Gujarat Earthquake Recovery Initiative (GERI) Lessons Learnt Workshop Hotel Cama Plaza Ahmedabad April 27 h,2004 Workshop Report Workshop Organization by: USAIDIIndia Workshop facilitation by: Development Alternatives, Report Prepared by: Sara Ahmed Development Alternatives Gender and Development Specialist B-32 TARA Crescent T-19, IIM(A) Campus, Vastrapur Qutub Institutional Area Ahmedabad Gujarat 380 015 New Delhi 110016 INDIA [email protected] Tel: 011 2680 4482 2680 1521 * Gujarat Earthquake Recovery Initiative (GERI): Lessons Learnt Workshop Organized by USAID/India and facilitated by Development Alternatives Hotel Cama Plaza, Ahmedabad, Tuesday April 2 7/, 2004 Table of Contents Executive Summary Glossary and Abbreviations 1.0 Introduction 1.1 GERI: background and objectives 1.2 Background to the workshop 1.3 Workshop participants and methodology 1.4 GERI Mid-term Evaluation: key findings and actions taken 2.0 GERI Initiatives: An Overview 2.1 CARE 2.2 CRS 2.3 UNDP 2.4 World Vision 3.0 Key Emerging Issues 4.0 Strategic and Operational Critical incident Analysis 5.0 Addressing Vulnerability - Expert Inputs 6.0 Prioritizing Strategies for Disaster Mitigation and Rehabilitation 7.0 Summary: Looking Ahead Annexure 1: List of participants and contact details Annexure 2: Workshop agenda Annexure 3: Group exercise details Annexure 4: USIAD/India Presentation Annexure 5: CARE Presentation Annexure 6: CRS Presentation Annexure 7: UNDP Presentation Annexure 8: World Vision Presentation A Report: Gujarat Earthquake Recovery Initiative - Lessons Learnt Workshop Executive Summary The Gujarat Earthquake Recovery Initiative (GERI) - Lessons Learnt Workshop was organized with an aim to provide a forum to USAID partners of the GERI program to come together with USAID staff to review the context, nature and challenge of GERI, evaluate the validity of assumptions made during the design of the program and identify successful interventions that might be replicable elsewhere. The Workshop began with a short introduction from Mr. Patara (facilitator from DA) followed by welcome remarks from the USAID Mission Director, Mr. Walter North. While thanking participants for all the hard work they had done in Kutchh, Mr. North reiterated that the Workshop was to be seen in the spirit of transformation and partnership underlying GERI, an opportunity to generate new experiences rather than simply list outcomes. Ms. Nina Minka from USAID outlined the key objectives and assumptions underlying GERI and why it was important to look at lessons learned. Each partner then made a brief presentation followed by quick clarifications. Dr. Sara Ahmed, gender and development researcher, Ahmedabad, closed the session by raising some important concerns to consider. After lunch, participants broke into three groups each consistent of representation from every partner organization. The objective was to identify key strategic and operational factors which either worked or did not work in the field context. Participants shared these factors with others in their group through an exercise analyzing critical incidents. Each group then made a plenary presentation. Mr. Prasad Chacko, Director Behavioral Science Centre, Ahmedabad summarized key points of concern and provided an external view of the GERI project. All participants were then asked to prioritize five key strategic and operational' factors which they thought were most critical for sustainable disaster recovery programs.' The Workshop ended with a quick summary of most important strategies and/or points of concern identified by the group and a vote of thanks from the USAID team. (Annexure 2 contains the workshop agenda) Development Alternatives Workshop Report 3 A Report: Gujarat Earthquake Recovery Initiative - Lessons Learnt Workshop Glossary Taluka Of Block level Mahila Vikas Sanghatan Women Development Cooperative Setu Literally meaning 'bridge' Sarpanch Village leader Panchayati Raj Local (Village) Governance System Abbreviations GERI Gujarat Earthquake Recovery Initiative NGOs Non Governmental Organisations CBOs Community Based Organisations USAID United States Agency for international Development CRS Catholic Relief Services UNDP United Nations Development Program DA Development Alternatives FICCI Federation of Indian Chambers Commerce and Industries KMVS Kutchh Mahila Vikas Sanghatan UNV United Nation Volunteers MoU Memorandum of Understanding GSDMA Gujarat State Disaster Management Agency Development Altematives Workshop Report 4 A Report: Gujarat Earthquake Recovery Initiative - Lessons Leamt Workshop 1.0 Introduction On 26m" January 2001, the Gujarat state of India was hit by a devastating earthquake, measuring 7.6 on the Richter scale. It affected 7,633 villages and towns in 21 districts (with a population of almost 16 million people), left 600,000 homeless and killed almost 20,000 (official government figures are 13,805). Nearly 1.3 million houses were damaged or destroyed. Infrastructure damage was worth approximately US$ 463 million. Many schools, hospitals and businesses were destroyed. 