SORRY!!!

Hello!

Sorry that our blogspot has not been updated since April 2009. We have encountered technical problems with our office being renovated. The connections been muddled up. We have many activities conducted and we will try to post them here before the month ends.

Thank you for your patience.

All the best this coming Christmas Season!

It's back to the original schedule for the BPSP Awarding Ceremonies

The BPSP Awarding Ceremonies is scheduled back on May 14, 2009 at the same venue.

To all guests and winners and finalists, please be advised on the new schedule - May 14, 2009 instead of the May 13, 2009.

Thank you.

Change of Schedule for the BPSP Awarding Ceremony

Per request from President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, the Best Public Sector Projects Awards Year-3 is scheduled a day earlier - MAY 13, 2009 at New Government Center, Bacolod City.

Please be guided accordingly.

Thank you.

BEST PUBLIC SECTOR PROJECTS AWARDS CEREMONY IN BACOLOD CITY

It's official! The awarding ceremony of the Best Public Sector Projects Awards Year-3 will be in Bacolod City.

The scheduled date is May 14, 2009 at Bacolod City Hall.

BEST PUBLIC SECTOR PROJECTS WINNERS ANNOUNCED

The official results for the Best Public Sector Projects Awards, 3rd year, was announced during the 1st Quarter 2009 RDC VI Full Conference on March 31, 2009 at L'Fisher Hotel, Bacolod City. The results are as follows:

Provincial/City Government Units Category

Top 3 winners:

Negros Occidental Province - Computerized RPTA Systems Project

San Carlos City - Eco-Center Project

Talisay City - Comprehensive Health Development Program

7 Finalists:

Antique Province - PPMD-DOTS Program

Antique Province - Uligmat Antiqueno - Disaster Preparedness

Iloilo Province - Batang Ilonggo Palangga Ka - Milk Feeding

Iloilo Province - Hospital Reforms

Iloilo City - MIGEDC-LGU Alliance

Kabankalan City - Task Force Kalinisan

San Carlos City - Watershed Management & Development

Municipal Government Units Category

Top 3 winners:

Nabas, Aklan - P.D. Hearth Nutrition Development Program

Sebaste, Antique - Integrated Health Care Program

Sta. Barbara, Iloilo - Ecological Solid Waste Management Program

3 Finalists:

Miag-ao, Iloilo - Secondary Growth Center Development

Nabas, Aklan - Barangay Midwife Volunteerism Program

Pandan, Antique - Community-Based Eco-Tourism Program

Regional Line Agencies Category


Top 3 winners:

Bureau of Jail Mnagement & Penology - BJMP Multi-Purpose Cooperative

Department of Health-CHD 6 - Empowering Persons Living with HIV/AIDS

Land Transportation Office - ISO Certification of Iloilo Licensing Center

6 Finalists:

Civil Service Commission - Public Service Delivery Audit in Region VI

Department of Agriculture - RFU6 - Diversified Farm Income & Market Dev't

Department of Science & Technology - Interventions in the Muscovado Industry

Department of Social Welfare & Development - Strengthening Community Participation

PNP-Iloilo City Police Office - Project OYSTER: Rent-to-Own a Trisikad

Office of Civil Defense - Water Search and Rescue Training Program

State Universities and Colleges Category

Top 3 winners:

Aklan State University - Isla Kapispisan Mangrove Refo and Eco-Tourism Project

Capiz State University - Coconut Breeding Trials Unit Program

University of the Philippines Visayas - Towards Community-Managed Peace and Order Initiatives

2 Finalists:

Aklan State University - Livelihood and Skills Enhancement for Rural Productivity

Carlos Hilado Memorial State College - Jatropha Oil Extractor Project

The Top 3 Winners shall be awarded cash prizes and trophies while the Finalists shall be given commendation certificates during the awarding ceremonies to be set by the RDC VI. The official ranking of the Top 3 Winners shall be announced during the awarding ceremonies in order to create more excitement and interest in the annual RDC VI Best Public Sector Projects Awards.

The awarding ceremonies is scheduled by the 2nd week of May 2009 in Bacolod City. Date and venue will be announced later.

3rd Best Public Sector Projects

In its third year of implementation, the Regional Development Council, Region VI continue to recognize regional line agencies, local government units and state universities and colleges in Western Visayas for implementing programs, projects or activities that have bigger impact and gave more direct contributions to local and national development objectives and targets.

This year, the categories have expanded to include municipalities in addition to regional line agencies, state universities and colleges and provinces/cities.

