Arwin Soelaksono

Mentawai Response Lessons Learned - A Spark of Hope to Rebuild Mentawai

2011-03-21T22:39:00.007+07:00

There are so many things to be learned during responding Mentawai following the earthquake and tsunami. The destruction was massive and the challenge on responding it was enormous. The good thing in responding Mentawai is the agencies responded to West Sumatra Earthquake in 2009 was still in Padang or Padang Pariaman. The relationship between agencies and government which has been developed for months has also given contribution so that response to Mentawai was quite fast.

These lessons learned also capture the uniqueness of Mentawai response. The strong joint effort amongst agencies is one of the benchmarks of the response. This can be seen not only in the emergency phase but also in the government early recovery program.

During 3 months (October 25, 2010 – January 25, 2011) on responding Mentawai, seeing strong cooperation amongst agencies and also with the government is encouraging everyone. The rebuilding of Mentawai would be a long process due to the area’s years of under-development and difficult terrain. But this spirit of joint effort gives a spark of hope in rebuilding Mentawai.

To download lessons learned document click here.

Arwin Soelaksono - Disaster Response and reConstruction

Enhancement of the Recovery Quality through Joint Effort and Combined Strategic Program - Lessons Learned from West Sumatra Recovery

2011-03-14T00:57:00.002+07:00

This paper will discuss the uniqueness of recovery effort in West Sumatera following the 2009 earthquake. The joint effort and combined strategic program was one of the uniqueness of the recovery. This initiative has proven its successes in building synergies amongst humanitarian agencies to speed up their program and enhance the recovery program quality and obviously reduce the program cost. In order to share this iniaitive to be replicated in other area, the paper give some recommendation which can be used for other program in other recovery effort.

Abstract

In the wake of the 2009 West Sumatra earthquake there were more than 75 international and national agencies works on recovery. Every agency has their experiences, approaches and expertise. It is rich variation on the way each agency undertake the recovery works. On the other hand government has their own perspective, policy and has already developed plans and budget. In the beginning it was difficult to find all efforts that can be intersected. All recovery stakeholders were firm on their decision on how the recovery effort should be implemented.

4 months after the disaster, international, national non-governmental organizations (NGO) and United Nations (UN) agencies that worked in shelter / housing program, started on taking initiative to harmonize their programs with the government plan. During that time serious study on the government plan had been carried out. The government quite open for inputs and both party – NGOs and government – established good relationship and mutual respect.

The joint effort and combined program in housing program caused other good implication. Other programs then interested to replicate this initiative. NGOs that joined in working groups such as Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR), Livelihood and other working groups tried to find synergies amongst them. The result can be sharing resource, joint funding and combined program. These initiatives surely increase recovery pace and enhance the quality.

Keyword: earthquake, West Sumatra, reconstruction, shelter, coordination

To download all paper content just click here

This paper was prepared to be presented in the 5th Annual International Workshop and Expo on Sumatra Tsunami Disaster & Recovery (AIWEST-DR 2010) in Banda Aceh, Indonesia on November 2010.

Arwin Soelaksono - Disaster Response and reConstruction

Strategic Documents and Lessons Learned from West Sumatra Recovery

2010-08-14T14:32:00.004+07:00

It’s always a big question after humanitarian efforts in disaster affected area, how to keep all lessons learned, and strategic documents and all sort of that so everyone can easily access it? Bigger disaster and bigger intervention make the question even more valid. In West Sumatra recovery, for instance, there are more than 70 international and national agencies works on recovery following the September 2009 earthquake disaster. Every agency has their experiences, approaches and expertise. It is rich variation on the way each agency undertake the recovery works. But I found out an important component to speed up recovery process those are come from sharing resource and joint effort amongst recovery stakeholders. Other important component to enhance the recovery quality and in the same time reduce the unnecessary cost is the replication on the best practices.

To answer the question above, West Sumatra Recovery Network website http://www.rn-unrc.org collects lessons learned from agencies that carried out recovery effort in west Sumatra. In this website we can find strategic documents produced by working groups such as shelter, disaster risk reduction and other working groups. We can download meeting, workshop and training materials as well so this website is like a living library which its document always regularly updated.

Arwin Soelaksono - Disaster Response and reConstruction

Eco-Friendly Reconstruction

2010-07-17T13:33:00.007+07:00

This paper was presented on Training for Facilitators, West Sumatera Post-Earthquake Rehabilitation and Reconstruction, 12-15 May 2010
Abstract:

As part of rebuilding effort following September 30th, 2009, earthquake in West Sumatra, the Government, Society and various Non-Governmental Organization (NGOs), both local and international, launched interventions to help victims of disasters. One form of support is housing reconstruction. Reconstruction and rehabilitation of hundreds of thousands of homes would need a lot of resources including building materials derived from nature. Learning from the cases of Aceh reconstruction, all parties should be wary of the potential environmental damage. Therefore all parties involved in the process of West Sumatra rehabilitation and reconstruction needs to think strategically to balance development efforts with ensuring environmental sustainability. The entire strategic plan must be able to be executed by the whole community and all actors of rehabilitation and reconstruction to protect the environment.

To download all paper content just click here

Arwin Soelaksono - Disaster Response and reConstruction

NGO and Donor Coordination to Speeds up Reconstruction and Avoid NGO Competition

2009-12-07T16:26:00.002+07:00

This paper was presented on 4th Anual International Workshop & Expo on Sumatra Tsunami and Recovery in Banda Aceh November 24, 2009.

Abstract

During 2005-2006, in cities like Banda Aceh, Meulaboh and other parts in West Coast, the presence of Non Government Organizations (NGOs) made these places feel small. These places were crowded of organizations. Nearly everyone was in a high spirit to run their program. Bad things happened when NGOs persuaded beneficiaries to receive someone's program and in the same time reject others.

Conflicting programs amongst NGOs was another problem as a result of the lack of NGO or donor coordination. The presence of one program affected the quality and delivery schedule of other program. When it getting worse the size of the program reduced and impeded. And at the end it created bad attitudes amongst the beneficiaries. There should be a way on strengthening NGO coordination otherwise there will be a hard competition amongst NGO.

Keyword: tsunami, reconstruction, NGO, competition, coordination

To download all paper content just click here.

Arwin Soelaksono - Disaster Response and reConstruction

4 prominent ideas on the rehabilitation works

2009-09-22T15:34:00.012+07:00

Another disaster struck Indonesia. The latest which was 7.3 RS earthquake jolted districts in West Java and one district in Central Java. UN-OCHA reported total of 31,778 houses were severely damaged and 22,453 houses were moderately damaged in 12 districts in West Java and one district in Central Java. And as WHO Emergency Situation Report released yesterday, public buildings severely affected as well. 377 schools, 605 religious buildings, 26 office buildings and 202 health facilities were damaged. WHO also reported 80 dead, 370 suffered from major injuries, 27 missing, and 1,098 people with minor injuries. In total 157,432 people become IDPs as the result of September 2, 2009 disaster.

Just in 24 hours several NGOs and UN agencies flocked to Garut, Ciamis, and Tasikmalaya which area heavily affected the earthquake. The NGOs which deployed their emergency response team and conducted assessment some of them can be described here were Catholic Relief Services, YTBI, Habitat for Humanity, ASB, ECHO, YEU, Oxfam, World Vision, Hope Worldwide, Save the Children, Palang Merah Indonesia, Church World Services, Plan International and Oxfam.

Until today there is no information regarding the exact number on how many building of those were damaged will be rehabilitated or rebuild. Government estimated the cost will amount to between IDR 1.4 trillion and 1.5 trillion. And the reconstruction expected to be completed by the end of February 2010. It can be predicted that there will be a massive rehabilitation work during these 5 months. Based on the experiences from reconstruction or rehabilitation of Aceh Tsunami 2004 and Yogyakarta Earthquake 2006, there are at least 4 prominent ideas should be considered on the rehabilitation works.

Beneficiaries’ participation

Based on the lessons learned from the Tsunami Response (2004-2008) and from Yogyakarta Earthquake (2006) shows beneficiaries and communities participation is the most important component in the program success. Yogyakarta shows huge difference in beneficiaries participation compare to Aceh which lead to the faster result and less cost of reconstruction. This participation brought to a stronger ownership and responsibility. Admittedly there are wide spectrums of participations. The fullest extent is they provide construction material and skilled labors for the rehabilitation of their houses or community infrastructure. On the lowest, they can guard the material or provide access when the construction materials come to their area. The participation can be anything but it should be there. All intervention by NGOs should complemented by their sweat equity. This is the only way if we want to develop mutual respect, synergies and long term cooperation. At the end of the day the communities will be able not only survive when other disaster strike again but have the skills to help other communities surrounding them.

