Technical Proposal Preparation of the Establishment of the Urban Institutional Development Program (UIDP) Management TECH-3 COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS ON THE TERMS OF REFERENCE AND ON COUNTERPART STAFF AND FACILITIES TO BE PROVIDED BY THE CLIENT Preparation of the Establishment of the Urban Institutional Development Program (UIDP) Management FORM TECH-3 A COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS ON TERM OF REFERENCE 3 A – COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS ON TERM OF REFERENCE 1. Please note that our technical proposal have not taken these comments into consideration, and is still assuming the original terms of reference as given in the RFP. We do not feel comfortable to write our technical proposal according to our suggestion on the changes of terms of reference, since these changes are subject to approval by the client and the World Bank. 2. Please also note that we have submitted points for clarification on the terms of reference including our suggestion for changes. As scheduled we submitted our inquiries in writing on October 12, 2007. We only received the reply from the procurement committee dated on November 9, and received by email only on November 12. This is certainly too late to incorporate into our proposal. Still we have questions on the clarification of our inquiries, we will include in our comments to the terms of reference in this technical proposal. 3. Our first question during the inquiry relates to description of Task A point 8 on TOR consultants for UIDP to ULGs, we propose to add v) local economic development, urban services delivery and poverty alleviation (the ‘other reform’ agenda). The reply on our inquiry suggest Part C task clarifies this, but we do not think that is the case, since Part C does not contain any terms of reference for consultants to be assigned for UIDP to ULGs. 4. We propose to change the term ‘UIDP Project Mannual’ to “Program Memorandum for UIDP Agenda’. 5. Our inquiry on Task C, the preparation for USDRP2 has not been clarified. We would like to be assured that our assignment does not include the preparation of a complete project preparation document (technical, financial and institutional) but will be confined to conceptual and guidance framework, consistent with our task of institutional development. 6. The reply to our inquiries does not clarify on the ‘documents to be attached to the terms of reference’, as those documents have not been supplied to us timely and in a complete set form. 7. The reply does not clarify our inquiry suggesting to change the ‘reporting requirements’ to only Bahasa Indonesia and summary in English. 8. Task A point 9: we propose to delete ‘in cooperation with the consultant for urban policy and strategy at Bappenas’ since we do not see the relevance of consultation as the ‘governance reform’ and ‘capacity building’ are not directly related with urban policy and strategy. 9. On section ‘Implementation Arrangement’, and ‘consultant reporting requirements’ point 1 we propose to delete ‘and MOHA’. Since MOHA is not Preparation of the Establishment of the Urban Institutional Development Program (UIDP) Management FORM TECH-3 A COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS ON TERM OF REFERENCE continuously and actively involved from the preparation until implementation of UIDP Reform Agenda. We will definitely involve MOHA as one of our reference and stakeholder partner. 10. We propose to consolidate the ‘strategic plan’, ‘business plan’, ‘detail financing plan’, and ‘project manual’ into one consolidated report namely ‘the strategic and implementation plan for UIDP’ 11. We would like to propose to reduce the number of ‘progress reports’ from ‘quarterly’ (every 4 months) to ‘semi annually’ every six months) 12. We propose to delete task ‘adopt the National Urban Strategy and Policy Development’ since such adoption (or assistance for adoption) might be more relevant to be taken up by the ‘national urban policy and strategy’ consultant. Finally we propose that the procurement committee will reissue a new clarification on our above suggestions for changes in the terms of reference, since we need the clarification for preparation of the Inception report later if we will be selected for the assignment. Preparation of the Establishment of the Urban Institutional Development Program (UIDP) Management FORM TECH-3 B COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS ON COUNTERPART STAFF AND FACILITIES 3 B – COMMENT OR SUGGESTION ON COUNTERPART STAFF AND FACILITIES The Consultant understands that the Directorate General of Human Settlements (DGCK), the Ministry of Public Works, the Government of Indonesia, will be the executing agency. The Term of Reference (ToR) further mentioned that the day to day counterpart for the implementation will be the Central Project Management Unit (CPMU) within the DGCK. The ToR and the Data Sheet in the RFP mentioned that all the costs for operational facilities, including office space in location close to the Client, office running costs, all staff and personnel costs, equipment, project vehicle, and communication facilities should be provided by the Consultant, therefore all the costs in providing such facilities will be included in the financial proposal. The Client will provide the budget for all workshop activities only, and provide assistance in the following areas: 1. Obtaining all permits, visas, and licenses necessary for the work. 2. Access to all available and relevant reports required to undertake the assignment. 3. Assistance with arranging meetings. 4. Facilitate prompts clearance through customs of any property required for the services of the Consultants. In the relation with the workshop expenses, we have been reassured by the Procurement Committee through its response to our inquiry that the Client will provide the budget for all workshops conducted by the Project either in the Central Government or in the Local Governments when necessary. Technical Proposal Preparation of the Establishment of the Urban Institutional Development Program (UIDP) Management TECH-4 DESCRIPTION OF THE APPROACH, METHODOLOGY AND WORK PLAN FOR PERFORMING THE ASSIGNMENT Preparation of the Establishment of the Urban Institutional Development Program (UIDP) Management FORM TECH-4 DESCRIPTION OF THE APPROACH, METHODOLOGY AND WORK PLAN FOR PERFORMING THE ASSIGNMENT Table of Contents A. Technical Approach and Methodology ................................................................ 1 1. Prologue .......................................................................................................... 1 2. Understanding of the Objectives of the Assigment ......................................... 1 2.1 Long Term Goal ...................................................................................... 1 2.2 How the objective will be achieved ......................................................... 2 2.3 Result Sought from UIDP ........................................................................ 5 2.4 Objectives of the Technical Assitance..................................................... 6 2.5 Synthesis of Our Understanding ............................................................ 7 2.6 The Logical Framework of UIDP Management ...................................... 8 3. Approach to the Service ................................................................................. 9 3.1 People Centered ..................................................................................... 9 3.2 Internalization........................................................................................ 10 3.3 Knowledge Building............................................................................... 10 3.4 Top Management Oriented .................................................................... 11 3.5 Sustainability ......................................................................................... 12 3.6 Networking ............................................................................................ 13 3.7 Learning Lessons.................................................................................. 13 3.8 Participatory Approach.......................................................................... 14 3.9 Urban Leadership.................................................................................. 14 4. Methodology in Carring Out the Activities and Obtaining the Expected Outputs ...................................................................................................................... 15 4.1 Focus on Professional Back-up Support to Urban Management at the Local Level .................................................................................................... 15 4.2 Central Capacity Building ...................................................................... 16 4.3 Strengthening the Role of the Province................................................. 17 4.4 Integrating UIDP with RPIJM and ‘Urban Policy and Strategy’.............. 17 4.5 Use of Modern Information Technology ............................................... 18 4.6 Multidimensional Urban Development Agenda .................................... 18 4.7 Expansion of UIDP to Non-USDRP Cities............................................. 21 4.8 UIDP2 in USDRP2. ............................................................................... 21 4.9 Breeding the UIDP Culture.................................................................... 22 4.10 Preserving the Continuum and Sustainabality....................................... 23 5. Degree of Detail of Outputs ........................................................................... 23 6. The Anticipated Problems and Its Importance ............................................... 24 6.1 Mandate of DGCK in Guiding Urban Development ............................... 24 Preparation of the Establishment of the Urban Institutional Development Program (UIDP) Management FORM TECH-4 DESCRIPTION OF THE APPROACH, METHODOLOGY AND WORK PLAN FOR PERFORMING THE ASSIGNMENT 6.2 Staffing Constraint ................................................................................. 27 6.3 Access to Local Governments ............................................................... 29 6.4 Potential Overlap with Other USDRP Consultants ............................... 31 7. Technical Approach to Address the Problems .............................................. 31 8. Compatibility of Methodologies With Proposed Approach ............................ 32 B. Work Plan ............................................................................................................ 34 1. Phasing, Avtivities, Content and Duration ..................................................... 34 2. Delivery Dates of the Reports ....................................................................... 41 3. Workshops ................................................................................................... 41 4. Final Documentation ..................................................................................... 42 C. Organization and Staffing ................................................................................... 42 1. Organization .................................................................................................. 42 2. Staffing .......................................................................................................... 44 DESCRIPTION OF APPROACH, METHODOLOGY, AND WORK PLAN FOR PERFORMING THE ASSIGNMENT A. Technical Approach and Methodology. 1. Prologue Yes, what you read in this proposal is the real service that you will get from the Consultant submitting this proposal. We would like to assure the Client that the person writing this proposal is the person that will lead the team and the team members that will implement the assignment. We would like to state this as an assurance of our professionalism in implementing the assignment. We are therefore ready to be invited to present our proposal in an open discussion to the Client, in this case the Procurement Committee or the Management of the Client. We also would encourage the Client to do so to other Consultants being invited to submit proposal. This would make the evaluation of the proposal easier by the Client rather than only reading the written proposal. We emphasize this in the prologue since we are aware that in many assignments, Consultant can assign a ‘proposal writer expert’ just to ‘win’ the assignment, while other group of persons will be assigned to implement the assignment. In so doing there will be a gap between what is written in the proposal of the Consultant (and being evaluated by the Procurement Committee), and the real service that will be performed. Although separating the proposal and real implementation theoretically is possible, but professionally this is not the practice chosen by us who submit this proposal. We therefore, decided to gather the whole team members lead by the Team Leader, to discuss on the terms of reference, and request every team member to contribute about his or her own conception, plan and steps in performing the service in his or her personal role as member of the team This will assure the formation of a solid team since the start of the assignment by contributing ideas and carrying the responsibility for winning the assignment that he or she will later implement. 2. Understanding of the Objectives of the Assignment. 2.1 Long Term Goal. The TOR stated ‘USDRP is a first step towards achieving the GOI’s long term goal to develop self reliant cities in the wake of recent decentralization laws’. Our understanding: - We understand the achievement of GOI’s long term goal will take many steps after this assignment will be completed. We would like to assure however, that the ’first step’ is a ‘significant step’ by showing ‘real actions that work’, ‘actions that is a breakthrough from current negative practices that we would like to change’, and ‘a step that will show clearly what will be the subsequent step to follow’. The assignment is a short term one and GOI’s goal cannot be achieved during the period of the assignment, but we must be able to indicate clearly in this first step, the directions we should follow in order to build GOI’s confidence that the step we have taken is in the right direction. - It is important to define what are ‘self reliant cities’. In our understanding ‘self reliant cities’ means cities comprising of urban communities that are self reliant, as a necessary condition to sustain a long term provision, maintenance and development of urban infrastructure and services. We would like to emphasize ‘urban communities’ to refer to the people that are most important and not only the 1 local government. In other words we would like to build urban communities that are economically, financially, socially, politically, environmentally and managerially viable. Our vision does not stop at self reliant local governments, meaning local governments having a capacity of its local generated resources to sustain investment in urban infrastructure and services. Again, our aim is to build the capacity of the people to carry the burden of ‘cost’ of providing the infrastructure and services. - This objective is important in the wake of the recent decentralization laws, since an important objective of the laws is to bring public services closer to the people we are serving. The concept however should not be perceived only administratively, but more towards a ‘people empowerment’ objective. - Scheme 1 illustrates how UIDP, being part of USDRP is related with the long term goal of GOI’s urban development. 