Kaakbay: Learning from Peers for Good Governance by Local Governance Support Program in ARMM

Learning from Peers for

Good Governance A Guidebook on Establishing a Program for Replicating Exemplary Practices for Local Government

Learning from Peers for Good Governance Copyright ÂŠ 2004 Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program (LGSP) All rights reserved The Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program (LGSP) and Federation of the Canadian Municipalities (FCM) encourage the use, translation, and adaptation and copying of this material for non-commercial use, with appropriate credit given to LGSP and FCM. Although reasonable care has been taken in the preparation of this handbook, neither the publisher and/or contributor and/or writer can accept any liability for any consequence arising from the use thereof or from any information contained herein. ISBN 971-92687-7-8 Printed and bound in Manila, Philippines Published by: Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program Unit 1507 Jollibee Plaza Emerald Avenue, Pasig City 1600 Philippines Tel. Nos (632) 637 3511- 13 www.lgsp.org.ph Federation of the Canadian Municipalities International Centre for Municipal Development 24 Clarence Street Ottawa, Ontario Canada, K1N 5P3 Email: international@fcm.ca Internet: http://www.fcm.ca This project was undertaken with the financial support of the Government of Canada provided through the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA)

Kaakbay Project Team: Basile Gilbert, LGSP Governance Advisor (Team Leader); Ria Adapon, LGSP Program Officer; Rizal Barandino, LGSP Program Officer; Rommel Martinez, EBJFI; Polly Dichoso, EBJFI; Norio Alumno, LMP Program and Guidebook Concept: Basile Gilbert, LGSP Governance Advisor; Sebastien Hamel, Regional Manager Asia, FCM Writers: Marilou Sabado, STRIDES, Inc.; Letty Tumbaga, STRIDES, Inc. Editorial Team: Basile Gilbert, LGSP Governance Advisor; Myn Garcia, LGSP Communications Advisor; Ria Adapon, LGSP Program Officer Cover Art: Arnold Beroya Cover Design and Lay-out: Redge Abos The publication of this guidebook has been made possible by support from the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM), International Center for Municipal Development, and the coordination efforts of the League of Municipalities of the Philippines, as well as the technical support of the Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program with funding from the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA).

SA KABUH AAN AY IW A

AT PAPAUNLA D PAG

Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG)

MBANSANG PA NG PA

A JOINT PROJECT OF

L IK A N G P ILIP I

National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA)

IMPLEMENTED BY

Agriteam Canada www.agriteam.ca

Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) www.fcm.ca

Canadian International Development Agency

contents Preface 7 Foreword 9 Acknowledgments 11 Acronyms 13 Definition of Terms and Concepts 14 Chapter One: Introduction to the Guidebook Background 1-3 Why undertake a replication program? A Wealth of Advantages 1-4 A Guidebook for Replicating Exemplary Practices in Local Governance 1-7 Objectives of the Guidebook 1-7 Who May Use the Guidebook 1-8 What the Guidebook Contains 1-9 Organization of the Guidebook 1-9 Chapter Two: Establishing a Program for Replicating Exemplary Practices in Local Governance Overview of the Process: Five Major Tasks 2-3 Setting up a Replication Program: Tasks 1-3 2-5 Task 1: Deciding to Undertake a Replication Program and Determining its Modalities 2-5 Task 2: Identifying Exemplary Practices for Replication 2-12 Task 3: Offering the Exemplary Practices to Potential Replicators and Selecting Replicators 2-18 Summing up: Lessons and Insights 2-21 Chapter Three: Practical Tools for Local Government in Sharing Good Practices Contents 3-5 Acronyms 3-7 Introduction What is Replication? 3-9 Why Replicate Exemplary Practices in Local Government: The Big Picture 3-9 What is the Peer-to-Peer Learning Approach to Replication? 3-10 What will you Find in this Chapter? 3-11 What can your Local Government Gain from Replicating or Hosting the Replication of an Exemplary Practice? 3-11 What else do you Need to Know about Replication? Guiding Principles of Replication 3-14

The Replication Process using a Peer-to-Peer Learning Approach: Overview 3-15 Doing It: The Replication Process 3-16 Pre-replication 3-16 Replication Using the Three Tools 3-17 Tool 1: Documenting the Exemplary Practice 3-22 Tool 2: The Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop Generic Agenda and Facilitatorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Guide 3-30 Tool 3: The Replication Workplan 3-39 Post Peer-to-Peer Workshop Activities: Validating and Implementing the Workplan 3-43 Monitoring and Evaluation 3-43 Summing Up: Lessons and Insights 3-48 Chapter Four: More on M & E and Ensuring Success in Replication at the Program Level Importance of M & E in a Replication Program 4-3 Monitoring and Evaluation at the Program Level 4-4 Conclusion 4-14 References A-1

Appendices (The Appendices of this manual are contained in the enclosed CD Rom)

Appendix A. A.1.

A.2. A.3. A.4. A.5. A.6. A.7. A.8. A.9.

Sample MOU and Forms used by Kaakbay A-7 Memorandum of Understanding between League of Municipalities of the Philippines, League of Cities of the Philippines, Department of Interior and Local Government and Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program A-9 Framework and Criteria for Identifying Exemplary Practices A-12 Kaakbay Template for Initial Documentation of Exemplary Practices A-14 General Information for Host LGUs A-16 Selection Criteria for Replicating LGUs A-19 General Information to Replicating LGUs A-20 Application Form for Replicating LGUs A-22 Initial Documentation of Exemplary Practices A-25 LGU Replication Cluster Memorandum of Agreement A-30

Appendix B.

Sample Kaakbay Reference Document: “Making Crime Prevention Everybody’s Business” Bantay sa Kahusay Ug Kalinaw (BKK) (Peace and Order Watch) A-32

Appendix C.

Kaakbay Brochure/Flyer A-40

Appendix D.

Monitoring and Evaluation Guide Questions Used by Kaakbay A-49

D.1. D.2. D.3. Appendix E. E.1 E.2 E.3 Appendix F.

Mid-Project Assessment Questions A-51 Progress Report Template A-53 End-Project Assessment Questions A-54 Replication Tools Tool #1: Guidelines in Documenting an Exemplary Practice (for Host LGUs) A-59 Tool #2: Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop Facilitator’s Guide and Generic Agenda A-63 Tool #3: Replication Workplan Template A-71 Sample Workplan of a Replicating LGU A-75

appendix p r e f a cA.1 e Learning from Peers for Good Governance fleshes out ideas and concepts, emerging as strong mechanisms for strengthening local government around the worldâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;it is about local government units learning from each other and sharing good practices to improve governance. In the era of rapid growth, local authorities are increasingly challenged to ensure the wellbeing of their constituents by providing shelter, health and education, job opportunities, managing land use and waste disposal, and addressing the plight of the urban poor. Local governments are more and more influential in determining the development and future of citizens. As globalization increases, local authorities are also finding the opportunity to get in touch with one another, exchanging information and resources. International organizations have recognized in these trends, the potential of city-to-city exchange and learning for improving local governance and the wellbeing of populations. CIDAâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s PhilippinesCanada Local Government Support Program (LGSP), and the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) as a partner in the implementation of the program have pioneered in this field, by piloting programs on structured peer-to-peer learning for local government. LGSPâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Kaakbay Pilot Program in the Philippines involving 30 local government units, is one such effort based on initial approaches experienced in Canada and around the world. The success of the Kaakbay Pilot Program became evident in the concrete benefits gained by these LGUs and their communities. Better roads and infrastructure, effective processing of local business permits, health care reaching more people, community involvement in solid waste management, reduced crime incidence were all positive outcomes had by LGUs. In doing so, these LGUs acquired a deep appreciation for peer-to-peer sharing to strengthen their ability to meet their challenges. This guidebook is a testament to the success of peer-to-peer sharing as an approach for replicating practices to improve local governance. It is our hope that local governments as well as the wide range of organizations which support them in one way or another take the information opportunity presented by this guidebook to share and produce new knowledge and greater capacities for serving communities around the world.

Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program

foreword

Learning from Peers for Good Governance is the product of a fruitful partnership between the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG), the League of Cities of the Philippines (LCP) and the League of Municipalities of the Philippines (LMP), with the support of the Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program (LGSP). Given our individual mandates, DILG, LMP and LCP have been intensively pursuing developing local government capacities to better address issues brought about by economic and population growth, urbanization, and poverty. The Kaakbay Pilot Program for replicating exemplary practices in local governance has allowed our respective organizations to work together for a common cause. We were able to pool and share resources and information, develop coordination mechanisms, and involve LGUs in a sustained intervention to learn from each other while building our own organizational capacities and partnership. Through this initiative, we developed an innovative and cost-effective approach to local capacity development through structured peer-to-peer learning and the replication of good practices in local governance. Given the increasing challenge of mobilizing and building capacity, the Kaakbay approach has emerged as a viable tool for improving local governance in the Philippines. Learning from Peers for Good Governance captures our experience in undertaking the Kaakbay Program, as it presents the tools and processes we developed and validated, and embodies our common goal of promoting and disseminating this approach for local capacity development. We are convinced that there is much value in sharing the richness of the experience and allowing others to access the tools and approaches for their own use and benefit. Learning from Peers for Good Governance is our way of contributing to such learning. As we endorse the benefits of sharing good practices for responsive and effective governance, we strongly encourage the use of this guidebook by local government organizations, institutions and local governments as they embark in developing and implementing a replication program. And as we jointly commit our support for replication in the Philippines, DILG, LMP and LCP will extend necessary and appropriate assistance to help ensure the success of such initiatives.

Finally, we would like thank the Philippines-Canada Local Government Support program for its invaluable partnership and pioneering spirit in making this project happen.

Angelo T. Reyes Secretary Department of the Interior and Local Government

Ramon N. Guico, Jr. National President League of Municipalities of the Philippines

Francis N.Tolentino National President League of Cities of the Philippines

acknowledgments The following individuals and organizations made invaluable contributions to this project: •

LGSP Governance Advisor Basile Gilbert for the conceptualization, overall project management and technical expertise throughout the implementation of the Kaakbay Pilot Program and publication of this guidebook;

•

Sebastien Hamel of the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM), for having helped conceptualize the Kaakbay Pilot Program and this guidebook;

•

The Evelio B. Javier Foundation, Inc. (EBJFI) team led by Rommel Martinez and Polly Dichoso for having contributed to the successful development and implementation of the Kaakbay Pilot Program;

•

The Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program (LGSP) team, led by Alix Yule and Marion Maceda Villanueva for providing direction and support;

•

Marilou Sabado and Letty Tumbaga of STRIDES, Inc., and Redge Abos and Arnold Beroya for the writing, cover design and lay-out of this guidebook;

•

Myn Garcia for providing technical and creative direction, and overall supervision of the design, layout and production of this publication;

•

Li-Ann de Leon of the League of Municipalities of the Philippines (LMP) for having coordinated the LMP involvement and support to the development of this guidebook;

•

Dir. Rolando Neri of Oroquieta City, Misamis Occidental, Mayor Melquiadez Azcuna of Lopez Jaena, Misamis Occidental, Loleimer Egos of Magsaysay, Davao del Sur, Liberato M. Undan of Banay Banay Davao Oriental, Norio Alumno of LMP, and Polly Dichoso of EBJFI for their participation in the Focus Group Discussion/Consultation held for the guidebook;

•

The 30 local government units that participated in the Kaakbay Pilot program and whose experience instructed the final content of this guidebook;

•

And finally, LGSP Program Officers Ria Adapon and Sef Carandang for overall technical assistance.

acronyms AO BALAK BKK CIDA DBM DILG EBJF EO EP FCM LCE LCP LGOO LGSP LG LGU LMP LRP M&E MOA NSC PAC RCC SB SP TWG UNDP USAID VNG

Administrative Order Basura Atras Linamon Abante sa Kalamboan Program (Exemplary Practice of Linamon, Lanao del Norte) Bantay sa Kahusay Ug Kalinaw (Exemplary Practice of Oroquieta, Misamis Occidental) Canadian International Development Agency Department of Budget and Management Department of the Interior and Local Government Evelio B. Javier Foundation, Inc. Executive Order Exemplary Practice Federation of Canadian Municipalities Local Chief Executive League of Cities of the Philippines Local Government Operations Officer Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program Local Government Local Government Unit League of Municipalities of the Philippines Local Resource Partner Monitoring and Evaluation Memorandum of Agreement National Steering Committee Paglilingkod Abot-Kamay Program (Exemplary Practice of Magsaysay, Davao del Sur) Regional Coordinating Committee Sangguniang Bayan (Municipal Council) Sangguniang Panlalawigan/Panglunsod (City/Provincial Council) Technical Working Group United Nations Development Programme United States Agency for International Development Association of Netherlands Municipalities or Vereniging van Nederlandse Gemeenten

terms & concepts Replication

A systematic and supportive project implementation process that involves learning from, and sharing with others, practices that are proven to be effective solutions to common and similar problems, so as to contribute to the sustainable wellbeing of citizens and advancement of local government with the least possible cost and effort.

Replication Program

Undertaking replication within an overall program that entails a management structure responsible for (a) organizing the various activities and processes, (b) providing systematic support and a mechanism to local governments before, during and after the replication process, (c) monitoring progress, and (d) ensuring adherence to program principles and strategies as well as the proper use of the replication tools.

Kaakbay

A pilot replication program undertaken in the Philippines implemented by the League of Municipalities of the Philippines (LMP), the League of Cities of the Philippines (LCP), the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) and supported by the Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program (LGSP) to introduce peer-to-peer coaching and learning as a capacity development methodology to replicate exemplary practices in local governance; a Filipino term meaning â&#x20AC;&#x153;arm-inarmâ&#x20AC;?.

Peer-to-Peer Learning

A learning or capacity development approach involving relationship amongst counterparts of the same professional sector. For the purpose of this guidebook, peers are local government officials learning from other local government officials.

Exemplary Practice (EP)

A mechanism, process, or method that has been proven to be an effective, efficient and relevant way of addressing a particular issue/challenge of local governance and that can be easily replicable by other local governments. Exemplary practices may support local government management, administration or service delivery and may have different levels of complexity.

Local Government/ Local Government Unit (LG/LGU)

A sub-national government unit, e.g. a city or municipality.

Host LGU

The local government whose exemplary practice has been selected for replication and will participate in the replication process as host to the replicating LGUs.

Replicating LGU/Replicator The local government unit replicating the identified exemplary practice.

1-2

CHAPTER

one

introduction to the guidebook

introduction to the guidebook BACKGROUND Celebrating Effective and Innovative Local Governance Local governance has moved center stage in social development and public decision-making. Changes toward devolution and decentralization over the past two decades have placed greater powers and responsibilities on local governments. At the same time, rapid urbanization, population growth, resource depletion and economic stagnation have created bigger problems at the local level. Local government units everywhere are proving themselves to be worthy of the challenge. There is a growing amount of information available on successful approaches by local government units, community-based groups and other local stakeholders, individually or in partnership, to address common challenges. Numerous publications, websites, and other media detail successful local government efforts at improving health care, housing, waste disposal, resource conservation, ensuring peace and order, tapping innovative sources of income, reducing poverty, and enhancing participation in governance.

A Missing Link Despite the abundance of best practices examples in local governance, however, there is a dearth of replication programs available for local government units (LGUs) wishing to exchange knowledge or replicate such practices. While several international donor organizations (for example, the Federation of Canadian Municipalities) support exchange programs between local government in developed and developing countries, there is almost no support for similar replication or exchange programs among local governments in developing countries. Thus, while the information is available and a growing number of local governments want to learn how to improve their localities, the resources and opportunities for such remain scarce.

1-3

A first effort at an exchange and replication program on local government best practices on a national scale came with the implementation of the Kaakbay program in the Philippines. The the first of its kind in the world, the Kaakbay program (arm-in-arm in Filipino) is a pilot replication program undertaken by the League of Municipalities of the Philippines (LMP), the League of Cities of the Philippines (LCP) and the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) supported by the Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program (LGSP). The program identified 6 exemplary practices (EPs) in the Philippines and brought together 30 local government units—10 that have successfully pioneered the practices and 20 to replicate them—in a one-year replication program. In many ways, Kaakbay illustrated how local and external resources can be pooled together to address “the missing link.” By successfully demonstrating that knowledge exchange and replication can be possible and viable on a national scale, Kaakbay also showed how similar programs can be successfully undertaken. This guidebook advocates that the replication and dissemination of good local governance practices will have greater chances of success and sustainability when undertaken as part of a program with an appropriate support system and structures. It offers a mechanism that can be used by organizations working with local government units wanting to share or replicate good practices with peers.

WHY UNDERTAKE A REPLICATION PROGRAM? A WEALTH OF ADVANTAGES Why undertake a replication program? For institutions and organizations open to the idea of a replication program, knowing its benefits and advantages may help you decide if you want to implement such a program. 1. Be part of a growing trend in local governance towards replication as well as production and exchange of knowledge. Undertaking a replication program puts you in the midst of a current trend, riding on the wave of an idea whose time has come. Pioneered by such organizations as the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) and the Association of Netherlands Municipalities (VNG) , small initiatives at peer-to-peer learning and replication among cities and municipalities are increasingly being supported by such international organizations as the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), Habitat, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and the World Bank. Undertaking a replication program for local government in the same country puts you on the cutting edge of such a trend.

1-4

2. Provide the ‘missing link’ in knowledge production and sharing. Many replication efforts are still being done on a small scale, such as between two or three cities, implemented on an ad-hoc, piecemeal basis. Often, efforts are also done off-the-cuff, with few guidelines and without the benefit of programmatic support or structured monitoring and evaluation. As such, these efforts are not enriched by previous experience and fail to build a solid base on which future initiatives can take off. The processes used and the lessons gained remain in the minds of those involved, if at all, instead of being documented and made available to others. A program that can help organize and structure the exchange of knowledge and learning can help ensure that learning takes place at an optimal degree.

Why Undertake a Replication Program? 1. Be part of a growing trend in local governance towards replication and the exchange of knowledge. 2. Provide the ‘missing link’ in knowledge production and sharing. 3. Use a common sense approach to learning and capacity-development. 4. Adopt an approach that is cost-effective. 5. Promote inter-local government cooperation. 6. Provide support to local governments undertaking replication. 7. Offer recognized governance programs as an additional incentive to LGUs. 8. Ensure sustainability and impact. 9. Use a tried and tested methodology.

3. Use a common sense approach to learning and capacity-development. A replication program embodies a common-sense principle: do not re-invent the wheel. With local governments operating in the same legal and regulatory frameworks and often facing similar challenges in finding better and more effective ways of delivering services and organizing themselves, a program on replicating successful practices ensures that individual local government units will not have to go through the same process, only to arrive at the same answer. 4. Adopt an approach that is cost-effective. Using approaches already tested by others offers a chance to eliminate the unnecessary steps and mistakes that may have been done while implementing the practice the first time. This is because good and innovative practices are often perfected through trial and error, driven by informal leadership and creativity. A champion has a good

1-5

idea and is able to mobilize people to implement it. At this experimental stage, however, the development of an innovative idea takes time and may involve unnecessary steps. Nevertheless, through this informal process, the idea evolves into a practice that addresses a perceived problem resulting in greater effectiveness and/or efficiency in local government operations. Replication will do away with the errors made the first time as it distills the lessons from the first experience. Thus, replication of the innovative practice can be done with greater precision; it is therefore faster and to-the-point, generally more cost-effective than starting from scratch. From a national policy or program point of view, the dissemination of good practices through replication programs offers an option for reducing capacity-development and human resources development costs. More local governments can be reached with fewer resources. It also offers a way to promote and mainstream local cost-effective practices, thereby reducing national expenditure required to support inefficiencies in the system. 5. Promote inter-local government cooperation. A replication program is an empowering and participatory method of capacity development for local governments. Local governments that have successfully replicated good practices are encouraged to appreciate other approaches and share their accomplishments with others, ensuring a continuous and ever-widening circle of learning. The inter-local government cooperation established through these relationships often results in creating avenues for sharing a wide range of ideas and preoccupations. 6. Provide support to local governments undertaking replication. The Kaakbay experience demonstrated that replicating local governance practices is more effective when undertaken within a larger program for the following reasons: â&#x20AC;˘ Local government units often need technical, financial and other forms of support in undertaking replication. A program provides such a support system. â&#x20AC;˘ Local government units also gain from having an external partner that can ensure regular monitoring and evaluation of progress made in the replication process. This often provides for an incentive to meet deadlines and tends to build effectiveness in the implementation. â&#x20AC;˘ A program can provide a structure/mechanism for managing relations between and among local governments, help stave off potential conflict or negative dynamics and ensure supportive modes of coordination.

1-6

7. Offer recognized governance programs as an additional incentive to LGUs. A replication program organized by a recognized and respected entity is an added incentive for local government units. Being part of a bigger program helps to â&#x20AC;&#x153;make officialâ&#x20AC;? an endeavor as good, and gives everyone involved a sense of being part of something bigger than their own locality. Also, when the idea of replicating a practice is supported and promoted by legitimate organizations, it helps local decision makers and stakeholders (legislative council, the executive branch, community representatives) reach consensus and leave their differences behind. 8. Ensure sustainability and impact. Most importantly, a program for replication ensures greater sustainability and impact. Capacities of local governments, as well as those of the organizations managing such programs are continuously enhanced. This ensures that the gains made last longer and can impact on a larger number of local governments and communities. 9. Use a tried and tested methodology. Undertaking replication within a program framework also allows the optimal use of a tried and tested replication process with simple, proactive tools. The experience of the Kaakbay replication program in the Philippines made it possible to refine such tools and methodologies, which are now available for general use by institutions working with local government.

A GUIDEBOOK FOR REPLICATING EXEMPLARY PRACTICES (EPs) IN LOCAL GOVERNANCE Given the many advantages of pursuing a replication program, this guidebook presents a set of how tos in implementing a tested and structured methodology for replicating exemplary practices in local government through a national or sub-national program. This methodology should be able to provide a link between, on the one hand, the abundance of local governments willing and eager to share their good practices, and, on the other hand, the even bigger number of local government units that are demanding information and opportunities to learn from others.

Objectives of the Guidebook This guidebook therefore aims to promote the replication and dissemination of exemplary practices in local governance as a way of building capacities and enhancing local governance.

1-7

Specifically, the guidebook aims to: A Chapter for the Local Government Reader While primarily targeting enabling organizations, Chapter 3 of this guidebook is packaged so that it can be used by an individual local government unit wanting to share or replicate a particular practice with one or more local government units, outside the framework of a larger replication program. Chapter 3, therefore, while an integral part of the guidebook, can also be distributed independently to individual LGUs.

• Introduce more peer-to-peer methodologies of capacity development in the local government sector • Provide various organizations with tools, guidelines, and processes to help organize, coordinate, and manage a local government exemplary practice replication program • Present/share some of the lessons learned in conducting a national program of replication of exemplary practices • Provide specific tools and insights to LGUs wanting to get involved in the replication and dissemination of exemplary practices, specifically those practices that would require a year to replicate and entail face-to-face contact with host and replicating LGUs

Who may use the Guidebook? For Organizations and Government Agencies working with LGUs The guidebook may be used by institutions, organizations or government agencies working with local government that are interested in managing, on their own or in partnership with other organizations, a program to support local government in sharing, learning and replicating good governance practices. These include: 1. Leagues or associations of cities, municipalities or other sub-national government units 2. National, provincial or regional administrative bodies in charge of local government 3. International or national foundations and donor institutions

1-8

What the Guidebook Contains The guidebook serves as a valuable practical tool in establishing a replication program for exemplary practices in local governance because it offers the following: 1. A viable, structured peer-to-peer coaching and learning methodology in replicating local government best practices that is based on a specific program experienceKaakbay 2. Generic, simple and practical tools and processes for replicating good governance practice that range from simple to highly-complex While the guidebook was inspired by the Filipino experience of the Kaakbay program, utmost effort has been made to make the guidebook as generic as possible, so that it can easily be adapted in different contexts and countries. Thus, while the guidebook is informed by a distinctly Filipino experience, the tools and processes it presents are practical and easy-tofollow, and can be conveniently adapted for use in other countries. At the same time, this guidebook is specifically for the replication of practices that are moderate-to-highly complex, meaning replication that would benefit from face-to-face communication and exchange between host and replicating local government units and will take from 6 to 18 months to replicate.

Organization of the Guidebook The guidebook is divided into four chapters, each with an introduction and a summary of important insights and reminders at the end. Chapter One provides the general introduction and overview of the guidebook. Chapter Two describes the first three major tasks and requirements in setting up a program for managing peer-to-peer replication. Chapter Three is a step-by-step guide to the replication process between and among local governments at the local level. It is also the chapter that can be used independently from the rest of the guidebook by individual local government units wishing to undertake replication outside of a structured program. Chapter Four is on monitoring and evaluation at the program level. It also concludes the guidebook with key lessons about replication from Kaakbay participants and partners in the Philippines.

1-9

1-10

two

CHAPTER

establishing a program for replicating exemplary practices in local governance

2-2

establishing a program for replicating exemplary practices in local governance As a first step to establishing your own program for sharing and replicating local governance practices, you need to determine the program modalities that will suit your needs and situation. You also need to acquaint yourself with the process of setting it up. This chapter helps you do that, by providing you with: 1. A general overview of the entire program process and its different components 2. A detailed description of the first three tasks in setting up the program

OVERVIEW OF THE PROCESS: FIVE MAJOR TASKS Setting up and managing a replication program essentially involves five major tasks: Task 1 Task 2

Determining the modalities of the program Identifying exemplary practices that will be offered for replication Task 3 Selecting local governments that will replicate the exemplary practices (EPs) Task 4 Managing and supporting the actual replication process among local government units Task 5 Monitoring and evaluating the program The rest of Chapter Two provides a more detailed discussion of the first three tasks. Chapter Three focuses on Task 4 or Managing and Supporting the Replication Process. Chapter Four discusses Monitoring and Evaluation at the program level.

2-3

Tasks

Task Components

Task 1 Determining the Modalities of the Program

• Determining program set up • management structures • roles and responsibilities of partners • objectives, frameworks, principles and strategies • Mobilizing available and needed resources

Outputs: 1. Management structure established. 2. MOA among institutional partners. 3. Procedures elaborated 4. Resources mobilized.

Task 2 Identifying exemplary practices (EPs) for replication

• Developing framework and criteria for identifying EPs • Search initial documentation and identification of EPs • Packaging of identified EPs for dissemination to prospective replicators • Building relations/arrangements with host LGUs • Setting up mechanisms to continue the search for relevant exemplary practices (Knowledge management unit)

Outputs: 1. Framework and criteria for identifying EPs 2. Information package for potential host LGUs 3. List of identified EPs and initial documentation of EPs 4. Incentive and support package for host LGUs

Task 3 Offering the Exemplary Practices (EPs) and selecting local governments that will undertake replication

• Developing selection criteria for replicators • Information dissemination • Screening and selection of candidacies • Getting the commitment of replicators • Clarifying roles and responsibilities of replicators and forms of support that the program can provide them • Building relations/arrangements with replicators

Task 4 Managing and supporting the actual replication process among local government units participating in the program

Pre-Replication: • Preparing for replication activities • Building relations between host and replicating LGUs

Outputs: • MOA or similar instrument between host and replicating LGUs

Actual Replication: Peer-to-peer coaching through three main activities • Documenting the exemplary practice as a guide for replication • Conducting the peer-to-peer learning workshop among host and replicating LGUs • Formulating the workplan

Tools Needed: • 3 Replication Tools 1. Guidelines for Documenting the Exemplary Practice 2. The Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop Generic Agenda and Facilitators Guide 3. Workplan Template • Assessment Tool for LGUs

Monitoring and evaluation at the LGU level

PROGRAM LEVEL

Task 5 Monitoring and evaluating the program (program level and local replication process)

2-4

Outputs and Tools

Outputs: 1. Selection criteria for replicators 2. Information package for potential replicators 3. Final list of replicators 4. Support package for selected replicators

REPLICATION LEVEL

• Monitoring and evaluation integrated throughout the replication process(program level and replication level) • Joint monitoring and evaluation by host and replicating LGUs at replication level (either self-assessment by LGUs or facilitated by program implementers) • Program support for M & E at the local government level • Use of monitoring and evaluation tools

Tools Needed: Program Assessment Tools

SETTING UP A REPLICATION PROGRAM: TASKS 1-3 TASK 1 Determining the Modalities of your Replication Program Task One includes the following activities: 1. Deciding to do it alone or in partnership with other organizations You need to decide if your organization wants to set up the program independently or in partnership with one or more organizations, for example, a government agency, an international donor agency, an association of LGUs, or some other institution. There are advantages and disadvantages in doing it on your own as well as in forming a partnership or consortium.

Table 2.1. Advantages and Disadvantages of Forming a Partnership or Consortium Advantages

Disadvantages

More resources can be made available to the program, as organizations can pool individual resources to maximize them.

Having more than one organization manage the program may diminish each organizationâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s sense of responsibility and ownership, especially if leadership and roles are not well-defined. This can result in involvement tapering off for one or more organizations, and the remaining group pressured to take on most of the tasks.

