Lessons from the Tsunami Experience

1. Lessons from theTsunamiExperience DAD Community of Practice Meeting, Yerevan, 5 October 2009 Aidan Cox, Aid Effectiveness Adviser UNDP Regional Centre, Bangkok

2. Outline of presentation • Why were DAD’s brought in as part of response to Tsunami? • What did they offer? • What lessons did we learn?

3. Tsunami Aid Tracking: why? • National desire to demonstrate accountability: • to affected populations • to donor partners • Better planning: reducing overlap & gaps • Quality and Quantity: delivery against promises? • are the funds being spent? • what are the results? – output level • what about impact? – partnership with departments of planning, statistics boards, DevInfo, etc • value for money – partnership with INTOSAI, SAIs

4. DAD, RAN, e-DIMS: practical tools to support aid effectiveness Mutual Accountability Managing for Results Harmonisation Alignment Ownership

5. Accessible to Everyone Full Transparency Ownership

6. How Much has been Promised? 4 DADs tracked over US$8.5 billion of tsunami assistance Mutual Accountability

7. Which parts of my country have receiving funding? Alignment

8. Who is Active in my District? Mutual Accountability

9. Recovery Aceh-Nias (RAN) Database What is happening at sector level? What sectors face gaps? Is their duplication? Alignment

10. What are they doing? Are there any Results? Will it benefit me? How we unblock Bottlenecks? Managing for Results

11. Supporting better decision-making • Decision makers need to know: • how are needs evolving? • are development indicators shifting the right way? ie – are our joint efforts (policy and investments) having the desired results? • are there differences between and within districts? • do we need to adjust our policies, programmes & projects so they do a better job of meeting needs?

12. Aid Effectiveness through Capacity Development • Not just systems, but people, skills, services – mutual understanding

13. But… • What did we learn?

14. National Development 1 ( Reconstruction ) Plan 2 Aid Sector Working Groups Information Sector Plans Management Medium Term 5 System Budgetary Framework 3 4 External Resources 6 Domestic Programme Revenue Grants Loans Implement ation & Monitoring Aid Policy Collective dialogue informs formulation of NDP and AIMS tracks physical progress of programme 1 4 NDP determines types of Sector Working Groups implementation and informs future programming NDP informs AIMS record of needs, which promotes AIMS informs collective dialogue at national and sectoral 2 5 alignment of aid by comparing supply with need level about aid allocations and development progress AIMS tracks foreign aid flows and informs future Sector Working Groups guide programme planning 3 6 resource allocations (foreign & domestic) and review its implementation

15. Lessons learned:Know what you need • There was no clear statement of needs against which you can align supply • Maldives was alone in having a quantified National Recovery & Reconstruction Plan • Needs were not well quantified or geographically disaggregated • (Lesson for the needs assessment teams – donor and government) • Hard to align aid supply with need, if there is no consensus on needs per location 1 2

16. Lessons learned: Get in Fast and Tell a Story • AIMS and teams should already be in place as part of (a) disaster preparedness; (b) integrating aid in national planning and budgeting • Systems & people need to be in place fast – else donors/implementers push ahead independently – and data has little impact on aligning allocations with need: • Post-disaster and reconstruction programmes were designed fast; monies were quickly allocated. • Data matters only when it helps tell a story: • We get excited about data collection – and ask for updates too often • Much more emphasis needed on analysis/packaging – implications for decision-makers 3 4

17. Lessons learned:Living & breathing data: make it matter • Data & analysis counts for little unless strongly linked to dialogue mechanisms and decision-making processes of government & donors • RAN had advantages – embedded concept note approval process (but some CNs caught up with facts on ground; approval process not without flaws) • Sectoral dialogue mechanisms weak • Mostly show & tell – little space to support evidence-based decision-making • Ideally, use your AIMS to prepare sector investment programmes and your national budget – these things have to be done – much else does not. 6 5

18. Lessons learned:Keep it simple • National authorities, often advised by inexperienced international consultants, wanted bells and whistles • RAN was user un-friendly • Updating was burdensome (and too frequent) • Push back and advise “no, phase it, go to the next level once you’ve proved core competence and relevance”

19. Lessons learned:Politics can make or break • DAD Maldives – more buy-in and impact than DAD Sri Lanka • Maldives: MoF, MoFA, Planning ministries didn’t like each other much, but each got something out of DAD – shared resource. • Sri Lanka: Government created TAFREN (stand alone Tsunami response institution) – seemed powerful, but lacked legal mandate, disliked by others (eg MoF), and great work by DAD team had reduced impact • Collaboration across government agencies (eg through joint oversight of system) is make or break

20. Conclusion • Government, UNDP and Synergy’s tsunami response: • first time governments, donors and citizens had quick access to aid data in a multi-country disaster • Aid transparency was higher than perhaps any other major disaster

21. Conclusions • But we needed to be far quicker • Governments need to invest before a disaster – as part of a commitment to regular aid effectiveness • We need to tell a story that has the power to change how business is done • Keep it simple • Aid systems and data need to help regular people get their regular work done • Understand – and use – the politics • Vital: Collaboration across government, anchored in policy, and showing measurable results