Engineering structural safety

If it comes to safety, all rehabilitation work should apply the engineering concept on structural safety. This becomes more important on the earthquake disaster prone area. Catastrophic failure happens on houses, clinics, schools and other infrastructure buildings which built not follow the engineering code. As per engineering concept, structural elements can be design as ductile elements which absorb earthquake energy. If the earthquake load big enough but within its specified loading code, the elements may be broken but no sudden collapse will happen. In every earthquake shows that buildings without proper engineering design and construction, the structural behave as a brittle material and collapse without any warning to people inside the building to escape.

Local resource

There is no one size fits all intervention by NGO. We can not easily replicate the solution from one area to the other. If we want to rehabilitate or reconstruct housing or other infrastructure we can not just go copying the previous intervention in other area. Each disaster area has its own uniqueness. One of the uniqueness is the local resource. We have to consider skilled builders, construction material, common technology and equipment available on the site. On the structural safety side there is no compromise, it should be followed strictly but for using local resource we have to be innovative. We have to use what is available on site as much as we can otherwise local resource can be idle. We have to balance the appropriateness on engineering and its cost with the local resource availability. These affects to the decision on the engineering side which lead to materials to be used and builders who will works. If we use bigger component from outside the area it will reduce their participation. In this case NGO intervention will be partner in reconstruction to train, supervise and provide management in reconstruction.

Sustainability

The sad part of Aceh reconstruction is there is no significant and longer term effect in local economic growth. World Bank reported on Aceh Economic Update May 2009 Aceh’s non-oil and gas gross domestic product growth had dropped to 1.9 percent in 2008, far below the national figure of 6.5 percent. When NGOs started their reconstruction works in 2005 the non-oil and gas GDP was 1.2%. Then on the heyday of reconstruction and rehabilitation in 2006 and 2007 the GDP became 7.7% and 7.0% respectively. But when NGOs phasing out in 2008 the GDP plummeted to 1.9%. There are several issues such as security issue, which made the 7.77 billion USD funding committed for the reconstruction of Aceh and Nias have very minimum impact in sustainability in local economic growth.
To minimize such problems NGOs have to leave the competition on waving flags and move forward to form a solid group. This group should produce pressure to every party which can impede all rehabilitation and reconstruction effort. The obstruction can be security issues, improper business practices since massive reconstruction effort may attract everyone seeks for opportunity and to some extent, very demanding beneficiaries.

These four ideas mentioned above should be considered before the any kind of work on rehabilitation commenced. Without all of these the rehabilitation effort will be difficult to have long term impact and sustainable.

Arwin Soelaksono - Disaster Response & reConstruction

Cash for Work – one of the challenges for reconstruction work

2008-12-22T18:24:00.006+07:00

Not more than two weeks after tsunami stroke Nangroe Aceh Darussalam 2004, the tsunami victim introduced to Cash for Work (CfW). The program developed by humanitarian organization in their relief program is a short-term intervention that would provide temporary employment. When the CfW program commenced there were no other livelihoods, since all economic infrastructures were wiped out. The CfW intervention is an alternative of Food for Work. And it is common in disaster response and post conflict area. The CfW apparently is less cost compare to the Food for Work since this program will not include huge procurement, transportation and storage cost.

In CfW program, the people can be as an employee of the NGO and work on the relief work and receive cash as their payment. A wide range of public project works in this relief operation start from removing corpses, debris, boats to shoreline, cleaning of road and drainage ditches and repair other public facilities as road and bridges as well. Even the worker is not literate or not skilled in this job, they still receive wages as long as they work, and on the earlier operation the salary was paid on daily basis.

In Aceh more than 75,000 people employed by the NGOs who have this program with total more of 8 million USD disbursed. This program has been carried out for more than a year which creates pros and contras among NGOs who work in the relief and mostly reconstruction phase.

the good

It is obvious that economic activity is dying in the devastated area due to a disaster. Tsunami which brought massive destruction in all infrastructures, in a blink of an eye everyone became poor person. Agriculture land flooded with saline water, fishermen’s boats dragged miles away into the city, shops turn to debris as happened with houses as well.

CfW proven as good intervention in this condition since cash infused to the local economy so that business activities start to reside. People regain their hope in a way to try to forget their sorrow start to work. Together with the idle workers they removed corpses, cleaned up agricultural land, drainage ditches, roads and houses. The money which they earned then can be used for their daily needs or as a capital for their business. As long as this program implemented as a short term program before livelihood program or long term economic opportunities, this Cfw was confirmed in stimulating economic activities.

the bad

When it was intended as a temporary intervention, many NGO was not prepared with the works should be done by the participants. Limited expertise of the NGO field staffs in managing the project (including in project design and logistic), made CfW participants left undirected. Many of the CfW participants in idle condition as can be seen they very small work to be done. Or there was no discipline was taken if people just showed up in the time they have to sign the presence list. Some people taken advantage as a ghost worker, they can put in their signature in the list of more than one Cfw program. During the first semester of 2005, CfW is a popular program done by NGOs. And this ghost worker can be understandable happened, since in a neighboring area two NGOs have the same CfW program. All they had to do just jumping around to signed in the list.

The program which intended to be an immediate response to rebuild economic activities became deterioration to the attitude of many people. These people might think that they can earn money easily without hard work or even worse, by cheating as a ghost worker. This sort of problem getting bigger since the implementation of CfW is quite long and made many people get used to it. A new comfort zone was created.

the challenges for reconstruction work

How long CfW program should be done? The answer is always debatable. But for sure this CfW program should be stopped when the reconstruction work commenced.

There are three arguments why CfW may hamper reconstruction works. First, it was difficult to find workers for construction. This is common sense, working in construction works is a hard work. Why people have to choose a harder one if they can earn almost equal amount of money from CfW. From their experience, controls from the supervisors are stricter in the reconstruction work since the number of working people is less compare to CfW and the amount of works are easier to quantify.

The other argument is the competition created higher cost for construction works. One of the characteristic in construction works is continuity. It means the work can not be stop unless the project is completed. It is always costly if we have to stop the work and resume. Every restart takes mobilization cost and in the idle time, the equipments and field staffs still need to be paid regularly. In order to retain workers higher wages should be provided.

The third argument is the beneficiary’s participation was deteriorated. In humanitarian approach when doing intervention including the reconstruction work, beneficiary participation is one of the success key. For example in housing reconstruction, the beneficiary can work as a labor when his house is being reconstructed. He can receive wages for this work and at the same time he built his sense of ownership during the construction. The CfW can distract them to leave working on their housing reconstruction to work in CfW program. In reality, the last argument seems not practical in Aceh reconstruction, since many beneficiaries still working for their houses but working in other livelihood area such as fishermen or farmers.

the recommendation

It is proven that construction work and CfW can not be implemented simultaneously. The nature of the payment itself is different. The CfW pay the participants based on the presence construction worker paid based on the amount of work. The payment for construction work based on unit rate of per each type of work meanwhile the wages of CfW based on how many days he/she is working. If the construction work using the approach of CfW the cost will be very high since every worker don’t have to rush on to achieve the target. They get paid on how many days they are working. On the contrary in the construction work they can get paid less or more – depend on their skills – and there is risk component. In the construction work in the same period of time they can earn less if they are not succeed to complete the job.

Naturally people more attracted to the secured job like CfW compare to construction work. Therefore it is difficult to find worker if in the same area, CfW and construction implemented in the same time.

One of the solution is there should be clear that CfW only short intervention. How long the CW can be implemented it depends on the scale of the disaster, but more than 6 months potentially make the people depended. The CfW should be a preparation and transition to the reconstruction phase. Therefore strong coordination amongst organization should be done to ensure the transition.

The other suggestion is the CfW should located not to close to area which already in reconstruction phase. There is should be some distance, let say 3 hours travel by motorbike, from the CfW area to the construction sites. This separation will obstruct their willingness to go back and forth from their residence or working area to join the CfW.

I believe there will not be a contradiction between implementing CfW and construction works. Both can be done successfully if all parties have strong coordination and clear understanding and enough capacity on managing the program.

