HARMONIZING CDD-

LPP ORIENTATION
NAUJAN, ORIENTAL MINDORO
August 22, 2019
TOPIC 1: TRANSITIONING TO THE
LAST CYCLE
TOPIC 2: MUNICIPAL PLANNING
IMPLEMENTATION PROPOSAL
GUIDANCE NOTE
Naujan, Oriental Mindoro
August 22, 2019
 TOPIC 1:
TRANSITIONING TO
THE LAST CYCLE
GUIDANCE NOTE
Naujan, Oriental Mindoro
August 22, 2019
 I. Introduction
II. Objectives of the Guidance Note
III. The LGU-led Modality
IV. Enrollment
V. Designing the LGU-led
Implementation
Topic 2:
Municipal planning implementation proposal
 KALAHI-CIDSS:
Project Cycle Objectives Matrix
1st Cycle 2nd Cycle 3rd Cycle
Objectives Introduction of KC and Integration of KC in the Institutionalization of
Application of Processes local dev’t. process. KC processes
DSWD ROLE

(Appreciation) (Acceptance) (Adoption)

Community Participation and Communities are able to Communities are able to

Empowerment mobilization of influence local dev’t. make claims / enter into
communities for KC planning and other agreements with LGUs.
concerns. initiatives.

Improved LGUs honor commitments KC processes harmonized LGUs adopt KC

Governance to KC. with local development processes.
processes.

Reduction of Sub-projects are Sub-project operation are Sub-projects are

Poverty implemented to generate sustained or expanded. replicated, scaled-up, or
poverty-reduction results. diversified.

LGU AND COMMUNITY ROLE

Source : KC:KKB Presentation M.O
 Retained most MT modality features and arrangements
 Enhancements:
o Expanded conduct of LGU Assessment: LGU Capacity Assessment,
to determine LGU capacity to determine LGU-led modality
o Possible provision of funds by KC-NCDPP to support MPIP
activities.
o Guidance on the design of the implementation process (i.e., CDD-
LPP harmonization is not automatically used if the LGU is deemed
not eligible for this).
o Inclusion of Tools and guidance on the conduct of the assessment
o Provision of one (1) Technical Facilitator c/o KC-NCDDP
o Guidance Note Form: Question-and Answer
 In relation to enhancements:
o Enhanced some existing documents to reflect new
arrangements and requirements (i.e., MLGU
Enrollment Form, PPA, Start-up conditionalities, SIA
and MPIP)
o MLGU submission of documents in support to
activating the MDC and BDCs.
 provide guidance to the Regional Program Management Office
(RPMO):
i. Enrollment into KC-NCDDP, and
ii. considerations for designing the implementation
process.
 KC-NCDDP coverage
o 377 municipalities, poor Yolanda-affected areas:
entitled to four cycles of implementation in three (3)
years, 2nd cycle grant frontloaded in cycle 1
o 293 poor municipalities, non-Yolanda-affected: 61%
(178 munis) entitled to 4 cycles of implementation

 Design: last cycle is LGU-led implementation - LGUs take

on more facilitation work => certain arrangements may
change (i.e., LGU responsibilities, implementation process)
• Performance- and Capacity-based selection and
enrollment
• LGU-managed implementation, with room to design
implementation process vis LGU capacity to implement
CDD program
• Provision of grant funds for small community sub-projects,
co-sharing in some MPIP activities, staff (TF)
• Purposive capability building
• Evidence-based monitoring and evaluation
 MLGUs that successfully completed 3 KC-NCDDP
cycle.
Successful completion if:
o All subprojects have been finished;
o All community accounts have been closed;
o Sustainability Plans have been prepared.
 Pending subproject began implementation in the
last cycle;
 Reasons for late completion are beyond the control
of the BSPMC and/or the LGU;

Prior to start of last cycle, MLGUs granted conditional

eligibility shall:
 finish all pending subproject/s
 close all accounts
 Conduct of end-of-cycle Orientation of LGU on: (i) operational details, (ii) PPA and LGU
Accountability Reporting assessment findings, and terms of SIA.

