#1Local Governments' Philippine Development Plan (PDP) 2017-2022 and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) Localization Efforts As Contribution to National Development Dr. Justine Diokno-Sicat, Angel Faye Castillo and Ricxie Maddawin PIDS P Philippine Institute for Development Studies Surian sa mga Pag-aaral Pangkaunlaran ng Pilipinas August 12, 2021 1#2PIDS Introduction and Rationale All government agencies, instrumentalities and LGUs were mandated to implement the Philippine Development Plan (PDP) and Public Investment Program (PIP) for the period 2017-2022 This PDP localization effort aimed to: Adopt a geographic-based perspective in planning and investment programming ◆ Strengthen provincial oversight of these Strengthen provincial-city/municipality interface, dialogue and database management 2#3PIDS Introduction and Rationale DILG and NEDA introduced the policy of drafting Provincial/NCR LGU Results Matrices (RMS) as an instrument/mechanism to "enable" and "approximate extent of alignment" of Local Development Investment Programs to PDP RMs and SDGs As NG agencies are preparing for strengthened devolution and oversight with the Mandanas ruling, this study can contribute to these efforts. 3#4Public sector to implement the PDP (Executive Order No. 27 series of 2017) Philippine Development Plan 2017-2022 Administration's Socioeconomic Agenda NATIONAL ECONOMIC AND DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY PIDS Philippine Development Plan AMBISYON 2040 NATIN 15 Years 17 Goals 169 Targets 232 Indicators 2 10 13 14 15 16 17 Philippine Development Plan 2017-2022 RESULTS MATRICES SPUBLIKA NG PILIPINAS Caraga Regional Development Plan 2017-2022 4#5Chapter 5 Chapter 6 PDP 2017-2022 Chapters People centered, clean, efficient, and effective governance ensured Swift and fair administration of justice Chapter 7 Philippine culture and values promoted Chapter 8 Chapter 9 Chapter 10 Chapter 11 Economic opportunities in agriculture and fisheries expanded Economic opportunities in industry and services expanded Human capital development accelerated Chapter 12 Chapter 13 Gains from demographic dividend maximized Chapter 14 Chapter 15 Chapter 16 Vulnerability of individuals and families reduced Safe and secure communities built Technology adoption promoted and accelerated Sound Stable and supportive macroeconomic environment sustained Consumer welfare improved Chapter 17 Just and lasting peace attained Chapter 18 Security, public order and safety ensured Chapter 19 Safe, efficient, reliable, cost-effective and sustainable infrastructure facilities and services are used by the population Chapter 20 Ecological integrity ensured and socioeconomic condition of communities improved PIDS 5#6Public sector to implement the PDP (Executive Order No. 27 series of 2017) Region: Province/City/Municipality Objective/Results (1) Indicator Shopping List (Regional Results Matrices) (2) Baseline Philippine Indicator SDGI Source Annual Plan Targets (7) End of Plan Target (8) (3) (4) Year (5) Value 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 (6) PDP/RDP Chapter: CHAPTER 5: EN SURING PEOPLE-CENTERED, CLEAN, AND EFFICIENT GOVERNANCE Sector Outcome: PEOPLE CENTERED, CORRUPT-FREE AND TRANSPARENT GOVERNANCE PRACTICED Subsector Outcome 1 Accountability and efficiency in Percentage of LGUs complying to the governance Full Disclosure Policy (FDP) measures improved Percentage of LGUS conferred with Seal of Good Local Governance 2017 100 00 100 100 100 100 00 100 2017 38 21 38 40 40 100 100 50 50 60 60 60 Means of Verification (9) Data Source (10) Remarks (11) QUARTERLY REPORT DILG ANNUAL ASSESSMENT DILG (SGLG) Percentage of LGUs which adopted Business Permits and Licensing 2017 100 10 100 100 100 10 100 00 100 100 100 QUARTERLY REPORT DILG/DTI System Percent of LGUs with Functional Local 2017 100 00 From Peace and Order Council 100 100 100 100 10 n0 100 100 100 100 100 QUARTERLY REPORT DILG PDP- RM/ ARTA Compliance Rate ANNUAL 2017 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 CSC