1. RELPA/PACAPS EW/ER component Close out summary
Sept 28th, 2009
Sarova Pan-Afric, Nairobi
Summary of the achievements of the EW/ER component of RELPA/PACAPS, lessons learnt and opportunities.

2. Agenda Problem analysis Brief summary of activities & lessons learnt:
Understanding cross-border livelihoods – two pilot baselines
Predictive livelihood analysis for EW & response analysis
Food security and nutrition Crisis Calendar Analysis with partners to improve preparedness, contingency plans and response strategies
Improved preparedness within an agency/district establishing systems for fast and flexible response
Generally promote livelihood thinking into long term pastoral development strategies
Summary of opportunities to take EW/ER components forward

3. “response to crises is often too late ”
The Problem
“response to crises is often too late ”
Which results in:
Massive asset depletion
Livelihoods become ever more fragile
Only response possible is life-saving, not livelihood protection
drought interventions despite late were the largest known by Kenya in terms of amount of funds made available, types of interventions carried out.
National and international agencies already on ground responded by rapidly adapting existing livelihood interventions to respond to the crisis. However there was not coordination between the long term programming and emergency response.
2006 – acute = 40% - 70% livestock died

4. Problem Analysis Early warning Decision makers need to trust it
More predictive outcome analysis
Must be timely
Must be used – to trigger a response
Preparedness
District-wide preparedness
Agency level preparedness
Donor level preparedness
EARLY WARNING
1. Credible baselines as reference point
Multi-actor participation in the analysis (EW produced at District level)
Transparent analysis using credible data
2. Uses quantified baselines – good understanding of local livelihoods
Uses quantified scenarios
Uses Crisis Calendar analysis
On-coming crises are monitored, and scenario predictions regularly updated linked to response
e.g. if the next rains are above normal, what should we be doing in preparation, when each activity is appropriate & who is affected – who to target
Allows for disaggregation to local level – can trigger response in just part of a District
3. Analysis done at district and output released soon after data collection
Less reliance on bi-annual assessment – more use of monthly updates
4. Must meet all above criteria (timely, credible, predictive)
National system takes it up
Feeds into regional system?
Products need to be timely, comparative, short, easy to read, analytical, useful, accessible (on the web...), ‘owned’ by the right people
PREPAREDNESS
District buy-in to a common framework – collaboration – different district dept, NGOs – common contingency strategy – Garissa clinic
Joint scenario & response analysis – transparent
Contingency plans – refer to guide
2. Agency level
Identify reasons for delayed response
Cost of delay
Solutions to bottlenecks
3. Donor level
Buy-in to predictive analysis to understand which responses are worth supporting when
Work with partners on response times (proposals, preparedness auditing, smooth procedures)
Good coordination between sectors and different donors

5. Problem Analysis Response capacity Better problem analysis
More response analysis
A fast response
A coordinated response plan
National structures support District initiatives
Funding
Knowledge of funds available
National level/district level funds available
Optimal use of funds
Longer term development funds have flexibility
Response capacity at District level
1 & 2 & 3. Problem and response analysis are collaborative with a livelihood perspective using the crisis calendar - leading to a coordinated response plan
4. national structures must themselves use, and allow Districts to use analysis independently
Funding
1. Agencies know who has what money and what funds are available for
2. National Contingency Funds functioning smoothly - clear disbursement criteria and mechanisms
3. Shared vision of fund-holders, or coordination on use of funds
Improved decision making processes at fund level transparency, participation – including wider population (‘community’) representatives
Decisions linked to facts through clear analysis and rational prioritisation with livelihood perspective included in analysis
Donors have technical capacity to evaluate proposals and to decide quickly
Agencies have capacity to meet donor requirements on disbursement rates
Interface Donor – Implementing Agency works quickly to allow funds to be made available (contractual obligations, procedures, etc.)
4. Long term development funds are available and have flexibility (for ‘tracking’)
Need a road map for development of pastoral areas
Clear problem analysis – widely shared
Prioritisation of interventions – widely shared
Govts use this for clear policy and prioritized requests for support
Accountability in use of funds
Consensus on need for ‘tracking strategies’ -Donors, GoK, implementing agencies
Modalities established on how to allow flexibility with accountability
Agreements on criteria for ‘changing gear’ within projects - ‘changing gear’ means shifting to work on the same objectives in different ways in response to changing conditions, e.g. supporting privatised animal health services paid by users, but then giving free vaccination vouchers in a crisis