Arwin Soelaksono - Disaster Response & reConstruction

Recommendation on reconstruction methodology

2007-11-04T15:46:00.000+07:00

On October 2006 I attended a workshop which held by BRR. Workshop which focused on contractors and construction contracts was interesting to me. Many of the attendees shared their Catch-22 situation with their contractors. The performances of contractors who done the construction jobs were a big issue at that time. In the opening remarks, Ray Benson from BRR, shared a problem which experienced by an NGO. The NGO already paid a down payment to one of their contractor, big money, but the contractor never showed up with their work. When the NGO pursued the contractor to work, the contractor on the contrary threatened the NGO guy with serious intimidation. Ouch!

Aceh reconstruction due to enormous of the house need is really a big business for contractors. More than 100,000 houses to be built, and should be as soon as possible. The tsunami victim became impatient since they have already in tents for almost 2 years. The donors were irritated due to the slow progress of reconstruction. They were chasing their NGOs whom receive their funding to fulfill what the NGOs had been promised. All of these were a perfect chemistry to drive a rush and messy construction job. In the next paragraph I will tell you how bad the situation was.

Bigger part or almost of all NGO who work in the reconstruction work are a relief NGO. Their experience is in mobilizing food, medicine and paramedic and also water-sanitation work and temporary shelter. But building a permanent house is a different story. Then at the end, the work of building a permanent house in a massive scale become out of context. This job becomes irrelevant since there are two things which mostly these NGO not possess. First, if they have this kind of experiences they should have all policies, procedures and the project management systems. All of these systems should be embedded in their org-ware and enable them to move fast to respond all the needs on the ground. Second, they don’t have human resource which capable enough to handle the job. Come to Aceh merely because of humanity is not enough. Reconstruction people should have project management skills if they want to succeed.

From the contractors’ side this reconstruction job is a fiesta and heavy meal. No wonder they were flooded BRR with requests for prequalification. In mid of March 2006, there were 3,088 companies who took the prequalification document. They were 2,885 contractors and 203 consultants. It was unbelievable, if we compare to the number of same kind of company in Jakarta with a lot of continuously construction job. A notary whom we hire for our legal works, mentioned that a week before the submission of the company profile, she received abundant request for company legal document. This was miserable. These new born companies are intended for the sake to win a contract. They don’t have the past record which shows they have the capacity to work. And their capability to supply the working capital is a big question mark. It was a common tale that if they can win the contract they will subcontract to other company so create the 2 tier or even worse. At that time many NGO became a sitting duck in front of the nasty contractor.

Someone asked me, which one is better using contractor for the construction or direct implementation using skilled labours? Both are fine. This is my recommendation; we have to use contractor and direct implementation using the skilled labours at the same time. Contractor and the skilled labours can be like Dr Jeckyl and Mr. Hyde. Sometimes they are good and sometimes they are corrupt. They can be nice and the other time can be ill-behaved. Let say, your contractor done something nasty, you can switch them off and turn the job to skilled labours, and vice versa. The project management discipline can do that. You have to have a strong system and quite some experience to make this kind of move. If you can’t make an immediate corrective action supported with system and enough resource, you can be fooled by the contractors or your skilled labours. I have shared my best practices on managing skilled labours (click here) and managing contractors (click here). But merely depend on using just skilled labours or only using contractors is not enough. We have to combine it. This methodology can increase our productivity, reduce or overhead and already proven in my work on completion of the 4,600 permanent houses in Aceh reconstruction.

Arwin Soelaksono - Disaster Response & reConstruction

Success Story of Blang Mounlung Resettlement

2007-10-06T14:09:00.000+07:00

Blang Mounlong is a village in Aceh Jaya District which swept by tsunami wave and sunk due to lowering of the land. This condition forced the village dwellers to move out and have to find a new place which livable. Last August when I visited the community, I saw flowers and gardens in almost every house that our team have been built. People with big smiles greet me asking for visited their house. Hedgerows and plants are along the path that they made. In short, Blang Mounlong is one of the success stories in resettlement.

There are two ways of doing reconstruction works. First, the on-site reconstruction which means to build a new reconstructed house in the previous land. The new house – even the house is smaller or bigger than the previous house - built in the land which the previous was destroyed by disaster. The new building may not exactly at the same spot with previous one, but it must be the same location or land or the same address. Second, the resettlement, which is the reconstruction of house, may be built in some distance from the previous location. And sometimes this can be quite far. Resettlement is needed since the previous land uninhabitable anymore.

Resettlement challenges

Resettlement beyond all questions is much more difficult than the on-site reconstruction. Land title is a one big issue. Before the house been built, the beneficiary should provide the evidence of the land proprietary. It means he/she has to own the land. If they can not afford the price of the land, the resettlement idea is only escapism. If they have the money to buy the land and the government support it; it does not mean that all problems are gone away. The autochthonous dweller is not automatically accepting Johnny come lately to be their neighbor. It happens to villagers of Desa Fajar in Sampoiniet sub-district in Aceh Jaya District. When they intended to move to Blang Dalam village, which is still in the same sub-district, Blang Dalam community shut the door against them.

Livelihood is another issue that makes resettlement more complicated. Their houses should be not far from their livelihood. A lot of fishermen were became the victim of tsunami. Their houses which just around the beach were swept off and the entire infrastructure were devastated as well. But the survivors still work as fishermen. That is the thing that they know since their childhood. To move them to a safer place at the higher ground means to move them quite far from beach. In June 2005 government issued the regulation of buffer zone; which is in area within 2 km from the sea shore is restricted to be rebuilt. This was real tough for the tsunami victim and to the government. For the government it is almost impossible to relocate people who affected by tsunami along more than 3,000 km coastal line. Prodigious number of people has to be moved in the place which is already dwelled.

Resettlement always cost dearly. New land has to be purchased. If the land is contoured it has to be developed, some cut and fill should be done to make paths and flat area to build the houses. It needs extra works and sometime extra equipment which brings more cost has to be paid. And the very expensive will be damage of the environment. Sometimes resettlement means deforesting. In mid 2005 an NGO intended to open a huge compound in Cot Gajah Mati forest in Aceh Barat District for relocation. Vast area was opened and thousands of trees cut down. When the first time I saw the place the scenery was hideous. For me it was an environmental destruction. The sad story has not finished yet. Until now there is none house has ever built there. Tittle-tattle the soil was too soft and then the house can not be built there.

Resettlement success tips

Community initiative is the key of success. Blang Mounlong community was solid under strong leadership of their village head. They managed themselves by collected money than purchased land which located around 2 km from their previous village. Coordinated by the village head they divided the land. Every one of them got as many as their agreed and paid. We guided them in village design, the lay out and road formation since the area is newly opened. For the land marking, we asked every land owner to plant coconut bud in every corner of the land. And coconut buds are very easy to found.

Community participation always a catalyst of success. Aceh Jaya District was the most destroyed area hit by tsunami. The infrastructure washed-out; this condition made this area so remote. There was neither electricity nor cellular network at that time, made our work even harder. But the community gave their hand to help us. They became the guard of the construction material. They gave their access that we can deliver the construction material to be sent to every house. They treated our worker nicely which made this new village a pleasant place to work.

Community provides local material to ensure availability of supply. We always expected that our logistic and construction material will come late. In our operations in West Coast of Aceh we found almost all of bridges are disappeared, and the temporary bridges in many times are broken due to heavy loads click here. Ground transportation was miserable. In November 2005, it took more than 24 hours to travel 43 km click here. From the sea we got problems with the big wave and at that time it was difficult to found a proper barge to carry the construction material. In January 2006, a barge that we rent, sunk, when they brought the material from Medan to our West Coast operation center. So to ensure that we have the availability of material, we asked them on what kind of material that they can supply. With the reasonable price and within the budget, off course. They agreed to supply rubble stone, sand and lumber. We appreciate their cooperation since it is a win-win business solution.

The appreciation goes to my comrade, Sugio. Blang Mounlong was one of Sugio’s beloved villages. He started his work in Blang Mounlong since April 2005 when we recruited him as construction manager. On April 2006 we appointed Sugio to be the head of West Coast Disaster Response Technical Center. He had done extremely good job in delivered the 739 houses in our operations at Aceh Jaya district. Though, Aceh Jaya district was the most difficult place for the reconstruction work as mentioned by Kuntoro, head of BRR click here. He can perform well in a very minimum condition and support. His achievement made the local government and many NGO who work in Aceh Jaya reconstruction paid him with respect. Blang Mounlong is just one of his undeniably successes.

Arwin Soelaksono - Disaster Response & reConstruction

Recognition from BRR for our Aceh Barat team

2007-09-01T20:06:00.000+07:00

After last June we received appreciation from Kuntoro, BRR head, click here, we received recognition from BRR, again.

