Categories: Disaster and Emergency:
- civic awareness and preparedness
-contingency planning
-reduction of vulnerability
-rehabilitation/reconstruction
-response capacity
Housing:
- affordable housing
-homelessness
Level of Activity: City/Town
Ecosystem: River Basin

Summary
In February 1996, heavy and prolonged rains in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil provoked widespread flooding and left a toll of nearly 10,000 victims
homeless. The majority of victims were those in poorer communities and shanty -towns where precarious or non-existent drainage systems provoke great damage, leaving thousands homeless, interrupts electrical service creates situations in area of sanitation that lead to the
rapid spread of contagious diseases such as Hepatitis B and Leptospirosy.
The Movement Viva Rio became involved
with flood and dissaster relief work in 1996. A
city-wide campaign was launched at the time to provide emergency assistance to the victims. From this initiative sprang the "Rio das
Flores" and "Rio Novo"housing projects which has resulted in new homes and the resettlement of 246 families who lost their homes and of their belongings in the 1996 floods.
The families worked in small committees, organizing the work force and construction materials among themselves with the help of a team of social workers and architects. They built the homes in a mutual help effort demonstrating great solidarity after having shared the same tragedy.
Having acquired in the area of flood relief and community coordination, the Movement Viva Rio's aim for the newly formed group of City Volunteers is to create citizens committees
which can rely on their own resources and organizational capabilities to effectively provide
support on their own neighborhoods so that the next time such a situation arises, tragedies can be avoided and overcome.

Narrative
The initiative had as its objective attend homeless who had just lost not only their houses or shacks, but all of their earthly possessions and evem family members due to flooding or mud slides. Great portions of florest
slid down hillsides in avalanches mud, rocks and trees provoking a catastrophe caused by the heavy, prolonged rains in February 1996 in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
The population most affected is one that lives in highly populated areas in vunerable conditions on hillsides and river banks or areas subject to flooding. They occuped illegally high-risk areas because they did not possess
economic conditions to establish residence legally in safe areas. Most of the families who became involved in the housing projects were from a area along the banks of the Canal do Anil, Communitie Cidade de Deus, and the slum of Rio das Pedras. These communities were from areas that were judged inappropriate for resettlement because they were destroyed in the disaster or did not offer reasonable degrees of safety. New areas were located for the new housing projects.
The initial phase of the project dealt with a emergency situation. A large number of homeless from the region were being lodged in schools, hospitals, community centers, churches, etc. First, the families were registered in a attempt to define the needs of the families and distribute donations that came in response to the disaster. Secondly, the families were sent to temporary shelters with extremely precarious sanitary conditions.
The priority was to find viable solutions for the problem at hand based on actions that would demonstrate solidarity. The existent Movimento Viva Rio made contact with the departament store chain C&A ans the TELERJ, the state telephone company. These three organizations developed a plan for telephone-marketing. By this means a network of solidarity was established. The movement grew rapidly; in three weeks, 82 people worked full-time in the headquarters of Viva Rio processing 3,609 individual donations for a total of 400 tons of donations (clothing, food, building material, etc.) which was distributed through more than a hundread community based organizations that attended in a organized fashion more than 10,000 victims.
While emergency measures were being formed between Viva Rio, the City Government, C&A and USAID and the families who were to be part of the housing project. The initiative has its objectives recuperation's of material possessions, construction of new houses and the recuperation of families after their traumatic experience in regard to their community links, sense of empowerment, dignity, etc. The initative has priorities to build decent houses, develop community organization, establish integration between neigborhood and city, and implant expeiences to generate income and provide job-training.
Actions taken:
- Viva Rio transfered 93 families to temporary shelter in "Rio das Flores";
- City of Rio also transferred 148 families to the shelter in "Rio Novo";
- Social workers helped in the transfers and were assigned to the settlements;
- Organization of the families and formation of groups: construction and sanitation;
- Construction of 93 new homes (44 sq. mt.) by mutual help method and removal of families to permanent homes in "Rio das Flores";
- Transferred of 148 families to basic homes (24 sq. mt) built by the City Housing Department of Rio de Janeiro in "Rio Novo"envisioning a second phase of construction to be carried our by the families themseselves to increase the size of the house to 40 sq. mt.;
- Implanted a course for preparation of community health agents;
- Established a day care center for 20 children;
- Established a program for basic adult education with 25 students financed by the Special Labor Secretary of Rio de Janeiro;
- Established a Community Center;
- Established a Special Departamento for Legal Services:
- Established a Credit Service - Viva cred (1998 total operating budget - US$ 500,000.00) for small initiatives.
The political support was mobilized by negotiation between partners, neighborhood association and the power of public opinion. The resources were mobilized by donations, contracts and public campaigns through mass media.
Viva Rio assumed the leadership roll the process and in forming the partnership, in non-government resource mobilization and mobilizing the public. The organization and implantation was a joint effort of Viva Rio with the population by means of meetings, assemblies, etc, where decisions were made that direct the path of project. Committees were formed, from the communities, based on interest and abilities. These deliberated and presented their work and decisions in a manner that resulted in self-governance.
One problem that arose in the period of discussions held at the emergency was that of the idealistic proposal that all of the constructions be executed in a program of mutual help. As the designs for the houses were elaborated and discussions entered into a more practical level, it was apparent that using non-skilled labor and mutual help construction exclusively would not be a viable plan. It was decided to contract a construction firm because the foundations needed professional attention due to the degree of difficulty. The firm also assumed the construction of the basic unit of the houses.- foundation, living room, kitchen and bathroom. The mutual help effort was restricted to the construction of the bedrooms and the finishing work.
Construction was delayed in the beginning because the misappropriation and legalization was a long process. Furthermore, the land could not be prepared for the construction phase until the legal process was completed.
The works of building the new residences and transferring the families was completed in October of 1997. However, the work with the families in assuming their new community and working for its maintenance and improvement is a constant one. It is of extreme importance that work continue in the area of improvement services in a program aimed at reducing the tendency of families to sell out and once again become a part of the statistics of homeless or living in height risk areas or sub-human conditions.
Job training programs and income generating efforts and being carried out before the project team leaves the community in a effort to guarantee the investment and quality of life of the families in their new community.
The community building in "Rio das Flores" and "Rio Novo" resulting from the removal of communities from diverse regions has four distinct phases:
- House construction;
- Community construction/reconstruction;
- Establishing community services;
- Integrating the new community in the community at large.
The results were measured by survey (July 1997) conducted nearly one year after the families moved to the new neighborhood:

