Tax 2 Reviewers Philippines Law

Document Sample
Tax 2 Reviewers Philippines Law Powered By Docstoc
					Draft 1: as of 18 September 2008

                                      Dominguez, Maria Teresa C.
                                        Barrameda, Teresita V.
                                         Magcuro, Thelma B.


         The Fostering Democratic Governance Programme (FDG) was evaluated to concretize
the new shift of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) in programming
orientation on the basis of outputs/activities to outcomes/results to improve its programme
effectiveness. Such change to results orientation would entail a major change in the way
programmes would be developed and implemented as well as in administrative and operational
support systems. Thus, specific outcomes committed in the Multi-year Funding Framework and
Country Programme Action Plan (CPAP) that included the FDG, were being evaluated.

         As defined by the UNDP, ―outcomes are the developmental changes between the
completion of outputs and the achievement of impact, and are achieved in partnership with
others1. An outcome evaluation focuses on four categories of analysis, namely, status of the
outcome, factors affecting the outcome, UNDP’s contributions to the outcome, and UNDP’s
partnership strategy2. The evaluation also looks into how the rights-based approach (RBA) and
gender are mainstreamed as cross-cutting concerns in the UNDP programme under study.

           This report is organized according to the following parts:

Part 1: Scope of Work
Describes the objectives, scope and data gathering methods used in the study

Part II: Findings
Elaborates on the findings on the following: status of the outcome, factors affecting the outcome,
UNDP contribution to the outcome through the outputs, UNDP partnership strategy, and gender
and RBA mainstreaming efforts.

Part III: Conclusions and Recommendations
Contains the conclusions and recommendations of the outcome evaluation team.

Part IV: Lessons Learned and Best Practices
Synthesizes the lessons learned and best/good practices from the development and
implementation of the FDG Programme from the perspectives of the outcome evaluation team.

    Guidelines for Outcome Evaluators, p. 6.

                         PART 1: SCOPE OF WORK

       As contained in the Terms of Reference (Annex 1), the objectives and scope of the
outcome evaluation were as follows:

General Objective:

        To improve the effectiveness of UNDP and its partners in implementing
programmes/projects to achieve intended outcome within the Results-Based Management
Framework. In addition, inputs to the Outcome Evaluation will contribute to the upcoming UNDP
mission on Assessment of Development Results 2000-2008.

Specific Objectives

    1. Determine the mechanisms by which outputs of programmes/projects lead to the
       achievement of the specified outcome;

    2. Determine if and which programme processes, e .g., strategic partnerships and linkages,
       are critical in producing the intended outcomes;

    3. Identify factors, which facilitate or hinder the progress in achieving the outcomes, both in
       terms of the external environment and those internal to the portfolio project (s) including
       weaknesses in design, management, human resource skills, and resources;

    4. Document lessons learned in the development and implementation stages;

    5. Recommend mid-stream changes, if necessary, in the implementation of the programmes
       and projects;

    6. Provide relevant inputs to the upcoming mission on Assessment of Development Results
       2000 – 2008.

        The FDG had three reform areas3 under study:

1. Political and Electoral Reforms- ―seeks to institute legislative, electoral and other political
reforms to enhance democratic governance and increase the participation of the poor and
disadvantaged especially among women in political processes.‖ The critical areas of political
reforms are the political, electoral and legislative systems;

2. Public Administration Reforms- focuses on ―interventions and assistance on improving level of
access to services and productive assets.‖ The critical areas of reforms are the national public
administration, local governance, and trade and corporate governance systems.

3. Justice Reforms and Human Rights- ―directed to achieve more accountable and rule-based
institutions to enhance access by the poor to justice and human security.‖ The critical areas of
reforms are: law enforcement, prosecution, court, correctional and penal, and community
integration systems.

 Country Programme Action Plan Between the Government of the Philippines and United Nations
Development Programme, 2005-2009, p.8.

         The outcome evaluation focused on the overall CPAP outcome4 for governance stated

           Disadvantaged groups empowered to participate in governance processes through
           more accountable and rule-based democratic institutions that deliver good
           governance, based on the fulfilment of human rights obligations and equal access
           to justice and services.

         Specific outcome statements of the CPAP for the three reform areas were as follows:

For Justice Reforms and Human Rights:

         Outcome #1: More accountable and rule-based justice institutions for greater access by
         the poor to justice and human security

For Public Administration Reform:

         Outcome # 2: More responsive national, sub-national and local institutions providing
         efficient social services delivery

For Political and Electoral Reform:

         Outcome # 3: Political, electoral and legislative reforms instituted to democratize and
         increase participation especially the poor

        The outcome evaluation focused on the TRAC and DGTTF-funded projects which were
implemented from 2005-2007. However, the projects implemented from 2002-2004 were also
looked into to link the current undertakings with the beginnings of the CPAP between the UNDP
and the Government of the Philippines (GOP) which was started in 2002. As will be evident later,
some of the 2005-2007 projects started in the previous programme cycle; a few even much earlier
than 2002.

         The methodologies used were the following:

1. Interview- a total of 25 heads and focal persons of the Implementing Partner, selected
Responsible Partners (RPs), NEDA, and the UNDP were interviewed either individually or in a

  The CPAP outcome for governance was based on the UNDAF Outcome # 2: ―By 2009, good governance
reforms and practices are institutionalized by government, local government units, civil society
organizations and the private sector at all levels toward poverty reduction, protection of rights and
sustainable human development‖. It must also be noted that this overall CPAP outcome statement was
revised later. However, to remain faithful to the presentation during the focus group discussion, the
outcome statement above was used in this report. Albeit, the final CPAP outcome statement was ―The poor
especially the disadvantaged women and indigenous peoples are able to exercise their human rights,
empowered to participate in governance processes, and have greater access to justice and services through
more accountable and rule-based democratic institutions.‖

panel. They represented 17 organizations- UP-NCPAG, CHR, 13 RPs, NEDA and the UNDP-
FDG Programme (Annex 2-A)

2. Focus Group Discussion (FGD) – three FGDs were conducted representing each of the three
reform areas under study. Of the 37 RPs invited comprising the 100% sample, 22 organizations
(60%) attended – 4 from the Political and Electoral Reform cluster, 10 RPs from the Public
Administration cluster, and 8 from the Justice Reforms and Human Rights cluster (Annex 2-B).

3. Review of Literature and Related Documents - pertinent documents were reviewed

                                     PART II: FINDINGS


1. Tracking the Outputs for 2005-2007

         Summary of Outputs. Annexes 3-A and 3-B provide a summary and inventory of outputs
that contribute towards the attainment of the CPAP for 2005-2009 and outcomes under each of
the reform cluster in the FDG Program. As classified in the FDG Programme document, these
outputs comprised seven clusters or typologies- Establishing Baselines, Setting Benchmarks,
Formulating Blueprints as roadmaps, Promoting Best Practices, Achieving Built Capacities,
Mobilizing Broad Constituencies, and Measuring Benefits of Reforms.

         In sum, the blueprints comprised the bulk of the outputs for the period which reflected the
strategic and purposive directions of the various thematic initiatives on governance. Majority of
the RPs which produced these blueprint outputs were already involved in the Programme in the
previous cycle (as gleaned from Annex 4) which outputs served as building blocks for their
succeeding engagements.

         The outputs on broad constituency building, baselines and best practices were the second
most numerous outputs. The outputs on broad constituency building, showed the trends towards
localization and strengthening of citizens’ groups or claim holders to address corruption, electoral
reforms through voters’ awareness-raising, achievement of the Millennium Development Goals
(MDG) targets, and public administration. The continuing efforts to come up with baselines
showed some of the new themes in governance necessitating baseline information or scrutiny for
immediate or future interventions, e.g., indigenous governance system, progress on MDG
localization, paralegal practice in the Philippines, monitoring of Government-Owned and
Controlled Corporations (GOCC), political reform advocacies, and gender and governance. The
outputs on best practices showcased the emerging models and tools on multi-stakeholder
collaborative approaches from the ranks of duty-bearers and claim holders on key governance
themes such as anti-corruption, MDG localization, voter’s education, public dialogue on
governance concerns, empowerment of the informal sector and citizen-friendly law enforcement.
The outputs on built capacities focused on constituencies that can facilitate localization,
replication or service delivery, e.g., capacity development of Association of Schools of Public
Administration in the Philippines (ASPAP) schools in the regions, citizen-media councils,
regional monitoring group on anti-corruption, training of paralegals and Barangay Human Rights
Action Centers (BHRAC).

