Type of Review: Project Completion Review
Project Title: Montserrat: Disaster Preparedness Review
Date started: 7 February 2012
Date review undertaken: October 2013
Instructions to help complete this template:
Before commencing the review you should have to hand:






the Business Case or earlier project documentation.
the Logframe
the detailed guidance (How to Note) - Reviewing and Scoring Projects,
the most recent annual review and other related monitoring reports.
key data from ARIES, including the risk rating
the separate project scoring calculation sheet (pending access to ARIES)
Two scores are produced at project completion - one based on achievement of the outputs and
one based on achievement of the outcome. You should assess and rate both the individual
outputs and the overall outcome using the following rating scale and description:
Output Description
Outputs substantially exceeded expectation
Outputs moderately exceeded expectation
Outputs met expectation
Outputs moderately did not meet expectation
Outputs substantially did not meet expectation
Scale
A++
A+
A
B
C
Outcome Description
Outcome substantially exceeded expectation
Outcome moderately exceeded expectation
Outcome met expectation
Outcome moderately did not meet expectation
Outcome substantially did not meet
expectation
Introduction and Context
What support did the UK provide?
The UK provided £726,802 to the Government of Montserrat (GoM) to support the implementation of
disaster preparedness activities. These activities were designed to bring disaster preparedness
standards in Montserrat back to acceptable standards to address the risked posed by the Soufriere
Hills volcano, hurricanes and tropical storms.
1
What were the expected results?
The project aimed to improve the safety of Montserrat’s citizens by strengthening the island’s
disaster preparedness and bring them up to acceptable standards.
The preparedness activities supported under the project were:





Repairs to the access road to Montserrat’s main communications centre and hub
Increasing the resilience of the main communications centre and hub
Replacement parts for the emergency siren system
Repairs to hurricane shelters
Re-establishing with replacement parts the emergency communications/radio network.
These activities were designed to ensure the population of Montserrat (4,9221) is better
prepared for disasters. Preparedness is essential to maintain Montserrat’s economic and social
feasibility. The project by using the measures below sought to prevent any unnecessary hazard
related deaths, losses and suffering:
1

Early warning. The population will be aware of any impending threats and be able to
take precautions. Any evacuation of vulnerable areas will be timely and effective.

Emergency broadcast. The broadcast system is an essential part of early warning
systems. Post emergency it provides assurance and guidance to the population. It must
be able to function after severe weather or under conditions of heightened volcanic
activity.