START
RPMO conducts eligibility check
RPMO sends letter to
municipality
RPMO Meeting with Mayors
LCE sends RPMO letter of intent
to participate with SB resolution
Enrollment, assessment and SIA Enrollment, assessment and SIA
issues resolved issues not resolved
RPMO sends letter of acceptance RPMO and MLGU agrees to waive
to LGU with list of requirements
MLGU submits all requirements to MLGU submits waiver
RPMO
RPMO informs NPMO of MLGU
compliance with requirements RPMO informs NPMO

MLGU submits completed

Enrollment Form NPMO concurs
RPMO prepares SIA NPMO concurs
incorporating agreed-upon
RPMO conducts Assessment preventive and mitigating
RPMO issues RPMO informs MLGU
measures to address
assessment issues NTP to MLGU
LGU Assessment Potential Problem Analysis
END
RPMO reviews Assessment findings END
 Design dependent on LGU capacity to
implement CDD program (LGU Capacity
Assessment Result)
 Implementation process may take two forms:
i. integrating CDD processes in existing
LGU planning processes (in MPIP) =
moderately strong to strong
ii. regular CEAC = poor to adequate
 KC-NCDDP oversight, management, implementation and coordination
structures still applies
 LGU as primary implementer: organize management and
implementations groups = oversee and facilitate MPIP implementation
o Formation of a Municipal Steering Committee (MSC) = oversee
project implementation at the municipal level
o Strengthening of the Municipal Inter-Agency Committee (MIAC)
= provide TA to participating barangays (e.g., engineering
advice and support, project development inputs)
o Organization of a Municipal Coordinating Team (MCT) = front-
line field implementer, TA provider, and monitor of local
communities.
 Community Grant and Funds Flow
o Provision of KC-NCDDP Community grants (community
development projects identified and developed through the
LGU-led implementation)
o Municipal grants shall be in accordance with the matrix of
computation prepared during Program inception.
o Allocation of municipal grant shall follow a participatory,
criteria-based community project prioritization process.
o Funds downloading, disbursement and liquidation: compliant
to Community-based Finance Manual procedures and
requirements
 Local Counterpart Contributions (LCC)
o LGU provision of cash and in-kind local counterpart contributions as a
percentage of the Local Development Fund in reference to the total
KC-NCDDP and BUB funds to be provided to the LGU for the period.
o Cash counterparts deposited in the Trust Account for Program
implementation.
o Eligible expense items for LCC: LGU personnel assigned/hired to
facilitate activities, capability-building activities for community
volunteers, and/or implement community subprojects. Some specific
eligible expense items:
 LCC for SPI = % of LDF indicated in BUB JMC vis-à-vis KC-NCDDP grant and KC-BUB funds
 LCC for CBIS = all MPIP activities including capbuild and project management
 Full MCT complement Cost for M&E, CEAC, salaries, operations and travelling expenses of MCT
 Travelling expenses of MIAC members who will be mobilized for LGU-led implementation
 Financing for Other Activities.
a. Costs c/o LGUs
o capability building of community volunteers
o salaries of LGU personnel assigned or hired to facilitate
the implementation of activities
o other community mobilization activities for
implementation support.
LGUs may mobilize resources from other sources to ensure availability
of counterpart funds. All funds (whether LGU-provided or externally
mobilized) shall be deposited in the Trust Account for the LGU-led
implementation cycle.
 Financing for Other Activities.
b. Costs c/o KC-NCDDP
o Preparatory and start-up consultations
o capability building for Municipal Coordinating Teams,
national and regional level implementation and
monitoring support
o salaries and travelling expenses of Program-hired staff
assigned in the municipality.
o Cost-sharing in activities indicated in the MPIP for good-
performing LGUs (NEED TO CHECK WITH FINANCE)
 KC-NCDDP procedures and requirements
 CHARACTERISTICS INDICATORS

Participation  Frequency of LDC meetings

 Citizens’ representation in LDC
 LGU Partnership with CSOs
 Provision of funds to CSOs/PSOs
 Information Dissemination on CSO Accreditation
 CSO Accreditation
Rule of Law  LGU abides by:
(i) people’s rights to information,
(ii) people’s rights to assemble and petition for redress grievance,
(iii) people’s rights to form unions, associations or organizations,
(iv) rights of individuals and different sectors to participate in local
affairs
 Legal instruments on Promotion of CDD principles

