ATTACHMENT NO 6 USAID ETHIOPIA CDCS CLA PLAN 2019 TO 2024.pdf

CDCS Collaboration, Learning, and Adapting (CLA) Plan This Plan replaces the Performance Management Plan (PMP)

Approval Date: June 4, 2020

Last Updated: June 4, 2020

(For revision history, please see tracker at the end)

USAID/Ethiopia CDCS CLA Plan

Table of Contents

Introduction - A New Approach 1 Results Framework 2

Strategy Learning 3 Learning Questions and Themes 4

Learning Themes 4 Learning Questions 5 Monitoring Approach 7 Monitoring Priorities 7 Monitoring Tools 8

Evaluations, Studies, and Assessments 9 Adaptive Management 10 Collaboration 11 DO 1: Disaster Risk Management Strengthened 13

Learning Agenda 14 Learning Questions 14 Monitoring for Adapting and Learning 18 Evaluation for Adapting and Learning 21

DO 2: Resilience of vulnerable populations to key shocks increased 22 Learning Agenda 23

Learning Questions 23 Monitoring for Adapting and Learning 26 Evaluation for Adapting and Learning 27

DO 3: Private sector-led economic growth promoted 29 Learning Agenda 29

Learning Questions 30 Monitoring for Adapting and Learning 34 Evaluation for Adapting and Learning 35

DO 4: Sustained improvement in essential service delivery outcomes focused on women and girls 37

Learning Agenda 37 Learning Questions 38 Monitoring for Adapting and Learning 39 Evaluation for Adapting and Learning 40

SpO: Citizen Responsive Governance Enhanced 41 Learning Agenda 41

Last Update: 06/04/2020 Page 1

Learning Questions 41 Monitoring for Adapting and Learning 43 Evaluation for Adapting and Learning 45

Enabling Environment 45 Culture 46 Processes 46 Resource 47

Annexes 49 Annex I: CDCS CLA Plan Roadmap 49 Annex II: Indicator Summary Sheet 49 Annex III: Performance Indicator Tracking Tables 49 Annex IV: Evaluations, Studies, and Assessments Plan 50 Annex V: CLA Mission Order 50 Annex VI: Project LME Plans 50 Annex VII: CDCS CLA Plan Update Tracker 50

Last Update: 06/04/2020 Page 2

ACRONYMS

ADS Automated Directives System AOR/COR Agreement Officer’s Representative/Contracting Officer’s Representative CDCS Country Development Cooperation Strategy CLA Collaboration, Learning and Adapting CM Crisis Modifier COPEWELL Composite of Post-event Wellbeing DAG Development Assistance Group DE Developmental Evaluation DIS Development Information Solution DO Development Objective DRG Democracy, Rights and Governance DRM Disaster Risk Management DRMTWG Disaster Risk Management Technical Working Group ECBH Empowered Communities for Better Health EER Effective Emergency Response EHCT Ethiopia Humanitarian Country Team EPHI Ethiopian Public Health Institute ESA Evaluation, Study and Assessment ETF Emergency Task Force EWS Early Warning System

EXO

FDI

Executive Office Foreign Direct Investment

FEWSNET Famine and Early Warning Systems Network FGD Focus Group Discussion FSR Financing Self-Reliance FTF Feed the Future GDP Gross Domestic Product GFSS Global Food Security Strategy GIS Geographic Information System GOE Government of Ethiopia HA Humanitarian Assistance HIMS Health Information Management System HRDG Humanitarian and Resilience Donor Working Group

HSS

IDS

Health System Strengthening Innovative Design Service

IP Implementing Partner IR Intermediate Result J2SR Journey to Self-Reliance LME Learning, Monitoring and Evaluation M&E Monitoring and Evaluation

MMT

MERLIN

Mission Management Team Monitoring, Evaluation, Research and Learning Innovation

MOE Ministry of Education MOH Ministry of Health MOWIE Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy MS4G Market Systems for Growth NPI New Partnership Initiative OAA Office of Acquisition and Assistance OFM Office of Financial Management OR Operational Research OU Operating Unit

Last Update: 06/04/2020 Page 3

P&R Pause and Reflect PAD Project Appraisal Document PD&L Program Design and Learning PEA Political Economy Analysis PITA Participatory, Inclusive, Transparent and Accountable PMP Performance Management Plan PPL Bureau for Policy, Planning and Learning PRO Program Office PSE Private Sector Engagement PSNP Productive Safety Net Program RDR Redefining our Development Relationship RFS Bureau for Resilience and Food Security RLO Residence Legal Officer SAGE Strategic Advisory Group for Emergencies SDRMSI Strengthening Disaster Risk Management System Institution SNNPR Southern Nation, Nationalities and Peoples Region SOW Statement of Work SpO Special Objective SRLA Self-Reliance Learning Agenda Sub-IR Sub-Intermediate Result TDY Temporary Duty TIGER Transitioning Into Graduation through Enhanced Resilience TIGER-OR Transitioning Into Graduation through Enhanced Resilience Operational Research USAID United States Agency for International Development USG U.S. Government WASH Water, Sanitation and Hygiene ZOI Zone of Influence

Last Update: 06/04/2020 Page 4

1. Introduction - A New Approach USAID/Ethiopia has embraced adaptive management as a central pillar to implementing its five-year (2019-2024) Country Development Cooperation Strategy (CDCS). The new CDCS integrates many sectors that have traditionally been vertical, or single sector focused. The shift to an integrated strategy and management approach drives the need for more integrated learning to more effectively monitor results. As such, the Mission has pivoted from solely focusing on monitoring and evaluation (M&E) towards a more holistic approach that is inherent in collaboration, learning, and adapting (CLA). This pivot resulted in a Mission-wide CLA Plan in lieu of a traditional Performance Management Plan (PMP). This CDCS CLA Plan consists of multiple mini-CLA plans at the Goal and DO-levels and will be managed by Development Objective (DO) Teams to drive learning for adapting to effectively achieve their DO results.

