IFRC Framework for Community Resilience · ting the IFRC to helping shape the future development...

24
IFRC Framework for Community Resilience www.ifrc.org Saving lives, changing minds.

Transcript of IFRC Framework for Community Resilience · ting the IFRC to helping shape the future development...

Page 1: IFRC Framework for Community Resilience · ting the IFRC to helping shape the future development agenda with three commit-ments: a. enabling every community in high risk areas to

1

IFRC Frameworkfor Community Resilience

www.ifrc.orgSaving lives, changing minds.

Page 2: IFRC Framework for Community Resilience · ting the IFRC to helping shape the future development agenda with three commit-ments: a. enabling every community in high risk areas to

2

© International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, Geneva, 2014

Any part of this publication may be cited, copied, translated into other languages or adapted to meet local needs without prior permission from the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, provided that the source is clearly stated.

Requests for commercial reproduction should be directed to the IFRC Secretariat at [email protected]

All photos used in this study are copyright of the IFRC unless otherwise indicated.

Cover photo: Victor Lacken / IFRC A family from the Pipeline community near Monrovia, Liberia, drying fish for sale in the market. Access to economic opportunities strengthens community resilience.

P.O. Box 303CH-1211 Geneva 19SwitzerlandTelephone: +41 22 730 4222Telefax: +41 22 733 0395E-mail: [email protected] site: www.ifrc.org

RMNCH Today1282600 09/2014 E 50

The International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) is the world’s largest volunteer-based humanitarian network. Together with our 189 member National Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies worldwide, we reach 97 million people annually through long-term services and development programmes as well as 85 million people through disaster response and early recovery programmes. We act before, during and after disasters and health emergencies to meet the needs and improve the lives of vulnerable people. We do so with impartiality as to nationality, race, gender, religious beliefs, class and political opinions.

Guided by Strategy 2020 – our collective plan of action to tackle the major humanitarian and development challenges of this decade – we are committed to ‘saving lives and changing minds’.

Our strength lies in our volunteer network, our community-based expertise and our independence and neutrality. We work to improve humanitarian standards, as partners in development and in response to disasters. We persuade decision-makers to act at all times in the interests of vulnerable people.

The result: we enable healthy and safe communities, reduce vulnerabilities, strengthen resilience and foster a culture of peace around the world.

Follow us:

Page 3: IFRC Framework for Community Resilience · ting the IFRC to helping shape the future development agenda with three commit-ments: a. enabling every community in high risk areas to

International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies

IFRC Framework for Community Resilience 3

For the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) the concept of community resilience represents a unique opportunity as this approach in many ways captures the totality of what the IFRC is working to achieve. Although their efforts may not have been characterized as ‘strengthening community resilience,’ this is in fact what many National Societies have been doing over the course of many decades by sup-porting their local communities.

The IFRC’s understanding of community resilience has grown to recognize the ever evolving and dynamic nature of commu-nities and the underlying vulnerabilities that challenge them. Responding to this reality, the IFRC’s approach has focused on combining humanitarian concern for imminent threats with longer-term, sus-tainable approaches and institutional strengthening traditionally associated with development. With an increased ability to adapt and cope with disasters, crises, shocks and stresses communities can protect and build on development gains that they have already made and address the effects of underlying vulner-abilities that challenge them. As being resilient includes being flexible in the face of changing risks, and climate change is increasingly influencing risk patterns everywhere, climate change considerations are an integral element of the Framework for Community Resilience (FCR).

The original Framework for Community Safety and Resilience published in 2008 confirmed that the concepts identified were not new and did not demand new areas of work for the IFRC. Rather the Framework for Community Safety and Resilience suggested that community safety and resilience approaches provided National Societies with an opportunity to build on, enhance and adapt activities they had already been carrying out. This updated FCR reinforces that message. The FCR builds on a foundation of decades of experience, combined with recent learn-ing and research on resilience, while rec-ognizing and proposing responses to some of the major challenges faced by commu-nity approaches in strengthening resil-ience – thus providing the opportunity for a more systematic approach.

The FCR has gone through an extensive consultation process, both within the IFRC and externally. Examples of the consulta-tion undertaken include: dedicated two-day workshops conducted with represen-tatives of 64 National Societies in the four zones; 77 National Societies participated in community resilience workshops at the 2013 IFRC General Assembly; workshops at various internal fora (e.g., with the di-saster preparedness and risk reduction group of Partner National Societies and the Stockholm health group); and feed-back received from a number of external organizations and private sector partners. Suggestions and recommendations from all of these groups have informed the FCR.

Background

Page 4: IFRC Framework for Community Resilience · ting the IFRC to helping shape the future development agenda with three commit-ments: a. enabling every community in high risk areas to

International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies

IFRC Framework for Community Resilience 4

Building on policies adopted and com-mitments made at previous statutory meetings, the 2013 IFRC General Assem-bly issued a declaration concerning the post-2015 Development Agenda, commit-ting the IFRC to helping shape the future development agenda with three commit-ments: a. enabling every community in high risk

areas to have capacity to prepare for and respond to disasters

b. ensuring a volunteer in every commu-nity we work with who is responsible for facilitating access to basic health services

c. continuing efforts to strengthen National Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies – to be trusted partners and auxiliaries to their governments in humanitarian and development work.

The declaration specifically noted that ‘strengthening resilience should be a cen-tral component of the new development framework.’

The 2013 General Assembly also approved:1. A revised set of principles and rules for

humanitarian assistance to improve coordination so that together we can maximize the mobilization and impact of Federation-wide resources and ex-pertise.

2. A National Society development frame-work to guide organizational develop-ment and capacity building together with a youth engagement strategy on the role of youth in building strong Na-tional Societies.

Our global commitments

Children in Meulaboh, Indonesia, learn how to clean their teeth. Basic hygiene is an important life skill that strengthens community resilience by improving community health. International Federation

Page 5: IFRC Framework for Community Resilience · ting the IFRC to helping shape the future development agenda with three commit-ments: a. enabling every community in high risk areas to

International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies

IFRC Framework for Community Resilience 5

This framework has the principle objec-tive to:

‘Establish a foundation on which all IFRC programmes, projects, interventions and actions, across the contexts, which contribute to the strengthening of resilient communities can be created, developed and sustained.’

The FCR has the goal of guiding and sup-porting the work of National Societies through the following three strategic ob-jectives:1. Supporting National Societies’ efforts to

assist communities as they adopt risk-informed, holistic approaches to address their underlying vulnerabilities.

2. Supporting National Societies’ efforts that encourage communities to adopt de-mand-driven, people-centred approaches to community resilience strengthening.

3. Supporting National Societies to be con-nected to communities – being avail-able to everyone, everywhere to prevent and reduce human suffering.

Objectives

resilienceintervention

partnership

communication

programmes

public information

projects

Page 6: IFRC Framework for Community Resilience · ting the IFRC to helping shape the future development agenda with three commit-ments: a. enabling every community in high risk areas to

International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies

IFRC Framework for Community Resilience 6

In common usage resilience typically re-lates to the ability of systems (and people) to effectively respond and adapt to chang-ing circumstances and to develop skills, capacities, behaviours and actions to deal with adversity – ‘resilience’ can be de-scribed as a process of adaptation before, during and after an adverse event.

The definition recognizes that resilience can be observed and strengthened at multiple levels:

1. Individual level: a resilient individual is healthy; has the knowledge, skills, competencies and mind-set to adapt to new situations and improve her/his life, and those of her/his family, friends and community. A resilient person is em-powered.

