＜DAY 07＞ (May 1, 2006)
The day started with a prayer by Indian team and the participants continued their group discussion in preparation for the reporting per barangay group. They were given until 10:00 in the morning to discuss according to the guiding questions of the workshop and prepare the sharing of outputs in a plenary.
Before the group presentation, Ms. Ui took the floor and requested the participants to practice a sort of applause in different languages that will be given after each presentation to wit:
(English) Good good very good
(Filipino) Galing galling ang Galing
(Cambodia) Laoh laoh laoh nas
(Japanese) Eyo eyo tottemo eyo
(Sri Lanka : Sinhala) Hondai hondai Bohoma Hondai
(Bangladesh: Bengali) Balo balo Khub Balo
(India: Telugu) Bagande bagande challa Bagande
The reporting started at exactly 10:20 in the morning.
PRESENTATION OF OUTPUTS FROM GROUP DISCUSSIONS Moderator: UI Shiori
1st Presenter: Barangay Del Pilar
Why PAD? Lack of participation Top-down approach not effective Limited scope of empowerment Lack of convergence of resources Lack of collaboration Lack of transparency and accountability
Processes/Strategies: Capability Building (All levels, sectors) Capability Building of coordinators, actors, organizers) Getting all institutions involved from the start Improved coordinative and communication processes Setting up space for feedback mechanism including monitoring and evaluation Building on what was there and transforming them
International Workshop on Participatory Area Development 49 April 25-May 2, 2006/Davao City & New Corella, Davao del Norte, Philippines Networking at the local level (sectoral and multi-sectoral) Networking 1. Focus on common issues for all/most 2. Clear lines of communication 3. Avoid competition and promote collaboration/complementation 4. More democratic relationship among key players through value formations among themselves with action-reflection-action praxis 5. Putting right leaders (Primary and secondary)
Sector/Stage Planning Implementation Post-Implementation PO Full participation - Actual Implementer - identification - Monitoring (internal – - prioritization including transparency) GO/LGU - Facilitator - Resource Mobilizer Project - Initiator Monitoring (external) implementation - Collator - Provide cost evaluator - bringing counterpart (labor, Process evaluator together materials) For all * Documentation
Promotion of People’s Participation:
Acknowledge presence of different sectors Integration of Plans (Program, Projects and Activities or PPAs) Trust building , through values formation, transparency, information sharing
Institutionalization of Sustainability Mecahanims Establish collaborative mechanism Networking, resource sharing/mobilizing Strengthening POs Increasing people’s of ownership through conscientization process Issue-based community organizing
Salient Points/Clarifications:
Q: How about the last page of the guide questions, how do you cope up with the emerging issues? Response: Sorry but we did not discuss about the issues that cut across in PAD.
Q: Why did you consider NGO as external monitor? Is that the role of NGO? Response: Some IADs has built-in funded internal monitoring. But in other areas the evaluation is done by a certain group specialized in monitoring.
Q: Is there an advantage/disadvantage? Response: We did not follow the guide questions one by one but we did discussed the important points. Regarding networking we discussed it and learned some from Del Pilar activity. We got the idea about networking system.
Q: Maybe for the benefit of other groups, what are the issues that we addressed using the issue-based CO and what are the learnings of the LCO, MDC and Local Leaders? Response:
International Workshop on Participatory Area Development 50 April 25-May 2, 2006/Davao City & New Corella, Davao del Norte, Philippines The starting point is the land issue by mobilizing the barangay sector. Dynamism of organized group able to identify certain issues that continuously binds them. They approached certain GOs but were hampered because they did not trace the owner of the land. The Municipal Government took initiative for government housing for the poor people. Such issues sustain them alive.
Q: How long did they achieve the result? Response: Still on the process. The LGU is still looking for funds to purchase the land.
Q: A participant raised the following issues on: The land reform issue was not shared which is a constraint point of SIAD. The approach is to improve the quality of life but the Kumboy is not aware. MBN is not achieved but many people are talking about it Issue-based approach is difficult to convene for SIAD processes Small salary of laborers/workers
Response (Mayor Federiso): On the issue of low salary of laborers/employees, so many owned a small area in the community. That is why we cannot solve the salary of laborers. For the municipal workers they received P196 daily. Based on MBN P5,000/month is below the poverty line. We have not gone to solve this problem because income of their land is not enough to support the family (e.g., 1 hectare with 10 children to feed). We cannot establish yet on how to solve the salary of the laborers. On agrarian reform until now lands were not distributed to owners. Beneficiaries are not also trained in SIAD process that is why they neglected the area.