Having a partnership/consortium manage the program may also lend a stronger profile/ cachet to the program and may attract funding agencies to provide more support. Each institutional partner brings its own strengths relative to its goals and objectives, networks, and organizational structure. There is potential for synergy and complementation. A consortium can consolidate resources and efforts by different groups and help avoid duplication or multiplication of programs with similar goals and objectives.

Having more than one organization manage the program may give rise to conflicts or negative dynamics that will have to be managed along the way, especially if partners are working together for the first time. The decision making process may take more time if consensus is required from institutions with different backgrounds and paradigms.

2-5

How Kaakbay did it: Forming a Consortium of Institutions The Local Government Support Program, a major capacity development program and the flagship governance program of the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) in the Philippines, recognized the need to develop replication methodologies for local government in the Philippines. It mobilized the two main national associations of local government, the League of Cities of the Philippines (LCP) and the League of Municipalities of the Philippines (LMP), as well as the national agency responsible for local government in the country, the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG), to initiate a pilot program on replication with the intention of establishing a permanent national replication program after the pilot program. LCP and LMP represented all cities and municipalities in the country and had solid communication networks linking their national secretariats to member local government units throughout the country. They have both identified the replication and dissemination of best practices as part of their strategic objectives but had not developed the mechanisms required to implement it. The DILG was already implementing the components of a framework to coordinate inputs of several national and international stakeholders for the capacity development of LGUs throughout the country. The department saw the replication of exemplary practices as one of several inter related approaches to capacity development for LGUs in the country. While the Kaakbay pilot program was officially implemented by three national institutional partners, LGSP provided financial and technical assistance throughout program implementation, assisted by the Evelio B. Javier Foundation (EBJF), a non governmental organization primarily dedicated to local government strengthening in the Philippines. See Appendix A.1 for Memorandum of Agreement between LGSP, LCP, LMP and DILG.

2. Setting up management structures Identify the management structures that you want to establish by determining the scope and coverage of the program, its objectives and strategies. It is important to have at least two basic structures: â&#x20AC;˘ A decision-making/policy-making body â&#x20AC;˘ An implementation team The decision-making body will be the higher body that sets the general direction and oversees the entire program. The implementation team is your program workhorse. It implements the program activities, manages the day-to-day operations and activities,

2-6

provides secretariat functions, and trouble-shoots problems. It can also develop plans and recommend policy changes for approval by the decision-making body. If you are implementing the program as a consortium, the decision-making and implementing bodies can be composed of two to three representatives from each member of the consortium. Representatives from the leadership of each organization will form part of the decision-making body along with other members you may identify. Key staff members with experience in handling related local governance programs can become part of the implementing body. Once you have set up your management structures, they will need to do the following: • Develop objectives, principles, framework and criteria for selecting EPs and replicators, as well as mechanisms for coordination and communication, reporting, information dissemination, monitoring and evaluation, process documentation and others • Manage/undertake the search and selection of EPs (including information dissemination, screening) • Manage and oversee the actual replication process among local governments and ensure the achievement of program objectives within the given timeframe • Monitor and evaluate the program • Provide overall management and coordination of the program

How Kaakbay did it: Setting Up Management Structures Three structures were set up by Kaakbay: • National Steering Committee (NSC)– the policy-making and oversight body for the program; composed of 2-3 representatives of the four partner organizations (LCP, LMP, DILG and LGSP), including the executive heads of the organizations. • Technical Working Group (TWG)- the group undertook secretariat functions, drafted policies for approval by the NSC, and took care of the day-to-day operations and overseeing of the replication processes. • Regional Coordinating Committees – composed of regional office representatives of the DILG, LMP and LCP; undertook information dissemination and pre-screening functions, as well as provided coordination at the regional level.

2-7

3. Formulating objectives, policies, principles and framework/criteria to guide the program The management structure/s you set up will formulate the following for the program: • General program objectives • Program policies • General guidelines on how to undertake the program To do this, your implementing team can draft the needed documents for the decisionmaking body to discuss, modify and approve.

How Kaakbay did it Kaakbay set the following objectives: • To introduce organized and structured methodologies in replicating exemplary practices in local governance as an approach to building capacities of local governments in improving the general wellbeing of their constituents with the least possible cost and effort • To promote the dissemination and replication of exemplary practices through a structured, peer-to-peer learning approach that involves sharing and learning from the experiences of local governments

4. Leveling off on roles and functions among those involved in the program Leveling off on roles and functions is important, particularly if you are doing this as a consortium. Keeping in mind the key functions that you need to undertake in the program, level-off on roles and functions of the management structures as a whole, the individual member-organizations, and the individual representatives.

2-8

How Kaakbay did it: General List of Roles and Responsibilities In the Memorandum of Understanding of the Kaakbay consortium, LCP, LMP, DILG and LGSP committed to undertake the following roles and responsibilities: 1.1. DILG a. Designate/appoint a coordinator/technical staff at national and local levels who will work with the Secretariat to implement the overall project in between meetings of the Project Steering Committee. b. Designate Local Government Operations Officer (LGOO) and/or province-level staff to coach and monitor the implementation of the replication projects in LGUs. c. Provide in-kind contribution in the implementation and management of the project. 1.2. LCP and LMP a. Play an active role in disseminating information required to support the implementation of the KAAKBAY Project among members. b. Provide in-kind contribution in the implementation and management of the project. c. Provide financial support for the implementation of at least 1 replication cluster. e. Disseminate information about the success and results of the project as well as about specific exemplary practices being replicated. 1.3. LGSP a. Provide financial assistance for the overall project implementation as well as for the four (4) Replication Clusters. b. Provide technical assistance and secretariat/administrative support for the implementation and management of the project. c. Designate a representative to the Project Steering Committee and play an advisory role in the implementation of the project. See Kaakbay Memorandum of Agreement on Appendix A.1.

2-9

5. Developing mechanisms and systems for the following is crucial: a) Management b) Coordination (among partners in a consortium/partnership and among team members (in a single organization) as well as with LGUs) c) Monitoring and evaluation d) Program support to hosting and replicating local governments At this stage, you need to agree on systems and mechanisms for managing the program and coordinating with each other. These include the following: • Modes of decision-making—what decisions can the implementing team make on its own and which decisions need the approval of the decision-making body? • Modes of communication and reporting—meetings, email, reports Tasks Two & Three of this Chapter tackle the process of identifying support mechanisms for local government units. The process of setting up mechanisms and developing systems for monitoring and evaluation will be taken up in Chapters 3 & 4. 6. Developing a workplan After you have laid down the basic parameters and modalities, a good next step will be to develop an initial workplan covering all program activities for a period of at least one year or till a first round of replication is completed at the local government level. Developing a workplan helps you situate the program within a concrete timeframe, identify the needs and activities within each step of the plan as well as the resources that will be needed. A workplan also helps identify internal and external factors that can affect program activities (elections, local government processes like budgeting, holidays) as well as give partners a chance to integrate the program activities within the other activities and programs of their respective organizations.

2-10

How Kaakbay did it: The Kaakbay Pilot Program Workplan Activities

Nov-Dec 02

JanMar 03

AprJun 03

JulSep 03

OctDec 03

Jan-Mar 04

AprJun 04

Inception Phase Formation of consortium / management structure Formation of National Steering Committee Identification of Key Areas for Replication Identification of Exemplary Practices / Host LGUs Selection of Local Resource Partners (LRPs) Gathering of Reference Documentation Selection of LGUs for Replication Implementation of Replication Process Joint Inception/Exposure Workshop (Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop) Establishment of Replication Project Committees Signing of MOAs among Replication Clusters Formulation of Replication Work Plans Implementation of Replication Projects Joint Mid-Project Progress Assessment Workshop Joint Final Assessments Finalization of Program Methodology Manual Develop strategies to establish a permanent national program based on the pilot program experience

7. Identifying and leveraging resources needed and available An important consideration in determining the modalities of your program is resourcesâ&#x20AC;&#x201D; human, technical and financial. You need to identify what resources you can mobilize and what you can do, given the resources you have. If you want to cover a large geographical area, you would need more people and more funds for travel and other costs. Selecting a bigger number of exemplary practices and replicating local government units would also entail more funds and people to manage.

2-11

How Kaakbay did it: Mobilizing Resources for the Program Funding for the Kaakbay pilot program was primarily provided by the Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program (LGSP) with financial and in-kind contributions from the two national associations of local governments-LCP and LMP. The DILG provided inkind contributions mainly by dedicating staff to the program. Host LGUs also provided staff time and other resources such as meeting rooms, community volunteers, etc.

TASK 2 Identifying Exemplary Practices for Replication To undertake TASK 2, both the implementing team and the decision-making body will have to be involved in the tasks outlined below. You can also decide to form a smaller group with representatives from these two bodies that will focus on the tasks involved (especially if you are managing the program as a consortium) or have the entire implementing team undertake it (in case you are doing it as a single organization.) These tasks are: 1. Developing a mechanism for identifying relevant EPs (Knowledge Management Unit) 2. Developing a framework and criteria for identifying exemplary practices 3. Conducting the search to identify EPs 4. Building relations with host LGUs Let us take each task in turn. 1. Develop a mechanism for identifying relevant EPs (Knowledge Management Unit) An ongoing program for replicating and disseminating EPs requires a continuous process for identifying relevant practices for the improvement of governance. The choice of exemplary practices to be promoted for dissemination in a given context is likely to be rooted in strategic orientations of your organization. Thus, a knowledge-management unit needs to be established to manage the selection of EPs and link them to your strategic orientations. Key issues to be taken into account here are: â&#x20AC;˘ The unit should be comprised of members of your organization with policy-related or strategic responsibilities. The work of this unit involves analysis and a deep understanding of the local government environment and its capacity development needs.

2-12

â&#x20AC;˘ Members of such a unit need to be in a position to link the identification of EPs with the strategic orientations of the respective organizations involved. â&#x20AC;˘ Depending on the magnitude of your program, a data base could be developed as a tool to manage EPs. Such a database would require regular updating thereby identifying new practices to be promoted as well as removing ones that are no longer relevant. 2. Develop a framework and criteria for identifying exemplary practices This includes identifying the following: a. Categories of EPs you would like to offer for replication. You may choose to limit your selection to practices that address specific orientations, goals and objectives of your organization, namely: poverty reduction, waste management, resource mobilization, urban development, government administration. Establishing categories will help to focus your identification of EPs and will also facilitate documentation and packaging of the same. The categorization may also point to specific conditions or contextual characteristics important to its replication. A practice related to coastline rehabilitation for example would only be proposed to coastal towns; a practice related to developing industrial activity would be suitable for cities with potential industrial growth. b. Geographical scope of your selection You may choose to select EPs from across the country, within certain regions, or within your area of work or jurisdiction to facilitate program implementation. c. Degree of difficulty entailed in replicating the EPs Some EPs are easier to replicate than others. There may be practices that can be replicated within one or two months and will require few or no additional resources at all to replicate, such as streamlining the issuance of business permits. Others may require substantial resources to replicate, and may entail promoting changes in attitudes and behavior of local government personnel and community residents such as a comprehensive community based waste reduction program. Categorizing EPs in terms of degrees of difficulty to replicating them is important. d. Timeframe for replication Related to establishing limits to the degree of difficulty in replicating EPs, it is also critical to establish a timeframe for replication. How long will it take local governments to replicate the selected EPs? Six months? A year? Two years? Setting up a timeframe will help you manage and monitor the replication process as well as help the host and replicating LGUs manage their time and activities.

2-13

Based on the lessons of the Kaakbay experience, it is best that you limit your choice of exemplary practices to those that would take no more than one year to replicate. Practices that require more than a year to replicate may entail greater difficulties to manage: local government units may lose momentum or enthusiasm in the process and monitoring may be less effective given the longer period. e. Generic Exemplary Practices (EPs) Selected EPs should also be generic enough so that replicating LGUs can modify and adapt them to their own situation. EPs that are too context-specific or require too many preconditions or are subject to a lot of external factors may be difficult to replicate. f.

Cost-effectiveness One of the principles of replication is that it should require the least effort and amount of resources. Thus, selected EPs should have proven their cost-effectiveness in terms of achieving their objectives vis-à-vis the amount of resources that went into the practice.

g. Number of EPs to be offered You will also need to determine how many EPs you would like to offer for replication, based on the amount of resources you have in documenting and packaging them, and in terms of managing the replication process. h. Potential involvement of the LGU having experienced the EP Lastly, if your replication program involves engaging the host in sharing its experience, a critical consideration is the level of institutional commitment a local government having initiated the exemplary practice is willing to give to the program.

How Kaakbay did it: Identifying Exemplary Practices of LGUs Kaakbay developed a framework for identifying exemplary practices in local governance. The framework and criteria focused on the following considerations: Criteria for Identifying Exemplary Practices Necessary Criteria • LGU-initiated. The exemplary practice has been/can be initiated by a LGU at the city or municipal level. The initiative should be sustainable and not dependent for its success, implementation or resources on any other program/project or agency. This being the case, the initiative should demonstrate LGU ownership and is socially accepted by its targeted beneficiaries. • Simple and implementable in a short time frame (a maximum of 18 months). The initiative is easily replicable and can progress to the “application stage” in a relatively short timeframe.

2-14

• Proven and effective solutions to the problems encountered. The exemplary practice has operationally demonstrated and proven to be an effective response to the identified needs of its target beneficiaries. It also means that the initiative has significantly contributed to improving the social and material conditions of the beneficiaries. • Demonstrated level of sustainability. The following indicators may help determine the level of sustainability of the initiative: 1) it has been in place for a considerable period of time; 2) it survived the entry of a new administration; 3)it has become a permanent program or structure in the LGU; 4)the community as well as executive and legislative bodies are involved in / supportive of it; and 5) related legislation is in place in the LGU. • Least possible cost and effort to replicate. The exemplary practice does not require huge amounts of resources or funding to replicate and is easy to implement. It’s a “common sense idea” as opposed to a capital-intensive project. It also means the exemplary practice was able to mobilize and maximize the use of indigenous resources. Desirable Criteria • Practices which are conducive to achieve results addressing the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) • Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger • Achieve universal primary education • Promote gender quality • Reduce child mortality

• Improve maternal health • Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria, and other diseases • Ensure environmental sustainability • Develop a global partnership for development

• Potential for multiplier effect or further replication. The practice addresses a problem or situation encountered in many LGUs. The success of the practice demonstrated in a few LGUs may incite other LGUs to adopt the same practice. • Documented exemplary practice. In order to reduce overall program costs, preference will be given initiatives that have existing documentation of the benefits, key milestones, success and hindering factors, results, key stakeholders, processes and mechanisms. “Host” LGUs While the exemplary practice or initiative may manifest the foregoing features or criteria, the city or municipal LGUs who have experienced the exemplary practice and will serve as host in the replication process, should likewise have: • The will and interest ( LCE and SB/SP support) to take part in an institutional sharing process • The presence of resource people with the ability to contribute/ articulate their experience • Readiness to start as soon as possible so that the initiatives are completed or are underway before the 2004 local elections • Existing documentation of the exemplary practice preferred See Kaakbay Framework and Criteria for Identifying EPs in Appendix A.2.

2-15

3. Conducting the Search to Identify EPs Once you have formulated your framework, you can begin the search for exemplary practices. a. Beginning the search for EPs • Issue a general call for EPs. • Tap into networks such as leagues or associations of local governments or government agencies to get recommendations for potential EPs. • Conduct research on existing literature on exemplary practices or get lists from institutions that provide support to local governments or grant awards and recognition to LGUs with exemplary practices. • Produce and disseminate a brief concept paper that contains the following – basic information about the program, the criteria for identifying EPs, and ways of contacting your organization/s for LGUs wanting to offer their good practices for replication. • If a comprehensive local government performance measurement system exists where you are establishing your program, assess the feasibility of identifying good practices related to high performing LGUs in specific service areas. This approach may require additional research and processes to make the link between the indicators of high performance and the practices associated to those high performance levels in the LGU operations. b. Screening and initial documentation After compiling an initial list of potential EPs from recommendations and/or the results of your research, designate teams or individuals that will undertake the screening of potential EPs on your list. These can be region-based teams/individuals. They may consider visiting the local governments under consideration and conduct initial documentation of potential EPs. For this, you need to develop a template for documentation that will provide you with the essential information you will need in assessing each EP. After documenting basic information on the EPs, screen the list you have made based on your criteria and make a final list of your identified EPs.

How Kaakbay did it Kaakbay implementors developed a template that was used to document potential EPs. The information obtained was then used for screening and selecting the EPs to be included in the program. See Kaakbay Template for Identifying and Initial Documentation of EPs in Appendix A.3.

2-16

c. Packaging information about EPs for dissemination to potential replicators Once you have finalized your list of identified EPs, package the information about the EPs for dissemination to potential replicators. You can do this by producing animated audio-visual presentations (in powerpoint CD formats, for example), brochures or pamphlets (See Appendix C for sample Kaakbay brochures). The EP package should include most of the information that potential replicators will need: • • • •

To determine if a specific EP represents a solution to a challenge or problem in their own LGU If the characteristics of the LGU that implemented it apply to their LGU In deciding if they can benefit from replicating such a practice and If they have the capacity and prevailing conditions for replication

How Kaakbay did it To document and disseminate information on the exemplary practices offered for replication, Kaakbay used the same template it developed to initially document and screen its EPs. A lesson learned by the program was that additional efforts may have been made to “market” the EPs to other LGUs. See Kaakbay Template for Initial Documentation of EPs in Appendix A.3.

4. Building Relations/Arrangements with Host LGUs This essentially entails the following: a. Getting the institutional commitment of the host LGU to participate in the replication process b. Providing information on the benefits of taking part in the replication process as a host c. Clarifying roles and responsibilities of the host LGUs in the replication process Roles and Responsibilities of host LGUs that need to be clarified with them include the following: • • • • •

Collaborate in documenting their exemplary practice following the guidelines set by the program, Cooperate in the preparation of the peer-to-peer learning workshop (mobilize champions, partners, beneficiaries; prepare presentations and field visits, etc), Undertake the peer-to-peer learning workshop, Establish modes of coordination and communication with the replicating LGUs; Participate in the monitoring and evaluation activities.

2-17

d. Putting together a support and incentive package for host LGUs Forms of support can include technical assistance in undertaking specific tasks of host LGUs (e.g. documenting their practice, facilitating the peer-to-peer learning workshop), financial support (such as travel and accommodation expenses if needed), honoraria for the time spent taking part in the sharing process, and any other creative approach to providing incentives.

How Kaakbay did it Kaakbay put together an information package that was disseminated to LGUs with exemplary practices to provide details on their roles and responsibilities in the program. See Kaakbay General Information Sheet for Host LGUs on Appendix A.4.

Task 3 Offering Exemplary Practices (EPs) for Replication and Selecting Replicators Selecting replicators involves undertaking a process similar to identifying your EPs. • Develop criteria for selection of replicating LGUs • Establish modes and media for disseminating information about the program and the EPs proposed for replication • Screen applications and finalize the selection • Build relations/arrangements with replicating LGUs 1. Developing a criteria for selecting replicating LGUs or replicators In developing criteria for selection, you need to take the following into consideration: a. Degree of need of LGU You may want to prioritize LGUs that have a greater need for improving their condition, as this will also help generate greater commitment to the program. b. Level of interest and commitment for a specific EP At the same time, just because an LGU needs a certain project does not always mean they are really interested in implementing it. LGUs must express a high level of interest for a specific practice because they recognize that it corresponds to a particular challenge or problem in their organization or locality. Furthermore they should be willing to undergo the replication process and follow the program guidelines and procedures.

2-18

Level of capacity/readiness to replicate This includes: • Willingness to provide resources (human, technical, financial) for replication • Presence of pre-requisites or pre-conditions needed to replicate a particular project

d. Geographical scope and number You may also choose to limit replicators to a certain number within an area or region to facilitate the management.

How Kaakbay did it: Selection Criteria for Replicators Kaakbay developed a selection criteria that put emphasis on the following qualities of potential replicators: • Need for assistance. LGUs demonstrating greater need for assistance will be prioritized in the selection. • Demonstrate the will to replicate a specific practice. The recipient LGU should have the daring and the intense desire and interest to pursue the exemplary practice proposed to them. Replication should also meet their identified needs. • Be willing to take part in an institutional cooperation process with other LGUs. The participating LGUs will be asked to formally bind themselves in a collaborative agreement with other LGUs to pursue the replication process. The support of the individual LGUs’ Local Chief Executive and the respective local councils will be required. • Have the readiness to implement the exemplary practice. The recipient LGUs should have the political support, basic capacity and required equipment, among others, as well as the readiness to start the replication process at the soonest possible time. • The will to provide the resources required for the replication process. While LGSP will provide a small support fund to the Kaakbay Project, recipient LGUs are expected to buyin into the replication process and provide the majority of resources required as well as other in-kind contributions • Have a competently strong LGOO assigned in the LGU. The LGOO, with support from a local resource partner (LRP), is expected to coach the LGU through the replication process. The Kaakbay project will take this factor into consideration when selecting specific LGUs for the Kaakbay project. • Minimum pre-requisites for a specific practice already in place. The recipient LGU has the necessary facilities, human resources and equipment required to replicate the specific exemplary practice. Those resources are available for utilization/deployment. • Be willing to abide by, and commit to the roles and responsibilities within the Kaakbay replication cluster. See Kaakbay Selection Criteria for Replicators in Appendix A.5.

2-19

2. Information dissemination Establish strategies and modes for disseminating the information package you have produced to potential replicators. Again, there are several ways of doing so: • • • •

Tap your and other networks, including leagues of cities, municipalities, or provinces, government agencies Advertise in commercial media or in local government newsletters, occasional publications and websites Get recommendations from government agencies, leagues and other organizations Take advantage of existing local government events or gatherings to promote the program

The information package you disseminate should include the following: • • • • •

Basic information about the program The packaged information on the EPs Overview of the requirements and steps in the replication process Application forms Information on the potential benefits of replication

How Kaakbay did it Kaakbay put together an information package that was disseminated to potential replicators through the regional offices of the partner organizations. This package included a general information sheet about the Kaakbay program including the roles and responsibilities of replicators (see Appendix A.6); an application form (Appendix A.7); the initial documentation of the offered EPs that can help the LGUs choose what practice they want and need to replicate (Appendix A.8); and the selection criteria for selecting replicating LGUs. (Appendix A.5) See Appendices A.5-A.8.

2-20

3. Selection of applicants Establish a selection committee that will go through the applications and compile a shortlist of applicants. After shortlisting, the committee may invite applicants for individual meetings or interviews or visit the areas/local governments short-listed before finalizing the selection. 4. Building Relations/Arrangements with the Replicating LGUs As with building relations/arrangements with host LGUs, this essentially entails the following: • •

•

Confirming the institutional commitment of the replicating LGU to participate in the selection process Identifying forms of support to be provided by the program to the replicating LGUs. Forms of support can include technical assistance in undertaking specific tasks of replicating LGUs, financial support, and others Clarifying roles and responsibilities of the replicating LGUs in the replication process

Roles and Responsibilities of replicating LGUs that need to be clarified with them include: • • • •

Ensuring institutional commitment and developing capacity/readiness to undertake replication Establishing modes of coordination and communication with the host LGUs Participating and following the process and procedures set by the program for replication Participating in the monitoring and evaluation activities

SUMMING UP: LESSONS AND INSIGHTS After undertaking Tasks 1 to 3, your management structures will be in place. You will also have a list of exemplary practices to replicate and a group of replicating LGUs ready to begin the replication process. To ensure success in undertaking these first tasks, particular emphasis should be placed on the following: •

Ensure a demand-driven approach to the replication process. Replication of a specific practice should correspond to a felt need by the local governments you select, not merely a response to your invitation to take part in the program or a passing whim or inclination. When local governments have a real and recognized need to replicate a particular project, they are more inclined and committed to the process.

2-21

•

Adhere strictly to the criteria you have set in identifying exemplary practices and selecting replicating LGUs. Once you agree on a criteria, stick to it. It helps avoid future problems, such as LGUs suddenly dropping out of the process, delays and longerthan-expected project duration, logistical difficulties, and others.

•

Ensure a supportive environment for replication by providing various forms of support to both host LGUs and replicating LGUs. At the same time, ensure that host and replicating LGUs have a clear understanding of their roles and responsibilities.

•

Keep to the principle of cost-effectiveness in replication. If a replication project takes longer and costs more to do than the original project, then it loses its value.

Consider good timing when implementing the program. Timing may not be everything, but it is critical. It would be best to time the start of the program or the replication process right after an election. This enhances prospects for the replication being completed and institutionalized, and minimizes the chances that it will be disrupted by changes in local government leadership.

2-22

Learning from Peers for

Good Governance Practical Tools for Local Government in Sharing Good Practices

Chapter 3 of the Guidebook on Establishing a Program for Replicating Exemplary Practices in Local Government

While this chapter is part of a larger guidebook, it is also a stand alone booklet on how to undertake a program for replicating exemplary practices (EPs) among local government units. It is based on the experience of the Kaakbay pilot program for replicating exemplary practices in local governance, undertaken by the Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program(LGSP), the League of Municipalities of the Philippines (LMP), the League of Cities of the Philippines (LMP) and the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG). Replication can be undertaken within or outside a replication program. Enterprising local government units (LGUs) interested in replicating a particular practice can undertake a replication process on their own, without being part of a larger program. This chapter of the larger guidebook was written with these LGUs in mind. It presents guidelines and tools in managing and supporting the replication process among local governments doing it on their own. For organizations or government agencies undertaking replication as a program, this chapter is a continuation of the earlier chapters that outline the process of managing and supporting a replication program. This chapter, however, repeats a few important points from previous chapters so that LGUs that will read this chapter as a separate booklet from the Guidebook can still have an appreciation of the rationale and value of replication programs.

3-4

contents

ACRONYMS 3-7 INTRODUCTION 3-9 What is Replication? 3-9 Why Replicate Exemplary Practices in Local Government: The Big Picture 3-9 What is the Peer-to-Peer Learning Approach to Replication? 3-10 What will you Find in this Chapter? 3-11 What can your Local Government Gain from Replicating or Hosting the Replication of an Exemplary Practice? 3-11 What else do you Need to Know about Replication? Guiding Principles of Replication 3-14 THE REPLICATION PROCESS USING A PEER-TO-PEER LEARNING APPROACH: OVERVIEW 3-15 DOING IT: THE REPLICATION PROCESS 3-16 Pre-replication 3-16 Replication Using the Three Tools 3-17 Tool 1: Documenting the Exemplary Practice 3-22 Tool 2: The Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop Generic Agenda and Facilitatorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Guide 3-30 Tool 3: The Replication Workplan 3-39 Post Peer-to-Peer Workshop Activities: Validating and Implementing the Workplan 3-43 Monitoring and Evaluation 3-43 SUMMING UP: LESSONS AND INSIGHTS 3-48

3-5

Appendices (The Appendices of this manual are contained in the enclosed CD Rom)

Appendix A. A.1.

A.2. A.3. A.4. A.5. A.6. A.7. A.8. A.9.

Memorandum of Understanding between League of Municipalities of the Philippines, League of Cities of the Philippines, Department of Interior and Local Government and Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program A-9 Framework and Criteria for Identifying Exemplary Practices A-12 Kaakbay Template for Initial Documentation of Exemplary Practices A-14 General Information for Host LGUs A-16 Selection Criteria for Replicating LGUs A-19 General Information to Replicating LGUs A-20 Application Form for Replicating LGUs A-22 Initial Documentation of Exemplary Practices A-25 LGU Replication Cluster Memorandum of Agreement A-30

Appendix B.

Sample Kaakbay Reference Document: “Making Crime Prevention Everybody’s Business” Bantay sa Kahusay Ug Kalinaw (BKK) (Peace and Order Watch) A-32

Appendix C.

Kaakbay Brochure/Flyer A-40

Appendix D.

Monitoring and Evaluation Guide Questions Used by Kaakbay A-49

D.1. D.2. D.3. Appendix E. E.1 E.2 E.3 Appendix F.

3-6

Sample MOU and Forms used by Kaakbay A-7

acronyms

AO BALAK BKK CIDA DBM DILG EBJF EO EP FCM LCE LCP LGOO LGSP LG LGU LMP LRP M&E MOA NSC PAC RCC SB SP TWG UNDP USAID VNG

3-7

3-8

managing and supporting the replication process INTRODUCTION What is Replication? Replication is a systematic and supportive process that involves learning from, and sharing with others, practices that are proven to be effective solutions to common local government problems. It aims to contribute to the sustainable wellbeing of citizens and advancement of local government with the least possible cost and effort. Why Replicate Exemplary Practices in Local Government: The Big Picture 1. Replication embodies a common-sense principle: Do not reinvent the wheel. Local governments operate in the same legal and regulatory frameworks and often face similar challenges. Using approaches already tested by others offers a chance to eliminate the unnecessary steps and mistakes. 2. Replicating exemplary practices in local governance is a practical, innovative and proven way of building local capacities, addressing local government needs and challenges, and generally enhancing local governance. 3. A replication program is an empowering and participatory method of capacity development for local governments. Local governments that have successfully replicated good practices are encouraged to appreciate other approaches and share their accomplishments with others, ensuring a continuous and ever-widening circle of learning. The inter-local government cooperation established through these relationships often results in creating avenues for sharing a wide range of ideas and concerns. 4. A replication program can contribute to greater effectiveness and/or efficiency in local government operations.

