The Episcopal Church in the Philippines’

Community-Based Development Program (Phase VI):

An Evaluation Research

 

I. INTRODUCTION

 

The Community-Based Development Program (CBDP) of the Episcopal Church in the Philippines (ECP) aims to improve the quality of life of program beneficiaries and partners, to promote the people’s determination and participation in their own development and to contribute to the development process in the country while deepening the church’s involvement in social development. It is implemented within the structure of the National Development Office of the ECP.

 

The CBDP shall start its Phase VII when Phase VI ends in March 2009. In view of this, the National Office and its funding partner, EED see the need to conduct an external evaluation to assess the implementation of CBDP Phase VI. This shall, hopefully provide the necessary inputs to facilitate the CBDP tea in preparing and planning program interventions.

It is timely to assess the efficiency and effectiveness of the program. As such an evaluation research shall be conducted to focus on the project management aspect of CBDP. Since a truly efficient project management cannot be separated from project impact, this evaluation research shall also examine the perception of communities on how CBDP has affected their lives in terms of the objectives set for their respective projects.

 

This evaluation research aims to provide answers to the following questions:

1. How well did the ECO implement and manage the various projects; and

2. How do the communities perceive the results of the projects.

Specifically, this study shall carry out the following: (Please see annex for the terms of reference.)

1. Map out and analyze the program operations and implementation process;

2. Evaluate the CBDP program management and monitoring processes and mechanisms;

3. Describe and discuss the perceptions of the partner communities on the impact of the projects on their lives; and

4. Provide recommendations for improvements in relation to potentials for expansion or replication and for a more efficient and effective program management and implementation.

 

 

 

 

II. FINDINGS

 

The Community-Based Development Program (CBDP) in the Episcopal Diocese of Southern Philippines (EDSP) is composed of the Development Officer and three (3) community development workers. They work closely with the other units and personnel of the EDSP including the finance staff, the program assistant of the Social Ministries Unit and the other support personnel. They also confer regularly with the Bishop, who has to study reports, examine plans and assessments and approve project proposals.

Together they try to bring development projects to communities that are hardest hit by economic problems. The three CDWs have their respective assigned areas. One of them is in-charge of south western Mindanao, the other one is for south central Mindanao and the other for the Sultan Kudarat area.

 

Tracing the Origins of a Development Project

A community may find itself in the midst of a problem or even a crisis to finally emerge as a place of change and eventually, hope but always with challenges. Its members usually gather together, discuss their predicament and act on it. They may bring their plight to the clergy or the priest in their midst. The latter would usually inform the CBDP of this situation and from there, the process of project identification and implementation starts.

Take the case of the Malitbog Farmers Association Multi-Purpose Cooperative. Similar to other farmers’ organizations they were saddled with problems of storing their palay. They were oftentimes forced to sell their yield as they had no place to store them. They had no option but to sell even if they will hardly earn after deducting the costs of their inputs to their income. It was time to discuss anew with their organization the possibility of having a project to address this and other related problems.

Their priest then was among the first to know of their plan. Fr. Ricardo Nuesca lost no time in informing the development office about this situation. The community consultations ensued. Data-gathering was implemented. In 2002, the post-harvest project for the Malitbog Farmers Association Multi-Purpose Cooperative was implemented under the CBDP of the ECP.

The development officer along with the community organization mapped out the activities of the project. The aims, methods and activities of the project were discussed extensively in the community. The project proposal was then written and submitted to the Development Committee for comments, suggestions and eventual approval.

The EDSP has a unique way of ensuring that the Development Committee is functioning. They created this body in the local level, meaning in the deanery level, instead of at the diocesan level. In that way, the five (5) Development Committee members will find it easier to meet and faster to make decisions. Oftentimes, Development Committee members at the diocesan level cannot hold meetings as they reside far from each other.

The members are chosen for their knowledge of the community situation and should have rapport with the community members.

From the Development Committee, the project proposal will then be submitted to the Bishop for the final approval. It will then be given to the partner agency. After the contract and terms of reference between the partner agency and the proponent organization has been signed, project implementation begins.

 

Project Implementation

The most important ingredient in co-implementing a project, the development officer says is the people’s understanding of the project at the onset of its implementation. There should be clearly stated terms of reference between the program staff and the community organization. In this manner, there are no expectations between the two parties which are not covered in the agreed upon terms of reference. It is also important that the CDWs should spend a lot of time in the community. This creates trust and respect for them. There will be few problems encountered if this is the case. It is the best way to prevent conflict and misunderstandings.

Participatory leadership and decision-making is practiced by the CBDP staff as consistently as possible. As the DO said, “We ensure that there is always consultation among the people”. They are the ones to analyze and decide on matters vital to the project.

But work for the project is not limited to the community. There is also the work done among the diocesan staff. The finance staff coordinates with the development officer in the fund disbursements. The former likewise monitors the budget and the latter depends on her for information on how much is still to be spent.

Both of them attend the weekly staff meeting in the diocese. Held every Monday, this is the venue where each unit in the diocese provides their own update and other developments. The Bishop presides over this meeting.

The development officer follows the plans and activities in the project proposal and ensures that these are implemented on time. Trainings conducted in the community are likewise held including those on leadership, gender sensitivity and project management.

CBDP coordinates with the other units in the diocese aside from the finance unit. It holds joint activities also for the Social Ministry Unit, which technically speaking is under the CBDP. The former has a Program Assistant who is being supervised by the development officer. EDSP also has units in Evangelism and Christian Education.

SMU relates with various organizations in addressing current issues that most affect the people including human rights, migration and women’s empowerment. The SMU Program Assistant backstops for CBDP by conducting trainings in leadership, gender sensitivity and on the environment in its project areas.

The development office including the development officer and the three (3) community development workers meet twice a year. It serves as their planning and review venue. They cannot meet more often than this because of the length of time that will be incurred by travel as well as the financial constraints. These two meetings are also the venue wherein the CBDP staff discuss the lessons learned.

 

The Development Office Staff

The strategic direction of the CBDP as well as the Episcopal Church in the Philippines is known and shared by the staff. They may not be able to articulate this in its totality but they have a strong sense of where CBDP is heading for. They realize the importance of an overall guide that unites not only the CBDP staff but also the Diocesan and the entire national staff.

The CDWs prepare their quarterly accomplishment report and submit this to the DO. The latter consolidates their reports. They believe that they try to be as gender responsive as possible in the course of their planning. Activities are designed in such a way that the women’s participation is encouraged, and even assured. One of the CDWs recalled that a water project seriously took into account the fact that it is the women in the community who are tasked with fetching water. Hence, the project to be identified must successfully ensure that women are free from this back breaking task, which is just among the domestic and household chores that they perform.

The Development Office Staff likewise believe that they have already acquired the skills in logical planning framework and can use this in their planning, monitoring and evaluation.

The CBDP in EDSP includes the Social Ministry Unit which has a Program Assistant. The DO supervises the Program Assistant. At the moment, the latter represents the SMU in national meetings and consultations.

 

Internal Networking

The CBDP in the EDSP relates with the National Office mainly through the DO. It is the DO who relays information and requests from the National Office to the Development Office. The staff of the NO likewise goes through the DO initially before communicating or giving requests to the CDWs.

The CDWs and the DOs relate with the other dioceses through their program work. CDWs would exchange ideas and experiences through the trainings provided for by the program.

A CDW recalled exchanging emails with CDWs from EDNP and EDS whom he consulted regarding some community development as well as health related matters. EDNP has a staff whose forte is community development while EDS has a CDW who is a physical therapist and health worker.

For his part, the DO relates with the other Dos of the other dioceses through the CBDP. There is oftentimes exchange of information, ideas and experiences through the quarterly meetings of the Dos.

Apart from the activities sponsored by CBDP, there are no major activities and venues through which the CDWs would relate with the other CDWs in the other dioceses. There are practical considerations such as the distance of the EDSP from their colleagues in the Luzon region. As they are in Mindanao region, trainings, consultations and similar type of activities outside of their region would be expensive to undertake.

When asked about their relations with the National Office, study respondents said that they have good interpersonal relations with its staff. Coordination with the NO are usually related to program matters (e.g. CBDP and SMU). Problems encountered are sometimes on the delayed submission of reports. But as much as possible program staff try to comply with deadlines. This is for them the best way to address such problems.

 

Capacity Building and Resource Generation

The Development Office Staff are one in saying that the training on SPSS is most useful to them. It, however, took awhile for them to finish because the pirated program they used often broke down and there were delays in their application of SPSS. Apart from this difficulty, the CDWs are satisfied with what they learned as they were able to come up with the expected outputs.

When asked how CBDP can generate resources, the DO shared that there is a plan at the diocese level that 50% of the grant shall be returned by the community organization to the diocese while 30% shall be given back to the deanery to be allocated to other community projects.

 

Effects on the People and their Communities

The Bishop goes to project areas through his pastoral visits. The DO and the CDWs are assigned their project areas. The other diocesan staff such as the finance officer and SMU Program Assistant likewise visit the communities. The former goes to project areas twice a year while the SMU Program Assistant occasionally acts as resource person for CBDP trainings.

From the point of view of the Diocesan staff (excluding the CBDP staff), CBDP has contributed to improving the lives of community members. For some, they have additional income and this is reflected in their church offering. There are also more people attending church activities. As Bishop Danilo Bustamante observed, “We see those people whom we haven’t seen for a long time. They exude joy. They take it upon themselves to serve the church”.

Rosanne Impenat, the SMU Program Assistant added that in contrast to other government and non-government organizations which are exposed to rural communities, the CBDP has concrete projects. The others merely provide inputs during meetings but hardly accompany the communities in their quest for development projects that respond to their situation.

For the community members in one project site, Sitio Malitbog, New Corella, Davao del Norte, the project is not merely a one-shot deal project that they implemented and then they go to their next activity. It has become their one big lesson in life as it is marked by both gains and challenges. For them, it has remained their success story precisely due to the challenges that it continues to pose to them. At present, many of them are determined to go on with the project as it is still perceived to be responsive to their plight as farmers. The project consists of post-harvest facilities and a multi-purpose cooperative.

They were able to acquire a dryer and a warehouse. From 23 members, their cooperative now has 32 members. The interest rate from their cooperative is 2.5%, which is lower than that from the loan sharks, at 5 to 10%.

Several of their members were recognized as model farmers by government agencies. Many of them related how they were able to increase their income at some point in their life by keeping a stock of their rice in the warehouse and then selling it at higher prices than before when there was no project yet.

Still, they were candid enough to admit that not everything went well with the project. For one, it was plagued by delinquent borrowers. They were able to identify at least two who even left their village after borrowing from the cooperative. It has not conducted any meeting in the last two years and several of its officers have become inactive.

Despite this setback, several of them have continued discussing the best steps to revive their organization. They have also come to certain realizations. Firstly, they should really enforce policies on credit. In the past, they were affected by those who borrowed reportedly due to emergencies such as in times of ailment or for tuition fee. Despite the fact that these borrowers were not qualified (e.g. small capital stock), they were still given credit. The members of the credit committee are deemed to be too lenient probably due to their sense of compassion. The fact that many of the members of the cooperative are relatives also reinforced their reluctance to reject a creditor. Secondly, they would want to include only those who are church members. With church members, at least they are better assured that policies will be complied with.

 

On the Service Delivery System

The process for service delivery starts with the community organization when its members would discuss their desire to engage in project implementation. This information would then be shared with the priest or the priest would be present in community meetings where this information was tackled.

The priest goes to the Development Office of the diocese and forwards the request for a project from the community organization. The DO staff conducts community meetings to determine the aims, methods and activities of the project. Based on these community discussions, the project proposal is made by the Development Office staff. The DO finalizes the proposal and is then forwarded to the Development Committee and then to the Bishop for comments, suggestions and eventual approval. The project proposal is likewise forwarded to the NDO.

After the proposal has been approved by the funding partner, the CBDP staff then ensures that its plans and activities are implemented on time. Depending on the nature of the project, there would be a package of services that are provided in the project sites. This includes trainings on leadership, project management, gender sensitivity and health.

The Development Office is the main unit responsible for the delivery of services to the project sites. It is, however, assisted by the finance unit, the SMU and sometimes by the other units and support staff of the diocese. The finance staff visits the project sites at least twice a year. She confers with the DO in terms of the monitoring of the budget and for fund releases and disbursements.

The Development Committee can be found in the local level, not only in the diocesan level. This was created so that its members can meet and discuss regularly on the projects. So far, such an arrangement has been effective. Since the members do not reside that far away from each other (unlike in the diocese-level Development Committee), this set-up has facilitated a more functioning committee.

Program planning integrates the concerns of women. For instance, in the EDSP’s water projects the plight of women is one of the primary considerations as they are the ones burdened with fetching water in the community. The DO staff are also conscious of the need for the women’s participation in project activities.

 

Observations and Recommendations

1. The process from the community request up to the actual project implementation seems to have been standardized and institutionalized. There are already agreed upon processes in the CBDP. In the case of EDSP it is noteworthy that they have set up Development Committees in the local level. This has enabled the latter to be more active in its work for project appraisal and consultancy.

2. In the main, gender has been integrated in the program as shown by indicators for gender sensitivity. This is seen in the gender indicators of success in the monitoring matrix. What can be improved is to articulate what happened to the other indicators of success apart from increase in the participation of women. For instance, in the monitoring matrix there are no remarks for the indicators, “minimizing stereotypes and increased roles of women in community development”. Since CBDP has been giving gender sensitivity trainings for a number of years, the articulation of gender responsive and gender sensitive parameters for project implementation has not been apparent in the reports of CBDP.

Even the interviews with study respondents reveal that other indicators for gender responsiveness have not been considered. For instance, providing opportunities for women so that they are not given traditional tasks and roles in project implementation has not been mentioned. Or providing creative methodologies for sharing of experiences of women and men (especially in projects where women are the dominant members). Or giving support mechanisms for mothers during meetings or activities of the community organization. On these occasions, mothers usually have to bring along their children and provision of a space for children’s play and rest or even setting up of a day care nook is helpful for women. These are not new ideas and may not have been simply articulated although they are present in program implementation.

Given these considerations, CBDP can include in its next program design activities wherein gender sensitivity goes beyond numbers and more into actualizing the potential of women as leaders, community development workers and project managers.

 

On the Linkage and Cooperation System

The main linkage of the CBDPs in the six dioceses is the activities planned out within the program itself. In the case of the Dos, their quarterly meetings serve as the regular venue for reporting, sharing of experiences, consulting with each other and expressing insights and lessons learned.

For the CDWs, there are no formal venues for updating and sharing as there are practical constraints. Since they are based in Mindanao region, it would be too expensive for them to travel to Luzon for gatherings with the other CDWs. It does not mean, however that they do not relate with the other CDWs. At the moment, they do communicate and share correspondence with the other CDWs mainly through e mail. For short and faster communication, they also send text messages. They cited communicating with the CDWs in EDNP and EDS as a means of exchanging information and sharing of experiences.

The National Office relates to the Diocese through its programs. For instance, the NDO coordinates the CBDP and is in-charge of relating with the other Dos in the dioceses. The same is true for the Program Assistant for SMU (based in the National Office). She coordinates the SMU activities with the other SMU coordinators in the dioceses.

