GO/NGO/PO Levels of Partnership: Development Framework
Principles of GO-NGO-PO Partnership
Framework and Mechanism on Project Formulation for People’s Participation in Rural Development Activities
Workshop Resolution
Proposed Project Ideas for Possible GO-NGO-PO Follow-up Action
Institutional partnership may be defined as the mode of interaction among various sectors, agencies, or groups to achieve a particular task, objective, goal, or vision while maintaining their own institutional autonomy. Institutional partnership takes on various forms and mechanisms to operationalize it. Such relationships are nurtured and developed depending on the degree of urgency to respond to a particular need, level of trust, organizational culture, target clientele/area, or commonality of mandate. It revolves around the sharing of vision, resources, expertise, and systems to create a greater and meaningful impact on a certain sector, a community, and the nation as a whole.
Consultative partnership. This exists among institutions who wish to establish new relations with other organizations for information exchange. Regular venues such as consultations or dialogues are organized to serve as initial mechanism through which various institutions know each other by sharing experiences, ideas, and opinions.
Coordinative partnership. Efforts are exerted to avoid duplication of activities and synchronize separate institutional initiatives for greater efficiency and effectiveness in field operations. As starting point for coordination, interagency committees and activities are usually organized to do a checklist or inventory of project interventions in the communities. An example is the relief efforts undertaken by government and NGOs where an interagency group is organized to avoid duplication in the distribution of goods to earthquake victims.
Complementary partnership. In this form or level of relationship, though each party has separate initiatives, they are both guided by a common program framework characterized by purposive efforts to support each other. An example is the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program of the Aquino Government where some NGOs have taken the initiative to undertake land transfer programs within the CARP framework and mechanism.
Collaborative partnership. In this relationship, both institutions agreed to work together, sharing a common vision, establishing common objectives, and plans of action on a program level. Mechanisms are institutionalized so as to facilitate delivery of services to their target communities.
Critical partnership. This may be the highest form and level of partnership where both institutions consider each other as indispensable partners in pursuing broad development goals and visions. Both sectors work together on a more strategic long-term arrangement on various aspects of the socioeconomic and political life of the community. NGOs are given access to government resources and are also given the chance to participate in the policy formulation and decisionmaking processes.
GO/NGO/PO Levels of Partnership Development Framework
|
Nature of partnership |
Description |
Objective |
Indicators |
Possible areas for partnership |
Key success factors |
|
Consultative partnership |
Open lines of communication for Information exchange |
· Information exchange |
· Regular venues for Information
exchange |
· Seminars, workshops,
consultations, newsletters |
· Openness |
|
Coordinative partnership |
Separate initiatives not necessarily supportive of each other
yet aspire in some form of complementation to achieve efficiency and
effectiveness |
· Avoidance of
duplication |
· Interagency committees and
activities |
· Campaigns |
· Openness |
|
Complementary partnership |
Separate initiatives but guided by a common framework
characterized by purposive efforts to support each other |
· Program support |
· Programs that are supportive
of each other |
· Agrarian reform |
· Mutual trust |
|
Collaborative partnership |
Joint efforts with a common vision and objectives |
· Joint programs |
· Long-term joint
programs |
· Integrated area
development |
· Mutual trust |
|
Critical partnership |
Interdependence Recognition of each other as Indispensable
partners in the development process |
· Strategic planning,
decisionmaking, and Implementation |
· Long-term and
Institutionalized working relations |
· In most aspects of
socioeconomic and political life |
· Common and mutually shared
vision, mission, and goals |
a Adopted by the participants of the “National Workshop on Project Formulation for People’s Participation in Rural Development Activities” held in Tagaytay City, Philippines on 9 November 1990. ANGOC, 1992.1. Government and NGOs shall strive to attain the following:
a. Social justice and equity2. Government and NGOs are accountable to the people.
b. People’s empowerment and solidarity
c. Transparent and effective governance
d. Sustainable and self-reliant development
e. Structural changes within the constitutional and legal framework
f. Subsidiarity
3. Government, NGOs, and POs should have a working understanding of each other’s principles, policies, processes, programs, and structures so that the elements of responsiveness, flexibility, and workability are built into GO-NGO-PO partnership.
4. The autonomy of NGOs and POs shall be recognized by the government. Government shall perceive the participation of NGOs and POs as a means to achieve a partner relationship, otherwise, working together will be a futile exercise in the long run. Partnership shall not be seen as an end in itself but must result in constructive progress toward the goals of the World Conference on Agrarian Reform and Rural Development (WCARRD).
