You are on page 1of 161

Field Guide for

Area Coordinating Teams


A Poverty-reduction Project of the Department of Social
Welfare and Development (DSWD) in partnership with the
International Bank for Reconstruction and Development
World Bank
January 2007

This document is a field guide to help you facilitate the enhanced community empowerment
activity cycle (CEAC). Please note that the operative word used here is facilitating and not
implementing. The choice is deliberate. This is due to the fact that the idea of
development delivery does not work, and that the role of so called development actors is
not to bring development to poor communities, but rather to facilitate this development from
within, to creatively craft opportunities for the people to realize their own potential for
change, and to nurture and build on this potential so that, in the end, the people will say, to
paraphrase a bit of ancient Chinese wisdom, We have done it ourselves!.

From a cursory glance of the document, you will immediately notice that this field guide does
not provide any specific procedure or instruction in facilitating the processes outlined. This
too is deliberate. The ACT is expected to develop implementation processes according to
context-specific conditions. This is a prime requirement of Community-Driven Development
(CDD) efforts. You should also bear in mind that while the ACT acts as lead facilitator of the
KC processes outlined herein, facilitation of community processes to bring about real,
community-driven development is the task of all stakeholders. Due to the specific contexts
of municipalities covered by the project, the CEAC is expected to evolve according to the
specific conditions within each municipality, barangay, and community. This document
should serve to guide you through this process of evolution in the course of the three-year
KALAHI-CIDSS engagement in the municipality and barangay in which you are assigned.
Like all things involving change, it would be very hard indeed to determine the exact final
form. If this manual provides you with at least a broad outline of how to plan and manage
this evolution, then it would have achieved its purpose.

On a last note, while facilitating the CEAC is the task of all, the ACT performs a very
important conducting role. Bear in mind that while the conductor does not make the
individual sounds, he or she does guide how and when the sounds are played, and thus, in
a real sense, create the music.

How to use this document

This field guide is organized around six chapters, which is further divided into sections and
sub-sections. Chapter 1 deals with an overview of the KALAHI-CIDSS: KKB project,
covering a brief background, the projects development framework, objectives and
strategies, and the various implementation arrangements and roles of stakeholders.

Chapter 2 discusses the Community Empowerment Activity Cycle (CEAC) and its role in the
implementation of the KALAHI-CIDSS: KKB Community-Driven Development (CDD)
strategy. This covers the rationale for the CEAC, its key elements, and the cycles various
stages. Chapter 3 goes into the specifics of each cycle, and is designed as a walk-through
of the various activities and process of the 1 st cycle of the CEAC. Most of the details in
operationalizing the key activities are included in this chapter, which also serves as a spring
board for chapter 4. Building on the content of the cycle 1 walkthrough, this short chapter is
also designed as a broad walk-through of how the implementation design of cycle1 is
projected to evolve into cycle 2, and on to cycle 3.

Chapter 5 (still being developed) discusses issues and concerns on sustainability and exit.
This covers such topics as the KALAHI-CIDSS: KKB Institutionalization Framework,
Sustainability and Exit Planning, and strengthening Community-based Organizations
(CBOs) and community volunrteers.

The last chapter (chapter 6) touches on the topic of implementation management. This
chapter begins with a discussion on the ACT and the need for teamwork, and provides tips
and practical solutions on how to handle day-to-day management issues and concerns.

This is a basic project document for all ACT members, but most especially for the Area
Coordinators and the Community Facilitators. You are enjoined to read the entire document,
since all of the chapters are inter-connected. However, you may also refer to specific
sections for details on specific topics of interest, especially those contained in chapter 3.
This document also does not try to be exhaustive, and deals more with the social processes
involved in the project than on the specific technical details of other project components
such as engineering or finance. While this field guide attempts to build cross-references
with the other project documents (particularly the project manuals on Monitoring and
Evaluation, Rural Infrastructure, Community Finance, Community Procurement, and the
Grievance Manual), please ensure that you have secured copies of these manuals as well,
and that these are readily available to all ACT members for reference purposes.

Finally, please take the time to study other materials on CDD and facilitation of participatory
development processes from other agencies and/or sources. The internet most especially is
an invaluable resource for additional readings on development. You may also visit other
government agencies engaged in rural development such as the Department of Agrarian
Reforms Bureau of Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries Development (DAR-BARBD), the
Department of Agriculture, the Department of Health, and so on. These are also a good
source of materials for further understanding rural poverty conditions.

Remember that acquiring new learning entails effort and, because of this, also requires
discipline. You must be able to build the learners attitude. While this, and other materials
can provide you with information and perhaps even insight, the attitude of learning can only
be built by you alone. This is critical in order for you to be one step ahead of the people in
your community. Only then will you be able to assist them in the path to collective,
participatory development.

This document is the result of a collective effort that straddled both time and disciplines.
Various documents prepared by the Project Preparation Team in 2002 and 2003 were
reviewed prior to the drafting of this document, as was the original ACT Manual of 2004.
Key elements of these documents permeate this field guide. The first round of thanks goes
to those involved in the preparation of these documents, which served as a spring board for
the enhancements contained in this guide.

Preparation of drafts for individual sections was undertaken by technical staff of the KALAHI-
CIDSS: KKB National Project Management Office. Most of the materials for Chapter 1 was
sourced from the original Community Organizing Manual and the Area Coordinators Manual
of 2003 prepared by Ms. Malou Padua, World Bank Consultant; and from the Area
Coordinating Team (ACT) Manual of 2003 prepared by Mr. Euberto Gregorio, formerly
Community Development Specialist (CDS) for KALAHI and now Community-Driven

Development Process Specialist (CPS) for Region CAR. Mr. Alwyn Javier, Monitoring and
Evaluation (M&E) Specialist for the Social Inclusion Project (SIP) prepared the draft on the
KALAHI-CIDSS development framework, while Ms. Lou Turiano prepared the draft on the
KALAHI-CIDSS implementation and coordination arrangements. Chapter 2 was prepared
by Mr. Cicero Juan Aguilar, Community Development Specialist for KALAHI, using various
project documents such as the Project Appraisal Document (PAD), the Project
Implementation Plan (PIP), and the results of numerous World Bank support and
supervision missions and the project mid-term review.

Draft materials for Chapter 3 were prepared by members of the various NPMO units, from
SDU to Engineering. Ms. Ayn Grace Regalado, M&E Specialist for KALAHI-CIDSS
prepared the draft on social investigation and assessment, while Ms. Connie Acosta.
Monitoring and Technical Assistance Head for the Mindanao Cluster prepared the draft on
the Barangay Assembly (BA). The section on the Grievance Redress System was taken
from materials supplied by Ms. Lei Generoso, former KALAHI M&E and Grievance Officer.
The draft on participatory situation analysis (PSA) was prepared by Mr. Ronnie Tapnio,
Community Development Specialist for the SIP, while Mr. Aguilar prepared the section on
social mobilization, community organizing, and community-based organizations. Materials
on Community-Based Monitoring and Community-Based Evaluation were supplied by Mr.
Jose Juan Dela Rosa, Development Communications Specialist. Draft materials for the
section on Project Planning and Development were supplied by Engr. Benito Cesario
Tingson, Senior Infrastructure Engineer, who also provided the draft on sub-project
implementation management. Mr. Edgar Pato, Head of the Social Development Unit and
coordinator of the SIP, provided the draft on the accountability reporting.

The drafts for chapter 4 and 5 was prepared by Mr. Aguilar using materials from various
consultation meetings on institutionalization undertaken by the SDU, as well as materials
from the Area Coordinators Manual of 2003. He likewise prepared the drafts on conducting
Tactic Sessions and Reflection Sessions in chapter 6. Ms. Turiano prepared the drafts on
the ACT and Teamwork, and Mr. Tapnio prepared materials for the section on community
training. Finally, the section on Management Troubleshooting was prepared by Director
Camilo G. Gudmalin, National Project Manager of the KALAHI-CIDSS Project, who also
provided the team with invaluable support during the initial stages of preparing the materials
fro the manual.

The unenviable task of putting together the various materials and drafts into one whole
document went to Mr. Aguilar, who also undertook editing and lay-out work on the final

Preparation of this field guide would not have been possible without the support and
encouragement of the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) and World
Bank. Special thanks go to Undersecretary Luwalhati F. Pablo, KC National Project
Director, and Assistant Secretary Ruel G. Lucentales, KC Deputy National Project Director,
without whos gentle but persistent pushing; this project may have taken more time to
complete than it already has. Special thanks also go to Mr. Andrew Parker, Task Team
Leader for the KALAHI-CIDSS Project, and Ms. Malou Padua, WB Consultant for
Community Development, for their valuable support to this effort.

Finally, the enhancements contained in this document are borne out of the experience of the
multitude of community volunteers, LGU partners, and Area Coordinating Teams in the
frontline of the campaign to end rural poverty in the course of the 1 st three years of project
implementation. This document is both a testimony and a tribute to their courage,
persistence, and sacrifice. Thank you very much!


1.1 What is the KALAHI-CIDSS:KKB Project? 8
1.3 What are the over-all development objectives of the KALAHI-CIDSS: KKB Project? 10
1.4 How will the KALAHI-CIDSS: KKB Project attain these objectives? 10
1.5 What does the KALAHI-CIDSS: KKB aim to achieve by these strategies? 11
1.6 What are the core principles of the KALAHI-CIDSS: KKB Project? 11
1.7 What is the KALAHI-CIDSS Implementation and coordination structure? 13
1.7.1 Policy-Making Bodies 13
1.7.2 Management Bodies 14
1.7.3 Implementing Bodies 14
1.7.4 Coordination Bodies 15
1.8 What roles and functions do members of Local Government Units play in the KALAHI-CIDSS
Project? 15


(CEAC) 16
2.1 What is the Community Empowerment Activity Cycle? 16
2.2 What is the rationale behind the CEAC implementation process? 17
2.3 What are the objectives of CEAC implementation process? 20
2.4 How is the CEAC implemented in the KC project? 20
2.5 What are the elements of the CEAC implementation design? 21
2.6 What are the stages of the CEAC? 22
2.7 How does the role of various stakeholders evolve in the course of the CEAC? 23


3.1 Social Preparation Stage 25
3.1.1 Social Investigation and Assessment 25
3.1.2 The Barangay Assembly 28
3.1.3 Promoting transparency thru the Grievance Redress System (GRS) 33
3.1.4 Participatory Situation Analysis (PSA) 38
3.1.5 Social Mobilization, Community Organizing, and CBO Formation and the BaBAE Teams 51
3.1.6 Community-Based Monitoring (CBM) 58

3.2 Selection & Planning Stage 61

3.2.1 The Municipal Inter-Barangay Forum (MIBF) 61
3.2.2 MIBF for Criteria Setting 64
3.2.3 Project Planning and Development 71
3.2.4 The Municipal Inter-Agency Committee (MIAC) Technical Review of Community Project
Proposals 92

3.3 Project Approval Stage 95

3.3.1 MIBF for Participatory Resource Allocation 95
3.3.2 Joint MIBF-Municipal Development Council Engagements 98

3.4 Project Implementation Stage 100

3.4.1 Sub-project implementation management 100
3.4.2 Operation and Maintenance (O&M) 108

3.5 Transition Stage 112

3.5.1 Community-Based Evaluation (CBE) 112
3.5.2 Accountability Reporting 118


4.1 The CEAC 2 nd Cycle Implementation 122
4.1.1 How is the CEAC 2nd Cycle implementation different from the 1st Cycle? 122
4.1.2 What is the role of the ACT in facilitating the 2nd Cycle? 122
4.1.3 How does the 2nd Cycle of the CEAC proceed? 123
4.2 The CEAC 3 rd Cycle Implementation 125
4.2.1 How is the CEAC 3rd Cycle implementation build on the 2nd Cycle? 125
4.2.2 What is the role of the ACT in facilitating 2nd Cycle activities? 125
4.2.3 How does the 2nd cycle of the CEAC proceed? 125


5.1 What is sustainability? 127
5.2 How do we ensure sustainability of CDD interventions? 128
5.3 The KALAHI-CIDSS Institutionalization Framework and Key Result Areas 128
5.3.1 What is Institutionalization in the context of the KALAHI-CIDSS Project? 128
5.3.2 Why is Institutionalization necessary in the KALAHI-CIDSS Project? 129
5.3.3 What is the KALAHI-CIDSS Institutionalization Framework? 129
5.3.4 How is institutionalization operationalized? 131

5.4 Promoting Convergence for Community-Driven Development 132

5.4.1 What is Convergence? 132
5.4.2 Why converge? 132
5.4.3 What are the objectives of convergence? 132
5.4.4 How is convergence operationalized in the KALAHI-CIDSS Project? 133

5.4 Organizational Development, CBO Strengthening and Volunteer Development 136

5.5 Exit Planning 136

6.1 The Area Coordinating Team 138
6.1.1 Why adopt a team approach in the KALAHI-CIDSS? 138
6.1.2 What are the functions of the Area Coordinating Team members? 138
6.1.3 To whom the ACT should engage? 139

6.2 Conducting Tactic Sessions 140

6.2.1 What is a tactic session? 140
6.2.2 How is a tactic session different from a regular team meeting? 140
6.2.3 What is the difference between a tactic session and a strategizing session? 140
6.2.4 Who participates in a tactic sessions? 140
6.2.5 How often is a tactic session conducted? 141
6.2.6 How is a tactic session conducted? 141

6.3 Conducting Reflection Session 143

6.3.1 What is a Reflection Session? 143
6.3.2 Why conduct reflection sessions? 143
6.3.3 Who should participate in a reflection session? 143
6.3.4 How often should a reflection session be conducted? 143
6.3.5 How is a reflection session conducted? 143

6.4 Conducting Community Trainings 145

6.4.1 Why the need for Community Training? 145
6.4.2 Who Should be Engaged in Community Training? 145
6.4.3 What community training activities need to be conducted in the course of engagement in the
KC project? 145
6.4.4 What are the processes involved in community training? 146
6.4.5 What are the Learning Tips in the Conduct of Community Training? 147

6.5 Management Troubleshooting Tips 150

6.5.1 What is Management all about? 150
6.5.2 How to get subordinates to do what they are supposed to do? 150
6.5.3 How can we effectively manage meetings? Or TO MEET OR NOT TO MEET? 151
6.5.4 How does one determine and manage priorities? 153
6.5.5 How does one effectively work with politicians? 155
6.5.6 How can one do effective planning? 156
6.5.7 How to develop and work with strategies? 157
6.5.8 IMPLEMENTATION: Practical Tips on How to Get Things Done! 159


To the ACT:

This chapter is intended to serve as your basic introduction to the KALAHI-CIDSS: KKB
Project. It will describe the rationale for the KALAHI-CIDSS: KKB, and its role in the
governments effort to address rural poverty.

The KALAHI-CIDSS: KKB is unique in many respects, but most especially on its treatment
of poverty and its causes, which is discussed at the beginning of the chapter. The chapter
will also discuss the objectives of the project, the strategies which the project adopts in
order to achieve these objectives, and the principles which will guide you in the
implementation of the projects various processes, interventions, and activities.

The last section of the chapter will walk you through the projects implementation structure
and the different coordination arrangements. This will cover policy guidance and
operationalization from the national down to the municipal implementation teams, outlining
the different avenues for project operationalization management, monitoring, and technical
assistance provision, ending in a discussion of the role of the municipal local governments
in project implementation.

Bear in mind that the KALAHI-CIDSS: KKB, like any development intervention that
addresses the complex issue of poverty, is far more that what can be discussed in this
chapter. You are encouraged to read through other materials about the project. In
particular, you can refer to the Project Appraisal Document (PAD) of August 2002 and the
Project Implementation Plan prepared in 2003. Both documents are part of the project
preparation stage, and can provide you with a deeper historical context to the KALAHI-
CIDSS: KKB Project design at start-up. You may also refer to the DSWD website at ,which contains a link to the KALAHI-CIDSS: KKB web page, for more
current updates on the project.

1.1 What is the KALAHI-CIDSS:KKB Project?

KALAHI-CIDSS: KKB stands for the Kapit-bisig Laban sa Kahirapan Comprehensive and
Integrated Delivery of Social Services: Kapangyarihan at Kaunlaran sa Bararangay. It is the
main poverty reduction program of the Government of the Philippines that seeks to apply
participatory, community-led and community-driven approaches proven to be effective in
community development work. Kalahi-CIDSS: KKB (KC:KKB) consolidates the lessons and
strategies applied by two national programs that have manifested a high degree of
effectiveness in poverty alleviation as compared to other state-led initiatives: the
Comprehensive and Integrated Delivery of Social Services (CIDSS) Program of the DSWD
of the Government of the Philippines, and the Kecamatan Development Program (KDP) of
the Government of Indonesia.

The Medium-Term Philippine Development Plan (MTPDP) 2004-2010 identifies KALAHI-
CIDSS as one of the main government intervention mechanisms to achieve empowerment
and poverty reduction (MTPDP Chapter 12). In KALAHI-CIDSS, empowerment is promoted
through active community participation during the design, implementation, and management
of development activities that reduce poverty, and putting control over resources in the
hands of the poor.


While being blessed with a hard-working people and bountiful natural resources, the
Philippine countryside is still characterized by the continued persistence of poverty. Poor
people in far-flung barangays have consistently pointed to numerous situations that reveal a
condition where people in poor communities experience the sustained inability to meet basic
needs required for a decent quality of life. Such limiting conditions include;
Low farm yield coupled with high prices of farming inputs leading to low level of
productivity and income;
Unemployment/underemployment coupled with the absence of facilities for engaging
in informal, socio-economic activities;
Absence of control over land and other vital means of production, tenancy and the
continued existence of feudal, and often oppressive tenurial arrangements in some
Environmental destruction increasing the vulnerability of poor families to quick-
occurring and slow-onset disasters, both natural and man-made;
Limited/no access to basic services leading to poor health conditions, low literacy,
and others;
Patronage and personalized politics, graft and corruption, and unresponsive
Powerlessness of the majority who are poor, characterized by the persistence of a
culture of silence and poverty, disunity and disorganization, and non-inclusion of
specially vulnerable groups in development activities (Indigenous People, Women
and Children, the Elderly, and others);

All of the above conditions contribute to the continued existence of poverty, in varying
degrees. In a sense, poverty can be characterized as a condition of deprivation, where poor
people are denied;

Participation in decision-making
Opportunities and access to basic services
Ownership of assets to allow sustained income
Resources to meet basic
needs The KALAHI-CIDSS will adopt people-centered
approaches to problem solving. It will foster the movement
A more in-depth look at the description of actors from being mere "subjects" who are passive
of poverty above reveals the critical beneficiaries of state assistance, to becoming active
link between disempowerment and citizens with rights and responsibilities who take control
marginalization, poor governance of their destinies. At an institutional level, the project
design will take into account the ways in which unequal
practices and systems, and the
access to political and economic decision-making
persistence of poverty conditions. processes affect access to and control over resources by
This linkage underscores the need to the poor. This focus on the flow of power in decision-
making processes is expected to identify the current
obstacles and suggest new ways of dealing with winners
and losers in the development process.
Project Appraisal Document
August 23, 2002
focus on improving avenues and processes for direct participation of the poor in
development activities, and improving governance, as necessary requisites to sustained
poverty reduction. Please refer to the KC:KKB Project Appraisal Document (PAD) of 2002
for more details).

1.3 What are the over-all development objectives of the KALAHI-CIDSS:

KKB Project?

The Kalahi-CIDSS Project envisions the development of self-propelling communities in high

poverty incidence areas in the countryside, where people actively participate, lead, and
propel development activities that will improve the peoples overall quality of life. In support
of this vision, the Project provides opportunities to:

Empower local communities, involving delivery of capacity-building inputs and the

creation and institutionalization of community-based mechanisms that will allow the people
to freely exercise their right to decide on issues affecting their own development. Emphasis
is given to vulnerable groups like the Indigenous Peoples, farmers, fisherfolk, by ensuring
their inclusion in the decision-making process especially on matters pertaining to resource
allocation and use.

Improve local governance, both at the barangay and municipal levels, by revitalizing local
governance structures designed to encourage community consultation and ensure
transparency and accountability, following the principles and processes of good
governance as mandated by the Local Government Code (Republic Act 7160). Through
capacity-building sessions and other project interventions, poor communities and their local
governments are primed to undertake relevant community development activities through
collaborative partnership engagements.

Aid in the Reduction of Poverty through the provision of funds for basic community
infrastructure or common service facilities and other relevant projects that address
community-defined needs and vulnerabilities. It is assumed that with empowered
communities and improved local governance, sub-projects of communities will be relevant,
successful and sustainable.

1.4 How will the KALAHI-CIDSS: KKB Project attain these objectives?

The KALAHI-CIDSS Project uses the Community-Driven Development (CDD) approach as

its over-all community development framework. CDD employs strategies that ensure that
development priorities are addressed in a participatory, collective, inclusive, demand-driven
way. This is done through localized decision-making during social preparation activities,
and in the identification, development, prioritization, establishment, and operationalization of
community projects.

Specifically, the following implementation strategies are employed;

1. Conduct of social preparation and capacity-building activities among communities
and participating local government units (LGUs);
2. Provision of matching grants to fund community projects identified, prioritized,
implemented, and maintained by communities with LGU and KALAHI-CIDSS
technical assistance;

3. Institutionalization of the KALAHI-CIDSS strategy within LGUs through capacity-
building of local officials and staff, and promotion of participatory development
4. Area convergence with national government agencies, NGOs, and local
organizations, through synergy and complementation of programs and resources to
support community priorities, and;
5. Promotion of good governance and public accountability through transparency,
participatory and socially inclusive decision-making, multi-stakeholder and civil
society participation, and gender equity.

1.5 What does the KALAHI-CIDSS: KKB aim to achieve by these


The KALAHI-CIDSS: KKB Project aims to contribute to improving the quality of life of the
poorest Philippine municipalities and barangays through its three-tiered objectives of
empowered communities, improved local governance, and reduced poverty.

Specifically, the Project aims to achieve the following;

1. Increased access to basic needs as a result of benefits from community projects that
are responsive to the communitys identified needs;
2. Communities are able to (i) assess their own development needs; (ii) identify, access
resources for, propose, plan, and implement appropriate solutions for these needs,
and; (iii) influence the allocation of development investments of LGUs towards
addressing these needs, and;
3. Improved local governance as indicated by LGU integration of CDD in regular
programs and processes, increased adoption of participatory development
approaches, consistency of budget allocation with Barangay Development Plan
(BDP) priorities, functional LGU planning bodies, and LGU personnel performing
CDD work.

Among the projects Key Performance Indicators outlined in the PAD to concretize these
aims, include the following;
Proportion of LGUs (municipalities) that have institutionalized the participatory
strategies and technical assistance introduced by the project to assist community
organizations/barangays reduce poverty.
Proportion of community organizations/barangays with well-defined and functioning
operational and financial procedures that promote people's participation.
Proportion of LGUs that assist participatory planning and management of
subprojects by barangays.
Improved poverty indicators in project barangays compared to without-project
Improved human development indicators in the target barangays.

1.6 What are the core principles of the KALAHI-CIDSS: KKB Project?

A principle is a guide to action. It is a freely-chosen and firmly-held set of beliefs that

serves as parameters for how you, as the ACT, should (i) implement the numerous
development processes and activities of the project and; (ii) evaluate the effectiveness of
processes undertaken. As a community-driven development Project, the implementation of
KALAHI-CIDSS and consequently, your actions and the activities which you will design and
facilitate, should be anchored on the following principles, with the acronym LET-CIDSS:

Localized decision-making

This principle gives life to the importance of having the community discuss and decide on
important issues that affect them including the formulation and implementation of projects
and other interventions that will address problems they themselves identified. The Project
guarantees that communities prepare and prioritize sub-projects for funding.


The Project invests heavily on capacity-building activities that are designed to progressively
develop the capabilities of the people from analysis of local conditions to design of
appropriate development interventions, to actual implementation of development projects.
This is undertaken throughout the KC:KKB Community Empowerment Activity Cycle
(CEAC), a five stage, multi-activity learning process where communities realize their
individual and collective their strength, acquire and develop community project management
skills, and increase their confidence in engaging local governments in periodic dialogues for
improved resource allocation and better basic services delivery.


Peoples Participation is the programs core requirement, and the active engagement of
community members in the various development processes and interventions is a
necessary prerequisite to the success of all project activities and interventions. The
informed participation of residents is ensured in all project activities such as barangay
assemblies where the people are informed on the physical and financial status of the sub-
projects and consulted on community issues or problems promotes responsibility and
accountability. The multi-level monitoring system including that of the NGO and media as
independent monitors and the Grievance Monitoring and Resolution Mechanism are
features that support the transparency objective.

Community Prioritization

Project interventions, most notably on the selection of sub-projects and capacity-building

activities is a product of a collective decision-making process. The Project engages the
participating communities in a tedious task of problem analysis, project identification,
development, implementation and monitoring. Decision on what projects are to be prioritized
for funding is made by an inter-barangay forum whose members are elected by the
barangay assemblies.

Inclusive and Multi-stakeholder

The whole community, with its formal and traditional leaders, the different sectors and other
individuals, groups or organizations are encouraged to participate in the Project. By
broadening the base of participation, elite capture of the Project is prevented. The project

also lends special attention on he participation of women and indigenous people in all
project activities.


Support is given to enable the communities to prioritize their own needs and problems,
design their own projects and make decisions on how resources will be used. Projects that
are developed and implemented by the community have better outcomes and are made
more sustainable. The people also develop ownership of the project because they
themselves identified, developed, and implemented the project..


For better understanding and appreciation of the Project and to enable all the stakeholders
to get involved, procedures and other requirements are kept simple.


The Project ensures that sub-projects have viable plans for sustainability. With reference to
Kalahi-CIDSS, viability and sustainability reflect the capacity of sub-projects to continue to
deliver intended benefits over a long period beyond the life of the project.

Each member of the ACT should strive not only to learn these principles by heart, but to also
study how these principles apply in the context of their specific tasks and duties in line with
each ones specific function.

1.7 What is the KALAHI-CIDSS: KKB Projects implementation and

coordination structure, and who are its members?

The KALAHI-CIDSS: KKB Project is guided by a four-level implementation and institutional

structure comprising the following: (i) Policy-making bodies; (ii) Management bodies; (iii)
Implementing bodies, and; (iv) Coordinating bodies.

1.7.1 Policy-Making Bodies

The project has two-level policy-making bodies. These are the National Steering Committee
(NSC) and the National Technical Working Group (NTWG).

The NSC is the policy-making body of the project. It is responsible for the resolution of policy
issues affecting project implementation as well as imposition of sanctions and provision of
incentives to non-complying or exceptionally performing LGUs. It is an inter-agency body
composed of the Secretaries of the Department of Social Welfare and Development
(DSWD) and National Anti-Poverty Commission (NAPC), as chairperson and lead convenor,
respectively. Its members include the Secretaries of the:

Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG)

Department of Finance (DOF)
Department of Budget and Management (DBM)
Director General of the National Economic and Development Authority
Three (3) representatives from the civil society

Other agency representatives (as needed)

The NTWG is responsible for the provision of technical requirements of the project, facilitate
coordination among various agencies, monitor and review project implementation, and
facilitate resolution of technical concerns. The NTWG is the recommendatory body for
policy directions to the NSC. Its members include representatives from the NSC agency
members (DSWD, DILG, NEDA, DBM, DoF, NGOs and civil society groups, and other
agency representatives (as needed). Other agency members include the:

Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR)

Department of Agriculture (DA)
Department of Education (DepEd)
Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH),
Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR)
National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP)
National Statistics and Coordination Board (NSCB)1.

1.7.2 Management Bodies

The National Project Management Team (NPMT) and Regional Project Management Teams
are 2-level management bodies of the project at the national and regional level, respectively.

The NPMT is responsible for the for the over-all management of the project. It shall provide
the over-all direction and guidance to project implementation. Headed by a National Project
Director, the NPMT is composed of the Deputy Project Director, the heads of the different
units of the Department (Admin, Finance, Social Marketing, Legal, Human Resource, Policy
and Plans, Bids and Awards Committee), project operations technical staff and consultants.

The Regional Project Management Team is responsible for the over-all management of
project implementation in the region. Chaired by the Regional Director, the RPMT is
composed of:

(i) the Assistant Regional Director/Regional Project Manager as alternate chair

(ii) All division chiefs, organic staff engaged in KC implementation (the Regional
Project Coordinator, the Regional Training Coordinator, Regional Information
Officer, Project Evaluation Officer, Accounting, Supply and Admin)
(iii) Regional Project hired staff (Community Development Supervisor, Regional
Infrastructure Engineer, Regional Financial Analysts, Deputy Regional
Infrastructure Engineer, Regional Training Associates, Social Marketing Officer,
Monitoring and Evaluation Officer, Budget Officer, and Admin Assistant.
(iv) Areas Coordinators
(v) Municipal Mayors or their duly designated representatives
(vi) MSWDOs in KC municipalities
(vii)PSWDOs in KC provinces

Expansion of TWG members during the 27th March 2003 NSC meeting

1.7.3 Implementing Bodies

The DSWD is the lead implementing agency of the project. Its implementing arm is
composed of the following:

National Project Management Office (NPMO)

Regional Project Management Office (RPMO)
Area Coordinating Team

Headed by a National Project Manager, the NPMO is responsible for the over-all
management of the project. It is composed of DSWD organic staff, and contracted
consultants and technical staff.

Headed by a Regional Project Manager, the RPMO is responsible for the day to day
operations of the project. Its functions include but not limited to implementation of national
policies and regional directions and strategies, provision of technical assistance and
supervise work performance of ACTs, manage engagement with the LGUs, and other

The Area Coordinating team is the frontline workers in the field. It is composed of an Area
Coordinator, Area Coordinator, Roving Bookkeeper, and Community Facilitators.

1.7.4 Coordination Bodies

The project shall organize and/or reactivate inter-agency bodies at the regional, provincial,
and municipal levels to (i) provide for the technical requirements of the project, (ii) facilitate
coordination among various agencies, (iii) monitor and review implementation, and (iv)
facilitate resolution of technical concerns. Its representation follows the membership of the

The Regional Inter-agency committee (RIAC) shall be chaired by DSWD Regional Director.
The Provincial Inter-agency Committee (PIAC) shall be chaired by the Provincial Governor.
The Municipal Inter-agency Committee (MIAC) shall be chaired by city or municipal mayor.

1.8 What roles and functions do members of Local Government Units

play in the KALAHI-CIDSS Project?

The provincial, municipal, and barangay local government units participate in the KC project
implementation in the following ways:
1. monitor and evaluate the over-all performance of the project
2. provide counterpart funding for all project components
3. provide personnel to work full-time to the project and other
support mechanisms in project implementation
4. provide technical assistance to barangays along the fields of
expertise of the different units
5. receives capacity building interventions to facilitate
institutionalization of KC processes into LGU planning and project implementation

6. Acts as convenors of inter-barangay forum, and inter-agency
committee meetings



To the ACT:

This chapter shall introduce you to the Community Empowerment Activity Cycle or the
CEAC, and provide you with basic information on the rationale and objective of the CEAC,
in relation to achieving the development objectives of the KALAHI-CIDSS: KKB Project.

The first parts of the chapter will discuss the evolution of the CEAC from the former
KALAHI-CIDSS: KKB 16-steps process. This will then be followed by a discussion on the
objectives of the CEAC implementation process and the key elements of the CEAC
implementation design. The last portion of the chapter will walk you through the major
stages of the cycle, ending in a discussion on the evolution of roles of stakeholders as the
CEAC is implemented within the three-year KALAHI-CIDSS: KKB engagement in the

As a descriptive operational framework for Community Driven Development, the CEAC is

essentially an attempt at a generalized working model of how CDD is facilitated in the
course of project implementation. However, actual facilitation of the CEAC should be
context-specific. Like all true CDD efforts, how the stages progress and what the final form
of specific activities will look like will be largely influenced by local conditions. It is your role,
as the ACT, to build understanding of the CEAC in order for you to better determine how to
effectively adapt the CEAC implementation process to fit the specific conditions of the
community you are working in.

2.1 What is the Community Empowerment Activity Cycle?

The KALAHI-CIDSS:KKB Project follows the CDD model implemented through a five-stage,
multi-activity process referred to as the KALAHI-CIDSS Community Empowerment Activity
Cycle (CEAC)]. Designed to systematically mobilize the capacity of local people to
prioritize their development needs, design activities, seek technical assistance, manage
resources, and implement and sustain development actions, the CEAC attempts to provide
communities with a guide for organized experience in purposeful collective action that
aims (i) to empower communities to participate in decision-making in ways that will improve
their skills, strengthen their sense of responsibility and human dignity, (ii) to use community
projects as a vehicle to promote representation, accountability and reduce poverty, and (iii)
to strengthen the linkage between communities and their local government units.

The CEAC is the primary implementation strategy adopted by the project to guide the
operationalization of the numerous community development processes and interventions of
the KALAHI-CIDSS: KKB project. The Project Implementation Plan (PIP) states among

others that The core component of the project is the mobilization of communities and
stakeholders towards the achievement of project objectives (involving) multi-level and
multi-stakeholder organizing, socialization and facilitation processes that is undertaken at all
stages of the project cycle.[iv].. The CEAC is the guide by which this component is

2.2 What is the rationale behind the CEAC implementation process?

The CEAC is the latest evolution of the KC:KKB project implementation framework. Called
the 16-Step Community Planning and Sub-Project Cycle (CPSPC) or more popularly as
simply the 16-Steps in previous manuals, the CPSPC involved the implementation of 16
pre-determined steps or activities over the course of one cycle, and over three cycles.
Observations borne out of supervision and
implementation support missions over the
last few years noted that the project
produced considerable gains in
community processes since it was
launched in 2003. New forms of
collaborative engagements to identify and
address local problems, implement
solutions, and sustain gains have also
been introduced, and enhancement of
local capacities has been made through
community and LGU engagements in
CDD and participatory development
processes. In all of these, the 4-stage,
16-step CPSPC served as the basic
Figure 1: The 16-Step Community Planning and
implementation guide for development Sub-Project Cycle
intervention activities.

However, the tendency towards a mechanical and bureaucratic implementation of the 16-
step process, as well as its overly sub-project focused presentation, has also been pointed
out. Concerns have been raised that the process has become too tedious, with specific
steps leading to delays in project implementation. Volunteers and community residents
alike complain of too many barangay assemblies, counted to be as many as 10 per year, as
opposed to a minimum of 2 specified in the RA 7160 (Local Government Code), highlighting
concerns over understanding and appreciation of specific functions and objectives of each
step and activity within the cycle. Suggestions such as emphasizing the clustering of the
16-steps as a series of progressive stages, and of improving the presentation of the 16-step
process by shifting focus from sub-projects to objectives of each step, have been put

Experience borne out of the last three years of project implementation point to three broad
concerns that demonstrate the need, and provide the rationale, for the progressive
application of the CEAC. These include the following;

The need to build on gains from the implementation of KC: KKB community development
processes and interventions. Over the years of implementation the project has been shown
to lead to the following gains;
Community engagement in CDD processes: Poor people and communities in
rural areas are made to engage in Community Driven Development processes such
as PSA, Project Identification, Development, and Implementation, Community Fund

Management, which has lead communities to recognize that they can define their
development needs, and identify, develop, and implement appropriate interventions.
LGU engagement in participatory development practices: The project promotes
the active engagement of LGUs with local communities in the practice of
participatory governance for development through the processes of BAP, budget
realignment for community-identified needs, MIAC engagement in project
preparation and monitoring, and others.
New forms of collaborative engagements: Because of the project, new forms of
working together are developed, including forms of engagement among community
members (through the BAs, through volunteer committees, and the BSPMC project
implementation mechanism), between the community and LGU (through exercises in
finance management, LCC provision, and even procurement), and between NGAs
and LGUs.
Organizations, associations established: These collaborative engagements have
lead to the formation and establishment of community mechanisms and structures
that propel specific aspects of the whole development effort, such as Operation and
Maintenance Groups for O&M of SPs, BaBAE Advocacy Teams, and others.
Volunteers trained, capacities developed: Thus far, a total of 10,764 trainings
have been provided to about 45,000 volunteers, 49% of whom are women.
Trainings provided to community volunteers and other stakeholders include
Participatory Situational Analysis, Project proposal preparation, Simple financial &
procurement management, Organizational Development, Operations & Maintenance,
and Advocacy & Resource Mobilization
Projects implemented and operational: Of 1,422 total number of SPs funded (as
of November 2005), 729 sub-projects have been completed, benefiting 1,492 poor

The need to actualize potentials and address opportunities emerging from gains in project
implementation by sustaining social processes and moving development forward. These
potentials include the following;
Potential for activating/re-activating MLGU/BLGU participatory governance
mechanisms through the activation of Local Special Bodies, and formation and
revitalization of Municipal and Barangay Development Councils.
Potential for enhancing MLGU/BLGU structures and systems , including the
Municipal Inter-Agency Committee structure to support local development efforts,
local budgeting process, local procurement, and project Planning, Implementation,
Monitoring, and Evaluation.
Potential for enhancing new forms of community-government engagements for
development, inclusing such mechanisms as the MIBFs, BSPMCs, MIAC, and the
Joint Inspectorate Teams.
Potential for sustaining, enhancing, and expanding community mobilization
through the various Barangay-level and Municipal-level formations and organizations
Potential for taking participation forward from problem identification, prioritization
of development interventions, and sub-project implementation towards using lessons
on peoples participation in these engagements in order to effect meaningful,
development-oriented policies at the Barangay and Municipal LGUs.

The need to address process gaps in implementation. At the very on-set, ccommunity-
driven development involves a constant process of growth and improvement. There were
no delusions that the steps were perfect, and that the true test of effectiveness of
approaches and methodologies also rely on how well the processes adapt to changing
conditions. In the course of project implementation, community members and partner LGUs
have not ceased to remind us of some of their observations on the CEAC, including;
Loss of income opportunities of volunteers because of their participation in the
projects various activities.
Community residents also complain that the project require the holding of too many
Barangay Assemblies, as opposed to the minimum of two per year set by the local
government code (RA 7160).
Local government partners also appear to constantly seek clarification of their role.
But rather than ask, they often try to test various aspects of the projects
implementation design, most notably in the area of SP identification and
prioritization, and procurement. The dominant question now appears to be What is
the role of local governments beyond provision of LCC?
Lastly, gaps have been noted in project implementation itself. Social preparation
has taken a whole year in some areas, and sub-project project implementation two
years in others. Disbursement targets also fall short of expectations, and cause the
creation of numerous catch-up activities that betray weaknesses in project
implementation that need to be addressed.

