AIN-Local Governance Working Group Workshop Interacting with LGCDP

AIN/Local Governance Working Group 25th August 2009

Table of Contents 1. Introduction and Workshop Objectives ………………………………………………………………………3 2. Key Points from Workshop Presentations……………………………………………………………………3 3. Suggested Areas for Collaboration between AIN and LGCDP……………………………………….……3 4. Closing Remarks………………………………………………………………………………………….……….7 5. Outputs from the Workshop ……………………………………………………………………………………7 6. Next Steps for the Local Governance Working Group………………………………………….………….6 7. Presentations………………………………………………………………………………………………………8 7.1 Appendix 1 LGCDP & Areas for Coordination and Linkage between governments & I/NGOS in Local Governance……………………………………………………………………………………8 Queries/Suggestions from the Participants………………………………………………………….…..….…12 7.2 Appendix II AIN/Local Governance Working Group and Suggested Areas …………………………13 for Collaboration between AIN and LGCDP 7.3 Appendix III Initial reflections from AIN members and their field workers……………………………16 Queries/Suggestions from the Participants……………………………………………………………….……19 8 Appendix IV Feedback/Suggestions from the Group Work ………………………………………...…….20 9. Appendix –VI Schedule………….………………………………..…………………………………………….22 10. Appendix –VII Participants List ………………………………………………….………………….………..23

2

1. Introduction and workshop objectives The AIN Local Governance Working Group (LGWG) organized a half day workshop with the Ministry of Local Development‘s LGCDP program. A total of thirty- five people from Ministry of Local Development (MLD), Municipality Association of Nepal (MUAN), NAVIN, ADDCN and AIN members participated in the workshop. The objective of the workshop was to understand the LGCDP program and identify key areas where AIN can collaborate so that the LGCDP is more effective in meeting the needs of its target groups. The first half of the workshop provided information about LGCDP followed by a period of group work to discuss potential areas for joint working and better engagement. The following presentations were delivered:

1) Mr Som lal Subedi, National Program Director LGCDP (Local Governance Community Development Program) focused on the program and areas of coordination and linkage between government and I/NGOs in local Governance (Appendix -1).

2) Mr Sten Andreasen, AIN Steering Committee presented on the AIN/LGWG and the

suggested areas of collaboration with the LGCDP program (Appendix 11).

3) Mr Grenville Hopkinson, coordinator of the LGWG made a presentation on the preliminary reflection of AIN members and partner NGOs experiences on the program (Appendix III).

After the presentation the participants discussed potential areas for collaboration between LGCDP and AIN including:

• Social Mobilization, • Participatory Planning Process, • Accountability, • Co-ordination- Linkage and • Skill enhancement.

Output from these discussions are also included in this report.(Appendix IV) 2. Key Points from the Workshop Speakers: Som lal Subedi ‘LGCDP & Areas for Coordination and Linkage between Government and I/NGOs in Local Governance’ The presentation provided some background information about the LGCDP including, programme goal and objectives, funding arrangements and management structures. In relation to areas for linkage between the programme and AIN members the presentation highlighted the following five priorities:

• Social Mobilisation • Participatory Planning Process • Accountability • Co-ordination and Linkage • Skill Enhancement

3

After the presentation there were discussions in relation to:

• Conflicting local level policies across Line Ministries – there are conflicting policies at local level and one approach to balance this is to empower citizens at grassroots to work out local requirements

• Gaps in provision for excluded / marginalized groups including women – this is a recognized challenge for the programme and the expanded block grant allocations have been developed to increase opportunity for poor and excluded groups.

• Progress in relation to the development and release of IEC strategy and materials – little progress has been made in this regard and AIN are invited to support identification and collation of IEC materials.

• Local level implementation of the LGCDP and the challenges to be overcome – the reality at VDC is that very few are able to meet minimum conditions to receive the expanded block grants and AIN are invited to build their capacity so that VDCs receive and allocate expanded grants more effectively.

The recent letter issued by the Social Welfare Council was also raised as a side issue as it affected a number of workshop participants. The advice was to inform DDCs about proposed projects / activities but that INGOs do not need formal approval from the DDC. The full presentation is included as Annex I to this report. Sten Andreasen ‘AIN / Local Governance Working Group and Suggested Areas for Collaboration between AIN and LGCDP’ The presentation outlined the rationale for the creation of the AIN Local Governance Working Group in relation to AIN’s Strategic Objectives and restated AIN’s desire to support the Government of Nepal better meet the needs of Nepali citizens through improved coordination and communication of INGO activities. The presentation assessed each linkage area highlighted by LGCDP and put forward suggestions as to how AIN might be able to support each theme and potential challenges to providing support. For example: Social Mobilisation –

• A challenge to focus more on ‘citizen’ mobilization rather than ‘social mobilization’ locating citizens outside groups for information and involvement

• Use of I/NGO social / citizen mobilisers? • More than awareness, it is building specific capacities to play active roles (both for

citizens in local communities and for those appointed or selected to local bodies) • INGOs can assist in developing and testing CE tools and materials.