5. NGOs and POs shall be substantially and equally represented in all levels of decisionmaking. Mere presence in planning councils or bodies does not indicate participation in decisionmaking. NGOs and POs shall be given equal opportunity to express their views and to decide on issues.
6. Participation in government shall not be the sole role of national-level NGOs, though they can initiate this process. To really involve the people themselves in the development stream, the people shall have a voice from the grassroots up to the national level.
7. Establishment and strengthening of NGO and PO networks shall take place both horizontally and vertically. This will also help strengthen their position vis-a-vis government and enhance their credibility.
8. The knowledge of concepts, objectives, and nature of participative activities shall not be confined only among the key personnel of both government and NGOs. Continuing orientation of government personnel at all levels, including those indirectly involved in the project, shall be undertaken so that they understand the rationale and nature of working relationships with the NGO and PO sectors.
9. Of particular importance to NGOs and POs is the need for continuous dialogue with government on the matter of NGO-PO-donor relationships with a view of evolving policies and procedures that satisfy the specific concerns of NGOs, POs and government.
10. NGOs and POs shall be conscious of the need to carry out periodic and systematic self-evaluation of their role and impact Also, they shall regularly update themselves by a process of self-education.
11. NGOs, especially at the grassroots level, must be seen in a complementary role and not in competition with government agencies operating at that level. Government should respect the integrity and autonomy of NGOs just as NGOs should retain their critical outlook. On the other hand, publication of criticisms that undermine the spirit of partnership should be avoided. NGOs and POs must realize that regular budgetary support from government could undermine their autonomy.
12. NGOs and POs must endeavor to establish their credibility with the government and the people, and for this purpose, they must demonstrate their sincerity, capability, and commitment.
13. NGOs and POs must be prepared to take the initiative to secure their recognition and also to propose constructive programs of partnership with government in evolving and carrying out practical programs in areas of concern to NGOs and POs.
14. GO-NGO-PO may resort to independent initiatives to pursue their development interests that take into account people’s participation in the event measures for forging a GO-NGO-PO partnership are not yet in place.
b Adapted by the participants of the “National Workshop on Project Formulation for People’s Participation In Rural Development Activities” held In Tagaytay City, Philippines on 9 November 1990. ANGOC, 1992
|
Project phase |
Activities |
Output |
|
Basic requirements |
|
1. Project concept generation (Developing opportunities for
partnership) |
Bottom up project idea generation gathered from constituencies based on their needs: subnational offices, NGOs, POs, etc. Explore project concept with GO or NGOs and POs Determine if project concept is consistent with national development objectives, policies, programs; agency priority Conduct joint/GO/NGO/PO forum to discuss: · feasibility of project
concept Other NGOs, POs, and government agencies may be invited to the
forum when the project requires expertise and resources not present among
initiators of project and when the project snows a potential for greater impact
if coverage is expanded. |
Common perspective/ understanding of problem Agreement in
principle to pursue development of project concept |
Focal points |
Presence of NGO and PO focal point in each government agency at all levels primarily to act as clearinghouse for: · information on government
programs Active and effective NGO/PO liaison system to be operationalized as an organic part of government Presence of GO focal points for rural development NGOs at central and regional office levels Focal points have working knowledge of mechanisms/processes involved in consultation with agency field offices, NGOs, and POs. Focal points regularly exchange information Strong commitment from NGOs, PO, and GOs |
|
|
|
|
Accreditation |
Mutually agreed set of accreditation criteria for
program/project participation by NGO, GO, and PO |
|
For ongoing projects |
|
|
Listing of NGOs/POs list of accredited NGOs/POs |
Each GO agency has a regularly updated POs in the rural
development sector |
|
Project assessment/ Reassessment |
Conduct review of project design to determine if project has elements of people’s participation Determine social acceptability of project to intended beneficiaries Conduct joint GO/NGO/PO forum to reassess project and discuss
areas of partnership: meet with donor to propose to redesign project |