Since its implementation in 2003, the Kalahi-CIDSS project now looks at three years of
implementation experience. Areas for enhancement in project implementation identified in
previous missions also served to underscore the need to determine whether avenues are
provided in the 16-step process for these enhancements, which include;

Community organizing (C.O.) and consolidation of local community structures for

mobilizing and sustaining community action for development, where community
organizing is understood as the strategy to build community demand, and where local
residents engage in community organizing processes in order to identify and respond to
identified community needs. Avenues for the conduct of activities in line with consolidation
and strengthening process gains outside of sub-project implementation are explored and
enhanced, including (1) CO requirements for effective Operation and maintenance of sub-
projects and the establishment of effective O&M groups; (2) CO as a strategy to facilitate
community action to address needs of non-prioritized barangays; (3) CO as a strategy to
mobilize communities around other issues identified in the Participatory Situation Analysis
(PSA) Barangay Action Planning (BAP) process; and (4) CO approaches leading to the
establishment of local structures, and community-based mechanisms, and local
orgabizations that will propel community-led, demand-driven engagements with local
government units and other stakeholders in a post-KALAHI environment.

Sub-Project preparation/ implementation, enhancing existing approaches and

methodologies in facilitating different social processes involved in formulating, developing,
and implementing interventions to identified community needs and problems. Enhancing
sub-project preparation and implementation also means purposively making community
processes built into preparation and implementation of sub-projects as avenues for
increasing local capacities in engaging in community development. Among these processes
include (1) sub-project identification, design, and preparation processes that increase SP
responsiveness and effectiveness; (2) community procurement and the application of the

procurement readiness filters, and; (3) community finance management and fiduciary

Institutionalization enhancement/s, focused on the processes and activities that improve

LGU systems and structures in ways that (1) promote and support Community-Driven
Development initiatives; (2) increase transparency; (3) maximize existing mechanisms and
mandated local structures, and; (3) uphold peoples participation in governance. A critical
factor in this regard involves facilitation of activities that harmonize KC:KKB development
processes and LGU development planning and participatory governance processes and

SP O&M and Sustainability Enhancement/s, focused on organizational development

processes that ensure sustainability of sub-projects developed under the KC:KKB
sustainability, as well as the conduct of activities in line with consolidation and strengthening
of processes and structures for post sub-project implementation operation and maintenance.

These concerns, and one cannot be addressed without due consideration given to the other.

As a CDD project, the KALAHI-CIDSS:KKB was premised not only on the active
participation and involvement of local communities, but also on the dynamic application of
processes grounded on the specificity of local conditions within each communities. The
latter underscores the suggestion that certain areas might require different strategies and
focal points than others, and recommendation for DSWD and the World Bank to engage in
continuous dialogue to determine whether current project design and execution through 16
pre-determined steps allows for necessary flexibility and adaptability in implementation, so
necessary to maintain demand-responsiveness integral to the KC:KKB project.

2.3 What are the objectives of CEAC implementation process?

Two objectives served as guides in the development of the CEAC.

The first is the idea of QUALITY. We need to do things better. Enhancement of the KC
CEAC must lead to an increase in the quality of implementation of social processes,
procedures and mechanisms. Concretely, this means that community situations must be
better analyzed, interventions better identified, volunteers better equipped, communities
participating better because they are better informed, sub-projects implemented and
operated better because they will lead to the concrete improvement (Im tempted to say
betterment) of peoples lives. This also means ACTS, RPMTs, and the NPMO doing their
jobs better. Technical assistance are provided better, both by the RPMT and the NPMO.
Administrative systems are made to serve the project and its objectives and goals better,
and so on. The first catch word is BETTER!

The second idea is SPEED. We must be able to do things faster. The project should be
able to adapt strategies that would allow field implementers to plan more effectively. There
will only be three years remaining in the project, equivalent to one phase of implementation.
There will be little room for playing with time. Concretely, this may mean that some activities
will have to be streamlined, others conducted back-to-back, or even simultaneously, and
some activities made optional. The second catch word is FASTER.

Our objectives are two fold; Do things BETTER! Do things FASTER!

2.4 How is the CEAC implemented in the KC project?

Each community under the project undergoes the CEAC three times, one for each cycle of
the project. However, lessons from field experience in implementing the CEAC over the
course of the last three years indicate that the running the CEAC in three cycles in any given
municipality must not be construed to mean a repetitive implementation of a generic cycle.
As development necessarily means a progressive movement from a condition of poverty
towards a state of improved over-all quality of life, so too must the process by which this
development come about be characterized by a progression of implementation strategies
and activities that build on the foundation and output of previous strategies and activities.

The CEAC is a dynamic process where progression occurs at two levels. The first level is a
progression of strategies and activities within a given cycle. Simply put, this means that all
activities should build from previous activities along one specific cycle. The second level of
progression occurs over the course of three cycles. This means that implementation of the
CEAC changes over the course of three cycles, and that while some activities remain the
same in form, they are essentially different in substance. Facilitation shifts over time from
KA:KKB field implementers to MLGU, MIAC, and Community Volunteers. Objectives of
certain activities such as the PSA also change over time, from data generation and analysis
in the first year to review and enhancement in the succeeding cycles. Facilitation of
Municipal activities also change over time.

2.5 What are the elements of the CEAC implementation design?

The CEAC is the major strategy adopted by the project to operationalize the social
development component. While each community under the project undergoes the CEAC
three times, one for each cycle of the project, the cycle is by no means repetitive. On the
contrary, following the idea of development as a progressive movement from a condition of
poverty to a state characterized by improved quality of life, as stated in the early pages of
this section, the activities in the CEAC also move progressively, with each step building on
previous steps, and each cycle building on previous cycles.

The enhanced version of the Community Empowerment Activity Cycle (Figure 2) is

represented as a five-stage, multi-step process where focus is placed on the stages that the
project goes through within a given cycle, as opposed to the old formulation that puts focus
on the specific steps or activities (Figure 1).

The former representation of the

CEAC as circular, connoting a
continuous cyclical process, is good
for presenting the idea of the CEAC as
process. This formulation is
essentially retained. However, the
numeric counting of specific steps is
abandoned. This is due to the
understanding that these steps go
through a process of evolution across
the three cycles, and the steps and
some of the activities will necessarily
change over time.

What remains constant are the stages

Figure 2: The Enhanced Community Empowerment that the project goes into across the
Activity Cycle (CEAC)

three cycles. Looking at Figure 3, the activities undertaken in each stage is a generic
representation of activities specific to that stage. It does not mean that all activities must be
undertaken in the same way across every cycle.

2.6 What are the stages of the CEAC?

As stated earlier, each cycle is in the new CEAC is composed of five stages. The first stage
is called the Social Preparation stage, and begins with a Municipal Orientation and a
Barangay Assembly designed to build understanding of the project among local government
units and community members. The most critical feature of the social preparation stage is
the conduct of the Participatory Situation Analysis wherein the community volunteers
collectively gather data on conditions existing in the community, analyze these conditions,
and define appropriate development interventions to address identified needs. These are
then validated through the conduct of another Barangay Assembly.

The Social Preparation stage is followed by the Project Identification stage where the
communities begin to develop identified interventions. The most critical feature of this stage
is the conduct of the criteria setting workshop which is essentially a collective exercise of
identifying the parameters by which development projects will be prioritized. However, more
than just setting criteria for project selection, the CSW is a process by which the people are
introduced to the idea of defining what local development means for them, and by
establishing criteria for selecting development projects, the people are actually defining how
development should come about, and how development interventions should be prioritized.

The next stage is the Project Preparation, Selection, and Approval stage, where the
people begin the arduous but rewarding task of preparing project proposals, and finalizing
plans for development projects identified during social preparation. It is also here where one
of the most distinct features of the KALAHI-CIDSS project is actualized; the competitive
project selection process by way of the Municipal Inter-Barangay Forum, or MIBF. The
MIBF is a mechanism by which members of barangays participating in the project select
which projects deserve to be funded from the municipal allocation, from among the
numerous project proposals prepared by local volunteers in the barangays, using the criteria
set during the Criteria Setting Workshop.

Once the projects are selected, the cycle moves on into the Implementation of sub-
projects. While KC:KKB is not just about infrastructure or development projects, these
none the less provide the people with a rich environment to in which to learn new ways of
working collaboratively with others in the community. In the course of project
implementation, community residents are provided with opportunities to engage local
government units at the barangay and municipal level for technical support and local
counterpart resources. People also learn first hand the basics of community procurement
and financial management. All these process conspire to enhance community ownership of
the project and its various outcomes.

Before beginning the second cycle, a period of transition is undergone by all the
barangays. Part of this transition involves the conduct of a Community-based Evaluation
process where community residents assess their participation in the project and the
changes which have been brought about because of this participation. The other critical
activity in this stage is the conduct of the Accountability Review and Reporting session,
where community volunteers, the Barangay, and the Municipal LGUs review their

commitments to the project, and report the same to the people. This signals the beginning
of the next cycle of the project.

2.7 How does the role of various stakeholders evolve in the course of
the CEAC?

Figure 3 illustrates the framework for a

progressive application of the KC:KKB CEAC
across three cycles. The application of
KC:KKB process along the CEAC is
calibrated such that appreciation among
various stakeholders is built in the 1st cycle.
In cycle 1, primary responsibility for facilitating
project development processes reside in the
Area Coordinating Teams (ACT), while
community members and other stakeholders
observe and participate in KC:KKB Figure 3: CEAC Implementation Framework
processes. For the 2nd cycle, activities will
seek to promote acceptance of KC:KKB
processes and systems among stakeholders. In this cycle, facilitation of KC:KKB
development processes is envisioned to be a shared responsibility among project
stakeholders. In the 3rd cycle, it is expected that stakeholders both at the community,
barangay, and municipal levels show adoption of KC:KKB development processes. In this
cycle, facilitation of KC:KKB development processes will move to the municipal and
community stakeholders taking a lead role, with the ACT providing technical assistance and
pre-activity preparation and planning assistance, coaching during actual activities, and post-
activity processing and evaluation.

Outputs of project interventions (as evidenced by concrete indicators), are also expected to
increase progressively across cycles, with succeeding cycles building on the outputs
produced from previous cycles of implementation.

The following sections will provide detailed exposition of the activities and steps in each of
the cycles of the three-cycle CEAC.


To the ACT:

This is the longest and most important chapter in this entire field guide. Having gone
through a discussion on the CEAC and its role in the implementation of the KALAHI-
CIDSS:KKB Project in the previous chapter, this chapter shall walk you through the fist cycle
of the three-year KALAHI-CIDSS implementation program.

The chapter is divided into five broad sections corresponding to each stage of the CEAC,
from Social Preparation in stage 1 to the Transition activities in stage 5. Each stage in turn
discusses the critical activities that need to be implemented within the stage. For each of
the activities, a backgrounder, discussion of the rationale, and description of the process of
implementing the activity is provided. You will note that the word used here is description.
This is deliberate. This chapter DOES NOT intend to provide instructions on how each
activity and process should be facilitated. What it hopes to provide are broad descriptions
of how each activity can and should flow. Following the idea of differentiation, what these
activities will look like in actual field conditions will depend on the specific contexts of each
KC area and the creativity of the ACT in developing methods, tools, and techniques that are
appropriate for their areas and audiences, but which will effectively facilitate achievement of
the objectives and outputs of each activity and stage.

The chapter begins with a discussion of Social Investigation and Assessment, and its role in
establishing the specific local situation prior to or at entry of KC processes. The output of
the SI/A process will be invaluable in subsequent tracking of progress towards achievement
of project objectives in the course of the three-year, multi-cycle KALAHI-CIDSS
engagement. The chapter also covers a lengthy discussion on Organizing and Engaging
Community-Based Organizations (CBOs) as a vital project activity serving to propel the
projects empowerment objective. The last section of this chapter covers discussions on the
Accountability Reporting (AR) and Community-Based Monitoring (CBM), critical end-of-cycle
activities that will pave the way for a smooth transition from cycle to cycle. Where indicated,
please refer to other project manuals, particularly the Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E), the
Rural Infrastructure Manual, the Grievance Redress Manual, Community Finance Manual,
and the Community Procurement Manual for more specific details.

You are encouraged to read the materials in this chapter carefully. Remember that this
chapter is by no means complete, and like any tool that seeks to aid Community-Driven
Development initiatives, the activities and processes outlined here only serve to guide you in
better facilitating local initiatives of poor community people to address poverty conditions
and challenges to local development. How this development actually comes about will

ultimately depend on your patience, and tenacity in analyzing the real causes of poverty in
the community where you are assigned, and in your creative discipline in designing
interventions that will allow people to realize their own potential in propelling development.
It is fervently hoped that this chapter will assist you in this endeavor.

3.1 Social Preparation Stage

3.1.1 Social Investigation and Assessment What is social investigation and assessment?

Social assessment is an iterative process that provides a framework for prioritizing,

gathering, analyzing, and incorporating social information and participation into the design
and delivery of development operations.

Social Assessment is a systematic investigation of demographic, socioeconomic, social

organization, socio-political context and needs and values. Why do you have to conduct social investigation and assessment?

Social investigation and assessment will help you, the ACT, in identifying stakeholders and
priority issues. Social assessments inform team strategies through identification of key
players who can champion or oppose the process, and understanding social dynamics.

Social assessment establishes participatory processes in the communities by involving the

community in the process.

It also serves as an evaluation tool. Social Assessments conducted prior to project

intervention establish the baseline by which project outcomes and impacts will be measured
against. End of cycle social assessments become point in time pictures of community
progress. Perceptions of stakeholders are also monitored over time. When is social investigation and assessment conducted?

In the context of KALAHI-CIDSS, social assessment is conducted at the beginning, prior to

project entry and at the end of the last cycle, after the conduct of the community-based
evaluation and accountability reporting.

25 What tools are used in the conduct of social investigation and

Data gathering for social assessment uses direct observation, focus groups discussions, key
informant interviews, questionnaires and analysis of statistics. For more information, please
refer to the Monitoring and Evaluation Handbook on Social Assessment. Who do you talk to when conducting the social investigation and

Ideally, all stakeholders at the community are involved in the social assessment, whether as
part of a group discussion, interviewee or as participants in meetings observed. At the very
least, the process includes observing meeting of the Barangay Development Council (BDC),
Municipal Development Council (MDC), group discussions with barangay captains and
interviews with the Mayors. Other key personalities in the barangay should also be spoken
to further understand local dynamics in the community. What is the output of the social investigation and assessment?

Three sets of outputs result from the social investigation and assessment process:

1) Data/information gathered from the interviews, focus group discussions,

2) Action plan outlining the teams strategy and outputs for the coming cycle;
3) Social assessment report based on of the data gathered.

For the social assessment report, please refer to the Monitoring and Evaluation Handbook
on how to prepare the social assessment report. How do you conduct social investigation and assessment?

The following key points are necessary to keep in mind when conducting SI;

1. Good SI results from good integration. Integration and social investigation are like
two sides of the same coin, one cannot be done without the other. The quality of
information in influenced in a very relevant way to the level of rapport established
with community residents.

2. The best SI session is a conversation over coffee. People, especially marginalized

groups, can feel threatened by a formal interview. Keep the conversations informal
and relaxed. It is best to frame an SI session as an informal, casual dialogue
between persons rather than a formal interview.

3. The answers you get depend on the questions you ask. It is necessary to prepare
and review questions beforehand. Ask open-ended questions but also be prepared
to improvise to keep the discussions flowing smoothly.

4. How you ask is as important as what you ask, and when. Be sensitive to the mood
of an over-all climate of the conversation. If the person you are talking to feels
threatened, they may provide you with the information they thing you want to hear

rather than what they really think. This is a phenomenon called meta-talk, which
should be avoided.
5. Not all information is audible, some are better seen than heard. Be sensitive to
non-verbal cues as they can provide you with valuable insight on what people you
are talking actually mean.

6. Suspend your judgement;

7. Triangulate your information. Always cross-validate information gathered with other

sources. Different government offices, both at the local, regional, and national levels
can provide information that you can use to cross-validate data gathered from the
community. The Community-Based Monitoring System (or CBMS) implemented in a
number of KC municipalities are also a rich source of information which you can use.
NGOs, on the other hand, are a good source of alternative, sector-specific

8. Plan your SI session well in advance. Prepare leading topics for your sessions, and
take note that these can vary from person to person. Learn your key questions by
heart and practice your delivery.

9. Evaluate your SI session, draw lessons and re-calibrate accordingly. This will ensure
that succeeding sessions will be better managed and hence be more fruitful.

10. The SI is one of the rare times when being dumb is a good thing. Remember that
nobody likes to talk to someone who knows it all. Besides, the people should be
the one sharing information. Your task is to keep the discussion flowing and keep
them talking. If in the first two minutes only you are talking and you are not eliciting
any response from the other person, chances are you are already in trouble.

3.1.2 The Barangay Assembly What is the barangay assembly?

The barangay assembly is a gathering of all barangay residents who are at least 15 years
old and above, Filipino and listed in the records as members of the barangay assembly (as
defined in the Local Government Code, R.A. 7160).

The barangay, as the basic political and socio-economic unit, wields tremendous powers if
tapped by its people. This power is made most apparent through the Barangay Assembly,
which serves as the primary mechanisms for the exercise of popular citizenship. It is the
foundation where the people can make claim-making with government over the delivery of
basic services and facilities, where the people can demand transparency, and even exercise
their supreme right to directly govern. With its own power to create and generate own
sources of revenue, the barangay can finance and sustain its own development.

While the LGC specifies a minimum age requirement for membership in the assembly,
citizenship is the ultimate basis for affecting governance. Hence, all citizens of any age,
color, ethnicity, religion, race, political belief, and social and economic status have an equal
right to be heard. Why do we conduct barangay assemblies?

KALAHI-CIDSS (KC) is a communitydriven development project where decision-making

resides in the community. It is for this reason that the conduct of barangay assemblies
during the community empowerment activity cycle (CEAC) is very important. The people in
the communities are the prime decision makers of the Project. This collective decision
making is exercised through the assembly.

Because decision-making resides in the assembly, it is responsible for deciding on critical

aspects of KALAHI-CIDSS project implementation in the barangay, including identification
and selection of community volunteers and leaders, deliberation and approval of needs
assessment and project selection results. It is also the primary venue for deliberation and
decision-making on project planning, implementation, and monitoring and evaluation
processes. KALAHI-CIDSS hopes to develop self-propelling communities where people
actively participate in activities and projects that will improve their lives. The BA serves to
make this hope concrete through collective processes consistent with the projects basic

28 What are the functions/responsibilities of a barangay assembly?

The following are the functions/responsibilities of a barangay assembly under the Local
Government Code (LGC) of 1991;

1. The barangay assembly shall initiate legislative processes by recommending to the

sangguniang barangay the adoption of necessary measures for the welfare and
development of the barangay,
2. The barangay assembly shall decide on the adoption of initiative as a legal process
whereby the registered voters of the barangay may directly propose, enact, or amend
local ordinances.
3. The barangay assembly shall hear and pass upon the semestral report of the
sangguniang barangay concerning its activities and finances. How are these functions applied in the KC project?

In the KC project, a BA is conducted primarily for information sharing and decision-making

between and among members of the community. Because the project undertakes
numerous participatory processes, the project principle of transparency and localized
decision-making call require that consultation mechanisms like the BA should be activated
for critical activities requiring collective information sharing and decision-making.

While there are no prescribed number of BAs conducted within the CEAC, the following
instances of project activities below are a few examples of how the BA exercises its
mandated functions in support of the project;

a. The first BA is geared towards building understanding of the project among

community members. This BA is usually where the KC Project is formally introduced
to the officials and members of the community. People in the assembly can engage
in dialogue with each other, with local government officials, and with the ACTs to
discuss and clarify participation requirements, and their rights and obligations as
partners in the project. This can also be the venue where all stakeholders in the
barangay and the ACT negotiate on the terms and requirements of their engagement
in the KC project, state their commitment and support to the Projects objectives, and
concretize the forms this commitment will take. They also agree/set the minimum
rate of household participation during assembly; select the volunteers who will
conduct the Participatory Situational Analysis (PSA), and representatives to the
Special BA for grievance.

b. The PSA process will require a community validation of its findings, especially on the
key problems and critical development challenges faced by the community. The
process of validating the PSA findings can take the form of a barangay assembly.
The BA in this instance can serve as a participatory exercise that gives opportunity to
members of the community to be consulted as well as provide further inputs and
refinement to, the PSA results. They can also elect the members of the Project
Preparation Team (PPT) and the Barangay Representation Team (BRT) during this

c. The process of preparing project proposals, from the project development workshop
up to the pre-Municipal Inter-Barangay Forum (MIBF) review of community project
proposals by members of the Municipal Inter-Agency Committee (MIAC) will also

require the conduct of barangay assemblies or individual purok or sitio meetings.
This is to ensure that comments, feedback, and other inputs are continually
exchanged between project preparation teams, barangay representation teams, and
community members so that proposals produced truly reflect the will of the people.

d. Consultation and validation meetings are regularly conducted for critical activities
along the CEAC. An example includes reviewing and validating the sub-project
concept prepare by the PPT with the community members. This is a feedback
mechanism where comments and other inputs to improve the sub-project concept
are given by the barangay assembly, and where the plan to address community
problems identified in the PSA, as well as the Operations & Maintenance (O&M)
concept for the proposed sub-project, are reviewed. The BA can serve as the
mechanism to validate and approve these plans.

e. Feedback on the Results of the MIBF can also be undertaken through BAs, where
the assembly becomes the venue where results of the 1 st MIBF are presented to the
community and reflection sessions on experiences and lessons learned from the
MIBF are made. For prioritized barangay, the BA becomes the venue for firming up
arrangements for the BSPMC, organizing new committees, and others. For the non-
prioritized barangay, decision on future actions regarding non-MIBF interventions is
also firmed-up in the BA.. How often is the BA convened?

The LGC specifies that the barangay assembly should meet at least twice a year to hear
and discuss the semestral report of the sangguniang barangay concerning its activities and
finances as well as problems affecting the barangay

A cursory look at the CEAC will show that the project conducts numerous activities. The
principle of localized decision-making also demands that people are continually consulted
and are supplied with the right current information on which to base decisions. In view of
these, there exists a tendency to conduct too many barangay assemblies which may be
seen as a burden by local communities, effectively hampering participation.

Bear in mind that the purpose of a Barangay Assembly is to promote active citizenship,
increasing peoples participation in barangay governance as the basis for public decision-
making and local development planning. Ordinary citizens attending barangay assemblies
are given the opportunity to articulate their views, voices heard, push for project-specific
needs that directly impacts on their lives, and participate meaningfully in the allocation and
use of local revenues and resources.

The conduct of barangay assemblies should serve this purpose, not just to facilitate
implementation of project activities. As such, some BAs can be made optional, depending
on the need. If data gathered, and problems, vision and plans formulated need to be
presented to the majority of people validation and approval, then the mechanism for
validation and approval can take on many forms, including that of a BA.

Not all barangay assemblies that serve the projects purpose need to be initiated by project
staff. Whenever the Barangay Local Government Unit (BLGU) or other organizations
conducts its barangay assembly, the KC agenda can be included to that of the BLGU and
vice versa. Meetings or assemblies of existing Community Based Organizations (CBOs) or
Peoples Organizations (POs) can also be maximized as a forum for discussing the KC
agenda and activities. .

30 Who needs to be involved in the conduct of a barangay assembly?

The participants in the barangay assemblies should include all (or an overwhelming
majority) of the barangay residents, the barangay legislative council and barangay
development council (BDC), representatives from the MIAC, representatives from peoples
organizations (POs) in the barangay, representatives of NGOs operating in the barangay,
and other stakeholders. The barangay captain convenes the barangay assembly.

In cycle 1 implementation, assemblies are facilitated by the Community Facilitator (CF) with
the assistance of an LGU staff and community volunteers (CF demonstrates the conduct of
a barangay assembly). In cycle 2, it will be facilitated by the community volunteer
designated by the BDC and an LGU staff (community volunteer and the LGU staff on the
lead role while CF assists them). In the 3 rd cycle, it will be facilitated by the community
volunteer and an LGU staff while CF observes and coaches them. Tips, dos and donts of facilitating a Barangay Assembly

Basic Facilitation Skills

Facilitation skills are a basic requirement for

you to ensure active participation and A facilitator should be like a sponge:
meaningful exchanges during meetings;
An effective way of learning facilitation
skills is through observing how effective
A facilitator: facilitators handle a group in a certain
Ensures the effective flow of communication activity. A good facilitator is like a sponge.
within a group so that the participants can They are never content with the skills and
share information and arrive at decisions. knowledge they have, and are aware that
Poses problems and encourages group their capacity for learning is endless. In
analysis. keeping with this sponge image, effective
facilitators learn from everything. In each
Provokes people to think critically and
course they conduct, they gain new
motivates them towards action.
Does not change or ignore any decisions reached by the participants through
Is sensitive, both to the verbal and non-verbal communications that occur in the group.
Is sensitive to the feelings, attitudes, culture, interests, and any hidden agenda that
maybe present in a group.

To resolve conflict, a facilitator should be able to sense the ADI where

A is for Agreement
D is for Disagreement
I is for Irrelevance

Agreements should be explored, disagreements respected and irrelevance identified so that

the focus will be on reaching an agreement. Exploring Ds can also be explored to widen the

Tips on the Preparation/Facilitation of a Barangay Assembly

1. Groundwork your barangay captain and other members of the LGU. Remember that
you are not the convenor of the BA. This is the role of the Barangay Captain. Make

sure that he/she is fully aware of the rationale, objective, and expected outputs of the
meting. Give him/her due importance by providing them with a formal role in the
2. Ensure that the schedule of the BA is not in conflict with other community schedules
such as fiestas, harvest time, and other community activities. Availability of community
residents is a very important factor and should not be overlooked. Good scheduling will
increase participation in the BA.
3. In scheduling the BA, consider as well as the schedule of other BA you will be
facilitating. Remember that you are handling at least five barangays and the proximity of
the schedules might be unmanageable. Make sure the BA schedules are realistic and
4. Organize separate meetings
or assemblies for sitios or Facilitation DO s and DONT s
puroks that are very far and
hardly accessible. The Learn to manage conflict Do not quarrel with
households and other
Have a good projection Do not lecture like a teacher
vulnerable groups like the
Indigenous People, farmers, Direct/sustain smooth and Do not embarrass nor insult
women, etc. in these areas systematic flow of discussion the participants
should also be reached and
Avoid biases Do not act like a terror
informed about the Project teacher
and how they can participate. Have mastery of subject Do not reprimand
They should be given the matter being discussed participants
opportunity to articulate their Give everybody a chance to Do not get angry with the
views, participate in the talk/participate participants
decision-making process, Lay down the ground rules of Do not overdo the sense of
and exercise their right to discussion humor
information. The people then Always give a running Do not be too
select their sitio/purok summary of the accommodating to the
delegates to represent them discussion/agreements participants
to the barangay assembly. Surface feelings and Do not be too serious
experiences of participants
5. Check the venue and ensure Be sharp and sensitive to the Do not be a dispenser of
the availability of required participants needs clarity but an enabler that
materials/equipment such as empower others
chairs, tables and sound Synthesize the entire Do not indoctrinate
system. Half day before the discussion
assembly, ensure physical Be relaxed, confident, warm, Do not lead participants by
arrangement. Mobilize the trusting and human asking questions to have
community volunteers to wanted answers
Reflect, judge, and decide Do not express personal
assist you. If possible, there
objectively opinion, standpoint or
should be no presidential viewpoint
table. A half moon Respond quickly to verbal Do not exercise authority
arrangement of the chairs and non-verbal reactions of over the group
maybe preferable so that participants
everyone easily sees your
presentation materials.
6. If you have presentation materials, check them before the meeting. Role play your
presentation. Anticipate possible reactions based on your interaction with the community
members and plan out your responses.
7. Be at the venue an hour before the assembly. As much as possible start on time.

32 Post Barangay Assembly Activity

Right after each barangay assembly, the CF conducts focused group discussion (FGD) to
selected members of the assembly (different sectors should be represented) to assess the
BA conducted. Questions for the FGD are in the BA form to be filled up by the CF after the

3.1.3 Promoting transparency thru the Grievance Redress

System (GRS) What is the Grievance Redress System (GRS?)

The Grievance Redress System (GRS) is a pioneering approach to social accountability in

the operations of Government. It provides an opportunity for the people to articulate their
comments, suggestions, and seek redress for problems or complaints related to the Project.

Through this mechanism, any queries about the Project are answered; problems that arise
out from implementation are resolved and addressed effectively and expeditiously.
Grievance or complaints may include misuse of funds and allegations of corruption,
inappropriate intervention by outside parties (in making decisions, determining allocations, in
procurement etc.); and violation of project policies, principles or procedures.

The system upholds the principle of transparency and accountability and demonstrates the
commitment of the Project to provide opportunities for the empowerment of communities. It
is for this reason that the system ensures the participation of the barangay assembly and
volunteers for grievance in the handling and redress of complaints. What are the principles of the GRS?

Consistent with the KALAHI-CIDSS principles, this mechanism enhances empowerment,

promotes transparency, and allows the Project to be fully responsive to its beneficiary
communities. This is strategically necessary in maintaining the credibility and integrity of
Projects operations and cultivates greater confidence in the bureaucracy. The Grievance
Redress System is anchored on the following principles that guide the KALAHI-CIDSS

Transparency The system encourages comments and feedback (negative and

positive) to improve the Project. The community must be aware of the progress and
problems encountered during implementation. People involved in any complaint or
grievance must be part of the resolution and kept informed on progress made in
resolving those problems.

Empowering and participatory Communities, project implementers, NGOs, civil

society groups, journalists and other stakeholders are encouraged to participate and
bring complaints, grievances and comments to the attention of Project management.

More importantly, communities are responsible for resolving problems and the system
will prepare them to do so.

Socially inclusive and open The whole community (and even those outside) is given
the opportunity to raise concerns and the right to be accorded a response. The
grievance system will allow anyone, especially the poor, the disadvantaged groups, the
women, to raise grievance or complaints, be heard and be involved in its redress.

Institutional capacity-building for good governance Through the system, the

DSWD and local government units can strengthen channels of communication and
mechanisms for grievance redress at the community level. The system enables the
government to be accountable to the people and work transparently to resolve
problems-- not on behalf of the people but with the people. This enhances
responsiveness of local governments and develops peoples trust. The LGUs become
fully responsive and accountable on their own actions to achieve better governance and
enhanced development effectiveness through improved public service delivery.

Simple and accessible Procedures to file complaints and seek redress are kept
simple and easy to understand by the communities. Complaints and queries may be
sent through different accessible means.

Quick and proportional action Response to grievance and comments is ensured

within an acceptable timeline and that the corresponding action is responsive and
commensurate to the complaint or comment. The system does not over-react to
problems and strives to provide solutions which shall address the problem rather than
penalize the people or communities. All grievances must be acted upon within five (5)
working days upon receipt.

Objective and independent The system entails objective and independent process
so that it will be perceived as fair and encourages people to use it, thus enhancing the
Projects contribution to good governance. In all instances, conflict of interest or
perceptions of conflict of interest will be looked into and avoided.

Anonymity and security To remain accessible, open and trusted, the grievance
system ensures that the identities of those complaining are kept confidential. This
encourages people to openly participate and file complaints or comments.

Due process implies the right of a person to be present and be heard before a duly
constituted body assigned or formed to hear, settle, mediate or conciliate complaints or
grievance. What are the common causes of conflicts in KALAHI-CIDSS?

In KALAHI-CIDSS, a complaint or grievance is filed because of a personal or collective

belief that there was a violation of a right or a non-fulfillment of an obligation of the LGUs,
residents, Project implementers, or other stakeholders. Rights of Participants in the Project.

Barangay residents, LGU officials, employees of national government agencies, media

representatives, NGOs and civil society groups and the project implementers are accorded
the following rights as Project participants.

Right to information The principle of transparency and good governance dictates that all
participants should have full access to information on the Project especially the status of
sub-projects in their communities. Having adequate information will enable the barangay
residents to make an effective decision on matters affecting their welfare.

Right against intervention The Project supports localized and demand-driven decision-
making. The Project respects the right of communities to choose the people who will
represent them, make decisions on the sub-projects they want to propose, the manner of
implementing projects, and the manner by which grievance and complaints will be resolved
-- free from interference from other sectors or agencies.

Provision of technical assistance by Project staff to the community must not be considered a
violation against intervention on community decisions. A sound technical assistance is
necessary to guide the community in coming up with the most appropriate, effective, and
efficient, solutions to their problems.

Right to participate and be heard -- The Project advocates for participation in the
selection, design and implementation of sub-projects and in the election of community
representatives. The right of all participants to be heard and to air grievance, comments, and
opinion is also respected.

Right to informed consent -- Only after the communities are informed of all options
available to them and the possible consequences of their choices should they be asked to
make their final decisions. The right of the people to information and technical advice is
premised on the assumption that they are only able to make right decisions after full
information has been given to them. Obligations of Participants in the Project.

Parties joining the Project will assume certain obligations inherent to or explicitly provided by
the Project. These obligations are categorized into four general areas, as follows:

Obligations arising from the LET-CIDSS principles of the Project. Adherence to the core
principles of the Project is required. The operationalization of these principles is mostly
contained in the CEAC Manual, which serves as a reference on these obligations.

Obligations arising from the provisions of the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) among
parties participating in the project. These MOAs contain the responsibilities of different
parties and become a source of obligations. The MOAs are between the:
- DSWD and MLGU perfected during the municipal launch
- DSWD, MLGU and BLGU/BSPMC on Sub-Project Implementation

Obligations also arise because the Project confers and recognizes certain rights of
stakeholders. Violation of any of these rights may result in the filing of grievance or
complaint. Discussed earlier, these rights are as follows:
- right to information
- right against intervention
- right to participate and be heard
- right to informed consent

To summarize, these are the prevalent sources of conflicts in the Project: 1). lack of
information and/or misinformation due to lack of transparency; 2). poor communication
and/or miscommunication on community decisions and progress of implementation; 3).
Strong traditional power structures and fear against authorities. What are the types of Grievances?

The system deals with four types of grievances/comments or queries. The categorization is
mainly for the purpose of sorting the different comments and grievance according to the
main authority that will address or resolve them.

Type A Grievance

This covers queries, comments, and suggestions. This type is non-contentious and merely
requests for information/updates, seeks clarification or a response and suggestions to
enhance the project design, improve operations and facilitate administrative/logistical
support to the project. This could also be issues raised during assemblies and focus group

This may be answered at the point of intake by any of the following: Project Staff (National
Grievance Monitor, Regional Grievance Monitor, Regional Project Manager, Area
Coordinator, Community Facilitator or any designated staff and community volunteers who
could respond clearly to the query/issue.

Questions related to date, place, and time for the conduct of KC-related activities are
unnecessary to intake under Type A.

Type B Grievance

This type of grievance involves violations of certain rights or non-performance of obligations.

This may cover: i). violation or non-accordance of any of the rights of the parties to the
Project; ii). violation of any of the principles of the Project; and iii). non-performance of
obligations contained in the MOAs

These types of grievance are primarily addressed by the Barangay Assembly (BA) and / or
the Municipal Inter-barangay Forum (MIBF).

Type C Grievance

This type refers to grievance or offenses involving a violation of law. This is more serious
and may take a little longer to resolve because the redress mechanisms are usually through
established legal processes like in the courts of law. However, the BA and MIBF may act on
these cases to facilitate out-of-court settlement.

Type D Grievance

This type involves complaints against Project staff, LGU staff, MIAC and MIBF members,
and staff of other organizations participating in the Project. These complaints are related to
conduct and behavior of staff.

Project Staff and other project stakeholders must adhere to accepted norms of conduct
dictated by legal precepts or cultural practices. These are contained in: i). Civil Code as the
basic law guiding human relations; ii).Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for
Government Employees; and iii). Traditional and Customary Laws of the areas where
Project is being implemented.

Complaints against DSWD Project staff will be handled and resolved by the DSWD using its
internal rules of procedure. Staff of other agencies, including LGUs and NGOs will likewise
be subjected to their own internal rules of procedure once they become the subject of
complaints. This is without prejudice to an inter-agency intervention to resolve the problem.
The BA and MIBF however, may recommend or articulate sanctions to the appropriate body. What is the Grievance Handling Process?

There are four major steps in the grievance handling process namely: (1) initiation; (2)
processing and action; (3) feedback; and (4) follow-up. Please refer to the Grievance
Manual for more details about specific aspects of the grievance handling process. Who may file grievance?

Anyone with a complaint against the Project, its implementation, the project staff, local
personalities in the areas of Project operation and others may file grievance. This includes:

Any or all residents of the barangay and municipality where the project is being
Officials of local and national government agencies;
Staff of non-government organizations, faith-based institutions, consultants, media
representatives and local business groups;
Non-residents of the barangay or municipality who stand to gain or lose from the
project; How is a grievance or comment filed or initiated?

A grievance or comment may be channeled or initiated through:

Letters, e-mails, text messages, phone calls
Verbal narration from walk-in complainants
Suggestion boxes to be placed in non-political/religious institutions
Reports on visits to project offices and sites by project staff, independent monitors,
supervision teams, government officials, or any interested persons or special groups
like IPs, elderly, etc.
Media newscasts, newspaper articles, and other publications, call in questions,
comments or complaints from radio programs,

The Grievance contact details (mobile hotline) must be posted in conspicuous places in the
barangays and municipalities as well as in the regional and national offices of DSWD.

3.1.4 Participatory Situation Analysis (PSA) What is Participatory Situation Analysis?

Participatory Situation Analysis (PSA) is a systematic, semi-structured and flexible method

of acquiring information. To other groups and organizations which are also adopting
participatory approaches, PSA is also known as Participatory Learning and Action (PLA),
Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA), Participatory Resource Review (PRR), and
Participatory Action Research (PAR).

PSA is a method of collective information sharing and analysis that can be used for a variety
of purposes, including but not limited to strengthening organizations, design and
implementation of programs and projects, monitoring and evaluation, and drafting of
community development plans. What is the purpose of PSA?

As a research method, the purpose of PSA is to mobilize local communities to share

information about local conditions from their own perspectives. Unlike other data gathering
instruments, PSA employs peoples involvement methods to acquire relevant data from
community members in the formulation of development plans. It is a collective analysis of
the community situation wherein people congregate to share their knowledge and
experiences on their condition through the use of visual tools.

But beyond being another research methodology, PSAs popular and collective process of
sharing information, analysis of data and prioritization of concerns and issues make the
people more critical and analytical in understanding their current condition.

Because it proceeds from the peoples perspective, it provides external development actors
with a key to understand how community people think and what their priorities and
aspirations are. By involving people in the entire process of data collection and analysis,
and in the formulation and design of plans to address identified development issues,
collective implementation of development interventions is enhanced.

When people are actively engaged, they acquire adequate knowledge, proper skills as well
as power to efficiently and effectively manage community development projects ensuring

that these projects will become more grounded and responsive to the actual needs of the
community. What are the principles of PSA?