For this year, we are giving cognizance to the new set of Board of Judges, headed by Rev. Edwin Lariza as Chief Judge and representing Social Development Committee. Other judges are as follows: DILG VI Director Evelyn A. Trompeta for the Development Administration Committee, Ms. Ana Eva G. Villanueva for the Economic Development Committee, Engr. Nestor Antonio Monroy for the Infrastructure Development Committee, and OIC-RD Ro-Ann A. Bacal for the Regional Land Use Committee.

The Board of Judges had their second meeting on November 25, 2008 at Iloilo Grand Hotel, Iloilo City (sponsored by Canadian Urban Institute with DILG-Local Governance Resource Center) where they deliberated on the projects per category and firmed up schedules for the field validation of the further shortlisted projects. Link

How an American recession might hit Asia

Next stop Asia?

How an American recession might hit Asia
Jan 23rd 2008 HONG KONG

http://www.economist.com/world/asia/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10559036

This is an interesting article posted over at NEDA N! Online which is worth the read! As doomsayers are not shrugging off American recessions, countries in Southeast Asia need to brace itself for the impact. But here's the thing, the economic 'decoupling' theory is not a myth.
To know more, just click on the link above. :)

The Importance of M&E in the PPBIME Cycle

A Reaction Paper presented during the Project Exit Conference of the British Embassy funded “Transparent Accountable Governance through Monitoring and Evaluation (TAG-ME)” Project

By:
Gilberto A. Altura
Supervising Economic Development Specialist
Plans and Policy Formulation Division
NEDA Region VI

At the outset, on behalf of NEDA Region VI Office and our OIC-Director Arturo Valero, I congratulate the I-CODE and the Provincial Government of Iloilo, together with the British Embassy for this inspiring project of making M&E as tool and mechanism for achieving transparency and accountability in governance. It is inspiring because we will get lessons that should urge us to do more about our function as a socio-economic planning agency of government.

One thing on the project results that really struck me is the big difference (40%) between the total cost of monitored projects and actual funds received by the project implementers, thus leading to a low physical completion of projects (60%) despite a high financial efficiency (97%).

This implies lack of due diligence on part of projects designers, implementers and fund-givers leading to these questions: Why give only a certain amount for projects that need more funds? Why start project implementation with no firm funding sources? Is it because we want to show to our constituents that, at least, we had a project implemented? Are we seeing projects as ends in its self, or are we really after the development results that should be brought about by a completed project?

The results of your TAG-ME project also manifested the weak development management structure and system that we at NEDA had been overseeing with the Regional Development Council. That is macro system of the coordination in Planning, Programming, Budgeting, Implementation and Monitoring and Evaluation (PPBIME) in the local development councils - from the Barangay up to the Provincial Development Council and then up to the RDC. There could be so many things lacking or inadequate in the whole system, but it is the M&E that brings them all out in the open.

So, it made me feel good that M&E was given focus under this project. Let me now share my reflections on this aspect of the development management cycle. The M&E in the PPBIME cycle has been least emphasized, often just lip-serviced. Theories and principles about M&E had evolved over time. From the purely external monitoring which proved to be conflict-rousing among project implementers and monitors, to internal monitoring that was often just a self-serving exercise, until participatory modes have been developed to promote transparency and accountability among all project stakeholders.

M&E tools also evolved from the use of a simple project work program to a project design using logical framework or matrix. External government assistance had also emphasized over the years the importance of M&E towards effective management of the overall development process. The Germans, for example, developed project cycle management and objectives oriented planning tools, adding on adjustment mechanisms in M&E. The USAID and AUSAID had comparable thrusts on project benefits M&E. The ADB is now strongly into Managing for Development Results emphasizing measurement of results on the ground. And the British Government thrust on M&E for good governance as experienced in this project.

Recently, the NEDA and RDC VI, under the auspices of GTZ-Decentralization Program, conducted a very short Technical Assistance project on streamlining regional and local M&E systems. It consisted of consultation workshops among the oversight agencies and provincial/city government units. Basically, the TA revealed to us that local governments and even line agencies are more concerned about M&E of programs and projects, but there is very weak or no link at all with the overall development plan. NEDA is continuing and increasing its advocacy on M&E Plan inclusion in all development plans in all levels.

If we liken development to a journey, the vision of the plan tells us where we want to go or to be. The mission is a resolve to embark on a journey to the envisioned destination. The strategies and policies are guides on how to get there. The plan objectives and targets are the landmarks and milestones along the way. The implementation of programs and projects are the different kinds of vehicles we use to travel the path towards our vision. The budget serves as gas and maintenance that we need for our vehicles. M&E system provides the radar that guides our steering wheel, constantly checking that we take on the right course in our journey.

