CRISIS MODIFIERS A SOLUTION FOR A MORE FLEXIBLE DEVELOPMENT– HUMANITARIAN SYSTEM? Katie Peters and Florence Pichon Evaluative learning for resilience Lessons from the BRACED experience in the Sahel CONTACT THE AUTHORS Katie Peters is a Senior Research Fellow at ODI and BRACED Deputy Director. She specialises in the coherence of resilience across the post 2015 frameworks, disaster risk reduction in fragile and conflict affected contexts, the securitisation of climate change, financing for emergency preparedness, and the humanitarian-development nexus. (@katiepetersodi) Florence Pichon is a senior research officer at ODI. She studies the social and political dynamics that shape people’s resilience to climate extremes. Recently, her work has focused on water access during the 2015 El Nino drought, developing tools for improved ex ante climate risk management in the water sector, and understanding mechanisms to better link humanitarian and development programming in fragile contexts. (@flo_pichon) ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Special thanks go to the BRACED partners who kindly allowed us access to their programmes, dedicated valuable staff time to helping us understand the difficult contexts in which they work and were honest and open in sharing their data and experiences. Without their support this report would not have been possible. This includes the PRESENCES consortium led by CARE, the Decentralising Climate Finance consortium led by NEF and the Livestock Mobility consortium led by AFL. Thanks also go to the Fund Manager (the consortium led by KPMG) and DFID for their willingness to participate in the evaluative learning process – specifically, Jonathan Patrick, Patrick Vercammen, Juliet Field, Samalie Lutalo and Liam Upson. The evaluation team included Paul Venton, who led the CARE case study, Gladys Le Masson, who provided substantial research support throughout the process. Thanks to Courtenay Cabot Venton, who conducted a complementary qualitative value for money analysis, which is shaping the data collection protocol for future crisis modifier evaluation. Thanks also go to the various peer reviewers and participants of the Peer Reference Group, including Dr Rebecca Nadin, Malcolm Ridout, Debbie Hillier, Barnaby Willitts-King, Dr Elizabeth Carabine, Oenone Chadburn, Luke Caley, Dr Catherine Simonet, Dr Maarten van Aalst, Paula Silva Villanueva, Dave Wilson, Robbie Gregorowski and Clare Shaw. We are grateful for the support received in preparing the case studies. Niger: Halila Issoufou, Mamane Halilatou Yero Abdolaye, Moussa Na Abou, Amadou Diallo, AbdoulKadri Boube Chayaya, Hadjara Moumine, Madougou Atikou, Penda Diallo, Hama Harouna, OumaKaltoume Issoufou, Sonia Martins, Alexander Economou, Awaiss Yahaya, Sheri Lim and Nicola Giordano. Mali: Yacouba Dème, Aly Bocoum, Jen Abdella, Amara Keita, Abdramane Diop, Daouda Cissé, Aby Dramé and Charlie Benjamin. Burkina Faso: Amadou Mohamadoun Diallo, Sedibe Drissa, Kambire Tilkilete, Annabelle Powell and Arnaud Francois. THE 3AS: TRACKING RESILIENCE ACROSS BRACED  1 Contents Acronyms 3 Executive summary 5 1. Introduction 9 2. The evolution of crisis modifiers 14 3. Linking humanitarian finance to resilience programming 20 4. Methodology: Evaluative Learning 24 5. The case of conflict-related displacement in Burkina Faso 29 6. The case of food insecurity in Niger 43 7. The case of flooding in Mali 60 8. Crisis modifiers in practice: When did theory hold? 76 8.1 BRACED project working in Sahel anticipates shock or stress 77 8.2 BRACED consortium plans intervention and applies for PHASE funding 78 8.3 The decision-making process is efficient and corresponds to the PHASE guidelines, and funding is disbursed quickly 81 8.4 Timely PHASE intervention helps beneficiaries absorb shock or stress 84 8.5 BRACED activities remain on track 85 8.6 BRACED resilience outcomes are protected in spite of shock or stress 86 9. Reflections on the use of crisis modifiers 89 9.1 Getting the basics right 89 9.2 Ownership and accountability: Does a crisis modifier reveal a flaw in the design of resilience programmes? 91 9.3 Six recommendations from BRACED 93 10. An antidote to the burden on the humanitarian system? 101 10.1 Crisis modifiers: A new way of managing risk 101 10.2 Fostering strategic coherence with humanitarians 103 10.3 Linking crisis modifiers with adaptive programming 104 10.4 Broader landscape of managing risk 105 10.5 Time to take action: Recommendations for specific stakeholders 107 References and consulted works 111 List of tables Table 1: The potential benefits and challenges of crisis modifiers 17 Table 2: Timeline for the case of conflict-related displacement in Burkina Faso 32 Table 3: Turnaround time for crisis modifier applications 82 Table 4: Innovative risk financing options 106 List of figures Figure 1: Crisis modifier countdown – 15 days for decision-making 22 Figure 2: Review of applications and selection of case studies 23 Figure 3: Causal chain 25 Figure 4: Causal chain for the case of conflict-related displacement in Burkina Faso 30 Figure 5: Causal chain for the case of food insecurity in Niger 44 Figure 6: Causal chain for the case of flooding in Mali 61 Figure 7: Mechanisms for funding crisis modifiers 103 List of maps Map 1: BRACED projects that accessed the crisis modifier in the Sahel 31 Map 2: Flooding in Mali 62 List of boxes Box 1: Where does PHASE sit in the range of crisis modifiers? 