9 ca programming session sept10 sd


Published on

Published in: Technology, Business
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • 24 hours – peer review and translation in French in parallel
    Right of scrutiny – is more of administrative right ensuring proper procedures were followed…
  • 9 ca programming session sept10 sd

    1. 1. DIPECHO South Asia 2011 – 2012 Information Session for Potential Partners Partners’ Meeting September 2010
    2. 2. DG ECHO Programming Cycle: Consultative Process based on: Regular exchange of information between ECHO and partners Consultative Meetings / Information sessions with partners and relevant stakeholders Body of knowledge gained from field monitoring of projects, external evaluations, best practices and lessons learned over time
    3. 3. Estimated Timings September / December 2010: Partners’ Meetings in South Asia and Consolidation of Priorities (field) 15 November 2010: Partners’ meeting in Brussels Mid February 2011: Funding Decision Approval Mid December (indicative deadline) Submission of Proposals December/ February 2011: Evaluation of proposals Mid March 2011: Start of first projects Partners’ Meeting in Brussels will update on all information contained in this presentation
    4. 4. Funding Decision (legal document) Objective: “To support strategies and complement existing strategies that enable local communities and institutions to better prepare for, mitigate and respond adequately to natural disasters by enhancing their capacities to cope and respond, thereby increasing resilience and reducing vulnerability in South Asia” Duration of the decision: 24 months (if no suspension) Start of Eligibility Date: 1 January 2011 Projects: possibly 18 months duration. Co-financing
    5. 5. FUNDING DECISION - Steps Disaster Preparedness Budget Line Estimated Timings Drafting decision text Mid September 2010 Adoption of the Decision by the Commission (ECHO + inter-service consultations) End of October 2010 Consultation with EU Member States Humanitarian Aid Committee (HAC) Mid November 2010 Parliament’s feedback to the Decision (right of scrutiny) February 2011 Adoption of Decision by the Commission Mid February 2011
    6. 6. Preparation of Projects Inform us of intent to apply by keeping in close contact with ECHO (field & HQ) Start working on your plans right now ! Use information available on the web from ECHO’s Strategy and previous work on DIPECHO Quality proposal = Early start! Avoid too many reviews of the initial proposal. Be clear on needs, vulnerabilities, process of implementation, and expected outcomes
    7. 7. Applicants EU-based NGOs: FPA A /P mechanisms UN: Financial and Admin Framework Agreement (FAFA) International Organizations: General Conditions and Contribution Agreement EU MS agencies Specific rules both for ECHO and MS agencies
    8. 8. Applicants Local organizations: cannot be grant holders; but partnerships with local actors are highly encouraged and will be a “plus” in criteria selection, Priority for agencies with experience in-country Priority for agencies with experience in DRR Several applications per applicant may be submitted (but be realistic)
    9. 9. Budget… Total DIPECHO South Asia for 2011-2012: 12 million EUR Trend since DIPECHO was established in SA: Progressive increase in funds Growing number of partners/projects Average grant during the 5th AP: 370,000 EUR Becoming unmanageable… Different Modalities must be encouraged
    10. 10. Modalities  National Project  1 operation = 1 proposal. Not ideal…  Multi-National Projects  Same organization = several countries targeted = 1 proposal  Regional Projects  Different approach that goes beyond the ‘mere’ sum of national projects  Consortia  Several organizations = same countries targeted = 1 proposal  Takes time to set-up… Start planning now!  Budgetary Ceiling depending on the modality but the average size of DIPECHO projects should increase Quality of the project, cost-efficiency ratio, partner’s experience and capacity is key  First DIPECHO project: be realistic!
    11. 11. Prior to the Submission of Proposals Partners to Coordinate: Joint activities and events, including Advocacy initiatives and celebration of DRR days Complementarities such as IEC materials, manuals, public awareness campaigns, training plans, cross-visits Definition and measurement of indicators Evaluations / Impact assessment Vulnerability and risk assessments Locations and definition of target groups Approaches vis-à-vis local DM committees eNewsletters – added value? Dedicated websites – added value? Targeting the Media and Media training
    12. 12. Submission of Proposals  Include in budget Budget should account for all activities including the joint initiatives In any case proposals should account for: Coordination mechanisms Partners’ Meeting Co-organisation of meeting towards the end of the action plan DIPECHO Lessons Learned Workshop Participation of 2 persons for 2 days in a south Asian country Re-printing of good materials (if relevant) Final report (if not part of the joint activities) Study reports (if any)
    13. 13. Do NOT Reinvent the wheel Retain knowledge for yourself but rather build capacities Create again and again IECs, unless they are innovative and needed.
    14. 14. Mitigation works – approach Affordable in terms of maintenance, replication, and appropriateness to local context Scope: depends on design of project (average 30- 50% of total budget including stock building) Amount: to be justified in design of project (numerous small activities vs. few large; in all locations vs. in some selected locations) Types of projects: based on HVCA (no wish list); agency should ensure the appropriate level of knowledge and supervision is available  Can we expand into scope and volume of mitigation works? To be discussed in detail in the Speaking Points
    15. 15. Managing Expectations… Community level When starting up in the community, be clear on nature of DIPECHO interventions, for how long you intend to be involved and with which strategy Only possible if field staff working directly with the communities and local authorities is also very clear on DIPECHO approach… Institutional Learning and Implementing Partners DIPECHO projects are not be regarded in ‘isolation’. Strategy, Models, Tools, Materials, etc. must feed into the overall DRM strategies of the partners Integration into overall development programs, into local authorities’ planning tools, into other programs (donors, government) Pilot has been demonstrated - promote replication
    16. 16. Human Resources DIPECHO projects require implementation of large number of ‘software’ activities innovative approaches all at a very fast pace Project Manager plays vital role in keeping the focus at all times on the what/where/how/why of the implementation. Therefore, Must have international experience in DRR/DRM, and specifically on disaster preparedness tools and methodologies Must have good knowledge of ECHO contract management (FPA/FAFA) Be able to provide technical support to implementing partners. (Ultimately, to ECHO responsibility lies with ECHO partner) Good staff mentoring skills (staff rotation always a challenge) Previous experience shows correlation between poor project results and weak project management…
    17. 17. Sustainability Implementation Strategy will determine level of sustainability… Community ownership Think beyond the lifespan of the project “one time off” projects without linkages to other projects / development programs lead nowhere