Study respondents agree that there is a good inter-personal relations between the NO staff and that of EDSP. The only area for improvement is the submission of reports. The CBDP staff is working hard to prevent such an occurrence. In the event that this happened in the past, this became a potential cause of not having good inter-personal relations. Thus, is one area where the CBDP EDSP is working hard on.

 

Observations and Recommendations

1. There is a built-in system for linkage and cooperation. Bodies and units have been set up to ensure that there are regular meetings. The Bishops have their regular meetings as well as the Dos and the SMU Coordinators. This has resulted in better communication, timely reporting and sharing of experiences.

The existing linkage and cooperation can still be enhanced by putting all these exchanges into a concrete form and that can be a website and e group. The former can include sections that would highlight both program concerns and human interest features on CBDP. At the moment there is an ECP website and the section on CBDP can also be incorporated here.

The website can have an orientation paper including the objectives, sections and editorial policies. For the CBDP, it can feature the basic information such as aims, methods, activities, and insights and lessons learned. There can be a section on news that can feature timely events and activities. Another section can be on best practices in terms of various themes including implementation of health, environmental, community development, water works and women’s projects.

Since cross visits can be done infrequently and they are quite expensive, featuring the CBDP through words and pictures in the website can be the next best thing. The e group, on the other hand, shall facilitate the fast and timely exchange of information among the Dos and CDWs from the six dioceses. The CBDP EDSP is expected to contribute to these recommended endeavors.

2. f it is not practical to include the Mindanao-based CDWs in the national activity for CDWs, then the former can further strengthen their ties and undertake regional activities for CDWs. Instead of the twice a year meeting of the Development Office staff, it can include another meeting, but the third one is focused on the strengthening of the capacity of the development office staff. It can include sharing of experiences, discussion of issues relevant to CDWs and an input on skills training.

 

 

On Program Management

The National Office monitors the CBDP EDSP through the quarterly Dos meeting. It also requires semestral narrative and financial reports from the Dos. Communication between the NDO and the Do of EDSP is open and there is a relatively good coordination. The lines of accountability are quite clear. The NDO supervises the Dos and he is accountable to the Prime Bishop. The Dos supervises the CDWs and the DO is accountable to the Bishop.

The monitoring matrix is presently used to take note of the progress of the various projects under the CBDP. The DO presides over the Development Office staff twice a year. He also supervises the staff of the SMU in EDSP.

It is usually the Development Committee which conducts the evaluation of a project one year after implementation. The Development Office staff assess their performance based on their targets. There is no performance evaluation conducted among the diocesan staff. The Diocese is presently in need of a personnel officer but is hindered by lack of funds.

The semestral meetings are the formal venue for the Development Office staff to provide feedback to each other. They also make use of modern communication such as the e-mail and the cell phone to provide vital information to each other.

 

Observations and Recommendations

1. The plan to hire a personnel officer for EDSP has not been realized due to lack of funds. One of the possible tasks of the personnel officer is to design a performance appraisal system for EDSP including the CBDP. In the meantime that this is not realized, the CBDP can initiate talks on the need for such a system. It can be the one to put into place a system of evaluating the performance of the CBDP staff. This is more of a helping intervention rather than a tool for grading one’s performance. The important thing is to have a structure wherein an individual is encouraged to be objective in gauging his/her performance so that he/she, along with his/her peers will be able to map out activities for performance improvement.

 

2. Project evaluation is usually conducted by the Development Committee. The Development Office staff can also be part of this evaluation. At the moment, project evaluation is an area for improvement that has been cited by the DO. If one examines the experience of the other Development Office staff this is an accurate observation. There is a need to train the CDWs on project evaluation. This would include drafting the scope of work and evaluation framework, formulating the study instruments, conducting the data gathering, data collation and analysis and report writing.

 

On Capacity Building Interventions

One of the CDWs participated in four trainings conducted by the CBDP at the University of the Philippines Baguio. These are on the Technology of Participation, Project Management, SPSS Encoding and Analysis and Research Writeshop. The other two CDWs also attended three of these trainings.

Two CDWs also attended a training on Impact Evaluation sponsored by the NDO sometime in 2006. Two CDWs attended a seminar on Disaster Management while another one was able to attend a workshop on the Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law and attend an inter-faith conference on mining plunder.

 

Observations and Recommendations

1. The Capacity Building inteventions have helped the staff acquire knowledge, skills and values especially on gathering the baseline data. They were also able to avail valuable inputs from trainings conducted by other organizations which invited them. Among these are the trainings and workshops on disaster management and human rights. Networking with other organizations especially for a wide area of jurisdiction is a plus factor in developing capacities. The interaction with other organizations in staff development activities broadens the perspective of development office staff.

2. There are recommendations from the study respondents which merit consideration. It involves the conduct of trainings on disaster preparedness, food processing and computer literacy. This is a response for the need to include in proposals projects related to disaster preparedness and food security. The training on computer literacy was forwarded by the DO and this has already been discussed as a need.

3. Another recommendation from the respondents is a training on writing and project evaluation. A look at previous seminars would reveal that there was already a training on program evaluation and a writeshop. What is needed at the moment is a training that will be more on the practical application of the previous learnings. There will be inputs also but the bulk of the time will be spent on the actual conduct of a project evaluation and writing for it. It will be learning by doing.

 

On Perceptions of the Partner Community on Project Impact

For the residents of Brgy. Malitbog, New Corella, Davao del Norte, the CBDP project was a big help in augmenting their income. It also provided them with a storage building and dryer that contributed to increasing their income. Due to this project, they were recognized by government agencies as “model farmers”. Neighboring barangays also came to know of their achievements.

The opportunities for running and managing a development project were also provided to the community members. They are grateful for this as they learned through experience the various facets of project management and participatory leadership.

But there is another side to this perception. Through the latter part of project implementation it became apparent to the community members that they have to contend with the problem of delinquent borrowers in their cooperative. The members of the credit committee were also not able to enforce their policies. This led to so far, Php600,000 in unpaid money to the cooperative.

Observations and Recommendations

1. The experience of this particular community organization may not necessarily lead to low morale and the eventual dissolution of the organization. It can, but at the moment the cooperative’s more active members have vowed to continue their organization, albeit with the necessary changes. The need for the remaining active members to act accordingly is seen in this general scenario. They can revive their organization and put it back on the right track.

2. From the point of view of the local implementors, the project presented some tough challenges for them but it does not mean that they consider it a failure. They have, afterall, gained a lot from the project especially in its initial stages. This case presents some insights on the parameters by which to measure the success of a project. If the traditional criteria of success is used, the project maybe found wanting but if, from the perspective of the people, the project remains relevant and responsive to the people’s needs. Other emerging types of evaluation can be discussed to CBDP for it to choose the best type of evaluations that it will use. There is now what is called as the appreciative evaluation which focuses on the merits of the evaluation. This is opposed to a type of evaluation which is centered on the areas of concern. All these can be part of the package of a more on-the-job type of evaluation consultancy, rather than on a one-shot deal type of project evaluation training.

 

Other Recommendations

 

On Program Management and Implementation

1. The Monthly Monitoring Report of the CDWs can be regularized as this can help in the documentation of experiences in the project sites. The semestral narrative and financial report prepared by the DO is already adequate for monitoring on their level.

 

2. The specific details on how to go about the life stories should be finalized. How often should these be submitted? What is the format and outline for this type of report?

3. A more pro-active human resource program can be implemented per diocese. This shall take into consideration the current capacity of the staff, the potentials and the programmed and organized intervention for growth and development.

 

On Potential for Expansion and Replication and Popularization

1. A handbook on the CBDP experience can be produced. This shall include a history and best practices in program management, program design and people’s participation. It can also be produced in a video documentary form. Or if there will be a scheduled evaluation, the evaluation results can be put into a video documentary form rather than in a printed form. In this way, the evaluation results can also be used as educational and promotional material. It is also a way of sharing the CBDP experience to other local and international non-government and government organizations that are into development work.

 

2. An inventory of all the training materials including visual aids, hand-outs and evaluation sheets should be made. If possible, collate all these materials for possible filing in the dioceses. These can serve as resource materials for those organization that shall implement similar projects in the future.

 

On Program Effectiveness

1. Include projects for fisherfolk for CBDP EDSP. This is in consideration of the expressed needs of community residents who depend mainly on fishing for their livelihood.

2. Other possible inclusion in the program design would be a component in disaster preparedness. This is in anticipation of the occurrence of both natural and man-made disasters in local communities. CBDP should be more forward looking in this aspect. With the state of today’s environment and the experience in the past (e.g. floods due to denudation of forests, massive evacuations due to floods and military operations) disaster preparedness has become a necessity for development projects to be effective.

 

The implementation of projects for CBDP in EDNCP follows a defined work plan. It is usually the priest who forwards a request to the Bishop for a project based on a barangay resolution. The Bishop then informs the Development Office of this request. The latter coordinates with the community, through its organization for the site visit. A participatory rural appraisal is conducted usually for 3 days. Another 2 days is spent for encoding the PRA results. The community then validates the PRA results.

The project proposal concept emanates from the community. However, the actual writing of the proposal is done in the Development Office. The writing of the proposal maybe divided among the DO and the CDWs. But it is the DO who writes the final draft which is submitted to the NDO and the Commission on Development and Social Concerns as well as to the Bishop.

The Commission on Development is composed of seven members. It endorses proposal to the Diocesan Council and meets quarterly. Its members are both lay and priests and they usually have a two year term.

The Diocesan Council is chaired by the Bishop and is the policy-making body of the diocese. Its members are elected every two years.

With the approval of the funding partner of the proposal, the project starts its operations. The DO and the local functioning institution jointly implement the project. The latter participates in all aspects of project management including planning, implementation, evaluation and re-planning.

 

Program Management

The DO ensures that the plans and activities outlined in the proposal are implemented on time. He does this by closely supervising the two CDWs. The latter usually stays in the project area for a minimum of 15 succeeding days or up to a month. The longer time spent in the community, the better for the project. In this way, the CDWs are able to know better their co-implementors and partner organization.

The partner organization or the local functioning institution (LFI) has a major role in project implementation. It is the unit that coordinates with the DO for all stages of project implementation from the planning, implementation, evaluation and re-planning. It provides the local counterpart and is the main mechanism for project sustainability.

The DO staff is also part of the diocesan staff. The diocese has a development office, a social ministries unit, land tenure and renewal and evangelism. The Bishop meets the diocesan staff monthly. They share updates and project developments, problems encountered and possible recommendations to be agreed upon.

Today, the EDNCP has one staff each for the Social Ministries Unit, Christian Education and Land Tenure. There are three staff members who work in the finance unit, an administrative staff who assists the Bishop and two maintenance staff. There is an annual diocesan planning with the program heads and the Bishop.

The Development Office conducts an annual assessment with SMU as they coordinate in small scale community projects. Both units also jointly run the cooperatives.

The development officer also performs other tasks assigned to him by the Bishop including coordinating with the land tenure unit especially on some church properties. He also acts as the driver for some activities for the land tenure unit.

The Development Office staff believe that they can use the logical planning framework in planning, monitoring and evaluation. There are no set planning sessions among the DO staff due to lack of time.

The DO opined that there is still no conscious consideration of gender sensitivity when planning. This is in terms of using gender sensitive criteria in planning. This can be included in planning but only to a certain extent. The DO staff are however conscious of the need for women’s participation in planning. They provide opportunities for women to be actively present in community plannings.

Other problems in planning cited by the study respondents are “forgetting what has been agreed upon”, sometimes there is lack of documentation of plans and lack of time management during planning sessions in the community.

The DO submits a semestral narrative and financial report to the NDO. The CDWs submit monthly monitoring reports. One of the CDWs mentioned that, on hindsight they should also have documented the trainings and meetings in the community.

There is usually no budget for project evaluation. Hence, the DO staff are not able to accomplish this. After project completion, the local community residents continue to coordinate with CBDP. One of the CDWs observed that there is a need to conduct project evaluation after completion. With this activity, post-project implementation activities can be determined and other recommendations on sustainability can be forwarded to the LFI.

Impact evaluations are usually conducted by external evaluators and organized by the national office. These are also almost always supported by the international partner.

The DO staff also discuss the insights and lessons learned but this is not consistently documented. Due to their varied tasks, they would sometimes resort to informal staff meetings. They try to have a monthly staff meeting but due to their varied tasks the DO staff sometimes fail to do this. But they easily provide feedback to each other through text messages and face-to-face interaction.

At the moment, the DO staff do not have a performance appraisal system. They evaluate their performance based on whether targets and plans are implemented.

The DO staff are united on their perception of both the short and long-term goals of CBDP. They have a sense of where they are leading the program. There is, however a difficulty in articulating some components of this strategic direction (i.e. vision, mission) but one can feel that the study respondents are aware of these components but they are just limited either by language or difficulty in articulation.

 

Capacity Building

Each unit in the diocese tackles human resource development. Those staff members who are interested to join trainings, engage in formal study and other similar activities can put forward their request to the Bishop.

The two CDWS attended the trainings conducted by the program. One of them finds useful the training on how to come up with a community profile. He learned various skills such as in data gathering and how to apply the SPSS program. He also attended a seminar on how to facilitate a trainers training. The other CDW expressed a similar observation. She related that the CBDP sponsored trainings for CDWs enabled her to learn knowledge and skills on project management, research, data-gathering and writing. Both CDWs, however expressed the opinion that the use of SPSS later proved to be too time consuming and forced them to stay in the office for quite sometime.

 

Inter-Diocese and NO-Diocese Relations

CDWs especially those in dioceses which are near to each other usually exchange skills and experiences. For instance, EDNCP requested a CDW from EDS to give a health training in Baguio.

 

The EDNCP DO was also invited by EDCP to provide inputs on project management while one of the CDWs became a resource person for EDNL.

The CDWs share their problems on how they can apply their learnings from their trainings. There was one formal venue for this. Aside from this, they usually engage in sharing of experiences and learnings during their trainings organized by the national development office.

The CBDP staff relates with the national office mainly through the CBDP. It is usually in connection with submission of reports and follow-up of activities for CBDP institutional development (i.e. trainings, regular meetings).

 

Project Results

However, community residents continue to relate with the development office even after project implementation. In one area, Lon-oy, San Gabriel, La Union, the members of the community organization still updates the CBDP on the developments of the project. The project is a micro-hydro electric generation system which was co-implemented with SIBAT. It aimed to help the community generate electricity, unite their members and uplift their living conditions.

As early as 1996, a feasibility study was done in the community for the project. By 1999, a site survey was conducted and by 2001 the project started its operations. About 75 households benefited from the project.

Each household pays P100 since January 2008 for the maintenance expenses. Before that, they paid P50. There was also a 50-day work per household as their labor contribution. A fine was given if the household was not able to provide this counterpart. Maintenance expenses include the fee for two persons (P2,000 a month) who serve as guard of the mini-hydro and for the fan belt, which costs P1,500 each.

In a focus group discussion, the community members cited the project’s effects on the community. For one, it was able to encourage unity and cooperation among the members. It was a unifying factor for the members of the community organization. They had a concrete project on which to unite. Many of the previous sources of irritants and conflicts in the community begin to disappear. One of them even observed that this unity cuts across sectors. They can see that the youth, women, men and the elderly actively participated in the project.

The project is also seen as strengthening traditionally positive practices such as the bunggoy or bayanihan (cooperation and helping each other). Without the project, there would be no reinforcing activity for this practice which is becoming extinct in some places due to urbanization.