In BRR Regional 4 report dated August 23, 2007; they put HFHI at the top notch in the 5 TOP DONOR LIST in Aceh Barat District. By June 2007, we have completed the 1,500 houses that we have committed. The completion brought our team on the BRR highest rank. Other big guys in BRR list are World Vision, Asian Development Bank, Catholic Relief Services and Japanese Red Cross.

When I read this BRR report I contemplated on what I have been doing in Meulaboh for almost 2 years.

Our pioneer team led by Tommy Pacatang who came in Meulaboh to open the reconstruction work in the entire of Aceh Barat had done a brilliant job. They dealt with all head honchos in Meulaboh to determine area of work and number of houses committed to be constructed. They dealt with the donor. They did the recruitment and set up the office in the time that many people reluctant to work in a frightened disaster area. And to add their ordeal, there were no adequate support to run proper operations, it was a disaster area, remember? Not enough suppliers, lack of materials and dearth of skilled labours at that time. Disbursement of huge amount of money, without banking presence is completle headache. But Tommy with his strenuous team were absolutely tremendous, they beat all these challenges down.

When I came for the first time in Meulaboh on November 2005, I contribute in strengthen their operation systems and construction methodologies. It was really interesting. Other my fascinating work was appointing who is to be the leader of our Disaster Response Technical Center in Aceh Barat. On March 2006 we assigned Gunawan Sudiyono to be the Center Manager.

The achievement of the 1,500 houses is a mark of Gunawan’s success. He had done exceptional job. Mobilization skilled workers, procurement, logistic management, community development, construction planning and monitoring —the whole enchilada.

One can be highlighted here is mobilizing hundreds skilled labours from Central Java and Medan. In order to deliver around 150 houses monthly we need to add skilled labours from outside Aceh. These skilled labours will increase the speed of works and deliver better quality of houses compare to the local workers. Even the labours paid slightly lower than they can get from other NGO, these workers are eager to work with us since we have the right system. Click here

Gunawan led his team to reach after their attainment. He succeed in orchestrated the construction works Aceh Barat district and Nagan Raya district; and very sure it was a big time.

Below is the list of Top 10 of BRR list. The source is BRR Perwakilan Wilayah IV Resume Kegiatan Aceh Barat 23 Agustus 2007. Actually the list not accurate since we have finished 1,500 house by end of June 2007.

Non Government Organization	House target (unit)	Completed (unit)
Habitat for Humanity Indonesia (HFHI)	1,439	1,439
Catholic Relief Services (CRS)	2,386	1,508
The Salvation Army	1,250	750
World Vision	1,536	721
KKSP	702	420
Islamic Relief	445	345
SOS Desa Taruna Indonesia	322	322
Yayasan Budha Tzu Chi	1,100	366
Tearfund UK	335	208
Caritas Switzerland	1,271	139

Arwin Soelaksono - Disaster Response & reConstruction

3 musketeers who set up a team and system for a massive reconstruction work

2007-07-30T18:58:00.000+07:00

Who are people should be in charge for setting up a team and system for a massive reconstruction work? This was one of my discussions with Treena Wu click here last week. Treena is a Research Fellow from Maastricht Graduate School of Governance. Aceh reconstruction work is quite familiar for her. On December 2005 she had produced a paper 1) on shelter reconstruction work.

In the discussion I shared to her what I called the 3 Musketeers of Reconstruction. The presence of these three’s company is a must for a massive reconstruction work. They have to be on the ground to set up the reconstruction team. They have to see by them self the problem faced then decide the policies, methodologies and the strategies for the operations.

Program Manager

This person will determine what kind of program will be implemented. He has to decide the methodologies that affect in long term development for the beneficiaries. Based on his/her experience the program should be operated efficiently and in cost consciousness manner. In order to simplify the work, Program Manager has to provide templates which tailor made suit to working condition. The templates should provide guidelines for the team to understand if the project tends to fail and provide the remedial action. Since the project is time limited, Program Manager should design time line and milestones prior the commencement. Last but not least, the manager should establish the exit strategy. The strategy which assured the output of the operations will be worth for a long period.

Finance Manager

Disbursement of big amount of money is a common thing in a massive reconstruction work. The challenge is how we can safely distribute the money in widely devastated area where no banking systems. It means no bank transfer or payment through bank can be made. For example, paying labours and local supplier with cash amounted of 1 billion Rupiah need to be carried by 3 men with backpack. This complicated work is just one thing should be anticipate by developing a proper finance system. Setting up finance procedural and budgeting will be the earliest work when he/she arrives on the ground.

Human Resource Manager

It is not an easy work to have an experienced, smart and dedicated staff to join the team. The team should be blend of experience people which mostly from outside of the area and from the local one. Set up a fair HR rules which can support the staffs to perform their best and in the same time can protect the staff from malicious act, should be done prior recruiting.

Last Tuesday, Treena came to our office as an external evaluator from Christian Aid, one of HFHI’s donor. I mentioned to her that even there are templates for the work, the presence of these 3 people are needed to make judgment of the most practicable methodology. The 3 musketeers have to work as a team. They have to have a good coordination since the beginning, so they can provide a realistic guidance to the team.

1) Aceh-Nias Reconstruction Shelter Sector: Views from Beneficiaries and NGOs. Treena Wu. December 2005

Arwin Soelaksono - Disaster Response & reConstruction

The strategy to deliver 4,500 houses

2007-07-15T23:08:00.000+07:00

On 30th June 2007 we handed over the 1,500 houses we have been built in Aceh Barat District and Nagan Raya District. The celebration took place on Kuala Tuha village in Nagan Raya District. That number completed the 4,500 houses in which we have built in our Tsunami Disaster Response Project.

In this 2 years project we learned how to manage the massive reconstruction in disaster affected area. The challenges and difficulties are huge, which I have written in my previous posts in this blog. Some of the topics can be seen on the right column of this blog under title “Blog HOT Topics”. Despite the intricacies we have to find what strategies should be implemented. The strategy for sure can help our team to excel and surpass the challenges.

In one of our monthly senior meeting which happened on June last year, I shared the 5 points should be implemented in our work. In brief it can be describe as follows:

1. Create budget and stick to it

Creating budget is a must to do before any commencement. There is no guarantee that all operation shall succeed. In this disaster area we might surprise with wide devastation of infrastructures or challenges come from the nature. Click here These difficulties may increase the costs such as transportation cost. Another challenge is due to massive reconstruction, we expected that the construction materials will sky rocketed. Click here

We have to carefully lay out the plan, methodology and strategy and supported with budget. With clear plan and budget, the Finance Department can help the operations in terms of guidance also check and balances. This condition can create cost consciousness on the ground on any aspects.

2. Good team delivers good results

For me this is the most interesting and most challenging. In our work entire Aceh we worked in 4 areas or we call it Disaster Response Technical Centers (DRTC). Each DRTC leaded by a manager. I remembered on mid of December 2005, we did the reorganization and we carefully selected on who to be positioned in each DRTC. We were lucky that we got smart, committed and dedicated managers to help us They performed well so we can deliver the 4,500 houses for the tsunami victims.

Not only managers and engineers, our work is to find the best labours to work in our sites. This was tough. Due to enormous construction work in Aceh, workers usually pirated to work to other organization which doing the same project like us. But we already prepared our self with this kind of challenge. Click here.

In our operations in Aceh, we do the construction by our self which gave the work to labour, labour contractor, through construction company and mixed of all those methodologies. Finding a good contractor has became a big issue in Aceh. There so many un-experience and even bogus contractor that was. So we set up method to choose the right one. Click here

3. Enhance procurement and logistic team

Huge construction work in Aceh is a business opportunity for many people including building suppliers. The were flocking to Aceh not merely from other area of Indonesia but also from overseas. When we started the project, some suppliers shocked us with their requirement. They needed fully upfront payment for material which they sell, which is laughable in normal condition. The worst condition is some of them offered commission to many NGOs staff to buy their material.

Proper strategy needed when to purchase material and how to handling them. Stock piling in huge number doesn't proof as a good idea. But lack of material because to small purchasing is create more problem and also made the price higher. Our team trained to handle those things.

4. Strong Community Organizer team

Our basic methodology is Community-based Disaster Response. If we don't have strong team to handle the community development work, our work will be messed up. Many NGO who do the project in Aceh, fell in the community problems. Many problems like land tenure, resettlement, community participation and many other things should be taken good care by the strong community organizer team

5. Community acceptance and accessibility

“Please do no harm the NGO worker”said Kuntoro Mangunsubroto, Head of Badan Rehabilitasi dan Rekonstruksi NAD dan Nias on June 23, 2007. In front of many Aceh local leader in Calang, Aceh Jaya District, he stated his disappointment since some NGO worker taken as hostage and beaten by the community.

