DFID’s Response to Typhoon Haiyan in the Philippines – Inception Report
1. Introduction
1.1 The Independent Commission for Aid Impact (ICAI) is the independent body responsible for scrutinising UK aid. We focus on maximising the effectiveness of the UK aid budget for intended beneficiaries and on delivering value for money for UK taxpayers. We carry out independent reviews of aid programmes and of issues affecting the delivery of UK aid. We publish transparent, impartial and objective reports to provide evidence and clear recommendations to support UK Government decision-making and to strengthen the accountability of the aid programme. Our reports are written to be accessible to a general readership and we use a simple ‘traffic light’ system to report our judgement on each programme or topic we review.
1.2 We have decided to undertake a ‘Rapid Review’ of the impact and value for money of the UK Government’s response to Typhoon Haiyan in the Philippines. A Rapid Review is a new type of ICAI report: a faster, smaller-scale assessment compared to standard ICAI reports, to be used when an especially timely and immediate perspective is merited.
1.3 This Inception Report sets out the questions, methodology and work plan for the review. It is, however, intended that the methodology and work plan be flexible enough to allow new questions and lines of inquiry to emerge over the course of the review.
2. Background
2.1 Typhoon Haiyan struck the Philippines on 8 November 2013 devastating towns and rural areas, affecting over 14 million people and displacing over 4 million.1 By 24 December, the UK Government had pledged £75 million to ‘help aid get through to hard to reach areas’ and ‘provide urgent humanitarian support for up to 800,000 people’.2 This assistance was delivered through implementing partners including the British military, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and multilateral entities such as United Nations agencies and the Red Cross.
2.2 The Humanitarian Emergency Response Review (HERR), chaired by Lord Ashdown and published in 2011, examined the effectiveness of the UK Government’s global humanitarian interventions and made a series of recommendations.3 The Department for International Development (DFID) implemented a number of measures to address them. DFID’s response to Haiyan is the first emergency to use mechanisms implemented in response to the HERR’s recommendations. Likewise, Typhoon Haiyan was the first major (Level 3) natural disaster to which the United Nations responded since the adoption of its ‘Transformative Agenda’ for emergency response.4
2.3 Further background to this review is described in the Terms of Reference.
3. Purpose of this review
3.1 To undertake a timely assessment of the appropriateness and effectiveness of the UK Government’s contribution to the aid effort in the Philippines mobilised over November and December 2013. We will take a beneficiary-centric view of the support and look, in particular, to assess the extent to which the UK-supported activities are meeting the needs and priorities of those affected.
3.2 This review will assess whether DFID’s response is appropriate for the humanitarian needs of the people affected and whether DFID is working effectively with national stakeholders in the Philippines and within the broader international humanitarian architecture to meet immediate needs and work towards sustainable recovery in the affected areas.
3.3 The review will focus on eight core questions:
- To what extent does DFID’s response to Typhoon Haiyan meet the humanitarian needs of the people affected?
- How well was the DFID response aligned with the global efforts of the multilateral community and the NGOs and how well did DFID make the choice of delivery partners and mechanisms?
- How effective and timely were the initial decision-making processes led by DFID across government in relation to the emerging disaster?
- To what extent has DFID’s support had the desired outcomes for the targeted populations? What are the expectations for future recovery of intended beneficiaries and other community members in the affected regions? Have there been any structural impacts from the flow of funds and aid delivery mechanisms? Are local people being suitably engaged?
- To what extent did DFID apply prior learning, especially the recommendations of the HERR, to its planning and implementation of support to this disaster? What difference has this made to DFID’s processes and decisions?
- How is DFID drawing lessons from the first phases of response to the crisis to shape future programming?
- DFID has pledged longer-term support to assist the Philippines. Is this support focussed on achieving sustainable outcomes for those affected and what shape will it take, given that DFID currently has no bilateral programme in the Philippines?
- How has the UK response assessed and taken account of the capability and contributions of national authorities (including the military), local communities and private sector?
4. Methodology
What is distinctive about our approach?
4.1 The proximity of this review to the crisis will allow us to assess the programmes of activity in close to real time and draw out early insights and recommendations. We will take a beneficiary-centric view of the support and look in particular to assess the extent to which the UK-supported activities are meeting the needs and priorities of those affected.
4.2 A faster, smaller-scale assessment with a focussed scope, this process aims to provide timely and valuable insights with minimum disruption to the ongoing response. It will make use of existing studies, including the HERR and relevant ICAI reports, to provide insight and context to the response to Typhoon Haiyan without the need of a comprehensive literature review.