        Interconnectedness of the Outputs: The above outputs were also seen in terms of their
interconnectedness and how these collectively contributed towards the level of achievement of
the CPAP outcomes, practically within a span of two years (since the UP-NCPAG as the IP was
only approved by mid-May, and the Annual Work Plan (AWP) implementation was started only
in August, 2005. Also, the 2007 AWP was only approved in May and implemented until
December, 2007). As such, the review of the outputs was done using the FDG parameters in
gauging projects, namely: Significance (or having an impact), Relevance (responding to current
and future contexts), Replicability (or having the capacity to scale-up or expand), Niche (or
unique undertaking), Innovation (having a distinct offering or a breakthrough effort), and Logical
Sequencing (or programmatic flow of projects and outputs). The interactions were viewed along
two modes which caused multiplier effect towards greater impact and inter-intra cluster
collaborations. One mode was the Scaling-Up which pertains to a project or projects of an RP
which have expanded in the course of implementation or beyond the project period. Another
mode was the “Snowball” Effect wherein there were projects that contributed or influenced other
projects and eventually created a ―snowball effect‖ towards progress in achieving the outcomes.
The range of outputs and momentum that they have generated showed the cumulative value of the
UNDP assistance provided.

a) Scaling-Up

         There were projects that have scaled up their operations in several ways. In the case of
the Concerned Citizen of Abra for Good Governance (CCAGG), its project on participatory
monitoring of government projects by citizens and civic groups had scaled up and was replicated
in the region of Northern Luzon. Under the project, a participatory project monitoring tool or
model was developed to guide citizens in monitoring government projects and budget. Due to the
significant contribution of the simple tool and model in curbing corruption especially in
government infrastructure projects, the CCAGG developed the tool and model into a
―laymanized‖ manual and a module on budget watch to guide volunteers in monitoring
government projects. From a small project that served as an independent anti-corruption
watchdog and operating in the province of Abra, the project has expanded its operation to cover
nine more provinces in Northern Luzon through influencing the formation of the Northern Luzon
Coalition for Good Governance (NLCGG). From a 15-member coalition, the NLCGG has
expanded its membership to 21 member-organizations. Through the project, the CCAGG has
forged a bilateral arrangement with the District Department of Public Works and Highways
(DPWH) on the mandatory adoption of a public consultation for projects with budget range of
five hundred thousand pesos and up. This achievement served as a building block towards the
institutionalization of effecting change in local governance. To date, the CCAGG has initial
agreement with the Catholic Bishop Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) to adopt the CCAGG
experience in citizen’s monitoring of government projects at the national level, thus, making it a
faith-based initiative.

         Another case of scaling up was the experience of the Institute for Political and Electoral
Reforms (IPER) which initiated the Citizen-Voter Education Campaign in 2005 and continuously
implemented it in 2006 through the Consortium for Electoral Reforms (CER), of which the IPER
is a member and lead organizer. In implementing the Citizen Voter Education Campaign, the
IPER organized the CER in the National Capital Region and the Citizen Coalition for ARMM
Reform and Election (CCARE) in the ARMM. Aside from organizing networks of volunteers and
coalitions for the Citizens-Voter Education campaign, the project has mainstreamed the campaign

in the formal education through the NSTP5 which then served as the nation-wide mechanism for
citizen voter education campaign. Three hundred (300) teachers from the participating schools
had conducted voter education as well as integrated the voter education in their NSTP syllabi. In
support of the instructors conducting voter education in schools, the project produced more than
400 copies each of the trainers’ training manual and module. Aside from the efforts to
mainstream the voter education in the formal schools, there were initiatives from CER-member
organizations to expand the undertakings. The CER network mobilized other institutions and
agencies like the COMELEC, CCARE and ERDA to undertake voter education within their
networks. As results of this campaign, the continuous participation of the Executive Department
was sustained through the 2003 Citizen-Voter Education Summit. IPER had prior projects with
the UNDP-- Citizen Voters’ Education Campaign and Citizen Voter Education and Election
Monitoring Campaign in 2003-2004.

          Examples of other projects that scaled up included the following: 1) the ASPAP project
that utilized the Civil Service Commission’s (CSC) Public Service Delivery Audit Assistance
(PASADA) mechanism in capacitating Public Administration students to become PASADA
volunteers in the different regions with ASPAP members-schools, 2) The Model Police Station
which was piloted in Marikina and later replicated in the province of Aklan and Marawi City. To
date, there are ten (10) more areas in various parts of the country requesting the PNP assistance in
setting up model police stations in their respective areas, 3) the MDG localization initiatives of
the UN-Habitat; 4) the Center for Community Journalism and Development (CCJD) project has
resulted to the formation of citizen-media councils in Palawan, Iloilo, North Cotabato, and Bicol
region. The councils served as the mechanisms for feedback and dialogue between the
government officials and the citizens. Through these media facilitated mechanisms, public audits
to address corruption and governance performance were done that would ensure state
accountability and transparency.

         Other projects that have potentials for scaling up include the following: the Ateneo
School of Governance’s localization (ASG) of Government-Watch (G-Watch) which offered the
proactive approach in monitoring selected government projects, and the assistance provided to the
ASPAP schools which were envisioned to become the academic and resource centres in various
regions that would serve various functions such as addressing the capacity building and technical
support needs of the Local Government Units (LGUs) and local public administration
practitioners, creating avenues for local and national discourse on democratic governance,
identifying best practices (as planned with Galing Pook Foundation (GPF) and accessing
knowledge products,

b) ―Snowball‖ Effect

         This tendency was well manifested in the projects under the Anti-Corruption sub-cluster.
Institutions like the CSC and the Office of the Ombudsman (OMB), two anti-corruption agencies
of the government drafted their Medium Term Anti-Corruption Plans and blueprints for
implementation. Part of the outputs of the CSC projects since its engagement with the Programme
in 2003, were the tools and blueprints for use in effecting reforms within the CSC. These included
reforms in the examination system, recruitment of prospective government employees,
performance management and incentives/awards and tracking client satisfaction. In the case of
the OMB, the National Anti-Corruption Program of Action (NACPA) was formulated on the

 NSTP is a requirement in any baccalaureate course that spans two semesters. It consists of the following
components: 1) the Reserve Officers Training Corps, 2) the Civic Welfare Training Service and 3) the
Literacy Training Service.

following bases: diffused anti-corruption efforts, gaps and overlaps in policy development and
implementation and the absence of a unified monitoring of anti-corruption efforts. The crafting of
the NACPA was seen as a convergence strategy for collective action and synergized initiatives
towards anti-corruption goals. Guided by the principles of the United Nations Convention against
Corruption (UNCAC), the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and the Medium Term
Philippine Development Plan (MTPDP), the NACPA adopted broad anti-corruption strategies
such as policy, prosecution, prevention, promotion of integrity, partnership building, performance
management, and perception management. Most importantly, it called for the multi-stakeholder
partnership among government agencies, civil society, business sector, the OMB, LGUs and
development institutions. In this regard, several RPs of the FDG Programme were involved.

        The OMB later forged partnership with the Transparency and Accountability Network
(TAN), a network with 32 member-organizations. The collective efforts of OMB and the anti-
corruption organizations were instrumental in the ratification of the UNCAC which then provided
a common framework for those groups working in combating corruption. At this point, the
challenge that these anti-corruption organizations faced is on how to concretize the UNCAC at
the local level and in the Philippine setting.