Questions were not taken after this presentation so that the groups could further discuss as part of the group work exercise. Key slides from the presentation are included as Appendix II to this report. Grenville Hopkinson ‘Initial reflections from AIN member bodies and their field-workers’ The presentation provided feedback gathered from a short survey to AIN members and their staff in relation to awareness about the LGCDP and practical experience at a grassroots level. The presentation identified flaws in the survey collection process but suggested that the findings

4

provided a useful baseline on which to build as collaboration between LGCDP and AIN continues and the project implementation gets underway. The survey asked 4 questions including:

• What is the level of awareness of LGCDP in your area? • To what extent is LGCDP operating in your area? • To what extent is the 14 step participatory planning process operating in your district? • Which aspect of LGCDP should AIN LGWG focus on?

Overall the survey findings suggest that awareness of the LGCDP is very low at the local level and a large proportion of field workers ‘don’t know’ about different aspects of the programme. Following the presentation there was a short discussion relating to challenges to LGCDP implementation were discussed including locally elected representatives, the early phase of LGCDP and a stronger focus on peace building and economic development. It was suggested that peace building and economic development are at the heart of LGCDP and AIN members were challenged to get onboard as LGCDP was transforming Local Government operations within Nepal. The full presentation is included as Appendix III in this report. 3. Group Work – Identifying how AIN & LGCDP might collaborate to improve the effectiveness of LGCDP The workshop created break out sessions relating to the five key areas for collaboration between AIN and LGCDP. Each group was asked to reflect on the presentations and determine how best AIN members might engage with LGCDP to improve its effectiveness and help achieve the programme objectives. The following ideas were put forward:

i Social Mobilization Group Members: Callum, S.P, Gordon, Shandhya, Prem & Santosh

• Identify Best Practice in Social mobilization incorporate in social mobilization Mechanism. • Sharing of experiences between Government bodies and INGOs. • INGOs support HRD of LG in Social Mobilization • AIN to share information (e,g DAGH) with District LSMC local bodies • Formulate Village PP • Capacity Building of local Bodies for social mobilization • Make accountability through formal planning, by IPC (Integrate Planning Committee),

CODE of Conduct for local units, Social audit National level body to make more accountability and Citizen Charter.

ii. Participatory Planning Process Group Members: Ramesh Adhikari, Shiva Rayamajhi, Chanda Rai and Badri Manandhar

• Ensure inclusive and participation in planning by sex, religion, regional, caste, age and

physical condition in 14 steps planning • Ensure integration (accommodate of our partners plan into LBs annual as well as periodic

Plan) • Provide TA prepare for periodic plan as well as annual plan

5

• a) Pre-Planning - Resource Map, Village Profile, Need opportunity mapping, Action and Activity Mapping, Gaps Identification/Mapping, AIN can work in coordination for a) Awareness b) Piloting c) Technical Backstopping d) orientation on LSGA (Local Self Governance Act. b) Post M&E - Awareness/Facilitate to make active the monitoring and supervision committee, Forum joint M&E committee: Civil Societies, Private Sector and Private Sector including government.

• Documentation of best practices in planning • Sharing of best practices in LGWG

iii. Accountability Group Members: Sanjaya, Sten, Ben, Neil, Juliana & M.L Jaiswal

Situation • Problems in Accountability • Different INGO has different role • Political Vs Bureaucratic staff in local bodies VDC/municipality/DDC • Role of Political Parties. Suggestion • One voice from all I/NGOs • Not only downward but vertical integration

National Level • Collecting Local cases and disseminating at the national level before multi-stakeholders

platform • Training and technical support to NGOs/civil society on public audit, including

enhancement with media • Citizen report card-plan/budget, revised and responsiveness • Making more representations in IPC local NGO, political parties, local agencies. • Representation of AIN in LGCDP advisory committee (oversight/independent voice)

Potential and conflicting roles while taking the role” Watchdog” role. • Local Governance accountability framework –more understanding and action theory • Sanction for non-performance” Who is responsible • Minimum conditions embrace by MLD is a welcome initiative.