Comment: This issue is not only in New Corella but also in other places. How can this be put into priority issue in PAD since this issue is conflicting with the government issue.
2nd Presenter: NEW CORTEZ
Why PAD? For process participation For community development For people’s empowerment/ownership People’s involvement in decision-making For sustainability of development process For people contribution For common direction For good governance
Process: Community organizing Organizational development and strengthening SAPBRIME LGU-NGO-PO collaboration Creation of BMT, PMC IEC EBDC Documentation
International Workshop on Participatory Area Development 51 April 25-May 2, 2006/Davao City & New Corella, Davao del Norte, Philippines Linkage building Advocacy Capacity building Exchange, exposure, benchmarking Strengthening of barangay councils, community
Role of stakeholders: Active participation Honest and trusted Visionary Voluntary service Community friendly
People’s Participation: Ownership given to community Involvement in the process Advocacy Capacity building Dialogue and consultation Exchange/exposure
Sustainability mechanisms: Community organizing LGU-NGO-PO collaboration Transparency VMGO known to community Ensure support Legal support of LGU Shared responsibility
Decentralization Process: Bottom-up system Transparency Addressing people’s demand Efficient delivery of services Flow of information Giving of authority to all sectors
How to cope up with emerging issues: Stakeholders interest Lots of demands/issues/needs Level off Prioritize people’s demands Lack of funds Resource mobilization
Salient points/Clarifications:
Q: Do you have any other issues that you want to discuss this afternoon? Response: We have different set of norms and different government policies (suited in the Philippines but not workable in Bangladesh and Cambodia) but we discussed it already. Maybe we will share these afternoon issues that we cannot answer.
International Workshop on Participatory Area Development 52 April 25-May 2, 2006/Davao City & New Corella, Davao del Norte, Philippines Q: What are the advantage/disadvantage (+ & - points) in the institutionalization of PAD? Response: The advantage is it is more effective as we saw in the barangay and the municipality. The mayor is active. With this process there are so many advantages and disadvantages. The advantages are so many. The delivery of the services to the people is faster than before. People knew their rights. People’s involvement is also strengthened. People understand that they form part as representative of the BDC. In New Cortez members reached to 32 members. The disadvantage is more on LGU leaders who have personal interest but we cannot do with it because of transparency.
Q: Does the PO have a clear agenda when they sit at the EBDC? Response: We can only talk with Brgy. New Cortez. There is a very clear agenda when they sit at the EBDC. Information were already disseminated to them before sitting in. Planning process starts at the purok level and bring their interest at the EBDC meeting to raise their concerns.
Q: How about the LCEs flexibility of the budget? Response: The Mayor has discretion in terms of budget.
Comment: Also a bigger issue is if other NGO will enter into the barangay, there might be a duplication of program from other NGO.
As process check, Mariper requested the body to include issues that are not resolved in their level. She further stated that she wanted to put some systems or order so it would be better to raise conflicting issues so that they can be considered in the processing and synthesis session.
3rd Presenter: BRGY. LIMBAAN
Why PAD? Bottom-up for planning and budgeting Transparency (openness and awareness) Holistic participation in development Stakeholders have a role in the development
Process: Purok consultation Formation of EBDC Capacity building of all stakeholders Benchmarking indicators Set-up different committees for PM&E Community organizing . strengthening of PO Taho sa barangay General assembly Active participation in the EBDC
International Workshop on Participatory Area Development 53 April 25-May 2, 2006/Davao City & New Corella, Davao del Norte, Philippines . How to build capacities of key actors: through field visit, exposure to other barangay, homestay, international workshop, training.coaching by PO
How to sustain the LSB? regular meeting of LSB Policy and resolution Leadership of local people through SIAD Spirit of volunteerism
Policy advocacy: municipal resolution and resolution support SIAD process and strategies MOA between NGO and GO Advantages: . GO led: Strong sense of ownership, political commitment and sustainability . NGO Led: preparing the grassroots to participate . PO led: People empowered Disadvantages: . GO led: Passive attitude of community, community will be not well- organized/mobilized, nepotism . NGO led: create dependency of LGU and PO, loss of people ownership of the process . PO led: difficult to convince LGU and other partners . NGO led: how PO participate, what role played? . How PO led the PAD what is the result?