Due to a strengthened community organization, the members have been inspired to be active in undertakings sponsored by their organization. They have seen something concrete and this has become their motivation for doing their best for their group.

The women members are also vocal in saying that the project enabled them to work at night making them more productive. It has also empowered them as they now believe that they can contribute something significant to their families and community. The women also helped out in the construction phase of the project.

 

Resource Generation

When asked on possible activities or schemes for resource generation a study respondent shared that local communities shall pay at least 20% of the costs for materials in their projects this is payable within 5 years. It is actually the churches that will pay for this. The clergy and the local community organization can also try to access funds from local government units.

 

 

On the Service Delivery System

The years of implementing CBDP has given rise to standardized procedures for service delivery for local communities. In sum, this starts and ends with the people themselves. Project request begins from the community organization. This is then forwarded to the clergy and then to the development office. Once the development office has acted on the request, one can be sure that this will result to a proposal for the international funding partner. With the approval of the proposal, project implementation starts. Project completion hopefully would lead to project sustainability and this is embodied in the local functioning institution.

There appears to be no conscious effort to use gender sensitive indicators when planning. But there is already a level of appreciation and consciousness on ensuring women’s participation in planning and other project activities. In that sense, one can say that gender orientation has already been mainstreamed and integrated into the programs to a certain extent.

The Development Commission conducts appraisal on proposals. It provides suggestions and comments regarding the proposals. It has a regular meeting to attend to its concerns for the development office and to the other units in the diocese.

 

Observations and Recommendations

1. The planning process of the development office should be synchronized with the schedule of meetings of the Development Commission. This is an observation of one of the senior staff of the diocese. This act can greatly contribute in ensuring that all proposals are well appraised by the Development Commission.

2. There is already a level of appreciation for gender concerns in planning. One may notice that the increase in the number of women participants is almost always a part of the indicators of success of a project when it is being drafted in planning. The degree of their participation, usually, whether they are inactive or active is another frequently used success indicator. This level of gender consciousness is already a gain for CBDP. However, CBDP can already go to the next level and ensure that other success indicators are likewise being part of the content in planning. For instance, providing opportunities for women to perform non-traditional and stereotypical roles in project implementation can be another success indicator or the provision of support services to women members of the community organization can be another success indicator. These success indicators along with others (i.e. provision of creative and non-hierarchical monitoring and evaluation schemes) can also be integrated in the proposals.

 

 

On the Linkage and Cooperation System

The National Office and the EDNCP development office relates mainly through the CBDP. The most regular and consistent venue for coordination is the quarterly meetings of the Development Officers. Other non-formal forms of coordination and communication is the text messaging and the electronic mail.

On the part of the CDWS, they usually meet each other and exchange experiences through the trainings coordinated by the National Development Office. For the other staff in the Diocese, they relate with the National Officer through their key staff members such as the coordinators. For instance, the SMU coordinator relates with the Program Assistant for SMU at the National Office.

The inter-diocese relations is also centered on the CBDP implementation. For instance, national office sponsored activities for CBDP staff remain to be the mechanism through which the CBDP staff from the dioceses meet and interact with each other.

There were also instances when the development officer was invited by EDNCP as resource person on project management. One of the CDWs was also requested by EDNL as resource person.

 

Observations and Recommendations

1. Linkages and cooperation can be further enhanced with the creation of a website and an e group. At present there is already an ECP website. This can be improved to include a section on CBDP. It can include news and updates and human interest features. Later it can be more detailed to include a section on the work of CDWs. It can rotate the CDWs in writing this section.

The ECP website can have first its own orientation paper including its aims, sections and editorial policies. From this, CBDP can have its own section and can include best practices in certain themes and lines of work. There can be best practices in program management, program design, or success stories on infrastructure, health, environment and post-harvest projects.

The e group can be a good venue for the exchange of information among CDWs and Dos. It is also a fast way of communications and there can be immediate feedback.

2. The yearly meeting of the CDWs can be institutionalized and can include both a business meeting and a recreational activity. It can be a formal venue for the discussion of issues relevant to the work of the CDWs. An outside facilitator or a staff of the National Office can help them in drafting the business meeting agenda, document the proceedings and disseminate them.

 

On Program Management

The national office through the development officer requires a semestral narrative and financial report from the diocesan development officer. The national development officer is accountable to the Prime Bishop and the diocesan development officer is accountable to the diocesan Bishop.

In the National Office, the Commission on Development and Social Concerns appraise and approve the project proposals. For the diocese, there is also the Development Commission which performs basically the same task.

The development office both at the national and diocesan levels work with the other units whenever necessary. In EDNCP, the development office relates with the SMU for some small projects and on cooperatives. It is also part of the diocesan staff which is being led and managed by the Bishop.

Feedback is given through the monthly diocesan meeting. There are also inter-unit consultations and immediate sharing among the diocesan staff members.

 

Observations and Recommendations

1. There are times when proposals are already prepared but there is no immediate meeting of the Development Commission. If it is possible, the project proposal preparation should be done before the meeting of the Development Commission. So that when the proposal is finished it can be part of the agenda of the Development Commission meeting.

2. The monthly meeting of the development office staff should be held and documented despite the multi-tasking among the staff. The advantages of being updated on each other’s task and the regular tracking of the work progress far outweigh the prioritization of other tasks. Written plans are also helpful when assessing an activity, a project and staff performance.

 

On Capacity Building Interventions

The capacity building interventions were usually identified in the Dos’ meeting. The national development office would then organize trainings to respond to identified needs of the development office staff. In the period under study, the CDWs were given trainings in the conduct of research and writeshop, interviewers’ training, and project management.

The CDWs appreciate the trainings given them. They were able to apply these in performing their tasks as CDWs. Their only apprehension is in the use of SPSS which requires that they should be office-based. In that case, they would have less time for community organizing. However, this does not often happen and the CDWs can make up for their absence in the community after they are done with SPSS.

 

Observations and Recommendations

1. The trainings have been helpful to the development office staff. For the development officer, the data base has been most useful. There is accessible and timely information available. For the CDWs, they acquired new skills and knowledge in research. The area for improvement is a training on how to conduct project evaluation. This can be best done in a manner that is built-in the work of the CDWs. There can be an initial input on how to conduct project evaluation and then there will be a practicum. In this way they learn by doing.

2. Another aspect of capacity building is the need for on-the-job training on the documentation of experiences. The current CDWs only need some training on this as they already have the basic skills. It is also their realization and suggestion that community meetings and trainings should have been documented. They can also continue with the writing of life stories. The important thing is to be definite about this task. How often should they come up with these? What should be the format and tone of the life stories?

 

On the Perception of the Community on Project Impact

The residents of Lon-oy, San Gabriel, La Union cited the project impact on their families and community. Their organization is now stronger and their members are more united. Their members have also become active and cooperative in the conduct of their organization’s activities.

They are particularly proud of one of their members whom they encouraged to run as a member of the municipal council. After completing his term of office, he ran as mayor of San Gabriel. He won and is acknowledged as the reason why the street from the town proper to their village has been cemented.

They attribute what they call as their “political gain” to the implementation of the project. Without the opportunity to come together and work for a common cause, they would not have been able to muster enough support for their co-member in the organization who eventually won as town mayor.

Related to this is the strengthening of their traditional practice of bayanihan or bunggoy (cooperation and helping each other). Among Filipino farmers, this practice has been carried out for years in the various stages of their life in the village or community. An individual can expect his/her neighbors and friends to help out should there be a need during planting or harvesting season or even when disaster would befall his/her family.

The other sectors in the community were also motivated to participate in the activities for the project. The youth, women, children, men and the elderly were mobilized for these. And it is noteworthy that the women were quite active in the construction phase of the project. They engaged in physical labor to complete the project.

The women also cited their having been able to do sewing at night as a result of the project. They have become more productive. It has even prompted some women respondents to say that the project resulted to women’s empowerment. They have acquired confidence in themselves and are more assertive of what they think and believe in.

 

Observations and Recommendations

1. At the moment the gauge of the mini-hydro has to be replaced and it would cost P100,000. Although the project has been terminated years back, the community organization still considers the CBDP/ECP as a partner organization. It is not surprising therefore, if the local organization would still expect some form of assistance from CBDP/ECP although it is clear to them that the project has already ended.

Aside from evaluating a project after its completion, it would also be helpful if there would be guidelines on what should be the role of CBDP to a partner community after project termination. Should there be occasional project visits to monitor project sustainability? Should there be a case study per project site for documentation of experiences? Can there be a continuity proposal which the local organization can submit to a funding partner even if not the same agency which funded the first proposal? What can be realistic expectations from CBDP after project completion?

2. The study respondents wanted to know if CBDP can coordinate with SIBAT and help them in buying the gauge for the mini-hydro. They would also want to know if there are possible sources of funds for this type of assistance. On its own, the community organization is also trying to engage in resource generation.

 

Other Recommendations

On Program Management

1. Continue with the monthly monitoring report of the CDWs. This is particularly helpful in tracking the progress of the project. The semestral narrative and financial report submitted to the NDO is sufficient at this level of monitoring.

2. The identification of life stories as a method of documenting the experiences of the project is notable. It can be further improved by being definite on the following:

- who is assigned to do it

- what is the format and tone

- how often should it be written

3. Implement a pro-active human resource management and development program at the diocesan level as this would lead to a more effective and efficient implementation of projects and programs. This can be undertaken by the conduct of a training needs analysis and then identification of possible capacity building interventions to respond to the needs.

4. The SMU and CBDP can be merged as one unit as the issues and concerns that they address are related ( i.e. development and mining) and at times (i.e. gender sensitivity), the same. This can streamline the diocesan operations and result in a clear delineation of the units.

 

On the Potential for Expansion, Replication and Popularization

 

1. Produce a handbook on the CBDP experience. It can include a history and best practices in program management, program design and people’s participation. Should there be other resources that can be generated for a similar project, a video documentary can also be produced. Through it, the success stories of CBDP can be shown.

Future evaluations can also be packaged in a video documentary form rather then in a printed form. Aside from a tool for decision making, this type of evaluation can also be used as an educational and informational material. The CBDP experience can also be shown to other organizations that are into development work.

2. An inventory of all the training materials in CBDP at the diocesan level should be made. List all the training handouts, visual aids and modules. These are valuable resource materials which can either be posted in the ECP website or packaged into a handbook. This is another way of popularizing a major component of the CBDP which is training. Other organizations can learn from this experience.

 

On Program Effectiveness

 

Although there have been attempts in the past for the conduct of a disaster preparedness program, recent developments have given rise to the need for a disaster adaptation project. Due to environmentally destructive practices such as logging and mining, there is an irreversible trend of the coming of disasters. This can be a new feature of the program design for CBDP VI.

 

 

The Community-Based Development Program in the Diocese of Santiago starts from the communities and is hopefully, sustained by them as well. Local communities as represented by their organizations, determine the type of project that they can undertake to respond to a particular problem. Sometimes, there are still no community organizations and the request for a project may initially come from a loose group of people with a common cause.

Through the clergy the community organization or a group of community residents forwards its decision and resolution to the Bishop who in turns relays this to the Diocesan Development Office. Community meetings are set. The necessary information such as the baseline data is gathered by the Development Office. The project concept and proposal is written by the staff of the Development Office. The Development Officer finalizes the proposal and submits it to the Development Committee for its comments and approval. The final approval rests with the diocesan Bishop.

Should funding be approved for the proposal, the diocesan development office co-implements the project with the local functioning institution (LFI) or the community organization. In the event that there is no LFI, a Management Committee is formed in the community to perform the tasks of the LFI.

There were a few problems encountered with the project areas. Among these is when the community residents are reluctant to perform their tasks for the project. This usually stems from their experience with government projects which are almost always free and there are no expected tasks from community members. A few also had the experience of signing contracts for government projects. Their usual attitude is to be present during the contract signing and later on they would be difficult to locate. So that when they are with CBDP they also repeat such behavior, something the CBDP tries to correct.

Trainings in leadership and project management are conducted to convey new ideas on development projects to the community residents. The CDWs also try to guide the LFI to develop members who will regard development projects as emanating from the people and sustained by them.

 

Program Management

The diocesan development office is composed of the development officer (DO) and three community development workers (CDWs). Together they ensure that plans and activities are implemented on time.

The CDWs spend most of their time in the project site. They engage in community organizing, conduct trainings and participate in the activities of the LFI. The diocesan DO visits the project areas if there is a need such as for a special consultation with community leaders or for managing conflict. Similarly, the NDO has no regular visits to the project sites but only when needed.

The CDWs have a monthly plan and report. They submit this to the DO who in turn, submits a semestral narrative and financial report to the NDO. The Dos from the six dioceses meet quarterly with the NDO to discuss project developments and updates.

The CDWs are also expected to come up with life stories per project area twice a year.

The development office staff try to include gender sensitive indicators of success when planning both in the diocesan and community levels. They have also noticed that in some areas, women’s participation in planning has increased.

The diocesan development office staff members are aware of the strategic direction of CBDP as part of the ECP. They are not merely project-oriented but have a sense of where to direct the program. Sometimes there is just a difficulty in articulating the components of this strategic plan. Internalizing long-term goals and actually saying them does not happen overnight and requires experience and exposure to the various facets of CBDP.

The diocesan development office staff meet at least once a month or every two months and conduct planning and assessment every six months. Lessons learned are discussed during these meetings. The DO says that “discussion of lessons learned are not mechanical”. If there are noteworthy insights from which people can get valuable lessons, then these are shared during meetings. They also conduct informal sharing of experiences during lunch breaks or when they are travelling.

EDS has the following units: Development Office, Social Ministries, Christian Education and a standing committee that is involved in property acquisition. There is also the Episcopal Development Foundation of St. Mark. Together they are convened by the diocesan Bishop every Monday for their regular meeting. The senior diocesan staff also conducts assessment and planning once a year.

 

Capacity Building Interventions

The CDWs noted the trainings given them for staff development. One CDW mentioned that she acquired facilitation skills from one of these trainings. Another recognized the importance of the training on data gathering. This was where he learned how to use the SPSS program. This proved to be useful in completing the baseline information for a project.

 

Diocese to Diocese Relations

The CBDP staff relates with other dioceses through their counterpart. For instance, the DO in EDS usually coordinate with the other Dos either through their quarterly meetings or through the electronic mail and text messaging. The EDS DO is also oftentimes consulted by the EDNL DO on matters regarding canvassing of materials and supplies.

There is an exchange of expertise and experiences among the CDWs especially those from EDNL and EDS, probably because of their proximity to each other. For instance, the EDNL can request a resource person from EDS and vice versa. Still, a CDW from EDS was also invited to conduct a health training in EDNCP.

 

 

NO to Diocese Relations

The diocesan development office relates with the national office mainly through the CBDP. Coordination is usually between the NDO and the DO. For administrative and other technical matters, the Program Assistant of the CBDP from the NO may also coordinate with the diocesan DO. The same is true with the ABM liaison coordinator who is based at the national office. She also coordinates with the diocesan DO.

So far, the coordination and communication between the NO and the Diocese is working. The diocesan DO however, noted that sometimes the area for concern is the submission of reports to the NDO. There were some delays in the past and they are trying to remedy this.

The NDO also assisted EDS in setting up the Episcopal Development Foundation of St. Mark. It also facilitated the funding support of several donor agencies for EDS local communities.

