Toolkit For Measuring Community Disaster Resilience: Guidance Manual Prepared by GOAL May 2015

TOOLKIT FOR MEASURING
COMMUNITY DISASTER RESILIENCE
GUIDANCE MANUAL
Prepared by GOAL
May 2015
Credits
GOAL would especially like to acknowledge the significant contribution of the European
Community Humanitarian Office to the development of this toolkit. This publication
was completed under the project “Community Based Disaster Preparedness and
Institutional Strengthening to Increase Resilience in the Homogenous Cross Border
Region of La Moskitia Honduras and Nicaragua”, financed by the European Community
Humanitarian Office, within in the framework of the DipECHO IX Action Plan in Central
America.

Table of Contents
ABBREVIATIONS & ACRONYMS 2
A. INTRODUCTION 3
B. BACKGROUND TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS TOOLKIT 3
C. DEFINITION OF RESILIENCE 4
D. THE COMMUNITY RESILIENCE MEASUREMENT TOOLKIT 5
D.1. SUMMARY OF THE TOOLKIT 5
D.2. RESILIENCE COMPONENTS 8
D.3. RATIONALE AND CLARIFICATIONS ON KEY QUESTIONS (SURVEY PART B) 10
E. APPLYING THE TOOLKIT IN THE FIELD 15
E.1. SCOPE OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE 15
E.2.1 PROFILE OF THE TECHNICAL FIELD STAFF 15
E.2.2 DATA COLLECTION 16
E.3.1. SURVEY PART A: GENERAL CONTEXT 17
E.3.2. SURVEY PART B: RESILIENCE CHARACTERISTICS ASSESSMENT 17
E.3.3. METHODS FOR DATA COLLECTION 18
ANNEX 1: KEY CONCEPTS 19
ANNEX 2: GLOSSARY 21
ANNEX 3: RESILIENCE QUESTIONNAIRE 25
BIBLIOGRAPHY 59
Abbreviations & Acronyms
DFID: Department for International Development of the UK
DipECHO: Disaster Preparedness Programme of European Community Humanitarian Office

(ECHO)
DRR: Disaster Risk Reduction
DRM: Disaster Risk Management
FAO: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
GOAL: International Humanitarian Agency (Ireland)
NGO: Non-Governmental Organization
UNEP: United Nations Environment Programme
MEAL: Monitoring, Evaluation, Accountability and Learning
KAPB: Knowledge, Attitudes, Practices and Behaviours
VCA: Vulnerability and Capacity Assessment
FGD: Focus Group Discussions
PLHIV: People Living with HIV and AIDS
LQAS: Lot Quality Assurance Sampling
MOV: Means of Verification
2 GUIDANCE MANUAL May 2015

A. Introduction
Major hazards such as hurricanes, earthquakes, volcano eruptions, droughts, and landslides, among others, constantly
threaten the lives and livelihoods of the most vulnerable populations across the world. In the context of accelerated
climate change and population growth, the current trend of frequent major disasters is expected to increase in the
foreseeable future. To mitigate this trend, increased Disaster Resilience1 is essential to reduce the potential impact of
humanitarian crises on the poorest communities. Who are disproportionately affected by these disasters.
This Toolkit for Measuring Community Disaster Resilience has been developed as a concise and user-friendly tool
to measure the level of disaster resilience at community level through the assessment of a broad range of resilience
components. These components span five key thematic areas, namely Governance, Risk Assessment, Knowledge and
Education, Risk Management and Vulnerability Reduction and Preparedness.
This toolkit builds on the work on disaster resilience by the Inter-Institutional Group, coordinated by the UK
Department for International Development (DFID), documented in the publication “Characteristics of Disaster Resilient
Communities”.2 The toolkit’s development was also informed by consultations with stakeholders at policy and technical
level, as well as validation through extensive field-testing in rural indigenous communities in the La Moskitia region of
Honduras; urban neighbourhoods in landslide and flood risk zones in Tegucigalpa, Honduras and Port-au-Prince, Haiti;
and in rural flood and drought prone areas in Malawi and Ethiopia.
It is recommended that this toolkit be applied as part of a wider framework of stakeholder consultations and risk
assessments to obtain the fullest understanding possible of all the context specific and complex aspects of disaster
resilience at community level.
GOAL invites feedback from users of this toolkit so that it can be continually updated and improved. Please send your
comments to the following address: [email protected].
B. Background to the development of this toolkit

GOAL is an international humanitarian organisation, founded in Ireland in 1977, dedicated to alleviating the suffering of
the poorest and most vulnerable communities across the developing world. GOAL has responded to the majority of
the major disasters which have occurred over the last 38 years and has contributed some €790 million in humanitarian
and development programs in more than 50 countries):
In 2006 GOAL identified the need to measure disaster resilience at community level, and in 2007 GOAL completed
a comprehensive KAPB survey in its operational area in La Moskitia, Honduras to gain a better understanding of the
factors influencing communities’ disaster resilience. In 2010, GOAL developed a survey toolkit for assessing disaster
resilience, which incorporated over 210 questions on a variety of aspects relating to disaster resilience and including
specific quantifiable disaster resilience characteristics, based on the work by John Twigg.3 Over 2010 and 2011, GOAL
applied this tool in its operational area in La Moskitia and it proved very effective in measuring progress in strengthening
disaster resilience, with results being consistent with other monitoring and evaluation processes, e.g. simulation drills
and programme evaluations, among others.
1
For the purposes of this toolkit Disaster Resilience is defined as “The ability of communities and households to anticipate and adapt to risks and to absorb, respond and recover from shocks and stresses in a timely and effective
manner without compromising their long term prospects.”
2
Twigg, John. Characteristics of a Disaster-resilient Community – A Guidance Note. Version 1, 2007 and Version 2, 2009.
3
“Characteristics of a Disaster-resilient Community – A Guidance Note”, in both of its versions, 2007 & 2009 was identified as the key reference material for the development of this guideline.
Toolkit For Measuring Community Disaster Resilience 3

In 2011, GOAL initiated large scale Resilience and DRR programming as part of the ECRP DISCOVER consortium funded
by DFID in Nsanje, Malawi. Within this programme GOAL also utilized survey tools to measure resilience at community
level. Simultaneously GOAL initiated programmes under the second and third DipECHO Action Plans in Africa. The
same year GOAL began implementation of the Irish Aid Programme fund, a multi-annual, integrated programme which
incorporates resilient livelihoods programming.
In 2013-2014 GOAL carried out a comprehensive revision and validation of its work on measuring disaster resilience at
community level in Honduras, Haiti, Malawi and Ethiopia, resulting in the current version of this toolkit focusing on 30
key components of resilience at community level.
During its development a draft version of the toolkit was shared with disaster risk management specialists, including
officials from national risk management systems, UN agencies, ECHO field office in Central America, non-government
organizations among others; their valuable feedback was incorporated into the final version of this toolkit.
C. Definition of resilience
GOAL understands Resilience as the ability of communities and households to anticipate and adapt to risks and
to absorb, respond and recover from shocks and stresses in a timely and effective manner without compromising
their long term prospects. In 2013 GOAL produced a document entitled ‘GOAL and Resilience: a Guidance Note’
which highlights the emergence of resilience programming as a response to the increased frequency and impact of
humanitarian crises affecting disproportionately the world’s poorest and most vulnerable populations.’ This document
notes the unique opportunity resilience presents to address the root causes of vulnerability which exacerbate the
impact of hazards. Resilience building can facilitate a transition from humanitarian response interventions to longer
term development programming.
The measurement of community resilience using this toolkit can be interpreted in two ways. The toolkit can be used to
give an indicative percentage of resilience based on the assessment of the key components of resilience. Alternatively,
the toolkit can be used to determine levels of resilience as shown in Table 1 below:
% LEVEL CATEGORY DESCRIPTION

Little awareness of the issue(s) or motivation to address them. Actions limited
0-20 1 Minimal Resilience
to crisis response.
Awareness of the issue(s) and willingness to address them. Capacity to act
21-40 2 Low Resilience (knowledge and skills, human, material and other resources) remains limited.
Interventions tend to be one-off, piecemeal and short-term.
Development and implementation of solutions. Capacity to act is improved
41-60 3 Medium Resilience
and substantial. Interventions are more numerous and long-term.
Coherence and integration. Interventions are extensive, covering all main as-
61-80 4 Resilient
pects of the problem, and they are linked within a coherent long-term strategy.
A ‘culture of safety’ exists among all stakeholders, where DRR is embedded in all
81-100 5 High Resilience
relevant policy, planning, practice, attitudes and behaviour.

D. The community resilience measurement toolkit
D.1 SUMMARY OF THE TOOLKIT
This Toolkit for Measuring Community Disaster Resilience is comprised of:
1. The Survey Questionnaire for Community Disaster Resilience, which is divided into two parts as described below:
Part A: General Context of the Community
The first part of the survey questionnaire collects data on the general context of the community, including socio-
economic and demographic data, identification of vulnerable groups and information on the main hazards faced
by the community and their frequency of occurrence (there is a comprehensive checklist of hazards, please see the
Glossary for the explanation of some of these).
Part B: Community Resilience Characteristics Assessment
This part of the survey features 30 consultation questions, each relating to a particular resilience component,
grouped under five thematic areas:
o Thematic Area 1: Governance
o Thematic Area 2: Risk Assessment
o Thematic Area 3: Knowledge and Education
o Thematic Area 4: Risk Management and Vulnerability Reduction
o Thematic Area 5: Disaster Preparedness and Response4
The consultation questions are designed to explore resilience characteristics under each component, based on a ranking
scale. Each of the five potential answers relates to a resilience characteristic, which corresponds to an assigned “level of
resilience”, ranging from 1 to 5 (whereby 1 indicates minimal resilience and 5 indicates high resilience). The answers recorded
will illustrate the community’s resilience for each component, which are verified using specific means of verification. NB:
When applying the survey, the key questions are to be answered by the survey technicians based on the dialogue generated
with the community representatives and means of verification. Guiding questions are provided to facilitate this dialogue
with the community. The technician should adapt these guiding questions to make them as context specific as possible and
incorporate additional guiding questions as necessary to facilitate the discussion.
As a general rule it is recommended that all 30 key resilience components should be assessed in order to measure the overall
community resilience score. However, based on the knowledge acquired on the community, the survey administrator may
decide that some of the 30 questions do not apply to the particular context of a community or survey area. For this reason
the toolkit allows the survey administrator to assign a weighting of 0 (if not relevant) or 1 (if relevant) to each resilience
component. Components which have been given a weighting of 0 will be omitted, (i.e. the key question related to that
component will not be asked during the survey process).
4
Twigg, 2009 “Characteristics of a Disaster-resilient Community – A Guidance Note”

2. The Digital Data Gathering and Reporting Module
The toolkit is intended to be surveyed by field technicians, who will be collecting the data using mobile digital data collection. The
Toolkit is based on the CommCare product platform which operates on Android devices, and stores data on the cloud-hosted
CommCare servers. Any organization can download the GOAL Resilience Toolkit survey template and begin collecting data
themselves. Directions to install the application from the CommCare Exchange can be found here: https://confluence.dimagi.
com/display/commcarepublic/Building+A+Blank+App+or+Starting+From+The+Exchange. If necesary, for additional assistance
to download the GOAL application please send request to the
following address: [email protected].
After downloading from the CommCare exchange, the survey

template will appear in a unique web domain, where the data
collected from the field will appear once the mobile is synced
with the CommCare server. Once the Toolkit application is
available on your domain, or “project space”, you can download
the application onto your Android to begin collecting data:
https://confluence.dimagi.com/display/commcarepublic/
Installing+CommCareODK+Android.
The entire application download process, from the CommCare

Exchange to the application on the Android, should take 20-30
minutes if connected to the internet.
All information on application troubleshooting, navigating

through the application on the mobile, selecting a compatible
Android device, managing your project space, etc. can be found
on the CommCare help site: http://help.commcarehq.org
Within the Toolkit application, surveyors will enter the name

of the community being surveyed and complete the survey
to get the community resilience score, which will calculate
as the surveyor goes through the questionnaire. At the end
of the survey, on the mobile, the application will present the
score (Figure 1). The application works offline, and once the
Android device is connected to the internet, the results of
the questionnaire will be sent to the CommCare server and Figure 1: The hypothetical community, “Newark”, has received
to the organization’s unique project space. Further directions a resilience score of 74%.
on navigating through the application are available on the
CommCare help site.
After the Android devices sync with the CommCare server either via wi-fi or via mobile data using a SIM card on the
device, all data will become available on the organization’s project space. Data can be exported on the CommCare server
for analysis of resilience score across all communities. Additionally, GOAL has developed an offline Excel dashboard
which connects to the CommCare server so the organization can monitor communities’ resilience scores in almost
real-time. Directions to customize the reporting template to connect to each organization’s unique online database
can be found here:
https://confluence.dimagi.com/display/commcarepublic/Tutorial%3A+Create+an+Excel+Dashboard.
Alternatively a GOAL offline dashboard reporting template can requested from the following address:
[email protected]. The offline dashboard can automatically generate pro-forma reports, which allows the user to contrast
the resilience scores achieved in the various assessments made during the lifetime of a project in a specific community,
and to contrast the scores among various communities. This immediate, quantified and visual representation of the
level of resilience during the intervals in which this was measured can be shared with beneficiaries and other interested
actors, and inform and prioritize future interventions. See below sample schematic from the GOAL offline dashboard
reporting template showing before and after resilience levels measured by the toolkit.
Figure 2: GOAL Offline Dashboard Schematic showing before and after resilience levels for a group of communities
3. The Guidance Manual on the toolkit (this document), containing the justification and background of the toolkit’s
development and an explanation of its application.