         Other projects like the G-Watch of the ASG, a member of the TAN has utilized the
UNCAC and the Government Procurement Reform Act (GPRA) in pursuing anti-corruption
initiatives. The G-Watch is a preventive approach to corruption that looks into the systems and
processes in the government bidding transactions to track public expenditures. The G-Watch
tools developed can be used by ordinary citizens in tracking public expenditures. There were
initiatives on the localization of the G-Watch experience in different areas in the Philippines.
One recent development was the initial exploration between ASG and two ASPAP member-
schools (University of Makati and Ateneo de Davao) to replicate the G-Watch in their respective
areas. These anti-corruption initiatives were then complemented by grassroots efforts like the
projects of the CCAGG and the NLCGG. These ―snowball‖ effect when sustained and expanded
to other areas and sectors overtime will eventually lead to the anti-corruption goals that these
projects seek to achieved. In the future, the anti-corruption concerns can ―snowball‖ with the
electoral and public administration reform efforts in the election and capacity building of new
breed of political leaders.

         Another ―snowball effect‖ is the collaborative efforts of the projects under the Justice
Reforms. The baseline study conducted by the Supreme Court (SC) on the operations and
linkages of the five pillars of justice system created an opportunity for agencies involved in the
criminal justice system to synergize their efforts for the disadvantaged to access to justice. The
Bureau of Jail Management and Penology (BMJP) conducted a study on jail decongestion in
Quezon City and Pasig which resulted in establishing a coordination and management system for
jail decongestion (i.e., legal, paralegal, pre-reintegration assessment and counselling services, and
re-integration referral). This effort was complemented by efforts of the IBP and Bureau of
Corrections (BUCOR). In particular, IBP updated records of detainees for release and
compilation of motions and pleadings while the BUCOR developed the National Standard on
Corrections. The combined efforts of these parties led to the release of 160 detainees released -
103 women and 57 men. The efforts of the duty bearers were further complemented by the
Alternative Law Group (ALG) project which trained 30 paralegals and mobilized other lawyers to
expand the access to justice of the disadvantaged. If these efforts would be sustained and
localized, then these would create ―snowball‖ effects in improving access to justice and human
rights and in developing more responsible institutions in the justice system. However, a missing
element in these collective undertakings is the reintegration of the released detainees into their

communities which was part of the package of assistance with a civic organization but
unfortunately, did not push through.

2. Tracking the Progress Towards the Outcomes

         Tables 1-A, 1-B, and 1-C, provide a summary of the perceived progress towards the
outcomes of selected projects and governance themes. Annex 5 presents the CPAP outcome
statements and indicators of the three reform areas and more detailed account on the perceived
results to date as shared by the informants. In synthesizing the perceived progress, the following
were the trends:

Duty Bearers

a) Continuing formulation and/or process of institutionalization of national and legal
  frameworks, mechanisms and plans on governance by duty bearers. Among the sample
  experiences were the agencies involved in declogging the jails, CHR, CSC, OMB, DILG, UN-
  Habitat, NEDA, PNP, DBM, government bodies involved in the UNCAC ratification;

b) Initializing model building and formulation of local policy on MDG localization by duty
  bearers like the DILG, UN-Habitat, and LMP;

Claim Holders

c) Broadening initiatives and continuing capacity building of claim holders and local
  champions in the exercise of their right to participate in governance; continuing efforts to set up
  and implement local mechanisms to assert and promote transparency and accountability, access
  to justice, honest election, and benefit from the MDG targets as experienced by CCAGG,
  CCJD, ESCR, IPER, TAN, ASG, FOCIG, GPF, and UN-Habitat communities;

d) Enjoying initial benefits (direct/indirect) by claim holders (e.g., released detainees,
  improvement in service delivery of selected frontline services, , achievements in certain MDG
  targets such as improvement in maternal mortality rate, more efficient tax collection, repair of a
  poorly constructed road, suspension of provincial government personnel, increased awareness
  on voter’s rights and rights of the informal sector);

Both Duty Bearers and Claim Holders

e) Developing monitoring tools and systems to arrest corruption at the national and local levels
  (CCAGG, ASG, CSC, FOCIG, CCJD) and to promote honest election (IPER); developing a
  performance appraisal tool to ensure transparent and accountable performance of public
  servants as experienced by the CSC/CESB;

f) Broadening avenues for duty bearers and claim holders to work together on various
   thematic areas on governance through multi-stakeholder, multi-level (national to local, local to
   national, city/town/provincial-level), multi-sectoral settings;

g) Sustaining the practice of RBA and/or gender-responsive approaches and principles as
  experienced by the SC, NEDA, PNP, IPER, CCJD, UN-Habitat, CPBD, WAGI, NCPAG,
  ASPAP, IBP. BJMP, BUCOR; continuing sensitization of both the duty bearers and claim
  holders on RBA and gender perspectives;

h) Establishing sustainability mechanisms to carry on the gains in governance as shown in
  the experiences of IPER, CCAGG, efforts of the IBP, BJMP, and BUCOR; ALG; anti-
  corruption cluster, media-community partnership, MDG localization with LGUs and
  communities, UP-NCPAG and the ASPAP schools, CSO network nationwide;

Table 1-A                 Perceived Progress Towards the Outcomes in the
                          Justice Reforms and Human Rights Cluster

                 DUTY BEARERS                                            CLAIM HOLDERS
   Continuing access to justice of the poor through       Established local mechanisms (e.g., Ulat sa
    improved synergy, capacities and mechanisms              Bayan, Citizens Media Councils) serving as
    among agencies and CSOs rendering direct                 avenues for communities, journalists and local
    services in declogging the courts and jails;             CSOs to work together to exercise the right of
   Developing partnerships between government               claim holders to participate in local
    and community to advocate human rights                   governance processes, to access social services
    reforms and access to justice through the rights-        and to address women’s issues;
    based and gender-sensitive law enforcement             Expanding the role and developing the
    system;                                                  capacities of journalists and media as catalysts
   Increasing requests for or establishment of              in pursuing local issues on governance, child
    rights-based police system and stations                  labour, women, human rights, etc. and
    nationwide;                                              empowering community participation, in
   Increasing awareness of both the duty-bearers            addressing ethical issues in journalism and in
    and claim holders on their respective rights and         crafting people’s stories/news through gender
    duties in the pursuit of justice and human               and rights-based lens;
    rights;                                                Increasing number of local champions and
   Awareness by duty bearers and pilot indigenous           broadening of constituencies among claim
    community on how to infuse the rights-based              holders from various sectors including the
    approach into the Ancestral Domain                       informal sector;
    Sustainable Development and Protection Plan            Sustaining the access to justice and human
    formulation                                              rights of the poor through the pool of lawyers
                                                             and paralegals who can complement the
                                                             government’s initiatives in the criminal justice
                                                           Increasing awareness and articulation of the
                                                             rights and concerns of the informal sector;

Table 1-B:                Perceived Progress Towards the Outcomes in Public Administration
                          Reform Cluster

                 DUTY BEARERS                                          CLAIM HOLDERS
MDG Localization                                        MDG Localization
 Increasing number of LGUs incorporating MDG            Formalization of partnership between the
  targets in their city/town development plans and        ASPAP and GFP in the search, documentation
  budgets;                                                and promotion of best local government
 Citizen monitoring teams or Integrity Circles           practices in MDG localization;
  established to sustain the monitoring of MDG
  localization and track significant achievements       Public Administration
  through time;                                          Constituency building and knowledge sharing
 Various mechanisms and tools for MDG                    among public administration practitioners,
  localization and monitoring are in place which          faculty, professionals and schools from national
  reflect various models of practice or                   to local levels;