EDS likewise relates to the NO. It sees to it that it complies with the NO requirements, be they for CBDP, SMU, finance or some other lines of work.

 

Resource Generation

The development office staff cited the local counterpart per project as constituting resource generation. The DO likewise shared EDS experience in accessing funds from other donor agencies which were also facilitated by the NDO.

 

Community Residents’ Perception of the Project Effects

The community visited for this evaluation is in Del Pilar, Alicia, Isabela. It is also the site of the project on concrete drying pavement, warehouse and cooperative. The seeds of this project started in October 1999 when the local church officials and the Episcopal Church Women (ECW) organized a credit cooperative. There were 15 members at that time. The cooperative has since grown and to date has 62 members.

The project aims to reduce production costs due to high interest rates of loans and high costs of farm inputs. It also provides financial assistance to members through credit.

Study respondents said that this project resulted in the construction of drying and storage facilities. The accessibility of these facilities proved to be advantageous to the members as it lessened their burden in the production process. These facilities were used even by the non-members of the cooperative who reside in their project area.

The credit extended to the members helped ease their financial difficulties. The cooperative has generated dividends (P68.00) and patronage refunds (P1,000 to P2,000 per member). There is also a “kiddy savings arm” from the cooperative which has a 6% per annum interest rate. At present the generated assets of the cooperative is estimated at P3 million.

The skills in running a cooperative were acquired by the members in trainings provided them by CBDP. These included those in leadership and management, strategic planning, basic accounting and bookkeeping and gender sensitivity.

The CBDP project was further enhanced by the members through expanding to a marketing cooperative, putting up a rice mill and widening the drying area. The unity and cooperation generated by the project inspired the members to go beyond what they have and they branched out to other activities.

 

 

On the Service Delivery System

The development committee conducts project appraisal. It is the unit that ensures that the project is technically and financially feasible and socially desirable. Any project proposal has to pass its criteria and eventual approval.

Communities benefit from the CBDP through an almost standardized process among the dioceses. After funding support has been approved, a development office team composed of the development officers and three CDWs combine efforts to implement planned outputs and activities. The usual project duration is one year. Within this period the development office team leads in the training and capacity building of the local functioning institution or of the management committee, in case there is still no LFI.

A package of trainings would include those in leadership and management, gender sensitivity and health. For infrastructure projects, the set schedule for construction would ensure. For cooperative projects, regular committee meetings are conducted.

The CDWs spend a lot of time in the project sites to check up on planned activities, initiate consultations and ensure the regularity of meetings and compliance with tasks and local counterpart activities. The DO coordinates the CDWs and attends to the overall management of CBDP.

So far, there is a noticeable increase in the number of women who are actively participating in the CBDP projects. EDS is now focused on ensuring that both men and women or couples, if possible can attend CBDP sponsored undertakings.

 

Observations and Recommendations

1. Part of the process of service delivery is the completion of the baseline data. This is where the use of the SPSS program comes in. Since it takes up most of the time of the CDWs, there is a recommendation to explore the possibility of taking in a contractual staff to do this instead of the CDWs. To be able to arrive at a decision, it is best to consider the following:

- how much will a contractual staff cost the organization?

- how many days are lost when a CDW perform the SPSS program to generate the necessary data?

- is there a pool of individuals where a contractual staff can easily be accessed?

If after taking into account the above mentioned considerations and the result is more outputs and less costs for the program, then the suggestion to hire a contractual staff to do the SPSS for data gathering is a valid one.

2. The integration of gender sensitive criteria for success can be seen in the project proposals. The staff members are also conscious of the need for women’s participation in all facets of project implementation. The area for concern is going beyond this criteria and ensuring that the other parameters for gender sensitivity are also present in the project. If we go by the respondents sharing and the pertinent documents reviewed, there is not much discussion of the other approaches to gender responsiveness. There is no mention for instance, of support mechanisms for women or for providing opportunities for women to perform non-traditional tasks in the community organization. In practice, these may or may not be happening but there certainly is no documentation or verbal articulation on this matter.

 

On the Linkage and Cooperation System

On both levels -- the national office vis-à-vis dioceses and in inter-diocese relations -- the main mechanism for linkage is the CBDP. In the latter, the Dos meet regularly, at least every quarter and discuss updates, problems encountered and other business matters. Since the members of this unit have been working with each other for the last couple of years, they are a pretty close knit group. There is openness and easy camaraderie among each other at the same time that they can also be critical of each other’s limitations.

The diocesan DO has received comments on his competence as a technical staff especially in engineering works. Aside from being a development worker, he is also an engineer. In the same manner, he may still improve on his documentation and writing skills. The diocesan DO has, on the other hand, also expressed his opinions on the performance of some of his colleagues or on project related matters.

The CDWs from the dioceses do not have regular meetings but they interact often in informal venues. This is especially true for the EDS’ CDWs and those from EDNL. They invite each other as resource persons. Also, their respective Dos share information and resources with each other. They consult each other on prices of materials for construction and other things that they need to keep track of to comply with program requirements.

For the NO-EDS relations, the line of coordination is from the national coordinators (NDO, SMU etc) to their counterpart in the diocese. The NDO relates mainly with the DO. He can also discuss or coordinate with the CDW but with information to the diocesan DO. The same is true for the NO person in-charge of SMU, finance and other units. They coordinate directly with their EDS counterpart.

 

Observations and Recommendations

1. In today’s fast-paced information technology-marked world, linkages and cooperation can be hastened and deepened through the website and creation of an e group. ECP already has a website but a look at it would reveal that the section on CBDP is still to be posted. There is already a plan for it and this plan can also integrate some suggestions namely inclusion of best practices in project design, monitoring and evaluation, capacity building and project impact.

An e group for the CBDP personnel can also be a fast way of disseminating information, immediate feedback and issuing announcements. This will also indirectly show the dynamism of the people behind the CBDP.

2. The CDWs’ yearly gathering should be formalized and institutionalized. It can be both a business meeting and a venue for recreational activities. The former can tackle urgent issues that affect their work and can likewise include an input from a resource person. For instance, an input can be on new directions for community organizing. Afterwards the CDWs can discuss their updates on this.

 

On Program Management

There is already a fairly established planning, monitoring and evaluation system. Semestral planning is done on the diocese level and this is based on proposals approved. The diocesan DO submits a semestral narrative and financial report to the NDO. The CDWs in turn, submit monthly reports to the diocesan DO. They are also clear on their task to come up with life stories at least twice a year. Lines of accountability are clearly stated and known to the staff. There are no gray areas the organizational structure is fairly working.

Feedback is given formally and informally through one-on-one talks or during breaks. There is no performance appraisal system at the moment.

 

Observations and Recommendations

1. It is clear to the staff that they should be able to engage in documentation of experiences through the creation of life stories. So far two such accounts were written. One of these is titled “What Lies Beneath”. It describes three interesting personalities and one indigenous group that the CDW encountered in the course of her work. The idea is to present real life stories which cannot be gleamed from photographs. And to better understand these stories, one has to integrate in the communities.

The aim of these life stories is commendable and there is an attempt to go beyond what one sees with the naked sight. The difficulty lies in how these stories were written and weaved together as one. There are few descriptions of the personalities involved and more attention was given to the reflections of the author. The latter are insightful and introspective but the basis from which these came from was not clear.

The other life story is titled “The Truth about Community Work”. This tackles the lessons learned from doing community work. These lessons were derived from varying situations encountered by the CDW. The reader will have a sense of the depth of the message and insights but the way these are presented is not that readable. The content is commendable but the form is wanting. The tone is supposedly informal but there is a portion that looks like a technical report.

The ability to see beyond the ordinary and grasp some meaning to events and the judgment to analyze why people engage in certain activities and behave in ways peculiar to them is already present to the CDWs. There is simply a need to hone their skills in putting these into words. As in the other recommended trainings, there is a need for on-the-job training for writing. An input on writing life stories can be given to them and then they should engage in practicum. Simply write and write and write and the mentor will then correct their piece up until such time that they will no longer commit their mistakes.

2. There is a need to help the CBDP staff to know their individual progress and to chart out the necessary human resource development activities for them. This is where the performance appraisal system can come in. This is not necessarily a test or basis for promotion, although it can be but it is primarily a tool for helping intervention. One can systematically take stock of the strengths, weaknesses and possible staff development activities for a CBDP staff.

 

On Capacity Building Interventions

Similar to the other CDWs in the other dioceses the EDS CDWs attended trainings on data gathering and research. The DO also attended trainings most notably on Development Management organized by the National Council of Churches in the Philippines (NCCP).

In the diocesan level, the staff are also allowed to attend activities and events which they may think are useful to them. The inter-unit diocesan meetings are also opportunities for learning from each other.

 

Observations and Recommendations

1. A capacity assessment process is also on-going in EDS at the time that data-gathering for this evaluation was being undertaken. This means that there is a serious attempt to address human resource development by ECP. For this to succeed a more pro-active stance can be initiated. The available data on the staff’s strengths and weaknesses can be collated and analyzed. The capacity building interventions can then be determined and should eventually materialize. Offhand a training on both technical writing and writing on human interest topics can be given to the CBDP staff. This can contribute to the documentation of experiences and will “put a face” on what CBDP has achieved.

2. The staff can also participate in a workshop on formulating the indicators for effects and impact. They already have knowledge on the output indicators of success. Still, they can complement this by systematizing their experiences and there, determine what, from the perspective of the communities are parameters for project success.

 

Perception of the Community Members on Project Impact

During the FGD for this evaluation, community members cited the impact of the project on their lives. With the drying and storage areas, they are now saddled with less work in the production process. They are also proud of the fact that these have benefitted not only the members of the church but even the non-members.

And since they accessed credit with lower interest rates (6% per annum) from the cooperative, they were also able to at least, allocate a few funds either for their children’s education or for basic needs in the house. They also consider it their achievement that the cooperative has a “kiddy savings arm” and that its generated assets is now estimated at P3 million.

The respondents are one in saying that this project provided them the opportunity to strengthen their unity and work to further improve their capabilities. In fact they expanded into a marketing cooperative, put up a rice mill and widened the drying area.

They also acquired some skills on running their organization as they had trainings on leadership and management, strategic planning, basic accounting and bookkeeping and gender sensitivity.

 

1. The cooperative project with concrete drying pavement and warehouse provided credit at a lower interest rate to an initial 15 members (and has since grown into 62 members). It also gave them facilities to lessen their workload. With such support mechanisms they were able to save on costs of production.

2. The project contributed to consolidating the unity of the community members and further strengthening their organization. Without the project, the community members had no rallying point to discuss and act on their common interests. Without it, they were dispersed and had no reason to come together. The project also provided them with some skills in ensuring that their organization is being managed well.

 

Observations and Recommendations

1. As shown by the growth of the cooperative, this project can be considered a success. It would be interesting, however, to compare it with other areas where a similar project has been implemented. The interesting point is will there be a difference in the project outcome if the beneficiaries come from a lower income group. This is because, it seems that the residents of Del Pilar, Alicia, Isabela are not from the lowest income group but maybe from middle lower income. Sometimes, there is an effect on the project if the beneficiaries have some disposable income. They can still pay their loans even if emergency strikes such as a typhoon or sickness in the family.

In random interviews with several respondents, it was found out that some of them have relatives working in urban centers. Others own a piece of land and farm implements. These elements do not erase the fact that there is project success. But it is a key element should it emerged that perhaps this success can also be attributed to the economic capacity of the project implementors. This information is helpful not only to EDS but to all implementors of CBDP. They can then help design a project along this line also (cooperative development) but catering to landless beneficiaries who do not own properties and implements. Or has this been done already?

2. The community residents plan to have a rice mill in the future. They also envision the possibility of buying and selling rice. They would want CBDP to also provide assistance to realize these plans even if this assistance is not in the form of financial help. It is however, clear to them that the responsibility for future plans rests primarily on their organization and not on any external entity.

 

 

Other Recommendations

 

On Program Management

Continue with the monitoring reports of the CDWs. This is important in keeping track of the project progress. It is also a documentation of the project development.

The SMU and CBDP have similar concerns. In some dioceses they are merged into one unit. EDS can consider this possibility. This is also the perception of a key personnel in EDS. This can result in a more streamlined operations. Resources can be shared anew and there will be more people to tackle and act on urgent social and community issues.

 

 

On the Potential for Expansion, Replication and Popularization

Come up with a handbook on the history and key events in the life of CBDP. It can be done on the national or diocesan level. With its rich experience, there is not much to read about it in terms of publications. This handbook can also feature best practices in program management, project design and people’s participation. Aside from being a documentation of sorts, this can also serve as an educational material on how to implement a development project in the Philippines or in the Cagayan Valley region. Should there be available funds, this material can also take the form of an audio visual production.

 

On Program Effectiveness

The next program design can include a component on disaster adaptation. With the state of today’s environment, natural calamities are expected to occur. CBDP should be forward looking and equipped its staff on skills in implementing disaster preparedness and mitigation projects.

A study respondent recommends the implementation of five-year development projects instead of the usual one-year projects. This is to ensure that there will be program impact. One year is such a short time to expect impact to happen for local communities. He also suggests designing integrated development programs with components in health, environmental protection, disaster response and agricultural production.

 

The Community –Based Development Program (CBDP) in the Episcopal Diocese of Northern Luzon (EDNL) is considered as an integrated part of the church ministry. It is seen as the concretization of the Christian Faith.[1]

As such, all the units of EDNL work together in working for the development projects bring benefits to and improve the lives of the members of their communities. The whole CBDP team composed of the Development Officer (DO) and three Community Development Workers (CDWs) play the major role. While the other units, Finance and Social Ministry, play support roles in the implementation.

 

Development Project Cycle

The cycle of a CBDP projects starts from a request of the communities expressed to the parish priest. The Parish priest then submits the request to the Bishop who then passes the request to the DO. The request is then validated by the Development Office through a community Participatory Action Research (PAR) and series of community consultations. The CDWs or DO then develop and write the proposals. This then must be approved by the Bishop upon the endorsement of the Diocesan Development Committee. When submitted to the National Development Office, it then packages and takes charge of accessing the funds. Actual implementation of projects following the approved schedule of activities follows.

The commitment of the partner communities is usually formalized through either a memorandum of Agreement or the Pledge of Commitment. This is even detailed during the first community consultation where the labor counterpart and the work schedule are developed and approved by all stakeholders.

The completed projects are turned over to fully functioning local organizations, (i.e. organizations with set of elected officers who attended the leadership training and with installed set of by-laws). In most cases, the organized community groups sustain and maintain the projects with minimal supervision from the DO when projects were completed.

In some cases, follow up projects were also developed and implemented. Take the case of the development projects in Sagpat. Despite the existing water supply system constructed several years ago, a mission ECP priest visited the area and validated the lack of water supply in the farther and lower part of the community, Purok 3 and Purok 6, upon the request of the community members. The water sample was collected and brought to Tuguegarao for testing. The water from the spring as the proposed source for the new water supply system was found not potable. But since the DO confirmed the need for supply of water, it researched for alternatives. The NDO advised to check the feasibility of solar panel submersible type of water system. When found feasible the new water system project designed with solar-powered water pump commenced in July 5, 2007.

This project can be characterized as an integrated community development project. As a support project to this development project, the pig dispersal project was integrated to help the member families augment their income to be able to shoulder the water fees. The members of Saranai Women and Men Organization led the pig dispersal and were the first beneficiaries of the project. The community toilets were also constructed to improve the health and sanitation conditions in the area.

