OFFICE OF THE PRIME MINISTER EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT UNIT DISASTER PREPAREDNESS REPORT OF THE AUDITOR-GENERAL ON THE FOR THE FINANCIAL YEARS

Transcription

1 REPUBLIC OF NAMIBIA REPORT OF THE AUDITOR-GENERAL ON THE OFFICE OF THE PRIME MINISTER EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT UNIT DISASTER PREPAREDNESS FOR THE FINANCIAL YEARS Published by authority Price (Vat excluded): N$ 59.1 Report no: 66

2 REPUBLIC OF NAMIBIA TO THE HONOURABLE SPEAKER OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY I have the honour to submit herewith my performance audit report on the Office of Prime Minister Emergency Management Unit Disaster Preparedness for the period in terms of Article 127(2) of the Namibian Constitution. The report is transmitted to the Honourable Minister of Finance in terms of Section 27(1) of the State Finance Act, 1991, (Act 31 of 1991) to be laid upon the Table of the National Assembly in terms of Section 27(4) of the Act. WINDHOEK, September 28 JUNIAS ETUNA KANDJEKE AUDITOR-GENERAL

3 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 CHAPTER INTRODUCTION Other performance audit reports of the Office of the Auditor-General on the Emergency Management Unit Background Project Motivation Statutory Mandate The EMU s Vision, Mission Statement & Core Values Organisational Structure Definition of a National Disaster The National Emergency Management System Staffing Financing 1 CHAPTER 2 2. AUDIT DESIGN Audit Scope and Limitations The Audit Object Audit Methodology 11 CHAPTER 3 3. PROCESS DESCRIPTION Establishment of the National Emergency Management System (NEMS) and the roles of the NEMC, EMU, REMU, CEMU and Operational and Focal Points The Release of Funds 16 CHAPTER 4 4. FINDINGS Training of Disaster Management given to REMU Members, Other Stakeholders and Community Members Mapping, Risk and Needs Assessment of Areas Prone to Disasters Mapping Risk and Needs Assessment Crop Assessment Interest from stakeholders and community members in disaster management Kavango Region Caprivi Region General 26 i

4 FINDINGS (continued) 4.4 Stakeholder s Sectoral Contingency/Disaster Plans Drawn-up and Implemented Lead Agencies: Sectoral Plans Regional Contingency Plans Decentralization of EMU and Activity of REMU s Logistical Support from EMU, REMU s and other stakeholders 31 CHAPTER 5 5. CONCLUSIONS General Conclusions Training Mapping, Needs and Risk Assessments Interest from stakeholders Sectoral Contingency/Disaster Plans Decentralisation of EMU Logistical support from EMU and other stakeholders 35 CHAPTER 6 6. RECOMMENDATIONS General Recommendations Training Mapping, Needs and Risk Assessments Interest from stakeholders Sectoral Contingency/Disaster Plans Decentralisation of EMU Logistical support from EMU and other stakeholders 37 ANNEXURES Annexure A National Emergency Management System Structure Annexure B Emergency Management Unit/Directorate Disaster Management Structure Annexure C Comment on the audit report form EMU ii

5 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Office of the Auditor-General is authorized to carry out performance audits in terms of section 26 (1) (b) (iv) of the State Finance Act, (Act 31 of 1991) which reads as follows: (The Auditor- General) may investigate whether any moneys in question have been expended in an efficient, effective and economical manner. Performance auditing may be defined as to whether Government Ministries are doing the right thing and utilizing the resources in the right and least expensive way. This report is based on the Operations of the Emergency Management Unit, the Regional Emergency Management Units and the other stakeholders who forms part of the National Emergency Management System in the Disaster Preparedness Process. The aim of the National Emergency Management System is to apply innovative approaches and technologies to enhance community resilience to disaster risks, through effective co-ordination and facilitation of all disaster risk reduction initiatives in Namibia. The audit revealed that even though a lot of money is being spent on the process of disaster prevention and alleviation, there are still serious shortcomings in the prevention of disasters and the management thereof. Findings Ten national training courses should have been carried out, but only six training courses have been carried out, of which two are a repetition of previous courses and two are workshops, rather than training courses. Mapping should have been done for all risk areas, but no evidence of mapping was found. Risk and needs assessments had to be made ten times and although eighteen forms of assessments have been made, the recommendations of these assessments have not been implemented in order to ensure preparedness for future disasters. The assessments have also been done after disasters have taken place rather than before. The frequency of meetings in both regions are sufficient, but the attendance of these meetings are average and below average respectively. Inconsistencies existed with quorums for the meetings in both regions and the scheduling of meetings, leading to meetings being postponed in one region and taking place in another. No schedules for meetings were found, leading to poor attendance. Meetings were only held during times of disaster, rather than regularly to maintain a high level of preparedness There should have been nine sectoral contingency/disaster plans for the lead agencies, but only two lead agencies had these plans. Each region should have had a contingency plan, but only three regions have contingency/disaster plans. EMU should have established a Regional Emergency Management Unit (REMU) in each of the 13 Political regions which should become operational whenever there is a disaster and maintain a high level of preparedness during non-emergency times. The two regions under review have operational REMU s, but not enough evidence exist that they are effective to ensure preparedness in times of disaster. 1