Adjectival rating will be based on the appropriate rating in the LGU Capacity Assessment Tool/Matrix, which corresponds to
[1]

the governance practice in the municipality

 CHARACTERISTICS INDICATORS
Transparency  Information Disclosure (Posting of fiduciary-related documents)
 Quality of Response to requests for financial and procurement
information
 Information dissemination
Responsiveness  CDP/LDIP/AIP formulation/ updating and finalization
 AIP and budget preparation and allocation
 Capacity to Fund its own development PPAs in LDIP/AIP

• Capacity to fund PPAs of barangays, ordinary citizens and CSOs formulated

through participatory planning
Consensus  Identification and Ranking of PPAs
Orientation  LGU competency in participatory planning and management
Adjectival rating will be based on the appropriate rating in the LGU Capacity Assessment Tool/Matrix, which corresponds to
[1]

the governance practice in the municipality

 CHARACTERISTICS INDICATORS
Equity  LGU implementation of PPAs closer to needy sectors
 Formulation and implementation of PPAs, incorporating needs of
certain sectors (such as women and girls)
Effectiveness and  Capacity to implement devolved service and regulatory functions
Efficiency
 Community access to LGU services
Accountability  Adherence to accounting rules and regulations
 Compliance with RA 9184 and its IRR, and other related government
rules and regulations
 Mechanisms for Feedbacking and Grievance Resolution
Strategic Vision  CLUP and CDP updating
Adjectival rating will be based on the appropriate rating in the OVERALL RATING: ________________
[1]

LGU Capacity Assessment Tool/Matrix, which corresponds to the

governance practice in the municipality
 LGU CAPACITY ASSESSMENT
SCORING SYSTEM
Adjectival Rating Score
(no. of indicators with such ratings)
Strong LGU display very high level of capacityto or  At least 22 of the 25 indicators are rated as
experience in implementing social “Strong”; OR
protection/CDD programs. Requires very  Majority of the indicators are rated as “Strong”
minimum, or no, assistance from the Program.
Moderately LGU displays a high level of capacity to or  At least 20 or maximum of 22 of the 25 indicators
Strong experience in implementing social are rated as “Moderately Strong”; OR
protection/CDD programs. Requires minimum  Majority of the indicators are rated as “Moderately
assistance from the Program. Strong”
Adequate LGU meets standards in most areas. Requires  18 to 20 of the 25 indicators are rated as
assistance from the Program. “Adequate”; OR
 Majority of the indicators are rated as “Adequate”
Moderately LGU meets standards in some areas. Requires a  15 to 18 of the 25 indicators are rated as
Poor reasonable amount of assistance from the “Moderately Poor”; OR
Program.  Majority of the indicators are rated as “Moderately
Poor”
Poor LGU displays inconsistency in performance, or  At least 15 of the 25 indicators are rated as “Poor”;
is not meeting set standards. Requires intensive OR
Program assistance and support.  Majority of the indicators are rated as “Poor”
Note: A more systematic manner of generating the LGU rating may be devised by assigning weights
(%) per characteristic and indicators.