D.2. RESILIENCE COMPONENTS
Twigg Resilience
Thematic Area Component Resilience
Characteristic(s)
(Twigg) (Twigg) Component in Toolkit
Selected
Policy, planning, priorities and 1. Community

TA 1, Characteristic 1.5
political commitment leadership
2. Rights awareness and

Legal and regulatory systems TA 1, Characteristic 2.2
advocacy
Integration with development 3. Integration with

policies and planning development planning
Thematic Area 1: Institutional
Governance mechanisms, capacities and
TA 1, Characteristics 5.6
structures; allocation of
responsibilities 4. Access to funding and
partnerships
Partnerships TA 1, Characteristic 6.2
5. Inclusion of
Accountability and
vulnerable groups TA 1, Characteristic 7.6
community participation
6. Womens participation
Hazard/risk data and TA 2, Characteristics 1.1, 1.2,

7. Hazard assessment
assessment 1.3, 1.6
Thematic Area 2:
Vulnerability/capacity and im- 8. Vulnerability/capacity TA 2, Characteristics 2.1, 2.2, 2.3
Risk Assessment
pact data and assessment assessment & 2.6
9. Local and scientific

Scientific and technical
methods for risk TA 2, Characteristic 3.2
capacities and innovation
awareness
Public awareness, knowledge and 10. Public awareness and

skills knowledge
Thematic Area 3:
11. Dissemination TA 3, Characteristic. 3.1. and
Knowledge and Education and training
of DRR knowledge Tearfund question
Education
Cultures, attitudes, motivation 12. Cultural Attitudes and Values TA 3, Characteristic 4.5

Environmental and natural 13. Sustainable environmen-
resource management tal management
14. Access to health care in

emergencies
15. Health access and awareness

Health and well being TA 4, Characteristic 2.1 & 2.5
in normal times
16. Food and water supplies TA 4, Characteristic 2.3
17. Hazard-resistant
TA 4, Charact. 3.5
livelihoods practices
Thematic Area 4: Sustainable livelihoods
Risk Management 18. Access to market TA 4, Charact. 3.7
and
Vulnerability
Reduction Social protection 19. Social protection TA 4, Charact. 4.1
20. Access to financial

TA 4, Charact. 5.3
services
Financial instruments
21. Income and Asset
TA 4, Charact. 5.1
protection
Physical protection; structural 22. Infrastructure and basic

TA 4, Charact. 6.3., 6.4. & 6.6
and technical measures Services
Planning régimes 23. Land use and planning TA 4, Charact. 7.1
24. Education in
NA NA
emergencies
Organizational capacities and 25. Capacities in prepared-

coordination ness and response
Early warning systems 26. Early warning systems TA 5, Characteristic 2.1
Thematic Area 5: Preparedness and contingency

Disaster 27. Contingency planning TA 5, Characteristic 3.2
planning
Preparedness and
Response Emergency resources and 28. Emergency
infrastructure infrastructure
Emergency response and 29. Emergency response and

TA 5, Characteristic 5.2 & 5.3
recovery recovery
Participation, voluntarism, 30. Volunteerism and

accountability accountability

D.3. RATIONALE AND CLARIFICATIONS ON KEY QUESTIONS (SURVEY PART B)
Resilience
# Key Question Rationale and Clarifications
Component
THEMATIC AREA 1: GOVERNANCE

This question assesses the existence, effectiveness, commitment and
Community Is the community leadership in accountability of community leadership in DRR. It aims to capture
1 leadership in DRR committed, effective, and details on leadership structures only, which are directly related
DRR accountable? to decision-making for emergency preparedness, response, risk
mitigation and vulnerability reduction.
This question measures awareness of rights, associated obligations on
Is the community aware of its
the part of duty bearers, and the degree to which communities call
Rights rights and the legal obligations
on the duty bearer to fulfill these obligations. The question captures
2 awareness and of government and other
knowledge and action on the part of the community only. Details of
advocacy stakeholders that provide
participation and appetite of duty bearers to receive and action this
protection?
information is not considered in this question.
Given that resilience is crucial in ensuring that long-term
development goals are not compromised and that development
Is DRR seen by the community outcomes are not reversed with shocks and disasters, DRR measures
Integration with as an integral part of plans that contribute to resilience should be seen as an integral part of
3 development and actions to achieve wider development plans. This question captures whether the community
planning community goals (e.g. poverty realizes the role that risk reduction plays in the in the achievement
alleviation, quality of life)? of the community’s development goals and whether this connection
is clearly documented in the community’s plans (local development
plan, mitigation plan, etc.).
Are there clear, agreed and Given that resilience often depends on the community’s ability to
stable DRR partnerships access or leverage external funding and support, this question
Access to
between the community captures the existence of a representative DRR organization and its
4 funding and
organization and other actors access for such support by probing whether the latter is available,
partnerships
(local authorities, NGOs, in what frequency, as well as how proactive the community DRR
businesses, etc.)? organization is in trying to access this support.
This question is important in measuring community resilience
Are the vulnerable groups in because it identifies the level in which vulnerable groups are involved
Inclusion of the community included/ in DRR decision-making. This question aims to capture the degree of
5 vulnerable represented in community their participation in regular community meetings, their involvement
groups decision making and in the DRR decision-making body as well as whether decision being
management of DRR? made (with or without their involvement) take into account their
needs (with concrete examples).
This question is important in measuring community resilience
because it showcases whether both genders are part of decision
Do women participate in making and that both take up leadership positions, especially
Women’s
6 participation
community decision making considering the fact that women’s participation and occupation of
and management of DRR? leadership positions is generally low when compared to men. In this
question we are trying to capture whether women meaningfully
participate in decision making and occupy leadership roles.

THEMATIC AREA 2: RISK ASSESSMENT
Given that disaster risk equals hazard x vulnerability, divided by
Has the community carried capacity, a community’s access to a formal assessment of the
out participatory hazard/ hazard(s) to which the its members are exposed is a crucial factor
risk assessments, shared in ensuring that the community’s risk awareness is accurate,
Hazard
7 assessment the findings and have substantiated, and can effectively inform appropriate DRR actions.
human resources capable of This question captures whether an updated and participatory hazard
conducting and monitoring assessment has been conducted in the community and whether
these assessments? the community is aware of/uses the findings and has the capacity to
conduct and monitor such assessments in the future.
Given that disaster risk equals hazard x vulnerability, divided
Has the community carried by capacity, a community’s access to a formal assessment of its
out participatory vulnerability vulnerabilities and capacities is a crucial factor in ensuring that the
Vulnerability/ and capacity assessments community’s risk awareness is accurate, substantiated, and can
8 capacity (VCA), shared the findings and effectively inform appropriate DRR actions. This question captures
assessment have human resources capable whether an updated and participatory VCA has been conducted
of conducting and monitoring in the community and whether the community is aware of/uses
these assessments? the findings and has the capacity to conduct and monitor such
assessments in the future.
Community risk awareness, especially in rural areas, traditionally
relies on local perceptions and monitoring of weather events using
local (informal) methods. The value of these methods should not
be underestimated in acquiring crucial information on long-term
Does the community use local
Local and patterns of frequency and magnitude of hazards, for example.
knowledge and perceptions
scientific However, climate change can compromise the reliability of these
9 methods for
of risk as well as other
traditional methods in many instances, which is why it is important
scientific knowledge, data and
risk awareness for these to be coupled with accurate scientific methods. In this
assessment methods?
question, we assess the extent of risk knowledge (indigenous
knowledge or a combination of traditional and scientific knowledge)
in the community and the extent to which this is used in DRR
actions.
THEMATIC AREA 3: KNOWLEDGE & EDUCATION
Is there an open debate within
Public the community resulting in This question seeks to understand the degree to which the wider
10 awareness and agreements about problems, community participates in dialogue related to potential risks and
knowledge solutions and priorities relating associated mitigating strategies.
to disaster risk?
Are DRR knowledge and
Question 11 seeks to understand the degree to which information
capacities being passed on to
Dissemination and expertise related to DRR is shared with children through
children formally through local
11 of DRR schools and informally via oral
mechanisms such as formal education and informal community
knowledge communication methods. Training of educators to disseminate
tradition from one generation
information correctly is also a consideration.
to the next?
Do the community's cultural
Cultural attitudes and values (e.g.
attitudes expectations of help/self- The extent to which religious/cultural beliefs and values impact on
12 and values sufficiency, religious/ideological communities’ understanding of risk and the capacity to adapt and
on disaster views) enable it to adapt to recover in a cooperative and effective manner is the key focus here.
recovery and recover from shocks and
stresses?
THEMATIC AREA 4: RISK MANAGEMENT AND VULNERABILITY REDUCTION
Does the community adopt Environmental conditions not only modify the frequency of hazard
sustainable environmental events, but ecosystems also serve as natural barriers that can
Sustainable
management practices that moderate the effects of a hazard and protect communities. Hence,
13 environmental reduce hazard risk and adapt pro-actively managing natural areas can ensure protection of the
management
to new hazards related to environment and reduce underlying risk factors for disaster by
climate change? maintaining the resilience inherent in ecosystems.
Does the community have
Primary care is an essential service that is relied on by the community.
access to health care facilities
Disasters and other crises may cause ill-health directly or through
and health workers equipped
the disruption of health systems, facilities and services, leaving
and trained to respond to
Access to many without access to health care. The capacity of local health
physical and mental health
14 health care in consequences of disasters
centers continue to provide services during disaster is essential for
emergencies the survival and recovery of affected communities. In this question
and lesser hazard events,
we aim to capture the level of resources (human and material),
and supported by access to
capacities and referral services available during small- and large-scale
emergency health services,
emergencies.
medicines, etc.?
Do community members
maintain good health and Community resilience during disasters and stresses is directly related
physical ability in normal times to the community’s health status before emergencies strike as well as
Health access
(through adequate food and their awareness on practices to help them stay healthy and to protect
15 and awareness nutrition, hygiene and health life during emergencies. In this question we aim to gauge the general
in normal times
care) and have awareness on health status of the community and the practices at community and
means to staying healthy and household level to protect health.
life-protecting measures?
Household food security exists when the household has at all times
physical and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious
food (including clean and accessible water) for a healthy and active
Does the community have life. Access to food, clean water and adequate nutrition is critical
a secure supply of food to survival in an emergency situation. Hence, not only should
Food and water
16 supplies and water and manages an emergency-affected populations have access to adequate food
equitable distribution system and water supplies, but an equitable distribution stratgy should
during disasters? be designed, budgeted, and applied at the time of disaster. In this
question we aim to capture whether such reserves exist, at what
level (community vs. household) and the processes in place for their
management during scarcity.
Hazard-
Does the community employ Question 17 emphasises the importance of diversified income
resistant
17 livelihoods hazard-resistant livelihoods generating opportunities to support sufficient food security during
practices for food security? times of disaster.
practices
Are the local trade and
transport links with markets for This question emphasises the impact of hazards on trade and
Access to
18 market products, labour and services transport links and measures resilience based on the extent to which
protected against hazards and such infrastructure and availability of labour can withstand shocks.
shocks?