6 No list of activities of the REMU s in various regions was provided to measure their effectiveness. All the necessary resources (finances, trained staff, vehicles, buildings, etc.) belonging to the EMU, REMU and other stakeholders should have been mobilized in the case of a disaster. The only resources that the REMU s have at their disposal are warehouses and staff that are either from Line Ministries or from the Regional Councils. Therefore, there is a delay when there are requests made from REMU s to its members and to EMU for assistance. There is no updated list of resources, kept by the REMU s and EMU. Conclusions Many of the preventative measures in terms of disasters are not taken, which leads to disaster unpreparedness. There seems to be a focus on decreasing the impact of disasters that have occurred, rather than the prevention of such disasters. The formal training provided is insufficient and leads to disaster unpreparedness. Most of the preparedness that should take place through continuous mapping, needs and risk assessment is not done, leading to disaster unpreparedness. It is multiplied by the fact that assessments are mostly done after the disasters have taken place. There are a sufficient number of meetings held, but attendances thereof is lacking. While the average attendances of the meetings in the Kavango Region is better than that of the Caprivi Region it is still not efficient. Contingency/Disaster Plans are insufficient in terms of the number. There are no contingency/disaster plans for all the stakeholders and the regions and the lack of knowledge about contingency/disaster plans by the REMU members in the different regions, leads to disaster unpreparedness. REMU s do exist in the two regions that were visited, but the functionality of the REMU s is questioned. The fact that the REMU s do not have their own funds for the acquisition of resources lead to REMU s not being a fully decentralized function of EMU and therefore leads to disaster unpreparedness in the various regions. There is not enough logistical support from EMU and the stakeholders to the respective REMU s. Coupled with the fact that the REMU s cannot acquire their own resources, leads to them being unable to quickly respond to disasters, leading to disaster unpreparedness. 2

7 Recommendations There should be a policy or legal framework that instructs the co-operation of all stakeholders when it comes to disaster issues. This has partly been solved by the drafting of a Disaster Risk Management Policy. However, a concerted effort needs to be made to co-ordinate all these activities and for good co-operation to exist among the REMU members in all the regions. REMU s should assess their training needs and come up with proposals to address these. Furthermore, the REMU s together with the EMU and other donors should come up with a budget to do viable training in order to make the regions prepared for disasters. Mapping, needs and risk assessment should be done before the occurrence of disasters and should be based on the collection of information on a regular basis on areas that are most prone to disasters. There should be closer links with the stakeholders such as NamWater for river water levels and dam levels as well as the Early Warning System of Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Forestry and the Weather Bureau, who assess the frequency of rain and possible drought situations. Lastly, all assessments should be documented and be made available to those that need it most and these records should also be kept at the EMU. The Legal Framework should ensure that all REMU members and other stakeholders improve their interest in disasters and emergencies by attending all the meetings. Meetings should be scheduled in advance and the schedule should be distributed to all REMU members. The Regional Councils in the respective regions should ensure the updating of the list of REMU members and this updated list should also be made available to EMU. The EMU should provide all the necessary assistance to the REMU s to ensure that all the REMU s draw up contingency plans in their respective regions in conjunction with the sectoral plans from the lead agencies. All this information should be made available to the EMU. There should be a prompt response from EMU to assist the REMU s in times of disasters to lessen the impact of disasters. EMU should ensure good co-operation with REMU s and ensure that the REMU s are functioning in all regions. A list of inventory from all the REMU members respective organizations should be kept, updated and made available to the REMU s in times of emergencies. A list of resources at the disposal of the EMU, should also be kept, updated and made available in times of emergencies to the REMU s in the regions where disasters occur. Comments from the Auditee Comments from the Auditee on the factuality of the audit report can be found at Annexure C which has been discussed with the officials of EMU. 3