The Mission continues to push this broader CLA approach to M&E down to the project and activities levels while empowering Project and Activity Leads to make CLA activity decisions.

USAID/Ethiopia envisions this CDCS CLA Plan will serve as a high-level and cohesive management tool to drive innovative CLA approaches in its programming and implementation.

The Plan is structured to highlight Learning as a priority that ultimately supports the Mission’s ability to continuously learn and adapt in a dynamic development context. The CDCS CLA Plan will complement the more detailed Project-level and Activity-level Learning, Monitoring and Evaluation (LME) plans where the Mission is operationalizing the strategy, particularly cross-office integration. This learning and adapting management tool is expected to guide all stakeholders within USAID/Ethiopia to surface evidence and learn from a wide range of sources for the benefit of USAID, the local Government and other development actors. The below framework exhibits how USAID/Ethiopia’s learning and adapting effort is envisioned.

Last Update: 06/04/2020 Page 1

USAID/Ethiopia’s Learning Agenda to Further Programming and Journey to Self-Reliance (J2SR)

The CDCS CLA Plan is a living document and will be reviewed and updated on a regular basis.

Items that will be further developed over the next couple of months are highlighted in yellow.

Current CDCS CLA Plan items under further development are highlighted in a tracker.

1.1. Results Framework

The CDCS Goal is “Ethiopia transitions to a more democratic, prosperous, and resilient society, with accountable institutions and private-sector led growth.” To progress towards this goal, USAID/Ethiopia supports four DOs and one Special Objective (SpO). Moreover, the Mission applies two Strategic Principles: (1) Improved citizen empowerment and household and community resilience and well-being; and (2) More effective and accountable systems and institutions at all levels. The principles, inter-woven throughout the development objectives, will enable Ethiopia to better address its own development challenges in the long run. Governance, Conflict Sensitivity, Resilience, Gender and Youth issues are the paramount cross-cutting approaches in the Mission’s strategic thinking.

Last Update: 06/04/2020 Page 2 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1waOILVsK3wjcIBXAESDmO39WDqAUTsXbxZN0jx1TrLE/edit?usp=sharing

USAID/Ethiopia’s Country Development Cooperation Strategy Results Framework

2. Strategy Learning 1

The Mission will advance a learning-driven approach whereby a cascade of learning themes and questions guide USAID’s monitoring, evaluation and other learning-related activities, while also complementing and reinforcing critical performance monitoring efforts throughout the lifetime of the strategy.

As projects will operationalize the integrated strategy, projects will be the locus for significant learning and performance monitoring for continuous improvement, as summarized in the Project LME Plans. This CLA Plan focuses on higher-level strategic choices, critical results, and relationships across DOs.

1 The Mission is in the process of updating the Monitoring Mission Order and will contain specific details to operationalize this plan.

Last Update: 06/04/2020 Page 3

USAID/Ethiopia’s Projects to Operationalize CDCS 2019-2024 (hyperlinks to approved PADs):

● Strengthening Disaster Risk Management Systems and Institutions

● Effective Emergency Response

● Highlands Resilience

● Lowlands Resilience

● Private Enterprise

● Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene

● Ethiopian Youth Empowerment

● Education System Strengthening

● Health Systems Strengthening

● Empowered Communities for Better Health

● Citizen Responsive Governance

2.1. Learning Questions and Themes

The Mission has identified a set of learning priorities that reflect strategy-level development hypotheses, knowledge gaps and key assumptions and to support the Mission’s application of strategic principles and cross-cutting approaches throughout the portfolio. The strategy-level learning priorities and themes serve as a touchpoint and unifying mechanism for coordinating learning activities (and application of that learning) with the potential to inform multiple DOs and projects, including opportunities to build Ethiopia’s self-reliance (e.g. Private sector engagement (PSE), Redefining our Development Relationship (RDR), Financing Self-reliance (FSR), etc) and the Mission’s approach to advancing a highly integrated, multi-sectoral strategic framework.

2.1.1. Learning Themes

The Mission strongly encourages learning as relevant at the Project and Activity levels. The overarching learning themes of the Mission are the following and each theme will develop more detailed plans in the future.

● Gender

● Youth

● Private sector engagement

● Governance, including civil society and citizen engagement

● Conflict

● New partnerships

● Mission operations

Last Update: 06/04/2020 Page 4 https://drive.google.com/open?id=1oCQd10XkR7AyIEzEiHCgIdkgOqJrljBi https://drive.google.com/open?id=1WH2O3vojKasmmlbWtLpAbm5BTYhXfpCk

2.1.2. Learning Questions

Learning questions and topic areas include both programmatic and operational themes and priority questions that were identified at the outset of CDCS implementation. The learning questions also allow for the flexibility to respond to emergent learning needs or unanticipated (and relevant) evidence throughout implementation.

Learning Question 2 Intended use/user Learning Activity Timeline Priority

Programmatic Learning

0.1 To what extent, and

under what conditions, does multi-sectoral integration lead to improved outcomes?

This included sequencing (such as across DO1, DO2, and DO4).

What are the other costs and benefits of integration (in terms development outcomes, organizational and staffing, for USAID, partners, and beneficiaries)?