Emergency shelter. This will provide protection for those living in vulnerable conditions
or temporary housing for those evacuated from vulnerable locations. People are typically
only prepared to evacuate if shelters are comfortable and safe.
Montserrat Census 2011
2
What was the context in which UK support was provided?
The UK’s responsibilities to Montserrat, and to all the aided Overseas Territories (OTs), are:
o
o
o
To meet the territory’s reasonable needs for public services;
To accelerate the territory towards economic self-sufficiency, where this is possible;
and
To manage the risk of contingent liability
The island of Montserrat has been on a state of high alert since 1995, when the Soufriere Hills Volcano
erupted after hundreds of years of dormancy. An active volcano (which has rendered 2/3s of the island
uninhabitable) together with the yearly threat of tropical storms and hurricanes has left the island very
vulnerable and as a result past priority was given to attaining high standards of disaster preparedness.
However the cost of maintaining a high level of disaster management readiness has been a challenge
due to the falling population. As investment levels fell there was reduction in the capacity to manage,
maintain and oversee the necessary preparedness systems and as a result standards fell. A joint
FCO/DFID capability review (2009), and poorly managed responses to Hurricane Omar (2009) and
Tropical Storm Tomas (2010), highlighted the need to improve contingency plans and response
systems.
In 2011 Montserrat’s Disaster Management Coordination Agency (DMCA) under a new director, was
tasked with re-building preparedness standards to acceptable levels. However the works identified as
being needed to repair the early warning system, emergency shelters and communication systems
could not be implemented due to a lack of funds. Due to GoM’s budget constraint, the Governor asked
if DFID could provide assistance.
Section A: Detailed Output Scoring
Output 1: Shelters repaired
Output 1: final score and performance description: B ; Outputs moderately did not meet
expectation
Final results: The target indicator 1.1 was that 5 shelters would pass inspection by Disaster
Management Coordination Agency (DMCA) and Planning and Works Department. However, the target
was revised and brought down to 3 shelters. This was updated in the logframe. This target has been
met.
The decision was taken by the National Disaster Preparedness and Response Advisory Committee
(NDPRAC) and at Cabinet level to reduce the number of shelters required for island’s population from
19 to 11. This was influenced by considerations on the quality of available housing stock, the number
of people actually using particular shelters and value for money. As a result only 3 shelters were
ultimately targeted for funding under this project. The shelters at Mongo Hill, Davy Hill and St Peters
were repaired with supervision from the Ministry of Communications and passed inspection. They will
continue to be inspected and checked in the future particularly ahead of hurricane seasons and the
Governor will be kept updated on the status of the shelters.
3
Target indicator 1.2 was that 10 MoUs would be revised.
Although draft Memoranda of Understanding to formalise some aspects of the relationship between
Government and those churches designated as shelters have been prepared they have not been
finalised or signed. DMCA have advised that the need to finalise and sign off these will be revisited
with the current Deputy Governor before the end of their work plan year.
Impact Weighting (%): 20
Revised since last Annual Review? N
Risk: Low
Revised since last Annual Review? N
Output 2: Resilient communications, including more reliable access to Silver Hills radio
site and back up emergency systems for the public broadcast system (so that it can
function after severe weather)
Output 2: final score and performance description: A; Outputs met expectation
Final results: Target indicator 2.1: improved accessibility of the Silver Hills Road, making the
road suitable for all weathers and securing the Silver Hills facility.
The necessary land acquisition took place which enabled the required road improvements to be
completed by December 2012. The road is now suitable for all weathers and has improved access up
to the Silver Hills radio site. The Silver Hills facility has been fenced and gated. The site grounding
ring (to which the antennae systems are connected) has also been completed. DMCA is currently
undertaking further work to connect all site installations in the facility to the ground ring.
Target indicator 2.2: a fully functioning Broadcast System.
The work on this area was completed by April 2012, with the broadcast system fully functioning and
tested.
Impact Weighting (%): 60
Revised since last Annual Review? N
Risk: Low
Revised since last Annual Review? N
Output 3: Siren systems that are fully functioning
Output 3: final score and performance description: A; Outputs met expectation
Final results: Target indicator 3.1: Emergency siren’s installed and working.
4
Existing siren system fully functional using spare parts procured under the project. As part of the
procurement process a spare siren head remains in stock to be utilised for the proposed new town.
Automated tests of the sirens are made three times a day with full tests undertaken on a fortnightly
basis.
Impact Weighting (%): 20
Revised since last Annual Review? N.
Risk: Low
Revised since last Annual Review? N
Section B: Results and Value for Money.
1. Achievement and Results
1.1 Has the logframe been changed since the last review? Y
This PCR is the only review undertaken on the project; which took place over a period of 15
months. There have however been some slight amendments to the projects logframe since
the project commenced mainly due to the decision made to reduce the overall number of
shelters required for the island’s population
1.2 Final Output score and description: A; Outputs met expectation.
Although it is concerning that GoM has still to finalise and sign off the Maintenance MoU’s
(Indicator 1.2), good progress has been seen across the other indicators.
1.3 Direct feedback from beneficiaries
The Director of the Disaster Management Coordination Agency has commented on the
timeliness of this support and in his view the project met its targets in general. He identified