6. 1. Understanding cross-border livelihoods
Providing credible baselines as reference point
Comparison of neighbouring border zones
Understanding symbiotic relationships
To:
Use in predictive livelihood outcome analysis to understand the impact of a defined problem
Guide regional program design and timing
Identify what are the important indicators to monitor and when – against a reference point

8. Cross-border Livelihood Profiles
10 page brief outlining:
Livelihood zone maps
Description
Similarities/differences
Historical timeline
Herd dynamics
Livestock migration
Seasonal calendars
Wealth breakdown
Sources of food and cash, Expenditure
Cross-border markets
Hazards
Response strategies
Recommendations
Livelihood zone description
Offers a general description of the bordering zones with a comparison of topography, vegetation, soils and natural resources. Recording these changes in the livelihood zones for over 5 years helps to identify trends in environmental concerns.
Livelihood
Gives a summary comparison of the pastoral households’ economic strategies and food security and the difference in access to social services and markets. The summary pulls out the common livelihood patterns of the pastoral communities for both adjacent border zones.
Historical Timeline
Includes a description of the reference year and baseline years. It provides a summarised timeline of events for both border zones based on a comparative analysis. This includes details of response strategies engaged to response to annual events/shocks. This can help livelihood analysis by looking back in time to understand what shocks have affected the border zones pastoralists prior to the reference year. This helps to understand how the resilience of these households has deteriorated making them more vulnerable over time.
Herd Dynamics
Outlines the reference year pattern of herd growth/depletion and reflects this within a 6 year timeline. Trends in herd dynamics and herd sizes can inform humanitarian organisations on how to support the different types of pastoralist. Depending on their herd sizes and composition, different types of support maybe more appropriate for some compared to other.
Livestock migration
Describes normal and abnormal movement of livestock across the borders to seasonal rangelands. This enriches monitoring alerting early warning systems that border pastoralists are following abnormal migratory routes and therefore are stressed.
Seasonal Calendar
Sets out the timing of monthly key activities during the year. This is the same for both sides of the borders who experience the same seasonal patterns. Information on seasonal production and consumption can guide implementers on when different interventions are most appropriate.
Wealth Breakdown
Describes the different wealth groups, explaining the differences between these groups and how this affects potential access to food and cash income. By understanding the different types of socio-economic households within these pastoral communities, implementers can refine their project designs to target the right household for the specific interventions.
Sources of Food and Cash
Examines the annual patterns of food and income access for each economic group. This identifies where households are accessing their food and income needs and which of these livelihood strategies can be stretched during difficult times.
Expenditure Patterns
Shows how households from different economic groups spend their annual cash income and how they prioritise purchases under stress.
Cross-border Markets
Contains information on important markets for these border communities, understanding trade routes. Markets are complex and access to favourable livestock marketing opportunities is the backbone to the pastoral economy. Pastoralist purchase up to 70% of their annual food needs so food availability in markets is important monitoring information. This can guide interventions.
Hazards
Outline common hazards that affect livelihood zones on both side of the border. It is important to monitor and quantify the impact of any hazard and identify who is most affected.
Response Strategies
Describes the various similar strategies available to different types of household in the border areas and to what extent they can expand on these strategies to make end meet during bad years.
Recommendations
Outline some ideas for longer-term programming. With this a list of appropriate key parameters are suggested for monitoring in the border zone, based upon an understanding of the cross-border livelihood patterns. Early warning involves identifying and interpreting key events that indicate that a crisis may be developing.