Agreement of all parties concerned on proposed changes Acceptance of donor to redesign project |
Networking |
Formation of broad coalition among NGOs and POs (GO and NGO
networks to consider/consult also nonaffiliated organizations) |
|
II. Partnership development (Strengthening of relationship in
all stages of project cycle at the national, provincial, and municipal
levels) |
Orientation workshops to discuss · assessment of individual
strengths and weaknesses · programs and experiences on
GO/NGO/ PO partnership |
Consensus on framework of partnership Deeper understanding of the nature and operations of GO/
NGO/PO |
|
Willingness of GOs and NGOs to allocate or program a portion
of their funds and/or realign existing resources, when and where possible to
activities that will forge and strengthen GO/NGO partnership, i.e. orientation
workshop, transportation cost of NGOs and POs based in the province who need to
attend meetings organized in Manila |
|
|
Exposure trips to relevant GO/NGO/ PO projects Regular meetings to exchange information, expertise, and resources Training modules on · managerial and technical
skills |
Institutionalized Information exchange/resource sharing Strengthened staff competencies Inventory of training modules
available from GO and NGOs |
|
A community-conceived mechanism/consultative body where more defined GO/NGO/PO prospects for partnership are discussed, agreed upon, carried out, and assessed Continuing involvement of GO/NGO/PO key officers and staff who are directly or indirectly involved in the project Support from NGO, GO, PO, and local government unit to pursue
and sustain partnership |
|
III. Project planning/preparation |
Meeting to discuss, define, and agree on · critical indicators of
successful projects Provision of training programs to beneficiaries on data
generation/analysis |
Developed framework for monitoring and evaluation |
|
Adequate financial and technical resources are available for project preparation. This will shoulder cost of feasibility study, training of POs in research, conduct of baseline survey, etc. Functional mechanisms that ensure PO participation in the project preparation stage Support of local government officiate to the project Mechanism whereby existing operations and procedures of
government are assessed and made responsive to NGO-PO partnership, e.g., bidding
procedures, etc. |
|
|
Conduct of baseline research/needs assessment of beneficiaries; develop research instrument with beneficiaries |
POs are involved at the onset of project development |
|
|
|
|
Formation of tripartite working advisory team (GO/NGO/PO) to oversee conduct of feasibility study and project proposal Identification and analysis of needs and resources |
Initiation of GO/NGO/PO institutional cooperation |
|
|
|
|
Consultations with DBM, COA, NEDA whenever necessary |
Project auditing and accounting system approved by tripartite
working advisory team |
|
|
|
|
Validation of feasibility studies and project proposals
through tripartite consultation mechanisms (at all levels depending on the
project) |
Assured timely funding Final form of project proposal accepted
by beneficiaries/ endorsed by GO/supported by NGOs |
|
|
|
|
|
Memorandum of Agreement |
|
|
|
For ongoing projects |
|
|
|
|
|
Project replanning/ redesign |
Modify project concept/design/ targets/timetable |
New program of work |
|
|
|
|
Conduct reorientation program for project implementors and
intended beneficiaries |
Common understanding of project |
|
|
|
IV. Resource mobilization |
Develop and mobilize internal and external resources |
Strategies and mechanisms for internal resource
generation |
|
Recognition of noncash assets and contribution as counterpart
of POs and NGOs by GO and donors |
|
|
Liaise with donor partner |
Familiarity with the thrust, priorities, and operations of potential donor partners Commitment of support from donor partners |
|
|
|
|
Determine roles and responsibilities of the various
partners |
|
|
|
|
V. Project implementation |
Orientation and planning meetings of executing agencies: GO,
NGO, and beneficiary group |
Program of work and organization |
|
Local government and military officials attend orientation and
planning meetings and support program of work |
|
|
Provisions for technical and financial assistance are made
available |
Smooth project operations |
|
Project is flexible to allow for contingency action in case of
unforeseen major problems |
|
|
Training on capability-building for NGOs and POs to ensure
project sustainability |
Strengthened local delivery structures; communities
organized |
|
|
|
|
Linkaging with various sectors and establishing institutional
alliances |
Strengthened interagency cooperation |
|
|
|
|
Socioeconomic projects Provision of opportunities for participation of NGOs and POs
in the management of fund resources of the project |
Capital buildup, increased income |
|
|
|
|
Conduct of capability-building sessions on resource
mobilization, project identification, program/project management, soda,
mobilization, etc. |