To identify conditions (programmatic, partnership engagement, organizational) for improved outcomes for multi-sectoral programming to support better design and targeting

To understand the relative benefits and costs of multi-sectoral collaboration to test the theory of improved efficacy

Primary User:

USAID/Ethiopia, implementing partners (IPs) Secondary Users:

Other USAID/Washington and donors pursuing integrated

● DO1 and DO2 cross-project learning

● Transitioning into Graduation through Enhanced Resilience Operational Research

(TIGER-OR)

● Developmental Evaluation (DE) for secondary city intervention areas

Continuously assessed each year with more robust efforts for a Special cross-Mission study in 2022 & 2024

First three years of secondary cities implementatio n

High

2 A detailed plan for each Learning Question will be developed and linked to this document.

Last Update: 06/04/2020 Page 5 https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rciO9LHJO6uigibYguFgLp5O0cRsw4iYINNnRRgtGP8/edit https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RYfMRhaB8UuFvfhu4KSdZnNr9j_AehcfZQgh1mV3jK0/edit?usp=sharing https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RYfMRhaB8UuFvfhu4KSdZnNr9j_AehcfZQgh1mV3jK0/edit?usp=sharing https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RYfMRhaB8UuFvfhu4KSdZnNr9j_AehcfZQgh1mV3jK0/edit?usp=sharing https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RYfMRhaB8UuFvfhu4KSdZnNr9j_AehcfZQgh1mV3jK0/edit?usp=sharing https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RYfMRhaB8UuFvfhu4KSdZnNr9j_AehcfZQgh1mV3jK0/edit?usp=sharing https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RYfMRhaB8UuFvfhu4KSdZnNr9j_AehcfZQgh1mV3jK0/edit?usp=sharing https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RYfMRhaB8UuFvfhu4KSdZnNr9j_AehcfZQgh1mV3jK0/edit?usp=sharing https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RYfMRhaB8UuFvfhu4KSdZnNr9j_AehcfZQgh1mV3jK0/edit?usp=sharing https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RYfMRhaB8UuFvfhu4KSdZnNr9j_AehcfZQgh1mV3jK0/edit?usp=sharing https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RYfMRhaB8UuFvfhu4KSdZnNr9j_AehcfZQgh1mV3jK0/edit?usp=sharing https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RYfMRhaB8UuFvfhu4KSdZnNr9j_AehcfZQgh1mV3jK0/edit?usp=sharing https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RYfMRhaB8UuFvfhu4KSdZnNr9j_AehcfZQgh1mV3jK0/edit?usp=sharing https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RYfMRhaB8UuFvfhu4KSdZnNr9j_AehcfZQgh1mV3jK0/edit?usp=sharing https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RYfMRhaB8UuFvfhu4KSdZnNr9j_AehcfZQgh1mV3jK0/edit?usp=sharing https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RYfMRhaB8UuFvfhu4KSdZnNr9j_AehcfZQgh1mV3jK0/edit?usp=sharing https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RYfMRhaB8UuFvfhu4KSdZnNr9j_AehcfZQgh1mV3jK0/edit?usp=sharing programming

0.2 How have particular

programmatic or sectoral approaches to systems strengthening been designed and implemented to foster self-reliance, and which are most effective? Why?

What type(s) of changes in self-reliance are observed and when after USAID interventions or engagement? What were the development outcomes, or are likely to be the development outcomes, of those changes? (Expanded from Self Reliance Learning Agenda (SRLA) Question 11)

To consolidate and document lessons from Project-level learning to identify potential for learning across DOs/Projects

To hone the timing, types of changes in theories of change related to self-reliance

Primary User:

USAID/Ethiopia Project Managers and teams Secondary User:

USAID/Washington

● Consolidated from all DOs, Projects (including programmatic portfolio reviews), and, Activities

2022, 2024 Annual programmati c review

High

Operational (Implementation-related) Learning

0.3 How can different

approaches to design, procurement, and management of projects and activities foster or inhibit (1) multi-sectoral integration and (2) self-reliance, and (3) adaptive management?

What promising partner engagement practices emerge from these approaches, and what are the observed benefits?

(Expanded from SRLA Question 8)

To identify business practices that support key outcomes (for replication) or inhibit key outcomes (to prompt changes in approaches or processes)

Primary Users:

Mission Management Team (MMT), Program Office

(PRO)

Secondary User:

USAID/Washington

● Organizational Development (OD) Contract

● CLA Platform

● Programmatic portfolio reviews; staff survey; short interviews with set interview tool

Annual Medium

Last Update: 06/04/2020 Page 6

0.4 Internally, how does

USAID’s organizational structures and staffing, policies, guidance, technical assistance, and capacity building enable USAID/Ethiopia to foster or inhibit (1) multi-sectoral integration, (2) self-reliance, (3) adaptive management? (Expanded from SRLA Question 13)

To identify organizational structures, policies, or approaches that support key outcomes (for replication) or inhibit key outcomes (to prompt potential changes)

Primary Users:

MMT, PRO, Office of Acquisition and Assistance (OAA), Executive Office (EXO), Residence Legard Officer (RLO), Office of Financial Management (OFM) Secondary User:

USAID/Washington

● Organizational Development (OD) Contract

● CLA Platform

● Operational portfolio reviews; staff survey; short interviews with set interview tool

Annual Medium

2.1.3. Monitoring Approach

USAID/Ethiopia will take a practical approach to monitoring its strategy and programming.

