1. Supporting community (survivor)-led responses to crises …
Supporting community (survivor)-led responses to crises …..changing the way we respond to ‘humanitarian’ emergencies (place and date)

2. Some key character types to strengthen co-design processes
Supporter, facilitator, team player, listener, encourages others,
Innovator, new-ideas, creative, risk-taker, starter
Analyser, thinking through all angles, thoughtful, realist, logical,
Empathiser: understands people, listener, caring, inclusive
Strategic thinker, bigger-picture, change-champion, visionary
Mobiliser, communicator, public-speaking, out-going, moves the crowd
Implementer, doer, practical, action, wants to see concrete outputs
Finance wizard, manages budgets creatively, understands accounts
Generalist, jack-of-all-trades, bit of wisdom everywhere, connects ideas
or ……?

3. Objectives of co-design & training workshop
To co-design context-relevant methodologies for supporting communities to lead and manage their own holistic responses to crises in ways that can better meet short term needs and also reduce future vulnerability (i.e. accelerate transformational change).
To help all participants develop the capacities, skills, plans and relationships needed for testing in practice after the workshop.
we can define co-design together
1. Co-design the approach to make it contextually relevant;
2. Develop capacities of participants to implement the approach
Stress the learning by doing approach as the best way to learn and change practices (LPRR and DEPP learning)

4. Key steps of the co-design process
Introducing concepts to key stakeholders
Developing prototype methodologies and relevant systems and skills (co-design/training workshop)
Planning implementation of pilots
Piloting the approaches in practice
Capturing lessons
Reflection workshop to share experiences and refine methodologies
Scale-up, expand application
Contribute to wider evidence base for changing crisis response
(on-going)
now!
Add new dates
Straight after
Oct-Dec 18
Jan ? 2019
Feb? 2019
2019 onwards

5. …not transferring a ready-made, perfected sclr manual
…not transferring a ready-made, perfected sclr manual ...not a one-off project – start of a long term process to change humanitarian programming
But sharing our concepts and experiences and systems - and adding in your capacities, ideas and priorities – to co-develop something to test (proto-typing).
Maybe you’ll pilot, learn, get funds to scale up, do, learn…and then be close to have a set of guidelines you would like to leave with your organisation and share with others
stress the holistic and linking short term response to long term resilience

6. Proposed content of the Workshop
Day 1 Module 0: Getting started, co-design Module 1: Overview of sclr: rational and emerging practice Day 2 Module 2: Participatory Action Learning in crises (palc) Day 3 Module 3: Emergency micro-grants Day 4 Module 4: Strengthening capacity in crises inc. basic OD, psycho-social issues, community-based protection, conflict transformation, networking & linking Day 5 Module 5: Addressing root causes during crises Module 6: Enabling demand-led coordination systems Module 7: Changing institutional relationships Day 6 Module 8: Planning the pilots, follow-up and next steps

7. Proposed schedule 3rd session: 1.30-3.00 pm 1st session: 9.00-10.30 am
tea break (20 mins)
2nd session: am
lunch break (1 hour)
3rd session: pm
4th session: pm
morning session only on Day 6
any informal evening sessions?

8. Workshop principles We are all learning from each other
Safe space for challenging and new thinking
Developing new sclr approaches together: co-design
Not one expert or leader: we all have different expertise, we all are leaders of different processes
Our collective challenge is how to maximise that expertise and leadership potential in each one of us….
The workshop must be demand-led – keep checking it is meeting needs with strong feedback systems to facilitators
Daily recap (every morning)
Present the slide
Add ‘safe space’ and ‘approach is demand led’
Remember accountability and feedback system

9. Ground rules Define collectively which are the ground rules
Get them to define accountability mechanism for workshop (daily mood meter, feedback committee (revolving?), suggestion box – (component of palc)
Identify who is good for energisers and allocate time for it.

10. Before we proceed….. Evacuation procedures Where are bathrooms?
Check if anyone needs extra help
Are power-points readable to all?
Are sound levels ok?
Is language ok?
Any other cultural sensitivities?
Dinners, extra costs, housekeeping etc
Remember for all next days, recap with ball in circle is important and takes 30 minutes
Ask people to speak only for 1 minute if possible

11. Module 1: Overview of sclr
Why support community-led responses to crises? Key concepts, definitions, terms
sclr as a complement to externally led humanitarian response
Identifying the components of an emerging practice for sclr
Well-being and key role of psycho-social issues and livelihoods
Reassure participants that sclr is not trying to replace all existing externally-led aid, but complement it and help it adjust - we should ‘not throw the baby out with the bathwater’ (keep the good stuff and get rid of the bad stuff)