There is a dilema for the NGO. Still working in a difficult community, hoping that they can be changed and adopt the program. The question is how long the NGO have to wait? Please see the point number 1, there is a budget that limited our time line. If we don't careful about this the admin cost will totally consumed just to wait they will be changed.

I believe that we can not help everybody. We just have to work and help people that willing to accept us and agree with our program. This kind of community can help us to achieve our best to help them.

Arwin Soelaksono - Disaster Response & reConstruction

Appreciation from Chief of BRR and NAD governor

2007-06-24T17:19:00.000+07:00

“This is the most difficult region. This is the most destroyed area” mentioned Kuntoro Mangkusubroto yesterday. The chief of Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Agency for Aceh and Nias (BRR) stated the intricate of reconstruction works in Aceh Jaya district. When he said that I remembered my experience passed Gunung Mancang, an area located between Kuede Patek and Lhok Kruet. I did the Camel Trophy drive in more than 24 hours to pass the 35 km road.

Saturday June 23, many people from government offices, NGO representatives gathered in Calang. It is a rare occasion, the Head of BRR together with the Governor of Nangroe Aceh Darusalam attended the house dedication for tsunami victims. In the occasion both the Governor and the BRR Chief express their gratitude to NGOs who works in Aceh west coast region. There are more than 40 international NGOs works in this region. Their appreciations since the effort of house construction works exceed the difficulties. The challenges not only caused by devastated of infrastructure but came from the unfriendly natural forces as well. But the most dreadful was the security problems. "Development in Calang is moving slowly. Many non-governmental organizations could not stay there. District heads were asking the organizations for their diesel fuel and contractors were 'approached' by security personnel. I have warned them (district heads and security personnel) not to disrupt reconstruction work," Kuntoro revealed to Jakarta Post on December 2005. In that edition Kuntoro also mentioned there were only two non-governmental organizations still in Calang: Samaritan Purse and Habitat for Humanity. *)

On the event yesterday again Kuntoro warned the local government. “Please do no harm the NGO worker”. He stated his disappointment since some NGO worker taken as hostage and beaten by the community. “Don’t ever think if one community reject an NGO, the community will easily get help from other NGO. Even BRR will not work for any reconstruction work in such community.” Kuntoro might be troubled since he received complaint from Canadian Red Cross since their staffs were taken as hostage in Kuede Patek.

The statement is good, but it is so late. This month our operation in West Coast will be finished. From the Valentine Day 2005 when we started the project, we received repeatedly serious oppression even to the death threat. The intimidation came from the beneficiaries, local leaders and also from local suppliers who force to sell their building materials with unreasonable price. For my self, I thought my time was come, when a mob of more than 100 men, came to our office in Rigaih in one night of April 2006. In the commotion they forced us to build 45 meter square house. They were not satisfied with the 36 meter square house we have already donated. They wanted larger.

Yesterday afternoon our toils and grieves were paid. In the midst of appreciation given by the BRR Head, NAD Governor and Aceh Jaya District Head; Habitat for Humanity is distinctively appreciated. BRR picked two NGOs to represent all NGOs to be acknowledged. Together with Samaritan’s Purse representative, Leonilo ‘Tots’ Escalada our Project Director received the placard. “Please extend my regards to your headquarter in United States” said Kuntoro after he paid tribute to Habitat for Humanity. With 739 houses built from Rigaih to Lhok Kruet, our mission in West Coast is accomplished.

*) http://www.thejakartapost.com/yesterdaydetail.asp?fileid=20051215.D07

Arwin Soelaksono - Disaster Response & reConstruction

A contrarian mindset, the more land released the more houses built

2007-04-29T19:25:00.000+07:00

I said those words in the UNDP workshop at Swissbel Hotel Banda Aceh at November last year. As a speaker on that workshop I shared our experience on the land issues amongst the NGOs.

Before Aceh reconstruction commenced, NGOs gathered to discuss one of the mainly important issues which are the land division. In the meeting coordinated by UN, the NGOs pledge their commitment to the government. At that time in high spirit many NGOs promised to build big number of house in their area. The area which is the land, that was entrusted for them as their working area. Some NGOs received larger area to engage than others. The bigger the commitment, the bigger area received.

The time went on and problems emerged. The reconstruction process is not an easy work. Problem of transportations, un-cooperated beneficiaries, unprepared local government, short of material for construction, are some difficulties which are hamper the reconstruction progress. Those create frustration. And to add the annoyance, it was found out that some NGO received the same area with other NGO. It is an overlapping area.

The problem of the overlapping area is the NGO and/or the community wants only one NGO who are working in their village. I believe this is good. This condition can reduce the jealousy which produces by dissimilar benefit that they can get from different NGO. The NGO will have more room to apply the terms and condition according their mission on the community development.

An example of that situation is in Crak Mong village, Sampoinet sub-district, Aceh Jaya district. At April 2005 we start our project by built our office in Crak Mong village. The office is a duplex house which made of brick. After project completed, those houses will be delivered to the community. The Crak Mong office will serve 4 villages i.e.: Crak Mong, Blang Monlueng, Meunasah Kulam and Alue Gro.

House constructions in the 3 villages went on, but not in Crak Mong. In this area the people had disagreement amongst themselves. Some of them wanted to have on-site reconstruction while others want to have relocation site at the hill. We told the community to settled down the difference and choose to where they want to build. The dispute went on for 10 months blocked us to commence our work. On February 2006, the problem is getting bigger.

Canadian Red Cross came to us showed their Memorandum of Understanding with sub-district head, that Crak Mong is their working area. So they have the same MOU as we have on Crak Mong. This is what we call the overlapping area. They asked us to hand over the area. They came to Crak Mong villagers promised them that they will get temporary shelter of International Federation of Red Cross at their previous house land. And on June 2006 they will have a brand new house on the hill. So Crak Mongers will have 2 houses. One is the temporary shelter and shortly they will have the brick house too. The offer off course is attractive.

We didn’t want to fall into NGO rivalry. Our instruction to Sugio, our West Coast Center Manager is just dropped that area and gave to CRC. But just gave away the site to CRC is not simple. Our workers who are Crak Mong villagers wanted us to build their houses. We couldn’t wait any longer after we have been working for more then 10 months. And we were very happy that UNORC arranged and led the villagers’ election. On May 19, 2006 the election taken place and CRC won the vote. We were very happy and congratulate CRC that Crak Mong community became theirs.

These pictures were taken on the election day. But today when I am writing this blog, more than eleven months after, none a single brick house was built.

Crack Mong is not the only one area that we give to other NGO. Some villages like Teupin Perao, Simpang Peut also we gave to other. While the majority of those who works on reconstruction tend to go into in rivalry, compete in having larger beneficiaries, we do not want to be like that. We go to the contrary course.

In that UNDP workshop I shared these mindsets:

1. The more land released, the more houses built. If our community is divided, some of them want to have our program and others want to receive from other NGO, just drop them. Let them who willing to receive program from others be removed from our list. We just focus on those who are ready to abide our terms and conditions. The result is immense. We move faster. I believe more than 4,200 houses we have built today, is one of the proof that the mindset is true.
2. We respect the disaster victim, we are on their side. If other NGO can work better and faster than us, that NGO should serve the community. It is not wise if we block the community from accepting better and earlier help.

Arwin Soelaksono - Disaster Response & reConstruction

Download section

2007-04-25T09:34:00.000+07:00

3 things to do to retain skilled labors

2006-11-09T20:34:00.000+07:00

Last June as reported by Serambi Indonesia newspaper more than 40 labors from West Java was left Calang to Meulaboh by walking. Out of their desperation, these people dare to go on feet. They have been frustrated by weeks because of un-clear payment. The contractor who employed them said the wages have been paid through the labors head. But disappeared some where, and did not trickle down. In other places reported the contractors left their projects leaving their workers unpaid. Same happen with some NGOs the payment procedure was complicated, made contractors and labors waiting for their payments for months. This situation becomes a common tale in Aceh reconstruction.

Conditions like these were spread out amongst the workers out side Aceh region. They were afraid to work in Aceh. They thought they will experience the unpaid work. These circumstances affected our work in last February. At that time almost our worker was Aceh worker. Their capacity is not sufficient to meet our standard and timeline. So when we were planned to bring skilled labors from Medan, they gave us the negative response.