IV. Co-ordination & Linkage Group Members Diawary Bouare, Parshuram Upadhyaya, Ashok, Soni Bijaya & Navaraj

• Civil Society Role as an observer (watch Dog) or as a part of the NAC (National Advisory

Council) of LGCDP • Regular Meeting and dialogue between LGCDP and AIN/LGWG –Quarterly Basis • AIN to share best practice of I/NGO to LGCDP +LGWG • AIN Regional Forums • Provide space for Initiating Linkage-Regional +Districts &local Level. • Coordination between LGWG and AIN Regional Network and work with Local

Government /Civil Society Association/Networks. • Inclusion of sectoral Ministries (Agricultural, Forestry…..) in NAC to influence policies.

LGWG/AIN • LGCDP regularly facilitate AIN/LGWG to update the LGCDP program

6

V. Skill Enhancement Group Members Sujana, Binny, Yadu, Bhoilentika & Bhumlal

• Identify Skill (Needed to be enhance) • Training • Manual/Guideline • Leadership (LB & community) • Exposure visit

4. Closing Remarks: Madan Rimal from Social Welfare Council made some closing remarks, he said that the workshop has provided a platform to explore and accelerate opportunities and area of coordination and collaboration to work together for the effective implementation of the LGCDP program. He said that I/NGO had a great role to support in program implementation and SWC also would like to work together. He also informed that the letter has issued from the Social Welfare Council that I/NGOs need to take pre-consensus of the program at the district level which has been decided at the Ministry level. He further informed that the project/program should be informed rather than taking pre-consensus at the district level so in this regard AIN and SWC need to work out. 5. Outputs from the Workshop The following were identified as outputs from the workshop:

• Common understanding of the LGCDP program its implementation. • Preliminary reflections of the LGCDP program by AIN members and partner NGOs in the

field. • Sharing and understanding of AIN’s Local Governance Working Group and the possible

areas of collaboration and collaboration. • Possible areas of collaboration between AIN and LGCDP program were suggested by

the participants. • Good platform for the LGWG to move forward with clear guidance as to priority focus

areas and goodwill with LGCDP for improved joint working. 6. Next Steps for the Local Governance Working Group The following next steps were identified for the Local Governance Working Group:

1) Draft a report of the workshop and share with LGCDP, and AIN Steering Committee 2) LGWG to reflect on the initial thoughts of workshop participants about potential areas for

linkage with LGCDP 3) LGWG to explore opportunities for ongoing coordination between LGCDP and AIN

potentially through AIN representation on the National Advisory Council for LGCDP 4) Encourage ongoing coordination of regional AIN networks and orientation to LGCDP 5) Coordinate the collection and sharing of best practices in relation to LGCDP 6) Gather existing civic education materials relating to Local Governance and LGCDP. 7) Engage with LGCDP via a small pilot based within one district yet to be confirmed. 8) Continue to raise awareness of LGCDP amongst AIN members so that our partners are

encouraged to engage with the process locally.

7

7. Presentations 7.1 Appendix: 1 Presentation LGCDP & Areas for Coordination and Linkage between government and I/NGOS in Local Governance Mr Som Lal Subedi, Joint Secretary, MLD National Programme Director LGCDP Goal LGCDP's over-arching goal is to contribute towards poverty reduction through inclusive responsive and accountable local governance and participatory community-led development that will ensure increased involvement of women, Dalits, Adibasi Janajatis, Muslims, Madhesis, disadvantaged groups in the local governance process. Purpose

• The purpose of the Programme is “Improved access to locally and inclusively prioritized public goods and services”.

Outcomes

• Citizens and communities are empowered • Increased capacity of local governments to manage resources and deliver basic services

in an inclusive and equitable manner • Strengthened policy and national institutional framework for decentralization, devolution

and community development Programme Intervention

• Empowerment of citizens and communities for active engagement with local governments and strengthening downward accountability

• Local bodies top-up grants for community led local development (DDC, Municipality and VDC)

• Capacity development of local governments for effective service delivery • Policy support for decentralization and local governance (devolution, fiscal

decentralization, human resource development) Key Areas of Support

• Community Development • Social Mobilization • Human Resource Development • Fiscal Decentralization • Gender and Social Inclusion • Local Governance and Devolution (downward accountability) • Action Research • Policy Support at National Level

Financial Provision Total LGCDP Budjet : USD 462.1 Million Source USD in Million Government of Nepal 260.8+VDC Development Partners 201.3 Total 462.1

8

Estimated Commitment from DPs Development Partners Estimated Total

Commitment ADB $ 106.30 m CIDA C$ 10 m

DANIDA $ 15

DFID $ 30 m NORWAY $ 10 m

(NOK 55 m) SDC CHF 4 m

($ 4 m ) UNDP $ 5 UNFPA $9 UNCDF 2 UNV 0.5 UNICEF 8.5 Composition of NAC MLD Secretary - Chairperson MLD Secretary - Municipality - Member MLD Joint Secretaries - Member Joint Secretaries of