M&E is really concerned about attribution of development results – that is also the essence of transparency and accountability. The results of our programs and projects will always bug us, whether we monitor and evaluate them or not, because the people that we want to serve especially as public officers will always see and feel the effects. So, M&E is really a win-win mechanism in governance. It makes clear to all what we want to do and what to achieve. People would love you if you do the right things in the right way. More people would love you if you know where you have gone wrong and try to make things right. So, let us love M&E more!

Executive Briefing and Formal Launching of PLPEM Guidelines in Western Visayas

The National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) formulated the five-volume guidelines on Provincial/Local Planning and Expenditure Management (PLPEM) in June 2007. This signaled the integration of regional/provincial and local development plans with the physical plan. The guidelines will help ebb the burden of the local government units in plan formulation. The policy context of the PLPEM is provided under the Joint Memorandum Circular No. 1, 2007 of the DILG, NEDA, DBM and DOF. The roles of the oversight agencies in planning, investment programming, budgeting and revenue generation at the national, provincial and sub-provincial levels were delineated.

Why is there a focus on the provinces? That is because the province has a total control of the entire planning-programming-budgeting processes and a broadened mandate under the Local Government Code. Likewise, the province links local development objectives with regional and national priorities, among others.


To ensure full support of the provincial governments and institutionalize the use of the guidelines by the provinces, orientation of Governors were conducted for the local chief executives of the six provinces of the region. The Orientation of Governors were conducted in two sessions. Session 1 was held in Bacolod City on November 26, 2007 for the Provincial Governor, members of the Sanggunian and Department Heads of the Province of Negros Occidental. The activity was sponsored by the Province of Negros Occidental.
Session 2 was held on November 28, 2007 at the Iloilo Provincial Capitol in Iloilo City for the governors of the provinces of Iloilo, Aklan, Antique, Guimaras and Capiz. NEDA Regional Office VI spearheaded the activity in coordination with the German Technical Cooperation (GTZ) and the Provincial Governments of the five provinces in Panay and Guimaras Islands.


This was followed by a Refresher Course on the Implementation of PLPEM designed to institutionalize the use of the guidelines among provinces. This provided an avenue where the PLPEM Provincial Core Teams created in each province by Executive Order could discuss, exchange views among planners where practices are learned, unlearned and relearned. It was participated in by legislators, planners, treasurers, accountants and budget officers of the 6 provinces in Region VI. The heterogeneity of the participants in the Refresher Course was an aspiration achieved by NEDA since legislators and planners were able to convene and work on the identification and prioritization of programs and projects.

The work is cut out for all of us in 2008. Through these guidelines, it is hoped that a more integrated and usable plan will be achieved.

Prepared by: Ma. Leah Letrero

The Filipino Middle Class is Shrinking!

The NSCB Executive Director, Dr. Romulo Virola challenged the policymakers during the 10th National Convention on Statistics late last year “to address the seemingly unnoticed but alarming trend. He warned in his blog that ‘we can no longer ignore the seemingly systematic shrinking of the group of professionals and skilled workers who can spell the difference between us being mired in poverty or crossing over to the league of First-World countries by 2020.’”

The recent release of the 2006 Family Income and Expenditure Survey (FIES) revealed that the population share of the Filipino middle class shrank in the country’s total population. The population share of the upper class likewise fell during the 1997-2003 period, resulting in a larger low income class. In a span of 6 years from 1997 to 2003, close to 4 families for every 100 middle income families have been lost to the low income category. The preliminary results of the 2006 FIES seem to indicate a ‘continuation of the pattern.’

He noted that the poverty reduction programs of the government have focused mainly on being “pro-poor,” “anti-poverty,” helping the “poorest provinces” etc but completely ignoring the needs of and the strategic importance of building and expanding the middle class of Philippine society. “For a country to be truly and sustainably prosperous there must be a broad-based middle class…that has the knowledge, the skills and the resources to foster economic growth and help generate employment for the poor.”

Dr. Virola said that the warning signs are clear and that the country’s policymakers should take notice.