But nowadays the condition was upside down. Just 9 months after they rejected our invitation, many head of skilled labors call our construction managers asking for works. Same happen with the above, the good news about us are spoken widely amongst the labors. This surprising circumstance was the fruit of how we treat our labors. There are 3 things as a must if we want to retain our skilled labors:

1. Punctuality of payment time. The on time payment is more appreciates than the contract value. For labors payment security is more important than high rate of their contract. This assurance makes them fully concentrated of their work. This regularity is produce of a strong team work from every department.

2. Material availability prior their arrival. It is easy to maintain our workers in high spirit. Put material on site prior their arrival. Show them that our warehouse is complete. Let them see the regularity of material inflow from our supplier.

3. Project management. The labor will comfortable if we have proper project management. They have to see the shop drawing that can guide them to work and minimize confuse and dispute. They have to see the projection about the flow of work. It means after their completing one work they will know another works prepared for them. The appropriate project management will direct their work and some time we can discipline them.

Arwin Soelaksono - Disaster Response & reConstruction

Brick price plummet

2006-05-13T21:15:00.000+07:00

After climbing for several months, nowadays brick price is plunge. Last January the price was double than before tsunami, it was reached 700 Rupiah. But currently we can buy 500 Rupiah each.

The contractors and NGOs who work in reconstruction purchase brick out side this region. This tsunami area was receiving brick from Bireun and Medan. Even though the transportation cost is expensive, the price of brick on site still cheaper compare with local bricks.

The brick business was attracted to some people who saw the opportunity. They opened home business based brick factory. Some NGO working with them as a livelihood program. The result is good. The supply is getting bigger and suit with the demand. Then the economic law is effective, all prices get down.

But the problem of high price is still there. In some area they force NGOs and contractors to buy their bricks. They are serious with their threat, by blocking the trucks which bring bricks which bought not from them. This harassment from the local supplier has an economic terminology, they call it, protection.

Arwin Soelaksono - Disaster Response & reConstruction

Local contractors flooded BRR with requests for prequalification

2006-03-23T19:26:00.000+07:00

Last week BRR issued a press release to inform the process of contractors’ selection. The numbers was astonishing. There were 3,088 companies who took the prequalification document. They were 2,885 contractors and 203 consultants.

Not all of them submit the documents, but most of them did. BRR received prequalification documents from 2,267 contractors and 121 consultants. 2,134 companies are Aceh-based. The results for prequalification will be announced on 27 March 2006. A joint committee (BRR, Unsyiah, BPKP (State Financial Audit Board)) are processing the prequalification documents.

The number was unbelievable. Is it true that Aceh before the disaster already has a lot of construction companies? If this is in Jakarta, I wont surprised me. Similar numbers of contractors are working in the golden years of 90’s in Jakarta. Or it is just people who want to grab the opportunity in the reconstruction job?

My alarm in the head was ringed. This condition can cause serious problem. It can describe in short in 2 implications.

First, only small numbers of them are really a genuine contractor. What I mean with genuine is capable, sufficient experience, adequate capital, own warehouse, construction equipments and vehicles, strong connections with suppliers, supported by big number of skilled labors and managed by professional engineers. So, we can predict if the huge number of contracts will be disbursed, these kind of contractors can win the job. Then we can expect the poor quality of work will produce.

Second, there are construction companies intentionally made for get the contract. And soon after they win the job, they will sub contract the job to other company. The bad news is not over yet. This subcontracting will go to 2 or 3 tiers. At the end of the day, the last tire will suffered out of cash. And they will easily leave the job unaccomplished.

Arwin Soelaksono - Disaster Response & reConstruction

Dumbest thing in Aceh reconstruction works, NGO competition

2006-03-17T20:50:00.000+07:00

Enormous funding flowing into Aceh due to extensive publication on tsunami victims. It brought 124 International NGOs, dozens of UN organizations and 430 local NGOs flocked to Aceh. All of these parties have their responsibility in relief, rehabilitation and reconstruction of Aceh. And off course they have their responsibility as a channel of their donor who poured the funding through them.

Around mid of 2005, in big cities like Banda Aceh and Meulaboh, the presence of NGOs made these 2 cities looks like getting smaller. These 2 towns are crowd of organizations. Nearly everyone are in the high spirit to run their program. If everyone is getting hot and the area is crowd the issue is who will be the beneficiaries of the huge funding? The nasty thing to do is persuade the beneficiary to receive someone’s program and in the same time reject others.

For instance is in permanent shelter work. There is a competition of the size and the completeness of the house. Some NGO to win the heart of the beneficiary’s they built 2 stories houses. Some provide kitchen set. Some endow with cash to move in the new house. The beneficiaries were spoiled that they can choose on one NGO and refuse others. Or they can bargain with some NGO in order to seize the best they can get.

This is utterly awful, the mission to reach many people shifted to put the flag of the organization on higher ground. If everyone’s mindset is to provide decent house to as many tsunami victims can get, the competition as mentioned above will not happen. The bigger house, the more complete house built or even more beautiful house, will reduce the number of beneficiary.

Other example from permanent shelter reconstruction works is as happen in Meulaboh, Aceh Barat District. Most of the NGO are prepared to build 36 m sq meters houses. But there was a day, when one NGO came to the local authority told all their houses will be 45 sq meters. Concerned with the jealousy will spread amongst the citizens, the local authority instructed all NGOs to build the same size with that NGO. Same as above based on the budget availability the number of the beneficiary decrease.

But the jealousy already reaches to other district. People of Aceh Jaya District which the closest area of Aceh Barat District receive smaller houses. Most of the NGO here build the 36 sq meters house.

Yesterday evening, a group of villagers came to our office in Rigaih, Aceh Jaya. They asked me, why we treat them differently. They knew that we build 45 sq meters house in Aceh Barat but here the 36 sq meters. In anger they forced me to build same as we build in Aceh Barat otherwise they will kick us out. I told them, we will only build the 36 sq meters. We will not persuade them to receive it. They who are willing to get the 36 sq meters house they can have it freely otherwise they can go to other NGO to receive bigger house. And I told them, if all of them agree to refuse us, we will leave that community.

NGO competition brings bad attitude to the beneficiaries. It made them spoiled. At the end of the day can dictate the NGO who helped them to fulfill their unreasonable needs. Our mission is not only building a house. More than that, we have to share the noble values which are embedded in every NGO entity.

Arwin Soelaksono - Disaster Response & reConstruction

Bridge Collapse in Panga

2006-03-09T20:40:00.000+07:00

This was shocking to us! Last 6 days ago we just awarded one supplier for the bulk buying. They will send their materials from Meulaboh to our sites in West Coast. It means they will pass this bridge. With this situation, they have to change the route. The roadway from Banda Aceh to West Coast is not much better compare from Meulaboh.

Below is the email of Eka Rinanda from Aceh Jaya Field Office
Office of the United Nations Recovery Coordinator for Aceh and Nias (UNORC): Today at around 12.00 am a UNORC Calang received a report of a bridge (bailey bridge) collapse in Panga. A 30 - 40 MT JICS truck loaded with sands/gravel which was trying to cross stumbled in to the river. No casualties was reported - there was only one driver and no passenger, but the truck is currently still in the river. The exact location is in Ulee Titi sub village, Keude Panga village, Panga sub district. The bridge is not totally disconnected, but twisted halfway through therefore it is not passable for vehicles. Motorbike can go trough, some reported, but passenger have to get off.

I spoke to Samaritan's Purse in Panga for the above detail information and informed this to BRR Regional Office here. I have called Dewi Elyana in our meulaboh office and she will inform NGOs/Agencies in Meulaboh about this situation, and maybe talk to JICS office there. From BRR side, Saliza will contact Banda Aceh for follow up. I also heard that Oxfam may has planned to fix this bridge and they have check on the spot today - this I will confirm with Oxfam Calang.

I attach photos taken by ACF staff for your clear description of the damage. It is critical for Aceh Jaya especially now that we hear about fuel shortage in Calang and need to get supply from Meulaboh. The email sent on Mar 9, 2006 3:01 PM

Arwin Soelaksono - Disaster Response & reConstruction

BRR warns it may take over unfinished contracts

2006-03-08T19:21:00.000+07:00

This is the time that every agency to realize that reconstruction in disaster area is not an easy thing. Many aspects and issues impeded the process along the way. Some of the NGOs are beaten up by the chief of BRR. It was written in the Jakarta Post newspaper.

One of UN body who works in reconstruction which its name is similar with us was heavily criticized. Funny thing is many people were confused with this similarity. When people asked us what was happened. We just told them…. “It’s not us. We are Habitat for Humanity. It is very different organization with the organization which described by the Jakarta Post.”