2. Household level: a resilient household has members who are themselves resil-ient.

3. Community level: a resilient communi-ty strengthens the resilience of its con-stituent individuals and households.

4. Local government: can either strength-en or weaken resilience at the individ-ual, household and community levels as it is responsible for infrastructure development, maintenance, social ser-vices and applying the rule of law.

5. National government: resilience at this level deals with policy, social protection systems, infrastructure, laws and gov-ernance issues and can profoundly im-pact community resilience.

6. Organizations such as National Societ-ies including their branches and volun-teers: make contributions that are inte-gral to resilience at all levels.

7. Regional and global levels: the im-pacts of conflicts, violence and insecu-rity; hunger; mass migration; economic recession and prosperity; pandemics; pollution and climate change; positive and negative effects of globalization and new technology all offer examples of the inter-connectedness of the levels and how actions at one level can negatively or positively impact the other levels.

Resilience is relevant in all countries be-cause all countries have communities that are vulnerable. For the IFRC, resilience relates to all the activities that National Societies carry out, regardless of whether they are domestic or international; it is about improving the sustainability and quality of the programmes and services that National Societies deliver in response to the demands of their communities and the scale at which these programmes and services are undertaken.

Understanding ‘resilience’

The IFRC defines resilience as, “the ability of individuals, communities, organizations

or countries exposed to disasters, crises and underlying vulnerabilities to anticipate, prepare for, reduce the impact of, cope with and recover from the effects of shocks and stresses without

compromising their long-term prospects.”

Page 7: IFRC Framework for Community Resilience · ting the IFRC to helping shape the future development agenda with three commit-ments: a. enabling every community in high risk areas to

International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies

IFRC Framework for Community Resilience 7

Resilience at multiple levels

Individual level Household level Community level

Local government National government Organisations

Regional level Global level

Page 8: IFRC Framework for Community Resilience · ting the IFRC to helping shape the future development agenda with three commit-ments: a. enabling every community in high risk areas to

8International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies

IFRC Framework for Community Resilience

Kadiatu is 11 years old and was the 3rd Ebola patient to arrive at the IFRC treatment centre at Kenema, Sierra Leone. Thanks to the care she received there she has regained her strength and has returned home to her mother, 8 brothers and sisters and her community. Katherine Mueller / IFRC

8

Page 9: IFRC Framework for Community Resilience · ting the IFRC to helping shape the future development agenda with three commit-ments: a. enabling every community in high risk areas to

exposed to

ex

posed to political

sharing

the same resourc

es

exposed to the sam

e

risks, diseases...

sharing

the same culture

living or not in

the same area

What is a community?

and economic issues

natural disasters

9International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies

IFRC Framework for Community Resilience

Page 10: IFRC Framework for Community Resilience · ting the IFRC to helping shape the future development agenda with three commit-ments: a. enabling every community in high risk areas to

International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies

IFRC Framework for Community Resilience 10

The Red Cross and Red Crescent recogniz-es the richness of the term ‘community’ and appreciates that communities exist in many shapes and forms. For example the term ‘community’:• often refers to a group of people that live

in a defined geographical area• is often a group of people who share a

common culture, values and norms and who are arranged according to a social structure that has evolved over time

• might refer to a group at the local, na-tional or international level

• may describe a group of people that come together because of specific or broad interests.

Individuals may belong to more than one community, in fact the more communities that an individual belongs to the more re-silient s/he is likely to be.

The IFRC understands that resilience strengthening programmes and activities impact at all levels and in all types of communities. The FCR uses the following definition for community:

Communities are complex and dynamic and so are the vulnerabilities that chal-lenge them. There are many factors that influence community resilience (e.g., phys-ical, human, financial, natural and social aspects of life). These factors are also in-terconnected, which requires that they be considered and understood holistically, through a multi-disciplinary approach which takes account of how factors influ-ence one another.

The IFRC has focused on learning more about the characteristics of a resilient community as a means of better under-standing this complexity. By listening to communities’ own experiences of resil-ience, through studies of the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami operation, a sample of activities in Latin America and the Ca-ribbean; together with further proposed studies and analysis, the IFRC will develop a much better understanding of what re-silience means to communities. This ap-proach will also indicate if the lessons, experiences and successes of individual communities can be replicated elsewhere.

There may be other characteristics that should be considered, particularly in a re-gional or national context, but those de-tailed above are offered as a general set of characteristics, applicable in many com-munities globally.

This appreciation of the complexity and dynamic nature of communities and their vulnerabilities reinforces for the IFRC that the members of the community are most likely to know how things around them work and how their lives can be improved.

Understanding communities

“A community is a group of people who may or may not live within the same area, village

or neighbourhood, share a similar culture, habits and resources. Communities are groups

of people also exposed to the same threats and risks such as disease, political and economic issues and natural disasters.”

Page 11: IFRC Framework for Community Resilience · ting the IFRC to helping shape the future development agenda with three commit-ments: a. enabling every community in high risk areas to

International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies

IFRC Framework for Community Resilience 11

A resilient community...

? !

JOB

... is knowledgeable, healthy and can meet its basic needs

... is socially cohesive ... has economic opportunities

... has well-maintened and accessible infrastructures and services

... can manage its natural assets

... is connected

Page 12: IFRC Framework for Community Resilience · ting the IFRC to helping shape the future development agenda with three commit-ments: a. enabling every community in high risk areas to

International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies

IFRC Framework for Community Resilience 12

1. Assisting communities as they adopt risk-informed, holistic approaches to address their underlying vulnerabilities.

The IFRC believes that strengthening com-munity resilience is a process owned by communities – resilience is not something that a National Society can ‘do’ or ‘bring’ to individuals or communities. The nature and extent of a National Society’s engage-ment in each community is situational – it reflects a number of specific contextual factors such as: 1) the underlying vulner-abilities and capacities of the community; 2) the community’s connection and in-teraction with the external environment; and 3) the specific added-value that the National Society offers to this process.

For the IFRC, strengthening community resilience is an integrating process that is multi-sectoral and involves multiple actors – it cannot be achieved by govern-ments, organizations or individuals acting alone or in isolation. The IFRC’s commu-nity resilience strengthening approach also recognizes that the dynamic nature of each community requires a flexible ap-proach that supports the development of resilience over time. Although each con-text is unique and requires a customized approach, there are a number of consis-tent management components involving IFRC programmes, volunteers and Nation-al Societies.

The IFRC recognizes that programmes de-veloped from risk-informed decisions that adopt a holistic approach are more likely to contribute to reducing the underlying vul-nerabilities of communities and ultimately lead to more resilient communities.

Examples of actions National Societies take in support of community-led, risk-informed decision-making include:

a. Supporting assessments that capture the needs, risks, vulnerabilities and capacities of all members of the com-munity, as well as the dynamic and complex context in which a community exists.

b. Supporting communities to develop solutions that are: i) holistic and ap-propriate to their context (e.g., consid-ering innovative and emerging technol-ogies whilst bearing in mind traditional knowledge, customs and practices); ii) technically sound; iii) effective and ef-ficient (e.g., looking for low-tech, low-cost solutions); and iv) sensitive to is-sues such as gender equality, cultural diversity, climate change and violence prevention.

c. Supporting communities to self-mobi-lize and address their vulnerabilities and hazards from their own resources.

d. Supporting communities to access ex-ternal support networks, such as the public authorities, civil society and the international Red Cross Red Crescent network.

e. Actively engaging communities in the monitoring and evaluation of pro-grammes and services.

f. Being accountable to communities, pub-lic authorities and other partners (e.g., by proactively providing regular reports, feedback and information relating to programmes, services and activities).

