Disaster Management Plan - City of Tshwane Metropolitan ...

CITY OF TSHWANE
Disaster Management
Plan
Updated Level 1
Disaster Management Centre
2011
| Updated by | Disaster Management Officers | OC Tshitannye | KZ Khotlele | KJ Matebane |
TJ Tshifaro | SV Mnguni |

ACCRONYMS
CBO
Community based organisation
CoT
City of Tshwane
CoT DRMF City of Tshwane Disaster Risk Management Framework
DMA Disaster Management Act No. 57 of 2002.
DMIS
Disaster Management Information System
DOC
Disaster Operations Centre
DRA
Disaster Risk Assessment
DRR
Disaster Risk Reduction
DRMAF
Disaster Risk Management Advisory Forum
DRMP
Disaster Risk Management Plan
EIA
Environmental Impact Assessment
FOG
Field Operations Guide
FPA
Fire Protection Association
GIS
Geographical Information Systems
GM
General Manager
GP PDMC Gauteng Province Provincial Disaster Management Centre
GPDMF
Gauteng Province Provincial Disaster Management Framework
GPS
Geographical Positioning System
IDP
Integrated Development Plan
IRCS
International Red Cross Society
JOC
Joint Operations Centre
KPA
Key Performance Area
MDG
Millennium Development Goals
MDMC
Municipal Disaster Management Centre
MFMA Municipal Financial Management Act No. 56 of 2003
MMC
Member of the Mayoral Committee

NDMC
National Disaster Management Centre
NDMF
National Disaster Management Framework
NGO
Non-governmental organisation
PDMC
Provincial Disaster Management Centre
PDMF
Provincial Disaster Risk Management Framework
PFMA Public Financial Management Act No. 1 of 1999
SED
Strategic Executive Director
SOP
Standard Operating Procedure
VOC
Venue Operations Centre
DEFINITIONS
Disaster is a progressive or sudden widespread or localized, natural or humancaused
occurrence which causes or threatens to cause death or injury, damage
to property, infrastructure or environment, disruption of life of a community and
its magnitude exceeds the ability of those affected to cope using only their own
resources.
Disaster management is a continuous and integrated multisectoral and
multidisciplinary process of planning and implementation of measures aimed at
disaster prevention, mitigation, preparedness, response, recovery and
rehabilitation.
Risk is a probability of a hazard occurring or threatening to occur

Prevention means activities to provide outright avoidance of the adverse impact
of hazards and means to minimize related environmental, technological and
biological disasters.
Mitigation means structural and non-structural measures undertaken to limit the
adverse impact of natural hazards, environmental degradation and technological
hazards.
Preparedness means activities and measures taken in advance to ensure
effective response to the impact of hazards, including the issuance of timely and
effective early warnings and the temporary evacuation of people and property
from threatened locations.
Response means measures taken during or immediately after an incident or a
disaster in order to bring relief to affected communities or individuals
Recovery means efforts, including development aimed at creating a situation
where-
(a) Normality in conditions caused by a disaster is restored;
(b) The effects of a disaster are mitigated; or
(c) Circumstances are created that will reduce the risk of a similar
disaster occurring
Capacity is a combination of all the strengths and resources available within a
community, society or organization that can reduce the level of risk, or the
effects of a disaster.

Hazard is a potentially damaging physical event, phenomenon or human activity
that may cause the loss of life or injury, property damage, social and economic
disruption or environmental degradation.
Disaster risk reduction is the conceptual framework of elements considered
with the possibilities to minimize vulnerabilities and disaster risks throughout a
society, to avoid (prevention) or to limit (mitigation and preparedness) the
adverse impacts of hazards, within the broad context of sustainable
development.
Environmental Impact Assessments are studies undertaken in order to assess
the effect on a specified environment of the introduction of any new factor, which
may upset the current ecological balance.
Environmental degradation is the reduction of the capacity of the environment
to meet social and ecological objectives, and needs.
Geographic Information System is an analysis that combines relational
databases with spatial interpretation and outputs often in form of maps. A more
elaborate definition is that of computer programmes for capturing, storing,
checking, integrating, analysing and displaying data about the earth that is
spatially referenced.

CONTENTS
Executive Summary ................................................................................................... 8
1. Custodian Of The Plan ......................................................................................... 10
3. Legislative Mandate ............................................................................................. 12
4. Purpose ................................................................................................................ 12
5. City Of Tshwane Overview ................................................................................... 13
6. Disaster Management Planning Overview ..................................................... 14
6.1 Foundational Institutional Arrangements ....................................................... 15
6.1.1 Disaster Risk Management Policy Framework ........................................... 16
6.1.2 Emergency Services Department Top Management Committee ............... 18
6.1.3 Disaster Risk Management Advisory Forum .............................................. 19
6.1.4 Ngo Forum ................................................................................................. 22
6.1.5. Other Sub-Fora .............................................................................................. 25
6.1.8. Municipal Disaster Management Centre (Mdmc) ........................................... 27
6.1.9. Sub-Structures Of The Mdmc .................................................................... 32
6.2. Divisional Disaster Risk Management Focal Points ....................................... 33
7. The Disaster Risk Management Planning Framework ……………………………………………..60
7.1 Risk Reduction Planning ............................................................................... 60
7.2 Contingency Planning .................................................................................... 61
8. Disaster Risk Assessment For The Cot ......................................................... 65
8.2 Macro Vulnerability Assessment ........................................................................ 70
9. The Disaster Risk Profile Of The Cot ............................................................. 77
10. Formal Consultative Mechanism For DRR Projects ...................................... 78
10.1 IDP Projects Contributing To Vulnerability And Hazard Reduction ................ 79
11. Disaster Risk Management Planning Priorities For The Cot .......................... 79
12. Incentive System For The Promotion Of DRM In The Cot .................................. 81
13. Disaster Risk Management Information System ............................................ 82
14. Emergency Communication System .............................................................. 83

15. Areas For Focussed Disaster Risk Assessments .......................................... 86
16. Implementation Strategy For The DRM Plan ................................................. 86

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Disaster risk management has become the major challenge the entire world is faced
with currently owing to the ever growing population, climate change, and the ever
changing environment in general. Natural and man-made disasters result in
economic as well as environmental losses which places a need for systematic
approach to management of risks.
The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa (Act 108 of 1996) places a legal
obligation on the Government of South Africa to ensure the health (personal and
environment) and safety of its citizens. In terms of section 41(1)(b) of the
Constitution, all spheres of Government are required to “secure the well-being of the
people of the Republic”. Section 152(1)(d) also requires that local government
“ensure a safe and healthy environment”. In the light of the above, and the
established understanding of disaster management, the primary responsibility for
disaster risk management in South Africa rests with Government.
Section 26(g) of the Municipal Systems Act 32 of 2000 as well as sections 52 and 53
of the Disaster Management Act 57 of 2002 compels each municipal entity to
develop a disaster risk management plan as part of and an integrated part of their
Integrated Development Plans. This plan establishes the arrangements for disaster
risk management within the City of Tshwane (CoT) and has been prepared in
accordance with the requirements of the Disaster Management Act, 57 of 2002 (the
Act) and section 26(g) of the Municipal Systems Act, 2000.
A Level 1 Disaster Risk Management Plan applies to national or provincial organs of
state or municipal entities that have not previously developed a coherent Disaster

Risk Management Plan. It focuses primarily on establishing foundation institutional
arrangements for DRM, putting in place contingency plans for responding to known
priority risks as identified in the initial stage of the DRA, identifying key governmental
and other stakeholders, and developing the capability to generate a level 2 plan.
The purpose of the CoT Disaster Risk Management Plan (DRMP) is to document the
institutional arrangements for disaster risk management planning which includes the
assignment of primary and secondary responsibilities for priority disaster risks posing
a threat in the CoT. It further provides the broad framework within which the disaster
risk management planning requirements of the Act will be implemented by the
departments and other entities included in the organisational structure of the CoT. It
establishes the operational procedures for disaster risk reduction planning as well as
the emergency procedures to be implemented in the event of a disaster occurring or
threatening to occur in council’s area. It aims to facilitate an integrated and
coordinated approach to disaster risk management in the municipality which will
ensure that the CoT achieves its vision for disaster risk management which is to
build a resilient people in the CoT who are alert, informed and self-reliant by
establishing risk reduction and resilience building as core principles, and developing
adequate capabilities for readiness; and effective and rapid, response and recovery.
Lastly the plan established contingency measures in the form of specific and generic
contingency plans in line with the indicative risk profile of the municipality and to
ensure a coordinated approach to disaster response.
This plan aims to familiarise key role-players in the CoT with the mainstream
concepts of disaster risk reduction. It provides a brief background study of the CoT in
line with its current Integrated Development Plan (IDP). The CoT disaster risk
management plan contains a macro disaster risk assessment based on field

esearch, observation, primary- and secondary data sources. The CoT DRMP has as
far as possible been imbedded in the current reality of the municipality. The macro
disaster risk assessment provides the foundation towards risk reduction planning
based on the identified and prioritised disaster risks and vulnerabilities of the CoT.
This DRMP for the CoT furthermore provides the municipality with a guiding
framework for future disaster risk management planning by the municipality as a
whole as required by the Disaster Management Act 57 of 2002 (DMA), the National
as well as CoT Disaster Management Framework, and the Municipal Systems Act 32
of 2000. This plan also gives guidance in relation to the declaration of a local state of
disaster, disaster classification and the institutional arrangement necessary for the
successful implementation of the Act.
1. CUSTODIAN OF THE PLAN
The Head of the CoT Municipal Disaster Management Centre (CoT MDMC) is the
custodian of the disaster risk management plan for the CoT and is responsible to
ensure the regular review and updating of the plan.
The Head of the Centre will ensure that copies of the completed plan as well as any
amendments to the plan are submitted to:
• the Disaster Management Centre of the Gauteng Province;
• the National Disaster Management Centre (NDMC);
• the CoT ward disaster management structures; and
• each of the municipalities neighbouring the CoT.