2 UIDP in The Framework of Indonesia’s Urban Development 3 2.2 How the objective will be achieved The TOR specifies how the USDRP project aims to achieve its objectives by a. Improving management municipal governance through (i) enhanced civic participation in key municipal decisions and monitoring/ supervision of their implementation, (ii) adoption of extensive public information disclosure policies, and (iii) reform of procurement and financial management practices; b. Strengthening of municipal institutional capacity to formulate long-term urban development strategies and plans, including local economic development and urban poverty reduction; staff; c. Building municipal institutional capacity and professionalizing municipal managers; d. Enhancing fiscal capacity by rationalizing expenditures and increasing revenues; e. Financing priority urban investments that support of improvement urban services, promote LED, accelerate poverty reduction; f. Implementing at the central level the Urban Institutional Development Program (UIDP) for supporting urban reforms and institutional capacity building. Our understanding: - We understand that instruments a), c) and d) are what in the TOR have been referred to as the ‘core reform agenda’, while instrument b) is referred to as ‘the other reform agenda’. The ‘core reform agenda’ is a ‘precondition’ for the ‘other reform agenda’ to be performed optimally. In fact, the two reform agenda cannot be separated and should be implemented in an integrated manner. Without the ‘core reform agenda’ much of what will be achieved through the ‘other reform agenda’ will lose its quantitative and qualitative values. While the ‘other reform agenda, is the agenda that is expected to deliver physical and economic outputs necessary to achieve the self reliant urban communities envisaged by the longer term goal of GOI. - Strengthening of municipal capacity to formulate long-term urban development strategies and plans, including local economic development and urban poverty reduction relates with (i) the other consultant service being recruited along with this UIDP Management dealing particularly with ‘national urban policies and strategies, (ii) previously completed CDS project implemented with technical assistance from the World Bank/City Alliance, and (iii) current GOI effort to institutionalize what is called the RPIJM (medium term planning and programming for the public works/Cipta Karya urban services and infrastructure comparable to the previous concept of IUIDP (Integrated Urban Infrastructure Development Programme). - The objective of ‘professionalizing municipal managers’ should be stressed especially related to recent development in the political arena of directly elected mayors and bupatis (pilkada). With the pilkada held in all Kota and Kabupaten resulting in the election of Walikota and Bupati having a strong foothold in the local political parties and strong legitimacy by the support of 4 urban citizens electing him or her, there is a need to support the politically elected Walikota and Bupati with a strong professionalism of the municipal staff. The technical and professional link will assure an able and committed urban management serving the best interest of its urban citizens. - Rationalizing urban expenditures relates with improving the municipal program and budget by implementing the RPIJM planning, programming and budgeting system recently introduced by the Directorate General Cipta Karya. The concept basically provokes for a multisector, multiyear, and multisource of funding system of planning, programming and budgeting, and ensuring an economically, financially, socially, politically, environmentally and managerially sound program and projects, at least in the urban public works/Cipta Karya sectors. While increasing revenues of municipalities would implement what was previously conceived as the RIAP (Revenue Improvement Action Plan) under the previous UDPs or ‘urban development projects’ supported by the World Bank, Asian Development Bank and other lending agencies in all cities throughout the country. This UIDP Management assignment should ensure a system whereby RIAP can be implemented in a more effective manner compared to the previous UDP projects, by integrating it within the overall reform agenda of the participating ULGs. - We are aware of the priority investment agenda in the participating municipalities funded by the USDRP project. The investment selected were for projects like terminal, market, solid waste disposal, and was assumed to be those promoting local economic development and reduce poverty at the local level. The linkage of those facilities with local economic development and poverty alleviation has still to be clarified. As the UIDP management assignment includes the Consultant to recommend the content and format for future USDRP2 projects, we will seek appropriate criteria and formula for the selection of project components best suited for delivering urban facilities having clear impacts for local economic development and accelerating poverty reduction. - The UIDP as we understand is a ‘program’ rather than an institution, although it has been often referred to in the TOR (by writing the word in capital letters) as if it is an institution. In other words, during the phase of UIDP Management assignment, it is important to define the activities of the program and to have those activities implemented. As a program it should consist of well defined action oriented agenda to be implemented as part of the UIDP Management assignment. The assignment includes a task for the Consultant to investigate the feasibility of establishing a ‘UIDP facility’ (a clear purpose institution) to sustain implementation of UIDP in the long run. Institutionalizing UIDP will be the objective of establishing the ‘facility’, to ensure that the UIDP (as a program) will not only be implemented but will stop when the USDRP project will be completed. 2.3 Results Sought from UIDP The TOR explains to following results anticipated of the UIDP: a. Improved ULGs’ governance through more inclusive and transparent mechanism on development decision making processes, improved procurement process, and better local financial management, including more efficient institutional and legal frameworks, planning and budgeting processes, budget execution, monitoring-evaluation and reporting. 5 b. Improved ULGs’ performance in urban services delivery, local economic development, and poverty reduction. c. Agreed National Urban Policy and Strategy which will serve as a guidance for improving the capacity national government as well as ULGs in designing and implementing sustainable urban development policies and strategies. Our understanding: - We have sufficiently elaborated our understanding on the ‘core reform agenda’ and ‘the other reform agenda’ under point 2.2 and do not like to add more comments. As another Consultant will be assigned to specifically address the issue of ‘National Urban Policy and Strategy’ we will not deal with this issue, but we will cooperate with the specifically assigned Consultant to retrieve a better understanding on the proposed national policy and strategy and incorporate in our work. 2.4 Objectives of the Technical Assistance The primary objective of the Consultant’s assignment is to assist Directorate General of Cipta Karya, Ministry of Public Works (DGCK, MPW) in: a. Establishing and managing the Urban Institutional Development Program (UIDP); b. Evaluating and guiding all components within UIDP in achieving its objectives, outputs and targets; c. Developing UIDP into UIDF and further development of USDRP Our understanding: - The Consultant will define a series of program activities that constitute the UIDP, and assist DGCK in implementing the activities during the first two years or during the phase of this assignment. In defining the program activities the Consultant will adopt the principle that in the era of decentralization the Central Government should play a role in guiding ULGS to achieve a set of national objectives of urban development by implementing a national urban policy and strategy. During the pre-reform era Central Government had a better means to impose on its national policy and strategy through its ‘financial and budgetary’ power as well as its authority in a centralized system of government. In the current era of reform Central Government has to make use of other means, specifically its role as a ‘knowledge center’ to disseminate knowledge regarding the ‘core reform agenda’ and ‘the other reform agenda’ and by facilitating exchange of knowledge and experience, both from international best practices as well as local wisdoms. - This role as a ‘knowledge center’ is very strategic in view of (i) In the previous era when government was centralized many strategic functions of local governments such as infrastructure planning, programming and budgeting were executed by the Central Government or with substantial Central 6 assistance, and utilizing foreign and domestic Consultants mostly based in Jakarta. Currently we have to rely on the ULGs willingness and commitment to allocate their own local budgetary resources and using local expertise, (ii) The subjects dealt with under the ‘core reform agenda’ and ‘the other reform agenda’ to be implemented by the ULGs are mostly dealing with new issues of urban management such as ‘urban good governance’ and ‘local economic development’, for which there might be many cases of international best practices, but also many local wisdoms, from which ULGs can learn. There is a need for Central Government to make the knowledge more systematic and accessible, and also for the government to initiate analysis and discussion forums to deliberate on the experiences and concepts. UIDP should function as the best instrument for such Central Government dissemination and initiation efforts to stimulate a nation-wide urban policy reform that will enhance the national urban development and management performance. - Aside from implementing the Central adopted program activities for promoting the nation-wide urban policy reforms, the Consultant will assist DGCK in over viewing and monitoring how the ‘core reform agenda’ and ‘the other reform agenda’ will be implemented by the ULGs and how the specifically assigned Consultants will perform its role in facilitating the ULGs. We will have to review the TORs of the specifically assigned Consultants and how it can guide effectively the Consultants in assisting the ULGs in implementing their specific city reform agenda. - We are fully aware of the need to ensure the sustainability of the urban reform agenda, for which we need to investigate the desirability and feasibility of setting up a special facility to continue with the UIDP in the longer run. We have among other to reflect on the experience of other comparable facilities earlier being established for comparable purposes. We will take into consideration the general reluctances and resistances towards creating new institutions for whatever good purpose. 2.5 Synthesis of Our Understanding. From the previously explained understanding, we can summarize the key features of our basic understanding of the objectives of the assignment to be undertaken by the consultant: 1. The assignment has a limited period, and should be considered as a first step, but it should be a meaningful step that is sustainable, and it should have a longer term vision of GOI’s goal in building a self reliant urban societies (not only municipalities). 2. The assignment should consistently apply a people centered urban institutional development program, by ways of implementing an integrated urban reform agenda, consisting of a ‘core reform’ and ‘other reform’ agenda. The agenda is aimed at serving the urban community with improved and meeting the needs of urban infrastructures and services. This is assured by the generation of ‘good governance’; clear physical and economic outputs of ‘urban services’ as a result of well defined urban policy, strategy, plans and programs; and real increased community and individual welfare through ‘local economic development’ and ‘poverty reduction. 7 3. The assignment will implement a set of programs that should be sustained in the longer term, through the establishment of a ‘knowledge center’, with the possibility (after its feasibility having been investigated) of creating a special facility to sustain the program activities in the long run. It will also be implemented through the next phase of USDRP that will test and secure its long term sustainability. 4. The assignment will aim at building professionalism of urban development management, balancing the stronger political legitimacy and status of directly elected officials as Mayors and Bupatis, that is committed and able to implement the urban reform agenda as initiated by this UIDP management assignment. 5. The assignment is not working in a vacuum but will establish a system of activities that is consistent and synergic with other UIDP assignments (particularly related to National Urban Policies and Strategies) and DGCK agenda particularly in institutionalizing the RPIJM. 2.6 The Logical Framework of UIDP Management - As earlier described, the long term goal of GOI is to create a resilient urban community. The ultimate goal of urban development of Indonesia can be specified in terms of its main objectives being the achievement of the following condition in the urban scene and management: (1) Urban Good Governance, (2) Urban Local Economic Development, (3) Urban Poverty Alleviation, and (4) urban Services Delivery. - The process by which the UIDP Management activity will be working starts from the following condition and problems faced in present urban development: (1) High rate of urbanization, (2) Pressures created to urban services provision and delivery, (3) Lack and low level of urban service, (4) Unattractive urban investment climate, (5) Poor urban governance, (6) Underdeveloped urban economy, and (7) High cost of urban service. - USDRP provides main instruments to facilitate the attainment of urban development objectives consisting of (1) UIDP Management leading to implementation of two reform agenda : first ‘the core reform agenda’ (transparency, accountability and participation or ‘TAP; financial management reform or FMR, procurement reform or PR and capacity building or CBD) and secondly ‘the oher strategic urban reform agenda (local economic development including poverty alleviation, urban services delivery, and urban institutional and human resources development), (2) Assistance in Formulation of A National Urban Development Policy and Strategy , and (3) Investment in Priority Sectors in Pilot Cities. - Implementation of UIDP Management will be undertaken at the Kota and Kabupaten level in the cities participating in USDRP with the guidance and supervision of the Central and Provincial government. - UIDP Management will work in close link with other national urban development programs including he RPIJM, UPP (Urban Poverty Project), NUSSP (Neighborhood Upgrading and Shelter Sector 8 Project), WJEMP (West Java Environmental Management Project)),and others. - UIDP Management process will be guided by a set of regulatory framework including the RPJP (long term national development plan), RPJM (medium term national development plan), RPT (annual national development plan), and KNSP (National Urban Development Policy and Strategy) as envisaged in the Minister of Public Works Regulation #494. The implementation at the Provincial and local level in guided by parallel regulatory framework including the RPJPD, RPJMD, RPTD and RPIJM. - The whole process of UIDP Management implementation will have to take into consideration the general strategic environment of Indonesia’s development with its main features of democratization, decentralization and globalization - The logical framework for UIDP Management is charted in Scheme 2. 9 The Logical Framework for UIDP Management 10 3. Approach to the Service The Consultant will undertake the assignment with a view and adopting the following approaches: 3.1 People Centered We have chosen the ‘people centered’ as an essential element of our approach that will be implemented in the following ways: - As we have indicated in the previous section on understanding the objectives of the assignment, we are putting great emphasis on ‘people centered’ development and ‘people empowerment’ in UIDP. We applied this in our understanding about ‘self reliant cities’ which should mean the ‘urban communities’ rather than the physical being of cities (urban areas) as usually physical planners refer to or municipalities being the administrative sense of cities as public administrators used to refer to cities. - This would imply that in every urban reform agenda we would be implementing, we will measure the value of the agenda by its impact on the urban citizens, how the people in the cities felt about the reform and whether the reform indeed has a positive effect to the people. We would not limit our satisfaction by measuring for instance whether the local government has issued a local regulation or establish a committee or even implemented an agenda, but most importantly how do people feel about the change and reform and whether the agenda is doing any good to the people in the cities. - We would similarly apply our thinking about institutions, for instance in judging the capability of a local government institution we would observe not only institutional structures (although we understand this is very important), but we would like to know the quality of the leadership and motivations of the staff being responsible of certain positions. Manpower development including training should be an important part of our institution building agenda, likewise the institution and official who are responsible for manpower development and training in a local government. - We will apply our approach starting with our own team. All members of the team should be recognized each of their individual roles in executing the UIDP assignment. We will avoid any member of the team to dominate, but we will make the best use of every individual member’s potential and skill in producing the best output for this assignment. As we have indicated in the Prologue of this proposal, we attach high value of each individual member’s participation in the assignment since we write this proposal. We would like to make sure that each of the projected activities, its plans, its methods, and its content are written by our team member that will implement them when this assignment will be executed. Every member of the team should have a pride of his or her contribution to the work of the team in this assignment. This should be assured without sacrificing the quality of the output and performance of this service. Every team member will also be encouraged to interact more with people, such as the target urban communities, including the Client and stakeholders for this assignment, more importantly than only producing papers and reports. 