Potentials for self-management actualized |
|
|
|
VI. Monitoring and evaluation |
Training of POs to develop capability in internal monitoring
and evaluation |
|
|
All GO agencies (where interagency cooperation is involved)
NGOs, and POs agree on a monitoring and evaluation schedule and
criteria |
|
|
Developing/incorporating project-specific
monitoring/evaluation and reporting system (simple, responsive, and
participatory) |
A community-based/managed monitoring and evaluation
system |
|
|
|
|
Conduct of periodic assessment/replanning/ consultation
sessions by the local community |
Project activities aligned/ bottlenecks resolved |
|
Beneficiaries and field-level officers have direct access to
GO Secretary or department official at central and regional office to validate
monitoring and evaluation reports |
|
|
Conduct of field visits, interviews with community
organizations |
Quarterly/yearend reports; on-site sessions |
|
|
|
|
Conduct of annual/midterm and postproject evaluation |
Plan of action to respond to findings: modified management
scheme |
|
|
|
|
Conduct of project impact research studies |
Project impact study snared with and discussed among executing
GO, NGO with POs |
|
|
|
VII. Project completion phase |
Tripartite meeting to develop post-implementation plan on the
baste of discussion inputs/monitoring and evaluation results/program/project
gains |
Post-implementation plan, components of which are designed to be managed by local institutions and POs Proposals for replication/expansion |
|
Commitment by GO, NGO, and POs to pursue follow-up action
plans in terms of institutionalizing gains from the project |
|
|
Conduct of continuing advocacy activities |
Priority clientele identified |
|
|
|
|
Conduct of regular follow-up visits/ dialogue, etc., and
provision of technical assistance |
Areas for further strengthening defined and
prioritized |
|
|
|
|
Conduct of an ex-post evaluation after 5 years |
Impact assessment of social and economic benefit |
|
|
c Adopted by the participants of the “National Workshop on Project Formulation for People’s Participation in Rural Development Activities” in Tagaytay City, Philippines on 9 November. 1990. ANGOC, 1992.WHEREAS, people are the “subjects” of development since only the people themselves can change their condition and work for their own development, and are also the “objects” of development, being the target beneficiaries;
WHEREAS, the 1987 Constitution and the Medium-Term Development Plan (1987-1992) explicitly recognize people’s organizations (POs) and nongovernment organizations (NGOs) as indispensable partners in development;
WHEREAS, mutual respect and the principle of tripartism where GO-NGO-PO view themselves as partners in development should be enhanced and further sustained;
WHEREAS, two project documents have resulted from the “National Workshop on Project Formulation for People’s Participation in Rural Development Activities”, namely: (1) Principles of GO-NGO-PO Partnership and (2) Framework on Project Formulation for People’s Participation in Rural Development Activities;
WHEREAS, the abovementioned documents provide for ways by which to enhance GO-NGO-PO partnership, after a review of rural development activities in the Philippines;
Now, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the participants to the “National Workshop on Project Formulation for People’s Participation in Rural Development Activities,” conducted in Tagaytay City, 7-9 November 1990;
1. That the documents entitled “Principles of GO-NGO-PO Partnership” and “Framework on Project Formulation for People’s Participation in Rural Development Activities” be adopted by the participants to the National Workshop;2. That the abovementioned documents be presented:
a) To Secretary Fulgencio S. Factoran, Jr., as Chairman of Cabinet Cluster (A) on Agro-Industrial Development for adoption by the said Cabinet Cluster and to other relevant Cabinet Clusters for consideration;3. That a task force be formed from among the workshop participants to operationalize the framework, preferably in Region XI, and to pursue follow-up actions.b) To the Caucus of Development NGOs and other NGOs and POs;
c) To UNDP. FAO, and other donor agencies for consideration in the evaluation of projects for assistance.
DAR
1. Training Program for Agrarian Reform BeneficiariesDENR2. Tripartite Partnership Program on Agrarian Reform and Rural Development in Antique, Zambales and Camarines Sur
3. Capability-Building Development Program for Field Officers and Staff of DAR
4. Monitoring and Evaluation of the Agrarian Reform Program and Related Support Services
5. Establishment of DAR NGO Desk
6. Inter-Cooperative Rice Trading
1. New Village Settlement Project in Nagcarlan, LagunaRegional Development Council
2. Integrated Social Forestry Revolving Fund
3. Integrated Forest Fire Management
4. Rattan Project in Palawan
5. Tenurial Security in the Uplands
1. Low-Income Municipality Development Program in Region XI (DA/DENR/NEDA/ ASDAR Joint Program)