In terms of section 52 of the Act each municipal organ of state and any other
municipal entity operating within council’s organisational structure is responsible for
the development and maintenance of a disaster risk management plan for its
functional area. Departmental plans and plans of other entities are an integral part of
council’s comprehensive disaster management plan and therefore the head of each
department and of each entity must ensure that copies of the plan and any
amendments to the plan are submitted to the CoT MDMC.
2. INTRODUCTION
In terms of the Disaster Management Act, 57 of 2002, each organ of state must have
the disaster management plan and review and update it regularly. Planning for
disasters leads to organisational preparedness and readiness in anticipation of an
emergency or disasters. The first version of Disaster Risk Management Plan for the
CoT has been structured in such a way as to address the requirements of a Level 1
Disaster Management Plan as per the guidance of the National Disaster
Management Framework (NDMF). This document aims to be a practical and
implementable plan which will ensure an integrated approach to disaster risk
management for the CoT.
Throughout this document, reference has been made to the Disaster Management
Act, NDMF, CoT DMF and localised incidents policy. It is therefore imperative to
read this plan in conjunction with these documents. Each section of this plan
addresses the multi-disciplinary, multi-sectoral and coordinated approach to disaster
management as stipulated in the DMA.

The workable objective criteria have been used to prioritise and plan for CoT’s ten
identified risks, informed by the results of risk assessment conducted.
3. LEGISLATIVE MANDATE
In terms of the constitution of the Republic of South Africa, Act 108 of 1996, section
41(1)(b), it is the responsibility of all spheres of government to secure safety and
wellbeing of the people of the Republic. The constitution also places the
responsibility of securing the safety and health of the environment on all spheres of
government. It is therefore imperative to realise that disaster management is the
primary responsibility of government as well, because the DMA puts emphasis on
healthy and safe communities and environment.
Section 26(g) of the Municipal Systems Act 32 of 2000 as well as sections 52 and 53
of the Disaster Management Act 57 of 2002 compels each municipal entity to
develop a disaster risk management plan as part of and an integrated part of their
Integrated Development Plans. This plan establishes the arrangements for disaster
risk management within the City of Tshwane (CoT) and has been prepared in
accordance with the requirements of the Disaster Management Act, 57 of 2002 (the
Act) and section 26(g) of the Municipal Systems Act, 2000.
Reference has also been made to the CoT Disaster Management Policy Framework
and the Disaster Management Localised Incident Policy.
4. PURPOSE
The purpose of this plan is to establish processes for a comprehensive disaster risk
assessment. It further seeks to identify and clarify the roles and responsibilities of the
internal and external stakeholders throughout the entire cycle of disaster

management, i.e.: pre-disaster, during disaster and post disaster phases. It again
identifies and establishes consultative mechanisms for specific priority risk reduction
projects aimed at promoting resilient communities within the city.
5. CITY OF TSHWANE OVERVIEW
The City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality was established on 5 December 2000
after the amalgamation of the following local authorities:
• The Greater Pretoria Metropolitan Council
• The City Council of Pretoria
• The Town Council of Centurion
• The Northern Pretoria Metropolitan Substructure
• The Hammanskraal Local Area Committee
• The Eastern Gauteng Services Council
• The Pienaarsrivier Transitional Representative Council
• The Crocodile River Transitional Council
• The Western Gauteng Services Council
• The Winterveld Transitional Representative Council
• The Temba Transitional Representative Council
• The Mabopane Transitional Representative Council
• The Ga-Rankuwa Transitional Representative Council
• The Eastern District Council
After the 2011 local elections, City of Tshwane officially merged with Metsweding
District Municipality, incorporating the areas such as Bronkhorspruit, Cullinan and
Reyton, making CoT the world’s third biggest municipality with an area of 6 368 km 2

The CoT's land area increased from 2,198 square kilometres (849 sq mi) in 2010 to
6,368 square kilometres (2,459 sq mi) after the incorporation of Metsweding and a
population of just over 2.5 million.
##Still looking for more info##
6. DISASTER MANAGEMENT PLANNING OVERVIEW
The National Disaster Management Policy Framework has simplified the disaster
management planning process into three progressive phases, being level 1, 2 and 3.
The table below summarises the levels of disaster management planning as well as
the expected critical outcomes as per the national policy framework requirements.
LEVEL OF
PLAN
I
CRITICAL OUTCOMES
1 Establish foundation institutional arrangements for disaster risk
management
2 Develop the capability to generate a Level Two Disaster Risk Management
Plan
3 Develop and implement contingency plans for known priority risks
4 Establish processes for comprehensive risk assessments
5 Identify and establish consultative mechanisms for specific priority risk

II
reduction projects
6 Develop a supportive information management system
7 Develop emergency communication capabilities
III
8 Establish specific institutional arrangements for coordinating and aligning
plans
9 Establish mechanisms to ensure informed and on-going risk assessments
10 Institute mechanisms to ensure on-going relevancy of disaster risk
management policy frameworks and plans
Source: Best Practice Handbook Series, NDMC (undated
However, this document will only focus on the level 1 disaster management plan.
The level 1 disaster management plan (this plan), according to the National Disaster
Management Policy Framework, focuses primarily on establishing foundation
institutional arrangements for disaster risk management, putting in place contingency
plans for responding to known priority threats as identified in the initial stages of the
disaster risk assessment. It further identifies key stakeholders and develops
capabilities to generate a level two disaster management plan.
6.1 FOUNDATIONAL INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS
In terms of disaster management legislations (i.e. disaster management act 57 of
2002, national disaster management policy framework, Gauteng disaster
management policy framework and municipal disaster management policy
framework), the council of each metropolitan municipality must establish institutional
capacity for disaster risk management in its area for implementing disaster risk
management within the municipal sphere of government. Furthermore these

arrangements must be consistent with national and provincial arrangements and
must provide the appropriate mechanisms to allow for the application of cooperative
governance to facilitate both intergovernmental and municipal interdepartmental
relations as well as community participation for the purpose of disaster risk
management. This is in line with the requirements of a Level 1 Disaster Risk
Management Plan as per section 3.1.1.2 of the National Disaster Management
Policy Framework.
6.1.1 Disaster Risk Management Policy Framework
The Act requires the development of one national disaster management framework,
a provincial disaster management framework for each province and disaster
management frameworks for all district and metropolitan municipalities. The national
disaster management framework is the legal instrument specified by the Act to
address such needs for consistency across multiple interest groups, by providing ‘a
coherent, transparent and inclusive policy on disaster management appropriate for
the Republic as a whole’ (section 7(1)). The national disaster management
framework also informs the subsequent development of provincial and municipal
disaster management frameworks and plans, which are required to guide action in all
spheres of government.
The CoT Disaster Risk Management Framework (DRMF) aims to provide CoT with a
holistic and integrated policy framework which underpins the implementation of the
Disaster Management Act 57 of 2002 at metropolitan level. This policy is in line with
the requirements of the National Disaster Risk Management Framework of 2005 as
well as the Gauteng Provincial Disaster Risk Management Framework. The CoT
DRMF is still under review and will soon be circulated for comments. The national

disaster management framework comprises four key performance areas (KPAs) and
three supportive enablers required to achieve the objectives set out in the KPAs. The
KPAs and enablers are informed by specified objectives and, as required by the Act,
key performance indicators (KPIs) to guide and monitor progress. In addition, each
KPA and enabler concludes with a list of guidelines that will be disseminated by the
NDMC to support the implementation of the framework in all three spheres of
government.
In all spheres of government, the disaster management framework is the guiding and
coordinating policy instrument for ensuring an integrated and uniform approach to
disaster risk management by all organs of state and other institutional role players.
This includes, among others, NGOs, the private sector and institutions of higher
learning. With specific reference to district municipalities, the disaster management
framework is the integrating instrument for consolidating the disaster risk
management plans of individual municipalities within the district.
Each disaster management centre in the respective sphere of government is
responsible for consultatively facilitating the development of the disaster
management framework in its area of jurisdiction, and subsequently amending it in
consultation with key stakeholders. Provincial and municipal disaster management
frameworks must be consistent with the national disaster management framework
and must establish foundation institutional arrangements for disaster risk
management, including formal consultative processes that provide for participative
planning.
This Plan must be read in conjunction with the CoT DRMF.

6.1.2 EMERGENCY SERVICES DEPARTMENT TOP MANAGEMENT
COMMITTEE
Referral section in the CoT
DRMF:
4.1.1
The CoT DRMF indicates that the Management Committee of the CoT is used as the
managerial coordinating body for inter-departmental liaison and coordination. In
order for this plan to be implemented successfully it is imperative for the
Management Committee to adopt disaster risk management as a standing agenda
point of the meeting. This will ensure that disaster risk management is addressed on
a regular and on-going basis. Though the Management Committee, high-level
decision-making will inform the tasks of the different disaster risk management focal
points in the respective divisions and municipal entities.
Action
Performance
Time
Budget
Responsible
indicator
frame
entity
Include disaster risk
management as a
standing agenda
point on the Top
Management
Committee agenda.
The
Management
Committee
accepts
disaster risk
management
On-going None HoC

as a standing
agenda point
and
discusses
related
issues on an
on-going
basis.
6.1.3 DISASTER RISK MANAGEMENT ADVISORY FORUM
Referral sections in the DMA 44
51
Referral section in the CoT
DRMF:
4.1.3
The Act calls for the active participation of all stakeholders, including the private
sector, NGOs, technical experts, communities, traditional leaders and volunteers, in
disaster risk management planning and operations. Specific arrangements must be
implemented to ensure the integration of stakeholder participation, to harness
technical advice and to adopt a holistic and organised approach to the
implementation of policy and legislation. In order for all relevant role-players in
disaster risk management in the municipal area to co-ordinate their actions on
matters relating to disaster risk management as prescribed in Section 4.1.3 of the