12. Sources of inspiration, learning, support
Multiple examples of “humanitarian/development” interface, community-led action and LNGO/INGO interface in different countries
Research into how crisis affected communities respond themselves to emergencies & what they think of mainstream aid (L2GP+local actors, CDA Listening Programme, LPRR, Oxfam, HLA, NEAR….)
Action-research in how to support survivor-led responses to crises (slr): L2GP+local actors, LPRR, Smart Risks, many others, many of YOU
Charter for Change, Grand Bargain
Leading Think tanks
Make people in the room feel part of something bigger
Possible use of LPRR videos interview from Myanmar and Kenya during co-design workshop (access from Simone)
5-10 minutes plenary: organisation present in the room can share their engagement/experience

13. Learning from examples of locally-led responses:
IDP camps in early 90s, drought response of settled farmers in Sudan
Chronic and acute livelihood crises in Ethiopia
Post conflict recovery in Mozambique
Myanmar: Nargis & Giri, recurrent floods, marginalisation in Karen; Rakhine
Civil war in Cote d’Ivoire
Ebola response in West Africa
Community protection in conflict areas of Sudan
Chronic livelihood and protection crises in oPt
Floods, earthquakes and conflict in Philippines
Climate change and conflict in northern Kenya
Numerous publications….

14. Efficiacy of many (not all) local knowledge and processes
What are the characteristics of community-led responses when external aid is absent (i.e. what are the positive and negative actions of local people during a crisis when there is no external support)?
People depend more on each other, self-help, local resources, local ideas
Multiple community groups want to manage their own multiple, holistic responses...but are limited by lack of resources
People do not separate “humanitarian”, “protection”, “development”, livelihoods etc
Greater focus given to livelihoods and longer term recovery and even root-causes
Importance of social, cultural, dignity and non-material needs (psychosocial)
Efficiacy of many (not all) local knowledge and processes
Knowledge and information are not evenly distributed
And of course neither is power or capacity...complex exclusion/inclusion issues (gender, ethnicity, social status, age, health)
In pairs, discuss positive and negative aspect of a crisis when there is no external support
Plenary feedback presentation from each pair.
Take note. Positive in one flip chart and negative in another
Highlight the psychosocial aspects
Make participants discuss over a topic:
Flag the psychosocial element (faith, passion, belief etc). research has shown survivors needs to be listened in terms of priorities, such a perfume. ‘people are not goats, they need more than food and water’ (LPRR pilot participants)
Power imbalances can be reinforced
Highlight the ‘heroes’, the ones that are standing and doing something about their condition. They come up spontaneously, but we need to find them
Local expert (local knowledge) exists, especially in recurrent crisis. They know what to do.
Build on social networks
Make people note that most point raised are positive and this make people open their eyes
Flag the transformative element of crisis. For example, gender roles (can be positive as well as negative). Make them discuss

15. What do crisis affected people think of externally-led humanitarian assistance?
First and foremost, appreciation of scale, scope, intention and often critical life-saving nature of assistance
But, frustration with tendency to be:
less responsive (to local needs & opportunities)
slow to start
quick to leave
less cost effective
poorly coordinated
at times divisive
Insensitive, degrading
ignoring local ideas, knowledge, capacity
Over time can promote learned helplessness, dependency
Can reinforce unhelpful power structures
DO this in pairs – 10 mins max and then get people to and fill up a flip chart before you share the contents of the slide
In pairs or plenary
2 flip charts, capture positive and negative

16. “ Either an international response is mounted that ignores local capacities to lead, plan and manage the response, or that uses local actors only as sub-contractors and as a means of outsourcing its own risk; or the crisis is ignored by the international community altogether….[this]…. frequently results in a top-down imposition of programs that ignores or, at best, subjugates local humanitarian action. All of this results in redundancy, overlaps, and gaps—some of which may be invisible to external actors. It can result in inappropriate or poorly designed interventions, the undermining of local response capacity in the future, and an increased lack of accountability. The latter results in an ineffective, inefficient response that can do long-term harm to affected communities, and to the operating environment, especially in chronic crisis.”
Keynote address to Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Feb 2018 , by Professor Daniel Maxwell Food Security Feinstein International Center, Science and Policy, Tufts University
Mention the changes of WHS, C4C
There is hope. People at the top are recognising this. WHS recognised what you experience on the ground.