8 CHAPTER INTRODUCTION This report is based on the operations of the Emergency Management Unit (EMU) within the Office of the Prime Minister (OPM). This Unit is responsible for coordinating and facilitating disaster management programmes in the Country. The report explores the impact of natural and man-made disasters and the role of the EMU in this whole process. 1.2 OTHER PERFORMANCE AUDIT REPORTS OF THE OFFICE OF THE AUDITOR-GENERAL ON THE EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT UNIT There were no previous performance audits carried out on the Office of the Prime Minister and the Emergency Management Unit BACKGROUND The Government of the Republic of Namibia signed an agreement with the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) to assist the Government in managing and coordinating the drought emergency of 1992/1993 and to assist the Government in establishing a national capacity to deal with disasters. This initiative was the start of the establishment of the Emergency Management Unit in close consultation with the Secretary to Cabinet. Cabinet at its 7 th meeting in 1993 discussed the flood emergency in the Country and expressed the need for the emplacement of a National Disaster Preparedness and Management System that will promptly and timeously respond to any disaster in the Country. Subsequently, Cabinet at its 23 rd session in 1993 resolved that the Office of the Prime Minister shall be the parent office for the proposed Emergency Management Agency. This resolution was endorsed by the Right Honourable Prime Minister to establish the EMU. The resolution also stated that a National Emergency Management Committee (NEMC) should be instituted to serve as the decision-making body and to meet continuously to discuss the process of preparedness and actual emergencies. Together, the NEMC and the EMU, will form the basis for the National Emergency Management System (NEMS) in Namibia. The EMU is the permanent body that coordinates the programmes of preparedness and relief operation, based on the guidelines and policy decisions issued by the National Emergency Management Committee. Furthermore, the EMU will be the focal point for all aspects of preparedness and all other matters related to emergency. A Deputy Director designated by OPM will head the EMU under the Secretary to the Cabinet who will also be the chairman of the NEMC. 4

9 1.4 PROJECT MOTIVATION This audit was motivated by the following factors: Concerns regarding the lack of disaster preparedness by Government and other stakeholders, A lack of coordination between Government and relevant stakeholders in times of emergencies, A public outcry on why the Government and other stakeholders were not doing enough in assisting the communities that were always affected by disasters such as drought, floods and pests, The loss of lives and the destruction of property of the general public and the business community, Concern that destruction and loss prevail while the Government of the Republic of Namibia invested a lot of money in this regard. 1.5 STATUTORY MANDATE As earlier mentioned, Cabinet at its 7th (93) meeting discussed the flood emergency in the country and expressed the need for the emplacement of a National Disaster Preparedness and Management System that will promptly and timeously respond to any disaster in the country. The EMU under the Office of the Prime Minister came into operation by way of Cabinet resolution 5 th / / THE EMU S VISION, MISSION STATEMENT AND CORE VALUES The EMU does not have its own vision, mission statement and core values as it forms part of the National Emergency Management System, therefore the three items are rather those of the NEMS than those of the EMU. NEMS Vision: By 215, Namibia has a functional national disaster risk reduction system that minimizes community vulnerability to hazards and effectively manages the impact of disasters within the context of sustainable development. NEMS Mission Statement: To apply innovative approaches and technologies to enhance community resilience to disaster risks through effective co-ordination and facilitation of all disaster risk reduction initiatives in Namibia. 5

10 NEMS Core Values: Proactiveness: the motto is prevention before cure; Impartiality: equity, neutrality, fairness, even handedness, objectivity and unbiased; Efficiency and effectiveness; Integrity: accountability, transparency, honesty and confidence; Innovation: creativity, visionary, energetic and inspirational; Professionalism: high quality, reliability, flexibility and timeliness; Participation: value ideas, inclusive, non-judgmental. 1.7 ORGANISATIONAL STRUCTURE The initial organizational structure indicates that the EMU is headed by a Deputy Director, which has now been upgraded to Director. According to information, the EMU has been restructured to Directorate: Disaster Management since January 27. However, since the study was done on the EMU, this report will still refer to the Directorate as the EMU. The previous Deputy Director is now the Acting Director. The Director reports directly to the Permanent Secretary of the Office of the Prime Minister. Under the Director there are two divisions, one is the Division Policy and Co-ordination headed by a deputy director and three subdivisions. They are: Policy Analyst, Training and Development, Planning and Operation Early Warning, Monitoring and Risk Assessment. The second division is called Support Services and is made up of two subdivisions. They are: Finance Logistics. The EMU is branched into the 13 political regions by way of Regional Emergency Management Units (REMU s), which are headed by the Regional Governors who report to Cabinet through the Secretary to Cabinet. For the constituencies in various regions, there are the Constituency Emergency Management Units (CEMU s), which are headed by the elected councilors of the different constituencies and they report directly to the Governor. See Annexure A for the complete structure. 1.8 DEFINITION OF A NATIONAL DISASTER It is a disruption of the functioning of a large segment of Namibia s population caused by drought, flood or natural or man-made situations. It becomes a national disaster, when the management of such a disaster goes beyond the capacity of the local authority and requires the intervention of the State. In such cases the President declares a partial or full national emergency. Such Presidential Cabinet Memorandum would enable the national emergency institutions, the EMU and the NEMC to plan and fully implement emergency operations with full authority and the support from the Government, the non-governmental organizations and the community. 6