Social protection is a collection of measures to improve or protect
human capital. A country/community should have set policies and
Does the community have programs designed to reduce poverty and vulnerability by promoting
access to social protection efficient labor markets, diminishing people’s exposure to risks, and
schemes to support risk enhancing their capacity to protect themselves against hazards and
reduction directly, through interruption/loss of income. Social protection interventions are,
Social
19 protection targeted DRR activities, therefore, essential to assist individuals, households, and communities
or indirectly, through to better manage and reduce risks that leave people vulnerable.
socioeconomic development This question captures access to both formal schemes (provided
activities that reduce by government, farmer associations or other actors) and informal
vulnerability? social protection measures (e.g. spontaneous assistance between
households) for DRR and recovery. Social protection measures
provided/supported by INGOs are not considered in this question.
Are there affordable and
Access to Question 20 seeks to understand the availability of financial resources
flexible community savings and
20 financial credit schemes, and/or access
to the community to facilitate preparedness, response and recovery
services actions.
to micro-finance services?
A livelihood comprises the capabilities, assets and activities needed
Are household and community for a means of living - and is sustainable when it can cope with
asset bases (income, savings, and recover from shocks and stresses. The sustainable livelihoods
and convertible property) approach considers vulnerabilities as the main factor that shapes how
Income and sufficiently large and diverse people make their living. The level of vulnerability of an individual or
21 asset protection to support disaster coping community is determined by how weak or strong their livelihoods
strategies and are there are, what occupational activities they are engaged in, the range of
measures to protect them assets they have access to for pursuing their livelihood strategies and
against disaster? the strength and support of the social networks and institutions that
they are part of or which have influence over them.
Are the community’s building Hazards of nature—floods, earthquakes, typhoons, and climate
infrastructure and basic change—affect infrastructures and accessibility and availability
Protection of services resilient to disaster of basic services. When infrastructure fails during a natural
infrastructure (including being located disaster, it can interrupt vital services (water, sanitation, electricity,
22 and basic in safe areas, using hazard- communications, etc.) magnifying the need for well-functioning and
services resistant construction methods resistant systems beforehand. Making infrastructure resilient and able
and structural mitigation to anticipate, absorb, and recover from a hazardous event in a timely
measures)? and efficient manner is essential.
Does the community decision-
The focus of question 23 is on the extent to which the community
making regarding land use
Land use and considers use and management of land in the context of potential
23 planning and management take hazard
exposure to hazards. The governance structures which support these
risks and vulnerabilities into
endeavours is also a key consideration.
account?
Operation Do education services have
This question seeks to understand the capacity of educational
of education the capacity to continue their
24 services in operation without interruption
services, including but not limited to schools, to continue to operate
in times of disaster.
emergencies during emergencies?
THEMATIC AREA 5: PREPAREDNESS AND RESPONSE

The existence and capacity of organizations at community-level
Does the community have dealing with disaster preparedness and response demonstrates
Capacities in
an operating organization in that the community can handle disasters in an organized manner.
25 Preparedness disaster preparedness and This question captures the existence of a community-level disaster
and response
response? preparedness and response and its credentials in terms of skills and
capacities (e.g. in search and rescue, fire-fighting and risk assessment).
The availability of an operational Early Warning System in the
community signifies how ready the community is to generate
and disseminate timely and meaningful warning information to
Is there an operational Early
Early warning enable individuals, communities and organizations for appropriate
26 systems Warning System in the
preparation and action to reduce damage and loss. This question
community?
captures hazard monitoring, warning dissemination and response
mechanisms, as part of a coherent EWS, and the community’s
capacity to operate and maintain it.
This question is important in measuring resilience because of the
need for contingency plans to consider the needs of vulnerable
groups in times of emergencies. In this question, we are trying to
Does the community use a capture:
contingency plan that takes • Availability of contingency plan for emergencies
into account the needs of • How community members participated in the preparation of
Contingency
27 planning vulnerable groups, and was this plan
prepared in a participative • Whether the plan is known and understood by the majority of
manner and considers the the community
context of the community? • If the contingency plan includes adequate measures for the
protection of vulnerable groups
• Whether the simulation drills are carried out regularly to test and
update the contingency plan
Accessibility and adequacy of emergency shelters becomes of
Are emergency shelters critical importance for persons whose homes have been affected by
(purpose built or modified) disasters. In this question, we are trying to capture: the emergency
Emergency
28 infrastructure accessible to community and shelter mechanisms currently employed by the community, the
with adequate facilities for all availability and accessibility of emergency shelters and the adequacy
affected population? of their conditions not only to cover basic needs but also to ensure
protection of vulnerable groups during disasters.
Does the community take This question is important in measuring resilience because the
a leading role in response community that takes leading roles in response and recovery action
Emergency
and recovery actions that that reach all affected members of the community and prioritized
29 response and reach all affected members of according to the needs is able to handle emergencies in time of
recovery
community and prioritized disasters. In this question we aim to capture the level of leadership
according to needs? assumed by the community in disaster response and recovery.
The level and quality of local volunteerism in preparedness, response
Is there a high level of and recovery is important in determining a community’s resilience,
community volunteerism in as it is directly related to the community’s capacity to tackle shocks
Volunteerism
all aspects of preparedness, and disasters effectively. Additionally, a community’s volunteer corps
30 and response and recovery; usually involves persons who have direct proximity and interaction
accountability
representative of all sections of with the groups that are most vulnerable to the impact of disasters,
community? which is why it is important to capture its representativeness and
adherence to relevant protocol.


E. Applying the toolkit in the field
E.1. SCOPE OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE
The questionnaire facilitates measurement of resilience at the community level according to the thirty resilience components
and five key thematic areas outlined above. The Resilience toolkit does not propose to replace existing methods to assess
vulnerability, capacities and risks at community level such as KAPB surveys, LQAS, VCA, Baseline, end line surveys/assessments.
The toolkit should be seen to complement other existing participatory assessments tools to assist in giving an overall measure or
snapshot of resilience at community level taking into account the various different key components of resilience.
While this toolkit is designed to measure resilience from the community’s perspective, it is recognized that external factors outside
the scope of the toolkit should also be assessed in determining overall resilience levels, local government and institutional response
capacities.
The application of the toolkit at the community level does not necessarily ensure appropriate interventions will be forthcoming.
Communication and consultation with communities to explain the scope and purpose of the toolkit is essential to facilitate
accountable programming, and manage the community’s expectations. Communities should be aware of how the data will be
used, understand that participation does not equate to intervention (which may support consultations more reflective of reality),
and be informed of how they can seek to support themselves or seek external support.
The results of the survey should be shared with all relevant stakeholders, including communities and government officials as
appropriate.
The survey can be used in multiple phases of a project life cycle, including assessment, design and implementation; including as
part of baselines, mid -term and end reviews, and evaluations.
E.2.1 PROFILE OF THE TECHNICAL FIELD STAFF
It is recommended that at least two facilitators, preferably one male and one female undertake the field survey assessment. One
is required to lead the focus group discussions, while the other should take detailed notes, ensuring the details of the consultation
with the community are captured to the fullest extent possible. It is vital that marking the resilience level for each component is
done following the capture of important supporting analysis. It is recommended that at least one facilitator should be trained and
experienced in DRR, and preferably have a detailed understanding of the context and cultural norms of the community. At least
one of the facilitators should also have experience in field data collection methods. The facilitators must ensure that the responses
represent the views of the community, which entails a level of cultural relativism.
Profile of 2 person Field Survey team
The persons conducting the field assessment should

have the following skills:
1. Training and experience in disaster risk

reduction programming.
2. Knowledge of the context of the community or

communities to be visited.

3. Experience and skills in facilitating focus group discussions.
4. Knowledge of the language and/or dialect used in the community.
5. Knowledge and use of participatory methodologies and tools.
6. Skills in data analysis.
E.2.2 DATA COLLECTION
Preparation:
Sufficient preparation before conducting the field survey will enable a more effective consultation with the community. Such
preparation in advance should include a review of studies and research documenting the socio-economic background of the
specific community (main livelihoods, health status, etc.) as well as the cultural context (religion, present ethnic groups, etc.),
which will also help the technicians adopt the most appropriate approach for the consultation.
As mentioned above the survey questionnaire addresses 30 resilience components which are to be graded following the analysis of
focus group discussion on each component. The guiding questions presented in the questionnaire are merely that, and questions,
terms, and MOVs should be modified to the specific context of the target community. It is recommended that the facilitators are
familiar with the questions and the discussion plan in advance of the field visit. This should be undertaken through:
• Facilitating training on how to implement the questionnaire.
• Developing a discussion plan in the local dialect to be used by all facilitators and adapted to the context, ensuring the
cohesive and consistent use of language. This will reduce disparities in the data collected.
Implementation:
To gather field data using the toolkit, the following methods are recommended:
a) Focus Group Discussion: The FGD should generate a structured conversation on resilience in the community, using the
survey instrument as a guide. The facilitators conducting the interview should maintain flexibility while managing the sequence of
subjects, and the order of the questions. The facilitators should avoid interrogative techniques and instead establish a conversation
that triggers authentic replies to the questions. The completion of the survey should be done in a participatory manner, seeking
consensus from the participants. For the general context survey (Part A), prior consultation with key informants or a review of
existing documentation may be sufficient to obtain the necessary data. If this is possible, this will allow the focus of the FGD to be
on the resilience components in Part B of the questionnaire. In planning the focus group discussion, it is necessary to determine
the size of the group, and the origin and characteristics of the participants. The size of the group should support opportunities for
dialogue among a range of participants. The suggested number of participants is between six to fifteen people.
Composition of participants: The make-up of the FGD group should facilitate a range of opinions, attitudes, points of view, etc. and
be representative of the different sectors of the community. For instance members of local organizations, people living in areas
of risk, community leaders, vulnerable groups etc. All groups should include male and female adults, young persons and children,
elderly persons and members of vulnerable groups, each of whom my provide interesting insights of disaster experiences and
mitigation strategies from the perspective of their gender, age and condition.
Separate FGDs: Where deemed appropriate, separate FGDs be carried out with different groups, e.g. men and women, or community
leadership and community members (or a combination of these). This approach would ensure that findings are not obscured by
potential power dynamics or other factors inhibiting free expression of certain groups or individuals. This would produce two or
more resilience measurements per community, so the field staff would have to convene and agree on the community’s overall

resilience level, per component.
b) Interview with key informants: Interviews with key informants is more relevant for the completion of Part A of the survey.
Completing Part B of the survey questionnaire should be entirely through focus group discussions. Should the participation of
certain key informants, for example, a health worker and a teacher, inform more accurately on components relating to health
and education respectively, the questions that require their participation should be asked of them separately, before assigning a
resilience level.
E.3.1. SURVEY PART A: GENERAL CONTEXT
Most questions and fields of Part A of the field assessment require the input of numbers or by checking a box against the relevant
response. However some are open questions and can be completed by the technician (i.e. identification of additional vulnerable
groups, ethnic groups, geographical administrative area of assessment etc.). This section of the survey serves to rapidly assess the
main hazards and identify the groups most vulnerable to these hazards. These generally include children, the elderly and persons
with disabilities, although they can also include female headed or child-headed households, persons with serious illness such as
PLHIV and other groups, according to the context. It is important to highlight these factors at the outset, so that they can be
carefully considered in the assessment of the resilience characteristics (Part B).
E.3.2. SURVEY PART B: RESILIENCE CHARACTERISTICS ASSESSSMENT
It is recommended that each question be introduced by reading out the resilience component title. Where necessary, the facilitator
should give a general explanation of what is being assessed under that component. The key questions and characteristic levels are
formulated for the reference of the technicians and not the communities. Reading the text of the key question or the characteristic
levels to the community may distort the community’s responses, or the language of the question may not be easily understood
by the community. Instead, the technician should ensure an appropriate level of discussion and consensus before making their
decision, through the use of the suggested guiding questions. Please note, that although the guiding questions are in their majority
closed questions, the technician is expected to use these to stimulate discussion and probe for additional information, either with
follow up questions or by asking for examples. After the completion of each component scoring, or at the end of the survey, it may
be beneficial to then read each question and resilience characteristics back to the focus group to validate the facilitators scoring.
In the survey, below each key consultation question, there is a column containing the corresponding resilience characteristics (5
answer options) to each question, one of which will be marked as the answer. This answer should be the closest fit to match the
findings of the discussion, and is ultimately based on an informed judgment that the technician should make and validate with
the FGD participants before moving on to the next question.
The column of suggested means of verification contains ways of substantiating the answers of the community to make a more
informed and objective interpretation of the community’s resilience level for each component; if such means of verification are
available. When possible, the means of verification should be gathered in advance of the FGD on the questionnaire. The technician
should keep in mind that the means of verification and group discussion should be mutually reinforcing and not contradict one
another.
Throughout the toolkit many questions describe the increasing resilience level of the 5 resilience characteristics (answer options),
using terminology of increasing quantities of families or community members e.g. “few community members”, “some”, “most”. A
suggested reference to assist in interpreting this terminology is given below:
• “Few”: up to approx. one quarter of community population (0-25%)
• “Some”: approx. a quarter to half of community population (25-50%)
• “Most”: approx. half to ninety per cent of community population (50-90%)

• “All”: ninety to one hundred percent of community population (90-100%)
E.3.3. METHODS FOR DATA COLLECTION
Suggested timetable for completing the Survey Questionnaire in the field:
It is recommended that the survey questionnaire be applied in the field using the following steps:
1. Advance preparation and information gathering on the community. This will involve the collection of key documentation
outlined as means of verification for multiple questions. Information may need to be sourced from a higher administrative
level than the community targeted for assessment. In this instance, data collection at this level should be completed at least
two days before the commencement of the questionnaire to facilitate time for review.
2. Introduction: Explanation of the process (15 mins)
3. Completion of Part A (General Context) of Community Resilience Characteristics Survey (1 hour): If secondary information
sources are available on the general context of the community, the technician should complete Part A in advance and seek to
validate the information with the key informant(s) if necessary.
4. Completion of Part B (Resilience Characteristics Assessment) of Survey (2-3 hours)
5. Validation: (20 mins): This can be done after each question or at the end of the survey. The facilitator should read out the key
question and the assigned characteristic level and confirm the assessment with the community focus group.