  experimentation that can become potential bases       Increasing pool of PA faculty and professionals
  for replication of best practices as well as           acting as local advocates of good governance
  measures of level of achievements of MDG               and engaging with LGUs;
  targets;                                              Knowledge products (e.g., SWS survey, GPF
 Quantitative and qualitative evidences of MDG-         case studies, standardized PA curriculum)
  related targets as well as public expenditures in      utilized as guides for awareness-raising, program
  social services in the process of becoming             development, and capacity building;
  available with the current and future efforts to
  develop monitoring systems by the duty-bearers;      Anti-corruption
                                                        Broadening the constituencies and building
Anti-corruption                                          capacities of claim holders and local champions
 Broadening partnership, participation and              to engage in monitoring the implementation of
  mutually reinforcing initiatives among                 government projects or undertake anti-corruption
  government, CSOs and private sector to address         initiatives for greater transparency and
  corruption, as well as integrate and                   accountability in public transactions (e.g.,
  institutionalize reforms among anti-corruption         Northern Luzon anti-corruption monitoring, text
  bodies through the NACPA. There is also an             book monitoring, possible replication in NCR
  improvement in the level of accountability and         with CBCP); use of monitoring tools developed;
  performance in the government side;                   Initial gains of monitoring: reduced expenditures
 Increased efficiency in tax administration as well     on books through proper textbook count in
  as increased taxpayers’ awareness on proper tax        partnership with citizens; improved effectiveness
  filing;                                                of Bureau of Customs operations towards
                                                         increased revenues; improved tax compliance
Public Administration                                    (i.e., major dailies have noted that FOCIG has
  Improved quality of government services through       boosted the BIR collection for the year);
   responsiveness of the various departments and         administrative actions taken (i.e., suspension) on
   elimination/minimization of overlaps and              11 dishonest DPWH engineers; penalty exacted
   duplication of functions,                             on the contractor with unacceptable work
  Increased number of government agencies and           performance;
   LGUs benchmarking their frontline services at        Institutionalization of anti-corruption mechanisms
   the NCR and regional levels using CSC’s               involving duty bearers and claim holders at the
   PASADA instrument;                                    local and regional levels (i.e. bilateral
  Through the PASADA mechanism, problems,               arrangement between CCAGG and district-level
   issues and interventions of frontline service         DPWH);
   agencies were identified leading to better           Unintended outcome: the ratification of the
   performance of selected agencies; awards were         UNCAC on November 6, 2006 which now
   given to agencies with outstanding service            provides the general roadmap and framework for
   delivery;                                             both the government and CSOs in addressing
  The Performance Evaluation System (PES) was           corruption in the country;
   implemented in the CSC and piloted in DTI and        There was a push for greater CSO participation in
   DOE resulting to better and fairer process of         monitoring UNCAC implementation.
   evaluation and more disciplined employees;
  Built a network of PASADA volunteers from
   ASPAP schools and CSC units;
  Transfer of anti-corruption skills (PASADA)
   technology and tools (PASADA primer) to the
   academe, CSOs and agencies.

Table 1-C                  Perceived Progress Towards the Outcomes in Political and Electoral
                           Reforms Cluster

                 DUTY BEARERS                                           CLAIM HOLDERS
Electoral Reform                                        Electoral Reforms
 Increased level of engagement of multi-sectoral        Citizen-Voter Education campaign has been
  groups in electoral reforms as observed by               mainstreamed in the formal education through
  COMELEC;                                                 the Department of Education’s National
                                                           Service Training Program curriculum and in
Legislative Reform                                         the program services of NGO networks in NCR
 Increased citizens’ awareness and changed                and ARMM; mobilized 300 NSTP instructors;
  perceptions about the legislative processes and        Citizen-voters education modules are adopted
  structures;                                              for use by the Consortium for Electoral
 Indirect outcome: the House of Representatives           Reforms member-organizations in NCR and by
  now requires the Congressmen/women to conduct            the Citizen Coalition for ARMM Reform and
  public hearings in their own constituencies (e.g.,       Election;
  reflected in the Reform Agenda paper of the new        Inclusion of provision on citizen-voter
  leadership) - this was the call of the CLAP              education in the amended Electoral
  project. Also, there is a growing consciousness          Modernization Law;
  among the congressional staff to be more citizen-      Formation of trainers and educators for voters
  friendly;                                                education from the ranks of teachers and youth
 Indirect Outcome: the knowledge product, Five            volunteers;
  Pillars of Growth (An Economic and Social              Formation of citizens election monitoring
  Development Framework)― became one of the                groups among the youth;
  influences for the Senate to file several bills and    Higher level of awareness/ consciousness
  enact the following into law— Republic Act               among citizens on electoral processes and their
  9334, RA 9335, RA 9336, RA 9337, RA 9480,                electoral rights; increased level of participation
  RA 9474; RA 9343, RA 9361, RA 9372, RA                   of parents as a result of their children’s efforts
  9358. RA 9344 (establishing a comprehensive              to educate them on electoral processes;
  juvenile justice and welfare system, creating the      More credible elections (2007) as a result of the
  juvenile justice and welfare council under the           monitoring process done by citizens
  DOJ).                                                    monitoring groups during the elections;

3. Tracking the Initiatives in Mainstreaming Gender and RBA

        The FDG Programme and the IP exerted efforts to ensure that gender and HR were
mainstreamed in the Programme. The UNDP organized an orientation on gender and HR
mainstreaming in May, 2006 and included the mainstreaming concerns during the review of the
2006 implementation in November. In addition, a discussion on progress on HR and gender
mainstreaming was included in the agenda of the cluster meeting or Programme meeting. UNDP
also had a section on indicative progress on HR and gender mainstreaming in its project
completion report form. Through the WAGI project on human rights and gender in governance,
WAGI and the HR consultant were able to provide mentoring/coaching assistance to the RPs,
conduct an HR and gender mainstreaming capacities needs assessment in late August, 2006,
conduct a training-workshop on mainstreaming gender and women’s rights into governance
reforms (November 15-16, 2006), conduct project-related consultations cum technical assistance
to PNP, COMELEC, SC and NEDA and formulate program indicators for gender responsive
governance, among others. As a result of the mentoring assistance, 18 projects/RPs have planned
outputs and activities on human rights and gender mainstreaming-- COMELEC, CER, PPSA,
PNP, IBP, and ALG. Of these, 13 reported that they have undertaken mainstreaming activities

based on their respective plans. However, WAGI and the HR consultant only came in after
majority of the projects have been approved which made adjustments difficult in terms of
additional mainstreaming activities and budget. In addition, the monitoring form developed by
WAGI was not implemented as well as an alternative monitoring tool, i.e., adding a column to the
AWP monitoring tool which was decided upon by the Tripartite Committee. 6

         All told, concrete assistance in mainstreaming gender and RBA was rather delayed
in implementation. In addition, monitoring on the progress of mainstreaming was not
sustained. The process of mainstreaming should have commenced at the project approval phase
so that the Tripartite Committee and/or the gender and HR consultants can have a more proactive
assistance to the RPs in project designing and budgeting. Skill-level and project-specific
assistance have not yet been conducted. In addition, WAGI’s program indicators for gender
responsive governance and NEDA’s Tracking Governance Reforms by NEDA could have been
related with the indicators set for CPAP and thereafter applied in the gender and RBA
mainstreaming of the FDG Programme.

       The continuation of mentoring/coaching assistance of WAGI and the HR consultant
and UNDP’s own efforts, and consequent gains from the initiatives and implementation of
gender/HR mainstreaming plans of RPs were affected by the sudden shift in UNDP’s
programme thrust in late 2006.

         In general, the initiatives were rather uneven across RPs. The RPs had varying
appreciation, understanding, skills and capacity in gender and RBA mainstreaming—e.g.,
already incorporating gender, open to mainstream, had a ―for compliance only‖ attitude, resistant
to gender mainstreaming, confused since gender mainstreaming was not part of the TOR. Some
of the examples of mainstreaming practice by the RPs were: ASPAP through their schools, IPER
which already included gender and HR in its voter’s education modules, SC which had a strong
GAD mainstreaming in the judiciary, UN-Habitat of which two MDGs were on poverty reduction
and women’s empowerment, and family empowerment targeted both men and women, and CPBD
which saw to it that men and women from all sectors were represented in consultations. It must
also be qualified that the level of gender and RBA mainstreaming by certain RPs were brought
about by a confluence of factors within each organization (for example commitment of the
leadership and initiatives undertaken prior to engagement with UNDP) and UNDP’s own
commitment to gender mainstreaming.