Sentiments concerning the move to a new location:
56% wanted to move
25% did not want to move
10% were indifferent
9% did not have a option

Preference for new house in comparison to former house:
- Prefer the new house 81%
- Prefer the former house 15%
- Undecided 4%

Resources mobilized for home improvements:
- Family increased income by additional work load 49%
- Family increased income by working more and family members helped 17%
- Family increased income by working more and used savings or loan 11%
- Family did not do any home improvements 9%
- Family increased income by working and sold some object 8%
- Received a donation of material 6%

Home improvements one year after moving to the new house (Community Rio das Flores):
- Celings 91%
- Window improvemet 56%
- Wall at back of property 48%
- Plaster on walls 46%
- Ceramic Floor Tiles 35%
- Tiles on Kitchen and Bath Walls 19%
- Replaced Door 5%

The base of the process was the involvement and participation of the population envisioning:
- A educational process of organization aimed at establishing mutual confidence and solidification of the resettled communities;
- The capacity builting of the population in the decision making process and in managing questions related to the collective group, and:
- A living experience related to the condition of citizenship of the families.

The partnership between public organs and the private sector was of great importance. The participation of the City of Rio de Janeiro was as representing the officialdom and the necessity to respect the rules and regulations of the city. The private sector permitted greater ease of operation and better quality in construction and social services in addition to guaranteeing the continuation of the project in moments of difficulty. The different styles and dynamics provided a certain tension in some phases of the project. This fact required the technical team had to pay special attempt to guarantee the continuation of the initiative and the maintain the motivation of the population.
The initiative is a example of political science in modern times: a network of partnerships that join the efforts and expertise of competent professionals, government, the private sector, NGO's, universities, those directly interested and beneficiaries in the realization of a specific project.
In comparison with other housing projecs, this one had the following impact:
- Reintroduced the concept of a participatory process, that means a longer process, but results in a greater appropriation by the families. Each family made a great investment building the houses and in the common areas. This is somewhat of a guarantee for the maintenance of these areas and for a better quality of life.
- In other experiences of the city government, 20%-40% of the families sell their houses or trade them if contract does not a sale. These families often end up back in their original high risk locations or shanty conditions.
- One important factor to note is the location of the project in relationship to the original neighborhood of families. By choosing a location
near to the former dwellings it was possible to avoid a trauma in regard to geographic references of the families. The location chosen has abundant urban transportation opportunities which helps the families in their travel to and from their places of employment as well as hospitals and schools to meet their needs.
- With a secure neighborhood in which to live and a house from which they would not be forced to move, there was a marked social development, reflected in the increase in adults with steady jobs and greater access to schools for children from 7-14. When the transfer was made, 43% of the children were not attending school. Today, practically all of the children are studying in the public schools in the region.
The work done with the families concerning their trash and environmental preservation show the following results:
- No accumulated trash around the homes or in the streets.
- Mutual help work days for neighborhood clean-up.
- Courses for monitors concerning the environment.
- Mutual help work days for planting and caring for gardens and public plazas.
The project brought urban infra-structure (city water, sewer, street lights, etc.) to all of the houses when in their former dwellings these services were not available.
The neighborhood has regular thash pick-up and clean up which is the responsibility of the city.