Based on lessons learned under the previous CDCS and PMP, strategy monitoring will focus on quality over quantity and employ a broader range of tools across both performance and context monitoring for the CDCS overall and in the DO learning plans.

2.1.4. Monitoring Priorities

Performance Monitoring: In addition to performance monitoring at the DO, Project, and Activity level, USAID/Ethiopia will monitor changes related to systems-strengthening, self-reliance, and integration on a regular basis. While indicators and more in-depth methodologies will be developed for Projects and Activities, the CDCS level will draw out experiential knowledge of staff on systems strengthening, self-reliance, and integration through annual portfolio reviews and staff surveys, tracing back and triangulating with other evidence.

USAID/Ethiopia will also establish geography-specific monitoring within secondary cities, where programming will overlap across projects.

Last Update: 06/04/2020 Page 7

Context Monitoring: To streamline the collection and sharing of context monitoring information throughout the Mission, the Program Office will manage, with inputs from Technical Offices, a context dashboard, such as: crop yield, weather patterns or predictions, shifting conflicts, price changes, economic trends, and major legislative or policy developments.

This context monitoring system will be developed further and expanded following approval of the CDCS CLA Plan.

Enabling Environment Monitoring: To facilitate the Mission’s programmatic work, USAID/Ethiopia is committed to self-reflection and establishing an organizational environment that supports the strategy. The most significant impediment to successful multi-sectoral programming is related to organizational culture, systems and processes. As such, the Mission will invest in the how of the Mission’s work through a follow-on organizational development contract to support a more conducive environment for successful multi-sectoral programming and equipping employees with the appropriate skill sets. This activity will closely track with the objectives of organizational development. Furthermore, annual staff surveys or other “check in” mechanisms will be planned to examine what organizational approaches, structures, processes, and partner engagements support or inhibit programming in line with self reliance and adaptive management. This will provide an important feedback loop for support offices in terms of establishing process and implementing mechanisms in reflecting agency priorities and best practices.

2.1.5. Monitoring Tools

The Mission will make use of diverse monitoring tools that are relevant to necessary learning within the operating context. These tools include, but are not limited to:

● Geographic Information Systems (GIS) will help the Mission to examine the effectiveness of geographic co-location and integration. Additionally, there are numerous opportunities for ‘strategic GIS’ particularly when understanding how events in country affect development programs. Wherever possible, USAID/Ethiopia projects and activities will collect and use geo-tagged data.

● Multi-tiered monitoring at activity level will help to triangulate data across sources and increase the comprehensiveness and reliability of activity monitoring. This will complement regular activity performance monitoring, including collaborative reviews between implementing partners and their AORs/CORs or Activity Managers.

Multi-tiered monitoring may include the following.

○ Site Visits, see point below

Last Update: 06/04/2020 Page 8

○ Third-party monitoring options will be used as appropriate and necessary, both based on the type of outcomes and data and the shifting context that may limit movement for USAID staff or partners. Activities in areas deemed high risk will outline a brief monitoring contingency plan in case of limited movement or access.

○ Independent corroboration of results of activity-reported data, such as, but not limited to through stakeholder feedback or other external sources

● Site visits are an important monitoring tool, but have historically been less useful above the activity level. To help USAID/Ethiopia projects in planning, conducting, and consolidating information from site visits, the Mission will develop a standard site visit report form. This will include standardized questions and sections relevant to learning questions above the activity level for more rapid feedback and the integration and sharing of evidence.

● Big data and remote monitoring can enable USAID and its partners to access new types of evidence, or do so more effectively or efficiently. Mobile phone interviews, technology-based meetings/collaborations such as using “‘Google Meet” and other platforms, media content analysis to understand most common news sources and points of leverage and entry will be used as remote monitoring approaches.

● Data visualization is helpful for users in making sense of monitoring data and evidence.

2.2. Evaluations, Studies, and Aseessments

As outlined in USAID/Ethiopia’s evaluation plan, evaluations, studies, and assessments (ESAs) will be important learning tools. To ensure their value and reinforce strategic priorities, USAID/Ethiopia commits to four guidelines for conducting an ESAs in addition to the ADS 201 evaluation principles (ADS 201.3.5.10 ):

1. Be utilization-focused. All ESAs should have a clear intended use or uses that informs their purpose, questions, and methods. ESA users should actively participate in generating recommendations, including but not limited to joint analysis and co-creation.

2. Provide timely information. Based on the intended use, ESAs should be planned in advance and timed appropriately based on information needs.

3. Align with learning and adaptation needs. In addition to contributing to Activity- or Project-level learning, ESAs should also contribute to higher-level (project and/or

Last Update: 06/04/2020 Page 9

CDCS-level) learning questions where possible and reasonable, and/or examine how activities contribute to higher-level results.

4. Engage local stakeholders. Learning is an opportunity for engagement and collective adaptation with stakeholders external to USAID. As much as possible, appropriate external stakeholders should participate (review statements of work, participate in utilization and dissemination) or be an intended ESA user.

While many evaluations will occur at the project and activity level, the Mission may choose to undertake ESAs across projects and DOs. These topics may include: the effects of multi-sectoral integration; protections of development gains through improved disaster risk management; programming in urban areas; political economy; or cross-cutting themes such as the J2SR or gender.

3. Adaptive Management During the CDCS, USAID/Ethiopia will need to navigate a shifting development context and implement an integrated strategy. Adaptive management--building on evidence to make intentional decisions about programming--will help the Mission to improve its relevance and effectiveness and best support Ethiopia’s self-reliance and development.