Key elements of the FCR

Page 13: IFRC Framework for Community Resilience · ting the IFRC to helping shape the future development agenda with three commit-ments: a. enabling every community in high risk areas to

International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies

IFRC Framework for Community Resilience 13

2. Community resilience is about a demand driven, people-centred approach.

Resilient communities are more likely to be empowered, whilst vulnerable commu-nities are more likely to be dis-empowered.

The IFRC’s approach to resilience strength-ening recognizes that enabling individu-als and communities to access what they need to improve their own lives is essen-tial. Examples of how National Societies add value to this process include: provid-ing appropriate technical capacity and re-sources; linking community and National Society actions with that of the public authorities, other civil society actors and partners; and by advocating for the most vulnerable within communities.

The IFRC strives to ensure that individu-als and communities are put first. The IFRC’s approach to community resilience strengthening ensures communities are placed at, and remain at the centre of de-cisions and actions that impact their fu-ture and that programmes respond to ob-jectives defined by the community.

Examples of actions National Societies take include:

a. Engaging with communities through local branches and volunteers and rec-ognizing the potential of volunteers as agents of change within their communi-ties.

b. Working with and through the formal system (e.g., laws, regulations, codes and standards, etc.) and informal sys-tems (e.g., traditional customs and practice and indigenous knowledge). Supporting the development of disas-ter risk reduction laws and standards

is an example of working in the formal system, whilst integrating climate and weather information with indigenous knowledge is an example of supporting smallholding farmers in rural settings, achieved through an informal system.

c. Advocating with communities for i) their engagement in decision-making processes; ii) inclusive approaches that take account of the needs of the most vulnerable; iii) context specific issues; and iv) the Red Cross and Red Crescent Fundamental Principles and humani-tarian values.

A Haitian Red Cross disaster risk management promoter uses a 3D model to explain to children how our actions can trigger disasters, in this case how deforestation can lead to landslides and floods. Gennike Mayers / IFRC

Page 14: IFRC Framework for Community Resilience · ting the IFRC to helping shape the future development agenda with three commit-ments: a. enabling every community in high risk areas to

International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies

IFRC Framework for Community Resilience 14

3. Being connected to communities by being available to everyone, everywhere to prevent and reduce human suffering.

The objective of being ‘available to every-one, everywhere, to prevent and reduce human suffering’ is not about doing every-thing for everyone. Rather the focus is on ‘connection’ between the community and its National Society.

This connection that National Societies have with their communities is central to efforts in delivering the IFRC’s mission to:1. Save lives, protect livelihoods and

strengthen recovery from disasters and crises.

2. Enable healthy and safe living.3. Promote social inclusion and a culture

of non-violence and peace.

Examples of ways in which National Soci-eties establish and maintain this connec-tion include:

1. Ensuring risks that communities face and underlying vulnerabilities existing within communities are understood and considered.

2. Supporting the community through ser-vices, programmes or interventions that are relevant to the context, are sustain-able and that target the most vulner-able.

3. Partnering with the public authorities, civil society and the private sector in support of holistic, integrated, commu-nity-led solutions.

New and innovative solutions (e.g., mobile solutions, connectivity, online tools and access to the internet) are emerging and becoming increasingly available in com-munities around the globe. The oppor-tunities that these provide must be har-vested if the IFRC is to be truly ‘available to everyone, everywhere, to prevent and reduce human suffering.’

Examples of actions National Societies take to connect with their communities include:

a. Ensuring an inclusive approach at all levels that welcomes, respects and val-ues contributions from all members of the society, these include: i) branches mobilizing local volunteers including affected people, youth, women and girls, marginalized groups; and ii) including local volunteers on governance bodies.

b. Partnering with the community, civil society and public authorities – par-ticularly valuing the unique role of the National Society being an auxiliary to government.

c. Using communication methods to con-nect with communities that are appro-priate and accessible for community members (e.g., online, sms, radio, news-letters, posters, branch and volunteer meetings, etc).

Page 15: IFRC Framework for Community Resilience · ting the IFRC to helping shape the future development agenda with three commit-ments: a. enabling every community in high risk areas to

International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies

IFRC Framework for Community Resilience 15

3

The Annex illustrates how IFRC activi-ties contribute to achieving strengthened community resilience and suggests in-dicators to measure these activities. The table does not provide an exhaustive list nor is it intended to be prescriptive, rather it provides global guidance that can be ap-plied and adapted to local realities.

Using the FCR

How to apply the FCR?

1. Explore the three key elements of the FCR

2. Review the information provided in Annex

3. Consider the specifi c context in which programmes/services are being developed

4. Refl ect this analysis in their programme design tools, e.g. Logframe

5. Discuss with your peers:

WHY?WHATWORKS?

IN WHICHCONTEXT?

FORWHOM?

UNDER WHAT CONDITION?

1 21 2 3

Page 16: IFRC Framework for Community Resilience · ting the IFRC to helping shape the future development agenda with three commit-ments: a. enabling every community in high risk areas to

International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies

IFRC Framework for Community Resilience 16

The IFRC values and prioritizes perfor-mance measurement and evaluation as it informs systematic learning, which in turn supports the exchange of information, the sharing of experience and knowledge and ultimately results in better programming.

The measurement of community resil-ience is relatively new and is still devel-oping – in contrast to more traditional, sector-based approaches, the same body of experience in its measurement, or con-sensus for how to measure it does not cur-rently exist. While the IFRC has policies, guidelines, frameworks and tools together with significant capacity and experience in measurement and evaluation of tradi-

tional approaches, it is important to ac-knowledge the limitations of the current methodologies in measuring community resilience strengthening.

A critical distinction in measuring com-munity resilience relates to assessing 1) a community’s level of resilience versus 2) the IFRC’s impact on community resil-ience being measured versus 3) the IFRC’s contribution to the community’s resil-ience.

Measurement of the IFRC’s Framework for Community Resilience

Table 1: Three key measures for community resilience

1. Measuring community resilience

A composite measure of the various characteris-tics that comprise community resilience.

2. Measuring IFRC’s impact on community resilience

Measurement of the attribution of IFRC’s work to community resilience. How much of the measured impact on community resilience is the result of the IFRC’s contributions versus other factors?

3. Measuring IFRC’s contribution to community resilience

Measurement of the incorporation and achieve-ment of specific activities supporting community resilience strengthening. Whether we accomplish the objectives we identify as supporting commu-nity resilience.

Page 17: IFRC Framework for Community Resilience · ting the IFRC to helping shape the future development agenda with three commit-ments: a. enabling every community in high risk areas to

International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies

IFRC Framework for Community Resilience 17

Recognizing these challenges and the limitations we are currently working with, the IFRC focuses on measuring our con-tributions to community resilience (i.e., point 3 in Table 1). The IFRC’s measure-ment system, approach and tools will be updated as, and when, further informa-tion and guidance on how to measure and capture both community resilience (point 1 in Table 1) and the IFRC’s impact on community resilience (point 2 in Table 1) becomes available.

In measuring our contribution to commu-nity resilience, the IFRC adopts a ‘mixed methods’ approach as this ensures com-munities are engaged in the development of indicator according to their specific context, which can then be assessed and compared across time and place.

Effectively a menu of indicators, based on and organized from the characteris-tics of community resilience, can assist communities to select and prioritize key indicators according to their specific local contexts and long-term goals. This com-plements the tried and true sectoral, tech-nical indicators that have been developed over time and that remain valid as indi-cators of technical performance account-ability to our traditional donors.

