meeting to take place. A two week advance notice in

terms of setting meeting dates and submission of documents is ideal and will be

observed to the extent possible.

3. Decisions and other relevant discussions including follow up actions will be captured

in the minutes of the project board. The Project Manager takes a lead role in

formulating the minutes and sharing the same with all concerned parties.

26

4. Once the meeting minutes have been finalized, the decisions and/or action points will

be shared with the implementing partners (MAFF and MRMD) for their appropriate

action.

Timeframe for Meeting

The Project Board meeting will take place at a convenient time as agreed by the Local

Project Appraisal Committee (LPAC). Ideally this meeting will take place once every quarter

however the timeframe could be extended as mutually agreed by all parties. The venue for

the meeting will be Suva as most stakeholders are based here however there might be a need

to have some board meetings in the West so that board members can take the opportunity to

visit the project sites.

27

VIII. ANNEX 2: TERMS OF REFERENCE, DRR/M OFFICER – EPSD/MAFF

Background


UNDP and the Government of Fiji. The project has 3 outputs, 2 of which are proposed to be

implemented by the Ministry of Rural and Maritime Development (MRMD) with the third

implemented by the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF). The Ministry of

Strategic Planning plays a pivotal role in the implementation of the programme given its

sectoral planning role and is proposed to take the executive role of the project.

The MAFF will be responsible for implementing the Output 2 of the project which is on

enhancing the capacity of MAFF Officers across the country in Disaster Risk Reduction and

Mitigation. The 3 principal activity results under output 2 are:

Activity Result 2.1: Utilize the Fiji Agriculture Statistics System to support recovery

efforts in post disaster situations (Damage Assessments, affected areas, crop variety, seed

distribution etc.).

Activity Result 2.2: Revisit existing Standard Operating Procedures and disaster damage

and needs assessment methodologies and conduct training of divisional staff.

Activity Result 2.3: National and divisional level stakeholder workshops conducted to

emphasize importance of DRR and M in the Agriculture Sector.


The DRR/M Officer will be based in the Economic Planning and Statistics Division of the

MAFF and will report to the Division Head, i.e., the Chief Economist. The primary role of

the person will be to coordinate the activities under Output 2 in consultation and approval

with the Chief Economist. Specific responsibilities assigned to the DRR/M Officer are as

follows:

1. Familiarize with the Fiji Agriculture Statistics System with a view to extracting and/or

updating data/information to support food security through crop diversification,

sustainable land use practices and dissemination of information to farmers to minimize

crop loss/damage during disasters.

- Liaise with relevant departments within the MAFF as well as the Lands

Department to extract information on arable land, i.e., those that are currently

used in food production as well as other potential sites that could be used to

expand food production.

- Update information on current variety of staple and cash crops used in subsistence

and micro level farming as well as explore other hybrid or disaster resistant

varieties that can be used to increase yield and minimize crop damage.

- Explore options and submit proposals for expanding knowledge and information

to extension officers and communities on crop protection and increasing agro

based food production.

2. Review existing Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) in times of natural disasters and

ensure training is conducted amongst field based MAFF staff to increase knowledge and

application of the SOPs.

- Review and revise SOPS based on best practices adopted within the Agriculture

Sector both locally and overseas.

28

- Review post disaster assessment tools to ensure complementarity with

international best practices.

- Organize training for field based MAFF staff to increase familiarity and

application of SOPs during natural disasters.

3. Liaise with agriculture stakeholders and coordinate activities to stimulate learning and

application of best practices within the industry.

- Identify and engage with key partners to identify resource persons that can be

used to share knowledge with micro/small scale farmers

- Organize learning activities connecting resource persons with small/micro level

farmers.

- Collate results and monitor progress in terms of adopted changes in farming

practices.

Duration:

The DRR/M Officer position will be hired for an initial period of 1 year with extension to the

second year subject to performance. Further extension of position will be subject to

performance and availability of funding.

29

IX. ANNEX 3: TERMS OF REFERENCE, PROJECT MANAGER

Background


UNDP and the Government of Fiji (GoF). The project has 3 outputs, 2 of which are proposed

to be implemented through the Ministry of Rural and Maritime Development (MRMD) with

the third implemented through the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF).

The Ministry of Strategic Planning (MSP) plays a pivotal role in the implementation of the

programme given its emphasis on sectoral planning as well as the primary liaison between

the GoF and UNDP. It is therefore proposed that the MSP will be the executive authority of

the project and will chair all board meetings.

Given the multi-ministry focus of the project, it is proposed that UNDP retains the overall

implementing partner responsibility and sub-contracts MRMD and MAFF for the specific

outputs that they will be responsible for.

The 3 project outputs are listed as follows:

Output 1 - Livelihoods in Disaster Prone Communities with specific focus on subsistence

and semi-subsistence agriculture and food security is restored and Community Driven

Emergency Employment implemented. Proposed responsible partner is MRMD

Output 2 - Enhanced capacity of the Department of Agriculture and stakeholders in

strengthening disaster risk resilience and mitigation in the agriculture sector. Proposed

responsible partner is MAFF

Output 3 - Lessons emerging from effective M & E are codified and disseminated. UNDP

will responsible for this output and will be engaging with MRMD and MAFF through the

Project Manager/Communications Specialist to facilitate activities under this output.