11 In Namibia, the following aspects have been identified as possible disaster threats: Disaster Drought Floods Deforestation Epidemics Pest Infestation Chemical and Industrial Accidents Environmental Pollution Earthquakes Acts of Terrorism and Civil Disturbance Disasters are categorized as man-made or natural and can be further categorized as sudden onset disasters or slow onset hazards. The components of disaster preparedness in Namibia are: Institutional Framework Early Warning System Information and Communication System Resource Base Response Mechanism Public Education and Training 1.9 THE NATIONAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM There are 6 important components that make up the National Emergency Management System and they are as follows: NEMC, EMU, REMU, CEMU, OPERATIONAL AND FOCAL POINTS, LEAD GOVERNMENT AGENCIES ON SPECIFIC DISASTERS. NEMC is tasked with: Complete authority in times of disasters and are directly responsible to the Cabinet, Coordinating between Government and UN agencies and national NGO s dealing with food, health, import, labour, etc., Ensuring quick response in cases of emergencies, Combining the various structures of the Emergency System in terms of disaster preparedness, Meeting regularly, the frequency of which will be determined by the chairperson, to discuss the status of the nation s preparedness for disasters, Ensuring the establishment of focal points to assist in mobilizing human and material resources in times of emergency. 7

12 EMU is tasked with: Coordinating the programs of preparedness based on the policies of the NEMC, Being the focal point for all aspects of disaster preparedness, Ensuring that there will be well organized logistical services to respond to the identified needs of the people at risk, In addition the EMU is responsible for the following: Monitoring and Evaluation Collecting of information, analyzing and providing to NEMC The objective of monitoring and evaluation can be divided into: Surveillance and needs assessment; Determining the current situation and projected need; Keeping track of resource flows, requirements and responses; Evaluation of both the efficiency with which the programme attempted to meet its objectives and the broader social consequences of the programme. Training and Information There will be continuous training and rehearsals from the headquarters to the regions and to the community in all the constituencies. This will include: Civil Protection; Needs Assessment and Identification of Needy People; Monitoring and Evaluation; Coordination and Planning of Emergency Operations; Food Security and Coping Mechanisms; Vulnerability Reduction; Storage and Distribution. In case of an emergency the EMU should mobilize the trained human resources. REMU Operation and Logistics The EMU is the first to react whenever the alarm is raised; The department will keep a complete inventory of all the resources available in the country that could be used for possible emergencies and coordinate the deployment of the required facilities and supplies. It is being chaired by the Governor in all regions and are composed of all government departments, representatives of NGO s, headmen and traditional leaders in the region; REMU s become operational whenever an emergency is being declared either regionally or nationally; In non-emergency times the REMU s must ensure that the region receives training and maintains a high level of preparedness. CEMU is tasked with: The responsibility for the coordinating and managing the efforts at constituency level, ensure training takes place and maintain a high level of preparedness. 8

13 OPERATIONAL AND FOCAL POINTS They are established in each Government and non-governmental agency and are composed of people who have been identified by their respective agencies and are activated whenever there is an emergency; Emergency Operational Units will be created at all levels of Government and NGO s; They will receive training in managing emergencies, data collection and management of information; Each operational unit must have a focal person, who would usually be the chairperson of the operational unit; EMU will contact this person in times of emergency and will therefore have a list of all the focal persons. LEAD GOVERNMENT AGENCIES ON SPECIFIC DISASTERS AND THEIR RESPONSIBILITIES The Lead Agencies on specific disasters are the agencies that provide information, conduct surveys and research, prepare recommendations and take all the necessary measures that could assist the NEMC and the EMU in organizing disaster preparedness programs, the lead Government agencies will primarily be responsible for organizing and conducting training programs in their specific fields and in preparing and implementing a program of intervention based on previously prepared sectoral disaster/contingency plans. The sectoral disaster plans are components of the National Disaster Plan. The Lead Agencies and their responsibilities are: Responsible Ministries Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Forestry Ministry of Health and Social Services Ministry of Home Affairs and Immigration Ministry of Defence Ministry of Regional and Local Government, Housing and Rural Development Ministry of Environment and Tourism Ministry of Works, Transport and Communication Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Resources Ministry of Trade and Industry Ministry of Works, Transport and Communication Specific Disasters Drought, Flood, pest Epidemics and other hazards Refugee crisis Terrorist acts Earth quakes Desertification, wild fires, etc. Oil spills, explorations at sea Chemical and industrial accidents Aviation and rail disasters 1.1 STAFFING Since its establishment in 1994, the EMU has been restructured and is now referred to as Directorate: Disaster Management since 27. This current structure reflects a total number of 31 posts with 12 vacancies. See Annexure B for the establishment. 9