Provision can also be made for additional, unexpected indicators to be added if iden-tified by, and appropriate for, the commu-nity. Such an approach provides structure while remaining flexible and adaptable to local contexts. Both quantitative and qualitative measures can be utilized in this approach.

This approach reinforces that community resilience strengthening activities require a context specific approach but also rec-ognizes that there are a number of consis-tent elements that can help us measure the IFRC’s contribution.

A good example of this approach is the IFRC’s East Africa Framework for Commu-nity Resilience. The framework was devel-oped in 2013 and 2014 through targeted literature review, consultations with re-gional and Partner National Societies and external partners, and operationalizes the concepts and principles described in the FCR in the specific context of IFRC’s work in East Africa.

As our experience in community resilience strengthening deepens, so too will our understanding of measuring community resilience grow. More guidance and tools will become available over time to sup-port programme managers and measure-ment and evaluation specialists in their efforts to measure IFRC’s contributions to strengthening community resilience.

Page 18: IFRC Framework for Community Resilience · ting the IFRC to helping shape the future development agenda with three commit-ments: a. enabling every community in high risk areas to

International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies

IFRC Framework for Community Resilience 18

National Societies already have many of the tools required in implementing com-munity resilience strengthening. Some tools may require adaptation to better reflect the approach described in the FCR and the need for replacement or addi-tional tools and guidance may emerge as our experience evolves and develops over time.

Many National Societies have developed their own context-specific guidance on community resilience (e.g., by adapting the 2008 Framework for Community Safe-ty and Resilience to their operations). Na-tional Societies are encouraged to consider the FCR and to explore how the guidance it provides can be customized to support their efforts within their communities.

IFRC tools and guidelines that support community resilience

Just as the 2008 Framework for Commu-nity Safety and Resilience has evolved into the FCR, this current framework will evolve dynamically as we collectively learn to improve our programmes and scale-up our contributions to community resilience. The sharing of experiences and lessons learned will help to maintain the FCR’s currency and relevance. Addition-ally, regular review of the FCR will ensure that it continues to provide guidance and support to National Societies.

Additional resources and guidance for re-silience strengthening exist and are avail-able and complement the many resources and tools identified in this document. It is likely that more will be developed over time and some existing tools will be re-placed as our knowledge and experience grows.

Practitioners are encouraged to capture, record and share their experiences of community resilience strengthening with-in the IFRC’s network as a tangible contri-bution to improving the lives of the most vulnerable.

Conclusion

Page 19: IFRC Framework for Community Resilience · ting the IFRC to helping shape the future development agenda with three commit-ments: a. enabling every community in high risk areas to

Obje

cti

veE

xpecte

d O

utc

om

es

Exa

mple

s of

NS

Contr

ibuti

on

Exa

mple

s of

Indic

ato

rs

Imp

rove

the

kn

ow

led

ge

and

hea

lth

of

com

mun

itie

s.

Com

mun

ity p

eopl

e ar

e ab

le

to a

sses

s an

d m

anag

e th

e ris

ks fa

cing

them

.

Eve

ryon

e ha

s op

port

uniti

es

to le

arn

new

ski

lls, b

uild

on

past

exp

erie

nces

, and

sha

re

and

appl

y th

is k

now

ledg

e in

pra

ctic

e.

Eve

ryon

e ha

s ac

cess

to

a su

stai

nabl

e w

ater

and

sa

nita

tion

syst

em.

Eve

ryon

e ha

s ac

cess

to a

se

cure

and

nut

ritio

us fo

od

supp

ly.

• H

olis

tic a

sses

smen

t of n

eeds

, ris

ks, v

ulne

rabi

litie

s

and

capa

citie

s of

com

mun

ities

thro

ugh

pa

rtic

ipat

ory

VC

A, b

asel

ine

surv

ey, e

tc.

• C

ontin

genc

y pl

ans.

Sim

ulat

ion

exer

cise

s.•

Pub

lic a

war

enes

s an

d pu

blic

edu

catio

n in

ris

k

redu

ctio

n, d

isas

ter

law

s, e

vacu

atio

n pl

ans,

clim

ate

chan

ge, e

tc.

• Tr

aini

ng in

ris

k re

duct

ion,

firs

t aid

, saf

e sh

elte

r

aw

aren

ess

• E

arly

war

ning

sys

tem

s.

• A

ppro

pria

te d

eplo

ymen

t of e

mer

genc

y st

ocks

.

• K

now

ledg

e an

d ex

perie

nce

shar

ing.

• Tr

aini

ng o

ppor

tuni

ties.

Com

mun

ity in

volv

emen

t in

prog

ram

mes

/pro

ject

s.

• M

onito

ring

and

eval

uatio

n

• S

afe

wat

er s

yste

ms.

• H

ygie

ne p

rom

otio

n.

• S

anita

tion

syst

ems.

• E

xten

sion

sup

port

ser

vice

s•

Food

sec

urity

fiel

d sc

hool

s fo

r ex

chan

ge

of

exp

erie

nces

• Fo

od p

repa

ratio

n an

d pr

eser

vatio

n•

Pos

t-ha

rves

t foo

d lo

sses

and

was

te re

duct

ion

• #

of V

CA

and

sec

tor

spec

ific

asse

ssm

ents

con

duct

ed

• #

of c

omm

unity

con

tinge

ncy

plan

s in

pla

ce.

• #

of s

imul

atio

n ex

erci

ses

cond

ucte

d.•

# pe

ople

reac

hed

thro

ugh

PAP

E.

• #

peop

le tr

aine

d in

DR

R, C

BH

FA, P

AS

SA

, etc

.•

# of

com

mun

ity w

ith e

arly

war

ning

sys

tem

s in

pla

ce.

• #

of e

mer

genc

y st

ocks

in p

lace

.

• #

oppo

rtun

ities

for

shar

ing

know

ledg

e an

d ex

perie

nce.

• #

trai

ning

wor

ksho

ps a

nd p

eopl

e tr

aine

d.•

# pe

ople

invo

lved

in p

rogr

amm

e/pr

ojec

t im

plem

enta

tion.

• M

&E

resu

lts u

sed

to in

form

the

impr

ovem

ent

of

com

mun

ity p

rogr

amm

es/p

roje

cts.

• %

of p

opul

atio

n w

ith a

cces

s to

saf

e w

ater

sup

ply.

• #

& %

of p

eopl

e w

ho k

now

how

to p

repa

re

sa

fe d

rinki

ng w

ater

.•

# &

% o

f peo

ple

reac

hed

thro

ugh

hygi

ene

prom

otio

n.•

sani

tatio

n sy

stem

s.•

# w

ater

-bor

ne d

isea

se o

utbr

eaks

.

• #

of fa

rmer

s an

d fis

hers

pro

vide

d w

ith e

xten

sion

ser

vice

s•

# of

farm

ers

and

fishe

rs a

tten

ded

field

sch

ools

• #

of p

eopl

e tr

aine

d in

food

pre

para

tion

and

pres

erva

tion

• #o

f peo

ple

reac

hed

thro

ugh

educ

atio

n an

d aw

aren

ess

on

food

loss

and

was

te re

duct

ion

RC

RC

Contr

ibuti

ons

to S

trength

enin

g C

om

munit

y R

esi

lience

119

International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies

IFRC Framework for Community Resilience - Annex One

1.

This

tabl

e of

fers

exa

mpl

es o

f IFR

C co

ntrib

utio

ns a

nd is

not

exh

aust

ive. A

ctua

l pro

gram

ming

sho

uld b

e led

by

the

iden

tified

nee

ds, i

.e. d

eman

d dr

iven

from

the

com

mun

ity le

vel.