Roles of the different stakeholders: COMMUNITY main participant partners with LGU provide voluntary services human resources
PO contribute financial assistance collect ideas, issues, concerns from the respective sectors member of monitoring team
NGO capacity building community organizing of all stakeholders technical assistance and trainings IEC advocacy member of monitoring team
GO provide funds support people initiative for advocacy regular budget allocation to barangay development projects member of monitoring team
BUSINESS/FUNDERS/DONORS provide financial assistance
International Workshop on Participatory Area Development 54 April 25-May 2, 2006/Davao City & New Corella, Davao del Norte, Philippines promote local production marketing assists IGPs
People’s Participation: How to create a balance between process and tangible gains? gradual change in level of participation constant education, awareness of their participation support of barangay chairperson strong political will
How do we promote/develop relationship based on trust among stakeholders? transparency informal communication (personal communication, informal interaction) formal communication Taho sa barangay
POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE POINTS OF SIAD: Positive: (the group did not mention)
Negative: routinary process of the government, became less innovation, less dynamic
SUSTAINABILITY MECHANISMS: LCO train a resident of barangay empower the people
Resource mobilization comprehensive plan of all stakeholders are integrated into the barangay development plan Maximize resources look for internal resources organize POs with SIAD process Comprehensive planning guidelines
ISSUES THAT CUT ACROSS: the Philippine has local government code as guide for decentralization but its up to the LGU to implement that guidelines
Salient points/Clarifications:
It’s an observation that there was no organizing of agrarian reform beneficiaries. It also came out in the other group’s presentation. For a non-devolved area like ARMM still the remaining issue is how do they apply the PAD process in this area. There was also an observation that for example in the health sector not all plans by all partners in the community related to health are incorporated in the health plan of the barangay (e.g., 1 PO which had a plan of providing assistance to BnB) but it was not integrated in the health plan of
International Workshop on Participatory Area Development 55 April 25-May 2, 2006/Davao City & New Corella, Davao del Norte, Philippines the barangay. What came out as a very strong recommendation is a clear cut guideline for the planning process from the MPDO. There was also a suggestion to gather all partners in the community which had plans for health and then consolidate this and put this in the barangay development plan. Health issue does not have much attention in SIAD in New Corella There was a coop in Brgy. Limbaan that has a budget of more than 5 Million pesos but we don’t know where they invested the money. To avoid duplication of program in the barangay, the Barangay Captain needs to know how to utilize the resources. And also the budget from the municipality allocated for BDP are to be integrated into NGO and coop budget so they can see the whole picture of the resources invested in the Barangay Development Plan. After our visit we had a short meeting and the Barangay Captain made a presentation but there was no budget sharing on the contribution of the NGO and coop to the barangay.
At this point, Mariper clarified the group of which coop they are talking about and what is that 5 M funds. The group responded that Guadalupe has this 5 M funds.
Additional Comment: The coop has programs on infrastructure, spring development and solar dryer. They said they commit to implement this but it was not clear. And to implement this they need to spend their investment (5 M ). They do not know how to integrate it to the Brgy. Limbaan development plan. Their explanation is not clear, we do not know which purok are they investing.
Reactions from the participant in relation to the 5 M funds: I think I got the issue that was raised. The grasp understanding with the word asset should be cleared here. When we say asset it is not money. It is all that you have like building and equipment. Those are assets or properties. This is not cash which you will budget but these are properties of the coop or of the association. So they did not show how they are using their asset because that is not money. Those are in the form of building and equipment. They just put a value into it and that is their total asset. Those assets were accumulated, some were grants from other NGOs. With the long existence of the coop (10 years) its assets was accumulated that reaches 5M. What they had reported is just the budget of the PO which was not included in the plan because it is their own money. The barangay also have budget for their own plan.