11 3.2 Internalization We are aware that the UIDP assignment is ‘to assist’ the government, in this case DGCK, MPW in guiding the implementation of the urban reform agenda. The Consultant cannot take over the task of the government but it should contribute its professional resources and service to the government. This means that: - The role of the Client is crucial in the performance of the assignment. The ‘leadership’ that is expected to come from the Central Government in promoting the urban reform agenda is so important. The Consultant expects this leadership role will be performed by the ‘vocal point institution’ representing the Client. The interest and commitment of the chief executives and the group of staff serving as the main counterpart for this assignment will determine the success and also the sustainability of what will be achieved with the urban reform agenda being the focus of this assignment. We would like to ‘downgrade’ the role of the Consultant to the lowest possible, in such a way that when the task of the Consultant will be completed, UIDP will be continued and sustained without any hesitancy. Such succession is assured because of the internalization process being implemented since the start of the Consultant’s assignment. - The Consultant would like to stress since the beginning of the assignment, the importance for the Client to appoint a team of motivated and professionally qualified counterpart staff to take the ‘front lead’ in every deal with ULGs, and to open the door for the urban reform agenda. In saying this, the Consultant is fully aware of its own potential role in facilitating the entry and maintaining a good relation with the ULGs for the smooth implementation of the assignment. - The internalization process should be assured at both the central and local level. At the local level, all the Consultants involved in facilitating the implementation of the urban reform agenda should as well internalize its tasks to the appropriate local agency responsible for sustaining the reform. Local leadership and commitment to the objectives of the urban reform agenda will be crucial for the success of attaining the objectives of the reform agenda. The Consultant will monitor this particular aspect o internalization process in guiding the Consultant assisting the ULGs to implement the urban reform agenda. 3.3 Knowledge Building The Consultant believes in the power of knowledge in motivating change towards the objectives envisaged by the integrated urban reform agenda. We would like to highlight the strategic importance of ‘knowledge building’ in this assignment in the following points: - We have stressed the role of Central Government, in this case DGCK in serving as a’ knowledge center’ in the execution of the urban reform agenda, departing from previous practices of using ‘authority’ and ‘budgetary’ power in imposing urban policy and strategy to ULGs. This new role as a ‘knowledge center’ should be developed since during the past 30 years of urban development, before decentralization, the Central Government had played a dominant role in urban infrastructure planning, programming and budgeting. The reformed era provide a good opportunity for Central Government to make use of its skilled and trained professional resources to assist local 12 governments in functions that are now decentralized, and as it has been practiced in recent decade, to devolve its manpower to the ULGs. - Although development in information and communication technology has opened access for ULGs to a global network of information on best practices and lessons learned, Central Government still has the opportunity to promote information dissemination and exchange among local government leaders and staff. Central government should take initiatives in linking its international network with local wisdoms related to implementation of the urban reform agenda. It should focus especially on new initiatives such as addressing the issue of ‘good governance’, local economic development’ and ‘poverty alleviation’ in the cities, and the integration of the three elements. - Knowledge building will be strongly reflected in the assignment particularly in the task of the Consultant to implement the ‘capacity building’, and ‘training’ agenda to ULGs staff and executives, and in organizing seminars and workshops to discuss on the issue related to the urban reform agenda. We would particularly attach importance to knowledge transfer between the Consultant and its counterpart staff at both central and local governments, as part of our internalization agenda. 3.4 Top Management Oriented The urban reform agenda we would be promoting will be ‘top management oriented’ in the following sense: - The Consultant will adopt the ‘integrated approach’ throughout the implementation of the urban reform agenda. We would like to see the integration of ‘the core reform agenda’ with the ‘other reform agenda’ in implementing the urban reform at both central and local level. The integration of ‘urban services’, ‘local economic development’ and ‘poverty alleviation’ should be given special attention in the assignment. We are also calling for an integrated planning, programming, budgeting, financing and environmental management system in developing urban programs and projects as envisaged by the RPIJM concept of DGCK. We are particularly interested in how the ‘integrated household spending’ structure can be related and integrated with the ‘integrated municipal budget’ structure. The integrated approach will relate the ‘sectoral development’ of urban infrastructure and services with the ‘urban development’ approach in the urban setting. We adopt the integrated approach realizing that the ‘human approach’ can best be dealt with through the ‘urban community development’ concept in the provision of urban infrastructure and services. - Only those in the ‘top management’ and ‘managers’ dealing with the comprehensive approach of urban development such as the Mayor, Bupati and chiefs of the Bappeda or Sekwil are in the best position to overview the development of cities in an integrated manner. These top managers have a different position compared to managers of a more sectoral or compartmentalized function of local government such as public works, education, health services, social affairs, and specialized affairs department of local government. At this level, decisions of urban policies and strategies are made. Obviously, knowledge, analysis and deliberation of issues related to urban policies and strategies should best be deal with at this level, as it will serve as inputs to decision making process at the top managerial level of urban management. 13 - When we deal with the urban reform agenda, both the ‘core reform’ and ‘other reform’, we need the touch of leadership, motivation, and commitment of the top urban managers and their chief of staff and line agencies. The top urban managers are those that can perceived the need for an ‘integrated approach’ to urban development planning, programming and budgeting and can guide the formulation and implementation of urban development strategies and such concept as DGCK’s promoted RPIJM. - Recently, and driven by the democratization and decentralization process there is a need to ensure the smooth and harmonious relationship between the ‘executives’ and’ legislatives’ in public decision making. Hence, the legislators are very important stakeholders that should be involved and continuously consulted, and they should be well informed and committed to the urban reform agenda. Maintaining such good relationship will be an approach that will be adopted by the Consultant in performing its tasks. 3.5 Sustainability - One of the biggest issues in any assignment like this is how to sustain the program in the long run. Sustainability is crucial since institution building efforts can only be achieved in the log run. Based on experience in other institution building program, lack of sustainability can be caused by factors beyond the control of the Consultant, and factors that the Consultant can control. The Consultant for this assignment is aware of the need to ensure the sustainability of the program by applying appropriate approaches in the implementation of the assignment. - The ‘internalization process’ is one that will ensure such long term sustainability for UIDP. The ‘long term vision’ of the program taking into consideration that USDRP is the first step of GOI’s long term goal as we described in our understanding on the objectives of the assignment, is another important factor in defining a gradual, stage by stage but sustained in the longer term agenda of UIDP. Another important aspect of implementing the assignment is the’ information system’ that will be generated during the execution of the assignment, that will provide the data base for future continuation of UIDP. We should further not undermine the skill and professional development being the result of a conscious and unconscious capacity building effort, as part of UIDP, both externally within the Client organization and the target local government, and internally within the members of the Consultant’s team, as well as the stakeholders that will be involved in UIDP implementation. - One aspect of UIDP sustainability is the application of an appropriate replicable system that can be expanded to all ULGs, and avoid a system that is only applicable during the period of the Consultant’s assignment. 3.6 Networking - The Consultant is aware of many other assignments within DGCK, studies and technical assistance projects in other government Ministries funded by many international agencies, as well as in-house programs of these government agencies having similar objectives, or doing similar and complementary work with this UIDP assignment. We do not see these as 14 negative competition or overlaps. On the other hand, we would make sure that we can synergize with all those efforts. We will make sure that we will share information, have regular consultation, and develop a productive network for the common interest of UIDP. - The Consultant will makes sure of similar networking being arranged at the local level, where Consultants will be working in assisting the ULGs with implementing the urban reform agenda. - UIDP will basically institutionalize a networking of DGCK with all its local partners throughout all the provinces and ULGs in Indonesia to sustain a long term urban reform agenda. The networks should be in the form of institutional network, personal network, agenda network, and information network that all together will be part of the UIDP agenda. - We will take note of a program being launched by DGCK since 2005 to institutionalize the RPIJM, which essentially will involve the building of network of capacity building, facilitation and technical assistance to ULGs in medium term planning, programming and budgeting of urban infrastructure in the public works/cipta karya sector. The Consultant will see and observe the development of DGCK RPIJM agenda and investigate how the UIDP network can best be built within the system of RPIJM network, 3.7 Learning Lessons - The Consultant understands of various programs of capacity building and institutional development being carried out in the many occasions, on which UIDP has to learn lessons, not to repeat the mistakes, not to reinvent the wheels, and to make use of good lessons which many be applicable for UIDP. These lessons most relevant for UIDP to learn are among others, the establishment of URDI (Urban and Regional Development Institute), the IUIDP institutional development, the CBUIM project funded by the Asian Development Bank, SCBD in the Ministry of Home Affairs also with Asian Development Bank support, and in house lessons such as being implemented for spatial planning (the ‘planning unit’ concept, and PUSIDO (center of information and documentation for spatial planning). - We have to learn lesson such as, how all information generated by a project funded by international technical assistance, should not be kept by Consultants carrying out the assignments, but should be transferred to institutions that can make the best use for following works of those assignments. Another lesson we can quote is, how institution building project should build a sufficiently ‘critical mass’ to promote acceptance of an idea, and how the idea can breed within the target institution for its longer term growth. Other lesson include, appreciating the role of universities and high learning institutions or research centers as partners for outsourcing of professionals to fill in strategic post in public institutions. Still other lesson we should be aware of is the lack of sustainability of project entities as a means for capacity building and institutional development, such as the experience of CDS project a few years ago supported by the World Bank/City Alliance. 15 3.8 Participatory Approach - Many dissemination (or ‘socialization’) agenda implemented by government Ministries are only confined to public civil servants participants. It seems not to be an easy process to depart from normal government practice and make those opportunities open to a mixture of stakeholders’ participation. We would adopt an approach in the implementation of the assignment to introduce gradual changes in the situation. We hope to promote more participation of the civic society in public deliberation on urban policies and strategies, and particularly on the urban reform agenda and in public decision making. The participatory approach adopted in implementing the assignment is expected to stimulate a multi dialogue among the participants during public deliberation rather than a monologue imposition of messages usually practiced in a ‘socialization’ agenda. - Introducing a wider stakeholder participations is expected to provide an opportunity to find the best mechanism of involving the private sector and communities in formulating urban policy and strategy, and to derive from it a medium and short term urban development plans, programs and budgets. Such planning, programming and budgeting system based on a locally defined policy and strategy is new, as current system is mainly confined to a bureaucratic combined with a legislative process. Involvement of wider stakeholders will also serve as an instrument to ensure that implementation of the urban reform agenda will satisfy the urban communities, and the impact and effectiveness of the agenda can be easily measured. 3.9 Urban Leadership - UIDP should provide an opportunity for DGCK assisted by the Consultant to exercise a national ‘urban leadership’, currently lacking or at least ‘weak’. Central government should be able to utilize the meager resources of UIDP to increase its leadership role for urban development, through a combination of institutional, knowledge and information, professional resources, and network instrument, in the implementation of the assignment. UIDP. The Consultant is confident to assist DGCK through this assignment to lead ULGs, appreciating their local autonomy position, in managing their urban affairs in accordance with a national urban policy and strategy. The ‘urban leadership’ was once identified to be one strategic factor in promoting better urban development management. The right means to mobilize such urban leadership has so far not yet been found. We see UIDP as a good opportunity to implement the ‘urban leadership’ approach throughout the assignment. 3.10 Innovation and Competition - We would encourage ULGs through the UIDP to be continuously innovative in implementing the urban reform agenda. This would continue efforts which previously was done under the IMP project supported by the World Bank, to give the ‘IMP Award’ to urban local governments for any outstanding innovations ULGs can demonstrate in their practice and ideas of urban management. Such an opportunity to win an award for recognized innovations and through a national competition system will be an incentive for ULGs to implement the urban reform agenda. UIDP itself will stimulate such innovation of ideas and practices at the local level by ULGs and also those elements of urban communities. The innovative approaches can take the form of local governments undertaking innovative policies and urban 16 development, but it can also take and is desirable for ULGs to take the leadership to stimulate innovation among business, non-governmental, and community elements in the urban civil society 4. Methodology in Carrying Out the Activities and Obtaining the Expected Outputs We have conceived the output of UIDP beyond the ‘technical outputs’ such as ‘business plan’, ‘strategic plan’, ‘briefing notes’, ‘periodical reports’, etc. UIDP will have produced meaningful outputs if at the end of the program one can clearly observe the program being carried out with enthusiasm and commitment, leadership and political support, and the program is well sustained and internalized within the Central and local government. We also expect UIDP program will sustain in an innovative and positively competitive manner, and that the program will have identified and mobilized resources for the succession of UIDP. To ensure the expected outputs can be achieved, the Consultant’s methodological approach will be based on the following principles. 