ANNEX 1:
KEY CONCEPTS

Disaster:
A serious disruption of the functioning of a community or a society involving widespread human, material, economic or envi-
ronmental losses and impacts, which exceeds the ability of the affected community or society to cope using its own resources.5
Disaster Risk Reduction:

“...development and implementation of policies, strategies and practices to minimize vulnerabilities and disaster risks throughout
society … it is a systematic approach to identifying, assessing and reducing the risks of disaster… [it] is, therefore, the sum of the
actions carried out or the process towards achieving resilience.” 6
Resilience:
The ability of communities and households to anticipate and adapt to risks and to absorb, respond and recover from shocks and
stresses in a timely and effective manner without compromising their long term prospects. 7
Disaster Resilient Community:

“No community can ever be completely safe from natural and man-made hazards. It may be helpful to think of a disaster- resilient
or disaster-resistant community as the safest possible community that we have the knowledge to design and build in a natural
hazard context, minimizing its vulnerability by maximizing the application of DRR measures. Place more emphasis on what com-
munities can do by themselves, and how their capacities can be strengthened”.
A focus on resilience means putting greater emphasis on what communities can do for themselves and how to strengthen their
capacities, rather than concentrating on their vulnerability to disaster or environmental shocks and stresses, or their needs in an
emergency.

5 UNISDR “Terminology on Disaster Risk Reduction”, 2009

6 Twigg John, “The Characteristics of a Disaster-Resilient Community: A Guidance Note” Version 2, 2009.
7 GOAL. “GOAL and Resilience: A Guidance Note”, August 2013

ANNEX 2:
GLOSSARY

Chemical and Nuclear Accidents8 : Discharging dangerous substances that can cause industrial accidents and can have an
immediate negative effect on humans and animals or the environment.
Chemical or biological residues9 : Chemical or biological residues that can cause sicknesses, damage to the ecosystem and to
the environment.
Community: “In conventional emergency management, communities are seen in spatial terms: groups of people who live in
the same area or close to the same risks. This overlooks other significant dimensions of the “community” which are to do with
common interests, values, activities and structures… From a hazards perspective, the spatial dimension is essential in identifying
communities at risk. However, this must be linked to an understanding of the socio-economic differentiations, linkages and
dynamics within the area at risk, not only to identify vulnerable groups but also to understand the diverse factors that contribute
to vulnerability… Communities do not exist in isolation. The level of a community’s resilience is also influenced by capacities
outside... Nearly all communities are dependent on external duty bearers and service providers to a greater or lesser extent, even
if some remain extremely marginalized.”10 It was noted during the field testing for the questionnaire in Malawi (2014), that the
smallest administrative level facilitates the most consensus in terms of resilience measurement. For the purpose of this toolkit
it is acknowledged that communities, their constitution, size, identifying features differ according to the context. Definition of
community can be determined in tune with that context in so far as a spatial element is also included.
Community can also be considered to be an urban neighbourhood. In addition in the urban context it may be useful to compare
the neighbourhood resilience level with the resilience scorecard utilized under the United Nations International Strategy for
Disaster Resilient Cities.
Desertification11 : This refers to land degradation in arid, semi-dry and dry areas, due to climate changes or human activity.
Desertification may happen due to inadequate land usage, excessive grazing, deforestation and over-exploitation.
Disaster Risk Reduction: “...develop and implement policies, strategies and practices to mitigate vulnerabilities and social risk… it
is a systematic focus to identify, analyse and reduce disaster risks.” 12
Drought13 : The National Meteorological Service of NOAA (NWS) defines a drought as “a period of time abnormally dry and of
sufficient length due to lack of water to cause a severe hydrological disequilibrium in the area affected.” Drought can be classified
into four different definitions: meteorological (deviation from normal rainfall), agricultural (abnormal soil humidity conditions);
hydrological (related to abnormal hydric resources) and socio-economic (when the lack of water affects the life and livelihoods
of persons).
Earthquakes14 : Earthquakes are due to the sudden release of accumulated tensions around earth crust faults. This energy is
released through seismic waves that travel to the source area, causing the earth to tremble. Severe earthquakes can affect buildings
and populations. The level of damage depends upon many factors, such as the earthquake intensity, the depth, the vulnerability
of structures and the distance from the earthquake source.
Epidemics15 : These are a significant threat at world level, above all in those areas that have already been affected by other
severe dangers, poverty and under-development. Epidemics are easily spread through country borders. Globalization increases the
8
Grasso Veronica F.UNEP, Early Warning System: State of art analysis an future directions, Page 19
9
From the contamination term. WIKIPEDIA, es.wikipedia
10
Twigg, John. Twigg, John. Characteristics of a Disaster-resilient Community: Guidance Note. England. 2007. Page. 7.
11
12
Twigg, John. Characteristics of a Disaster-resilient Community: Guidance Note. England. 2007. Page 6.
13
Ibid18
14
15

potential of catastrophic outbreaks of disease; there is a risk of millions of people in the world becoming affected.
Examples : Anthrax; Bird flu; Crimea-Congo, haemorrhagic fever (FHCC); Dengue / haemorrhagic dengue; Ebola haemorrhagic
fever; Hepatitis; Influenza; Lassa fever; Marburg haemorrhagic fever; Meningitis; The plague; Rift Valley fever; Severe Acute
Respiratory Syndrome (SARS); Smallpox; Tularaemia; Yellow fever.
Erosion of river banks and soil16 : Wearing down of land surface due to external agents, such as water or wind.
Flooding17 : Floods are often caused by severe storms, tropical cyclones and tornados. The numbers of floods have been growing
steadily and have become, together with droughts, some of the deadliest natural disasters in recent decades. The number of losses
caused by floods is also due to climate changes that have caused increases in rainfall in some parts of the Northern Hemisphere.
(Natural Disaster Task Force, 2005). Floods can cause deaths, particularly when they arrive unannounced.
Food Security18 : There is food security when all persons have, at all times, physical and economic access to sufficient safe and
nutritious food to satisfy their food needs and preferences in order to lead an active and healthy life (World Food Summit, 1996).
Food security includes the following measures regarding food: availability, access, stability and use. Food availability is having access
to food, or to a farm, as well as having the capacity (the capital) needed to buy food that cannot be cultivated in the local or
national environment. (Food insecurity is the opposite of food security).
Forest Fires19 : These are threat to life and property and, often are connected to secondary effects, such as landslides, erosion and
changes in the quality of water. Forest fires can be caused by nature, humans in agricultural exploitation or simply the result of
human negligence.
Hurricanes (Tropical)20 : Closed wide scale circulation system, in the atmosphere, with low pressure and strong winds that rotate
anti-clockwise in the Northern hemisphere and clockwise in the Southern hemisphere. In the Indian Ocean and the Pacific Ocean
they are called Cyclones; in Western Atlantic and Eastern Pacifica they are called Hurricanes.
Impact of climate change21: Information on climatic impact and variability is needed by communities and resource administrators
in order to adapt and prepare for greater climatic fluctuations which are becoming more evident as a result of climate change. This
information includes evidence of the changes that are caused due to climate change, such as the loss of eco-systems, ice melting,
coastal degradation and severe droughts.
Landslides22 : They are earth, rock and debris slides caused by heavy rains, floods, earthquakes, volcanoes and forest fires. Landslides
cause thousands of millions of dollars in losses every year all over the world.
Plagues23 : Plagues occur when animals produce economic damages, normally physical, and human assets (health, plants, domestic
animals, materials or natural means).
Resilience and Community Disaster Resilience: “...the resilience of the system or community can be understood as: the capacity
to absorb the pressure or destructive forces through resistance or adaptation; the capacity to manage or maintain certain basic
functions and structures during contingencies; the recovery capacity of recovering after an event; Focussing on resilience means
placing a greater emphasis on what it is that communities can do for themselves and how they can strengthen their capacities. A
16
Spanish Royal Academy Dictionary, http://www.rae.es
17
Ibid 6
18
Organic agriculture Glossary, www.fao.org, page 63
19
Ibid 1
20
Updated Glossary of terms for DRR, CEPREDENAC, http://www.sica.int/, page 45
21
22
23
WIKIPEDIA, es.wikipedia

“Disaster resilient community” is ideal. No community can ever be completely safe from natural or man caused dangers. It can be
useful to think that a community that is “disaster resilient” or disaster resistant” as a “community that is as safe as possible and has
knowledge to design and construct in a natural threat context”, lessening vulnerability by maximising the DRR measures. DRR is
therefore the sum of actions taken or processes to attain “resilience.” 24
Storm25 : Storms are produced by cumulonimbus clouds, and are short duration events within the micro-scale characterised
by thunder, lightning, wind surges, turbulence, hail, ice, rainfall, moderate and severe up and down currents and in very severe
conditions, tornados.
Surges26 : Surges are generally produced through the action of wind on water surfaces producing waves with a 20 second separation
one from the other with a maximum land invasion of 150 meters; these can be observed during storms or hurricanes.
Tornado27 : Tornadoes are violent wind swirl that goes from the clouds to the ground. They travel fast and their winds can reach
speeds of 400 kilometres per hour (250 miles per hour) or more, they change direction in an erratic manner and cause great
destruction. Sometime they occur during an electric storm or hurricane.
Tsunamis28 : Tsunamis are the series of waves produced by submarine earthquakes, landslides, volcanic eruptions or underwater
explosions. Tsunamis can have devastating effects on coastal regions.
Volcanic eruptions29 : Volcanic eruptions can be slight, expelling water vapour and gases or lava flow, or they can be violent
explosions of ash and gases affecting the atmosphere. Volcanic eruptions can destroy land and the communities around them;
they affect the air quality and even influence the earth’s climate during a short time. Volcanic ashes can affect aviation and
communications.
24
Twigg, John. Characteristics of a Disaster-resilient Community: Guidance Note. England. 2007. Page 6.
25
26
27
28
29
Spanish Royal Academy Dictionary, http://www.rae.es

ANNEX 3:
RESILIENCE QUESTIONNAIRE

PART A: General Context of the Community
1. Location:
Address Level 1: (e.g., Department)
Address Level 2: (e.g., Municipality)
Address Level 3: (e.g., District/Sector)
Name of Community
Indicate whether community is urban or rural
2. Population:
No. of girls No. of boys
(younger than 18 (younger than 18 years)
years)
No. of women No. of men
aged 18-60 years aged 18-60 years
No. of women No. of men
older than 60 years older than 60 years
Total community Total no. of households
population
3. Population characteristics
Ethnic groups/population origins Number of people in each group
4. Identified Vulnerable Groups:

Description Number of Persons Comment
Extremely vulnerable Children and Youth:
(e.g., Child labourers, orphans, etc)
No. of female headed households:
Persons with serious illness:
Persons with Physical Disability:

Persons with difficulty to walk, run, ascend or descend
staircases, maintain balance, etc.
Persons with Sensory Difficulty:
Loss in capacity to perceive surroundings, e.g., impair-
ment in senses of sight, sound, taste and touch.
Persons with Intellectual Disability:
Impairment in basic social interaction; Loss of ability to
analyze, synthesize, conceptualize, understand, question,
think by oneself, etc.
Other vulnerable group (please specify):
Other vulnerable group (please specify):

5. Hazards Identified Frequency: Mark Indicate frequency (M,S, A,
M: Monthly, S: Semi-annual, A: Annual, #: If it is less frequent than annual insert estimated num- X #) and comment if increasing
ber of years between events, e.g. If frequency is every 5 years insert “5”. due to climate change where
relevant.
Geological Hazards:
Earthquake
Tsunami
Volcanic Eruption
Landslide
Hydro meteorological hazards:
Flood
Large Storm
Sudden Onset Tropical Cyclone
Hazards
Tornado
Storm surge
Epidemics:
Detail epidemic
Detail epidemic
Plagues:
Detail plague
Detail plague
Air Quality:
Industrial Contamination
Other please specify:
Chemical or biological residues
Slow Onset Hazards Desertification
Drought
Erosion along rivers or land
Food Insecurity
Insecurity / violence
Chemical/radioactive/nuclear accidents
Fire spread (including forest fire)
Other Hazards