        From the experiences of the RPs and IP informants, the following confluence of factors
were identified as having affected the extent of achievement of the outcomes or progress towards
the outcomes:

1. Identifying champions within the leadership and personnel in the government structures

        Commitment of the leadership and presence of focal points from the ranks of duty bearers
were crucial in initiating governance reforms. The presence of these champions facilitated the
formulation of common agenda, framework and plans, and setting up of mechanisms within the
agency that ensured implementation of internal reform initiatives and delivery of desired outputs
and outcomes. For example, in several RPs, the heads of office were resolute in their
engagement. In addition, the responsibilities for implementation of governance initiatives were

    Source: WAGI’s 2006 Project Completion Report

lodged with certain personnel or units (e.g., PMO- either already in existence or created within
the programme period).

         However, despite the presence of internal champions and work structures in governance
reforms, the day-to-day demands and internal situations of each government agency affected the
target outputs and outcomes under the FDG. Concretely, the duty bearers had to deal with
competing priorities and demands of project work and regular agency tasks. In addition, they had
to consider possible changes in work assignments of staff due to the government’s rationalization
plan (as experienced by an RP). Moreover, they had to face the lack of technical and/or financial
capacity to implement approved projects (e.g., documentation skills, resources, personnel).
Furthermore, an agency had to address the lack of vision for project continuity of its leadership.

2. Installing structures and mechanisms to support the reform initiatives of duty bearers

         Duty bearers involved in the governance reform initiatives could only be effective if they
enjoyed the support of institutional partners such as government agencies in various branches of
the government structure as well as the LGUs (especially the local chief executives). Thus,
structures and mechanisms of relationships were set in place such as in the case of the MDG
localization of the DILG and UN-Habitat. In addition, these partnerships consciously expanded in
order to broaden their networks (within the government structure and with civil society
organizations) and constituencies (as in the case of the tie-up between CSC and ASPAP on the
localization of the PASADA). Furthermore, adequate capacity building of implementing unit and
personnel was an important element in enhancing and sustaining the support on issues.

3. Fostering citizen-led and inclusive community participation

         Governance reforms could not be successful without the participation of grassroots
communities and local champions in ways that enhanced inclusiveness and community ownership
of the governance issues, reform initiatives and processes. In addition, capacity building for the
citizens on their rights and duties was an imperative for a meaningful and sustainable citizen-led
engagement. However, stakeholders in governance reforms also had to deal with the challenge of
sustaining the enthusiasm of the community and of addressing the evolving capacity building
needs of communities. Governance reforms could not be achieved in a short span of time alone as
―governance is a multi-dimensional enterprise‖, according to an IP representative.. Essentially,
governance reforms targeted changes in societal structures, systems and cultures.

4. Involving broad participation of claim holders and expanding the role of media in
governance for sustainability

The CPAP between the UNDP and the GOP needed the willingness and sustained commitment of
claim holders from the ranks of CSOs, academe, media and grassroots organizations and
communities. Evidently, the collaboration between duty bearers and claim holders in the past and
current FDG Programme implementation had attained concrete gains (such as ASPAP partner
schools to engage with the LGUs, active participation of TAN’s network in the ratification of the
UNCAC) and surfaced critical partnership issues (such as dynamics between CSOs and
government) that concerned parties had to deal with. In addition, certain RPs from the claim
holders had also evolved and installed sustainability mechanisms that reflected their long-term
commitment to governance reforms. Examples were the experiences of IPER, UP-NCPAG and
ASPAP chapters, and presence of citizens monitoring groups. The role of media and journalists--
having rights-based, gender and MDC lens on governance issues—were illustrated in the funded
projects. Furthermore, the delivery of committed support or tie-ups between/among CSOs was to

be ensured so that governance initiatives could scale up and the intended benefits could be

5. Forging partnership between UNDP and its programme partners and among programme
partners for the collective pursuit of governance reforms

As drawn from the 2005-2007 engagements, partnership between the UNDP and its programme
partners entailed transparency and clarity on the principles and rules of engagements. These rules
of engagement were translated into decision-making and negotiation processes, programme
management system and work processes that could enhance unity, efficiency, mutual benefits and
effectiveness on programme concepts, intents, decisions, directions and results (short-term and
long-term) as well as responsibilities among partners/parties. The selection and performance of
the IP and the constitution of the PMO or any unit within the IP structure were vital ingredients in
the partnership arrangements. Complementation of work, convergence of efforts and cross-
fertilization of ideas among partners despite political and cultural differences were experienced
for the collective attainment of the CPAP outputs and outcomes, and governance reforms for the
country. Likewise, the participatory and consensus building style of working together among duty
bearers and claim holders enhanced transparency and mutual trust among partners. However, the
varying interests and commitment of agencies concerned also tended to slow down the
implementation process. Limited resources or venues for various groups to get together and plan
for the replication of these best practices also constrained the consultative processes. Lacking
management system and tools also hampered the partnership arrangements and results.

As will be expounded in the section on partnership strategy and synergy, the intent of UNDP to
have a meaningful partnership with its partners towards the target outcomes was evident in many
of its approaches and mechanisms such as frequent consultations, coaching sessions, and funding
support, and provision of UN experts (in the case of the UNCAC ratification). However, it was
affected by lapses in consultation and communication on the part of UNDP (e.g., sudden
disengagement, delays in fund releases, injection of additional concepts/tools). The IP provided
the overall orchestration of the governance initiatives of the RPs and links with the UNDP. It set
up mechanisms for mutual cooperation (e.g., meetings). The PMO rendered technical support and
coordinative role on a day-to-day basis. More importantly, the PMO assisted the Tripartite
Committee and Executive Committee in tracking results, mutual accountability and resource
utilization through time in this multi-stakeholder, multi-theme and multi-year engagements.

6. Responding to the evolving external socio-political milieu

The external milieu that located the governance initiatives of both the duty bearers and claim
holders affected the attainment of the CPAP outcomes. How the players in the FDG Programme
and governance work in general dealt with the external milieu and were affected by it were
among the major enhancing or hindering determinants of the progress towards the outcomes. On
the part of the duty bearers, there was the reality of disillusionment and lost of trust in certain
government institutions by the people in general. Certain agencies had credibility problems with
the claim holders. Our local government units which were one of the primary targets and partners
of governance reforms were still influenced by traditional politics. It was not surprising that there
were local officials such as the mayors who did not share the governance issues that the partners
of the FDG Programme were pursuing. In similar vein, there were personnel in government who
were resistant or uncooperative with the governance initiatives.

The claim holders from media and electoral reforms were also susceptible to death threats and
bodily harm, court cases and killings. Among media practitioners, corruption also existed.

There was also the dynamics between CSOs and the government arising from contradictions in
development perspectives, political agenda and work styles.


         From the foregoing discussions on the progress towards the outcomes and extent of
achievement of outputs, UNDP played a crucial role in the accomplishments of outputs and
indications towards the outcomes. UNDP’s pivotal role was acknowledged by the IP and RPs.
Accordingly, UNDP pioneered in governance reforms that were of strategic importance to the
Philippines beset by a gamut of governance concerns. UNDP served as a catalyst in laying down
an enabling environment for policy reforms, community actions, research undertakings, CSO
engagement with government, access to justice service delivery, model building on governance
strategies and approaches, production of numerous and useful knowledge products, and creation
of avenues for sharing ideas and tools. It provided the funding facility to support the operations of
governance initiatives by both the duty bearers and claim holders, thereby fast-tracking or
accelerating their respective mandates on governance.

         UNDP was perceived as a non-aligned and impartial body that could pursue thematic
governance reforms in a multi-stakeholder and cross-sectoral settings of varying and/or
conflicting political interests. It provided a strategic intervention because its approach was
programmatic, thus, it was able to provide guidance for the development and implementation of
subsequent projects. UNDP had a keen interest in exploring innovative, replicable, cost-effective
and sustainable ideas with partners and on how these ideas could find congruence among
partners. Thus, UNDP encouraged partners to delve into new avenues of governance work. It
strove to be consultative with its partners and encouraged evolvement of partnership from below.

         However, the enabling partnership was marred by the sudden changes in programme
thrust and partnership arrangements with the IP and RP which tested UNDP’s practice of its
partnership strategy.