As the Mission’s 11 projects serve to operationalize the integrated strategy, the majority of CLA activities within the Mission will occur through projects. Each Project LME Plan outlines how its Project team members will collaborate, learn, and adapt to best achieve the Project purposes and contribute collectively to the CDCS. To achieve adaptive management, it necessitates that each staff member internalizes CLA concepts as embodied in the Mission of Leaders charter. Development Objective leads, Project Managers, AORs/CORs, USAID support team members (especially for learning, monitoring, and evaluation), and adaptive implementing partners are all necessary to realize adaptive management with the Mission. USAID/Ethiopia will strive to identify drivers of the lack of personnel bandwidth and mission cultural dynamics that may limit the ability to adapt efficiently.

The Mission strongly believes that much of the adaptive management power is derived from ongoing engagement with partners, activities and beneficiaries in the field. As such, USAID/Ethiopia will use appropriate learning, monitoring, and evaluation tools, utilization-focused learning agendas, annual portfolio reviews (programmatic and operational) and invest in pause and reflect moments that can surface evidence from the field. Moreover, planning must also be in sync with execution. It is essential that the support offices, especially OAA and PRO, work closely with the technical teams to develop incentive structures within A&A guidelines to reinforce adaptive management behaviors. USAID/Ethiopia staff and partners

Last Update: 06/04/2020 Page 10 will document adaptations in at least annual updates and support the Mission’s ability to capture and preserve lessons learned and the rationale for changes.

To enable this, the Mission will continue to design flexible projects and mechanisms that foster rather than inhibit adaptation. At the activity level, this will include design choices around technical scopes, instrument selection, management and staffing requirements, the SAGE process, continuing use of crisis modifiers, windows of opportunity, inception periods, or scenario planning as appropriate. All USAID/Ethiopia offices will also work to streamline the process of modifying agreements.

PRO/OAA To Do: Add more flexibilities within the permissible guidelines to make our projects and activities foster rather than inhibit adaption

At the strategy level, these opportunities will examine questions such as:

● Shifting development landscape, such as changing needs or Government of Ethiopia (GOE) priorities or partner investments;

● Feedback on and evidence about current programming, with USAID/Ethiopia partners, beneficiaries, and the GOE;

● Good practices (programming or processes) to share within the Mission

● Potential gaps or efficiency gains across programming levels or with other actors; and

● Other support that would be helpful within the Mission to best realize the CDCS and adaptive management.

Throughout the CDCS period, the Mission commits to using adaptive management as one way to strengthen partnerships and Ethiopia’s Journey to Self-Reliance. In advancing true partnership, USAID/Ethiopia will endeavor to involve other actors in learning and adaptation, including decision making. Joint learning and decision making, where possible, will best share information, integrate perspectives outside of USAID, and facilitate buy-in and collective adaptation. Such substantive involvement in evidence-based adaptation will better align the Mission’s portfolio with other development partners and GOE and promote Ethiopian leadership.

4. Collaboration Throughout implementation, USAID/Ethiopia will collaborate to leverage strategic partnerships to maximize joint results. There is a great deal of power in partnerships, both across the interagency, with the GOE, other donors, and within USAID. USAID/Ethiopia will continue to collaborate with USAID/Washington to exchange technical expertise and global best practices in design and implementation. USAID/Ethiopia will also maintain close contact with partner USG agencies such as the Department of State (such as Embassy’s Political/Economic and Public

Last Update: 06/04/2020 Page 11

Affairs sections, Conflict and Stabilization Operations), Department of Defense, Center for Disease Control and other relevant U.S.Government (USG) stakeholders to capitalize on potential areas of collaboration. USAID/Ethiopia will revitalize these relationships in order to crosswalk and coordinate programming and review evolving political/conflict dynamics. This will enable USAID/Ethiopia to support Ethiopia’s self-reliance through reinforcing the roles of domestic actors and designing relevant programming.

The Mission’s integrated strategy requires intentional, strategic collaboration at multiple levels, across DOs, projects, technical teams, and activities. Internally, the Strategic Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE) is a particular venue for the Mission to collaborate in the design and implementation of shock-responsive programming. The CLA Advisory Group is another group that will guide the overall direction of CLA within the Mission. While specific collaboration mechanisms will be established through Project and Activity LME Plans based on the integration envisioned, potential approaches include: joint analytical work; joint design, theory of change workshop, work planning, pause and reflect sessions; co-location; or joint site visits by USAID/Ethiopia staff.

Externally, USAID’s commitment to supporting Ethiopia’s Journey to Self-Reliance, as well as its economic and social transformation, requires USAID to expand its local partners and build their capacity to support the GOE and citizens of Ethiopia, in addition to continuing to work closely with the Ethiopia Development Assistance Group (DAG) and other working groups with the GOE and other development actors. To support this external collaboration, USAID/Ethiopia will:

● Maintain engagement matrices by technical office to support coordinated relationship management.

● For select projects or years, hold joint project reviews with USAID-external partners at national or regional levels.

● During each portfolio review, explicitly examine the relevance of USAID’s strategic choices based on context changes and new evidence, with input from development partners and to ensure USAID’s work is complementary.