What will we do?
4.3 The small review team, led by the Lead Commissioner, will undertake a one-week field visit to areas where significant support has been delivered, insofar as this is practicable. During the visit, the team will follow the trail of UK funds to practical activities delivered by multilateral, NGO and private sector partnerships. The site visit team will aim to visit previously unmonitored interventions.
4.4 The team will undertake interviews and focus group discussions with the impacted populations and as many key stakeholder groups as possible, recognising the limitations of the short notice and tight review timeline. Where feasible we will consult individuals, such as local leaders and civil society figures, who have a broader perspective on the experience of their communities.
4.5 Given our beneficiary-centric focus, the team aims to focus particularly on the experiences of beneficiaries, community leaders and others in the most affected areas. We aim to meet with intended beneficiaries and also with those yet to receive aid, insofar as this is possible.
4.6 We will also aim to meet with key stakeholders from the multilateral and NGO communities, especially the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA). These will include personnel with a hands-on role in the response, including aid workers who have since left the country. In addition, we will aim to meet with members of the Philippine government, including the military, at central and local levels, insofar as this is practicable at short notice and given the pressures on their time.
4.7 The team will review DFID’s planning functions in London and on the ground to understand how the priorities were set, both in terms of the types of interventions and the geographic areas to be addressed. Such an emphasis will also include a focus on cross-governmental forms of co-ordination and collaboration, including the use of military assets as part of the humanitarian response.
4.8 Our work in the UK will include meetings with the DFID humanitarian co-ordinating team in London and reviews of relevant DFID documentation, including planning documents, as well as interactions with leaders from other ministries/services involved in the response (including the Ministry of Defence, Foreign and Commonwealth Office and National Health Service).
4.9 We will review the HERR and assess the extent to which its findings and recommendations have influenced DFID’s response. In particular, we will consider whether this has improved the effectiveness of DFID’s response mechanisms and/or affected the decisions made. Other documents will also be considered in the preparation of the report, including evaluations and lessons learnt from the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami and the 2010 Haitian earthquake and relevant ICAI reports which will form a concise and targeted literature review.
5. Roles and responsibilities
5.1 The Team Leader will be the primary point of contact with DFID. KPMG will provide oversight of this review under the overall leadership of the ICAI Project Director. Supplementary analysis and peer review will be provided by KPMG staff.
5.2 The Lead Commissioner will play an active role in the review and report writing. The core team will comprise the following members:
Team Leader (KPMG)
The Team Leader specialises in impact reporting, sustainability and grant-making. His work with corporate, government and philanthropic clients involves assisting them to assess, measure, address and report a wide range of governance, health, safety, environmental, human rights and social/community impacts. He designed and manages DFID’s Civil Society Department’s pre-grant due diligence programme and is KPMG’s global co-ordinator of humanitarian grant audits for DG ECHO. The Team Leader has been KPMG’s liaison delegate to the World Business Council for Sustainable Development. He is a chartered accountant and has a Masters degree in Human Rights Law. He has also led ICAI reviews of DFID’s Humanitarian Emergency Response in the Horn of Africa and Girl Hub.
The Team Leader will lead the team and have overall responsibility for the review and the report.
Team Member 1 (Overseas Development Institute)
He is a Research Fellow with the Humanitarian Policy Group (HPG) at ODI where he leads research projects on disaster response and emergency preparedness. He has extensive experience as a researcher and practitioner with a focus on humanitarian response and aid delivery in crisis-affected contexts. He has worked as a Research Fellow and Acting Deputy Director of the University of York’s Post-war Reconstruction and Development Unit; he was also Lead Analyst with the Civil-Military Fusion Centre. Before beginning a research career, he was Country Director of ACTED: the largest international NGO in Central Asia, and worked with the International Organization for Migration (IOM) in Afghanistan. He has also served as an adviser to or consultant with the World Bank, UNICEF, UNDP, WFP, IOM, DFID, the FCO, the UK Stabilisation Unit, the Norwegian Refugee Council, Islamic Relief and many other organisations in more than a dozen countries.
He will serve as a humanitarian specialist on the site visit and review team.
Team Member 2 (Independent Consultant)
This team member is a Philippines National with 38 years of professional work experience within the Philippines as a researcher and consultant in the fields on human rights, internally displaced persons, women’s rights, and research methodologies. She has also sat on the board of directors on multiple NGOs and commissions within the Philippines. She has extensive work experience carrying out reviews and assessments of programmes including: an assessment of the health facilities and service utilisation in Mindanao; a qualitative baseline study of Kalahi-CIDSS project; and an external evaluation of the various gender and development programmes of NGOs. She has also held numerous leadership positions within the Philippines civil society sector including being: a board member in the Caucus of Development NGO Networks; the founding director, national council member and chair of PILIPINA legal resources centre; board member of the Mindanao Coalition of Development networks, board member of the Partnership of Philippine Support Agencies; and chair of the commission on Internal Reform Initiatives.
