240
A. M. A. Saja et al.
that standalone project model does not comply with the requirement for replicability and sustainability. A complementary or a common CBDRM model that is
affordable by the local DRM stakeholders needed to have evolved and validated
by the stakeholders of Disaster Management and other policymakers from sectoral
ministries.
The project aimed to work with and support the Ministry of Disaster Management (MDM) and Ministry of Education (MoE) to take the lead in implementing
the ICBDRM model that can promote technically, operationally and financially
affordable best practices from field-tested experiences towards building resilient
communities.
In order to ensure that the communities are safer to disasters, it is fundamental
that all its members, including vulnerable groups such as women, children, people
with disabilities, can better cope and avert disasters and risks are reduced. Thus the
project promotes an inclusive approach to disaster risk management, recognising
that different people face different risks and barriers, so responses are tailored and
empowering. The approach, including community mobilisation, capacity building,
and inclusive risk assessment, planning and mitigation ensures the full and meaningful participation of all groups and individuals in identifying and reducing risks;
promotes equality of rights and opportunities for them in encountering potential risks;
appreciates and responds to their diverse characteristics, capacities and vulnerabilities; contributes to resilience for everyone by removing barriers that keep excluded
people further away from engagement.
Third Phase: This is the final phase of operationalising CRF, where the contribution to the national framework for risk-sensitive development planning was scaled
up.
(a) Advocated for Community Resilience Framework as a common model for
community-based risk management in Sri Lanka.
(b) Trained the human resource capacity of the government as a sustainable
approach.
(c) District planning mechanisms and the common format were replicated in other
divisions.
(d) Simplified tools and processes for risk-sensitive development planning as a win–
win, where the tools were simplified and updated to suit the time and technology
of the government system (Fig. 13.1).
13.5 Results and Discussion
Implementation of Community Resilience Framework (CRF) training for the key
divisional and district-level development state officials has highlighted further revision to refine the training manual on Community Resilience Framework (CRF) developed by the technical working committee on DRR under the DMC. The need for
fine-tuning the existing training guidelines along with the addition of training aids and
A. M. A. Saja et al.
that standalone project model does not comply with the requirement for replicability and sustainability. A complementary or a common CBDRM model that is
affordable by the local DRM stakeholders needed to have evolved and validated
by the stakeholders of Disaster Management and other policymakers from sectoral
ministries.
The project aimed to work with and support the Ministry of Disaster Management (MDM) and Ministry of Education (MoE) to take the lead in implementing
the ICBDRM model that can promote technically, operationally and financially
affordable best practices from field-tested experiences towards building resilient
communities.
In order to ensure that the communities are safer to disasters, it is fundamental
that all its members, including vulnerable groups such as women, children, people
with disabilities, can better cope and avert disasters and risks are reduced. Thus the
project promotes an inclusive approach to disaster risk management, recognising
that different people face different risks and barriers, so responses are tailored and
empowering. The approach, including community mobilisation, capacity building,
and inclusive risk assessment, planning and mitigation ensures the full and meaningful participation of all groups and individuals in identifying and reducing risks;
promotes equality of rights and opportunities for them in encountering potential risks;
appreciates and responds to their diverse characteristics, capacities and vulnerabilities; contributes to resilience for everyone by removing barriers that keep excluded
people further away from engagement.
Third Phase: This is the final phase of operationalising CRF, where the contribution to the national framework for risk-sensitive development planning was scaled
up.
(a) Advocated for Community Resilience Framework as a common model for
community-based risk management in Sri Lanka.
(b) Trained the human resource capacity of the government as a sustainable
approach.
(c) District planning mechanisms and the common format were replicated in other
divisions.
(d) Simplified tools and processes for risk-sensitive development planning as a win–
win, where the tools were simplified and updated to suit the time and technology
of the government system (Fig. 13.1).
13.5 Results and Discussion
Implementation of Community Resilience Framework (CRF) training for the key
divisional and district-level development state officials has highlighted further revision to refine the training manual on Community Resilience Framework (CRF) developed by the technical working committee on DRR under the DMC. The need for
fine-tuning the existing training guidelines along with the addition of training aids and