- MoF, MoHP,MoPR,MoA, MoE, MoCSW,NPC - Member DG of DOLIDAR - Member Deputy Financial Comptroller

General of FCGO - Member Representatives of LB

Associations - Member DPs - ADB,CIDA,DFID,Norway, DANIDA,

SDC,UNDP,UNV, UNCDF, UNFPA,UNICEF,JICA,GTZ,Finland, - Member Joint Secretary – Governance Division/MLD -Member- Secretary

Responsibility Assignment Output Coordinators S.N. Output Coordinator Outputs

1 Chief of Self Governance Coordination Division- Joint Secretary

Output 2 & 6

9

2 Chief of Planning & Foreign Aid Coordination Division- Joint Secretary

Output 5 & 7

3 Chief of General Administration Division- Joint Secretary

Output 3 & 4

4 Chief of Municipal Management Division- Joint Secretary

Output 1

Responsibility Assignment Output Coordinators Output No

Outputs Output Managers (Under Secretary)

One Community Participation Municipal Management Section

Two Accountable Local Governance

Local Body Support Section

Three Fiscal Transfers Financial Administration Section

Four Capacity Building Support

Human Resources Development Section

Five Service Delivery Monitoring & Evaluation Section

Six Policy Coordination Decentralized Work plan Coordination Section

Seven National Support Planning and Foreign Aid Coordination Section

There are 5 Cluster Offices in five Regions to be headed by Cluster Coordinators Programme Coordination Unit

• PCU has been established at the premise of MLD • MLD has designated following officers to manage PCU since

o Joint Secretary, Mr. Som Lal Subedi: National Programme Director o Under Secretary, Mr. Gopi Krishna Khanal: Programme Manager o Section Officer, Mr. Amrit Lamsal: Administrative Officer o Account Officer, Mr. Lal Bahadur Karki, Account Officer o Mr. Keshav Padhre: Store Keeper ( Recently)

Some Achievements Output Activities Output 1

Review of Social Mobilization Preparation of Social Mobilization Guideline Preparation of Planning and Decision Making guideline

Output 2 Preparation of IEC Strategy Report Preparation of Concept Paper of LGAF Design of LGAF

10

Output 3 Assessment of MCPM system of all DDCs & Municipalities FY 2064/65

Assessment of MCs system of all VDCs FY 2064/65 Block Grant allocation ( including topping up) on the basis of MCPMs

Revised Guidelines of Block Grant allocation( GON) Prepared Topping up guidelines

Output 4 Study on Capacity Development Grant Strategies Preparation of Capacity Development Strategies Institutional assessment of MLD

Output 5 Development of GESI Strategy Preparation of Social and Environmental Framework

Output 6 Joint Financing Agreement Preparation of Operational Manual for conducting feasibility and pre-feasibility study of large scale projects implemented by LBs Preparation of Operational Manual of Impact Evaluation of large scale projects

Prepare Pilot Sector Conditional Grants System Output 7 Baseline Survey of all districts

Design Monitoring and Result Framework Output 8 Recruitment of Specialists

Recruitment of Cluster Coordinators Prepare Procurement Plan Prepared LGCDP’s Annual Strategic Implementation Plan 2066/67

Areas for Coordination and Linkage between government and I/NGOs in Local Governance a) Situation

• Inadequacy in services delivery • Expectation for better services • Lack of Services • Delivery gaps (Provision-Production-distribution) • Services are concentrated in accessible areas • Service delivery is always in transition so interventions are always welcome.

b) Issues in Local Service delivery

• Responsibilities assigned by LSGA and real benefit received by the people • Relation of 'Functions & Fund' and available resources as well as absorbing capacity • HRD and utilization/Institutional capacity • Awareness demand generation and supply capacity • Vertical & horizontal linkage • Real delivery • Elite capture & breaking the circle • Planning (Participative, Consensus, Weak, required interventions)

11

Areas of Linkage and Coordination 1. Social Mobilization

• Awareness (Community, LBs and Self) 2. Participatory Planning Process (PPP)

• Potentially analysis (Resource Mapping and Profile Analysis • Facilitation of plan formulation (at any level as per the demand and requirements) • Information shring in the meeting and council • Consultation at Ilaka Level • Planning workshops about supports and coordination • Support to M & E (sectoral and joint etc)

3. Accountability

• Enhance downward accountability (Public audit, Social Audit and Other guidelines) • Support to revenue mobilization

