MTR/ Building peace in Mindanao through public participation in governance/ Conciliation Resources

May 2015

Mid-term review of the project: Building peace in Mindanao through public participation
in governance.
Inception Report
May 15, 2015
Overview of methodology and revised timeframe
The methodology originally included in the mid-term review proposal was discussed with CR staff and
generally agreed upon as it is. The conversation determined, however, a stronger emphasis on the learning
that the review is supposed to generate, and evaluation tools have therefore been modified accordingly (see
below). This said, the hybrid framework, with a focus also on the more traditional criteria of relevance and
effectiveness, will be maintained. Going into the data collection phase, we made the following adjustments:

Data for assessing the projects theory of change and logical pathway will be mainly collected
through the reflection workshop to be conducted during the projects Steering Group (SG) meeting in
Davao (May 22). Other information will be gathered through key information interviews (KIIs) with
project partners in Cotabato and Manila (Asia Foundation).

The main methodology for assessing TOC will be the Reflecting on Peace Practice (RPP)
framework. The workshop will be designed to be participatory and driven by partners, to the extent
possible. At the same time, a few presentations will be included to explain the tools.

Data for assessing the projects relevance and effectiveness will be collected through KIIs with other
stakeholders (including any government representative and the EU point of contact) and through the
focus group discussions (FGDs) with activity participants in Cotabato.

The methodology will include a particular focus on gender: we propose that FGDs are organized by
gender; and we will strive to include gender-specific questions that will be mainly used in KIIs with
women and young people.

The work-plan has been reviewed based on the agreed starting date of May 11 and modified as follows:
Weeks
1
2
3
Task
Preparation phase
Review of key project documents
Submission of inception report
Data collection and field visit phase
FGD and KII questionnaires and guidance
finalized
Data collection in Philippines (incl. reflection
workshop)
Data coding and analysis
Finalization and presentation phase
Draft report prepared and sent to CR
Presentation at validation workshop
Report finalized
Total number of consultants/ days

Finally, we have discussed and will use the following deadlines for the agreed deliverables:

May 15:
June 23:
July 3:
July 10:

Submission of inception report

Submission of draft report
Presentation of findings and recommendations (*to be agreed*)
Submission of final report

No of
days
2
1
1
12
2
2
1
2
23

MTR/ Building peace in Mindanao through public participation in governance/ Conciliation Resources
May 2015

Overview of data collection tools

As per the original methodology, we will rely on four tools: 1) a document review, 2) a reflection
workshop, 3) KIIs and 4) FGDs.
1) Document review
We will review and analyse documents relating to the peace process as well as the project, as
provided by CR as well as other organisations supporting these processes. In addition to standard
project documents, including reports, these could also include agreements, formal policies,
communications, academic reports and articles. The document review will complement all other
tools and in particular support conclusions relating to the relevance and effectiveness criteria. A
tentative list of documents to be reviewed includes:

Internal Project documents:

- Event and activity reports
- Original proposal documents
- Official publications and press releases

Agreements and institutional documents:

- Signed Agreements GPH-MILF, 1997-2015.
- Office of the Presidential Adviser on the Peace Process OPAPP website.
- Congress of the Philippines, Bangsamoro Basic Law - Draft, 2015.
- Transition Commission (TC), Bangsamoro Online.
- GPH, Primer on the proposed Bangsamoro Basic Law, 2014

Sources from international organizations:

- UNDP, Guidebook on Conflict-Sensitive and Peace- Promoting Local Development
Planning, 2013.
- UNDP Philippines, Managing Performance in Peacebuilding: Framework for ConflictSensitive Monitoring and Evaluation, 2013.
- World Bank, Data and Research.
- EU/ EEAS, EU Support to the Peace Process.

NGOs and think tanks reports:

- Conciliation Resources, Information and documents on the projects in the Philippines.
- Canan Gndz and Raul Torralba, Evaluation of the Nonviolent Peaceforce Project with
the Civilian Protection Component of the International Monitoring Team in Mindanao,
Philippines, 2014.
- Reimann, C. Evaluation of NPs Project in Mindanao, Philippines Report, 2010.
- McDonald, A. and G. Munuera Vials, The EU and Mindanao: Innovative Avenues for
Seeking Peace, EU ISS Occasional Paper No.97, 2012.

Context documents:
- Michael Vatikiotis, Opinion - Why peace in Muslim Mindanao and how it was reached
matters, Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue, 2014.
- Mary Ann M. Arnado, Opinion - Women's involvement in conflict early warning systems:
Moving from rhetoric to reality in Mindanao, Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue, 2012.
- Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue, Taking Peace Into Their Own Hands, 2012.
- Arndt Graf, Peter Kreuzer, Rainer Werning, Conflict in Moro land: Prospects for Peace?,
Penerbit USM, 2014.