        UNDP’s partnership strategy is ―guided by the principle that the attainment of the desired
outcomes is possible only with the support and concerted actions of stakeholders. Building
consensus and creating a deeper sense of ownership and a higher level of accountability of the
development process and the intended outcomes among partners is therefore critical in achieving
the results. For this reason, attention has been given to the process of building partnerships and
how partnerships are strategically utilized to achieve the outcomes set forth in the Country

         Expansion of Partners. Partnerships were built among duty bearers and claim holders
from government units (representing the legislative, judicial and executive branches of the
government), civil society organizations, media and the academe tackling issues on anti-
corruption, electoral reforms, electoral reforms, voters’ awareness, community journalism,
informal sector, access to justice, MDG localization, and public administration. As shown on
Table __, from 2002 to 2007, the number of partners of the FDG Programme grew from 26 in the
first programme cycle (2002-2004) to 37 in the 2005-2007 programme cycle. There was a good

 Country Programme Action Plan Between the Government of the Philippines and United Nations
Development Programme, 2005-2009, p. 12.

balance of duty-bearers and claim-holders. However, among the claim-holders only two were
citizens’ groups- CCAGG and FOCIG, although the other CSOs have their respective
constituencies and networks from the ranks of service providers and communities. Most of the
partners started their engagements during the first programme cycle. Those which were only
involved during the 2005-2007 programme cycle were the BUCOR, OP/DAP and LMP, ALS,
WAGI, ECSR-Asia, CFA, CER, SWS, FOCIG, and ASPAP. For the 2002-2004 programme
periods, there were seven IP while in the second cycle, there was only one, the UP-NCPAG.

                          Table 2: Summary of Partners from 2002-2007

Period/Reform         Duty Bearers                  Civil Society         Academe        Total
2002-2004             COMELEC, CPBD-HOR,            IPER, CCJD, IBP,      PPSA,
                      SEPO, SC, PNP, CHR, BJMP,     CCAGG, TAN, ASG,      NCPAG,
                      DBM, NEDA, OMB,               GPF, FTA, ECOP        UP-TWSC,
                      CSC/CESB, DILG-LGA, TF-
                      PLG UN-Habitat,
TOTAL                 14                            9                     3              26

Justice               SC,PNP, CHR, BJMP, BUCOR,     CCJD, IBP, ALG,
Reform/Human                                        WAGI, ESCR-Asia,
Rights                                              CFA,                                 11
Political/Electoral   COMELEC, CPBD-HOR, SEPO       IPER, CER             PPSA
Reforms                                                                                   6
Public                DBM, NEDA, OMB, OP/DAP,       SWS, CCAGG,           NCPAG,
Administration        CSC/CESB, DILG-LGA, LMP,      TAN, FOCIG, ASG, ,    ASPAP,
Reforms               TF-PLG, UN-Habitat            GPF, FTA, ECOP        UP-TWSC        20
TOTAL                 17                            16                    4              37

         Partnership Mechanisms Set Up. According to the document, ―Report on the Progress
Towards Achieving Outcomes of the UNDP CPAP on Fostering Democratic Governance,
Calendar Year 2006‖, the UNDP-FDG Programme implemented the Result-based
Monitoring and Evaluation Framework and tools to ensure that all projects conformed with
the data requirements that could track the achievement of outputs, utilization of resources
and desired CPAP outcomes or progress towards the outcomes. As described, for monitoring
the project status, the tools and activities were the AWP format, Project Completion Report, field
visits of the PMO once a year, review of the outputs required (as contained in the TOR) for the
release of succeeding fund tranche, and two types of Quality Review (one by the IP and one by
independent reviewers) for completed projects. For monitoring the progress towards the
outcomes, the following were used: Standard Progress Report prepared by an independent
reviewer, conduct of the annual CPAP review by the Outcome Board, conduct of annual surveys
to establish baselines and progress towards the outcomes, and use of the HR and Gender
Diagnosis/tracking studies to track RBA and gender mainstreaming. For the management
structure, the Report cited the functions of the following entities:

1. Executive Committee, composed of the UNDP and NEDA, ensured that the CPAP is being
  implemented properly;

2. Tripartite Committee, composed of the FDG Manager, NEDA and UP-NCPAG, provided the
  overall guidance and direction to the Portfolio and ensured that the projects would contribute to
  the target outcomes;

3. Implementing Partner, the UP-NCPAG, ensured the delivery of Portfolio targets and was
  accountable to the Tripartite and Executive Committees;

4. Project Management Office provided the technical, secretariat and administrative support to the

        In addition, there were Responsible Parties which were tasked to implement their
respective projects under the FDG Programme. The IP and RPs met and interfaced through the
cluster meetings and other venues such as workshops. The four projects being funded by the
Democratic Governance Thematic Trust Funds reported directly to the UNDP Portfolio Manager.

         Partnership Experience. Some believed that UNDP was consultative in relating with the
RPs. It had a vital role in building on, expanding and fast-tracking existing thrusts and
activities of the IP and RPs. However, the sudden change in programme thrust and
replacement of IP towards the end of 2006 by the UNDP without prior consultation or
communication with all stakeholders put the partnership in a precarious situation. In
addition, the future participation of the IP and the RPs on board vis-à-vis the new programme
thrust of UNDP was not clearly conveyed to the stakeholders. UNDP’s decisions were perceived
as not only lacking in transparency and communication but a contradiction in its own
principles of partnership strategy and empowerment goals. Many partners were in the belief
that the FDG was a multi-year engagement until 2009, subject to an annual performance review
of the participating RPs. Thus, the succeeding phases of their governance work, particularly for
2007 were affected by the sudden shift in thrust. In the first place, many RPs shared that the
annual project implementation was practically less than one year since the period also included
project processing, approval, and staggered release of project funds. Finally, some informants
opined that the current programme cycle should have been properly closed with all the RPs and
IP, and turned over to the new IP.

         On the other hand, the situation created an opportunity for RPs to look for other funding,
despite their varying fund sourcing capacities. Even during the project period, the IPs and UNDP
had encouraged the RPs to initiate fund sourcing outside the UNDP. To date, there are many RPs
which continued the next phases of their mandates as they were able to tap other funding (such as
the Model Police Station) or despite funding assurance (IPER, CCJD, CCAGG). However, there
were those which slowed down due to limited resources (such as the CPBD, SC, DILG).

        Some partners shared that although they welcomed new learning on project management,
there were mid-stream changes in the financial system of UNDP (from ATLAS to HAC to
FACE) and M and E tools which caused confusions. There were also delays in fund releases
which affected their implementation. While some RPs believed that the M and E tools facilitated
the reporting requirements of the RPs, others felt that some of these were cumbersome to
accomplish especially for projects that span less than a year.

        For some partners, there was also the issue of co-ownership of the outcome and
output statements and indicators set for the FDG as these were laid down only by the
UNDP. The RPs had varying understanding on the linkages of outputs and outcome statements
and indicators.

         The cluster meetings served as the main avenue to consult the RPs, to synergize work and
to shepherd the various projects and RPs towards the CPAP outcomes. In the management
arrangement, shepherding of the projects towards the outcome was the responsibility of the
Outcome Board and the Tripartite Committee. During the program period, the Outcome Board
has just been constituted, thus, shepherding the clusters was with the Tripartite Committee. The
mechanisms set to share governance experiences and to plan actions to shepherd the
clusters towards the CPAP outcomes were not adequately designed nor maximized as
gleaned from the following experiences of selected RPs:

        One, some informants shared that at the early part of the programme cycle there were
frequent cluster meetings. However, later, these meetings became less frequent and as observed
by a few RPs, became a collective sessions to prepare the requirements of the PMO and other
administrative concerns rather than on substantive aspects like sharing experiences and linkage-

        Two, a few RPs were not familiar on inter- and intra cluster members activities and
progress towards the outcomes except with RPs which were part of its usual network outside the
FDG Programme. The RPs tended to mind their own deliverables. A few informants opined that
there was not much synergy or mutual assistance that materialized with other clusters during the
program period.

         Three, among the RPs and IPs, there were emerging realization and efforts to synergize
initiatives and/or to utilize the knowledge products in the course of project implementation (e.g.,
ASPAP with Galing Pook on sharing of case materials on best practices; DILG with LMP on
MDG localization; CCJD with CHR on extra-judicial killings, PASADA instruments used by
ASPAP volunteers). However, these have been more of an informal arrangement and initiatives
of certain RPs. A more programmatic inter-intra mechanism could also have been set in place as
part of the program design and management, aside from the initiatives of the RPs/IP that evolved
in the cluster interactions.