CoT DRMF, Section 44 of the Act, Council has established a Disaster Risk
Management Advisory Forum in 2004 as provided for in Section 51 of the Disaster
Management Act 57 of 2002. The Forum comprises of the relevant stakeholders and
role-players including all CoT departments, NGOs and CBOs; individuals or groups
with special technical expertise.
This forum carries the following responsibilities:
‣ give advice and make recommendations on disaster-related issues and
disaster risk management
‣ contribute to disaster risk management planning and co-ordination
‣ establish joint standards of practice
‣ implement response management systems
‣ gather critical information about the municipality’s capacity to assist in
disasters and to access resources
‣ Assist with public awareness, training and capacity building.
Action
Performance
Time
Budget
Responsible
indicator
frame
entity
The MDMC to
A meeting of the
Quarterly
Disaster
arrange a meeting
DRMAF is
Management
of the DRMAF and
arranged.
Centre
invite all the
relevant roleplayers
as per the
relevant sections of
the DMA and CoT

DRMF.
The DRMAF to
establish
permanent
membership and
establish a terms of
reference.
The DRMAF to
consider the
content of the CoT
DRMF and DRMP
and to provide input
and advice in this
regard.
The DRMAF to
consider the
indicative disaster
risk profile of the
CoT and provide
input to the MDMC.
All relevant roleplayers
who will
enjoy permanent
membership on
the DMAF are
recorded and a
term of reference
is developed and
adopted.
Advice and input
from the DRMAF
has been noted
and incorporated
into the relevant
documents
where needed.
The indicative
risk profile of the
CoT is assessed
by the DRMAF
with written
advice and
comments to the
MDMC.
DMC
On-going None DMC

The DRMAF to
consider the
different subcommittees
to
function under the
DRMAF (in relation
to the indicative
disaster risk
profile).
The DRMAF to
meet at least twice
a year.
Different
permanent and
ad hoc subcommittees
for
the DRMAF have
been
established.
Two successful
meetings of the
DRMAF has
been arranged
and completed.
6.1.4 NGO FORUM
Referral section in the CoT
DRMF:
4.1.3.1
Template MDMC_2
The NGO Forum as a sub-committee of the CoT DRMF is responsible for the
development and alignment of their own terms of reference with this DRMP and the
CoT DRMF, and for the development of a social disaster relief contingency plan.

Such a plan must be developed according to Contingency Plan template as
contained in the CoT DRMF.
According to the Terms of Reference of the NGO Forum it is responsible for:
‣ Relief resources mobilisation;
‣ Assist in relief distribution;
‣ Damage and needs assessment;
‣ Hazard identification;
‣ Assistance during response;
‣ Coordination of relief efforts from various NGOs and CBOs;
‣ Participate in DRM activities in the CoT such as awareness campaigns;
and
‣ Provision of first aid services (especially during events in the community).
The NGO Forum consists of the representation of all the regions of CoT:
Action
Performance
Time
Budget
Responsible
indicator
frame
entity
The NGO sub-
Bi-annual
committee to meet
meetings of
in conjunction with
the NGO
the meetings of the
sub-
DRMAF.
committee
has been
planned and
completed.

The NGO subcommittee
to align
their terms of
reference with the
CRMP and CoT
DRMF and for
social disaster
relief.
The NGO subcommittee
to
develop a social
disaster relief
contingency plan.
The NGO subcommittee
to
develop a
contingency plan
for social disaster
relief in line with the
guidelines in the
An NGO subcommittee
term of
reference is
developed
and adopted
by the
DRMAF.
A social
disaster relief
contingency
plan is
developed
and aligned
with the
indicative
disaster risk
profile of the
CoT.
A social
disaster relief
contingency
plan has
been
developed in
line with the

CoT DRMF
The NGO subcommittee
to
develop
standardised and
agreed relief
requirements in
terms of food
provision, shelter
and clothing.
requirement
of the CoT
DRMF and
adopted by
the DRMAF.
Relief
requirements
has been
develop and
adopted by
the DRMAF.
6.1.5. OTHER SUB-FORA
Due to the dynamic nature of disaster risk management, the DRMAF must from time
to time consider the establishment of other sub-fora should the need arise. These
sub-fora, as is the case of the NGO Forum will be responsible for the development of
their own Term of Reference for the fulfilment of a specific disaster risk management
task assigned to them by the Head of the CoT MDMC.
Action
Performance
Time
Budget
Responsible
indicator
frame
entity

The MDMC to
identify the need for
additional sub-fora
linked to the
DRMAF.
Additional
sub-fora are
established
to address a
specific
disaster risk
management
need.
6.1.6. DISASTER RISK MANAGEMENT COMMITTEES
It is further recommended that all metropolitan and district municipalities establish
interdepartmental disaster risk management committees for their areas and that all
district municipalities establish disaster risk management committees in district
management areas. In addition, local municipalities should establish their own
disaster risk management committees and ensure the establishment of disaster risk
management committees or forums in all municipal wards. Ward structures have
been identified and tasked with responsibility for disaster risk management.
6.1.7. PARTICIPATION OF VOLUNTEERS IN DISASTER RISK MANAGEMENT
Volunteers are citizens over the age of 18, who donate their time to assist the
Disaster Management Centre in a variety of areas. These generous citizens are
trained and enhance the Centre's ability to build safer and disaster resilient
communities.

In order to maintain an inclusive approach to the participation of volunteers in
disaster risk management, volunteers are classified into three categories.
These categories are:
‣ Units of volunteers
‣ General volunteers
‣ Spontaneous volunteers.
6.1.8. MUNICIPAL DISASTER MANAGEMENT CENTRE (MDMC)
Referral section in the DMA 43 & 43
Referral section in the NDMF 1.2.5.1
Referral section in the GPDMF 1.2.3
Referral section in the CoT
DRMF:
4.2.1
4.2.2
The CoT Disaster Management Centre is the primary functional unit for disaster risk
management in the municipal area. It (DMC) provides direction for the
implementation of disaster risk management policies and legislation and integration
and coordination of municipal disaster risk management activities and priorities in
order to ensure that national and provincial objectives are achieved. Furthermore,
the DMC provides support to the NDMC and the GPDMC.

Action
Performance
Time
Budget
Responsible
indicator
frame
entity
Establish and
The MDMC has
maintain
ensured the
institutional
establishment of
arrangements
institutional
that will enable
arrangements (as per
the
above sections 5.2,
implementation of
5.3 and 5.5).
the DMA;
Communicate the
The indicate risk
indicate disaster
profile of the CoT has
risk profile of the
been communicated
CoT to all
to all stakeholders.
planning
departments in
the CoT in order
to inform
developmental
planning.
Provide disaster
HOC is member of
risk management
IDP planning
input to the IDP
committee and
process.
provides disaster risk

Action
Performance
Time
Budget
Responsible
indicator
frame
entity
management input to
development
planning.
Monitor the
The MDMC monitors
integration of
the integration of
disaster risk
disaster risk reduction
reduction
initiatives into
initiatives into
development plans on
development
an ongoing basis and
plans.
provides planning
departments with
advice and input.
Establish
The MDMC has
communication
established
links.
communication links
with all relevant
disaster risk
management focal
points in the CoT.
Facilitate the
Contingency plans for
development of
prioritised risks have
response and
been developed by all
recovery plans.
divisions and

Action
Performance
Time
Budget
Responsible
indicator
frame
entity
municipal entities
under the guidance of
the MDMC and in line
with the CoT DRMF.
Maintain public
The MDMC
awareness
implements regular
mechanisms.
public awareness
strategies in line with
its indicative disaster
risk profile.
Facilitate and
The MDMC has
promote disaster
established
risk management
mechanisms to
education,
facilitate and promote
training and
disaster risk
research in the
management
municipality
education, training
and research
Implement and
The MDMC has
maintain dynamic
developed
disaster risk
programmes for
management
monitoring, evaluating
monitoring,
and improve disaster

Action
Performance
Time
Budget
Responsible
indicator
frame
entity
evaluation and
risk management in
improvement
the CoT.
programmes;
Regular reporting
The MDMC submits
of disaster risk
an annual report on
management
its disaster risk
activities.
management activities
to the NDMC, PDMC
and neighbouring
MDMCs as per the
requirements of the
DMA and NDMF.
Make
The HOC has made
recommendations
recommendations
regarding the
regarding disaster risk
funding of
management funding
disaster risk
in the CoT to the
management in
relevant
the municipal
departments/divisions.
area and the
initiation and
facilitation of

Action
Performance
Time
Budget
Responsible
indicator
frame
entity
efforts to make
such funding
available.
6.1.9. SUB-STRUCTURES OF THE MDMC
Referral section in the CoT
DRMF:
4.2.2.5.1
The approved organisational structures of the Disaster Management Division
(referred to as the MDMC in this Plan) consist of the following sections:
• Office of the HoC
• Disaster Risk Management Planning.
• Community Disaster Risk Management.
• Multi-Sectoral coordination.
• Disaster Operations Centre
The Section: Community Disaster Risk Management is the only section within the
MDMC which functions on a regionalised basis.