● Increase engagement of staff with cross-cutting roles (Mission Economist, Resilience Research and Learning Advisor, Gender Advisor, Private Sector Engagement lead, Conflict Mitigation and Peacebuilding, Youth Development) with all projects support integration across programming

● Invest in co-creation and co-design when it adds value, including in laying the foundation for ongoing collaboration in implementation and learning

● Increase focus on consulting and amplifying the feedback of beneficiaries to ensure relevant and responsive programming

● Support the New Partnership Initiative (NPI)

● Resource collaboration tasks through support or other contracts given staff bandwidth

Last Update: 06/04/2020 Page 12 https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Hegwa_M-eobiFNSSg_LVIXIfogl-HVKkImhoGdhfWyY/edit?usp=sharing https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1yDpSZVK-_0q-U5W6bPID0ePCtbBPK7JhyJR4Y6AnYms/edit#gid=952829934

5. DO 1: Disaster Risk Management Strengthened

Ethiopia is vulnerable to frequent and severe shocks that undermine the country’s J2SR. Year after year GOE launches billion dollar humanitarian appeals, to which USAID contributes between $200-$500 million a year. Government and community capacity to manage shocks is limited, and successive humanitarian crises erode development gains.

To reduce the impact of shocks and reliance on external humanitarian assistance, DO1 will strengthen Ethiopia’s disaster risk management (DRM) capacity by empowering communities to mobilize, mitigate, and respond to shocks, enhancing resilience and reducing humanitarian needs. It will improve institutional risk management capacity to better predict, prepare for, and respond to shocks, enabling earlier and more effective emergency response. It will further reinforce Ethiopian capacity and commitment to shift from reactive emergency relief to emergency preparedness, contingency planning, and disaster risk reduction. This will increase proactive and effective GOE responses (Government Capacity: Government Effectiveness) and decrease reliance on external assistance over the long-term. USAID will balance high-level system strengthening and coordination with local-level government and community (Civil Society Capacity) early warning systems to initiate early action to pre-empt the need for large-scale responses. USAID will build on its experience in utilizing crisis modifiers to protect development gains by designing shock-responsive activities with flexible options to respond to emergencies. The Mission will also generate evidence on best practices to support the GOE’s ability to flex its own resources and protect its reform agenda.

While USAID/Ethiopia and its partners have long been collaborating, learning and adapting in various forms, given the current increasing complexity, unpredictability and rapidly changing context, there is an increasing need for strategic collaboration, intentional learning and nimble adaptation so that programming remains relevant and effective. The CLA model emphasizes joint monitoring and learning through periodic reflection exercises that seek to generate feedback to enable iterative adaptation of programmatic direction. The CLA approach will serve as a DO support vehicle through which DO1 will pursue its development objectives within the complicated and shifting development context of the humanitarian-development nexus. In this regard, the DO team shall use every opportunity to collaborate, learn, and adapt so that it becomes part of the routine of implementation; proactively creating time for USAID and partners staff to learn and reflect; and ensuring that these events are purposeful, international, systematic and resourced. Through CLA tools, DO1 expects to collaborate and learn with and from others about key dynamics and evolving political, social, economic, demographic and development environments and how USAID can best bend, adapt and influence humanitarian

Last Update: 06/04/2020 Page 13 and development programming. This calls for a well functioning system where the DO continuously tests original assumptions to learn from success and failures and make evidence-based decisions to adapt.

The rest of the sections focus on the collaboration, learning agenda, adaptive management and enabling environment for collaboration, learning and adapting.

5.1. Learning Agenda

The DO1 development hypothesis posits: IF communities and citizens are empowered to mobilize and act, institutional risk management capacity is strengthened, and emergency response is more effective, so that sufficient resources are mobilized and utilized effectively, logistics and commodity management capacity is in place, and evidence-based decision making is supported, THEN disaster risk management will be strengthened, the GOE will better manage crises, the impact of shocks will be reduced and Ethiopia’s self-reliance will grow.

Utilization-focused learning is a core priority for DO1 and critical to its success. The learning agenda prioritizes questions that will inform implementation and future programming decisions, helping USAID better understand how disaster risk management contributes to development, and which disaster risk management interventions leverage the greatest impact. The DO1 learning questions aim to address knowledge gaps in disaster risk management and inform adaptive implementation of the DO1 projects and activities. They are linked to the SRLA with the intent to further the DO1 team’s understanding of commitment and capacity. Below in section 5.1.1 are the prioritized learning questions, which will still be reviewed over the course of the CDCS.

5.1.1. Learning Questions

The utilization focused DO1 learning agenda and has been developed through an iterative process. This link summarizes the DO1 and DO2 learning agenda, with proposed gold standard, middle ground and bare minimum approaches for each question. From this broad agenda the DO1 team has prioritized the three questions in the below table, with other questions incorporated at the project and activity level as outlined in the Strengthening Disaster Risk Management System Institution (SDRMSI) and Effective Emergency Repose (EER) project LME plans.

The DO1 team intends to review and refine the learning agenda every four months as part of the triennial CLA review, using the use case canvases and question action plans as resources to guide the work.

Last Update: 06/04/2020 Page 14 https://docs.google.com/document/d/1gO2Wr4dmjySr8z7VlOX5VH85A9MWqhkRJhv4qAx04OE/edit#heading=h.erelogkd99up

Learning Question Intended user/use Learning Activity

Timeline Priority

To what extent have USAID’s interventions to strengthen disaster risk management reduced the risk and impact of disasters?

Which modality (empowering communities, strengthening institutional risk management, improving the effectiveness of humanitarian response) is most effective (and most effective for vulnerable and marginalized populations), why and how?

USAID/Ethiopia Project 1 Team: Data-driven decision making and adaptations of Project 1 activities.

USAID/Ethiopia Mission:

Evidenced resourcing decisions on DRM portfolio.

USAID/Washington:

Evidenced resourcing and programmatic decisions/guidance on DRM work; Evidence for

SRLA.