3-9

Why replicate exemplary practices in Local Government? 1. Use tested solutions to local government problems 2. Adopt an innovative and proven way of building LGU capacities 3. Empower and enjoy a participatory method of capacity development 4. Contribute to greater effectiveness and efficiency. 5. Become more cost-effective. 6. Reduce costs.

5. The replication of the innovative practice, because informed by previous experience, can be done with more precision and therefore, the replication is faster and to-the-point, generally more cost-effictive than starting from scratch. 6. From a national policy or program point of view, the dissemination of good practices through replication programs offers an option for reducing capacity development and human resources development costs. More local governments can be reached with fewer resources. It also offers a way to promote and mainstream local cost-effective practices, thereby reducing national expenditure required to support inefficiencies in the system. What is the Peer-to-Peer Learning Approach to Replication? While replication as a concept presents a great number of benefits, there are also different ways of undertaking replication, some more effective than others in producing results. This guidebook introduces the Peer-to-Peer Learning Approach to Replication. Used in the Kaakbay pilot program for replicating exemplary practices among 30 local governments in the Philippines, this approach was pioneered by the Federation of Canadian Municipalities in its municipal exchange programs. The approach features the matching of 2 or more local government units, with similar situations and facing similar challenges. Concretely, one of the LGUs (the host LGU) has a practice that was successful in addressing a particular problem, such as solid waste management, low revenues, bad roads, inadequate infrastructure, or limited services to remote areas. Two or more LGUs having the same problem will then be matched with the host LGU so that they can learn about the successful practice and adapt and replicate it in their locality. The pair or group of host and replicating LGUs then go through the replication process together, following the guidelines and tools developed, with the host LGU coaching

3-10

the replicators as needed, and the replicators designing and implementing their replication projects. Both host and replicating LGUs will jointly monitor progress in the replication process and resolve problems and issues together. What will you find in this Chapter? The replication process featured in this chapter is specifically for the replication of practices that are moderate-to-highly complex. This means replication that requires face-to-face communication and exchange between host and replicating local government units and will take from 6 to 18 months to replicate. This chapter presents the actual replication process that takes place at the local government level, between the host LGU (the LGU that has an exemplary practice and is hosting its replication) and the replicating LGU (the LGU replicating the practice of the host LGU). It presents a step-by-step guide to undertaking replication and the generic, practical tools that will be used in the process. What can your Local Government gain from Replicating or Hosting the Replication of an Exemplary Practice? Local government units new to the idea of replication may be ambivalent or unconvinced of the value of such an effort. Others may hold the view that replicating may prove ineffective because government units have differing situations, needs and capacities that are not transferable. As such, they may believe that a practice that works in one area will not work in another. Some may view replicating the practices of others as copying or imitating. Since each local government unit may have their own unique way of doing things and necessarily takes pride in their own corporate initiative, they may be reluctant to replicate other LGUsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; practices as this may cast a negative light on their efforts. LGUs with replicable innovative practices may not see any benefit in sharing their experience; rather, they may see it as an added burden on their resources and personnel. However, the experiences of many local governments that have participated in replication efforts and programs mostly testify to the manifold benefits of replication. Here are some of them:

3-11

Benefits for LGUs Sharing their Exemplary Practice with other LGUs

Benefits for LGUs Sharing their Exemplary Practice with other LGUs 1. It will enhance your reputation and prestige. 2. It’s a potential source of income. 3. It provides professional development opportunities for staff.

1. It will enhance your reputation and prestige. For host LGUs, sharing their expertise and innovativeness makes for a more prestigious profile and reputation. It increases the visibility of the LGU nationally and possibly internationally. The LGU becomes known for good governance among its peers and other institutions. Greater prestige and reputation, in turn, can make it easier for an LGU to promote its locality and attract potential business investments. In addition, it can help increase credit worthiness and eligibility to various national or international support programs. 2. It’s a potential source of income. As the experience of some LGUs show, replication can also be a potential source of income for host LGUs. Showcasing your exemplary practice and coaching others in replicating can be a regular service that you can provide to other LGUs for a reasonable fee. The income earned can then be used to experiment with other projects that can turn out to be equally exemplary practices. 3. It provides professional development opportunities for staff. Local government officials and personnel involved in sharing their expertise often develop new skills as part of the process. They must analyze their experience, take part in the documentation process, sharpen their presentation skills and gain from the feedback their peers offer them. Most local governments involved in such exercises find ways of improving their own processes when they share them with others. Benefits for Replicating LGUs 1. It is an effective and innovative way to build your LGU’s capacities. Replication is innovative because it features firsthand, peer-to-peer learning, a new approach

3-12

to LGU capacity development. Instead of long, highly technical and expensive training programs whose impact may be limited to a few individuals, you get to learn new practices from peers, people who are like you, who have been through the same experiences, face the same limitations and challenges and can share good practices firsthand. Replication makes learning and capacity development more interesting and exciting because the process is highly personal and participatory. You get to see the practice and its benefits firsthand. You get to meet new people and hear them share their experience. Then you identify the consequences of, and requirements for adopting the practice in your own context, designing and implementing your own project with the help of those who have done it before you. You are also not buying an unknown product; you know it works because you have seen it in operation.

Benefits of Replicating LGUs

1. It is an effective and innovative way to build your LGUâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s capacities. 2. It is cost-effective. 3. It is participatory and empowering. 4. It improves governance.

At the same time, it involves the LGU as a whole to make the institutional changes required to adopt a new way of delivering a service or a new management process. 2. It is cost-effective. Because you are not starting from scratch, you have a clearer idea of the work involved, the resources needed and the time it takes to do it. This makes it faster and less costly. You also avoid making the mistakes that the host may have made since you will have the support of knowledgeable people who have gone through the same experience. 3. It is participatory and empowering. Replication needs the involvement of the entire LGU, not just a few individuals. An LGU has to provide institutional (legislative and executive) commitment and support, and a project management team needs to be on hand to undertake the process.

3-13

4. It improves governance. Most importantly, replication can greatly improve local governance. The experience provides multiple opportunities for officials and personnel in both host and replicating LGUs to gain new knowledge and skills. They are both exposed to a greater variety of experiences and situations beyond their locality. Host LGUs, for example, develop newfound skills in hosting and coaching replication. In turn, improved capacities translate to better services, higher revenues, more efficient administration, improved wellbeing for constituents, and greater prospects for growth and development.

Guiding Principles of Replication 1. 2. 3. 4.

Seeing is believing. Replicating is innovating. Follow the methodology. Replicate at least possible effort.

What else do I need to know about replication? Guiding Principles of Replication Before describing the replication process, it is critical to review some key principles in replication as they serve as guideposts in ensuring the effectiveness of the replication process. 1. Seeing is believing. Firsthand learning is one of the best ways to share and transfer knowledge and skills. Thus, replication must ensure that LGUs learn first hand about the exemplary practice they wish to replicate. Seeing it in action, so to speak, talking to the people who have successfully implemented it or benefited from it and finding tangible evidence of its benefit are exciting, participatory ways of learning as well as powerful incentives to replicating. 2.

3-14

Replicating is innovating. Replicating can be a genuinely creative process. It challenges you to expand your vision beyond your locality and see the situations and efforts of others. Then, it compels you to shift perspective and skillfully transform this information into a viable, original project that will suit your localityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s unique needs and conditions.

Don’t under-estimate the importance of the process, follow the methodology. A structured, organized process of replicating ensures the best chances of achieving results. First hand learning and innovative replication may diminish in value without the benefit of an effective methodology that is properly followed by host and replicating LGUs. Work planning is a crucial part of the replication process. Under a replication program, it is the Management Team’s task to ensure that the replication methodology featured in this manual is adequately adapted to guide the replication effort. For individual LGUs, following the replication methodology will greatly help you manage the process on your own.

4. Replicate at least possible cost and effort. Replication loses its value if it is done at great expense and effort. The underlying principle of replication is to avoid reinventing the wheel and benefiting from already tested solutions.

THE REPLICATION PROCESS USING THE PEER-TO-PEER LEARNING APPROACH: OVERVIEW The Process Under this approach, host and replicating LGUs undergo the following process: 1.

Pre-Replication 1.1. Preparing for replication 1.2. Building relations between host and replicating LGUs

Replication using Three Key Tools 2.1. Documenting the exemplary practice (by host LGUs and/or their facilitator support institution) using Tool 1 (Guidelines for Documenting the Exemplary Practice) 2.2. Conducting the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop, using Tool 2 ( Generic Agenda and Facilitator’s Guide) 2.3. Developing and Implementing a Replication Workplan (by the replicating LGU) using Tool 3 (Replication Workplan Template)

3-15

Figure A. The Replication Process at a Glance

Pre â&#x20AC;&#x201C;Replication Build Capacities for Replication (mainly for host LGUs) Build Relations Between Host and Replicating LGUs

Actual Replication

Document the Exemplary Practice

Conduct the Workshop

Implement the Workplan

By host LGU and /or support institution facilitator

To be organized by host LGU and participated in by replicating LGU

Validate and Finalize the Workplan

Formulate a Replication Workplan

Implement the Workplan

2-3 days

6 months â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 18 months

2 weeks to 1 month

DOING IT: THE REPLICATION PROCESS Pre-replication Pre-replication involves two activities: 1) preparing for replication and 2) building relations between host and replicating LGUs. 1. Preparing for replication To ensure your readiness to undertake the process and increase your chances for success, an LGU needs to build some level of capacity in hosting or replicating a local government practice. However, initial capacity development takes different forms for the host and replicating LGUs. LGUs hosting replication or sharing their exemplary practice with others will need to do more work at the start of the process. Replicating LGUs will take on greater responsibility when they are actually replicating the practice.

3-16

Table A. Preparing to Host or Replicate an Exemplary Practice For Host LGUs

For Replicating LGUs

•

• • •

Ensure institutional support in hosting the replication of your exemplary practice by passing an executive order or a similar document declaring your intention to host other local governments in replicating a practice pioneered by your LGU. Allocate initial funds if required Designate a team to take the lead in hosting Become familiar with the replication tools and process and Plan the replication activities (including the documentation of the exemplary practice and the conduct of the Peer-toPeer Learning Workshop)

•

Get the approval of the City Council or a similar legislative body of your intention to undertake replication in the form of a Resolution or similar order Designate a core group of 3 to 5 members within the LGU to take the lead in the project. Ensure that team members have the needed competence and adequate authority to make decisions and undertake activities called for by the replication process. You can expand or change members as you go along to suit the changing needs of the process Start considering the level of effort needed for replication ( in terms of financial, human and other resources, time needed, etc) so that these can be planned and appropriated

2. Building relations/arrangements between host and replicating LGUs This means initial communication and coordination between LGUs through email, telephone, fax, or letter. Initial communication would involve introducing the host and replicating team to each other, arranging for the conduct of the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop and clarifying questions and expectations.

Replication using the three key tools Three key replication tools, designed to facilitate the conduct of the three key steps in the replication process, guide the Peer-to-peer Learning approach. These tools ensure simplicity, ease and efficiency in replication.

3-17

Table B. Steps, Replication Tools and Who Will Use Them Steps in the Replication Process

Key Replication Tools

Who will use the Tool?

Documenting the Exemplary Practice (by the host LGU)

Tool 1. Guidelines for Documenting the Exemplary Practice

Host LGU

Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop (for host and replicating LGUs))

Tool 2. Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop Generic Agenda and Facilitatorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Guide

Formulating and Implementing the Replication Workplan

Tool 3. Replication Workplan Template

Host LGU

Replicating LGU

The first two steps (and tools) will be done by the host LGU. The host LGU will document their exemplary practice in order to share it with the replicating LGU. They will also conduct a Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop. During the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop, the spotlight will shift to the replicating LGU, as they formulate their project workplan and then proceed to implementing it. In terms of a timeline, steps 1 and 2 will be two short steps that may take from 1-2 months to complete while Step 3 will cover the rest of the replication period of 6-18 months. Because the three steps in the replication process directly lead one to the other, the three tools proposed by this manual are likewise designed to facilitate this connectedness and flow. Key sections of the three tools correspond to one another and help the LGUs organize the information in such a way to facilitate the work planning for the replicating LGUs. Abiding by the instructions of the respective tools can therefore ensure ease and efficiency in undertaking the replication process.

For LGUs undertaking replication on their own, you may need to look into getting external assistance (such as getting a technical consultant) in facilitating the process and using the three tools. For organization/s managing a replication program, you will need to facilitate and manage this process in support of your host and replicating LGUs.

3-18

Step 1 Documenting the Exemplary Practice using Tool 1: Guidelines to Documenting Your Exemplary Practice (GDEP) a. Who will use the tool? Tool 1 is used by the Host LGU and/or their facilitator/support institution in documenting (putting on paper) their exemplary practice to make pertinent information about the implementation of the practice available to the replicating LGU. b. Objective: Documenting the practice to be replicated serves the following purpose: Make available essential information about the practice and present it in a way that will facilitate its use by the replicating LGU in developing its work plan and implementing its replication project c.

Output: The Reference Document The output of Tool1 will be a Reference Document that will be shared with the replicating LGU/s and will serve as reference in undertaking the next two steps of the replication process preparations (i.e. Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop and Replication project Work plan, tools 2 & 3). The Reference Document will contain the following information: • Objectives of host LGU in implementing the practice • Conditions in the LGU/locality prior to implementing the practice (Rationale) • Key Steps in implementing the practice • Resources used in implementing the practice • Results/Impact to the LGU/community of implementing the practice • Analysis: Lessons learned and Insights gained in implementing the practice • Samples of the specific forms, plans, tools, etc used by the host LGU in implementing its project The Reference Document will help replicating LGUs understand the practice they are about to replicate, and provide them with a ready template to modify in developing their own replication project. The Guidelines and their output, the Reference Document, will thus provide the needed anchors for structured learning and implementation to take place.

d. How to use Tool 1 The team or individual designated by the host LGU will take charge of documenting the exemplary practice. This will include data gathering (review of documents and interviews) to get the information required under the Guidelines and writing up

3-19

the Reference Document. If no one in the organization has time to put a Reference Document together, you may need to involve a writer or external persons (from a local university, for example) to do it for you using Tool 1 as their guide. e. Pointers in Documenting your Exemplary Practice From the perspective of replication, the “Key Implementation Steps “ are likely the most important part of the guidelines. These steps constitute the actual implementation process of the initial project and will be adopted/modified by the replicating LGUs. Documenting the implementation steps may require a meeting with the key implementers of the practice in the host LGU. It requires that the facilitator or writer exercises judgment and helps the implementers of the initial practice “take a step back” and objectively analyze their implementation process. One of the principles of replication as an approach to innovation in the LGU is to implement a solution to a common problem at the least possible cost and effort. This implies that the replicating LGU may implement the project implemented in the host LGU more effectively, likely in a shorter timeframe, and avoiding the mistakes made by the host LGU in the first place. The writer of the Reference Document may therefore use his or her judgment to simplify the replication process by avoiding some steps implemented by the host but that may have proven un-necessary in retrospect. In modifying any step undertaken by the host however, the writer must be sure it will lead to the same results. Similarly, the writer may choose to identify a step that the host may have omitted but that is common sense and appears beneficial to the successful implementation of the project. For example, it may be good to recommend the formation of a small project implementation team at the beginning of the project even though the host may not have had one. Such changes would usually require a discussion with the host LGU representatives so that they can agree on the value of the suggested change to the implementation process. Documenting an exemplary practice requires time and a series of interactions with the individuals having implemented the project in the first place. Several meetings may be required to properly document an exemplary practice. Since different sections of the guidelines correspond to specific sessions of the Peerto-Peer Learning Workshop, it is important to divide the information as suggested in the guidelines i.e. separate the rationale, objectives, implementation steps, results, etc. Most people involved in the process, especially hosts having previously shared their experience with others in their own manner, may not understand the importance of dividing the information in the way the guidelines are suggesting it. The rationale for this is to make the tool more didactic and easily understood by others.

3-20

Since local government people tend to be practical, generally need to get the job done quickly and seldom have time to read lengthy papers, the reference document should be short, focused on implementation and written in a simple manner. Adding visual elements and pictures is important. Preparing the Reference Document may be inter-related with the preparation of the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop. Since the sections of the Reference Document correspond to presentations members of the host LGU will need to do during the Peerto-Peer Learning Workshop, it may be easier to ask them to prepare their respective presentations and the writer can then integrate this information in the respective sections of the Reference Document.

3-21

Replication Tool 1: GUIDELINES TO DOCUMENTING THE EXEMPLARY PRACTICE

Replication Tool 1: GUIDELINES TO DOCUMENTING THE EXEMPLARY PRACTICE Introduction I. Background These guidelines are aimed at helping the Local Government Unit that is hosting the replication project (Host LGU) put together a Reference Document that will describe the Exemplary Practice. The Reference Document will serve as the main project description to help replicating LGUs understand the various aspects of the Exemplary Practice and how it was implemented. If you look closely, The Reference Document has several sections which correspond to various sections of other tools proposed for use in this Guidebook that will help replicating LGUs through the replication process: namely: the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop (Tool 2) and Replication Workplan (Tool 3). To ensure full and effective use of these tools, it is recommended that these Guidelines be strictly followed to facilitate the completion of the next two tools. At the same time, the Reference Document should contribute to the production, dissemination and promotion of information about exemplary practices in local governance. It should be written so it can be used again and again as a reference and an information source. Objectives of the Reference Document The Reference Document should: • • •

Provide simple information about each step of implementing the Exemplary Practice to facilitate the Replicating LGUs’ development of a workplan Provide a common reference/outline for the various stakeholders involved in the project Contribute to promoting innovative approaches of local government management and service delivery among peers and stakeholders of the local government sector

The writer must develop the Reference Document in consultation with the team involved in the actual project implementation. If the host LGU does not have a writer it can find outside resources to develop the LGU involvement is essential. Total Length of Document The document should be short, to the point and simply written so it is easy to understand, particularly by LGU personnel who do not have time to go through elaborate documents. Ideally it will be 8 to 10 pages. Additional materials relevant to the replication process such as training materials, sample MOAs, technical specifications, etc. can be provided as appendices to the Reference Document. You can add visuals (photographs, maps, charts and graphs) to help tell the story, as they are powerful aids in helping the replicating LGUs get a fuller understanding of the project. For example, if there are no photographs already available, make time to take new ones to complete the Reference Document. II. Proposed Parts and Content of the Reference Document 1. Title The title should reflect the major theme of the project and be short and to the point. It should also include the name of the LGU

3-22

Replication Tool 1: GUIDELINES TO DOCUMENTING THE EXEMPLARY PRACTICE

2. Summary (300 words or 1⁄2 page) This section should give a general overview of the project/initiative. • • •

Describe the project and the area/LGU where it was implemented. Explain the strategy and methodology used, and the various stakeholders involved in the process. Note the major accomplishments and point out the global impact on the LGU and the community

3. Project Description (300 words or 1⁄2 page) This section should state the reason or the purpose for the project • •

Describe the situation before starting the project - Point out the main problems, the consequences and the attempts to deal with them, as a rationale for the project Present the purpose and priorities of the project, for instance: * Satisfying basic human needs * Involving women in the development process * Supporting good governance, and so on

•

Present the project objectives

4. Project History (150 words or 1⁄4 page) • • •

Describe how the project was initiated; who championed it. Explain the process for setting goals and determining the strategy and methodology (how, by whom) Indicate over which period the project was implemented

5. Project Results (300 words or 1⁄2 page; include photos to show some of the results) This section should have a catchy title that highlights the main accomplishments • • •

Describe to what extent the purpose and objectives were met Outline the indicators used to evaluate the results Identify the effects of the project in certain key areas? For instance: * Relations between the LGU and the community * Improvement of institutional capacity in the LGU and among the project stakeholders * Significance of the outputs for the citizens * Change in decision-making processes * Change in the use and distribution of human, technical and financial resources

•

Insert some participants’ comments on the impact of the project

6. Key Implementation Steps (up to 2,400 words or 4 pages; use photos to illustrate some of the key steps) This section of the Reference Document is particularly important to help other LGUs appreciate the chronological chain of events in the implementation of the project. It requires that the writer/s analyze the sequence of activities in the implementation of the project and present each step with

3-23

Replication Tool 1: GUIDELINES TO DOCUMENTING THE EXEMPLARY PRACTICE

its respective outputs and resources. This is best done through a consultation with the project implementation team. LGUs wanting to replicate the practice will refer to this section to determine their own implementation plan for the replication of the practice. Describe the main implementation steps / milestones in chronological order and provide a detailed breakdown of the output; individuals / stakeholders involved; resources required; and tools, procedures, systems which need to be in place for each key implementation step.

A typical LGU project may have 5 to 8 main implementation steps and each of these steps can be broken down in more detail with a few sub steps or activities relating it. To sum up: Present the main Implementation Stages / Milestones in chronological order. Each key implementation stage should be detailed with related sub steps and activities. For each main step and/or sub step, the following should be presented: • Main output: committee created; Training activity; Small infrastructure / equipment put in place; Education campaign to the citizens; etc • What procedures, tools, techniques, systems or structures need to be in place: examples: an Executive order; committee TOR or procedures; specific forms to collect information about citizens; a specific computer program; training modules and materials; the reconfiguration of office space; etc • Who needs to be involved and why (LGU staff, volunteers, institutional partners, etc): (a) describe the involvement of other institutional partners, organizations, and the community.; (b) What was their respective role? How is it complementary to the LGU’s contribution to the project? • What budget is required and when: estimate or provide actual costs for each component, which requires a specific budget allocation. • Other resources required (facilities, equipment, meeting halls, etc) • Lessons learned, What worked / What didn’t: Throughout the implementation of the project, the implementers may have learned from errors and successes. These lessons learned become valuable information for other LGUs wanting to replicate the exemplary practice. For example: (a) Some critical pre-requisites needing to be in place (b) What should be the ideal timing of a specific activity? (for example, scheduling activities with the agricultural community after the harvest season; establishing new procedures about business permits in relation with the LGU licensing cycle) (c) Ensuring community or political support

7. Analysis and Lessons Learned (1200 words or 2 pages) This section should have a catchy title • •

Identify specific opportunities and limitations, and solutions applied Put an emphasis on sustainability factors: * Cultural: respect and consideration for attitudes, behaviours and traditions * Social and economic: involvement of and benefit to both women and men, inclusion of and benefit to cultural minorities or economically disadvantaged groups * Environmental: reduced dependence on non-renewable resources (air, water, soil, energy, and so on); change in methods of production and consumption

3-24

Replication Tool 1: GUIDELINES TO DOCUMENTING THE EXEMPLARY PRACTICE

* Financial: use of available resources; contributions by various stakeholders; terms for repayment of loans; etc •

Explain the importance and significance of the project/activities relative to the context it was implemented in: * Example 1 - Support for a consultation process in a municipality/country with traditionally little co-operation between the elected representatives and the population * Example 2 - Improvement to the recovery of taxes with the use of automated data in a context where there is little computerization

•

Describe any general lessons learned about the whole project and their influence on subsequent planning. * Were these lessons used later to change policies/strategies/plans, and so on * What aspects should be changed, avoided? What pitfalls should be prepared for and avoided?

• • •

•

• •

Describe the exemplary value of this activity, and the elements that make it so. Indicate what type or class of LGU would most benefit from this project? What specific conditions or target group can benefit from such a project? Describe which are the generic aspects/components of the project (easily transposable to other contexts) and which ones might require more adaptation to the specific conditions of another LGU/context Where relevant, identify what is the core activity or component and which components may or may not be implemented in another LGU (for example, the composting component of a comprehensive waste management project may be more important to some LGUs than others because of the specific amounts of organic waste generated in their communities) If the project was implemented over a long period of time, provide an indication of the minimum amount of time required to replicate it. Identify any known cases of successful replication of this practice by other LGUs so far

8. Use of photos / Illustrations Do not forget to use photos (at least 3) and available illustrations to illustrate the process and the accomplishments (e.g. photos of training sessions, community participation, illustration used in advocacy campaign, equipment provided, renewed infrastructures, etc.). Photos can be included in the Implementation Steps section or the Results section.

See Appendix B for sample Reference Document developed and used by Kaakbay

3-25

Steps in the Replication Process 1.

Documenting the Exemplary Practice (by the host LGU) Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop (for host and replicating LGUs)) Formulating and Implementing the Replication Workplan

Step 2 Conducting the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop using Tool 2: The Facilitatorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Guide and Generic Agenda After documenting the exemplary practice, the host LGU needs to plan, prepare for and conduct the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop. a. Objectives Why a Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop? The Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop has four objectives: a. Allow the host LGU to present and share their exemplary practice to the replicating LGUs b. Deepen the understanding and appreciation of replicating LGUs for the exemplary practice (through the host LGU presentations and seeing the practice for themselves) c. Provide a venue for replicating LGU/s to formulate a first draft of their replication workplan with the inputs from the host LGUs d. Forge partnership and commitment of host and replicating LGUs to the replication project (through the signing of a formal agreement, personal interaction, agreeing on modes/mechanisms for communication and coordination, and leveling off on roles and expectations) The Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop may be the first opportunity for host and replicating LGUs to meet and get to know each other. It should therefore be structured in a way that affords the greatest opportunity to build a solid foundation and take-off point for the replication process. Tool 2 will guide the preparations and conduct of the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop. By providing an agenda and facilitatorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s guide, Tool 2 helps host and replicating LGUs undergo the activity by simplifying the procedure, setting clear tasks for both and ensuring that optimum results are achieved. b. Who will use Tool 2? The designated teams of the Host LGU will use Tool 2 in preparing and conducting the Peer-to-Peer Learning

3-26

Workshop. The host LGU can decide to get the services of an external/professional facilitator to help them facilitate the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop. Selected members of the host and replicating LGUs will then participate in the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop. c.

Output The actual conduct of the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop will be the output of using the faciltator’s guide. The Replication Workplan will also be an output of the replicating LGU during the workshop (Tool 3).

Table C. Steps to Take for Tool #2 Conducting the Workshop Within a Replication Program

For individual LGUs Hosting Replication Outside a program

Under a program, the management team will undertake the following tasks:

The host LGUs will undertake the following tasks: • organize the activity and ensure logistical arrangements • coordinate the invitations and ensure the participation of relevant representatives to the workshop • prepare the presentations needed in various parts of the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop (see Tool #2) on the exemplary practice; • assign presenters within the host LGU for each presentation • facilitate the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop

• •

•

organize the activity and ensure logistical arrangements assist the host LGU in preparing their presentation ensure participation of host and replicating LGU teams help facilitate the workshop

Option: Forming Replication Clusters To facilitate the conduct of the activity and the replication process in general, you can opt to group LGUs into replication clusters. Each cluster can consist of one host LGU and 3 or more LGUs that are replicating the same practice.

Option: Assigning a Facilitator As host to the replicating LGU, the host LGU will organize the conduct of the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop and appoint an overall facilitator. The host LGU can choose to appoint someone from the local government staff to act as facilitator or, if necessary, obtain the services of an external facilitator to help conduct the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop.

3-27

How is Tool #2 linked to Tool #1? The flow of the respective sessions of the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop Generic Agenda generally follows that of the Reference Document. The various sessions of the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop introduce various aspects of the exemplary practice in an organized manner. Thus, if Tool #1 was properly used and followed, the host LGU will have a good Reference Document that can be used as basis for their presentation of their exemplary practice in the various sessions of the Peer-topeer Learning Workshop.

3-28

THE PEER-TO-PEER LEARNING WORKSHOP GENERIC AGENDA

The Generic Agenda proposes a flow for the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop. It is recommended that the general chronological order of the presentations and activities be followed but the organizers of the workshop can adapt it to their specific situation with actual starting times for presentations, names of presenters, etc. The adapted or personalized version of the agenda can be distributed to the participants from the replicating LGUs.