REPORT RDP Percentage of LGUs conferred with Seal of Child-Friendly Local 2017 100 100 100 100 000 100 100 80 100 100 ANNUAL AUDIT DILG Governance Percentage of Major River Basin- LGUS with Disaster Risk Reduction +Climate Change Adaptation (DRR+CCA) mainstreamed 0 Comprehensive Development Plans (CDPs) and Comprehensive Land Use Plans CLUPS) No. of LGUs with 6-year Local Climate Change Adaptation Plan (LCCAP) using the Climate and Disaster Risk Assessment (CDRA)/ Vulnerability Assessment Tool Additional indicators not reflected in the Regional Results Matrices Percentage of LGUS with enhanced BPLS 2017 6. 6 8 12 15 23 23 ANNUAL DILG#7PIDS NEDA (RDC) DILG Local Planning and Budgeting Framework Map AMBISYON NATIN 2040 Philippine Development Plan Public Investment Program General Appropriations Act National Expenditure Program Regional Development Plan Regional Investment Program National Government Agencies (Regional of Central office) Provincial Development Plan Provincial Development Investment Program Regional Development Council Provincial Annual Investment Program Municipal Development Plan DBM Local Development Investment Program Annual Investment Program Municipal Budget#8Policy Questions and Objectives Objective: To assess how recent PDP Localization efforts to ensure the alignment of provincial/NCR LGUs to national development goals fared. Policy question: How effective were recent PDP results matrices (PDP-RM) localization efforts? Were the objectives of the PDP localization efforts met? ➤ Have these efforts resulted in aligned provincial/city RMS with regional development plan RMs? Can these be used to monitor progress and development in priority areas in each region? PIDS 13#9Scope, Data, and Methodology Mixed methods approach, sequential parallel analysis and process evaluation Desk review KII and FGD of both DILG field officers and LGU officials ■ Case Study on using PDP accomplishment reports for monitoring PIDS 14#10PIDS Did LGUs comply with the PDP localization efforts? 97.4% (74 out of 76) provinces 94.1% (16 of 17) NCR LGUs 15#11National Summary Number of Average Number of Indicators aligned Region indicators with Number of indicators with indicators with SDG (in %) baseline targets || 210 18% 63% 53% || 255 55% 73% 65% III 181 52% 78% 61% IV-A 391 41% 85% 72% IV-B 258 39% 96% 93% V 278 34% 85% 65% VI 442 13% 61% 51% VII 260 34% 91% 60% VIII 528 31% 95% 86% IX 431 36% 72% 63% X 248 44% 89% 54% XI 189 43% 96% 86% XII 336 69% 72% 52% XIII 394 52% 76% 80% CAR 695 28% 92% 67% NCR 106 10% 96% 66% Average (excl. 340 37% 82% 67% NCR) PIDS 17#12Region III An average of 181 reported indicators, 52% aligned with SDGs, 78% with baseline data and 61% with targets Top 3 PDP chapters: 1. Ch. 10 Human capital development 2. Ch. 8 Agriculture and fisheries 3. Ch. 11 Vulnerability of individuals and families reduced tied with Ch. 20 Ecological integrity Top 3 SDG-aligned indicators: 1. Ch. 10 Human capital development 2. Ch. 20 Ecological integrity 3. Ch. 19 Sustainable infrastructure facilities and services With most number of baseline and target data 1. Ch. 10 Human capital development 2. Ch. 8 Agriculture and fisheries 3. Ch.19 Sustainable infrastructure facilities and services PIDS 18#13NCR Summary An average of 106 reported indicators, 10% aligned with SDGs, 96% have baseline data and 66% with targets. The top 3 PDP chapters: 1. Ch. 8 Agriculture and fisheries 2. Ch. 7 Philippine culture and values promoted 3. Ch. 5 People centered, clean, efficient, and effective governance ensured The top 3 with SDG aligned indicators: 1. Ch. 8 Agriculture and fisheries 2. Ch. 7 Philippine culture and values promoted 3. Ch. 9 Industry and services expanded With most number of baseline and target data 1. Ch. 7 Philippine culture and values promoted 2. Ch. 8 Agriculture and fisheries 3. Ch. 5 People centered, clean, efficient, and effective governance ensured PIDS 19#14Case Study: PDP RM accomplishment reports for monitoring ■To show how the drafted RMs can be used for monitoring through accomplishment