Before the presentation of another group Mariper verbalized that while listening to the concerns raise her reflection is that when they go to a certain community whether in New Corella or in other areas how are they intervening. Are they bringing in their own biases in the community because they think that is how the community should go forward? Or are they respecting the rights-based wherein this is really what the community has to have as their priority. She added that she is just raising it now because it seems that they are trying to look into the cases based on what they think are the important based on their own measurement. If they will go through the concept of PAD they are only one of the stakeholders. There is the community and there are other people as well.
International Workshop on Participatory Area Development 56 April 25-May 2, 2006/Davao City & New Corella, Davao del Norte, Philippines 4th Presenter – BRGY. SUAWON:
Why PAD? to empower the community to prepare, participate and identify their needs and prioritization people are depending on the government support to basic social services to build the transparency and accountability to prepare the plan for collection of resources goal of sustainability PO/NGO/GO and other stakeholders should take responsibilities in the area development The trend of decentralization Economic development through equal access and equitable distribution of resources Efficient and effective delivery of basic social services
Process and Strategies in PAD?
According to focus group, the process and strategies appropriate Based on the points, like area situation, background of community, awareness levels and information access, we have to make plans
How to build the capacities of key actors? PO: training, exposure, interaction with different stakeholders
. Local elected members/officials: convergence meeting, interface with different stakeholders, trainings . Local government units: convergence meetings, training, interface with different stakeholders
How to sustain LSB? meeting should be regular formation and revisit of the plans Policy advocacy: timely information dissemination to LSB
If NGO Led, how PO participate, what role played? Peoples’ role will be like implementer and initiator
Advantages and disadvantages of GO/NGO/PO led PAD:
STAKEHOLDERS ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES GO Availability of resources GO forced to include their to support PPA of the own plan in development plan community Less priority to people Project in community can be utilized as political means or personal interest NGO They accept people’s plan Less financial resources less ownership of people Creation of dependence to NGO PO People utilize their Limited knowledge,
International Workshop on Participatory Area Development 57 April 25-May 2, 2006/Davao City & New Corella, Davao del Norte, Philippines capacities, abilities, a information and the skill to knowledge facilitate Appropriate to their own needs People can develop ownership
Roles of the stakeholders:
Stakeholders Roles PO Identify their problems and prioritize them so they can express their problems NGO Facilitating role Fund sourcing GO Influencing policies/programs, giving the appropriate services, including people’s needs in their plan
Business/funders/donors Giving services, financial supports according to the needs
How do we promote a relationship Direct implementation, transparency and based on trust? accountability (PO, NGO, GO) regular meetings
PEOPLE’S PARTICIPATION: Involving people in planning, implementing, monitoring and evaluation
How do we create a balance between process and tangible gains? - Analyzing what they had done and make a plan again after the completion of each activity.
Positive and negative points of PIAD Institutionalization - Only positive points. People’s Participation and transparency of transaction. SUSTAINABILITY MECHANISMS: Institutionalizing the sustainable mechanisms, people-based, mobilizing resources from different stakeholders with their linkages and lobbying.
Issues on donor/NGO dependence, leader-centered - Sustainability
Resource Mobilization - Timely information dissemination through PO at village level
How to maximize resources from all sources? lobbying, convergence meetings creating impact
Issues that cut across:
International Workshop on Participatory Area Development 58 April 25-May 2, 2006/Davao City & New Corella, Davao del Norte, Philippines How is the decentralization process of the government? Local government code of the Philippines need for amendment no equal provision of funds
How to cope up with the emerging issues/concerns? policy advocacy meetings convergence of resources
Salient points/Clarifications:
Q: Do you have any feedback on sustainability mechanism done by the people in the area? Response: People got some schemes from the government but other sources are not existing. There is a gap since people have less resources.
Suggestion: To mobilize more resources. To start their group savings and not too be dependent with the government.
Comment: There was a reduction of women’s group from 65 to 25 members but they are still active in participating the EBDC. EBDC has 40 members including other sectors and convene regularly as mandated by law.
Q: How do Paramma and Ramanamma see the tribal group in Suawon. Are there similarities with their own group? Response/Comments: The group is very good especially when it comes to the women’s group. Up to the implementation of project is okey. They suggested to them to start savings regularly and to get registered to women’s group to have more sources Political leaders are not involved during the 2 meetings. All the groups presented nicely but there were no local officials present.
Response: There are barangay officials present during the 2 days interaction but did not present themselves who they were individually during the meeting.