the physical interventions such as the construction of the Silver Hills road and repairs of the
shelters (especially St. Peters) as valuable outputs.
5
1.4 Overall Outcome score and description: A; Outcome met expectation.
The expected outcome of this project was to ensure the safety of the population of Montserrat
through strengthening disaster preparedness.
There has clearly been improvements to the island’s disaster preparedness as a result of this
project with the necessary shelters having been repaired, access improved to the vital Silver
Hills radio site, and new fully functioning broadcast and siren systems
1.5 Impact and Sustainability
The Impact of this project was to improve the safety of the population of Montserrat by rebuilding disaster preparedness competencies to acceptable standards. The improved
accessibility to the Silver Hills facility is an important step towards achieving the Impact as
were the required repairs to the shelters and the establishment of improved broadcasting and
siren systems. If properly maintained and regularly inspected they will make an important
contribution to Montserrat’s disaster preparedness into the future. It will be important that
DFID and FCO in particular help ensure GoM continues to seek opportunities to further
improve and maintain its disaster preparedness systems and preparation plans.
2. Costs and timescale
2.1 Was the project completed within budget / expected costs:
Yes. The budget for this project was 726,802, total actual spend was £703,252.14.
2.2 Key cost drivers
The key cost driver for this project was the costs of building materials and the procurement of
equipment. Most of the construction was supported technically by GoM’s Public Works Department
which ensured the need for a potentially costly tendering process was avoided.
2.3 Was the project completed within the expected timescale:
No. Delays in the delivery of siren equipment and in the construction work at the Silver Roads
site required extensions to the project until 31/7/13 to ensure all the necessary work could be
undertaken. It did mean however that there was drawdown against OTD’s 2013/14 Capital
Budget which had not originally been programmed.
3. Evidence and Evaluation
3.1 Assess any changes in evidence and what this meant for the project.
No changes in the evidence base were realised and no changes in the programme design were
needed.
3.2 Set out what plans are in place for an evaluation.
6
There are no plans for an evaluation of this project.
GoM undertakes a review and reports to the National Disaster Committee on the status of Montserrat’s
Disaster Preparedness on an annual basis. Disaster systems will undergo checks ahead of yearly
exercises and the hurricane shelters will be subject to review ahead of hurricane season. Maintaining
disaster preparedness standards is a requirement of Montserrat’s disaster legislation.
4. Risk
4.1 Risk Rating (overall project risk): Low
Did the Risk Rating change over the life of the project? No. The overall risk did not change.
4.2 Risk funds not used for purposes intended
This project was part of OTD’s Financial Aid support to Government of Montserrat and therefore before
any funds could be released, detailed financial and project reporting outlining spend and progress
against the projects outputs was required.
4.3
Climate and Environment Impact
The Business Case did not identify any negative climate or environment risks in the rehabilitation
project. None were realised during the implementation and the repair/rehabilitation programme will
have increased the islands resilience to climatic events.
5. Value for Money
5.1 Performance on VfM measures
To ensure value for money on this project, the Director of DMCA had regular engagement with
the Head of the Governor’s Office who monitored project delivery and liaised with DFID’s
Disaster Risk Adviser for technical guidance and support. Regular financial and project
reporting was shared with both DFID and FCO, with GoM’s Ministry of Finance responsible for
the accurate and timely submission of reports and claims.
5.2 Commercial Improvement and Value for Money
N/a
5.3 Role of project partners
GoM is the direct beneficiary of the project and also the main implementer through expending financial
7
aid funds on strengthening its disaster preparedness.
5.4 Did the project represent Value for Money : Y
Despite some delays in the project it did represent value for money, having the island’s
disaster preparedness systems enhanced will better mitigate against the potential costs of
damage, injuries and death from the threat of the volcano and other natural disasters. The
consequences of not addressing the identified weakness in the island’s disaster preparedness
represented a significant liability for both GoM and HMG.
It is hoped that the increased capability will encourage business to remain or relocate/invest in
Montserrat. The construction of a permanent Silver Hills road including the provision for a
water mains pipe will also impact of local development options.
6. Conditionality
6.1 Update on specific conditions
No specific conditions were attached to this project. Release of funding depended on the receipt of
narrative and financial reporting. This is in line with DFID’s Blue Book guidance.
7. Conclusions
Based on the findings of this review the following recommendations should be considered going
forward:



GoM should ensure that the new systems and infrastructure resulting from this project are
properly maintained and subject to regular review and inspection.
There needs to be greater clarity on roles and responsibilities when several different
departments are involved in the management of a project, particularly related to finance and the
need to ensure suppliers are paid in a timely manner. There must be clear central oversight.
Future Disaster Risk Reduction interventions must take into account existing infrastructure and
include focus to encourage greater synergy and avoid wastage.
8. Review Process
The review process was based on meetings and correspondence between Montserrat’s Deputy
Programme Manager and the Director of Montserrat’s Disaster Management Coordination Agency.
8
Inputs were also sought from DFID’s Regional Disaster Risk Adviser (both former and current) and the
Head of the Governor’s Office, Montserrat.
9