The Project Management Role is a critical role as it is responsible for coordinating of

activities under the project, mostly related but not limited to: i) Acting as intermediary

between UNDP Joint Operations Centre and the 2 Responsible Partners (MAFF and MRMD)

in terms of preparation of payment requests and disbursement of funds, ii) Collation of

project progress report and iii) Submission of progress reports through the Executive i.e.,

MSP and onwards to the Project Board members. The Project Manager also ensures that all

stakeholders are kept abreast of the progress made by the project and important decisions

made to facilitate timely implementation. While the MRMD and the MAFF will be

responsible for activities for Outputs 1 and 2, the Project Manager will be liaising with these

ministries to ensure the following:

1. Upon the approval of the Project Document and the Annual Workplan, the Project

Manager will be responsible for organizing activities relating to the initiation of the

project.

2. The Project Manager will guide the officials of the MAFF and the MRMD to put

together the 6 monthly workplan for each of the 3 project outputs. At this point,

modes of fund disbursement, procurement of project related supplies and other

associated activities will be identified to ensure that MAFF and MRMD staff are fully

aware of their responsibilities viz. a viz. the Project Manager and who is doing what,

when and how.

30

3. Once the 6 monthly workplan has been signed and approved with the responsible

partner, the Project Manager will interact with the Joint Operations Centre of UNDP

to facilitate payments to the MAFF and MRMD as well as other idenfitied vendors

for implementation of activities as specified under the workplan.

4. Together with the Communications Specialist, the Project Manager will undertake

routine monitoring of the project however will coordinate his/her activities with the

relevant officials of the MAFF and MRMD. The MSP will be kept abreast of all

important issues in the implementation stage and may be asked to convene an ad-hoc

board meeting as and when the need arises. The Project Board meeting will under

normal circumstances be convened 2 weeks before the six monthly workplan has

lapsed.

5. The Project Manager will collate information and prepare a first draft of the project

progress report and the subsequent 6 month workplan. These will be shared firstly

with the MAFF and MRMD before it is finalized and sent to the MSP for review and

onward forwarding to the rest of the Board Members. The format of the Project

Progress Report will be based on the standard UNDP formats but could be modified

to integrate pertinent information gathered from the field.

6. The Project Manager will assist in collating the minutes of the Board Meeting and

obtaining the signature of the Board Chair, i.e., the PS for MSP. Follow up actions

emanating from the Board Meeting will be taken into account in the approval of the

subsequent bi-annual workplan.

Duration:

The Project Manager position is parallel to the duration of the project which is initially for 2

years. However this will be reviewed and revised as and when the need arises. As the

functions of the Project Manager will not be full time, a nominal allocation of USD10,000

has been allocated under the budget for UNDP to recover costs for the appropriate person

assigned to undertake the Project Manager functions.

31

ANNUAL WORKPLAN (2013)

EXPECTED OUTPUTS and Target

And baseline, indicators including annual targets

PLANNED ACTIVITIES

List activity results and associated actions

TIMEFRAME

RESPONSIBLE PARTY

PLANNED BUDGET

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Funding Source

Budget Description

Amount in USD

MRMD - Ministry of Rural and Maritime Development MAFF – Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries DIM – Direct Implementation, BCPR – Bureau for Crisis Prevention and

Recovery TRAC – UNDP Core Funds

OUTPUT 1: Livelihoods in Disaster Prone Communities with specific focus on subsistence and semi-subsistence agriculture and food security is restored

and Community Driven Emergency Employment implemented

Baseline:

- 6,000 dwelling houses

damaged either partly or

fully.

- 60% of Fiji’s total population

affected by TC Evan, 49% -

females.-

- F$17m in damages sustained

(crops, livestock) in the

Western Division (Ba,

Lautoka, Tavua, Nadi,

Yasawa)

- Job losses temporary and

more evident in Tourism and

Agriculture Sector, Farm

Labourers were the most hit.

Performance Indicator

# of community-based group

benefited with sex-disaggregated

data

# of work days generated

# of DRR initiatives/measures

Targets:

2013: 30 - 35

farming/fisheries venture

groups established supporting

some 1000 – 1200 individuals.

50% or more, roughly 600

beneficiaries to be females.

Activity Result 1.1: Community

driven emergency employment

implemented in 4 districts covering

30 -35 community groups.

Actions:

MRMD as lead

Support

provided by the

Integrated

Team located

in the

Commissioner

western’s

Office

BCPR

Micro-

capital

Grants

Supplies

120,000

30,000

- Undertake consultations with

potential beneficiaries/community

groups.

- Selection of beneficiaries for

emergency employment and

conduct training for Team

Leaders.

- Develop work programme for

each of the community groups

including physical measures to

protect agricultural areas, assets

and facilities.