Q: With regards to women’s group we visited a handicraft group. There is no equity in terms of wages. Employer-employee problem is bringing in, why was this? All the members of the women’s group should be equal in terms of their pay (they are working hard to have a better product). Hiring other women with cheaper wage of P100/day is disappointing. Response: In Del Pilar the average income per labor depends on the output per meter. Average pay is P100/day but you can have more if you can finish more. Two persons get P150 pesos so P75 each for laborer.
Comments: Are they doing it in the store or in the house? If done in their house they have the availability of time. How was the system? Maybe we are misled or they do it at home and work depending on their availability. The P75 is not an 8 hours work. The minimum wage in Davao del Norte is P190/day for an 8 hours work. To have below daily wage is not a good practice. It is against the labor law.
International Workshop on Participatory Area Development 59 April 25-May 2, 2006/Davao City & New Corella, Davao del Norte, Philippines We should understand things in proper context. Mayumi presented two types of POs. In violating their rights do they see this as an issue? But we cannot do anything since there are other competitors. Maybe the community were hesitant to share because they do not see this as an issue. New Corella is one of the favorite places for Kumboy, hence the BLGU raised the policy that only the people who resides in New Corella will be hired to do farm labor. Issue on equity has a lot more to do. We tried to facilitate how it will be resolved. We suggested to federate themselves because it will increase their power. They are now trying to federate themselves (Kumboy). We have Kumboy to increase income since we have problems in the buying price of the farmers product (low-buying price hence low profit in the farm). If we can demand higher buying price then there will be no problem in paying the labor. If the quality of the product of the farmers will increase then we can give higher wages.
5th Presenter: POBLACION:
Why PAD? transparency and accountability autonomy “people is the subject” for the people, of the people, by the people
Process and strategy in PAD: LGU’s commitment (MOA) and legal basis Large range of involvement, involvement of different sectors Situation Analysis giving basic platform for SIAD = Minimum Basic Needs conducted Through PRA (Participatory Rapid Appraisal), key actors identified Extention of network among different sectors --- Extended Barangay Development Council Participatory Planning – 5 year development plan/annual investment plan and budget Approval of plan and budget by Barangay Council with confirming by Municipal LGU Regular monitoring and feedbacking to make change (flexibility assured) Capacity Building to stakeholders . Awareness building . Skill training If GO or NGO only led…. High demand or expectation, People think it another “project” If NGO led. Financing will be faster and easier. With POs involvement, commitment of community will be stronger Utilization of existing institution (= Purok – Barangay) with innovation
Roles of different Stakeholders:
PO: Initiate community needs and responses Involvement of POs and different sectors Providing feedbacks
International Workshop on Participatory Area Development 60 April 25-May 2, 2006/Davao City & New Corella, Davao del Norte, Philippines LGU: activate functionaries allocate/provide funds assure legislative procedure assure general welfare of constituents Coordination role Institutionalize participatory mechanism and innovation
NGO: Technical support At initial stage providing/creating the common platform Provide funds Provides information and experience sharing Continuous coaching (= support through LCOs)
Funders/Donors:
giving of funds joint monitoring and evaluation
Promotion of people’s participation assuring transparency budget performance of officials continuous innovation/improvement htrough feedbacking continuous/regular reporting recognition by LGU timely funding according to the plan providing venue to clarify doubts and concerns increasing awareness through information sharing
How to institutionalize sustainability mechanism? to have common system through integration among stakeholders through “proper” planning and identifying areas of contribution, resources can be mobilized
* Decentralization process is the key for participatory governance
Salient points/Clarifications:
Q: Is there any problem in your lending policy? Response: We have set our policies for lending, and one of these is the criteria created. We have a committee to screen the recipient of our project.
Q: Is SIAD non-partisan? Was the SIAD process affected by the partisan politics in the barangay: Response: We have not observed that in the barangay if there are non-partisan politics. Only problem observed are within the PO.
International Workshop on Participatory Area Development 61 April 25-May 2, 2006/Davao City & New Corella, Davao del Norte, Philippines Q: How is the SEED Project integrated with the SIAD Process. If you can clarify more related to this matter? There was a statement from the Barangay Kagawad that IPHC works independently.