reports ■ Of the 90 provinces and NCR LGUs that drafted an RM, those that submitted accomplishment reports were only: ■ 44 for 2018 37 for 2019 "Looked at provinces of Regions 1 and 10 PIDS 20#15PIDS Case Study: Region 1 and Region 10 accomplishments Different provinces, and, consequently regions, have different priority areas. These provinces also perform differently in terms of achieving their targets. Region 1 Top priority is human capital development. Agriculture and fisheries is also in Top 3 All provinces submitted accomplishment reports for both years Pangasinan was the only province that improved in hitting targets from 2018 to 2019. • • . • Region 10 Top priority are vulnerable individuals and families. Agriculture and fisheries is also in Top 3 Only 2 of 5 provinces submitted accomplishment reports; Only 1 of these (Lanao del Norte) submitted for both years 21#16Case Study: Pangasinan accomplishments ■Improvement in overall RM accomplishments from 8% of indicators in 2018 to 14% in 2019. ▪Accomplishments were in: ■ Ch. 8 Agriculture and fisheries Ch. 10 Human capital Ch. 13 Gains from demographic divide Ch. 19 Sustainable infrastructure ■ Of the reported accomplishments, those that reached targets were higher in 2019 at 74% compared to only 55% in 2018 PIDS 22 22#17PIDS Case Study: Lanao del Norte accomplishments ▪Decline in overall RM accomplishments from 57% of indicators in 2018 to 34% in 2019. "Accomplishments were in: Ch. 8 Agriculture and fisheries Ch. 11 Vulnerability of individuals and families. reduced Ch. 19 Sustainable infrastructure "Of the reported accomplishments, those that reached targets were higher in 2019 at 51% compared to only 35% in 2018 23#18Key Informant Interview Results *Overall, majority of key informants interviewed, from both LGU and the DILG, believe in the relevance of creating provincial/NCR results matrices and their usefulness in identifying and clearly defining priority areas for investment as well as monitoring and evaluating progress. Though implementation was initiated by DILG-NEDA through the conduct of regional workshops, some provincial governments conducted their own workshops including lower level LGUs. For some provinces, lower level LGUs were given opportunity to give inputs, not always complied with PIDS 24#19Key Informant Interview Results Human resources was one major concern in the exercise: Lack of manpower so there is a need to assign someone to do this task Lack of technical capacity Minimize efforts of LGU officers to make RM codes consistent with Annual Investment Plan (AIP) codes. Concern of the exercise encroaching local fiscal autonomy: Perceived as an exercise to prioritize NG assistance to LGUs, focusing on NG priority infrastructure PIDS 25 25#20PIDS General Findings The PDP localization exercise was well received and is believed to be a useful tool in identifying priority areas of LGUs and their contribution to national development. There is a demand to institutionalize and integrate the provincial/NCR results matrices as part of the local development planning process. The RMS could show areas where technical, capacity- building, and budgetary support could be given to local governments. Ensure the correct completion of the RMs in the future. 26#21Recommendations Institutionalize the drafting of results matrices with local development planning ☐ Strengthen the link between planning (RM) and investment programming (LDIP), budgeting, outputs and outcomes. Enhance capacities to facilitate accurate compliance Ensure data is available To help LGUs identify priorities (CBMS Act) Establish a management information system where data will be input and summarized Improve the information and education campaign to highlight LGU contribution to national development PIDS 27#22PIDS Philippine Institute for Development Studies Surian sa mga Pag-aaral Pangkaunlaran ng Pilipinas Service through policy research Thank you! WEBSITE: www.pids.gov.ph FACEBOOK: facebook.com/PIDS.PH TWITTER: twitter.com/PIDS_PH EMAIL: [email protected] 28