PART : INTRODUCTION Opening Ceremony (15 min) Presentation of Participants (10 min) Participants’ Expectations (20 min) Workshop Overview (10 min) By the facilitator/Host LGU Overview of the Exemplary Practice (20 min) By the Mayor of the Host LGU Fellowship Activity (evening) Facilitator to be identified PART 2: APPRECIATION OF THE EXEMPLARY PRACTICE: SEEING IS BELIEVING “Exemplary Practice Title” : What is it? (60 min) By the Project Manager Seeing the Practice in Operation (half day) Guided by the Project Manager with presentations by stakeholders Participants’ Reflections on the Exemplary Practice (60 min) Facilitator ANALYZING THE EXEMPLARY PRACTICE Rationale and Purpose of the Exemplary Practice (20 min) By the main Project Manager (City/Municipal Manager / Department Head) Key Implementation Steps and Related Resources (1 hr 30 min) By the main Project Manager (City/Municipal Manager / Department Head) PART 3: IMPLEMENTING THE EXEMPLARY PRACTICE IN THE REPLICATING LGU Managing the project in your LGU (45 min) By the facilitator Formulating the workplan (120 min) By the facilitator Working as Partners – Memorandum of Agreement (45 min) By the facilitator Next Steps ( 45 min) By the facilitator/replicating LGU member Conclusion of the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop

3-29

Replication Tool 2: FACILITATOR’S GUIDE TO THE PEER-TO-PEER LEARNING WORKSHOP

Replication Tool 2: FACILITATOR’S GUIDE TO THE PEER-TO-PEER LEARNING WORKSHOP The facilitator’s guide is the Generic Agenda with detailed notes on conducting the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop for the facilitator. The Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop is divided into 3 distinct parts: Part 1: Part 2: Part 3:

Introduction Appreciating the Exemplary Practice: Seeing and Analyzing Implementing the practice in the Replicating LGUs

For the Host LGU: As host to the replicating LGU, the host LGU will organize the conduct of the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop and appoint an overall facilitator. The host LGU can choose to appoint someone from the local government staff to act as facilitator or, if necessary, obtain the services of an external facilitator to help conduct the activity. If replication takes place under a program, the program implementing team helps organize the activity and, if the host LGU agrees, designate a program staff to act as overall facilitator

For the Replicating LGU: A discussion should be held with the Host LGU project implementers to determine which personnel of the replicating LGU should attend the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop. Since the replication of an Exemplary Practice is a LGU organizational process, the host LGU can best suggest who in the LGU should attend the activity: i.e. the Mayor or local chief executive, the concerned department head, legislative member, technical personnel, etc. To minimize costs, it is suggested that the delegation to visit the host LGU comprises a maximum of 3 or 4 members. If carefully chosen considering the relevance of their work / position for the specific exemplary practice, they should be able to adequately share what they learned with others of their LGU. They should then be able to mobilize others for the implementation of the replication project. PART 1: INTRODUCTION 1. Opening Ceremony (15 min) 2. Presentation of Participants (10 min) • Host LGU • Replicating LGU(s) 3. Participants’ Expectations (20 min) Process to be determined by the Facilitator 4. Activity Overview (15 min) • Objectives • Sequence of the sessions • Support materials available • Outputs

3-30

Replication Tool 2: FACILITATOR’S GUIDE TO THE PEER-TO-PEER LEARNING WORKSHOP

If the replication project is part of a larger replication program, include the following sessions: Introduction to the Replication Program/ (30 min) • Rationale / Background of the program/project • Project Steps and Methodology 5. Overview of the Exemplary Practice (20 min; by the Mayor or prominent leader of the Host LGU) • Inspirational Presentation by the Mayor of the Host LGU • Main Achievements • Benefits / Results

Notes to the Presenter: OVERVIEW OF THE EXEMPLARY PRACTICE This presentation is to provide an overview of the Exemplary practice keeping in mind that the practice will be presented in detail during the next days. The presentation should provide the Chief Executive’s or a prominent leader’s perspective. It is meant as a primer to get the participants excited about the project. It should last about 20 minutes and cover: • How did the LGU decide to implement this project? (history of the project) • Who was the instigator? Who was the champion of this project? • How important was this project for the LGU? • What were the main achievements? • Most important results and benefits of the project to the citizens

6. Fellowship Activity (evening; facilitator to determine how to conduct this session) • Activity for participants to get to know each other • Building the host and replicating LGUs’ collaborative relationship • Possible activity: humorous presentation of each LGU PART 2: APPRECIATION OF THE EXEMPLARY PRACTICE I. SEEING IS BELIEVING 1. “Exemplary Practice Title”: What is it? (60 min; by the Project Manager/head) • More detailed presentation of the EP as an introduction to the site visits • Implementers, Stakeholders and Beneficiaries • How was it implemented • General level of effort • Introduction to the specific sites/groups to be visited

3-31

Replication Tool 2: FACILITATOR’S GUIDE TO THE PEER-TO-PEER LEARNING WORKSHOP

Notes to the Presenter: “EXEMPLARY PRACTICE TITLE”: WHAT WAS IT? This presentation provides the participants with a basic understanding of the practice prior to the site visits. It should provide the information that participants need to maximize their appreciation during the site visits. The level of detail of this presentation should take into account what was presented by the Mayor the previous day. Depending on the project’s focus, it could present the basic concept of the practice, and should emphasize the main implementers, stakeholders and beneficiaries. It should last about 30 minutes and allow for a question period. The presentation should cover: • The basic concept of the project/practice; what are the most important aspects the practice; why this project? • What was the general/relative level of effort of the LGU to implement this project? • Who are the implementers and main stakeholders; Who were the key LGU staff to take part in the implementation • Beneficiaries: Which target group was the project intended for (a specific Barangay, segment of the LGU’s citizens, the city staff, etc) • What were the key benefits to: * The specific target group * The LGU as a whole (revenues saved, providing a much needed new service to the citizens, better relations with citizens, etc.) * The LGU staff

2. Seeing the Practice in Operation (half day) Guided by the Project Manager/Head with presentations by stakeholders and beneficiaries

3-32

•

Visits to the implementation sites: * Observation of the Exemplary Practice (EP) in action (the Host schedules an activity for the group where pertinent) * Inter-action with project implementers & stakeholders * LGU departments involved * Partner organizations collaborating in the implementation (Local government sub-units, NGOs, community organizations, etc) * Facilities & Equipment in place or contributing to the project * Visible results/benefits of the project

•

Inter-action with the Beneficiaries: * Perspectives from different groups of beneficiaries (the LGU itself, citizens, staff, local officials involved, etc) * Main results to them * Interviews with beneficiaries

Replication Tool 2: FACILITATOR’S GUIDE TO THE PEER-TO-PEER LEARNING WORKSHOP

Notes to the Presenters: BENEFITS OF THE EXEMPLARY PRACTICE Citizen / Community Group: • As a citizen, how do you benefit from this initiative of the LGU? (Better service, better access to the service, better information from the LGU, safer/ cleaner community?, etc) • What was your situation before the existence of this service by the LGU? How is your situation now? What changed? • Why is this service important to you? How significant is it for you and your family? • If you were involved in the implementation of the project, how did that happen? What was your contribution? How did the LGU relate with you during the implementation? • If your LGU were to implement this project again, what would you recommend they change? What could they do better? Stakeholders / Institutional Partners; • Why did your organization get involved in the project? • What was the specific role of your organization in the project? • What was your relationship with the LGU? Did you have a protocol agreement or Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the LGU outlining the respective roles and responsibilities of your respective organizations? • What were the benefits of the project for your organization? • From your perspective, what were the most important benefits to the citizens? LGU Employees: • What do you see as the most important benefits to the citizens? • Why is this project important for the LGU? How different is the LGUs approach in this area compared to how it was before? • How has your work changed as a result of this initiative? Are you saving time? How is the LGU more efficient in this area? • What new knowledge, skills and aptitudes have you learned from this initiative? • Are you relating to citizens in a different way? • What would you recommend your LGU to do differently if it was to implement this project again?

3. Participants’ Reflections on the Exemplary Practice (60 min; facilitator) This session allows the facilitator to do a diagnosis of the participants’ appreciation and understanding of the Exemplary Practice so far. It also allows the participant to revise and process the observations from the visits. • • •

Participants share their understanding of the EP following the site visits Host resource people help the group clarify what they saw and heard from various presentations during the day Facilitators summarize the key points and lessons learned during the visits

The facilitator should determine if this session would add value to the learning process or not at this particular stage of the workshop. Depending on the specific dynamics of the particular group and their apparent appreciation and understanding of the practice, the facilitator can choose to do this session or not. The following sessions will also allow a deepening of the understanding of the practice through a more in-depth analysis.

3-33

Replication Tool 2: FACILITATOR’S GUIDE TO THE PEER-TO-PEER LEARNING WORKSHOP

II. ANALYZING THE EXEMPLARY PRACTICE 1. Rationale and Purpose of the Exemplary Practice (20 min; by the main Project Manager: City/ Municipal Manager / Department Head) This session aims at helping the participants analyze and understand the situation before and after the Exemplary Practice was implemented. From this session, the participants will be able to formulate the Goal, Objectives and Expected Results of their Replication project in their own context. This session covers: • Prevailing conditions before the Project • Situation after the project was implemented / when the practice is in place changed? • The objectives of the practice • Sort term and long term results/impact

What

After the presentation, 10 to 15 minutes should be given to the participants so they can compare how the rationale and purpose of the Exemplary Practice in the Host LGU is comparable to the context of their own LGU. The participant thereby starts thinking about how the project can be implemented in his/her LGU. 2. Key Implementation Steps and Related Resources (1 hr 30 min; by the main Project Manager (City/ Municipal Manager / Department Head) The session should cover: • Main Implementation Stages / Milestones in chronological order • Each key implementation stage should be detailed with related sub steps and activities, resources, etc. This session is particularly important to help the participants appreciate the chronological chain of events in the implementation of the project. It requires from the Host LGU to analyze the sequence of activities in the implementation of their project and present each step with its respective outputs, and resources. The session prepares the participant for developing his/her Implementation Plan to replicate the exemplary practice.. After each key step or at the end of the session, the facilitator should provide time for the participant to determine how those implementation steps are relevant to the recipient LGU context. The following guide questions could be asked: • • • •

3-34

Would those implementation steps and activities be appropriate for the recipient LGU? If not, what should be changed? What specific procedures, systems and tools need to be developed? Who are the people (LGU staff, community representatives, Partner organizations) you need to involve in your LGU?

Replication Tool 2: FACILITATOR’S GUIDE TO THE PEER-TO-PEER LEARNING WORKSHOP

Notes to the Presenters: KEY IMPLEMENTATION STEPS AND RELATED RESOURCES The session should cover: • Main Implementation Stages / Milestones in chronological order • Each key implementation stage should be detailed with related sub steps and activities For each main step and sub step, the following should be presented: • Main output : committee created; Training activity; Small infrastructure / equipment to put in place; Education campaign to the citizens; etc • What procedures, tools, techniques, systems or structures need to be in place: examples: an Executive order; committee TOR or procedures; specific forms to collect information about citizens; a specific computer program; training modules and materials; setting up agricultural technology for demonstration purposes; the reconfiguration of office space; etc • Who needs to be involved / Why? (LGU staff, volunteers, institutional partners, etc) (a) Describe the involvement of other institutional partners, organizations, and the community. (b) What was their respective role? How is it complementary to the LGU’s contribution to the project? • What budget is required and when? Estimate or provide actual costs for each component, which requires a specific budget allocation. • Other resources required (facilities, equipment, meeting halls, etc) • Enabling Measures, What worked / What didn’t Throughout the implementation of the project, the implementers may have learned from errors and successes. These lessons learned become valuable information for other LGUs wanting to replicate the exemplary practice. For example: * Some critical pre-requisites needing to be in place * What should be the ideal timing of a specific activity? (for example, scheduling activities with the agricultural community after the harvest season; establishing new procedures about business permits in relation with the LGU licensing cycle) * Ensuring community or political support

PART 3: IMPLEMENTING THE EXEMPLARY PRACTICE IN THE REPLICATING LGU 1. Managing the project in your LGU (30 min; by the Host LGU project manager or project team member • Forming a Core Management Team • Designating a Contact Person with the host LGU • The 4 capacity development and project implementation stages • Implementing the project within a specific timeframe • Workplan: main implementation guide • Introduction to the Workplan Template • Monitoring and Reporting 2. Formulating the workplan (120 min; by a Facilitator/Host LGU member) (Note: This session is where there is real value added in having an outside facilitator with management experience. Not all host LGUs will have a resource person comfortable with facilitating this session for the

3-35

Replication Tool 2: FACILITATOR’S GUIDE TO THE PEER-TO-PEER LEARNING WORKSHOP

replicating LGUs.) In this session the participants start writing the draft workplan for implementing the replication of Exemplary Practice in their LGU. The Facilitator presents the Project Workplan Template. • Adapting the Exemplary Practice to your LGU’s Situation • Drafting the Work plan: * Goal, Objectives and Expected Results * Implementation plan: - Main steps in Chronological order - Human Resources - Financial and in-kind resources * Coordination, monitoring and Evaluation * Budget 3. Working as Partners – Memorandum of Agreement (45 min; by the Facilitator In this session, the facilitator talks about the potential sharing and support opportunities offered by working as with one or more LGUs. A template Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) or similar instrument may be drafted before hand and introduced during the workshop for approval. If approved, the instrument can then be signed by the host and replicating LGUs to show their commitment to the project. (See Appendix D, for a sample MOA used under Kaakbay.) A MOA may detail commitments between host and replicating LGUs with regard to the following: • • • • •

Support system among peers (including modalities of requests to Host LGU expertise) Common time frame & activities Sharing of resources Mechanisms for communication/coordination Deriving lessons learned about replication

4. Next Steps (45 min; by the facilitator/replicating LGU member) • • • • • •

Mobilizing the core management team & other stakeholders Validating the Work plan and securing necessary legislative support from the local council Finalizing the work plan Getting feedback on the workplan from the host LGU Monitoring and evaluation activities? Communications and coordination mechanisms

5. Conclusion of the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop (Note: If replication occurs within the framework of a replication program and not just between individual LGUs, the program implementing team can facilitate the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop, including the actual planning. If you decide to take on the Kaakbay model of setting up replication clusters with one host LGU and several replicating LGUs in one cluster, then the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop is conducted per cluster. Part of the program support to the host LGU, then, would be in providing the necessary assistance in helping them organize and prepare for the activity.)

3-36

Step 3 Formulating and Implementing the Replication Workplan using Tool 3: Workplan Template Following the presentation and sharing of the exemplary practice, the second part of the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop involves the formulation of the Replication Workplan by the replicating LGU/s, with the help of the host LGUs. Tool 3, which is a template for the Workplan is recommended as a guide to workplan formulation. a. Objectives Tool 3 serves four purposes: a. Provide the replicating LGU with a simple, yet comprehensive template in designing their workplan for replicating the exemplary practice b. Guide the replicating LGU in identifying their objectives for replication, who should be involved, key replication steps and activities, needed resources, potential problems, constraints and issues and ways of resolving them c. Provide replicating LGUs with a plan by which to monitor progress and identify delays, milestones and accomplishments in the replication process d. Set modes and mechanisms for coordination between host and replicating LGUs, as well as monitoring and evaluation b. Output The result of using this template is a WORKPLAN, which is a key document for the replicating LGU to use as a main reference in implementing the project. The workplan lays down the following key components for replication: • • • • •

Context for replication Objectives and expected results Implementation plan/key implementation steps Coordination mechanisms between host and replicating LGUs Monitoring and evaluation

At the same time, it is comprehensive enough to be used as a communication tool for any interested stakeholder (members of council, department heads, community representatives, partner government agencies, etc) to understand what the replication project is all about. c.

Who will use Tool 3? The replicating LGUs will use Tool 3, with inputs and support from the host LGU. Again, under a program, the management team will support the replicating LGU in formulating the workplan. Individual LGUs undertaking replication outside the program may opt to avail of the services of an external facilitator/consultant to help in formulating the workplan.

3-37

How is Tool3 linked to Tools 1 and 2? Tool 3 also closely follows the format/ outline of Tool 1 and 2. As such, it makes it easier for the replicating LGU/s to develop their own workplan; replicating LGUs can simply follow the flow and format of Reference Document and materials from the presentations of the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop and convert/translate it into a Workplan with their own innovations.

3-38

Replication Tool 3: REPLICATION WORKPLAN TEMPLATE

Replication Tool 3: REPLICATION WORKPLAN TEMPLATE COVER PAGE Title of Project Project Work Plan, Municipality / City, Logo Project start date (mo, year) – project end date (mo, year) WORKPLAN PROPER Preamble/Executive Summary (Maximum 1 page): Give a short description of the context for this project. Include: • •

a statement on why this project is important for your LGU. How it is linked to the LGUs strategic orientations and priorities description of replication process, including * * * * *

start date of project focus area of the project which host LGU has implemented this project successfully what other Recipient LGUs are replicating the project as part of the replication cluster brief reference to how the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop and relations with the host LGU helped define this workplan

•

project workplan description: aim, duration, main results

• •

signature of the Mayor or relevant authority date

1.0

Project Title

2.0

Rationale, Goal, Objectives, and Results 2.1 Rationale Explain why the project should be carried out. Include: • a brief explanation of the importance of the area that the project will address for your LGU (for example, solid waste management, traffic control, etc.) • what is the current situation (or prevailing conditions) in your LGU (weaknesses, problems) that the project will help address • what capacity building needs of your LGU will this project help address. 2.2 Goal State the aim of this project. 2.3 Objectives State the specific objectives of the project.

3-39

Replication Tool 3: REPLICATION WORKPLAN TEMPLATE

2.4 Expected Results State what you expect will be achieved by the project. Include: • Short term results or outputs Ex. Components of infrastructure in place; new practice established in the LGU; reorganization of a LGU department; citizens trained in basic heath care; etc • Medium and long term results as consequence of the outputs (outcomes and impact) Ex. Better accessibility to a service; better collaboration between the LGU and citizens; increased LGU revenue; more services delivered to citizens; safer community; cleaner environment; healthier citizens; improved living conditions for the citizens; etc 3.0

Implementation Plan Provide the schedule and details for the activities in your project. Include key implementation steps with corresponding completion dates in chronological order. For each step include: • • • •

What procedures, tools, systems or structures will be put in place Who needs to be involved / Why? (staff, volunteers, institutional partners, etc) Other resources required (facilities, equipment, meeting halls, etc) Monitoring and evaluation measures

GANTT CHART 4.0

Coordination, Monitoring and Evaluation Contact Person / Coordinator Identify the Contact Person. The contact person is the main coordinator of the project in the LGU. He/She coordinates all Replication activities. Communications with the following individuals / groups are channeled through him/her: • All project participants and stakeholders within the LGU • The contact person in the Host LGU • The contact persons of other Rereplicating LGUs • (the program implementing team, in case of replication within a program) Core Management Team Identify the members of the project core management team. This is a small team of 3 to 5 members who may oversee the project implementation. Monitoring progress and reporting Indicate a reporting schedule (usually a short progress report after each key implementation step or project activity). The reports are used to inform the Mayor, the legislative council (and the program implementing team in case of replication within a program) and the of project implementation progress.

3-40

Replication Tool 3: REPLICATION WORKPLAN TEMPLATE

Evaluation Indicate the joint evaluation plan in collaboration with the host LGU and replicating LGU (and the program implementing team, in case of replication within a program.). Include: â&#x20AC;˘ planned date of evaluation â&#x20AC;˘ evaluation team composition (who will take part in the evaluation process? 5.0

Budget Provide a budget for the project. The budget should include the direct expenditures required for the LGU to implement the Exemplary Practice.

3-41

Table D. How Tools 1-3 are Linked to Each Other Tool 1: Guidelines for Documenting the Exemplary Practice with the Reference Document as Output

Tool 2: Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop Generic Agenda and Facilitatorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Guide

Tool 3: Replication Workplan Template

Purpose of the Tool:

Allows for the documentation of the following information about the exemplary practice

Repeats the information provided in the various sections of the Reference Document with personal touches by implementers, stakeholders and beneficiaries

Allows for the formulation of a Replication Workplan by the Replicating LGU based on and adapting from the Reference Document and the various Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop presentations

Allows for the sharing and learning of the exemplary practice following the flow of the Reference Document Parts of the Tool/Data Required by the Tool

Parts of the Tool/Data Required by the Tool

History; how the practice was developed/evolved

Context for replication, related initiatives by replicating LGU; description of need/importance for replicating exemplary practice

Conditions prior to implementing the practice

Conditions currently prevailing that surface the need for the exemplary practice

Objectives for implementing exemplary practice

Objectives for implementing the practice

Objectives of Replication

Key implementation steps and resources used during the implementation of the practice in the host LGU

Implementation Plan/Key Implementation Steps to Replication and resources/ budget needed

Results/Impact to the LGU and the Community

Results/Impact to the LGU and the community

Expected Results Monitoring and Evaluating Results

Analysis: Lessons Learned and Sustainability measures

3-42

Analysis: Lessons learned and sustainability measures

Sustainability measures

POST-PEER-TO-PEER LEARNING WORKSHOP ACTIVITIES: VALIDATING AND IMPLEMENTING THE WORKPLAN The workplan can then serve as the overall project implementation guide, as it sets the mechanisms, processes and activities for the project. It facilitates and allows LGUs to: • • • • •

Identify the situation prior to the replication process Define specific needs for the project and objectives Determine the key steps and activities to undertake Identify the required resources Set key areas to monitor during project implementation

The draft workplan produced by the replicating LGU team that participated in the Peerto-Peer Learning Workshop will need refinement and approval from stakeholders and relevant authorities. Further consultation of various stakeholders, verification of available resources, additional budget information, further adaptation to the specific conditions of the replicating LGU will be necessary. The delegation that took part in the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop can take the lead in consulting other colleagues, stakeholders and decision makers, adapt and build consensus on the project workplan and finally having it approved by the appropriate authorities, executive and legislative. Once the workplan is refined and approved, the LGU is finally ready to replicate its choice exemplary practice as outlined in their workplan.

MONITORING AND EVALUATION 1. Rudiments on LGU M & E of a Replication Program Monitoring and evaluation is an important part of the replication process. Monitoring serves to measure the extent to which the workplan is being implemented, what difficulties are encountered as you go along, what measures can be taken to address these difficulties, what additional steps are needed or can be skipped. Evaluation helps gauge how successfully an LGU has replicated the practice based on the objectives set at the start and what lessons can be derived from the experience. In the replication process, there are four key concerns to monitor and evaluate: • •

Understanding and use of the three replication tools Effectiveness or appropriateness of the implementation steps outlined in the Replication Workplan

3-43

â&#x20AC;˘ â&#x20AC;˘

The ability of the LGU to implement the replication process The results achieved and lessons learned

For LGUs undertaking replication outside a program, monitoring and evaluation will be in the form of self-assessment by replicating LGUs, perhaps with some degree of advice from the host LGUs. In case of replication within a program, the program implementing team can facilitate the work of developing the assessment tools and the conduct of assessment activities. While replicating LGUs would be most concerned with monitoring and evaluating their replication process, host LGUs can also take part in M & E activities, to provide lessons learned in hosting replicating projects and giving inputs/advice to replicating LGUs.

2. Putting a Monitoring System in Place Replication Tool #3 recommends the making of a short monitoring report at the end of each implementation step to record progress made with regard to the workplan and timeframe, difficulties and delays, and what measures were undertaken or planned to address these challenges. Replicating LGUs can do at least one or two evaluation activities (e.g. an evaluation workshop) for a 6- to 18- month replication period to assess your accomplishments vis-Ă -vis your objectives and the lessons learned by your LGU in the process, using an assessment tool that you can develop or adapt from the one presented here. The important thing to remember here is whether you decide on monthly monitoring reports and one or two evaluation activities (using an assessment tool) or other alternatives, you need to put in place a monitoring and evaluation system (with assessment tools, procedures and timetable) that you will undertake throughout the replication process.

3-44

Monitoring and Evaluation Tool for Local Governments to assess the Replication Process and Outcomes This is a pool of guide questions that can be used by the replicating LGUs the replication process they implemented. It can be accomplished by replicating LGUs on their own or with the help of an external facilitator. Under a replication program, the program implementing team can organize and facilitate the assessment activities. I. Choosing An Exemplary Practice to Replicate to Address Needs in your LGU • • •

Did the practice your LGU is now replicating provide a solution to the challenge your LGU was / is facing? How relevant is/was the exemplary practice in addressing the challenge your LGU was facing? Did the executive (Mayor) and legislative council in your LGU support the idea of replicating the exemplary practice before you started the project? Did this contribute to the success of the project?

II. Accomplishments/Gains • •

What were the major gains/accomplishments/breakthroughs in your LGU as a result of implementing this project, both expected and unexpected? What has been the importance (level of effort/results) of this replication project relative to other activities of your LGU?

III. Difficulties/Issues •

• • • •

How far did your LGU go in replicating the exemplary practice? What components/steps were implemented? Were not implemented? Why? Will your LGU continue with the steps that were not implemented? What difficulties were encountered by your LGU in replicating the exemplary practice? In using the tools? At each implementation step? What measures were taken to address such difficulties? How successful were these measures in overcoming the difficulties? What recommendations would you have in case of future replication projects (or as you continue with the replication process) to avoid these same difficulties from recurring?

IV. Factors that Facilitated / Hindered the Replication (generic to any practice) • • •

What are the factors that facilitated the replication of the exemplary practice in your LGU? What are the factors that hindered the replication of the exemplary practice in your LGU? What recommendations would you make to LGUs wanting to replicate an exemplary practice initially implemented by another LGU?

V. Lessons Learned • •

What lessons has your LGU (or individual members) learned in implementing this replication project? How closely did you follow/use the replication tools? What deviations from/innovations in the methodology and tools did you undertake and why?

3-45

VI. Sustainability • • • •

• • • •

3-46

What structures/procedures/tools/systems has your LGU put in place to apply the exemplary practice? How rooted are these structures/procedures/tools/systems in your LGU’s operation? Are there legislative measures/ordinances to support these? What are the chances that these structures/procedures/tools/systems remain as regular functions of the LGU? Are the key project implementors (departments/units, partner agencies, community representatives) likely to remain in place as implementors/supporters of the project in the future? Please identify. What needs to be done (at executive, legislative, community levels) to ensure continuity of the new practice/budget/project finalization before and after the elections? From your LGU’s perspective, has this replication project been a success? Why? Why not? Do you believe the exemplary practice proposed to your LGU was appropriate for rapid and effective replication? Why so? Upon the termination of the project, what additional support (i.e. technical assistance, coaching, on-going inputs from host, other incentives, etc.) from external sources would your LGU require to ensure your replication project’s completion/continuity?

How Kaakbay did it: Towards Sustaining Efforts Perceived in an LGU capacity development perspective, the replication process amongst LGUs should go through four main development stages to enhance their chances of sustaining the effort. The Four Stages of Capacity Building in Replicating LGUs Stage 1: Consensus Building This involves building consensus within the local government unit to make an institutional commitment to replicate a practice. This includes building a consensus that a specific practice has been identified as a solution or answer to a concrete challenge/ issue faced by the LGU and that replicating this practice is how they choose to address this challenge/issue. There should also be a general understanding of and commitment to the level of effort required to complete replication (financial and human resources, community participation, etc) as well as to following the steps in the replication process within the timeframe specified. Stage 2: Capacity Enhancement This stage entails that the LGU achieves the necessary know -how to replicate the identified practice. . This capacity is gained through the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop where the replicating LGU undertakes an exposure visit to the host LGU, to better understand and appreciate the practice it is planning to replicate and also begin the process of thinking about how to apply the practice in their own context and developing a workplan to replicate it. Stage 3: Application This is where you test your LGUâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s capacity by actually implementing the workplan you have developed. This involves following the step-by-step procedure you have mapped out, including mobilizing people and other resources, making changes when necessary and monitoring your progress and evaluating if the practice you have replicated has actually met its objectives and improved governance in your locality. Stage 4: Institutionalization After you have successfully implemented your workplan and seen for yourself the definite benefits of the practice you have replicated, you need to take necessary measures to institutionalize the practice, making it a permanent function of the LGU by enacting appropriate ordinances, informing and mobilizing citizens, ensuring institutional commitment through institutional funding and support, ensuring that it lives beyond the terms of the current administration.

3-47

SUMMING UP In summing up, we need to emphasize that managing the replication process requires four critical tasks: 1. Ensure a supportive environment and the needed institutional support for replication, in terms of making available human, technical and financial resources for the program. 2. Clarify roles and expectations of both host and replicating LGUs, to avoid potential conflicts, misunderstandings and delays. 3. Manage relations and dynamics between host and replicating LGUs by ensuring constant and open communication through well-set coordination mechanisms. 4. Establish a monitoring system to ensure the success of your replication initiative.

3-48

CHAPTER

four

more on M & E and ensuring success in replication at the program level

4-2

more on M & E and ensuring success in replication at the program level Sustained and meaningful monitoring and evaluation (M & E) that is integrated in the program and undertaken at key periods is critical to the success of a program for replicating exemplary practices in local governance. Thus, while Chapter 3 discusses M & E at the level of local governments participating in replication, this chapter provides a more detailed discussion of M &E for institutions implementing a replication program.

IMPORTANCE OF MONITORING AND EVALUATING A REPLICATION PROGRAM For a replication program, monitoring and evaluation essentially serves the purpose of assessing the effectiveness of the program as a mechanism to disseminate exemplary practices amongst LGUs. To do so, it must look at the following dimensions: 1. Assess if the program itself was developed with the appropriate structures and processes to generate the dissemination of exemplary practices 2. Assess if the methodology and tools proposed to the LGUs undertaking replication are effective and lead to actual replication 3. Identify gains and accomplishments from the process, as well as lessons learned by program implementors and LGU participants that can inform future program implementation In the replication methodology offered in this guidebook, M & E emerges as an integral part of the program, meaning each of the five major tasks to program implementation provides clear anchors for monitoring and evaluating. For example, by developing frameworks and criteria for identifying EPs and selecting replicators, you are able to measure how valid your choices of EPs and replicators are. You can also check the correctness of the bases for your selection. Since

4-3

LGUs replicating an exemplary practice develop a workplan, you can monitor the following: â&#x20AC;˘ â&#x20AC;˘

The changes that occur in the LGU and the community as a result of replicating the practice The progress in undertaking replication based on the implementation steps and activities outlined

And, by having a set of Replication Tools to follow, you are able to review the process each step of the way, identifying which activities were followed, which were not and what the corresponding results were.