         Four, the RPs/IP have strategic views of their projects and efforts in the FDG
Programme. However, there were varying levels of appreciation of the expected CPAP outcomes
as the program period was still on its early stages, and on a daily basis, the RPs were more
focused on the deliverables.

         The delineation of roles, especially of the Tripartite Committee, the IP and the PMO
was unclear or differently perceived by the RPs (e.g., who should be shepherding, does the
PMO have a supervisory function over the RP, hierarchy of decision-making). On the other hand,
certain RPs believed that the PMO was effective in reminding RPs on deadlines and technical

       To its credit, the IP exerted efforts to respond to the feedbacks of the RPs, e.g.,
coming up with simplified reporting system and formats, shepherding the clusters,
organizing the AWP, and achieving the goals and deliverables. In addition, the IP utilized
bottom-up and participatory approaches in planning with the RPs. In a cluster meeting in
December, 2006, there was an agreement to have a cluster head and more regular meetings to

improve the synergy and shepherding towards the outcomes-- sub-cluster meeting every two
months, cluster meeting quarterly and inter-cluster yearly. However, this mechanism did not push
through as it was overtaken by the decision of UNDP to shift its programme thrust and change the



         For the 2005-2007 programme cycle, the FDG Porfolio has contributed in the quest for
democratic governance in the Philippines through the numerous projects and outputs that were
produced with 37 partners among duty bearers and claim holders. The outputs, categorized into
seven typologies, formed the building blocks for the various thematic reform areas undertaken.
Many of these outputs built on the initiatives of the previous programme cycle. In addition,
through the outputs produced, certain thematic reform initiatives showed the capacity to scale-up
and to ―snow ball‖ with other outputs- these tendencies were good signs of multi-stakeholders
actions in addressing certain governance issues and in generating more impact. Other outputs
were projected to do the same. If these would be continued and effectively directed, the
attainment of the CPAP outcomes would be envisaged To date, certain progress towards the
outcomes were manifested through the continuing reforms within partner agencies in the judicial,
legislative and executive branches of the government. On the part of the claim holders, the
assertion for their right to participate in governance and to benefit from access to justice and
human rights, and gender mainstreaming efforts have shown great strides as the citizenry,
together with the CSOs developed ways and means to broaden their ranks, localize their work,
systematize their collective actions, enjoy initial benefits, and establish sustainability
mechanisms. The FDG also opened avenues for duty bearers and claim holders to complement
each other, despite varying ideologies and interests. UNDP was also contributory in articulating
and mainstreaming gender and RBA in governance reforms. However, the momentum generated
was slowed down by the sudden shift in UNDP’s programme thrusts in 2007. This turn of event
also put the relationship between UNDP and its partners in a precarious situation. In addition, the
time frame of practically two years for project implementation was not enough for the CPAP
outcomes to be attained. In addition, there were areas for improvements in UNDP’s practice of its
partnership strategy, as well as in its formulation of the program design and management system
which affected the delivery of outputs, tracking of the progress towards the outcomes and the

         The FDG Programme must now face the challenges of sustaining the gains and
momentum of governance reforms that it helped create. Among the challenges are the localization
of the various thematic reform areas, inclusive participation and expansion of constituencies
among the claim holders in various geographical areas and grassroots communities, utilization of
the knowledge products for greater impact and constituency building, greater complementation of
work among stakeholders, and sustaining the governance initiatives of both the duty bearers and
claim holders beyond funding. For UNDP, the challenges are its support to more local
organizations from claim holders, improving the practice of the tripartite partnership (duty
bearers, claim holders and UNDP), up-scaling the gender and RBA mainstreaming initiatives, and
effective shepherding of the projects towards the CPAP outcomes and impact of governance


a) Several projects show promise of sustainability and impact on governance reforms as
  proven by the momentum that they have generated in terms of up-scaling capacity,
  “snowball” effects, experimentations or model building and localization with grassroots
  initiatives that UNDP might consider.

These are the anti-corruption cluster, electoral reform cluster, and the MDG localization. While
anti-corruption campaign is currently a global concern of the World Bank, the UNDP can sustain
its niche on the issue at the grassroots level to balance the current and future efforts on the duty-
bearer and CSO side. There are also several opportunities which can propel the anti-corruption
campaign and these are the ratified UNCAC, drafted NACPA, elections in 2010, and WB’s
studies on the most corrupt countries. The support of media, the UP-NCPAG and the ASPAP
schools can play supportive roles in these clusters.

The above recommendation does not mean a diminution of the achievements in other cluster and
sub-cluster. For example, the gains from the initiatives of CSC and CESB in instituting reforms
for better service delivery within the government bureaucracy can already be sustained by these
agencies (through the mechanisms and tools piloted) and can supplement the anti-corruption
campaign and reforms in public administration. The sub-cluster on the five pillars in the criminal
justice system is already attracting other funding supporters and/or can already be self-propelling
with the mechanisms and tools already set in place. With the knowledge product on the legal
empowerment of the poor and the broad network that it had generated through the FDG
Programme, the ESCR-Asia can have a leverage in tapping the assistance of other funding
sources and networks assisting the empowerment of the informal sector.

b) Increase support for citizenship empowerment and grassroots initiatives of claim
  holders and more engagement of UNDP with claim holders from the grassroots and

The engagement of the citizenry, and CSOs within the context of inclusive and democratic
processes must now be supported by the UNDP to propel the governance reform agenda further
and ensure access to justice, social services and governance of the poor. In addition, by directly
partnering with local/regional claim holders, more localized implementation of governance
reforms can be ensured as shown by the initiatives of CCAGG and NLCGG. Moreover, UNDP
can contribute in the continuing creation of critical mass that upholds the governance reform
agenda of the FDG. It can also share in the project management capacity building of grassroots
and regional claim holders by exposing them in its management systems and tools.

c) Improve the partnership strategy and program management system of the UNDP to
  contribute in the achievement of the CPAP and UNDAF outcomes and impact.

The experiences of the FDG especially for the 2005-2007 showed the gains, lessons and
challenges of shepherding the projects towards the outcomes which the next phase of FDG
programming must seriously look into to improve the attainment of target outcomes and impact.
With the Reforms and Rights for Results Framework in mind, the following should be ensured:

   Development and selection of strategic partnership and projects -- possible criteria are
    balance of claim holders and duty bearers, balance of national and local partners, area
    coverage and wide constituencies, track record in governance work and delivery of
    commitments on outputs/outcomes, high replicability and synergy with other FDG partners,

    significance or impact, innovativeness in project concepts, niche in the issue, least prone to
    interest groups;

   Selection of IP-- possible criteria are acceptability to various stakeholders, capacity to
    management multiple projects, stakeholders and governance themes, track record on
    democratic governance and delivery of outputs/outcome, presence of organic staff/unit to
    take care of the day-to-day operations and project continuity;

   Installation of efficient and effective mechanisms that can aid the IP, RPs, UNDP and NEDA
    in collectively tracking the outputs and shepherd the projects towards the outcomes through
    time-- the current mechanisms to account for the outputs and outcomes must be improved,
    e.g., more programmatic and inter-intra-convergence among the projects and clusters,
    optimization of the cluster meetings; identify possible cluster project/s for a more organized

   Installation of more user-friendly planning, monitoring and evaluation (PME) or management
    information system/s and tools-- the current management system, tools and indicator-setting
    of the UNDP must be enhanced or augmented so that output, process and outcome data can
    be generated and linked to serve many purposes. In addition, project-specific outcome
    indicators that mirror the CPAP indicators must be identified by each RP in consultation with
    the IP and UNDP so that co-ownership of the CPAP outcomes between UNDP and the RP/IP
    and relevance of the outcomes to the RP can be achieved. The baselines and benchmarks
    outputs (e.g., SWS governance study, WAGI’s gender/HR in governance indicators, NEDA’s
    tracking governance reform) produced through the Programme must be used to establish
    indicators and progress through time.