PART B. Assessment of Community Disaster Resilience Characteristics
Thematic Area Resilience Component Weighting
In the following section the surveyor should insert the weighting value (0 or 1) assigned to each resilience component, with 0
meaning the component is not relevant and 1 meaning it is relevant. The components having received a weighting of 0 should
not be included in the application of Section B of the survey.
1. Community leadership
2. Rights awareness and advocacy
Thematic Area 1: 3. Integration with development planning

Governance 4. Access to funding and partnerships
5. Inclusion of vulnerable groups
6. Women's participation
7. Hazard assessment
Thematic Area 2:
8. Vulnerability / capacity assessment
Risk Assessment
9. Local and scientific methods for risk awareness
Thematic Area 3: 10. Public awareness, knowledge and skills
Knowledge and 11. Dissemination of DRR knowledge
Education 12. Cultural attitudes and values

13. Sustainable environmental management
14. Access to healthcare in emergencies
15. Health access and awareness in normal times
16. Food and water supplies
Thematic Area 4: 17. Hazard-resistant livelihoods practices
Risk Management 18. Access to market
and Vulnerability 19. Social protection

20. Access to financial services
Reduction
21. Income and asset protection
22. Infrastructure and basic services
23. Land use and planning
24. Operation of education services in emergencies
25. Capacities in preparedness and response
26. Early warning system
Thematic Area 5:
27. Contingency planning
Preparedness and
28. Emergency infrastructure
Response
29. Emergency response and recovery
30. Volunteerism and accountability

THEMATIC AREA 1: GOVERNANCE
Resilience component Community leadership
Key Question Is the community leadership committed, effective, and accountable?
Suggested Guiding Suggested Means
Resilience Characteristics
Questions of Verification
There are no leaders in the community, or if there are, Commitment: • Documentation
they are not effective, show no commitment, they are • Do you see the of existence of
not accountable (do not share info, invite participation or community leaders community
Level 1 respond to feedback). ¡ act regularly for organization
the community?
Are they regularly • Documentation
available? Examples? of election process
Limited leadership commitment and effectiveness, with
actions being sporadic, piecemeal and short-term, rarely of community
accountable. Effectiveness: leadership
Level 2 ¡ • Do the actions
of leaders result • Agreements/Notes
in solving the taken in community
problems? Can you assemblies
Medium level of commitment and effectiveness, with give examples?
more numerous and long-term actions; accountable only
for big problems or issues. • Completed
Level 3 ¡ Accountability: projects/works
• Do leaders
promote
1 community • Assembly
Medium level of commitment and effectiveness, with participation photographs
more numerous and long-term actions, and regularly and information (if applicable)
accountable. (in decisions)?
Level 4 ¡ Examples?
• Triangulation
consultations to
• Are leaders verify commitment
Leadership is committed, effective (actions linked to an responsive to your
agreed long-term strategy) and is regularly accountable. complaints or
recommendations?
Examples?
Level 5 ¡
Comments

Resilience component Rights awareness and advocacy
Key Question Is the community aware of its rights and the legal obligations of government and other
stakeholders that provide protection?
Community has no awareness of its rights or legal • Do you know what • Local plans
obligations of government and other key actors that rights you have? Can referencing rights
Level 1 provide protection. ¡ you name a few? and/or relevant
legislation for
protection in
• Do you know disasters
Community has some awareness of rights but little to no legal obligations the
awareness of legal obligations of government and other government has
Level 2 stakeholders that provide protection. ¡ towards citizens? • Records of
Can you name a institutional visits
few?
Community has some awareness of both its rights and
• Records of
legal obligations of government and other stakeholders
• Can you name key meetings with local
Level 3 providing protection, but takes no action for their ¡ actors that provide governments
enforcement.
protection (Civil
Defense, Social
Community has good awareness of both its rights and Services, Health,
legal obligations of government and other stakeholders etc.)?
2 Level 4 that provide protection but only occasionally invokes ¡

these when interacting/advocating with the government.
• Do leaders of
your community
advocate for funding
or support before
local government?
Can you give an
example?
Community has good awareness of both its rights and
the legal obligations of government and other stakeholders • What was the
Level 5
that provide protection and invokes these regularly when ¡ motivation for this
interacting/advocating with the government. advocacy by the
leaders of your
community?
Comments

Resilience component Integration with development planning
Key Question Is DRR seen by the community as an integral part of plans and actions to achieve wider
community goals (e.g., poverty alleviation, quality of life)?
The community does not see DRR as an integral part of • Does your • Local development
Level 1
plans and actions to achieve wider community goals. ¡ community have plans incorporating
Community sees importance of DRR for achieving wider common goals for DRR
Level 2 community goals, but this is not documented in their ¡ development? Is
local development plan. reducing risk part of
these goals? • Risk Management
Community sees importance of DRR for achieving wider plan
community goals and has documented DRR actions
Level 3
within local plans to achieve wider development goals but ¡ • Has your
these are not used or outdated. community • Project profiles
3 Community sees importance of DRR for achieving wider documented these that include DRR
measures
community goals and has documented DRR actions goals in a plan?
Level 4
within local plans to achieve wider development goals but ¡
these are only occasionally applied. • Projects/works
• Do you carry out
Community sees DRR as an integral part of plans and the actions in these completed
actions to achieve wider community goals and these are plans? With what
Level 5 regularly acted upon. ¡ frequency?
Comments

Resilience component Access to funding and partnerships
Key Question Are there clear, agreed and stable DRR partnerships between the community and other
actors (local authorities, NGOs, businesses, etc.)?
Suggested Guiding Suggested
Resilience Characteristics Means of
Questions Verification
There are no DRR partnerships between Note: DRR partnership: Different actors • Written
Level 1
the community and other actors. ¡ either internal or external to the community agreements
There are agreed DRR partnerships working together for the continuous between
between the community and other actors implementation of DRR actions. (Note community
but these are unstable in frequency these actors could include government organization
Level 2 and unclear to the community. These ¡ agencies, private businesses, civil society and agencies
partnerships provide one-off and groups, producer associations etc.). These internal and/or
piecemeal access to funds or resources for partnerships can be documented in writing external to the
DRR and recovery. or based on a mutual understanding community
established over a long period of time. (municipal
There are agreed DRR partnerships,
actors, NGOs,
between the community and other actors
• Can you name external actors that etc.)
that are unstable in frequency and are
your community has strong relationships
clearly understood by some community
Level 3
members. These partnerships provide ¡ with, whether for funding, resources,
• Work and
coordination, training or activity
increased access to funds or resources activities
implementation for DRR?
for more long term DRR and recovery completed as
actions. a result of DRR
• Have these partnerships been regular or
4 There are agreed, stable and effective irregular? Long-term or short-term? Have partnership
DRR partnerships, developed with some they only occurred once or many times?
degree of community participation,
that are clearly understood by most • Records of
Level 4
community members. These partnerships ¡ • Were these partnerships explained to the management
community? of funds and
provide access to funds or resources that
are linked within a long term strategy resources
• Do you understand what the
for DRR and recovery. relationship is for and what these actors
There are agreed and stable and effective are doing in your community? Please
DRR partnerships, developed with a explain.
high degree of community leadership,
that are clearly understood by most • Effectiveness: What results have these
community members. These partnerships partnerships had? Examples?
Level 5
provide access to all funds or resources ¡
required to achieve a long term strategy • Does the community ever seek support
linked to DRR and recovery. (funding & resources) from institutions or
local government? How many efforts have
been made before? Examples?
Comments

Resilience component Inclusion of vulnerable groups
Key Question Are the vulnerable groups in the community included/represented in community decision
making and management of DDR?
Vulnerable groups never participate in decision-making • Do you know • List or census of
on DRR. who the vulnerable vulnerable people
Level 1 ¡ groups are in and groups
your community?
Some vulnerable groups occasionally participate/are Examples?
• Notes taken at
represented in community decision-making on DRR, but
Level 2
usually as part of wider community meetings and do not ¡ meetings
• Are these
occupy positions in the main decision-making body.
vulnerable
Some vulnerable groups participate/are represented groups present • Attendance lists of
regularly in decision-making meetings and in the decision- or represented meetings
Level 3
making body but do not occupy leadership positions. ¡ in community
meetings? How • List of decision
Most vulnerable groups regularly participate/are often? making body
represented in decision-making meetings and some members and their
Level 4
occupy leadership positions in the DRR decision-making ¡
• Do these persons positions
body.
participate/are
All vulnerable groups regularly participate in decision- represented in the
making/are represented at meetings and some occupy • Assembly
community DRR
5 leadership positions in the decision-making body. decision making-
photographs
body?
• Photographs of
measures taken to
• Do they occupy protect vulnerable
leadership positions groups (e.g., disabled
in the decision- access ramps
making body? How
Level 5 ¡ often?
to community
buildings)
• Do you think
decisions and
actions take into
account the needs
of vulnerable
groups? Examples?
Comments

Resilience component Women's participation
Key Question Do women participate in community decision making and management of DRR?
Women never participate in decision-making meetings • Do women • Minutes of
on DRR. participate in community
Level 1 ¡ the community meetings
meetings?
Women occasionally participate in community decision- How often? • Attendance lists of
making on DRR, but usually as part of community
Level 2
meetings and do not occupy positions within the main ¡ meetings
decision-making body. • Do women
participate in the • List of decision
Women participate regularly in decision-making
DRR decision making body
meetings and occasionally in the decision-making body
Level 3
though not in leadership positions. ¡ making-body? members and their
positions
Women regularly participate in decision-making • Do women occupy
meetings and always occupy positions within the main leadership positions • Photos of
6 Level 4
DRR decision-making body, though only occasionally the ¡ in the decision assemblies and
higher-level leadership positions. making body? meetings, if available
Women regularly participate in decision-making
meetings and occupy high level leadership positions • What kind of
within the decision-making body. positions do they
usually occupy?
Level 5 ¡
• Are their opinions/
decisions taken into
account? Examples?
Comments

THEMATIC AREA 2: RISK ASSESSMENT
Resilience component Hazard assessment
Key Question Has the community carried out participatory hazard assessments, shared the findings and
have human resources capable of conducting/updating these assessments?
Participatory hazard assessment Note: In this component the emphasis is on • Hazard
and/or hazard mapping has never hazard assessment rather than vulnerability/ assessment
Level 1
been carried out in a structured and ¡ capacity assessment (VCA). VCA is addressed reports
participatory way in the community. in the next component.
Participatory hazard assessment
Participation: • Hazard
and/or hazard mapping has been
mapping
carried out in the community, • Has a hazard assessment been conducted in
Level 2
findings were not shared and the ¡ the community? Who participated in it?
document/mapping is currently • Evidence of
outdated or not in use. • Has a hazard map been prepared for the information
community? Was it done with high level of sharing: Photos
Participatory hazard assessment
community participation? of assemblies,
Level 3 carried out, is currently in use but ¡ Use: trainings, etc.
findings have only been shared
with some community members. • When was the assessment made? Is it still used?
Examples? • Minutes of
Participatory hazard assessment meetings for
7 and/or hazard mapping has been
carried out, is currently in use
• Has the hazard assessment/mapping been info sharing
Level 4
and findings have been shared ¡ useful to the community? In what ways?
with most or all members of the Result sharing: • Triangulation

community. consultations
• Were the results published or communicated to verify
A participatory hazard assessment
to the community? In what ways?
carried out, is currently in use and • Are most people in the community aware
findings have been shared with all of the main hazards that could impact the
members of the community; the community?
community has human resources
Level 5
capable of conducting/updating ¡ HR:
this assessment/mapping.
• Are there people who currently monitor these
assessments?
• Are there people in the community who can

carry out and update these assessments?
Comments

Resilience component Vulnerability / capacity assessment
Key Question Has the community carried out participatory vulnerability and capacity assessments (VCA),
shared the findings and have human resources capable of conducting and updating these
assessments?
A VCA has never been carried out in a structured and • Has a VCA been • Tangible works
participatory way in the community. conducted in the carried out based on
Level 1 ¡ community? Who VCA analysis
participated in its
A participatory VCA has been carried out in the creation?
• Lists of
community, but it is outdated and currently not in use.
Level 2 ¡ participation in VCA
• When was the
assessment made?
A participatory VCA has been carried out but findings • VCA report
• Has the VCA
were not fully shared with the community.
Level 3 ¡ been useful to the
community? In what • Evidence of
ways? information sharing:
A participatory VCA has been carried out and findings Meeting notes,
have been shared with most and/or all members of the photos if available
Level 4
community. ¡ • Were the results etc.
published or
8 A participatory VCA has been carried out and findings communicated to
have been shared with all members of the community; the community? • Triangulation
the community has human resources capable of How many verification
conducting and monitoring the assessment. members of the consultations
community know with additional
about them? community
members
Level 5 ¡ • Are there people

who currently
monitor these
assessments?
• Are there people
who can do these
assessments?
Comments

