The Impact of Catholic Relief Services Aceh Reconstruction Program May 2008 Team: Dean Johnson, Fachrurriza, Jamal Sitepu, Lisdayanti, M. Anike, M. Zuhri, Retno Ika Praesty, Risza Lopes Da Cruz, Said Mahdani, Tamara Saukotta, T. Syamsul Alam, Yusriati and team leader Pauline Wilson Acknowledgements The evaluation team would like to thank all the men, women and leaders of the six villages in various sub-districts of Aceh Besar and Aceh Barat who gave so generously of their time to provide feedback on the Catholic Relief Services (CRS) reconstruction program carried out with them from 2005 through 2008. Thank you also to staff in external agencies. This includes Government of Indonesian staff based in Banda Aceh and Meulaboh, and staff who worked in Aceh with Caritas Switzerland, IFRC, Mercy Corps, UNORC and the World Bank. All of these staff willingly shared their views on the quality of the CRS reconstruction program. Many CRS Aceh staff also helpfully contributed their views of the CRS reconstruction program to the evaluation team. This enabled us to understand the great efforts made in a complex environment to try and deliver houses and other infrastructure that all stakeholders would consider of high quality. Special thanks to the CRS steering committee of Anat Prag, Christopher Frey, Dean Johnson, Maureen Capps, Provash Budden and Scott Campbell who provided clear guidance on what questions the evaluation must answer and the type of methods that would be appropriate in the Aceh context. The evaluation team is grateful to everyone for the assistance, time, information, and support provided. It is only with your support that the evaluation was possible. Aceh Evaluation Report 18 May 2008 2 Contents Contents 3 Abbreviations 4 Executive Summary 5 1. Introduction 10 2. The evaluation process 10 3. The post tsunami context in Aceh encourages a fast pace to reconstruction 12 4. Post tsunami conditions for people in villages where CRS worked were hard 14 5. Pressure to build permanent houses fast diverts attention from transitional shelter 15 6. An overview of CRS’s reconstruction program 16 Figure 1: The CRS permanent and transitional housing program 16 7. CRS reconstruction program activities are mostly appropriate 18 Figure 2: Owner satisfaction with their new house 19 Figure 3: The adequacy of the new house 19 Figure 4: Adequacy of water supply for drinking and washing purposes 23 6. The immediate impacts of the reconstruction program are mostly encouraging 24 Permanent housing 24 Water and sanitation 25 Other village level infrastructure 26 7. Recovery levels of communities and families is underway 27 Housing 28 Water supply 28 Village level infrastructure 28 Economic 28 CRS’ contribution to recovery 29 8. There is some community involvement in housing reconstruction 30 Figure 5: Consultation with perspective house-owners 31 9. Recommendations from others about what CRS should do in the next emergency 32 10. Main Conclusions 33 11. Recommendations 36 Annexes 37 Aceh Evaluation Report 18 May 2008 3 Abbreviations ACCORD Aceh Community-Based Recovery and Development ACT Area Coordination Team AIPRD the Australian-Indonesia Partnership for Reconstruction and Development AMM Aceh Monitoring Mission ACARP Aceh Community Assistance Research Project BRR Aceh and Nias Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Agency (Badan Rehabilitisi dan Rekonstrucksi – a quasi Indonesian government agency) CFW Cash for Work CRS Catholic Relief Services FGD Focus Group Discussion GAM Free Aceh Movement (Gerakan Aceh Merdeka) GOI Government of Indonesia IDP Internally Displaced People IFRC International Federation of the Red Cross INGO International Nongovernmental Organization LOGA Law on the Governing of Aceh MOU Memorandum of Understanding NAD Nanggore Aceh Darussalem NFI Non Food Items PDAM Regional Water Supply Company (Perusahaan Daerah Air Minum) SSI Semi structured interview ToR Terms of Reference UN United Nations Office of the Recovery Coordinator for Aceh and Nias VDC Village Development Committee VDP Village Development Plans Watsan Water and Sanitation WFP World Food Program YDD Yayasan Dian Desa Aceh Evaluation Report 18 May 2008 4 Executive Summary 1. Introduction On December 26, 2004 a devastating earthquake and tsunami struck the province of Aceh. In response, Catholic Relief Services carried out a number of programs one of which was a reconstruction program. The reconstruction program started in early 2005 and is currently planned to finish at the end of 2008. In March 2008, CRS commissioned an impact evaluation of the reconstruction program. The objective of the reconstruction program was ‘Affected communities have rebuilt and improved their households and community assets’ . The goal of the entire CRS program in