The basic essence of the PSA process is the active participation of the community people.
Because of this, PSA practitioners follow certain principles to ascertain its development
objectives. Below are some of the defined operational values in the performance of PSA:

1. Optimum Ignorance (no monopoly of information). Adequate and concrete

information is needed in order to have a sound conclusion. In PSA, it is imperative to
exhaust the process of data gathering and analysis before vaulting into conclusions.
Otherwise, formulated development plans without ample information may not directly
address community concerns and issues.
2. Triangulation (cross-checking of data). Getting hold of the validity of the acquired
information through cross-checking of data to other PSA tools used, from various groups
or individuals in the community or from various information materials available. Through
this process, we can get the most objective data.
3. Self critical awareness and responsibility (focused on PSA principles). The
facilitator needs to regularly check his/her words and actions on the principles of PSA
approach. It is the responsibility of the facilitator to make the entire process people-
centered, unbiased and participatory.
4. Reversal of learning (lessons from peoples experiences). Facilitators are not
the one providing information but acquiring information from the people. Facilitators are
not to lecture but to facilitate the learning process among community people.
5. Consultative (process coming from the people). If and when the people are not
comfortable with the activities and tools presented, they can use other indigenous
activities or resources available in the community.
6. Collective formulation (plans made by the people). Nobody knows everything
but everybody knows something. PSA is process of consolidating peoples knowledge
and experiences to come up with a collective formulation of development plans.
7. Focused learning on limited but important data (quality than quantity). In
PSA, it is important to know the various and important data to gather where the data
gathering will focus on. Initial analysis is imperative to know what data are important and
what are not. This is for the PSA resources to concentrate on the essentials of the
process or activity.
8. Learning by doing (activity-oriented learning). PSA is an experiential process of
gathering information. People learn while collectively sharing experiences on the context
of the community through PSA tools. And in doing so, there will be a deeper appreciation
and understanding on their existing positive and negative condition and how these be
enhanced and addressed, respectively. Why the Need for PSA in the KC Development Process?

A basic truth about development is that local people know more about local conditions that
are relevant to development planning than do people at higher levels. As a poverty
reduction program adopting community-driven development as the primary project strategy,

development interventions to address local poverty issues under the KC project proceed
from community demand, and are not pre-identified by external experts.

By allowing local determination of development interventions, the need for a process of

careful analysis of local conditions by local communities takes on a prime importance. In
the KC Project, this process proceeds through PSA. Because of its participatory character,
the PSA is an effective and efficient form of collective data gathering and analysis that
engages community people in simple, visual, fun, and semi-structured processes of sharing,
gathering and analyzing information in order to ascertain the general and particular needs of
the community for the creation of concrete, responsive and relevant strategies for
community development. When is the PSA process conducted, and for how long?

Planning for participatory, community-driven development is a dynamic and never-ending

process. The process should be imagined as a wheel - at some point in the process, one
must return to the first step in order to plan further.

In the case of the KC Project, the PSA can be likened to the starting point of this cyclical
process. The PSA in the KC project is conducted after the conduct of the first barangay
assembly where the project is first introduced to the barangay, and the PSA volunteers are

Prior to the conduct of the actual PSA workshop, the CF should be able to undertake
preparatory activities such as groundworking the PSA volunteers, engaging leaders of
existing CBOs in discussions on community situations, ground working barangay officials
and MIAC members to attend the PSA, collection and review of existing secondary data
(especially those contained in the barangay and municipal development plans, MBN
surveys, or CBMS data if available). All of these preparatory activities should lead to firming
up the objectives, processes and methodologies, facilitation plans, and schedules and other
logistical details of the PSA workshop.

The KC PSA workshop is expected to last for two and a half days, aside from the community
validation of PSA results in a barangay assembly, which is expected to take half a day.
Over-all, the entire PSA process from data gathering to validation should last for three days. How does the PSA process proceed? Preparing for the PSA

The community facilitator's behavior and valuations are critical to PSA. The people in the
community and facilitators are learning from each other. Facilitators must act according to
what seems to be the best alternative. They must avoid biases, particularly gender biases,
and sit down, listen and respect the views of people. They must make the activity fun and
enjoyable. They must ensure that the process is open and participatory, and prepare people
to be ready to own up mistakes. The CF must also ensure that people are learning while
enjoying the process.

The mentioned values should influence the methods employed by PSA. Remember that It
is the community that makes the map, models, diagram, scoring, charts, ranking, analysis,

planning, monitoring and evaluation. Community facilitators guide the people in the PSA
process being undertaken by the community. In the course of performing the activities,
people begin to share and help one another towards the formulation of development plans.
The lessons from these experiences should be the foundation in the creation and
implementation of new programs and projects. Who Needs to be Involved in the PSA process?

All community members are expected to participate in the PSA process. However, if the
participation of all is not possible (which normally happens), it will be crucial to engage
representatives from all sectors, puroks or sitios and community leaders in parts or the
whole of the PSA process. They can serve as key informants on local conditions, as well as
provide critical information leading to the formulation of development plans.

Apart from the mandated organizations, it is also vital to involve the existing community-
based organizations (CBOs) in the PSA process. Because these organizations are
composed of local residents who have come together for a specific purpose, they can be
maximized for generating information on specific local conditions related to their particular
area of interest, as well as in validating the PSA results. Engaging local organization in the
PSA process will also produce the added effect of building ownership of PSA results among
organized groups, thereby increasing the potential for buy-in of CDD processes as well as
for inclusion of the peoples issues in their respective development agenda. Forming the PSA Volunteers Team

In order to make the PSA process in the KC Project more dynamic, experiential, and
participatory, a PSA Volunteers Team is created who shall take the lead in the PSA process,
supported by the KC Community Facilitators (CF). The PSA Volunteer Team is a group
composed of at least 2 community residents per purok. Potential PSA volunteers can be
nominated during the first barangay assembly, where they shall be formally selected.

The composition of the PSA volunteer team is a critical step. The CF must ensure that
those selected for the work are knowledgeable of local conditions, and acceptable to the
members of their respective puroks. The CF must also ensure that there is balanced
representation between men and women in the volunteer team.

To ensure that volunteers are prepared to undertake their task, the CF must be able to
undertake effective groundworking. (Note: Insert Box explanation of Groundworking). Conducting the PSA workshop

The PSA process in the KC Project is largely iterative. While there are no hard and fast
rules or specific procedures in the conduct of the PSA workshop, there are broad stages in
the process. Please note that these stages are iterative, and do not necessarily proceed in
an end-to-end sequence. These include the following;

A. Preliminary warm-up

This is a very critical, but often overlooked, stage in the PSA process. During the
preliminaries, the CF and the PSA volunteers get to know each other better and review the

tasks that need to be undertaken. In this stage, all participants join together in defining the
goals, objectives, and expected outputs of the PSA workshop. Too often, CFs tend to rush
this process by defining the goals, objectives, and expected outputs themselves, leading to
agency domination of the PSA process, and non-ownership of the results by the volunteers.
Remember that it is the community who are the primary actors in the PSA workshop, and
therefore the role of the CF is to facilitate dialogue and consensus on the goals, objectives,
process, and outputs of the workshop among the volunteers.

B. Data gathering and sharing

This is the second stage of the PSA process, during which PSA volunteers share information
about local conditions through the use of visual tools. The over-all goal of this stage is to
produce a coherent profile of the barangay. Please note that no one person has a complete
grasp of the totality of the barangay condition and that for this reason, each volunteer should
be allowed to provide his or her own views of the situation in the barangay based on the
data he or she has. There are also a lot of secondary sources of data about the barangay.
The information from these sources should be reviewed at this stage. The validity of
information contained in these secondary sources should be checked against the peoples
knowledge of local conditions. If these information are proven valid, they should be
incorporated in the data gathering and sharing, and presented along with other information
supplied by the volunteers. The following section provides a list of the tools that can be used
for data gathering and sharing.

C. Data Analysis and Interpretation

This is the stage where PSA volunteers begin to step back and look at the totality of
information available to derive conclusions about the community situation. Since each tool
presents a specific set of information, each tool should be analyzed and conclusions drawn
about what each tool reveals about the local situation. Secondly, the information revealed
by each tool should also be counter-checked (or triangulated) against information revealed
from other tools. Where gaps exists, further information may be required, or deeper
analysis undertaken, to fill these gaps.

Bear in mind that unlike academic research, data gathering and sharing, and data analysis
and interpretation often over-lap and at times even mix in the PSA process. It is perfectly
alright if in the course of analyzing a data set, other information need to be collected, or
information previously accepted are discarded altogether. This is part of the key PSA
feature of immediate and continuing data presentation, validation and revalidation. Data
gathered through participatory processes are often perception-based, and as such are not
static, but dynamic interpretations of reality by community members.

D. Identification of community strengths and development potentials

One important output of data analysis and interpretation is the identification of key
community strengths and development potentials. Here the PSA volunteers should be able
to identify key features of the physical, demographic, social, economic, political, and cultural
situation that can be utilized to propel community-driven development initiatives or support
CDD efforts of local residents.

E. Identification of key poverty problems and development challenges

The data analysis and interpretation process will also result in the identification of key
problems contributing to local poverty and hindering development. At this point, community
facilitators guide participants through a process of analyzing community issues and
problems, identifying their causes, how they affect the lives of the community residents, and
in what ways these effects are expressed as observable negative conditions.

Bear in mind that community problems seldom stand alone. In most cases, community
problems are interconnected in fundamental ways. For example, the problem of insufficient
income to meet basic needs may be an effect of poor quality of agricultural produce.
Residents of poor communities are almost always aware of these connections since they
experience these issues first hand. It is therefore necessary to facilitate a process of
connecting these problems so that core issues are properly identified. By surfacing the
connections between issues, community members also begin to see the necessity of
addressing these issues in their totality, and not just focus on shotgun, one-to-one solutions.

F. Identification of the range of possible solutions to address development


After having identified both the communitys potentials for development as well as the
challenges it faces, a process of brainstorming is undertaken in order to identify the range of
possible solutions to each core issue surfaced. Please note that each community member
views a particular issue from a specific view point or bias. For instance, the problem of x
number of school-age children not attending school can be viewed by some as an issue of
distance of facility, to which the solution can be to bring the school closer to the
community. Some however, may view this problem from an economic perspective in the
sense that some poor parents opt not to send their children to school because they do not
have the resources to support the cost, or that the children contribute to household income
by doing farm work. In this case, an economic support solution may be more appropriate.
Because of these differences in perspectives, it is better to begin the process of identifying
solutions by surfacing the range of all available solutions, and then selecting which is more
appropriate and beneficial for all, or a majority of the residents concerned. In the process,
the interconnections of problems and solutions are reinforced.

G. Action Planning

Unlike academic research, the PSA process leads to the mobilization of local communities
to address development challenges identified in the course of analysis of local conditions.
Because the people are the ones involve in the whole process, from setting the goals and
objectives of the PSA activity to data sharing and collection to analysis and identification of
development potentials and challenges, it is only logical that the people themselves begin to
think about how to address the development problems they face. Having identified the
development potentials, key poverty issues and problems, and the range of potential
solutions to address the same, the process now moves to the drafting of an action plan that
describes the specific responses that the community will undertake to implement solutions
already identified.

Bear in mind that the activities do not need to be complicated, and the action plan does not
need to be overly detailed. What matters is that having understood the local conditions and

development challenges the community faces, poverty and its causes are demystified. In
the process, the people begin to understand that some of these problems are actually
solvable, and that the solutions are within their capacity to bring about. However simple the
plan, these represent the peoples first step towards development. Like all first steps, they
must necessarily be simple following the community organizing principle of moving from
simple to complex, and from concrete to abstract concepts.

The final form of the action plan may vary from barangay to barangay. However, they must
be concrete enough to allow for effective follow-through and monitoring of accomplishments.

H. Community Validation

After drafting the action plan, the PSA volunteer team consolidates all outputs of the PSA
process and draft the barangay profile for presentation to the wider community, which shall
then validate the information and analysis undertaken by the team.

Necessarily, the community members need to understand the information first before they
are able to comment and validate. To this end, information gathered through the PSA
process should also be presented the way they were generated, that is, through the use of
visual tools and representations like maps, diagrams, drawings, pictures, graphs, and in
some cases even through interactive methods such as community theater presentations.
Whatever the methodology, the first goal is for the people to understand the information
being presented, and for the residents to be able to engage with the information in a
dynamic way.

Many CFs and PSA volunteers make the mistake of treating the Community Validation
activity as largely a ceremonial presentation of the PSA outputs, rather than an integral part
of the PSA process itself. In actuality, the Community Validation process is a second loop
PSA activity. It is perfectly OK for the people to comment on the accuracy of the data
generated, and is perfectly allowed to correct wrong information, add missing information, or
even subtract irrelevant data. In a sense, the validation is a whole PSA process rolled into
one activity.

The end goal of the validation exercise is for the people to own the results of the PSA
exercise. Its objective is to build buy-in of the analysis undertaken by the volunteers. This
can only be achieved if the community is made to feel that the results of the process are
theirs and not the volunteers, and as such, they can add their own perspectives and
comment on the analysis. If the process is undertaken properly, mobilizing community
response to address identified problems becomes easy.

It must be stressed that the above process outline is iterative, and only describes the stages
in broad strokes. Community Facilitators are encouraged to study their local conditions
carefully, study other examples and manuals on PSA from various sources, and design their
own workshop facilitation plans as deemed appropriate. What tools are used in PSA?

Because of the participatory nature of the PSA process where the people themselves
undertake information gathering, the data gathering tools and methods need to be adjusted
to local conditions so that they meet the communication requirements of community

residents who are not used to communicating in overly scientific, academic terms. To this
end, PSA makes use of various tools - visual, creative and participatory - in gathering and
presenting information.

Currently, there are more than a hundred documented PSA tools, and the number is
increasing rapidly due to the nature of PSA as inspiring and encouraging creativity and

Following are some of the most important and commonly used Tools:

Resource and Social Maps

The "top view" of the community. The map shows the resources of the community, e.g.,
forest cover, rivers, springs, irrigated land, crops, residential areas, watersheds, grazing
land, etc.

Transect Maps
The "side view" or cross-section of the community. It shows the topography, soil type, crops,
livestock, problems, and opportunities of each ecozone. Before a Transect Map is made, a
few members of the team along with some community guides need to take a "transect walk".
The map identifies problems and opportunities for particular sites in the community.

Seasonality Diagrams
Is done to determine the seasonal patterns and trends in the data, e.g., rainfall, crop
sequence, jobs, incomes, loans, food availability, incidents of pests and diseases, migration,
etc. - any data which form regular patterns overtime.

Pair-Wise Ranking
Is a ranking exercise, that is, a comparison of factors in order to see which among them are
most important. Comparison is done in pairs. This is usually done when it is difficult to
make criteria for comparison of all items and to prioritize the perceived problems for

Matrix Ranking
Ranks several items in order to determine which item is the most important to the people in
the community. Criteria determined by the community are put in a matrix, which will be used
for ranking items according to priority.

Venn Diagram
Shows the institutions, individuals or factors that influence the people in the community.

Work Division Matrix

Shows the contribution or activities of women and men in production and reproduction,
leisure activities, etc. This tool provides the significant contribution of women in the
production and reproduction activities.

Historical Transect
Is a matrix or table in which patterns over time, population trends, forest cover, livestock,
crops, etc. are shown by means of illustration.

Pie Chart
Is a visual representation of percentages, e.g. income, expenditures, source of income, etc.

Service Map
Shows the services rendered inside and outside the community.

Flow Chart
Shows the steps in the production process up to the sale of the product.

Organizational Rating Matrix

Indicates the activities and duties of an organization or association, e.g., local government,
leadership of a cooperative, women's association, etc. The community people will rate each
activity or duty to discover the strong and weak points of an organization or association in
their performance.

Vision Map
Shows the aspirations of the people about their community through illustration. This is done
after prioritization of needs. After which, vision statement is formulated. What are the outputs of the PSA process?

In the KC Project, the PSA results in the identification of the communitys key strengths in
different dimensions (physical and demographic, political, economic, social, and cultural) as
well as the key development challenges facing the local population. This is captured in a
Barangay PSA Profile, which will serve as one of the basis for tracking changes in local
conditions over time resulting from project inputs.

As part of the CEAC process, the PSA is also expected to produce two vital outputs; (1) a
list of key problems that contribute to the persistence of poverty at the local level, and (2)
the range of potential development interventions to address each identified problem.
As all poverty problems are commonly multi-dimensional, a single development challenge
often requires the implementation of a wide range of solutions. The PSA process of
participatory problem analysis should capture this diversity. For example, the problem of
Insufficient income to meet basic needs can originate from the problem of low agricultural
production which can have many antecedent causes. The range of solutions to address
this problem can include access to credit for farm inputs, or increasing capacity of farmers to
engage in better planting technologies, or improving farm to market road infrastructures. It
is obvious that no solution can be singly responsible for increasing income, and that
addressing this problem may require the implementation of all these solutions.

These problems and ranges of solutions serve as inputs in the preparation of viable and
effective Barangay Action Plans (BAPs). However, the degree of viability and
effectiveness of a plan depends on the process by which it is formulated. Critical to such
process is the active and proactive participation of both men and women living in the
community. The participation of all sectors in the planning would ensure that the primary
needs of the community are determined including womens needs, on the basis of which
projects would be prioritized according to necessity.

More importantly, the people in the community who themselves crafted the plan would be
able to claim it as their own, thus leading them to lend their full support in implementing the

The formulated BAP can lend utility to the development and/or refinement of Barangay
Development Plans. Often in KC areas, barangays only prepare annual investment plans
and not BDPs. Because of the scope of study and analysis undertaken in the PSA process,

the results can serve as basis for the drafting of a more comprehensive and strategic BDP in
barangays where non exists. In the few barangays where BDPs are present, the results of
the PSA exercise can serve to validate and enrich the directions and priorities contained in
the BDPs.

Community facilitators and PSA volunteers should work closely with barangay officials
during the course of the PSA activity with the end view of building buy-in to the idea of
incorporating PSA outputs in BDPs or of developing BDPs using the PSA results where
none exists. This way, institutional support for the peoples development agenda is
strengthened and a response to the peoples development priorities by the barangay
government is more or less assured. What are the challenges to facilitating the PSA process?

The participatory, iterative, and creative nature of the PSA process presents facilitators with
unique challenges. Some of these challenges include the following;

Rushing the process: Some facilitators tend to rush the process, as a result, the output
may not reflect the real situation of the community, and thus, the formulated plans are not
responsive to the real needs of the people. Rushing the process can occur in many forms,
from gathering unverified and un-triangulated information to shallow analysis. Some
facilitators hide this propensity for rushing the PSA process by referring to their role as mere
facilitators and that it is actually the people who provide the information and analysis.
However, this is a serious distortion of the principle of people-led development and the role
of facilitators as catalysts. It is imperative that facilitators fully orient themselves on PSA
principles, processes and tools, and understand their role as catalyst in the peoples process
of analysis. It is the role of the facilitator to serve as the grindstone upon which the people
test their views and perspectives against. If the grindstone is not hard or does not provide
enough roughness and tension to the peoples analysis, then the resulting analysis will be

Mechanical conduct of the PSA: Due to the number of times facilitators need to
conduct the PSA process (five times in every cycle, one for each assigned barangay), there
exists a dangerous tendency to conduct the PSA process in a mechanical manner.
Facilitators must remember that every community is unique and has its own specific context.
Facilitators must accord each community the same amount of time and respect, and must
never fall into the trap of assuming that the same conditions exist in all areas. A learners
attitude is critical in ensuring that facilitators are able to surface the unique characteristics,
potentials, and development needs of each community.

Gathering too little or too much information: In the conduct of the data gathering
and sharing process, facilitators and volunteers are often confronted with the challenge of
determining when sufficient information has been gathered to allow for substantial analysis.
A common question that arises is How do we know when information and data collected is
enough? The obvious answer is of course You dont. Facilitators should understand that
PSA is a dynamic process, and that the goal of PSA is to get people to look at local
conditions from their own perspective, share what information they know, gather more
information as the need arises, and develop a coherent picture of local conditions that is
clear enough to allow for action. In this context, information is never enough, but the fact
that one does not have hold of all information is not a cause for inaction. On the contrary,
determining the extent of information available as well as gaps in the data is a critical PSA

Non-utilization of existing secondary information: One common failure of PSA
efforts is the non-utilization of existing secondary information. Facilitators and volunteers
should understand that other efforts by other agencies and individuals have been
undertaken to collect and analyze information about local conditions. These includes such
data sources as the Minimum Basic Needs (MBN) survey, Community-Based Monitoring
System (CBMS) data collection efforts, and even sector specific data such as those on
health and education undertaken by the local health centers and the records from local
public schools. The wealth of information already existing can potentially provide volunteers
with data that can be used in analyzing observed local conditions. However, these data
sources as often underutilized.

It is the task of facilitators to gather this wealth of information and feed them into the PSA
activity. In the process, the data collected and shared by local volunteers are enhanced,
and volunteers are afforded the opportunity to validate information about their situation that
are collected by various sources.

Focus on the tools and not on process: Connected to the previous challenges, a
tendency to focus on the accomplishment of individual tools rather than on the entire
process is a major challenge that facilitators should be able to overcome. This proceeds
from the fact that undertaking the tools is one of the most active and engaging part of the
PSA process and it is very easy to get lost in the maze of information being generated.
Facilitators must bear in mind that the tools exist for the purpose of making data generation,
sharing, and analysis among the participants easier. If the tools are making this difficult,
then the tools must be replaced with other methods. Also, each tool only gathers a specific
type of information or information set, the results of which must be triangulated with results
from other tools.

Treating the PSA as a one-shot activity: Some facilitators also tend to look at the
PSA as a one-shot deal process that ends upon completion of the BAP. However,
information is seldom static, and because of the nature of PSA information, which are largely
perception based, the process of validating and revalidating information is never ending.
The PSA is a dynamic process, and the results of the PSA are living data which lend utility to
a number of purposes. In the course of utilizing the PSA results, PSA data evolve, become
more defined, and even change over time. Even in the course of implementing activities,
new information continually arise and which need to be incorporated in the PSA profile. For
this reason, facilitators must be consciously communicating the need to periodically revisit
the PSA results to community volunteers.

Incomplete or shallow groundworking: In many communities in rural areas, some

people are not yet used to participate in the development process. Others think activities
such as PSA are just for leaders and elected officials or for experts only. At other times,
people perceive the activities as early electioneering or have political affiliations that prevent
them from involving. Some facilitators complicate this situation further by failing to do
effective groundworking. Facilitators should bear in mind the basic truism of community
organizing that people come to meetings or community activities only if they have a
compelling enough reason to come. The fact that volunteers have been elected by the BA
to participate in PSA activities does not constitute a compelling reason. Volunteers, and
anybody for that matter, should see an individual, personal stake in the successful conduct
of community activities for them to come. This is only achieved through thorough, one-on-
one groundworking, where facilitators take the time to visit each volunteer in their homes
and engage them in personal dialogue on their roles in the PSA process in particular and in
the development of the community in general. If they find a compelling personal role for
them, then they will surely attend.

Improper PSA scheduling: In the rush to meet schedules and timelines, facilitators will
be confronted with the challenge of activity scheduling. Facilitators should be conscious of
the fact that project activities often disrupt the peoples normal, day to day routine, and
people are often uprooted from their regular economic or social activities. The facilitators
convenience must never be placed above the peoples welfare. Proper groundworking will
ensure that disruptions caused by project schedules are kept to a minimum or are even

Given these challenges, it is essential to have good quality facilitation in order to address
PSA implementation concerns, without which it would be difficult to realize the particular
objectives of the process or activity. Worst, bad facilitation of the PSA process may lead to

Some facilitation guidelines are described below ;

The facilitator provides Tips on facilitating the PSA process

methods or tools for the
people to share their DOs DONTs
knowledge, skills and
insights and in order for them Relax and enjoy the Dont rush the process
to collectively decide on activities
development plans they will Have an adequate planning Dont try to do the process
collaboratively implement. as to the conduct of PSA alone, form a Team.
Have a clear PSA Dont promise anything
Facilitation is not as easy as objectives
it seems. There is a risk of Always find time to assess Dont overburden the people.
creating frustrations when conducted activities and Ask them if it is okay to
the expectations of people plan the succeeding extend time.
are not met. To ascertain activities
successful participation of Observe the people if they Dont go anywhere while
the people, it is critical to are participating tools are being performed
have enough understanding Have a synthesis of every Dont prioritize your own
on the structures, guidelines PSA tool used agenda against peoples
and methodologies. agenda
Facilitation should encourage If a mistake done, accept Dont be negative. If a
creativity and innovations and learn from it mistake done, try to work it
among community people. out directly.
Immediately document Dont take time in
processes and outputs documenting PSA process
Facilitation is not just a (written and photo) and output
matter of moderating Be alert on new things, Dont be too stiff on tools.
questions and answers. concepts, tools, materials They can be enhanced or
Facilitation is about creating etc. Be creative modified according to
meaningful interaction community context.
between and among Ask the support of the Dont give lectures
participants. Their outputs or community particularly its
formulated plans will be the leaders
product of their own Respect the Dont barge in when people
collective effort. Facilitation perspective/ideas of the share their experiences or
people ideas.
provides an avenue for the
Listen and observe Dont hesitate to solicit
people to understand each
peoples verbal and non- peoples suggestions
verbal messages
Switch Team roles. Ensure Dont exhibit competition
that all members have the among Team members.
chance to facilitate,
document and observe.

others context towards creative relations as an essential factor for community

Dont be baffled with so many ideas. It is so easy to vanish from the fuse of individual
and collective ideas and energies. Facilitation is guiding these ideas and energies into a
productive and meaningful sharing with the aim of coming up with sound situation
analysis and sensible and feasible plans.

Facilitation is not a magic bag where all solutions to problems are in. To motivate
people to collectively participate in the resolution of a certain situation or problem, it must
be clear to them that they are the ones who will work for the realization of their plans.

The facilitators are just guides who dont directly provide answers. Their main approach
is to be evocative with the purpose of surfacing peoples knowledge and they
themselves provide answers.

3.1.5 Social Mobilization, Community Organizing, and CBO
Formation and the BaBAE Teams What happens after the PSA?

The PSA activities walked community residents through a process of collective sharing and
analysis that led to the identification of development challenges and priorities generated
through the peoples own distinct perspectives and contexts. Community residents have
defined their conditions using their own worldview and in the process outlined the activities
that need to be conducted to begin the process of changing their conditions. By this token,
they have also begun to take upon themselves the challenge of addressing local poverty.

The ensuing process of social animation that begins to take shape after the PSA will follow
two tracks. The first is the CEAC project selection and planning track, which will be
discussed in greater detail in section 4.2. The second track proceeds through the
community organizing process and the formation, mobilization, and engagement of
community-based organizations (CBOs). What is Community Organizing?

Community Organizing is a development approach to address concrete development

challenges by shifting control over resources and decision-making to the larger majority of
people in a given community.

The goal of community organizing is to facilitate the formation of local groups of community
residents which shall serve as vehicles for the expression of collective, popular demand.
These groups are also called CBOs or Community-Based Organizations. What are Community-Based Organizations (CBOs)?

Community-based organizations (or CBOs) are membership organizations composed of

individuals within a self-defined community who have collectively banded together to
address a common need or advance a common interest.2

Throughout history, people who have neither economic nor political means have continually
relied on power in number to achieve change. However, the quality of change is not solely
determined by number but rather by organization. There is a fundamental difference
between a CBO and a mob. While both are a gathering of people, the first relies on
organized number while the other relies on number alone to achieve results. It is this
collective, organized effort to address a common, felt need that serves as the foundation for

Reference to the WB PRSP Sourcebook on CDD.

all community organizing and the formation, development, maintenance, and sustainability
of CBOs.

The process of generating collective demand, however, does not happen mechanically, but
is rather nurtured through a continuing process of action. This is also a hallmark
characteristic of a true CBO, to be in constant action. Action, after all, is the lifeblood of
community-based organizations. What is the difference between a CBO, an NGO, and Local Governance
Structures and Local Special Bodies?

As membership organizations, CBOs differ from both Non-Government Service

Organizations (broadly referred to as NGOs) and Local Governance Structures in very
fundamental ways. The operations of CBOs are calibrated to directly produce benefits for its
members. An NGO on the other hand has a wider scope of operation and activities usually
do not benefit NGO members directly. Both CBOs and NGOs are voluntary membership
organizations who chose their own objectives and are often more flexible in designing and
carrying out ways for achieving them. Unlike NGO personnel however, leaders of CBOs are
accountable to its members in very direct ways.

Government agencies, on the other hand, often operate within specific mandates, and adopt
rules and procedures following generally accepted legal (and often bureaucratic) norms,
such as revenue collection or the delivery of specific services. What are the different types of CBOs?

There are many ways to classify CBOs. One of the more general classifications is based on
form of membership. Most CBOs have direct, individual membership. However, there are
also organizations within the community which are composed of organizations rather than
individuals. These include alliances, federations, and networks. The difference between the
three types are on the tightness of the relationships between the organization-members.
(informal formal, direct membership organizational membership, local alliances and

Another way of classifying CBOs is made on the basis of economic activity, such as a
farmers group, a firsherfolk organization, or a labor organization.
Some type of CBOs commonly engaged in the KALAHI-CIDSS project include local health
associations, mothers clubs, parent-teachers associations, farmers associations, fishrefolk
groups, IP groups, water-users associations, youth groups, and church-based groups. What is the role of CBOs in Community-Driven Development? (Can a

CDD project be implemented without the need for engaging CBOs?)

Community Driven Development is a strategy that puts premium on the capacity of local
communities to make development interventions and investments more responsive to
community needs. A critical requirement of this strategy is the building of collective,
informed demand of local communities. By definition, a demand needs to have expression,
and a demand is not demand unless it is expressed. CBOs provide this agency by which
local communities are able to articulate their issues and communicate development
alternatives in a way that also demonstrate community empowerment.

In addition, Community-Driven Development is fundamentally grounded on the ability of
poor people to come together and collectively express not only the direction of development
but also how this development should take place and by what means. However, not all
needs are the same, and consequently, there arises a great deal of variety in terms of
perspectives about development choices. CBOs serve as a venue for synthesizing and
transforming individual needs and aspirations into community demand, and serve as the
agency by which these demands are expressed and achieved. There can be no community
demand without organization. Consequently, there can be no true CDD without the active
engagement of CBOs. Should we work with existing CBOs or facilitate formation of new


In the Philippine rural context, it is often rare to find a community where no community
organization of whatever form exists. How these organizations operate within the
community will largely determine whether they can be engaged in the KALAHI-CIDSS

The purpose to which the organization serves and by which token the organization was
formed is one indicator. A farmers organization that is actively working to secure land
tenure, or a group of mothers working to establish a health program, will be invaluable allies
in the project. So is a local youth organization that conducts periodic sports activities.

How local residents view the programs, services, or activities of these groups is another
indicator. Obviously, an organization that is known to have a track record of providing
benefits to members is worth engaging in the project.

The credibility of the leaders of a local CBO can also serve as indicator of whether an
association can be engaged in the project. If a particular leader is known to be good for
nothing, then his credibility, and consequently the credibility of the group, is compromised.

Lastly, the extent of inclusiveness of the organizations membership among community

residents can also be taken as an indicator. An organization which includes more than half
of households in a community as members, or which represents more than one sectoral
interest, is definitely a force to reckon with and will be worth engaging.

Whatever the parameter the ACT decides on, what remains critical is the need to engage
local groups in the project. In the absence of a strong CBO, the KALAHI-CIDSS process
which the community will undertake should lead to the establishment or strengthening of a
local association. How can existing CBOs be engaged in the KC:KKB project?

Building capabilities of local organizations is a basic principle for sustaining community-

driven development. This is undertaken by deliberately engaging existing organizations in
CDD process. There are numerous ways by which existing CBOs can be engaged in the
KC project. The following are a few examples;

During community meetings and assemblies:

Officers and members of youth organizations are tapped by a number of community
facilitators to assist in groundworking and inviting community residents to attend in barangay
assemblies. Mothers groups are also mobilized to lead in the preparation of snacks,
prepare the venues, and other logistical concerns. Fathers even assist in gathering and
carrying chairs, fixing sound systems, and other tasks.

During the PSA:

Officers and members of sectoral organizations can be tapped to provide invaluable data on
specific aspects of community conditions during the PSA process from data gathering to
validation and re-validation. Leaders of Agrarian Reform Communities and Beneficiaries
(ARCs and ARBs) in KALAHI-CIDSS barangays are a source of vital information on local
agricultural and tenurial conditions. Members of Parent-Teachers Associations (PTCAs) can
provide information on the school-age population and other related data.

Sectoral organizations can be asked to look into a specific aspect of the PSA output that
directly relates with their specific area of interest, and provide preliminary analysis of the
same for the community revalidation, and even in subsequent PSA review processes. Their
members can also be asked to serve as PSA volunteers.

Post-PSA Community-Based Monitoring and Advocacy;

Specific CBOs can be mobilized by the Barangay Assembly to take charge in addressing
particular PSA problems. An identified health issue can be tackled by a group of mothers
interested in the problem, while a clean-up solution can be implemented by a youth

Monitoring of implementation of community plans to address PSA concerns is also a major

area where CBOs should play an important role. Community-based monitoring can even be
a focal point for the coming together of different community associations interested or
working on specific aspects of an over-all development plan. For a more detailed discussion
on this topic, please refer to the section on the BaBAE Team below.

During Project Development:

Regular consultations with CBOs during project development can also be invaluable during
design of specific projects, specially on how specific designs can produce particular impacts
for specific groups.

During Sub-project Implementation:

A CBO, particularly a strong organization that has a wide membership base in the
community and which enjoys a high level of credibility among residents can be tapped by
the Barangay Assembly to take the lead in implementing a community project. This is an
alternative implementation mode to the creation of a Barangay Sub-Project Management
Committee. In this case, the CBO has to be fully accountable to the Barangay Assembly.

Whatever roles CBOs play in the project, the ACT must ensure that these are aligned with
the projects over-all goals of empowerment, good governance, and poverty reduction. How

these roles are played out should also be consistent with the projects principles, especially
those on inclusion and participation, and the accountability of CBOs to the Barangay
Assembly. When can existing CBOs be engaged in the project?

CBOs should be engaged from the very beginning of project implementation. At the
Municipal-level, ACTs should ensure the presence of municipal-level CBOs during the
Municipal Orientation, and in subsequent municipal-level activities, most especially during
the criteria setting workshops and the MIBFs. Municipal-level CBOs can also be tapped to
provide technical assistance in the preparation of feasibility studies, planning for resource
mobilization, and other aspects of project development.

At the barangay-level, community associations should be engaged starting with the

barangay orientation. ACTs should realize that community associations already have pre-
established systems and processes that the CF can tap, such as mechanisms for
information dissemination, membership consultation mechanisms, and the like. Tapping
these systems is an effective way for multiplying CF functions, while at the same time
serving as a method for enhancing capabilities of local leaders. What types of groups are formed during KC:KKB project


In the event where no local organization exists or where existing CBOs are inadequate for
what the project requires, it become the task of the ACT to ensure the formation and
development of local organizations which will propel CDD processes in the community.

As a CDD strategy, the KALAHI-CIDSS project utilizes the groundswell of interests

generated by development initiatives beginning with the PSA in order to mobilize
communities to engage in the development of local projects to address poverty. At the same
time, the planning, development, and implementation of these projects provide a rich
environment for local residents to build capacities for development. In the course of project
implementation, numerous volunteer groups are mobilized and formed, which can become
the basis for the formation of a strong local organization. These groups include;

PSA Volunteers, formed to lead in the conduct of participatory situational analysis, from
data gathering to community validation. These volunteers are either elected or chosen
during the first barangay assembly. Ina typical KC barangay, about two to three persons
from each purok are chosen to serve as a PSA volunteer. In large barangays, this is a
sizable group.

Barangay Representation Teams (BRTs). This is a committee formed to represent the

barangay in Municipal Inter-Barangay Forums. They can also be chosen or elected by the
Barangay Assembly during the 1st BA meeting, or can be elected during the 2nd BA, prior to
the CSW.

Project Preparation or Project Development Teams (PPTs or PDTs). These are

community residents chosen to assist in the preparation of community proposals which will
be recommended by the barangays for prioritization during the MIBF for PRA. There are no

limits to the number of people who can be chosen to serve in this team. They can be as few
as three people or as many as required by more complex community projects.

Project Management Committees. Implementing community projects to address issues

identified during the PSA will require organization of work teams or project implementation
management committees. In simple projects such as environmental clean-up drives, this
committees can include such simple groups as information and dissemination, clean-up
volunteers, logistics committees, those in-charge of refreshments, and so on.

In more complicated projects, such as those that require the construction of a level 2 Water
System, committees with more complex tasks need to be formed, which may include any or
all of the following;
1. Procurement Teams
2. Project Implementation Teams
3. Audit and Inventory Teams
4. Membership Teams
5. Finance Teams
6. Operation and Maintenance Teams
7. and so on, depending on the tasks that need to be undertaken.

Barangay-based Awareness and Education Team (BaBAE Teams). These are

groups of local volunteers who are tasked to ensure that issues and problems identified
during the PSA are addressed, and progress towards resolving the issues or achieving the
objectives of efforts to address PSA problems are monitored and disseminated to
community members.

The primary purpose of BaBAE Teams are to form actions groups which will propel local
efforts to resolve community development issues. In a real sense, each issue-based group
formed also acts as BaBAE Team, and there can be more than one BaBAE Team in any
given community.

Barangay Development Councils.

The Barangay Development Council is a duly mandated organization existing under the
barangays assembly that is charged with development planning at the level of the
barangays. In most cases in rural areas, the BDC composition is limited to the Barangay
Captain and the council and does not include CBOs or NGOs. This is because in a large
number of rural communities, CBOs and NGOs are simply not present or do not engage the

The identified community development problems in the PSA can be used as a rallying point
for the organization of the BDC were non exist or, activation of the BDC in areas where they
do exist but are only marginally active. The most immediate form of engagement towards
the organization or strengthening of BDCs is the mobilization of the barangays for the
preparation of strategic barangays development plans beginning after the PSA and
culminating in a prepared BDP by the period of sub-project implementation. This agenda
should be a focal point in the engagement of Community facilitators with barangays LGU
representatives and local volunteer groups, beginning with the PSA volunteers. How are these groups formed?

As discussed in section, the primary strategy implemented for the formation,
strengthening, and development of local community groups is community organizing.
Broadly, the critical activities involved in the formation of community organizations through
the community organizing process include the following;

1. Understanding the community, which includes such activities as social

investigation, one-on-one discussion with local residents, and integration. PSA is also
part of this process.

