Disaster Resilience in LGUs: 2 Proposed Methods for Performance Assessment

This article was based on my application exam for a project with the Department of the Interior of Local Government.

Title Separator Site title

How good are Philippine local government units in building disaster resilience?

Local government units are mandated to ensure that people and property can absorb, accommodate, and recover from disasters in a timely and efficient manner.

Philippine law (Republic Act 10121) expresses that building the resilience of local communities is upholding the constitutional rights of people.

The vulnerability of Filipinos is a globally-recognized fact. The Philippines always ranks top in lists of disaster-prone territories.

I have recommended four immediate actions for ensuring resilient local governments in another article.

To ensure that LGUs are maximizing their capacities in building disaster resilient communities, regular assessments of their performance are necessary.

The following are proposed methodologies for research towards strengthening institutional capacity of LGUs in building disaster resilience.

These simple methodologies were rapidly structured for an application exam for a DILG project.

Further research may be necessary to incorporate published literature into these methodologies.

Join email list!

Proposed methodology for assessing the performance of LGUs in building disaster resilience

With the objective of assessing the performance of LGUs in disaster resilience building, the main research question to answer is,

“How are LGUs performing in the four thematic areas of the National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Plan (NDRRMP)?”

To answer the question, I propose the following methodology:

1. Through stratified random sampling, select 3-5 LGUs from each income classification.
2. Based on the indicators in the NDRRMP, selected LGUs accomplish a compliance checklist.
3. Compile relevant information from self-reporting mechanisms of LGUs (e.g., Expenditure Reports, Accomplishment Reports, Executive-Legislative Agenda) and governance assessments (e.g., SGLG, Gawad Kalasag, CMCI).
4. Conduct key informant interviews (KIIs) with the following participants, according to project budget priority:
   • Local DRRM Officer
   • Representatives of marginalized sectors: indigenous peoples, women’s groups, PWD groups, urban poor
   • Private NGOs and foundations related to DRRM
5. Conduct thematic analysis on the results of the key informant interviews, grouped according to the four thematic areas of the NDRRMP.
6. Recommend specific capacity building support for each income classification of LGUs based on results of compliance checklist and thematic analysis of KIIs.

Related Articles:

Proposed methodology towards incentivizing LGUs that are high-performing in building disaster resilience

With the objective of incentivizing high-performing LGUs, the main research question to answer is,

“Which LGUs perform best according to the four thematic areas of the National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Plan (NDRRMP)?”

To answer the question, I propose the following methodology:

1. Based on the indicators in the NDRRMP, LGUs accomplish a compliance scorecard.
2. Validate compliance scorecard.
   • Compile relevant information from self-reporting mechanisms of LGUs (e.g., Expenditure Reports, Accomplishment Reports, Executive-Legislative Agenda) and governance assessments (e.g., SGLG, Gawad Kalasag, CMCI).
   • Conduct key informant interviews (KIIs) with the following participants to validate compliance checklist results. Participant groups by priority per project budget:
     • Representatives of marginalized sectors: indigenous peoples, women’s groups, PWD groups, urban poor
     • Private NGOs and foundations related to DRRM
     • If project budget permits, conduct KII with DRRM Officer of supervisory LGU (i.e., for a Municipality, the Provincial DRRMO).
3. Rank LGUs based on validated compliance scorecards.

---

Strengths and Limitations of Proposed Methodologies

The table summarizes the strengths and limitations of each proposed method.

Method	Strengths	Limitations
Key informant interviews of LDRRMOs	Primary source of capacity building needs	Availability of participants Responses may be self-preserving
Use of self-reporting mechanisms	Available information through desk research	Reports may be inconsistent with current realities
Key informant interviews with other stakeholders	-Provides a landscape analysis of the current situation of DRRM in the LGU –Follows “we are only as safe as the most vulnerable” principle of resilience	Process may be favorable to prominent and active voices
Compliance checklist	Data and information can be obtained from desk research	Reports may be inconsistent with current realities
Thematic analysis	Context of LGU may be integrated into capacity-building assessment	Biases of the researchers may apply
Conduct KII with DRRM Officer of supervisory LGU	Supervisory LGUs can attest to the role of the LGU to broader DRRM (e.g., LGU as role model, central hub)	Political bias may apply.

Next steps

Use these proposed methodologies as inspiration for your own researches on disaster resilience of local governments.

How can these methodologies be improved? Leave a comment or email me!

I would appreciate a citation and a heads-up email if you consider using these methodologies for your research.

Suggested citation: Tinio, M. (2020). 2 Proposed Methodologies for Assessing Performance of Local Government Units in Building Disaster Resilience. https://enptinio.com/lgu-disaster-resilience-methodology

Read next!

• 15 Youtube Videos You Need to Watch to Increase Your Environmental Planning Knowledge (UPDATED!)
• CLUP Experience: Ideology in Tiwi
• Comprehensive Development Plans 101

---

Join email list!