LGU CAPACITY ASSESSMENT TOOL

“Communities in targeted poor
and disaster-affected
municipalities are empowered
to achieve improved access to
services and to participate in
more inclusive local planning,
budgeting, implementation,
and disaster risk reduction and
management”
 Program /
Activity/Project/ Primary Tasks Adoption (What may be possible?)
Deliverables
Improve the 30% Pantawid families participating in local decision- Ways in adoption may be
capacities of 18,182 making activities (e.g., brgy assemblies, participatory institutionalized on side of planning;
Pantawid Families in situational analysis, resource allocation by end of June 1. Ensure that all PPAs approved are
accessing 2017 consulted to Community with 80%
opportunities to 70% of National Community Driven Development Participation.
move their level of Program (NCDDP) barangays with poverty reduction 2. PPAs may refer to Municipal or
well-being by 2017 actions plan prepared with the involvement of the Barangay Development Plan which is
community members through participatory process by yearly done.
end of June 2017
No. of beneficiaries employed during sub-project
implementation disaggregated by sex by end of LGC:
December 2017 There is no mandate on people’s
a. 10% are Pantawid Beneficiaries participation specific to % of Attendees
in Barangay Assemblies but is required
b. 70% are non-Pantawid Beneficiaries to be represented per Sector. LGU may
c. 30% are women opt to consider the 80% performance
10% Pantawid families benefitting from KC community indicator of KALAHI CIDSS in Barangay
identified sub-projects completed in the 1st semester Assemblies.
of 2017 & prior years
 PERFORMANCE INDICATOR
Program /
Activity/ Primary Tasks Ways possible to adopt?
Deliverables
Cost effective, 70% of completed sub-projects At the government operation, projects funded and implemented by the LGU after Turn-
functional and implemented in compliance with over does not have an assessment tool to review whether the Project after completion
sustainable sub- technical plans and within or after turn-over is assessed as to technical structure and functionality.
projects of schedule and budget. (Engineering,
communities Finance and Procurement) KALAHI uses Sustainability Evaluation and Functionality Audit after project completion,
85% of KC Projects completed 6 mos and regularly 1 year after.
submit Sustainability Evaluation
and/or Functionality Audit. (Social *Inventory of LGU Projects be booked as assets of LGU; These assets should return
Development) development to LGU through Income Generation.
85% of KC-NCDDP municipalities In Sablayan, the 20% BDF or LGU special funds are implemented using the KALAHI
institutionalized CDD. (Process) CIDSS CEAC Process; the planning to implementation n is adopted except for
procurement. Sectoral Planning through PSA; Inter-Barangay Forum is also considered
in the process.
Inclusive, 85% of KC-NCDDP municipalities At the MDC; only CSOs accredited form part of the body; in KALAHI the planning and
participatory and with citizens other than public approval of projects is represented by the CVs or expanded member of the BDC.
accountable KC officials, who participate in
implementation municipal level prioritization
forum. (Process)
80% of registered grievance Adopting Grievance Redress System (GRS) in KALAHI CIDSS is categorized accordingly
satisfactorily resolved in line with for people’s access to information. The level of concern is also addressed thru the
the GRS. (Monitoring System) Grievance Committee executed by EO. Since the Municipal has CSC specific guidelines
on this, however this is only applicable for public officials. Citizen’s Concern are also
addressed in the community GRS.
 TOPIC 2:
MUNICIPAL PLANNING
IMPLEMENTATION
PROPOSAL
GUIDANCE NOTE
Naujan, Oriental Mindoro
August 22, 2019

Topic 1: Transitioning to the Last Cycle

- LGU Capacity Assessment
 count of ADJECTIVAL RATING AND RESULT
Indicators
Adjectival rating STRONG
·At least 22 of the 25 indicators are
STRONG 23 rated as “Strong”; OR
MODERATELY ·At least 20 or maximum of 22 of
2 MODERATELY
the 25 indicators are rated as
STRONG STRONG
“Moderately Strong”; OR
ADEQUATE ·18 to 20 of the 25 indicators are
POOR ADEQUATE
rated as “Adequate”; OR
MODERATELY MODERATELY ·15 to 18 of the 25 indicators are
POOR POOR rated as “Moderately Poor”; OR
Grand Total ·At least 15 of the 25 indicators are
POOR
rated as “Poor”; OR
Initial Rating: “ Strong”
Implementation process may take two forms:
Therefore:  integrating CDD processes in existing LGU
“integrating CDD processes planning processes (in MPIP) = moderately
in existing LGU planning strong to strong
processes (in MPIP).”
 regular CEAC = poor to adequate
Part 1:
1. What is the Community Empowerment Activity Cycle
(CEAC)?
2. What have we learned from the last 10 years of doing CDD
in the Philippines?
3. Compare Regular and Accelerated CEAC
a. Steps
b. Timelines
4. Detailed Accelerated CEAC process
5. Detailed Regular CEAC Social Preparation process
6. Implications
 KALAHI-CIDSS:
Project Cycle Objectives Matrix
1st Cycle 2nd Cycle 3rd Cycle
Objectives Introduction of KC and Integration of KC in the Institutionalization of
Application of Processes local dev’t. process. KC processes
DSWD ROLE

(Appreciation) (Acceptance) (Adoption)

Community Participation and Communities are able to Communities are able to

Empowerment mobilization of influence local dev’t. make claims / enter into
communities for KC planning and other agreements with LGUs.
concerns. initiatives.