 

Project Management: Organizational Structure

The EDNL has the following programs: CBDP implemented by the Development Office, and headed by the DO; the Social Ministry Unit, the Renewal and Evangelization Unit and the Federation of Cooperatives.

Majority of the members of the diocese’s workforce-- the Bishop, the heads and staff of the units, the Development Office, Social Ministry Unit, and the Finance and Administration unit, and their staff, take part in the management of development projects. The Development Committee, the diocesan committee whose seven members are elected or confirmed during the Diocesan Convention also participates in assessing the proposals.

From the request of the communities, the DO validates the need and conducts the necessary preparation to develop the proposals. The Diocesan development committee is the convened to assess the proposals and to give recommendations. The Bishop then approves the proposals.

The Development Office staff is the main implementers of the CBDP. Its members are accountable to the bishop and the diocesan council. As part of the Development Office, the CDWs recognize that they take the lead in project implementation. In general, they described their role capped by the word “community empowerment” that includes mobilizing people to conduct community development projects. It is established that development projects have almost always this two major bottom lines. One is to improve the lives of the community people in socio-cultural-economic aspects. The other one is to build their capacity as a people and to strengthen the community cohesion

The Social Ministry Officer (SMO) works closely with the team. He takes care of the advocacy components of CBDP development, especially those concerning health and sanitation, peace and order, and gender issues. At the same time, he integrates his advocacy concerns with the CBDP projects. He backs up in conducting training seminars for the communities especially in the areas of health and sanitation and gender sensitivity. He links with the communities in the advocacy of the diocese for peace and order. Likewise, the CBDP tapped the expertise of the SMO. This happened in Sagpat Waterworks where the SMO coordinated the reforestation training for the community. He included in the training the showing of the film “The Inconvenient Truth”, and introduced environment issues like global warming to the community.

The CDWs task included ensuring that scheduled activities were implemented and targets were achieved using the approved proposal and project logical framework developed to operationalize the project. He then served as liaison between the community and the diocese as he monitored the progress of the project. The CDW together with the DO conducted the end-project evaluation after the completion of the project

The community participants of the focus group discussion shared that the DO, CDWs, the SMO and the local priest of Sagpat were all visible at certain phases of the project implementation. The Development Officer frequented the area in the early stages of the project. He conducted the orientation and the community consultations with the CDWs. After which the CDW in charge took over.

Finance Unit support the CBDP by managing the funds of the program. The Finance Officer (FO) directly deals with the DO and CDWs. Canvassing of materials, taking care of the purchases, dealing with big suppliers are the concrete support service of the Finance unit.

 

 

Project Management: Monitoring System

The development officer is responsible in achieving the targets of the CBDP. He is accountable to the Bishop in the diocesan structure and to the National development officer in the national structure of the church. He is responsible in supervising and monitoring the outputs of the CDWs.

The Development Office conducts annual assessment and planning. The DO submits annual and semiannual reports to the National Development Office, thus he meets the CDWs. Aside from these, he and the CDWs also hold meetings quarterly to assess the projects, exchange updates and suggestions and recommendations on how to treat the problems encountered in implementing the projects.

The Development Office conducts periodic evaluation of the CBDP projects. They conduct it quarterly, semi annually. They also hold annual assessment and planning.

The CDWs accounted that they use the logfrome in planning, implementation of the projects, and in monitoring and evaluation. One CDW even shared that he brings a copy of the logfrome developed for the projects assigned to him. This guided him as in implementing and ensuring that targets are achieved at the right schedule. The same way, during evaluation period he uses the log frame as checklist if activities were implemented and result targets were met.

The whole diocesan staff meets every Wednesday. This is the venue where each unit of the diocese reports their program updates and other developments, as well as the problems and concerns in their units and programs. The Bishop convenes and presides in the weekly meetings.

The local priest, Fr Jonie Imbentan, also played an important role in the implementation of the development project . During the construction period, he monitors the progress of the work with the community representatives. After the construction, the monitoring activities become less frequent. He usually intervenes and attends to problems experienced by the community.

The Development committee also take a part in monitoring the CBDP. It is composed of seven (7) members. Four(4) are priests and three (3) are lay members. As part of their monitoring task, they require the quarterly reports that include all the activities implemented and the quantifiable targets achieved. The committee meets quarterly to asses proposals and draft their recommendations and endorsement to the Bishop. And as the need arises, they conduct ocular visits to areas to monitor the implementation of development projects. The lay members of the committee are engineer, accountant and project planning professional. The members will serve a three year term. The committee meets quarterly to asses proposals and draft their recommendations and endorsement to the Bishop. And as the need arises, they will conduct ocular visits to areas to monitor the implementation of development projects.

The Finance Unit supports the CBDP by monitoring the completed tasks vis-à-vis the approved budget of the project.

 

 

 

Capacity Building

The capacity building needs of the CBDP team or the Development office has been attended to by the national development office. The CDWs attended the series of workshop baseline research and participatory action research, data encoding and processing using SPSS and research report writing. The NDO tapped the expertise of the University of the Philippines Baguio for the said training.

The DO attended a workshop in Planning, Effective Project Management and Entreprenuerial Training arranged by the NDO and held in Manila. The learnings from the training were immediately applied in CBDP program implementation, especially in formulating the Logical Framework Indicators.

In the diocesan level, the staff capacities are built mainly through on the job training and actual implementation of projects. One of the CDWs, for example, was technically promoted from a more clerical and administrative position to actual direct implementation of development projects.

The Development Office, the DO and the 3 CDWs take care of the capacity building needs of partner communities. The SMO helps in this component also. For more specialized knowledge and skills, the DO invites local resource persons from government agencies, or staff from other dioceses of the national office.

The SMO also serves as resource person especially for topics and concerns related to tribal issues, mediating tribal conflicts, conflict management, and for environment issues and concerns advocacy.

The local priest interviewed in Sagpat, Barangay Balong, Tabuk Kalinga shared that their participation usually comes in coordinating the seminars conducted in the area and in choosing participants to be sent to diocesan capacity building activities. Their role in building the capacity of the community members via coaching to sustain and maintain the project was even more crucial. In his case, he facilitated the community meetings. He also conducted values clarification session for the community to instill in their system that the project is not owned by the church and that they own the project.

The community members related that they attended the leadership training and gender sensitivity seminars. Seminars on how to maintain the water system, the distribution pipes specifically, were also given to the community members. They were also educated on environment issues like global warming. The local priest added that they also attended the seminars on bookkeeping to help them manage the fees collected for the maintenance of the water project.

 

Effects on the People and their Communities

The Bishop occasionally visits the areas. He usually goes with the CDWs and or the DO to attend the turnover of the completed projects. He gets inspired with the very warm and positive reception of the community people. According to him CBDP has ‘truly touched the people’s lives.” CBDP provided for the basic needs of the people, water, livelihood, health and sanitation. These obviously improve their lives both in economic and socio cultural aspects.

Since values formation is integrated in the implementation of CBDP, the people are empowered to take more responsibility in uplifting their lives.

The local priest recognized that because of the ‘bayanihan” strengthened by the development projects, the “napadali ang buhay sa Sagpat” (life becones easier in Sagpat). [2]He means that maintaining the family life and the household, as well as the upkeep of the community became easier. They saved time in fetching water.

The FO feels that CBDP work is rewarding. He sees the impact of the projects to the community whenever he joins the diocese in the inauguration of the projects. The community is in celebration of a completed project, answered needs, and of a better life.

 

 

 

Project Implementation and Management

 

Delegation of tasks and authority over program matters and the high trust level of the Bishop to the diocesan staff especially the senior ones is one strength of the diocese that contributed to the success of the CBDP implementation. Bishop Renato Maggay Abibico, together with the other bishops, participated in the original conceptualization of CBDP. After which, the Development Officer represents the EDNL to the periodic long term planning of NDO every three years. The DO also brings the development needs of the diocese to the national office. It is also part of the DO’s main task to report the development and progress of the projects to the National Development Office.

The local priest assumes the role of a CDW once the development project has been completed. He also assists in supervising the progress of development projects. The use of technology of text messaging has been devised as the way of immediately communicating the progress of the projects. It is helpful in relating the problems being experienced in the project that needs immediate response especially to far and hard to reach parishes and mission stations. The priest also prepares monthly reports about the parish and submits them to the Bishop. The matters related to development projects are then communicated by the Bishop to the DO.

Inter-unit exchange of resources occurs in CBDP project implementation. In the case of Sagpat Water Work project, Fr. Denver Mareeko shared that when he handled the reforestation training, he also followed it up with the training of fire brigades. He also tapped the 501 Army brigade and DENR. He also related the inter-Parish Youth Camp on Environment Awareness, where the CBDP integrated the tree planting activity for Sagpat community. The local church shared in the expense of the camp.

This created a venue for inter parish interaction. Sixty youth delegates from 5 local parishes participated in this youth camp. The youth participants planted 568 tree seedlings in a 1-hectare land in Sagpat.

The Bishop added that although there is no formal mechanism for inter-unit collaboration, the layout and physical structure of the office (small work area and all in one floor level) facilitates communication and coordination.

Some unforeseen circumstances is one of the problems identified by a CDW in their planning process. For example in the Alanginan Project, though the team has considered the possible delays in the implementation that may be experienced due to bad weather, the rainy days came even earlier, more often and even extended. The sunny days did not come when the summer period is already over. At the time of the interview, the materials remained undelivered because no transportation could come up the area.

Another problem experienced in planning is the need to seriously consider the unique culture of the areas of the diocese. There are migrant communities, mixed indigenous culture and a history of tribal conflicts. Minor problems like conflict during consultation are handled by the CDWs by diverting the conflicts into healthy competition. But there are some cases that affected the implementation of the project. For example, the Sagpat Waterwork was originally designed for a deep well source / gravity fed type of waterwork. The project was significantly delayed and eventually dropped when a member of the Dulag clan demanded for the payment for the use of the clan’s property. During the social preparation this elder man attended the meetings and brought up nothing about the property sale. Despite that other members of his clan already agreed to use the land beacause it would benefit the larger community, the community leaders and even the relatives (brothers and children) could not convince the old man.

With respect to the gender integration, it is consciously integrated in planning and implementation of development projects. The implementers ensure the participation of women not only in activities but more importantly in decision making processes and exercise (e.g. ensure women in leadership of the community organization). Also the livelihood and health and sanitation program are usually lead by the women members of the community.

 

 

Observations and Recommendations:

1. Inter- unit common planning activities should be institutionalized. Though the diocese plans as one body through the structure of after the annual diocesan convention, the units (Finance Office, Development Office and the Social services Unit) exercise autonomy in detailing their unit plans. Periodic in depth review of targets can help identity the areas and ways of integrating project components and programmed collaboration among units.

2. Three to six projects per diocese per year or per project cycle is manageable. The CDWS suggested limiting the development projects for implementation to one project per CDW per year. This would give them more time in assisting and monitoring other completed project; and at the same time, the space to identify new projects and conduct PRAs. They opined that this will lead to a more meaningful transformation of the communities.

3. Community counter-parting has been clearly introduced and explained to partner communities. However, a more systematic way of valuing the labor counterpart, and integrating it to the reports to partners must be devised. The community members have internalized that part of their counterpart and their responsibility to the future users, is the need to institutionalize the systems for sustainability. Systems in managing the operations of development projects and maintenance of the structures or infrastructures for sustainability should be realized.

 

4. Efficiency is affected when implementation period is extended. But the delays in project implementation were almost always due to bad weather. In cases when the factor of bad weather has been considered in mapping out the activities and still caused further delays, creatively employing techniques within the capacity of the project can be innovated. One specific suggestion is to move to other activities or components of the project like the conduct of training and workshops or values formation.

5. Although the social preparation activities scan the community’s cultural and social map, the CDWs and DO, as well as the leaders of the community failed to see the personal interest of the old man in Sagpat. The trust building element in the social preparation stage should not blind the implementers from re-checking the track records of the significant players (like the old man owner of the land for deep well and gravity fed system).

 

 

 

Project Monitoring

The Bishop monitors and supervises the CBDP through the reports prepared by the DO and submitted to the NDO. All reports and communications of the diocese to the national office need his approval and signature. He does his part in the day-to-day operation of the CBD through approvals of the budget request of the CBDP team.

 

The monitoring systems are more than enough. The weekly updates and assessment during the Diocesan meetings documented the lessons and insights in the implementation of the project.

The field visit reporting, monthly reporting and quarterly reporting are practiced by the Development Office. The field visit report is accomplished by the CDWs and other diocesan staff when they visit to the areas. The DO meets the CDWs before they leave for the field visit. He lines up the things that need to be accomplished in the area visit. One CDW shared that this tool helps them in setting the objectives and agenda for area visits, requires them to take the minutes of activities conducted in the area visit, and facilitates the smoother and easier reporting to the DO.

The monthly reports are likewise prepared by the CDWs. The Field Visit Reports are one of the sources of data for the report. This report includes the work schedule, activities accomplished; difficulties and problems encountered, and success stories. The DO uses this to assess the accomplishments of the CDW and in guiding them on how to proceed. Their reports are then used in quarterly and semi-annual reports that are prepared by the DO and submitted to the National Development Office.

The DO prepares various types of annual report. He prepares the terminal reports of the completed projects and the annual report of the Development Committee. The Development committee then prepares the report to the annual diocesan convention.

 

Observations and Recommendations:

1. The monitoring systems, the weekly meetings most especially, fostered close working relationship among the staff of EDNL. A more systematic inter-unit monitoring of the projects as part of the internal evaluation can be developed and installed.

2. CBDP team members are one in saying that they use the approved proposal and the project logframe in monitoring the projects. A new monitoring and tracking matrix with clear indicators that can measure the impact of the project was developed. However, there is a need for a tool for monitoring and evaluating projects that were already completed. The tool can be devised with dummy indicators to measure the impact of the projects especially those implemented in the areas when PRA or baseline were not established.

3. The impact assessments are usually done by external evaluators. This sets the balance and validates the internal evaluation results. The CDWs suggested for them to be part of the team to evaluate other dioceses. This serves as an opportunity to hone their monitoring and evaluation skills.

4. The structure of the Diocesan Committee can be maximized. For this year, the Dioceses has foregone the canonical provision on the DC’s membership and composition of DC. In the past, some DC members faced logistical problems while others had limited technical skills and knowledge on development issues. This prompted the DO to recommend members of the DC who were then appointed by the Bishop.

Currently the diocese sees the need to make the committee more active not only in drafting recommendations of proposals presented before them but also in monitoring the projects especially those projects that are completed.[3]

5. Completed projects are seldom monitored. It is a blessing if the areas has assigned priest. The project is monitored through him/her. To those without priest, scheduled visits to perform ministerial services are more frequent, for example in Cagayan, priests visit the area for mass wedding or mass baptism.

Monitoring of completed projects has no budget allocation in the CBDP project. The DO and FO are one sharing that they use the administrative allocation for this. It is obvious in saying that the impact of the projects can not be measured immediately after the completion of the projects. Thus the commissioning external evaluators and integrating the assessment of past projects into the design of the evaluation had been a wise and strategic steps.

 

Capacity Building

The investment of the EDNL to its human resource development is very limited. The diocese has a seasoned and established senior church worker who is also a priest as the head of the Development Office. He is tasked to take care of the staff development needs of the CDWs. Also the National Development Office takes care of the capacity building needs of the CBDP team of the six dioceses.