GOE: Evidenced support and application of proven DRM approaches and requests to other donors.

Other Development Actors: Enhanced coordination and streamlined DRM efforts consolidated around best practice and evidence.

IPs: Adaptive management of current activities;

Improved implementation of future activities based on evidence best practice.

(Use case canvas)

This question will be used as a project management tool, guiding Project 1’s CLA efforts and conversations, as well as integrated into each activities’ LME plan, and utilize a meta-evaluation to consolidate and review findings at period (Question action plan).

End of the current

CDCS

TBD

What are the dependencies and inter-relations between communities and institutions in improving DRM in the Ethiopia context? How

USAID/Ethiopia DO1 and DO2: Programming will be adapted based on answers to this question.

Integration between DO1 and DO2 will be strengthened, adapted, and

This question will be answered through consolidation and analysis of contributing, individual

Througho ut the

CDCS

period

TBD

Last Update: 06/04/2020 Page 15 https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rciO9LHJO6uigibYguFgLp5O0cRsw4iYINNnRRgtGP8/edit https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rciO9LHJO6uigibYguFgLp5O0cRsw4iYINNnRRgtGP8/edit https://drive.google.com/open?id=1n2ZVAeGNKtriwzaGEVG-F-trveR7gxaXIyg_V4VdRbg https://drive.google.com/open?id=1rGpHTWokptzya_ufmR38167X1yyyyPQrbkfE5lL-720 https://drive.google.com/open?id=1rGpHTWokptzya_ufmR38167X1yyyyPQrbkfE5lL-720 does this relationship impact the effectiveness and efficiency of DRM?

What is the sequential nature of capacities development for these different stakeholder groups to improve DRM in Ethiopia?

refined based on answers to this question.

USAID/Washington:

Evidence will be shared with the SRLA question team and disseminated/leveraged to other relevant Agency actors as appropriate.

GOE: Learnings and evidence may be used to strengthen institution-community relationships, interactions, and participatory and inclusive service provision related to EER, DRM, Resilience, and beyond.

Other Development Actors: Better evidence to use for their own interventions and evidence in convos with GOE.

Having a more coordinated approach and bringing everyone on board with the same agenda, layering, and structuring of the interventions so work at the community level and institutions level is mutually reinforcing.

IPs: Learn how to better interact and build relationships between communities and GOE institutions. Implement proven interventions and community-institution coordination pathways based on evidence and learnings.

activity-level LME efforts guided by activity-level sub-questions (mapped here), as well as through additional data collection, feedback loops, and adaptation and integration facilitation provided by the LME coordinating mechanism.

(Question action plan)

Last Update: 06/04/2020 Page 16 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1nU5gB6aGSQ9YiufvbvPy1c56xVmwdCtL6iCEi7JUFOg/edit?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/open?id=1wu7VPD6QzsMbAiDlxp0vrOGz-hyF7BLzxvcT9ZxL7XM https://drive.google.com/open?id=1wu7VPD6QzsMbAiDlxp0vrOGz-hyF7BLzxvcT9ZxL7XM

(Use case canvas)

How will we know if a pivoted emergency response activity is (not) protecting development gains and building self reliance?

USAID/Ethiopia DO1:

Refinement of data processes associated with piloting Composite of Post-event Wellbeing (COPEWELL) indicator on tracking resilience and development gains (Year 1-3). Integration of learnings and programmatic adaptations in DO1 and DO2 activities as relevant (Year 4-5).

Year 4-5:

USAID/Ethiopia: Evidenced resourcing decisions and prioritization of EER/DRM/Humanitarian Assistance (HA)/Resilience portfolios USAID/Washington:

Evidenced resourcing decisions and prioritization of EER/DRM/HA/Resilience portfolios Agency-wide GOE: Evidenced resourcing decisions and prioritization of

EER/DRM/HA

Other Development Actors: Evidenced resourcing decisions and prioritization of EER/DRM/HA. Improved

EER/DRM/HA

coordination. Streamlined, coordinated, and appropriately layered/sequenced

EER/DRM/HA

interventions.

This question will be answered through intentional piloting of the

COPEWELL

resilience indicator at the activity level (may also be used on other levels for learnings beyond answering this question). Years 1-3 will involve establishing a time sequence and refining the data processes. Years 4-5 there should be sufficient data to start using evidence and making adaptations to programming based on learnings.

Additional contributing data sources for the Pause & Reflect may include operational, process, and performance monitoring of the SAGE initiative, as well as through

Througho ut the

CDCS

period

TBD

Last Update: 06/04/2020 Page 17 https://drive.google.com/open?id=1fHoNDi_PAomm04TIxp3-OfSXsVvLXGiDLj_eJUtwTx4

IPs: Adaptive management of current activities;

Improved implementation of future activities based on evidence best practice.

Increased agility to respond to emergencies and pivot development activities accordingly.

(Use case canvas) additional monitoring and learning requirements/con tributions from IPs with approved Crisis Modifier (CM) funding, and through After Action Reviews of pivots of development activities under SAGE review.

(Question action plan)

5.1.2. Monitoring for Adapting and Learning

Performance monitoring: The DO1 team will track progress, report results and adapt throughout CDCS implementation. Project and activity level monitoring will feed directly into DO level efforts. Regular site visits will be conducted by USAID staff as part of project and activity oversight and management, with coordination by the project managers and joint field visits as appropriate. Besides compliance with agency standards, these visits will provide utilization-focused learning that can be applied to both project management and future designs.

