9:00 am | Welcome |
9:15 am | A. Review of Vulnerability Reduction Action Plans Selected at 1st Roundtable Meeting (Jan. 18 in Antigua) |
9:45 am | B. Agree a Common Project Management Approach |
Break | |
10:30 am | C. Project Definition Workshops Meeting attendees will split up for separate workshop sessions to complete project definitions for the four main action plan areas reviewed at 9.15 discussion. |
12:30 pm | Lunch Break |
1:30 pm | C. Continue Project Definition Workshops |
2:30 pm | Break |
2:45 pm | D. Joint Review of Workshop findings (all attendees) |
3:45 pm | E. Agree Next Steps |
4:30 pm | C L O S E |
Bankers and Insurers agreed to joint action plans to:
Additionally, the Bankers called for an action plan to:
Note: The ordering of the action items has been inverted from the 1st Roundtable meeting Report to allow more logical sequencing for the 2nd Roundtable discussions.
The 1st Roundtable reckoned several groups would contribute to the design and implementation of vulnerability reduction programs.
The following were initially identified:
Antigua/Barbuda: Bankers’ Trade Association Insurers’ Trade Association |
St. Kitts/Nevis Bankers’ Trade Association Insurers’ Trade Association |
Additionally, during the planning and programs’ design phases, coordination will need to cover:
Later, as the vulnerability reduction programs are implemented, a wider coordination effort appears likely to be needed, e.g.
Therefore we could usefully discuss the need for, and the approaches to, establishing a common Project Management framework for adoption by participants. This would provide us with a modular capability by which each participant’s contribution would be neatly slotted into the overall effort. Having a common project approach will facilitate understanding and communication as well as permit common yardsticks for monitoring and reporting on progress. Attachment I is a discussion proposal for such a common Project Management approach.
Each participating entity would be requested to follow a common project management format containing :
‘Our disaster mitigation role will be fulfilled by establishing effective and continuing programs to reduce the vulnerability of new and existing building structures to the physical forces of windstorms, flood, and wave surge.’
2. Key Objectives. These will be those goals directly supporting the Purpose. They should include measurable performance criteria for their attainment. Examples could include:
Key Objectives |
Performance Criteria |
|
In place by September 30, 2001 |
|
Dwelling standards by September 30,2001 Commercial standards by December,31, 2001 |
|
etc. |
3. Key Relationships Here should be listed those entities & people closely related to the project. This serves as a working reminder for consultations and communications on progress. As an example, these could be formatted as follows:
Key Relationship | Nature of Relationship | Activity Required | Status/date |
1. OAS/PGDM | Have hazard mapping info | Keep mutually updated | |
2. OAS | Can suggest project sponsoring candidate organizations | Ascertain and keep updated on requirements | |
3. Construction Professionals' Associations | Are coordinating publication of construction protection standards | Have input to their work and critique |
4. Project (or sub-project) Report This contains summary project information and the progress status. It is a useful tool for all project participants especially project leaders, supporters and key relationships. It is also valuable for giving progress reports to donor agencies providing project resources. A suggested format is:
Project/sub-project Title ____________________ Date__________
Project Leader(s) __________________________
Key Objectives | Performance Criteria | Resource Requirements | Resource Availability | Comments |
1.
|
||||
2.
|
||||
3.
|
* ‘Resource Requirements’ should include People, Skills, Money, Time, Equipment, Systems etc.
Responsibilities | Progress Status (date) | Comments | |
Key Objective #1 Phases:
|
|||
Key Objective #2 Phases:
|