14 1.11 FINANCING EMU is financed as a unit within the Office of the Prime Minister. The funds that the unit gets for disaster preparedness comes from the Central Government through OPM. There is a Contingency Fund kept at the Ministry of Finance for urgent, national, unforeseen matters for example funerals and disasters. The NEMC makes a request to the Ministry of Finance when there is a natural disaster. The money is then released to OPM and to the EMU. In times of emergencies, on Cabinet and NEMC directives, money is being deposited into an account that is being kept by the EMU at a commercial bank, which is called the National Emergency Disaster Fund (NEDF). This Fund is supposed to be audited by the Office of the Auditor-General as well as the Internal Auditors from the Office of the Prime Minister. When EMU receives donor funds and funds from the Government, it is deposited into this account. The operations of the EMU are budgeted for under a Main Division 2, OPM, which also includes transfer payments to other organizations and therefore it was impossible to separate the funds for EMU only. The amounts spent by the NEDF, according to information received from EMU, were as follows: Years Expenditure N$ 22/ / / / / Total The breakdown of both the Operational Budget and the NEDF was not provided by the EMU. 1

15 CHAPTER AUDIT DESIGN Audit Scope and Limitations The Audit Object The audit was limited to the Emergency Management Unit under the Office of the Prime Minister and how it interacts with the Regional Emergency Management Units as part of the National Emergency Management System. The purpose was to identify the risks relevant to the activities under review and evaluate the adequacy and effectiveness of the system. The main focus of the audit was to find out whether there is coordination between the stakeholders, whether EMU activities are known to the stakeholders and whether the REMU s are operational as an extension of the EMU in the regions to prevent and limit the impact of disasters Geographical Limitations Namibia has 13 political regions of which three were identified and visited since they were regarded as high risks in terms of the occurrence of disasters. The Hardap Region was visited in the preliminary study of this audit and then the Caprivi and the Kavango Regions were selected and visited in the main audit Time Limitations It was identified that the audit will cover the period to include the most relevant data. A period of 5 years was selected, since it will give the auditors an indication of what improvements have been made and what operations have been undertaken over a period of time. It will also enable the auditors to establish a trend by selecting more than two years Audit Methodology Interviews Conducted A total number of 44 interviews were conducted in two of the regions visited. In the Caprivi Region, 26 interviews were conducted and 18 interviews in the Kavango Region. These interviews were conducted with REMU members in the regions that include the Governors and other staff from the Regional Councils, the Mayors and other staff from the Local Authorities, staff from Line Ministries, staff from NGO s and also community members. The purpose of the interviews was to obtain evidence in terms of the operations of REMU and the EMU in the prevention of disasters as well as limiting the impact of disasters that have taken place. 11

16 Documentation collected and analyzed A total number of 274 documents were collected from the Emergency Management Unit in Windhoek, as well as the Caprivi and Kavango Regions and were analysed. It has not been possible to list all the documents that were collected, but the main documents that were collected were: The National Disaster Plan, which is the main document guiding the operations of NEMS, Contingency/Disaster Plans for Caprivi and Kavango Regions, Training records and slides, Minutes and schedules of REMU meetings, Documents on Mapping, Needs and Risk Assessment, Documents of the operations of EMU and REMU, Documents on the request for resources by the EMU, REMU and other stakeholders, A list of resources kept by EMU and the REMU s. The main objective of the analysis of these documents was to gain understanding and insight on the management processes and operations of the EMU and REMU s in terms of preventing disasters and limiting the impact of disasters Physical Observations During the audit, physical observations were made to the storage facilities in the region like warehouses where food and other disaster relief equipment are kept. Physical observations were also made at Fish Farms and the temporary sites for Flood victims in both the Caprivi and Kavango Regions. The purpose of these observations was to assess the damages that occurred during disasters and also to assess the suitability of the storage facilities in terms of the safe-guarding of the food and non-food items and other equipment for disaster situations. 12

17 CHAPTER 3 3. PROCESS DESCRIPTION The process description was taken from the National Disaster Plan, which is a guidance document in terms of emergency situations and information obtained through interviews with staff of the EMU. The process description is covering the following areas: 1. Establishment of the National Emergency Management System (NEMS) and the roles of the NEMC, EMU, REMU, CEMU and Operational and Focal Points, 2. The Release of Funds. 3.1 Establishment of the National Emergency Management System (NEMS) and the roles of the NEMC, EMU, REMU, CEMU and Operational and Focal Points NEMS is a system established by the President of the Republic of Namibia through the directive of a Cabinet Memorandum to be able to put the nation at the highest level of preparedness for any kind of disaster. In addition, to be able to implement a well co-ordinated emergency operation with the aim of saving lives, minimizing suffering, protecting property and rehabilitating the lives of the affected population in the event of a disaster. The same Memorandum also states that in time of national disasters, the co-ordination of the emergency operation and mobilization of resources will be vested upon the President. Therefore, to this extent the President has established a NEMC, chaired by the Secretary to Cabinet. This committee will be responsible to the President and the Prime Minister (PM) and will meet regularly to ensure that the nation has a high level of preparedness, and in the event of a national disaster act as a body to prepare policy options and co-ordinate the emergency operation. In the same vain, the Cabinet Memorandum also established a permanent unit within the OPM, known as EMU to prepare the nation in terms of training personnel, assessing needs, developing strategies for reducing vulnerabilities and co-ordinating emergency operations on the instruction of the NEMC. National Emergency Management Committee (NEMC) The National Emergency Management Committee (NEMC) is the Inter-Ministerial Committee that will have the complete authority and specific responsibilities to make the decisions, as appropriate, in regards to the state of preparedness of the country and the mobilization of local resources to meet the urgent needs created by a disaster. The NEMC is the coordinating committee composed of Permanent Secretaries representing all ministries, the UN agencies and national NGO s dealing with food, health, medical supplies, impact, labour, storage, meteorology, transport, etc. The NEMC members should undergo preparedness training on a continuous basis and should be collectively responsible for the national mobilization and prompt and effective response for a national disaster. The NEMC should be directly responsible to the Cabinet since this kind of arrangement can guarantee efficiency and timely assistance which could result in the prevention or mitigation of the effects of disasters. Since disaster response and preparedness are usually multi-sectoral and inter-disciplinary, the structures both at national and regional levels should be able to bring together all the relevant agencies for disaster preparedness and response. The NEMC members would regularly meet and 13