The Bishop opined that his role in capacity building is to provide the inspiration. The DO on the other hand is in-charge of mentoring and coaching not only the CDWs but all the other young staff of the diocese.

 

Observations and Recommendations:

1. The CDWs knowledge and skills in project implementation were acquired and honed through the years of direct implementation of projects. The patient and persistent coaching and mentoring of the DO facilitated the learning process.

However, the power of coaching and mentoring as a strategy in building the capacities of CBDP staff can be systematized. This can be even programmed at the national development office level. This will not only foster greater linkage and collaboration between and among the dioceses but also o facilitate and maximize the exchange of expertise and resources the six dioceses.

2. A CDW thinks that he needs additional theoretical inputs on logical framework. The Development Office has been using the logical framework in planning. And the team say that they use the logical framework in implementing, monitoring and evaluating the projects. However, the principles and the logic behind the tool may not be that clear.

3. The members of the Development Committee need to be oriented on the frameworks and strategies of development projects. They also need trainings on project development and project monitoring.

 

4. Although basic bookkeeping was taught to the community members, basic skills in managing the projects finances is more needed. This was confirmed by the local priest interviewed; The Saranai Women and Men Association in Sagpat started collecting fees for the maintenance of the project. At the moment the safekeeping of the collection is being handled by the church. The DO agreed to this recommended tapping resource persons from the cooperative sector. Since mentoring is proven to have worked with the CDWs, he also added community mentoring on project management. The CDWs should mentor the community organization to manage the fund of he association.

5. Community members note the positive features of CBDP. These include the bayanihan structure in constructing the water system, the conduct of leadership training and other seminars, and the coming together of community members in meetings and consultations.

 

The community members had the chance to mingle with each other and from those in other areas. They are grateful for this opportunity as those who could not even speak up in small groups can now express themselves in meetings.

But more group dynamics interventions to build the confidence of the leaders and to help them overcome the shyness brought by their feeling that they are ‘culturally impaired” are recommended to be institutionalized in the project implementation.

6. The community also practices the shared leadership. They adopted the Board of Directors type of structure, that the leadership is shared among its members. A review of the leadership modules of the CBDP is recommended. Standard modules that teach shared leadership and reflect this in all related modules is a good support to the program.

7. CBDP has implemented trainings on monitoring and evaluation. Still, a CDW suggested that CDWs can participate in external evaluations of CBDP projects. There is a similar recommendation for the CDWs to participate in trainings on report writing and techniques in facilitation. He noted that he learned these skills in the course of implementing the CBDP projects but theoretical and formal inputs would help professionalizing te work of CDWs.

8. There is a need to review the competencies of the current staff and the competency requirements of the project. There seems to be a need for a technical person, an engineer, to join the Development office. He/she would be a great addition to the team.

 

On Service Delivery System

The DO frequented the area in the early stages of the project including the conceptualization, development of design and drafting of the plans, orientation and the community consultations.

A member of the Development and Social Concerns Committee shared that he knows that around 10 projects were implemented in CBDP Phase 6. These were a combination of water projects, water supply projects and post harvest projects. He is familiar with the three (3) ongoing project at the time of interview – Sagpat Water Works, Pinokpok Waterworks and Coner Development Project.

The CDWs confirmed that these ongoing projects and added the two more projects that were started this year. All ongoing projects are the following:

Ø Mapako Goat Raising in Mapako Pinokpok;

Ø Sagpat Waterworks in Sitio Sagpat, Barangay Balong, later on a pig dispersal and health sanitation projects were integrated into it;

Ø Alangigan Integrated Development in Alangigan, Coner, Apayao with post harvest facility. Post harvest facilities include a multipurpose hall, pavement as solar drier and ricemill;

Ø Guedegued Integrated Development in Buluca, Coner, Apayao which started this 2008;

Ø Manag Post Harvest Project in Manag, Coner, Apayao which is the addition to the ongoing projects

The bishop estimates that CBDP might have reached directly and indirectly 50% of the communities of the diocese. The EDNL serves a total of 160 communities with only 30 priests, 5 program staff, 2 finance staff and 3 clerks.[4]

 

Observations and Recommendations:

 

1. There is a need to strategize the CBDP sustainability in the community level. A support project in livelihood components to sustain the infrastructures is not enough, in the opinion of a respondent. Equally important or even more important is strategizing to sustain the operation and project implementation.

Almost after a decade of implementing CBDP, ECP still has to reach out to a large number of communities. This is reinforced further by the growing coverage of the mission work of the church and the fact that basic services harldy reach for far flung communities.

2. Considering the growing needs of the communities while resources are getting more limited, the units of the diocese can start working on institutionalizing the integration of project components of CBDP in the operation of other units in the diocese. Exchange of views and learnings during meetings foster collaboration dn coordination the units in the diocese. It is reccommened to seriously consider for inter unit joint implementation of the projects.

3. The advocacy on environment protection and issues became a more conscious effort of the diocese in their areas maybe because of the big floods that hit Tabuk last year. But this is also important in raising the consciousness of the partners, especially in the communities to protect the existing and possible sources of water. As one of the respondents shared that this demonstrates care for the future generation as the water sources for the future were also protected and preserved.SMO suggested to integrate a follow up program on waste management and garbage disposal to contribute to the sustainability of the project and to continue raising the consciousnesss of the communities on environment protection and environmental issues.

 

 

 

On the Linkage and Cooperation System

 

The DO attends the quarterly meetings of the National Development Office. This is the regular venue for sharing of experiences, insights and lessons learned from CBDP and exchange of information related and relevant to development work.

The CDWs on the other hand meets other CDWS from the other five dioceses in staff development training seminars sponsored by the NDO. This year the National Development Office organized the first inter diocesan CDW workshop held in Maiinit, Bontoc. This served also as a venue for the much needed rest and recreation of the DOs and CDWs.

The linkage with EDS and EDNCP in terms of exchange of expertise and sharing of resources is maximized because of proximity. For example, the DO borrowed altimeter from EDS and invited Engr. Johnny Golucan for technical assistance in some designs of the project. He also asks assistance in checking the availability and canvassing of prices for construction of projects.

The exchange of views and sharing of experiences with other dioceses logistically far from EDNL was made possible through email and other electronic communication technologies.

Another experience in inter-diocesan cooperation is the exchange of expertise of CDWS. CDW Penny of EDS joined in the gender sensitivity activities and training in EDNL. In turn she assisted in the conduct the health training in EDNL.

The St. Luke’s Hospital has partnered with the diocese in building churches in the province. CDW suggested linking up with St Lukes’s Hospital for the community health projects.

 

 

 

On the Perception of the Community on Project Impact

The solar powered submersible water supply system in Sitio Sagpat, Barangay Baling. Tabuk, Kalinga was built in July 5, 2007. A pig dispersal project was integrated to help the residents generate income to shoulder the fees of the water project. Communal toilets were also built to improve the health and sanitation condition in the area.

The members of Sagpat community opined that the Sagpat Water Work project clearly achieved its objective in providing water to residents, particularly of Purok 3 and Purok 6. When asked about the impact of the development projects in their lives they answered the following:

Ø Provided better access to water (for household use, for the care of animals and the toilets);

Ø Has helped lessen the burden of women who are primarily responsible for fetching water because for every 3 houses, there is 1 faucet installed;

Ø Beneficiaries who come from 4 different groups/communities learned about order and unity ;

Ø Helped maintain cleanliness since there is easier access to water for cleaning the toilets ;

 

However they shared that they experienced some problems and aired out some concerns:

Ø Experienced insufficient supply of water from the reservoir that hand pumps had to be installed in Purok 6;

Ø There is a need to improve the well, make it deep enough to provide sufficient water supply for the residents in the 3 communities;

Ø Need to expand/widen laundry area in Purok 6;

Ø Need to work on the funds for the maintenance of the system since not all embers pay their fees and dues.

Ø The support of the pig dispersal project for the water system maintenance remains to be seen;

Ø The need to institutionalize the schedule and assignment for monitoring and maintaining operation of the water pump and the reservoir.

 

The community members related that they attended the leadership training and gender sensitivity seminars. Appreciation of the importance of environment and protecting it, of the value of cleanliness, unity and participation, and community health were among the learnings from the training seminars.

The livelihood component as well is a big help to beneficiaries. It gave them extra income and enabled them pay the fees for the use and maintenance of the water supply system.

 

On Program Sustainability

Resource generation for the sustainability of the operation of CBDP is a serious concern. A CDW said “sa pagkalam ko kapag wala nang grant, wala na kaming trabaho” (to my knowledge, if there are no more grants, we will lose our jobs.)

The CBDP has three major and long term partner. These are the Evangelischer Entwicklungsdienst), Australian Board Mission, ERD and PWR. The diocese has partnered also with a local group called Heifer. The heads of the uits and the bishop see the need to expand our tie up with other funding partners.

 

Observations and Recommendations:

1. The development work is even more challenge by globalization. CBDP can continue focusing on small projects but be more innovative in designing to create/ or result to high-impact. For example in the area of safety nets for our farmers, the subsidies to farmers in the form of post harvest facilities, can be coupled by support to farmers’ cooperatives to establish stronger financial base for them. [5]

2. The FO suggested exploring the feasibility of accessing funds from the government especially for infrastructure projects. Although this may be a long shot strategy, the DO with the support of the NFO can facilitate the mapping of resources and opportunities available through the government agencies both from the National and local levels.

 

 

Other Recommendations:

SMO recommended for additional staff. The area coverage of the diocese is so vast to covered by the 3 staff.

Secure additional computers to efficiently implement and maximize the learning from staff development on the conduct of PRA. Completion and processing of the survey in PRA were delayed due to lack of hardwares. Currently the computer system of the Development Office is shared among the 3 CDWs and the Development Office

 

 

Organizational Structure

The Episcopal Diocese of Northern Philippines (EDNP) covers seven deaneries with 64 parishes and organized missions in Mountain Province, part of Ilocos Sur, Abra and Kalinga. It is composed of the Development Office, Social Ministry Unit, Christian Education and Finance Unit. It has thirteen full time staff including the two credit cooperative staff of the diocese.

The Community Based Development Program (CBDP) is implemented by the Development Office. The Development Office is composed of the Development Officer (DO), and three Community Development Workers (CDWs).

The Development Committee, a committee under the structure of the diocese organized in diocesan convention held annually, is also involved in CBDP. The committee helps in the assessment of proposals. This committee reports to the bishop and reports to the convention. Its members are appointed by the bishop and are confirmed by the convention. The current committee is headed by the DO. The Development Committee used to be active in the 90’s, but it functionally declined over the years.

In choosing its members, the availability of time to attend the meetings and the related development work experience are the main considerations.

The finance unit manages the financial resources of CBDP in close coordination with the DO and the National Finance Officer (NFO).

All the units contributing to the implementation of CBDP are accountable to the bishop.

 

 

 

The CBDP Team

 

The DO and the CDWs know the strategic direction of the Episcopal Church in the Philippines (ECP). The strategic role of CBDP in the vision-mission and goals of the church is also known and shared by them.

The EDNP holds its annual planning during the annual diocesan convention. The CBDP, the program supervised and coordinated by the ECP’s National Office thru the National Development Office, has been developing its three-year plans and annual plans since its conception. The Development Office gets direction from both the diocese and National Development Office, thus accountable to both.

 

 

Program Implementation

 

The requests for development projects come from the communities. The diocese has no set criteria for the approval of proposals, only that the availability of funds dictates the need to prioritize. The urgency of needs and the basic hierarchy of needs are some of the unwritten criteria in prioritizing. For example, potable water is more basic than pig dispersal and irrigation is more basic than electrification.[6]

The development projects go through several bodies or persons before it gets implemented. When the local priests receive the request, they bring them to the bishop who then passes to the Development Office. The DO then assigns a CDW to check the request, to conduct the Participatory Research Appraisal (PRA) and to organize community consultations. Then, the DO prepares the project proposals. After which, the Development Committee assesses them and endorses to the Bishop. Upon the approval of the Bishop, proposals are then submitted to the National development Office for funds accessing.

The DO leads the implementation of CBDP in the diocese. The direct project implementation is mainly the responsibility of the CDW. A CDW then facilitates the implementation of approved projects in the requesting communities.

The CDWs stay in the communities most of their workdays to effectively implement the projects. A CDW described how her schedule looks like in handling ongoing projects and the same time, monitoring completed projects. She shared that she usually stays for straight two weeks in the communities especially in those with ongoing projects, and reports to the office for paper works and administrative tasks. The DO shared that he also continues visiting communities, especially to cases that need his attention, like problems that need immediate decision, or concerns that involve dealing with other agencies.

The Finance Officer (FO) supports in the implementation by managing the funds of the CBDP. The members of the Finance Office assist in canvassing of materials, analyzing the prices and purchasing the materials.

The Development Office uses the logical framework tool in implementing and managing the CBDP. It is a helpful tool in ensuring that scheduled activities are implemented and in checking if targets are achieved.

On integrating the gender concern in the program, the DO explained that from the stage of planning, the role, participation and benefits for women are taken into consideration. In the implementation stage, the formation of committees for women, participation of women in decision –making (i.e. number of women in the elected set of officers), the attendance of women in trainings conducted are ensured. The gender sensitivity training is almost a standard training workshop to all communities where CBDP are implemented.

Take the case of the livelihood projects in Barangay Lacmaan, Besao, Mountain Province. The community went to Bontoc with the local priest, Fr. Johnson Falitu, who also coordinated the project. Community consultations were conducted from June 2007. The community organization – St. John the Divine Congregation Association was organized. In July 2007, the diocese and the Barangay officials had a dialogue with the community members to discuss the process they would take for the project implementation and the formation of work committees. The project then started in August 2007.

The people who got involved in the implementation of the project were Fr. Brent (DO), Sarah (CDW), the local priest and the fourteen (14) families for pig dispersal, fifteen (15) families for cattle dispersal and twelve (12) families for the strawberry farm.

 

 

Program Monitoring

When asked about his role in program monitoring, the bishop answered that he guides the DO and the CDs, as well as the other personnel members of the diocese. He checks if the jobs are well done. He added that as he monitors the projects, he also monitors the implementers.

He approves all the project proposals. He shared that the DO has his full trust and confidence. This is the reason why the CBDP has the autonomy to implement the approved projects. But he still asks the team to report the progress of the projects from time to time.

The CDWs report to the DO directly, the DO then reports to the Bishop. In monitoring the CDWs, the DO convenes and facilitates the quarterly meetings. The CDWs prepare the field visit report every time they go to the communities and report the accomplishments during the visit orally during meetings. He requires the CDWs to submit semestral written reports. These are all integrated by the DO to the written reports he prepares and submits to the NDO and the bishop.

The DO prepares and submits semestral reports to the NDO. He also prepares the quarterly progress reports. They are all passed to the bishop for his approval.

The FO plays her role in monitoring by implementing the finance system and policies that the National Finance office developed with the National Development Office. She checks the project budget request using the approved budget proposals.

She also prepares the financial reports quarterly, semi annually and annually. She also provides the DO of the regular budget balances of the projects. Likewise, she also checks the liquidation reports. Using them, she gets informed of the completed tasks in the projects.

The narrative and financial reports are all submitted to the National Development Office.

