"Tax 2 Reviewers Philippines Law"
Draft 1: as of 18 September 2008 OUTCOME EVALUATION OF THE FOSTERING DEMOCRATIC GOVERNANCE PORTFOLIO OF THE UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME, PHILIPPINES Dominguez, Maria Teresa C. Barrameda, Teresita V. Magcuro, Thelma B. INTRODUCTION 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. 1 Guidelines for Outcome Evaluators, p. 6. 2 Ibid. 1 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. 3 Country Programme Action Plan Between the Government of the Philippines and United Nations Development Programme, 2005-2009, p.8. 2 The outcome evaluation focused on the overall CPAP outcome4 for governance stated below: 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 4 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.‖ 3 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 A. STATUS OF THE OUTCOMES/PROGRESS TOWARDS THE OUTCOMES 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). 4 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 5 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 5 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. 6 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 7 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; 8 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 system; 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; 9 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. 10 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, CPBD-HOR DBM, NCPAG, CESB, ASPAP, NEDA, LMP, GPF, FTA, CCAGG, ASG, FOCIG, PNP, IBP, and ALG. Of these, 13 reported that they have undertaken mainstreaming activities 11 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. B. FACTORS AFFECTING THE PROGRESS TOWARDS THE OUTCOMES 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 6 Source: WAGI’s 2006 Project Completion Report 12 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 13 be ensured so that governance initiatives could scale up and the intended benefits could be sustained. 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. 14 There was also the dynamics between CSOs and the government arising from contradictions in development perspectives, political agenda and work styles. C. UNDP’s ROLE AND CONTRIBUTION TO THE OUTCOMES 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. D. UNDP’s PARTNERSHIP STRATEGY AND SYNERGY 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 Programme.‖7 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 7 Country Programme Action Plan Between the Government of the Philippines and United Nations Development Programme, 2005-2009, p. 12. 15 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 Cluster 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 2005-2007 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: 16 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 projects. 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. 17 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- building. 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 support. 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 18 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 IP. PART III: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS A. CONCLUSIONS 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 partnership. 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 reforms. 19 B. RECOMMENDATIONS 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 regions. 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, 20 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 collaboration; 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. 21 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 Portfolio 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 22 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. PART IV: LESSONS LEARNED AND BEST PRACTICES 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- 23 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 governance; 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. 24