Each of these sub-sections has full responsibility for community preparedness by
ensuring community participation though the ward structures as well as the
involvement of the public and private sector.
Action
Performance
Time
Budget
Responsible
indicator
frame
entity
The MDMC sub-
Community
structures to
disaster risk
establish
reduction
appropriate
programmes
community
and
preparedness and
strategies are
participation
developed in
mechanisms.
line with the
indicative risk
profile of
specific
wards.
6.2. DIVISIONAL DISASTER RISK MANAGEMENT FOCAL POINTS
The CoT DRMF elaborates on the general and specific disaster risk management
responsibilities of each division in the CoT. In order to comply with the requirements
of a Level 1 Disaster Risk Management Plan each division/department/municipal
entity must complete the following actions:

Action Performance indicator Tim
e
fram
e
KPA 1: Institutional capacity for disaster risk management
Budg
et
Responsi
ble entity
Identify one person in the
administration of the
division/department/munic
ipal entity to serve as the
disaster risk management
focal point.
Assess the
division/department/munic
ipal entity institutional
capacity for disaster risk
management.
A disaster risk
management focal point for
the
division/department/munici
pal entity has been
identified and include
disaster risk management
responsibilities on the
scorecard/performance
agreement of the individual
as well as SEDs and GMs.
Each
division/department/munici
pal entity has undertaken
an assessment of their own
capacity to engage in
disaster risk management
and have submitted a
report to the MDMC (such
a report can contain
training and capacity

Action Performance indicator Tim
e
fram
e
building requirements or
infrastructure
requirements).
Budg
et
Responsi
ble entity
In consultation with the
disaster risk management
structures of the MDMC,
take ownership (primary,
secondary or tertiary
responsibility) of an
indicated risk in line with
the core functions of the
division/department/munic
ipal entity.
Conduct an annual
resource analysis of
critical resources and
communicate such
analysis with MDMC.
The
division/department/munici
pal entity is actively
planning towards the
reduction of the disaster
risk as per the agreement
with the MDMC.
Annual resource analysis is
communicated with MDMC
in written and agreed
format (see Template
MDMC_1 of the CoT
DRMF).
KPA 2: Disaster risk assessment

Action Performance indicator Tim
e
fram
e
Budg
et
Responsi
ble entity
Conduct a scientific risk
assessment of agreed
division/department/munic
ipal entity risks.
Determine acceptable
levels of risk and possible
thresholds for action.
Identify
division/department/munic
ipal entity specific
developmental projects
with directly reduces the
disaster risk in the CoT.
Each
division/department/munici
pal entity with primary
responsibility has
conducted a scientific risk
assessment as per MDMC
guidelines
Acceptable and
measurable levels of risk
are identified and
thresholds for action have
been allocated.
An updated list of
developmental projects
which contributes to
disaster risk reduction has
been submitted to the
MDMC.
KPA 3: Disaster risk reduction
Develop a disaster risk
management plan for the
A
divisional/departmental/mu

Action Performance indicator Tim
e
fram
e
Budg
et
Responsi
ble entity
division/department/munic
ipal entity.
Integrate disaster risk
reduction activities into
the day-to-day planning
and operations of the
division/department/munic
ipal entity.
Identify and implement
projects annually in line
with departmental
mandate which will
reduce risk in vulnerable
communities
Develop contingency
plans in line with primary,
nicipal entity disaster risk
management plan is
developed, submitted to the
MDMC and incorporated
into the Level 3 Disaster
Risk Management Plan of
the CoT.
Reduced risk in the CoT is
evidence of the integration
of disaster risk reduction
activities into all
divisions/departments/muni
cipal entities.
Developmental projects are
identified, planned and
executed with reduced
disaster risk in the CoT.
Contingency plans for all
prioritised risks in the CoT.

Action Performance indicator Tim
e
fram
e
secondary or tertiary
responsibility of the
division/department/munic
ipal entity and
unacceptable thresholds.
Budg
et
Responsi
ble entity
Submit an annual report
on the risk reduction
activities of the
division/department/munic
ipal entity to the MDMC
for inclusion in the annual
municipal disaster risk
reduction report to be
submitted to the NDMC
as per the DMA
Annual reports of all
divisions/departments/muni
cipal entities are timely
submitted to the MDMC for
inclusion in the CoT annual
report on Disaster Risk
Reduction.
KPA 4: Response And Recovery
Compile standard
operating procedures
(SOPs) and field
operations guides (FOGs)
in line with the
Divisional/departmental/mu
nicipal entity SOPs and
FOGs has been developed.

Action Performance indicator Tim
e
fram
e
requirements of the
division/department/munic
ipal entity specific
contingency plan and the
guidelines of the CoT
DRMF.
Budg
et
Responsi
ble entity
Adhere to the standard for
incident management of
the CoT and ensure that
all response personnel
are trained in the standard
(See Annexure 2 of the
CoT DRMF).
Ensure that rehabilitation
and reconstruction plans
relating to the primary
activities of the specific
division/department/munic
ipal entity are developed
in line with disaster risk
management plans.
The standard for incident
management in the CoT is
implemented.
Rehabilitation and
reconstruction plans are
develop in line with
division/department/munici
pal entity disaster risk
management plans.

Action Performance indicator Tim
e
fram
e
Budg
et
Responsi
ble entity
Ensure that rehabilitation
and reconstruction plans
are based on
developmental challenges
and are development
oriented.
Rehabilitation and
reconstruction plans are
based on developmental
challenges.
Enabler 1: Information management and communication
Communicate disaster
risk management data
and information to all
relevant
divisions/departments/mu
nicipal entities.
Draft standard warning
messages to be
disseminated in the media
for specific risks
pertaining to the core
function of the
division/department/munic
ipal entity.
Divisions/departments/muni
cipal entities are
communicating disaster
risk management data and
information on an on-going
basis with written evidence.
Standard warning
messages for specific
primary, secondary or
tertiary responsibility risks
is drafted.

Action Performance indicator Tim
e
fram
e
Budg
et
Responsi
ble entity
Diligently record all
incidents, hazardous
impacts and disasters in
order to establish a
historical record for
forward planning.
Historical records of
hazardous impacts and
incidents pertaining to
division/department/munici
pal entity responsibility are
maintained.
Enabler 2: Education, training, public awareness and research
Conduct a disaster risk
management training
needs analysis for the
division/department/munic
ipal entity
Identify specific target
groups for awareness
campaigns and
coordinate such
campaigns with the
MDMC (e.g. early warning
communication).
Encourage research in
disaster risk management
A disaster risk
management training
needs analysis is compiled
and forwarded to the
MDMC.
Target groups are
identified.
Research relating to
division/department/munici

Action Performance indicator Tim
e
fram
e
Budg
et
Responsi
ble entity
related to the
department’s main
responsibility
pal entity specific disaster
risk focus is commissioned
and/or undertaken.
Enabler 3: Funding arrangements
Budget adequately for
departmental disaster risk
management activities.
Allocate a percentage of
the annual budget to
implement developmental
projects focussing on
disaster risk management
(capital as well as
operational).
Co-finance disaster risk
reduction projects with
other
divisions/departments/mu
nicipal entities in line with
Disaster risk management
is budgeted for through the
normal budgeting process
of the CoT.
A percentage of
division/department/munici
pal entity budget is
allocated for developmental
projects focussing
specifically on reducing
disaster risk.
Disaster risk reduction
projects are co-funded by
CoT
divisions/departments/muni
cipal entities.

Action Performance indicator Tim
e
fram
e
the IDP of the CoT.
Budg
et
Responsi
ble entity
Promote insurance and
reinsurance of public
assets.
CoT public assets are
insured and reinsured
where necessary.
6.2.1 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE DEPARTMENTS/SERVICES
In order for this plan to be practical and executable, the internal departments have to
carry out the following roles and responsibilities in accordance with the CoT DMF.
i. Office of the Mayor and City Manager
Action
Performance indicator
KPA 1: Institutional capacity for disaster risk management
Appoint the Head of the MDMC.
Ensuring all departmental involvement
in disaster risk management matters by
identifying senior officials to serve on
the disaster risk management structures
A head of the MDMC has been appointed.
Senior officials to serve on the disaster
risk management structures of the CoT
have been identified.

Action
Performance indicator
of the CoT.
Assign specific disaster risk
management responsibilities to each
CoT department and ensure the
inclusion of measurable disaster risk
management criteria in the scorecard of
each focal point.
Enforce the implementation of any
national, provincial and CoT guidelines
pertaining to disaster risk reduction.
Specific DRM responsibilities have been
assigned to each CoT department and
measurable DRM criteria have been
included in the scorecard of each focal
point.
The implementation of national, provincial
and CoT guidelines pertaining to disaster
risk reduction are enforced.
KPA 3: Disaster risk reduction
Ensure the effective integration of the
disaster risk management plan within
the municipal IDP.
Implement sustainable livelihoods
strategies as an integral part of the IDP
process.
Encourage gender sensitivity in risk
reduction and development planning.
Enforce an IDP focus on poverty
reduction strategies.
Ensure land reform takes place and that
The disaster risk management plan has
been integrated in the municipal IDP.
Sustainable livelihoods strategies are
implemented in the IDP process.
Risk reduction and development planning
processes are gender sensitive.
The IDP focuses on poverty reduction
strategies.
Land reform takes place and the most

Action
access to resources by the most
vulnerable communities is enhanced.
Performance indicator
vulnerable communities’ access to
resources improves.
KPA 4: Response and recovery
Ensure emergency funds and stocks
(through MAAs with product providers).
Emergency funds and stocks are
available.
ii. CORPORATE AND SHARED SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Action
Performance indicator
KPA 1: Institutional capacity for disaster risk management
Ensure that procedures are in place to
appoint temporary staff on short notice if
necessary to execute disaster risk
responsibilities.
Ensure that the Conditions of Service
make provision for the utilisation of CoT
staff to assist with the mitigation of a
disaster.
Procedures to appoint temporary staff on
short notice are in place.
Conditions of service includes a clause to
the effect that staff may be used to assist
with disaster mitigation.
KPA 4: Response and recovery
Coordinate operations in respect of
Formal agreements exist regarding the

Action
matters related to business continuity
and human resource management in
order to ensure limited duplication with
disaster risk management.
Performance indicator
division of labour regarding DRM.
Enabler 1: Information management and communication
Ensure adequate continuity planning
and structures are in place for
information management.
Develop, implement and update the IT
Disaster Recovery plan for CoT
information systems and data.
Adequate continuity planning and
structures are in place for information
management.
An IT Disaster Recovery plan for CoT
information systems and data has been
implemented and procedures are in place
for updating.
iii.
Economic Development Department
Action
Performance indicator
KPA 2: Disaster risk assessment
Integrate the indicative disaster risk
profile of the CoT with all economic
development programmes and projects
in order to ensure no or minimal
The indicative disaster risk profile of the
CoT has been integrated with all
economic development programmes and
projects.

