Country: Switzerland
Closing date: 07 Mar 2018
Floods Resilience Alliance Background
The Zurich Flood Resilience Alliance (Alliance) seeks to develop a model for delivering effective community flood resilience programs at scale and contribute to shaping the flood resilience agenda for policy-makers and donors. The objectives of the partnership are to:
Enhance community flood resilience at scale
Enhance effectiveness of disaster risk reduction solutions
Develop and promote knowledge and expertise
Influence policy makers and donors on disaster risk reduction policies
Launched in 2013, the Alliance 1.0 brought together the skills and expertise of a variety of organisations (Zurich Insurance, International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC), International Institute of Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), Practical Action and Wharton Business School) to holistically tackle this challenge.
The second phase, the Alliance 2.0, will be launched in 2018 and will include new alliance members: Concern Worldwide, IIASA, IFRC, ISET, Mercy Corps, Plan International, Practical Action, and Zurich. The member will collaborate to achieve above strategic objectives, consist of the following:
Influencing and Advocacy
Knowledge Management
Knowledge Generation through end-to-end community programs
Scaling and Multiplying Impact in existing partner community programs
Research
Research-to-Practice Integration and PERC
Shared Value and the role of Insurance
Flood Resilience Measurement Tool (FRMT)
The Alliance partners set out to develop, implement, and evaluate a framework that uses a technology-based data gathering and evaluation tool for measurement and assessment of flood resilience. The overall aim of the FRMT 1.0 is to better inform future planning and interventions, and demonstrate the impact of resilience-enhancing initiatives. The FRMT 1.0 has been tested in over 100 communities worldwide, and research is ongoing to explore the data.
To build flood resilience, we need to know whether a community is and will be resilient when a flood occurs. To do this, we have to measure the sources of resilience, or look for indicators of capacity (or its lack) in the community’s socio-economic system, before an event strikes. Our framework broadly builds on the properties of a resilient system developed at the University of Buffalo, and the Sustainable Livelihoods Approach (SLA) that was adopted by the UK’s DFID. This ‘systems thinking’ approach takes into account the assets and deficits, interactions and interconnections at community level, and provides consistency when it comes to identifying and testing potential sources of resilience. Across a community’s stock of human, social, physical, financial and natural capital we have defined a total of 88 specific sources of resilience. Data can be collected in different ways according to context and need, e.g. household survey, qualitative community discussion, key informant interviews, and third party sources, and each source is graded A–D by trained NGO staff working with the community. Data collection and grading are done via an integrated mobile and
web-based application. To evaluate a community’s resilience after an event, the tool measures outcomes to assess impacts such as total losses, and for how long important community functioning such as critical services and livelihood activities are interrupted.
Over time and across different communities, consistent measuring of sources will be tested against post-flood outcomes to see where sources and outcomes are related. Ultimately, we hope to be able to get statistically significant matches between our measure of sources of resilience and outcomes, to empirically explore which sources make the difference for outcomes across different contexts, something that has never been done in this field.
As of the start of 2017, all baseline surveys have been collected and are being analysed; post-flood studies are underway as floods occur. Preliminary feedback indicates that the process of training staff and implementing the tool is already producing positive outcomes. In particular, implementing NGOs report that the holistic view of the community system is building local staff capacity to think systemically about their work. For example, in addition to the traditional physical infrastructure, the human and social elements required to make an early warning system operational are being considered in system planning.
The Zurich Flood Resilience Alliance is currently in the process of redesigning the FRMT and producing FRMT 2.0 or ‘Next Gen’. This review and redesign process takes account of all the lessons learned in the use of FRMT 1.0.
For a more detailed description on the tool:
Consultancy Objectives
- To support the production of the final content of the FRMT 2.0 through a thorough review of the wording of source descriptions, grade definitions, and question-answer pairs.
Note: In undertaking this review the consultant would focus on ensuring that the material is accessible to NGO field staff and community respondents, and sensitive to a variety of cultural contexts. Additionally, they would ensure the content is consistent throughout, and that the data collection and grading process generate the desired data in a reliable way.
Desired outcomes
The external consultant will provide an independent, objective perspective as well as technical experience on measurement to revise the content of FRMT 2.0 relevant question and answer sections. Provide a review of source descriptions and grading criteria to make sure it is consistent and accessible to broad audiences and contexts.
Consultancy outputs
The consultancy aims to provide the following outputs:
Measurement & Evaluation Review of the FRMT 2.0
Executive summary overview of recommendations to improve the FRMT 2.0 and document with revisions and recommendations of sources and corresponding question and answer sections across the entire framework.