 

 

Capacity Building

The Bishop relayed that the new CDWs are required to attend the seminars coordinated by the NDO.

The DO participated in the Enterprise Development Workshop and a refresher course in program management organized by the National Development Office.

The CDWs attended the program monitoring workshop that include survey/monitoring matrix, encoding and processing of data using SPSS (a statistical computer software). They also attended the seminar workshop on technology of participation.

One of the CDWs, Engr. Paul expressed his need to upgrade his technical knowhow in designing. The DO heeded this. He was allowed and was supported in taking up a short course on the use and operation of CAD (a computer program used in designing).

In terms of competencies, the CDWs complement each other. They all have the experiences in development work and the skills in the project planning, implementation and monitoring.

 

 

Linkage and Cooperation

The Bishop shared that the dioceses get updated of what is happening in other dioceses through the quarterly meetings of the Executive Council. All the bishops attend these meetings. The developments, concerns and problems, as well as learnings are shared in these meetings.

 

The DO regularly communicates with the NDO. He attends all the meeting and activities organized for CBDP. When the NDO visits EDNP, he usually comes to the bishop’s office and discusses project updates and developments, and problems and concerns of CBDP.

 

The Finance officers of all dioceses have a tighter coordination. They also meet regularly. They even had a workshop together with all the DOs last year. They helped each other on formulating policies and finance system in support to project implementation.

 

The diocese asks help of other dioceses for some concrete support task. For example, the DO asked EDS to canvass some materials and check some species of tree for them.

The whole Development Office expertise is willingly shared to other dioceses. The expertise of Sarah (CDW) in project monitoring, Engr. Paul in technical designing and consultation, and Fr. Brent in program management are openly shared to other dioceses.

 

 

 

Effects on the People and their Communities

 

According to Bishop Malecdan, it is hard to gauge the impact of the projects. But in his ten years of experience as the Bishop, he said that one can easily feel the enhanced cooperation among the community members with completed development projects. He added that he heard it from the community members themselves that “lumalakas ang bayanihan system”. The development projects also bridged the gap between the men and women in the communities, a manifestation of enhanced gender sensitivity.

There is no doubt that the projects brought improvement in the lives of the community members. Take the case of the very first water supply system project of the diocese; it was in Malideg, a very far and remote area. The children and women there then were burdened of fetching water from a remote source. The benefits of the circular reservoir water system were not only shared to them and other members of Malideg, they were also extended to the nearby communities.[7]

Same thing with the micro-hydro projects, the members of the communities found their productive hours extended until the evenings. Also, the rice mill eased the burden of women and children in pounding the rice. The water projects also resulted to sprouting of backyard gardens and backyard poultry and piggery. With all these impacts, the communities are empowered.[8]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

On Project Implementation

Although there is an isolated case where the community members were divided, in general, the church has witnessed the impact of the projects especially in enhancing cooperativeness. The CBDP implemented in 60-65% of the 64 congregation still continues creating impact to the lives of the community people.[9]

 

The Development Committee was active in the 90’s. But it has not functioned in the past years. It used to support the CDWs in serving as resources in health and gender training.

Planning with the community was maximized in ensuring their participation. The community planning facilitated by the CDWs is one of the first steps downloaded to the communities when the proposal gets approved. The capacity and unique situations in communities vary that causes varying pace for planning.

Through the years, gender sensitivity has been consciously integrated in the implementation of CBDP projects. The DO opined that this is a very ‘tricky” matter. Although it is considered in all stages of the project cycle (planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation) and in all project components (construction, project operation, training and advocacy), the number of women participants and attendees is the most concrete indicator that was developed and can be checked. And despite the changes in women participants in term of asserting their rights and becoming more expressive, there are some cases that the assertion and expression happen only in a short period immediately after the training. This is maybe because of the patriarchal characteristic of indigenous communities.[10]

 

 

Observations and Recommendations:

 

1. The diocese plans to reactivate the committee. The DO projected for the Development Committee to be functional as a support structure for CBDP. It will not only asses and endorse proposals but it will also support in the actual implementation of projects, in training component in particular.

 

This was seconded by the CDWs. They recommended including in the task of the development committee the impact evaluation or second level evaluation of completed projects, as they called it.

 

2. The CDWs expressed the bias of the diocese in community based planning. But they find it time consuming. Planning with the community should be a continuing process and not only be conducted for identification of needs in the earlier part of the project cycle. The feasibility of integrating the continuous community planning in the implementation the projects considering the dynamism of communities can be explored.

 

3. There is a need to review the training module being used for gender sensitivity seminars. Though it was found effective in opening the minds of the men and women on the equality of their rights and on more just sharing of roles of husbands and wives, its effectiveness in sustaining the increased awareness must be assessed. The unique culture and situation of the patriarchal indigenous peoples’ communities must be also considered in redesigning the modules.

 

It is also aligned with this recommendation to review the project indicators in measuring the gender concerns integration into the CBDP project implementation and management.

 

 

On Project Monitoring and Evaluation

 

There is a need to be creative in telling the stories of EDNP. In terms of reporting , the DO and CDWs should tell their stories in a wider sense, meaning taking into account the impact, not only, of the immediate community but also the impact to the bigger development circle. The readers must read also beyond the report on progress of the projects. They must read and see the impact of the projects to individuals, families and communities.[11]

The internal monitoring and evaluation system in the diocese is regular and extensive. Regular meetings and one-on-one consultations of DO and CDWs is the venue for extensive discussion of the updates on the development projects. While the written quarterly, semi-annual and annual reports of the CDWs facilitate the timely submission of the narrative reports to the NDO and the funding partners.

A monitoring matrix was learned from the training conducted by UP Baguio for CDWs. The CDWs are still applying the use of this matrix in monitoring the development projects. However, they found it not applicable to some projects like water supply system projects.

 

Observations and Recommendations:

 

1. The CDWs must start telling the stories of the people. Technical reports may have expressed the impact and results of development projects. Sharing the faces of the people affected by the projects and telling the life stories of families that were affected by the projects will animate the impacts of CBDP.

 

2. The internal monitoring system is found to be working. Fr. Brent noted that they in EDNP CBDP have to continue the practice.

 

3. The CDWs, especially the senior ones, should start assuming management roles. They should start mentoring the younger CDWs, writing reports, and preparing project proposals. The system to institutionalize this should be developed and set up in the unit.

 

 

On Capacity Building

 

The DO uses the one-on-one consultations of the CDWs with him as a venue for identifying their training needs. In case that the training need look common across all dioceses, the National Development Office may sponsor holding the training for all CDWs.

The NDO, on the other hand, takes the opportunity of the presence of the majority of the CDWs during training seminars. At the end of the workshops, they discuss what follow up training activities or other training needs they find necessary to be arranged to help them in their development work.

The series of training on baseline survey or participatory research that included training on SPSS, a program in data encoding and processing, were found very useful by the CDWs. A CDW shared that she now uses the learning from that training in profiling the communities assigned to her. Another said that the training seminars helped her to be a more effective community facilitator. Another CDW also stressed the application of learning in systematizing processes.

The gathering of all CDWs in Maiinit, Mountain Province was the first outing and unwinding activity of the CDWs. They found it helpful since they found it as venue to exchange experiences in a relaxed and informal way. It was also an opportunity to get to know better and enjoy with co-workers.`

 

Observations and Recommendations:

 

1. The dual level way of identifying the needs of the CDWs, from the levels of NDO and DO, proved to have helped in conducting training workshop matched with the CDWs actual needs. However, a more detailed and systematic analysis of the capacity building needs could have been conducted.

 

2. Moreover, the conduct of training needs analysis (TNA) for each training workshop can also help come up with more custom fit designs of seminars to help ensure that learning from training seminars to be even more useful to CDWs.

 

For example, the baseline survey could have been designed to transfer the skill of developing survey tools or revising readymade tools and not only the skills to use and conduct them. Although the readymade survey tool can be revised to cater to the actual situation of the diocese’s communities, the practice was seemingly not taught to CDWs because the CDWs found too much comprehensive.

 

3. The CDWs suggested including documentation and writing workshop, specifically, proposal writing and report writing in the follow up capacity building activities for CBDP.

 

4. The CDWs suggested the inter-diocesan exchange program for CDWs to share their expertise to other dioceses and at the same time learn from the projects of their dioceses from actual visits.

 

The activity in Maiinit, where the CDWs had the chance to exchange their experiences can be institutionalized also.

 

5. It was also suggested to build the capacity of the church units relating to CBDP. The DC can activated and be oriented on CBDP. The finance unit can be encouraged to join the evaluation and monitoring visits

 

 

On Perceptions of the Partner Community on Project Impact

 

The livelihood project in Barangay Lacmaan, Besao, Mountain Province comprise four components – rice mill, pig and cattle dispersal, strawberry production, and sugar cane planting.

As a whole, the community members were enlightened that the project gave them many benefits. The projects provided the community with productive and constructive activities and work. The families, especially those in strawberry farming project, experienced increased in income. The rice mill project lightened the burden of members from manual pounding of rice and in bringing the rice to far locations for milling. It also resulted to savings of time from manual pounding and savings in money from the transportation cost. The community members were also influenced to practice saving part of their income from these projects for other needs of their families and other needs of the projects.

The projects fostered community values. The members have developed their sense of responsibility through caring and managing the projects. The project also strengthened the spirit of cooperation and sharing among the community members. It also inspired the members to be hardworking and to do well with their projects through healthy competition integrated in the design of project implementation.

The training seminars given to them have increased their technical knowledge in farming, particularly on planting strawberries and production of organic fertilizer and pesticide; leadership knowledge and skills, like facilitating meetings; and project management skills like, basic accounting.

The project is not free from problem. The community residents shared that they experienced minimal losses from the animal dispersal. They also had problems with supply of materials for strawberry farming. And at the time of the conduct community focus group discussion, the community members were still waiting for the some supplies to start the next cycle.

The benefits of the project were already extended to the church, because the project has encouraged the inactive church members to be active again. Community contributions to church also increased.

 

 

Observations and Recommendations:

 

1. In some cases of working with communities, the partnership agreements were already in place after the completion of projects. But in general, to ensure sustain the enthusiasm and maintain the partnership with the communities, creative strategies must be devised. One suggestion is the deployment of full time community organizers.

 

2. Holding regular community-wide assemblies and continuous training workshops for communities with completed development projects to help ensure the participation of the communities is also suggested. This will also help them learn from the experiences of other communities.

 

3. Setting up an institution like a formal network of community organizations formed through CBDP project is another possible strategy to ensure the continuous participation of the community people.

 

4. Mechanisms for increasing community counterparts were started. However a systematic way of valuing the labor counterpart, documenting and recording the kind donations/counterpart should be designed and installed.

 

 

Other Recommendations:

 

On documentation

It is fitting that the diocese has started documenting the life stories of the people whose lives were touched and changed by the development projects. The initiative must be sustained and developed.

 

Other popular ways of documenting the project not only to promote the results and impact of the projects and but also to inspire other people must be strategized. Publication of the experiences will touch the minds of other people, inform them and help them in replicating best practices. But more creative, popular and animated way of presenting the experiences and the life stories of people behind the project will touch the hearts and help them contribute and commit to the cause of developing communities.

 

On Resource Generation

The funds through grants are becoming limited. Although the diocese has the capacity to access funds from local partners, there is an urgent need to expand the network of the diocese to access more funds for CBDP. Partnership with existing local funding partners must be sustained and partnership with the government sector and other non governmental organizations must be explored.

The feasibility and strategies for increasing community counterpart can be seriously explored and studied also. This will not only be a source for additional funds but more importantly will also promote self reliance.

 

On Program Focus

The putting more focus on the food security issue and conceptualizing related new projects should be explored for the next phase of CBDP. Existing models, frameworks and components for this program focus should be researched.

 

 

 

On Personnel and Human Resource System

There is an urgent need to review the existing salary schedule of CDWs against the work load, work experience, and competencies and expertise. The salaries are standard among the CDWs regardless of the work load, work experience and professional competencies.

Internal monitoring system is developed and installed, however, no tool yet that covers the assessment of the performance of the CDWs. This can be developed and can be used also in developing the schedule for salary increase or work benefit upgrade.

In general, the human resource system is one area that needs to be reviewed, so that necessary system can be developed and installed.

 

 

 

The Community Based Development Program (CBDP) projects of the Episcopal Diocese of Central Philippines (EDCP) are spread to 4 deaneries of the diocese. They are prioritized to those in most need of development projects. The openness and the readiness of the communities are the immediate counterpart asked from the communities

 

 

Case: Batong Lusong Project

The Batong Lusong, the project was developed from the regular visits and fellowship of Apolonio Bangao, then the chairperson of the national minorities of Nueva Ecija and Episcopal priest Fr. James Boligit in the community.

The community people presented the problem in lack potable water supply to Fr. James before a community consultation. They presented two sources of water -- a creek situated down the community but very steep; and the spring project of the Cannossian sisters.

The Development officer of the CBDP, instructed the Community Development Workers (CDW) to gather baseline data from the community. With the catechist and a priest, the CDW then talked with the national minorities’ chairman. Then have identified the source of the water that is about 11 kilometers away from the community. After which, they submitted the location sketch of the water source and a copy of the barangay resolution. The CDW prepared for the project. The CDW made the draft proposal and submitted to the development officer.

The project proposal was submitted directly to the bishop who then approved it.

 

 

 

Organizational Structure and CDWs

 

The CDWs and the Development Officer (DO) together composed the Development Office. They are the implementers of CBDP. They are merged with the Social Ministry Unit (SMU). In the structure of the church, the CBDP in EDCP is accountable to the Commission on Social Concern and Development and the bishop.

Aside from the community based projects, the Development Office is also in-charge of church construction and development. It retains a consultant for the infrastructure projects who is directly responsible for them.

From the experience in the past 3years when the Development Office seemingly did not function regularly the organizationally mandated task, it is now reformed and reorganized. It is now functioning with clear directions, organizational structure, and staff.[12]

Two CDWs were employed in 2006. The CDWs Mark Domogen started working in EDCP in 2005 and was employed officially for CBDP in the January 2006, while CDW Apolonio Bangao was employed in September1, 2006. The latter used to be the chairman of the indigenous peoples of Nueva Ecija, and had been actively coordinating with the national minorities communities.

The CDWs have good grasp of the vision, mission and goals of the church, as well as that to the CBDP. In the implementation of the spring development project in Batong Lusong, they have asses its contribution to the overall goals of the Anglican Church.

 

 

Relationship with other dioceses and the National Office

 

There is an active cooperation among the dioceses. They assist each other in the implementation of the projects. The experience and strength of some dioceses complement the limitations of the others. Like in the case of EDCP, being new in the program and first timer in spring water development after some years of hibernation in CBDP, the other 5 dioceses shared their pieces of advice and assisted in the implementation of the development projects in EDCP areas. For example, the other five dioceses assisted EDCP in acquiring the water rights requirement from the Natural Water Resources Board for the Batong Lusong Spring Development Project.

 

As to the relationship of EDCP with the national development office, the CDWs requested for assistance directly from them. The EDCP CDWs tapped the assistance of the staff of the National Development Office in producing a baseline data using the SPSS for Batong Lusong.

 

The bishop shared that the EDCP is appreciative of the help extended by other dioceses especially that their diocese sort of hibernated from CBDP operation for three years. The technical and program assistance of other DOs were sought by EDCP. Fr. Clarence Olat of EDS assisted them in some technical designs concerns and Fr. Brent Alawas of EDNP visited Palawan for some community preparations.