18 discuss the status of preparedness of the nation. The frequency of the meetings will be determined by the chairperson. Furthermore, the NEMC members will act as part of a collective body in the formulation of policies and decision-making regarding national preparedness and actual emergency operations. The Permanent Secretaries in their respective agencies/offices/ministries should ensure the establishment of focal points to assist in the mobilizing of human and material resources that a high level of preparedness exists. Emergency Management Unit (EMU) It is the permanent body that co-ordinates the programs of preparedness based on guidelines and policy decisions made by the NEMC. The EMU will be the focal point for all aspects of disaster preparedness and all aspects relating to emergencies. The functions of EMU are as follows: (a) Monitoring and Evaluation The objective of monitoring and evaluation can be divided into: Surveillance and needs assessment Determining the current situation and projected need Keeping track of resource flows, requirements and responses Evaluation of both the efficiency with which the programme attempted to meet its objectives and the broader social consequences of the programme This unit will have the important role of collecting information from various national and international sources, analyzing it and then providing the Government with an overall picture of the situation and alerting the NEMC to future programme needs. (b) Training and Information There will be continuous training and rehearsals from the headquarters to the regions and to the community in all the constituencies in the management of various kinds of emergencies. This will include: Civil protection Needs assessment and identification of needy people Monitoring and evaluation Co-ordination and planning of emergency operation Food security and coping mechanisms Vulnerability reduction Storage and distribution Training of selected personnel is one of the major responsibilities of the unit. (c) Operation and Logistics Once a decision has been made based on the early warning system that a disaster exists, the system in place will be activated by EMU, specifically the operations department within EMU. It will identify the problems, assess the needs, determine the priorities and the availability of resources and to prepare a plan of action based on an already existing format. 14

19 This department will keep a complete inventory of all the resources available in the country that could be used for possible emergencies and co-ordinate the deployment of the required facilities and supplies. During emergencies, the task of the EMU will be to mobilize the available and trained human resources to assist the affected population/people. (d) Co-ordinating established structures Another important task of the EMU is to co-ordinate the national and regional structures. Four major structures will be created at all levels: (i) The Emergency Operational Units (EOU) in each Government and Non-governmental agencies (ii) The Regional Emergency Management Unit (REMU) (iii) The Constituency Emergency Management Unit (CEMU) The EMU s responsibility is to establish and to develop the capacity of these units and this task requires detailed planning, discussion and organization of structures at national and regional levels. There should be frequent visits and briefing sessions to all regional offices preceding formal training and the establishment of structures. Several meetings will have to be scheduled with line ministries to be able to create a clear understanding of roles and responsibilities of each Government agency. Operational and Focal Points or Emergency Operational Units (EOU) Operational and Focal Points are established in each Government and Non-governmental agency and are comprised of people who have been identified by their respective agencies and are activated whenever there is an emergency. Emergency Operational Units will be created at all levels of Government and NGO s. EMU will contact this person in times of emergency and will therefore have a list of all the focal persons. Regional Emergency Management Unit (REMU) REMU s are being chaired by the Governor in all regions and are composed of all Government departments, representatives of NGO s, headmen and traditional leaders in the region. The chairperson will have the authority to call an emergency meeting. The REMU s will have the following authorities: To prepare their regions for any kind of emergency through the establishment of the required structures, training of personnel and periodic rehearsals. To prepare an intervention plan, mobilize local resources and co-ordinate with the NEMC, whenever a disaster is declared. 15