17. Who are the most significant responders to any crisis?
It is the Communities in crisis themselves that are first (and last!) responders, and usually by far the most significant
Plenary discussion
Use numbers (studies) and live experience. Need to find some case studies.
....you can show (at the end of the day) the short 12 min ted talk video of Peter Walker of Tufts providing more examples of this on :

18. Definitions Localisation, locally-led, community/survivor-led
Humanitarian v Development (nexus)
Crisis (emergency, disaster)...acute & chronic
Resilience…..
Community
Optional: you can define collectively each definition. Only if you have time and you feel this is important. It is time consuming. You can divide in groups and assign one term to each. They need to come out with ‘how they would describe the concept to their neighbour’. Focus on simple language. just key points. No debate.
Concepts are relative, they mean different things to different people
Localisation: broad umbrella concept for many approaches to give more resources and accountability (CHS) to local actors
Locally-led: ownership, management and leadership to local actors (including government)
SCLR: supporting community led response where survivor led response, brings the localisation a step further down to affected population
Humanitarian-development nexus: the divide is fiction, it doesn’t make sense to affected populations, it is a aid sectoral divide. The nexus puts emphasis on the overlap between short term humanitarian ways of work and long-term development which looks at the root ca uses of vulnerabilities.
Crisis: we use this word instead of humanitarian or disaster as it captures better how people perceive their condition and to avoid the humanitarian-development divide and language. Crisis can be immediate, acute, chronic.

19. Core issues and terms 1: Resilience
Capacity/Power of a community to cope, respond to a disaster, adapt or prevent it
Capacity to recover at least to previous condition, or better (“bounce-back better”)
Capacity to reduce vulnerability to future crises – i.e. to transform their situation (address root causes )
Slide present how L2GP learn how to use the term resilience in their workshops
Alternatively, we could present:
AAT model: absorb (response), adapt (recovery), transform (long term)
KCL research definition by some survivors: ‘crises survivors felt that resilience meant both independence and support when needed’ or ‘resilience means having the skills and capacity to look after yourself whilst knowing how and where to ask for support when needed’
Bring back the definition to how people define it or make sense.

20. The triangle represents the population in a
RESILIENCE
The triangle represents the population in a
society/ community.
HEALTHY NORMAL STATE
All People live in networks composed of families, influenced by multiple cultural, social and economic factors. These networks, structures and relationships are what help to bring cohesion to a community and provide a sense of belonging, protection and perception of the surrounding world.
They are not homogeneous
They are not “perfect”
It is a bit patronizing and usually inaccurate to refer to all people affected by crisis as “the community”. Often many communities – each one of which in turn is made up of multiple sub-groupings.
SEVERELY AFFECTED

21. HEALTHY NORMAL STATE SEVERELY AFFECTED
In any community there are different structures and networks, both private (family, friends etc.) and organisational (work, authorities, NGOs etc.) that can support individuals and communities in times of distress.
Community is a relative term. There are many communities and we are part of many communities. Community is an aspect that bring us together, we’re interconnected, we’re part of different networks.
When we are part of communities our resilience is stronger
SEVERELY AFFECTED

22. HEALTHY NORMAL STATE SEVERELY AFFECTED
This safety-net prevents people from falling down, and also helps people recover and be able to get higher in the triangle.
SEVERELY AFFECTED

23. HEALTHY NORMAL STATE
In case of a disaster, the ordinary structures and social fabric is disrupted, and the normal support systems fail.
The community and family networks that provide support and care for people are disrupted and unable to function properly increasing of social resilience being undermined. Foundationally, we believe that the heart of resilience is enabling communities to rebuild their connections, their voice and resources – restoring hope , dignity and safety. Without the social side to resilience, there is no holistic recovery.
community during crisis
In a ‘healthy’ community the various networks are stronger and ‘safe’ the individual falling down
But during a crisis some networks might break down, such as during displacement
Our crisis response must acknowledge these networks and support them
There is a higher risk of people falling down, without anything strong enough to stop the fall.
SEVERELY AFFECTED

24. Emerging benefits of strengthening first responders
More responsive – fits local needs & opportunities
Faster
Cost-efficient – less money helps more people
Psychological benefits (dignity, hope, trauma recovery)
Social benefits (cohesion, self-help, accountability)
Holistic: no barriers: allows relief, development, protection, services, peace-building etc
Generates new ideas from the ground (emergent, organic)
Capacity building through learning-by-doing (avoids learned helplessness)
Encourages/accelerates longer-term processes to address root causes
(....improved understanding of duty bearers, changes of approach)
Several initiatives have identified these concepts as key for making humanitarian response more relevant to people perception of the crisis

25. Recovery (building back better) +
...improvements in:
Immediate response +
Recovery (building back better) +
Process of transformation
(reducing future vulnerability)
= ....
....INCREASED RESILIENCE

26. Risks, challenges Overcoming learned helplessness
Community can’t do it all
Accountability issues
Unhelpful domination by local power structures
Exclusion of certain groups
Gender-norms prevent women’s full involvement
Provoking Internal tensions (money)
Dealing with long term, complex root causes
Coordination problems
Contradictions with back donor & INGO procedures and norms
Back with practical examples
Session can be Can be done in plenary Or two groups in parallel to cut time
We can focus on internal organisational challenges if done only with one organisation

