Governance & Social Accountability Mechanisms

- Naga City, Philippines

JESSE M. ROBREDOMayor, Naga City

Philippines

Showcase Initiatives1. Kaantabay sa Kauswagan (or Partners in Development) Program

Empowering the urban poor

2. People Empowerment Ordinance

Broadening, deepening democratic space

3. i-Governance Program

Empowering individual citizens

4. Participative Planning and Budgeting

Social accountability in planning and budgeting processes

Limitations and Challenges

□Not centrally located □ 377 kms south of Manila

(national capital), 380 kms north of Cebu (2nd biggest urban center)

□The core of Metro Naga□ A fast-growing area

comprised of 14 municipalities and Naga City belonging to Metro Naga Development Council (MNDC)

□A medium-sized city□ 137,000 population (2000

census)□ Daytime population of

around 250,000

Kaantabay Mechanics□ Conceptually, program is a form of social

housing. Its core is securing tenurial rights for urban poor beneficiaries

□ Accomplished by acquiring occupied landholding through various innovative schemes□ City government plays a critical facilitative and

mediating role □ When negotiations are completed, beneficiaries

amortizes homelots under very affordable terms through community mortgage

□ Urban poor embraced as partner-beneficiary of the program

Outcomes

□ Innovative approaches to land acquisition, community development and project financing enabled achievement of near universal coverage

□ Covered a total of 8,763 urban poor households, representing 30 percent of the total citywide, as of December 2005.

Accountability Mechanisms

□Community Organizing – A necessary first step□ There are now around 80 urban poor associations

belonging to the Naga City Urban Poor Federation (NCUPF) compared with the only nine in 1989

□Tripartism - Mechanism that enables involved parties to sit down and cooperate in solving disputes. Includes:□ city government and other national government

agencies; □ urban poor associations, aided by NGOs and POs; and □ private landowners

Institutional Structures□ Naga City Urban Development and

Housing Board - defines, monitors and evaluates city’s urban development directions; sets policies governing Kaantabay program □ Composed of 20 members, half comes from

government, other half from civil society. Equal sharing by NGO and NCUPF representatives

□ Naga City People’s Council (NCPC) - federation of local NGOs and POs. Mandated to partner with city government under Empowerment Ordinance of 1997.

NGO-PO Council□Precursor of the Naga City People’s

Council □A loose coalition of NGOs and POs which

sought to work with City Hall in maximizing potentials of the LGC

□Initiated city’s engagement with local NGOs and POs

□Facilitated by “open” city hall□Built up confidence among progressive sector□Affirming advantages of being inclusive and

participative on the part of the city government

□ Multi-level consultation mechanisms□ Specific sectors, groups, or the entire constituency can

participate in identifying and affirming developmental priorities

□ Referendum on development issues□ On August 6, 1993, Naga pioneered a citywide

referendum when three development issues were submitted to Nagueños for decision

□ City government demonstrated that participation even at this scale works

□ The Empowerment Ordinance and the Naga City People’s Council□ Through landmark legislation, a system of partnership

was established encouraging federation of NGOs and POs into the Naga City People’s Council (NCPC)

□ Institutionalized system of self-regulation among NGOs and POs in the city

People Empowerment Program

Naga City People’s Council

□ Appoints NGO representatives to local special bodies of the City Government

□ Observes, votes and participates in the deliberation, conceptualization, implementation and evaluation of projects, programs and activities of the City Government

□ Proposes legislation, participates and votes at the committee level of the Sanggunian, and

□ Acts as the people's representatives in the exercise of their constitutional right to information

□ Progressive development perspective. Seeks prosperity-building tempered by an enlightened perception of the poor

□ Functional partnerships. Vehicles that enable the city to tap community resources for priority undertakings

□ Participation. Mechanisms that ensure long-term sustainability of local undertakings

Governance Framework

The Naga Governance Model

Guided by its experience, Naga City evolved its own governance model

The i-Governance Program□Identifies and uses various tools to:

□encourage participation in government decision-making, especially by individual citizens and households

□concretize the governance principles of transparency and accountability

□Allows city government to meet the challenge of sustaining innovative approaches by:□Doing more with less□Improving and ensuring equitable service

delivery

3. Mobile Governance. Uses cellphones which have higher penetration rate than dial-up internet. Around 67% of households own a mobile phone.

