SAS 1200 Disaster Management, including Relief, Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Activities

Social Audit Standard (SAS) 1200
Disaster Management, including Relief, Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Activities
(SAS 1200 should be read in conjunction with the “Preface to the Social Audit Standards” and “Framework
for the Social Audit Standards”, issued by the ICAI)

SECTION I – INTRODUCTION

Objective and Scope

1.10 This Social Audit Standard relates to the thematic area of “Disaster Management including relief, rehabilitation and reconstruction activities”. The Standard aims to provide the Social Auditor with the necessary guidance about independent impact assessment engagement of Social Enterprises engaged in disaster management including relief, rehabilitation and reconstruction activities and the audit steps and procedures that should be applied while conducting the Social Impact Assessment. The Standard sets out the minimum requirements to be followed while conducting impact assessment. Laws or Regulations may establish additional requirements which should be followed as applicable.

SECTION II – PROCESS OF SOCIAL AUDIT

Data Collection

1.20 The stakeholders that may be approached for obtaining data include:

> Directly Affected People e.g., children, women, men, people with special needs

> Local bodies including Panchayati Raj Institutions

> Community Leaders

> Government Officials/Concerned departments

> Non-Government Organizations (NGOs) personnel working in the disaster affected areas

> Volunteers

> Key program officials of the reporting entity

The overall activity of conducting a survey and collecting sample data should be reviewed in terms of the following factors to assess relevance and reliability:

> designed by an in-house team or external specialized agency

> conducted by an in-house team or external specialized agency

> coverage: number of villages/districts/states total distance (kms) covered, clusters, number of families,

> response speed and quality

Desk Review

1.30 The Social Auditor should conduct a desk review of existing documents to gain further insight into the evaluation procedure and impact assessment. Such documents, about Disaster Management, including Relief activities, Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Activities, may include the following:

i. General (Indicative):

• Type of disaster
• Disaster impact assessment reports
• Prioritisation of and classification of pre and post disaster rehabilitation activities and overall plan Government Initiative on Disaster management and Relief activities (state/central as applicable) and other organizations working on Disaster management & Rehabilitation
• National Policy on Disaster Management 2009
• National Disaster Management Plan
• Assessment reports of similar disaster management programme of other organizations

ii. Programme Specific (Indicative):

• Implementation Plan, if available
• Disaster related aids
• Relief and Response Initiatives/Activities
• Any Rapid Assessment/Baseline Report, if available
• Roles, responsibilities and experience of staff in the organizations responsible for handling disaster related aid
• Programme Evaluation Reports
  Inspection & Personal Interviews

1.40 Besides desk review, the Social Auditor should also consider conducting physical inspection and personal interviews to get first hand assessment of impact.

Evaluation Questions

1.50 The Social Auditor may design questionnaires for Key Informants Interview, In-depth interviews, and Focused Group Discussions to assess the responses received from various stakeholders and to understand what has changed. The questionnaires may be designed in such a manner that would help the Social Auditor in forming his views on the following aspects:

Goals Attainment:

• What types of activities were carried out for disaster management programme?
• Were the activities planned for disaster victims able to cater their needs?
• Did the affected population receive the support it needed as it was envisaged? Process:
• What was the response strategy followed?
• Were procedures prepared adequately in advance and followed during the post-disaster period?
• Was any process followed for conducting damage and loss assessment in the affected area? Was there any effective liaison with concerned government departments and the relief organizations?
• What were the selection criteria for implementing partners? (presence, language, experience in carrying out similar projects, coverage etc.)

Training:

• Whether trainings were conducted for outreach workers and volunteers in on how to respond to such emergency situations during disaster?
• Whether trainings were conducted for health workers on sanitation, first aid, disposal of wastes, food sanitation, medical care etc., if applicable?

Quality:

• Was the quality of the relief and rehabilitation, reconstruction activities (food, medical facilities, shelter etc.) acceptable to beneficiaries and in line with state/ national guidelines, if any?
• Whether any specific criteria was followed for relief material distribution (age, disability etc.)? Challenges:
• What were the constraints or challenges faced during the relief and rehabilitation activities?

Key Metrics for Evaluation of Project/ Program

1.60 The Social Auditor should review the project/ program documents to formulate the evaluation criteria for assessing impact. Such key metrics may be collated from base-line/ rapid assessment (in case of emergency support programmes), mid-line (monthly/quarterly if applicable) and end-line assessment (if available), respectively at the beginning, middle and end of the reporting period/project/program to effectively understand and evaluate the impact.

The evaluation of the project/ program information would facilitate the Social Auditor to assess:

• What would have happened in the absence of the intervention?
• How much has the project contributed to the changes that are evidenced?
• Is there any unintended negative impact that happened due to the intervention?