4.1 Focus on Professional Back-up Support to Urban Management at the Local Level. - We would like to focus UIDP on establishing an adequate professional back- up support to the urban management at the local level. This is crucial in view of the new system of directly electing Mayors and Bupatis or the Pilkada. The ‘pilkada’ provides stronger legitimacy to its urban managers to lead urban development in every city. The system however, can not guarantee the directly elected Mayor and Bupati will all have the professional background and capability to manage urban development. We should therefore make sure that the elected Mayor and Bupati will have the professional back-up support he needs to manage the development of his or her city in a technically, economically, financially, socially, politically and environmentally sound manner. We have to persuade Mayors and Bupatis to be interested and willing to commit to build such professional back-up for the city. - Learning from the experience of cities in China, where every city has established an institution called ‘Institute for Urban Planning and Design’ we are thinking in similar line to establish such an institution in the Indonesian cities. In China the institution is established by the Municipality, but once being created it can operate as a semi-governmental unit. It has the freedom to establish its own salary scale which is different from the normal government civil service. In such framework the institution is an ideal place for professionals to work, having an incentive of reward system that is not bound by government scale of remuneration, and yet working closely with the local government bureaucracy. - Our idea of implementing UIDP is to promote the establishment of local ‘vocal points of UIDP’ in every city. These ‘local UIDP centers’ will serve as the focus for implementation of the urban reform agenda. In institutionalizing these local UIDP units we would be working in cooperation with the Ministry of Home Affairs, and also with the Indonesian Association of Municipalities (APEKSI) and Indonesian Association of Kabupatens (APKASI). We will also approach the Indonesian Association of Local Parliaments or DPRD. 17 - If fund is available we would like to invite one Chinese resource person from the Institute for Urban Planning and Design to tell Indonesian cities about the experience of China. Aside from the Institute, China is also a place where we can learn about the set up of professional associations for urban planning and development.. 4.2 Central Capacity Building - As we propose in the ‘Approach’ (see Knowledge Building) we propose UIDP as an instrument to assist DGCK to perform as a ‘knowledge center’ for the urban reform agenda. This will be a major shift in the role and function of a central institution like DGCK viz a viz the local government. Moving from an agency having performing the national role of ‘urban infrastructure development’ towards a ’local capacity building institution’ and facilitating the implementation of urban reform agenda will be a big challenge for the institution. But being the executing agency o USDRP and UIDP provide a good opportunity for DGCK to strengthen its own role and capacity to become the national vocal point for urban development in Indonesia. The Consultant is aware of this opportunity and will use UIDP as an instrument for central capacity building in implementing the national urban reform agenda. - The central capacity building will be conducted among other through the ‘internalization process’ (see Internalization in the Approach Section) where we perceive our tasks as having to implement hand in hand with the executing agency, and the Consultant role is to assist the government and not to do for the government. We will therefore ensure that DGCK will appoint professionally qualified and motivated team of counterpart staff, supported with a strong political will and commitment by the management. We have to discuss this issue with the management of DGCK at the beginning of the assignment. - One important issue in the central capacity building is the relationship between DGCK with other Central agencies dealing with urban development. The issue has been discussed among the agencies concerned for quite some time, but without agreement on how the Inter Ministerial Cooperation for Urban Development will be institutionalized. For the time being there exist a ‘core team for coordination of urban development’ functioning without any formal structure. We understand that for UIDP an Inter Ministerial Steering Committee (IMSC) will be formed to guide the direction and basic policy for UIDP. The Consultant plans to cooperate with the other Consultant to be assigned for the ‘National Urban Policy and Strategy’ to contribute to the resolution of the central coordination for urban development issue. This is strategic for UIDP as we perceive the central capacity to have one important feature of a unified approach at the central government level in addressing the urban development issues. This should be the basic objective of central capacity building and an essential part of the urban reform agenda at the central level. 4.3 Strengthening the Role of the Province. - Our target for institutional development in the UIDP will be cities (Kota and Kabupaten). Looking into the future we have a target of more than 500 cities all over the country, so a basic methodology has to be found to implement UIDP in the most effective manner. The number of target cities and the spread of the cities in geographical location al over the 33 Provinces of Indonesia make it inefficient for the Central government to reach all those cities. Using a basic simple logic, UIDP has to be implemented using a hierarchical structure of delivery system, namely 18 from Central government through the role of the Province to reach the Kota and Kabupaten. - Fortunately, DGCK as the executing agency of UIDP has already adopted the system in the implementation of facilitation to local governments for the RPIJM. In implementing RPIJM, DGCK has established a three tier ‘task force’ called the ‘Satgas RPIJM” at the Central, Provincial and Kota/Kabupaten level. The rationale is logical, although the operation is not very simple. But we believe it is in the right direction, and UIDP can be instrumental to strengthen the role of the Province in guiding urban development in each of the Province. - The role of the Province in urban development is still unclear. Although in previous ‘urban development projects’ or UDP supported by the World Bank, ADB and other lending agencies, several Provinces supported the urban projects by taking the burden of sub loan from the Central government to the Province and also by allocating the Provincial budget for the rupiah counterpart. This is the case for instance in the drainage component of urban development project in several cities. But even in those days of UDP, urban projects were mostly prepared and developed by the Central government, from the planning until the project execution stage. The dominance of Central government played down the role of the Province, plus the limitation of Provincial development budget which had to be distributed for urban and a major non-urban component of development in the Province. Looking ahead we see it as a great opportunity if the Province can be strengthened and given increased role in promoting the urban reform agenda within the framework of UIDP. 4.4 Integrating UIDP with RPIJM and ‘Urban Policy and Strategy’ - As we have indicated in the previous section, we propose to implement UIDP by strengthening the role of the Province and making use of the three tier institutional model of RPIJM. Even more we are thinking of integrating the implementation of he urban reform agenda with the RPIJM and ‘urban policy and strategy’ development. The RPIJM concept requires all ULGs to define each city’s RPIJM (medium term program) for the public works / Cipta Karya infrastructure based on the ‘urban development strategy’ of the city. Currently we are aware that the RPIJM and the ‘urban policy and strategy’ have not been fully integrated yet. - We are of the opinion that it would be ideal if the institutional structure for implementation of RPIJM, the ‘urban policy and strategy’, and the UIDP urban reform agenda can be integrated as one solid program. Still we think we have to be cautious in integrating the three elements of urban development facilitation system. We will follow the development of the RPIJM, and make sure that the system will not be overburdened with inclusion of UIDP urban reform agenda. In the initial stage we will do the agenda in parallel and continuous cooperation with each other, but then later decide the proper timing for including UIDP in the system. The timing will depend on the absorption capacity of the Province, and may differ from Province to Province, and may have to be undertaken in stages and based on selection of the Provinces. - Scheme 3 illustrates the link of UIDP Management with the National Urban Development Policy and Strategy and RPIJM 19 Urban Development Management Framework 20 4.5 Use of Modern Information Technology - In our approach, we have explained the need for DGCK as the central vocal point of urban development to establish a solid network of institutional structure, people, agenda and information linking with cities through the Province. This would ideally be created by establishing an efficient data base and information shared by all the stakeholders of urban development. Current development of information and communication technology makes it possible for establishing such a system of network. We will start building such network in the implementation of UIDP, and in particular in monitoring the progress of ULGs urban reform agenda, and linking the system with RPIJM and the ‘urban policy and strategy’. - This means that we would like to strengthen the information system development component of UIDP, much stronger than envisaged in the TOR for this assignment. We assume funding to develop the information system can be found within or outside the UIDP Management assignment. 4.6 Multidimensional Urban Development Agenda - Based on the traditional function of ‘public works’ DGCK had focused its program activities on the infrastructure sector, more specifically on human settlements infrastructure with priority in the urban infrastructure. Infrastructure development tends to be ‘supply driven’ leading to the need to progressive mobilization of financial resources, including a large amount of international lending. The sector has contributed to the large accumulated international debt aggravating the country’s economic and financial crisis in the post 1998 era. Based on the experience, when later DGCK was transferred into an ‘urban’ and more later to become an ‘urban and rural’ DG, new ideas were proposed to change the ‘supply driven’ towards a more ‘demand driven’ approach in urban infrastructure development. The new approach suggested DGCK in guiding urban development to look at the multidimensional problems of urban development beyond physical infrastructure. The reformed urban policy suggested DGCK to adopt the ‘urban approach’ to include local economic development as a strategic instrument for urban communities’ economic and financial empowerment. The new approach is expected to assure long term sustainability of urban infrastructure and services provision and development. - One impact of the new policy of the government was the direction given in the preparation of the USDRP project to accommodate an ‘open menu’ proposal of projects from ULGs. In the earlier stage of USDRP preparation, a wider range of sector, including health, education, agriculture, etc was proposed by ULGs who expressed interest in using the proceeds of USDRP loan. The initial enthusiasm was later overruled by the Decree 35 of the Ministry of Finance suggesting the use of international loan resources to favor direct cost recovery projects instead of social oriented projects. The financial policy was then translated to the understanding, that only those ULGs prepared to accept the resources from USDRP as a sub loan to the local government, will be included as the loan beneficiaries. Based on the revised policy, USDRP finally agreed to finance such projects as market development, terminal development, and solid waste management, all being urban infrastructure, but deviating from traditional public works/Cipta Karya sector. 21 - We have noted the ‘other reform agenda’ of USDRP and UIDP assignment include ‘local economic development’ and ‘poverty alleviation’. This particular aspect of the assignment is consistent with the multidimensional approach of urban development, and in the attainment of GOI’s long term goal of achieving ‘self reliant’ urban communities. - The TOR does not specify the task of Consultant to prepare TOR and assist in the recruitment of specific Consultant to assist the ULGs in implementing ‘the other reform agenda’ including LED and poverty alleviation. Our assumption is for the UIDP Management Consultant to undertake as a first step the upstream work for a national agenda of local economic development. We would implement the expected initial work, but recommend the Client to seek additional resources to recruit specific Consultant to provide assistance to participating ULGs on this particular aspect of LED ad poverty alleviation at the local level. This will ensure that we will implement an integrated urban reform agenda consisting of both ‘the core reform agenda’ and ‘the other reform agenda’, as strongly expressed in the TOR of UIDP Management assignment. - Scheme 4 provides a summary of USDRP Menu. 22 Concept of USDRP Menu 23 4.7 Expansion of UIDP to Non-USDRP Cities - The TOR for this assignment specifies the expectation to implement the urban reform agenda in ‘at least 13 reform-oriented ULGs’ (assumed to be participating in the USDRP. The list of 13 cities is changing in the implementation of USDRP as several cities withdrew from the project or were cancelled out. Looking at the original list of cities participating in USDRP, substantial number of those cities is in the Sulawesi Island. Most of these participating cities were small or secondary cities. Since we are aiming at a wider range of cities and to cover cities in other Provinces in Indonesia we propose to include more cities representing the urban areas in Indonesia for the UIDP reform agenda. Although cities o USDRP will remain to be the target of UIDP but we will invite other cities outside the USDRP to be involved in the UIDP, and to commit to the urban reform agenda. - We hope Semarang and Yogyakarta will continue or rejoin with the USDRP cities, as both represent a case of large metropolitan cities in Java, the most urbanized island of Indonesia. In choosing cities outside USDRP we will consider how we can relate with the selection of cities for the RPIJM agenda of DGCK. Taking larger cities will have a different impact of UIDP, as urban reform may have a better impact to cities that have more complexity of problems. It will be more difficult and complex, but it may also be easier for cities that have higher degree of urbanization where the human resources have higher education and are used to work in an urban institutional set up compared to small cities. - The selection of cities for UIDP will be crucial for the expansion of the program and the reform agenda. If not too many cities will be selected because of resources constraint, at least we will invite participation of cities outside the USDRP cities in the UIDP capacity building, human resources development, including training agenda about the urban reform. This is the methodology we will adopt to expand the UIDP to cover wider geographical scope of Indonesia, which is one of the objective of UIDP institutionalization. 4.8 UIDP2 in USDRP2 - UIDP is conceived as ‘the first step’ in a long term agenda of urban reform. This means that subsequent steps for UIDP will be needed and the Consultant will propose the next program of UIDP. Since in the UIDP assignment, a task as been included in the TOR to assist in the preparation of USDRP2, it is logical for the Consultant to investigate and propose UIDP2 to be incorporated in the USDRP2 program. - It is too early to predict the format of USDRP2, but our preliminary thought is inclined to address the multidimensional urban issues beyond infrastructure development. This will be consistent with the earlier thinking of making USDRP allowable for an ‘open menu’ proposal from ULGs. In such a format, it would be possible to include wider spectrum of urban development agenda, including efforts to promote local economic development and poverty alleviation. The precedence for such inclusion can already be traced, if we look at the ‘urban poverty project’ or UPP supported by the World Bank and implemented by DGCK. We are therefore aware that preparation of USDRP2 will also require the Consultant to take a closer look at other urban related project such as UPP, including its institutional structure within the executing agency, and how it could interrelate or being integrated into future USDRPs. 24 - Looking back at DGCK’s agenda in the past, there were times when DGCK entered into cooperation with ‘social oriented’ agencies such as UNICEF, in which the ‘social aspects’ of urban development were addressed by integrating the social development sectors, including health, education, youth and women development, and perhaps in the near future also crime, social disintegration, and other social disharmony in the Indonesian cities. We are interested to explore these issues also in the UIDP assignment. 