4. Co-ordination & Linkage

• Sharing sectoral expertise in relevant meetings & discussions. • Coordination among INGOs/NGOs at field, Ilaka & district level. • Coordination with District Information Center (Progress, Review etc) • Knowledge sharing (policy maker implementation & use committees (stakeholders)

5. Skill Enhancement

• Skill enhancement (Working with VDC, DDC & Municipality) • Support to HRD (Cash, kind & technology) • Exchange ideas & experiences among INGOs, NGOs and other stakeholders

Issues and Challenges

• Different conditions and requirements of DPs • Not receiving the funds from DPs due to delay in signing JFA • Absence of local elected leaders at LBs • Monitoring of Programme activities in 75 districts • Frequent strike, bandha, Tarai agitation slowed down the Programme activities delivery

at the districts • Lack of trained human resources • Fiduciary risks at the local level • Implementation of systems and mechanism developed under LGCDP

6 Suggestion/Feedback of the Participants after the Presentation After the presentation queries were raised by the participants on :

• If LGCDP program also advocate lobby with the government on the conflicting policies on the devolution of the resources by the different government institutions and the users group.

• How LGCDP program is building capacity of marginalized community trying to minimize

the gap and own by the local community?

• What has been done so far in IEC strategy, what that consist of and if any materials have been prepared.

12

• How often periodic planning is done at VDC level, what are the areas of coordination

• Though Local self gover4nance act give authority to local bodies but in practice often in

decision making central driving force succeed at this situation decision making is not at local or district level when less result is seen at local level so how the situation could be changed ?

• The recent letter issued by SWC on taking the pre-consensus by INGOs at district level

how feasible it will be. For INGOs to take pre-consensus with DDC at district level.

• LGCDP program should also focus on local economic development Mr Som Lal Subedi responded the queries of the participants he said that he agree there are conflicting laws in using the devolution resources parliament amendment of the law if we empower the beneficiaries and they can coordinate themselves. He further said that to include the marginalized group the VDC is categorized and fund is allocated to the poorest one. Social mobilization is also considered as one of the major component at VDC and DDC level to include the marginalized group He responded that the IEC strategy ahs not yet worked out and AIN can coordinate to collect the related IEC material and work together. He said that the VDC has to prepare the plan but in realistic must of the VDCs are not able to meet the minimum conditions. I/NGOs can help in integrated planning. He said that whatever the notice is how we can integrate resources and SWC INGOs can contribute to this. He further said that INGO is not to take permission at DDC level, INGOs should at least inform at district level about the program and project that implemented. INGOs can also collaborate by participating in the review, planning meeting in transparent way. 7.2 Annex: II AIN/Local Governance Working Group and Suggested Areas for the Collaboration between AIN and LGCDP, Sten Andreasen, LGWG Member AIN Strategic Plan 2008-10: Situation Analysis • National Context:

– People's Movement, the peace process and the Constituent Assembly elections a unique opportunities to CSOs and NGOs

– Nepal in fragile situation due to political transition and peace process – Proactive and creative role in launching concerted and coordinated efforts to support

national development goals – required by INGOs • International Context:

– Paris Declaration of 2005 (ownership, alignment, harmonization, managing for results, and mutual accountability + strong focus on the concept of state-led development

– Sector-wide Approach (SWAPs). Donor funding on the basis of sectors; with national government ownership

– A role of AIN to ensure the national development plans and policies truly reflect the needs and the priorities of the poor and the marginalized sections of society

13

AIN Strategic Plan 2008-10: Relationship w. Stakeholders

• AIN recognizes Nepalese citizens as its key stakeholders. AIN will have a strong relationship and build alliances with Nepalese NGOs, the Government of Nepal, local government bodies, the SWC, donors, political parties, the media, the corporate sector and other civil society networks

• Government of Nepal: Coordination and harmonization of development aid in the best

interest of the poor and the marginalized sections of society. • Local Government Bodies: Partnership through local partners (NGOs, CBOs) for strong

coordination and provision of technical support to government line agencies for their capacity building.

AIN Strategic Plan 2008-10: Selected Strategic Objectives

• To foster, facilitate and coordinate dialogue with the government and donors on areas of common interest, including guidelines and policy.

Specifically, that will include the following roles:

• Facilitate voluntary coordination of programs and projects of INGOs (with each other and with donors and government) to avoid overlapping and duplication and to promote synergy and effective use of resources (geographically and sector-wise).

• Encourage INGOs to align with government policies, strategies, institutions and procedures when they are in line with AIN’s principles, mission, and objectives and do not contradict with the members’ missions.