MONITORING AND EVALUATION AT THE PROGRAM LEVEL At the program level, monitoring and evaluation focuses on the following program issues and concerns: Table 4.1. Key Issues and Questions for Program Level Assessment Program Tasks Determining Program Modalities

4-4

Program Issues/ Concerns to Monitor

Key Questions To Ask

Institutional Partnership evolved (in case of partnership/ consortium)

Is the partnership being fully realized? Are partners playing the roles they have committed to? What are the gaps and how can they be addressed? Is each partner adequately benefiting from being part of the program?

Management structures

Are the management structures appropriate? What needs to be changed?

Program objectives and framework

Are the program objectives and framework relevant? What needs to be added/modified?

Program workplan

Is the workplan realistic? What changes need to be made and why?

Resources

Are the resources being properly used? How can they be better maximized? What other resources are needed and have yet to be tapped?

Methodology/processes

How effective are the processes and tools used (partnership-building, decision-making, problemsolving, resource mobilization, planning)? What can be done to improve them (lessons learned)?

Monitoring strategy

Is the approach set up for monitoring progress effective?

Program Tasks

Identification of EPs - ensuring participation of Host LGUs - providing support to Host LGUs

Selection of Replicators - ensuring commitment - providing support to replicators

Program Issues/ Concerns to monitor

Key Questions You may ask

Framework and criteria for identifying EPs

Are the framework and criteria helping your organization meet its objectives? Which EPs are proving more difficult to replicate than expected and why? Can the criteria be improved for future use? What can be done to learn more about types of EPs to promote for replication for different types of LGUs?

Support/incentive package for host LGUs

What difficulties are host LGUs having and how can these be addressed? What other support is needed and the program can provide for host LGUs?

Methodology/processes

How effective were the processes and tools undertaken (communication, info dissemination, identification process)? What can be done to improve them (lessons learned)?

Selection criteria for replicators

Is the selection criteria appropriate and effective? Is the criteria helping to identify the right LGUs for participation in the program?

Support for replicators

What difficulties are replicators having and how can then be addressed? What other support is needed and the program can provide for replicators?

Methodology/Processes

How effective are the processes and tools used (info dissemination, screening, communication, etc)? What can be done to improve them (lessons learned)?

4-5

Program implementors in consultation with the participating LGUs undertake program-level monitoring. This means that the experience and information provided by the LGUs will inform the program assessment.

Putting in Place a Monitoring and Evaluation System at the Program Level 1. Identify strategic timepoints for monitoring and evaluation 2. Develop and use standard tools that can be used by LGUs and program implementors 3. Conduct the M&E activities jointly with program partners

Putting in Place a Monitoring and Evaluation System As discussed in Chapter 3, monitoring and evaluation of the replication process among local governments should be in the form of self-assessments by replicating LGUs, perhaps with some degree of advice from the host LGUs. The program implementing team can facilitate the work of developing the assessment tools and the actual assessment activities. While replicating LGUs would be most concerned with monitoring and evaluating their replication process, host LGUs can also take part in M & E activities, to provide lessons learned in hosting replicating projects and giving inputs/advice to replicating LGUs. To ensure that these activities are effectively done, it is important to put in place a monitoring and evaluation system. This means integrating the following considerations in the program: 1. Identifying strategic points/stages in the process when you will undertake monitoring and evaluation activities, whether monthly, quarterly, or end-project. As a minimum, in addition to regular monitoring, you may need to do at least one or two more formal assessment activities for a six month- to- one year replication program period. During the replication process, Replication Tool 3 recommends the making of a short monitoring report by replicating LGUs at the end of each implementation step to record progress made with regard to the workplan and timeframe, difficulties and delays, and what measures were undertaken or planned to address these challenges. It is also recommended that you do at least one or two evaluation activities (e.g. an evaluation workshop) for a 6- to 18- month replication period to assess your accomplishments vis-a-vis your objectives and the lessons learned by your LGU in the process, using an assessment tool that you can develop or adapt from the one presented here.

4-6

2. Developing and using standard tools for self-assessment by LGUs and for program assessment by program implementors. (You can use or innovate from the Kaakbay tools presented in this chapter). Structured assessments maximize learning and ensure that lessons learned are not lost in the end. 3. Ensuring that monitoring and evaluation activities are conducted jointly between host and replicating LGUs to maximize and sustain peer-to-peer learning and that the results are documented and easily available for future reference. End-project joint assessment At the end of the replication process and as one of the final activities in your replication program, it is recommended that you undertake an end-project evaluation workshop/activity among host and replicating LGUs. A representative of the host LGU visits the replicating LGU for a one-day joint self-assessment of the replication process. Using a tool your program has developed (which you can adapt from the one presented here), this joint end-project assessment will go a long way to assessing the effectiveness of your program and glean lessons that can inform your efforts when you undertake a similar program in the future.

4-7

How Kaakbay did it M & E by Cluster To facilitate program implementation and monitoring, the Kaakbay program grouped host and replicating LGUs into replication clusters. Each cluster consisted of one host LGU and 3 to 5 replicating LGUs, all replicating the same practice in the host LGUs. M & E activities, therefore, were also undertaken per cluster. The results were then consolidated to inform program-level assessment. Kaakbay program implementors facilitated the conduct of M & E activities at the LGU level. Kaakbay developed the assessment tools and facilitated workshops where the tools were used. The results of the assessments were then consolidated. M & E at two points in time: Mid- project and end-project As a one-year pilot program on replication, Kaakbay undertook M & E at two points mid-project and end-project. A key principle guiding the assessment is that both the host and respective replicating LGUs take part in the assessment. Mid-project Assessment The mid-project assessment focused on assessing the effectiveness of the replication methodology being piloted by Kaakbay. A set of guide questions were developed and answered by each cluster in a workshop facilitated by a program monitor (members of the Kaakbay implementing team). At the program level, program institutional partners and implementors also reviewed selected program issues, including the frameworks and criteria, institutional partnerships, governance structures, LGU capacities, methodologies and processes. The end-project assessment used another set of guide questions to assess the overall replication process and the tools Kaakbay developed and were used by the different LGUs. For example, Kaakbay developed the tool presented below. The replication clusters in the assessment workshops used the results of the posed questions to guide their M & E process. These questions are presented here as a pool of potential questions which may be used or may inspire implementers of replication programs.

4-8

KAAKBAY AND M & E TOOLS: Getting Involved in the Program: The Overall Replication Process Suggested by Kaakbay Getting involved in the Program • Did the practice your LGU is now replicating provide a solution to a key challenge your LGU was / is facing? • How relevant is the exemplary practice in addressing the challenge your LGU is facing? • Did both the executive (Mayor) and legislative (Sanggunian) leadership of your LGU support the idea of replicating the exemplary practice before your project started? Was this a critical factor for the success of the project? • Was the information provided by the Kaakbay program sufficient for our LGU to understand what it was getting involved in? • What recommendations can you make regarding any aspect of the application process your LGU undertook to get involved in the Kaakbay program? • Is the practice your LGU is replicating a good practice for replication? Why? The overall Replication Process Suggested by Kaakbay (application to replicate a specific practice; being part of a cluster; Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop; replication in your LGU; on-going host support; mid-project assessment workshop; etc) •

• • •

What general comments can you make about the process suggested by Kaakbay as a mechanism to facilitate the replication of an LGU practice corresponding to a need/challenge you have in your LGU? Is the period of 9 months for replicating your project an appropriate time frame for the replication to be effective? Are there steps/components of the process that are not necessary? How close is the practice you are implementing in your LGU to the exemplary practice that inspired it? Do you think you are really replicating the practice as it was first implemented by the other LGU?

Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop • Was the Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop conducive to helping your LGU replicate this practice? • What aspects of the workshop helped (or not) the replication of the practice in your LGU? • Was the workshop too long? Too short? • What recommendations would you have about the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop for it to further maximize the appreciation and replication of the practice in your LGU?

3-9

The Workplan Template • How effective was the use of this template to facilitate the development of a workplan for your LGU to replicate the exemplary practice? • How effective was the use of this workplan to facilitate the replication of the practice in your LGU? • What suggestions can you make to improve this template? The Reference Document • Did you use the reference document as a guide as you were replicating your practice? • Do you feel this document adequately reflects the practice you are/were replicating? • Is the outline of the document (rationale, objectives of the practice, results, implementation steps, etc) contributing to your understanding of how project should be implemented? • What improvements could you make about the reference document? The Cooperation Between the Host and the Recipient LGUs • How frequently did you relate with the host LGU in the overall replication process? • Did the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop provide a sufficient amount of exchange with the host to help you replicate or did you require further exchanges? • How did you collaborate after the workshop? Visits? (e.g. telephone calls, request for additional materials) Other means? • How important was your relationship with the host LGU in helping you replicate the practice? • What recommendations can you make about the relations with the host to support the implementation of your replication project? Factors that Facilitated / Hindered the Replication • What are the factors that facilitated the replication of the exemplary practice in your LGU? • What are the factors that hindered the replication of the exemplary practice in your LGU? • What recommendations would you make to LGUs wanting to replicate an exemplary practice initially implemented by another LGU?

3-10

Based on the results of the cluster assessments, the program monitors wrote progress reports per cluster using the template below. These progress reports were then consolidated and summarized. Mid-project Assessment Replication Cluster Progress Report (Template used by program monitors)

Project Title

: (Exemplary Practice being replicated)

II.

Host LGU

III.

Recipient LGUs

IV.

Brief Description of the Practice

Summary of the Status of Replication Process 1.

VI.

Based on the implementation of the individual work plan of the recipient LGUs, what major outputs can be considered as breakthroughs of the replication process? What were the key implementation steps of the practice adopted by the recipient LGUs that have been implemented as planned? Did these produce the desired outputs? What didnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t work? What were the problems/difficulties encountered by the recipient LGUs in the implementation of their respective work plan?

Lessons Learned to Date 1. 2.

Based on the major outputs/breakthroughs, what insights (beneficial or otherwise) could be derived from the implementation of the practice? On the problems/difficulties encountered by the recipient LGUs, what measures/mechanisms should have been in place prior to the implementation of various activities of the project? What type of interventions should have been done to minimize difficulties?

For the end-project assessment, Kaakbay program monitors conducted cluster visits to apply the Guide Questionnaire developed. Two questionnaires were answered, one for the host LGUs and one for the replicators or recipient LGUs.

3-11

End-Project Assessment GUIDE QUESTIONNAIRE FOR THE FINAL ASSESSMENT VISITS (for Recipient LGUs) I. Work Plan Implementation • •

• • •

Based on your workplan, what were/are the major results/ breakthroughs of the project being replicated by your LGU? How far did your LGU go in replicating the exemplary practice? What components/ steps were implemented? Were not implemented? Why? Will your LGU continue with the steps that were not implemented? What key/implementation steps produced the desired results? Which ones did not? Why? What has been the importance (level of effort/results) of this replication project relative to other activities of your LGU? Was the period (July to February) sufficient to bring the replication project to application stage?

II. Sustainability • • • •

• • • •

3-12

What structures/procedures/tools/systems has your LGU put in place to apply the exemplary practice? How rooted are these structures/procedures/tools/systems in your LGU’s operation? Are there executive orders, ordinances, or other means to support these? What are the chances that these structures/procedures/tools/systems will remain as regular functions of the LGU? Are the key project implementors (departments/units, partner agencies, community representatives) likely to remain in place as implementors/supporters of the project in the future? Please identify. What needs to be done (at executive, legislative, community levels) to ensure continuity of the new practice after the elections? From your LGU’s perspective, has this replication project been a success? Why? Why not? Do you believe the exemplary practice proposed to your LGU was appropriate for rapid and effective replication? Why so? After the termination of the Kaakbay project (March 30, 2004), what additional support (i. e. technical assistance, coaching, on-going inputs from host, other incentives, etc.) from external sources would your LGU require to ensure your replication project’s completion/continuity?

GUIDE QUESTIONNAIRE FOR THE FINAL ASSESSMENT VISITS (for Host LGUs)

•

As host LGU, please estimate (in person-days) the general level of effort your LGU has committed to the Kaakbay replication process. (mayor? senior staff? support staff?)

•

What has been the value of participating in the Kaakbay replication process as host? (staff development, visibility, knowledge gained, improvements in operation, etc.)

•

Outside of the official activities of Kaakbay (i.e. Exposure Visit and Workshop, midproject assessment, validation visit), how much request for assistance did you receive from recipient LGUs?

•

Would your LGU want to continue acting as host for other LGUs wanting to replicate your exemplary practice? On your own? As part of an official national replication program?

3-13

Five Major Tasks to Implementing a Replication Program Task 1: Determining the modalities of the program Task 2 : Identifying exemplary practices that will be offered for replication Task 3: Selecting local governments that will replicate the exemplary practices Task 4: Managing and supporting the actual replication process among local Government units Task 5: Monitoring and evaluating the program Essential Ingredients to Successful Replication 1.Ensure a demand-driven framework for replication 2. Ensure the commitment and political will of local government leaders in the program. 3. Formulate relevant, appropriate and viable frameworks and criteria for identifying EPs for replication. 4. Use or develop a replication process that is adapted to your clientele. 5. Ensure that monitoring and evaluation is integral to program implementation. 6. Successful replication breeds further replication, thus expanding good governance practices beyond your program expectations and immediate sphere of influence.

4-14

CONCLUSION: GOING FOR IT Monitoring and Evaluation rounds up the five major tasks in undertaking a Replication Program on Exemplary Practices in Local Governance. Undertaking each of the five tasks effectively, understanding their rationale and the accompanying tools and guidelines with an eye to innovation, will ensure the success of your replication program. Undertaking a replication program on good practices in local governance puts you on a path that has not been taken before, except by Kaakbay implementors in the Philippines. This presents an exciting and unique challenge for which this guidebook attempts to prepare and guide you through. At the same time, since pioneering in local governance replication can be a daunting and lonely task. There are few examples to learn from and mobilizing resources for a new idea may pose a challenge. Also, for many local governments, dealing with the day-to-day minutiae of managing local bureaucracies, working with small budgets, and following routine transactions can stunt creativity and visionary work, hampering local government officials from enlarging their vision and signing up for such an innovative effort as replication. As a conclusion to this guidebook, we revisit key principles in program implementation as guideposts along the way and offer words of inspiration and guidance from the Kaakbay program implementors, whose experience has closely informed the making of this guidebook. National government officials, program implementors, mayors, and local planners point out the essential ingredients to successful replication and testify to the concrete gains in replicating exemplary practices and the effectiveness of a peerto-peer learning approach. Keeping these insights in mind will help you on your way to a successful replication program and a greater contribution to improving local governance in your area.

1. Ensure a demand-driven framework to replication. Replication must be an expressed demand of local governments. The practice LGU replicators choose to replicate should represent a solution to a problem or situation they are seeking to resolve. The LGU replicators you select should clearly and strongly identify the need to replicate a particular practice. This will ensure sustained commitment and active participation of replicating LGUs and, consequently, greater prospects for success. Caution must be exercised when involving LGUs in your program. Do not jeopardize the quality of your program because you need to meet deadlines or expenditure targets. Apply the criteria you set out. Poorly selected LGUs can lead to early dropouts or lackluster participation.

Replication should be a demand and a need. It should be something that LGUs really want to do, are eager to do. This way, they will really be involved, they will be pro-active in finding the needed resources, they will not bemoan the time, money and effort involved, and they will not be easily discouraged when problems arise. — Lilian de Leon, Executive Director, League of Municipalities of the Philippines (LMP)

2. Ensure the commitment and political will of local government leaders in the program. This was a recurring lesson and insight throughout the Kaakbay program process. The lack of sustained support and political will of the mayor or chief executive and the local legislative body (council) can spell the failure of a replication project. As program implementors, therefore, leadership support and commitment needs to be a key criterion in choosing replicators. Sustaining this commitment through program activities that encourage leadership participation should also be integrated in the program.

One of the vital elements that will ensure its success is the political will of the local officials, strong management team and community support. — Hon. Melquiadez Azcuna, Jr., Mayor, Lopez Jaena Misamis Occidental_, CAP Cluster

3. Formulate relevant, appropriate and viable frameworks and criteria for identifying EPs for replication. Ensure that identified practices may be realistically replicated by other LGUs. Poor criteria for identifying EPs may result in your EPs not being suitable for replication. Categorize EPs in terms of their degree of complexity in being replicated (time, resources, capacities of LGU). Replication makes most sense if it is cost-effective. EPs that prove more difficult than expected can place greater burdens on replicating LGUs in terms of time and resources and may ultimately result in LGUs abandoning the project. Similarly, poorly-selected replicators may cause a high percentage of dropouts in the program, which will waste the time and effort put in by host LGUs as well as the program.

Developing criteria for identifying the EPs was a very important element of our replication program. I think that if we did not have the criteria we used or simply chose practices we already knew of or the ones recognized by existing award programs, the program may not have been as successful as it was. Not all practices are good to propose for replication. The criteria we developed made it easier for the program stakeholders to better appreciate what should be replicated and what shouldn’t. The criteria are also critical to make links to the objectives of the implementing organizations or to national priorities. — Basile Gilbert, Governance Advisor, Local Government Support Program (LGSP)

4-15

Definitely, the tools, particularly the way the Exposure Visit and Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop were organized, encouraged the mayors to replicate; it served to inspire and educate and made the LCEs realize that learning from another municipality’s experience can be a good way of resolving one’s problems. — Engr. Zoilo C. Gudin Jr., City Planning and Development Officer, Panabo City Davao del Sur, Balak cluster

4. Use or develop a replication process that is adapted to your clientele. In the Kaakbay pilot program, the three interconnected tools prescribed were developed based on knowledge of Philippine LGUs and their capacity development needs. Study tours were common practice but rarely structured to maximize fast appreciation; local government officials would return to their respective towns but often without knowing how to apply what they learned. The tools address these gaps and are generic enough to be adapted to many different contexts. Thorough study and familiarization with the three tools, their purposes and contents, how they relate to one another, are important to maximize their use.

We kept revisiting our frameworks, criteria and tools based on the lessons we learned and the feedback from the LGUs. We revised our criteria and tools, narrowed them down and made them more specific and relevant. Every new experience, every difficulty, and every breakthrough showed the way towards improving our tools and processes. — Rommel Martinez, Executive Director, Evelio B. Javier Foundation, Inc.

5. Ensure that monitoring and evaluation is integral to program implementation. Because a replication program is an innovation, monitoring and recording your own experience in program development as well as the experience of LGUs replicating helps your organization build its capacity for undertaking similar programs in the future. It also contributes to the larger endeavor of disseminating good governance practices and building effective programs for replicating and disseminating good practices in local governance.

Given our government’s thrust for good governance, peer-topeer learning emerges as a good strategy for building capacities of LGUs. It is relatively less expensive than other modes of capacity development because it builds its own momentum, generating synergies between stakeholders. The resources you provide for an initial program can actually spread and benefit many LGUs. — Hon. Austere A. Panadero, Assistant Secretary, DILG

6. Ensure the effectiveness and success of your replication program. Enriched by their experience, LGUs that have successfully replicated good practices are often eager to do more. They may even be interested in sharing their own experience. Thus, ensuring the effectiveness of your program helps you achieve more than your targets and contribute to improving governance in general. Successful replication will breed further replication. This will expand good governance practices beyond your program expectations and immediate sphere of influence.

4-16

references ___. 2003. A Framework for Identifying Exemplary LGU Practices for Replication. Produced under the Kaakbay pilot program for replicating LGU exemplary practices. Philippines. ___. 2004. All for One and One for All. Building LGU Alliances for Infrastructure Development. The KABALIKAT PALMA Infrastructure Project of the PALMA Alliance: Pigcawayan, Alamada, Libungan, Midsayap, and Aleosan, Cotabato Province. Kaakbay Reference Document produced under the Kaakbay pilot program for replicating LGU exemplary practices. Philippines. ___. 2002. Background and Context to City-to-City Cooperation. In City to City Cooperation: Issues Arising from Experience. ___. 2004. Bringing Government Services Closer to People. Paglilingkod-Abot-Kamay Program, Magsaysay, Davao del Sur. Reference Document produced under the Kaakbay pilot program for replicating LGU exemplary practices. Philippines. ___. 2003. Cabuyao Replication Progress Report. Produced under the Kaakbay pilot program for replicating LGU exemplary practices. Philippines. ___. 2003. Cluster Memorandum of Agreement. Produced under the Kaakbay pilot program for replicating LGU exemplary practices. Philippines. ___. 2003. Final Assessment Visit Questionnaire. Produced under the Kaakbay pilot program. Philippines. ___. 2003. General Information for Recipient LGUs. Paper produced under the Kaakbay pilot program for replicating LGU exemplary practices. Philippines. ____. 2003. General Observations on the Kaakbay Pilot Program So Far. Kaakbay program paper for replicating LGU exemplary practices. Philippines. ___. 2003. Get your Business Permit in One Hour at Cabuyaoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s One-Stop Shop. Reference Document produced under the Kaakbay pilot program for replicating LGU exemplary practices. Philippines. ___. 2004. Guidelines in Documenting your Exemplary Practice. Produced under the Kaakbay pilot program for replicating LGU exemplary practices. Philippines. ___. 2004. Inception Workshop Facilitatorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Guide. Produced under the Kaakbay pilot program for replicating LGU exemplary practices. Philippines. ___. 2004. Inception Workshop Generic Agenda. Produced under the Kaakbay pilot program for replicating LGU exemplary practices. Philippines. ___. 2003. Kaakbay Application Form. Produced under the Kaakbay pilot program for replicating LGU exemplary practices. Philippines. ___. 2002. Kaakbay: Replicating LGU Exemplary Practices. Concept Paper for Kaakbay pilot program for replicating LGU exemplary practices. Philippines. ____. 2003. Kaakbay. Replication and Dissemination of LGU Exemplary Practices. Brochure produced by the Kaakbay program for replicating LGU exemplary practices.

A-1

___. 2004. Making Crime Prevention Everybodyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Business, Bantay sa Kahusay Ug Kalinaw (BKK), Peace and Order Watch, Oroquieta City, Misamis Occidental. Reference Document produced under the Kaakbay pilot program for replicating LGU exemplary practices. Philippines. ___. 2003. Memorandum of Understanding. Kaakbay pilot program for replicating LGU exemplary practices. Philippines. ___. 2003. Mid-Project Assessment Workshop Report. Produced under the Kaakbay pilot program for replicating LGU exemplary practices. Philippines. ___. 2003. Mid-Project Assessment Workshop Report. BALAK Cluster. Produced under the Kaakbay pilot program for replicating LGU exemplary practices. Philippines. ___. 2003. Mid-Project Assessment Workshop Report for CAP Replication. Produced under the Kaakbay pilot program for replicating LGU exemplary practices. Philippines. ___. 2003. Mid-Project Assessment Workshop Report. PAK Cluster. Produced under the Kaakbay pilot program for replicating LGU exemplary practices. Philippines. ___. 2003. Minutes of the January 20 Steering Committee meeting, Kaakbay pilot program for replicating LGU exemplary practices. Philippines. ___. 2003. Minutes of the March 26 Steering Committee meeting, Kaakbay pilot program for replicating LGU exemplary practices. Philippines. ___. 2003. Observations on Local Replication Process. Produced under the Kaakbay pilot program for replicating LGU exemplary practices. Philippines. ___. 2003. PALMA Cluster Progress Report. Produced under the Kaakbay pilot program for replicating LGU exemplary practices. Philippines. ___. 2003. Project Workplan Template. Produced under the Kaakbay pilot program for replicating LGU exemplary practices. Philippines. ____. 2004. Purok Power for Primary Health Care. The Countryside Action Program of Balilihan, Bohol. Reference Document produced under the Kaakbay pilot program for replicating LGU exemplary practices. Philippines. ___. 2003. Replication cluster Progress Report Guiding Questions. Produced under the Kaakbay pilot program for replicating LGU exemplary practices. Philippines.

___. 2003. Role of the Host LGU in the Kaakbay Replication Process. Paper produced under the Kaakbay pilot program for replicating LGU exemplary practices. Philippines. ___. 2003. Selection Criteria for Recipient LGUs. Produced under the Kaakbay pilot program for replicating LGU exemplary practices. Philippines. ___. 2003. Summary and Highlights of Kaakbay Methodology Assessment. Produced under the Kaakbay pilot program for replicating LGU exemplary practices. Philippines. ___. 2004. UNDP-Brief on City to City Cooperation.

A-2

Kaakbay Participants in a Focus Group Discussion on Kaakbay Guidebook Development 27 February, 2004: Alumno, Norio, Research Head, League of Municipalities of the Philippines Dichoso, Apolinar, Program Officer, Evelio B. Javier Foundation, Inc. Egos, Lolemeir, Community Development and Information Officer, City Government of Magsaysay, Davao del Sur Garcia, Myn, Communications Advisor, Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program Gilbert, Basile, Governance Advisor, Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program Martinez, Rommel, Executive Director, Evelio B. Javier Foundation, Inc. Neri, Rolando, City Director, Departmentof the Interior and Local Government â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Oroquieta City Undan, Liberato, Municipal Planning and Development Officer, Banay-Banay, Davao Oriental

A-3

app endices Appendix A: Sample MOU and Forms used by Kaakbay

A-7

A.1. Memorandum of Understanding between League of Municipalities of the Philippines, League of Cities of the Philippines, Department of Interior and Local Government and Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program A.2. Framework and Criteria for Identifying Exemplary Practices A.3. Kaakbay Template for Initial Documentation of Exemplary Practices A.4. General Information for Host LGUs A.5. Selection Criteria for Replicating LGUs A.6. General Information to Replicating LGUs A.7. Application Form for Replicating LGUs A.8. Initial Documentation of Exemplary Practices A.9. LGU Replication Cluster Memorandum of Agreement

A-9

A-12 A-14 A-16 A-19 A-20 A-22 A-25 A-30

Appendix B. Sample Kaakbay Reference Document “Making Crime Prevention Everybody’s Business” Bantay sa Kahusay Ug Kalinaw (BKK) (Peace and Order Watch)

A-32

Appendix C. Kaakbay Brochure/Flyer

A-40

Appendix D. Monitoring and Evaluation Guide Questions Used by Kaakbay

A-49

D.1 Mid-Project Assessment Questions D.2. Progress Report Template D.3. End-Project Assessment Questions

A-51 A-53 A-54

Appendix E: Replication Tools

A-57

E.1 Tool #1: Guidelines in Documenting An Exemplary Practice (for Host LGUs) E.2 Tool #2: Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop Facilitator’s Guide and Generic Agenda E.3 Tool #3: Replication Workplan Template

A-59

Appendix F: Sample Work Plan of a Replicating LGU

A-75

A-63 A-71

A-6

appendix A

kaakbay sample MOU and forms

A-7

A-8

appendix A.1 Memorandum of Understanding between League of Municipalities of the Philippines, League of Cities of the Philippines, Department of Interior and Local Government and Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program

Kaakbay: Replication and Dissemination of Exemplary Practices MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: This Memorandum of Understanding is entered into by and between: THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT with main office at Francisco Gold II, Edsa corner Mapagmahal Street, Barangay Pinyahan, Quezon City and represented in this Agreement by Honorable Secretary Jose Lina, hereinafter referred to as the “DILG’; THE LEAGUE OF CITIES OF THE PHILIPPINES, with its office at Suite 1209 Cityland, C 10, Tower 2, H.V. de Ia Costa cor. Valerlo Sts., Makati City and represented by its National President, Honorable Mayor Francis N. Tolentino, hereinafter referred to as the “LCP”. THE LEAGUE OF MUNICIPALITIES OF THE PHILIPPINES, with its office at 265 Ermin Garcia St., Quezon City and represented by its National President, Honorable Mayor Ramon N. Guico, Jr. hereinafter referred to as the “LMP”; THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT SUPPORT PROGRAM II a Philippine-Canada Bilateral Program with its office at Unit 1507, JoIlibee Plaza, Emerald Avenue, Ortigas Center WHEREAS, DILG, LCP and LMP have the appropriate combined set of roles, responsibilities and networks to maximize the implementation of a pilot project to experience replication methodologies; WHEREAS, LMP during its 12th National Assembly has passed a resolution in favor of establishing a national program for replication and dissemination of exemplary practices of local government units which include among others development of methodologies and guidelines as well as documentation of other best practices not so far recorded in collaboration with DILG, LCP, NEDA and funding institutions; WHEREAS, the LCP has been implementing replication of best practices among member cities and generated experiences and learnings from the undertaking; WHEREAS, the DILG is promoting and encouraging LGUs to replicate exemplary practices through their LGU Capability Building Program being implemented nationwide; WHEREAS, a partnership between DILG, LCP and LMP will implement the KAAKBAY project and derive lessons learned to develop a national program to address dissemination and replication of Exemplary Practices national wide; WHEREAS, the goal the of the program is to assist the Philippines in realizing its objectives of equitable growth and poverty reduction through more effective local governance, with enhanced stakeholder participation in Regions VI, IX, X, XI, XII, XIII and the Autonomous Region in Muslim M1i9~nao; WHEREAS, the dissemination and replication of exemplary practices were established as key elements of the LGSP Implementation Strategy;

A-9

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above premises, the parties have arrived at an understanding on the following: Title of the Project “KAAKBAY: Replication and dissemination of Exemplary Practices” Objectives • • •

To develop and experience simple replication methodologies for the dissemination of “best” or exemplary practices in the Philippines through a partnership between DILG, LCP and LMP To determine the best possible arrangements and mechanisms for knowledge management about exemplary practices for replication and dissemination in the country. To develop a strategy to establish a national program for the dissemination of exemplary practices in the Philippines.