4.9 Breeding the UIDP Culture - Beside DGCK’s RPIJM the UIDP should become a new culture of tasks for all public works/Cipta Karya human resources from the Central through the Province to the Kota and Kabupaten. When the RPIJM was first launched in 2005, the program failed to take off because of lack of internal involvement within DGCK. Learning from its past mistake, DGCK starting this year has ‘breed the culture of RPIJM’ with a very effective internalization process. Recently the DG issued instruction for the establishment of a three tier task force group or the Satgas RPIJM at the Central DGCK, Provincial and Kota/Kabupaten level. Not stopping at creating task forces for RPIJM, DGCK has issued instructions to all its central project managers in the Province, and all city coordinators and management consultants in the Province to provide an active assistance to Provincial and local governments for RPIJM. These actions have proven the strong commitment and the political back up it provides for the institutionalization of RPIJM. Only recently three regional workshops for socialization of the RPIJM have been convened in Medan, Semarang and Denpasar for the Western, Central and Eastern region of Provincial and Kota/Kabupaten public works/Cipta Karya entities. The above actions of DGCK illustrates how the agency is working had to breed the culture of RPIJM within its own institution and its counterparts in the Province and Kota/Kabupaten. We are confident that in the not too distant future, when we ask about RPIJM in all Provinces and Kota/Kabupaten we will observe that everybody has been informed and has an understanding about RPIJM. This is a repetition of DGCK former achievement in institutionalizing and breeding the culture of IUIDP. - We are confident that UIDP deserves similar ‘breeding of culture’ by DGCK and the central government to make it work and to gain acceptance and commitments from ULGS. We support the approach taken for RPIJM and support positively the actions taken by DGCK. Much needs to be done to improve the quality of socialization, but we applaud DGCK for taking the right action. As we emphasized in the previous section, our methodology of integrating UIDP with RPIJM and the ‘urban policy and strategy’ institutionalization and breeding the culture of these in an integrated way is consistent and right. 4.10 Preserving the Continuum and Sustainability - UIDP should not be perceived as an entirely new and isolated agenda. If broken down in activities, partially the activities have many predecessors. Take for instance the ‘capacity building’ and ‘institutional development’ components we can trace a previous similar activity undertaken by the CBUIM (Capacity Building for Urban Infrastructure Management) project supported by the Asian Development Bank. The former ‘urban development projects’ or UDPS always included as part of the project two action plans, namely ‘the LIDAP (Local Institutional Development Action Plan)’ and ‘the RIAP (Revenue Improvement Action Plan)’. Although its predecessors differ from UIDP but it contained experiences and practices very much similar to the ones in UIDP. Another example is in the procurement reform, where in the past the Ministry of Public Works applied the R1 and R2 (confidential) 25 forms to prevent corruptive practices by asking all firms winning a contract award to fill a statement regarding possible ‘kickbacks’ and ‘commissions’ demanded by the bureaucracy. - If we follow closely the evolution of urban development management from the past until the present, and looking into the future we will see the continuum in approaches and efforts. Moving from ‘sectoral and centralized’ towards ‘integrated and decentralized’ approach, from ‘top down’ towards ‘more democratic and bottom up approach’, from ‘urban infrastructure’ towards a more holistic ‘multidimensional urban development’ approach, from IUIDP (integrated urban infrastructure development program) towards RPIJM and perhaps later to IUDP (without infrastructure) approach, and from ‘one reform’ towards the ‘another reform’. Preserving the continuum will ensure that we will not loose or forget good lessons and successes as well as mistakes and failures in the past, and to build on those lessons learned for UIDP - UIDP Management Sustainability can be summarized to have the following components: (1) The Preparation o Future UIDP Agenda, (2) The Shift from UIDP as a Program towards UIDF as a Facility, (3) Implementation of UIDP Reform Agenda Nationwide, (4) The Establishment of UIDP Information System and Data Base, and (5) The Establishment of Monitoring and Evaluation System to monitor and evaluate institutional, personnel, information and agenda performances. - This component of UIDP Management sustainability is presented in Scheme 5. 26 Component of UIDP Sustainability 27 5. Degree of Detail of Outputs As we envisaged in our Methodology, we look at the substantial outputs of UIDP as the real improvements being achieved in the implementation of the urban reform agenda, such as a sustained and internalized program, enthusiasm and commitment as well as political support and leadership, improved system of management practices, and others While if the proposal is requested to comment on the degree of detail of outputs it refers to more ‘technical outputs’ of UIDP such as ‘ the business plan’, ‘the strategic plan’ etc as indicated in the TOR for the assignment. We would like to assure the Client that we will produce the ‘technical outputs’ in sufficient detail to describe the substantial outputs of the assignment as we have elaborated in our Methodology. 6. The Anticipated Problems and Its Importance Any reform agenda implies change, and often big changes. Therefore, reform agenda will have to face resistances from those who are negatively affected by the change. To introduce reform in an institution would require an institution having the proper mandate, the drive and the strength of bringing the change. The issue becomes more difficult in the political setting of administrative decentralization as we are facing in Indonesia. UIDP is anticipating to face a number of critical problems such as the following: 6.1 Mandate of DGCK in Guiding Urban Development. - DGCK has been recognized to perform as a leading agency in urban development in the past three decades. It has the role of providing financial and technical assistance and to guide local governments in the provision of basic urban services such as clean water, waste water disposal, urban drainage, solid waste disposal, housing and building, and a wide range of other human settlements infrastructure and services. It performance in leading urban development was enhanced through the ‘integrated urban infrastructure development program’ approach bringing large amount of investment in the urban sector from many international lending agencies to all cities throughout the country. DGCK has a traditional intimate working relationship with other urban related agencies such as Bappenas, Ministry of Home Affairs and Ministry of Finance through a solid inter Ministerial teamwork in preparing, reviewing, deciding, and negotiating urban development loan projects for cities. In the nineties the Inter- Ministerial coordination was institutionalized with the establishment of TKPP (Coordination Team for Urban Development). The Inter-Ministerial teamwork inclines to weaken in recent years. - There was a period during the structure of the Ministry of Public Works became the Ministry of Settlements and Regional Development/Infrastructure, and DGCK became the DG for ‘urban and rural) development’ when the urban mandate of the agency was reinforced in the organizational structure. The advantage position of the urban mandate was later weakened when DGCK was returned to its original structure to become a ‘sectorally oriented’ agency. Although weakening in its mandate, we observe the positive sign of DGCK’s commitment to lead urban development. This is among others reflected by (1) Issuance of the Ministry of Public Works Regulation on the ‘Establishment of National Urban Policy and Strategy, (2) Launching the RPIJM agenda nation-wide, basically reestablishing the; integrated urban 28 infrastructure development program’ for all Kota and Kabupaten as an instrument to guide urban development in the cities, and (3) The implementation of the USDRP project and particularly this assignment of UIDP Management. - Although we do not have doubts in DGCK mandate and commitment to urban development, we are hoping DGCK as the executing agency of UIDP will provide a stronger leadership in implementing the urban reform agenda. This leadership’s role will have to be articulated in the following ways: (1) Recognition and cohesive action by all the DG in the Ministry, to support DGCK position in urban development; this implies the commitment of the Minister himself to lead urban development, (2) Recognition of and sharing the responsibility of other urban related agencies at the central government with DGCK to guide urban development and particularly in implementing the urban reform agenda, and (3) Recognition of ULGs in the role of DGCK to guide urban development, (4) The function of urban development be well institutionalized in the organizational structure of DGCK, by among others clarifying the line agency within DGCK having the responsibility of urban development, and (5) The commitment of DGCK to sustain implementation of RPIJM, the urban policy and strategy, and the UIDP urban reform agenda with the same enthusiasm and imposition power as it has been proven in the later half of 2007. 6.2 Staffing Constraint. - We are aware that our expectation cannot be realistic in view of the current staff position in the government, and particularly UIDP will face the following constraint of staffing o counterpart the agenda: (1) There is generally a serious weakening trend of staff within DGCK caused by a backlog of recruitment and training of professional staff during the past decade of reform era, (2) Because of the staff shortage and insufficiency of recruitment, the current available staff are heavily overloaded, and it would be unrealistic to expect to add more burden to their assignment, (3) DGCK staff are working in a predominantly ‘technical’ or ‘engineering’ environment, and which is different from ‘capacity building’ and ‘institutional development’ requiring interest and focus on human resources development and the use of ‘social engineering’, including local economic development and poverty alleviation. Although DGCK in the past had the experience of managing and implementing ‘social oriented development planning’ this portion of the work was a minor portion in the overall agenda of the institution. We fully understand the implication of implementing UIDP to the burden to DGCK staff, as the agenda will need special group of professional staff assigned to the UIDP work. 6.3 Access to Local Governments - Recent decentralization laws increased awareness of local governments to assume responsibility of local autonomous functions assigned to them by the laws. Decentralization has also changed the relationship of central and provincial with local governments. In a centralized system it is easier for Central government to impose certain rules and policy to the local governments. It should be noted that as regulated by the laws, the Province has parallel status with Kota and Kabupaten in its position as local governments, although it still has the function of representing or serving as an administrative arm of the Central government. The Provincial position is 29 therefore constrained in over viewing and guiding the Kota and Kabupaten local governments. The changing relationship between the Central, Province and the Kota and Kabupaten is expected to be an obstacle for central agency like DGCK to impose on an agenda such the urban reform agenda. - Before decentralization laws, Central government could have better access to local governments through their ‘centralized authority’ and through their ‘funding power’. With the changing system of channeling funds from Central government to local governments through the DAU and DAK, more and more funds are allocated to local governments as a ’block grant’, this would allow local governments to have the freedom to decide on the use of the grants. Another conventional channel of Central grants is through the allocation of Central budget through the ‘sectoral Ministry’. Central Ministry can therefore use its sectorally allocated budget as a ‘funding power’ to impose o certain policy or rules to local governments. - In this case of UIDP, DGCK can still use its ‘funding power’, by using the Central budget allocated to the Ministry, which in the past two years are still significantly large; and secondly using the USDRP loan funds which requires receiving local governments to commit to implement the urban ‘core reform agenda’. There is still doubt however, whether these advantages will sustain in the long run, and if not what alternative instrument can be used by Central government to exercise stronger influence to local governments in shaping their policy in line with the national policy and strategy. The Consultant has proposed in our approach to develop another aspect of Central government power, namely its ‘knowledge power’ about which we have elaborated in previous sections. 6.4 Potential Overlap with Other USDRP Consultants We understand that because of late recruitment of the UIDP Consultant CPMU has requested its Management Consultant to undertake a ‘bridging assignment for UIDP Management’. This Consultant will certainly take over the tasks of the bridging consultant. The bridging consultant for UIDP has already prepared the TOR for the consultants to assist the ULGs in implementing the core reform agenda. Some confusion still needs to be clarified during implementation of the urban reform agenda. We are given the terms of reference that included the monitoring, supervision and evaluation of the core reform agenda, including the work of the consultants to ULGs. Seen from the viewpoint of UIDP as part of the USDRP ‘project’, and therefore the Management Consultant to CPMU will also undertake similar supervision to these consultants to ULGs. There is a potential overlap on this support to implementation task (Task B) that needs to be discussed with and clarified by the client. 7. Technical Approach to Address the Problems The problems we have described in the previous section are not technical ones, and cannot be approached by technical means. We would rather look at those problems as ‘constraints’ to be considered in the implementation of UIDP assignment. The constraints relate to a high level political issue that lies beyond the mandate of neither the Consultant nor DGCK as the executing agency to resolve. Based on experience, the following might help in dealing with those issues we will also try if it can work in UIDP: 30 - Looking at a possible cooperation with the Ministry of Home Affairs (MOHA). The reform for decentralization has changed the role of MOHA, making the agency very much less powerful compared to before the reform took place. But still the culture of the agency’s influence to local governments and for local government to wait for MOHA instruction before acting on certain policy have not changed. In implementing the urban reform agenda, DGCK can approach MOHA to get the agency’s cooperation to use its influence to ensure the cooperation of local governments to the agenda. Technical agency such as DGCK however is usually very cautious in soliciting such cooperation from MOHA to avoid the agenda being pulled to other directions beyond the control of the executing agency of UIDP. - One other possible means is for DGCK as the executing agency to act on its own initiative and as a central government authority to instruct local governments to follow the urban reform agenda. Departing from past practice when a technical agency will rely on instruction from MOHA to impose on certain policy to local governments, recently DGCK has taken steps on its own and directly to urge local governments to comply with certain policy and action. This has been followed by DGCK when instructing local governments to prepare RPIJM as a requirement for getting budgetary support from central government in development on urban public works/Cipta Karya infrastructure and services. DGCK has also appealed to the Governor of all the Province of Indonesia to support the RPIJM by establishing the RPIJM Provincial task force, and for the Province to urge local governments, in this case Kota and Kabupaten to form compatible RPJM ask forces. This sole action of DGCK as a technical agency towards local governments will have to be observed whether it works and can effectively move local governments to follow the agency’s instructions. - There is a need for DGCK to confirm its commitment to deal with the urban reform agenda by clarifying its internal institutional arrangement in dealing with the urban sector. As the agency is currently organized based on ‘sectoral infrastructure’ focus, it should decide on where the task and role of urban development will be placed in the institution. In the absence of an ‘urban Directorate’ it might be a logical reason to appoint Directorate Bina Program of DGCK to manage the urban agenda such as USDRP, especially for the tasks of planning, programming, budgeting, and integrated project management including UIDP Management. Another option, and this seems to be the initial thinking during the early step of DGCK organization development, is to assign ‘urban development’ to the ‘Human Settlements Development Directorate’ or Bangkim. The choice between the two options need to be clarified by the management of DGCK as the urban program will be expanding including implementation of the urban reform agenda carried by the UIDP agenda. - The issue of staffing is a more difficult one, not only for the central DGCK but also it’s Provincial and local governments counterpart. The need for qualified and motivated staff to implement a nationwide urban development agenda is significantly a huge agenda deserving a special attention and special manpower development agenda. UIDP should investigate the most appropriate design of an urban manpower development agenda, and learn from failure and unsustainable manpower development project such as the CBUIM, MDP of the Ministry of Public Works, and others. - The issue of potential overlap between UIDP Management and CPMU Consultants is not too much a problem, and we are convinced it can be resolved easily by consultation with the client and USDRP CPMU and with the goodwill and understanding of every party. 