Office

Activity Result 1.2 – Training in

Financial Literacy and DRR/M

conducted at the community level

Actions:

MRMD TRAC

Travel &

supplies 10,000

32



PLANNED ACTIVITIES


TIMEFRAME

RESPONSIBLE PARTY

PLANNED BUDGET

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Funding Source

Budget Description

Amount in USD

undertaken

# of people trained with sex and

age disaggregated data

# women and youth participants

Outcome Indicators

# of community-based

farming/fishing ventures which

are able to respond to a disaster

effectively at a time of natural

disasters

Sources


Field visits

- Identify financial literacy

through questionnaire survey to

be completed by the Team

Leaders.

- Analyse survey and develop

appropriate programmes tailor

made to suit the communities

- Engage with NGOs and other

programmes particularly on

community loan schemes.

- Develop monitoring mechanisms

to assess progress and results

Activity Result 1.3: Agriculture skills

development for the target

beneficiaries conducted

Actions:

MAFF

Misc. 2,000

- Design and undertake training and

awareness raising

- Incorporate DRR (and CCA)

practices/measure including those

arising from recent TC Evan

PDNA recommendations that

focus on low-income households

TRAC

- Conduct training on best practice

methods for resilience including

nursery management

Activity Result 1.4: District and

Divisional Level Workshops held to

identify best practices and

incorporate lessons learned for

future implementation

MRMD &

MAFF -- --

33



PLANNED ACTIVITIES


TIMEFRAME

RESPONSIBLE PARTY

PLANNED BUDGET

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Funding Source

Budget Description

Amount in USD

Actions:

- Undertake review workshop

- Document good practices and

lessons learned

- Foster inter-community

engagement around knowledge

sharing ie site visits

Sub Total 162,000

OUTPUT 2: Enhanced capacity of the Department of Agriculture and stakeholders in strengthening disaster risk resilience and mitigation in the

agriculture sector.

- - Activity Result 2.1: Provision of

additional support to establish

database to support recovery efforts

in post disaster situations (Damage

Assessments, affected areas, crop

variety, seed distribution etc.).

Actions:

MAFF TRAC

DRM

Officer

5,000

- Prepare TOR for the DRM officer

and recruit.

- Recruit local consultant to

strengthen DRM capacity within

DOA and conduct capacity

assessment.

- Consolidate existing data and

gather other data in partnership

with regional technical agencies

34



PLANNED ACTIVITIES


TIMEFRAME

RESPONSIBLE PARTY

PLANNED BUDGET

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Funding Source

Budget Description

Amount in USD

Activity Result 2.2: Revisit existing

Standard Operating Procedures and

disaster damage and needs assessment

methodologies and conduct training of

divisional staff.

Actions:

MAFF TRAC Supplies/

Travel 5,000 - Gaps analysis of exiting

procedures to improve

effectiveness of disaster impact

assessments

- Conduct training to review the

existing SOP and assessment

methodologies

Activity Result 2.3: National and

divisional level stakeholder workshops

conducted to emphasize importance of

DRR and M.

Actions:

MAFF -- --

--

- Undertake workshop for national

and divisional officers

Sub Total $10,000

OUTPUT 3: Lessons emerging from effective M & E are codified and disseminated. Activity Result 3.1: An effective

monitoring and evaluation (M & E)

system is developed and implemented

throughout the course of the project.

Actions:

UNDP TRAC

Learning

costs

5,000

35



PLANNED ACTIVITIES


TIMEFRAME

RESPONSIBLE PARTY

PLANNED BUDGET

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Funding Source

Budget Description

Amount in USD

- Identify Key target groups with

MRMD and MAFF for

questionnaire survey on RBM.

- Based on Feedback, develop

programme for emphasis on

RBM, including workshop for

Senior and Middle Managers and

focus group discussions of

improving service delivery

Activity Result 3.2: Communication

strategy developed and implemented

Actions:

TRAC Misc.

5,000

- Discuss communication needs

amongst project implementers and

community groups.

- Develop communications plan

and implement.

- Collate findings/best practices

and disseminate locally and

internationally

Activity Result 3.3: Project Board

Meetings convened to oversee project

activities.

Actions:

TRAC Contracts/

Travel 10,000

- Develop project board meetings

schedule. TRAC Project

Manager 6,000

- Prepare Board Papers and

circulate with ample notice to

meeting attendees.

36



PLANNED ACTIVITIES


TIMEFRAME

RESPONSIBLE PARTY

PLANNED BUDGET

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Funding Source

Budget Description

Amount in USD

- Minutes of meetings circulated

and decision implemented in

efficient manner..

Sub Total 26,000

TOTAL - USD 193,000

Summary of 2013 Budget:

Funding Distribution by Output: Funding Distribution by Fund Source:

Output 1 – Community Temporary Employment generated - USD

Output 2 – DRR/M Capacity at MAFF Strengthened - USD

Output 3 – Codification of Lessons Learned - USD

BCPR– USD

TRAC - USD

- USD USD

Approved: Approved:

_______________________________

______________________________

On behalf of the UNDP On behalf of the CPAP Coordinating Agency

Mr. Knut Ostby

Resident Representative

UNDP Fiji Country Office

Date: ______________

Mr. Pita Wise

Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Strategic Planning

Date: _______________________

united nations development programme fiji multi-country office · albeit staffed by a solitary...

Documents