2. Identifying community issues and problems. From the range of problems and
issues identified during the PSA, community residents begin to choose priority problems
or issues which they will come together to work on. Note that different people have
different interests, and it is this truism that allows for multiple groups to be formed to
tackle multiple issues. A group of 10 mothers may want to tackle an issue of
malnutrition, while a youth group may want to tackle a community clean-up drive.
Another group may want to work on increasing agricultural productivity, while another
may want to work on improving water sanitation. There is no need to select which of
these issues should be worked on first. The point is that there are people who are
interested to work on them. Let them work!

3. Mobilizing issue groups. This is the part where issue groups begin to think about
how to best tackle the issue they need to work on, how to organize the scope of the work
required as well as divide the work among themselves, select informal leaders, and
actually begin the work.

4. Consolidating gains. As groups begin to work on their chosen problems, they begin
to get a sense of the organizing and community work required to achieve the goals of
the effort. Some groups may be able to achieve something concrete, others may not.
Some may experience difficulties, others may encounter setbacks. However, all of them
gain actual practical experience in working together. This is the first gain of any
community organizing effort. This experience will need to be consolidated so that they
become a growing pool of lessons on working together that community members will be
able to tap on as they continue working to achieve higher objectives and face more
complex challenges. Two tools in the CO bag of tricks are critical for consolidating this
gain. The first is assessment and evaluation, and the second is reflection.

5. Formalizing the community group. When members of an issue groups have

gained enough experience in working together, and/or have achieved considerable gains
from the effort, the group becomes ripe for formalization. At this point, norms are
established, and specific rules and systems for coming together are formalized.

Note that the above process presents a simplified version of the CO process. There are
numerous manuals on CO which provide the practical aspects of organizing community
associations. The ACT is encouraged to explore these manuals and readings, and explore
how they can be used to enhance CBO formation, strengthening, and capacity building in
the project.

3.1.6 Community-Based Monitoring (CBM) What is Monitoring?

Monitoring is the process of continuously and regularly reviewing a program to ensure that
activities are proceeding according to plan. In facilitating this process of continuing review,
data is systematically and regularly collected about a program and its activities over time,
with the end view of ensuring that the program as a whole moves towards the attainment of
its goals and objectives. What is participatory Community-Based Monitoring?

Participatory monitoring is a process of measuring, recording, collecting, processing and

periodic analysis of information by community members themselves. The ultimate goal of
participatory monitoring is to help facilitate collective decision-making. In participatory
monitoring, people decide for themselves what they want to monitor, why they want to
monitor these, and what the standards for monitoring will be. The direct engagement of
community people in participatory CBM also helps in promoting local dialogue and building
respect for each other opinion, as well as in building their understanding of the purpose of
their work, contributing to improved teamwork. What is the KALAHI-CIDSS: KKB CBM framework?

The KALAHI-CIDSS: KKB Project follows the Action-Reflection-Action (ARA) framework in

CBM. ARA is a process of interlinking theory and practice in a collective manner. Because
of the highly participatory nature of the ARA method, implies belief in acting on community
issues and problems, then studying, analyzing and reflecting on the effects of action. Based
on the results of the reflection, the community undertakes another level of action to address
the problem or issue at hand.

In concrete, the framework leads to the following 2 levels of reflection and analysis;

1. As a learning process showing good performance and areas for improvement, the
following questions can be considered for reflection;
What worked well? Why?
What strategies did not work? Why?
The process for this first part can be in the form of celebrations of achievements and
victories and / or reflection on actions undertaken.

2. As a process designed to lead to action;
Produce relevant, action-oriented findings on the progress of the program, and
follow-though with concrete plans, and;
Seek commitment on the basis of the lessons identified to foster sustained
involvement and local ownership of the tasks at hand; What are the characteristics of a participatory CBM system?

Some of the key attributes of a Participatory CBM System include the following;
Taps and utilizes indigenous knowledge and skills (what to monitor, monitoring
indicators, how to monitor and when, are all decided by the community);
Allows the people to reflect on the causes of their problems and make informed
decisions on what they can do about them;
Helps the community develop its resources and determine development directions;
Encourages a sense of responsibility among the community members; What is the process of CBM?

The following is an iterative process for undertaking CBM. Like any method adapted to
CDD interventions, the specific steps and activities will necessarily be context-specific. You
should therefore explore how these processes and activities can be best adapted to your
local condition in order to make the CBM system more effective.

Step 1: Form the monitoring team (BaBAE Team)

Broad activities to this end can include;

spotting of potential volunteers (this can be done during SI)
formation of core group (this can be done during the 1st BA)
the core group participates in the PSA process

Step 2: Create the monitoring plan

From the results of the PSA process, particularly the analysis of local conditions based on
information from the different tools, you should now be able to facilitate collective formulation
of the monitoring plan. This includes the following;
Problem identification - using the problem tree analysis and the PSA problem matrix;
Problem prioritization using a number of different methods, including PSA ranking
exercise, criteria-based decision making (ranking or rating), or pair-wise ranking
using pocket pictures;
Goal setting which is essentially an exercise in reformulating and/or transforming
the prioritized problems or problem statements into objectives;
Formulating indicators which should be SMART, incorporating Quality, Quantity,
Target, and Time;
Identifying method and tools for monitoring, which can include any of a umber of
monitoring tools such as data review, mapping, checklists, interviews, FGD,
empowerment stories, and;

Determining the frequency of monitoring activities.

Step 3: Implement the monitoring plan

Having facilitated the creation of the monitoring plan, you must now be able to enjoin the
community to implement the plan. To this end, you should be able to facilitate the creation
of enabling environments where the BaBAE Team will be able to perform the monitoring
tasks based on the plan, and conduct regular meetings to discuss developments in

Step 4: Discuss monitoring results with the rest of the community.

The findings of monitoring activities should be fed back to the members of the community.
In this way, a learning environment is created that provides opportunities for community
residents to engage in discussion of issues and other development concerns.

3.2 Selection & Planning Stage

3.2.1 The Municipal Inter-Barangay Forum (MIBF)

Upon conclusion of the PSA process, community volunteers will have been able to put
together a profile of the community which identifies the critical poverty conditions and the
key problems that need to be addressed. This profile has also been validated through the
conduct of a barangay assembly where community members also agreed on a range of
possible interventions to address these problems.

At this point, there shall be two tracks to project implementation. The first is the CO track,
where the CF facilitates the process of mobilizing community residents to address simple
problems identified during the PSA process through community organizing. For a detailed
discussion of this process, please refer to the section on Community Based Organizations
and Community Organizing.

The second track begins when the PSA process has been concluded in all barangays, and
will walk community volunteers across barangays through the project identification and
selections stage. This shall involve a process of setting criteria for selecting development
interventions, municipal-level development planning, participatory resource allocation, and
participatory project design and development. The primary project mechanism to propel
these processes is the Municipal Inter-Barangay Forum. What is the Municipal Inter-Barangay Forum?

The MIBF is a public gathering of community volunteers, municipal and national

government representatives, NGOs and CBOs, and other groups or individuals within a
municipality. It is a venue for pooling together different perspectives and disciplines in a
collective dialogue on key development issues within a municipality, and for building
consensus on the best means to achieve development in the most participatory and
inclusive manner. What is the purpose of an MIBF?

As the conditions which produce poverty are complex, so are the solutions for addressing
the same. This is often further complicated by issues of control of decision-making
processes by small, elite interests leading to the marginalization and exclusion of vulnerable
groups from the development process.

By employing the CDD approach to development, the KC:KKB project takes great care in
designing activities that are built around the principle of inclusion. The Municipal Inter-
Barangay Forum is one such mechanism, and are designed to;

1. Provide a venue for the collective discussion on broad municipal-level poverty

conditions, causes and development directions that are;
a. Informed by community-level identification and analysis of local poverty
conditions and potential solutions from the PSA activities;
b. Informed by other data available at the municipal level;
c. Informed by existing development plans (MDPs) and available resources;

2. Provide a venue for harmonizing community needs and barangay and municipal
development options and plans grounded on commonly identified development
indicators and criteria.

3. Serve as a venue for negotiation between communities (who feel the effects of
poverty conditions the most) and local government units (who are charged with
allocating funds for development) for criteria-based allocation of development
investments What is the difference between the MIBF and the Municipal
Development Council?

From a cursory reading of the points above, one may come to the impression that the
function of the MIBF overlaps that of the Municipal Development Council. While there may
be some truth in this view, there are very critical differences in both the form and substance
of both activities. In any local government unit, the task of planning development projects is
a function of the MDC. However, the processes by which MDCs undertake development
planning is often limited to the formal bureaucratic structure, and seldom directly involve
local communities in the generation and analysis of local poverty conditions. Also, the
process of identifying development projects and setting the amount of financing that go into
these projects are often confined to members of the local development bodies.

In the light of these realities, the MIBF can be viewed as an exercise in demonstrating how a
municipality can go about undertaking a more participatory and inclusive process of
development planning and resource allocation. The MIBF is NOT A PERMANENT
STRUCTURE. It does not seek to replace the MDC nor subvert its processes. Rather, the
MIBF will serve to demonstrate how citizen involvement can enhance integration of
development efforts and more effective utilization of scarce resources for development
efforts. Through a process informed by multi-stakeholder analysis of local poverty
conditions and commonly agreed development criteria and indicators, the MIBF can also
serve to provide an example of how to match the wealth of human resources of local
communities with the technical expertise of local government units and other development
agencies (NGAs, NGOs) operating in the municipality, putting the latter to bear on
community development projects in a more strategic way.

The MIBF provides an opportunity to demonstrate a two-handed approach to participatory

development. On the one hand, communities are provided the avenue for exercising their
right to determine what problems need to be addressed when and through what form of
intervention. Local government units and other stakeholders, on the other hand, are
provided with an opportunity to meaningfully engage poor people in development activities
through the provision of technical and other means of support.

62 Who participates in Municipal Inter-Barangay Forums?

The MIBF is an open, public forum. The range of people who can participate in the MIBF
process can include, but may not be limited to, the following;
Members of Barangay Representation Teams (BRTs)
Members of community project development committees
The Municipal Mayor
Representatives of the Municipal Council
Members of the Municipal Inter-Agency Committee (MIAC) which can include, but may
not be limited to, the following;
o Municipal Development Planning Officer (MPDO)
o Municipal Social Work and Development Officer (MSWDO)
o Municipal Engineer (ME)
o Municipal Health Officer (MHO)
o Local Poverty Reduction Officer (LPRAO)
o Municipal Local Government Operations Officer (MLGOO)
o Municipal Budget Officer (MBO)
o Others
Representatives of Local Special Bodies such as the Municipal Development Councils
(MDC), the Local Health and Local School Boards (LHB and LSB), and others
Representatives of other National Government Agencies (NGAs) operating in the
Representatives of Community-based and Non-Government Organizations (CBOs and
Community residents How will MIBFs be operationalized in the project?

There are four general occasions where an MIBF may be convened in the course of project
implementation. These include the following;
For identifying and setting common development-oriented criteria for selecting
projects and interventions to address critical poverty issues and problems;
For participatory development planning, identification and selection of critical
problems that need to be addressed, and allocation of resources to fund community
development projects;
For municipal-level accountability reporting;
For the resolution of grievances;

Each of these MIBFs will be discussed in detail in the following sections.

3.2.2 MIBF for Criteria Setting What is the MIBF for Criteria Setting?

The criteria setting workshop is the mechanism by which community members determine
the factors that will guide the selection of CDD interventions to most effectively address
identified community problems. It is also the mechanism by which community volunteers
identify the critical community problems from among the range of negative conditions
resulting from the PSA activities.

The process of Criteria Setting takes the form of a Municipal Inter-Barangay Forum and
Workshop, and is the first of a series of such forums which will provide community
volunteers with venues for collectively experiencing analysis of municipal poverty conditions,
criteria-based identification of development problems and solutions, and participatory project
design and development, and participatory resource allocation. Why conduct criteria setting?

Development problems are often broad and complex, and factors that impede growth and
development often transcend geographic boundaries. Because of this, development
interventions often require multi-tracked approaches. While the PSA process in KC provide
community volunteers with an organized way of looking at poverty conditions within their
barangays, the data generated through this process is by no means complete, and there
may be conditions that impair development which only become apparent when viewed
through a higher perspective.

Development interventions to address local poverty conditions are also often constrained by
limited resources. With a host of problems and very limited funds, appropriate design
coupled with effective targeting of interventions must be ensured in order to maximize
available resources and produce the maximum benefit for all. In this light, participatory
criteria setting for selection and targeting of development interventions can contribute to
ensuring that;

both community and municipal-level poverty conditions hindering development in critical

ways are identified and addressed;

limited resources are efficiently utilized on interventions that will really make a
substantial impact in addressing critical poverty conditions;

development interventions are designed in an appropriate and responsive way, making

use of appropriate technology when feasible, and aligned with the peoples capacity to
implement and sustain the project over time;

capability of local people to manage community-based monitoring of changes in local
conditions are enhanced by connecting locally defined criteria to locally defined
indicators (that in turn can feed into nationally accepted poverty indicators), bringing
development management effectively into the realm of local community activities. What are the results of a criteria setting activity process?

In operational terms, the process of criteria setting produces a set of development criteria
that can be used to guide (1) identification of municipal-level critical poverty conditions and
their causes; (2) allocation of development funds / development financing; (3) design of
development projects and interventions, and; (4) continuing monitoring and evaluation.

The development planning areas mentioned above are traditionally the realms of experts.
However, it has been shown in numerous instances that the direct and active participation of
poor people in development processes greatly increase the chances of success of
development projects. Conducting criteria setting in a participatory and inclusive manner
also facilitate an experience of meaningful dialogue between poor people, local
governments, and other stakeholders on poverty conditions and causes within local
communities and across community boundaries. It also provides local people with the
opportunity to review local development plans and challenge current assumptions guiding
local development planning. By empowering communities to meaningfully participate in this
process of dialogue, local people are placed in a better position to negotiate how, where,
when, and in what form development should take place. What are the objectives of the MIBF for CSW?

In the context of the KC:KKB project, the MIBF for CSW shall be a venue for local
volunteers and other stakeholders to;

1. Collectively discuss local and broad municipal-level poverty conditions and their causes,
where the discussion shall be;
a. Informed by community-level identification and analysis of local poverty
conditions and potential solutions from the PSA activities;
b. Informed by other data available at the municipal level;

2. Agree on a list of critical poverty issues that need to be addressed at the community
level, where the agreements are;
a. Based on collective analysis of local poverty conditions synthesized at the
municipal level;
b. Informed by existing development plans (MDPs) and available local resources;

3. Agree on the broad development vision and/or key directions that will guide
development investment, and;

4. Agree on a set of development criteria for selecting the most appropriate and responsive
development interventions to address the identified poverty issues.

65 What are the outputs of the MIBF for CSW?

The output of the MIBF for CSW should include the following;

a. A consolidated profile of the municipality based on the different barangays PSA

results. This should be enhanced by other data available at the level of the

b. A prioritized list of community problems that need to be addressed. This should be

based on the results of the consolidated municipal PSA outputs.

c. A range of proposed interventions to address the prioritized problems, which shall

feed into the project design and development process.

d. A set of development criteria for determining appropriateness and responsiveness of

development interventions, which will serve as basis for prioritizing development
projects for implementation during the MIBF for Project Selection and Resource
Allocation. Who can participate in criteria setting?

As an MIBF, the CSW is a public gathering. The main actors in the CSW include the

Barangay Representation Teams (BRTs) These are three volunteers elected by

their respective barangays assemblies to represent the barangays in the activity. They
shall act as the primary decision makers. The process of decision-making shall also be
decided by them.

The Municipal Mayor who shall convene the forum and ensure that members of the
MIAC and other MLGU representatives attend.

Members of the MIAC who shall provide technical assistance and inputs on the
analysis of the PSA results, on the identified problems and issues, and on the range of
possible solutions. The MIAC can also provide information on local development plans
and directions, and on the availability of resources to finance development projects to
BRT members when necessary.

Community-Based Organizations and Non-Government Organizations

operating in the community. These groups can provide an alternative perspective to the
development issues being discussed, and can be a good source of program reality.

Representatives form Local Special Bodies such as the Local School Boards,
Peace and Order Councils, and so on, who can provide distinct, sector specific
perspectives and ideas.

Representatives of National Government Agencies implementing programs in

the municipality. These can be an excellent source of information on specific areas of
concerns like agriculture. Engaging them in the activity can also minimize potential
duplication of projects and lead to improved convergence of anti-poverty efforts and

As a public event, there is an inherent educational value to the conduct of the CSW. Hence,
ordinary people should be encouraged to attend, observe, and participate in the
proceedings. There should not be any a priori exclusion, and anyone in the community can
come and participate. How does the process of criteria-setting proceed?

As stated earlier, criteria setting in the KC: KKB project is undertaken through an MIBF. The
first thing that will be evident is that the ACT will need to facilitate a number of processes
within the forum itself in order to produce the expected results and achieve the objectives of
the activity. Broadly, these processes include;

a. Sharing of the results of the PSA process per barangays;

The first step in the criteria setting workshop is for each barangay to present the results of
their PSA process, specifically, the identified development issues and poverty problems, and
the range of options and solutions to address each of the problems. Please note that each
problem may require the implementation of multiple solutions. This should be properly
reflected in the PSA results presentation. Barangay volunteers can also present the PSA
results in creative ways through drawings or pictures, and even Community Theater.

b. Synthesis and consolidation of the PSA results into a municipal profile;

After each barangay has presented their PSA results and the range of issues and
development challenges, these are then plotted onto a municipal map of development

One way this can be done is through the use of multi-colored meta-cards, where each card
stands for a general problem area, such as health or agricultural productivity, or water and
sanitation, and so on. The specific form of the problem encountered in the barangay, such
as high-incidence of respiratory illness among children 0-5 years old are then written on
the card corresponding to the general problem area to which this specific problem belongs,
in this case, health.

Another way this can be done is through the preparation of thematic maps of specific areas
of concerns and the geographic area of coverage. A water-less area map, or malnutrition
incidence map can be prepared for this purpose. If plotted onto acetates, these maps can
even be superimposed on each other, revealing specific areas where most multiple
problems are faced.

The first method can be done during the CSW itself, while the second will require
preparation of the thematic maps by a group of PSA volunteers coming all barangays prior
to the CSW.

c. Presentation and harmonization of the consolidated PSA Map of Development

Challenges and the Municipal Development Plan;

After the consolidation of the PSA results, the municipal LGU will be presenting the
municipal development plan (MDP). The purpose of this exercise is for the municipal LGU
and the community volunteers to identify which problems will be responded to by the MDP,
and which problems need to be further addressed.

Thus, the areas where problems and plans converge or diverge, as well as
recommendations, will need to be developed. This is also a period where the volunteers
and the MLGU engage in dialogue about priorities, and even potential areas of the MDP
which can be reviewed and/or re-aligned.

d. Determining the development vision and broad development directions and

priorities based on the remaining predominant critical poverty conditions;

After the discussion on the municipal development plan, the CSW proceeds to the
identification of the municipal development directions. Here the facilitators guide the
participants in reviewing the results of the PSA consolidation, and in determining what the
development priorities will be. More often, development directions are determined based on
what the predominant problems and issues are. If the most expressed problem is low
income from agriculture or its other forms, then the development direction can be
Increasing income from agricultural activities or Increasing farmers income by enhancing
agrarian productivity. Please note that there can, and most likely will be, more than one
development direction for any given municipality.

e. Identifying the criteria for selection of specific development projects for KC


Having laid out the broad development directions from the consolidated PSA results
harmonized with the MDPs, the next step is to determine the criteria for selecting which
community project will be provided with funds from the KC municipal grant pool.

The different communities will be preparing community project proposals during the project
development stage, which will be discussed in the following sections. These proposals will
be the subject of prioritization during the MIBF for Participatory Resource Allocation (MIBF-
PRA). The criteria which will be determined during the MIBF will be the basis for selecting
which of these proposals gets approved for KC funding.

The most obvious criteria will be consistency with the development directions set, meaning
that the proposals should be in line with the broad development direction outlined in the
previous section. Other criteria may include poverty incidence, and so on.

f. Determining the form, processes and procedures, mechanisms, and rules of

decorum for the MIBF for Participatory Resource Allocation;

Once the criteria are identified, the last step is to discuss and agree on the form, processes,
and mechanisms for the actual prioritization process in the MIBF for PRA. This should
include discussions on such questions as;

1. What is the form of the MIBF for PRA? Should it be a straight meeting, or can other
creative forms be adopted, such as a municipal development festival?
2. How should the proposals be presented? In a straightforward presentation (which
will be long and boring) or in a creative manner? Should copies of the proposals be
circulated to each barangay prior to the forum? If the form is a development festival,
can the barangays set up booths and present their proposals there?
3. Who can participate in the forum? During the deliberations? During the selection?
4. How should deliberations on the proposals proceed?
5. How should the proposals be ranked? What methods will be used? Should it be by
criteria or in totality? By straight voting (yes/no) or by assigned weights?
6. When will the prioritization be conducted? What time should it start? What are the
mechanics for the presentations, deliberations, and selection?

7. What are the logistical requirements? Can these be used to mobilize community
participation in the preparation of the event?

This last point in particular is very important. In the last analysis, the MIBF for PRA is the
peoples event and not the projects nor the ACTs activity. Therefore the community
volunteers, and even the municipal LGU, should be made to actively engage in the
preparation process. The ACT should be able to hype enough interest and enthusiasm
about the MIBF for PRA such that the people themselves own the preparation for the event,
and mobilize for it. In this way, the ACT can focus on the content and management of the
facilitation process rather than on the technical details which the people can already take
care of themselves. What methods are used to facilitate criteria setting?

A host of methodologies can be employed to propel these processes during the forum.
These can include;

Creative presentations of PSA results per barangays;

Small group work on the Municipal PSA consolidation;
Thematic mapping of issues or development problems using the municipal map as
Plenary discussions for decision making and reporting of small group work;
Workshops to draw the prioritized list of problems, the possible development
interventions, and even indicators;
And other methodologies that the ACT can design;

Whatever the methodology employed, it is important to bear in mind that the method should
contribute to facilitating the process in order to produce the desired results and outputs.
Each method will require their own set of rules and will impose their own set of requirements
to both facilitators and participants. This will have to be factored into the design of the MIBF
for CSW. How do you prepare for facilitating the CSW?

While facilitation of the CSW is the task of the Area Coordinator, it is the responsibility of the
whole ACT to ensure that the activity runs smoothly and the results are achieved. While this
is a function of facilitation, it is only 10% so. The other 90% is a function of preparation.
The following are some useful ideas to consider prior to conducting the CSW;

Do your groundwork! Remember the cardinal rule in community organizing. People come
to an activity if they have a reason to come. They need to have a compelling enough
reason to come and that reason have to be a personal one. There is a big difference
between inviting someone to attend a meeting and ground working someone to come. In
the second, people need to be convinced enough that they have a personal stake in the
event to actually look forward to attending. This requires that you have a good insight on
who you are groundworking, and how you think they can contribute to they activity. As a
rule, organizers who fail to integrate with people also do bad groundwork, or cant do
groundworking at all.

Do your legwork! This means reminding people whom you have already ground worked of
their commitment to come to the meeting. Unlike groundworking, this is more of a quick,

straightforward reminder with little small talk. This is usually done at least two days before
the activity.

Draft your facilitation plan. This is your roadmap to achieving the objectives and outputs
of the activity. Review it with your team. Run down it, revise it, and review it again until you
get it right! Bear in mind that a facilitation plan is there to assist you in making the dialogue
between the participants easier. The plan does not revolve around you but around the
participants. They, and not just the objectives and outputs of the activity, should influence
how the plan is crafted. The number and typology of your participants also have to be
considered. Bear in mind that some people or groups will require a more concerted
exercise of your facilitation skills than others. Factor this into your plan.

Choose your methodologies carefully! Simulate them so you get a good feel of how it
will run, what the potential problems and gaps are, how long it will take and how tight or
loose the time requirements are. Remember that there is an inherent exclusion element in
all methodologies. For example, meta-card activities naturally exclude those who cannot
write or read. In areas where there is a small IP minority, plenary sessions may not be able
to capture their perspectives adequately.

Pay attention to details! Too often, many activities fail because of insufficient attention to
details during the preparation stage. Pay close attention to details in planning for the
activity. Determine what data or information you need for the meeting, and acquire and
study these well in advance. For the CSW, the AC will need to have the PSA results from
each of the barangays, and should have studied these prior to the meeting. The AC should
also have acquired and read the municipal development plan.

Prepare and submit your activity proposal well in advance. Check your logistical and other
requirements against your facilitation plan! Check what materials you will need and in what
volume. See what kind of venue you will require. Make a checklist with your team and
make sure that a person is assigned to each task.

Make the preparation participatory! Involve as many people as possible in the

preparation of the activity, beginning with the people in the communities.

BOX: A note on Development Indicators as criteria for identification and selection of

CDD interventions (side bar)
What are indicators?
How are indicators chosen? What are the basis for choosing appropriate indicators?
What are the 13+1 Indicators of Poverty?
How can these be translated into criteria for CDD interventions identification (will provide
some examples, i.e. Proportion of household without access to safe water as
Percentage of beneficiaries with improved access less than 20 meters away from tap
stands compared to previous (design consideration). How do you sustain interest in criteria setting (beyond ritual)?

Since the over-all purpose of criteria setting is to identify and select what parameters for
development, its applications are wide. The following are examples of specific instances
where the identification of development criteria will be very helpful;

Community visioning
Community forums for popularization

Community profiles
Developing master plans / development planning
Enhancing PSA outputs
Location (or special place) mapping (pockets of poverty, areas of exclusion, etc)
Improving resource maps
Conducting thematic mapping (i.e. land holdings, water service area, eco-zones, etc)
Creating community income and expenditure statements
Forming action teams (i.e. Ecology Team, Neighborhood Watch, etc)
Sustainability monitoring and evaluation

3.2.3 Project Planning and Development

In KC community driven-development (CDD), community members are given control over

decision-making and allocation of development investments. In this regard, the
appropriateness of both choice and design of interventions to address identified
development challenges constitutes a critical element in the success of the CDD effort.

In order to ensure community-projects are designed and developed in an appropriate and

responsive manner, the KC project invests heavily in building local capacities to engage in
effective project design and development. This is undertaken through the Project
Development Workshops (PDW). What is a community project in the context of KALAHI-CIDSS?

A project is an organized set of activities to address a defined problem or condition, and/or

attain a desired condition. It is different from a program because a project has a definite
timeframe while a program is typically sustaining. A program can also have many
component projects, while projects have component activities divided into major clusters,
according to project objectives. A project is also different from a strategy, which is the basic
methodology for implementing the project;

In the context of KALAHI-CIDSS, a community project performs the following critical


a. Community projects serve as a learning tool. In the course of identifying

appropriate projects to address identified development challenges, communities build
local understanding of poverty conditions existing in the community. In the course of
implementing community projects, leaders, volunteers, and even ordinary community
residents acquire new skills and knowledge. But more importantly, community residents
are provided with a rich environment to explore ways of working collectively guided by
the principles of participation and inclusion.

b. Community projects are convergence points. They provide a focus for

concerted, systematic community action on development challenges and the pooling
together of resources and technical expertise of different development agencies and
stakeholders. They also provide a venue for direct, creative dialogue between providers
of technical assistance (such as LGUs, NGAs, and NGOs) and community residents.

c. Community projects are instruments for poverty reduction. Properly
designed community projects effectively targeted at critical development challenges
contribute in a direct way to reducing local poverty. The continuing community action
generated by effective community projects (such as operation and maintenance, and
eventual expansion activities) also provide opportunities for sustained local
development. What is Project Development?

In the context of KALAHI-CIDSS, project development is the process of determining and

designing the most appropriate and responsive solution (or set of solutions) to community
problems and development challenges. This process proceeds through the Project
Development Cycle. What is the Project Development Cycle?

The project development cycle outlines

four critical areas that need to be
considered in developing a community
project. These areas cover the following;

a. Project Identification and Selection

b. Project Development
c. Project Implementation and
d. Project Sustainability

The key points for each area will be

further discussed in the succeeding
Figure 4: The Project Development Cycle What types of projects can be undertaken in the KALAHI-CIDSS?

The KALAHI-CIDSS operates on an open menu system. This means that, outside of the
negative list, the communities are the ones to decide what projects they will implement. In
general, all project under the KALAHI-CIDSS can be categorized under three broad project
types. These include the following;

Public Goods/ Access projects these are projects which intend to deliver a public
service and/or address an issue of access to basic services. These include most
infrastructure projects such as roads and bridges, drainage works, irrigation systems, water
systems, public school buildings, public health stations, and others.

Community Enterprise projects these are projects which intend to directly contribute
to increasing income of its intended beneficiaries. Examples include all income-generating
projects and common-service facilities which intend to provide services for profit for users
and members.

Human resource development projects these are projects which intend to increase
local capacities and capabilities. While the latter cover trainings projects, the former can
include advocacy projects such as those for asset reform (i.e. activities intended for natural
resource protection or land reform), since their primary intent is to increase capacity of
beneficiaries to meet needs by establishing ownership and control of means of production.

Due to the complexity of poverty problems facing local communities, it is impossible for a
specific project type falling under as single category to address a single development
challenge. More often than not, the resolution of development problems will require a
combination of project types and interventions. What is Project Development Workshop (PDW)?

In the KALAHI-CIDSS:KKB Project, the Project Development Workshop is a training activity

that involves a hands-on capability building process, where community volunteers discuss
and are provided technical assistance inputs on the 4 key areas of the project development
cycle. Why do we need to conduct the PDW?

As a project adopting the CDD strategy, one of the major goals of KC is to empower local
communities to address development challenges. Part of this process of empowerment is
the building of local capacities to design and implement development projects.

In the course of project development, volunteers will be faced with such concerns as
selection of appropriate interventions, which may vary from infrastructure projects to income
generating projects or human resource development projects. They will also discuss
possible effects and impact of proposed projects or technologies and design, in the case of
infrastructure projects. They will also be made to evaluate technical and financial feasibility
of proposed interventions, as well as reckon with evaluating local capacities for
implementation, operation, maintenance, sustainability, and even potential expansion. The
PDW provides an environment where people will learn to decide on the appropriateness and
technical feasibility of interventions based on existing resources and capacity.

In a sense, the PDW is the first step in the project development and planning process, which
will culminate in the preparation of integrated proposals at the community level, which will be
the basis for prioritization during the MIBF for PRA. Technical assistance inputs on the
preparation and packaging of simple community proposals will also be provided during the
PDW. As the activity is essentially a training session, the actual project development
activities will be undertaken in a series of parallel activities at the community level. The
formal workshops in the PDW will only serve as an orientation to the various aspects in
development planning while most of the activities are done at the community. What are the objectives of the PDW?

The objectives of the PDW include, but may not be limited to, the following;

1. To orient local volunteers on the critical areas of the KC Project Development cycle;

2. To provide local volunteers with the basic knowledge of the key points that need to be
considered in the preparation, design, and development of community projects, and the
packaging of community project proposals;
3. To create a venue for creative dialogue between community volunteers and local
technical assistance providers, in particular local government unit MIAC members, on
the design of development interventions. This will hopefully provide opportunities for
continuing MIAC engagement at the community level during the actual community-level
project development activities. When is the PDW conducted and for how long?

The PDW is conducted immediately after the Criteria Setting Workshop. Alternately, it may
also be conducted running parallel to the CSW. However, the ACT should bear in mind that
elements that feed into the selection of appropriate technology and assessment of
community capability are already available from the social investigation and PSA process.

In terms of duration, the PDW is intended to run for three days. However, there are
instances where other ways of conducting the workshop may be designed by the ACT,
especially in instances where there are many barangays, and where the ratio of participants
and facilitators are not conducive to hands on, focused learning.

Since KALAHI-CIDSS Project is time-bound, stakeholders should observe the twelve-month

cycle duration. Hence the project development and planning phase is expected to be
completed within the two-month period following the CSW and PDW, after which the
prioritization in the MBF for PRA follows. Who are involved in the Development Planning and Workshops?

The key players during the planning workshops are interested community members, as
appointed by the development and planning committees. These may consist of the existing
CBOs (e.g. womens group, farmers cooperative, etc.), Barangay officials, technical staff
from the municipal government, NGOs, Service Providers and other stakeholders in the
area. The ACT will be the main facilitator for the activities. What are the roles of stakeholders in the Project Development


Planning committees in the absence of an existing CBO in the barangays, the BA

may select volunteers as members of various committees needed depending for a
specific type of intervention. Committees may vary depending on the technical, financial,
environmental, social and operational and maintenance aspects of the intervention. This
will ensure wide participation from community members who are interested to work on
the packaging of an integrated proposal.

Community based organizations any active CBOs present in the community may
be appointed by the Barangay Assembly as the lead persons in the planning body for the
sub-project. It is assumed that these CBOs have gained experience in project planning
and proposal-making.

Barangay Council is the oversight body in the development planning of the
community. They can be tasked to monitor the progress and provide support for the
planning activities

MIAC members are technical staff from the MLGU that can assist and guide the
planning committees. They may also assist the community members in the preparation
of some technical plans or capability-building plans.

NGOs and Service Providers can also provide the needed technical expertise to
assist the planning committees in the preparation and finalization of proposals. An NGO
working on agrarian development issues can be a source of invaluable assistance in the
development of proposals on agricultural productivity.

Area Coordinating Team the lead Facilitator who will ensure that workshop outputs
are carried out properly, depending on expertise per sub-project types. Listed below are
the roles of the ACT.

Deputy Area Coordinator

Assists in identifying options for appropriate interventions/technology/designs for

proposals with infrastructure components or those with legal procurement requirements;
Assists in the preparation and review of technical plans and specifications for
infrastructure projects that are suitable for the community;
Together with the CF, provides guidance on potential adverse environmental and social
impacts of proposed infrastructure projects, following environmental and social
Ensure cost estimates for infrastructure components are within the regional cost
Provide coaching on technical and infrastructure elements of community proposals to
other members of the team, as the need arises, and;
Coordinate with other technical staff (e.g. Municipal Engineer, Service Providers) in the
provision of technical assistance to local volunteers and communities;

Roving Bookkeeper

Assists the team and community volunteers in the preparation and review of feasibility
study, particularly the financial and economic aspect of the proposal;
Assists the CF and AC in conducting organizational diagnosis of sub-systems related to
Ensures that LCC commitments are properly documented, and
Provide coaching to team members on financial matters.

Community Facilitator

Ensures mobilization of planning committees;

Mobilizes volunteers for critical analysis on the range of interventions that can be
integrated in the proposal.
Facilitates organizational formation for operation and maintenance arrangements (if no
CBOs are present);
Provides technical assistance to community volunteers in ensuring required documents
are complied with;
Conducts periodic consultations to follow-up BAP and BDP implementation plan;

Area Coordinator

Ensures proper, timely and close coordination with local government units, NGOs and
CBOs on any activities and assistance to be provided for the proposals.
Facilitates provisions of technical inputs during workshops and
Ensure objectives are understood and appreciated by the planning committees. How does the PDW flow and what topics need to be discussed?

Since community volunteers will proceed through the project development cycle outlined in
section, it is critical for the community volunteers to be oriented on the key elements
of each area of the project cycle. However, the ACT should guard against too much detail in
their discussions. It would be much better if the volunteers can be presented with examples
which they can undertake themselves in an exercise using the simulation method. The
following are the critical topics per area of the development cycle; Project Identification and Selection Why is proper project identification and selection important in the


Effective project identification and selection is the most critical part of project development,
for the following reasons;

Complexity of poverty issues: Local poverty problems and development challenges

are often complex. While the effects are immediately observable and felt by community
residents, their causes often transcend local boundaries and originate in broad policy issues
connected with regional, national, and even international economic policies, governance
issues, and investment priorities. Affecting a lasting and meaningful solution to poverty
issues therefore require an understanding of these connections.

Limitations of standard project designs: No solution can claim to being a cure-all for
all, or even most, of the problems in the community. Most poverty problems in fact require
the implementation of a broad range of solutions. Understanding the inherent limits of any
one solution will ensure that implementers recognize other solution tracks, identify the
requirements for designing and implementing parallel support interventions, and calibrate
project implementation accordingly.

Development resource and financing limitations: Addressing development

challenges entail costs, and while resources are always limited, most critical poverty
problems occur in areas where the availability of resources to fund development efforts are
either negligible, or access to these resources are made difficult by a host of factors. In the
face of limited resources, determination of the most appropriate projects that will provide the
most benefits with the limited inputs becomes critical.

Social and Environmental Safeguards: Solutions are not without risks. Almost all
roads and bridges projects will require earth moving, which can adversely affect natural
ecosystems and limit the intended impact of the project in the long run. Other projects can

produce effects unintended and unforeseen during project design. Understanding how
specific projects will impact specific social groups, or the larger ecosystem, is a critical input
in project selection. How does one facilitate project identification and selection?

In projects like KALAHI-CIDSS:KKB which employ community-driven development as a

primary strategy, development workers facilitate project identification and selection by local
communities. There are no hard and fast rules to problem identification and selection.
However, the CDD principle of making development investments responsive to informed
demand specify two critical parameters for determining if the demand of local communities
for a specific form of intervention to address poverty issues is appropriate and realistic.
These include (1) informed, meaningful choice, and (2) community identification of local
contributions to investment and recurrent costs.

In the KALAHI-CIDSS project, facilitating informed, meaningful choice can be effectively

facilitated by undertaking a review of the PSA results, specifically the problem analysis tools,
as well as such as a review of the development criteria and directions identified during the
MIBF for Criteria Setting;

Facilitating community identification of local contributions to investments and recurrent costs

should cover community discussions on the following points;

a. Capacity and willingness of community to provide counterpart during project design

and implementation, in whatever form;
b. Capacity of community to implement the intervention, or operate and maintain the
system (for infrastructure projects), and;
c. Willingness of the community to support continuing implementation or O&M needs
for resources; What are the key considerations in project identification and


1. Review of PSA outputs, in particular, the matrix on key community problems and the
range of proposed solutions; (insert matrix here)

2. Review of the CSW results, particularly the agreed municipal development directions;

3. Discussion on the categories of project types in the KC project, which was discussed
in section

4. Discussion on the key environmental and social safeguards (and the KC project
negative list INSERT HERE) as an element in the selection of project type;

The discussion on Project Identification and Selection should result in the review of the PSA
results (matrix of problems and solutions), and the identification of the key development
challenge that the barangay has identified as the priority problem, and the range of solutions
to address the same, following the inputs on project type categories and environmental and
social safeguards. This shall then feed into the discussion on the second area of the cycle
on project development;

77 Project Development
The area on project development constitutes the main section of the PDW and covers
critical topics related to the design of specific components and of the proposal as a whole. What are the key considerations in the design of community


The following are the key areas that need to be considered in designing appropriate and
responsive community development projects;

A. Project Feasibility:

The purpose of undertaking a feasibility study is for the community volunteers to acquire
both an overview and deeper understanding of the primary issues related to a project idea
or activity. In a nutshell, the objective of the feasibility study is to identify any make or break
issues that would prevent the project from succeeding. In simple words, it seeks to answer
he question Does the project make sense in view of the development challenge it seeks to
address? Please refer to the attached annex on the preparation of feasibility studies.