31 8. Compatibility of Methodologies With Proposed Approach The relationship between the ‘methodology’ and ‘approach’ proposed for UIDP is a complex one, much more complex than what can be described in this section. There is an intricate relationship between one approach and the other approaches, and between one or group of approach (singly and together) with the methodology. The following highlight the important relationships. - One approach that ties together the methodologies is the ‘sustainability’. If we would like UIDP sustainable, then we have to address the agenda of reform at the local. Province and Central level (point 4.1, 4.2, 4.3). - The adopted methodology of Integrating UIDP with RPIJM, Multidimensional Urban Agenda, and UIDP2 in USDRP2 (see point 4.4, 4.6 and 4.8) are interrelated to ensure the sustainability of UIDP. This is true if the ‘other reform agenda’ containing local economic development and poverty reduction, and delivery of urban services will be accommodated in future UIDP, beyond the current focus of urban infrastructure development, or confined to the public works/Cipta Karya sector of services. We have explained this elaborately in the section on approach and methodology. Integrating the multisectoral urban development relates with two key approach of ‘top management oriented’ urban management, and expectation of a stronger ‘urban leadership’ (3.4 and 3.9). - The use of modern IT (see 4.5) is an essential tool for sustaining UIDP by setting up the data base of both the ‘core reform agenda’ and the ‘other reform agenda’ envisaged in UIDP. Breeding the culture and preserving the continuum (see 4.9 and 4.10), is another strategic element in sustaining UIDP as we experienced in our earlier experiences in institutionalizing IUIDP, the RPIJM, and other DGCK promoted initiatives. - On the ‘approach’ side we emphasized the linkage between ‘sustainability’ with three other approaches, namely internalization, networking and the urban leadership (see 3.2, 3.6 and 3.9), as the three elements of approaches contain links between individual and institutional roles and personal relationships in ensuring sustainability of UIDP in the post project period. - The ‘human factor’ we proposed under the ‘human approach’ is consistent with other approaches putting the human element n the forefront of the approach such as in the internalization process, knowledge building, networking, participatory approach, urban leadership, and innovation and competition (see 3.1, 3.2, 3.3,3.6, 3.8, 3.9 and 3.10) - The approach and methodology for UIDP will be adopted in bringing the ‘’technical output’ of the project towards the achievement of the functional outputs of UDIP being the ‘sustained UIDP agenda in operation’,’ the internalization and institutionalization of UIDP well established, ‘the network and information system to support UIDP created’, ‘the political leadership, will, commitment, and support assured’, and ‘UIDP is well accepted and culturally bred’. Ultimately it will achieve GOI’s long term objective of building ‘self reliant urban communities’. Scheme 6 illustrates the highlight of these linkages, among the approaches, and between the approach and methodology in the execution of UIDP as we propose. 32 Linkage of approach, methodology and outputs 33 B. Work Plan. l. Phasing, Activities, Content and Duration Following the logic of sequence and consistent with the approach and methodology adopted in executing the assignment, we have divided the whole activities of the assignment in four phases, as the following: Phase I: Establishment of the Team (immediate after mobilization until end of 2nd month or 2 months duration) In this period the team of UIDP Management has to be firmly and well established in the physical environment setting, as well as the strategic environmental setting. We have to acquaint ourselves with the whole network with whom we will be working, interconnected, and associated and to make ourselves known to the environment. Phase II: Conceptualization of the Agenda and its Institutionalization (from the 3rd until the end of 8th month after mobilization or 6 months duration) This is the crucial period of exploiting the whole knowledge and experience of all members of the team to get a clear idea about both the UIDP Agenda and how it is going to be institutionalized to secure its sustainability. It will be a period of reading and going through the documents, and meetings with our stakeholders and network institution will be essential to obtain first hand input about what has been done so far in the subject. We should be sure not to overdo and redo the work that has been explored by others, but we should build from there on. Phase III: Implementation of UIDP (from the 9th until the end of 26th month or 17 months duration). In this phase the ‘implementation of the UIDP Agenda’ will be conducted in the selected cities of USDRP. As we suggested in the Methodology we will have to go through three tiers of implementing the UIDP Agenda, from the Central to the Province and through the Province we will reach out to the pilot cities. This will involve a capacity building at the Central level to establish a ‘knowledge center’ at this level, getting agreement and approval from the Province to serve as agent of facilitation, providing technical assistance, and monitoring and evaluation of the progress of UIDP Agenda as t will be implemented at the city (Kota and Kabupaten) level. We understand the implementation of the UIDP Reform Agenda at the local level will be assigned to special Consultants that will be working with each of the ULGs to implement the agenda. The selection of cities will be a crucial point in this phase as we have to decide whether we should stick ourselves to USDRP cities, and if so whether we should take all USDRP cities or select priorities among them, or whether we will select Province and cities outside USDRP for the purpose of expanding and sustaining UIDP in the future. This will also the be the phase for investigating the need and if so the feasibility of transferring UIDP into an established institution or facility or UIDF. We will also take up one strategic point in this phase assigned in the terms of reference, namely the selection and identification of criteria for eligibility for the next USDRP or USDRP2. Learning from the experience of implementing the UIDP Agenda in 34 this phase will guide us to the direction and format of future UIDP Agenda after this UIDP Management project will be completed. Phase IV: Sustaining UIDP (from the 27th until the end of 30th month or 3 months duration at the end f the Project). As we reiterated throughout our approach and methodology, ‘sustainability’ will be the key feature of the UIDP Agenda. Therefore, before closing, we have to devote the last phase of the assignment to make sure that the UIDP Agenda will sustain after this assignment will be completed. This would mean that we have to concentrate our mind to define clearly what will be the next steps for UIDP, if it will be replicated in similar or different fashion in other Provinces and places within a nation-wide agenda. We have to assist the Client to decide whether the UIDF should be set up and the concrete steps to establish the facility, and we have to deal with the whole institutionalization and internalization aspects of UIDP. The activities in each Phase and the content of each activity are described as the following: Phase I Establishment of the Team: 1. Physical Establishment: The RFP suggested that an office space be rented to accommodate the team, located close to the Ministry of Public Works. This would be ideal, although the funds may not allow for renting an office close to the Ministry, as the Ministry is located in one of the most expensive prime location of the city. From past experience the Ministry has some buildings used to accommodate Consultants working on assignment by the Ministry. If the Ministry may have some space vacant, it would be the best place for the UIDP Management team to locate in one of the Ministry’s building. This has to be negotiated with the client. 2. Work strategy and tasks division: The team must define its work strategy and tasks division as a condition for the team to work harmoniously as a team. The work strategy and tasks division will be designed by the Team Leader, but has to be discussed with and agreed upon by the team members. Once agreed the work strategy and tasks division will guide each member of the team in performing each of their individual task and in interacting as a team. In preparing this proposal we learn the lesson of the difficulty to produce an integrated and consistent concept from team members coming from many different backgrounds. The work strategy and clear tasks division is meant to overcome such difficulty. 3. Establishment of counterpart team, IMSC and Stakeholder Forum: This activity is very strategic for the internalization and institutionalization of UIDP Agenda, and will be a tough part of activities in this Phase. We are aware of the shortage of staff in the Ministry, and it would be not easy to obtain a deal of getting adequate number of the agency’s best staff devoting sufficient time for UIDP Management. Forming the IMSC is another difficult task, as based on experience it is not easy to nominate the most suitable staff representing each of the agency member of IMSC. It usually takes some time and we have to be patient to get a decision of the government regarding the composition of the IMSC and to have the legality of forming the committee signed timely. We have proposed to 35 form a Stakeholders Forum for two reasons : one, it is a condition for implementing a participatory UIDP Agenda, and secondly, based on past experience Steering committees do not function effectively due to the heavy load of work of its members who are fr the most part high ranking officials. 4. Networking: We are aware of a situation where UIDP Management will be operating in an environment with many studies and analysis ongoing or completed, on similar or related subjects to UIDP Agenda. We have to acquaint ourselves with those similar and related activities either in house or by consultants within he USDRP, DGCK, agencies outside the Ministry and DGCK, and ones driven by technical assistance projects from many international agencies. 5. Introducing UIDP Management: While we are learning from what others are doing, we also need to introduce ourselves and to make our activities in the UIDP Management known by our stakeholders and network agencies. Phase II A: Conceptualization of UIDP Agenda USDRP has outlined two basic urban reform agenda, one is the ‘core reform agenda’ and secondly, ‘the other reform agenda’ (we prefer to refer to the second agenda as the ‘strategic reform agenda’). Both urban reform agenda are well explained and defined in the terms of reference, and the accompanying documents attached to the terms of reference. For the purpose of implementing both reform agenda, both needs to be formulated as a ‘program’ or ‘project’ to be implemented under the guidance of this UIDP Management assignment. Hence, the UIDP Project Manual will elaborate to operation of the UIDP Urban Reform Program in more detail. During the conceptualization phase, we will firm up the ‘design of the program’, we will ‘analyze all key data’ and ‘define all the upstream tasks to be performed’. In this phase we will further conceptualize the UIDP Urban Reform Agenda by: 1. Appreciating existing concepts which have been developed by others, including the ones by MTIS of CPMU of the USDRP, and as elaborated in the attached documents of the terms of reference. We observe that more materials are available on the ‘core reform agenda’, while not much have been developed as the ‘other (strategic) reform agenda such as local economic development and poverty alleviation, delivery of urban services, and others. Because of this gap, we will in this assignment undertake more works to define the ‘other (strategic0 reform agenda’ so as to balance between the two main urban reform agenda. 2. Generating the team concept: we may agree and use existing concepts but the team members will deliberate to clarify and elaborate those concepts, and also to generate our own concepts. We will conceptualize based on the team deliberation regarding the two main reform agenda of UIDP to guide implementation of the agenda in the pilot cities in the third phase of the assignment. 3. Conducting policy dialogues and prepare briefing notes: at this stage it would be desirable to conduct policy dialogues to interact with our stakeholders to test the concepts and ideas we have developed through 36 our internal discussions. The first workshop of UIDP will be an ideal forum to implement the policy dialogues. 4. Information sharing: Gathering inputs from our stakeholders: we will organize and systematize the inputs from our stakeholders to consolidate our thoughts about both the ‘core reform’ and ‘strategic reform’ agenda. Phase II B: Institutionalization of UIDP. The terms of reference for the assignment requires the Consultant to produce a ‘strategic plan’, a ‘business plan’, a ‘detail financing plan’, ‘TOR for consultants to assist ULGs of the pilot cities’, and to investigate the development of UIDP(program) to be established as an UIDF (facility). We conceive the ‘strategic plan’ and the ‘detail financing plan’ can be part of the ‘business plan’ forming an integrated concept. The ‘business plan’ can be formulated once we conceive and are convinced UIDP can be operated as ‘business’. The institutionalization phase covers most of Part A and part of Part C of the assignment as envisaged in the terms of reference. To produce the requested outputs, in this phase we will concentrate on the following activities: 1. Formulate the ‘detail action plan’ for UIDP: defining the responsibilities, timing, resource requirement and performance indicators for implementing the UIDP reform agenda. The detail action plan for UIDP will contain those actions that will be stipulated in the UIDP Project Manual. 2. Undertake needs assessment of ULGs for UIDP services: This activity will be the first step towards implementation of UIDP reform agenda in the pilot cities, and will be considered in defining the UIDP agenda to be elaborated in the ‘strategic plan’ and ‘business plan’ 3. Selection of UIDP cities: As we indicated in the earlier part of this proposal, the selection of cities can include all or only part of the USDRP cities, and can include cities outside the USDRP considering their potentials to be included in the next batches of USDRP and for future expansion of the UIDP agenda nation-wide. 4. Allocation of TA grants and consultant resources to ULGs: the activity will include writing the terms of reference for the consultants, and it should be kept in mind that the consultant services will cover both the ‘core reform’ as well as the ‘other (strategic) reform’ agenda. 5. Institutional development and capacity building: an activity most essential to support implementation of UIDP agenda, and therefore its strategy and plan will be formulated in greater depth. 6. Recommending UIDP and after, including direction for the next USDRP or USDRP2: This activity is an advance thought on how UIDP Agenda will be sustained after the UIDP Management project will be terminated, to be considered further in Phase IV. In this activity the criteria and direction of USDRP2 will be explored including the link between UIDP and USDRP. 