 

In the same way, EDCP willingly sends Architect Mark Bayawan when other dioceses ask assistance related to church constructions and development.

 

 

 

Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation

 

The CDWs implement the logical framework technology in planning, monitoring and evaluation in their community based projects. They used it to address the problems encountered in the project implementation.

 

Planning: The CDWs’ planning is based on the approved overall plan of the project proposal. They detail the activities, time frame and resources needed. The CDWs ensure the inclusion of trainings like gender sensitivity, leadership, and health and sanitation to sustain the project. The CDWs were required to provide the details such as identified training topics and concerns, target number of participants, and other resource requirements during the proposal stage. These will make certain that systems are in place to help make the project sustainable.

 

These same plans, with approved time frame and detailed activities, stipulated in the project proposal are being followed by the CDWs for the implementation. During the meetings adjustments are done to respond to unique situations and conditions in the communities.

 

Monitoring: The Development Office requires the CDWs to submit bi-monthly, semestral and annual reports. These are submitted to the DO and the NDO. In the case of the annual reports and terminal reports, the DO consolidates first all the reports of CDWS then finalizes them before submitting to NDO.

 

There is no definite schedule for the meetings and consultations of CDWs with the DO. But the CDWs are required to attend the meeting when the DO called for it. In the long absence of Development Office meetings, communication among the DO and CDWs is done thru is thru Short Message Service (SMS) or text messaging.

 

At the diocesan level, the DO reports to the Diocesan council quarterly. Also, the diocese meets every Wednesday for prayers and meetings. During meetings all staff report project updates and developments. Meetings also serve as a venue in discussing problems and in formulating solutions and resolutions.

 

In monitoring, the logical framework is used to check if activities are achieved and targets are delivered as planned.

 

When the schedule permits, Bishop Dixie shared that he tries to go with the CDWs to the communities. He added that he makes time to join the inauguration of completed project.

 

Evaluation. Internal and External evaluation is done after the termination of the project.

 

Internal evaluation is conducted one year after the completion of the construction of the project. The bishop, the senior staff of the diocese, the DO and the finance officer (FO) discuss, plan, and decide on the internal evaluation.

 

The internal evaluation measures the impact of the project to the community. The project is assessed on how it has improved lives of the community economically and socially.

 

One CDW illustrated this. For example in rice production, a project of rice mill installation in the community improved the economic and social life of the people. The project gave them time and space for other social and productive activities than when they do the milling traditionally with mortar and pestle. Before if a member of the community spends 5 hours to mill a certain weight of palay with mortar and pestle, now with the rice mill, it will only take 30 minutes.

 

Sustainability is another aspect assessed in this internal evaluation. The measures taken by community members to sustain the projects are checked.

 

External evaluation, on the other hand is conducted after 2 years that a project was completed. The national development office chooses and contracts the evaluator. The objectives and design of the evaluaton are mutually agreed by all parties involved in the evaluation study.

 

Like in the case of the Spring Development Project in Batong Lusong, EBN, OCP and a NGO evaluated the spring project development.

 

 

 

Capacity Building

The DO and the National Development Office took care of equipping the CDWs with the skills and knowledge necessary to effectively implement CBDP. They arranged for the training seminars of CDWs to help them perform their tasks as development workers. The CDWs attended the training workshop in social enterprise development, project management, participatory research appraisal (PRA), techniques in conducting surveys, SSPS (a statistical software in encoding and processing survey data).

The bishop plays his role in building the capacities of the diocese. He meets the clergy quarterly and identifies and prioritizes their needs with them As to the diocesan staff, he identifies their needs with their departments during the weekly meetings. The joint staff-clergy retreat is conducted annually.

 

Effects on the People and their Communities

The CDWs conducted trainings on health and sanitation, project management, gender sensitivity, leadership skills. These trainings may not be included in the basic entitlement but these are implemented to ensure and increase the community’s participation.

The Batong Lusong Tribal Organization and its network contributed to the success in the Spring Development Project. The people’s organization actively participated in activities and projects in the community. They participated in the whole project cycle-- conceptualizing, planning and project implementation. They also learned to tie up with the local government unit and local government agencies.

The network among the people’s organization and local government units and agencies is one of the gains in implementing development projects.

The Spring Development project was also completed with the free labor contributed by the community members. They willingly committed their labor counterpart because they were assured of the positive impact the project will bring in their lives. And they believed in the integrity of the CDWs who facilitated the process.

 

 

 

On Service Delivery

There were 2 projects submitted to the funding agency. The project that was approved encountered problem on the location of the source of water. The source of water that is nearer (about 2 kilometers) the community; however it was part of a private property, a Hacienda. The community asked the owner to donate or sell the water source, but owner declined.

With the approval from the funding agency and the National Development Office, the project was diverted. The alternative design of the spring development project would have a budget deficit of 700,000 to 1,000,000 pesos. But the community was steadfast to pursue the water project. The community solicited assistance from the local government. The city government of San Jose responded to the need of the community and they supplied sand for the spring development project.

Another problem encountered during the implementation of the project is the military presence and the insurgency in the province. The province is in virtual martial law. The curfew at 9:00 in the evening was enforced and the barangay defense system was set–up.

The military is very suspicious of new faces in the community. Thus, the local priest advised the organizers to carry proper identification cards and community tax certificate when visiting the area. Also, the organizers had to coordinate and to secure permission from the military in implementing their activities in the community.

During the conduct of census or the PRA, the military accompanied the organizers to the area and also sat and observed during the community meetings. The military monitored their activities in the area tightly. When the commanding officer was convinced that the goal and purpose of organizers in the area is sincerely to provide potable water, the military men left them in the area.

The Development Office experienced some limitations due to the health condition of the DO. The CDWs showed their unwavering commitment to helping partner communities. They performed tasks and functions outside their job assignments. The situation built their confidence to take on extra tasks and certain program management functions.

 

 

 

Observations and recommendations:

1. The CBDP team has handled the military presence in the area effectively. The hiring of the local leader as CDW has probably helped facilitate the community processes despite the security risks. It is recommended to review the policies and procedures in hiring CDWs. Unique situation such as this should be considered.

 

2. The shift in plans of the spring development project from the approved source of water to an alternative location posted problems to the implementers. The implication in budget deficit compared to the urgent need of the community for the very basic need for water did not falter the CBDP to pursue the project.

Experience like this where the problem was turned into an opportunity to exercise group problem solving should be promoted to and encouraged among entire CBDP team.

3. Shared leadership emerged in the EDCP CBDP team in the implementation of phase VI. There were periods when the CDWs, being new in the program, needed the guidance and mentorship, but their immediate supervisor could not attend to their needs logistically and physically. Their resourcefulness and the assistance of the National Development Office and other senior staff in the diocese filled up the gaps.

The problems and limitations experienced by the team in performing the unit’s mandate built the culture of shared responsibility for problem identification, solution formation and action taking. Diocesan weekly meetings and informal consultations of CDWs with DO and NDO already promote the culture of shared leadership. However, more measures to encourage new staff to take the risk of assuming management functions can be taken to strengthen it. Simple steps like structuring the agenda and sequence of discussion, developing guide on how to conduct the meetings and consultations are some initial steps in promoting the culture of shared leadership.

 

 

 

On Project Monitoring

The CBDP’s system in monitoring the development projects is already properly installed. It is regular to ensure efficient implementation of the projects. It is scheduled on weekly, monthly, quarterly, semi-annually and annually. The monitoring is also conducted in multi levels-- the team, the diocese, and the national development office.

 

The CDWs are required to submit reports in matrix form. The report in matrix form is practical and useful. It was patterned after the CBDP Phase VI goals. The report format guides the CDWs monitor the progress of the project, the improvements needed, and synthesis the project activities.

 

Review of sample reports -- the activity reports, the bi monthly reports of CDWs, the reports submitted to partners-- showed that the CDWs also prepare the narratives. Common to all reports are the lining up of activities implemented, narrating the problems experienced, the solutions formulated, as well as the alternative actions taken. The format also encourages the CDWs to share their personal reflections from their work.

 

Observations and Recommendations

1. The bishop opined that the CBDP is the most well-kept program of the church. They hold meetings frequently. Parallel to this, they also prepare the written reports.

 

The monitoring and evaluation activities may be building up the collection of data from the weekly meetings to terminal evaluation. The documentation of the meetings, community consultations, traning seminars conducted, and the report matrices are good sources of data in preparing the narrative reports.

 

However, there is need to map out the schedules of the meetings, and reporting and dates of submission of the reports to synchronize the efforts.

 

2. There is a need to hone the skills of CDWs in writing the reports. It was observed that the richness and the depth of the CBDP is not well reflected in the sample reports reviewed. Writing workshops can be organized regularly to help the CDWs write the reports, improve the quality of reports, and to collect life stories.

 

 

On Capacity Building

The EDCP CDWs acquired their capacity building needs from the seminars organized by the National Development Office for CBDP personnel.

When asked to share on the impact of these trainings, a CDW related that they became systematic in carrying out their community organizing and development tasks while maintaining their general responsibility as church workers. They were taught in the project management training the step by step of implementing the projects. They also shared that in extending the projects to the communities, they kept in mind that as part their church mission, they consciously imparted to the people that projects were “gifts” not only to the members of the church, but also to the non-members as well, and the bigger community.

The SPSS training was a big help in encoding and processing the data gathered from community survey. It also taught them to analyze data and use them to describe the specific or detailed characteristics of a community. In this way, the training also taught adopting the approaches and tactics that can be applied appropriate to the characteristics and needs of the community.

 

 

Observations and Recommendations:

1. The CDWs are both relatively new in community organizing and community development work. They both have significant experience and background in working with communities. One of them was once the chairperson of a PO of indigenous communities. Despite that, they need guidance in processing their people skills and group dynamics knowledge. The CDWs suggested on job training on motivating and convincing the people of the importance and the relevance of community contribution and participation to realization of the objectives of the project. Institutionalizing the structure and mechanisms for mentoring and coaching is recommended.

 

2. The CDWs expressed their need to be capacitated in supervising and monitoring projects. Follow up seminars or activities to project management workshop given last year can be designed based on identified and analyzed actual training needs; and can be conducted employing practical methodologies (e.g. on-the-job training and work practicum). The follow up activities can focus on monitoring and evaluation.

 

 

On Perceptions on Project Impact

The community of Batong Lusong has five aspirations -- spring development, feeder road, school building and reforestation. The barangay council even passed resolutions to realize these projects. They even furnished the Philippine Senate to request support for these projects, but the result is nil.

The community dialogues started in last the quarter of 2005. Fr. Boligit, with Mr. Polong Bangao presented the community’s heed to the church. In early 2006, when a member of the BOD visited the area, the Batong Lusong Tribal organization presented to the sketch of the plans and the supporting ten year old Barangay Resolution.

With the help of the Batong Lusong Tribal Association, the project objectives were defined and plans were discussed with the project beneficiaries. Plans to extend the benefits to the members of the larger community and their farms were also discussed.

In March 2006, the Batong Lusong Tribal Association started the census (this means the Participatory Research Appraisal) and the community preparation. It took them half year to process the project in the community.

The spring development project commenced in April 23, 2007. The fifty-one (51) household beneficiaries have contributed their labor counterpart to complete the project. While the men constructed the water system, the women and youth helped to cook food for them. There were 3-5 groups composed of 3-5 members that worked eight hours a day to construct the water system. With the systematic and organized work schedule, the project was completed in six (6) months. The spring water was inaugurated in December 5, 2007.

Training seminars were conducted in the community to equip the members to effectively contribute and participate in project implementation and maintenance. According to the CDWs, the trainings gave the community members new ideas and information that they found useful also for their everyday lives . CDWs conducted training seminars in leadership, water management, health and sanitation, and gender sensitivity.

When the community leaders were asked on what they learned from the training seminars. They enumerated the following:

Ø In water management training, they realized their responsibilities in maintaining the source of water. Thus, they have divided themselves into groups of 3-5 members to take turns in maintaining the water system.

Ø The training on health and sanitation made them aware of the importance of maintaining good health of the community members.

Ø The seminar on gender sensitivity given by the Department of Social Welfare and Development, educated them on the roles and responsibilities of husband and wife, and responsible parents.

The community leaders opined that the water system sourced from a spring in the mountain gave them clearer and cleaner water even during rainy season. They compared it from the muddy water when it is rainy from an old water system connected from a creek.

 

According the leaders they community members were able to save money with the water system. Before, they spend one hundred fifty pesos (Php 150) to two hundred fifty pesos (PhP250) from water truct to water their farms. Now a family saves that amount of money for watering their farms. And they can even till and earn from the land located in mountains with the new water system.

 

Observations and Recommendations:

1. The Batong Lusong Tribal Organization designed a work plan that considered the culture and economic activities (e.g. planting activities when the project started right during the planting period) of the community members. In that way, all work groups were accommodated and given an alternative schedule if they could not participate in their assigned days.

To ensure this, The CDWs recommend to creative ensure the continuous active participation of the community. The peoples’ organization and the community members should be part of the decision making process in every step and activity in the implementation of the project.

 

2. The Bishop added the importance community continuing education as integral part of community development. Training and education should not stop with the termination of the project. The leaders, as well as the members of the partner community, should be trained towards sustainability of projects and autonomy of community from assistance.

 

3. The beneficiaries agreed to contribute the amount of P2.50 per month or P30 per year, the amount they used to pay for the old water system, and P500 for the penalty when the connection was damaged. Collection will be pooled for the maintenance of the system. This is maybe a good start, but the amount is so minimal to build up funds to shoulder major repairs in the future.

 

In line with this, it is recommended to conceptualize other mechanism to help the communities develop generate funds for water system maintenance. The CDWs can help the community explore the cooperative structure that already worked in other dioceses. The cooperative’s income from its main business can be appropriated for the maintenance of the water system. Other livelihood projects can be also explored. Poultry and piggery were suggested. They can be designed to help the individual households earn extra income so that they can contribute more for the maintenance and sustainability fund of the water system or can be support projects of the cooperative

 

 

Other Recommendations:

 

On Resource Generation

The EDCP joins the other dioceses in envisioning the Episcopal Church in the Philippines and its every congregation to be self-reliant by 2018. But the CDWs see that CBDP still needs the continuous financial supports to reach to the poorer parishes, mission stations, and other possible partner communities.

1. There is a need to expand the partnership to more funding partners. The team should continue the networking with other funding agencies and scouting for sources of local resources.

 

2. It was also suggested by the bishop to explore and institutionalize the support structure for the self-reliant and economically well-off parishes to the dioceses smaller, newer and poorer parishes.

 

3. Mapping out the opportunities and resources available from the local government units and local government agencies; and eventually establishing relationship with them for collaboration in implementing development projects is also recommended.

 

 

On the Involvement of other units in CBDP

The development work should be seen in its totality. The development work is not only the responsibility of the Development Office. The whole diocese, both the clergy and the staff, the parishes and the partner communities should all participate.

1. It is suggested to maximize the involvement of the full –pledged parishes in the development work. Venues to inform, educate and involve the parishes of the development efforts of the church should be created and sustained.

 

2. In the same venues to involve the other units of the diocese to the implantation of the development projects more than the exchange of information and updates during meetings should be institutionalized.