B. Selection of appropriate design (for community projects with an

infrastructure sub-component);

Coming up with an appropriate design is based on several factors such as: type of users,
local resources available and the geographical location of the community. (Refer to Box 8.1
for some case examples)
Box 8.1 Case Scenario in selection of interventions
a. Type of users - The planners have Example 1. The technical staff presented the standard technical
to consider the type of users (e.g. design of a classroom building to be constructed in a far-flung area.
women, children, persons with The technical specifications indicated concrete structures and a steel
design for trusses. However, the Barangays location posed some
disability) to be more socially difficulties on accessing and hauling of these materials. As a result,
responsive. delays in the procurement process, problems in hauling and the
unavailability of laborer and animals cause further delays in the
b. Local resources available - construction. The technical staff should have decided to modify the
specification on the materials. Perhaps, good lumber available at the
Selection of an appropriate design community can be utilized. The structure would then be more socially
could be awkward in the sense that acceptable as observed by the community members. Maintenance
there are available standard designs would also be easily done since the materials used are readily
available at the community.
for some selected structure or
interventions. However, in the Example 2. A community, composed of 75 households, have
selection process, it is important to requested for a rural access road to their far-flung barangay. The
desired design would be: the standard design of a barangay road
consider whether these standard spanning over five kilometers, where the existing transport vehicles
designs can be applied to local are a few motorcycles and one jeepney. Is the proposal
conditions. For some, standards economically viable and cost-effective considering the investment
cost? Can the community members maintain the total length of the
could mean technical specifications road after its completion? Where will community members get their
of materials to be used for such maintenance fund? Is the fund sufficient to cover the costs? What is
intervention. These technical the environmental impact of the road construction activities? Do they
have the capability to mitigate the negative effects of the sub-project?
specifications may not be applicable These are some of the talking points for the facilitator during the
planning and design stage. Answers to the above questions should
provide the basis for applying design options. These options have to
consider usable and appropriate technology to address the
communitys need, which is a problem of access. The capability of the
community to manage and maintain have also to be considered and
established. The Facilitator has to be ready with all possible options
on the type of technology to be recommended, which must be based
on the topography, geographical location and the socio-cultural 78
practices in the area.
in some communities but the standard functional design, or the purpose for which it is
applied, can be the same.

c. Geographical location of community - This involves identifying a wide range of

applicable options based on the geographical location and the socio-cultural orientation
of the community.

C. Simple Economic Analysis:

Simple economic analysis is the process of determining a projects viability in terms of its net
contribution to the society as a whole. It compares the economic benefits and costs of a
subproject, which are given economic monetary values to allow comparisons. However,
economic analysis looks beyond financial considerations such as revenues and profits, but
treats these as important considerations.

Simple economic analysis can be performed before the implementation of a subproject

using projected benefit and cost streams, and can also be used as basis for approving a
subproject or redesigning it if it fails to meet set standards for economic viability.

For more details, please refer to the attached annex on undertaking simple economic

D. Determining social and environmental impact and the corresponding

mitigation measure:

While development is a right that should be enjoyed by everyone, the reality of social
inequality, where social relations defined by hierarchies divide people between the privileged
and discriminated, the powerful and the powerless, the center and the marginal, continue to
persist. For this reason, ensuring adherence to social and environmental safeguards set by
both the project and various Philippine laws is a critical aspect of project design. This
covers the following two elements;

The principle of Social Inclusion, grounded at promoting the attainment of a better life
for all, especially the marginalized groups, by (i) protecting peoples rights and creating
opportunities for the development of peoples abilities and individual strengths; (ii) removing
all legal and cultural barriers to the attainment of full human development, and (iii) reducing
the vulnerabilities of the marginalized through a system of social protection, and by
engaging them in the development process, and;

The principle of sustainable development and environmental protection, where

there exists an explicit recognition of (i) the specific and prime vulnerability of the poor to
environmental hazards, and (ii) the centrality of protection of ecological integrity as a
requisite to sustained development;

The Project, in adherence to the provisions of the Loan Agreement (LA) and existing laws of
the country, observes the social and environmental safeguards policies set forth during
project implementation. Therefore, it is imperative to know the different components of the
project safeguards in order to guarantee that the policies are being followed at the
community level. The major aspects of Project Safeguards are as follows:

Social Safeguards the LA for the Project specifically Schedule 5, parag. 6 (d)
requires adherence to certain social aspects of the sub-project. One of the Bank

Policies requires the proponent Barangay to observe activities during the selection and
implementation phase of sub-project. This covers the following: Land Acquisition,
Resettlement and Rehabilitation of Project Affected Persons (PAPs) and the Indigenous
Peoples (IPs) concern. The policy also gives importance to respecting cultural practices
in IP areas, establishing ownership of property to be used for the sub-project, and giving
just compensation for people affected by the proposed sub-projects.

Environmental Safeguards - This covers the compliance to existing laws on as

required by the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). Proponent and project staffs
have to understand the importance of this aspect relative to their proposed sub-project.
The EIA defines the category in which the sub-project belongs, and enumerates certain
documentary requirements. These requirements are: either an environmental
compliance certificate (ECC), a certificate of non-coverage (CNC) or simply an
environmental management plan (EMP). It is also expected that the facilitators,
particularly the technical staff, will assist the community volunteers in determining the
anticipated negative impact of the sub-project and define appropriate mitigating
measures for such.

Reference material containing information on the possible impact for each type of sub-
project, and some suggested mitigating measures have been disseminated to the regional
field offices, through the regional engineers. For a more detailed discussion on Project
Safeguards, a facilitators guide on how to conduct an orientation can be found in Annex 11
of Step 6 of the previous ACT Manual.

E. Determining resource requirements and sources:

Community projects are not without costs. Determining what resources are needed, how
much these are, and where they can be accessed, constitute a major area of concern in
developing community projects.
In order to build community ownership and ensure viability and sustainability of community
projects, the KALAHI-CIDSS adopts a cost sharing scheme where all interested
stakeholders contribute to the implementation of the community project. Specifically, the
municipality is expected to shoulder around 30% of the total KALAHI grant to be for the
implementation of the sub-projects. It is also expected to provide this counterpart
contribution for three cycles. Other forms of contributions, as stipulated on the
Memorandum of Agreement signed between the project and the MLGU, have to be fully
documented and accounted for. These have to be classified as either intended for sub-
project implementation (SPI) or for capability building and implementation support (CBIS).

Local counterpart contribution - common forms of local counterpart contribution (LCC)

are cash or contributions in-kind. In-kind contribution could either be in the form of
monetized labor, materials available at the community to be used for the sub-project, or
equipment committed by the local government units. Cash counterparts are either coming
from the barangay internal revenue allotment (IRA) or from municipal and provincial
assistance. On some cases, congressional representatives also provide financial
assistance to communities. For these types of cash contributions, it is necessary to verify
the availability of this commitment before the approval so to avoid delays during the sub-
project implementation.

F. Determining community mobilization, and corresponding organizational

development requirements for implementation (determining the
capacity of the community to implement the project):

The section on community organizing and the formation of CBOs are critical considerations
for determining community mobilization and organizational formation requirements for
project implementation. Additionally, in relation to the preparation of technical designs for
community projects with infrastructure sub-components, Service Providers 3 must consider
the capability of the community to implement and operate the structure and system
proposed. In some cases, community members and stakeholders tend to over commit and
identify responsibilities that are beyond their capacity in order to get approval of their
proposed intervention. This condition has proven to be a futile exercise in the
implementation. The design intervention has to be the within the implementing capacity of
the locality so as to maximize collective participation from most of the community members. Project Implementation and Management Why is a discussion of project implementation and management

necessary during project development?

As previously discussed in the section on project identification, a critical requirement for

sustaining a CDD effort is the capacity and willingness of the community to provided
counterparts to project implementation and recurrent costs. By providing their share of the
cost (both monetary and non-monetary) of implementing, managing, and operating sub-
projects, community ownership is established.

By taking a deeper look at the implementation, management, and operationalization

requirements of the proposed project, community volunteers are also provided with an
opportunity to juxtapose needs and wants, and local capacity and resource availability,
effectively providing a sense of program reality to project design and implementation,
management, and operationalization arrangements.

Capacity for operationalization, however, include not only existing capacity, but also capacity
that can be built in the course of project implementation. Reckoning project implementation,
management, and operationalization during project development and design will also
provide community volunteers with an opportunity to take stock of existing capacities as well
as a realistic understanding of capability-building needs which must be addressed in the
course of implementation. What are the key considerations in project implementation and


The following need to be carefully considered during project preparation in order to ensure
effective project implementation management.

A. Community Mobilization

An individual or group of individuals who will provide technical assistance to community members during the preparation and finalization
of their proposed interventions. The Service Provider must have an extensive experience and knowledge on his field of specialization.

A reckoning of the level of community mobilization required to implement, manage, and
operate and maintain the community project is a critical element that must be factored into
project design, especially of the implementation aspect.

It must be remembered that in a CDD effort, it is the people themselves who must take
charge in implementing development interventions which they themselves identify. The
capacity of local people to implement development projects does not only refer to the
technical competence of local people to undertake the construction of a water system or
implement a capability-building intervention on sustainable farming technology. It also
includes the capacity of local communities to break down the tasks required, identify the
organizational needs to deliver these services, and organize themselves according to the
required work. While implementation of development projects are also undertaken in
collaboration with other stakeholders, even mobilizing and managing stakeholder
commitment and participation requires organized effort by community members. Thus even
this requires organization.

Section 3.1.5 on Social Mobilization discusses the role of community organizing and the
formation of community-based organizations, or engagement of existing CBOs in areas
where these exist, in the KALAHI-CIDSS Project. In addition, the following needs to be
considered in project development relative to social mobilization;

1. Organizational Arrangements for project implementation;

2. Volunteer development;
3. Implementation modalities for infrastructure components;
4. Organizational Development and Management for project operationalization,
management, maintenance, and sustainability;

B. Resource Mobilization

Having projected what the project will cost and determining where these resources can be
accessed, the next point that needs to be established is how these resources can be
delivered. This includes clarifying what the specific tasks and activities need to be
undertaken to ensure resources are either delivered (based on stakeholder commitments) or
effectively accessed from previously identified sources.

Based on project experiences, availability of resources constitute a major cause of project

implementation delays, attributed to;

(i) over commitment of LCC;

(ii) lack of proper coordination for the delivery of stakeholder counterparts.

The second have included such issues as the non-availability of the labor force during
implementation although these have been previously committed by community members
themselves during project design and development In other cases, municipal LGU
stakeholders fail to deliver committed equipment, pointing to problems of ineffective
scheduling. Also, releases of cash commitment can also be delayed, leading to delays in
the implementation of critical activities.

In order to avoid similar problems during implementation, context-specific strategies should

be developed in order to ensure that resources are available during implementation. These
strategies should be the focal point for discussions on resource mobilization during project
design and development.

C. Community Procurement

Depending on the complexity of community project proposals, some components,

particularly those which require the construction of infrastructure facilities or the purchase of
equipment, will require the community to engage procurement activities.

A hands-on training on community procurement processes should be conducted so that

community volunteers can better factors these into the design and development of project
proposals. The training can focus on a broad overview of the community procurement
process and the required parameters, procurement packaging, familiarization of forms, and
exercises on the actual conduct of procurement. For a more detailed discussion of various
procurement methods applicable to the Project, refer to the Community Procurement

D. Community Finance Management

One of the key features of CDD involves making resources available to local communities
for the implementation of development projects. In the KALAHI-CIDSS project, this is
undertaken through direct fund transfers to a community account, guided by the one-fund
concept. This means that all resources from all stakeholders are pooled into a single
community account which the community directly manages.

For this reason, it is critical for community members and local volunteers to have a basic
understanding of community finance management and accounting procedures to ensure
that these resources are efficiently utilized for their intended purpose. The required activities
and tasks for managing resources for community projects should be factored into project
design and development.

Fore more detailed discussions on the Please refer to the Community Finance processes
and procedures, and the projects various fiduciary safeguards, please refer to the
Community Finance Manual. Project Sustainability

The last critical area for consideration in project design and development is the area of
project sustainability. In the KALAHI-CIDSS, project sustainability refers to the capacity of
communities to continually deliver the intended benefits, or continually provide the intended
services, of a specific community project. For infrastructure projects, sustainability does not
only refer to sustaining the physical infrastructure, but rather to the ability of communities to
ensure that the services for which these structures were built are continually delivered to
their intended beneficiaries, in the same or even better quality, over time.

While both the preparation of feasibility studies and simple economic analysis can provide
us with inputs in determining potential sustainability, a critical component of the definition
above relates to community mobilization and organization for sustained service delivery by
local community projects. In addition, KALAHI-CIDSS sustainability framework (note:
insert sustainability framework here) identifies three components that directly relate to
sustainability of community projects. These include;

83 Group / Association Formation and Development;

This includes such concerns as (i) community mobilization and organizing concepts
discussed in previous sections; (ii) organizational assessment and ODM for sustained
project operationalization and maintenance; (iii) resource mobilization and financial
management, and; (iv) development of organizational culture. Institution Building and Development;

This component includes such activities and tasks as (i) accessing and mobilizing technical
assistance and support from stakeholders; (ii) linkage and networking, and (iii) policy
development and advocacy to create enabling environments for the sustained delivery of
benefits of projects directly operated and managed by community people themselves. Project design and development, implementation, and


This component covers such concerns as (i) capability building and technology transfer; (ii)
project planning, implementation, and monitoring, and evaluation processes and systems;
(iii) project operationalization and operation and maintenance activities, and; (iv) cost
recovery systems and schemes. The Community Project Proposal and the Sub-Project

Concept Form Where will the inputs on the Project Development Cycle lead to?

The inputs and subsequent discussion on the key elements of the project development cycle
should lead to the preparation of community project proposals to address the priority
development problems of the barangay. The development and finalization of this proposal
and its accompanying documents and plans will be the major output of the project
development phase of the CEAC, and will be the basis for prioritizing of community projects
during the MIBF for PRA. What is the format of the Community Project Proposal?

The Community Project Proposal should necessarily be simple in form but provide enough
information for the prioritization process during the MIBF.

The proposal itself can follow a question answer format (or a Q&A) but should cover at
least the following five major parts;

1. The problem statement:

The problem statement section can cover such questions as (i) What is the situation in the
community?. This will provide a short context; (ii) What is/are the problem/s or

development challenge/s faced?, and (iii) How does the problem/development challenge
affect the community?. The goal of this section is for the community to explain their
condition and the development challenge they face, and its cause/s and effect/s through
actual, concrete felt experiences.

2. The proposed solutions:

The proposed solutions section should effectively answer the question What needs to be
done (proposed solutions) to address the problem?. The proposed solutions can be
formulated as objective statements. The ACT should take note that most problems require
multiple solutions. The solutions matrix (note: attach solutions matrix here) can be used
to explain how each solutions track contributes to solving the problem and achieving the
development goal of the proposal.

3. Implementation plans and arrangements:

This section should answer the question How will this proposal be implemented in order to
achieve its objectives?. Other questions that should be considered here can include (i)
What are the key activities to implement this project (and even each component)?; (ii)
What is/are the organizational arrangements for implementation?. This latter should cover
such concerns as Who will implement?, What are the decision-making arrangements and
processes? , What are the control systems and transparency arrangements?, and so on.
The goal of this section is for the community volunteers to describe how the project and its
specific components will be implemented, who will be tasked to implement specific activities
and oversee the implementation of the project as a whole, and what the implementation
systems, processes, and procedures are. The previous sections on community mobilization
can provide vital inputs in this regard.

4. Sustainability plans:

This section should address the question of sustaining project benefits in the long run.
Some of the key questions that need to be considered here should relate to the following
key areas of project sustainability previously discussed, including (i) Organizational
Development and Management arrangements for implementation and management (ODM);
(ii) Development of local technical skills and competencies for implementation, operation
and maintenance (for projects with infrastructure and/or equipment components), and
management, and; (iii) Resource mobilization and accessing, and financial development and

5. Component for KALAHI-CIDSS funding:

This last section will focus on the specific component that will be proposed for funding from
KALAHI-CIDSS. As explained earlier, no one solution can claim to be a cure all for a
community problem, and that a development challenge (such as low income from
agricultural activities or increasing morbidity of children 0-5 ears old) may require the
implementation of multiple solutions. These solutions can range from construction of an
irrigation system or community health facility to the conduct of education and capability-
building interventions on bio-intensive farming technologies or primary health care and
nutrition. All of these solutions will have to be incorporated into the proposal, and will
constitute the proposals different solution tracks or components.

Each of these components will require some form of resource mobilization and investment.
The community may opt to propose the cost of the whole proposal for KC funding, especially
if the proposal does not include an infrastructure component which entails big costs. The
community can also propose a specific component for KC funding, with the cost of other
components for accessing elsewhere.

Once the component for proposed KC funding is identified, this component will then be the
subject for the preparation of the Sub-project Concept Form (or SPCF). A simulation on the
preparation of the SPCF should also be included in the topics for discussion during the
PDW. Please refer to the attached SPCF for more details.

6. Proposal Attachments

The community proposal itself does not need to be overly long and complicated. Depending
on the nature and content of the interventions included in the proposal, the following
documents will have to be prepared and included as attachments.

The Sub-Project Concept form which all proposals will necessarily have as this is the
basis for determining the cost of the specific component proposed for KC funding;

Feasibility Study - especially for Community Enterprise projects, including those with
common service facility components;

Simple Economic Analysis - especially for infrastructure projects or community projects

with common service facility components;

Action Plan - especially for Human Resource Development (HRD) or Community

Enterprise projects;

Program of Works or POW - especially for Infrastructure or Community Enterprise with

common service facilities;

Procurement Plan - especially for Infrastructure or Community Enterprise projects with

common service facilities or equipment purchase requirements;

Technical Plans - especially for infrastructure or community enterprise projects with

common service facility components; What are the major outputs of the PDW?

At the end of the PDW, the community volunteers should have;

1. Identified and/or finalized the priority problem and priority development project of the
barangay, as well as its major components;

2. Simulated the drafting of a community project proposal, using the lessons learned
from the technical inputs on key areas of the Project Development Cycle;

3. Simulated the drafting of the Sub-project Concept Form from the Community Project

4. Drafted a community project proposal of their proposed community project,
highlighting major areas for further development, and

5. Drafted a two-month action plan for project development activities to be undertaken

by the barangay; What community activities need to be conducted within the two

month project development period after the PDW?

As explained in previous sections, the project development process lasts for approximately
two months. During the whole planning period, basic Project requirements have to be met,
and numerous activities are conducted at the community level for the development of the
project and the preparation of the community project proposal. Since the KC Project fosters
an open menu of interventions, it is expected that various proposals shall be identified. As
communities are expected to come-up with different projects, these project development
activities will necessarily vary across communities and barangays. However, some common
forms of activities will need to be conducted by all barangays. These include, but may not
be limited to, the following; Community consultation meetings

A number of things need to be consulted with the whole community during the project
development process. These range from the prioritized problem and choice of interventions
to the costs, designs of infrastructure components if these are required, implementation,
operationalization, and management arrangements, and so on.

A host of strategies and processes can be employed to propel these activities, including the
conduct of barangay assemblies, purok and sitio meetings, information drives, cluster
meetings, house-to-house consultations, and so on. While often tedious, this is nonetheless
an important requirement since the participation of the entire community is required for the
development effort to succeed. At the very least, the conduct of consultations will ensure
that no group is excluded from the development process. Site/field validation

There are two levels of site validation. One is conducted by the technical staff prior to the
PSA. The other is conducted jointly by community volunteers (representatives to MIBF)
before the approval phase in the Municipal Forum. The first type provides information
needed to identify an appropriate technology of intervention. The latter, which is a joint
validation, serves as an input to the MIBF representatives who will justify, analyze and later
approve the proposal based on its responsiveness to community needs. A prescribed
Report Format (Site Visit Report) will facilitate the technical staff in establishing initial data
for analysis on the proposed sub-project.

For non-infrastructure interventions, technical staffs conduct pre-assessment of the

proposal. For income- generating sub-projects and other non-infrastructure interventions,
feasibility studies have to be prepared. Resource Mobilization

The Project adopts a scheme for ownership claiming, which will ensure the viability and
sustainability of the intervention. This is done through cost sharing from all interested
stakeholders who, in one way or another, can contribute to the implementation of the sub-
project. The required resources to implement the proposed project and its different
components will have to be mobilized from the identified sources, and commitments
secured. Possible activities in this regard can range from meetings with the municipal
mayor, the local congressman, and even the governor to secure local counterpart
commitments. It can also include house-to-house activities to secure in-kind contributions
from community residents. It may even include dialogue with local NGOs, National
Government Agencies (such as a training session on bio-intensive farming from the DA) and
other Funding Agencies to access resources or technical assistance and support. The ACT
should ensure that the communities take full stock of the range of options available to them
to access resources to implement their project. Organizational development formation

Along with the preparation of the technical and financial aspect of the proposal, the
Facilitator must also guide the community in the formation of community based
organizations or strengthening existing CBOs. This is to ensure that project implementation,
operationalization, and operation and maintenance arrangements are known and agreed on
by the community members. Preparation and finalization of packaged proposal

All of the activities conducted and outputs have to be integrated into one proposal. The
results of exercises during selection process shall be transformed into a set of plans and
drawings understood by the community. In some cases, like infrastructure sub-projects, the
cost of the intervention maybe less than the established regional parameter, due to the use
of appropriate technology that was adopted by the community. The plan needs to include
the schedules of the following activities; (i) trainings to be conducted, (ii) utilization of
equipment, (iii) labor force distribution, (iv) Procurement activities, and (v) implementation
period. For common infrastructures, the Project has established acceptable duration to be
observed during construction. For common service facilities, IGPs and non-infrastructure,
the set of documents shall be incorporated in feasibility study. Required permits, clearances
and certifications must also be complied before the final approval of the proposed

The matrix below shows the minimum set of requirement for approval depending on sub-
project types:

Infrastructure support Common Service Facility Other non-infra and

& IGPs non IGPs
1. Technical plans and 1. Technical plans and 1. Feasibility Study
drawing details drawing details
2. Survey plans (Horizontal & 2. Specifications of 2. Investment Cost
vertical controls) equipment/machine estimates and POW
3. Specifications to be 3. Cost estimates and POW 3. Permits and Clearances
adopted required
4. Program of Works (POW) 4. Feasibility Study 4. Certifications or proofs
and detailed cost estimates of commitment (e.g. bank
deposit slip)

5. Environmental 5. Environmental 5. Operation and
Management Plan Management Plan Maintenance arrangements
(Roll-out Plans)
6. Water Potability Test result 6. Acquisition documents 6. Cost recovery scheme
(water system) (e.g. Deed of Sale or
Donation for the site)
7. Acquisition documents 7. Permits and Clearances 7. schedules of activities
(e.g. Deed of Sale or required
8. Permits and Clearances 8. Certifications or proofs of
required commitment (e.g. bank
deposit slip)
9. Certifications or proofs of 9. Operation and
commitment (e.g. bank Maintenance arrangements
deposit slip)
10. Procurement package/s 10. Cost recovery scheme or
Tariff computations
11. Operation and 11. Marketing Plan
Maintenance arrangements
(to include Tariffs) Tips for the ACT in the conduct of Project Development and Planning
workshops, and in the Project Development period

The ACT should bear in mind the basic principles of the Project in order not to get lost in the
multitude of activities during Project Development. Remember that the workshops and
exercises will gear people to participate towards the completion of their proposals. Listed
below are some of the tips that will guide the project staff in accomplishing tasks during
project development;


Secure and read other reference materials related to technologies on various types
of interventions. Dont be contented on the limited materials provided by the Project.
Have patience in conducting workshops and consultation meetings with the
community members. Learn to accept realities and provide wide range of options in
solving issues and tasks ahead. Get out of the box!
Always organize the activities/tasks to be assumed. Prepare your work or session
plan for any activity.
Prepare the necessary materials and be ready with the presentations before going to
any workshops.
Prepare list of advantages and disadvantages for any recommendations you have.
This can be shared to the community members for them to come up with an
informed decision according to their demands.
Review the quality of outputs. Inconsistencies and incomplete outputs could lead to
tiresome and time consuming activities.
Considering that there will be a lot of activities during the period, you have to set
your priorities. List down all the major outputs and monitor the status of compliance.
Always prepare an alternative set of action plans to accomplish the task.
Conduct tactic sessions when necessary.
When in doubt for any actions to be undertaken, dont hesitate to call for assistance.


Do not hesitates to ask other team members for feedbacks on the concluded activity.
This will help you improve the next activities. Learn to master your craft!
Do not saddle the task alone. Remember this is a community-driven development
Project, seek assistance with concern committees and other development partners.
Do not submit documents that are incomplete and inconsistent with other related
Do not disregard commitment offered by the women sector to help the planning

Annex 1. Technical Assistance Fund

A.1 What is Technical Assistance Fund?

TAF, as it is popularly known, is a fund provided by the KC project during the planning stage
or even during construction period to provide support to community in the preparation and
implementation of their sub-projects. It is taken from the Community Grant amounting to
Php9,000.00 intended for each barangay willing to avail the assistance.

A.2 Why is there a need for TAF?

Considering the open menu features of KC, there will be proposed interventions that will
require technical expertise that are not available in the community. TAF will be used to
compensate the outputs of technical person/s willing to engage with the volunteers.

A.3 When to avail the TAF?

After the selection process and the communities have decided on the type of interventions
and technologies that they will propose to implement, during the 2nd Barangay Assembly
meeting, this can be raised for discussion. If the proposed intervention is within the list of
eligible for funding, the barangay concerned will be required to open an account where the
Php9,000.00 will be deposited by DSWD.

During the implementation, the planner failed to include in the estimates the cost for testing
of water potability for an underground source, the TAF can also be access to shoulder
payment for laboratory examination for the chemical and physical characteristic of
underground water source.

A.4 Who can avail the TAF?

During the social investigation stage, part of the output of the Deputy Area Coordinator is an
inventory of possible Service Providers. From the list of Service Providers, the community
will select the needed expertise based on the type of proposed interventions. Not all
proposed interventions can be funded by the TAF. Common infrastructure sub-projects that
have standard designs (e.g. Day Care Center, Health Stations, School Buildings) are not
eligible for TAF.

In case that common sub-project is proposed by several barangays, the amount of TAF will
be equivalent to the number of barangays involved times Php 9,000.00. The barangays will
elect a lead barangay who will manage the fund and the engagement with the Service

A.5 What are the required documents to avail the TAF?

There are only three (4) requirements for TAF:

Eligibility Checklist to be administered by AC or DAC
Resolution from the Barangay Assembly for the use of TAF
Contract of Service between the Planning Committee Head and the Service
Bank account opened by the barangay.

A.6 What are the expected outputs of the Service Provider/s?

Depending on the type of interventions and the needs required by the community, the
Service Provider will have to deliver their outputs before the 1 st MIBF. The engagements of
Service Providers are expected by the time technical workshops are conducted. This is
required for them in order to understand their engagement and the timelines for completion
of their outputs.

3.2.4 The Municipal Inter-Agency Committee (MIAC)
Technical Review of Community Project Proposals What is the Municipal Inter-Agency Committee (MIAC)?

In the course of activities during the PDW, the ACT should remember that they are not the
only source of support and technical assistance in the identification, development, and
preparation of community project proposals. You do not need to saddle these tasks alone.
The municipal local government unit also maintains a pool of technical staff that it mobilizes
in the preparation, development, and implementation of its various programs.

In order to maximize involvement of municipal LGU stakeholders, build convergence of

programs and interventions, and promote institutionalization of the CDD processes of the
KALAHI-CIDSS, the team must be able to either form or enhance mobilization of the
Municipal Inter-Agency Committee (MIAC). This is a gathering of municipal technical
personnel representing the various departments and programs of a municipality. What is the composition of the MIAC?

Depending on the municipal context, the MIAC can be composed of the following MLGU
The Municipal Mayor as MIAC Convenor
The Vice-Mayor (or a member of the Municipal Council who shall represent the
Sanggunian Bayan)
The Local Poverty Reduction Action Officer (LPRAO)
The Muncipal Planning and Development Officer (MPDO)
The Municipal Budget Officer
The Municipal Engineer (ME)
The Municipal Health Officer (MHO)
The Municipal Agrarian Reform Officer (MARO) or the Municipal Agriculture Officer

The MIAC can also include members of locally mandated organizations and local special
bodies, which may include the following;
The Municipal Development Council
The Local School Board
The Local Health Board
The Local Peace and Order Council
The Local Disaster Coordination and Management Council
And others

Representatives of National Government Line Agencies (NGAs) implementing programs in
the municipality may also be enjoined to participate in the MIAC. These can include
representatives from the following offices;
The Department of Agriculture (DA)
The Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR)
The Department of Health (DoH)
And others How can the MIAC be engaged in the KC project?

The creation or strengthening of the MIAC is one of the key responsibilities of the Area
Coordinator. The MIAC is critical because it shall be the venue for participatory decision-
making at the municipal level. It will also facilitate the eventual institutionalization of KALAHI-

The organization of the MIAC is included in the list of responsibilities agreed to by the
participating LGUs. The role of the area coordinator is to facilitate the formal organization of
the MIAC and provide continuing technical assistance to ensure that it functions. Although a
secretariat may be designated, the Area Coordinator makes sure that adequate assistance
is provided particularly during the first two years. Ensure that members of the MIAC get
proper authority to represent their respective offices by a Special Order from the Mayor.

Members of the MIAC can be engaged in a number project of processes and activities,

PSA Members of the MIAC can be invited to observe and provide inputs and cross-
validate information provided by local volunteers in the PSA process. Since information
provided by local people are usually perception-based, the qualitative information that can
be provided by specific MIAC members can provide a good balance, or provide objective
support to, data provided by local people.

CSW Since the barangays PSA processes are usually limited to conditions within the
barangays boundaries, MIAC members, in particular the MPDO and the LPRAO, can be a
vital source of information for broad and strategic development challenges that cut across
barangays. This will be extremely useful during the consolidation of barangays PSA results
into a municipal profile of development challenges.

PDW Individual MIAC members can provide technical support and assistance in the
development of community proposals of individual barangays. If the proposal is about
agricultural development, both the MARO and the MAO can provide vital technical
assistance in designing activities and interventions. The Municipal Engineer and members
of the engineering office can assist local communities in preparing technical plans for
projects with infrastructure components. The Municipal Budget Officer can provide
information on potential sources of financing for proposed development proposals. Towards
the end of the project development process, the MIAC should also be gathered together to
undertake a MIAC Technical Review of proposals. Since proposals will be more integrated
and comprehensive, the specific competencies and mandates of a number of MIAC
members may be needed to review a single proposal, depending on the specific
components. This will be further discussed in the next sections

MIBF The MIAC members should be present during the MIBF and provide technical
assistance in the MIBF processes during prioritization. However, the MIACs role in the
MIBF for PRA should be limited to provision of technical assistance and support. It is the
role of the community representative in the MIAC to undertake the prioritization of proposals.

SPI The numerous activities during sub-project implementation will accord the MIAC with
many opportunities to engage with local people at the barangays. The MIAC is expected to
provide continuing Technical Assistance support and monitoring during the SPI process,
depending on the thrust of he proposal and on the specific expertise and mandates of
individual MIAC members.

In addition, the MIAC can also serve to provide vital support in the lobbying work required
for the release of municipal local counterpart contributions and on the integration of
community proposals in both the Barangay Development Plans (BDPs) and Municipal
Development Plans (MDPs).

Just as it is the CF is expected to organize members of the local community, the AC is also
expected to organize the MIAC in the provision of technical assistance. Municipal-level
stakeholders are the ACs public, and organizing them to support project activities is the
ACs prime responsibility. What is the MIAC Technical Review of Community Project Proposals?

As discussed above, the MIAC technical review of community project proposals is a

municipal-level activity. Its purpose is provide communities with an opportunity to secure
additional inputs and technical assistance from the MIAC and other TA providers in the
finalization of community proposals. When is the MIAC Technical Review conducted?

The MIAC Technical Review is conducted at the end of the Project Development stage prior
to the MIBF for PRA. Depending on the municipal context and number of barangays, the
technical review can last anywhere from two to three days. Who participates in the MIAC Technical Review?

Participants to the MIAC Technical Review should include the following;

Members of project development committees
Members of barangay representation committees
MIAC members and other technical assistance providers.
The Area Coordinating Team
Members of the RPMT How is the MIAC Technical Review conducted?

There is NO standard process for the MIAC Technical Review. The following methods can
be used;
Straight reviews in plenary, where volunteers present proposals for review;

Small group workshops according to project proposal type;
Clustering of communities according to project proposal types;
Collective site validation and cross-visits of PPTs and BRTs;
Other creative methods the ACT may design;

In addition, the community project preparation teams may opt to provide MIAC members
and other TA providers with advance copies of proposals to more efficiently manage time
during the actual technical review. Collective site validation is also recommended to be
undertaken as part of the MIAC technical review process.

3.3 Project Approval Stage

3.3.1 MIBF for Participatory Resource Allocation What is the MIBF for Participatory Resource Allocation?

The MIBF for Participatory Resource Allocation is the mechanism by which various project
stakeholders engage in dialogue on development problems and interventions, and come to
a collective agreement on the critical development challenges that need to be addressed,
the order of priority in addressing the same, the forms of interventions that need to be
implemented, and the allocation of resources for these interventions. Why conduct the MIBF for PRA?

The following outlines the rationale for the conduct of the MIBF for PRA;
Development can only be meaningful and sustainable with the full, active participation of
an empowered citizenry. This is the root of the projects emphasis on community-
demand. The MIBF for PRA concretizes the role of the citizenry in establishing the
demand for development through community proposals to address development
challenges, as well as their role in development planning through the participatory
allocation of resources to address the same. In a real sense, the MIBF for PRA helps to
establish people empowerment and participation as necessary components in effective
poverty reduction.
The MIBF for PRA also serves as a negotiation venue between communities (who feel
the effects of poverty conditions the most) and local government units (who are charged
with allocating funds for development) for criteria-based allocation of development
In the course of determining resources to support proposed development projects, the
KC:KKB municipal block grant constitutes one source of funds. It is not the only source.
In the process of reviewing and enhancing current development plans, and approving
proposed interventions (projects) to address community problems, the MIBF for PRA
also serve as the venue for allocating the KC:KKB municipal block grant. The MIBF
shall determine how the municipal grant will be allocated, and which development
projects shall be provided with fund support from the KC project.

Enhancing integration of development efforts and more effective utilization of available
technical expertise of other development agencies (NGAs, NGOs) operating in the
municipality (putting these to bear on community development projects in a more
strategic way); What are the objectives of the MIBF for PRA?

The MIBF for Participatory Development planning and resource allocation is guided by the
following objectives;
1. Review of consolidated PSA results (from CSW).
2. Review of current municipal development plan.
3. Review of development criteria (from CSW).
4. Formalize identification of critical poverty areas and development gaps (based on
CSW outputs)
5. Prioritize problems based on CSW criteria (to form part of the CSW output)
6. Identify development options to address prioritized problems When is the MIBF for PRA conducted and how long does it run?

The MIBF for PRA is conducted approximately 2 months after the conduct of the PDW, on a
day agreed upon during the Criteria Setting Workshop. The length of the forum itself is
dependent on many factors, such as the number of barangays, the form of the forum, and
so on. While the indicative time allocation for the forum covers one whole day, it will be up
to the volunteers to set the date and period for the forum. Who should participate in the MIBF for PRA?

As an MIBF like the CSW, the MIBF for Participatory Resource Allocation is an open, public
forum. The range of people who can participate in the MIBF process can include, but may
not be limited to, the following;
Barangay Representation Teams
Project development committees
The Municipal Mayor
Municipal Inter-Agency Committee members
Municipal Council members
Representatives of other NGAs operating in the barangay
Representatives of NGOs and CBOs
Community residents
How these different groups will participate in the actual MIBF process, as well as the
level of their participation, will have to be discussed and approved during the CSW. What are the outputs of the MIBF for PRA?

The outputs of the MIBF for PDPRA should include, but may not be limited to, the following;
A more comprehensive municipal profile
Community project proposals reviewed for prioritization;
The prioritized list of community project proposals for KC funding (in the form of an
MIBF Resolution);

Community proposals (especially non-prioritized proposals) for inclusion into the
municipal development planning process (may also be in the form of an MIBF
Resolution addressed to the Municipal Development Council);
Formation of the MIBF Executive Committee (as the need arises) What is the MIBF Executive Committee?

In the course of project development and the preparation of community project proposals,
the timeframe for completion of specific community proposals and their corresponding
requirements will vary depending on the nature of the project being proposed. Some
proposals for projects which do not have infrastructure components may take a shorter
period to develop, while proposals of other projects which require the implementation of
more complex infrastructure components, such as a water system straddling two barangays,
or a farm to market road, may take a longer time to complete.

This means that for some projects which have complex infrastructure requirements, the
proposal itself may be complete at the time of the scheduled MIBF for PRA, but some
documents like technical plans and permits, may still be in the process of completion, or in
the case of permits, are yet to be secured. This however, should not prevent the proposal
itself from being deliberated on or even prioritized during the MIBF for PRA.

If a proposal or proposals with incomplete documents and requirements is prioritized during

the MIBF for PRA, the MIBF may opt to allot additional time for the proponent barangay/s to
finish completion of all requirements. However, rather than re-schedule another full MIBF,
an executive committee may be organized instead.

Once organized, the MIBF-EC becomes the mechanism for reviewing MIBF-prioritized
proposals with lacking supporting documents at the time of the scheduled MIBF for PRA.
Depending on the scope of authority the MIBF prescribes to the committee, the MIBF EC
may certify completeness of the prioritized proposal upon review after the prescribed period
or, if the proposal remains incomplete, the MIBF can certify that the proponent barangay has
defaulted, in which case it may be empowered to review the next ranked proposal as to
completeness, and if found to be so, award the funds previously allocated to other prioritized
but defaulted barangays.

Note that the MIBF EC DOES NOT PRIORITIZE PROPOSALS. This is a function of the
FULL MIBF. What the MIBF EC does is to review prioritized but incomplete proposals, and
follow the order of prioritization of proposals set by the MIBF. The responsibilities and
powers of the MIBF EC emanate from the MIBF, which has the sole responsibility to define
and limit the extent and scope of the responsibilities of the MIBF EC. How is the MIBF for PRA conducted?