37 7. Designing the Information System support for UIDP; the system will be established in the implementation phase of UIDP in Phase III, and will be maintained in the period after this assignment will be completed as an essential element of sustainability of UIDP Based on the results of the above activities in this phase, the expected major outputs of UIDP as outlined at the beginning of explanation of Phase II activities will be written and finalized in this phase. Phase III: Implementation of UIDP An UIDP Project Manual will guide the implementation of UIDP Reform Agenda in the selected cities. These cities will serve as pilot for implementation of the reform agenda. As explained in our methodology we will implement the UIDP Agenda through three tiers of institutional development and capacity building activities. First, the activities will be focused on the central government, in this case DGCK as the executing agency, to function as a ‘knowledge center’ in guiding the implementation of UIDP. Secondly, we will emphasize the role of the Province as the vocal technical assistance and monitoring evaluation center, to extend the implementation of UIDP to the local or Kota and Kabupaten level. Both urban reform agenda, the ‘core reform’ and ‘other (strategic) reform’ agenda will be implemented at the Kota and Kabupaten level. As envisaged in the terms of reference, the assignment will focus on providing the ‘implementation support and project monitoring’ which include quality management, supervision, monitoring and evaluation of the outputs. It will measure the implementation of UIDP in terms of its effectiveness, appropriateness, sustainability and consistency with the program design. The assignment will involve monitoring the work of consultants assigned to assist the ULGS in the implementation of the urban reform agenda. The implementation support and project monitoring to be performed under the assignment will consist of the following main activities : 1. Formulating key performance indicators to measure achievement of the agenda implementation: As a matter of principle we will monitor the result and output of the work from the feedback of the urban citizens and communities rather than merely bureaucratic outputs such as issuance of decrees, formation of committees, etc. 2. Regular field supervision to the pilot cities and back to office reports after the supervision. 3. Developing concept and action plan for field monitoring and evaluation. 4. Identify problems, obstacles and propose possible solutions. 5. Consolidate and harmonize the reform strategies. During this period, we will monitor how UIDP can best be institutionalized ad internalized locally by looking at : a. The local leadership, commitment, will and support given o the agenda. 38 b. Local institutional development and capacity building agenda that is demand and locally driven rather than based on standardized prescription. c. Information system developed and established locally in support of UIDP. Phase IV: Sustaining UIDP The last phase of UIDP Management will be devoted to assure the implementation of UIDP will sustain after the assignment will be terminated. The activities in this phase are grouped into two categories as the following : A. The institutional sustainability 1. Confirmation of the Executing Agency role for future UIDP: As we indicated in the earlier paragraph of this proposal, the role, mandate and capacity of DGCK and the Ministry of Public Works to guide the nation’s urban development need to be clarified and affirmed. We recognized the agency’s track record in managing urban infrastructure development and the broader scope of urban development. The need for reaffirmation of the agency’s function does not only depend on external recognition but most importantly requires a political decision regarding the agency’s attitude from within the organization. It will depend for a major part on the position of the management of the agency. 2. Establishment of UIDF: The terms of reference for this assignment assumes or at least inclines to suggest that to sustain UIDP the government will need to establish a facility for the purpose. The entire aspects of institutionalizing UIDF will be thoroughly investigated by the Consultant during Phase II, and whatever the recommendation will come up from the analysis it will have to be discussed and decided by the client in close cooperation with the UIDP Management Consultant. 3. Institutional network from central-provincial and local network for UIDP Reform Agenda established and in operation: This will be the result of implementing UIDP in the pilot cities, and extrapolation of the project to other Provinces and cities (Kota and Kabupaten )reinforced through the conduct of national dissemination workshop as exemplified by the RPIJM facilitation and institutionalization. B. Program Sustainability. 1. Implementation of Nationwide UIDP Reform Agenda: Learning from the experience of RPIJM, once the UIDP Project Manual will have been tested during its application in the implementation of UIDP in Phase III, the project manual can serve similar purpose as the ‘Buku Panduan’ RPIJM. It should jump on institutional infrastructure, which has been set up for RPIJM, and integrate UIDP in the implementation of RPIJM. The issue of integrating UIDP with RPIJM will be, how we cane design the integrated agenda in a manner that will not make the agenda overcomplicated and overburdened. Some simplification and rationalization will be needed, but past practice showed it was possible to 39 integrate the then RIAP and LIDAP into the Urban Development Project (UDP) scheme. The issue during the UDP was on the institutionalization and internalization of RIAP and LIDAP being both a non-physical and non-infrastructure component of former UDPs. 2. Guiding USDRP 2: We assume one important mission of UIDP Management is to assure the sustainability of USDRP as the ‘umbrella project’ of UIDP. We understand USDRP to be the new urban project format for Indonesia after the UDP during the previous period before the reform towards decentralization. The format is not yet fixed and still subject to various policy and strategy changes. The experience of implementing UIDP is expected to provide new insights for future urban development project format for Indonesia. The future UIDP agenda will also relate to the format of future USDRP, being one important element of UIDP sustainability to be explored in Phase IV of the project. 3. TA Support for Long Term UIDP: Both implementation and support to implementation will need mobilization of resources from within the government as well as from international agencies. The assignment will look into the possibility including approach to potential international agencies, to obtain funding support for UIDP. 4. Information System Support: One instrument to sustain the long term agenda of UIDP is to maintain the information system which will have been designed, operated and maintained during the implementation of UIDP in Phase III. Scheme 7 provides a summary of the four Phases of the Work Plan, including description of detail activities, content and interrelationships of the phases for UIDP Management. 40 Scheme 7 UIDP Management Work Plan Months 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 12 16 18 20 24 26 28 29 30 Inception Workshop I Report Annual Progress Progress Annual Progress Final (August 2008) Progress Report I Report III Report IV Report II Report V Completion (12/05/2008) Report II Report Progress (09/03/2009) (06/07/2009) (09/11/2009) (08/03/2010) (07/07/2010) (10/11/2008) (13/09/2010) Report I Workshop III Workshop II Workshop (14/07/2008) (August 2009) IV Workshop V (February 2009) (March 2010) (August 2010) Task A Task B Task C Phase III Phase IV Phase I Phase II A 1. Design of all Implementation of UIDP UIDP Project Manual Sustaining UIDP Agenda Establishment of The Team A. Conceptualization of UIDP programs 2. Upstream Task 3. Analysis of key data Implementation support Institutional Sustainability 1. Physical 1. Appreciation of existing and project monitoring Establishment concept (Quality management, supervision, monitoring & Project 2. Work Strategy & 2. Generating Team Concept 1. Confirmation of EA role Implementation Task Division 3. Preparation of policy dialogue 1. Core Reform evaluation of outputs 1.Effectiveness (DGCK) 3. Establishment of & briefing notes - (A10) Agenda 2.Appropriateness 2. Establishment of UIDF counterpart team 4. Information sharing gathering 2. Other Strategic 3.Sustainable Pilot Cities 3. Institutional Network 1. Key performance & IMSC, input from stakeholder Reform Agenda 4.Consistency with (Central-Province-Local) indicators to Stakeholder (A10) measure program design Forum Provincial Level achievement (B1) 4. Networking : With 2. Regular field USDRP, supervision (B2) Interagency, Inter Phase II B UIDP Project Local District / 3. Concept & action Program Sustainability TA Agency, Inter Institutionalization of UIDP Manual (A3) Local level plan for field Consultant monitoring & 5. Information 1. Implementation Strategic Plan (A1) evaluation (B3, B4, Sharing 1. Detail Action Plan Nationwide UIDP B5) UIDP Agenda (Responsibility, time, resource 4. Identify problems, Reform Agenda (C6) requirement, Performance Business Plan obstacle, solutions 2. USDRP 2,3..n (C3, C4) indicators (A2) Financing Plan (B6) Urban Reform 3. TA support for long term 2. New assessment of ULGS for (A1) 5. Consolidate & Agenda UIDP UIDP services (A7) harmonize reform 4. Information system 3. Selection of UIDP Pilot Cities strategic (B8) support 4. Allocating TA grant and TOR for, and 1. Core Reform consultant services to ULGS recruitment of Agenda 5. Institutional Development & Consultant to ULGS 2. Other Capacity Building strategy and (A5, A8, A9) Strategic plan Reform 6. UIDP and after development Agenda UIDP policy & strategy of USDRP 2 (Program) 7. Information system development (A12) UIDP Institutionalization & 8. Information sharing seek Internalization clearance & approval UIDF (Facility) (A6, C2, C6) 1. Leadership, commitment & support 2. Capacity building, institutional development 3. Information system development Notes : A1, 2, 3,…n, B1, 2, 3,…n refer to task definition in the original TOR 2. Delivery Dates of the Reports - The assignment will produce 4 categories of reports: (1) Administrative reports, (2) Special reports, (3) Progress reports, and (4) Project report. - There is only one administrative report, namely the Inception report to be submitted on May 12, 2008. - Special reports consist of : i) Program Memorandum for the Urban Reform Agenda (to be delivered on Nov.10,2008, ii) UIDP Project Manual (due date July 14, 2008), iii) 5 year Strategic Plan for UIDP (due date for first draft July 14, 2008, final draft Nov, 10, 2008, iv) 5 year Business Plan for UIDP (due date first draft July 14, 2008, final draft No.10,2008), v) Financing Plan for UIDP to be incorporated into the Business Plan with the same due dates, vi) Detail Action Plan for UIDP to be incorporated into the UIDP Project Manual with the same due dates, vii) Needs Assessment of ULGs for UIDP Services (due date July 14, 2008) - Progress reports consist of i) Monthly progress reports (due dates every first week of the month), ii) Program reports (due every four months after the Consultant’s mobilization, namely on July 14, 2008, Nov.10,2008, March 9, 2009, July 6, 2009, Nov 9, 2009, March 8, 2010, July 7, 2010and Sept 13, 2010), and iii) Annual reports (due every 12 months after commencement, namely March,9 to substitute the four monthly program report, and March 8, 2010 to substitute the four monthly program report) - The only project report will be the Final Completion Report due on September 13, 2010 after termination of the assignment. 3. Workshops - The terms of reference requires the convening of workshops every 6 months. - The dates projected for the workshops will be: First Workshop : August 13, 14 and 15, 2008; Second Workshop Feb 9, 10 and 11, 2009; Third Workshop August 10, 11 and 12, 2009; Fourth Workshop Feb 10, 11 and 12, 2010; and Fifth Workshop August 16, 17 and 18, 2010. - It is not our intention to exhaustively suggest the exact themes and topic of the workshops since it should be a result of thorough consultation with our stakeholders and with the client. Our preliminary idea is to invite wider discussion on relevant topics related to the core and other strategic reform agenda. The theme of the discussion can be divided according to the general or specifics of each of the reform agenda, while we can select either a single or crosscutting topics. Topics such as 1)“A Clean City is a Reflection of Clean Governance’, 2)‘ Urban Economic Development that is Employment Generating and Income Improvement versus Production and Market Oriented’, 3) ‘The Central and Provincial Role in Promoting Urban Good Governance’, 4)‘Urban Leadership in Implementing Strategic Urban Reform Agenda’, and 5) ‘People Centered Measurement of Impact of Urban reform Agenda’ are samples of thought provoking ideas that can enrich and enlighten all that is concerned with the urban reform agenda as provoked by UIDP. 42 4. Final Documentation. The final documentation of the Project has been mentioned in Section 2 of this proposal regarding the delivery dates of the reports. C. Organization and Staffing 1. Organization. - The Executing Agency for USDRP will also be the Executing Agency for UIDP, which is the Ministry of Public Works, and specifically the Directorate General Cipta Karya or DGCK.. - Within DGCK, the Project will be managed by the Directorate of Program Development of Cipta Karya. - An Inter Ministerial Steering Committee (IMSC) will be formed chaired by Director General Cipta Karya with members at least at the level of Director (or Echelon II), and representing Bappenas, Ministry of Home Affairs, Ministry of Finance, the State Ministry for Administration Development, and may include the Institute for Public Administration (LAN). - A Stakeholder Forum will be formed consisting of representative of agencies, project entities, non-governmental organizations including consultants doing works which are related or having the same objectives as UIDP such as URDI (Urban and Regional Development Institute), Pustra (Center for Strategic Analysis) of MPW, the National Urban Policy and Strategy Consultant for UIDP, the SCBD Project of ADB in the Ministry of Home Affairs, GTZ Project for Local Government Development, USAID Project, and others to be identified during implementation of the Project. - The Project will have close linkages with the Central Project Management Unit (CPMU) of the USDRP Project and the Management Consultant assisting CPMU, and other consultants to be assigned to ULGs for implementation of the UIDP reform agenda. - The Project will have a three tier structure organization linking the central operation with the Provincial and local (Kota and Kabupaten) operation. The three tier structure organization of UIDP will follow the same pattern of the Satgas RPIJM (Pusat, Propinsi and Kota/Kabupaten), and may gradually be integrated wth the RPIJM structure, accommodating also the ‘national, Provincial and local urban policy and strategy ‘components. - The organizational structure of UIDP Management is illustrated in Scheme 8. 43 Organizational Structure of UIDP Management 44 2. Staffing - The staffing of the UIDP Management team follows the guidance in the terms of reference consisting of a Team Leader (TL), a Co Team Leader (Co TL), an Local Economic Development cum Poverty Alleviation Specialist (LED), an Institutional Development cum Capacity Building Specialist (ID/CB), a Finance Management Reform Specialist (FM), Procurement Reform Specialist (PR) - The terms of reference further specifies the duration of the assignment will be 30 moths, and the total man-months of professional services will be 128 man-months, including 26 man-months service of an International Expert as Team Leader. - We have allocated the 128 man-months taking into consideration of the Four Phases UIDP Management, leading to (1) 26 man-months of Team Leader spread into 12 month from commencement of the Project (month 1 until 12), with a 2 months break, followed by 11 months service (month 15 until 25), with a second 2 moths break, and another 3 months at the tail end (month 28 until 30, (2) The Co Team Leader will be allocated 26 man-months, divided into the first part of 13 months (month 3 until 15), and the second part of 13 months (month 18 until 30). The allocation of man-month for the Co Team Leader has been arranged to ensure there will be no gap of leadership during the break of the TL and Co TL, (3) The LED Specialist will be allocated 22 man-months in view of the relatively lesser analysis and information on LED in the by USDRP produced document. The four specialist (LED, ID/CB/FM and PR) will be in service during the first 6 months of Conceptualization and Institutionalization Phase II of UIDP and 4 months at the end when the final report will be prepared. The remaining man-months, in the case of LED Specialist 12 months will be spread intermittently during the 18 months Phase III Implementation of UIDP. (4) The allocation of Institutional Development and Capacity Building (ID/CB), Financial Management Reform (FM) and Procurement Reform (PR) Specialist will be 18 months for each specialist, divided into 6 months (from month 3 until 8), 8 months intermittently during a period of 18 months, and 4 months at the last end of the assignment. - Scheme 9 illustrates the man-months allocation of all the team members totaling to 128 man-months. - The team Leader will take care of the Establishment of the Team during the first 2 months or Phase I of UIDP Management assignment. - Scheme 9 also provides detail of the tasks division among the Team Members by Phase, activities, and outputs. - The CV of the Team Members are attached to this proposal in the Form Tech 6. - The Consultant feels comfortable and confident about the qualification of each member of the team, the ability of the team to work together as a team, and the richness of the background experience of each of the team members. The team will have the advantage of making the best use of information including outcome of previous studies in both the memory and written and electronic documentation of projects to which each of the members was associated to in the past. - Although not counted in the total man-months the team will include a mid level experienced professional to assist in information system development. 