1.1 GERI: Background and Objectives Following the immediate relief phase, USAID/India (referred to as USAID in this report) recognized longer term needs in Gujarat and launched the Gujarat Earthquake Recovery Initiative (GERI). GERI provided US$ 8.6 million to four main partners namely, CARE, Catholic Relief Services (CRS), World Vision and UNDP and their sub partners to facilitate longer term recovery efforts. However, it seemed that the resources available would not be able to match the scale of this humanitarian tragedy. USAID, therefore, decided to focus on how aid from the United States Government could be used to add extra value to recovery. USAIDs assistance was intended to leverage and mobilize public and private Indian resources and build up existing Indian capabilities. The GERI program had the following key recovery objectives: * Promotion of earthquake resistant construction - Re-build homes and community centers - Re-institute critical health services - Ensure dissemination of information about reconstruction programs at village level * Mobilize public and private resources * Engage affected households - Cash for work programs: * Debris removal, earthen block production * Development of water conservation structures (drought proofing) Since much of the massive assistance flow to Kutchh was being targeted to urban areas, 'USAID decided that GERI would focus largely on rural areas and generate best practicesfor approaching community recovery in a participatory manner. This was in consonance with USAID's country strategy to increase capacity of partners and support a new National Disaster Management Authority in India. 1.2 Background to the Workshop USAID/India organized a one day workshop on lessons learned from the Gujarat Earthquake Recovery Initiative (GERI) in Ahmedabad (Hotel Cama Plaza, April 27 , 2004). The workshop was facilitated by Development Alternatives (DA). The main objective of the workshop was to provide a forum to USAID partners of the GERI program to come together with USAID staff to review the context, nature and challenge of GERI, evaluate the validity Development Alternatives Workshop Report 5 A Report Gujarat Earthquake Recovery initiative - Lessons Leart Workshop of assumptions made during the design of the program and identify successful interventions that might be replicable elsewhere. Ahmedabad was chosen as the venue as it was seen to be a convenient location for representatives of partners' sub-grantees (NGOs based in Kutchh district) and others from Gujarat (development professionals, local resource persons) to attend the Workshop. Each partner was asked to make a 20 minute presentation on project accomplishments, challenges and success stories. An expectation from the workshop was to highlight what could be done differently in a similar program in future. 1.3 Workshop participants and methodology 29 persons participated at the Workshop. These included the Mission Director and senior representatives from USAID, representation from the four partners, namely, CARE, UNDP, CRS and World Vision, facilitators from DA and two development professionals for expert inputs (refer to annexure I for list of participants and their contact details). The methodology used included: - Short presentations - Group discussions - Prioritizing exercise - External inputs 1.4 GERI Mid-term Evaluation: Key Findings and Actions Taken USAID commissioned an independent mid-term evaluation of GERI in 2003 to look at how well the needs of the affected population, particularly vulnerable communities, were being met in the relief and recovery stage in relation to the broad program objectives. The evaluation team found that: * Houses were well built and met recommended standards for earthquake prone areas * GERI-funded health care played a useful role for local communities * Cash for work programs were not having the envisaged impact * Women did not feel adequately represented in decisions related to housing design * No GERI activities were undertaken in urban areas (not intended) * Housing reconstruction may not be the best use of USAID resources USAID agreed with some of the recommendations made and subsequently changes were made in the program. For example, targeted villages and households were changed, cash­ for-work for water conservation was added to some programs and construction of check dams was approved. Some programs were also extended until January 2004. USAID, along Development Alteratives