Action
Performance indicator
disruption of natural and anthropogenic
hazards on the economic development of
the CoT;
Identify areas of vulnerability related to
different economic activities.
Areas of vulnerability related to the most
prevalent economic activities have been
identified.
KPA 3: Disaster risk reduction
Ensure that economic growth contributes
to vulnerability reduction and disaster risk
avoidance within the CoT.
Economic growth and development has a
specific focus on vulnerability reduction.
KPA 4: Response and recovery
Making arrangements for providing
transport for affected families.
Plan for mass transport during
emergencies and disasters.
An emergency transportation contingency
plan is developed.
Contingency plans for mass transport
during emergencies are in place.
iv.
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
Action
Performance indicator

Action
Performance indicator
KPA 1: Institutional capacity for disaster risk management
Establish a disaster management task
team for finances under the guidance of
the Chief Financial Officer.
A disaster management task team for
finances under the guidance of the chief
financial officer has been established.
KPA 3: Disaster risk reduction
Enforce disaster risk management
measures as pre-requisites for project
funding.
Project funding is only allocated when
DRM measures are in place.
KPA 4: Response and recovery
Implement disaster risk management
spending guidelines and mechanisms
for resource mobilisation.
Resource mobilisation takes place in
accordance with DRM spending guidelines
and measures.
Enabler 3: Funding arrangements
Ensure adequate disaster risk
management funding in line with the
requirements of the Disaster
Management Act 57 of 2002 and the
NDRMF (see Table 71 and 7.2 of the
NDRMF) and the Municipal Finance
Management Act for:
Disaster risk management on-going
Disaster risk management is adequately
funded for:
Disaster risk management on-going
activities;
Disaster risk reduction;
Mitigation and preparedness measures;
Contingency reserve;

Action
activities;
Disaster risk reduction;
Mitigation and preparedness measures;
Contingency reserve;
Performance indicator
Disaster response, recovery and
rehabilitation; and
Education, training, capacity building
programmes and research.
Disaster response, recovery and
rehabilitation; and
Education, training, capacity building
programmes and research.
v. EMERGENCY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Action
Performance indicator
KPA 1: Institutional capacity for disaster risk management
House and equip the MDMC as per
legislation and national policy
requirements.
The MDMC is established and equipped as
per national legislation and policy.
KPA 4: Response and recovery
The Fire and Rescue Division must
attend to all fire fighting and rescue
Contingency plans and operating
procedures for fire fighting is developed.

Action
Performance indicator
functions (rescue of people and
animals).
The Emergency Medical and
Ambulance Division must execute
patient care and transport patients to
hospitals and clinics. They must have a
plan in place for handling mass
casualties.
Operational Support must coordinate
emergency communication and have
procedures in place to deal with same.
They must provide adequate
communication links with relevant
stakeholders.
Contingency plan for the handling mass
casualties is developed.
Operational Support has procedures in
place for emergency communication.
vi. CITY PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND REGIONAL SERVICES
DEPARTMENT
Action
Performance indicator
KPA 2: Disaster risk assessment
Adequately plan for emergency housing.
Contingency plans for emergency housing

Action
Performance indicator
are in place.
Apply various forms of environmental
protection and management (e.g.
reforestation, river-basin planning,
agricultural practices, soil conservation
and natural hazard control techniques)
and enforce the adherence to the above
through the Management Meeting.
The absence of environmental
degradation.
KPA 3: Disaster risk reduction
Integrate risk management within all
project management activities.
Include DRM principles in spatial
development frameworks.
All management activities include an
element of disaster risk management.
Spatial and development frameworks
include DRM principles.
KPA 4: Response and recovery
Compile a strategy and plan to provide
for alternative housing, temporary
shelter in case of emergencies.
Compile a contingency plan to provide
for alternative housing during localised
events and disasters. This should
include criteria of the circumstances
when alternative housing will be
A strategy and contingency plan to
provide for alternative housing, temporary
shelter in case of emergencies is in place.
A contingency plan to provide for
alternative housing during localised events
and disasters, including criteria of the
circumstances when alternative housing
will be provided should be in place.

Action
Performance indicator
provided.
Compile a response strategy to deal
with informal settlements at various
levels. (Including illegal squatting).
Relocation procedures as prevention
measure and during emergencies.
Prepare a plan for mass burials
(cemeteries, social development).
Plan for and provide transport to move
affected people to temporary shelter in
cooperation with Local Economic
Development.
A response strategy to deal with informal
settlements is in place.
Relocation procedures are in place.
A contingency plan for mass burials is in
place.
A contingency plan to move affected
people to temporary shelter in cooperation
with local economic development is in
place.
Enabler 1: Information management and communication
Communicate development related
information to the MDMC especially
information on high risk developments.
MDMC is always aware of high risk
developments.
vii. CORPORATE & SHARED SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Action
Performance indicator

Action
Performance indicator
KPA 4: Response and recovery
Ensure a legal framework for response
and recovery in terms of CoT liability to
identified risks.
A legal framework for response and
recovery in terms of CoT liability to
identified risks is in place.
viii.
COMMUNITY SAFETY DEPARTMENT
Action
Performance indicator
KPA 4: Response and recovery
Provide security in response to disasters
and emergencies, if needed.
Contingency plans for the provision of
security in response to disasters and
emergencies are in place.
ix. ROADS AND TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT
Action
Performance indicator
KPA 2: Disaster risk assessment
Conduct regular flood assessment.
Ensure a continuous of water supply to
Up to date flood assessment is available.
Maintenance records of water supply

Action
Performance indicator
the CoT.
Monitor and maintain flow meters in
rivers in the CoT
infrastructure are available.
Records of flow meter inspections are
available.
KPA 3: Disaster risk reduction
Create adequate supportive
infrastructure to enhance sustainable
livelihoods.
Develop and maintain storm water
infrastructure.
Maintain maximum water discharge
capacity in storm water infrastructure.
Compile a flood management plan.
Strive to maintain a healthy balance
between flood prevention and
environmental conservation.
Adequate supportive infrastructure to
enhance sustainable livelihoods is
created.
Maintenance records of storm water
infrastructure are available.
Procedures/guidelines are in place for
maintenance of storm water infrastructure
and are enforced.
A flood management plan is available.
Proper guidelines to ensure a balance
between flood prevention and
environmental conservation are in
available and enforced.
KPA 4: Response and recovery
Provide water tankers in emergency and
disaster situations.
Plans/procedures are In place for the
deployment of water tankers in emergency
and disaster situations.

Action
Provide for the pumping of water from
flooded houses and areas.
Repair/reconstruct road damage caused
by hazards.
Performance indicator
The necessary equipment for pumping
water form flooded houses is available
and working.
Roads are always in good order.
Enabler 2: Education, training, public awareness and research
Initiatives to support awareness of
flooding and being water wise in
general.
Water awareness projects are launched.
Enabler 3: Funding arrangements
Funding all activities related to flood
management.
Sufficient funding for all flood
management has been sourced and is
available when needed.
x. PUBLIC WORKS AND INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
Action
Performance indicator
KPA 2: Disaster risk assessment
Identify areas of risk in terms of
A list of areas at risk in terms of electricity

Action
electricity provision.
Identify critical facilities for priority
electricity provision (e.g. hospitals,
national key points, CoT systems).
Performance indicator
provision exists and is available.
A list of critical facilities for priority
electricity provision exists and is available.
KPA 3: Disaster risk reduction
Develop and implement an effective
infrastructure maintenance programme.
Conduct contingency planning for
prolonged electricity failures.
An infrastructure maintenance programme
is implemented.
Contingency plans for prolonged electricity
failure exist and are available.
KPA 4: Response and recovery
Provide generators in the case of
electricity crises during emergencies
and disasters.
Working generators are available.
Enabler 1: Information management and communication
Maintain a database of critical facilities
in terms of electricity.
Establish communication links with
Disaster Operations Centre.
A database exists of critical facilities in
terms of electricity.
Relevant lists of telephone/cell phone
numbers and e-mail addresses are
available.

xi. SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Action
Performance indicator
KPA 2: Disaster risk assessment
Identify socially vulnerable
communities.
Records of socially vulnerable communities
and the reason(s) they are deemed
vulnerable (vulnerability assessments) are
available.
KPA 3: Disaster risk reduction
Ensure that communities at risk have
access to basic services in line with
the developmental focus and strategic
objectives of the CoT in order to
reduce vulnerabilities.
Universal provision of basic series such as,
water, sanitation and electivity.
KPA 4: Response and recovery
Compile an in-departmental response
and relief plan for all eventualities with
specific emphasis on the human
element.
Develop and implement procedures for
provision of emergency food, blankets
and shelter (in coordination with the
Housing, City Planning and
An in-departmental response and recovery
plan for all eventualities is available.
Procedures for the provision of emergency
food are on record.

Action
Performance indicator
Environmental Management
Department).
Enabler 1: Information management and communication
Maintain an indigent register which will
contribute to vulnerability identification.
Provide information on “poverty
pockets”.
Provide information on child headed
families.
An indigent register is available.
A list of “poverty pockets” and the relevant
details of each pocket (e.g. location and
extent and nature of poverty) is on record.
Information relating to the amount of and
locations of child headed households are
available.
6.3. INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT PLAN
In view of the inextricable relationship between disaster and development, it is
imperative that the heads of MDMCs and those individuals assigned responsibility
for disaster risk management in local municipalities serve on the relevant IDP
structures. The Head of Disaster Management Centres has full participation in
integrated development planning processes and structures for the City.
As disaster risk reduction efforts are medium- to long-term multispectral efforts
focused on vulnerability reduction, they must be incorporated into on-going IDP
projects, processes, programmes and structures. Effective and adaptive disaster risk

eduction interventions in the municipal sphere are best planned and implemented
as development initiatives through IDP mechanisms and phases.
6.4. MUTUAL ASSISTANCE AGREEMENTS
In accordance with the Act, national departments, provinces and municipalities must
establish their level of capacity to deal with disaster risk reduction, response and
recovery. Where necessary, and to strengthen this capacity, they must enter into
mutual assistance agreements with their neighbours, the private sector, other organs
of state and communities. At provincial and municipal level, co-operation and coordination
efforts must be supported by cross-boundary mutual assistance
agreements (that is, between provinces, between provinces and municipalities and
between municipalities), and by creating partnerships within each sphere with the
private sector and NGOs through memoranda of understanding. Mutual assistance
agreements and memoranda of understanding are legal documents. Their
parameters must be clearly defined and they should include details of financial
arrangements, reimbursements and liability. They must also be in compliance with
the national standard guideline on mutual assistance agreements developed by the
NDMC.
6.5. CROSS-BORDER RELATIONSHIPS
It is of paramount importance that the CoT maintains cross-border relationships with
other municipalities. The GPDMC is coordinating cross-border task team which
comprises of all municipalities in the Gauteng Province and the team meets regularly
to monitor the cross-border related disaster management issues. The team also
gives feedback to the CoT DMAF.