Page 20: IFRC Framework for Community Resilience · ting the IFRC to helping shape the future development agenda with three commit-ments: a. enabling every community in high risk areas to

Obje

cti

veE

xpecte

d O

utc

om

es

Exa

mple

s of

NS

Contr

ibuti

on

Exa

mple

s of

Indic

ato

rs

Eve

ryon

e ha

s ac

cess

to

heal

th s

yste

m re

sour

ces.

Pro

gram

mes

link

with

the

form

al h

ealth

sys

tem

thro

ugh

refe

rral

sys

tem

, am

bula

nce

serv

ices

,

safe

blo

od s

uppl

y, e

tc.

• P

rom

otio

n of

hea

lthy

lifes

tyle

s.•

Scr

een

for

chro

nic

dise

ases

.•

Imm

uniz

atio

n ca

mpa

igns

.•

Psy

chol

ogic

al/P

sych

osoc

ial s

uppo

rt.

• %

of p

eopl

e w

ith a

cces

s to

hea

lth s

ervi

ces.

• #

of p

eopl

e w

ith a

cces

s to

hea

lth in

sura

nce.

• M

orta

lity

rate

s, b

y ca

use.

• %

in re

duct

ion

of li

fest

yle

rela

ted

dise

ases

/illn

esse

s

(NC

Ds)

.•

% o

f at r

isk

popu

latio

n sc

reen

ed fo

r ch

roni

c di

seas

es.

• M

orbi

dity

rat

es, b

y ca

use.

• P

reva

lenc

e of

beh

avio

ural

ris

k fa

ctor

s.•

Imm

uniz

atio

n ra

tes.

• #

peop

le w

ho re

ceiv

e ps

ycho

logi

cal/p

sych

osoc

ial

su

ppor

t.

Str

eng

then

th

e so

cial

co

hesi

on

of

com

mun

itie

s.

Com

mun

ities

pro

vide

pr

otec

tion

and

secu

rity

for

all o

f the

ir m

embe

rs a

nd

have

the

capa

city

to d

raw

on

form

al a

nd in

form

al

com

mun

ity n

etw

orks

of

supp

ort t

o id

entif

y pr

oble

ms,

ne

eds

and

oppo

rtun

ities

, es

tabl

ish

prio

ritie

s an

d ac

t fo

r th

e go

od a

nd in

clus

ion

of a

ll in

the

com

mun

ities

.

• P

rom

otio

ns a

nd d

isse

min

atio

n of

the

RC

RC

Fund

amen

tal P

rinci

ples

and

hum

anita

rian

valu

es.

• P

rom

otio

n of

vio

lenc

e pr

even

tion.

• C

omm

unity

org

aniz

atio

n.•

Com

mun

ity in

volv

emen

t in

asse

ssm

ent

an

d pl

anni

ng o

f pro

gram

mes

/pro

ject

s.•

Pro

mot

ion

of s

ocia

l inc

lusi

on a

ctiv

ities

and

proj

ects

.•

Bra

nch

and

volu

ntee

r en

gage

men

t in

com

mun

ity

ac

tiviti

es.

• P

artn

ersh

ip w

ith lo

cal p

ublic

aut

horit

ies

an

d ot

her

stak

ehol

ders

to im

prov

e th

e co

mm

unity

safe

ty, s

ocia

l coh

esio

n, in

clus

iven

ess,

etc

.•

Adv

ocac

y fo

r th

e ne

eds

of v

ulne

rabl

e pe

ople

and

stig

mat

ised

gro

ups.

• A

dvoc

acy

for

effe

ctiv

e le

ader

ship

and

goo

d

go

vern

ance

• P

rom

otio

n of

beh

avio

ural

cha

nge

thro

ugh

key

m

essa

ges

and

publ

ic e

duca

tion.

• E

ngag

emen

t of y

outh

as

agen

ts o

f Beh

avio

ur

C

hang

e (Y

AB

C).

• #

RC

RC

bra

nche

s.•

# pe

ople

reac

hed

thro

ugh

the

diss

emin

atio

n

of F

unda

men

tal P

rinci

ples

and

hum

anita

rian

valu

es.

• #

peop

le a

war

e of

RC

RC

vio

lenc

e pr

even

tion

prog

ram

mes

. •

% re

duct

ion

in d

omes

tic/g

ende

r ba

sed

viol

ence

cas

es•

Inci

denc

e of

vio

lenc

e in

the

com

mun

ity.

• Fo

rmal

RC

RC

role

in p

ublic

aut

horit

y pl

ans.

• #

peop

le in

volv

ed in

ass

essm

ent a

nd p

lann

ing

of

com

mun

ity p

rogr

amm

es/p

roje

cts.

• #

vuln

erab

le (e

.g. m

argi

naliz

ed) p

eopl

e in

clud

ed

in

form

al a

nd in

form

al n

etw

orks

.•

# of

RC

RC

pro

gram

mes

con

duct

ed in

the

com

mun

ity.

• #

of a

ctiv

e vo

lunt

eers

. •

# br

anch

es a

nd v

olun

teer

s en

gage

d in

form

al

an

d in

form

al n

etw

orks

.•

# of

par

tner

ship

s.

• #

peop

le re

ache

d th

roug

h H

uman

itaria

n D

iplo

mac

y.•

# pe

ople

reac

hed

thro

ugh

publ

ic a

war

enes

s ra

isin

g

ab

out g

ood

gove

rnan

ce p

ract

ice,

acc

ount

abilit

y

and

tran

spar

ency

.•

# pe

ople

who

hav

e ch

ange

d th

eir

beha

viou

rs

as

a re

sult

of R

CR

C p

rom

otio

n•

# yo

uth

enga

ged

in Y

AB

C

20International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies

IFRC Framework for Community Resilience - Annex One

Page 21: IFRC Framework for Community Resilience · ting the IFRC to helping shape the future development agenda with three commit-ments: a. enabling every community in high risk areas to

Obje

cti

veE

xpecte

d O

utc

om

es

Exa

mple

s of

NS

Contr

ibuti

on

Exa

mple

s of

Indic

ato

rs

Eve

ryon

e ha

s ac

cess

to

heal

th s

yste

m re

sour

ces.

Pro

gram

mes

link

with

the

form

al h

ealth

sys

tem

thro

ugh

refe

rral

sys

tem

, am

bula

nce

serv

ices

,

safe

blo

od s

uppl

y, e

tc.

• P

rom

otio

n of

hea

lthy

lifes

tyle

s.•

Scr

een

for

chro

nic

dise

ases

.•

Imm

uniz

atio

n ca

mpa

igns

.•

Psy

chol

ogic

al/P

sych

osoc

ial s

uppo

rt.

• %

of p

eopl

e w

ith a

cces

s to

hea

lth s

ervi

ces.

• #

of p

eopl

e w

ith a

cces

s to

hea

lth in

sura

nce.

• M

orta

lity

rate

s, b

y ca

use.

• %

in re

duct

ion

of li

fest

yle

rela

ted

dise

ases

/illn

esse

s

(NC

Ds)

.•

% o

f at r

isk

popu

latio

n sc

reen

ed fo

r ch

roni

c di

seas

es.

• M

orbi

dity

rat

es, b

y ca

use.

• P

reva

lenc

e of

beh

avio

ural

ris

k fa

ctor

s.•

Imm

uniz

atio

n ra

tes.

• #

peop

le w

ho re

ceiv

e ps

ycho

logi

cal/p

sych

osoc

ial

su

ppor

t.

Str

eng

then

th

e so

cial

co

hesi

on

of

com

mun

itie

s.