Below is the article from The Jakarta Post.

Duncan Wilson, The Jakarta Post, Banda Aceh

Source: The Jakarta Post, 8 March 2006.

http://www.thejakartapost.com/detailheadlines.asp?fileid=20060308.A02&irec=3

Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Agency for Aceh and Nias (BRR) chief Kuntoro Mangkusubroto has blasted non-governmental organizations, accusing some of dishonesty and a lack of professionalism, and threatened the agency would take over any projects that remain unfinished in June next year.

Kuntoro said some of the larger organizations had "lied" to their donors and the public about their progress, were beset by high overheads or divided by internal problems, and fixated with obtaining land for houses when most survivors wanted to return to their villages.

"One NGO took pictures claiming they had built 100 houses but they just built two houses. Another NGO built toilets but in some areas there was no water in them, how can professionals do that kind of thing?" Kuntoro said recently.

He singled out several NGOs for special criticism.

They included UN Habitat, which he accused of "being slow in some areas". He also alleged that CARE had often behaved duplicitously.

Kuntoro said the BRR would measure the NGOs' current performance against their pledges, so that donor countries could best target their funding.

"We are so proud of projects and groups like the Salvation Army for example, but when it comes to bigger organizations I am sad to say they're not as effective.

"They have too many overheads and I believe too many internal governance problems and I feel it is my duty to communicate that to donors and the NGO head offices.

"Usually the NGOs say 'can you give us land?', but that is not the (correct) approach when 90 percent of people will go back to their villages," Kuntoro said.

He said that any agencies that failed to deliver on their commitments by the middle of next year would be required to leave, and the BRR or more efficient NGOs would assume their work.

"We will now be asking the NGOs to review their current performance against their December pledges, and submit new numbers and projects.

"The consequences are severe, but I want to send a signal that we are serious here and this is not business as usual.

People have to work fast in these projects and I'm really serious about that."

Kuntoro's comments focused on the construction of housing, but BRR's Nias operations head William Sabander said Kuntoro intended to apply sanctions across the board.

"He has told me that we will ask for commitments from all agencies, which should come with an action plan, and if this does not meet the schedules we need to evaluate and get someone to take over things, or the BRR could assign another agency," William said.

The BRR, UN and Red Cross recently announced they had pushed back by several months their March target for moving people out of tents and into temporary shelters.

Only 235 out of the estimated 16,000 temporary shelters needed for the 70,000 Acehnese living under canvas have been completed since the program began in September.

About 12 percent of the around 120,000 new permanent homes required have been built.

While Kuntoro acknowledged his comments could create tensions between some NGOs and the BRR, Kuntoro said he hoped they and the performance review would encourage efficiency and transparency.

"We need the houses now, not at the end of the year. If the agencies say they have to scale back their pledge, fine, as long as they deliver the pledge.

"What I really worry about is philanthropists or donors' nasty surprise if they find out that something is untrue or not realistic," Kuntoro said.

UN Habitat project head Ian Hamilton said the organization may have been a little slow initially.

"Maybe we could have spent less time at the beginning talking and starting to build things but you always do much analysis at the start."

Hamilton said the organization had built 200 homes, which put them "in the top four or five organizations."

UN Habitat had agreed to construct 4,000 houses.

CARE's Aceh head Christophe Legrand said the company, with projects for this year worth US$30 million, was always transparent and professional.

"(Kuntoro's criticisms) may be referring to initial work in the emergency, but the standards we strive to reach are very high," Legrand said.

He said the company had 700 houses at various stages of construction, but not one had yet been completed.

Hamilton and Legrand said they were not troubled by the Aceh and Nias Reconstruction and Rehabilitation Authority's proposed review of non-government organizations, and enjoyed a positive working relationship with the organization and Kuntoro.

¿Qué Pasa, Waskita Karya ?

2006-02-10T20:01:00.001+07:00

Almost all people who are dealing with construction business know Waskita Karya. It is a name of a well-know state owned contractor. In Indonesia’s construction business they are one of the top 10. The company which found on 1961 has experiences in building skyscrapers. The BNI tower which is the highest building in Jakarta marked their achievement. Big projects like bridge which are connecting islands in Batam was done successfully. Successes in housings are the same as mentioned previously. In short Waskita Karya (WK) is a highly regarded and reliable contractor company.

But what is going on in Aceh? Kuntoro, the head of BRR slammed WK down. With his order he blacklisted WK. The decree which issued yesterday is refrained WK to have a job in Aceh for 2 years. Everybody who knows WK, like me, was surprised. ¿Qué Pasa. What was happened?

Last year WK won a contract for 1,050 houses from Turkish Red Crescent Society. The project is in Kemukiman Lampuuk, Aceh Besar and Desa Bitai, Banda Aceh. I believe because of WK excellent track record, they entrusted the 90.3 billion Rupiah project. But last December in the commemoration of 1 Year Tsunami, the leading light of WK turns to grow fainter. None of the house was completed.

What was happened to WK can be happen to any contractors or NGOs. So these are the lessons learnt:
1. Renew the mind set. If we go to do the reconstruction work we have to change our mind set. The mentality from doing business in the normal area to the state of mind of working in disaster area. We have to live by our own. We have to have a strong system to protect our values and mission. We have to prepare our mind to well-perform in the place with no bank, no internet connection, no cellular network, no electricity, no medical support and sometimes no food. In short there is no business at usual. I think WK still in the mind set of normal condition area.
2. Be careful when budgeting. Providing all by our self may costly. Meanwhile along the process the costs may soars. When WK sub-contracted the project with 68 million Rupiah, they thought the cost is sufficient until the project completion. They may surprise with the skyrocketing price for more than 40% of construction materials.
3. Transparency and equality. We have to treat equal to all sub-contractors. WK gave the job to PT Almahdali with 82 million Rupiah per-unit. But WK gave the same job to 6 local contractors with 68 million Rupiah per-unit. At the end of the day, the 6 local contractors asking for a rise until 80 million Rupiah unless they stop the work.
4. Be clear in the contract document. There were dispute between WK and the 6 sub-contractors. They were mentioned did not know about the material specification, so they asking for the rise. The local contractors said, they just knew the material just did not fit with the specification in the middle of the work. I don’t know this is true or not, but with the clear in contract document the dispute may be minimized.
5. Give the sub-contractor job in staggered. Do not award the contractor just in one shot. This is the disaster area, everyone may experiencing failure. If we give big number of money for down payment to our subcontractor, it is difficult to withdraw when they failed. Release the job or in package is a better solution. In this case WK awarded Alhmahdali 315 houses, but none the house was completed.
6. Be careful of 2 tier work. If we have to give our work to sub-contractor, be careful that the sub-contractor is just looking for fee. Obviously WK them self is looking for fee. GeRAK anticorruption watch mentioned, with this sub-contracting scheme, WK gains 18.9 billion Rupiah.

Arwin Soelaksono - Disaster Response & reConstruction

Construction material price soars

2006-01-28T11:35:00.000+07:00

This is the day when the suppliers are the KINGs.

Since last month, the construction works amongst the implementing agencies was on fire. Every one in Aceh reconstruction is like a participant in the race track. All of us are working hard, to complete the work on time. All agencies who work in the reconstruction are craving for construction materials. Timbers, cements, steel rebar, zinc roofing and bricks go through the economic law. The construction material production is not fast enough as the speed of construction. Scarcity of bricks, cements and other material is start to happen. The price goes up with no one can prevent it.

One brick before tsunami was Rp. 300 but nowadays is Rp. 700 each. Even though, it was easily sold out. Payment should be in hard cash. Just like in the stock market, every hour and even every minute, the price can be change by the supplier. The supplier will give to the best bidder who comes to them with highest price and with enough money in their pocket.

The nightmare is not over yet. The quality of the brick is poor. Generally the brick burned within 3 days, to reach its strength. But because the buyer is already in front of their gate, they just burn it in 2 days.

This is too much and has to be stopped. There are 3 things we have to do to end this madness.

First, just stop the work. Stop and watch. We are not allow someone make a fool upon us by playing the price. If we follow their game, the price will continue to skyrocketing. If other agencies are still willing to dance with their rhythm, let them, it won’t be long; they will short of cash soon.

Second, we have to buy materials outside Aceh region. Even we have to pay the transportation cost; the price is still lower compare to the local supplier. And still we will get better quality bricks.

Third, we make by our self. We just need to find enough space to build our factory and the quarry for material. We can enhance the life quality of the local people to work with us.

The first idea maybe the easiest and the last suggestion is to idealistic. But if we just do one of them, the kings will woke up and smelt the coffee.