Resilience component Local and scientific methods for risk awareness
Key Question Does the community use local knowledge and perceptions of risk as well as other scientific
knowledge, data and assessment methods?
Suggested Guiding Suggested Means of
Community has little or no local • What kind of practices have you • References to
knowledge or perceptions of risk traditionally practiced to reduce dangers in ancestral DRR
Level 1 or scientific data and analysis (e.g. in ¡ your community? practices in plans or
the case of refugee camp or recent assessments
unplanned urbanization). • What methods have you been using to
Community has some risk monitor the hazard?
awareness based on local
Level 2 knowledge and perceptions of ¡ • Apart from local knowledge, has there • Scientific studies,
risk but this is not supported by been new scientific knowledge (from reports
scientific data or analysis. institutions or actors that work on these
issues) or assessment done on disaster risk
Community has medium level • Equipment/
in your community? Can you name a few?
of risk awareness based on local instrumentation for
knowledge and perceptions of risk monitoring hazards
Level 3
which is supported by one-off ¡ • Do people in the community rely more
in the community
on local knowledge or scientific analysis
or piecemeal scientific data or
9 analysis.
when assessing disaster risk? Explain why?
Community has high level of • Consultation with

• Do you act upon new scientific relevant technical/
risk awareness based on local information or do you continue to use
knowledge and perceptions of risk scientific institutions
Level 4
which is supported by longer term ¡ traditional practices? Or a combination of
both?
and more numerous scientific
data or analysis.
Community has high level of
risk awareness based on local
knowledge and perceptions
Level 5 of risk which is reinforced by ¡
comprehensive scientific data
and analysis as part of a long-
term strategy for risk awareness.
Comments

THEMATIC AREA 3: KNOWLEDGE & EDUCATION
Resilience component Public awareness and knowledge
Key Question Is there an open debate within the community resulting in agreements about problems,
solutions and priorities relating to disaster risk?
There is no open debate within • Do you have open assemblies in the • Notes from
the community about problems, community to reach agreements about open community
Level 1
solutions and priorities relating to ¡ problems, solutions and priorities relating meetings
disaster risks. to disaster risk? How often?
There is some (infrequent) open
• Participation list of
debate within the community
open community
about problems, solutions and
Level 2
priorities relating to disaster ¡ • Do all households participate in these meeting
risks, but there is a low level of open meetings?
community participation. • Agreements of
There is some (infrequent) open community actions
debate within the community
• Have you taken any actions to reduce
about problems, solutions and
disaster risk based on these agreements? • Photos of
Level 3 priorities relating to disaster risks ¡ Examples? community
with a good level of community
meetings, if
10 participation that usually results
in agreements.
available
There is frequent and • Does the community have a clear

participatory open debate with understanding on disaster risk and • Triangulation
Level 4
the community that always results
¡ measures that can be taken to reduce this consultations for
in agreements about problems, risk? verification
solutions, priorities relating to
disaster risks.
There is consistent and
participatory open debate with
the community that always results
Level 5 in agreements about problems, ¡
solutions and priorities relating to
disaster risk that the community
acts upon.
Comments

Resilience component Dissemination of DRR knowledge
Key Question Are DRR knowledge and capacities being passed on to children formally through local
schools and informally via oral tradition from one generation to the next?
There is minimal to no • Is there discussion or transmission of • Records of
dissemination of DRR knowledge DRR knowledge in the community? In teachers’ training
Level 1 and capacities in the community, ¡ what ways?
whether through formal or informal
transmission. • Teaching materials
incorporating DRR
Some DRR knowledge and
• Is the local school one of the channels? knowledge
capacities being passed on through
Level 2 oral tradition only; no knowledge ¡
and capacities being transferred • Photos of school
through the local school system. DRR activities
• Have the teachers been formally trained carried out, if
Some DRR knowledge and
in DRR? available
both oral tradition and local
Level 3
schools, however local teachers ¡
• Triangulation
11 have not received formal training
in DRR. • Are there DRR teaching materials? Is consultations
DRR mainstreamed in the official school with students for
Some DRR knowledge and curriculum? verification
both oral tradition and local
Level 4
schools, with local teachers ¡
having received formal training
on DRR.
Widespread dissemination of
DRR knowledge and capacities
through both oral tradition and
Level 5
local schools, with teachers trained ¡
in DRR and the school curriculum
mainstreaming DRR.
Comments

Resilience component Cultural attitudes and values
Key Question Do the community's cultural attitudes and values (e.g. expectations of help/self-
sufficiency, religious/ideological views) enable it to adapt to and recover from shocks and
stresses?
Community plays a weak role due to its belief that • What or who is • Plans or
adaptation and recovery from shocks and stresses is the main cause assessments
Level 1
beyond their control and primarily the responsibility of ¡ of disaster in the making reference
external entities (deities, government, NGOs etc.). community? to cultural values of
Community believes they have a key role to play in community
adaptation to and recovery from shocks and stress but
• After a disaster
Level 2 cultural attitudes and values contributing to lack of ¡ happens, who • Additional
social cohesion (prejudice, hostility) prevents them
has the primary consultations
from undertaking that role.
responsibility to help with external
Community plays a more active role in adapting to and your community key informants
recovering from shocks and stresses due to adequate recover? as verification of
level of social cohesion, however cultural attitudes and attitude trends in
Level 3
values contributing to gender inequality and/or lack ¡ disasters
of protection for vulnerable groups in the community • Do neighbors help
12 compromises the effectiveness of this role. each other in an
emergency? If not,
Community plays an effective role in adapting to and
recovering from shocks and stresses due to cultural why not?
Level 4
values and attitudes which contribute to high level of ¡
social cohesion. • How well do
Community plays a proactive and effective role in you think you all
adapting to and recovering from shocks and stresses work together as a
due to cultural values and attitudes which are conducive community to cope
to ensuring high level of social cohesion and a shared with a disaster? Are
Level 5 vision in DRR. ¡ there factors that
prevent you from
working together?
Please explain.
Comments

THEMATIC AREA 4: RISK MANAGEMENT AND VULNERABILITY REDUCTION
Resilience component Sustainable environmental management
Key Question Does the community adopt sustainable environmental management practices that
reduce disaster risk and adapt to new risks related to climate change?
There is no consideration for sustainable • Does your community use • Existence of
Level 1 environmental management practices in the ¡ practices that are damaging environmental
community. to the environment and management
There are little or no sustainable environmental which increase disaster risk? committees
management practices utilized by the community Examples?
(environmental protection measures tend to be one-
Level 2
off, piecemeal and short-term) and thereare few or ¡ • Hazard or
vulnerability
no measures taken to adapt to new risks related to • Do you take any measures assessment
climate change. to reduce this environmental reports
There are some sustainable environmental degradation?
management practices utilized by the community
(environmental protection measures are more • Seasonal
Level 3
numerous and longer term) and there are some ¡ • Have you perceived changes mapping
measures taken to adapt to new risks related to
13 climate change.
in the climate compared to
years ago? How does this • Tangible
Sustainable environmental management practices affect you? evidence
are utilized by the majority of people in the reported/
Level 4
community with medium adaptation capacity to ¡
observed of
new risks related to climate change. • Have you taken measures to measures
Sustainable environmental management adapt to or reduce these new to adapt
practices are utilized widely throughout the effects? or reduce
community with high adaptation capacity to new degradation
risks related to climate change.
Level 5 ¡
• How many people take
these measures?
Comments

Resilience component Access to healthcare in emergencies
Key Question Does the community have access to health care facilities and health workers equipped
and trained to respond to physical and mental health consequences of disasters and lesser
hazard events, and supported by access to emergency health services, medicines, etc.?
There is no one in the community trained or • Are there trained people • Health center
Level 1 qualified to practice healthcare and there is no ¡ who provide health services in reports
access to healthcare in the surrounding area. your community?
There are occasional visits from trained
• Equipment
community health workers and there is a
Level 2
healthcare facility available but access is very ¡ • Is there a health center in
inventory
difficult and/or quality of service is poor. your community or within a
Trained community health workers consistently reasonable distance? • Medicine
visit and there is access to a healthcare facility inventory
Level 3
assisted by a trained auxiliary nurse; however ¡
medicines and equipment are insufficient. • In emergencies, does this • List of the
Trained community health workers consistently health center have adequate health center
visit and there is an accessible healthcare facility supplies e.g. therapeutic food, staff and their
Level 4 with a physician and nurse, with the most ¡ water reserves, equipment and qualifications
essential equipment, medicines and referral healthcare staff? Please explain.
mechanisms.
14 • Maps
Trained community health workers consistently
visit and there is an accessible healthcare facility • In emergencies, has there to verify
completely equipped with all necessary staff, been health service delivery in accessibility of
equipment and medicines for health care and the community? What about health centers
referrals for emergencies. the referral mechanisms?
• Does the health care

Level 5 ¡ structure in the community
provide mental health
services?
Comments

Resilience component Health access and awareness in normal times
Key Question Do community members maintain good health and physical ability in normal times
(through adequate food and nutrition, hygiene and health care) and have awareness on
means to staying healthy and life-protecting measures?
Few community members • Are there adequate sanitation facilities in the • Health center
maintain good health and community? reports
physical ability in normal times
Level 1
and do not have awareness on ¡ • Do community members use good hygiene
staying healthy and life-protecting practices? (Name three basic good hygiene
measures. practices). • Evidence
Some community members • Are there periodic health checks in the of sanitation
maintain good health and community carried out by health workers? facilities in the
physical ability in normal times community
Level 2
but have low awareness on ¡ • In normal times does the community have
staying healthy and life-protecting access to a health center with adequate supplies,
equipment and healthcare staff? Please explain. • Water quality
measures.
sampling
Most community members • Are children under 5 routinely vaccinated?
maintain good health and
physical ability in normal times • Are there high levels of malnutrition in the • Observations
15 Level 3
and have some awareness on ¡ community? in relation
staying healthy and life-protecting in hygiene
Additional questions which could be asked standards
measures.
separately to a sample of mothers of young in the
Most community members children with assistance from health worker.
maintain good health and community
physical ability in normal times • Do mothers/carers know what to do if her
Level 4
and have an adequate level of ¡ child under 5 years has diarrhea? • Triangulation
awareness on staying healthy and consultations
life-protecting measures. • Do mothers/carers know how to reduce the
risk of dengue/malaria? with health
All community members workers
maintain good health and • Are health services provided regularly to
physical ability in normal vulnerable groups (e.g. people with disabilities,
Level 5
times and have a high level of ¡ elderly, children, pregnant and lactating women)?
awareness on staying healthy
and life-protecting measures.
Comments

Resilience component Food and water supplies
Key Question Does the community have a secure supply of food and water and manages an equitable
distribution system during disasters?
There is frequent scarcity of food and water during • Do households • Resource inventory
adverse conditions/emergencies. keep food reserves
Level 1 ¡ to be used in case of
emergencies? • Resource mapping
Some households have a minimum food reserve;
community access to water is often disrupted during
Level 2 ¡ • Is there a collective • Distribution
adverse conditions/emergencies. and management
food reserve to
be used in case of reports
Majority of households have a food reserve in case emergencies?
of adverse conditions/emergencies and measures are
• Evidence of storage
Level 3 being taken to reduce vulnerability of water supply, ¡ system either at
AND/OR there is community storage but it is poorly • Is there food
scarcity in the household or
functional.
community during community level
Community is organized to collectively store food
and water supply is secure for emergencies/periods of emergencies?
Level 4
scarcity; equitable distribution management system is ¡
16 weak. • Is water
Community is organized to collectively store food and supply to the
to manage an equitable distribution system; water community likely
supply is secure for emergencies/periods of scarcity. to be interrupted/
contaminated
during emergencies?
• Is there an
Level 5 ¡ organization in
place to manage
distribution of
collective food
reserves and water
supply fairly?
Comments

Resilience component Hazard-resistant livelihoods practices
Key Question Does the community employ hazard-resistant livelihoods practices for food security?
No hazard-resistant livelihoods • Are livelihood activities diversified in the • Evidence
practices are being employed in community or is there dependence on a single of practices
Level 1 the community and there is food ¡ or small number of livelihood activities? Describe employed
scarcity during certain periods of livelihoods activities.
the year.
Few community members
employ hazard-resistant • Are livelihoods in the community regularly
Level 2
livelihoods practices but they are ¡ affected by disaster (e.g., once a year)?
the exception.
Some community members
Level 3 employ hazard-resistant ¡ • Are hazard-resistant livelihoods practices
livelihoods practices. employed (e.g. hazard tolerant crops, soil and
Most community members water conservation)?
17 Level 4 employ hazard-resistant ¡
livelihoods practices.
All community members • If the answer to the above is yes, are these
employ hazard-resistant measures applied by most of the community
livelihoods practices and food members?
supplies remain secure during
emergencies as a result.
Level 5 ¡
• Are these measures sufficient to prepare or
recover from disaster and to enhance your food
security?
Comments