20 Constituency Emergency Management Unit (CEMU) The CEMU is chaired by the councilor and is composed of representatives of Government and NGO s. The chairperson will have the authority to call an emergency meeting. The CEMU will have the following authorities: To prepare their regions for any kind of emergency through the establishment of the required structures, training of personnel and periodic rehearsals. To prepare an intervention plan, mobilize local resources and co-ordinate with the NEMC, whenever a disaster is declared. 3.2 The Release of Funds If a disaster occurs, there are two ways of dealing with it: In the first instance, there are institutions like the Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Forestry and the Weather Bureau that are working on the Early Warning System and then according to their assessments, they will inform Cabinet on an emergency situation. Secondly Cabinet can instruct the EMU to make an assessment of some sort on an emergency situation that exists. Cabinet will then issue directives in terms of what the EMU should do. This is in the case of slow-onset disaster. If the disaster is a sudden onset disaster the EMU will have to take immediate action. The EMU does not have funds readily available, but the Cabinet can arrange for EMU to get money from the Contingency Fund. Cabinet will then make arrangements for the EMU to get this money from the Contingency Fund from the Ministry of Finance. Cabinet requests the EMU through its Operations and Planning Unit and the Early Warning and Risk Assessment subdivisions to give information to Cabinet on emergency situations that exist. As referred to in Chapter 1, the NEDF is an account that is being kept by the EMU at a commercial bank for assistance in times of emergencies or disasters. The NEDF account is supposed to be audited by the internal auditors from OPM and the auditors from the Auditor-General s Office. A financial report is supposed to be submitted to the Office of the Auditor-General (OAG) every month-end and the accountant at EMU should prepare the financial statements and bank reconciliation statements. Based on the assessment that has been made on the disaster or emergency, the EMU will receive instructions from Cabinet as to what they should acquire in order to assist the afflicted areas/regions. 16

21 CHAPTER 4 FINDINGS The performance of the EMU is measured against a standard referred to as assessment criteria. However, it was difficult to obtain such standards from the EMU, therefore the auditors developed their own set of assessment criteria. The assessment criteria were discussed with officials from the EMU, but were not confirmed. 4.1 Training of Disaster Management given to REMU members, other stakeholders and Community members The assessment criteria are that training should take place at least twice a year for all the relevant stakeholders in all the regions. This training should include all the nine (9) disaster risk areas. According to the twenty six (26) interviews carried out with REMU members from the Caprivi Region, only 31% confirmed that they have received training even though they are not sure about the year in which they received the training, while 35% said that training was not done. The other 34 % specified that they are aware that training was done, but that they have not been trained. According to the eighteen (18) interviews carried out with REMU members from the Kavango Region, 33% specified that there is training even though they could not provide records while 67% said that no training was done. In general, no evidence was provided on what courses the interviewees attended and when it took place. Therefore, the audit was unable to establish the relevance of such training with regards to the preparedness of the community when a disaster occurs. The documents indicated that national training took place six times, which was twice in 25 and four times in 26 of which different participants attended, who are REMU members and who are not REMU members from all the regions. The auditors were unable to establish whether some of the participants were members from CEMU as they were not provided with a list for the CEMU s in the respective regions. However, two of the courses contents were unchanged for both years, and were attended by different people, meaning that only four courses took place, one in 25 and three in 26. Two regional courses also took place in the Caprivi Region in 25, but no regional courses in the Kavango region. Moreover, no evidence of training courses conducted for the years of 22, 23 and 24, was provided on both regional and national training. The two courses conducted in 25, were similar with the main objective of Strengthening Disaster Risk Management Capacity in Namibia as well as other issues such as preparedness, response and recovery. It has also outlined each activity that needs to be undertaken and its objectives are as follows: To develop a comprehensive National Action Plan to strengthen disaster risk management capacity in Namibia, To improve the understanding of disaster risk management/reduction in Namibia in line with regional and international disaster risk management, 17

22 To establish country disaster risk management priority needs based on the capacity needs assessment and To outline an action program to strengthen capacity for disaster risk management in Namibia. These courses took place in October 25 at a Conference Centre and in November 25 at a lodge near Windhoek. However, during the audit there was no list of participants provided for both courses in 25, therefore the audit was unable to determine whether the courses were given to the same or different people and whether they were actually REMU and CEMU members. Furthermore, it was also difficult to determine whether these courses enabled the regions involved to be prepared for disasters as there was no course material made available at the time of the audit. Documents analyzed show that two courses on Disaster Risk Reduction took place in July 26 at a hotel in Tsumeb and the following regions participated: Caprivi, Kavango, Oshikoto, Ohangwena, Oshana, Kunene, and Omusati. A letter which was sent from EMU to all Regional Governors indicated that the first course would take place from 9-15 July 26. The second course took place from July 26 at a resort near Mariental and the following regions have participated: Otjozondjupa, Erongo, Omaheke, Hardap, Khomas and Karas. There was an invitation sent to all stakeholders to partake in such training and the audit reveals that all regions responded and attended the training. The objective of the two courses in 26 were as follows: To Establish and Strengthen Disaster Preparedness and Emergency Response Practices for the Regional Emergency Management Units, To enhance the understanding and application of Disaster Risk Reduction Concepts, To improve capacity and governance in Disaster Risk Management, To improve co-ordination and response for the Emergency Management System. The course on Disaster Risk Reduction in Tsumeb was attended by thirty three (33) participants, including two from the OPM. It featured participants from the Red Cross and Government agencies from seven regions: Kunene, Kavango, Oshana, Oshikoto, Ohangwena, Caprivi and Omusati. The course on Disaster Risk Reduction near Mariental was attended by twenty eight (28) participants, including two from the OPM. It featured participants from the Red Cross and Government agencies from the six regions: Hardap, Omaheke, Khomas, Erongo, Karas and Otjozondjupa, Only four Lead Agencies were represented in both courses and they were the following: Ministry of Regional and Local Government, Housing and Rural Development, Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Forestry, Ministry of Health and Social Services, Ministry of Works, Transport and Communication. 18