Com

mun

ities

pro

vide

pr

otec

tion

and

secu

rity

for

all o

f the

ir m

embe

rs a

nd

have

the

capa

city

to d

raw

on

form

al a

nd in

form

al

com

mun

ity n

etw

orks

of

supp

ort t

o id

entif

y pr

oble

ms,

ne

eds

and

oppo

rtun

ities

, es

tabl

ish

prio

ritie

s an

d ac

t fo

r th

e go

od a

nd in

clus

ion

of a

ll in

the

com

mun

ities

.

• P

rom

otio

ns a

nd d

isse

min

atio

n of

the

RC

RC

Fund

amen

tal P

rinci

ples

and

hum

anita

rian

valu

es.

• P

rom

otio

n of

vio

lenc

e pr

even

tion.

• C

omm

unity

org

aniz

atio

n.•

Com

mun

ity in

volv

emen

t in

asse

ssm

ent

an

d pl

anni

ng o

f pro

gram

mes

/pro

ject

s.•

Pro

mot

ion

of s

ocia

l inc

lusi

on a

ctiv

ities

and

proj

ects

.•

Bra

nch

and

volu

ntee

r en

gage

men

t in

com

mun

ity

ac

tiviti

es.

• P

artn

ersh

ip w

ith lo

cal p

ublic

aut

horit

ies

an

d ot

her

stak

ehol

ders

to im

prov

e th

e co

mm

unity

safe

ty, s

ocia

l coh

esio

n, in

clus

iven

ess,

etc

.•

Adv

ocac

y fo

r th

e ne

eds

of v

ulne

rabl

e pe

ople

and

stig

mat

ised

gro

ups.

• A

dvoc

acy

for

effe

ctiv

e le

ader

ship

and

goo

d

go

vern

ance

• P

rom

otio

n of

beh

avio

ural

cha

nge

thro

ugh

key

m

essa

ges

and

publ

ic e

duca

tion.

• E

ngag

emen

t of y

outh

as

agen

ts o

f Beh

avio

ur

C

hang

e (Y

AB

C).

• #

RC

RC

bra

nche

s.•

# pe

ople

reac

hed

thro

ugh

the

diss

emin

atio

n

of F

unda

men

tal P

rinci

ples

and

hum

anita

rian

valu

es.

• #

peop

le a

war

e of

RC

RC

vio

lenc

e pr

even

tion

prog

ram

mes

. •

% re

duct

ion

in d

omes

tic/g

ende

r ba

sed

viol

ence

cas

es•

Inci

denc

e of

vio

lenc

e in

the

com

mun

ity.

• Fo

rmal

RC

RC

role

in p

ublic

aut

horit

y pl

ans.

• #

peop

le in

volv

ed in

ass

essm

ent a

nd p

lann

ing

of

com

mun

ity p

rogr

amm

es/p

roje

cts.

• #

vuln

erab

le (e

.g. m

argi

naliz

ed) p

eopl

e in

clud

ed

in

form

al a

nd in

form

al n

etw

orks

.•

# of

RC

RC

pro

gram

mes

con

duct

ed in

the

com

mun

ity.

• #

of a

ctiv

e vo

lunt

eers

. •

# br

anch

es a

nd v

olun

teer

s en

gage

d in

form

al

an

d in

form

al n

etw

orks

.•

# of

par

tner

ship

s.

• #

peop

le re

ache

d th

roug

h H

uman

itaria

n D

iplo

mac

y.•

# pe

ople

reac

hed

thro

ugh

publ

ic a

war

enes

s ra

isin

g

ab

out g

ood

gove

rnan

ce p

ract

ice,

acc

ount

abilit

y

and

tran

spar

ency

.•

# pe

ople

who

hav

e ch

ange

d th

eir

beha

viou

rs

as

a re

sult

of R

CR

C p

rom

otio

n•

# yo

uth

enga

ged

in Y

AB

C

21International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies

IFRC Framework for Community Resilience - Annex One

Dev

elo

p w

ell-

mai

ntai

ned

an

d

acce

ssib

le

infr

astr

uctu

re

and

se

rvic

es in

co

mm

unit

ies.

Com

mun

ities

have

wel

l-pl

anne

d, w

ell-m

aint

aine

d

and

acce

ssib

le in

frast

ruct

ure

and

serv

ices

.

Com

mun

ities

hav

e th

e ab

ility

or s

uppo

rt to

use

, mai

ntai

n,

repa

ir an

d re

nova

te th

e pu

blic

in

frast

ruct

ure

and

syst

ems.

Com

mun

ities

hav

e ap

prop

riate

- sa

fe, s

ecur

e an

d

a

fford

able

she

lter,

-

wat

er a

nd s

anita

tion

sy

stem

s

-

tran

spor

t and

ene

rgy

syst

ems.

• A

dvoc

ate

for

educ

atio

n an

d he

alth

faci

litie

s

to b

e bu

ilt in

saf

e ar

eas.

• A

dvoc

ate

for

and

prom

ote

the

deve

lopm

ent

an

d fu

ll im

plem

enta

tion

of g

ood

disa

ster

law

s,

re

gula

tory

sys

tem

s, b

uild

ing

code

s an

d st

anda

rds,

and

wel

l pla

nned

bui

lt en

viro

nmen

ts.

• P

ublic

aw

aren

ess

and

publ

ic e

duca

tion

prog

ram

mes

.•

Pro

vide

trai

ning

and

pee

r-to

-pee

r ed

ucat

ion

to

enh

ance

ski

lls a

nd k

now

ledg

e.•

Influ

ence

urb

an a

nd c

omm

unity

pla

nnin

g fo

r m

ore

pu

blic

spa

ce, p

arks

, pub

lic tr

ansp

orta

tion.

Pro

mot

e ro

ad s

afet

y.

• S

afe

and

affo

rdab

le p

hysi

cal s

truc

ture

s•

She

lter

safe

ty a

war

enes

s•

Sec

urity

of t

enur

e (re

ntin

g, le

asin

g, o

wne

rshi

p, e

tc.)

• A

dvoc

ate

and

prom

ote

the

deve

lopm

ent o

f saf

e

se

ttle

men

ts a

nd w

ell p

lann

ed b

uilt

envi

ronm

ents

.

• A

dvoc

ate

for

larg

e sc

ale

urba

n w

ater

and

sani

tatio

n in

frast

ruct

ure.

• A

dvoc

ate

for

com

mun

ity a

cces

s to

relia

ble

an

d af

ford

able

tran

spor

t and

ene

rgy

syst

ems

• #

Pub

lic in

frast

ruct

ure

plan

s an

d in

vest

men

ts a

re

di

sast

er r

isk

info

rmed

.•

Com

mun

ity e

ngag

emen

t in

infra

stru

ctur

e pl

anni

ng.

• B

uild

ing

code

s an

d la

nd u

se s

tand

ards

that

con

side

r

di

sast

er r

isk

redu

ctio

n an

d en

viro

nmen

tal c

once

rns.

• #

of p

ublic

aw

aren

ess

and

publ

ic e

duca

tion

prog

ram

mes

.•

# of

trai

ning

s, n

umbe

r of

par

ticip

ants

.•

# of

urb

an a

nd c

omm

unity

pla

ns in

corp

orat

ing

publ

ic

sp

ace,

par

ks, a

nd p

ublic

tran

spor

tatio

n st

anda

rds.

Inci

denc

e of

road

acc

iden

ts.