The DO1 team may use third-party monitoring where appropriate in non-permissive environments and intends to explore innovative approaches such as data collection and reporting through mobile phones and leveraging big data. Key stakeholder interviews will be conducted at regular intervals to provide additional qualitative insight. The DO1 team will also use relevant data collected from activities implemented under other DOs, notably DO2 and the SpO. In an effort to secure greater development partner coordination, where appropriate, the monitoring approach will draw upon broader efforts through the disaster risk management development partners group and the Ethiopia humanitarian country team (EHCT).

The DO1 team intends to pilot a DO-level performance indicator to measure protection of development gains, building on the COPEWELL resilience measure being developed by Jon Link at Johns Hopkins University. Such an indicator would be designed to normalize different programmatic outputs as a percentage of target achieved on the y axis, which would

Last Update: 06/04/2020 Page 18 https://docs.google.com/document/d/1czcBJDDO360A5NPpHl85s7APWDhap9F77vgLaf62QO0/edit?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/open?id=1czcBJDDO360A5NPpHl85s7APWDhap9F77vgLaf62QO0 https://drive.google.com/open?id=1czcBJDDO360A5NPpHl85s7APWDhap9F77vgLaf62QO0 conceivably allow for it to be used across different sectors and/or levels within a given system (community, organizational, institutional). While there is no Agency policy on the piloting of an indicator, the team consulted with RFS and PPL for guidance. Key considerations include the trade-offs in phasing out indicators and acknowledging that it will take a number of years to amass the underlying time-series data before it can be used to measure programmatic contribution, and so establishing pause and reflect moments about the data, what it can tell the team and how the team might want to adjust data collection, analysis and interpretation accordingly. The DO1 team intends to source support for this effort through Washington-or-Mission-based CLA Platform or any other feasible body that has the advanced measurement and analysis capabilities required. The DO1 team will develop a statement of work (SOW) in consultation with the Lab, Bureau for Policy, Planning and Learning (PPL) and Bureau for Resilience and Food Security (RFS) by the end of July 2020.

Performance monitoring indicators are included in Annex III and will be refined through ongoing work on the project and activity level LME Plans. Although sub-IR indicators will not be included here, the DO1 team will make sure that they are included in the project LME plans as linked here.

Context monitoring: The DO1 team will monitor the critical assumptions and potential risks such as climate, conflict and health shocks; GOE’s political will to acknowledge and respond to disasters, and equitable targeting and delivery of assistance in case of crisis and will inform ongoing conflict sensitivity of projects and activities enabling adjustments as appropriate. The DO1 team will use GOE’s Early Warning System (EWS), Famine and Early Warning Systems Network (FEWSNET), IPs reporting, Emergency Task Force (ETF), SAGE, Humanitarian and Resilience Donor Working Group (HRDG), Ethiopian Public Health Institute (EPHI) and Disaster Risk Management Technical working Group (DRMTWG) as some of the sources for context monitoring. The SAGE meeting provides a regular platform for the sharing of critical information to key mission stakeholders, and the regular ETF meeting provides an information sharing platform for external stakeholders. The team revisits its context monitoring approaches and sources at regular intervals as part of the regular CLA pause and reflect moments, with updates made as appropriate.

Process monitoring: The SAGE will also serve as a platform to review the efficiency and effectiveness of internal USAID operations and share evidence and lessons learned with internal and external bodies to allow for continued adaptation of the process.

Illustrative process monitoring indicators for how USAID/Ethiopia intends to deliver emergency response activities when necessary, appear in the table below.

Last Update: 06/04/2020 Page 19 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1iCQ261rUHbRSt74ZCbxkmoA5ZV3KyYfTG3b0aBUA-kA/edit#gid=1722915833 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1iCQ261rUHbRSt74ZCbxkmoA5ZV3KyYfTG3b0aBUA-kA/edit#gid=1722915833

Illustrative Process Monitoring Indicators

Intended Use

#/% of instances IPs request CM (disaggregate by outcome:

approved, denied, sent back for revision)

● Understand demand for CM activities — leverage this demand signal to build in new/better pre-approved Contingency Plans to development awards that may have to respond to predictable shocks

● Improve templates for CM requests and job-aids for USAID staff to reduce the instances of CM requests that require revision

Time from first (informal) CM request to approval

● Identify and make process improvements in SAGE meetings to better support moving a CM request to approval in a timely manner

Time from formal CM request to approval

● Identify and make process improvements in SAGE review process to better support moving a CM request to approval in a timely manner

#/% of instances in which AOR/OAA can authorize interim response (up to $ threshold) before a full SOW/budget is required

● Examine during P&R to identify whether the dollar thresholds are a) appropriate, and b) allowing for faster approvals and action when shocks require a rapid response

#/% of CM financial resources used (by underspent/spent/requested more; sector; effect of shock)

● Understand the need for flexible funds to respond to shocks; potentially adapt allocations in new or existing awards to reflect appropriate fund allocations (either total $ or % of award) for different types of interventions and/or shocks

Project level records shall be kept in the USAID portfolio performance management system called Development Information Solution (DIS). Project managers will use DIS as the tool to capture all indicators contributing to the measurement of the project level results and ensure that this effort happens consistently and often so that data aggregation gives an accurate picture.

Last Update: 06/04/2020 Page 20

5.1.3. Evaluation for Adapting and Learning

Evaluations will be an important source of learning for the DO 1 team and will assess both the extent to which the projects are achieving their high-level results and contributing to progress toward the development objective, and the result and sustainability of the project interventions.

The DO1 team intends to pursue a project level developmental evaluation (DE) for the SDRMSI project, which will complement and…