J.7_-_Notes_from_July_11_Meeting_on_Draft_SOW_with_Beneficiaries.pdf

NOTES FROM MEETING FOR FEEDBACK FROM BENEFICIARIES (GOVERNMENT AND

REGIONAL COUNTERPARTS) ON THE RESILIENCE LEARNING PROJECT DRAFT

STATEMENT OF WORK

Norfolk Hotel, Nairobi, July 11, 2013

Opening remarks were made by Stephen Gudz of USAID/East Africa, who introduced the draft statement of work (SOW), which was also posted on FedBizOpps.gov for comment between July 3-17, 2013. He explained that it is one component of a broader response to the 2010-11 drought. Peter Ewell presented a summary of the draft SOW.

The following comments were made in the discussion:

The proposed five-year time frame is good, as it is sufficient to pull together assessments of impact and lessons learned.

The project embraces healthy and functional partnerships that will support existing institutions and programs.

The project is taking a multidimensional approach, building resilience by leveraging ongoing support for humanitarian needs to build agricultural development investments.

It was recommended that a bottom-up approach would be more effective than a top-down one;

the project should start from the national focal points and then expand to a regional perspective.

It is important to strengthen the links between institutions— Kenya’s National Drought Management Authority (NDMA) is linked with IGAD, but would appreciate stronger linkages with national organizations in other countries.

Sustainability should be a focus for the Resilience Learning Project from the beginning, building working relationships with the national and regional institutions that will carry forward after the end of the project.

Institutions and policies are crucial in determining the impact of innovations and technologies, so the project should include analysis of policies and the roles of institutions at all levels.

Political resilience should be included as a topic.

The project should include issues of adaptation to the broader effects of climate change, beyond the core issue of recurrent droughts.

The political devolution process in Kenya provides a good case study how to effectively engage with all levels of government (local, county, national, and regional).

The project should engage with the World Bank and improve linkages with universities and institutions of higher learning.

Scaling up is a big challenge. The best thing to do is build a consensus on the best practices. The project needs to define what constitutes a good practice and how it will influence or undermine resilience. There is also an obligation to analyze how activities impact on richer and poorer people.

The project should evaluate the services available to communities in the ASAL regions, many of which are not adequately supported by government and other organizations.

There should be a focus on youth.

The project should focus on the existing medium Term Plans and Country Programming Papers, and on how they are implemented.

Knowledge management programs should look closely at how information and knowledge can be made widely available in communities with high rates of illiteracy.

Links should be strengthened with the national agricultural research institutes (NARIs), and the extension services.

There is an opportunity to bring together the currently scattered resilience programs.

The project should put an emphasis on collecting and organizing existing information rather than on bringing in new partners to collect new information.

There are still many gaps to be filled: land tenure and use, planning, etc.

Work with existing thematic groups to scale up the project’s =scope and effectiveness.

Invest in long-term data collection in the drylands. The data sets in existence are not sufficient for analysis that will be used by policy makers in decision making.

There needs to be more focus on coping with the effects of climate change. Of concern to many organizations are issues related to food, water, and resource security.

There is a need for better coordination among multiple organizations and government plans by identifying strategic entry points for collaboration.

The private sector must be brought in for sustainability.

The draft needs more work on a common narrative of what resilience is, and include a clear distinction between knowledge and information. The better use of existing knowledge should be promoted and enhanced.

Look at outcome mapping as a methodology. There is a need for better documentation of what is happening in different types of communities

The project should clearly identify its target audiences: communities, institutions and programs, and governments.

There is a need to improve monitoring and measurement systems, to document clearly when resilience has been attained.

The project needs to strengthen cross-border and regional activities; we should embrace the fact that as a regional project it will focus on issues that transcend man-made borders and boundaries.

The project should document different perceptions on key issues, especially the role of livestock in the pastoral areas.

Other factors that have influence on resilience need to be addressed, e.g. infrastructure, politics, etc.

The project should embrace a landscape approach and recognize the importance of interactions between eco-systems.

Harmonization and coordination needs to be a focus, to build synergies and maintain effective communication.

Participants were also reminded that they had the opportunity to respond via email per the email address provided on FedBizOpps.gov.