Arwin Soelaksono - Disaster Response & reConstruction

West Coast adventure

2005-12-01T20:59:00.000+07:00

Kabupaten Aceh Jaya - West Coast - November 2005, the final frontier. These are pictures of Habitat For Humanity Tsunami
Disaster Response team in a place called Gunung Mancang. It's a humanitarian mission, to help the tsunami victim to have a decent house to live. At that time, Gunung Mancang was a place there were no man want to go.

Gunung Mancang is an area in the West Coast Aceh, it is between Kuede Patek to Lhok Kruet. It is on the way from Meulaboh to Banda Aceh.

It was a devastated area. The road and bridges were wiped out by tsunami. To transport materials and workers, we have to go there, though.

I went here at November 30, 2005. From Kuede Patek to Lhok Kruet which should be in one hour, with 4x4 vehicles, I took 24 hours plus 7 minutes.

Arwin Soelaksono - Disaster Response & reConstruction

Bailey bridge on the Road between Calang and Rigah is about to collapse

2005-11-15T15:39:00.000+07:00

If you are in Rigaih (our West Coast office is there), you know how horrendous it is passing this bridge. Everyday more than 10 times our cars crossing it to Calang, back and forth. The big question mark is. Can we use this bridge to bring our material? We have similar condition in the bridge near to Lhok Kruet. It means, delivering material from Banda Aceh either from Meulaboh to West Coast will be delayed, waiting the bridge to be repaired.

Email from Joerg Meier, Head of Aceh Jaya Field Office, Office of the United Nations Recovery Coordinator for Aceh and Nias (UNORC). In his email he wrote: according to a CRS engineer assessment the damaged bailey bridge on the Road between Calang and Rigah is about to collapse any time. Please pay extreme caution when crossing the section (picture attached). CRS looks into improvement but currently still waiting for heavy equipment and spare parts.

Arwin Soelaksono - Disaster Response & reConstruction

First day in Aceh

2005-11-04T21:26:00.001+07:00

As my aircraft landed in Sultan Iskandar Muda Airport in Banda Aceh at 16.50 PM, this is my first day in Aceh. I will be joined Habitat For Humanity for one year. My assignment is for Operations Manager for Habitat For Humanity Indonesia (HFHI)for Aceh Tsunami Disaster Response Project. I will be in charge for all their service area. And that will be in Banda Aceh, Sigli, Meulaboh and West Coast. HFHI planned to build 10.000 houses in those areas.

I believe there is a very big opportunity, and responsibility. Hopefully with help of God I will be able to accomplish the job.

Arwin Soelaksono - Disaster Response & reConstruction

Arwin's projects portfolio

2005-11-01T11:14:00.001+07:00

My updated profile can be seen at http://id.linkedin.com/in/arwinsoelaksono

List of projects have been done during 1990 - 2007

Tsunami Disaster Response Project -
Habitat for Humanity Indonesia

No.	Area operation	Sub-district	Number of houses completed	Year
1	Aceh Besar	Banda Aceh, Lhok Nga, Leupung	1,847 (*)	2005 - 2007
2	Aceh Pidie	Sigli and Jangka Buya	398	2005 - 2006
3	Aceh Barat and Nagan Raya	Meurebo, Kuta Padang, Samatiga, Arongan Lambalek and Kuala	1,609	2005 - 2007
4	Aceh Jaya	Setia Bakti and Sampoiniet	739	2005 - 2007

(*) including 184 houses construction work intervention

PT Nobelia Konstruksindo

No.	Project	Building type	Client	Year
1	Egypt Embassy – Jl. Teuku Umar Jakarta	Building 3 stories	PT Decorient Indonesia	2004 - 2005
2	Pertamina Blue Sky Project – Balongan Wesr Java	Cooling tower building	PT Rekayasa Industri	2004
3	Pupuk Kujanng Factory – Cikampek West Java	Water treatment plant and building	PT Satyamitra Surya Perkasa	2004
4	Ship Analytic Building. Sekolah Tinggi Ilmu Pelayaran. Marunda, Jakarta	Building 3 stories	PT Satyamitra Surya Perkasa	2003
5	House Jl. Patimura No. 18 Kebayoran Baru, Jakarta	Building 2 stories	PT Grahacipta Hadiprana	2003
6	Graha Pena, Kebayoran Lama, Jakarta	Building 13 stories	PT Wijaya Kusuma Contractors	2002
7	Bekasi Trade Center	Building	PT Nindya Karya	2002
8	PT Padama Bahtera Office and Factory Labelindo, Cibitung.	Building 2 stories	PT Padama Bahtera Labelindo	2002
9	Raw Sugar Warehouse. Jawamanis Rafinasi. Cilegon. Banten.	Silo	PT Tiga Adi Rekabangun	2002
10	Vihara Vajrabodhi Bogor	Building 7 stories	PT Mitrabangun Adigraha	2002
11	Hospital Karya Medika Tambun. Jawa Barat	Building 5 stories	PT Saranabaja Tatagraha	2001
12	Soda Ash Warehouse, PT Lautan Luas Tbk. Tambak Langon, Jawa Timur.	Building	PT Multi Cipta Mandiri	2001
13	PT Agio Multimex. Office Karawaci	Building 3 stories	PT Prasamta Citrasena	2001
14	PT Galic Bina Mada Factory Cibitung.	Building 3 stories	PT Galic Bina Mada	2000 - 2001
15	Biridge Cihaur. Kota Baru Parahyangan. Padalarang.	Bridge	PT Agung Surya Perkasa	2000
16	Tamani Kafe. Melawai. Jakarta	Building 4 stories	PT Kencana Sewu Persada	2000
17	Optik Melawai Office. Jl. Melawai Raya No. 67 – 68. Jakarta.	Building 5 stories	PT Parama Darma	2000
18	Muara Baru Port. Jakarta. o Revetment….1.500..meter o Quaywall…...4.000..m² o Slipway………120..meter o Water inlet and outlet	Port building facilites	Ringkai Nusantara – Hutama karya J.O.	1999- 2001
19	Danalaga. Stadim Sukabumi. West Java.	Stadium	PT Putrasakti Sukamulya	1999
20	Gereja GBI Bethany Kelapa Gading	Building 4 stories	PT Mega Firdaus	1998 - 1999
21	Golf course. Kota Baru Bandar Kemayoran. Danau Kemayoran, Jakarta.	Bridge	PT Pembangunan Perumahan	1998
22	Bermis Madu Factory Bojonegara. Banten.	Silo	PT Tashida Sejahtera Perkasa.	1998
23	Taman Merdeka MONAS. Jakarta.	Underground Building	PT Jaya Konstruksi MP	1998

PT Swakarya Centraditama

No.	Project	Building type	Client	Year
1	Bogor Raya Permai (Bogor Country Estate) 100 houses	Middle – high end housing	PT Bumi Upaya Griya	1996 - 1998
2	Kranggan Permai 7 Houses	Middle end housing	PT Bumi Upaya Griya	1996 - 1998

PT Freyssinet Total Technology

No.	Project	Building type	Client	Year
1	BDNI Tower Jl. Karet Jakarta	High rise building (Ground Anchor)	PT Waskita Karya	1995
2	Agro Plaza Kuningan Jakarta	High rise building	PT Duta Graha Indah	1994 - 1995
3	Manggarai Tunnel	Tunneling below railway track	Kumagai – Kadii JO	1995
4	Wisma Anggana Danamon (Danamon Square) Jl. Sudirman Jakarta	High rise building (Ground Anchor)	PT Kali Raya Sari	1992 - 1994
5	Mampang – Tendean Flyover	Bridge	PT Agra Budhi	1993 - 1994
6	Lippo Life Building Jl. Sudirman Jakarta	High rise building	PT Total Bangun Persada	1992 - 1993
7	Wisma Kyoei Prince Jl. Sudirman Jakarta	High rise building	Jaya Konstruksi – Toda Corp. J.O	1991 - 1992
8	Shangrila Hotel Jl. Dukuh Atas Jakarta	High rise building	PT Waskita Karya	1991 - 1992
9	Ibis Slipi Hotel Jl. S. Parman Jakarta	High rise building	PT Decorient Indonesia	1991
10	Mulia Center Jl. Rasuna Said KuninganSquare) Jakarta	High rise building	PT Total Bangun Persada	1991
11	Jabotabek Elevated Railway Section C1	Bridge	Nindya – Kumagai – PSC JO	1990 - 1991
12	Pondok Cina Fly Over.	Bridge	PT Multi Structure	1990 - 1991