TxtNaga

4. Network access improvement. Addresses digital divide through strategic IT investments

Cyberschools (Click Project)

Cyberbarangays

1. Analog or paper-based tools. Addresses need of around 67% of population without ICT access

Performance Pledges Citizens Board Naga City Citizens

Charter

2. Digital or ICT media (eGovernance)

naga.gov initiative, through the city’s website www.naga.gov.ph

Delivery Mechanisms

The Citizens CharterGREATER ACCOUNTABILITY IN SERVICE DELIVERY

□ A guidebook on 130 key services being delivered by the City Government to customers

□Procedure□Response time□Personnel responsible for each

service□Requirements checklist to facilitate

service delivery□Schedule of fees (if applicable)□Location maps sketching office/s

handling the service

□ A “contract” that can be enforced through feedback

□Provides for customer feedback form

□Directory of city hall agencies

www.naga.gov.ph□ Maximizes web

technology □ Within reach of local resources

and capability in a developing country

□ Offers access to information on Naga, including city government financial reports

□proposed and approved annual operating budget

□quarterly financial statements□bid tenders, and bidding

outcomes □ Platform for communicating

requests and complaints in cost-effective and efficient manner

□ Contains a digital version of the Charter (called NetServe) and the Citizens Board

□ Allows citizens to send complaints, other concerns to City Hall through SMS or text messaging□ Previously uses Smart

Telecommunication’s 2960 facility

□ Reconfigured early this year to meet local needs more fully□ Owned by city government,

instead of being Smart network dependent

WHY IS D YOUTH CNTER\'S POOL W/C S SUPPOSD 2 B PUBLC POOL BEING CLOSED COZ PRIVATE SKOLS\' P.E. STUDENTS R USING D WHOLE POOL EXCLUSIVELY? why?

TxtServe NagaA MOBILE GOVERNANCE ENGAGEMENT TOOL

TxtServe Naga, Reloaded i-GOV’S MOST PROMISING FRONTIER

Consists of□ a PC□ a GSM/GPRS modem□ TXTNAGA hotline with

Globe Telecoms (0917-TXTNAGA or 0917-8986242), and

□ SMS applications developed by local programmers

ADVANTAGES:□ Locally managed, customizable and therefore more flexible, instead of being network dependent□ More accessible to ordinary citizens. Less than P1 per SMS sent vs. P2.50 under the 2960 service□ More cost-effective in the long-run

□ TXTNAGA Hotline – a locally managed and controlled SMS messaging system

Participative Planning and Budgeting

□Adopt the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and the Public Governance System (PGS) vision-mission statement and scorecards as plan targets□No need to reinvent the wheel and go through

time-consuming visioning process

□Updating local land use and development plans with 9-year time horizon □Revisit outputs and refine targets set□Align city plans towards attaining these

targets

PGS Roadmap for Naga

Sectoral Planning□Tap 16 existing and mandated

councils in coming up with sectoral components of local plans□There is already more than adequate GO-

CSO representation□Deliverables:

□Establish baseline data□Assess needs□Craft programs, projects and activities (PPAs) that

will respond to these needs Cost out these PPAs, and

□Lay out 9-year action plan for implementation, monitoring and evaluation

Sectoral Councils as basic planning unit

□ Social Sector□ Children’s Council,

Women’s Council, Health Board, Urban Poor, Senior Citizens, Youth Council

□ Economic Sector□ Investment Board,

Livelihood Council, Agriculture and Fisheries Council, Tourism

□ Environmental Sector□ Solid Waste, Airshed,

Watershed Councils□ Development

Management□ Association of Barangay

Councils, Peace and Order, Housing and Urban Development Board

□ Infrastructure Sector□ Infra and Utilities,

Transport

Development management

Environmental

EconomicSocial

Infrastructure

City Development CouncilCity Development Council

Advantages

□Higher data quality □Stakeholders will have opportunity

to validate and reconcile official (i.e. those collected, generated by the local government staff) and non-official data (community-based)

□Shared ownership and responsibility on outputs

□More strategic role for local councils and special bodies

Participative Budgeting

□ Planning process involving NCPC has positively influenced local budgeting processes of the city government

□ Ensured alignment of local budget with the city vision and mission statements and scorecards that incorporate the MDGs

NCPC

Local Special Bodies

Sanggunian Committees

Sectoral Councils

Departmental Planning and

Budgeting with Sectors

Lessons □Local society must secure strong

voice□Variety of social accountability

mechanisms exist, one often building up on others

□Local planning and budgeting can further institutionalize accountability

□There is always a better way