Resilience component Access to market
Key Question Are the local trade and transport links with markets for products, labour and services
protected against hazards and shocks?
All local trade and transport links • Are access routes to market likely to be • PMSD survey
that the community depends interrupted or damaged during disaster or other market
Level 1
on are extremely vulnerable to ¡ situations? system study
hazards and external shocks.
Most of the local trade
• Evidence of
and transport links that the • Are there business agreements or completed
Level 2 community depend on are ¡ partnerships likely to be affected during works to protect
extremely vulnerable to hazards disaster (e.g., access to financial services, transport and
and external shocks. services by intermediaries, suppliers, packaging communications
Some of the local trade etc.)? infrastructure
and transport links that the against hazard
community depends on are
Level 3 vulnerable to hazards and ¡ • Are demands from buyers for produce from
18 external shocks but some the community likely to reduce significantly
measures are in place to protect during disasters?
them.
Most of the local trade
and transport links that the • Do you have a way of storing or processing
Level 4 community depends on are ¡ and shelving produce?
protected from hazards and
external shocks.
All local trade and transport
• Is availability of labour necessary for
links that the community depend
livelihood activities likely to be significantly
Level 5 on are protected from hazards ¡ reduced during emergencies?
and external shocks.
Comments

Resilience component Social Protection
Key Question Does the community have access to social protection schemes to support risk
reduction directly, through targeted DRR activities, or indirectly, through socioeconomic
development activities that reduce vulnerability?
The community has no access • Do community members generally • Documented
to formal or informal social help each other out during situations of info on available
Level 1
protection schemes to support ¡ emergencies? Examples? formal social
risk reduction. protection
Social cohesion within schemes
community provides informal • Do community members carry out actions
social protection arrangements to protect vulnerable persons in your
Level 2
that support risk reduction at a ¡ community during situations of emergencies?
small scale, but there is no access
to formal mechanisms.
Community has limited • Are there formal social protection schemes
(inconsistent) access to formal provided by central government or other
19 Level 3 social protection schemes that ¡ agencies such as farmer associations or
only indirectly support risk cooperatives available to the community?
reduction.
Community has access to formal
social protection schemes that
Level 4
only indirectly support risk ¡ • Can these provide funds for disaster
mitigation measures (e.g. house
reduction. improvements or livelihoods protection)?
Community has access to formal
social protection schemes that
both directly and indirectly
• Are these informal/formal social protection
Level 5 support risk reduction. ¡ measures adequate to effectively prepare for
and/or recover from disaster?
Comments

Resilience component Access to financial services
Key Question Are there affordable and flexible community savings and credit schemes, and/or access to
micro-finance services, whether formal or informal?
Community members have • Where do community members save or • Documentation
no access to financial service obtain loans from? Are these services in the evidencing
Level 1
providers, whether formal or ¡ community or external to the community? existence and
informal. functioning of
Some community members can VSLAs (cajas
access only informal service • Do people know about these services? rurales) or other
providers, though their services credit schemes
Level 2
are weak/unstable; no formal ¡ available to the
financial services available to community
• Are these services affordable and flexible for
the community.
users?
Only few community members
can access formal and informal
services in the community
• Do people in the community use these
(due to unaffordability and/or
Level 3
lack of knowledge) and these ¡ services on a regular basis? If not, why not?
20 are not sufficient to finance
preparedness, response and
recovery. • Can these services provide funds to prepare
Most community members can for and/or respond to disaster?
access both formal and informal
services though their capacity
Level 4
can finance only some aspects ¡
of preparedness, response and/or
recovery.
Most community members can
access both formal and informal
financial services which have
Level 5
sufficient capacity to finance ¡
preparedness, response and
recovery.
Comments

Resilience component Income and asset protection
Key Question Are household and community asset bases (income, savings and convertible property)
sufficiently large and diverse to support disaster coping strategies and are there measures
to protect them against disaster?
Household/Community asset • Do community members have savings either • Evidence of
Level 1 bases cannot support any ¡ individual or collective which can be used to collective savings
disaster coping strategies. prepare for and/or recover from disaster? schemes, e.g.
Household/Community asset VSLAs
bases in the community can
support coping strategies in • Do community members have assets/ • Insurance
Level 2 small-scale emergencies with ¡ belongings which can be quickly sold/used to policies for the
significant impact on quality prepare for and/or recover from disaster? protection of
of life and income generation
asset bases
capacity.
Household/Community • Do community members have relatives
asset bases can support outside the community that can transfer • Evidence of
coping strategies in small- money in an emergency? measures in place
Level 3 scale emergencies without ¡ to protect assets
significant impact on quality
21 of life and income generation
• Are funds that can be accessed quickly
capacity.
either through savings and other incomes
Household/Community asset sufficient to prepare for and/or recover from
bases can support coping disaster?
strategies for survival in
Level 4
disasters, with significant ¡
impact on quality of life and
income generation capacity. • Are measures in place to protect economic
assets from disaster (e.g. insurance policies,
Household/Community asset
physical protection measures etc.)?
bases can support coping
strategies in disaster without
Level 5 significant impact on quality ¡
of life and income generation
capacity and measures currently
in place to protect them.
Comments

Resilience component Protection of infrastructure and basic services
Key Question Are the community’s building infrastructure and basic services resilient to disaster
(including being located in safe areas, using hazard-resistant construction methods and
structural mitigation measures)?
Majority of housing, critical • What proportion of housing/infrastructure • Infrastructure
infrastructure and basic services in the community is located in areas which works
in the community are located are vulnerable to disaster?
Level 1
in unsafe areas and no hazard ¡
mitigation measures are being • Mitigation
taken. works
• Are there schools, health centers and
Majority of housing, critical principal access routes to the community
infrastructure and basic services located in areas that are vulnerable to disaster? • Evidence of
in the community are located in works
Level 2
unsafe areas but some hazard ¡
mitigation measures are being
• Is water supply, electrical supply • Works
taken.
communication, drainage or other key basic execution reports
Some housing, critical services likely to be interrupted/contaminated
infrastructure and basic services during an emergency situation?
in the community are located in
Level 3
unsafe areas and some hazard ¡
22 mitigation measures are being
• Are construction methods used in the
taken.
community that increase resistance to
Majority of housing, critical disaster?
infrastructure and basic services
in the community are located
Level 4 in safe areas and some hazard ¡ • Have mitigation works been undertaken to
mitigation measures are being
taken for infrastructure in unsafe reduce risk to transport routes, water supply
locations. and/or to protect houses, schools, health
centers located in unsafe areas?
Majority of housing, critical
infrastructure and basic services
in the community are located
in safe areas and those in
Level 5
unsafe locations are adequately ¡
protected, through hazard-
resistant construction and
structural mitigation measures.
Comments

Resilience component Land use and planning
Key Question Does the community decision-making regarding land use and management take hazard
risks and vulnerabilities into account?
No community decision- • Are there hazard maps available for the • Hazard maps
Level 1 making process around land use ¡ community?
and planning.
• Community
Community land use and
land use plan
Level 2 planning does not consider ¡ • Are these taken into account when making incorporating
hazard risks and vulnerabilities decisions? DRR documented
Community land use and or reported
planning considers hazard risks
Level 3
and vulnerabilities in the short- ¡ • Is there a community land use plan?
term. • Documentation
Community land use and of land planning
planning considers hazard risks decisions if
• Does it take into account hazards and available
Level 4 and vulnerabilities in the long- ¡ vulnerabilities?
23 term (community land use plan
if applicable). • Local authority
Community land use and or central
• Is land use planning short-term or long-
planning which considers government land
term?
hazard risks and vulnerabilities use plans
in the long-term (local land • Do community decision-makers use that
development plan if applicable), plan?
Level 5 which is supported by local ¡
authority/central government
land use policy and planning.
• Does the community plan align with higher
administrative level plans?
Comments

Resilience component Operation of education services in emergencies
Key Question Do education services have the capacity to continue their operation without interruption
during emergencies?
School frequently impacted (at least once a year) • How often is the • School safety plan
by disasters and shocks that result in suspension of school impacted by
Level 1
school activities. School does not have a safety plan or ¡ emergencies?
emergency committee. • Documentation
of the existence of
School impacted at least once every 5 years by
• Are school a school emergency
disasters and shocks that result in suspension of school
activities suspended committee
Level 2 activities. Interruptions generally last for more than a ¡ as a result? For how
month before activities are resumed. School does not
long?
have a safety plan or emergency committee.
School impacted at least once every 5 years by
disasters and shocks that result in suspension of school • Is there a school
activities. Interruptions last less than one month before safety plan in place?
activities are resumed. A school safety plan is in place
Level 3
and some of the preparedness measures identified have ¡
• Does it include
been implemented. A school emergency committee
measures to ensure
has been formed but it does not perform simulation
the continuous
drills.
operation of
24 School impacted at least once every 10 years by the school in
disasters and shocks that result in suspension of school emergencies
activities. Interruptions are generally less than one week (protection of
before activities are resumed. A school safety plan is materials and
Level 4
in place and most of the preparedness measures ¡
supplies, teacher or
identified have been implemented. A school emergency substitute availability
committee is in place and at least one simulation drill etc.)?
has been performed in the last school year.
School’s operation rarely impacted by emergencies
(or impacts result in minimum disruption to school • Is there a school
activities), a school safety plan is in place and most of emergency
the preparedness measures have been implemented. committee? Does it
Level 5
A school emergency committee is in place and regularly ¡ perform simulation
performs simulation drills and reviews/updates the drills and periodic
school safety plan. reviews of the plan?
Comments

THEMATIC AREA 5: PREPAREDNESS & RESPONSE
Resilience component Capacities in preparedness and response
Key Question Does the community have a trained and operating organization in disaster preparedness
and response?
Suggested Means
Resilience Characteristics Suggested Guiding Questions
of Verification
The community does not have a trained • Is there a community • Documentation
organization responsible for emergency emergency committee trained and records of
Level 1
preparedness and response. ¡ and certified or otherwise meetings of the
validated by higher bodies? local organization
There is a community organization In what topics (search and
responsible for emergency preparedness rescue, first aid, management
of emergency shelters, needs • Tangible
and response but only some of its
Level 2
members have been formally trained in ¡ assessment, relief distribution, prevention or
fire-fighting)? preparedness
DRR skills and its operational capacity is
actions
weak.
There is a community organization • Is the current training adequate
responsible for emergency preparedness to protect the community in • Damage analysis
Level 3 and response and its members have been ¡ disasters? If not, what other and needs
trained in DRR skills but it only operates training is needed? assessment reports.
in emergencies.
There is a fully trained community • Lists of attendance
organization responsible for emergency • Do members of the local
emergency committee carry out to training
preparedness and response, which cascades workshops
25 Level 4
training to other community members ¡ preparedness activities regularly?
and carries out preparedness activities
and response in emergencies. • Do they have the necessary • Photos of training
There is a fully trained community equipment to carry out their days
organization responsible for emergency roles in first aid, search and
preparedness and response, which cascades rescue, damage assessment etc.? • Tangible
training to other community members, evidence that
performs prevention, preparedness, shows knowledge
response and recovery and effectively • Do they respond effectively
during emergency situations? acquired is put into
coordinates with external agencies.
Level 5 ¡ • Are there district/regional
practice (simulation
drill reports), as
emergency committees that applicable
provide ongoing support? Is there
effective coordination between • Evaluation reports
the two? from simulation
drills
Comments

Resilience component Early warning system
Key Question Is there an operational Early Warning System in the community?
Suggested Means
of Verification
In spite of the local knowledge of some • Are the community members • Early Warning
people, the community rarely knows aware of potential hazards and System community
Level 1
about the coming of a hazard that could ¡ how these may affect their operation manual/
significantly impact the community. homes and livelihoods? plan
Due to local knowledge sometimes the
community knows when a hazard that
• Is there a mechanism in place • Evidence of
Level 2 could be dangerous is approaching, but ¡ to monitor these hazards/threats monitoring
they do not always take the appropriate
(e.g. river flood level monitors). equipment and
measures.
tools
Additional to local knowledge, the
community has tools for monitoring • Are people at risk alerted of
Level 3 hazards and established communication ¡ an impending emergency with • Communication
channels for alert dissemination, but sufficient time in advance? and warning tools
these are not always effective.
Additional to local knowledge, the • Does the community have the • Reports on
community has effective tools to capacity to evacuate persons dissemination the
26 monitor hazards and communicate alerts. rapidly from high risk areas in Early Warning
The operation and maintenance of this advance of an emergency? System
Level 4
early warning system is supported by ¡
the regional/national risk management
authorities. However simulation drills are • Have community members
not regularly carried out. been trained in operation and
Additional to local knowledge, the maintenance of the EWS for their
community is equipped with a functioning community?
Early Warning System with reliable
hazard monitoring and alert dissemination
Level 5
fully supported by regional/national risk ¡
management authorities. Simulation drills
are regularly carried out and weaknesses
addressed.
Comments