Such information, about Disaster management, relief and rehabilitation, may include the following points in respect of the beneficiaries covered under the survey:

• Composition
  • Demography, area, disaster prone communities, social background of the affected community-e.g., age wise distribution, distribution based on disability, gender, people with comorbidities, social category wise distribution
  • Volunteers from the fields
  • Changes in socio-economic factors – acceptance in the village/society, economic condition, health condition including mental health, confidence level, livelihood options, income generation activities
• Pre-disaster Measures
  • Preparedness to deal with any disaster
  • Plan for prompt responses to any disaster, including assessing the severity of situation
  • Planning for protective measures such as evacuation of people to safe place, education of public regarding disasters especially in areas subject to natural disasters
  • Timely warning and alerts to be issued within the disaster-prone areas
  • Helpline numbers were shared with the community people
• Post-Disaster Measures
  • Rapid Assessment of Disaster location and situation
  • Immediate mobilization of personnel and equipment
  • Search and rescue operations carried out
  • Beneficiary listing and validation
  • Continued rescue and care of victims with referrals to hospital as needed
  • Restoration of communications, water services, waste disposals etc.
  • Inspection, identification, and evaluation of sanitation problems
  • Relief activities
  • Provision of Shelter
  • Food Services
  • Water Supply
  • Clothing
  • Medical Care, Public Health, Environmental Control and Welfare Services
  • Emergency repairs
• Rehabilitation
  • Status of livelihood of the affected people
    • Provisions of livelihood for affected people (temporary/permanent, gender based)
    • Distribution of equipment to support their livelihood
    • Restoration of electricity supply
    • Family Services including information and welfare inquiries
    • Medical facilities through mobile clinics and volunteers
    • Distribution of educational and play materials
    • Temporary schools/ school continuation for children
    • Awareness generation regarding menstrual health, hygiene, and wash in affected areas
    • Counselling services to the affected population requiring psychological support
    • Capacity building of communities to prepare and respond to disasters
• Reconstruction
  • Shops/ houses provided to the victims had adequate space
  • Relocations were made in view of the educational needs especially girls
  • Reconstruction of schools and Anganwadi centers
  • Reconstruction of health care facilities
  • Reconstruction of transport infrastructure such roads, railway line etc.
• Skill development and opportunities creation
  • Skill development programs conducted
  • Linking the skilled workforce to market
  • The projects undertaken to create opportunities to earn sustainable livelihood
• Other Factors
  • Community based early warning system
  • Provision of supplies to community centres
  • Development of knowledge products

Assessment of Evaluation Criteria (Illustrative Key Performance Indicators)

1.70 The Social Auditor should identify the quantitative and qualitative evaluation criteria against which the impact has to be assessed.

Such criteria for Disaster Management, Including Relief, Rehabilitation, and Reconstruction Activities may broadly include any of the following aspects:

SECTION III – ASSESSMENT OF CHALLENGES AND LIMITATIONS

Challenges/Areas for improvement

1.80 The Social Auditor should identify the challenges faced by the stakeholders and the areas for improvement based on the suggestions and feedback received from them, which might influence the impact assessment. Some of the examples of commonly faced issues about disaster management, including relief & rehabilitation and reconstruction activities may include the following:

• Regulations set forth by Government for Disaster Management and Relief activities are not complied
• Insufficient data / information available to plan appropriately
• Slow evacuation process due to logistical challenges
• Relief material was not provided on time
• Quality of response was not up to the mark
• Sufficiency of the Response
• Identification of affected population
• Lack of coordination and collaboration with other implementing organizations (government departments, NGOs etc.)

Any significant issues observed during the assessment, that may influence the user of the Impact Assessment in decision making, should be highlighted by the Social Auditor in the Social Audit report.

Limitations of the assessment

1.90 The Social Auditor should identify the inherent limitations of the evaluation process which might influence the impact assessment. Some of the examples for Disaster Management, including Relief, Rehabilitation & Reconstruction Activities may include the following:

• Cases of no-response in case the questionnaire is not administered in person

Social Audit Standards (SAS) 1200

• Some of the questions being skipped by the respondents and remaining unanswered
• Non-traceability of beneficiaries
• Lack of pre-disaster information about people, communities, livelihood etc.
• Limited documentation maintained for relief provided after disaster

Any significant limitation observed during the assessment, that may influence the user of the Impact Assessment in decision making, should be highlighted by the Social Auditor in the Social Audit report.

SECTION IV – APPENDIX

Taxonomic classification of areas and sub-areas for social objectives

(relating to Disaster Management, including Relief, Rehabilitation & Reconstruction Activities)

*****

To Read Related post Social Audit Standard