Sources:

“The Shrinking Filipino Middle Class,” Dev Pulse, NEDA Development Advocacy Factsheet, Vol.12, No. 1, January 15, 2008;


“How Do We Measure Poverty?” Dev Pulse, NEDA Development Advocacy Factsheet, Vol. 11, No. 19, December 15, 2007

Community Dialogue On Disaster Preparedness and Management In Brgy. Tiolas, San Joaquin, Iloilo

The Philippine government recognized the economic, social, physical and human losses brought by disasters in the country. To note, there is an increasing trends in disaster losses in the country averaging the direct damage annually at Php15 billion (at 2000 prices). Impact to GDP, for example, was at 1.2 percent due to the 1990 Luzon earthquake; 0.9 percent due to the Pinatubo eruption; and 0.5 percent average due to typhoons every year. Moreover, the calamity fund appropriations could not meet the cost of damages brought by these disasters.

With the growing recognition of the effects of disaster on development, the national government called on to mainstream disaster risk reduction in subnational development and physical planning. This way, appropriate intervention designed to mitigate disasters will be planned, funded and implemented.

In Western Visayas, an inter-agency driven activity kicked off in Brgy. Tiolas, San Joaquin, Iloilo on September 26, 2007 during a community dialogue on disaster preparedness and management. The activity was spearheaded by NEDA VI, Mines and Geosciences Bureau, Disaster Coordinating Council of the Iloilo Province and coordinated with the Municipality of San Joaquin, Iloilo.

Over 500 residents of San Joaquin, headed by Mayor Ninfa Garin and local officials attended the dialogue. They were made aware on hazard-prone areas in their locality especially on barangays that are considered high risks. The Municipality of San Joaquin is vulnerable to these hazards – tsunami, high intensity earthquake, landslide and erosion.

As cautioned by Atty. Raul Anlocotan of NEDA VI, disaster could happen anywhere and anytime but being prepared could save lives and properties. For his part, Engr. Rolly Calomarde, Chief Geologist of the Mines and Geosciences Bureau accorded his agency’s aim of identifying areas susceptible or vulnerable to various geologic hazards and provide vital information to stakeholders in order to lessen or mitigate the negative impact of these geologic processes.

For San Joaquin, out of 85 barangays, 74 were assessed for landslide susceptibility. Of these, 19 coastal barangays are prone to coastal erosion, storm surge and tsunami while 21 barangays with high susceptibility for landslide. Earthquake is another hazard because of the West Panay Fault in Iloilo Province from the municipality of Lambunao and traverses areas in Janiuay, Maasin, Alimodian, Tubungan, Igbaras, Miagao and finally San Joaquin. Engr. Ramil Atando of PHILVOCS cautioned the people that the movement of this fault would result to high intensity earthquake in these municipalities.

Living along hazard areas requires one to take extra precaution.

1. Observe presence and monitor progress of mass movement e.g. landslides,
tension cracks;

2. Observe for rapid increase/decrease in creek/river water levels, possibly
accompanied by increased turbidity (soil content);

3. Observe for saturated ground or seeps in areas that are not typically wet;

4. Observe for sunken or displaced road surfaces;

5. Develop an early warning device/system

6. Identify evacuation sites;

7. Constant communication and updates with BDCC and MDCC on geohazard situation.

It is with hope that more dialogues should be provided to keep people informed and for the local government unit to consider disaster preparedness and management in their plans and programs.


Source:
"Mainstreaming Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) in Subnational Development and Physical Planning in the Philippies," 2nd Project Board Meeting, NEDA Board Room, 6/F NEDA sa Pasig, Otober 18, 2007

How Do We Measure Poverty?

Source: Dev Pulse, NEDA Development Advocacy Factsheet, Vol.11, No. 19, December 15, 2007

The article is a good read as it describes how poverty is measured. As indicated, while private polling firms use perception surveys, the government, for its part, has the Family Income and Expenditure Survey (FIES). The article gave a rundown on how FIES is done and what the data can do, not to mention its limitations. Let it be known that the 2006 FIES data was acquired from 51,000 households from all over the country, across all income groups. This, in constrast with perception surveys done by private research groups that rely on much smaller statistical samples.

The 2006 FIES released this year showed that:

"The average nominal income of families at the bottom 30 percent grew by 15.9 percent from 2003-2006. In real terms however, income actually declined by 2.7 percent to Php144,000 from Php148,000 recorded in 2003 as a result of faster growth in the number of families. Average family expenditures also weakened by 0.8 percent, putting average real savings to Php21,000 from Php24,000 in 2003."

Another revelation is the shrinking middle class on which Dr. Romulo Virola of the National Statistical Coordination Board challenged the development planners to do something about. "The seemingly systematic shrinking of a group of professionals and skilled workers who can spell the difference between us being mired in poverty or crossing over to the league of first world countries by 2020" should not be ignored.