45 SCHEME 9 ASSIGMENT OF TEAM MEMBERS BY ACTIVITY AND OUTPUTS Phase I Phase II Phase III Phase IV Expert No Phase and Activity Technical Outputs Outputs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 TL Co TL LED ID/CB FM PR SP Phase I Establisment of The Team Team mobilized and Physical establishment 1 established Work Strategy & Task Work strategy and Division team division defined 2 Establishment of Consultant team, consultant team, IMSC IMSC, Stakeholder Internalization 3 and Stakeholder Forum form fromed Networking Networking Institutional 4 establishment Information sharing UIDP Management information of UIDP object 5 Phase II A. Conceptualization Of UIDP Appreciation of existing 1 concept 1. Design & Program 2. Definition of 1. Urban reform Generating team concept 2 information agenda 2. Other Preparation of policy 3. Analysing task of (Strategy) dialogue & briefing notes key notes 3 Reform Agenda Information sharing gathering inputs from Briefing notes 4 stakeholder B. Intitutionalization of UIDP 1. Formulation of detail Detail Action Plan 1. Strategic plan action Plan 2. Need assessment of Report of need ULGS for UIDP Service assesment 2. Business 3. Selection of UIDP pilot Pilot UIDP cities plan including cities financing plan 4. Allocation of TA Grant & TOR for ULGS consultant service to TA for ULGS consultant ULGS 5. Institutional Strategy and plan for Development and Capacity institutional Strategic plan Building development and 6. Defining Policy and Feasibility study UIDP strategy for UIDP and after Strategic plan to USDF and USDRP 2 Information 7. Infromation System Recommendation for system Development USDRP2 establishment Information system designed Phase III Implementation of UIDP Implementation support Project monitoring 1 and project monitoring sheets Field supervision back to office reports Projects evaluation report Project Implementation 1. UIDP Agenda 2 (Pilot Cities) * Core team agenda * Other (strategic) reform agenda 2. UIDP intitutionalizatio n& internalization 1. Leadership, will, commitment and support 2. Staff development & institutional development 3. Information system updated & maintained Phase IV Sustaining of UIDP Agenda 1. Institutional Regulation and Sustainability strategies UIDF Formed Final Report of UIDP 2. Project Management project sustainability * Nation wide UIDP agenda * USDRP2 Preparation * TA Support for long term UIDP * Information system support Notes : TL : Team Leader CoTL : Co Team Leader LED : Local Economic Development Specialist ID/CB : Instittutional Development/Capacity Building Specialist FM : Financial Management Specialist PR : Procurement specialist SP : Sub Professional Technical Proposal Preparation of the Establishment of the Urban Institutional Development Program (UIDP) Management TECH-5 TEAM COMPOSITION AND TASK ASSIGNMENTS Preparation of the Establishment of the Urban Institutional Development Program (UIDP) Management FORM TECH-5 TEAM COMPOSITION AND TASK ASSIGNMENTS 5 - TEAM COMPOSITION AND TASK ASSIGNMENT Professional Staff Name of Staff Firm Area of Expertise Position Assigned Task Assigned 1. HENDROPRANOTO IHS Urban Sector, Urban Urban Management 1. Leading and managing the team for UIDP Management SUSELO Spatial, Regional (Development) Assignment of IHS-PT Gafa Multi Consultant-PT Adi Raka Planning, Integrated Specialist/Team Konsulindo Planning, Urban Leader 2. Coordinating the team with the Client, the USDRP management Infrastructure, Public team and consultants, IMSC, the Consultant on National Urban Development Facility, Policy and Strategy, and the Stakeholder Forum to be formed for Public Policy, Policy the Project Formulation, 3. Coordinating the team with the Client, the USDRP management Institutional team and consultants, IMSC, the Consultant on National Urban Policy and Strategy, and the Stakeholder Forum to be formed for the Project 4. Leading the team in conceptualizing and institutionalizing the UIDP Reform Agenda 5. Leading the team in providing the implementation sup port for UIDP Reform Agenda through the hierarchical of central-Provincial- local (Kota/Kabupaten) system of technical assistance and capacity building. 6. Leading the team in assuring the internalization and institutionalization of UIDP Management in the longer term after termination of the project 7. Leading the team in providing direction to the USDRP2 Project, and the subsequent UIDP activities, including support of international lending and technical assistance Agencies. 8. Leading the team in producing all the administrative, special output, progress and project reports required under the assignment. 9. Interacting on behalf on the team and the Project with all ULGs involved I implementing UIDP Reform Agenda Preparation of the Establishment of the Urban Institutional Development Program (UIDP) Management FORM TECH-5 TEAM COMPOSITION AND TASK ASSIGNMENTS Professional Staff Name of Staff Firm Area of Expertise Position Assigned Task Assigned 10. Leading the team in designing, establishment, and maintenance of the information system and data base needed to support the project and its future sustainability. 2. GUNAWAN WIBISANA GAFA Urban and Regional Urban Institutional 1. Assist the Team Leader in guiding, coordinating, and supervising Planner, Urban (Legal) Specialist/ Co- inputs of the team members and take the responsibility of Institutional, Spatial Team Leader preparing and finalizing the required outputs Planning, Public 2. Analyze and coordinate the linkage among reform strategies within Private Partnership, UIDPs Urban Infrastructure, 3. Strengthen key legal and institutional scheme, which strongly Public Policy, Public connected with UIDPs (transparency, accountability and Private Partnership participation; procurement and financial management) at central and local levels to ensure the achievement of objective 4. Assist the MPW in designing the appropriate and the most effective mechanism for inter¬agency coordination, decision making process and procedure, and information dissemination for the implementation of UIDP 5. Develop a list of key indicators, in institutional and regulatory aspects, to measure the program performance. 6. Together with other consultants, develop procedure or manual or technical papers on the establishment and operationalisation of UIDPs. 7. Together with other consultants, develop procedure or manual or technical papers on the establishment and operationalisation of UIDPs. 8. Supervise, monitor and evaluate the implementation and achievement of UIDPs for the institutional and regulatory aspect. 9. Assist the MPW in preparing the establishment of UIDP/UIDF Preparation of the Establishment of the Urban Institutional Development Program (UIDP) Management FORM TECH-5 TEAM COMPOSITION AND TASK ASSIGNMENTS Professional Staff Name of Staff Firm Area of Expertise Position Assigned Task Assigned 3. HANIA RAHMA ADIRAKA Team Leader, Local Economic 1. Give input to the Team Leader in the preparing and finalizing the Financial and Development/Urban required output, from the aspect of local economic development Economic Specialist, Poverty Specialist and urban poverty alleviation Urban and Regional 2. Develop indicators to program performance evaluation Planner, Spatial 3. Together with other consultants, develop procedure or manual or Planning, Urban technical papers on the establishment and operatienalisation of Poverty, Integrated UIDPs Planning, Urban 4. Provide input to the Work Plan and Business Plan Infrastructure, Public 5. Provide inputs and support to the program dialogues, workshops Policy and seminars 6. Identify and strengthen local and national policy and strategy in LED and urban poverty alleviation to ensure the achievement of UIDPs objective and target 7. Analyze and coordinate the linkage of LED and Urban Poverty Alleviation with other reforms within UIDPs 8. Supervise, monitor and evaluate the implementation and achievement of UIDPs for the local economic development and urban poverty alleviation 9. Give recommendation to improve the concept and operationalization of the national urban strategy and policy in terms of local economic development and urban poverty alleviation 10. Assist the MPW in preparing the establishment of UIDP/'UIDF 4 IRA INDRAYATI GAFA Team Leader, Capacity Building 1. Give input to the Team Leader in the preparing and finalizing the Capacity Building, Specialist required output, from the aspect of: capacity building Urban and Regional 2. Develop indicators to program performance evaluation Planner, Urban 3. Identify the need of and strengthen capacity building program and Institutional, Spatial strategy at local and national levels to ensure the achievement of Planning, Urban UIDPs objective and target Infrastructure. 4. Together with other consultants, develop procedure or manual or technical papers on the establishment and operationalisation of UIDPs 5. Provide input to the Work Plan and Business Plan Preparation of the Establishment of the Urban Institutional Development Program (UIDP) Management FORM TECH-5 TEAM COMPOSITION AND TASK ASSIGNMENTS Professional Staff Name of Staff Firm Area of Expertise Position Assigned Task Assigned 6. Provide inputs and support to the program dialogues, workshops and seminars 7. Supervise, monitor and evaluate the implementation and achievement of UIDPs for the capacity building program 8. Assist the MPW to ensure the achievement of the capacity building program 9. Assist the MPW in preparing the establishment of UlDP/UIDF 5. IWAN WIDODO GAFA Financial and Urban Financial 1. Give input to the Team Leader in the preparing and finalizing the Economic Specialist, Management required output, from the aspect of public financial management 2. Develop indicators to program performance evaluation 3. Identify and strengthen public financial management policy and strategy at local and national levels to ensure the achievement of UIDPs objective and target 4. Together with other consultants, develop procedure or manual or technical papers on the establishment and operationalisation of UIDPs 5. Provide input to the Work Plan and Business Plan 6. Provide inputs and support to the program dialogues, workshops and seminars 7. Analyze and coordinate the linkage of financial management reform with other reforms within UIDPs 8. Supervise, monitor and evaluate the implementation and achievement of UIDPs for the financial management aspect 9. Give recommendation to improve the concept and operationalization of the national urban strategy and policy in terms of financial management 10. Assist the MPW in preparing the establishment of UIDP/UIDF 6. EKO SUBHAN IHS Procurement, Public Public Procurement 1. Give input to the Team Leader in the preparing and finalizing the Policy Expert, Specialist required output, from the aspect of public procurement Regional Planning, 2. Develop indicators to program performance evaluation Preparation of the Establishment of the Urban Institutional Development Program (UIDP) Management FORM TECH-5 TEAM COMPOSITION AND TASK ASSIGNMENTS Professional Staff Name of Staff Firm Area of Expertise Position Assigned Task Assigned Socio-Economics, 3. Identify and strengthen public procurement policy and strategy at Local Government local and national levels to ensure the achievement of UIDPs Sp, Institutional, objective and target Capacity Buillding 4. Together with other consultants, develop procedure or manual or technical papers on the establishment and operationalization of UIDPs 5. Provide input to the Work Plan and Business Plan 6. Provide inputs and support to the program dialogues, workshops and seminars 7. Analyze and coordinate the linkage of public procurement reform with other reforms within UIDPs 8. Supervise, monitor and evaluate the implementation of UIDPs for the public procurement aspect. 9. Give recommendation to improve the concept and operationalization of the national urban strategy and policy in terms of public procurement. 10. Assist the MPW in preparing the establishment of UIDP/UIDF. Remarks: 1. Institute for Housing and Urban Studies (IHS) 2. PT. Gafa Multi Consultants (GAFA) 3. PT Adiraka Konsulindo (ADIRAKA) Technical Proposal Preparation of the Establishment of the Urban Institutional Development Program (UIDP) Management TECH-7 STAFFING SCHEDULE Preparation of the Establishment of the Urban Institutional Development Program (UIDP) Management FORM TECH-7 STAFFING SCHEDULE 7 - STAFFING SCHEDULE1 Staff Input (in the form of a bar chart) 2 Total staff-month input No Name of Staff 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Home Field3 Total International HENDRO PRANOTO 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 26 1 SUSELO 0 Subtotal 26 0 26 Local 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 26 1 GUNAWAN WIBISANA 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 22 2 HANIA RAHMA 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 18 3 IRA INDRAYATI 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 18 4 IWAN WIDODO 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 18 5 EKO SUBHAN 0 PROFESSIONAL 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 15 6 STAFF 0 Subtotal 117 0 117 Total 143 1. For Professional Staff the input should be indicated individually; for Support Staff it should be indicated by category (e.g.: draftmen, clerical staff, etc.) 2. Months are counted from the start of the assignment. For each staff indicate separately staff input for home and field work. 3. Field work means work carried out at a place other than the Consultant's home office. Full time input Part time input Technical Proposal Preparation of the Establishment of the Urban Institutional Development Program (UIDP) Management TECH-8 WORK SCHEDULE Preparation of the Establishment of the Urban Institutional Development Program (UIDP) Management FORM TECH-8 WORK SCHEDULE 8 - WORK SCHEDULE 2 Month No Activity 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Phase I: Establishment of the Team 1 Physical Establishment 2 Work Strategy and Tasks division 3 Establishment of counterpart team, IMSC and Stakeholder Forum 4 Networking 5 Introducing UIDP Management Phase II A: Conceptualization of UIDP Agenda 6 Appreciating existing concepts which have been developed 7 Generating the team concept 8 Conducting policy dialogues and prepare briefing notes 9 Information sharing: Gathering inputs from our stakeholders Phase II B: Institutionalization of UIDP 10 Formulate the ‘detail action plan’ for UIDP 11 Undertake Needs Assessment of ULGs for UIDP Services 12 Selection of UIDP Cities 13 Allocation of TA grants and consultant resources to ULGs 14 Institutional Development and Capacity Building 15 Recommending UIDP and after, including direction for the next USDRP or USDRP2 16 Designing the Information System support for UIDP 17 Establishment of Strategic Plan 18 Establishment of Business Plan 19 Establishment of Financing Plan 20 Establishment of ToR ULGS Consultant 21 Establishment of UIDP (Program) 22 Establishment of UIDF (Facility) Preparation of the Establishment of the Urban Institutional Development Program (UIDP) Management FORM TECH-8 WORK SCHEDULE 2 Month No Activity 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Phase III: Implementation of UIDP 23 Formulating key performance indicators to measure achievement of the agenda implementation 24 Regular field supervision to the pilot cities and back to office reports after the supervision 25 Developing concept and action plan for field monitoring and evaluation 26 Identify problems, obstacles and propose possible solutions. 27 Consolidate and harmonize the reform strategies. Phase IV: Sustaining UIDP 28 Confirmation of the Executing Agency role for future UIDP 29 Establishment of UIDF 30 Institutional network from central-provincial and local network for UIDP Reform Agenda established and in operation 31 Implementation of Nationwide UIDP Reform Agenda 32 Guiding USDRP 2 33 TA Support for Long Term UIDP 34 Information System Support Workshops 1 Workshop I 2 Workshop II 3 Workshop III 4 Workshop IV 5 Workshop V Reporting 1 Inception Report 2 Progress Report I 3 Progress Report II 4 Annual Report I 5 Progress Report III 6 Progress Report IV 7 Annual Report II Preparation of the Establishment of the Urban Institutional Development Program (UIDP) Management FORM TECH-8 WORK SCHEDULE 2 Month No Activity 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 8 Progress Report V 9 Final Completetion Report Special Reports 1 UIDP Project Manual 2 Program Memorandum for the Urban Reform Agenda 3 5 year StrategicPlan for UIDP 4 5 year Business Plan for UIDP 5 Financing Plan for UIDP to be incorporated into the Business Plan 6 Detail Action Plan for UIDP to be incorporated into the UIDP Project Manual 7 Needs Assessment of ULGs for UIDP Services 1. Indicates all main activities of the assignment, including delivery of reports (e.g.: inception, interim,and final reports), and other benchmarks such as Client approvals. For 2. Duration of activities shall be indicated in the form of a bar chart.
Pages to are hidden for
"Project Business Plan Bahasa Indonesia - PDF - PDF"Please download to view full document