Improved LGUs honor commitments KC processes harmonized LGUs adopt KC

Governance to KC. with local development processes.
processes.

Reduction of Sub-projects are Sub-project operation are Sub-projects are

Poverty implemented to generate sustained or expanded. replicated, scaled-up, or
poverty-reduction results. diversified.

LGU AND COMMUNITY ROLE

Source : KC:KKB Presentation M.O
 INSTITUTIONALIZATION FRAMEWORK
LGU DEVELOPMENT
INSTITUTIONALIZATION KEY RESULT AREAS
PROCESSES/ PLANNING
BODIES
Barangay Level:
• Legislation integrating
CDD in regular programs.
• Adoption of participatory
development processes.
• Functionality of the BDC.
•
BAs SBs Barangay-based
mechanisms to address
1. Mainstreaming B/MLGU BAP priorities.
KC Principles • Consistency of budget
and Processes OLCE LSBs allocation with BAP
priorities.
and • O&M groups as PO’s
2. Sustaining its with legal status.
Application
Municipal Level:
in: • Legislation integrating
CDD in regular programs.
• Adoption of participatory
development processes.
• Functionality of the MDC
and the MIAC.
• MLGU staff performing
KC functions.
Making Participatory, Community-Driven • Consistency of MLGU
Development a “WAY OF LIFE” !!! budget with barangay
priorities.
 MDC multi-year
Standard CEAC MDP/LPRAP MIBF
Comm’ty. prioritization
Consultation
Comm’ty.
Participatory Situation Consultation Formation of TRANSITION
Analysis Comm’ty. Org. for to Standard CEAC
MIAC Tech. O&M (Cycle 2)
Review
Community
Consultation (BA) Proj. Dev’t. Community-managed Functionality Audit
Workshop implementation of and Sustainability
Social Investigation projects Evaluation
Feedback to BA

Community Action Accountability

Municipal Orientation PSA – BDP Criteria Setting Planning (BA) Reporting
integration WS
3 Community –Managed
1 Social Prep 2 Community Planning & Implementation & CBO 4 Community
& Community Proposal Preparation &
Consultation
Monitoring
Approval Formation

Municipal Orientation Municipal Forum Community Action Accountability

Planning (BA) Reporting

Consultation meeting Project Proposal Community-managed Functionality Audit

on disaster impact Development implementation of and Sustainability
and barangay ranking
projects Evaluation
and allocation
Community
Consultation (BA) Formation of TRANSITION
Community
Consultation (BA) Comm’ty. Org. for to Standard CEAC
Technical Review and O&M (Cycle 2)
Approval for fund
Accelerated CEAC release
Accelerated CEAC Timeline
All Proposals completed

Grants Allocated
All Functionality SET
Project ideas generated All O&M Groups Formed Audits completed completed

Brgys. ranked and

grants determined All SPs Completed

1st Tranche disbursed

MO
1 3 6 9 12 15 18

1 3 6 9 12 15 18
MO All Proposals completed All SPs Completed

SI completed Grants Allocated All Functionality

Audits completed
All 1st Tranche disbursed
BA completed

PSA completed All O&M Groups Formed

Regular CEAC Timeline

 Municipal level
Standard CEAC activity links and flows

MDC
TRANSITION
mtg. on
to Standard
multi-
Mun. CEAC
year
Orient’n. (Cycle 2)
plng.

MIAC
PSA prep. CSW MIBF- Mun.
PDW Tech.
mtg. (MIBF) PRA AR
Review

Social Sustn’ty
Investiga- Eval.
tion
Comm’ty
Consul’tn
(2nd BA)
Comm’ty Project Comm’ty Comm’ty
Brgy.
Consul’tn Proposal Consul’tn plng.
AR
(3rd BA) Dev’t. (4th BA) (5th BA)
Barangay level

Comm’ty
Consul’tn
(1st BA) Comm’ty.
Func.
managed
Audit
SPI

BLGU
mtg. On CBO
PSA-BDP Form’tn .
integ’n. for O&M
 PDW Proposal
Preparation KALAHI CIDSS CEAC
CSW process elements
(Municipal wide community
consultation)
PSA