7. THE DISASTER RISK MANAGEMENT PLANNING FRAMEWORK
The diagram below (figure 1) provides an overview of the structure for disaster risk
management planning for the CoT for compiling its disaster risk management plans and
must be viewed in conjunction with the disaster risk management framework for the CoT. It
is applicable to disaster risk management planning by the divisions and other municipal
entities of the CoT.
Two main components to the planning framework for disaster risk management is the
integration of disaster risk assessment and developmental practices. This is evident in the
emphasis this planning framework places on disaster risk assessment and the Integrated
Development Plan. In essence the planning framework aims to introduce the need for
mainstreaming disaster risk management actions into development planning. The rationale
behind this is the fact that in the South African context, disaster risk is rooted in community
vulnerability and poverty. Thus, a logical and most appropriate manner in which to address
the above is through development planning.
Furthermore, the planning framework is divided into two sections: risk reduction planning
and contingency planning. In both instances the CoT MDMC as well as all municipal
departments/divisions/entities has certain planning responsibilities. These planning
responsibilities are directly related to the inherent function of the municipal
departments/divisions/entities in question. Section 1.7 of the CoT DRMF provides
information in the specific and general responsibilities of the different municipal
departments/divisions/entities.
7.1 RISK REDUCTION PLANNING
In terms of disaster risk reduction planning, each municipal departments/divisions/entities as
well as the CoT MDMC must compile a disaster risk management plan.

Risk reduction planning consists of two components. Firstly, the disaster risk management
plans of the MDMC as well as the different municipal departments/divisions/entities must
engage in vulnerability reduction planning. Such planning involves addressing the root
causes on social, economic, physical, ecological and political vulnerabilities. Each of these
can already be addressed by the existing development projects in the CoT. Secondly,
municipal departments/divisions/entities must make provision for disaster risk management
planning in their respective developmental projects. Special emphasis should be placed on
high risk developments as well as in communities in which multiple vulnerabilities has been
identified.
7.2 CONTINGENCY PLANNING
The Disaster Management Act mandates each municipal entity and organ of state to prepare
a disaster risk management plan which must include contingency strategies and emergency
procedures to be implemented in the event of a disaster. It mandates all municipalities within
an applicable municipal disaster risk management framework to develop disaster risk
management plans which must include contingency plans and emergency procedures to be
applied in the event of a disaster.
Contingency planning is referred to as ‘a forward planning process in a state of uncertainty’
because although the findings of the disaster risk assessment for the CoT provides a risk
profile from which the hazards which pose the greatest threat (priority risks) have been
identified, there is no certainty of:
• when it will strike?
• where it will strike?
• what the magnitude and extent will be?
• what impact it will have?

Despite the fact that planning must focus on those hazards that pose the greatest threat,
planning must also take into account other threats which are less likely to occur, or those
which may not occur at all but cannot be ignored.
Contingency planning is therefore a matter of creating scenarios and making assumptions,
asking the question ‘What if?’, and then planning to deal with the possible consequences.
Disaster risk-based planning means that although plans must address the specific hazards
which have been identified as a priority for a given area they must also be flexible enough to
cater for all eventualities (hazards). All of these factors will have a direct influence on how
contingency plans are structured.
Contingency planning therefore related to the mitigation, prevention and response plans for
all prioritised hazards in the CoT. These contingency plans is risk specific and aims to
ensure that in the event of a hazard exploiting vulnerability, a response and mitigation
mechanism is in place. As is the case in disaster risk reduction planning, the MDMC and all
other municipal departments/divisions/entities must be involved in the development of
contingency plans (see section 11 below).
The second aspect to contingency planning is the development of generic contingency
plans. These generic plans aims to ensure contingency measures for the activities normally
associated with any event. It therefore means that these generic plans can be applied in any
given instance which will limit the amount of planning which will be repeated in the hazard
specific contingency plans.
Cognisance should be taken of the fact that a number of contingency plans already exist in
the CoT. These plans must be incorporated into the planning process of the MDMC and
aligned with this DRMP.

In the interim, the DMC has developed a template for both generic and hazard specific
contingency plan, which must be filled in by relevant CoT departments in order to complete
the Disaster Management Planning process.
DISASTER RISK ASSESSMENT
Economic
Floods
COT
Municipal Divisions/
Departments/
Entities:
Disaster Risk
Management Plans
Social
Physical
Ecological
Fires
HazMat
Sinkholes
Floods
Municipal
Divisions/
Departments/
Entities:
Involvement in
contingency
planning
CoT
Political
Vulnerability
Severe weather
etc.
Hazard Specific
Risk
Reduction
Contingency
Contingency
Reduction
Specific Risk
Reduction
High Risk
Developments
Local areas/
Incident
management
Early Warnings
Generic
Contingency
Plans
Planning
Projects
Communities
Assessment
with multiple
vulnerabilities
Search and
Rescue
Public Health

Figure 1: Disaster Risk Management Planning Framework for the CoT

8. DISASTER RISK ASSESSMENT FOR THE COT
Phase one of the projects included a literature and document study in order to ensure that all
known and relevant information in the CoT is taken into consideration. Part of this phase was
meetings with the staff of the MDMC in order to conduct a macro disaster risk assessment
based on the experience and perceptions of the MDMC staff.
Phase two of the project included data and information sourcing from various internal as well
as external sources. The sources obtained enabled the consultant to ground truth the macro
risk assessment of phase one and also to add to the existing knowledge base of disaster risk
in the CoT. Through the geo-referencing of historical incidents an accurate profile of
hazardous events could be recorded and probability analysis could be conducted. This
allowed ensure a better and verified macro-risk assessment. By making use of the macrorisk
assessment, a prioritised list of disaster risks in the CoT could be identified which in turn
provided the impetus to phase three of the project.
The third phase included the identification of disaster risk management planning priorities for
the CoT. In this phase the current developmental (IDP) projects of the CoT was assessed in
terms of their contribution to disaster risk reduction in the CoT and in doing so their disaster
risk reduction factor in relation to the indicative disaster risk profile of the CoT could be
determined. This allowed for the adaptation of the macro-risk profile of the CoT to take into
consideration the developmental initiatives by various CoT divisions and departments to
reduce disaster risk.
In addition to the above, the fourth phase of the project identified special disaster risk
reduction projects which different departments and divisions should consider which will lead
to the further reduction of disaster risk.

The fifth phase of the project related to the requirements for the development of generic and
specific contingency plans for the prioritised risks of the CoT. Institutional arrangement for
the development of contingency plans was specified. The contingency plans must be
developed in accordance with the specified template of the CoT DRMF
The final phase in the project established (as an integrated component to the whole DRMP)
action steps towards the development of a Level 2 Disaster Risk Management Plan.
8.1 Macro Hazard Assessment
The following table contains a macro hazard assessment for the CoT in order to prioritise
disaster risks. A three-point scale was used for the standardisation of the assessment.
Scale used:
• High
• Medium
• Low

HAZARD GEOGRAPHICAL
LOCATION
1. Fires (Shack) In formal
Settlements e.g.
1) Itereleng
2) Kanana
3) Lusaka
4) Plastic view
5) Mooiplaas
6) Olievenhoutbosch
7) Brazzaville
8) Mamelodi
9) Atteridgeville
2. Fires (veld) 1) Fort Klapperkop
2) Gerhardville
3) Wahlamnsdal
Area
4) Rietvlei
5) Moot
3. Floods 1) Greater
hamanskraal
area
2) Olievenhoutbo
sch
3) Lotus gardens
4) Atteridgeville
5) Mamelodi
6) Apies rivier
PROBABILITY FREQUENCY INTENSITY PREDICTABILITY
/ FOREWARNING
EXPOSE IMPACT KNOCK-ON
EFFECT
High High High Low Properties and High Veld fires
communities
High but High High Medium Environment, Medium
seasonal
properties
High but High High Low Properties, High
seasonal
livelihoods and
infrastructure.

HAZARD GEOGRAPHICAL
LOCATION
7) Hennops rivier
4. Sever weather All areas in
conditions Tshwane
5. Hazardous Along the major
materials routes, e.g. N1,
R27, N12, N4 along
the industrial such
as Roslyn, Watloo,
PTA West.
6. Sinkholes Greater Centurion
area. All areas in
centurion.
7. Special events All facilities
(including 2010) handling events
such as sports,
large gathering.
E.g. Loftus,
1) Super stadium,
2) Odi stadium,
3) union
buildings,
4) HM Pietjie.
5) Waterkloof
airport
6) Tshwabac
PROBABILITY FREQUENCY INTENSITY PREDICTABILITY
/ FOREWARNING
EXPOSE IMPACT KNOCK-ON
EFFECT
High but Medium Medium Low Properties, Medium Damaged
seasonal
livelihoods and
infrastructure
infrastructure.
Medium Medium High Low Environment. High Pollution
Communities
High High Medium Low Communities
and
infrastructure
Medium
Medium Low Medium Low People
High
attending the
gatherings.