Resilience component Contingency planning
Key Question Does the community use a contingency plan that is widely understood, includes
measures to protect vulnerable groups, and was prepared in a participative manner?
Suggested Means
of Verification
Community has no contingency plan. • Does the community • Contingency plan
have a contingency plan for
Level 1 ¡ emergencies?
• Inventory of
resources to respond
Community has a contingency plan but this
• Did a lot of the community to emergencies
was not prepared in a participatory way,
members participate in the
nor does it take into account the needs
Level 2
of vulnerable groups. Few community ¡ preparation of this plan?
• Clearly signed
members know its content and it is evacuation routes
currently not being applied. • Is the plan known and
Community has a contingency plan that understood by the majority of
the community? • Maps of alternative
was prepared in a participatory way that
water sources
takes into account the needs of some
Level 3
vulnerable groups. Some community ¡
• Does this contingency plan
members know its content but it is only • If possible, perform
include adequate measures for
occasionally applied and updated.
27 the protection of vulnerable an evacuation
Community has a contingency plan, groups? Examples? exercise
developed in a participatory and
inclusive manner that takes into account
Level 4 the needs of most vulnerable groups; ¡ • Are evacuation routes and
most community members know its (in case of drought) routes
content however it is only occasionally to alternative water sources
applied and updated. mapped?
Community has a contingency plan,
developed in a participatory and • Are simulation drills carried
inclusive manner that takes into account out to test and update the
Level 5 needs of most vulnerable groups; ¡ Contingency Plan? How often?
majority of community members know Are improvements made after
its content and it is regularly applied and simulations?
updated.
Comments

Resilience component Emergency infrastructure
Key Question Are emergency shelters (purpose built or modified) accessible to community and with
adequate facilities for all affected population?
Suggested Means
of Verification
All of community housing is unsafe for • Is housing infrastructure in the • Photos of buildings
any emergency (small-scale and large-scale) community adequately safe? used for emergency
Level 1
and there is no physical space to evacuate ¡ shelters
to. • In an emergency situation do
community members stay in
In small scale emergencies, community
their homes? Or do they take • Manual for
members can house themselves in homes
shelter in community buildings, operating the shelter
of relatives or neighbours in more secure
Level 2
conditions or using school buildings, but ¡ or in the homes of relatives/
friends?
there is no other community building to • Inventory of the
function as an evacuation shelter. • Are schools used for emergency resources in the
Additional to the homes of relatives shelters? shelter
and neighbours, the community has a
• Are there community buildings
structure (community center or other
which have adequate conditions
Level 3 community building other than schools) ¡ and equipment in terms of
that can serve as a shelter in emergencies
water supply, sanitation, first aid,
but its facilities are inadequate to meet
sleeping, food storage for the
the basic needs of all affected persons.
community members during
28 Additional to the homes of relatives and the time necessary to recover
neighbors, the community has a structure from a disaster (e.g. Are they
(community center or other community equipped with potable water,
Level 4 building other than schools) that serves ¡ electric power, 3/5 square meters/
as a shelter with adequate conditions to person, and 1 latrine/ W.C., per 20
meet the basic needs of affected persons persons)?
in emergencies.
Additional to the homes of relatives and • Do these community buildings
neighbours, the community has a purpose include access for persons with
built emergency shelter in optimal disability? Are latrines clearly
conditions to meet all basic needs of signed for men and for women?
affected persons and also to protect
Level 5
vulnerable groups in emergencies. ¡ • How many people can these
community buildings shelter?
Does it cover the needs of the
community?
Comments

Resilience component Emergency response and recovery
Key Question Does the community take a leading role in response and recovery actions that reach all
affected members of community and that are prioritized according to needs?
Suggested Means
of Verification
Community has a mainly passive role in • In an emergency situation does • Contingency plan
response and recovery actions. your community wait for external
Level 1 ¡ help before responding or does
the community begin responding • Hazard and risk
using its own resources? maps
Community usually plays an active role
in response and recovery actions, but
Level 2 these actions do not prioritize need and ¡ • Inventories of
reach only few of the affected community • Does your community have resources and
members. the capacity to lead response equipment for
Community usually plays a leading role and recovery actions or does it emergency response
in response and recovery actions that depend on external assistance
Level 3 can reach most affected community ¡ to effectively respond to
• Evacuation routes
members, but the needs of vulnerable emergencies?
groups are still not prioritized.
Community always plays a leading role
29 in response and recovery actions, reaches • In previous emergency
Level 4 most of the affected members in the ¡ emergencies did external agencies
community and prioritizes the needs of come to assist the community
some vulnerable groups. and if so did these actors make
Community always plays a leading role the decisions or was it the
in response and recovery actions, which community leadership or a
can reach all of its affected members combination of both?
and needs of all vulnerable groups are
prioritized and met.
Level 5 ¡ • In an emergency situation do
the community leaders ensure
that the needs of the affected
populations and vulnerable
groups are met? Examples?
Comments

Resilience component Volunteerism and accountability
Key Question Is there a high level of community volunteerism in all aspects of preparedness, response
and recovery; representative of all sections of community?
Suggested Means
of Verification
There is very low to negligible level of • Are there volunteers in your • Volunteer
community volunteerism in aspects of community willing to participate inventory
Level 1 preparedness, response and recovery ¡ in community projects for
and there is no adherence to relevant preparedness, response and
protocol. recovery? Examples? • Attendance lists
trainings
There is some level of community
• Do these volunteers come from
volunteerism but not in all aspects of
a small group in the community
preparedness, response and recovery, and it • Photographic
Level 2
is not representative of all sections of the ¡ or is there active participation
evidence
of volunteers from across the
community and there is no adherence to
community?
relevant protocol.
• Are they trained in DRR? Do • Evidence
There is high level of community
they adhere to relevant protocols of projects
volunteerism but not in all aspects of
in preparedness, response and implemented by
preparedness, response and recovery and
Level 3
it is not representative of all sections of ¡ recovery? volunteers
30 the community, with limited adherence to
• Do they ensure the protection
relevant protocol.
of vulnerable persons such as the
There is a high level of community elderly/persons with disability?
volunteerism in all aspects of preparedness,
response and recovery, but still is not • Is their participation adequate
Level 4
representative of all sections of the ¡ to meet the needs of your
community, with limited adherence to community?
relevant protocol.
There is a high level of community
volunteerism in all aspects of
preparedness, response and recovery,
Level 5
which is representative of all sections of ¡
the community, with full adherence to
relevant protocol.
Comments

Bibliography
Mella, Orlando. Nature and theory-method guidelines of qualitative research. 1998.
Iñiguez, Lupicinio. Group Interviewing. Guadalajara University, Mexico. 2008.
Twigg, John. Characteristics of a Disaster Resilient Community; Guidance note. Version 1, England, 2007.
Twigg, John. Characteristics of a Disaster-Resilient Community. Guidance note Version 2, England, 2009.
Manual for the Inclusion of People with Disabilities in Emergency Situations in Honduras. GOAL,
DIPECHO, COPECO, HANDICAP International.
Grasso Veronica F.UNEP, Early Warning System: State of art analysis and future directions.
Up-dated Glossary of Terms on the Perspective of DRR, CEPREDENAC, http://www.sica.int/
Glossary of Organic Agriculture, www.fao.org

The EU’s humanitarian aid funds relief operations for victims of natural disasters and
The EU’s humanitarian
conflict outside theaid funds relief
European aperations
Union. for victims
Aid is provided of natural
impartially, disasters
directly and in
to people
conflict outside
need, thediscrimination
without European Union.
of theirAid is provided
race, impartially,
ethnic group, religion,directly
gender,toage,
people
natio-
in need,
nalitywithout discrimination
or political affliation. of their race, ethnic group, religion, gender, age,
nationality or political affliation.
This document covers humanitarian aid activities implemented with the financial asis-
This tance
document
of the covers
European humanitarian
Union. The aid activities
views expresed implemented
here should with the
not be financial
taken, in any
asistance of the European Union. The views expresed here should not be taken,
way, to reflect the official opinion of the European Union, and the European Comis- in any
way, sion
to reflect
is notthe official opinion
responsible of use
for any the European
that may be Union,
made and the information
of the European Comission
it contains.
is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information it contains.
Version 3
Printed by: RILMAC Impresores, S.de R.L., de C.V., PBX (504) 2245-1625
February 2015
Printed by: RILMAC Impresores, S.de R.L., de C.V., PBX (504) 2245-1625
May 2015
Preparedbyby
Prepared
GOAL
GOAL
web site: www.goal.ie
web site: www.goal.ie
Major hazards such as hurricanes, earthquakes, volcano eruptions, droughts,
and landslides, among others, constantly threaten the lives and livelihoods of the
most vulnerable populations across the world. In the context of accelerated climate
change and population growth, the current trend of frequent major disasters is
expected to increase in the foreseeable future.
To mitigate this trend, increased Disaster Resilience is essential to reduce the

potential impact of humanitarian crises on the poorest communities who are
disproportionately affected by these disasters.
This Toolkit for Measuring Community Disaster Resilience has been developed
as a concise and user-friendly tool to measure the level of disaster resilience at
community level through the assessment of a broad range of resilience components.

Toolkit For Measuring Community Disaster Resilience: Guidance Manual Prepared by GOAL May 2015

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Toolkit For Measuring Community Disaster Resilience: Guidance Manual Prepared by GOAL May 2015

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Toolkit For Measuring Community Disaster Resilience: Guidance Manual Prepared by GOAL May 2015

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

TOOLKIT FOR MEASURING

COMMUNITY DISASTER RESILIENCE

ABBREVIATIONS & ACRONYMS 2

B. BACKGROUND TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS TOOLKIT 3

D. THE COMMUNITY RESILIENCE MEASUREMENT TOOLKIT 5

D.1. SUMMARY OF THE TOOLKIT 5

D.2. RESILIENCE COMPONENTS 8

D.3. RATIONALE AND CLARIFICATIONS ON KEY QUESTIONS (SURVEY PART B) 10

E. APPLYING THE TOOLKIT IN THE FIELD 15

E.1. SCOPE OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE 15

E.2.1 PROFILE OF THE TECHNICAL FIELD STAFF 15

E.2.2 DATA COLLECTION 16

E.3.1. SURVEY PART A: GENERAL CONTEXT 17

E.3.2. SURVEY PART B: RESILIENCE CHARACTERISTICS ASSESSMENT 17

E.3.3. METHODS FOR DATA COLLECTION 18

ANNEX 1: KEY CONCEPTS 19

ANNEX 3: RESILIENCE QUESTIONNAIRE 25

DFID: Department for International Development of the UK

DipECHO: Disaster Preparedness Programme of European Community Humanitarian Office

DRR: Disaster Risk Reduction

DRM: Disaster Risk Management

FAO: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

GOAL: International Humanitarian Agency (Ireland)

NGO: Non-Governmental Organization

UNEP: United Nations Environment Programme

MEAL: Monitoring, Evaluation, Accountability and Learning

KAPB: Knowledge, Attitudes, Practices and Behaviours

VCA: Vulnerability and Capacity Assessment

FGD: Focus Group Discussions

PLHIV: People Living with HIV and AIDS

LQAS: Lot Quality Assurance Sampling

MOV: Means of Verification

2 GUIDANCE MANUAL May 2015

B. Background to the development of this toolkit

Toolkit For Measuring Community Disaster Resilience 3

% LEVEL CATEGORY DESCRIPTION

4 GUIDANCE MANUAL May 2015

This Toolkit for Measuring Community Disaster Resilience is comprised of:

Part A: General Context of the Community

Part B: Community Resilience Characteristics Assessment

o Thematic Area 1: Governance

o Thematic Area 2: Risk Assessment

o Thematic Area 3: Knowledge and Education

o Thematic Area 4: Risk Management and Vulnerability Reduction

o Thematic Area 5: Disaster Preparedness and Response4

Toolkit For Measuring Community Disaster Resilience 5

After downloading from the CommCare exchange, the survey

The entire application download process, from the CommCare

All information on application troubleshooting, navigating

Within the Toolkit application, surveyors will enter the name

Toolkit For Measuring Community Disaster Resilience 7

Policy, planning, priorities and 1. Community

2. Rights awareness and

Integration with development 3. Integration with

Hazard/risk data and TA 2, Characteristics 1.1, 1.2,

9. Local and scientific

Public awareness, knowledge and 10. Public awareness and

8 GUIDANCE MANUAL May 2015