   Uphold commitment of UNDP- the UNDP must show its definition of partnership strategy
    and role in GOP and UNDP engagement by practicing transparency and equality with its
    partners. If there would be changes in its thrusts or commitment, these changes must be
    communicated and consulted with the partners. In addition, actions must be mutually done to
    cushion the impact of the changes as co-equal partners. Moreover, UNDP and its partners
    must engage in role clarification and expectations to enhance partnership.

   Presence of organic unit/staff within the IP who are capable of managing the day-to-day
    demands of the FDG Programme, periodically orient and inform the RPs on developments,
    provide technical support to the RPs and sustain the governance work after project
    completion. The staffing complement should be based on the areas of competencies needed in
    delivering the target outputs and outcomes so that the unit can provide technical support
    proactively and reactively;

   Development of a programmatic capacity building plan for the IP/RPs to ensure unity in
    framework and tools, knowledge sharing and skills transfer on areas of competency that
    should be held in common (e.g., gender and RBA mainstreaming);

d) Optimize the utilization of the knowledge products produced through the FDG
    Programme within the IP/RPs and their networks and outside the FDG networks to
    expand the stakeholders in the governance reform agenda of the FDG Programme and
    enhance awareness on democratic governance.

This can be done through a more systematic dissemination of the knowledge products especially
those which can be used by more stakeholders such as the source books and manual on human
rights, modules on voters’ education, various monitoring tools on anti-corruption, the CCAGG
manual on participatory monitoring of government projects, case studies on best practices,
national action plans, and many more. However, popularization of some of these knowledge
products needs improvement in style, taking into consideration the target audience and packaging
techniques. In addition, the comments of the Quality Review Team are worth looking into.

e) Strengthen the mechanisms and expand the initiatives, technical assistance and
  monitoring on gender and RBA mainstreaming initiatives on governance

Mechanisms and tools on mainstreaming gender and RBA throughout the project cycle must be
installed—for example, use of gender and RBA-related diagnosis and criteria in reviewing the
proposals received, improvement in the project design. Aside from continuing the formal
capacity building on gender and HR mainstreaming of the RPs, mentoring and coaching
assistance should now focus on skills and project-specific interventions. In addition, monitoring
on the actual practice of mainstreaming must be seriously conducted for various purposes such as
identifying remedies, good practices and progress. Aside from continuing the involvement of
WAGI, enjoining the assistance of NCRFW and the CHR should be explored. Since NCRFW is
the mandated government body on women’s concerns and gender mainstreaming in government,
its involvement can strengthen the commitment of the government, as the duty bearer, and sustain
mainstreaming within the government structure.

f) Continue exploring the theme of indigenous peoples and governance

Like in other avenues of development, indigenous peoples are marginalized in governance work
as their indigenous governance systems are viewed as backward to and incompatible with the
state-led governance system especially at the local level. In this regard, avenues for claim holders
among indigenous peoples to articulate and practice the kinds of governance that can protect their
rights and uphold their self-determining actions as indigenous peoples must be supported.

g) Strengthen the collaboration and services of IBP, BUCOR, ALG, BJMP in pursuing
  criminal justice reforms by linking them with the human rights thrust of the Governance

The projects on the five pillars of the criminal justice system has also shown ―snowball‖ effect
However, not all the pillars have access to funding. Perhaps these pillars can be included in the
work plan of CHR, the current IP.

h) Rethink UNDP’s application of the One-IP policy in the management and shepherding of
  the FDG Programme Portfolio in the light of varying contexts of the RPs/IP, multiple
  projects, stakeholders and governance themes, and interactions between duty bearers and
  claim holders.

As shown by the country experience involving various thematic reform areas and stakeholders in
fostering democratic governance, the selection of one IP to manage and shepherd these initiatives
had merits and limitations. Among duty bearers, there was also the separation of powers among
the judicial, executive and legislative branches of government. There was also the independence
of public (government) and private (CSOs) entities. Thus, it was difficult to identify an IP that
could bridge all these concerns. It was fortunate that the choice of the UP-NCPAG was a good
decision given its track record and neutral role as an academic institution dealing with theory and

practice of public administration and governance. In the next programme cycle, the new IP, CHR
has a more specific mandate, thus it might be more difficult for it to manage and shepherd
governance reforms outside of its mandate as an institution. Thus, should the rest of the thematic
reform areas be continued by the UNDP, decisions must be arrived at in ensuring the
identification of mechanisms that can contribute in sustaining the gains from the previous
programme cycles and shepherd the thematic reform areas. Possible options are:

    Option 1: To waive the One-IP Policy and request the UP-NCPAG to be the IP for the Public
              Administration, and Political/Electoral Reform Areas while the CHR will be the IP
              for the Justice and Human Rights Reform. Each IP should create an organic unit
              which will perform the functions of a PMO;

    Option 2: The members of the clusters and sub-clusters outside the scope of CHR, will select
              from among themselves a cluster convenor per cluster/sub-cluster. The selected
              convenors and clusters/sub-clusters will then have periodic meeting to converge
              plans, issues and other concerns and to track outputs and progress towards the
              outcomes. RPs which concerns cut across clusters can either choose a cluster or
              identify representatives that can sit in each of the clusters that they would like to be
              involved in. UNDP can fund the cluster activities and cluster management support
              of the selected cluster convenors. Following up of the periodic outputs and
              financial reports can be done by the UNDP portfolio staff;

              The coordinative role of the SC in the sub-cluster on the five pillars of the criminal
              justice system can be retained if this sub-cluster will not be included among the
              RPs of the CHR.

i) Open a funding window for innovative projects that can complement the strategic
projects and contribute to the policy research needs of the programme thrusts;

j) Proper closure of the current programme cycle should be done by UNDP to draw out
learning and recommendations for the next programme cycle and for the collective learning
of the IP/RPs.


        From the experiences of the various partners in FDG and the UNDP, the following
lessons and best practices were culled:

1. The practice of inclusiveness in enjoining the participation of duty bearers and claim holders
especially at the grassroots communities is an important element in broadening constituencies,
developing local champions and mobilizing grassroots actions on governance reform areas that
can change systems, structures, mindsets and cultural practices;

2. The diversity of approaches, strategies and tools in governance can contribute in responding
to varying situations and needs, in building workable models of governance reforms for
replication, and in enjoining other stakeholders to participate;

3. The complementation of top-down and bottom-up approaches and processes (or horizontal and
vertical processes) facilitates constituency building (especially at the grassroots level), cross-

fertilization of ideas, spread of governance reform initiatives and gains (from national to local and
vice-versa), and complementation of work among duty bearers and claim holders from various
parts of the country.

4. The wide array of knowledge products produced showcased the creativity and innovativeness
of stakeholders in doing governance work. These knowledge products can now be used, adapted,
and popularized within and outside the FDG clusters to expedite localization of governance work
and to inspire others to take up governance reforms;

5. Duty bearers and claim holders can complement each other and manage their differences under
an enabling environment that promotes the articulation of common agenda (e.g. NACPA,
UNCAC), that upholds transparency and consultative processes and complementation of work,
and that facilitates the enjoyment of people’s rights to participate in and benefit from good

6. Mainstreaming gender and RBA in governance is an important element in ensuring that both
men and women across sectors are active participants and together with the children, youth and
elderly, will benefit from governance reforms;

7. Partnership between UNDP and its partners must be forged within the context of equality,
transparency and consensus building and delivery of commitments; sharing on changes in
partnership, arising conflicts and matters that will affect the terms of engagement should be done
in order to arrive at remedies or solutions that will foster mutual understanding and benefits;

8. In a development programme that involves multi-stakeholders, multiple projects and sites,
numerous implementers, various governance reform themes and multi-year engagement, the
crafting of suitable program design, management system and tools and shepherding mechanisms
is crucial especially within the context of work efficiency, effectiveness of program interventions,
differences in work styles between duty bearers and claim holders, and the need to track
outcomes and impacts;

9. The development and installation of sustainability mechanisms reflects the seriousness of a
partner in the performance of its mandate and can ensure the long-term gains of a project.


Shared By:
Description: Tax 2 Reviewers Philippines Law document sample