Support to be provided to the consultant
The consultant will benefit from the support of the Alliance FRMT working group to provide details on lessons learnt in the process of implementing FRMT 1.0 and a full draft of FRMT 2.0 for revision. The FRMT working group will provide the consultant with a guidance document to assist their revision, and be available for discussion throughout the consultancy. Furthermore, the consultant will benefit from the use of the IFRC e-travel system to support travel planning.
Schedule for payment of fees
DELIVERABLE (milestones)
Familiarization with FRMT approach and experience to-date/timeframe: 2 days/Deadline: March
Detailed assessment and revision of sources and questions on framework document/timeframe: 12 days/Deadline: April
Preparation of executive summary of recommended revisions/timeframe: 1 day/Deadline: April
Total: 15 days
Management of consultancy
The consultant will report directly to the IFRC Senior Officer for Flood Resilience and have a technical reporting line to the Alliance FRMT working group.
Quality & Ethical Standards The consultant should take all reasonable steps to ensure that the evaluation is designed and conducted to respect and protect the rights and welfare of people and the communities of which they are members, and to ensure that the evaluation is technically accurate, reliable, and legitimate, conducted in a transparent and impartial manner, and contributes to organizational learning and accountability. Therefore, the evaluation consultant should adhere to the evaluation standards and specific, applicable process outlined in the IFRC Framework for Evaluation. The IFRC Evaluation Standards are:
- Utility: Evaluations must be useful and used.
- Feasibility: Evaluations must be realistic, diplomatic, and managed in a sensible, cost effective manner.
- Ethics & Legality: Evaluations must be conducted in an ethical and legal manner, with particular regard for the welfare of those involved in and affected by the evaluation.
- Impartiality & Independence; Evaluations should be impartial, providing a comprehensive and unbiased assessment that takes into account the views of all stakeholders.
- Transparency: Evaluation activities should reflect an attitude of openness and transparency.
- Accuracy: Evaluations should be technical accurate, providing sufficient information about the data collection, analysis, and interpretation methods so that its worth or merit can be determined.
Participation: Stakeholders should be consulted and meaningfully involved in the evaluation process when feasible and appropriate.
Collaboration: Collaboration between key operating partners in the evaluation process improves the legitimacy and utility of the evaluation.
It is also expected that the evaluation will respect the seven Fundamental Principles of the Red Cross and Red Crescent: 1) humanity, 2) impartiality, 3) neutrality, 4) independence, 5) voluntary service, 6) unity, and 7) universality. Further information can be obtained about these principles at: www.ifrc.org/what/values/principles/index.asp”
Notes
• The consultant will be contracted by the IFRC and the standard contractual terms will apply. • Only individual applicants will be considered. • Agreed travel expenses will be reimbursed at cost in accordance with in the IFRC’s relevant regulations. • Keating et al., 2017. Development and testing of a community flood resilience measurement tool. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 77–101. • Risk Nexus: Measuring Flood
Education:
- Master’s degree or equivalent in social sciences, economics, statistics, development, international studies, politics, humanitarian action, or related field - required.
Experience, Knowledge and Skills:
Required:
Proven experience in monitoring and evaluation, including 5 years of working experience in carrying out these activities.
Experience with community assessment and a good understanding of community work.
Substantial experience in working with indicators and knowledge of resilience measurement
Awareness of current trends in development and disaster risk management, in particular resilience.
The ability to communicate effectively and sensitively with people from diverse backgrounds.
Ability to mainstream gender, disability and other equity considerations in monitoring and evaluation frameworks.
Excellent interpersonal skills. Ability to build effective partnerships and maintain working relationships within the organisation and with external partners.
Ability to critically analyse and evaluate and prepare and present concise oral and written reports and content for internal and external audiences in English.
Ability to develop indicator content for effective monitoring and evaluation in English.
Awareness of issues associated with translation of indicator content to other languages.
Excellent verbal and written communication skills. Ability to formulate questions and adapt to diverse audience.
Ability to work independently, good independent judgment, discretion, and initiative.
Fluent in spoken and written English
Preferred:
- methodologies. Demonstrated experience of development and/or humanitarian intervention.
How to apply:
Interested candidates should submit their application material by March 7, 2018 to: lucia.roblesdios@ifrc.org. Application materials should include:
Curricula Vitae
Cover letter clearly summarizing your experience as it pertains to this assignment, your daily rate, and two professional references.
Application material is non-returnable, and we thank you in advance for understanding that only short-listed candidates will be contacted for the next step in the application process.