Local
Submission
Development
Accountability of proposal LGU Planning and
Planning
Reporting for funding
Budget Budgeting Cycle
Performance
CBE
Assessment
Formulation elements
(Sectoral and MDC Planning
Activities using regular LGU LPP)
O&M
Budget MIBF – PRA
Execution Selection
Project
M&E

CDD - LPP Harmonization

and Convergence Nexus
(Sectoral and Community Planning Activities with
Project Implementation the MDC at Municipal Activities)

CDD-LPP Harmonization Framework

 Can we do the
institutionalization of
KALAHI CIDSS?
Consideration and highlight:
1. CEAC Plan (CDD-LPP Activities)
2. Sustainability plan
 O&M Activities
 Sustaining the functionality of sub-projects
 Institutionalizing CDD in the LGU System

3. Community Involvement in the Harmonization process.

4. Community Empowering indicator and results.
MUNICIPAL SUSTAINABILITY PLAN (FORM 4.2)
 Program /
Activity/Project/ Primary Tasks Adoption (What may be possible?)
Deliverables
Improve the 30% Pantawid families participating in local decision- Ways in adoption may be
capacities of 18,182 making activities (e.g., brgy assemblies, participatory institutionalized on side of planning;
Pantawid Families in situational analysis, resource allocation by end of June 1. Ensure that all PPAs approved are
accessing 2017 consulted to Community with 80%
opportunities to 70% of National Community Driven Development Participation.
move their level of Program (NCDDP) barangays with poverty reduction 2. PPAs may refer to Municipal or
well-being by 2017 actions plan prepared with the involvement of the Barangay Development Plan which is
community members through participatory process by yearly done.
end of June 2017
No. of beneficiaries employed during sub-project
implementation disaggregated by sex by end of LGC:
December 2017 There is no mandate on people’s
a. 10% are Pantawid Beneficiaries participation specific to % of Attendees
in Barangay Assemblies but is required
b. 70% are non-Pantawid Beneficiaries to be represented per Sector. LGU may
c. 30% are women opt to consider the 80% performance
10% Pantawid families benefitting from KC community indicator of KALAHI CIDSS in Barangay
identified sub-projects completed in the 1st semester Assemblies.
of 2017 & prior years
 Program /
Activity/Project Primary Tasks Ways possible to adopt?
/Deliverables
Cost effective, 70% of completed sub-projects At the government operation, projects funded and implemented by the LGU
functional and implemented in compliance with after Turn-over does not have an assessment tool to review whether the
sustainable sub- technical plans and within schedule and Project after completion or after turn-over is assessed as to technical structure
projects of budget. (Engineering, Finance and and functionality.
communities Procurement)
85% of KC Projects completed submit KALAHI uses Sustainability Evaluation and Functionality Audit after project
Sustainability Evaluation and/or completion, 6 mos and regularly 1 year after.
Functionality Audit. (Social Development)
*Inventory of LGU Projects be booked as assets of LGU; These assets should
return development to LGU through Income Generation.
85% of KC-NCDDP municipalities In Sablayan, the 20% BDF or LGU special funds are implemented using the
institutionalized CDD. (Process) KALAHI CIDSS CEAC Process; the planning to implementation n is adopted
except for procurement. Sectoral Planning through PSA; Inter-Barangay Forum
is also considered in the process.
Inclusive, 85% of KC-NCDDP municipalities with At the MDC; only CSOs accredited form part of the body; in KALAHI the
participatory and citizens other than public officials, who planning and approval of projects is represented by the CVs or expanded
accountable KC participate in municipal level member of the BDC.
implementation prioritization forum. (Process)
80% of registered grievance Adopting Grievance Redress System (GRS) in KALAHI CIDSS is categorized
satisfactorily resolved in line with the accordingly for people’s access to information. The level of concern is also
GRS. (Monitoring System) addressed thru the Grievance Committee executed by EO. Since the Municipal
has CSC specific guidelines on this, however it is only applicable for public
officials. Citizen’s Concern are also addressed in the community GRS.
Matamang Salamat!