• #

of p

eopl

e ki

lled

or in

jure

d in

road

acc

iden

ts

• %

of p

eopl

e w

ith a

cces

s to

saf

e sh

elte

r•

Bui

ldin

gs c

ompl

y w

ith b

uild

ing

code

s, r

ules

and

land

use

stan

dard

s.•

# &

% o

f peo

ple

who

kno

w th

e sa

fety

ele

men

ts

of

thei

r ho

me

• A

fford

abilit

y of

she

lter

• #

& %

of p

eopl

e re

ache

d th

roug

h sa

fe s

helte

r

aw

aren

ess

trai

ning

or

activ

ities

• #

& %

or

peop

le w

ith s

ecur

e te

nure

and

lega

l

prot

ectio

n of

thei

r as

sets

.

• #

of w

ater

and

san

itatio

n sc

hem

es.

• A

cces

sibi

lity

and

affo

rdab

ility

of tr

ansp

ort

an

d en

ergy

sys

tem

s.

Pro

vid

e ec

ono

mic

o

pp

ort

unit

ies

to c

om

mun

ity

peo

ple

.

Com

mun

ities

pro

vide

a

dive

rse

rang

e of

em

ploy

men

t an

d in

com

e op

port

uniti

es.

Com

mun

ities

are

flex

ible

and

re

sour

cefu

l.

• Li

velih

ood

prog

ram

min

g.

• Vo

catio

nal a

nd s

kills

trai

ning

.•

Inco

me

gene

ratio

n ac

tiviti

es (p

etty

trad

ing,

lives

tock

pro

duct

ion

and

mar

ketin

g, s

mal

l sca

le

vo

catio

nal a

ctiv

ities

etc

.)

• P

eer-

to-p

eer

educ

atio

n to

enh

ance

ski

lls

an

d kn

owle

dge.

• #

of p

eopl

e su

ppor

ted

thro

ugh

livel

ihoo

ds p

rogr

amm

es.

• #

of p

eopl

e w

ho h

ave

bene

fitte

d fro

m v

ocat

iona

l

and

skills

trai

ning

and

act

ive

in b

usin

ess.

• U

nem

ploy

men

t rat

e, s

tand

ard

of liv

ing

of c

omm

unity

, etc

.

• #

peer

-to-

peer

pro

gram

mes

con

duct

ed

• #

part

icip

ants

in p

eer

to p

eer

prog

ram

mes

Page 22: IFRC Framework for Community Resilience · ting the IFRC to helping shape the future development agenda with three commit-ments: a. enabling every community in high risk areas to

International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies

IFRC Framework for Community Resilience - Annex One O

bje

cti

veE

xpecte

d O

utc

om

es

Exa

mple

s of

NS

Contr

ibuti

on

Exa

mple

s of

Indic

ato

rs

Com

mun

ities

have

the

capa

city

to

acc

ept u

ncer

tain

ty a

nd

resp

ond

(pro

activ

ely)

to c

hang

e.

• E

ncou

rage

com

mun

ity to

inco

rpor

ate

new

know

ledg

e an

d te

chno

logy

, sha

re tr

aditi

onal

livel

ihoo

ds, f

ood

and

nutr

ition

str

ateg

ies.

• A

war

enes

s of

and

und

erst

andi

ng o

f new

kno

wle

dge

and

tech

nolo

gy a

nd tr

aditi

onal

met

hods

and

appr

oach

es.

Man

age

natu

ral a

sset

s.C

omm

uniti

es re

cogn

ise

the

valu

e of

thei

r na

tura

l ass

ets.

Com

mun

ities

man

age

thei

r na

tura

l ass

ets.

Com

mun

ities

hav

e th

e ab

ility

to p

rote

ct, e

nhan

ce a

nd

mai

ntai

n th

eir

natu

ral a

sset

s.

• E

duca

te c

omm

uniti

es a

bout

nat

ural

ass

et u

se

is

sues

rela

ted

to d

isas

ter

risk

• P

rom

ote

envi

ronm

enta

lly re

spon

sibl

e ur

ban

plan

ning

and

land

use

• S

uppo

rt e

nviro

nmen

tally

resp

onsi

ble

livel

ihoo

ds

ac

tiviti

es, f

ood

prod

uctio

n, e

tc.

• P

ursu

e en

viro

nmen

tally

resp

onsi

ble

cons

truc

tion

prac

tices

.•

Env

ironm

enta

l con

serv

atio

n in

itiat

ives

, e.g

. tre

e

pl

antin

g, e

nviro

nmen

t-fri

endl

y sa

nita

tion,

redu

ctio

n

of c

arbo

n fo

otpr

ints

, ene

rgy

savi

ng, e

tc.

• P

ublic

aw

aren

ess,

pub

lic e

duca

tion

and

advo

cacy

prog

ram

mes

.•

Pro

mot

ion

of e

ffect

ive

envi

ronm

enta

l reg

ulat

ion

rela

ted

to r

isk

(e.g

., re

gula

tion

of lo

ggin

g,

w

etla

nds

pres

erva

tion,

sol

id a

nd to

xic

was

te

di

spos

al, i

nteg

ratio

n of

DR

R in

Env

ironm

enta

l

Impa

ct A

sses

smen

ts (E

IAs)

).

• Le

vel o

f und

erst

andi

ng o

f env

ironm

enta

l iss

ues

and

cons

eque

nces

of m

ism

anag

emen

t.•

# of

urb

an p

lans

that

inco

rpor

ate

envi

ronm

enta

l

mea

sure

s.

• #

of e

nviro

nmen

tally

resp

onsi

ble

livel

ihoo

ds, f

ood

secu

rity,

etc

. pro

ject

s.•

Red

uctio

n in

env

ironm

ent d

egra

datio

n as

a re

sult

of in

appr

opria

te la

nd u

se, s

helte

r co

nstr

uctio

n, e

tc.

• U

se o

f sus

tain

able

bui

ldin

g pr

oduc

ts a

nd m

ater

ials

.•

# en

viro

nmen

tal c

onse

rvat

ion

proj

ects

.

• #

peop

le re

ache

d th

roug

h PA

PE

.•

carb

on fo

otpr

int.

• #

of n

ew e

nviro

nmen

tal r

ules

/pla

ns s

uppo

rtin

g D

RR

• #

of E

IAS

inte

grat

ing

DR

R

Str

engt

hen

the

conn

ecte

d-ne

ss o

f co

mm

unit

ies.

Com

mun

ities

hav

e th

e ca

paci

ty

and

capa

bilit

ies

to s

usta

in a

nd

build

on

good

rela

tions

hips

w

ith a

rang

e of

ext

erna

l act

ors

who

can

pro

vide

a w

ider

su

ppor

tive

envi

ronm

ent.

Com

mun

ities

hav

e ac

cess

to

a ne

twor

k of

ext

erna

l act

ors

willi

ng/a

ble

to s

uppl

y ta

ngib

le

and

inta

ngib

le fo

rms

of

supp

ort t

o th

e co

mm

unity

.

• R

CR

C ro

le in

hol

istic

com

mun

ity p

lans

at a

ll le

vels

(com

mun

ity, l

ocal

gov

ernm

ent a

nd n

atio

nal).

• A

bilit

y of

NS

to m

obiliz

e ph

ysic

al a

nd fi

nanc

ial

re

sour

ces

• N

S n

etw

orki

ng w

ith IF

RC

and

sis

ter

NS

s.•

Par

tner

ship

s w

ith d

iffer

ent s

take

hold

ers.

• A

dvoc

acy

for

adeq

uate

pub

lic fu

ndin

g fo

r

co

mm

unity

resi

lienc

e st

reng

then

ing

prog

ram

mes

.

• C

omm

unity

pla

ns w

ith c

lear

ly d

efine

d R

C ro

le.

• #

and

valu

e of

reso

urce

s m

obiliz

ed.