Rationalization of Regional and Provincial/City Monitoring Systems

The NEDA Regional Office VI, in cooperation with the Decentralization Program-German Technical Cooperation (DP-GTZ) conducted a series of forum in the rationalization of regional and provincial/city monitoring systems. The technical assistance came about to address the problems in data generation for the Regional Development Report (RDR). Ideally, a good system of monitoring really captures how plan targets are being accomplished, including the indicators of assumptions used in the plan. As it is, the delay in the publication of the RDR is caused by late and incomplete submission of desired data on indicators. Key indicators under the Local Government Performance Management System (LGPMS) of DILG, and monitoring systems of oversight agencies like the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) and Bureau of Local Government Finance (BLGF) of the Department of Finance, are useful for the assessment of the regional plan, but these are not timely available. The series of forum conducted provided the venue to come up with doable measures to make the existing monitoring systems more attuned towards efficient and effective assessment of regional and local plans.

The workshops were attended by representatives from local government units, regional line agencies and oversight agencies (NEDA, DILG, DBM and BLGF). The workshops were made possible through assistance from the Decentralization Project-German Technical Cooperation.

Workshop I was conducted on October 23-24, 2007 at Iloilo Grand Hotel, Iloilo City to review the relevance of existing monitoring systems to regional and local plans. A Bridging Workshop ensued on November 21, 2007 in order to take into account the lessons learned in Workshop I and linking it with the identification of doable M&E systems improvements in Workshop II, which was conducted on November 23-24, 2007 at Amigo Terrace Hotel, Iloilo City.

The latter workshops were attended by guests from the Asian Development Bank, namely Mr. Bruce Purdue and Ms. Therese Ng. Likewise present was Mr. Emmanuel J. Solis of DP-GTZ.

Lessons Learned:
The lessons learned from these three workshops are highlighted below. In general, all these learnings should serve as a big challenge to the participants. Premium should be placed on M&E as part of development goals so that we, in the planning business, will not only be balance but become good managers of development for results.

1. It is evident that the M&E aspect of the development cycle is generally weak. Planning, programming and implementation are done actively but M&E does not come as important as the others. There is a need to balance the elements of the cycle for development results to be achieved. With the increased knowledge and awareness related to M&E, it is hoped that the balance will be achieved;

2. The existing M&E systems in the region are primarily focused on project monitoring, thus the need to harmonize both plan monitoring and project monitoring to see the extent the benefits of the projects reach the community;

3. There is a need to generate timely & adequate information for indicators in M&E. It is equally important that the indicators should be relevant. The participants have reviewed the different sets of indicators and the LGU representatives have acquiesced to provide the needed data.

4. The importance of M&E as a tool & process for good governance as it equates with transparency & accountability is highlighted. M&E will play a great role towards achieving transparency and accountability. Good governance also means managing for development.

5. In the development cycle, M&E should lead to adjustments or should steer development towards what was initially planned so that in looking back, M&E is not an end in itself but should lead towards the next cycle of the planning process. As emphasized by Mr. Bruce Purdue of ADB, the indicators are not an end in itself.

6. Finally, there are various local initiatives that have been done in the region. In the case of Iloilo province, the M&E was linked with ODA. In order to enhance initiative, external sources need to be tapped. The NEDA and other national government agencies, ODA and British Embassy can be good sources of external sources. The British Embassy will be financing Iloilo’s initiatives given that Western Visayas is a priority region by the British Government. ADB’s Community of Practice can also be tapped through linking with the website. It is not just a source of ideas but also a good source of funds.


Recommendations:

1. Come up with League of Monitors by province with the Provincial Monitoring Office forming this organization. This was commended by Atty. Raul Anlocotan of NEDA, as he shared the idea based on his experience when he went to China. He shared that there is a school that solely focuses on evaluation. One of the agencies there is also named Evaluation Board. This board simply manages results.

2. National agencies should also present their M&E process so that a comparison between LGUs and national line agencies may be looked into. Because of the workshop, the national line agencies appreciate the way LGUs do their own M&E systems.

3. Publish learnings as well as the questions because they have become a rich source of information.

4. After the workshop, everybody is enjoined to enroll in the Community of Practice. Also, the LGUs as well as line agencies are encouraged to make a proposal to GTZ or ADB to finance an activity that would put importance on the M&E practices in the provincial and public expenditures managements systems.

5. Monitors should use the tools for evaluation like the 10 steps to management of development results.

6. Plan another workshop that would show outcome indicators to see whether or not LGUs have the same indicators. However, Mr. Altura commented that the workshop did not primarily focus on uniformity but rather harmony of indicators.