HAZARD
8. Mission
Critical Systems
Failure (MCFS)
9.Transportation
accidents
10. Building
collapse
GEOGRAPHICAL
LOCATION
PROBABILITY FREQUENCY INTENSITY PREDICTABILITY
/ FOREWARNING
EXPOSE IMPACT KNOCK-ON
EFFECT
showgrounds
All facilities. Medium Low Medium Low All
High
Rietvleidam
infrastructure
NECSA
and facilities.
PTA West power
station
All train stations, on Low Low Low Low Commuters High
major routes and
and
along the airport.
infrastructure.
N1, N12, N4
All areas Medium Low Low Low Buildings and highH
people

8.2 Macro Vulnerability Assessment
The macro vulnerability assessment considered the elements which are vulnerable due to the possible impact of a hazard on the indicated
geographical areas. The table below contains a breakdown of the social, physical, economic, environmental and political/institutional
vulnerability factors which contributes to the increase in disaster risks.
COMMUNITY:
Vulnerable elements exacerbating the possible impact of the hazard
COT
HAZARD SOCIAL PHYSICAL ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENTAL POLITICAL/
INSTITUTIONAL
1. Fire (Shack) • Lack of knowledge on • Building methods • Poverty
• Settlement in fire • Faction fighting
fire prevention • Type of structures, • Lack of awareness prone area.
• Inadequate
• Incorrect risk use of combustible and education • Weather conditions, enforcement of
perception
materials
• Conflict between seasonal factors e.g. building codes
• Unemployment • Incorrect use of fuels various “classes” in windy season, dry • Inadequate
• Child headed for heating
communities
season etc.
development
households
• No access to fire • Lack of safety nets • Presence of high • Land redistribution
• Domestic disputes
protection/ equipment
trees next to • Political expectations
• Social behaviour e.g. • Lack of electricity
settlement especially • Inadequate planning
substance abuse
services
alien vegetation. • Exclusivity
• Lack of natural • Shacks build too close
• Unchecked
conservation
to each other
urbanisation and
• Need for self • Displacement
urban sprawl
preservation
• Unsafe/old
• Unchecked land

COMMUNITY:
Vulnerable elements exacerbating the possible impact of the hazard
COT
HAZARD SOCIAL PHYSICAL ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENTAL POLITICAL/
INSTITUTIONAL
equipment
invasion
• Unsafe practices e.g.
placement of cooking
utensils
• Storage of bulk fuels
used generally for
heating close to
shacks
• Incorrect farming
techniques
2.Fires veld • Lack of knowledge on • Absence of fire breaks • Uncontrolled might • Overgrowth of alien • Lack of information
fire prevention • Illegal dumping of lead to burning of vegetation
• Influencing people to
• Arson
combustible material feedlots, loss of • Maintenance of road settle in specific areas
• Environmental • Unavailability of fire farming equipment, reserves
for political gain
ignorance
protection equipment tools etc
• Negative impact on • Insufficient resources
• Social behaviour e.g. • Grazing fields
ozone layers
to combat veld fires.
smoking, uncheck destroyed
• Air and land pollution • Unchecked land
open fires.
• Fire breaks getting out
• Wild animals attracted invasion
• Incorrect agricultural of control
to suburbs in search
practices
of food / running from
• Lack of access to
fires
early warning
• Pest control problems
messages through
• Damage to sensitive
IT/media
environmental species

COMMUNITY:
Vulnerable elements exacerbating the possible impact of the hazard
COT
HAZARD SOCIAL PHYSICAL ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENTAL POLITICAL/
INSTITUTIONAL
3. Floods • Settling in flood prone
areas
• Improper household
drainage systems
• Settling too close to • Absence of storm
riverbanks
water drainage
• Settling in pathway of systems
storm water
• Effective urban storm
• Illegal dumping in water drainage
storm water drains systems might cause
• Dumping in rivers and
spruits blocking water
floods in receiving end
areas and suburbs
runways
• Soil type and structure
• Acts to deforest • Unplanned
immediate
developments
environment
• Plane areas
4. Severe weather • Lack of awareness/ • Soil type (drainage)
conditions
training
• Geographic location
• Non-compliance to • Storage of hazardous
building codes
material
• Settling in illegal • Insufficient lightning
areas
protection
• Types of housing • Poor building
structures and structures
materials used • Abuse of natural
• Dangerous social
• Lack of education
• Lack of safety nets
• Availability of budget
for maintenance of
storm
water
management
• Lack of access to
• Improper
• Poor development
management and or planning
development in • Poor storm water
wetlands
planning
• Deforestation
• Poor maintenance of
• Seasonal factors
dam wall structures
• Maintenance of storm
early warning
water systems
messages through
IT/media
• Lack of access to • Abuse of natural • Poor urban planning
early warning resources
• Lack of integrated
messages through • Poor farming development planning
IT/media
practices
• Poor farming • Research / advanced
practices
technological
• Urbanisation
interference with
• Lack of development
and implementation of
early warning systems
nature processes

COMMUNITY:
Vulnerable elements exacerbating the possible impact of the hazard
COT
HAZARD SOCIAL PHYSICAL ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENTAL POLITICAL/
INSTITUTIONAL
behaviour
• Ignorance of early
warning signals
5. HAZMAT • Social behaviour e.g.
smoking in prohibited
areas, drunk driving
etc.
• Non-compliance to
legal requirements
• Continuous training of
HAZMAT workers
6. Sinkholes • Settling on specific
soil types prone to
sinkholes
• Lack of information
and education
• Unsafe practices e.g.
lack of repair of water
leakages
• Uncontrolled watering
of gardens
water resources
• Poor maintenance of
farming and other
equipment, storm
water manholes
• Storage facilities • Clean-up costs • Spillages impact • Building regulations
compliant with • Maintenance of roads • Pollution
• Enforcement of
regulations, location mainly used for • Early warnings in
etc
HAZMAT transport place for extreme
• Transporting vehicles • Protective clothing weather conditions
compliant with provision and • Environmental impact
legislation
maintenance
assessment
• Building structures • Lack of safety nets • Soil type
• Maintenance of water • Poverty
• Lack of drainage
pipes and taps • Delays in informal • Geological surveys
• Control over mining settlement relocations prior to development
activities
• Geological survey • Environmental impact
funding
assessments
• Insurance coverage
for dolomite areas
legislation and
regulations
• Keeping of HAZMAT
registers
• Monitoring and
planning of transport
routes
• Building codes
enforcement
• Aggressive
awareness programs
• Strict development
and settlement control
mechanisms

COMMUNITY:
Vulnerable elements exacerbating the possible impact of the hazard
COT
HAZARD SOCIAL PHYSICAL ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENTAL POLITICAL/
INSTITUTIONAL
• Ignorance
• Misinterpretation of
Councils responsibility
relating to repair of
private property
damage
7. Special events • Risky social behaviour • Specific location • Public entry fees • Extreme weather • Sufficient security
• Large gatherings • Venue capacity • Emergency resources conditions
• Event planning
• Uninvited attendees • Permanent / and costs for stand-by • Environmental • Safety and security
• Cultural clashes
temporary structures
analysis
regulations
• Lack of crowd control present
compliance
• Substance abuse • Adequate
• No disaster
• Unusual emotional facilities/amenities
prevention plans
states
• Security at adjacent
• Type of event
premises
• Crowd expectations • Lack of knowledge of
• VIP presence
access
and
evacuation routes
8. Mission critical • Sabotage
• Illegal connections • Non-payment for • Pollution
• Accurate accounting
systems failure • Irresponsible care for overloading systems services rendered • Extreme weather systems
equipment
• Planning and • Maintenance of conditions
• Alternative sourcing
• Improper usage
maintenance of systems
options available
• Crime e.g. theft
systems
• Non-compliance to
• Disaster risk
control measure over
management plans

COMMUNITY:
Vulnerable elements exacerbating the possible impact of the hazard
COT
HAZARD SOCIAL PHYSICAL ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENTAL POLITICAL/
INSTITUTIONAL
• Bypass of meters/
resources e.g.
• Safety and
equipment
watering outside
environmental
• Illegal connections
restriction times
regulations
• Abuse of natural
enforcement
resources
• Compliance to
• Rage
national and provincial
• Despondent council
regulations
employees
9. Transportation • Social behaviour e.g • Lack of clear road • Road maintenance • Extreme weather • License renewals
incidents
tiredness, substance names/maps/signs • Emergency service conditions
• Enforcement of traffic
abuse
• Poor road conditions provision and costing
regulations
• Road rage
• Poor vehicle condition • Policing costs
• Integrated
• Crime e.g. Hi-jackings • Lack of appropriate • Safety nets
infrastructure planning
, vandalism
lighting after hours • 3 rd party insurance
• Adherence to road • Overloaded vehicles • Availability of
regulations
• Vehicles not alternative routes
• Overloading of roadworthy
vehicles
• Lack of SOS
• Rubbernecking at communication
incidents
assistance
• Insufficient trained
and effective Metropol
and EMS personnel in

COMMUNITY:
Vulnerable elements exacerbating the possible impact of the hazard
COT
HAZARD SOCIAL PHYSICAL ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENTAL POLITICAL/
INSTITUTIONAL
incident management
10. Building collapse • Exceeding max • Building structure
• Reconstruction • Environmental impact • Lack of compliance to
people capacity • Building maintenance
costs
assessment prior to building and safety
• Vandalism
• Location
• Insurance costs development
regulations
• Crowd and spectator
• Search and • Geological analysis • Lack of emergency
control
rescue costs
prior to dev (soil planning
• Terrorism
• Law suits
analysis)
• Early warning
systems in place

9. THE DISASTER RISK PROFILE OF THE COT
The City of Tshwane, as one of the urban growth centres in South Africa, faces
increased levels of urban risk. These disaster risks include the following as listed
in table 3.The DMC considered and incorporated all inputs and comments obtained
from role-players through the processes mentioned above. The risks had now to be
ranked in order of importance. To assist with this process, the following risk equation
was applied:
Risk =
Hazard X vulnerability
_________________
Manageability X capacity.
Priority Risk
Area/region most
vulnerable
1 Dolomite resulting in sinkholes South (region 4)
2 Community impact of mission critical All regions
systems failure
3 Informal settlement and veld fires All regions
4 Pollution All regions
5 Flooding incidents All regions
6 Hazardous material incidents
7 Civil strife and xenophobia Attrigeville & Mamelodi
8 Major transportation accidents All major routes
9 Epidemics All regions
10 Special events incidents All regions

Other disaster risks occurring within the jurisdiction of the City of Tshwane
include but not limited to the following:-
• Terrorism/Weapons of Mass Destruction
• Extreme Heat
• Tornado
• Blight Infestation
• Drought
• Earthquakes
• Extreme Cold
• Hail
• Hostage Incident
• Windstorm
• Aviation incidents
10. FORMAL CONSULTATIVE MECHANISM FOR DISASTER
RISK REDUCTION PROJECTS
The appropriate mechanisms for consultation for disaster risk reduction projects are
indicated in the CoT DRMF. Though these forums and in partnership with the activities
of the IDP structures of the CoT, disaster risk reduction projects must be identified and
planned for in line with the disaster risk priorities in section 8 above. The rationale is that
disaster risk can largely be addressed through developmental initiatives and projects.
The IDP process is therefore ideally suited for such actions.
In order to ensure the continuous incorporation of disaster risk related information into
the IDP planning process and projects it is important that the MDMC have access to the
IDP planning structures and become an active member of its meetings. Although
cognisance is taken of the fact that disaster risk management will not be incorporated
into all developmental projects in the short-term, it remains imperative that current IDP
projects are aligned with the disaster risk profile of the CoT.