• #

part

ners

, sta

ndin

g ag

reem

ents

for

supp

ort/

coop

erat

ion,

etc

.•

Sup

port

(res

ourc

es, t

echn

ical

sup

port

, etc

.) at

trac

ted.

22

Page 23: IFRC Framework for Community Resilience · ting the IFRC to helping shape the future development agenda with three commit-ments: a. enabling every community in high risk areas to

Obje

cti

veE

xpecte

d O

utc

om

es

Exa

mple

s of

NS

Contr

ibuti

on

Exa

mple

s of

Indic

ato

rs

Com

mun

ities

have

the

capa

city

to

acc

ept u

ncer

tain

ty a

nd

resp

ond

(pro

activ

ely)

to c

hang

e.

• E

ncou

rage

com

mun

ity to

inco

rpor

ate

new

know

ledg

e an

d te

chno

logy

, sha

re tr

aditi

onal

livel

ihoo

ds, f

ood

and

nutr

ition

str

ateg

ies.

• A

war

enes

s of

and

und

erst

andi

ng o

f new

kno

wle

dge

and

tech

nolo

gy a

nd tr

aditi

onal

met

hods

and

appr

oach

es.

Man

age

natu

ral a

sset

s.C

omm

uniti

es re

cogn

ise

the

valu

e of

thei

r na

tura

l ass

ets.

Com

mun

ities

man

age

thei

r na

tura

l ass

ets.

Com

mun

ities

hav

e th

e ab

ility

to p

rote

ct, e

nhan

ce a

nd

mai

ntai

n th

eir

natu

ral a

sset

s.

• E

duca

te c

omm

uniti

es a

bout

nat

ural

ass

et u

se

is

sues

rela

ted

to d

isas

ter

risk

• P

rom

ote

envi

ronm

enta

lly re

spon

sibl

e ur

ban

plan

ning

and

land

use

• S

uppo

rt e

nviro

nmen

tally

resp

onsi

ble

livel

ihoo

ds

ac

tiviti

es, f

ood

prod

uctio

n, e

tc.

• P

ursu

e en

viro

nmen

tally

resp

onsi

ble

cons

truc

tion

prac

tices

.•

Env

ironm

enta

l con

serv

atio

n in

itiat

ives

, e.g

. tre

e

pl

antin

g, e

nviro

nmen

t-fri

endl

y sa

nita

tion,

redu

ctio

n

of c

arbo

n fo

otpr

ints

, ene

rgy

savi

ng, e

tc.

• P

ublic

aw

aren

ess,

pub

lic e

duca

tion

and

advo

cacy

prog

ram

mes

.•

Pro

mot

ion

of e

ffect

ive

envi

ronm

enta

l reg

ulat

ion

rela

ted

to r

isk

(e.g

., re

gula

tion

of lo

ggin

g,

w

etla

nds

pres

erva

tion,

sol

id a

nd to

xic

was

te

di

spos

al, i

nteg

ratio

n of

DR

R in

Env

ironm

enta

l

Impa

ct A

sses

smen

ts (E

IAs)

).

• Le

vel o

f und

erst

andi

ng o

f env

ironm

enta

l iss

ues

and

cons

eque

nces

of m

ism

anag

emen

t.•

# of

urb

an p

lans

that

inco

rpor

ate

envi

ronm

enta

l

mea

sure

s.

• #

of e

nviro

nmen

tally

resp

onsi

ble

livel

ihoo

ds, f

ood

secu

rity,

etc

. pro

ject

s.•

Red

uctio

n in

env

ironm

ent d

egra

datio

n as

a re

sult

of in

appr

opria

te la

nd u

se, s

helte

r co

nstr

uctio

n, e

tc.

• U

se o

f sus

tain

able

bui

ldin

g pr

oduc

ts a

nd m

ater

ials

.•

# en

viro

nmen

tal c

onse

rvat

ion

proj

ects

.

• #

peop

le re

ache

d th

roug

h PA

PE

.•

carb

on fo

otpr

int.

• #

of n

ew e

nviro

nmen

tal r

ules

/pla

ns s

uppo

rtin

g D

RR

• #

of E

IAS

inte

grat

ing

DR

R

Str

engt

hen

the

conn

ecte

d-ne

ss o

f co

mm

unit

ies.

Com

mun

ities

hav

e th

e ca

paci

ty

and

capa

bilit

ies

to s

usta

in a

nd

build

on

good

rela

tions

hips

w

ith a

rang

e of

ext

erna

l act

ors

who

can

pro

vide

a w

ider

su

ppor

tive

envi

ronm

ent.

Com

mun

ities

hav

e ac

cess

to

a ne

twor

k of

ext

erna

l act

ors

willi

ng/a

ble

to s

uppl

y ta

ngib

le

and

inta

ngib

le fo

rms

of

supp

ort t

o th

e co

mm

unity

.

• R

CR

C ro

le in

hol

istic

com

mun

ity p

lans

at a

ll le

vels

(com

mun

ity, l

ocal

gov

ernm

ent a

nd n

atio

nal).

• A

bilit

y of

NS

to m

obiliz

e ph

ysic

al a

nd fi

nanc

ial

re

sour

ces

• N

S n

etw

orki

ng w

ith IF

RC

and

sis

ter

NS

s.•

Par

tner

ship

s w

ith d

iffer

ent s

take

hold

ers.

• A

dvoc

acy

for

adeq

uate

pub

lic fu

ndin

g fo

r

co

mm

unity

resi

lienc

e st

reng

then

ing

prog

ram

mes

.

• C

omm

unity

pla

ns w

ith c

lear

ly d

efine

d R

C ro

le.

• #

and

valu

e of

reso

urce

s m

obiliz

ed.

• #

part

ners

, sta

ndin

g ag

reem

ents

for

supp

ort/

coop

erat

ion,

etc

.•

Sup

port

(res

ourc

es, t

echn

ical

sup

port

, etc

.) at

trac

ted.

The Fundamental Principles of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement

Humanity The International Red Cross and Red Cres-cent Movement, born of a desire to bring assistance without discrimination to the wounded on the battle-field, endeavours, in its international and national capacity, to prevent and alleviate human suffering wherever it may be found. Its purpose is to protect life and health and to ensure respect for the human being. It promotes mutual understanding, friendship, cooperation and lasting peace amongst all peoples.

Impartiality It makes no discrimination as to nation-ality, race, religious beliefs, class or political opinions. It endeavours to relieve the suffering of individuals, being guided solely by their needs, and to give prior-ity to the most urgent cases of distress.

Neutrality In order to enjoy the confidence of all, the Movement may not take sides in hostilities or engage at any time in controversies of a political, racial, reli-gious or ideological nature.

Independence The Movement is independent. The National Societies, while auxiliaries in the humani-tarian services of their governments and subject to the laws of their respective countries, must always maintain their autonomy so that they may be able at all times to act in accordance with the principles of the Movement.

Voluntary service It is a voluntary relief movement not prompted in any manner by desire for gain.

Unity There can be only one Red Cross or Red Cres-cent Society in any one country. It must be open to all. It must carry on its humanitarian work through-out its territory.

Universality The International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, in which all societies have equal status and share equal responsibilities and duties in helping each other, is worldwide.

Page 24: IFRC Framework for Community Resilience · ting the IFRC to helping shape the future development agenda with three commit-ments: a. enabling every community in high risk areas to

Further information is available from:

International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent SocietiesP.O. Box 3721211 Geneva 19 SwitzerlandEmail: [email protected]: www.ifrc.org

www.ifrc.orgSaving lives, changing minds.