9. Cross-border Livelihood Analysis
What was learnt?
Little up-to-date information was available for most cross-border areas
Strong technical team was required for a credible quantitative livelihood analysis
Access to some border areas in the region is limited due to insecurity
Country level EWS need to share more livelihood information on a regular basis
Partners operating in border areas need to collaborate in assessments & interventions

10. Opportunities Partners involved FEWS-NET FSNAU SC UK Kenya
Sharing of national EW information regionally
Livelihood baselines & cross-border analysis in Kenya, Somalia & Ethiopia
….and with other countries in the region – Sudan, Tanzania, Ug…
….and in other regions (SA)
Use the information for improved predictive outcome analysis, contingency planning and response analysis
Incorporate other types of information in the profiles – more details on markets, livestock disease, conflict….
Partners involved
FEWS-NET
FSNAU
SC UK Kenya
SC UK Ethiopia

11. 2. Predictive Livelihood Analysis
The analysis suggests that post-shock, households will not be able to maintain their normal livelihood assets without assistance.
3 types of information combined:
- Quantified baseline
- Defined problem (quantified impact of the hazard)
- Quantified response strategies (expandability or increase)
Gap

12. The problem - 50% price increase & reduced food aid
Impact on food sources
Impact on expenditure
Gap = 4 shoats
They cope by:
reducing expenditure on staple/non
Selling 2 additional shoats (4-6)
Increasing self employment
Increasing reliance on gifts
The impact of the shock will cause households to have a 44% food deficit before coping

13. Opportunities Partners involved
Increase use of livelihood perspective in early warning predictions
Outcome analysis done on a regular basis to provide recommendations for response strategies to current (El Nino) or recurrent (drought) hazards
Incorporate the analysis to quantify number of people at risk in each socio-economic group in each livelihood zone for targeting justification.
Partners involved
FSNWG – impact of price increase, drought & food aid reduction on pastoral households
SC UK Kenya – impact of destocking programme in NE Kenya

14. 3. Crisis Calendar Analysis
Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of our partners’ contingency plans.
Developed a simple and practical tool to engage a range of actors to share a common understanding of needs, difficulties and possibilities of early response
The ‘crisis calendar’ added a predictive analysis to contingency plans assessing the current situation and looking at the possible crisis to come.
Developed a generic pastoral calendar to understand the impact of the ‘crisis’ and therefore what responses are appropriate when.
Then used the calendar to anticipate calendar months for implementation.
Establish start-up timeline
Included into contingency plans (district, organisation)
Link this to response coordination – who does what where when
1. we found that many of these long documents lacked clear triggers; start up timelines; justification for proposed intervention; and a link to preparedness.

15. The ‘normal’ year Sep-Oct Nov-Dec Jan-Feb Mar-Apr May-June Jul-Aug
Rainy
season
short
rains  
cattle & goat births
goat births
milk
l'stock price high
l'stock price -25%
grain price up 50%
grain price falls
Milk ends

16. Crisis Calendar Analysis: drought Mandera April 09 (FEWS-NET & SC UK)
Identify geographical areas of concern
Identify vulnerable groups
Quantify the impact on the vulnerable groups
Identify appropriate response & realistic start-up timelines
Coordinate who is best placed to do what when in each sector – link to response coordination bodies
Discuss how these responses can compliment development programmes and contribute to long term strategies
What was done?
Verify situation analysis
Compare with trend data
Identify who are most affected
Quantify the impact of the combination of different ‘shocks’ on a household
Incorporate the impact of the current situation into the CCA
Analyse which response would be appropriate when
Establish start-up timeline to incorporate into the response strategy
Ensure included in contingency plans
Link to response coordination

17. Drought analysis – Mandera April 09

18. Cross-border Crisis Calendar Analysis: Garissa-Afmadow El Niño/floods Contingency Planning
What was done?
Crisis calendar analysis
Developed inter-agency cross-border response strategy
Looked at start-up timelines
Scheduled interventions and decisions
Decided on cross-border coordination mechanisms
Looked at what needs to change for this to work!
Assessment
No contingency plan in place
No analysis done on flood scenario
Dissatisfaction with usefulness of existing CPs for droughts
No mechanisms for coordination across-borders
No mechanisms for joint strategic analysis and planning across-Districts

19. Flood analysis – Garissa & Afmadow Sept 09

20. The Crisis Calendar & Contingency Planning
What was learnt?
Agencies had never developed combined strategy before – and all felt it essential
All agreed that CCA should be done on a regular basis
Deadline for start-up for many activities had already passed
Should do the CCA in good times too – preparing for the bad
Many activities and strategies need cross-border co-ordination e.g. RVF vaccination
Key is ownership of strategy/plans and accountability for response and outcomes
Communication and response with donors and Govt need more active management (on both sides)
Most important change needed is in ‘mind set’
Ownership – actors all blamed DSG for doing nothing and felt it was belonged to Aridlands – in the same sentence that they said they needed a coordination forum and the DSG was the best possibility!