10.1 IDP projects contributing to vulnerability and hazard reduction
An assessment of the current IDP projects indicated that a number of developmental
projects are already contributing to disaster risk reduction in the CoT to some extent.
Although these projects form part of the normal line function responsibilities, it already
indicate that a vast number of projects are inherently taking issues of disaster risk
reduction into account. It remains impetrative to conduct a detailed analysis of these as
well as all future planned projects and align these with the disaster risk priorities as
alluded to earlier in this plan.
The following IDP projects are linked to the disaster risk priorities. Note that some
projects are repeated as they address more than one priority risk.
11. DISASTER RISK MANAGEMENT PLANNING PRIORITIES
FOR THE COT
Although the CoT disaster risk profile has identified a wide range of risks posing a
potential threat to its area, it is not practical nor is it financially achievable to address all
the risks simultaneously. Effective and focused disaster risk management planning by all
organs of state and municipal entities can only be achieved through the identification of
priority disaster risks and by the identification of the areas, communities and households
most at risk to disaster in council’s area. It is therefore necessary to adopt a carefully
considered process which will enable this prioritisation.
Part of the prioritisation process will also be to adopt a three - phased approach to
disaster risk management planning. This does not however imply that once the third
phase is completed that the planning process is over. It must be clearly understood that
disaster risk management planning is not a stop/start activity or project but a continuous
process which of necessity must produce dynamic, real time plans which remain current
in a continuously changing environment.

The process of prioritisation for disaster risk planning is critically informed by the disaster
risk assessment findings for the CoT.
The CoT must focus on the development of plans and the implementation of explicit
programmes, projects and practices which give priority to building resilience and
reducing the impact of a wide range of different disaster risks in areas, communities and
households known to be to risk
The CoT’s priorities must therefore focus on preventing or limiting the impact of the
following disaster risks:
Wide scale events that due to their magnitude, likely to affect the CoT as a whole. These
include widespread floods and other severe weather events such as severe storms, and
tonadoes; veld fires; and hazardous materials (storage, transportation and usage).
Recurrent high and medium impact events that may require CoT’s intervention or the
mobilization of resources and infrastructure such as sinkholes, special events, floods
and other severe weather events, large informal settlement fires, veld and urban fringe
fires.
Low frequency high and medium magnitude disaster risks with potential for severe loss
and which require specialist support possibly not available in the CoT, such as nuclear
accidents, major transport accidents, Mission Critical Systems Failure and building
collapse.
Disaster risks that affect neighboring authorities which may have consequences for the
CoT.
In the above regard it is the responsibility of each division and any other entity included
in the organizational structure of the CoT to identify and prioritize those disaster risks
relevant to their functional area and prepare their departmental disaster risk
management plan accordingly.
Action Performance Time frame Budget Responsible

Disaster risks must be
prioritised by different
municipal entities and
departments in line with
the key functions.
indicator
All CoT
departments
and entities
have prioritised
the CoT
disaster risks in
line with their
specific
function and
include this in
their planning.
entity
12. INCENTIVE SYSTEM FOR THE PROMOTION OF DISASTER
RISK MANAGEMENT IN THE COT
Referral section in the DMA:
44(1)(e)
44(2)
Referral section in the CoT DRMF: 1.7.2.5
6.4.2
9.4.1
In involvement of all role-players in disaster risk management in the CoT remains an
important element which must be achieved in the next 5 years. Although this is not a
requirement of a Level 1 Disaster Risk Management Plan, the process to involve all
stakeholders and to obtain their buy-in is long term. For this reason the CoT MDMC
must already develop an incentive system for the promotion of disaster risk management
in the CoT.
Such an incentive system can take on various formats from tax rebates, to local/ward
competitions, schools projects and community imbizos. The development of an incentive
system for the CoT must from part of the deliberations of the CoT DRMAF.
No. Action Performance
indicator
Time frame Budget Responsible
entity

12.1 Develop a phased
incentive system for the
promotion of disaster risk
management in the CoT
among different roleplayers.
A phased
incentive
system has
been
developed
through the
assistance of
the DRMAF.
13. DISASTER RISK MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM
The Disaster Management Information System (DMIS) for the CoT is in the process of
development. It is been developed in a web base environment and is database driven to
make it accessible from anywhere and to make it more user friendly. The system relies
on data and different databases for disaster risk assessment. Spatial and attribute data
is joined to provide a complete picture of disaster risk or what to expect whenever a
disaster occurs.
The DMIS is enabled to do hazard identification, vulnerability assessments, risk
assessments, disaster risk reduction as well as planning for an incident. In order to
conduct the above a vast amount of GIS information is required which ranges from
baseline information (such as infrastructure, land use, topography and hydrology) to
stakeholder contact detail for contingency planning.
A functional element of the DMIS is the integration of various checklists which allows the
MDMC to track tasks and responsibilities of all role-players. These checklists guide the
used through a planning process which ensures that all information requirements are
supplied by the various municipal departments and entities. Furthermore, all Standard
Operation Procedures, legislation, policies and bylaw documentation are incorporated in
the system for ease of use and reference.
The DMIS has a SMS and e-mail facility to communicate between all role players. All
actions on the system are captured in an electronic “Occurrence Book” for record
keeping.

The GIS system is an integrated and essential part of the system in order to display
generic datasets. The overlay functionality of the GIS allows various databases and
datasets to be overlaid in order to provide a valuable and powerful decision-making tool
for the MDMC and all other municipal stakeholders. Vulnerability and hazard maps is a
key output of the system as this can provide politicians with a better understanding of the
dynamics of a specific ward.
Reporting to the NDMC is also done by exporting data from an incident to a MS Excel
worksheet. Status screens assist in keeping top management up to date will all actions
of all role-players through a web-enabled environment.
It remains imperative for the MDMC to obtain full functionality of the DMIS in order to
fully utilise its components for development planning and disaster risk reduction
purposes.
Action
Ensure the completion of
the DMIS.
Performance
indicator
DMIS is
completed and
operational.
Time frame Budget Responsible
entity
14. EMERGENCY COMMUNICATION SYSTEM
During 2009 the CoT has procured a Tetra radio system for all departments. This system
replaces all other analogue system that was in operation. This system is managed by
Electronic Services and they also provide user support and technical support. All tetra
radios are multi-channel and users can select on which channel they want to work.
Direct communication between two radios is also possible. All functions that are
available on the desktop and mobile versions are also available in the hand held sets. All
line functions are responsible for their own contingency plans for emergency
communication. Where there is no reception this system makes use of the cell phone
network to communicate.

Figure 2 below is a graphical representation of the current information flow between the
different role-players in the case of an emergency, major event or disaster. The flow of
information is directly related to the physical set-up within the DOC. For purposes of
coordination and different levels of decision-making the information flow is divided into
two sections: information for tactical decision-making (DOC) and information for strategic
decision-making (Decision Making Room – Perdehoef).
The DOC is responsible for the coordination of all operation and tactical information from
the various role-players. Such information is relayed to the DMIS and GIS system for
readily available strategic decision-making by the Decision Making Room (situated in the
Perdehoef in the Pieter Delport Centre). It should be noted that the diagram below has
not been adapted to include the new and current realities of the Cot MDMC in relation to
the CoT DRMF, contingency plans, incident management system (see Annexure C) and
Level 1 Disaster Risk Management Plan. The emergency communication system must
be updated and aligned by the MDMC to take into account the aspects as discussed
above.

Figure 2: Emergency Communication flow in the Disaster Operation Centre of the CoT

Action
Align the current emergency
communication flow with the
new requirements of the Cot
DRMF and Disaster Risk
Management Plan
Performance
indicator
Emergency
communication
flow plan.
Time frame Budget Responsible
entity
15. AREAS FOR FOCUSSED DISASTER RISK ASSESSMENTS
In order to process towards a Level 2 Disaster Risk Management Plan for the CoT, and
in line with the findings of the macro disaster risk assessment, it is imperative that the
following wards enjoy immediate attention in terms of focussed, community based
disaster risk assessments:
• (wards still to be confirmed)
The above assessments must be conducted in accordance with acceptable community
based disaster risk assessment methodologies, taking into account the specific
requirements of the MDMC GIS.
Action
Determine and agree on a
community based disaster
risk assessment
methodology for the highrisk
wards in the CoT.
Conduct detailed
community based disaster
risk assessments in
Performance
indicator
A robust
community
based disaster
risk
assessment is
developed.
Comparative
and robust
results of the
community
based disaster
risk
assessments.
Time frame Budget Responsible
entity
16. IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY FOR THE DRM PLAN
In order to successfully implement this plan the MDMC is responsible for all action as
contained in Annexure A. Through the successful implementation of the actions as set
out in Annexure A, the CoT MDMC will have achieved a Level 1 Plan status for the CoT.