Aceh was ‘Tsunami and earthquake affected people in Aceh live productive and dignified lives’. The objectives of the evaluation were to assess: The pre-construction conditions in the communities where CRS worked. The difference reconstruction work made to beneficiaries and the communities in which they lived (immediate impacts). The degree to which reconstruction activities supported individuals, families and communities to restore the dignity of their lives. The degree to which reconstruction activities helped people and communities in terms of recovery of housing, water and sanitation and infrastructure. Local peoples’ involvement in planning, implementation, and monitoring of reconstruction activities so that social problems are effectively addressed. 2. The context encourages a fast pace to reconstruction Villages and cities across Aceh, particularly along its western and northern coastlines, were devastated by the tsunami. An estimated 130,000 people were killed, 37,000 are still missing and half a million people were displaced. The villages where CRS worked had similarly high levels of destruction though the level of mortality varied greatly, from a few people in some villages to as high as 60-75% of the population in other villages. The Government of Indonesia (GOI) and hundreds of NGOs rushed in to provide assistance. As many GOI officials were killed in the tsunami, coordination on the ground was limited while funding support available to NGOs reached unprecedented levels. Many organisations along with the GOI are involved in reconstruction efforts with the reconstruction of houses the primary focus. Speed and quality were the two drivers that influenced most agencies including CRS to use a contractor led approach to building houses. Pressure to build fast came from the GOI, the media, donors and local people. Tensions and accusations about the pace of reconstruction activities have been great since 2005 and most agencies responded by trying to build quickly. 3. The CRS reconstruction program CRS has built nearly four thousand permanent houses across fifty two villages. Each house was equipped with a bathroom with toilet area and a household septic tank system. In most of these villages support was provided to recoup water supply systems. In addition 2162 temporary shelters were distributed and 17 temporary water and sanitation systems were provided for IDPs as they awaited construction of their permanent houses. Over 200 micro-infrastructure projects are now complete. These included road culvert and bridge repair; land clearance and renovation; and construction of markets, clinics and community halls. Village development committees were established in CRS priority villages. Priority villages were the twenty nine villages where CRS built twenty five houses or more. In these villages, Aceh Evaluation Report 18 May 2008 5 processes were set up to ensure extensive consultation with local people on selection of beneficiaries for permanent houses, site location of houses and selection of a house design. A complaints system was set up so perspective home owners could voice concerns as housing construction progressed. 3. The main conclusions The post tsunami conditions for people and communities were very hard: Most people in all twenty-nine CRS priory villages became internally displaced people (IDP) dependent on emergency food aid and the support of relatives, NGOs and government. Many had lost loved ones as well as all their earthly possessions including their home. ‘ After the tsunami we didn’t even have a piece of cloth left. We were naked and had no belongings.’ People became scattered. Many lived in tents. Some lived in barracks and others with relatives. By mid 2005 some people began to relocate to transitional shelters as more agencies distributed these but many families would end up living in barracks, or with relatives for up to two years making it difficult for them to resume normal everyday activities. The perceptions of the CRS Aceh reconstruction program were positive : Every villager we spoke to said CRS and other NGOs did the right thing by building permanent houses. Compared to other agencies villagers considered the quality of CRS houses among the very best. The positive view of the quality of CRS constructed houses was echoed by the external agencies we interviewed who also commended CRS for the professionalism of its staff and the efforts made by CRS to encourage coordination by all agencies in Aceh. The staff of CRS said that the Aceh program has accelerated CRS’s learning in the non-core competency area of housing and enabled them to build the skills and knowledge of local staff and of local contractors on constructing quality housing in Indonesia. Though some construction defects were reported,