27. Supporting community-led (survivor-led) responses to crises sclr

28. Aim of sclr approaches
To support crisis-affected communities to lead and manage their own holistic, coordinated responses to emergencies in ways that improve immediate well-being, strengthen longer term resilience and accelerate transformational change.
Builds on benefits and challenges identified
An approach evolved from field experience
It builds on practical approaches from humanitarian and development toolboxes

29. Autonomous self-help by crisis affected
An emerging practice
Community–based information, mobilisation & learning systems
Collective emergency micro-grants
Rapid provision
of relevant emergency skills up-grading:
- context specific tech & management
- psycho-social response
- conflict analysis & resolution
Changes in
Institutional roles, relationships,
and systems
Autonomous self-help by crisis affected
people
Central triangle: the main assumption of the approach is to recognise there is already a response by crisis affected population. The approach looks at working with these self-help groups work and support them
PALC: Community–based analysis, information management, mobilisation & learning systems - how can we strengthen the self-help to collect information, mobilise various groups and individuals and learn (this will be discussed as the first step in the next day):
Support communities to rapidly initiate (and sustain) their own rapid situation analysis and appreciative enquiry
Generating new or wider initiatives
Learning from immediate responses
Gap analysis
Power issues and relationships, systems of accountability
Conflict sensitivity
Micro-grants: micro-grants will be used to support the self-help groups to address their needs. It can have an impact everywhere, even where there is no market. You can bring the example of Nuba mountains where there is no cash or market (this will be discussed in day 3)
Capacity strengthening: in the sense of skills upgrade and demand led. It can be technical support such as engineers for building, or SME support; Organisational development/management for the self-help groups; psychosocial to address stress; conflict analysis and resolution). Make examples for each type
Connecting/networking/alliances: this component could be addressed in other parts such as in 3. But experience has shown that it deserves a specific focus. How to link the self-help initiatives to other initiatives to address needs but also address long term needs. It is so important that we miss an opportunity if we do not consider this aspect (discussed in day 4)
Root causes: we must take advantage of the opportunity for transformation offered by the crisis. Example of Ace war during Tsunami in How can we use all the previous components to address the long-term root causes of the crisis?
Locally relevant coordination: practical experience has shown this as a major blockage for locally led responses to interact to the wider response and maximise effectiveness. We must improve local coordination and increase the access of NNGOs to UN cluster system
Change in institutions: how to make the policies and systems relevant to SCLR? What needs to change internally to organisations and the wider system?
Support for locally-led longer term processes to address root causes of vulnerability,
& mentoring
Connecting, networking, alliances (inc. private sector)
Locally-relevant coordination services (horizontal & vertical)

30. Possible core components of an emerging practice
Community-owned processes for rapid situation analysis, information- management and learning
Systems for rapid use of micro-grants to support and promote survivor groups’ own (autonomous) crisis responses
Rapid provision of demand-led skills training:
- context specific practical and management skills
- community-based psycho-social recovery
- community-based protection, conflict analysis and conflict resolution
4. Locally-relevant coordination services
5. Linkages, alliances and networks for collective action
6. Support for locally-led longer term processes to address root causes of vulnerability (advocacy, fund-raising etc)
7. Changes in institutional relationships, roles and systems
This slide is not needed – you have talked through the points from the previous diagram slide. But if you want you can leave it there (not to talk through) but just to remind everyone that they have it as a hand out.

31. What limits communities resilience. (i. e
What limits communities resilience? (i.e. its ability to respond, recover, transform)
Lack of resources
Lack of information
Gaps in knowledge, skills
Lack of confidence, fear
Lack of wider connections, networks
Community splits, local conflicts
Bad governance issues (local or national)
Lack of power
Disempowerment, learned helplessness
Trauma, despair
Restrictions on trade & markets
Restrictions to movement and communications
IDPs
Other vulnerable groups
Geophysical location
Conflict and children vulnerability
optional group exercise: if the group is totally new and needs clarification
What limits self-reliance by crisis affected people? Or what is stopping affected population to achieve self-help?

32. Locally-led humanitarian programme is not brand new!
Watch this minute ted-talk. Even Humanitarian Aid policy leaders are promoting it. What we’ll look at for the rest of this week is how to put their good principles into practice…
Find video on
Introduce the dude. With over 25 years of field experience in international humanitarian relief, Peter Walker now leads a team of 30 academics and practitioners at the Feinstein International Center at Tufts University. His group conducts research to better understand the factors that lead to, or exacerbate humanitarian crises, and how to effectively respond to them. Walker is actively involved at all levels: driving policy and international standards whilst also training aid workers for crisis response during his annual disaster simulation workshop at Tufts.