There is no standard, prescribed process for the conduct of the MIBF for PRA, and the ACT
is encouraged to develop creative, context-specific ways by which the MIBF can be
facilitated. However, a number of key elements should be present in whatever process the
MIBF adopts for prioritizing community proposals. These include the following;

Presentation and creative dialogue on the consolidated PSA results, the municipal
development plan, and the municipal development directions from the criteria setting
workshop (CSW);

Presentation, deliberation, and finalization of the development criteria and
prioritization process and mechanisms developed form the CSW;

Presentation of and creative dialogue on community project proposals;

Prioritization of proposals using agreed process and mechanisms;

Preparation of MIBF Resolutions;

Formation of the MIBF EC, if necessary; What methods can be used to facilitate the MIBF for PRA?

There is no prescribed form or method for conducting and facilitating the MIBF for PRA. The
ACT is encouraged to develop creative ways by which the process of participatory resource
allocation can be conducted following project principles of participation and inclusion.

The most common form is the meeting. However, this form has its limitations, especially for
large municipalities where a number of days would be required to review all proposals.
Other more creative ways can include;
Clustering of barangays;
Holding of Development Festivals;
Use of creative presentation methodologies;
Workshpps and open-space discussions;
Other, more creative methodologies.

Whatever the form and methodologies used, the ACT must ensure that these are consistent
with project principles, and the specific mechanics of the process are widely understood and
agreed by all stakeholders. How can the MIBF for Development Planning and Resource Allocation
be sustained?

The MIBFs for Criteria Setting and Participatory Resource Allocation is a valuable exercise
in participatory development planning. In the process of undertaking the MIBF for PRA,
common people participate in a direct way in determining development priorities and
allocating resources to implement development project and realize development objectives.

Because of the highly participatory, collective, and inclusive nature of the MIBF where the
people develop their own criteria in creative dialogue with their local governments, the MIBF
concretizes direct, participatory democracy in concrete ways. The experiences and lessons
learned in the process feed directly to improving participatory planning and eventually to
potentially improving local governance systems.

The function both MIBF plays in the development planning and resource allocation process
has concrete parallels in the development planning and resource allocation processes
outlined in the Local Government Code of 1991, in particular the function of the Municipal
Development Council.

In the course of the three-year project implementation timeline within a given KC

Municipality, the MIBF should evolve to enhance the functionality of the MDC particularly on

the areas of public participation and inclusion. The ACTs are encouraged to explore the
relationship between the MIBF for PRA and other formal local governance processes
leading to enhancing local governance structures (particularly the BDC and MDC), and
develop strategies to slowly integrate both processes in the course of the three-year KC

3.3.2 Joint MIBF-Municipal Development Council Engagements

The prioritization process of the MIBF for PRA will lead to the provision of KC funds for
prioritized barangays. These communities shall then begin with the process of implementing
their community projects. This will be discussed in the next section on the project
implementation stage.

However, the prioritization process will also, in most cases, lead to the non-prioritization of
other community proposals. These shall then be the basis for continuing MIBF-MDC
engagements for the incorporation of these proposals into the Muncipal Development Plan,
and the accessing of resources to fund these projects from other sources.

Before the MIBF for PRA ends, the ACT should ensure that schedules for a joint meeting of
the MIBF (or the MIBF EC) and the MDC are established in order to explore possibilities for
incorporating non-prioritized proposals into the municipal development plan, as plan for
accessing resources to fund other community development interventions. The joint MIBF-
MDC should also define how the MDC can engage in monitoring and providing continuing
support for the implementation and eventual operationalization of prioritized proposals and

3.4 Project Implementation Stage

3.4.1 Sub-project implementation management What is Sub-Project Management?

Project management is a carefully planned and organized effort to accomplish a specific

(and usually) one-time goal or objective. It involves: developing a project plan, where
project goals and objectives are defined; specifying tasks and resources needed to achieve
the goals; and associating budgets and timelines for completion. It also includes
implementing the project plan. During this phase, careful controls are established so as to
stay on the "critical path", that is, to ensure the plan is being managed according to the
goals and timelines set. Project management usually involves several major phases such
as: feasibility study, project planning, implementation, evaluation and support/maintenance. 4
There may be various titles for these phases.

In short, the five major activities in project management are;

a. planning specifying how to achieve objectives

b. organizing providing the authorities and leaders necessary to carry out the
c. staffing recruiting, selecting and developing human resources
d. directing channeling human behavior towards the accomplishment of objectives
e. controlling determining performance against objectives and taking action when
necessary. What are the components of SPM in KALAHI-CIDSS:KKB Project?

Pre-implementation workshops in preparation for the implementation of sub-projects,

various community trainings are conducted after the MIBF. These include project
management, community finance, infrastructure (for projects with infrastructure
components), procurement, leadership, volunteer mobilization, and other context-specific
training requirements. In these workshops, committee members will learn basic principles in
managing sub-projects. For more details on the conduct of community trainings, refer to
section 6.6.
Project Management by Carter McNamara

Sub-project implementation this is where approved interventions are implemented,
with the active involvement and participation of stakeholders under the supervision of
concerned technical staff. Implementing committees will try to meet objectives given the
time and scope of activities identified. They will manage the costs involved, including the
delivery of various commitments and the risks that come along with it. Hands-on training on
various technical skills (e.g. community mobilization, advocacy, plumbing, simple
bookkeeping, etc.) will be conducted while the implementation is on-going. This is in
preparation for project sustainability or, in the case of projects with infrastructure
components, the operation and maintenance component after the completion of the facility. Why the need to manage the sub-project implementation?

Though the interventions for implementation may be specific, there are other aspects that
stakeholders need to observe. The complexity of tasks may vary, depending on the type of
interventions and involvement of a varied set of people and organizations. It is important
that everyone involved should closely coordinate to avoid misunderstanding and delays in
the implementation. Managing the assigned tasks, controlling fund utilization, ensuring
compliance to safeguards policies and quality of works, assessment of output and
monitoring the progress of implementation of tasks and activities are some of the essential
elements for success. The people assigned to any of these responsibilities must be trained
for this purpose. In the end, empowered communities will appreciate the outcome and will
continue to manage the operationalization and maintenance activities of their interventions
or facilities, as the case may be. Who are involved in the implementation?

Considering the various aspects of implementation, it is expected that additional community

members will actively participate in the implementation stage. Working committees
established during the planning stage are now expected to perform their assigned tasks.
The following are the expected roles of participants during the implementation stage:

An over-all management committee or a Barangay Sub-Project Management

Committee (BSPMC) - the over-all Manager during sub-project implementation. They will
regularly report to the Barangay Assembly on the status of accomplishments and other
concerns or resolutions.

Finance Team assigned to ensure adherence to financial processes, proper

documentation and filing of records of financial transactions.

Procurement Team (in the case of projects requiring purchase of equipments, supplies,
and /or services) tasked with ensuring timely procurement activities of goods/materials
and procuring works through shopping, bidding or any applicable method.

Monitoring and Inventory Team (especially for projects with an infrastructure

component, but may also apply to projects requiring purchase of supplies or services) will
guarantee that delivery of materials, supplies, and / or service and its utilization are properly
accounted and monitored. Participates in the inspection of construction works (as the case
may be) within the barangay or with adjacent barangays whether the construction work is
undertaken either by force account or by contract.

Specific Task Teams, or Work Teams, or Sub-project Implementation Teams
in-charge in the actual physical implementation of the approved task, intervention, activity, or
technology (depending on the type of task, whether construction, or the conduct of a specific
activity such as a dialogue or mobilization).

Operation & Maintenance group (especially for infrastructure projects involving the
construction of a facility intended to deliver a public service) depending on the type of
intervention, selected O&M members have to work for the finalization of their responsibilities
and decide on tariff for collections. For barangays without CBOs, it is expected that
organizations formed are now ratifying their by-laws, policies and have established a set of

MIAC members will provide technical assistance to community members depending on

their field of expertise (e.g. Mun. Engineer for infra, Agriculturist for agro-industrial and
income-generating projects, etc).

ACT members will guide the committees and its members on the compliance of Project
requirements and at the same time provide them appropriate information they can use for
decision making. Listed below are the roles of ACT during implementation:

Deputy Area Coordinator

Ensure that civil works are implemented as planned, with acceptable quality testing
results and within the agreed timetable.
Conduct close supervision on the compliance of social and environmental mitigating
measures listed on the EMP.
Assess status of sub-projects and facilitate steering of implementation team in the
preparation of required reports. Ensure that reports are understood by the
As the technical staff in the team, procurement is expected to be managed and
supervised with diligence. Conduct a regular ex-post fiduciary review of at least 20%
for completed transactions.

Roving Bookkeeper
Guide the community volunteers on the accurate financial entries and assist them in
monitoring the delivery of commitment and other financial transactions.
Facilitate the establishment of a good recording system at the community level
Assist the Finance Team/Committee in managing the flow of funds in the barangay
Assist the DAC in the conduct of ex-post fiduciary review.

Community Facilitator
Guarantee the mobilization of working committees and ensure close coordination
among them.
Develop and implement capability-building programs in all barangays, particularly the
one included in the package of approved proposals.
Mobilize action groups formed to work on other issues and BAP priorities.
Facilitate community volunteers during the conduct of sub-project inspections and
assist them in resolving concerns during BAs and BSPMC meetings.

Area Coordinator
Facilitate the MIAC support provision and monitoring.
Close coordination with LGU and other stakeholders for the timely release of their
LCC commitments.

Ensure that O&M arrangements for all prioritized barangays are finalized before the
conduct of sub-project inauguration.
Facilitate conduct of periodic meetings and tactic sessions with ACT to update on
status of SPI and address emerging concerns.
Keep track of disbursement targets and the timely submission of required and
completed documents and reports. Why is there the need to mobilize the community members?

A basic principle behind a CDD project like KALAHI-CIDSS, is mobilizing the stakeholders to
enhance participation among its members and for better community control. It is important
to include the community members in project management for them to have a sense of
ownership. Since the people were involved during the planning workshop, it is essential that
they be also involved in the implementation stage. This will ensure the sustainability of the
intervention after its completion. The implementation of technical aspects of a project can
also lead to the acquisition of new skills, or the enhancement of existing skills. In some
cases, this can even lead to improved chances for employment, especially in the case of
skills acquired in the implementation of infrastructure facilities. What are the major activities during implementation?

Various project-specific types of intervention will be implemented by various communities.

Rural infrastructure, social services, common service facilities, and income-generating
projects require their own distinctive approaches to implementation. The following section
will discuss some of the specific activities of sub-project categories: Public Goods and Rural infrastructure interventions

This type of sub-projects include road access and bridges; village water supply systems;
vertical structures such as buildings; flood control, drainage and other related
appurtenances; small irrigation canals; community shelters and other vertical and horizontal
structures that the community may have identified. Most of the activities may be similar but
the scope of works and duration for implementation should differ. Listed below are the
common major activities to observe during implementation period;
Planning the works and assigning people to do the task this involves
identifying and documenting the specific activities that must be performed in order to
produce delivery of works. There is the need to maximize the labor force available
and to provide employment opportunities at the community level. Engineers have to
be ready with the work and manpower schedules to manage the distribution of
workers. Matching of available skilled workers to the works to be undertaken has to
be analyzed by the Engineers. If required skills are not available at the village, the
management committee may decide to explore securing it in other barangays.
Facilitators can assist the implementing committees and Engineers by mobilizing the
interested volunteers/workers during implementation.
Organizing the work activities must be accurately sequenced in order to
support later development of a realistic and achievable schedule. In most cases,
there will be item of works to be simultaneously undertaken to meet the desired
timeline for completion. It is therefore necessary for the supervisor to manage the
level of complexity during this period. Ensuring that required resources and
manpower are available will expedite completion of the work. The timing of weather

conditions has also to be factored-in during the scheduling in order to come up with a
realistic completion date.
Directing activities this is the critical stage of the implementation. Technical
instructions or activities to be undertaken by the community volunteers and workers
must be explained very clearly and must be understood by them. Engineers must be
specific on the instruction and be very explicit in explaining the possible outcome,
implications of the works and as well as expected completion dates.
Controlling project execution - this process provides the project with necessary
flexibility to update schedules, make revisions, install corrective actions and
document the lessons or experiences learned. Implementing committees and
project supervisors have to learn to control the time of implementation, cost of
investment, the quality of the execution and managing the risks involved. The risks
could be either in the aspect of procurement process, financial transactions or
environmental impacts from the work activities. Mitigating measures have to be
executed promptly to minimized further damage.
Tracking progress and reporting system for effective management, this
activity shall establish a system for tracking progress of implementation and a tool for
regular reporting. In KC project, simple progress and monitoring reports are
submitted regularly as required. Posting of reports at the ACT and BSPMC offices
are essential for examining the performance during implementation. This activity
practices the transparency principle and fosters responsibility sharing among
community members.
Analyzing the results generated reports must be analyzed as to whether the
accomplishment or performances are within the expected timelines and parameters.
Once the sub-projects incurs delays, the causes are analyzed and solutions and
collective actions are agreed upon. Community Enterprise and IGPs (including those with common

service facilities component)

Interventions on these types of category include; rice and corn milling; pre and post harvest
facilities; meat processing; community banca (small motorized outrigger); and other income
generating sub-projects identified by the communities. The following section lists some of
the common activities to be undertaken during the implementation stage.
Building structures (where required) structures included in the package of
proposal shall observe similar activities to that of constructing rural infrastructures.
Installation of machinery (where required) when machinery support is
required for the proposal, it is important to ensure that appropriate specifications
were delivered. If after-sale services includes the installation of the machinery by the
supplier, it would be better if people who will operate the equipment be trained.
Defective equipment should be rejected and should immediately be replaced by the
supplier. No payment must be made unless there is full satisfaction on the
performance based on the expected output.
Production and marketing readiness these aspects have to be guaranteed
in order for the intervention to operate as planned. Based on the feasibility study
conducted, community members have to ensure production inputs are ready after
the installation of required equipment and machines.

104 Human Resource Development interventions

Most of the activities for public goods and rural infrastructure also apply in HRD
interventions. In addition, capability-building and training, and advocacy are also critical
elements to most HRD projects. Capability building of volunteers

All of these interventions will require the conduct of community trainings while
implementation activities are on-going. Existing skills of CBOs present at the community
can be enhanced to maximize their participation. Continuous capability building activities
will not be limited only during planning but even more during implementation and operation
stages. How do sub-projects stay within the timeline?

Managing sub-project implementation requires patience and an effort to understand the

complexity of various activities built-in in every sub-project type. The excitement of
community members in implementing project to address long time needs have to be
sustained so that they will not lose interest in the various activities. However, procedural
lapses can be committed in the course of implementation. Some take the form of failed or
delayed submission of reports, and lack of analysis on the project implementation status.
The section below cites some of the most common challenges that the stakeholders have to
overcome during implementation. What are the common causes of delays in implementation?

Part of good planning should be the anticipation of possible delays in the implementation
stage. However, there are unavoidable circumstances that will delay the implementation.
Some common causes and its implications are;
Lack of authority and directions for work activities resulting to confusion among
Poor cost and data gathering and low productivity of manpower
Poor communication and coordination among stakeholders
Poor allocation of resources (e.g. non-delivery of LCC on time)
Improper scheduling of work activities
Incompetent workers and inadequate manpower (most especially felt in
infrastructure construction works)
Disorganized record keeping What are some of the consequences of poor project implementation

For any decision and actions made, there are always repercussions involved. Some
implications of the abovementioned delays were noted from previous experiences in the
project and in the community. These are;
Conflicts between project participants/stakeholders
Escalating materials and equipment costs
Incurred cost overruns (shortage of funds)

Reduction in benefits due to revisions of plans and specifications to suit available
Damaged Projects image and community respect to leaders
Diminished interests to participate in other activities
Penalties for succeeding cycles What measures can be adopted to avoid delays and stay within
Important activities that the project staff and stakeholders have to remember while
implementing sub-projects. and avoid delays in implementation, can include the following;

Establish accountability of committees and work teams by assisting the

selected leaders in the decision making. Ensure leaders have good sense of
authority; possess required skills for the position, are respectable and credible to the
Conduct regular monitoring of activity output. In infrastructure works, this
can include establishing cost control system (value of work accomplished and
incurred expenses vs program costs). In other projects, this may entail regular
meetings of work teams.
Conduct regular meetings and update the committees on status of
accomplishment vs planned targets (e.g. explain the activities completed and the
succeeding works and its requirements)
Set-up system of reporting and information sharing to guide community
members on the activities on-hand. (ex. posting of required manpower/skills for
succeeding week/s, ) This will provide community members enough time for family
interaction, work on their farm and other off-farm activities.
Technical staff has to provide clear and appropriate guidance on the tasks
and activities to be undertaken by specific group of volunteers. When necessary to
give out instructions, write the instructions in the logbook and ensure that it is
understood by the volunteers and workers. Ascertain that the specific instructions
are understood and can be delivered by the community members. What are the transparency mechanisms in SPM?

In every project, reports are required to monitor and review the progress of its
implementation. Similarly, KALAHI-CIDSS has its own and distinct report requirements to
be complied with on a regular basis. These reports are part of the accountability and
transparency principles of a CDD project. Please refer to the Monitoring and Evaluation
Manual (M&E Manual) for the required project reports and instructions on how to fill-up the
same. In addition, listed below are some of the compulsory field reports specific to
infrastructure projects required by the Project: Monthly Reports

Individual sub-projects are required to submit monthly reports on;

Sub-project Work Schedule and Physical Progress Report includes the
work items to be undertaken, the corresponding unit cost and weighted percentage.

On it is the schedule/duration to accomplish work items and the issues and actions
taken for the period. This can help the committee to analyze if the performance of the
sub-project is ahead of schedule or incurring delays on a particular activity. (Annex
Environmental Management Plan Report to monitor the compliance of
planned mitigating measures for the anticipated negative impact. Documentation of at
least two issues per sub-project type is to be carried out to satisfy the Projects
requirement. There is a regular audit conducted by an Island cluster Environmental
Officers to check the compliance of the reports. (Annex __) Completion Reports

To manifest that the sub-projects were undertaken in accordance to plan and within budget
costs, the following documents are proof;

Joint Inspection Report prepared before the conduct of final inspection and serves
as Punch List to rectify unacceptable works and to complete the remaining on-going
pay items. The report is also required when requesting the final release of grant funds.
(Annex __)
o Final Inspection Report conducted and prepared after the completion of the
sub-project. The report covers the physical structures constructed by the
o Sub-project Completion Report a comprehensive report to be prepared by
the ACT and BSPMC after the completion of the sub-project which covers the
activities and experiences learned while implementing the interventions.
(Annex __) Mutual Partnership Agreement (MPA)

The MPA is a set of documents prepared and agreed by the involved stakeholders prior to
the inauguration of completed sub-projects. It is a binding document where responsibilities
of each stakeholder will have to be observed during the operation and maintenance period.
It is expected that the formulation of roles and responsibilities done was in consultation with
concern participants. Ex-post Fiduciary review

This is an activity conducted at community level to review the procurement and financial
transactions undertaken by the volunteers. The culmination of the activity is a reflection
session by the participants on the result of review. The and agree on appropriate actions to
avoid committing similar lapses on succeeding transactions.

At the end of the implementation stage, it is expected that community members are able to
make claims on the experiences and learnings from the exercises. They will be proud of
the feat they have accomplished on the patience they have showed.

3.4.2 Operation and Maintenance (O&M) What is Operation and Maintenance?

Operation and Maintenance or more simply O&M is defined as the process of managing
the continued implementation of a community project in a way that ensures the sustained
delivery of intended benefits of the project to its intended beneficiaries. By this definition,
you will note that the term covers a wider area of use to include not just infrastructure
projects but also the other project categories mentioned in section While the term
has been traditionally used to refer to that post-project implementation stage where
community members begin to operate a constructed infrastructure facility (as is the sense
used in the Rural Infrastructure Manual), the term has now been broadened to refer to that
stage in project development and implementation where community residents begin to
deliver the projects intended service, which now need to be sustained. Why give emphasis to O&M?

From the definition above, you will notice that the idea of O&M is tied in a critical way to the
idea of sustainability, which will be discussed in length in chapter 5. Efficient and effective
operation and maintenance activities will contribute to ensuring sustained benefits of
interventions, while the failure to effectively operate and maintain development interventions
lead to loss of investments and the opportunity to contribute to poverty reduction. Worst, the
failure of communities to operate and maintain structures after completion or to sustain the
momentum of human resource development and community enterprise projects after start-
up inevitably contribute to worsening feeling of inadequacy or incapacity among local
people, or deepen perceived animosity between communities and local governments, when
the later are perceived to have been a contributing factor to the failure of interventions.

On the side of the community, this can potentially lead to non-participation in other
development interventions, effectively contributing to disempowerment. On the side of
LGUs, a project that is designed to be people-led and community-managed but which
consequently failed provides a neat argument against too-much community participation,
and a convenient excuse for development planning by experts. For these reasons,
emphasizing O&M requirements and tasks are a critical element in the success of CDD
interventions and the attainment of the KALAHI-CIDSS development objectives. What are the key elements in successful O&M?

In the KALAHI-CIDSS: KKB project, the success of operation and maintenance activities for
community development interventions is largely influenced by the processes inherent in
project development as discussed in section 3.2.3. This includes such processes as
selecting the right set of interventions to address a given development challenge, the choice
of the appropriate level of technology based on context-specific factors, and the depth of
analysis of the level or organization, resources, and work required to undertake
implementation, operation, and maintenance. Assuming all of these have been properly

thought of and factored into the design of the intervention, the following will then constitute
key task areas in preparing for operation and maintenance;

Organizational Development which includes community organizing, determining

membership and leadership, determining organizational form, establishing committees,
establishing lines of coordination and decision-making, creating rules, processes, and
policies. This also includes determining organizational needs, and establishing linkages and
networks to address these needs.

Capability building and training This includes determining technical competency

requirements and planning for how these can be delivered, when, and by whom. Note that
all projects, even those for advocacy and asset reform, will require some sort of capacity
building on the part of the people who will propel the effort (such as para-legal training, or
dialogue and mediation, and so on).

Resource mobilization which includes determining what resources will be required to

continually run the project and deliver the service, how much these will be, where they can
be accessed, and when they will most likely be needed.

Each of these elements will require the carrying-out of specific tasks and the conduct of
specific activities. What these tasks and activities are will be largely determined by what the
objectives of the project are, what the project intends to produce by way of service or
benefit, and the specific socio-economic and socio-political context. Since O&M ultimately
deals with project benefits, the latter most especially constitutes an all-permeating influence
in how each element plays out in the community. You must therefore have a good
understanding of your specific context in order to more effectively manage interventions for
O&M. What are the key roles of project stakeholders in ensuring continued
O&M of CDD initiatives?

As the major stakeholder in any CDD effort, volunteers in local communities must be
capacitated to enable them to (i) effectively undertake mobilization activities to generate
active involvement in operation and maintenance activities, (ii) develop effective monitoring
mechanisms and processes, (iii) undertake day to day project operations management, and
(iv) effective mobilization of resources to support continuing project operation.

Local government units, on the other hand, should also be capacitated so that they can (i)
provide technical assistance to operation and maintenance activities of local communities,
(ii) access resources if not provide resource augmentation to community O&M activities, (iii)
lead in the establishment of enabling environments for direct community management of
development projects through policy reform, and (iv) assist local communities in monitoring
activities on O&M.

Capacitating both local communities and LGU partners for them to be able to accomplish
these and other tasks is the primary responsibility of the Area Coordinating Team.

109 When should O&M Mechanisms be installed along the CEAC?
The following are a few examples of how O&M considerations can be plotted in the course
of implementing the CEAC. The ACT is enjoined to explore other ways by which we can
ensure that completed sub-projects will be effectively operated and maintained in order to
deliver their intended benefits.

Participatory Situation Analysis Effective operation and maintenance is tied in a

critical way to how community problems are analyzed, and how the ranges of solutions are
identified. If the wrong problem is identified, people will not mobilize to support whatever
solutions are carried out. In addition, if local conditions are analyzed properly but the
solutions are not responsive to the problems, the people will also not mobilize to support
these interventions. Concepts and principles of sustainable development should be a
critical element of the PSA process, and suggestions on interventions to address community
problems should be framed against these concepts and principles. One way this can be
done is to introduce a community visioning exercise where the volunteers come up with an
image of what a developed community means for them. Solutions to identified problems
can them be framed against this vision.

Criteria Setting Workshop Project operations management and sustainability do not

necessarily need to be used as a criterion for prioritization of projects, as these are key
project development requirements. It is assumed that all projects under KC should be
sustainable. It is also assumed that projects developed under KC include arrangements for
effective operations management and maintenance. If projects do not have these elements,
they should not be included in the prioritization process at all, and should be re-designed to
meet this requirement.

Project Development Workshop - Operation and maintenance considerations are an

integral component in the selection of interventions to address development challenges
during the Project Development process. You should be able to facilitate community
discussion on the O&M implications of projects and interventions proposed by local
communities, and guide exploration on ways by which O&M issues can be addressed.

Project Development and proposal preparation Operation and maintenance

considerations of identified interventions should be part of the preparation and packaging of
community proposals. A sustainability plan can also be developed, covering two parts.
The first can include all activities that need to be undertaken in preparation for project
operationalization, following the three key elements of O&M. This should include such
elements are organization building, membership-building, training needs identification for
O&M, developing a training accessing plan, resource mobilization, determining
organizational form and the project management structure, and so on. The second part can
include the project management and maintenance plan, which will cover all activities that will
be undertaken upon completion of project construction (in the case of infrastructure projects)
or upon project start-up (in the case of community enterprise or human resource
development projects). This can include determining routine project operations activities,
who will undertake these, and how. This can also include projections of technical
requirements and competencies that should be present upon project start-up, and those that
can be reasonably built as the project progresses in operations. The former set of
competencies should be built in the course of project preparation and/or construction of the
facility or purchase of the equipment.

All of these will have to be included in the preparation of the community project proposal. If
the proposed project will be difficult to manage with local resources (both human and
material), then the intervention which the proposed project is expected to produce, as

designed, will not be feasible. Hence, the project should be re-designed and activities re-

MIBF for Participatory Resource Allocation The sustainability plan, which should
include O&M concerns, will be reviewed as part of the community project proposal during
the MIBF. If a proposal does not contain a sustainability plan or whose sustainability and
O&M plan are inadequate, the MIBF may move to approve a proposal subject to conditions
calling for modifications, or even disapprove a proposal altogether, in which case it will not
be included in the prioritization process.

Sub-project Implementation In the case of infrastructure projects, implementation of

the pre-project operationalization plan should run parallel to project construction activities.
This will ensure that the structure will be used immediately once finished, and project
operations dependent in a critical way to the structure or facility can immediately commence.
For instance, in the case of a water system project, organizing the Water Users Association,
determining membership based on users, agreeing on the policies and tariffs, and so on will
have to be undertaken while the structure is being built. This may mean that in a barangay
constructing an infrastructure facility, you may have to organize two volunteer committees.
One will be in charge of activities relative to building the physical infrastructure, and one
tasked to implement activities that will build the social infrastructure that will support
operationalization of the system once completed. While the first deals with construction and
public works, the other deals with community organizing. Both will have to be implemented
at the same time.

For non-infrastructure type projects, setting-up the social infrastructure to support project
operations will have to be weaved into the project operationalization process itself. For
instance, in an advocacy campaign project for land rights (asset reform), setting up the
management committee, and the campaign management systems will be part of the pre-
campaign preparatory work. However, please note that in projects of this nature, it is often
difficult to precisely peg when pre-campaign and actual-campaign activities happen.
Information and education activities to popularize the issue of tenancy are a legitimate part
of the actual campaign process. The key is not to get caught up in the semantics but rather
to determine the proper sequencing of activities. In this instance, the O&M plan will deal
largely with activities that will sustain the campaign process up to the point where the issue
is finally settled to everyones satisfaction. The sustainability plan, however, should focus
not on sustaining the campaign, but rather on preparing the community to manage the land
and the accompanying activities that will make the land productive once tenure is secured.

You will note that the focus and specific activities and processes of O&M changes according
to sub-project category. However, the focus of sustainability does not change. It is up to
you and the other members of the ACT to strategize, together with local volunteers, how to
craft an effective O&M and sustainability plan that will fit context-specific requirements.

3.5 Transition Stage

3.5.1 Community-Based Evaluation (CBE) What is Community-Based Evaluation?

Participatory Community Evaluation is a reflection process where the people involved in the
implementation of the various development processes of the KC project are thinking and
talking about changes brought about by the project, and are involved in generating,
analyzing and understanding information in order to generate lessons for future actions. What are the objectives of CBE?

In the KC project, the objectives of the CBE process are to;

Obtain the views of the community about the changes generated by the Project in
terms of empowerment, good governance and poverty reduction.
Seek explanations from the participants about the extent of the changes, the reasons
for and the importance of the changes. How often is the CBE conducted?

Ideally, the CBE should be conducted twice per cycle, with the first CBE conducted at mid-
cycle and the second conducted as an end-of-cycle activity. If this is not feasible, then the
CBE can be conducted at least once per cycle, at the end of the 12-month KC cycle time-
line. What are the methods and processes involved in the conduct of the

Three main steps comprise the evaluation process:

1. the preparatory activities;
2. the actual evaluation; and
3. the post-evaluation sharing with the rest of the community.

112 What are the important preparatory activities that you need to

The following are a few of the critical activities that you should consider undertaking in
preparing for the Community-Based Evaluation;
Orient facilitators/moderators and documenters
Review secondary information (e.g. baseline data, SI report, PSA results,
accomplishment reports, and process documentation)
Select participants it is recommended that the group be composed of 10 to 15
people. It should be made up of active volunteers and ordinary barangay residents.
Representatives of each purok and marginalized groups should also be included.
Select site for group discussion a suitable quiet, open, covered site should be
selected with either wall space or other means (e.g. blackboard) to which manila
paper and meta-cards can be fixed How does the actual CBE proceed?

The following is an iterative process for the CBE. Please note that this is a suggestion that
should serve as a guide only. You should be able to develop a more context-specific
process and/or adopt context-specific methods to produce the intended CBE results.

The CBE flows through the following six broad steps;

Step 1: Warm-up
Step 2: Timeline of change
Step 3: Sub-group brainstorming
Step 4: Categorization of change
Step 5: Cause-effect diagram
Step 6: Domains of change

Each step is discussed below;

Step 1: Warm-up

Purpose to break the ice and to focus the discussion on change and the process of
change; to explain to the participants the Participatory Evaluation Process.

Time: thirty (30) minutes

Materials and equipment: Guitar (optional)

Conducted by: a Project staff and participant(s)

1. Facilitator(s) and documenter(s) introduce themselves and explain to the
participants the purpose of the exercise. Participants also introduce themselves.
2. The facilitator, documenter or a participant leads a warm-up or ice breaker

Step 2: Timeline of Change

To help the participants remember the main activities undertaken by KC and identify
changes brought about by those activities, and to set the information in a calendar.
To demonstrate to the participants how specific activities led to specific changes to
individuals and the community.

Time: Three (3) hours

Materials: Manila paper, masking tape, marking pens, meta cards

Conducted by: Facilitator


1. The participants gather around a location where a manila paper has been mounted on the
wall. The manila paper should be prepared in advance in a matrix divided into months of the

2. The facilitator asks the participants to write down on single-color meta cards the KC-
related activities that they remember in the barangay, and the changes brought about by
those activities to the individuals (another color meta cards), their family and/or community
(third color cards).

3. The participants post the cards on the appropriate columns.

4. Probing questions are asked about SEPTEMBERPagkilos

why the activity/event took place, what (activities)Bookkeeping seminar
Nag-survey kung saang area ilalagay ang mga faucet
were the changes brought by it, and
Nagdugtong ng tubo galing sa sourcePagbabago sa sarili
when did each of these happen. The (changes: individual)Nadagdagan ang kaalaman sa financial
facilitator also asks the participants to management
identify the activities continued, until Natutunan ang gawain ng engineer
Tumibay ang paninindigan na magpatuloy ang proyekto.
when, and ask why an activity stopped
Pagbabago sa pamilya o komunidad
and/or continued. The information (changes: family or community)Nakapagpatuloy sa pagta-trabaho.
should be entered on the time line in May pananagutan; division of labor
the relevant months. Sakripisyo sa pinansyal na usapin.

5. The result is a simplified sequential

flow on the calendar showing how the
Project activities and events have fed
through to changes.
Sample: Time-line of Change

Step 3: Sub-group Brainstorming

Purpose To help the participants identify all the changes they believe have been generated
by the Project.

Time: thirty (30) minutes

Materials: Meta cards, masking tape, marking pens

Conducted by: Facilitator and participants in two groups


1. The Facilitator asks the participants to divide into two groups arranged around two

2. Meta cards and pentel pens are distributed to each group.

3. The facilitator explains that in the previous exercise the participants had developed a
picture of how a Project activity or activities had generated changes to individuals, families
and the community.

4. The participants are asked to discuss among themselves what other important changes
have been generated by the Project and they write down the changes on the meta cards.

5. The facilitator and documenter assist the participants in the task.

6. If the participants find it difficult to identify changes, the facilitator/documenter asks

probing questions based on the prompt sheets developed for the exercise.

Step 4: Categorization of Change

Purpose to make a preliminary analysis of the types of changes identified using the
Knowledge, Attitudes, Practices and Wellbeing framework; to standardize the
terminology on the cards, to remove irrelevant cards and to agree on the meaning of each
card. (For the optional approach, the meta cards can be replaced with pocket pictures.)

Time: One (1) hour

Materials: Manila paper, masking tape, meta cards, marking pens, pocket pictures (optional

Conducted by: Facilitator


1. While the participants are writing on the cards (previous step), the facilitator mounts a
chart on the wall. There are four columns in the chart, Knowledge, Attitudes, Practices
(behavior) and Wellbeing. Symbols representing each of the column headings can be
developed in advance, or the headings can be written.

2. The facilitator initiates KNOWLEDGE

a process to place each (Pag-uugali)PRACTICES
of the meta cards in the (Gawain)WELL-BEING
appropriate column of the (Kabuuhang kalagayan)Natuto sa pag-gawa ng resource map. problem analysis, action
chart. Natutunan ang proseso sa pamimili ng mga materyalesPag-kikilahok/ pag-sali sa mga
3. Another option is to Sakripisyo para sa barangay
Transparency sa lahat ng transaction
develop a series of cards Ang konseho sa barangay mas madalas magapatawag ng asembliyaLumiit ang gastos
dahil mayroon nang pagkukunan ng tubig.
Nagkaroon ng vegetable garden.

Sample: Categorization of Change

in advance with pocket pictures representing different types of change. These are
substitutes for the meta cards.

4. The facilitator leads the processing. Meta cards with the same information are posted
together and irrelevant cards are excluded. Cards can be re-written to sharpen the
formulation of ideas.

5. The facilitator asks why each card is placed in a particular column. The participants must
agree on the classification of all cards.

Step 5: Cause and Effect Diagram

- To arrange the changes identified in the time-line, brainstorming and categorization in
cause-effect networks so that the processes of change generated by the Project can be
- To ensure that the facilitator and participants have a clear and shared understanding of the
changes and the processes of change.
- To quantify the people in the barangay who have benefited from the changes identified
and, where appropriate, identify the extent of changes.
- To assess the significance of the changes from the point of view of the participants

Time: Two (2) hours

Materials: Manila paper, masking tape, meta cards, pocket pictures (if this option is chosen),
marking pens

Conducted by: Facilitator (method 1) or participants (method 2)

Procedure 1:

1. The manila paper from the previous exercise is moved to another wall and a blank piece
of manila paper is mounted on the wall in front of the participants.

2. The facilitator asks the participants to agree on which of the changes in the Knowledge
and Attitude columns is the most significant.

3. The meta card or pocket picture representing the change is moved from the sidewall and
posted on the manila paper in front.

4. The facilitator asks the participants what led to the change. Is there a card on the sidewall
representing this change? If there is, it is posted on the board to the left of the original card.
If none, the facilitator writes a new card and posts it on the board. Draw an arrow to link the

5. The participants are then asked if the first posted change led to any other changes
(consequences). Is there a card on the sidewall representing this change? If there is, it
should be posted on the board to the right of the original card. If none, a new card is written
and posted on the board. Draw an arrow between the two to represent the link.

6. The facilitator probes for indirect causes or consequences. If somebody mentions an

indirect linkage, ask the person to identify the more direct cause or linkage and enter it on
the diagram. Ensure that the indirect linkages (represented by broken arrows) are labeled

differently from the direct linkages (represented by solid arrows). A network of cause and
effect flows will develop.

7. The facilitator asks the participants to what extent they believe the changes identified
have occurred. For example, if improved health service at the BHS is identified, ask what
the available services are and how many have availed themselves of the services. The
information is written on the diagram.

8. Ask the participants if everybody in the barangay benefited to the same extent from the
change. For example, if only people from the puroks near the BHS are benefiting from
improved services, this should be noted on the diagram.

9. Repeat steps 4-8 until no more linkages can be established.

10. Both complex and simple cause and effect diagrams can be developed.

Procedure 2:

In the second method, the participants are responsible for developing the cause-effect
diagram. The manila paper is placed on the table or the floor instead of mounted on the wall.
The facilitator and documenter closely follow how the diagram is developed and ensure that
the extent of changes and the spread of the benefits from the changes are recorded.

Step 6: Domains of Change

Purpose to make a final analysis of the changes by categorizing them according to the
domains of empowerment, good governance and poverty reduction


problema ug naghatag solusyon
Nag-desisyon at nag-manage sa sub-projectPaspas ang release sa pondo og
Materials: manila paper, insakto
meta cards, masking tape, Ang konseho sa barangay marunong na magplanoNakapatuman ug panarbaho
(208 laborers)
marking pens Duha ka beses maligo kada adlaw (from 2x a wk)
Dili na mohakot og tubig, naay extra time sa trabahoon
Conducted by: a Project staff
and participant(s)

1. The facilitator asks
the participants to Sample: Domains of Change
agree on the major
domains of change arising out of the diagramming exercise. The major change
domains are the Project goals of empowerment, good governance and poverty
2. Place each of the cards in the diagram on a three-column chart (columns are the
3. Discuss with the participants why and how each change is a function of the domain.

Post-Evaluation Sharing with the community:

The proceedings of the exercise is reported to the BA and the major outputs are discussed
with the body for validation.

3.5.2 Accountability Reporting What is Accountability Reporting?

The Accountability reporting is an end of cycle activity where in the both prioritized and non-
prioritized barangays convene and discuss the highlights of their performances during the
concluded cycle. The main audience is the Municipal Inter Barangay Forum as well as the
expanded Municipal Development Council. The main content of the reporting focus on, but
may not be limited to, (i) sub-project implementation; (ii) compliance to counterpart
commitments both at the barangay and municipal level; (iii) compliance to social and
environmental safe guards; (iv) summing up of learning on CDD processes; (v) plans for
enhanced participation and implementation of the cycle, and; (vi) setting directions for
community development and municipal engagements in the succeeding cycles. Why is Accountability Reporting necessary?