21. Opportunities Partners involved CARE Kenya/Somalia
Continue to use the Crisis Calendar for preparedness within individual organisations, DSGs, FSNWG …
Keep contingency plan documents as working documents – update regularly with situation change
Use the Crisis Calendar logic to change mind sets in EW, implementing agencies and donors.
Partners involved
CARE Kenya/Somalia
SC UK Kenya/Ethiopia
VSF Swiss
Oxfam GB
ACF
FEWS-NET
FSNWG (all members)
UNICEF/FSNAU/WVI

22. 4. Preparedness clinics What was done?
Heads of departments sat together to analyse speed of response – for the first time!
Bottlenecks in response time were identified – for the first time
Everything that could be done in advance was identified – and shared
Causes of bottlenecks were identified – for the first time
Most problems were identified as coming from ways of working together, not ‘technical’ (the forms, the procedures)
An example. Logs and purchasing have problems when supplies are only asked for at the last minute. Well drillers don’t know what parts they need until they know the depth and flow of water, so can’t specify until the last minute. BUT they could indicate in advance to logs when they would know so the purchasing people could block out a day for them. Mindsets that need to change:
Think what would be useful for the other person to know and tell them !
tell the other people what you would like to know !

23. Preparedness clinics What was learnt?
The cost of delay had never been considered
Most bottlenecks have solutions
Much preparatory had been done – but not shared
Fast systems only work with organisational support for a fast attitude (& donor….)
Response times needs to be managed as much as the response itself – from the top
Main issue is communication – being proactive about what each one needed from the other
Change in mind-set can bring major changes in speed
we calculated the cost of delay for pastoralists (see OGB report). Pastoralists in Turkana lose over £30m worth of livestock in a drought over around 3 months, or close to $400,000 per day. Even if faster and better response could save only half of the ones that died, that’s still a cost of nearly $200,000 for every single day that a project delays. Speeding up purchasing by just 2 days could be worth $400,000 to the pastoralists of Turkana

24. Opportunities Partners involved OXFAM GB CARE Kenya/Somalia
The preparedness clinic was offered to all our ELMT partners, but few took advantage of it.
Organisations need to identify why they are slow to respond – identify the bottlenecks and find the solutions.
Analyse start-up timeline
Communication between departments
Partners involved
OXFAM GB
CARE Kenya/Somalia

25. 5. Long term pastoral development strategies
What was done?
Facilitate the development of the Horn of Africa Pastoral Network as a forum to understand who is doing what where in support to pastoralists and collectively work towards a common long term strategy for pastoralist in the HOA.
Facilitate a seminar on Perceptions of Pastoralism and influence on a common long term pastoral strategy involving pastoral focused representatives from key donors, implementing agencies, government representatives, regional bodies and pastoralist.
The objective was to identify different constraints that are central to the pastoral livelihoods & develop recommendations to strengthen policies to support pastoralist

26. 5. Long term pastoral development strategies
What was learnt?
There was a huge interest to come together as a network to discuss pastoral issues
Many organizations in Kenya and Ethiopia have pastoral focused programmes and were interested to find out who is doing what where
One seminar was not enough to develop pastoral long term strategies but initiated a dialogue
The need to engage the political, policy makers and elites over pastoral issues
There is need for larger mass engagements that brings together pastoralists, political leaders, civil societies, and policy makers
It is easy to initiate a forum but a challenge to maintain a momentum

27. Opportunities Partners involved Find a home for the network
Encourage further dialogue between pastoralists, political leaders, civil societies, and policy makers
Contribute to the FEWS-NET Food Security Stakeholders Database with HoA Pastoral Network members contact list
Finally build consensus towards a long term strategy for pastoralists
Partners involved
26 regional/international organizations – EW, implementing & donors
Five local organizations based in Kenya
Five government ministries representatives from Kenya and Ethiopia