DFID Risk framework analysis

DFID Risk framework analysis – Update January 2015 The following possible obstacles to the achievement of the project’s results and objectives have been identified.

External risks 

Political risk: Political situation in target countries changes/becomes unstable (e.g. terrorist attack, public sector strike, governmental shutdown due to demonstrations), resulting in risks for programme implementation and beneficiaries’ safety. o

In 2013, 2014 and at this moment again (for more information on recent political violence Bangladesh political violence 2015), Bangladesh has been politically unstable.

At the beginning of 2013, a political shutdown caused significant delay in programme implementation. However, this was corrected for in the second half of the year through intensification in programme activities.

o

Although the situation in Bangladesh is still unstable, we do not expect programme delay in 2014 nor 2015.

o

In 2013 prolonged teacher strikes took place in Kenya, influencing programme implementation of our partner in Nairobi specifically as their activities take place at school sites. Events were organised for the beneficiaries to catch up on missed sessions.



Legal & Regulatory risk: Changes in laws or regulations limit scope to act. o

In Kenya, law makers created a Bill that would cap foreign investment in local Kenyan NGO’s to 15%. Fortunately the Bill was rejected in Parliament in December 2013.

o

In 2015, public hearings were introduced in Kenya to propose amendments to the Public Benefits Organisations Act. This could influence the rules and regulations for NGOs operating in Kenya. More information can be found here: Kenya PBO Act 2015



Acts of God: Natural disasters prevent or delay action. o

In March 2014, the first case of Ebola was reported in West-Africa. Since then there has been an extensive Ebola Outbreak in several countries, including Nigeria. This has influenced programme implementation in Nigeria, although YEF has been able to mitigate the risk quite successfully. Policies by educational authorities to reduce personal contact as a precaution made peer session challenging. Therefore some girls used informal settings to reach out to their peers. They used break periods, and interpersonal communication to reach out to their peers. Weekly life skill sessions also

held alongside sports session thus achieving project set objectives while alongside obeying the school rules. 

Personal harm: staff, consultants, beneficiaries run the risk of personal harm (e.g. abduction) while working on the project.

Partner risks 

Implementation risk: partners lack or lose the capacity to implement the programme.



Sustainability risk: partners cannot attract and/or retain sufficient human capital. o

Over the duration of the programme, several AGYW whose capacity was built by Women Win on M&E, the Goal curriculum or DST left their organisation. This happened at KMG, MTG, BRAC Uganda, and Sadili Oval. It remains crucial that capacity built is disseminated in each of the organisations. We will continue to stress this during the workshops we conduct with the partners.



Safety risks: Beneficiaries are not safe in the programme.

Programme risks 

Innovation risk: Intervention does not result in desired outcomes.



Unintended outcomes: Intervention results in negative unexpected outcomes.

Organisational risks 

Operational risk: Women Win cannot attract and/or retain sufficient human capital to run the programme. o

In 2013, one of Women Win’s key staff members was on leave for six months. This did not significantly influence the implementation of the programme, as appropriate measures were taken.

o

In 2015 again, one of Women Win’s key staff members will be on leave for several months. Similar measures are taken and thus it is not expected to influence programme implementation.



Management risk: Women Win does not succeed in managing their partners, and partners’ capacity building.



Reputational risk: Insufficient impact or other unforeseen activities/outcomes can lead to negative image.

Financial risks 

Budgetary risk: Women Win and/or programme partners cannot attract and/or retain sufficient financial capital to run the organization.



Fraud: Resources are lost because an entity or person in the programme does not manage the money as agreed.

Probability and impact Each risk can be characterized by the probability that it will occur, and the impact it may have. Based on those aspects, the right mitigation strategy can be chosen.

Low

Probability Medium

High

Impact

High

Medium

Low

Risk Mitigation There are several ways of managing the established risks1: 

Transfer: This might be done by conventional insurance or by supporting a third party to take the risk in another way.



Tolerate: This course of action is common for large external risks. The ability to do anything about certain risks may be limited, or the cost of taking any action may be disproportionate to the potential benefit gained. In these cases the response may be toleration but the risk should be tracked so managers are ready to reconsider should it start to escalate.

1

Based on “Guidance: Risk Management in DFID”



Treat: By far the greater number of risks will belong to this category. The purpose of taking action to reduce the chance of the risk occurring is not necessarily to obviate the risk, but to contain it to an acceptable level.



Terminate the risk by doing things differently thus removing the risk where it is feasible to do so.

Political risk

Probability Medium

Likely impact Medium

Legal & Regulatory risk

Medium

Medium

Act of God

Medium

High

Personal Harm

Medium

High

Implementation risk

Low

Medium

Sustainability risk

Medium

Medium

Safety risk

Low

High

Innovation risk

Medium

Medium

Unintended outcomes

Medium

High

Mitigation Tolerate – Political risk cannot be prevented nor foreseen. We will keep track, and evaluate the risk continuously, treating the risk at the moments that we can.

Tolerate – This risk cannot be prevented nor foreseen. We will keep track, and evaluate the risk continuously, treating the risk at the moments that we can.

Tolerate - Natural disasters cannot be prevented nor foreseen. We will keep track, and evaluate the risk continuously, treating the risk at the moments that we can.

Transfer – We will make sure staff and consultants travelling for this project are insured for this risk.

Treat – Assess organizational capacity with the partners at the start of the project; create a roadmap for capacity building & sustainability with them, making sure that they are fully engaged in the process.

Treat - a solid base of staff and consultants will be engaged, making sure that the project does not become dependent on specific staff members.

Treat – by ensuring child protection policies are in place, and by building capacity on creating safe spaces for girls in programmes, this risk can be reduced.

Treat - since this is an innovation grant, it is possible that the intended outcomes do not occur. To reduce this risk we will extensively and continuously monitor and evaluate the activities, outputs and impact on the ground, and interfere when possible.

Treat – since this is an innovation grant, it is possible that outcomes occur (positive as well as negative) that were not intended at the start of the project. To reduce this risk on unintended negative outcomes we will extensively and continuously monitor and

Operational risk

Low

Medium

Management risk

Low

Medium

Reputational risk

Low

Medium

Budgetary risk

Low

Medium

Fraud

Medium

Medium

evaluate the activities, outputs and impact on the ground, and interfere when possible.

Treat – a solid base of staff and consultants will be engaged making sure that the project does not become dependent on specific staff members.

Treat – by arranging for an external evaluation in the first year that focuses specifically on the management and relationship between Women Win and its partners, any issues can be discovered and managed.

Treat – by treating the other risks managed in this framework, the risk on reputational damage is decreased.

Treat – in the current economic situation, NGOs can have trouble securing sufficient funds to run their organisations. To mitigate this, continuous monitoring and evaluation of the financial situation will take place, and action will be taken in reducing costs were possible. Furthermore if necessary, resource mobilization training will be given to partners as part of the organizational capacity building efforts.

Treat – each contract contains a fraud and corruption policy, ensuring everyone is aware and required to comply with these policies.

Note: Indeed, more often than not, the risks associated with not engaging in these contexts – both for the countries themselves and for the international community – outweigh most of the risks of engaging in the first place. The question therefore is not whether to engage but how to engage in ways that are context-specific and do not come at an unacceptable cost.