MTR/ Building peace in Mindanao through public participation in governance/ Conciliation Resources
May 2015

2) Reflection workshop
The workshop will take place on May 22nd on the last day of the SG meeting. It will involve CR staff
and participating partners. The events overall objectives are:
To generate reflection, among implementers, on the projects pathway to peace and theory
(or theories) of change (TOC);
To assess the quality of the projects TOC and identify recommendations to address
possible weaknesses; and
To leave participants with tools and points for additional reflection and analysis.
The workshop will include 3 sessions and be based on a participatory methodology: the facilitators
will rely on minimal presentation; use group exercises and work to structure initial analysis and
reflection; and then rely on plenary discussions to foster collective reflection and brainstorming.
The plan for the day is as follows:
Session 1: Introduction (9.00 9.45)
Objectives:
To present the purpose of the workshop and the facilitators
To review some of the key elements of the project
Structure:
Presentation (10 min)
Plenary discussion: review of project goal (25 min)
Exercise 1: Each participant to write goal in his/ her own words (10 min)
Session 2: RPP Matrix (10.00 12.00)
Objectives:
To generate reflection among participants on the linkages between the project elements
To assess the strength of existing linkages and any existing gaps
The leading question for this session is: Are CR and partners are doing everything necessary to
bring about their contribution to the goal in a way that is strategic, clear and logical?
Structure:
Presentation (15 min)
Exercise 2 and discussion: Getting acquainted with the RPP matrix (20 min)
Exercise 3 and discussion: Using the RPP matrix on the project (1h 15 min)
Session 3: Theory of Change (13.30 15.00)
Objectives:
To generate reflection among participants on the theory (or theories) of change
underpinning the project
To assess the strength of the projects TOC and any existing gaps
The leading question for this session is: Do CR and partners have a clear, plausible and wellthought theory of change for why their work is going to successfully contribute to the overall goal?
Structure:
Presentation (15 min)
Exercise 4 and discussion: Identifying TOC for specific activities/ results (40 min)
Discussion: identifying and locating key assumptions and identifying a project-wide TOC
(35 min)

MTR/ Building peace in Mindanao through public participation in governance/ Conciliation Resources
May 2015

Wrap-up (15.00 15.30)

3) KII questions and interview guide
We will interview a group of key project stakeholders from various respondent groups and conduct
in-depth interviews with them. These will be one-on-one, semi-structured events based on agreed
questions to be developed based on the main lines of inquiry above. Interviews will target three
stakeholder groups: a) project partners; b) NGOs and civil society organizations, both national and
international, working to support the peace process; and c) Representatives from local and national
government and other institutions with a role in the peace process, like the ICG.
Criteria
Introduction

Relevance

Effectiveness

Questions
1. What has been your involvement in the project to date?
2. What are the main challenges related to governance and development in
project locations?
3. How relevant do you think that the project is to these challenges?
4. Is the project involving all the relevant stakeholders?
5. Has the intervention responded flexibly to changing or unexpected
circumstances over time?
6. Has the project sufficiently involved women? What about young people?
7. Do you think that the participation of these groups is important? Why?
8. How well is the project progressing to achieving its intended outputs? What
are the strong aspects and areas for improvement?
9. How successful has the project been in: (1) fostering support for the BLL?
(2) Strengthening community security? (3) Promoting transitional justice?
(*specific question will depend on informant*)
10. What major factors are contributing to the achievement or non-achievement
of results and outputs?
11. How have training and/ or awareness-raising events benefited you?
12. How successful has the project been in empowering particularly vulnerable
or marginalized groups, such as women, in participating to the peace
process?
13. How well have CR and partners been coordinating their work?
14. What are in you opinion the main risks to the project? How do you think CR
and partners are managing them?
15. Have changes occurred to the project since its start? Why did they occur
and what responses have they triggered by the implementing team?
16. Do you think that the project is making contributions to the larger peace
process? How?
17. Should CR and partners be doing something else or more?

All conversations will be kept confidential. If quotes are collected and included in the report, we will
endeavour to obtain the permission of the relevant informant.

MTR/ Building peace in Mindanao through public participation in governance/ Conciliation Resources
May 2015

4) FGD questions and interview guide

We propose to hold 2 FGDs with participants from consultation activities. We leave partners to
make the selection of those people; however, we would request that the criteria below be followed,
is possible:
Participants should be people who have taken part in at least one event organized by the
partnerand better if their participation has been even greater;
Each FGD should have 8-12 participants (ideally 10);
We would propose to have two gender-specific FGDs: one only with women, one only with
men.
Arrange for someone to translate to/from English, if at all necessary.
The format for discussion will be informal and semi-structured, based on the questions below. Each
event will last about 60 minutes.
Criteria
Introduction

Relevance

Effectiveness

Questions
1. What has been your involvement in the project to date?
2. Can you tell us one particular aspect of an activity you participated to that
you particularly liked and why?
3. What are the main challenges related to governance and development in
project locations?
4. How relevant do you think that the project is to these challenges?
5. Is the project involving all the relevant stakeholders?
6. Has the intervention responded flexibly to changing or unexpected
circumstances over time?
7. Has the project sufficiently involved women? What about young people?
8. Do you think that the participation of these groups is important? Why?
9. What do you like the most about the project and why? What do you like the
least and why?
10. What do you think of the peace process and the BLL? Has your opinion/
view changed as a result of participating to the activities? And if so, how?
11. Do you think that the project been successful in fostering support for the
BLL and the peace process in general?
12. Do you think that the project has empowered (or otherwise benefited) you?
If so, how? Please provide specific examples.
13. Has the project (and/or your participation to it) created any changes within
your community? If so, what changes?
14. And what is the main objective that the project will bring about, in your
opinion?
15. Should CR and partners be doing something else or more?
16. Do you have suggestions for improving the project?