23 The audit aimed to establish whether the participants who attended the training were REMU members and thus requested a list of REMU members for all the regions. A list was provided for all regions, except for the Khomas, Oshikoto and Omusati Regions. An analysis of the data revealed the following: REGION PARTICIPANTS REMU MEMBERS 1. Hardap Omaheke Khomas 3 No data provided 4. Erongo Karas 2 6. Otjozondjupa Kunene 4 8. Kavango 1 9. Oshana Oshikoto 4 No data provided 11. Ohangwena Caprivi Omusati 3 No data provided 14. Other 21 TOTAL Table 1: Participants and REMU Members The table above indicates that the only regions where all the participants who attended the training are REMU members, are Oshana and Caprivi. It further indicates that the other regions participants are not all REMU members and in some regions none of the participants are REMU members. Further two workshops took place in September and November 26 on Mainstreaming of Disaster Risk Management. 1. During the September workshop only twenty eight (28) participants from various organizations attended and its purpose was as follows: To initiate and enhance a common understanding by participants of disaster risk management and pave a way for the mainstreaming of disaster risk reduction into development planning. Further objectives of the workshop were as follows: To strengthen integration of disaster risk management; Improve capacity to identify and asses disaster risks; Increase political commitment to disaster risk reduction into development initiatives; Identify the successes and common challenges in Disaster Risk Management (DRM) across sectors. 2. The workshop in November 26 was on developing a draft disaster risk management policy and was held in Swakopmund. It was attended by eighteen (18) participants from various organisations. The objective was to engage a process of developing a National Policy on Disaster Risk Management for Namibia. 19

24 Through the documentation made available during the audit, it is noted that 5% of the participants who attended the aforementioned workshop were the same, to complete the whole process and to equip them with necessary skills that will enable them to develop a disaster risk management policy of the country. Moreover, upon completion of such workshop nothing has been done either in training REMU and CEMU members in the development of a national policy on disaster management of Namibia. It is reported on the Caprivi Regional Flood Management Planning Workshop that was held in Katima Mulilo on 13 and 14 April 25 that the objective was to draft a long-term Participatory Flood Management Strategy after approval by the Khutas (Traditional Courts) and the Regional Council for implementation by all communities and the REMU. However, there is no evidence of any regional training courses held in other regions due the absence of regional training reports and programs at EMU. The REMU members in visited regions indicated through interviews that they have requested training on many occasions for those who have not been trained, but have been told that there are no funds for training. The response from the EMU was that training has been taking place since 1997, but that the trainers in the regions never continued with the training and later left the Government sector. The response from the EMU further indicated that the responsibility of the REMU s was to conduct training during non-emergency periods for preparedness. The REMU s must identify the need and then present these to EMU, which is not being done. The officials from EMU said that REMU s are not furnishing EMU with their identified need as required, subsequently EMU was unable to conduct training on those needs during non-emergency periods, which could make REMU s prepared for any kind of disaster that arises. The training courses that were conducted, especially the national training courses covered all nine disaster areas that needed to be covered in terms of disaster management. However, the auditors were unable to determine whether the participants that attended the courses were the ones that were from the REMU and CEMU, who are the people that need the training. It was also difficult to establish whether those who received the training have conducted training in their respective committees/units. It was also unclear as to what amount of money was being used for training, as this budget was not provided by EMU. There was also no training program provided, making it unclear as to what was planned for and what actually took place. According to interviews carried out, it was mentioned that the REMU and CEMU members, who did not receive the training, are lacking knowledge on what action to take in times of disasters and are therefore not prepared for disasters Mapping, Risk and Needs Assessments of Areas Prone to Disasters The Assessment Criteria are for mapping of disaster risk areas as well as needs and risk assessments to be done twice a year. According to the National Disaster Plan, crop assessment has to be done four times a year. Therefore normal needs assessments are supposed to be carried out twice a year, while crops assessments should have been made four times a year. According to interviews carried out with REMU members from the Caprivi Region, 5% revealed that no mapping, needs and risk assessments were made, 19% said that no formal mapping was 2