The Accountability reporting is done primarily to demonstrate a mechanism of transparency

and inculcate among stakeholders the value of taking responsibility for actions and
commitments made during the project cycle. The reporting process allows stakeholders to
apply the principles of accountability. Purposely all these will lead towards improving
governance which includes responsive resource allocation and consultative delivery of
services, empowerment among communities, and overall poverty reduction. What are the objectives of the AR process?

The key objectives of the AR process include the following;

1. Gauge the performance of barangays and municipalities in terms of participation,
delivery of commitments and plans, operations and maintenance of sub-projects,
and addressing grievances;
2. Gauge the performance of the barangay in implementing their Barangay Action Pans
3. Sum up the experience of the concluded cycle and gain insights on good and bad
4. Set directions for the next cycle. Who will participate in the Accountability Reporting

The AR is a public event and anyone can participate in the process. However, the key
participants should include the following;

Barangay Level AR
BSPMC ( if barangay is prioritized)
Barangay Chairperson

BRT Members
Community Volunteers
Community Facilitator

Municipal level AR
The Municipal Mayor or designated representative
Department Heads of LGUs
Members of the Municipal Inter-Agency Committee
BRTs from prioritized and non-prioritized barangays
At least 2 volunteers per barangay
Representatives for Civil Society organizations, NGOs, and POs
RPMT Members (PRM, PRC, CPS, RIE, RFA,M&E officer, KC Writer)
All, ACT members
Others e.g media When is the Accountability Reporting Conducted

The AR is conducted on the 12th month of the cycle from the date the Municipal Orientation
was conducted. The AR will commence regardless of whether there are community sub-
projects still on-going or nearing completion.

ACTs should NOT delay the AR just to accommodate barangays with sub-projects nearing
completing. It would be best to set the target date for the AR during the 2nd MIBF. What are the different levels of Accountability Reporting

The Accountability Reporting is done at two (2) levels, first in all barangays followed by the
Municipal Level AR.

The Barangay Level AR

The Barangay Level AR is a one (1) day activity mainly to prepare and finalize the following
Actual accomplishment of approved sub-projects physical and financial status
based on the POW and project implementation plan
Compliance to Social and Environmental Safeguards (use of checklist)
Status of Operations and Maintenance of Sub-projects
Actual accomplishments of the Barangay Action Plans (for prioritized and not
prioritized barangays)
Compliance to transparency mechanisms (updated signboards, regular reporting of
financial and physical status to the assembly)
Status of the Grievance Redress System
Summing up of experiences for the concluded cycle
Plans for the succeeding cycle

The Municipal AR

The Municipal Level can be conducted in 1-2 days depending on the number of barangays
per municipality. The Municipal AR highlights the following:
Concurrence of the accomplishments of each barangays
Delivery of LCEs commitments during the MIBF
Summing up of leanings together with the MLGU
Setting directions for the succeeding cycle What strategies can be adopted in conducting Accountability


There are no standard processes and methods

for conducting the Accountability Reporting. Before the Municipal AR, the ACT
The following strategies may be adopted, or the should prepare a guide format of
ACT can develop their own strategies for presentation for barangays to follow.
conducting the activity. ACTs creativity and innovativeness is
encouraged. Workshop /Plenary Type

During the barangay and municipal level, a workshop may be done to be able to come up
with reports on the status of sub-projects and other project related activities:
Review of SP Implementations: actual physical accomplishments and financial
disbursement vis--vis target.
Review of the actual performance of barangays in terms of attendance and
participation in BAs
Status of Operation and Maintenance Groups focusing on operations and
organization (Organizational diagnosis check list may be used for this)
Actual status of the BAP against targets
Review of the GRS and how are grievances resolved
Compliance to transparency and accountability requirements (updated sign boards
and regular reports during assemblies
Summing up experiences on the concluded cycle look into three things: what we
done right, what we done wrong, and what must we start doing. The META Card
technique may be used for this activity.

During the presentation of status at the Municipal Level AR, validation of reports between
the Barangay and municipal representatives should be facilitated through an open forum. META Plan Technique

The Meta Card technique is a simple Note:

brainstorming technique to generate
Implementations of sub-projects look into the
ideas for analysis and determine
relationships. The tool requires the actual physical accomplishments and financial
use of meta cards ( 18x12 cms) where disbursement vis--vis target.
in ideas or opinions are written down Accomplishments of the BAP look into the actual
and categorized under set sub- status against targets
Summing up experiences on the concluded cycle
look into three thing: what we done right, what we
done wrong, and what must we start doing. The
META Plan may be used for this activity.
headings. Cards may be rearranged and placed under other sub-categories as seen fit.
Color coding may be used to identify ideas in a specific category.

After the Meta planning, the facilitator will synthesize the results of the workshop drawing
commitments among participants on the outputs. Negotiations

This strategy is best used during the barangay and municipal level planning for the
succeeding cycle.

Basically the idea is for Barangay Chairpersons or Volunteers to present key issues
identified during the Barangays level AR answering the question what can we continue in
support of the MLGU in order to make the next cycle even more effective? After presenting
the key issues to the members of the MIAC, the same is requested to respond to the issues
and come up with agreement before the end of the activity. What follows after the Accountability Reporting?

After the AR has been conducted, all the outputs of the activities will now be used for
planning at the RPMT and ACT level. The main areas for planning are the items stated
below and all will be the content areas of the RPMT and ACT action plans. The action plans
will define the next steps after the conduct of the AR and what activities/ interventions must
be made to effectively deliver the plans made.
Planning for next cycle activities focusing on LGU engagements moving towards
doing things together (second cycle) and LGUs taking the led for the third cycle.
Coordination with BLGU/MLGU regarding roles to be assumed by the same across
succeeding cycles.
Capability building requirements for BLGU/MLGU staff
Preparation of action plans-ACT/RPMT.


To the ACT:

This short chapter will describe how cycle 2 and 3 of the CEAC will proceed, building on the
implementation process of the 1st cycle. It only provides a broad description, as the
operational details will be largely determined by conditions obtaining from the
implementation of the 1st cycle. It is assumed that this will vary across municipalities.

The chapter is divided into two parts, one for each subsequent cycle. Each section begins
by describing how each cycle is different from the previous cycles, as well as how the role of
various stakeholders are expected to evolve. The sections then proceed to discuss in broad
strokes how each of the major CEAC processes will change across cycles.

The ACT is enjoined to explore how activities in subsequent KC cycles will be enhanced,
building on the success, and even shortcomings, of the 1st cycle, study in detail how the 1st
cycle proceeded in their respective municipalities and barangays, and calibrate 2nd, and
consequently, 3rd cycle implementation accordingly.

4.1 The CEAC 2 nd Cycle Implementation

4.1.1 How is the CEAC 2nd Cycle implementation different from the 1st Cycle?

Cycle 2 is arguably the most critical cycle in the 3-cycle KC:KKB CEAC. The logic guiding
activities in the 2nd cycle is largely borne by the implementation of the KC Institutionalization
framework (section______), which calls for progressive, more active involvement of local
government units and community volunteers in project implementation across 3 cycles.
Cycle 2 of the enhanced CEAC
will seek to actualize these
engagements. Facilitation of
cycle 2 activities will be
conducted by BDC identified
volunteers, representatives of
the MIAC, and other

4.1.2 What is the role of the

ACT in facilitating the
2nd Cycle?

The role of the ACT will be to

orient and prepare facilitators on
Figure 6: Cycle 2 KC:KKB CEAC

the task of facilitating the CEAC activities, provide coaching during activities, and conduct
post activity processing and evaluation. Through this strategy, greater acceptance of the
projects development processes will be achieved, and the capacity of local volunteers,
community members, and other stakeholders will slowly be enhanced.

Looking back at section on forming new groups in the KC project, one will recall
the CF task of conducting activities calling for the organization of the BDC beginning in the
Social Preparation stage and culminating in the composition or re-composition of the
Barangay Development Council by the time of Sub-project Implementation. This strategy
will have an immediate bearing in the implementation of cycle 2 of the enhanced CEAC.

4.1.3 How does the 2nd Cycle of the CEAC proceed?

Cycle 1 weaves into cycle 2 around the time of the conduct of the 1st Municipal
Accountability Review and Reporting session (Cycle 1 Transition Stage). The
completion of this activity signals the beginning of Cycle 2 by way of conduct of the
Municipal Meeting. Both the Municipal Accountability Review and Reporting of Cycle 1,
and the Municipal Meeting of cycle two will be conducted back-to-back, in one day. The
process of conducting the Municipal Meeting of cycle 2 will be slightly different form cycle 1
in the sense that more outputs are expected, in line with the KC:KKB Institutionalization
Framework, but the basic design of the meeting remains the same.

Prior to the conduct of the 1st Barangay Assembly in cycle 2, a meeting of the Barangay
Development Council (BDC) shall be conducted to orient BDC members on the process of
Participatory Situational Analysis (PSA) and Barangay Development Plan (BDP) review and
updating. The BDC shall also draw-up a list of candidate volunteers for the PSA review, and
potential members of the Barangay Representation Team (BRT) and Project Preparation
Team (PPT) for cycle 2.

The 1st Barangay Assembly (1st BA) for cycle 2 shall be facilitated by a community
volunteer duly designated by the BDC. Both the BDC meeting and the 1 st BA shall be
conducted back-to-back, with the BDC in the morning and the 1 st BA in the afternoon. The
BDC meeting can also be conducted even during the transition stage for cycle 1. Please
refer to the attached Cycle 2 Output Indicators and ACT Matrix as well as on the Sub-
manual on the 1st BA for more guidance.

The Participatory Situational Analysis (PSA) review and updating shall be conducted as
an expanded BDC meeting, to be attended by regular members of the BDC, the BDC-
nominated and BA elected PSA volunteers, and assisted by municipal staff designated by
the Municipal Inter-Agency Committee (MIAC). Preparatory to the conduct of the PSA
review, the ACT shall gather and consolidate secondary data so that these can be used to
enrich the PSA results. The BAP from cycle 2 is also updated and enhanced. For this
purpose, a report on accomplishments with regards to addressing other BAP concerns from
the previous cycle is a necessary pre-requisite.

As in the previous cycle, the PSA review process shall end in a validation exercise through
the conduct of the 2nd Barangay Assembly. The 2nd BA shall constitute the last activity of
the PSA review, and shall be conducted in the afternoon of the last day of the PSA review
and updating process.

The conduct of the Criteria Setting Workshop (CSW) and the Project Development
Workshop (PDW) shall be the same as in the 1st cycle. However, the most critical
difference is in the facilitation task of the two activities, which shall be the primary

responsibility of a MIAC-designated staff. The AC and DAC shall provide coaching in the
preparation and actual conduct of the activity, as well as facilitate processing of experiences
and evaluation after the activity to generate lessons and insights.

The Sub-project Proposal Preparation and Finalization process will be interspersed with
community consultations, MIAC technical assistance provision, and with pre-implementation
training workshops such as procurement and community finance management. This
process shall end in a MIAC technical review, where the MIAC shall lead in a process of
examining the completeness of prepared proposals. The BRT site validation exercise
shall be conducted as part of the MIAC technical review process.

The conduct of a single Muncipal Inter-Barangay Forum for Participatory Resource

Allocation, which will be conducted after the MIAC technical review, and should be jointly
facilitated by both the AC and a member of the MIAC.

The MIBF shall be followed by a Municipal Development Council (MDC) Review of Sub-
project Proposals. The purpose of this activity is for the MDC to mobilize support for the
implementation of prioritized sub-projects, as well as review the PSA and BAP results, and
the Barangay Development Plans developed as a result of the PSA process. The MDC is
also expected to come up with MDC resolutions urging the Municipal LCE to release
committed local counterpart contributions, and call for a review of the Municipal
Development Plan to incorporate the various BDPs developed.

Parallel to the conduct of the MDC SP Review, meetings to feedback the results of the MIBF
to the community shall be conducted by the CFs through the holding of a Barangay
Assembly, which shall be conducted similar to the 5th BA in the cycle 1 CEAC.

The process of SubProject Implementation shall then follow the conduct of the BA for
MIBF Feed backing. The transition period towards cycle 3 then follows.

4.2 The CEAC 3 rd Cycle Implementation
4.2.1 How is the CEAC 3rd Cycle implementation build on the 2nd Cycle?

Adoption of KC:KKB Development process is hoped to be achieved in cycle 3. This cycle

shall proceed much in the same way as cycle 2, with a number of adjustments, most notably
in the facilitation of major activities, which will continue to be shifted more towards project
stakeholders, and less on area coordinating teams. It is also expected that both barangay
and municipal local
government units shall
be providing more
resources for the
conduct of major
activities, including that
of the PSA review, the
MIBF, and on MIAC
technical support
provision and

4.2.2 What is the

role of the
ACT in
facilitating 2nd
Figure 1: Cycle 3 KC:KKB CEAC
The role of the ACT in
the third cycle will focus
primarily on technical assistance provision. The activities in the third cycle are expected to
be implemented by the MLGU partners and local community volunteers. The ACT is
expected to walk municipal partners and volunteers through the whole implementation
process and in each activity, providing technical support and guidance as necessary, and
conducting process monitoring to ensure the projects development interventions continually
build towards sustaining CDD in the post project period.

4.2.3 How does the 2nd cycle of the CEAC proceed?

Figure ___ outlines the major stages and activities of the cycle 3 CEAC. All activities
colored red are expected to be funded from local government counterparts.

The PSA review for cycle 3 shall also include a review of the Barangay Development Plans
developed in the previous cycle, in order to determine effectiveness in addressing BAP
concerns as well as update both the SA and the BDP.

All municipal activities in cycle 3 are expected to be conducted through expanded Municipal
Development Council meetings. The MDCs are expected to be expanded to include all
BRTs as well as representative of other organizations, Operation and Maintenance groups,

and other community associations formed as a result of previous project interventions. The
expanded MDC is expected to be the basic mechanism for facilitating implementation of the
Criteria Setting process as well as the Sub-project Prioritization and Approval Process.

The MIAC mechanism for technical support monitoring shall continue to be strengthened,
and a planning process for post-KC support provision and monitoring shall be developed to
ensure that development process introduced and built by the project are sustained in a post-
KC environment.


To the ACT:

This chapter focuses on the processes and mechanisms which will aid in ensuring
sustainability of KC CDD interventions beyond project life. The chapter begins with a
discussion on the concept of sustainability in the context of the KC project, and outlines 10
Principles for sustaining CDD interventions from the Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers
Sourcebook of the World Bank. This is then followed by discussions on the four critical
sustainability intervention areas of (i) Institutionalization; (ii) Convergence; (iii)
Organizational Development and CBO Strengthening, and; (iv) Exit planning.

While sustainability is the concerns of all members of the ACT, managing the
implementation of processes and mechanisms outlined in this chapter are the primary
responsibility of the Area Coordinator. Most of the activities outlined in this chapter, with the
exception of CBO strengthening and O.D., are largely municipal-level activities, and hence
are in the realm of the ACs tasks and functions.

The question of sustainability is an ever present challenge for any development project.
Addressing this concern takes on an even greater relevance in CDD interventions. As
communities learn how to work together and build social structures and systems for
collectively addressing rural poverty conditions, the task of the ACT shifts to ensuring that
these structures and systems endure through the peoples own efforts, aided by lessons
learned in KC implementation.

Remember that ensuring sustainability also means planning obsolescence of project-aided

structures and mechanisms. This means making ourselves obsolete. The opposite would
be creating even more dependency and consequently, disempowerment.

5.1 What is sustainability?

In the context of the KALAHI-CIDSS: KKB project, sustainability is broadly defined as the
capacity of a community to respond to development challenges in ways that will provide
continuing benefit to its members. The focus of sustainability is not on the quality of
construction, as all structures, no matter how strong; will eventually fall into decay if not
maintained. Neither does sustainability refer to simple capacity building on the use of a
certain type of technology, nor on the level of institutional support provided to community-led
development interventions.

To be sure, all of these are necessary elements that support local initiatives at sustaining
development projects. However, without the ability of the community to creatively respond
to poverty conditions, both existing and emerging, all development interventions will be
placed at risk. The concept of response-ability is a more useful and insightful way to frame
sustainability in the context of CDD interventions.

5.2 How do we ensure sustainability of CDD interventions?

Chapter 9 of the World Bank Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers Sourcebook5 lists the
following key principles for ensuring sustainable and effective CDD interventions;
1. Establish an enabling environment through relevant institutional and policy reform.
2. Make investments responsive to informed demand.
3. Build participatory mechanisms for community control and stakeholder involvement.
4. Ensure social and gender inclusion.
5. Invest in capacity building of Community-Based Organizations.
6. Facilitate community access to information.
7. Develop simple rules and strong incentives, supported by monitoring and evaluation.
8. Maintain flexibility in design of arrangements.
9. Design for scaling up.
10. Invest in an exit strategy.

You will notice that a number of these principles are already built into the KALAHI-CIDSS:
KKB Projects implementation and facilitation design, particularly in the operationalization of
the community empowerment activity cycle (CEAC). In addition, four critical areas of
intervention need to be responded to by the Area Coordinating Team in parallel to the CEAC
implementation process. These include;

Organizational Development, CBO strengthening and Volunteer Development, and;
Exit planning;

Each of these interventions will be discussed in the following sections;

5.3 The KALAHI-CIDSS Institutionalization

Framework and Key Result Areas

5.3.1 What is Institutionalization in the context of the KALAHI-CIDSS Project?

Because of the highly participatory and essentially decentralized nature of all Community-
Driven Development initiatives, these interventions naturally create tensions in highly
centralized and bureaucratic governance structures and processes. Local government
officials unused to popular participation, not only in the choice but even in the design of
development interventions and in the allocation of development financing, will inevitably feel
threatened by a development strategy that proceeds from, and calls for organized popular
demand. For this reason, a key element in sustaining CDD initiatives involves building the
capacity of local governments to creatively and constructively respond to the demand-driven
initiatives of local communities. This is the supply side of CDD, echoed in the first principle
of establishing enabling environments called for above.

In the KALAHI-CIDSS Project, the process of addressing the supply-side of development is

anchored on the projects institutionalization framework, where Institutionalization is
For a detailed discussion on these principles, please refer to Chapter 9 of the Poverty Reduction Strategy
Papers Sourcebook, World Bank. An electronic version is available for download at the World Bank website at

defined as the process of mainstreaming CDD principles and process, and sustaining the
application of the same, in local development planning processes, as well as in the
implementation of interventions to address development challenges.

5.3.2 Why is Institutionalization necessary in the KALAHI-CIDSS


A number of conditions provide the rationale for institutionalization of CDD processes

introduced by the KALAHI-CIDSS: KKB project. These include;

The complexity of development challenges conditions which create rural poverty are
hopelessly complex, transcending not only geographic boundaries but also deeply
entrenched beliefs and norms about governance and popular participation in decision-
making. Creating lasting solutions to well-established poverty conditions require the
concerted effort of all stakeholders.

The need to ensure sustainability grounded on convergence of all stakeholders in the

provision of technical assistance and resources to local communities undertaking CDD
initiatives. Numerous studies have consistently shown how community-driven development
interventions inevitably fail because of lack of institutional support to community
development efforts. The KC Institutionalization process seeks to capacitate project
stakeholders to effectively deliver support to local community initiatives.

The need to guide transfer of CDD technology to local government unit counterparts to
whom the task of sustaining project gains and benefits will ultimately fall. The KALAHI-
CIDSS CDD technology provides an example of how direct peoples participation in
development planning and resource allocation can occur, both at the barangay and at the
municipal levels. However, both shortages of resources for development financing as well
as socio-political dynamics can often constrain how common people are engaged in
development activities. on the local government units, fo

5.3.3 What is the KALAHI-CIDSS Institutionalization Framework?

The KALAHI-CIDSS Institutionalization

Framework (figure _____) broadly
outlines the key elements in
institutionalization and how these
elements play together to ensure
adoption of CDD processes in local
development initiatives.

In the context of the Local Government

Code of 1991, the process of
institutionalization of CDD is reflected in;
1. How local governments
undertake participatory, inclusive
development planning;

Figure ___: KC Institutionalization Framework

2. How local governments allocated resources for development, as well as the
parameters and criteria they refer to when allocating resources, and;
3. How local governments implement development interventions in a participatory,
transparent, and inclusive manner.

Since the primary responsibility for animating these process are part of the mandates of
local government units, the manner by which specific local government bodies function to
support CDD efforts is also a reflection of the institutionalization process. These include;
1. The Office of the Local Chief Executive of both the Barangays and the Municipality;
2. The Sangguniang Bayan or Legislative Council of both the Barangay and the
3. Local Special Bodies such as the Barangay and Municipal Development Councils,
and others;
4. The Barangay Assembly;

The local governance processes and bodies mentioned above constitute key
institutionalization agendas and arenas for engagement. Among the key agenda that should
be put forward by local communities, with the support of the ACTs, may include, but are not
limited to, the following;

Policy development, which may include engagements towards;

Issuance of local ordinances adopting KALAHI-CIDSS as a local poverty reduction
strategy/technology at the barangay and municipal level;
Issuance of policy on prioritization of targets, programs and resources based on
experiences or lessons learned from KALAHI-CIDSS;
Issuance of other local ordinances responsive to the priority needs of community;
Issuance of ordinance for adopting MIAC as regular structure and/or its functions;
Community plans integrated into local development plans.

Structural Adjustments, calling for institutionalization activities aimed at;

Promoting continued operations of the MIAC, beyond the project life;
Integration of MIAC and its functions into MDC;
Enhancing level of convergence of programs and agencies engaged in development
work at the community, barangay, and municipal level;
Developing more open governance systems and processes for participative
Basic sector representation in development councils;
Community facilitators being absorbed into regular plantilla or LGU staff designated
to continue CDD efforts;

Systems Enhancement, which may include efforts at;

Adoption of participatory tools and techniques in planning and program development;
More transparent resource allocation and utilization;
Converged and participatory monitoring and evaluation;
Continued development of innovative and/or need-based programs that are poverty-
More focused targeting of poverty alleviation/reduction programs and services;

Resource Allocations, calling for;

Progressively increasing resource requirements integrated into annual budgets;
Adoption of resource sharing schemes;
Adoption of participatory and inclusive resource allocation processes;

In summary, the specific key results areas for KC institutionalization include the following;

At the Barangay Level:

Legislation integrating CDD in regular programs.
Adoption of participatory development processes.
Functionality of the BDC.
Barangay-based mechanisms to address BAP priorities.
Consistency of budget allocation with BAP priorities.
O&M groups as POs with legal status.

At the Municipal Level:

Legislation integrating CDD in regular programs.
Adoption of participatory development processes.
Functionality of the MDC and the MIAC.
MLGU staff performing KC functions.
Consistency of MLGU budget with barangay priorities.

5.3.4 How is institutionalization operationalized?

Since institutionalization primarily involves advocacy, the Team is encouraged to carry out
the following activities:

1.1 Together with the facilitators, build a network of KALAHI-CIDSS advocates at the
municipal and barangay levels who will serve as primary partners in advocating for
localization of the Project.

1.2 Involve the community representatives or basic sector to effectively draw more
attention to the advocacy messages.

1.3 Form support group/s from among the community groups, sectoral organizations,
other agencies and local officials.

1.4 Always update the data and share widely the information about the situation of the
barangays and the accomplishments of the Project.

1.5 Facilitate the formulation of an advocacy plan to ensure systematic efforts. In

choosing the advocacy strategies and tactics, consider the objectives, experiences
of the key players, target audience, time frame and available resources. Be clear
and realistic about your demands. These should be based on both short term and
long-term objectives. Please refer to Annex 8 for some strategies and methods.

The ACT should bear in mind that the level of institutionalization engagements will
necessarily vary depending on the specific contexts of each community, and that the specific
activities will be different across communities.

5.4 Promoting Convergence for Community-Driven

5.4.1 What is Convergence?

Convergence is the synchronization and complementation of resources and initiatives to

ensure greater impact of development interventions. In convergence, all stakeholders must
be enjoined to approach a common point in development interventions. It therefore requires
that stakeholders and agencies engaged in convergence efforts agree to cooperate and
have a common understanding and commitment to pursue a goal or an objective.

In concrete, convergence may require unity of perspectives and vision; common targeting of
communities and families; synchronized delivery mechanisms and sharing of resources.

5.4.2 Why converge?

Poverty is now recognized as a multi-dimensional problem, and because of this, there has
been growing realization of different agencies of the urgency of responding to current social
and economic realities that contribute to poverty of rural communities.

However, development interventions have often been characterized by divergence rather

than convergence, with different agencies implementing development projects following their
own specific and narrow mandates and relegating coordination work with different agencies
as an add-on task rather than an integral component of project activities. In a number of
instances, this lack of convergence results in duplication of efforts, and waste of

With development financing always inadequate, there now exists a growing awareness that
efficiency in poverty-alleviation activities can be met only by complementation of resources.
Overall impact is greater than the impact generated by any one agency on its own.

While the communities are assisted to organize themselves, it is also necessary that the
various stakeholders at the municipal level coordinate their initiatives. The passage of the
Local Government Code mandates the LGUs to achieve convergence; hence, convergence
efforts should be supportive of the development vision of the LGUs. This will require the
LGU to take on active roles to ensure their needs are met by the collaborative efforts.

5.4.3 What are the objectives of convergence?

In the context of the KALAHI-CIDSS project, activities aimed at enhancing convergence

efforts are undertaken in order to;
1. Maximize use of governments scarce resources to generate greater impact for
community members;
2. Accelerate local development through complementation of institutional & project
3. Forge closer collaboration with all stakeholders engaged in development in any
given KC municipality;

4. Build solidarity across sectors & communities to harness potentials of the
5. Broaden and enhance technical assistance provision for CDD efforts of local

5.4.4 How is convergence operationalized in the KALAHI-CIDSS Project?

Figure ___ illustrates how development

efforts of different government agencies at
different levels can be managed to
support community initiatives for
development. While different agencies
operate on specific, and at times narrow,
mandates, the services these agencies
provide are ultimately channeled through
the local government structure. It is at this
point that local initiatives at promoting
more practical convergence can occur.

LGUs have a natural need to ensure

development efforts of different agencies
operating within the municipality are
properly managed and integrated into Figure ___: KC Convergence Framework
municipal development plans. The local
government code provides a way for
LGUs to address this need by specifying provisions for local development planning, and by
providing local chief executives with the power, supported by the local sanggunian, to
rationalize local development priorities with the specific priorities of national government
agencies operating within their respective jurisdictions.
While efforts at promoting national and
regional convergence in the KC project are
the tasks of the national and regional
project management offices respectively,
the ACT play a very critical role in
concretizing convergence efforts, and
promoting practical convergence initiatives
at the municipal level. Figure ___ presents
one example of a municipal-level
convergence structure grounded on the
Municipal Inter-Agency Committee (MIAC).
This is an ideal form of a convergence
structure, where multiple agencies are
Figure __: Local Convergence Structure made to provide specific forms of technical
assistance to community initiatives, or are
tapped to assist local government units and
community members in more strategic development planning initiaves.

A simpler form can include one or two agencies working with the local government unit and
a local community on a specific form of intervention in a type of issue-based convergence
initiative. As an example, staff from both the Department of Agriculture (DA) and the
Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) can be tapped to collectively provide technical
assistance to a local community undertaking a development project focused on agricultural
productivity and asset reform.

Whatever the form, it is your task as the ACT to promote municipal-level convergence
initiatives in support of CDD efforts of KC communities.

5.4.5 What convergence activities can be undertaken?

The first task at convergence revolves around the organization of the Municipal Inter-Agency
Committee (MIAC). Section 3.2.4 above discusses the MIAC, its background, composition,
and the role it plays in the CEAC. In addition, organizing the MIAC can involve three broad
processes, including;

1. Social preparation, which includes groundworking of specific MIAC members, review of

development interventions of different agencies working in the municipality; inventory of
agencies and organizations (NGO and other civil society organizations) in the area and
the resources they may have to support barangay sub-projects); undertaking
stakeholder analysis; undertaking local community planning for resource and support
accessing from local agencies; and community advocacy work;

2. Organization building, which can include activities like: (i) the formal organization of
MIAC or where a MIAC already exists, the strengthening of the partnership especially in
the provision of technical assistance and conduct of monitoring and evaluation, (ii)
promoting active engagement of MIAC members in specific project activities; (iii) MIAC
review and consolidation of barangay plans; (iv) installation of a monitoring and
evaluation system; and (v) building the capability of specific MIAC members in the
provision of technical assistance to local communities;

3. Consolidation, which can include such activities as (i) facilitating the integration of the
principles and processes of KALAHI-CIDSS to local development planning and resource
allocation such as in the formulation of the barangay development plan and the
municipal development plan,(ii) institutionalization of MIAC functions into the municipal
development council (MDC); (iii) building MIAC support for representation of
communities in the MDC in additional to the barangay captains who are automatic
members of the MDC; (iv) back-door MIAC advocacy to Sangguniang Bayan for a
balanced strategic and bottom-up allocation of resources; (v) resource generation; and
networking with provincial, regional and national development councils and other

In addition, other activities aimed at promoting convergence at the municipal level can
include the following;

Discussions on the Local Development Plan the LGU can be enjoined to present
its Municipal Development Plan, discuss how the plan was prepared, problems encountered
during preparation (including challenges to participation, budgets, NGA priorities, and so
on), the municipal development thrusts, and how problems identified during the PSA can be
incorporated to enrich the plan further. In this instance, convergence is built around the
municipal development plans and prorities.

Presentation of agency programs and projects National Government Agencies

(NGAs) implementing foreign assisted projects (FAPs) and other development interventions,
Private Agencies, and Non-Government Organizations (NGOs) implementing development

projects in the municipality can be called together to share information on their various
programs. These can include objectives, principles, strategies, components, beneficiaries
and beneficiary selection processes, implementation arrangements, resource allocation
mechanism, special features, and so on. Discussion on areas of over-laps, and
convergence and inter-agency multi-sectoral support areas can then proceed from these

Workshop to define, identify, and agree on convergence areas which can


Developing convergence models, such as;

Geographical or spatial convergence where inter-agency coordination and
support is based on area-specific considerations. One example is the potential for
cross support between Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries (ARBs) in Agrarian Reform
Communities (ARCs) supported by the DAR, and KC volunteers undertaking
development projects in the same areas.
Program recipients/beneficiaries where inter-agency support is focused on a
specific group of beneficiaries. Coupled with good poverty targeting, this model
increases the potential of effectively addressing multiple dimensions of the same
poverty condition. One example can be the addressing challenges to health of
beneficiaries of a level 2 water system project.

Developing and enhancing local implementation mechanisms, especially those that

also provide opportunities to build local capabilities in project design, management,
operation and maintenance, and monitoring and evaluation;

Agreeing on the basic principles to guide convergence efforts, which will serve as
the basis for building operational relationships, and the parameters of the convergence
effort, and;

Rationalizing project areas within the municipality. This can include clarifying what
areas different agency projects focus on, and in the case of major over-laps, how
interventions can be rationalized to ensure project benefits do not cancel each other out.
Common project areas include;
asset reform and land tenure improvement
institutional strengthening
provision of small-scale infrastructure
access & provision of agricultural support services
technical support to communities
The potential for identifying areas of weakness in terms of intervention is also created,
providing further opportunities for developing new forms of interventions. Because these
are collectively identified, they become in additional platforms for convergence initiatives.

Action Planning activities, which can include mapping of community needs and resources
of different agencies, including FAPs.


6.1 The Area Coordinating Team

An Area Coordinating Team (ACT) is a composite team deployed in a municipality to
implement KC project. They assume the most crucial role in project implementation directly
working with the community and other project stakeholders. Its members vary depending on
the number of barangays in a municipality. The members of an ACT are the following:
1. Area Coordinator WHY USE A TEAM?
2. Deputy Area Coordinator
3. Roving Bookkeeper 1. No single person has the monopoly
4. Community Facilitators of all the ideas for a particular job or
2. A group of people working together
6.1.1 Why adopt a team approach have better ideas and make better
in the KALAHI-CIDSS? decisions that people working separately.
This phenomenon is called synergy.
In the achievement of the KC project 3. Commitment to a decision or idea is
objectives, it is believed that greater if the team takes part in making it.
multidiscipline members of the Area People tend to resist change that is being
Coordinating Team will show the best imposed upon them and tend to support
results. That ACT members must be change that they helped to design. It is
interdependent, that is, each member easier to implement change and see
perceive they need one anothers results when they were developed by a
experience, ability, and commitment in team.
order to achieve project goals and objectives. Teamwork then is a requirement in working in
a team.

6.1.2 What are the functions of the Area Coordinating Team members?

Headed by an Area Coordinator (AC)

who has extensive experience in
community development work and
1. the group members must have a
supervision, the AC assumes full
shared goals or for reason for working
responsibility of supervising the ACT
members. H/She takes responsibility
2. The group must be interdependent
that municipal and barangay level
(that is, they perceive that they need one
activities are undertaken as well as
anothers experience, ability, and
establishing partnerships/lingkages with
commitment in order to arrive at mutual
project stakeholders to include LGUs,
NGOs/POs, and other agencies.
3. The group members must be
committed to the idea that working
The Deputy Area Coordinator (DAC)
together leads to more effective decisions
who is an engineer assumes
than working in isolation;
supervisory function to team members
4. The group must be accountable as a
in the absence of the AC. The DAC has
functioning unit within a larger
the responsibility of providing technical assistance together with the municipal engineer to
the community volunteers.

The community facilitators build the capacities of the communities in undertaking
participatory situation analysis, community planning, project development and
implementation, organizational building, and monitoring and evaluation.

The Roving Bookeeper builds the capabilities of the barangay volunteers in recording
financial transactions and preparing financial reports.

The Area Coordinating Team has the primary responsibility of ensuring that Key
Development Indicators of the project is achieved. The AC takes responsibility in municipal
level activities with the help of the DAC and Roving Bookkeeper. The CF has the full
responsibility of barangay level activities.

For each of the tasks of the Area Coordinating Team members, specific report requirement
is expected. Refer to Monitoring and Evaluation handbook.

For the ACT members to effectively carry out their tasks and responsibilities, they should
possess the following requirements:

1. A strong belief in the capacity of the people. That poor people is an asset and
can be partners in development;
2. An understanding of poverty as caused by structural problem e.g. inequality of
resources, opportunity and access issues;
3. Clarified of their roles as catalyst of change, enabler, broker, and an advocate;
4. Can work in a team.

6.1.3 To whom the ACT should engage?

As frontline implementers, the Area Coordinating Team will be directly working with the
community, with the Local Government Units, and other stakeholders of the project.

For coaching, supervision, and provision of logistical support, the team should be directly
engaging with the Regional Project Team Management members.

Direct engagement of the National Project Management Office (NPMO) with the ACTs in the
field can also happen through conduct of site visits to (i) demonstrate new processes and
technologies; (ii) validate monitoring findings, and (iii) conduct of consultation meetings with
LGU staff, community volunteers, and other stakeholders when necessary.

6.2 Conducting Tactic Sessions

6.2.1 What is a tactic session?

A Tactic Session is a specialized team meeting for surfacing issues, problems, and gaps in
implementation in context-specific conditions and developing appropriate, often short-term
(tactical) responses to break an implementation impasse.

It has been said that a good tactic session is as necessary to a community organizer as rice
is to the Filipino. This is a very precise description of the role of the TS in any community
development campaign. The Tactic Session is the mechanism at the heart of a successful
community organizing effort.

6.2.2 How is a tactic session different from a regular team meeting?

A tactic session is different from a regular team meeting in that the purpose of a tactic
session is to find and immediate and effective solution to a specific problem. A tactic
session therefore requires the existence of a critical problem that, unless resolved quickly
and effectively, will hinder further progress in implementation.

The TS is mainly a mechanism for creative thinking on tactics (and in some cases strategies
as well) and on the effect of specific implementation problems to the whole organizing thrust.

In a real sense, the TS is also a venue for group planning.

6.2.3 What is the difference between a tactic session and a strategizing


In terms of content: Tactic sessions deal with immediate, short-term, context-specific

concerns and issues while strategizing sessions often deal with more long-term,
programmatic issues and concerns cutting across a broad range of contexts.

In terms of process: Tactic sessions are often quick paced and intense while strategizing
sessions are more relaxed.

In terms of data requirements: Tactic sessions deal with micro, context specific
information calibrated to address the immediate concern or issue at hand. Often,
perception-based information triangulated from different sources suffice, although hard data
are also desirable.

In terms of outputs: Tactic sessions lead to concrete action plans and activities designed
to be implemented with speed.

6.2.4 Who participates in a tactic sessions?

Participants to tactic sessions are generally people who have experienced working together
for some time and have at least a common understanding of the contexts being tacticized. It
is often very difficult for outsiders to participate in tactic sessions. Also, because of the

nature of the discussions involved, it is strongly recommended for community volunteers to
not be involved in tactic sessions of ACTs.

6.2.5 How often is a tactic session conducted?

As mentioned earlier, a tactic session is conducted whenever a problem or issue exists that
requires immediate resolution and for which the expertise of everyone in the team is
required. This can be conducted either on a regular basis, in which case every team
member gets to be the focus of tacticizing, or on a need basis depending on the issues at
hand. For newly composed teams, it is suggested that tactic sessions be conducted
regularly in the beginning to get each member of the team familiarized with the TS process,

6.2.6 How is a tactic session conducted?

While no hard and fast rules exist for the conduct of a tactic session, the TS usually begins
with reports from the members of the team on developments in the work in their area. As
much as possible, the area development report should be presented as concretely as
possible so that other team members can get a clear picture of what is happening in the

The TS is usually facilitated by an experienced member of the team. It is the role of the TS
facilitator to direct the TS and draw on the experiences, thinking, and suggestions of the
team. The facilitator leads the reporter to n analysis of the events and the developments in
the area as a conclusion to the report.

In the TS, area developments are viewed against previously set expected results. Analysis
of events and developments focus on whether plans went according to plan. If so, why? If
not, why not? Gaps are pinpointed so that lessons are learned. Successes are also
pinpointed for their learning experience value. Sometimes in development work, plans do
not come out as expected because of a number of reasons. Perhaps the target of the effort
was wrong, or the tactics were ineffective. Sometimes the issues are more fundamental,
such as the activity was beyond the experience of the people, or were not from the people in
the first place but fed by the CF. The groundworking may have also been faulty or too
cerebral and lacking in emotional motivation.

The role of the lead person or facilitator, and of the team members as a whole, include the

1. To probe, never to defend or take sides, never to ask personal questions. The team
must remember that the TS is not a mechanism for checking performance as there
are other venues where this id more effectively done. The TS is a mechanism for
objective thinking on issues and thrusts. Sulking and being defensive has absolutely
no place in it.