She will serve as a country specialist and gender and development subject specialist on the site visit and review team.
Team Member 3 (KPMG)
She has been a member of the Public Sector Audit Department at KPMG since 2010. During this period she has worked on internal and external audits in the NGO and government sectors to deliver high quality audit and assurance work. She has carried out pre-grant due diligence assessments on civil society organisations selected for Global Poverty Action Fund grants. She has also undertaken audits of NGOs receiving DG ECHO funding at headquarters level and in the field in South Sudan. She is a part-qualified accountant and has a Masters degree in Structural Engineering.
She will support the team by conducting research into the review and in the preparation of the report.
Peer Reviewer (ODI)
The Peer Reviewer has been an ODI Research Fellow with the Humanitarian Policy Group division since April 2012. She has a background in Social History and a Masters in Master of Arts in Anthropology from Colombia University. She has worked extensively with Oxfam to develop an advocacy strategy for following Cyclone Nargis in Myanmar and developed and led Oxfam’s Policy and Advocacy Unit in Aceh-Nias. The Peer Reviewer has also served as an advisor for UNHR, Malaysia and has a research background in housing, land and property rights pertaining to the challenges to recovery and reconstruction for earthquake-affected displaced persons.
She will support the team as a peer reviewer.
6. Expected outputs and time frame
6.1 The main deliverables will be:
| Phase | Timetable |
|---|---|
| Planning | Finalising methodology Drafting Inception Report 10 January 6-16 January |
| Phase 1: Field Work | UK field work Philippines Field Work 10-17 January (and 27 January -3 February if needed) 19-24 January |
| Phase 2: Analysis and write-up | First draft report / Roundtable with Commissioners Second Draft Report quality assurance and review by Secretariat and Commissioners Report to DFID for fact checking Final report sign-off 10 February 14 February 24 February 25 February 7 March |
7. Risks and mitigation
7.1 The following sets out the key risks and mitigating actions for this review.
| Risk | Level of risk | Specific Issues | Mitigation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Inability to meet key stakeholders in Philippines / Lack of access to or support from DFID's implementing partners | Medium | Lack of credible evidence for the report | Work closely with DFID to design schedule Coincide visit with DFID monitoring visit Consult stakeholders not currently based in the Philippines or London remotely Adopt a flexible approach to report format and focus Use team members' networks and contacts to help obtain access |
| Missed timetable due to delays or lack of connectivity of team members | Medium | Publication date delayed | Work closely with DFID to design schedule Initial report writing to involve the Lead Commissioner and to take place as early as possible Check key facts with DFID in advance of formal fact checking process |
| Inability to access hard-to-reach areas supported by UK assistance | Medium | Applicability of findings limited | Work closely with DFID to identify key areas assisted by the UK and to explore means of accessing them Identify and consult stakeholders familiar with UK response in those hard-to-reach areas |
8. How this ICAI review will make a difference
8.1 The review will provide timely insights into how DFID co-ordinates its emergency humanitarian input alongside a wide range of donors, national government entities and aid agencies. It will also consider the extent to which the pre-disaster planning and on-the-ground co-ordination are proving fit for purpose following the HERR.
8.2 There will clearly be a need for ongoing aid to the affected areas beyond the immediate response. This review will help to identify some of the potential areas for future focus, paying particular attention to the transition from relief assistance to recovery-oriented objectives and activities.
Footnotes
- Philippines: Typhoon Haiyan – Humanitarian Snapshot (as of 06 Jan 2014), UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, 6 January 2014, http://reliefweb.int/report/philippines/philippines-typhoon-haiyan-humanitarian-snapshot-06-jan-2014.
- Typhoon Haiyan: Latest updates on UK aid, DFID, 24 December 2013, https://www.gov.uk/government/news/typhoon-haiyan-latest-updates-on-uk-aid.
- Humanitarian Emergency Response Review, March 2011, http://www.dfid.gov.uk/Documents/publications1/HERR.pdf.
- IASC Principals Transformative Agenda, Inter-Agency Standing Committee, December 2011, http://www.humanitarianinfo.org/iasc/pageloader.aspx?page=content-template-default&bd=87.