Q: SEED activity is not integrated with the process of SIAD. So would there be a space of possibility for them to be more active or to take part of the process?
Comments: It bothers me a lot that IPHC works independently in the area. If there is any room for improvement we would appreciate it very much. It is not so clear how SEED project integrated into SIAD. How will SEED complement to make SIAD more comprehensive. This is the key point that needs to be clarified.
At this point in time, Mariper asked the participants if there are any points that they feel missing and to be discussed further in the big group this afternoon.
Responses from the participants: SIAD process is good but can we have more focus on the health sectors. How does this comprehensive SIAD process contribute to health sector? How could we focus on health sector with the SIAD Process in New Corella?
As a challenge, Mariper threw the following questions to the big group:
How are we intervening? Are we bringing our biases in the community? Or are we bringing the right-based issues in the community. Which concerns/problems/measurement are we bringing in when we work in our community?
The morning session ended at 12:50 noon and was followed with a buffet lunch.
The afternoon session resumed at 2:30 with an ice breaker to energize the participants.
OVERALL SYNTHESIS AND PROCESSING: Moderator: Mariper Mercader
Mariper explained that what they did this morning is to come up with their learnings based on the cases presented as well as with the field exposure. She then proceeded with her presentation of the processing/synthesis based on the previous discussion.
Mariper started the synthesis with the sharing on the elements of PAD and how these elements were seen in the learnings presented by the participants from the case presentation and barangay visit.
Summary of Commonalities as the ELEMENTS of PAD:
Pink Cards: Green Cards:
International Workshop on Participatory Area Development 62 April 25-May 2, 2006/Davao City & New Corella, Davao del Norte, Philippines Environment Nurturance - devolution process - peace and order condition - external donors
Livelihood Development - savings mobilization - micro-credit support
Empowerment of the People - community organizing - SAPBRIME - Policy Advocacy - Capability Building
Multi-sectoral Cooperation - Youth, political leaders, women, GO, NGO, PO, Community - NGO/PO/GO Forum - Other sectors, purok
Effective & Efficient - Use of existing structure for service Delivery of Basic Services delivery - Maximization of volunteer workers - Increase budget allocation
No to gender & other biases - Focus on women
Technology Development - Innovations on planning, monitoring, project implementation - organic farming - HCF, appropriate technology
Sustainability/Continuity - Group savings - TWGs - Network/forum - Increase level of awareness of the community
Mariper also stated that people will demand the process hence SIAD will continue. She then proceeded by presenting the issues that arise during the case presentation or the issues that are pointed as disadvantages.
Yellow Cards:
GO led – passive community NGO led-create dependency
PO led –difficulty to convince other partners
GOs routinary process result to less innovation
She also presented the issues to be discussed and to be resolved and to put to an end at the end of the 8-day workshop. Blue Cards:
- How to avoid duplication of services? “Coordination Policy” - How do we consolidate plans, resources? At different levels? - How do we level off stakeholders interest?
International Workshop on Participatory Area Development 63 April 25-May 2, 2006/Davao City & New Corella, Davao del Norte, Philippines - How do we balance NGO/GO Biases/priorities with community needs? - How do we bring community to focus on Health?
- How can we apply PAD in a non-devolved area?
- How is SEED integrated in SIAD?
- How do we share roles/position?
- How do we respond to “Equity” Issue in PAD? - What about the Land Ownership Issue? - Low wages/salary by POs - How about the poorest of the poor? - Issue-based organizing
After the presentation of the synthesis, Mariper asked the body on how they wanted the things to be discussed, should it be in plenary or not. The group agreed to have the discussion in plenary.
Discussion:
ISSUES/CONCERNS/QUESTIONS that need further discussion:
1. How do we level off stakeholder’s interest? How to avoid duplication of services? How do we consolidate plans, resources at different levels? How accountable the POs are to the community and the barangay?