Project Management Arrangement a. b.

The Kaakbay Project shall be directed and administered by a Project Steering Committee composed of representatives from DILG, LCP, LMP and LGSP. The Project Steering Committee shall be supported by a Technical Working Group to be organizec for the purpose composed of technical staff designated by each partner.

IV. Roles and Responsibilities of Parties

A-10

1.1.

DILG a. Designate representative in the Project Steering Committee. b. Contribute and share studies and examples of “best” or exemplary practices in the area of poverty alleviation and resource mobilization. c. Participate actively in the formulation of selection criteria, selection of host and recipient LGUs and development of methodologies for the dissemination and replication of “best” or exemplary practices. d. Designate/appoint coordinator/technical staff at national and local levels who will work with the Secretariat to implement the overall project in between meetings of the Project Steering Committee. e. Designate LGOO and/or provincial staff to coach and monitor the implementation of the replication projects in LGUs. f. Provide in-kind contribution in the implementation and management of the project.

1.2.

LCP a. Designate representative in the Project Steering Committee. b. Designate/appoint coordinator/technical staff who will work with the Secretariat in between meetings of the Project Steering Committee. c. Contribute and share studies and examples of “best” or exemplary practices in the area of poverty alleviation and resource mobilization. d. Participate actively in the formulation of selection criteria, selection of host and recipient LGUs and development of methodologies for the dissemination and replication of “best” or exemplary practices. e. Play an active role in disseminating information required to support the implementation of the KAAKBAY Project among members. f. Provide in-kind contribution in the implementation and management of the project. g. Provide financial support for the implementation of 1 replication cluster in the amount P600,000. h. Disseminate information about the success and results of the project as well as about specific exemplary practices being replicated.

1.3

LMP a. Designate representative in the Project Steering Committee. b. Designate/appoint coordinator/technical staff who will work with the Secretariat in between meetings of the Project Steering Committee. c. Contribute and share studies and examples of “best” or exemplary practices in the area of poverty alleviation and resource mobilization. d. Participate actively in the formulation of selection criteria, selection of host and recipient LGUs and development of methodologies for the dissemination and replication of “best” or exemplary practices. e. Play an active role in disseminating information support the implementation of the required to KAAKBAY Project among members. f. Provide in-kind contribution in the implementation and management of the project g. Provide financial support for the implementation of 1 cluster. LMP will provide an amount of P300,000. and will secure additional financial support from the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) so that the total amount provided by LMP, with the support obtained from its institutional partner, is at least P600,000. h. Disseminate information about the success and results of the project as well as about specific exemplary practices being replicated

1.4.

LGSP a. Provide financial, assistance up to an amount of Philippine Pesos 5 Million for the overall project implementation as well as four (4) Replication Clusters. b. Provide technical assistance and secretariat/administratiye support as an in-kind contribution to the implementation and management of the project. c. Designate representative in the Project Steering Committee and play an advisory role in the implementation of the project.

1.5

The Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) Designate representative in the Project Steering Committee and play an advisory role in the implementation of the project.

This Memorandum of Understanding shall take effect upon its signing and shall remain in full force until the end of the project. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereunto signed presents on this 21th day of February 2003 at Philippines

A-11

appendix A.2 Framework and Criteria for Identifying LGU Exemplary Practices This framework and criteria were developed by Kaakbay partners to guide the search for exemplary practices INTRODUCTION The KAAKBAY Project is a pilot experience designed to develop simple, organized and structured methodologies for the replication of “best” or exemplary practices among local government units (LGUs) in the Philippines. Using a methodology based on a coaching approach among peers, the project is seen as a partnership between and among DILG, the League of Cities and the League of Municipalities of the Philippines. The proposed project envisions institutional partnerships to be developed between one “host” LGU and several “recipient” LGUs for the replication of a specific practice. The key partners in each replication process are the LGUs having experienced the “exemplary practice” acting as host; the LGUs wanting to replicate an exemplary practice as recipient LGUs; national and local league representatives; representatives from the regional offices of DILG as well as the LGOOs associated with each municipal or city LGU. The Kaakbay Project will involve some 16 to 20 LGUs either as host or recipient LGUs. Of this number, 75% will be municipalities and 25% will be cities. The project hopes to help explore the best possible mechanisms for managing knowledge on exemplary practices for dissemination throughout the country in the future. The Project initially will be financially supported by the Local Government Support Program (LGSP) with inkind contributions from DILG and the Leagues. REPLICATION DEFINED A systematic and supportive project implementation process that involves learning from, and sharing with others practices that are proven and effective solutions to common and similar problems, so as to contribute to the sustainable wellbeing of citizens and advancement of local government with the least possible cost and effort. IDENTIFYING EXEMPLARY PRACTICES OF LGUS The Kaakbay Project is fully cognizant of the fact that LGUs, being nearest to the grassroots, are in the best position to identify their needs and the initiatives they want to replicate. The project is also aware that there have been truly deserving LGU practices that have been recognized over the years by several award-giving bodies, but whose replication in other LGUs have been few, short-lived or have never been tried. When following a supply-driven approach, the Kaakbay Project will suggest such initiatives as exemplary practices for replication by interested LGUs. In addition, the project may also allow LGUs to “demand” for recognized initiatives that respond to their specific needs. This latter approach would require a cluster of contiguous LGUs to determine their common needs so that the Kaakbay project may help identify an appropriate exemplary practice to be replicated within the project timeframe and logistical parameters. In identifying exemplary practices of LGUs, preference (at least for the first phase of the project) will be on those initiatives that focus on issues that address poverty alleviation and resource mobilization. Considered among the priority thrusts of the national government, these issues are also among the felt needs of local communities and are being actively pursued by all the institutional partners of the Kaakbay Project namely, DILG, LCP, LMP and LGSP. Exemplary practices of LGUs to be considered for replication under the KAAKBAY Project are those initiatives that possess as many as possible of the following features or characteristics:

A-12

•

Municipal or city LGU-initiated. The exemplary practice should have been initiated by a LGU at the city or municipal level. The initiative should be sustainable and not dependent for its success, implementation or resources on any other program/project or agency. This being the case, the initiative should demonstrate LGU ownership and is socially accepted by its targeted beneficiaries.

•

Creative Use of LGC powers. The exemplary practice should demonstrate the creative use of governmental and/or corporate powers provided to LGUs by the Local Government Code of 1991. In the area of resources mobilization for example, these include activities such as : enactment of tax

ordinances/revenue codes; assessment and reclassification of real properties; land use planning and land reclassification; organizing community assemblies for tax information campaigns; establishing linkages with the private sector, NGOs and POs in generating resources service delivery, local development programs and projects; mobilizing community-based organizations and barangay officials in monitoring the cost-effectiveness of development program and projects as well as establishment of local economic enterprises; local credit financing; private sector participation in BOT/PT schemes, joint ventures, etc •

Simple and implementable in one year. The initiative is easily replicable and can progress to the “application stage” in a relatively short timeframe. This also means that the replication must start ASAP so that the initiatives are completed or are well underway before the next local elections.

•

Proven and effective solutions to common or similar problems. The exemplary practice has operationally demonstrated and proven over a reasonable period to be an effective response to the identified needs of its target beneficiaries. It also means that the initiative has significantly contributed to improve the social and material conditions of the beneficiaries.

•

Demonstrated level of sustainability. The following indicators may help determine the level of sustainability of the initiative: it has been in place for a considerable period of time; it survived the arrival of a new administration; it has become a permanent program or structure in the LGU; the community as well as executive and legislative bodies are involved in / supportive of it; related legislation is in place in the LGU.

•

Least possible cost and effort to replicate. The exemplary practice will not require huge amounts of resources or funding to replicate and is easy to implement. It’s a “common sense idea” as opposed to a capital-intensive project. It also means the exemplary practice was able to mobilize and maximize the use of indigenous resources.

•

Potential for multiplier effect or further replication. The processes and approaches of the exemplary practice have the potential to address other needs or deliver services beyond those originally targeted or intended. This also means that the initiative manifests a relatively high potential for success achievement. The success of the practice demonstrated in a few LGUs may incite other LGUs to adopt the same practice.

•

Documented exemplary practice. Conceding other features of the exemplary practices to be equal, preference will be given initiatives that have existing documentation of the benefits, key milestone, success and hindering factors, results, key stakeholders, processes and mechanisms.

While the exemplary practice or initiative may manifest the foregoing features or criteria, the city or municipal LGUs who have experienced the exemplary practice, and will serve as host in the replication process, should likewise have: • • • •

The will and interest ( LCE and SB/SP support) to take part in an institutional sharing process The presence of resource people with the ability to contribute/ articulate their experience Readiness to start ASAP so that the initiatives are completed or are underway before the 2004 local elections Existing documentation of the exemplary practice preferred

Recognizing that playing host to other LGUs could be arduous and difficult, the Kaakbay project is proposing a methodology that will minimize the level of effort required from the host LGU. As the initiator of the exemplary practice, the host LGU/LCE will have the opportunity to “showcase” its good work and success, which may prove to be an effective promotional vehicle as we approach local election time. The sharing process will increase the LGU’s local and national visibility and can serve as a learning opportunity for staff to develop their skill and capacities (teaching to others offers the opportunity to take a different look at what we already know). Participating in the Kaakbay Replication Cluster can also serve as a continuous learning process that could further enhance a LGU’s service delivery mechanism. The opportunity to host other LGUs may eventually lead to more development partnerships and a chance at collectively addressing needs and concerns that may seem gargantuan or insurmountable if a LGU were to address them by itself.

A-13

appendix A.3 Kaakbay Template for Initial Documentation of Exemplary Practice Used by Host LGU Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) League of Cities of the Philippines (LCP) League of Municipalities of the Philippines (LMP) With Support from The Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program (LGSP)

Description of Exemplary Practices Proposed for Replication NOTES IN CAPITALS IN EACH BOX ARE MEANT TO HELP THE WRITER OF THE DESCRIPITON UNDERSTAND WHAT INFORMATION TO PROVIDE FOR EACH ITEM OR CRITERIA. THEY ARE GUIDE QUESTIONS. THESE NOTES SHOULD BE REMOVED FROM THE FINAL DESCRIPTION.

Title: TITLE SHOULD DESCRIVE / REFLECT THE ESSENSE OF THE ACTIVITY

Local Government Unit(LGU):

Program Category: POVERTY ALLEVIATION OR LGU RESOURCES MOBILIZATION

Region:

Purpose: PURPOSE OF THE PROJECT OR EP Brief Description : THIS SECTION SHOULD PROVIDE A SHORT NARRATIVE DESCRIPITON OF THE PROJECT OR EP, IT SHOULD DESCRIVE: - HOW THE ACTIVITY WAS IMPLEMENTED OR WHAT THE LGU DID TO IMPLEMENT THE PROJECT - WHO ARE THE KEY STAKEHOLDERS, IMPLEMENTORS AND BENEFICIARIES -DOES THE PRACTICE INVOLVE SIGNIFICANT EDUCATION OR CULTURAL CHANGE ON THE PART OF STAKEHOLDERS FOR IT TO ACHIEVE SUCCESS? - IT SHOULD BE WRITTEN FROM THE PERPECTIVE OF THE LGU (EX. WHICH LGU DEPARTMENT WAS PARTICULARLY INVOLVED, WHY IS THIS PRACTICE IMPORTANT FOR THE LGU, HOW IT HELPED THE LGU ACHIEVE ITS OBJECTIVES, ETC) - APPROX. 2 PARAGRAPHS OR HALF A PAGE Key Results WHAT WERE THE MOST INPORTANT RESULTS OF THE PROJECT OR EP? -WHAT NEW SERVICE DID THE LGU PROVIDE WITH THIS PRACTICE IN PLACE OR WHAT SERVICE WAS ENHANCED? -WHAT STAFF DEVELOPMENT OCCURRED THROUGH THIS PRACTICE? -WHICH SPECICIC CITIZEN GROUPS BENEFITED FROM THIS EP? -HOW DID THE CITIZENS BENEFIT?

Main Implementation Steps 5 OR 6 BULLETS IDENTIFYING WHAT ARE THE KEY STEPS OR MAJOR ACTIVITIES REQUIRED TO IMPLEMENT THE PROJECT. THIS WILL GIVE AN LGU WANTING TO REPLICATE THIS PRACTICE AN IDEA OF HOW EASY OR DIFFICULT THE REPLICATION MAY BE

A-14

Compliance with Selection Criteria Title:

Local Government Unit(LGU): Region:

Prevailing Conditions for the Specific Practice WHAT SPECIFIC CONDITIONS WERE IN PLACE IN THE LGU FOR THIS PRACTICE TO BE IMPLEMENTED A CHAMPION PROPOSING THE IDEA? A SPECIFC PROBLEM TO ADDRESS? CITIZENS OR COMMUNITY GROUPS PARTICULARLY COMMITTED TO THE IDEA? ETC Sustainability HAS THE PRACTICE BEEN SUSTAINED OVER TIME? FOR HOW LONG HAS THIS PRACTICE BEEN ON PLACE? DID OR DOES IT HAVE FULL SUPPORT BY THE EXECUTIVE AND LEGISLATIVE BODIES, AS WELL AS THE COMMUNITY? DID IT SURVIVE A CHANGE IN ADMINISTRATION? IS IT STILL PROCUCING THE LEVEL OF RESULTS ANTICIPATED? ETC Support to Implementation DID THE ACTIVITIY REQUIRE SUPPORT FROM A NATIONAL GOVERNMENT AGENCY? MUST THE PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT GET INVOLVED? WAS THE ACTIVITY THE RESULT OF A DONOR SUPPORTED PROGRAM? WHAT DID THE LGU HAVE TO INVEST IN CASH OR IN-KIND? WAS TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE REQUIRED FROM OUTSIDE SOURCES? ETC Estimated cost to Implement EVEN WITHOUT SPECIFIC FIGURES AVAILABLE, WHAT TO WE ESTIMATE THE COST OF IMPLEMENTATION IN ANOTHER LGU TO BE? WHAT ARE THE RECURRING COSTS TO MAINTAIN THIS PRACTICE IN PLACE? Time needed to Implement WHAT REALISTIC TIME PERIOD IS REQUIRED TO REPLICATE THIS PROJECT? CAN IT BE DONE IN 1 YEAR WITH A RESSONABLE LEVEL OF RESULTS? Impact On Citizens WHAT IS THE IMPACT ON CITIZENS? WHAT SEGMENT OF THE POPULATION WILL BENEFIT? HOW DIRECT IS THE IMPACT OF THIS PRACTICE ON CITIZENS? Pre-Requisites for Replication WHAT ARE THE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS WE MAY BE LOOKING FOR IN LGUS WANTING TO REPLICATE THIS PRACTICE? CAN IT BE REPLICATED BY ONE LGU? DOES THE PRACTICE INVOLVE COOPERATION WITH OTHER LGUs? IS IT STRRICTLY FOR COASTAL LGUs, URBAN LGUs, UP-LAND, ETC? Remarks ANY ADDITIONAL REMARK HELPING TO DESCRIBE THE PRACTICE AND ITS POTENTIAL REPLICATION IN OTHER LGUs. APPROXIMATE DEGREE OF DIFFICULTY TO REPLICATE? CAN IT BE REPLICATED IN BOTH CITIES AND MUNICIPALITIES? HAS IT ALLREADY BEEN REPLICATED? ETC The above criterion is meant to help analyze the practices and help guide the selection of eventual recipient LGUs. It should not be perceived as absolute pre-requisites for the selection process.

A-15

appendix A.4 General Information for Host LGUs

This form was disseminated to host LGUs after their exemplary practice has been identified by Kaakbay for replication under the program GENERAL INFORMATION TO HOST LGUS What is the Kaakbay Project? Kaakbay is a project initiated by DILG, LMP and LCP proposing simple methodologies to help cities and municipalities easily adopt best or â&#x20AC;&#x153;Exemplary Practicesâ&#x20AC;? experienced in other LGUs. The Kaakbay project helps LGUs work together to replicate practices that are simple, effective and proven solutions to common LGU challenges. How does it work? The Kaakbay project identifies Cities and Municipalities having experienced simple and innovative ways of addressing LGU challenges. In the Kaakbay project, these are called Exemplary Practices and the LGUs having experienced them may become Host LGUs. The host LGU is invited to share its know-how in implementing its Exemplary Practice with a small group of LGUs wanting to learn from them in a clearly defined replication process. Once several Exemplary Practices are identified, they are proposed to LGUs wanting to replicate them and Replication Clusters are formed. A Replication cluster is formed of one Host LGU and two to four Recipient LGUs. The Host LGUs play an important role in sharing their experience with LGUs wanting to learn from them.

KAAKBAY REPLICATION CLUSTER Recipient LGU (Replicating) LGOO Coaching

CLUSTER WORKSHOP Host LGU Exemplary Practice

LGU REPLICATION WORKPLAN

Recipient LGU (Replicating) LGOO Coaching

The 1 year replication process starts with the Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop in the host LGU and helps determine how the practice may be replicated in other LGUs. During this workshop the host helps Recipient LGUs learn about the key steps to implement the practice; the success factors and difficulties in implementing it; who are the key stakeholders and how they contributed; what to avoid; how long it takes to implement; and what are the main benefits in implementing the practice. The host also agrees with the Recipients on how they will work together as a cluster of LGUs and what the host contribution will be help replicate the practice. The host therefore takes part in a 1 year process starting in April-May 2003 supporting other LGUs implement a practice the host LGU has been very successful in.

A-16

Benefits to the Host LGU As the initiator of the exemplary practice, the host LGU will: •

Have the opportunity to “showcase” its good work and success. In the long run, this will increase the LGU’s local, national and even international visibility and may prove to be an effective promotional vehicle to build additional support from constituents and perhaps even attract investors and tourists

•

Host LGUs will be highly recognized for their professionalism in local governance as information about the Kaakbay project will be disseminated though DILG, LMP and LCP newsletters, conferences and other public information vehicles.

•

Since replication methods are drawing much attention from most government agencies and international donors, Host LGUs will be recognized for contributing to a pioneering local government capacity development initiative and network.

•

The sharing process can serve as a learning opportunity for LGU staff to develop their own skills, capabilities and confidence as the learning process provides the opportunity to take a fresh look at what they are doing. Teaching to others helps develop analytical and inter-personal skills. Participating in the Kaakbay Replication Cluster can serve as a continuous learning experience that could further enhance or multiply the Host LGU’s service delivery mechanism.

•

The opportunity to host other LGUs may eventually lead to more development partnerships and a chance to collectively address needs and concerns that may seem insurmountable if an LGU were to address them by itself

•

Being a Kaakbay host may prove to be economically advantageous. The host LGU may be able to charge fees from other LGUs for transferring a technology that has been proven to work effectively/ successfully.

What is expected from the host LGU? Host LGUs under the Kaakbay Project are expected: •

to be a part of an institutional cooperation process. The host and recipient LGUs will bind themselves in a collaborative agreement to pursue a replication process requiring the support of their respective local councils or Sanggunian.

•

To be willing to abide by, and commit to the roles and responsibilities assigned to them as part of the Replication cluster

•

Selected members of the Host LGUs are required to take part in 2 three-day cluster workshops and may undertake short term (2 or 3 day) visits to share their experience. Host LGUs will therefore mobilize staff and community/ beneficiaries for specific activities of the replication process according to a pre-determined schedule within the one year project implementation period.

Support from the Kaakbay Project to Host LGUs Recognizing that playing host to other LGUs could be demanding and difficult, the Kaakbay Project is proposing a methodology that will minimize the level of effort required of the host LGU. Kaakbay will provide: •

Financial and logistical support to host LGUs for all activities they will be involved in. This includes the cost of travel and accommodation of its staff should they be required to travel as well as the costs of hosting representatives from other LGUs. Kaakbay is developing a mechanism through which the host LGU may be able to be compensated for the time of its staff taking part in the project

A-17

â&#x20AC;˘

The Kaakbay Project will propose a specific methodology, provide tools and technical assistance for the replication process. This will include processes and measures to help channel the demand for information from the host LGU to ensure it is not over-burdened by its involvement the Kaakbay replication process. Kaakbay will assist the Host LGU in documenting its experience so that it can be easily shared with other LGUs.

A-18

appendix A.5 Selection Criteria for Replicating LGUs

Kaakbay used the term Recipient LGUs for LGUs who were selected to replicate the identified exemplary practices. Recipient LGUs were selected based on this criteria. CRITERIA FOR SELECTION OF RECIPIENT LGUS Recipient local government units for the Kaakbay Project are municipal and/or city LGUs who want to take part in an institutional sharing process for the replication and dissemination of exemplary practice/s. The Kaakbay project would create “clusters” of LGUs for replicating exemplary practices. A cluster may be composed of a group of LGUs which may or may not be geographically contiguous with each other. The project will involve some 16 to 20 LGUs either as host or recipient LGUs. Of this number, 75% will be municipalities and 25% will be cities. For the first phase of the project, these LGUs are to be located in Region X or Region XI. The candidate LGUs should have the initiative, commitment and the resources to replicate exemplary practices. Specifically, recipient LGUs should: •

Need for assistance. LGUs in demonstrating greater need for assistance will be prioritized in the selection.

•

Demonstrate the will to replicate a specific practice. The recipient LGU should have the daring and the intense desire and interest to pursue the exemplary practice proposed to them. Their will to work on a replication project in a specific area should respond to one of their identified needs or priorities.

•

Be willing to take part in an institutional cooperation process with other LGUs. The participating LGUs will be asked to formally bind themselves in a collaborative agreement with other LGUs to pursue the replication process. The support of the individual LGUs’ Local Chief Executive and the respective local councils or Sanggunians will be required.

•

Have the readiness to implement the exemplary practice. The recipient LGUs should have the political support, basic capacity and required equipment, among others, as well as the readiness to start the replication process ASAP so that initiatives are completed or are well underway before the 2004 local elections.

•

The will to provide the resources required for the replication process. While LGSP will provide a small project support fund support to the Kaakbay Project, recipient LGUs are expected to buy-in into the replication process and provide the majority of resources required as well as other in-kind contributions

•

Have a competently strong LGOO assigned in the LGU. The LGOO, with support from a local resource partner (LRP), is expected to coach the LGU through the replication process. The Kaakbay project will take this factor into consideration when selecting specific LGUs for the Kaakbay project.

•

Minimum pre-requisites for a specific practice already in place. The recipient LGU has the necessary facilities, human resources and equipment required to replicate the specific exemplary practice. Those resources are available for utilization/deployment.

Be willing to abide by, and commit to the roles and responsibilities within the Kaakbay replication cluster.

A-19

appendix A.6 General Information for Prospective Replication LGUs What is the Kaakbay Project? Kaakbay is a project initiated by DILG, LMP and LCP proposing simple methodologies to help cities and municipalities easily adopt best or “Exemplary Practices” experienced in other LGUs. Filipino LGUs are experiencing numerous excellent practices recognized through various award programs and these practices can be replicated by municipalities and cities facing similar issues and problems. The Kaakbay project helps LGUs work together to replicate practices that are simple, effective and proven solutions to common LGU challenges.

KAAKBAY REPLICATION CLUSTER Recipient LGU (Replicating) LGOO Coaching

CLUSTER WORKSHOP Host LGU Exemplary Practice

LGU REPLICATION WORKPLAN

Recipient LGU (Replicating) LGOO Coaching

How does it work? Two or three LGUs will be selected to replicate each specific exemplary practice. Cities and Municipalities taking part in the project will visit the LGU having implemented the best practice and will take part in the “Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop” to determine how they will replicate it as part of the Kaakbay project. During this visit they learn about the key steps to implement the practice; the success factors and difficulties in implementing it; who are the key stakeholders and how they contributed; what to avoid; how long it takes to implement; and what are the main benefits in implementing the practice. They also sit down and determine how they will work together as a cluster of LGUs to replicate the practice. Finally, they develop a workplan identifying how they will implement the exemplary practice in their municipality or city. The projects will be replicated within a period of one year (April 2003 to April 2004). The project will provide technical assistance and monitoring to help your LGU implement the replication project and achieve the targeted results within the timeframe identified. How can my LGU benefit from taking part in the Kaakbay project? If one of the Exemplary Practices proposed by the Kaakbay project corresponds to a challenge your LGU is facing, no need to reinvent the wheel. The Kaakbay project will help your LGU implement a simple project to introduce the practice that is proven to be an effective solution to help address that challenge. Your LGU will take part in a peer-to peer exchange project in which your staff, your Sangunian members and your community will learn new ways of addressing common problems with less effort and at lower cost.

A-20

Within a 1 year period or less, your LGU will have implemented and instituted the new practice. The practice (new service to your citizens, more efficiency and effectiveness in the way you deliver a service, etc) will be applied in your LGU and your constituents should start benefiting from it before April 2004. How can I take part? The Regional Office of DILG in collaboration with your League of LGUs (LMP or LCP) will be providing information on pre-selected Exemplary Practices that your LGU may consider for replication. You may review these practices and determine if your LGU would benefit from replicating one of them. If so, your LGU may apply to the project by filling in the form provided for this purpose. In the application process, you will be required to specify which Exemplary Practice your LGU wants to replicate. The application of your LGU must be supported by a Sangunian resolution supporting the LGU’s participation on the project. In addition, your LGU will be required to demonstrate its commitment to the project with an appropriate financial and/or in-kind contribution. Time Frame The selection process will take place between March 27 and April 25. Selected LGUs will be notified by March 26nd The first activity is the Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop. The 4 day workshop will take place between May 15 and May 30. Your LGU will have until April 2004 to implement the replication process. The final Assessment workshop with other cluster LGUs will occur between March 1 and April 2004. What is my LGU’s contribution? Your LGU’s will and commitment to implement the replication project is the key contribution to the Kaakbay project. Staff time and community resources are the usual main contribution to the project. Your LGU may also need to demonstrate it has the financial resources required to support the project. Those resources will vary according to the Exemplary Practice selected. The Kaakbay project will provide technical assistance in the project implementation as well as the costs of your LGU representatives in the cluster workshops with other LGUs.

A-21

appendix A.7 Application Form for Replicating LGUs

This form was disseminated together with the General Information for Recipient LGUs to potential replicators. APPLICATION FORM For Recipient LGUs INSTRUCTIONS The Kaakbay Project Steering Committee has identified a list of Exemplary Practices being proposed to Municipalities and Cities of Regions X & XI for replication as part of the Kaakbay project. Your LGU may determine if the replication of one of these Exemplary Practices can help address one of your LGUâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s key challenges. If you think your LGU (a) is willing to take part in an institutional cooperation process with other LGUs; (b) has the readiness to implement a specific exemplary practice; and (c) has the ability to provide the resources required for the replication process, your LGU may apply as a Recipient LGU to the Kaakbay Project. Deadline for application is on March 21, 2003. Your application may be submitted in English or Filipino. Should your LGU be selected, a Sanggunian Resolution supporting your LGUâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s participation in the Kaakbay project for the specific practice will be required. Please submit completed application form to: C/O Kaakbay Regional Coordinating Committee DILG Regional Office XI Matina, Davao City FAX: 297-2600 Email: region11@dilg.gov.ph For further information or assistance, please contact Mr. Danilo Lunapas, 297-2604

SUBMISSION DEADLINE: March 21, 2003

Application No.____

1. Name of LGU: City

Municipality

2. Financial Classification of LGU ___ first class

___ second class

___ third class

___ fourth class

___ fifth class

___ sixth class

A-22

3. From among the menu of exemplary practices, which specific practice is your LGU applying for? What particular needs do you wish to address in your LGU by replicating the practice you have chosen? Why? ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ 4. How does this Exemplary Practice relate to your LGU strategic orientations, priorities, or Executive Agenda? ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ 5. To successfully implement the replication process, what resources required by the implementation of the exemplary practice are readily available for deployment and utilization by your LGU (financial, material, human)? ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ 6. What other resources can be committed to this Project? ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________

A-23

______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ 7. Other comments in support of your LGU’s application to take part in the Kaakbay project? ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ Your LGU may submit additional documentation in support of your LGU’s application to this project.

A-24

appendix A.8 Sample of the Initial Documentation of an Exemplary Practice Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) League of Cities of the Philippines (LCP) League of Municipalities of the Philippines (LMP) With Support from The Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program (LGSP)

Proposed Exemplary Practices for Replication Title: Delivering Primary Health Care Through Purok

Local Government Unit(LGU): Balilihan, Bohol

Program Category: Resource Mobilization/Poverty Alleviation

Region:

Purpose As major component of the countryside action program, the primary health care through the purok system intended to mobilize and organize local government, rural health unit and agencies tasked to deliver basic services to the community. Brief Description The Primary Health Care through Purok is a system and mechanism for the delivery of health services under the Balilihan Countryside Action Program (CAP). It aims to : 1.

Raise the health consciousness of purok residents

Organize team trained purok volunteers who will assist the municipal health team in maximally providing basic services to the purok.

Encouragement of the design and implementation of purok-level livelihood projects such as organic gardening, home industries, etc.

Involvement and mobilization of both manpower and material resources in the purok and also networking with other government and non-government agencies for the effective planning, design and implementation as well as monitoring and evaluation of community-based health programs.