Regarding constitution impact these entities have:
Viva Rio Movement:
Was able to change the emphasis from one of a Campaigning or one of impact and Mobilization of the City to an intervention and a concrete experience in a specific geographic area and with a socio-economic group (Rio das Pedras Community), where the program provided different services.
The Department Store C&A as an Institution for social development;
The emergency support, that was to be only for building houses, has been extended to implanting and maintaining social services (day care center) and community capacity building (capacity building programs for leaders, youth and day care workers).
The City Government of Rio de Janeiro: The practice directly influenced the city program in the following ways:
- Re-implantation of mutual help programs that had been suspended.
- Confirmation that a participatory method is better and comes closer to reaching objectives.
- Confirmation of the necessity of accompaniment of social and technical professionals in the removal and resettlement process in forming new housing nucleus.
-Implanting a system of evaluation, using the form in the project, to survey families in government projects.
- Confirmation that transfers of populations with attention to social organization are effected with less conflict.

The communities Rio das Flores and Rio Novo are not homogenous units but the process permitted a introduction of social and cultural values. Each family made adaptations on their house according to their necessities and aesthetic values. This heterogenic expression produced better relationships among the families. Today only 6% of the families have not made improvements and added their personal touches.
Other changes in attitudes observed have been:
-Improvement in patterns and importance of cleanliness.
-Creation of collective criteria for the definition of codes for taking action when needed.
-The introduction of a improved concept of the law, by means of free judicial services made available to the community by Viva Rio in its program called "Balcão de Direito".
- A greater confidence build in regard to public authority.

The introduction of elements of sustainability were achieved by discussions among the various partners. There was a search for funds to meet the needa as demands arose.
In the area of social services there was a team that was active in all phases of the process. This group was fundamental in the elaboration, implementation, accompaniment and evaluation of the practices that were developed.
Resources mobilized:
City Government:
- Expropriation of the site and regulation of questions concerning the lots formed in the new neighborhood.
- Infrastructure of the development.
- Supplying construction materials.
Viva Rio Movement:
- Proct and technical consultants.
- Small credit opportunities for economic ventures of the community.
- Implantation of judicial service.
- Implantation of "telecurso"- adult education using TV.
- Donation of food stuffs and household goods for the community.
- Establishment of day care center.
Department store C&A:
- Construction materials.
- Contracting labor for construction of the houses.
- Maintaining the day care center.
- Furnishing capacity building opportunities.
- Furnishing a sport court.
USAID:
- Donation of construction materials.
The above sited investments were made outright with no plan for repayment due to the emergency character of the situation. The resources mobilized were applies in a social context attending victims of a natural disaster.
Even though the families were not going to be called upon to replay help received, they did participate in the construction of the houses.
Each family worked a average of 640 hours on the building and finishing of the houses representing approximately US$4,200, based on the local labor salaries, and representing a significant contribution of the community in partnership with the private and public sectors.