2. To ask direct questions, never irrelevant ones.

3. To pay attention to every detail of a report as if each report was his/her own.

4. To give a well-thought-out question that can challenge and lead the reporter into a
new learning.

5. To grill or to challenge, ask questions, provoke, and give suggestions. One of the
key elements to an effective TS is the grilling session. Broadly, the process
proceeds with a team member presenting a pressing issue requiring immediate
resolution. The word grill as a CO term used during TS refers to the act of
questioning by the whole team wherein the reporter is not given a chance to make
defenses or rationalizations. The main purpose of grilling is to train each other to
think objectively under pressure. In a grilling session, members of the team asks
open-ended questions to help the reporter to think through the situation, define and
refine the context, share information that will help to frame the problem, and come up
with concrete solutions (tactics) to achieve an effective breakthrough.

Once the range of tactics are surfaced, these are further refined and the most effective one
chosen for implementation. This is then followed by a plan of action for implementing the
tactic and for monitoring achievement of the desired results.

6.3 Conducting Reflection Session

6.3.1 What is a Reflection Session?

Reflection is the process of raising experience of action to the level of learnings. A reflection
meeting is a venue for people to discuss critical experiences and distill key lessons that can
be used to improve or enhance future actions.

6.3.2 Why conduct reflection sessions?

The ACT should keep in mind that their role is to facilitate change from fear to courage,
individualism to community-centeredness, apathy to risk-taking, despair to hope,
powerlessness to empowerment. A taste of victory or success can lead to much learning
but there should be a conscious effort to sustain and internalize the psychology of
empowerment in order to counter the deeply rooted psychology of learned helplessness and
dependency. This is facilitated by engaging in constant action and constant reflection.

In the course of engaging in the KALAHI-CIDSS development processes, both the ACT and
the different stakeholders are exposed to new activities and experiences from which a
wealth of lessons can be generated to feed into achieving empowerment. However, these
lessons do not come out of the blue or develop on their own course. They have to culled
out from the numerous details and concerns of day-to-day implementation, isolated, and
elevated to the level of lessons so that they become useful for subsequent processes. This
is where the value of reflection sessions come in. Without the benefit of constant reflection
on experience, the KALAHI-CIDSS becomes a mere string of activities. Changes may occur
in local conditions, but true development may not come about.

Bear in mind that without reflection, no improvement in people empowerment can occur,
because it is during reflection where the people talk of remedies in relation to the culture of
silence and learned helplessness.

6.3.3 Who should participate in a reflection session?

Reflection sessions can be done on different levels depending on the type and nature of
participants. Ideally, all stakeholders engaged in the project, from the ACT to the community
volunteers, should engage in constant reflection on experience.

6.3.4 How often should a reflection session be conducted?

A reflection session should be conducted after every action or activity. This is a necessary
step. If reflection is set aside after an action, much learning may be wasted. If this occurs,
our actions become actions for the sake of action alone.

6.3.5 How is a reflection session conducted?

Reflection sessions can have many forms i.e. drama or Community Theater, scripture
reading, song analysis, and others. It can also resemble a ritual or can simply be in the form
of a celebration a festival, a peoples mass, a thanks-giving celebration.

The use of carefully calibrated reflection questions on key themes can also be used to
trigger critical thinking on experiences. These questions will necessarily be context-specific,
but should touch on the following;
What happened?
What did you feel?
Why did . happen?
What would have happened if?
How should things be done differently?
Who should be .?

After drawing out key reflections during the session, it would be good for the facilitator or a
resource person to give a short input on a related topic such as the nature of power, the
society we want in the future, about rights and privilege, the role of leaders, and others.
These inputs will help to deepen the peoples learning.

Much depends on the creativity of the team or person facilitating the reflection session. The
discipline and tenacity of the facilitator will determine if the reflection session is maximized
as a learning opportunity or it is reduced to a routine to be carried out for the sake of

6.4 Conducting Community Trainings

6.4.1 Why the need for Community Training?

Peoples participation in the implementation of the KALAHI-CIDSS project is a necessity

critical to the attainment of true community-driven development. However, people need to
be capacitated on needed knowledge, skills and attitude in order to efficiently and effectively
implement development interventions. The success of projects as well as sustainability
depends to a large extent upon the capabilities of community leaders and members to
address emerging issues and concerns in the course of project implementation.

In the course of their engagement in the

KALAHI-CIDSS, community volunteers and Adult Learning Psychology
members are exposed to numerous
occasions for learning. Beginning with the Adults have a wide experience and have learnt
PSA process up to the Accountability much from life. They learn most from their
Review, the KC project provides a rich peers. So animators should help them share
environment for both formal and informal their own experience and create a situation
capability building. Managing this learning where they are encouraged to have a dialogue
process is a critical task of area to one another. Let them sit in a circle where
they see each others faces so that speaking
coordinating teams.
and listening can both be helped by the use of
their eyes.
Adults are interested and learn quickly about
6.4.2 Who Should be Engaged in those things that are relevant to their lives. So
Community Training? the animator needs to create a situation in
which they can share in the planning, choose
All project stakeholders exposed in different the topics and participate in regular evaluation
of what they are doing.
ways to new processes and inputs provided
Adults have a sense of personal dignity. They
by the projects numerous activities. must be treated with respect at all times and
Groups and individuals from the community, never feel humiliated or laughed at before
e.g. barangay officials, community leaders, others.
community-based organizations, As adults grow older their memories may get
representatives of various sectors, sitios or weaker but their powers of observation and
puroks, community volunteers and other reasoning often grow stronger.
concerned groups and individuals engaged
in the project are also engaged in a continuing process of capacity enhancement.

It is essential; at this point, to differentiate between formal and informal capability building.
For purposes of simplicity, this manual will only cover the formal training sessions that need
to be conducted in the course of engagement of local volunteers with the KC development
processes. However, the ACT should bear in mind that learning can occur at any point in
the course of project implementation, and the acquisition of new skills and knowledge, and
the development of attitudes can occur outside of formal training sessions. The ACT must
therefore acquire the discipline of knowing when new learning are being acquired by local

6.4.3 What community training activities need to be conducted in the

course of engagement in the KC project?

Some of the community trainings that need to be conducted in the course of one project
cycle can include the following;
1. PSA tools and processes;
2. Project Development and Proposal Preparation;
3. Community Procurement;
4. Community Finance;
5. Project implementation management;
6. Organizational Development and Management;
7. Leadership

In addition, other project-specific and context specific trainings may need to be conducted.
These can include discussions on tariff setting or the IPRA for Tribal Communities.

Bear in mind that these are a small sample of the actual range of inputs provided to local
volunteers and communities. Rarely also are inputs on these areas given in a single sitting
during a formal training. More often, these inputs are provided through demonstration and
coaching in actual, hands-on sessions. Whatever the case may be, all training sessions,
whether formal or informal, follow a general process flow.

6.4.4 What are the processes involved in community training?

Community training typically undergoes a

process divided into three (3) major parts How People Learn
namely: (i) conceptualization or characterization
of training; (ii) actual conduct of the learning Tests have shown that
initiative and its administrative details, and; (iii) People remember 20% of what they Hear,
post training activities. 40% of what they Hear and See, and
80 % of what They Discover For Themselves Conceptualization or Education should stress Learning more than

Characterization of the training Teaching. Where possible animators should
create a learning situation where adults can
mainly involves: discover answers ands solutions for themselves.
People remember the things they have said
1) Analysis of learning needs of partners vis- themselves best, so teachers should not speak
-vis the expected knowledge, skills and too much. They need to give participants a
attitudes that they should possess at a chance to find solutions before adding
particular stage in the learning process; important points the group has not mentioned.
2) The drawing of objectives which are
based on such learning factors as individual vs. group needs;
3) Time in scheduling training a factor to consider for it determines its relevance;
4) Selecting direct learners/participants through identified standards. Actual training:

Effective facilitation of learning is a key to the successful implementation of the training. The
objectives of the training will be set at the level of the expectations of the participants.
Realistic outputs and attainable objectives will be clarified at the start of the learning

144 Post-training activities:

Assessment of the entire learning process is vital in any training initiative. Thus, this
community training initiative will conduct formal and informal discussion with learners to
gather feedback as to the activitys effectiveness in addressing their needs. This feedback
mechanism will be facilitated in determining the activitys success in meeting the objectives
identified as well as determining the future needs of the participants (for report
requirements, please see M&E report guidelines).

In the main, the community training initiative will be an opportunity for project implementers
to hone their skills and acquire adequate knowledge with proper attitude towards realizing
development goals. Likewise, the collective learning process will enable them to build
confidence in their capabilities and boost their self-worth.

6.4.5 What are the Learning Tips in the Conduct of Community


Educators must remember that

learning occurs within each individual From Freedom and Development
as a continual process throughout life. A very pleasant thing about adult education is that we can learn what
People learn at different speeds, so it we want to learn what we feel would be useful to us in our lives. At
is natural for them to be anxious or school, children are taught the things which we adults decide they should
be taught. But adults are not like children who sit in classrooms and are
nervous when faced with a learning then taught history, or grammar, or a foreign language. As adults, we can
situation. Positive reinforcement by try to learn these things if we wish; we do not have to do so. Instead, we
the instructor can enhance learning, can learn about growing a particular crop, about the government, about
housing building about whatever interests us. We can build on the
as can proper timing of the instruction. education we already have using the tools of literacy or a foreign
language, or an understanding of scientific principles. Or, if we never
went to school, we can start by learning about the things of most
Learning results from stimulation of immediate importance to us better farming methods, better child care,
the senses. In some people, one better feeding. We do not have even to start by learning to read and
sense is used more than others to write.

learn or recall information. Trainers or For literacy is just a tool; it is a means by which we can learn more,
facilitators should present materials more easily. That is its importance
that stimulate as many senses as Julius K. Nyerere
possible in order to increase their
chances of teaching success.

There are four critical elements of learning that must be addressed to ensure that
participants learn. These elements are:

1. motivation
2. reinforcement
3. retention
4. transference

Motivation. If the participant does not recognize the need for the information (or has been
offended or intimidated), all of the trainer's effort to assist the participant to learn will be in
vain. The trainer must establish rapport with participants and prepare them for learning; this
provides motivation. Trainers can motivate participants via several means:

Set a feeling or tone for the lesson. Trainers should try to establish a friendly,
open atmosphere that shows the participants they will help them learn.
Set an appropriate level of concern. The level of tension must be adjusted to
meet the level of importance of the objective. If the module has a high level of
importance, a higher level of tension/stress should be established in the group.
However, people learn best under low to moderate stress; if the stress is too high, it
becomes a barrier to learning.
Set an appropriate level of difficulty. The degree of difficulty should be set high
enough to challenge participants but not so high that they become frustrated by
information overload. The instruction should predict and reward participation,
culminating in success.

In addition, participants need specific knowledge of their learning results (feedback).

Feedback must be specific, not general. Participants must also see a reward for learning.
The reward does not necessarily have to be monetary; it can be simply a demonstration of
benefits to be realized from learning the course. Finally, the participant must be interested
in the subject. Interest is directly related to reward. Adults must see the benefit of learning in
order to motivate themselves to learn the subject.

Reinforcement. Reinforcement is a very necessary part of the teaching/learning process;

through it, trainers encourage correct modes of behavior and performance.

Positive reinforcement is normally used by trainers who are teaching participants

new skills. As the name implies, positive reinforcement is "good" and reinforces
"good" (or positive) behavior.
Negative reinforcement is normally used by trainers teaching a new skill or new
information. It is useful in trying to change modes of behavior. The result of negative
reinforcement is extinction -- that is, the trainer uses negative reinforcement until the
"bad" behavior disappears, or it becomes extinct.

When instructors are trying to change behaviors (old practices), they should apply both
positive and negative reinforcement.

Reinforcement should be part of the teaching-learning process to ensure correct behavior.

Trainers need to use it on a frequent and regular basis early in the process to help the
participants retain what they have learned. Then, they should use reinforcement only to
maintain consistent, positive behavior.

Retention. Participants must retain information from discussions in order to benefit from
the learning. The trainers' jobs are not finished until they have assisted the learner in
retaining the information. In order for participants to retain the information taught, they must
see a meaning or purpose for that information. They must also understand and be able to
interpret and apply the information. This understanding includes their ability to assign the
correct degree of importance to the module.

The amount of retention will be directly affected by the degree of original learning. Simply
stated, if the participants did not learn the module well initially, they will not retain it well

Retention by the participants is directly affected by their amount of practice during the
learning. Trainers should emphasize retention and application. After the participants
demonstrate correct (desired) performance, they should be urged to practice to maintain the
desired performance. Distributed practice is similar in effect to intermittent reinforcement.

Transference. Transfer of learning is the result of training -- it is the ability to use the
information taught in the course but in a new setting. As with reinforcement, there are two
types of transfer: positive and negative.

Positive transference, like positive reinforcement, occurs when the participants uses
the behavior taught in the course.
Negative transference, again like negative reinforcement, occurs when the
participants do not do what they are told not to do. This results in a positive (desired)

6.5 Management Troubleshooting Tips
The success and failure of any undertakings depends largely to the way it is being manage.
The continuous interactions of diverse interests among people and organizations make
management very challenging and difficult. However, the interplay of these interests is a
given environment that the Project must deal with.

In KALAHI-CIDSS Project, management problems are in the nature of people-performance,

engagement with partners, teamwork, planning and others. These tips intend to perform two
functions. First, it will deal with understanding the workers, partners and working relationship
and the seemingly indefinable process called management. Second, it will deal with the
techniques you can use to solve common problems. Remember that working relationship is
dynamic and therefore techniques could change too. This is an on-going process. The
Projects implementers (ACTs and the RPMOs) should know how to make things happen
through others.

6.5.1 What is Management all about?

Lawrence Appley, President of the American The only reason for you to be there as
Management Association, define management as manager/supervisor is to do everything
getting things done through others. He said, when in your power to help subordinates be as
you do things yourself you are a technician, when successful as possible. You succeed only
you get things done through others, you are a when they succeed
manager. Most of us in our day-to-day
management role frequently change hats. At times F.F. Fournies
we close the door and do things ourselves
(technician things); at other times, when we open the door and do management things. Too
frequently many of us fail however, because we spend more time doing things ourselves
than getting them done through others. Sometimes this is because we dont know any
better, other times it is because the organization imposes tasks on us that are not
managerial tasks.

To be successful as a people manager, we must recognize three very important basic facts
about the role of a manager.

1. Management is getting things done through others;

2. You need your subordinates more that they need you;
3. You get paid for what your subordinates do, not for what you do;

6.5.2 How to get subordinates to do what they are supposed to do?

In a survey conducted with several managers ranging from foreman to president and
including every function such as administration, research, marketing, and development
works, the responses to this question were as follows:

1. They dont know what they are suppose to do;

2. They dont know how to do it;
3. There are obstacles beyond their control;
4. They dont know why they should;
5. They dont think it will work;
6. They think their way is better;

7. Not motivated-poor attitude;
8. Personally incapable of doing it;
9. Not enough time for them to do it;
10. They are working on wrong priority items;
11. They think they are doing it (no feedback)
12. Poor management
13. Personal problems

These are listed in the order they are usually given by managers. What is surprising about
this is that when managers and supervisors try to solve individual non performance
problems they rarely select this first answer as the place to start solving the problem.
Another interesting aspect of the list is that only three items point to something inherently
wrong with the subordinates, such as incapacity, poor attitude or personal problems. The
majority of the reasons for nonperformance are obviously there because management didnt
do something right.

Most of the reasons appear to be the result of a communication problem- lack of direction
and lack of feedback

Frequently the problem is that supervisors and subordinates understand each others, but
they are not talking about what they should be talking about. In other instances they are
talking about the right things, but there is no understanding. Analysis of these obvious
communication failures has revealed that one of the major reasons supervisors are not as
effective as they could be (for the purpose of influencing others) is because they are
operating with the wrong definition of communication. Most often, communication is merely
defined as transmission of information which is incorrect.

The basic elements of successful and effective communication are the sender, message,
channel, receiver and feedback. Underemphasizing any of these elements would result to
communication failure and misunderstanding. To complete the communication process, it is
not enough to just deliver the message but ensuring that the receivers understand it by their
feed back on how they understood it.

For you to communicate effectively for the purpose of influencing others, you must recognize
that communication between people is not information transmission but thought
transmission. It is a process of getting a thought from your head to their heads.

6.5.3 How can we effectively manage meetings? Or TO MEET OR

KALAHI-CIDSS being multi-stakeholder necessitate regular meetings to coordinate and
harmonize several interests and activities of the Project. Involvement and participation of the
major stakeholders is imperative for the Projects success.

While Peter Drucker states that you can work or you can meet, you cant do both at the
same time and that a manager spending more that 25 percent of his or her time meetings
is a sign of malorganization it is not to say that when we meet too often and too carelessly
is to say that we should not meet at all. At best, meetings are useful managerial tools for:

a. Getting out information in a simultaneous way to a select audience, with

opportunity for an on-the-spot questions and comments feedback session;

b. Demonstrating and modeling the cooperative, inter-dependent work relation
you want to foster in the community and partner institutions;

c. Gathering and sharing input necessary for decision-making; What are the different types of meetings?

Half of all the meetings we conduct are called mission meeting. This meeting is called to;

a) make a decision;
b) solve a problem, and;
c) formulate policy.

The other half is called process meeting that involves managing of information and
people. The process meeting includes among others:

a) information meeting- here information flow down from management, up from

work units and across from unit to unit;
b) team building meeting-here meeting leaders and participants demonstrate by
example their strong desire to work as a team;
c) transition meeting- here meetings bring together both those causing the
change and those affected by it;
d) orientation meeting- here participants learn whos who, and whats what,
responsibility levels are assigned, changed and reinforced. When should you NOT call a meeting?

The problem with meetings is that we always know when to call one, but we somehow do
not know when it is better not to have one at all. Though meetings are important, the
following should serve to guide when not to call one, along with suggestions on an

It is probably better not to call a meeting if;

1. you have no clear agenda in mind;

2. youre relying on the meeting participants to come up with agenda items; (call
participants well in advance of the meeting, then organize their suggested agenda
items into logical agenda)

3. you want to spend the meeting getting answers to your questions from individual
participants; (call the individuals)

4. you have other pressing things to do and could postpone the meeting without
causing problems;

5. You plan to do all the talking in the meeting; (put your thought down in writing,
perhaps in the form of extended memo. Ask recipients to call you if they have
questions or concerns)

6. You have already made your decision and want to convene the group merely as a
rubber stamp; (again, use memo to communicate decisions and policies)

7. You want to get together simply to get together; (have a party, not a meeting!)

8. You need a meeting simply to show superiors youre doing something; (a bad
meeting cant make a good impression.) What right skills are needed for a successful meeting?

As a meeting leader, you have three important responsibilities. One is to guide the
participants through the meeting in a way that will accomplish its purpose. The second is to
encourage participation. And the third is to keep the meeting on track and on time. Here are
some of the tips on how to do this:

a. Before the meeting, plan and prepare the content, make up and distribute the
agenda, and check out the room and equipment;

b. At the start of the meeting, review the agenda and objectives and explain what role
the participants have in the meeting;

c. To encourage participation, ask open-ended questions, reinforce statements that

highlight objectives and use examples to encourage the group to think along similar

d. To maintain control, ignore off-target remarks, ask questions related to the task at
hand, and restate relevant points of the agenda;

e. At the end of the meeting, summarize, state conclusions, and outline actions to be
taken as a result of the meeting;

6.5.4 How does one determine and manage priorities?

We have wider things to do that cant be done in the same time or with same efficiency. One
has to make several choices. First, what is most important? What is not? What has to be
done first? Second, we must set up priorities. The best way is to write a list of all things to
be done, rearrange them in order of importance, and changes or modify the list daily,
weekly, or whatever is required.

If you create a priority list, discuss it with your superior, and get his or her comments or
suggestions. You may be surprised to find that there are other matters you are supposed to
attend to, or that there are other things on your list for which you arent responsible. If you
plunge ahead on your own and hope for the best, later events may reveal you left out an
important item, or you spent an excessive amount of time on less important tasks, but you
find out too late. Take time to write a priority list, check it out with the supervisor, revise it as
the ebb and flow of daily action indicates, and keep your priorities straight and current. Most
supervisors are happy to advise and guide you upward. All you have to do is ask.

Your mission is the foundation of priorities. See the whole picture first, and then decide on
what you needed to focus. When youre confident of where you should be headed, your
priorities become clearer, and your actions take significant meaning. The complete equation
looks something like this:

Great Passion + Clear Mission = Focused Action How can you set priorities among objectives and activities?

A rule of thumb for setting priorities among objectives and activities is:

An objective or activity is imperative and has to be attacked first if it is not only important
but also carries with it a sense of urgency or immediacy, especially if its urgency is tied to
the important needs of others

To determine how immediate or urgent an objective or activity is, the following tips will help
in measuring immediacy.

1. What has to be done in order to accomplish the objectives?

2. What has to be done first in order that other things can happen?
3. What part of the process is the most complicated or the most difficult, or about which
part of the process do I know least, and how long will it take to complete that aspect
of the task?
4. Who needs this task completed, why it is important to him or her, and by when does
he or she need it done or want done?
5. What would happen if I miss the deadlines set? What would be the negative
consequences, if any, for me or for others?
6. How important is it that I meet the demands of the task, especially if the deadlines
are set by someone else?

Generally, there are five ways that supervisors and workers decide how to spend
their time. The following are the styles. Take the time to determine which one best
describes how you spend your time:

1. Urgent- Loud Things First

Youve no doubt heard the saying: the squeaky wheel gets the grease. Over time you
will probably encounter a lot of squeaky wheels in the form of requests,
suggestions, or complaints from people. Some of them will be valid and merit
spending some of your time on them. But often, oiling the squeaky wheels in your
organization and community isnt the best use of your time. Though its tempting-
specially if you happen to be a people pleaser-you have to learn to discern which
wheels really need grease, which ones can be greased by others, and which ones
will squeak no matter what you do.

2. Unpleasant- Hard Things First

When we were young, many of us were taught to do the hard things first. Its the
dinner before dessert mentality. There is some value in it, but just because
something is hard doesnt mean it should be at the top of your to-do-list. You need to
be able to check your motives. If you have strong work ethic, you may naturally want
to get the harder things done first. But dont just start in on hard stuff before
determining the value of your actions. If doing something easier is better use of your
time, and then do that before you tackle a difficult task.

3. Unfinished- Last Thing First

Most supervisors work on a day-to-day schedule. And many times your to-do list is
left partially undone at the end of the day. If you complete only eight of the ten items
on your list, your tendency is to automatically place the remaining two items at the

top of your list the following day. But thats not always the best use of your time.
Chances are, if the two items were on the bottom of your list, they werent top
priorities in the first place. And they wont necessarily be top priorities the following
day either. Before you spend time completing an unfinished task from the day before,
evaluate it in comparison to the other things you need to accomplish. If finishing the
task is still not a top priority, place it at the bottom of your list again, and work on it
after you finish more important items.

4. Unfulfilling- Dull Things First

If you subscribe to this notion, your tendency is to do the dull, mindless things first,
but these things are rarely the most important.

5. Ultimate- First Things First

This is the concept of spending time only on what is ultimately needed to be done.
Dont try to get more done in a day by doing easier or more appealing things. Stick
with the most important and leave the rest to be done by others. Give your best time-
now and every time- to your most important tasks.

Although its admirable to be hardworking, its even more desirable to be smart working.
The key to becoming a more efficient supervisor and worker isnt in checking off all items on
your to-do list each day. Its in forming a habit of prioritizing your time so that youre always
doing whats most important. When youre able to do that, it wont be long before you begin
to exceed you expectations as a supervisor.

6.5.5 How does one effectively work with politicians?

A major and recurring challenge that usually confronts us is intervention from politicians.
This cannot be evaded or avoided. We should learn how to work harmoniously with political
leaders. We need their support and additional inputs. In fact many development workers
achieved significant accomplishments by working with politicians. In general, politicians
usually know more about what is going on in the community thus will decide who should
benefit from available public resources. To achieve a good working relationship with
politicians but prevent total elite capture, the following tips are suggested:

1. Maintain good lines of communication with them in order to develop and deepen mutual
understanding and trust;

2. Be prepared to give politicians the credit for the good that happens in the Project. This
takes many forms in practice, like announcing their contribution at the end of the project and
asking them to announce the opening of a new project;

3. Be prepared to meet a politicians demand for actual patronage. However, when their
recommenders performance turns out to be unsatisfactory, here are some useful ways to
communicate with the sponsor:

a. The fellow you sent me only shows up three days a week. Please replace him.

b. He reports late, leaves early. Send me another.

c. He is not physically well but he is willing to work. We will try him another month and
see if his health improves.

There are few advantages in entertaining patronage demand. It can improve coordination,
support, and operations of the project. It will also broaden the choices with regards to those
who will work in the Project. But if you want to fight a politician who wants to exploit you,
here are some tips:

a) Fight only on one front where you are likely When asking for help, appeal to peoples self-
to win; interest, never to their mercy or gratitude

b) Seek to take advantage of whatever If you need to turn to an ally for help, do not
support you can muster among your clientele bother to remind him of your past assistance
groups or from the media to put pressure on and good deeds. He will find ways to ignore
the antagonistic politician. you. Instead, uncover something in your
request, or in your alliance with him, that will
benefit him, and emphasize it out of
But fighting back should be done carefully for proportion. He will respond enthusiastically
the following reasons: when he sees something to be gained for
a) It may only result in destroying your own
effectiveness; Robert Greene

b) your superior might grow tired defending you, or;

c) you might be relieved or transferred.

6.5.6 How can one do effective planning?

Planning is one of the most important functions of management. It provides direction and
courses of action for the entire organization based on available and potential resources. It is
a process of determining the needs, formulating the objectives, and identifying the outputs,
activities and inputs needed by the Project. It defines what management and implementing
staff should do and how they are going to do it. Planning Tips

1. Begin with the End in Mind-create the future in your mind, imagine it. If the end
results or objective is clearly seen, activities, resources and strategies can be properly
directed to achieve the desired objectives.
2. Plan all the Way to the End- The ending is everything. Plan all the way to it, taking
into account all the possible consequences, obstacles and twists of fortune that might
reverse your hard work and give glory to others. By planning to the end, you will not be
overwhelmed by circumstances and you will know when to stop. Gently guide fortune
and help determine the future by thinking far ahead.
3. Manage Backward from the Future Rather than Forward from the Present.
4. Schedule uninterrupted time every day to do your planning.
5. Anticipate possible problems you could encounter in the project because of
people, material, or mechanical failures. Purposely provide preventive actions and
contingency plans in important high risk situations;

6. Each day anticipate the sequence of activities that you will do to attain the
objectives you are after.
7. Think about your entire week. How will important activities be sequenced?
8. Do your planning in paper to capture all of your ideas and to be sure none of them
get lost. We can only work mentally with about seven pieces of information without
losing something. Write your thoughts down and you will be able to utilize everything you
think of during your planning process.
9. Encourage your staff to create their own plan and then to explain it in detail to
10. When starting a new activity, take a moment to quietly review, mentally, the steps
you will follow.
11. Set your own due dates for projects/activities earlier than the actual deadline;
12. Put schedules in writing. Publish them and follow them.
13. Create and use Gantt charts.
14. Create and use PERT/CPMs.
15. Stick Post-it-Notes on paperwork to indicate or highlight scheduling and due
16. Schedule formal planning meetings with your staff regularly;
17. Remember the 6Ps of Planning: Proper Prior Planning Prevents Poor

6.5.7 How to develop and work with strategies?

We make decisions every day that affect our long-term success. People talk about "strategy"
but they have only a vague idea of how to use it to achieve success. The science of strategy
teaches that success means achieving your goals in the easiest way possible. The purpose
of strategy is not only to identify how to win but how to win easily with a minimum of risk.
One way to think about strategy is as a powerful decision-making tool.

The science of strategy came from the art of war, but its rules apply to any form of
competitive environment. These methods apply to any challenges or competitive activity,
including project implementation, career, and problems in your personal life. What is a strategy?

Strategy is NOT a plan and not a "big idea." It is a well-defined process. Classical
strategy consists of tools for analyzing your position, methods for identifying opportunities,
and techniques for moving to new positions, and rules for using your positions to achieve

The science of strategy provides a framework for understanding the complexities of

situations. This framework starts with the five elements that define a competitive
position. These elements are philosophy, the climate, the ground, leadership, and methods.
The science of strategy analyzes positions using these five elements. The goal is not,

however, simply analysis, but choosing the best possible action. We analyze positions to
make the right decisions about what to do next.

The larger context of this model is an economic view of the strategy. In terms of skills,
aiming and movement are costly while claiming and listening generate benefits. The
most costly form of movement is moving into conflict. Success is not only a matter of beating
the challenges but making victory pay. Long term, your position must generate more benefits
than the costs of selecting opportunities and pursuing them.

Planning works on those little islands of stability where you can eliminate chaos. Our life isn't
controlled. It is dynamic. We cannot predict what will happen. Planning was designed for
controlled situations, and strategy was designed for dynamic situations;

The best time to deal with bad situations is before they happen. Your own missteps hurt
your progress much more than any rivals can hurt you. One of the most common
missteps is overreacting to a threat or challenge. Know the rules, and recognize the moves
that are most likely to get you into trouble and avoid them. Strategy Making Tips

1. Use participatory approach to strategy making where possible;

2. Recognize the importance of thorough and accurate assessment of the current
situation. A strategy will only be as good as the analysis on which it is based;
3. Strategy should be designed to provide the Project with a distinctive competitive
advantage in the long term. Never lose sight of that imperative;
4. Strategic goals serve as targets for achievement. Make sure they are measurable,
specific and realistic;
5. Strategy is meaningless if it is not implemented well. Ensure that you plan for
implementation all along the way;
6. Never underestimate the importance of control. It is the only means of ensuring that
the Project is on track; Tips for Executing a Strategy

According to a recent Ernst and Young study, a full 66% of strategy is never executed. It is
because as we all know, doing something new is hard. Organizations, and the units within
them, must overcome long-standing traditions, conflicting interests, poor communication
channels and untold other devils lurking deep within the bureaucratic culture. The seeds of
execution problems are planted early, often during strategy formulation. The lesson here is
clear: the process of defining and designing the strategy cannot be seen as distinct from
creating the plan to execute it. Broad inputs from different stakeholders are necessary not
only to lay out the best strategy but also in developing sense of ownership and buy-in. Yet
despite executions inherent difficulties, the Project has no choice but to implement it.

The following tips from Robert Neimans Execution Plain and Simple: 12 Steps to Achieving
Any Goals on Time and on Budget may help you gain buy-in and focused action from your

1. Design a strategy execution plan;
2. Take personal responsibility for supporting your Projects strategy;
3. Define your execution assignment in writing;
4. With your team, decide how youll carry out the assignment in practical terms;
5. Refine the plan with input from your top performers and key stakeholders;
6. Carry out the plan;
7. Build schedules, budgets and controls;
8. Make realistic, achievable demands;
9. Follow up without driving people crazy;
10. Tackle tough issues;
11. Apply your political know-how to gain the support of people whose cooperation you
need but over whom you have no formal authority;
12. Use creative problem-solving on surprises;

6.5.8 IMPLEMENTATION: Practical Tips on How to Get Things Done! After-Action Report-

When your meeting is over (e.g. RPMT, MIAC, Bas, MIBF, etc) before you packs up, sit
down in q quiet corner and make two lists: (1) everything you did right, (2) everything you
did wrong. Such a report should be made on any significant activity that is going to recur in
the future. Memory is treacherous and after it is over, you will have forgotten the valuable
lessons you learned this time around. Your brief record of what happened and why, including
recommendations for how to do it better and more quickly next time can save a lot of time
and energy. Bottlenecks-

This can occur in an organization of any size whenever a key person fails to take essential
action, whether because of indecision, laziness, mistaken priorities, stubbornness, or
overwork. If you are a victim of bottlenecks created by your boss or by others in the
organization over whom you have no authority, what can you do? Plenty. You dont have to
be a victim. Here are five suggestions:

a. Be a squeaking wheel- remind, hint, beg, cajole, plead, write memos. Stop
muttering to yourself and take some action. Keep in mind that to get anything done in
this world you must be willing to make a nuisance of yourself if thats what it takes.
One thing that can make this process palatable is to get advance permission to nag.
For example, you might say, Boss, the deadline for the monthly report always
seems to sneak up on us. I know how busy you are-would it be helpful to you if I
remind you about the twenty-fifth of the month so you can start getting your materials
together? Any boss will agree to that, of course, so now you have the mandate to

initiate action: Boss, you wanted me to remind you about the monthly report.
Todays the twenty-fifth. Is there anything I can do to help you?

b. Announce that you will take action unless.If you cant bypass the system
but dont want to be stymied by delay, write a memo saying, Unless I hear from you
to the contrary, here is what I plan to do This saves time for everyone involved,
protects you from repercussions, and enhances your reputation as a doer.

c. Make it a matter of honor. When someone promises get a task done by a certain
date and you suspect they wont, just ask, can I have your word on that? Its
surprising what a difference that simple little query makes. It signals to the other
person that you are serious about the deadline. Having given their word, they have a
sense of obligation that they otherwise wouldnt have.

d. Use Positive Reinforcement. On those occasions (and they may be rare) when
people do something to you on time, dont take it for granted. Thank them profusely
let them know how much you appreciated their promptness. Lay it on thick. Give
them the reputation to live up to. Of all the techniques for changing the behavior of
others, this is the most powerful-and the least used. Correspondence

How to handle correspondence quickly and efficiently:

1. Have incoming mail screened and sorted, if possible. If you open your own mail, sort
as you open ( with wastebasket close at hand);

2. Handle each letter only once. Avoid paper shuffling. Do whatever has to be done
(checking, forwarding, phoning, replying) immediately instead of postponing action. A
good phrase to keep in mind is the 3-Ds: do it, delegate it, or ditch it.

3. If a brief reply is possible, write it on the incoming letter or memo, and fax or mail it
back to the sender. Or make a photocopy for the file and return the original;

4. Use form letters and paragraphs for routine correspondence;

5. Use electronic mail or voice mail instead of paperwork whenever is possible;

6. If you have long memo, make an outline before writing;

7. For internal correspondence, try speed-letter forms with space for reply;

8. Dont write when a phone call will do. Especially if there is something to be
negotiated or ideas to be exchanged. Use memos primarily to announce, to remind,
to confirm, or to clarify;

9. Use short, terse words. Dont perpetuate polysyllabic obfuscation. Days End

Make it a habit to end every workday by doing three things:

1. Tidy up. Never sentence yourself to start the next day with the ultimate downer, a
messy desk.

2. Evaluate your day. Mentally give yourself a grade. Ask yourself such questions as-
Was I proactive or reactive? Did I initiate or just respond?
Did I establish a major goal for the day-and did I reach it?
Did other people intrude unduly on my time, and if so how did I respond?
Was I guilty of wheel-spinning activities at any time during the day?
If I could live this day over, what would I do differently?

3. Plan the next days activities. Dont leave work with only the hazy idea of what youll
do tomorrow. Crystallize your intentions by writing them. Youll sleep better knowing
that you dont have a lot of ill-defined loose ends to take care of, and when you arrive
at work tomorrow morning youll get off to a running start. How to deal with Unfinished Business

In baseball, victory is determined not by hits but by runs. The team that gets a runner to third
base and no further doesnt get credit for three-quarters of a run. Its that way with a task.
Getting started is fine and carrying it forward is fine, but until the task is completed, you
havent done what you set out to do. Yet many people form the habit of working for a while
on a project, then setting it aside, kidding themselves into thinking that they have
accomplished something. All they are doing is leaving men stranded on base.

Once you start something, finish it. Dont accumulate a backlog of half-finished projects. In
the words of William James, nothing is so fatiguing as the eternal hanging on of an
uncompleted task.

Of course there will be times when the task is too large to be completed at one time. How do
you handle those situations? Simple. You divide and conquer. Break the task down into
small, manageable segments (preferably in writing) and assign yourself to complete action
on one segment before stopping. Then, instead of feeling that you are leaving a lot of loose
ends when you put the task aside, you will feel that you have completed one phase of the
project and are ready to begin the next. Logbooks

It is better to have a short pencil than a long memory. Keep a logbook to enter the major
events of your days work. Usually, five or ten minutes at the end of each business day is all
that is required. The following are some of the advantages:

1. A logbook, over the long run, is your own evaluation of your progress. You can read it
every month or so and assess if youre doing the right things or not.

2. It is a good place to record events, items or directions you were given verbally that
later may be forgotten or misinterpreted;

3. A logbook is a handy reference if you have to write a report or chronology to explain

events that developed over a longer period of time;

4. The logbook is also a record of when someone reported for work, was transferred, or

It is to your advantage to start and maintain a logbook if you have not already done so, and
keep it up to date. You never know when such a simple thing can be of tremendous help to
you and to the Project. Crisis Management

Not all crisis situations are dramatic. Commonplace events such as new work procedures,
unpopular supervisory actions, problematic staff, uncooperative partners, etc can all
provoke a crisis in the workplace. To deal with this, Practical Supervision offers these

Understand the precise concerns and needs of those affected by what has
Get your supervisor to help support you- youll need his experience and a fresh
perspective on the problem;
Be calm and even-handed when trying to resolve the problem. Remember that
everyone wants a resolution;
Dont force anyone into a corner. You may have to issue ultimatums at some point.
But look at all other options first;
If you have to resolve the crisis through unpopular decisions and actions, take them
all at once. One bombshell is easier to deal with than an on-going series of
unpopular remedies. Coordination

The success of a project in reaching its goal depends upon the ability of supervisors and
managers to coordinate individuals, staff, participating agencies and groups. Achieving
effective coordination, however, is never easy. First, those who need to be coordinated often
have contrasting perspectives on the problems at hand and differing interest to be served.
Second, those managers responsible for coordination often do not have the power to force
compliance, and therefore must rely on persuasion and influence rather than institutional
authority. Third, a variety of coordination strategies are potentially available, but the
appropriateness of a given strategy depends upon the specific situation and contextual
variables. Coordination emerges as a problem because tasks, especially in project, have
multiple interdependencies. The nature of interdependencies can vary. Some are tightly
drawn and involve people interacting with each other; others do not depend on interaction,
but rather on making sure that there is a proper sequence of activities.

The first step in designing coordination is for the management team to decide early in the
projects life which functions and tasks are central to achieving objectives and thus must
receive close coordination. The second step is to consider the range of approaches to
coordination that are available and how each might be deployed. There are three categories
of approaches to coordination: procedures, processes, and structures. Procedural changes
include requiring sign-offs on files, notification, routing of bulletins. Processes involve
establishing such groups as committees, task forces, and other more informal systems of
coordination. Finally, structural approaches include crating liaison positions, or instituting an
actual reorganization, either of which will change the lines of authority and information flows
in the organization.

Those who are responsible for coordination often think first about structural change, and
design various organizational changes. Since reorganization can be very stressful, it should
usually be considered last rather than first. Because learning and experimentation are part
of the project management process, flexibility is important. For this reason changes in
procedures and processes are usually preferable.