21 Box 2: How does cash-for-work help in managing food insecurity? 54 Box 3: Programming choices – more of the same? 88 Box 4: Institutionalising contingency planning at the project level 98 Box 5: ‘Workarounds’ – options for design 102 Acronyms 3es Economy, Efficiency and Effectiveness ACP Africa, Caribbean, Pacific AFL Acting for Life BEIS Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy BRACED Building Resilience and Adaptation to Climate Extremes and Disasters CAPC Community-Level Adaptation Planning Committee CFW Cash for Work COPRASUR Comité Provincial de Secours, d’Urgence et de Réhabilitation (Provincial Department of Emergency Relief and Rehabilitation) CRS Catholic Relief Services DCF Decentralising Climate Finance DEFRA Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs DFID Department for International Development EC European Commission ECHO EU Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection Department EU European Union FEWS-NET Famine Early Warning Systems Network FGD Focus Group Discussion FM Fund Manager IASC Inter-Agency Standing Committee ICAI Independent Commission for Aid ICVA International Council of Voluntary Agencies IFRC International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies IP Implementing Partner (this refers to a BRACED consortia project) INRAN Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique du Niger (Nigerian National Institute for Agronomic Research) KII Key Informant Interview M&E Monitoring and Evaluation NEF Near East Foundation NGO Non-Governmental Organisation OCHA UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs ODI Overseas Development Institute OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development OPM Oxford Policy Management PHASE Providing Humanitarian Assistance for Sahel Emergencies PRESENCES Projet de Résilience face aux Chocs Environnementaux et Sociaux au Niger (Building Resilience against Environmental and Social Shocks in Niger) PRIME Pastoralist Areas Resilience Improvement through Market Expansion PSNP Productive Safety Net Programme PSP Participatory Scenario Planning RECOPA Réseau de Communication sur le Pastoralisme (Communication Network on Pastoralism) RISE Resilience in the Sahel Enhanced SAREL Sahel Resilience Learning Initiative UK United Kingdom UN United Nations UNFCCC UN Framework Convention on Climate Change UNISDR UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction US United States USAID US Agency for International Development VfM Value for Money CRISIS MODIFIERS ExEcutivEsummary 5 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY image:Eric Montfort An estimated 87% of people living in extreme poverty are in fragile or environmentally vulnerable countries (Global Humanitarian Assistance, 2017). Tackling poverty and responding to crises are increasingly linked, and the aid system is struggling to respond to new challenges posed by the interconnected risks of climate change, displacement, conflict and political fragility. Though enormous progress has been made in helping nearly 1.1 billion people escape poverty since 1990, such progress in fragile contexts has been stubbornly slow, periodically interrupted by shocks and leaving the extreme poor more vulnerable than before. To meet ambitious commitments articulated by Agenda 2030, (UN General Assembly, 2015) both development and humanitarian actors must get serious about preventing and minimising the impact of crises on the poorest. By design, the humanitarian–development aid architecture is strictly segregated, divided by mandates and rules that were originally designed to meet different kinds of needs. Today, however, this rigidity is hampering the aid system’s ability to manage risks and rapidly respond to shocks and stresses. Pre-planned development programmes do not have the flexibility to quickly reallocate funding to address spikes in need, and humanitarian organisations are largely confined to funding instruments that prevent longer-term engagement in vulnerability reduction. When a localised crisis interrupts people’s lives, the place between routine development work and full-scale humanitarian response is found wanting. CRISIS MODIFIERS ExEcutivEsummary 6 To address these issues, donors, governments