Lessons Learned and Transferability

1- Urban planning should be done in a manner that makers very clear which are public and which are private spaces. Only dubious areas the object of conflicts.
2- Better use should be made of left over spaces; those not used for parks, leisure and public equipament.
3- The importance of bonds of confidence ans security for a population who has suffered significant losses - their house and belonging. The replacement of the house and belonging is only one of the aspects to be dealt with.
4- The responsible public organs who should attend emergency situations have to be better prepared to attend them (in regard to temporary shelter facilities) and in the selection of families to be attended. The selections were made in a inadequate manner; in a tremendous rush due to the urgency of the situation.
5- The period that the families lived in their temporary shelter represented a experience of multiple consequences:
- A tense period due to the fact that the families had to live together (common bath and kitchen facilities) with reduced space and practically non-existent privacy.
- A period of learning how to take collective action (rotating the clean-up crews; discussions and the implanting of a living code dealing with hours, noise, hygiene and cleanliness).
- A period of increased social relationship for the families, including both conflict and solidarity.
- Formation of mutual help groups for construction and the code to govern them.
- Accompaniment of the house construction as a measure to guarantee quality.
- Economy of the families during a period of 10 a 15 months when they did not have to pay rent, lights, water, etc, and canalizing this economy into house and the recuperation of belongings .
6- The mutual help building process;
It is of fundamental importance to se the social-educational work that accompanied the actually construction and the development of the mutual help, collective experience. Most of the population experienced occasional expressions of solidarity or families more of explicit community regulations, discussions and decisions made in a democratic process. However the most predominant characteristic of this period was the habit of obedience or the "law of the strongest" or most "powerful".
The mutual help process requires a social- educational process munch more ample than ono in regard to the construction of the houses themselves. The houses however were, and should be the greatest motivating factor and the most concrete manifestation that gave meaning to the other organizational actions taken by the families.
7- The mutual help process should be constantly and designed according to each step of the group. The initial model (10 families per group) was transformed into 5 or 3 families in other stages. On the other side, the process of mutual help transcends the structured groups when neighbours help each other independent of their designated groups.
8- The point values adopted (points gained recorded for each family) was a positive factor that motivated the families and made the evaluation, according to internal criteria, much easier to track. The family members in change of keeping the point records carried out their task with respect and honesty. They were rigorous in recording the hours worked while at the same time showed flexibility with the weakest and least protected members of community (the ill, aged, etc.) as selection was made in regard to who would be responsible for which task. This careful accompaniment and recording of participation is most important.

Key Dates
February 1996 - Catastrophe caused by the heavy, prolonged rains;
April 1996 - Transfered families to temporary shelter;

May/July 1996 - Organization of the families and formation of groups: construction and sanitation;

December 1996 - Mutual help construction;

October 1997 - Families moved .

References
Imports of non-profits organizations in the society: a case study in Brasil
Laudine, Leilah
John Hopkins University / Iser
1998
Filantropia Empresarial
Goes, Sergio
1997

Rede de Informação sobre o terceiro setor
Goes, Sergio
Fundação Ford
1998

Contact
Ana Maria Quiroga
Estr. Variante de Jacarepagua 1441
Jacarepagua - Rio das Pedras
Rio de Janeiro
RJ
Brasil
55 21 556 5004
55 21 556 1381
vivario@ax.apc.org
Type of Organization: Community-based organisation (CBO)

Nominating Organization
Movimento Viva Rio
Baltazar Morgado Neto
Ladeira da Glória, 98
Glória
Rio de Janeiro
RJ
Brasil
22211-120
55 21 556 5004 / 556 5923
55 21 551 1381
vivario@ax.apc.org
Type of Organization: Non-governmental organisation (NGO)

Partners
City Goverment of Rio de Janeiro
Isabel Tostes
Rua Afonso Cavalcanti 455
Centro
Rio de Janeiro
RJ
Brasil
2021110
55 21 503 3637
55 21 293 2295
Type of Organization: Local Authority
Type of Partner Support: Financial Support

Instituto de Desenvolvimento Social C&A
Paulo Castro
Rua Conde de Bonfim 366
Tijuca
Rio de Janeiro
RJ
Brasil
20521-000
55 21 284 9012
55 21 264 7343

Type of Organization: Private Sector
Type of Partner Support: Financial Support

USAID - United States Agency for International Developement
Ricardo Falcão
Av. das Nações Q801 L3
Brasilia
DF
Brasil
70403-900
55 61 321 7272 R 2402
55 61 323 6875
RFaucão@usaid.gov

Type of Organization: International Agency (Multilateral)
Type of Partner Support: Financial Support

Financial Profile
For the financial year 1996/1997
The total operating budget: US$ 3,066,000.00
The City Government of Rio de Janeiro:
US$ 2,296,000.00 (79% of total)
Instituto de Desenvolvimento Social C&A:
US$ 600,000.00 (19,5% of total)
USAID: US$ 50,000.00 (1,5% of total)
For the financial year 1998
The total operating budget:US$ 1,056,000.00
VIVA RIO: US$ 755,000.00 (71,5% of total)
The City Government of Rio de Janeiro:
US$ 301,000.00 (28,5% of total)