Conclusions/Recommendations
E
xamination of initiatives designed and implemented by NGOs to enhance the resilience capacity of the chronically vulnerable provides certain lessons that can help
improve the implementation and effectiveness of future programming and enhance impact. Following are some recommendations for future NGO resilience capacity–building initiatives:
• Risk-informed program design: Effective interven- tions for addressing resilience require well-designed programs based on a theory of change that correctly identifies appropriate leverage points needed to effect desired outcomes. Good program design for building resilience capacity requires a comprehensive multi- hazard, multisector assessment of all the contextual factors that affect the system(s) under study, which then informs the theory of change. A comprehensive assessment is necessary to fully understand the con- stantly changing relationship between risk and vulner- ability on the one hand and livelihood outcomes and resilience on the other.
• Investment in M&E capacity for measuring re- silience: Comprehensive risk analyses are costly, and NGOs oſten do not have the capacity to conduct such detailed analyses (especially for quantitative data)—or to design appropriate M&E systems. Pay scales at many NGOs are not adequate for recruiting and retaining high- ly qualified staff. Many NGOs also rely on M&E systems heavily biased toward participatory processes to gather
qualitative data and thus potentially miss important quantitative information found in secondary data and other sources. More innovative donor funding mecha- nisms, such as DFID’s BRCED initiative, are needed in order to support NGOs’ capacity to conduct comprehen- sive risk analysis, develop meaningful theories of change, design appropriate interventions to address underlying causes of vulnerability and risk, and design effective M&E systems to monitor progress and impact.
• Long-term, integrated approaches to resilience programming: A cross-sectoral approach with a long-term commitment is required in order to improve the absorptive, adaptive, and transformative capaci- ties of vulnerable populations to shocks and stresses. Programs with an integrated approach for improving cross-sectoral outcomes ensure that partners and sec- tors work together to address key leverage points and adopt complementary, synergistic strategies to promote resilience. Cross-sectoral programming needs to sup- port and protect core programming (for example, food security, poverty, peace building) that contributes to
29
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45