CDC - Partnership and Harmonization TWG

XVI. Risks Analysis and Mitigation

16.1 A risk assessment is a necessary component of any Strategic Plan, providing an opportunity to identify risks to successful implementation, assign probabilities and to gauge the likely repercussions of any such risk manifesting itself as a reality. Mitigation approaches can then be identified, especially in high risk/high cost areas.

16.2 The approach that is taken here is to identify risk and then ask two questions:

Is the probability of this risk manifesting itself considered to be high or low?
Are the consequences – defined as undermining either implementation and/or sustainability - associated with the risk considered to be mild or severe?

16.3 Identified risks can then be located in a matrix, as presented in Table Sixteen.

Table Sixteen. Risk Analysis

		Risk Probability
		High	Low
Consequences	Severe	Staff positions are not established, so that seconded and contract staff are not made permanent and additional staff cannot be retained. Aid coordination work – including capacity development - becomes increasingly internally focused within CRDB, resulting in insufficient support to other parts of RGC to fully implement the H-A-R Action Plan and the capacity developed within CRDB having no broader impact on the NSDP Sustainability of the Strategy is not assured for multiple reasons (incentives, attrition, loss of management, failure to develop skills or organisational competencies, lack of support from CRDB staff/management, staffing)	Staff attrition results in trained staff leaving CRDB, undermining organisational capacity and sustainability Sufficient analytical work is not produced to promote the kind of evidence-based policy work that CRDB needs to function effectively as the national focal point Fatigue for aid effectiveness work or a change in RGC or donor policy undermines or changes the CRDB mandate
Consequences	Mild	CRDB continues to function without its own Budget. Cultural factors detract from the objective use of the performance management system Political economy considerations that limit the pace of reform lead to unfulfilled expectations	Training drop-out rates undermine the implementation of the Strategy as staff fail to develop skills

16.4 The most significant risk relates to staffing issues. It is necessary to note that the total existing staff (32), comprising those seconded and individuals employed on yearly contracts, represent only around 60% of the staff required (55) to fill the positions that are considered to be necessary to perform all CRDB functions. CRDB management must continue their efforts to secure permanent staff for CRDB in order to make its new organisational structure functional. Mitigation in the short-term must aim to prioritise the deployment of available staff so that key activities are supported.

16.5 It is recognised, however, that the resolution of this challenge is beyond the direct control of CRDB management and finding solutions to such problems takes time. The challenge to address the staffing issue therefore has four dimensions:

Securing approval of a permanent staff complement for CRDB based on its organisation structure from relevant authorities;
Securing the transfer of the seconded staff to authorised positions;
Securing budget resources to regularise the status of staff employed on yearly contracts to authorised complement positions; and
Securing resources from budget and external sources to fill the vacant positions.

16.6 The staffing challenge is formidable, although the Prime Minister has authorised the establishment of a permanent staff at CRDB. Interim mitigation can be undertaken through support provided by MDSP. The strong demonstration effect of building effective aid management in Government, and the imperative that sustainability be safeguarded, may contribute to the identification of a longer-term solution.

16.7 The second of the high-cost/high probability risks relates to the manner in which aid coordination work is taken forward across Government. The limited capacity that exists currently within CRDB has reduced the ability of the organisation to meet in full its responsibilities for supporting the broader aid effectiveness agenda across Government. CRDB has, however, managed to successfully facilitate the working of the GDCC-TWG mechanism, including by chairing the P+H TWG, which remains central to the implementation of the H-A-R Action Plan.

16.8 The capacity development work will promote the ability of CRDB to more effectively play its broader aid coordination role, including through more robust monitoring of the H-A-R Action Plan and JMIs, as well as through providing on-demand support to the TWGs. An increased role in the new CDCF arrangement will also require that capacity development support is provided so that CRDB can effectively and sustainably assume full responsibility for the management of this high-level dialogue.

16.9 Sustainability of the Strategy represents the last of the high-cost/high probability risks. There are a wide range of factors that might undermine sustainability. Mitigation therefore begins in the risk assessment process itself, identifying each of them and thinking through longer-term measures that can complement the implementation arrangements to promote sustainability. Equally, the monitoring and evaluation framework should be developed so that it also addresses issues of sustainability.

16.10 Amongst the multiple factors that might undermine sustainable capacity work are issues of incentives, attrition, loss of management (or their engagement), failure to develop skills or organisational competencies, and lack of support from CRDB staff/management, staffing). Each of these issues is addressed in turn as part of this Strategy. The mitigation challenge is to pay particular attention to each, to ensure that the approach remains participatory so that some form of 'early warning system' is instituted, and to pay particular attention during routine monitoring and evaluation.

16.11 All these risks, and those that are identified in the other quadrants of the risk matrix (Table Sixteen) should be routinely discussed as part of the monitoring arrangements for the Capacity Development Strategy. An annual reflection should also be undertaken, possibly including an external appraisal.