Q: Is there a policy that prevents duplication of services? (New Corella experience) Accreditation of NGO and MOA signing between stakeholders, Government and NGO decides on the type/kind of partnership and agree on the process to be undertaken by both partners. Encourage the people to exercise transparency in all transaction. (Talaingod experience) The intervention of any organization will contribute to the realization of the vision of the municipality. Stakeholders (NGO, PO) actively participates in the planning process (Barangay level) Business sectors or any NGO wanted to engaged with the barangay level must attend the barangay session to inform the council on the NGO/sector programs and projects. Roles of stakeholders will also be defined. Legal accreditation will be check by the Brgy. Council. The Brgy. Council will then authorized the Brgy. Captain to enter into an agreement with the NGO. Open discussion on the nature of the project as well as its limitations is also important. (Likas) Network of NGO at National level has developed “Code of Ethics” which all NGO has to follow. Philippine Council for NGOs also exists who helps the Network of NGOs. NGO coordination network in the Phils. is very strong with check and balance among NGOs which includes transparency of funds New trends (ODA): Funder course through its funds to the LGU. NGOs will prepare proposals & present to council for approval. - Disadvantage: there are LGUs who would request special negotiations for that NGO to be accepted. Through ODA foreign funding are course through the LGU. The decision is at the LGU level. Some NGOs are donor dependent. Being like it some NGOs will have difficulties in balancing. LGU is the one endorsing the NGO to work in the area (India experience) LGUs supported the NGOs. 85 NGOs in one district
International Workshop on Participatory Area Development 64 April 25-May 2, 2006/Davao City & New Corella, Davao del Norte, Philippines POs who will allow direct purchased can avail of cheaper price on materials and equipments than bidding by the government. (Cambodia) Installation of GIS (geographical information system) provides information on specific NGOs (nature/operation) which is accessible to all (GO,other NGO,funders). NGO local forum is also conducted. Multisectoral planning is also utilized (GO. NGO, funder, other sector) where indicators are set. All NGOs who would like to join has to adopt the indicators being agreed. Village health support group represent the grassroots level and they are being consulted on health issues & concern. There are different technical working groups representing different sector involved in planning which are then consolidated into the national anti-poverty plan.
Suggestion/Recommendation: There is a need to come up with a consolidated plan of all stakeholders (data base) at the village level. This could be used for monitoring purposes.
2. How do we balance NGO, GO priorities with community needs? (Philip) Minimum Basic Need survey results are relayed to the community. Analysis of the result of the survey is crucial but the perception of the peoples need has to be considered also. All stakeholders has to focus all interventions based on their own needs (SIAD process). Advocacy will help each community member realized what they need against their perceived needs. Transparency of the NGOs is also important for the community to understand its limitations. The community people will really have to say what kind of intervention, type of intervention, timing of intervention etc. encouraging participation of the poorest among the poor, empowering them will lead them to actively participate in their development at a higher level.
3. How do we bring the communities to focus on Health? (Mayor) 65% is below poverty line. We orient the people to participate for us to know their situation (Cambodia) Not only health sector is involved but there are other sectors involved in health undertaking. (Ui) Basic needs should be identified in the community since we have also our weaknesses and limitation. Transparency is one of our strengths. Convergence of intervention
4. How do we respond to “EQUITY” issue in PAD? What about the land ownership issue? Low wage/salary by POs? How about the poorest of the poor? (issue-based organizing). (Bangladesh) PO want to developed on our own. Not to depend on others. Savings among members is encouraged. PO protecting the children, women’s rights we are doing on our own through participation. (India) Women were organized. Venue for discussion, opportunity to sit with other members in the village and discuss things among themselves. Low wage/salary for POs has to be balance with viability of their enterprise and competition among stable business stakeholders. (IPHC) on the part of the CO creating job for the PO is a small victory. Through the Kumboy they were able to build their houses in concrete materials. But before their houses are made of sacks. We are still looking for some other means to increase their income. This is just the beginning for them to be more participative in community activities.
International Workshop on Participatory Area Development 65 April 25-May 2, 2006/Davao City & New Corella, Davao del Norte, Philippines (IPHC) As compared with the previous situation, women with P75/day is already worth recognizing since in the past they have no opportunities like this. (India) wages issue is a slow process. All aspect has to be studied. (Mayumi) How to narrow the gap between the poor and the rich – Is SIAD really responding? Based on her experience although the commitment is there but most of the time it was put aside. (IPHC) providing livelihood to the poorest among the poor is not that easy. The issue of equity cannot be responded right away. But by little by little it can be answered. It has to be look into a very comprehensive manner. (Sri-lanka) The poor were being used before for the GO/NGO to have some funds for the project then just go. A lot of projects has been installed but they themselves in the community don’t know about the project. They later started to organize themselves and do some planning. These plans are presented to the GO and most of these plans are not accepted. Education , awareness raising have contributed to the environmental protection. At present they are now empowered and they can already express what they want. (New corella) helping the very poor will really take TIME. We are moving towards equity. This has also to be related to the Macro level – national and even global level. Multi-level intervention is already started. Commitment, sincere participation of the poorest among the poor as well as continuous education and awareness raising for them are vital.