A-25

The Purok Primary Health Care was initially implemented in 1983 with limited scope and coverage due to the compartmentalized view that health programs were the sole concern of the health sector. In 1988, when the new mayor was elected (Mayor Chatto) it was expanded and transformed into Balilihan Countryside Action Program (CAP) covering 31 barangays of the municipality. The CAP framework departed from the usual top-down approach. The personnel in the municipality and barangays underwent a number of training programs to equip them with new skills and attitudes before carrying out the program. Armed with new skills and attitudes, the municipal and barangay machinery was ready to engage the municipality as partners in development. CAP was launched with its purok system, giving spirit to empowerment through community organizing, mobilization and human resource development. The target population of CAP was the 14,527 residents in 31 barangays of Balilihan. These people were mostly marginal farmers of rice, corn and other staples. Each of 31 barangays was divided into six (6) puroks composed of 10-25 adjacent households, resulting to a total of 186 puroks of the entire town. The main feature of the program that mobilized the community to participate was the construction of Kiosk made up of indigenous materials. The Kiosk had the features of a typical home and served as a model of the members. Each Kiosk had the following: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

Meeting/teaching area Kitchen Water sealed toilet Seed houses Compost pit/pile Vegetable garden Herbal garden

Key Results The CAP has established 186 puroks with 1,302 sectoral volunteers, acting as semi-autonomous extensions of the government. With these purok-level organizations nearly 1 out of every six adult Balilihan was a sectoral volunteer. Each purok had an income-generating project to augment from the municipal government and other agencies. At the start, construction of kiosk was merely a rallying point, a project to prove to the residents that they could effect change through collective effort. In time, the purok kiosk served as venue for human resource development. It was a meeting place, a classroom, and a social hall. Once a year, the best purok per barangay was chosen. Criteria were set for the assessment of the program

A-26

On Health and Nutrition 1. The primary health care has been strengthened indicated by the effective delivery of health services to the community. 2. Propagated herbal medicines 3. Extended the expertise of the volunteers BHWs 4. Established 2 boticas (BINHI) ran by BHWs with a plan to establish a botica for every 6 barangays 5. Accomplished of at least 95% of its 1996 performance targets.

On Livelihood and Agriculture 1. Established communal farms using SALT, municipal nursery, vegetable and herbal gardens. 2. Established bigasan sa purok â&#x20AC;&#x201C; buy and sell, babuyan (swine raising) sa purok, paluwagan and rootcrop raising.

Main Implementation Steps A.

Preparatory Phase: 1. Training and Orientation of the Bureaucracy

Community Organizing Phase 1.

Revitalizing the Purok. From loose social group, the purok was upgraded into a more functional unit. One Barangay Council member was assigned per purok and served as its chairperson, one Barangay Health Worker as its Vice-chairperson.

Purok Mobilization through Kiosk Construction. Indigenous materials were used for the construction of purok kiosks to avoid financial burden on the volunteers. Puroks were often built as temporary structures on the land of the Purok Chairperson.

Setting-Up the Organizational Structure. The Purok organizational structure is composed of the following: a. b. c. d. e. f.

Chairperson Vice-chairperson Secretary Treasurer Auditor 7 Sectoral volunteers representing health, agriculture, infrastructure, education, peace and order, livelihood and environment and youth and sports.

Operational Phase Puroks began holding monthly â&#x20AC;&#x153;problem-solvingâ&#x20AC;? meetings to discuss relevant issues on health service delivery. In time, puroks were initiating activities that were either health-related, such as: 1. 2. 3.

Operation Timbang Nutri-Feeding for maltnourished chlidren Immunization and First Aid

A-27

Compliance with Selection Criteria

Title: Delivering Primary Health Care Through Purok

Local Government Unit(LGU): Balilihan, Bohol Region:

Prevailing Conditions for the Specific Practice • •

•

Presence of purok (dormant) as a loose social group Purok initiative for community-based primary health was being implemented in a limited scope and coverage but had made little progress apart from the construction of kiosk and training of Barangay Health Workers Health program had little support from other government agencies

Sustainability In 1997, the municipal government of Balilihan approved an ordinance institutionalizing the purok system in every barangay. Though the purok was a highly functional extension unit under Mayor Chatto’s administration, the purok still did not have any official and permanent role in the municipal government. It was conceivable that a new mayor could refuse to recognize the puroks and deprive of the opportunity to work in partnership with the government. To prevent this from happening, Municipal ordinance No.97-07 was enacted, further strengthening the CAP and assuring the community of its sustainability even after the term of the politicians. The purok system was even applied at the provincial level when the mayor after two terms was elected vicegovernor. Support/Implementation • Contribution and donation from citizens • Technical assistance from different line agencies • Conisederable staff time for citizen’s education activities. Estimated cost to Implement • For the construction of Kiosk it cost 3,000 in 1989 • For the Health and Sanitation Program P10,000 in 1989 and P100,000 in 1996 Time needed to Implement • One- two years Impact On Citizens • Out of their initiatives they started all sorts of projects with little or no support from the municipal government • Purok became a social institution among others. • During election, a candidate, performance in his/her respective purok became an important critierion for voters • It also enhanced socialization because it became social hall.

A-28

Pre-Requisites in Place for Replication • Barangay Council members who are willing and ready to revitalize/restructure/reorganize their puroks and implement pilot project and share counterpart • Available packages of training and transfer of technology programs and pool of municipal trainors for community health volunteer workers • Piece of land/space for each purok for the construction of temporary kiosk • Strong desire and will of the LCE to utilize the innovative approaches in order to deliver the services to a large number of beneficiaries/client. • Supportive Sangguniang Bayan members

Remarks Can be replicated in any LGU. In fact, seven municipalities of Bohol has been replicating the Balilihan Model.

A-29

appendix A.9 LGU Replication Cluster Memorandum of Agreement

This agreement was signed by the members of the replication clusters formed among host and replicating LGUs under the Kaakbay program. Each replication cluster consists of one host LGU and 3-5 replicating LGUs. CLUSTER MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT

KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: This Memorandum of Agreement is entered into by and between: The municipalities ________________ represented herein by the Mayors:_______________hereinafter referred to as “Recipient LGUs”; The Municipality __________________, host of the Exemplary Practice, represented herein by Hon._________ __hereinafter referred to as the “Host LGU”. WHEREAS, KAAKBAY Project has been identified as a pilot experience to develop simple methodologies for the dissemination and replication of “best” or exemplary practices in the Philippines. WHEREAS, the Exemplary Practice, __________________ of the municipality of ______________has been identified and adopted for replication by the municipalities of ________________. WHEREAS, the recipient LGUs the municipalities of ___________ have agreed to enter into a Memorandum of Agreement between and among as part of the institutional cooperation process in the replication process of exemplary practice of ______________________under the KAAKBAY project. WHEREAS, the Host LGU has agreed to assist the recipient LGUs in the replication process. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above premises, the parties arrived at an agreement on the following: THAT, the recipient LGUs will undertake the following:

Finalize and secure LGU support for the work plan in consultation with other stakeholders;

Ensure the implementation of the activities outlined in the approved work plan;

Keep a record of the implementation of the various activities of the project;

Attend and participate in the Mid-Project Cluster Workshop;

Attend and participate in the Recipient Project Evaluation Missions;

Attend and participate in the Final KAAKBAY Assessment Workshop;

Provide KAAKBAY Project documented information on the status of implementation of the project every other month; and

A-30

Implement specific measures to ensure the institutionalization of the project beyond Kaakbay and into the next administration.

THAT, the Host LGU of the exemplary practice ______________________ will designate a Senior Technical Staff to undertake the following:

Recipient work plan confirmation visits;

Responses to occasional queries of Recipient LGUs;

Attend and participate in the Mid-Project Cluster Workshop;

Attend and participate in the Recipient Project Evaluation Missions; and

Attend and participate in the Final KAAKBAY Assessment Workshop

THAT, the Host LGU and the Recipient LGUs shall initiate efforts on the following: 1. 2. 3.

Establishment of mechanism for the exchange and sharing of learning experiences in the implementation of innovative practices between and among themselves. Serve as resource institutions for other LGUs that expressed interest in implementing their models. Initiate the establishment of mechanisms for the continuation of institutional cooperation in the dissemination and replication of exemplary practice beyond the KAABAY project.

In WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereunto signed presents on this ______ 2003 at ___, Philippines.

A-31

appendix B Reference Document This is one of 6 Reference Documents developed by host LGUs using the Guidelines for Documenting the LGU Exemplary Practice (Replication Tool 1) with assistance from the Kaakbay program. It documents the exemplary practice of Oroquieta City, Misamis Oriental, one of 11 host LGUs in the Kaakbay program. “Making Crime Prevention Everybody’s Business” Bantay sa Kahusay Ug Kalinaw (BKK) (Peace and Order Watch) Oroquieta City, Misamis Occidental Summary Oroquieta City in Misamis Occidental is rich in natural bounties, with rivers, waterfalls, forest areas and wildlife. Its name, in fact, translates to “where gold is found” (in Spanish, oro means gold while quieta means “to find.”) With rapid urban growth, however, Oroquieta slowly woke up to the growing threat to its natural wealth. Forest areas were dwindling due to logging, wildlife was disappearing, and pollution was on the rise. In addition to the environmental threat, Oroquieta also came to be known as a place of crime and communist insurgency. In the 1980s, more than half of its 47 barangays were classified by the police and military as influenced, infiltrated or threatened by insurgency and criminality. The rise in crime and insurgency was largely caused by the presence of organized crime syndicates in neighboring cities, inadequate police personnel, and the indifferent attitudes of residents to law enforcement. As a result, the city was periodically rocked by waves of violence and crime, especially in the months of September through December, as well as during elections. Alongside these problems, however, is the city’s success record in implementing effective programs. Foremost of these is the city-wide Barangay Self-Sufficiency Program or BSSP which not only brought about a cleaner and ‘greener’ Oroquieta, but also improved agriculture and food security. To sustain the gains of BSSP that were being threatened by the unstable peace and order situation, Oroquieta launched the Bantay sa Kahusay ug Kalinaw or BKK (Peace and Order Watch). BKK is a barangay-based, city-wide network of volunteers that carries out a two-pronged approach to crime in the city – a) crime prevention through advocacy and a neighborhood watch and early warning system and b) a quick response team for acting on actual crime cases in the communities. Like BSSP, BKK has proven to be a success. It has two effective strategies – 1) barangay-based community action and involvement using the spirit of the Bayanihan tradition (volunteerism) and 2) strong capacity building of the barangay-based groups through special training and the provision of such equipment of radios, patrol vehicles and operations center. Through BKK, crime incidents in Oroquieta have gone down to 10 a month from 30-40, remarkable for a rapidly growing city of 80,000 residents. BKK has reduced juvenile delinquency and drug abuse, as well as petty theft and burglary. BKK has also helped hinder the Balik-Masa program of communist rebels to recruit residents. For its BKK initiative, the city government received an award for having the Most Outstanding Lupong Tagapamayapa (barangay justice system). With the awakening of vigilance and the formation of structures, preventing crime has become everybody’s business in Oroquieta.

A-32

A. ABOUT BKK Project History: Addressing Crime to Sustain Economic Gains In 1992, the city government, then under the leadership of Mayor Ernie Flores Bandala, confronted the environmental problems of the city by launching the Barangay Self-Sufficiency Program or BSSP. From a simple “clean and green” program, the BSSP has successfully expanded into a comprehensive program that has helped improve agriculture and food security in the city. City officials soon realized, however, that BSSP’s gains will not be sustained if it does not address its peace and order problems. Thus, in 2000, 8 years after BSSP was launched, Oroquieta turned its attention to crime, by launching the Bantay sa Kahusay Ug Kalinaw or BKK. While BSSP focused on developing the local economy, BKK targeted crime response and crime prevention. Giving birth to the BKK: Who, when, how The City Peace and Order Council (CPOC) gave birth to the BKK. Inundated with countless reports of crime and insurgency movements, while at the same time instructed by the DILG to address its peace and order problem, the CPOC began conceptualizing the program. The city mayor, who chairs the CPOC, asked DILG to help develop a conceptual and operational framework. Through DILG’s assistance, BKK was evolved and adopted by the city government and endorsed to the Sangguniang Panglungsod (SP) for approval. The SP enthusiastically approved the program and allocated a budget for it. On November 30, 2000, BKK was launched in a parade participated in by more than 5,000 volunteers and members of the support organizations. Project Description: Bayanihan for crime prevention BKK placed the barangays at the forefront of the fight against crime and insurgency. Recalling the tradition and spirit of ‘bayanihan,’ an old social practice where community members voluntarily contribute their labor when needed by a neighbor, BKK was founded as a volunteer network to address crime at the barangay level BKK Objectives BKK had the following objectives: 1. Harness the people of the barangay in the prevention of crime, disaster preparedness and assistance in law enforcement; 2.

Revive and sustain the time-honored tradition of Bayanihan and value of cooperation among barangay folks through volunteerism in the maintenance of peace and order;

Establish a mechanism in the barangay that will prevent the occurrence of crime or quick response in solving crimes;

Establish a coordinated monitoring and information-gathering network in every barangay.

BKK Strategies: Harnessing Barangay Volunteer Action and Building Capacities As the title says, BKK operates successfully on the principle that crime prevention and action should be the concern and responsibility of each resident, instead of being a matter for the police or the military alone. But how did the first champions and promoters of the BKK got this principle accepted, internalized and translated into action? The first strategy is basing the initiative at the barangay level and harnessing systematic barangay-level action around the problem. This includes 1) the formation of barangay level structures, which helped institutionalize the program 2) structuring and systematizing the needed response, first into action and prevention, and second, by formulating such mechanisms as a neighborhood watch and alert (early warning) systems/ groups (Alarma Tagongtong), quick response teams to respond to actual crimes (Pasa Bilis), a reporting and documentation system (Bakukang) and a monitoring and evaluation mechanism. Anchoring the program on the principle of volunteerism or ‘bayanihan” recognized the key role and capacity of barangay officials and residents preventing and responding to crime.

A-33

Along with mobilizing people around the issue of crime, the second strategy is the strong effort made to build their capacities and mobilize resources for capacity building. Aside from undergoing training on crime prevention and quick response, BKK volunteers are also equipped with the following: • • •

establishment of an operations center in each barangay as base for their operations radios for easier and faster communication patrol vehicles for a quicker response

Operationalizing BKK: How it works The Bantay sa Kahusay Ug Kalinaw (BKK) was founded on the following operational framework: BKK Operational Framework 1. Crime prevention is everybody’s concern, safety is everybody’s duty 2. The best crime fighting unit is the organized community itself 3. Crime can be effectively prevented and safety can be ensured through concerted efforts of the community, LGU, government agencies, police and media. 4. The local PNP and its resources cannot keep pace with the growing population and rising crime rate 5. A program to facilitate quick response to call for assistance and emergencies is imperative 6. A forum to educate the citizenry on crime prevention is necessary before any response can be effected From this framework, BKK has 2 main components: pro-active and re-active. BKK Components 1. The Pro-active Component is focused on crime prevention. This consists of advocacy, education, organization of a neighborhood watch structure, activation and coordination of a citizen’s alarm and feedback system for intelligence and crime detection. The barangay-level pro-active unit has the following functions: •

•

Prediction. the ability to predict the likelihood of crises and emergencies through continuous gathering/updating of information from intelligence reports and analyzing events. Prevention. advocacy, organizing information drives and periodic drills to continuously raise the alert level of the identified crime and disaster zones. Preparation. planning for probable crisis situations, organization and training and stockpiling of equipment and supplies needed.

Each purok has its own pro-active unit that operationalizes the early alarm and warning system. These volunteers constantly patrol and watch the streets and the neighborhood in the absence of the police. 2.

The Re-active Component is the quick response function for detecting crime and dealing with actual crime incidents. This consists of organizing mobile patrol groups of Barangay Tanods and Volunteer Working Groups that assist the police during crime scene responses. These groups constantly patrol the streets and public areas. The Operations Center serves as coordinating center with rescue teams and a legitimate reaction force.

Simplified Information and Warning Systems. BKK uses 3 simplified warning, information and reporting systems:

A-34

•

Pasa-Bilis – involves the instantenous relay of information at early stages of crime commission, using community means like tricycles, vendors, habal-habal. This mobilizes community residents.

•

Alarma Tagungtung is an early warning and alert code that mobilizes everyone in cases of crime or crises.

•

BAKUKANG – is short for 4Ws and 1 H. translated from the Visayan, it stands for BA-barangay, K-kanusa (what), U-unsa (where), K –kinsa (who), A-asa (where), N –ngano (why), G – guinsa (how).

BKK Organizational Structure. The BKK is governed by the City Peace and Order Council, headed by the mayor with members from the law enforcement agencies and NGOs concerned with peace and order. The daily operation is managed by the BKK Management Team chaired by the DILG Officer and co-chaired by the Chief of Police.

CPOC (chaired by the mayor) CPOC Secretariat BKK Management Team PNP 117 Operations

BKK Monitoring Team BPOC BKK Operations Center

BKK Re-Active Unit

Purok BKK

BKK Pro-Active Unit

Purok BKK

The other members of the BKK Management Team includes City Chapter President of the Liga ng mga Barangay, SP Chairpersons on Peace and Order Committee and SP Appropriation Committee. The Team Leader of the BKK Monitoring Team also sits with the BKKMT. At the barangay level, the Barangay Peace and Order Council (BPOC) oversees the operations of the BKK. The barangay-level BKK is composed of barangay officials, barangay tanods and citizen volunteers. General policies and procedures for BKK operation are laid down in a barangay ordinance that are then implemented.

A-35

Policies and Procedures that can be included in a Barangay Ordinance on BKK: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11.

Criteria, recruitment process and deployment of BKK volunteers Schedules of duty of BKK members/volunteers Fines for BKK members for failing to fulfill responsibilities Confidentiality of logbook entries Speed and secrecy in monitoring Contact mechanism for every BKK member Alertness and inter-support in case of crises Establishment of Alarma Tagongtong in every household Installation and implementation of boom system Regular conferences to evaluate operations Reporting systems and procedures

Recruitment of BKK volunteers is done by the Barangay Peace and Order Committee based on recommendations of purok leaders. The barangay chair issues an appointment paper to BKK volunteers prior to their deployment in their respective purok or areas of assignment and responsibility. BKK Recruitment. BKK volunteers are recruited and accepted based on the following criteria: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

Has resided in the barangay for at least six (6) months Of good moral character Has no pending criminal or civil case Is not more than 60 years old Knows how to read and write Is physically fit

Monitoring and Evaluation. The monitoring and evaluation is done by the city level organization. The BKK Monitoring Team composed of CPOC members and ABC members conduct the following activities on a regular basis. Project Results: Reaping the fruits of peace and development BKK’s success is evident in several ways. 1. A Much Lower Crime Rate Owing to the effectiveness of the BKK as a mechanism of crime detection and prevention, the city of Oroquieta has registered only ten crimes a month, thus creating a favorable business climate and unhampered flow of commerce. It is also an emerging safe haven for travelers for their stop-overs. 2. Rise in Volunteerism in the Community The spirit of bayanihan and volunteerism is now a pride of Oroquieta City Government and the people of Oroquieta. In general, the greatest gain of the BKK is the heightened vigilance of every barangay folk in keeping their own security and safety; crime prevention is everybody’s business, and not just of the police and the military. 3. More Anti-Crime Mechanisms in the City BKK structures are now present in all the 47 barangays of Oroquieta. And their success as crime detection and prevention groups has inspired other groups within the city itself to replicate this anti-crime mechanism. Business and religious organizations, as well as NGOs, for example, have organized groups within their sectors to replicate/complement the BKK. Among those spurred by BKK are the following: • • • • • •

A-36

Oroquieta Chamber of Commerce Oroquieta Bankers Association Oroquieta Council of Churches Oroquieta Integrated Market Vendors Association School Administrators Association of Oroquieta Integrated NGOs of Oroquieta

• • •

Federated Students of Oroquieta Oroquieta Inter Fraternities League Radio Communicators Group like REACT, PASABAY, BBRA

4. Expanding BKK scope beyond crime prevention So successful has the BKK been, in fact, that its functions have gone beyond crime detection and prevention, to encompass disaster preparedness and rescue operations particularly in the coastal areas during the rainy season. B. Replicating BKK BKK is now being replicated by several local governments and communities, following the key implementation steps identified and learning from the lessons learned by Oroquieta in implementing the project. Key Implementation Steps Based on the experience of Oroquieta, the following were identified as key steps to follow in establishing and implementing a BKK system for crime prevention and action. 1. Conceptualize and Gain Approval This first step includes a series of preparatory activities to actual BKK implementation: a.

Holding consultations with key POC officials to build consensus for adopting BKK- Chief of Police, DILG, SP chair on Peace and Order, ABC President and SP Committee on Appropriation

Holding a consultation with all Barangay Chairs through an ABC assembly, to orient them about the program and get their support

Conceptualizing and Preparing the Program Proposal

Getting Approval and Resources for the program. The POC has to adopt the program and endorse it to the Sangguniang Panglungsod (SP). The SP then enacts a Resolution Adopting the Program and Appropriating a budget for implementation.

Conducting Barangay Action Planning for establishing and operating the BKK at the barangay level.

2. Form the BKK Organization and Structure. For a period of three months, the BKK organizational structure is formed from the city level down to the barangay level. The CPOC with technical assistance from the DILG, can take the lead in BKK formation, which consists of the following: a.

Forming the BKK Management Team with members from the City Chapter President of the Liga ng mga Barangay, SP Chairs on Peace and Order Committee and SP Appropriation Committee. The Team Leader of the BKK Monitoring Team also sits with the BKKMT.

Identifying, orienting/briefing city and barangay officials on preparations for organization of BKK and training of Barangay Coordinators;

Organizing of BKK barangay structures in all barangays and integrating such structures in the Barangay Council structure;

Enacting a barangay ordinance creating BKK, and providing for schedule of duty and duty personnel;

Creating of Peace and Order Monitoring Group at the City level composed of members of the CPOC and ABC members.

A-37

Conduct Capacity Building of BKK Volunteers. BKK volunteers in Oroquieta underwent the following seminars and training workshops: • • • • •

Administrative and organizational management of BKK Reporting, recording and duty procedures Instituting and making citizens arrest, gathering and handling evidence, law enforcement procedures, proper handling of witnesses and self-defense Information gathering and reporting; Familiarization with simplified reporting called “BAKUKANG” - a concise writing of four W’s and one H Operationalizing “Pasa Bilis” and “Alarma Tagongtong”

4. Establish the Operations Center and Operationalize BKK at the Barangay Level. After the capacity building of the BKK members, they can go into operationaling their BKK in their barangay. This consists of the following actions: a. b.

Identifying the site for the BPOC operations center Constructing the center and acquiring/setting up equipment, including: • • • • • • •

Boom Radio/cellphone Logbook for reporting of crimes and BKK activities Flashlights/searchlights Kitchen Batuta (police baton) Vehicle/motorcycle (optional)

Forming and operationalizing the Pro-Active and Reactive Teams/Units.

5. Conduct Information, Education and Communication (IEC) Campaign. Information campaign on the role and functions of the BKK as well as on crime prevention and action can be done through the following venues: a. b. c. d.

Barangay assembly Purok meetings or assembly Barangay Council meetings. Program Launching. All the Barangay councils, BKK volunteers, law enforcers were mobilized to a parade with complete uniforms, slogans and streamers. The launching culminated in a program participated in by more than 5,000 tanods, volunteers and members of the support organizations. It was launched during the crime prevention week.

6. Undertaking Monitoring and Evaluation. The monitoring and evaluation is done by the city level organization. The BKK Monitoring Team composed of CPOC members and ABC members conduct the following activities on a regular basis: a. b. c.

Visit barangays individually to check implementation of the standard operating procedures and gather all concerns and problems encountered by the implementors Gather all oral and recorded reports, consolidate, analyze and submit reports to the CPOC for evaluation during their meeting Reports that require immediate action are submitted directly to the PNP Chief or CPOC chair.

Lessons and Insights for Replication Oroquieta’s experience in implementing BKK presents several important lessons for that can help LGUs wishing to replicate the project. For Oroquieta, the following factors are key to establishing a successful BKK.

A-38

Strong support and commitment of the LGU leadership, especially at the beginning of the project.

Participation and support of barangay officials

Capacitating community members

Building all necessary structures and resources (operations center, communications network, personnel and volunteers, recording and reporting systems, funding and other resources)

Constant supervision and monitoring and evaluation to identify strong and weak points and address mistakes and shortcomings

Addressing crime should not stop at solving crimes committed. Prevention is always better than cure.

Reference Matrix for Replication Implementation Steps

Timeframe

1. Conceptualizing and Gaining Approval

City level Barangay level

Budget/Resources Needed (approximate) Logistics for consultations at the city/municipal and barangay level

1 month 1 month

Php 5,000 15,000

2. Forming the BKK organization and structure *City level formation of BKK Management team to include Enactment of ordinances down down to the Barangay level as basis for organization

3 months

Php 20,000

3. Conducting Capacity Building for BKK members and volunteers. *Barangay level only

1 month

Resources for training and seminars identified Technical assistance from DILG, other sources Est: Php 200,000

4. Establishing the Operations Center and Operationalizing BKK at the barangay level

1 month

Php 200,000

5.Conducting Information, Education and Communication (IEC) campaigns

1 month

Resources for the development and production of IEC materials Php 5,000-10,000

6.Conducting Monitoring and Evaluation

After full operationM & E is conducted throughout the year

Php 20,000-50,000

A-39

appendix C The Kaakbay Brochure

A-40

A-41

A-42

A-43

A-44

A-45

A-46

A-47

A-48

appendix D Monitoring and Evaluation Guide Questions Used by Kaakbay

A-49

A-50

appendix D.1 Mid-project Assessment Questions These guide questions were answered by replicating LGUs per cluster as part of the mid-project assessment.

Guiding Questions to Help Assess / Improve the Kaakbay Methodology Getting involved in the Program • Did the practice your LGU is now replicating provide a solution for a key challenge your LGU was / is facing? • How relevant is the exemplary practice to address the challenge your LGU was facing? • Did both the executive (Mayor) and legislative (Sanggunian) leadership of your LGU support the idea of replicating the exemplary practice before your LGU started the project? Was this a critical factor for the success of the project? • Was the information provided by the Kaakbay program sufficient for our LGU to understand what it was getting involved in? • What recommendations can you make regarding the any aspect of the application process your LGU undertook to get involved in the Kaakbay program? • Is the practice your LGU is replicating a good practice to have been proposed for replication? Why? The overall Replication Process Suggested by Kaakbay (application to replicate a specific practice; being part of a cluster; Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop; replication in your LGU; on-going host support; mid-project assessment workshop; etc) •

• • •

What general comments can you make about the process suggested by Kaakbay as mechanism to facilitate the replication of an LGU practice corresponding to a need/challenge you have in your LGU? Is the period of 9 months for replicating your project seem like an appropriate time frame for the replication to be effective? Are there steps/ components of the process that are not necessary? How close is the practice you are implementing in your LGU to the exemplary practice that inspired it? Do you consider you are really replicating a practice that was first implemented in another LGU?

Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop • Was the Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop conducive to help your LGU replicate this practice? • What aspects of the workshop helped (or not) for the replication of the practice in your LGU. • Was the workshop too long? Too short? • What recommendations would you have about the Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop for it to further maximize the appreciation and replication of the practice in your LGU. The Workplan Template • How effective was the use of this template to facilitate the development a workplan for your LGU to replicate the Exemplary practice? • How effective was the use of this workplan to facilitate the replication of the practice in your LGU? • Was suggestions can you make to improve this template? The Reference Document • Did you use the reference document as a guide as you are replicating your practice? • Do you feel this document adequately reflects the practice you are replicating? • Is the outline of the document (Rationale, objectives of the practice, results, implementation steps,

A-51

•

etc) helpful to help you understand ho to implement / replicate the practice in your LGU? What improvements could you make about the reference document?

The Cooperation Between the Host and the Recipient LGUs • How frequently did you relate with the host LGU in the overall replication process? • Did the Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop provide a sufficient amount of exchange with the host to help you replicate or did you require further exchanges? • How did you collaborate after the Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop? Visits? Telephone calls? Request for additional materials? etc • How important was your relationship with the host LGU to help replicate the practice. • What recommendations can you make about the relations with the host to support the implementation of your replication project? Factors that Facilitated / Hindered the Replication (generic to any practice) • What are the factors that facilitated the replication of the exemplary practice in your LGU? • What are the factors that hindered the replication of the exemplary practice in your LGU?

•

A-52

What recommendations would you make to LGUs wanting to replicate an exemplary practice initially implemented by another LGU?

appendix D.2 LGU Replication Cluster Progress Report Template

The form was used in making the cluster reports on the results of the mid-project assessment.

Replication Cluster Progress Report (Template for the Monitors)

Project Title

: (Exemplary Practice being replicated)

II.

Host LGU

III.

Recipient LGUs

IV.

Brief Description of the Practice

Summary of the Status of Replication Process

VI.

Based on the implementation of the individual work plan of the recipient LGUs, what major outputs can be considered breakthroughs of the replication process?