AIN Strategic Plan 2008-10: Selected Strategic Objectives

• To initiate activities that can help build the capacity of NGOs and promote good governance in the development sector in Nepal, including among INGOs

Specifically, that will include the following roles:

• Encourage and facilitate AIN members to help partners to work in ways that encourages good governance and gender equality in partners and in greater civil society, as well as government.

• Promote strategies to enhance good governance among AIN members. Areas of linkage and coordination (LGCDP – AIN)

14

Areas of linkage and coordination (LGCDP – AIN)

Areas of linkage and coordination (LGCDP – AIN)

Areas of linkage and coordination (LGCDP – AIN)

15

Areas of linkage and coordination (LGCDP – AIN)

7.3 Appendix: III Initial reflections from AIN member bodies and their field workers: Grenville Hopkinson, Coordinator Local Governance Working Group (LGWG) AIN Members were asked to answer a short survey about their experience of LGCDP • Question 1 what is the level of awareness of LGCDP in your area? • Question 2 to what extent is LGCDP operating in your area? • Question 3 to what extent is the 14 step participatory planning process operating in your

district? • Question 4 which aspect of LGCDP should we (AIN LGWG) focus on? 24 responses were received from 13 AIN member organisations • International Nepal Fellowship • CARE Nepal • United Mission to Nepal • WWF-nepal • IDE/Nepal • Un Raggio Di Luce Onlus Fondazione (FURDL) • The Mountain Institute • The Inter Party Women’s Alliance (IPWA) • Sahakarya/CECI Nepal • The Lutheran World Federation Nepal • Helvetas • Mercy Corps International • IRD Responses reflected AIN staff members experience across 33 districts, including Achham (x2) Baitadi Bajhang (x3) Bajura (x3) Banke (x4) Bardiya, Chitwan Doti (x3) Dadeldhura (x4) Dailekh (x2) and Darchula (x3) Initial reflections of LGCDP from AIN members

16

Question 1 What is the level of awareness of LGCDP in your area?

• Almost 2/3 of respondents agreed that the DDC/LDO is aware of LGCDP. However 9 out of 24 disagreed or didn’t know.

• Less than half the respondents agreed that NGOs they are working with are aware of

LGCDP. However 9 out of 24 said they didn’t know.

• Only 4 respondents agreed that community members were aware of LGCDP. A large proportion of people disagreed, while 11 out of 24 didn’t know.

The following feedback was received relating to LGCDP local level awareness:

• I have found one VDC (Bhagwanpur) in Rupandehi has good coordination.

• Some district have LGCDP program and some have not. Even implementing district has not publicly announced LGCDP program is rolled out.

• Only the seven political parties are aware of this programme.

• Communities have no idea about it. NGOs have heard about LGCDP but their level of

knowledge is not enough to access the LGCDP resources.

• No formal orientation organized at district level. Only few events were known to us. 2. To what extent is LGCDP operating in your area/s? • Most respondents are not aware of the level of operation of LGCDP at DDC or VDC level • 1/3 of respondents agree that expanded block grants were distributed by the DDC last year.

However two thirds didn’t know. • 6 respondents agreed that expanded grants were allocated at VDC level last year. However

18 out of 24 disagreed or didn’t know. The majority didn’t know. • Only 3 respondents agreed that LGCDP cluster co-ordinators were appointed in their areas.

The majority (21 out of 24) didn’t know or disagreed. The following feedback was received relating to the local operation of LGCDP • DDC and VDC not willing to expand the grants to community people once they faced with

delegation, protest by community groups • The planning for LGCDP is largely based on the political sharing rather than need base. • We don't have information about the size of grants available and allocated for each VDC • The fund distributed through LGDCP is confined between the LDO and party representatives.

Non government organizations and people are not aware.

17

• LGCDP has not been able to reach the target audience since it is confined to a few people. 3. To what extent are the 14 steps of the 'Participatory Planning Process' operational in your District? • 2/3 of survey respondents agree that ‘VDC Council meeting’, ‘District level Sectoral Committee

Planning Meetings’, and the ‘DDC Meeting’ are either fully or partially operational in their areas. • 1/2 of survey respondents agree that ‘Pre planning workshops’, ‘VDC /Municipal Meetings’,

‘District level Integrated Plan Formulation Meetings’ and ‘Council (Categorization of Programme)’ are either fully or partially operational in their areas.

• A significant proportion of survey respondents agree that ‘Plan formulation workshop

settlement level’, Ward level meetings’ and ‘llakha level planning workshops’ are only partially or not operational in their areas.