Suggestion/Recommendation: Equity has always to be in the agenda. Critical collaboration is very important also.
At this point, Mariper presented the Empowerment Process as an input to be considered. She emphasized that people in the community can participate only after their basic needs are met and they are provided with access to utilize resources. This will be the start that they can understand their situation through the guidance of an NGO or a helping institution. Once the community understood this, taking action would be easy.
EMPOWERMENT PROCESS
BASIC NEED LEVEL (resources)
ACCESS LEVEL (utilize existing resources)
AWARENESS (understand and analyzed present situation in a structural way)
International Workshop on Participatory Area Development 66 April 25-May 2, 2006/Davao City & New Corella, Davao del Norte, Philippines PARTICIPATION LEVEL (taking action)
CONTROL
TRANSFORMATION LEVEL (change in policy)
Mariper added that the empowerment process should be think of very critically. She then continued with the discussion on the remaining issues identified beforehand.
5. How SEED is integrated in SIAD? Started as livelihood support to SIAD Provide capital for the entrepreneurial poor and not the poorest among the poor There are different microfinance groups, even banks are now existing in the area (competition). Coordination among the groups has to be built. Forum among all microfinance groups operating in the area was initiated but they did not attend except IPHC. Clients has been given big loans as big as 500 Thousand There still lot of things to improve towards integrating SEED in the SIAD process.
6. How can we apply PAD in a non devolved area? Coordination with the regional level (IPHC) started health as an entry point Convergence of resources for there are lot of donors Provision of livelihood (e.g. rebel returnees) indirectly improving peace and order situation. May allocate funds for capacitation for peace & development.
7. How do we share roles/position? Cooperative Law of the Philippines does not allow relatives occupying close positions (eg. Chairman & treasurer) in other organizations it depends on the policy they have drafted. IPs have low chances of being voted upon since Filipinos would really vote for their relatives. Popularity also is a big factor in winning a certain elected position. Political education plays a crucial role in the electoral process Decision making, organizing, transparency will be very much affected if all the officers are relatives.
8. In what conditions where PAD is not applicable? In communist areas Still necessary even in rich countries for transparency, coming together is important. If there is hostility among the stakeholders? Perhaps innovations have to be developed.
After the discussion, Mariper summarized what have been discussed by presenting the shift in the development approach to wit:
THE SHIFT IN THE DEVELOPMENT APPROACH
International Workshop on Participatory Area Development 67 April 25-May 2, 2006/Davao City & New Corella, Davao del Norte, Philippines FROM TO “What” of the development “How” of development Development “for whom” Development “by whom” Blueprint development Learning Process Large/Big projects “Small in beautiful” project Specialized Integrated Lecture Dialogue Top down Bottom-up Modern technology Appropriate technology Highly centralized Community-based/Autonomy Growth Equity Passivity Empowerment Outside intervention Internal knowledge Before she ended her session she expressed her hope that the participants are now prepared to do their POAs.
ORIENTATION TO POINTS OF ACTION: Moderator: UI Shiori
Ms. Ui took the floor and showed to the participants where they had gone through so far in terms of the process flow of the workshop. Having done with it, she also presented the guidelines in making their POAs.
Points of Actions What learnings/insights are applicable to your area? (Per team/area) How will you make a difference? Your action Strategy Role
- As a team
- As an individual
* Maximum of 10 minutes/per person. * Presentation and Comments * Visual aids can be used.
International Workshop on Participatory Area Development 68 April 25-May 2, 2006/Davao City & New Corella, Davao del Norte, Philippines Some adjustments on schedule were discussed. After some other announcements were made, the session ended at 7:00 in the evening. All the participants started working on their POAs till late evening.
International Workshop on Participatory Area Development 69 April 25-May 2, 2006/Davao City & New Corella, Davao del Norte, Philippines