What were the key implementation steps of the practice adopted by the recipient LGUs that have been implemented as planned? Did these produce the desired outputs? What didnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t work?

What were the problems/difficulties encountered by the recipient LGUs in the implementation of their respective work plan?

Lessons Learned to Date 1.

Based on the major outputs/breakthroughs, what are the insights (beneficial or otherwise) could be derived from the implementation of the practice?

On the problems/difficulties encountered by the recipient LGUs, what measures/mechanisms should have been in place prior to the implementation of various activities of the project? What type of interventions should have been done to minimize difficulties?

A-53

appendix D.3 End-Project Assessment Guide Questions Sample End of Replication Process Assessment Tool Guide Questions in Assessing the Replication Process I. Getting involved in the Program 1. Did the practice you are replicating provide a solution for a key challenge your LGU was / is facing? 2. How relevant was the exemplary practice in addressing the challenge your LGU was facing? 3. Did both the executive (Mayor) and legislative (Sanggunian) leadership of your LGU support the idea of replicating the exemplary practice before your LGU started the project? Was this a critical factor for the success of the project? 4. Was the information provided by the program sufficient for our LGU to understand what it was getting involved in? 5. What recommendations can you make regarding the any aspect of the application process your LGU undertook to get involved in the program? 6. Is the practice your LGU is replicating a good practice to have been proposed for replication? Why? II. The overall Replication Process Suggested by Kaakbay (application to replicate a specific practice; being part of a cluster; Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop; replication in your LGU; on-going host support; mid-project assessment workshop; etc) 1.

2. 3. 4.

III. Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop 1. Was the Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop conducive to help your LGU replicate this practice? 2. What aspects of the workshop helped (or not) for the replication of the practice in your LGU? 3. Was the workshop too long? Too short? 4. What recommendations would you have about the Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop for it to further maximize the appreciation and replication of the practice in your LGU? IV. The Workplan Template 1. How effective was the use of this template to facilitate the development a workplan for your LGU to replicate the Exemplary practice? 2. How effective was the use of this workplan to facilitate the replication of the practice in your LGU? 3. Was suggestions can you make to improve this template? V. The Reference Document 1. Did you use the reference document as a guide as you are replicating your practice? 2. Do you feel this document adequately reflects the practice you are replicating? 3. Is the outline of the document (Rationale, objectives of the practice, results, implementation steps, etc) helpful to help you understand ho to implement / replicate the practice in your LGU? 4. What improvements could you make about the reference document?

A-54

VI. The Cooperation Between the Host and the Recipient LGUs 1. How frequently did you relate with the host LGU in the overall replication process? 2. Did the Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop provide a sufficient amount of exchange with the host to help you replicate or did you require further exchanges? 3. How did you collaborate after the Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop? Visits? Telephone calls? Request for additional materials? etc 4. How important was your relationship with the host LGU to help replicate the practice. 5. What recommendations can you make about the relations with the host to support the implementation of your replication project? VI. Factors that Facilitated / Hindered the Replication (generic to any practice) 1. What are the factors that facilitated the replication of the exemplary practice in your LGU? 2. What are the factors that hindered the replication of the exemplary practice in your LGU? 3. What recommendations would you make to LGUs wanting to replicate an exemplary practice initially implemented by another LGU?

A-55

A-56

appendix E Key Replication Tools

A-57

A-58

appendix E.1 Tool 1: Guidelines in Documenting an LGU Exemplary Practice Introduction The replication and dissemination of Exemplary Practices amongst LGUs is a powerful tool for development. Kaakbay is a project initiated by DILG, LMP and LCP proposing simple methodologies to help cities and municipalities easily adopt best or “Exemplary Practices” experienced in other LGUs. The Kaakbay project helps LGUs work together to replicate practices that are simple, effective and proven solutions to common LGU challenges. In the Kaakbay replication process, the Reference Document is the main project description document to help recipient LGUs understand the various aspects of the Exemplary Practice and how it was implemented. The document has several sections corresponding to various sessions of the Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop as well as sections of the Workplan that Recipient LGUs will develop to replicate the practice in their own LGU. It can therefore be used as a key tool in the replication process. More specifically, the Reference Document contributes to: • • • •

Promoting innovative approaches of local government management and service delivery among peers and stakeholders of the local government sector; Providing simple information about each step of project implementation to facilitate the Recipient LGUs’ development of a workplan to replicate the practice; Providing a common reference / outline for the various stakeholders involved in the project; Maximising the effectiveness of replication and dissemination of Exemplary Practices among LGUs in the Philippines and around the world

To ensure consistency in the way Exemplary Practices are documented and to maximize knowledge transfer, the Kaakbay project has prepared these guidelines for those who have to write the Reference Document . Total length of document The document should be short, to the point and simply written so as to be accessible to LGU staff and officials who are practical and don’t have time to go through elaborate documentation. Ideally it will be 8 to 10 pages. Additional materials relevant to the replication process such as training materials, sample MOAs, technical specifications, etc. can be provided as appendices to the reference document. Title The title should reflect the major theme of the activity and be short and to the point. It should also include the name of the LGU and Province it is located in. Summary (300 words or 1⁄2 page) This section should give a general overview of the project/initiative. • • •

Describe rationale and objectives of the project. Explain the strategy and methodology used, and the various stakeholders involved in the process. Note the major accomplishments and point out the global impact on the LGU and the community

Introduction (300 words or 1⁄2 page) This section should state the reason or the purpose for the project • •

Describe the situation before starting the project - Point out the main problems, the consequences and the attempts to deal with them. Present the purpose and priorities of the project, for instance:

A-59

* * * •

Satisfying basic human needs Involving women in the development process Supporting good governance, and so on

Present the project objectives

Results (300 words or 1⁄2 page) This section should have a catchy title that highlights the main accomplishments • • •

Describe to what extent the purpose and objectives were met Outline the indicators used to evaluate the results Identify the effects of the project in certain key areas? For instance: * * * * *

•

Relations between the LGU and the community Improvement of institutional capacity in the LGU and among the project stakeholders Significance of the outputs for the citizens Change in decision-making processes Change in the use and distribution of human, technical and financial resources

Insert some participants’ comments on the impact of the project

Project History (150 words or 1⁄4 page) • • •

Key Implementation Steps (up to 2,400 words or 4 pages) This section of the reference document is particularly important to help other LGUs appreciate the chronological chain of events in the implementation of the project. It requires that the writer analyze the sequence of activities in the implementation of the project and present each step with its respective outputs, and resources. This is best done through a consultation with the project implementation team. LGUs wanting to replicate the practice will refer to this section to determine their own implementation plan for the replication of the practice. Describe the main implementation steps / milestones in chronological order and provide a detailed breakdown of the output; individuals / stakeholders involved; resources required; and tools, procedures, systems which need to be in placefor each key implementation step. A typical LGU project may have 5 to 8 main implementation steps and each of these steps can be broken down in more detail with a few sub steps or activities relating it. To sum up: Present the main Implementation Stages / Milestones in chronological order. Each key implementation stage should be detailed with related sub steps and activities. For each main step and/or sub step, the following should be presented: •

•

A-60

Main output * committee created; Training activity; Small infrastructure / equipment to put in place; Education campaign to the citizens; etc What procedures, tools, techniques, systems or structures need to be in place * examples: an Executive order; committee TOR or procedures; specific forms to collect information about citizens; a specific computer program; training modules and materials; setting up agricultural technology for demonstration purposes; the reconfiguration of office space; etc

•

• •

Who needs to be involved / Why? (LGU staff, volunteers, institutional partners, etc) * Describe the involvement of other institutional partners, organisations, the community. * What was their respective role? How is it complementary to the LGU’s contribution to the project? What budget is required and when? * Estimate or provide actual costs for each component which required a specific budget allocation. Other resources required (facilities, equipment, meeting halls, etc) Lessons learned, What worked / What didn’t Throughout the implementation of the project, the implementers may have learned from errors and successes. These lessons learned become valuable information for other LGUs wanting to replicate the exemplary practice. For example: * Some critical pre-requisites needing to be in place * What should be the ideal timing of a specific activity? (for example, scheduling activities with the agricultural community after the harvest season; establishing new procedures about business permits in relation with the LGU licensing cycle) * Ensuring community or political support

Analysis (900 words or 1.5 page) This section should have a catchy title • •

Identify specific opportunities and limitations, and solutions applied Put an emphasis on sustainability factors: * * * *

•

Cultural: respect and consideration for attitudes, behaviours and traditions Social and economic: involvement of and benefit to both women and men, , inclusion of and benefit to cultural minorities or economically disadvantaged groups Environmental: reduced dependence on non-renewable resources (air, water, soil, energy, and so on); change in methods of production and consumption Financial: use of available resources; contributions by various stakeholders; terms for repayment of loans; etc

Explain the importance and significance of the project/activities relative to the context it was implemented in: * *

Example 1 - Support for a consultation process in a municipality/country with traditionally little co-operation between the elected representatives and the population Example 2 - Improvement to the recovery of taxes with the use of automated data relative to developed lands

Lessons learned and replicability of the experience (300 words or 1⁄2 page) •

Describe any general lessons learned about the whole project and their influence on subsequent planning. * *

• • •

•

Were these lessons used later to change policies/strategies/plans, and so on What aspects should be changed, avoided?

A-61

â&#x20AC;˘ â&#x20AC;˘

the technologies presented might have a stronger impact than others, 2 or 3 technologies may be complementary but others, while adding value, are not critical to the results or context) If the project was implemented over a long period of time, provide an indication of the minimum amount of time required to replicate it. Identify any known cases of successful replication of this practice by other LGUs so far

Use of photos / Illustrations Use photos (at least 2) and available illustrations to illustrate the process and the accomplishments (e.g. photos of training sessions, community participation, illustration used in advocacy campaign, equipment provided, renewed infrastructures, etc.). Photos can be included in the Implementation Steps section or the Results section.

A-62

appendix E.2 Tool 2: Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop Facilitator’s Guide and Generic Agenda

Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop Facilitator’s Guide The Inception workshop is divided 3 distinct parts: Part 1: Part 2: Part 3:

Introduction Appreciating the Exemplary Practice: Seeing and Analyzing Implementing the practice in the Recipient LGUs

Recipient LGU Participants: For each Exemplary Practice, a discussion should be held with the Host LGU project implementers to determine which participants should attend the Inception Workshop. Since the replication of an Exemplary Practice is a LGU organizational process, the host LGU is the best to suggest which positions in the LGU should attend the workshop: i.e. the Mayor, the concerned department head, a Barangay Captain, a technician, etc.

PART 1: INTRODUCTION Opening Ceremony (15 min) Presentation of Participants (10 min) • Host • Recipients • Kaakbay Team Participants’ Expectations (20 min) Process to be determined by the Facilitator Workshop Overview (15 min) By a Kaakbay Technical working Group Member • • • •

Objectives Sequence of the sessions Support materials available Outputs

Introduction to the Kaakbay Project (30 min) By a Kaakbay Technical Working Group Member • • • • •

Rationale / Background Kaakbay: a Pilot Project Selection Process of Participating LGUs Working in a Cluster – Host & Recipients Project Steps

A-63

Overview of the Exemplary Practice (20 min) By the Mayor or prominent leader of the Host LGU • • •

Inspirational Presentation by the Mayor of the Host LGU Main Achievements Benefits/Results

Notes to the Presenter: OVERVIEW OF THE EXEMPLARY PRACTICE This presentation is to provide an overview of the Exemplary practice keeping in mind that the practice will be presented in detail during the next days. The presentation should provide the Chief Executive’s or a prominent leader’s perspective. It is meant as a primer to get the participants excited about the project. It should last about 20 minutes and cover: • How the LGU decided to implement this project? Whose idea was it?? (history of the project) • Who was the instigator? Who was the champion of this project? • How important was this project for the LGU • What were the main achievements • Most important results and benefits of the project to the Citizens

Fellowship Activity (evening) Facilitator to determine how to conduct this session • • •

Activity for participants to get to know each other Building the cluster collaborative relationship Possible activity: humorous presentation of each LGU to the other members of the cluster

PART 2 – APPRECIATION OF THE EXEMPLARY PRACTICE: •

SEEING IS BELIEVING

“Exemplary Practice Title”: What is it? (60 min) By the Project Manager • • • • •

A-64

More detailed presentation of the EP as an introduction to the site visits Implementers, Stakeholders and Beneficiaries How was it implemented General level of effort Introduction to the specific sites/groups to be visited

It should last about 30 minutes and allow for a question period. The presentation should cover: • • • •

The basic concept of the project/practice; what are the most important aspects the practice; why this project? What was the general/relative level of effort of the LGU to implement this project? Who are the implementers and main stakeholders; Who were the key LGU staff to take part in the implementation Beneficiaries: Which target group was the project intended for (a specific Barangay, segment of the LGU’s citizens, the city staff, etc.

Seeing the Practice in Operation (half day) Guided by the Project Manager with presentations by stakeholders and beneficiaries •

Visits to the implementation sites: * Observation of the EP in action (the Host schedules an activity for the group where pertinent) * Inter-action with project implementers & stakeholders * LGU Department-s involved * Partner organizations collaborating in the implementation (Barangays, NGOs, etc) * Facilities & Equipment in place or contributing to the project * Visible results/benefits of the project

•

Inter-action with the Beneficiaries: * Perspectives from different groups of beneficiaries (the LGU itself, citizens, staff, Barangay Officials, etc) * Main results to them * Interviews with beneficiaries

A-65

Notes to the Presenters: BENEFITS OF THE EXEMPLARY PRACTICE Citizen / Community Group: • As a citizen, how do you benefit form this initiative of the LGU? (Better service, better access to the service, better information from the LGU, safer/ cleaner community?, etc) • What was your situation before the existence of this service by the LGU? How is your situation now? What changed? • Why is this service important to you? How significant is it for you and your family? • If you were involved in the implementation of the project, how did that happen? What was your contribution? How did the LGU relate with you during the implementation? • If your LGU was to implement this project again, what would you recommend they change? What could they do better? Stakeholders / Institutional Partners; • Why did your organization get involved in the project? • What was the specific role of your organization in the project? • What was your relationship with the LGU? Did you have a protocol agreement or MOA with the LGU outlining the respective roles and responsibilities of your respective organizations? • What were the benefits of the project for your organization? • From your perspective, what were the most important benefits to the citizens? LGU Employees: • What do you see as the most important benefits to the citizens? • Why is this project important for the LGU? How different is the LGUs approach in this area compared to how it was before? • How has your work changed as a result of this initiative? Are you saving time? How is the LGU more efficient in this area? • What new knowledge, skills and aptitudes have you learned from this initiative? • Are you relating to citizens in a different way? • What would you recommend your LGU to do differently if it was to implement this project again?

Participants’ Reflections on the Exemplary Practice (60 min) Facilitator This session allows the facilitator to do a diagnosis of the participants’ appreciation and understanding of the Exemplary Practice so far. It also allows the participant to revise and process the observations from the visits. • • •

A-66

ANALYZING THE EXEMPLARY PRACTICE Rationale and Purpose of the Exemplary Practice (20 min) By the main Project Manager (City/Municipal Manager / Department Head) This session aims at helping the participants analyze and understand the situation before and after the Exemplary Practice was implemented. From this session, the participants will be able to formulate the Goal, Objectives and Expected Results of their Replication project in their own context. This session covers: • Prevailing conditions before the Project • Situation after the project was implemented / when the practice is in place • Sort term and long term results/impact

What changed?

After the presentation, 10 to 15 minutes should be given to the participants so they can compare how the rationale and purpose of the Exemplary Practice in the Host LGU is comparable to the context of their own LGU. The participant thereby starts thinking about how the project can be implemented in his/her LGU. Key Implementation Steps and Related Resources (1 hr 30 min) By the main Project Manager (City/Municipal Manager / Department Head) The session should cover: • Main Implementation Stages / Milestones in chronological order • Each key implementation stage should be detailed with related sub steps and activities, resources, etc. This session is particularly important to help the participants appreciate the chronological chain of events in the implementation of the project. It requires from the Host LGU to analyze the sequence of activities in the implementation of their project and present each step with its respective outputs, and resources. The session prepares the participant for developing his/her Implementation Plan in the workplan document. After each key step, the facilitator should provide time for the participant to determine how those implementation steps are relevant to the recipient LGU context. The following guide questions could be asked: • • • •

A-67

Main output * committee created; Training activity; Small infrastructure / equipment to put in place; Education campaign to the citizens; etc

•

What procedures, tools, techniques, systems or structures need to be in place * examples: an Executive order; committee TOR or procedures; specific forms to collect information about citizens; a specific computer program; training modules and materials; setting up agricultural technology for demonstration purposes; the reconfiguration of office space; etc

•

What budget is required and when? * Estimate or provide actual costs for each component which required a specific budget allocation.

•

Other resources required (facilities, equipment, meeting halls, etc)

•

Enabling Measures, What worked / What didn’t Throughout the implementation of the project, the implementers may have learned from errors and successes. These lessons learned become valuable information for other LGUs wanting to replicate the exemplary practice. For example: * Some critical pre-requisites needing to be in place * What should be the ideal timing of a specific activity? (for example, scheduling activities with the agricultural community after the harvest season; establishing new procedures about business permits in relation with the LGU licensing cycle) * Ensuring community or political support

PART 3: IMPLEMENTING THE PRACTICE IN THE RECIPIENT LGUS Managing the project in your LGU (30 min) By a Kaakbay Technical Working Group Member • • • • • • • •

A-68

Core Management Team Contact Person The 4 capacity development and project implementation stages Implementing the project within the timeframe Workplan: main implementation guide Introduction to the Workplan Template Technical Assistance by the Kaakbay project team Monitoring and Reporting

Writing the workplan (120 min) By a Kaakbay Technical Working Group Member /Facilitator In this session the participants start writing the draft workplan for implementing the replication of Exemplary Practice in their LGU. The Facilitator presents the Project Workplan Template. • •

Adapting the Exemplary Practice to your LGU’s Situation Drafting the Work plan: * Goal, Objectives and Expected Results * Implementation plan: • Main steps in Chronological order • Human Resources • Financial and in-kind resources * Kaakbay Cluster Activities * Coordination, monitoring and Evaluation * Budget

Working as a Cluster – Memorandum of Agreement (45 min) By a Kaakbay Technical Working Group Member In this session, the presenter talks about the potential sharing and support opportunities offered by working as part of a cluster of LGUs. A template MOA can be introduced and signed by the cluster members. • • • •

Support system among peers (including modalities of requests to Host LGU expertise) Common time frame & activities Sharing of resources Deriving lessons learned about replication

Next Steps ( 45 min) By a Kaakbay Technical Working Group Member • • • • •

•

Mobilizing the core management team & other stakeholders Validating the Work plan and securing support by the SB Finalizing the work plan Getting feedback on the workplan from the host LGU Mid-project Workshop * Dates * Which Recipient LGU? Communications to, and support form the Kaakbay project team

Conclusion of the Workshop

A-69

PEER-TO-PEER LEARNING WORKSHOP GENERIC AGENDA This form is a simply a short version of the longer Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop Facilitator’s Guide, with the notes to facilitation taken out. PART 1: INTRODUCTION Opening Ceremony (15 min) Presentation of Participants (10 min) Participants’ Expectations (20 min) Workshop Overview (10 min) By a Kaakbay Technical working Group Member Introduction to the Kaakbay Project (30 min) By a Kaakbay Technical Working Group Member Overview of the Exemplary Practice (20 min) By the Mayor of the Host LGU Fellowship Activity (evening) Facilitator to be identified PART 2 – APPRECIATION OF THE EXEMPLARY PRACTICE: SEEING IS BELIEVING “Exemplary Practice Title” : What is it? (60 min) By the Project Manager Seeing the Practice in Operation (half day) Guided by the Project Manager with presentations by stakeholders Participants’ Reflections on the Exemplary Practice (60 min) Facilitator ANALYZING THE EXEMPLARY PRACTICE Rationale and Purpose of the Exemplary Practice (20 min) By the main Project Manager (City/Municipal Manager / Department Head) Key Implementation Steps and Related Resources (1 hr 30 min) By the main Project Manager (City/Municipal Manager / Department Head) PART 3: IMPLEMENTING THE PRACTICE IN THE RECIPIENT LGUs

Managing the project in your LGU (45 min) By a Kaakbay Technical Working Group Member Writing the workplan (120 min) By a Kaakbay Technical Working Group Member Working as a Cluster – Memorandum of Agreement (45 min) By a Kaakbay Technical Working Group Member Next Steps ( 45 min) By a Kaakbay Technical Working Group Member Conclusion of the Workshop A-70

appendix E.3 A.1 Tool 3: Replication Workplan Template

Title of Project

Project Work Plan, Municipality / City

Project start date (mo, year) â&#x20AC;&#x201C; project end date (mo, year)

A-71

PREAMBLE /EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

Give a short description of the context for this project Include: • a statement on why this project is important for your LGU. How it is linked to the LGUs strategic orientations and/or Executive Agenda. • description of Kaakbay process, including * start date of project * focus area of the project * which host LGU has implemented this project successfully * what other Recipient LGUs are replicating the project as part of the replication cluster * brief reference to how the Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop and relations with the host LGU helped define this workplan • project workplan description: aim, duration, main results

(Maximum 1 page)

Signature of the Mayor

A-72

Date

1.0 PROJECT TITLE 2.0 RATIONALE, GOAL, OBJECTIVES, AND EXPECTED RESULTS 2.1 Rationale Explain why the project should be carried out. Include: • • •

a brief explanation of the importance of the area which the project will address for your LGU what is the current situation (or prevailing conditions) in your LGU (weaknesses, problems) that the project will help address what capacity building needs of your LGU will this project help address.

2.2 Goal State the aim of this project. 2.3 Objectives State the specific objectives of the project. 2.4 Expected Results State what you expect will be achieved by the project. Include: • • •

Short term results or outputs end-of-project results or outcomes, and results achieved long after the project is completed or impacts.

3.0 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Provide the schedule and details for the activities in your project. Include: •

Key implementation steps with corresponding completion dates in chronological order. For each step include: * What procedures, tools, systems or structures will be put in place * Who needs to be involved / Why? (staff, volunteers, institutional partners, etc) * Other resources required (facilities, equipment, meeting halls, etc)

• •

Kaakbay progress Workshop Project support activities by the Kaakbay project team

A template will be provided so that LGUs can present their sequence of activities in the form of a gant chart or “work flow”. 4.0 COORDINATION, MONITORING AND EVALUATION Contact Person / Coordinator Identify the Contact Person. The contact person is the main coordinator of the project in the LGU. He/She coordinates all Kaakbay Replication activities. Communications with the following individuals / groups are channelled through him/her: • • • •

All project participants and stakeholders within the LGU The contact person in the Host LGU The contact persons of other Recipient LGUs within the Replication Cluster The Kaakbay project team (DILG, LMP, LCP, LGSP)

Core Management Team Identify the members of the project core management team. This is a small team of 3 to 5 members who may oversee the project implementation.

A-73

Monitoring progress and reporting Indicate a reporting schedule (usually a short progress report after each key implementation step or project activity). The reports are used to inform the Mayor, the SB and the Kaakbay project team of project implementation progress. A progress report will also be presented at the Mid-project Cluster Workshop and a final report will be presented at the Final Assessment Workshop. Evaluation Indicate the joint evaluation plan in collaboration with the host LGU and Kaakbay project team. Include: â&#x20AC;˘ â&#x20AC;˘

planned date of evaluation evaluation team composition (who will take part in the evaluation process? One host LGU representative and one Kaakbay team member will join the process)

5.0 BUDGET Provide a budget for the project. The budget should include the direct expenditures required for the LGU to implement the Exemplary Practice. It does not need to reflect staff time or in kind contributions required.

A-74

appendix F Sample Work Plan of a Replicating LGU

KAAKBAY: REPLICATION AND DISSEMINATION OF DELIVERING PRIMARY HEALTH CARE THROUGH PUROK SYSTEM Title of Project: Villanueva Primary Health Care Program through Purok Project Work Plan, Municipality/City: Municipality of Villanueva, Misamis Oriental

Project Start Date: July 2003 – March 2004

PREAMBLE/EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

____________________________ HON. JULIO T. UY Mayor

A-75

1.0. 2.0.

PROJECT TITLE: Villanueva Primary Health Care Program through Purok RATIONALE, GOAL, OBJECTIVES AND EXPECTED RESULTS

2.1. Rationale • No intra-inter sectoral linkages • Insufficient assistance to emergency needs • Insufficient affordable drugs • Less community participation in health related activities 2.2. Goal Well- developed community based Primary Health Care with strong inter-sectoral collaboration, delivering accessible, acceptable and affordable health services promoting good health habits and practices towards a self sustaining community. 2.3. Objectives a. To sustain better health education program towards health consciousness of Purok residents. b. To strengthen the Purok system through volunteers. c. To promote the design and implementation of purok level livelihood in order to augment income of Purok residents. d. To foster strong inter-agency collaboration and linkaging among agencies, LGU, Barangay and Purok in delivering primary health care. 2.4. Expected Results Short term: a. Kiosks constructed in all Puroks b. Organized cluster of households in Puroks c. Trained LGU officials and personnel, barangay officials and Purok volunteers on Primary Health Care Service Delivery d. Purok system and guidelines of operations e. Defined structure of an inter-agency collaboration Medium and Long Term: a. Better collaboration between and among LGU, agencies and citizenry in promoting good health habits and practices b. Accessibility and acceptability of health services, projects and programs c. Empowered community d. Improved economic and health condition e. Well informed and educated citizenry 3.0. IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 3.1. Time Frame: July 2003 – March 2004 3.2. Procedures, Tools, Systems 1. Preparation Phase: • Creation of the Program • Presentation of the program/ project outline to LCE and SB • Project proposal/Project Outline • Executive Order/SB Resolution • Creation of the Management Team 2. Organizational Strengthening Phase a. Capability building town level b. Strengthening of the MDC and all Agency for proper coordination c. Assignment of one Kagawad to one barangay.

A-76

3. Capability building at the Barangay level a. Strengthening of the ABC to enhance barangay linkages b. Barangay administration capability building c. Livelihood and environmental protection, peace and order, infrastructure and youth and sports capability building and transfer of technology. d. Yearly evaluation and planning to sustain the organization 4. Purok level a. Purok Chairmen, Secretaries, Treasurers & Barangay Health Workers Leadership Training b. Purok Health Workers Training on Primary Health Care for Capability Building and Technology Transfer on health programs. c. Establishment of Purok kiosks or activity centers 5. Mobilize People/Ensuring Peoples Participation a. Holding of regular monthly meeting for a well organized cluster of houses in purok b. Holding of re- orientation capability building seminars to capacitate the different members of the sectoral committees c. Sustain the activities of the purok to have a well-organized community and NGOs and POs to support the community. 6. Monitoring and Evaluation HUMAN RESOURCES: • LCE • SB Member • Barangay Captain • Barangay Kagawad/ Purok Chairpersons • Head of Offices • Health Personnel • Barangay Health Worker • Barangay Secretaries/Treasurers RESOURCES: Audio-visual room, funds from LGU, community contribution MID YEAR EVALUATION: October 2003 ( Mid-Year Progress Workshop with Kaakbay Project Team and Host LGU) PROJECT SUPPORT ACTIVITIES BY THE KAAKBAY PROJECT TEAM AND HOST LGU: • Countryside Action Program “ Delivery Primary Health Care Through Purok” Training and Workshops

A-77

A-78

4.0 COORDINATION, MONITORING AND EVALUATION Contact Person: Municipal Mayor Core Municipal Management Team Chairperson: Vice Mayor Bienvenido Valcurza Vice Chairperson: Kag. Jose Oliver Ello Secretary: Erma P. Mar Member: Kag. Adelaida Baconguis Member: Kag. Leocio Abejo Monitoring Progress and Reporting: Purok level – monthly Barangay level – monthly Municipal level – semi annual Evaluation: Mid Year – 3rd week of October 2003 Year end: 3rd week of March 2004 5.0. BUDGET: Php 100,000

A-79

A-80

Learning from Peers for Good Governance is a practical guide to implementing an innovative and cost-effective approach to promoting good local governance. The approach is the structured replication of good practices in local government through peer-to-peer learning. Under a replication program, local governments learn from other local governments about proven solutions to common challenges such as raising revenues, providing housing, managing land use and waste disposal and reducing crime. â&#x20AC;&#x153;Learning from Peersâ&#x20AC;Śâ&#x20AC;? offers a step-by-step guide on establishing and managing such a program, from setting up your management structures, to identifying what good practices to replicate and selecting local governments that will replicate them. It also provides three key tools that can be used by local governments in replicating good practices independently or within a larger program. The peer to peer learning approach featured in this guidebook is a tried and tested methodology; the approach was used in the Philippines through Kaakbay, a replication program involving 30 cities and municipalities. The success of the Kaakbay experience has inspired the production of this guidebook, as another contribution to the dissemination and promotion of good practices in local governance. Though culled from the Kaakbay experience, the guidebook has been made as generic as possible, the tools and guidelines simple and easily adaptable. Thus, it can be used to implement replication programs in localities and countries with conditions different from the Philippines. Institutions, associations of local government units and other organizations working with local government will find in this guidebook a valuable tool in pursuing efforts to enhance local governance and helping LGUs face the growing challenges in the world today.