• The majority of respondents didn’t know the status of LGCDP operations across many process

steps. The following feedback was received relating to the 14 step participatory planning process for LGCDP: • There is a DDC council but the way it is organized it cannot be considered as a participatory

planning process. It is observed that planning process is dominated by 'all party mechanism' in favor of their interest.

• DDC has been doing as formality or without commitment and realistic expectations. • At the planning stage at the DDC and VDC level there is no involvement and participation of

women. • Planning meetings at VDCs and ward levels are participated by only a few elite people and

thus the demand placed to DDC for funding do not reflect the real need of the targeted group. • VDCs do not have long-term plan therefore the activities proposed in the meeting are ad hoc

and relevant to those attending the meeting. 4. Which aspect of LGCDP should AIN focus our support? • The question included the following aspects for AIN involvement:

– Social mobilisation, – Planning support, – Information sharing, – HRD, – Monitoring & Evaluation.

• Social mobilisation and Monitoring & Evaluation were identified as high priority by

approximately 80% of respondents • Planning support and Information Sharing were identified as high priority by approximately

70% of respondents

18

• HRD was identified as a High Priority by approximately 40% of respondents The following feedback was received relating to the priority focus areas for AIN-LGCDP joint working: • Monitoring & Evaluation should be given high priority. Feedback received on LGCDP should

be shared so that we can do better from the lessons learnt. • LGCDP has to be deliberately planned and monitored otherwise no thing difference than

previous years/practices • Political instability and absence of local body are the major barriers for LGCDP. • Low service delivery capacity of public goods and service providers is the number one barrier • The program should focus more on women issues like health, education. • AIN should focus on promotion of governance in CBOs and civil society too 6. Queries/Suggestions after the presentation After the presentation the participants raised their queries and made some suggestions.

• The baseline /reflection shared by AIN is a good starting. • Mr S. P Shrestha from MLD shared that the LGCDP is in the initial phase of the

implementation and has completed one year and is in the planning stage. Cluster coordinator has not yet appointed and will be appointed by end of September. The present cluster coordinator is of DLGSP.

• On HRD I/NGO and LGCDP can work together.

• Should also focus on Peace building issues and AIN can support on this.

• Should also focus on the local economic development S. P Shrestha from MLD inform

that economic development and peace building is core of the LGCDP programme.

• International bodies focus for the election of the local bodies.

19

8. Feedback/Suggestions from the Group Work Appendix IV Group Suggestions Group -1 Social Mobilization

• Identify Best Practice in Social mobilization incorporate in social mobilization Mechanism.

• Sharing of experiences between Government bodies and INGOs.

• INGOs support HRD of LG in Social Mobilization • AIN to share information (e,g DAGH) with District LSMC

local bodies • Formulate Village PP • Capacity Building of local Bodies for social mobilization • Make accountability through formal planning, by IPC

(Integrate Planning Committee), CODE of Conduct for local units, Social audit National level body to make more accountability and Citizen Charter.

Group-2 Participatory Planning Process

• Ensure inclusive and participation in planning by sex, religion, regional, caste, age and physical condition in 14 steps planning

• Ensure integration (accommodate of our partners plan into LBs annual as well as periodic Plan)

• Provide TA prepare for periodic plan as well as annual plan

a) Pre-Planning • Resource Map • Village Profile • Need opportunity mapping • Action and Activity Mapping • Gaps Identification/Mapping • AIN can work in coordination for

a) Awareness b) Piloting c) Technical Backstopping d) orientation on LSGA (Local Self Governance Act.

b) Post M&E • Awareness/Facilitate to make active the monitoring and

supervision committee • Forum joint M&E committee: Civil Societies, Private

Sector, Private Sector including government. Overall recommendations:

• Documentation of best practices in planning • Sharing of best practices in LGWG

Group-3 Accountability

Situation • Problems in Accountability • Different INGO has different role • Political Vs Bureaucratic staff in local bodies

VDC/municipality/DDC • Role of Political Parties.

Suggestion • One voice from all I/NGOs • Not only downward but vertical integration

National Level • Collecting Local cases and disseminating at the national

level before multi-stakeholders platform • Training and technical support to NGOs/civil society on

public audit, including enhancement with media

20

• Citizen report card-plan/budget, revised and responsiveness

• Making more representations in IPC local NGO, political parties, local agencies.

• Representation of AIN in LGCDP advisory committee (oversight/independent voice) Potential and conflicting roles while taking the role” Watchdog” role.

• Local Governance accountability framework –more understanding and action theory

• Sanction for non-performance” Who is responsible • Minimum conditions embrace by MLD is a welcome

initiative. Group-4 Co-ordination & Linkage

• Civil Society Role as an observer (watch Dog) or as a part of the NAC (National Advisory Council) of LGCDP

• Regular Meeting and dialogue between LGCDP and AIN/LGWG –Quarterly Basis

• AIN to share best practice of I/NGO to LGCDP +LGWG • AIN Regional Forums • Provide space for Initiating Linkage-Regional +Districts

&local Level. • Coordination between LGWG and AIN Regional Network

and work with Local Government /Civil Society Association/Networks.

• Inclusion of sectoral Ministries (Agricultural, Forestry…..) in NAC to influence policies.

LGWG/AIN • LGCDP regularly facilitate AIN/LGWG to update the

LGCDP program Group-5 Skill Enhancement

• Identify Skill (Need to be enhance) • Training • Manual/Guideline • Leadership (LB & community) • Exposure visit

21

Appendix: V AIN-Local Governance Working Group Workshop

Interacting with LGCDP, SWC Offices 25th August 200

Schedule 9:00-9:10 am Registration 9:10 -9:30 am Welcome & Introductions

– Grenville Hopkinson - AIN LGWG coordinator 9:30-10:00 am Presentation on LGCDP – Som Lal Subedi - LGCDP National Programme Director 10:00-10.30 am Presentation on AIN and LGWG

– Sten Andreasen – AIN Member and Former Steering Committee Member

10:30-11.00 am Presentation on AIN field staff reflections of LGCDP Grenville Hopkinson - AIN LGWG Coordinator 11:00-11:15 am Tea Break 11:15-12:15 pm Interaction Sessions – Developing options for joint working Options to include:

• Social Mobilization • Participatory Planning Process • Accountability • Co-ordination & Linkage • Skill enhancement

12:15-12:55 pm Feedback and plenary Groups to summarise discussions and feedback 12:55-1.00pm Closing Remarks – Som Lal Subedi – LGCDP National Programme Director 1:00-2:00pm Lunch

22

Annex VI Participants S.N Name Organization Email 1 Sujana Shakya Shia Nepal sujanashakya@gmail.com 2 M.L Yayaswal World Neighbors jayaswal@wn.org 3 Badri Manandhar Helvetas badri.manandhar@helvetas.org.np 4 Kalanidhi Devkota Municipality Association

of Nepal (MuAN) muan@ntc.net.np

5 Santosh Sharma CARE Nepal snatosh@crenepal.org6 Nawaraj Subedi Eco-Himal nawasubedi@hotmail.com 7 Dr Bijaya

Bajracharya IDE Nepal bbajracharya123@yahoo.com

8 Ramesh Adhikari MS Nepal Ramesh@msnepal.org.np9 Dawary Boure CARE Nepal diawary@carenepal.org 10 SP Shrestha MLD/LGCDP shresthasp@lgcdp.gov.np 11 Neil Websler UNDP/UNCDF Neil.websler@undp.org12 Juliana Yonzon VSO Nepal Juliana.yonzon@vsoint.org13 Gordan Findlay VSO Nepal gordonandmiranda@gmail.com 14 Sandhya Shrestha Oxfam sshrestha@oxfam.org.np15 Sten Andresen MS Nepal sten@msnepal.org.np 16 Callum Newman World Vision Callum_Newman@wvi.org 17 Yadu Shrestha LWF Nepal hrac@lwf.org.np18 Bhum Lal Pandey FURDL furdl@ntc.net.np19 Kileshwor Malla Winrock kmalla@winrock.org.np 20 Prem Maharajan UMN Prem.maharjan@umn.org.np 21 Hem RaLamichhane ADDCN addcn@addcn.org.np 22 Kamal Rupakheti GNHA gnhanepal@wlink.com.np 23 Ashok Shrestha ADRA-Nepal ashok.cshrestha@adranepal.org 24 Sanat Sapkota ADRA-Nepal Sanat.shrestha@adranepal.org 25 Deepak Koirala SC deepak.koirala@savethechildren.org.n

p26 Binny Subba NDI binny@ndinepal.org 27 Kishori Yadav SWC info@swc.org.np28 Madan Rimal SWC info@swc.org.np 29 Chanda Rai CCS Italy chanda.rai@ccsitaly.org.np30 Grenville Hopkinson UMN grenville@umn.org.np31 Ben Thuley UMN ben@umn.org.np32 Lucky Gurung AIN lucky@ain.org.np33 Soni Pradhan AIN/CBWG soni.pradhan@savethechildren.org.np34 Shiva Rayamajhi Shia Nepal usrayamajhi@gmail.com 35 Parsu Ram

Upadhyaya VDC Association info@navin.org.np

23