Learning from

Peers for
Good
Governance
A Guidebook
on Establishing
a Program for
Replicating
Exemplary
Practices
for Local
Government
Learning from Peers for Good Governance
Copyright © 2004
Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program (LGSP)
All rights reserved

The Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program (LGSP) and Federation of the Canadian
Municipalities (FCM) encourage the use, translation, and adaptation and copying of this material for
non-commercial use, with appropriate credit given to LGSP and FCM.

Although reasonable care has been taken in the preparation of this handbook, neither the publisher
and/or contributor and/or writer can accept any liability for any consequence arising from the use
thereof or from any information contained herein.

ISBN 971-92687-7-8
Printed and bound in Manila, Philippines

Published by:

Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program

Unit 1507 Jollibee Plaza
Emerald Avenue, Pasig City
1600 Philippines
Tel. Nos (632) 637 3511- 13
www.lgsp.org.ph

Federation of the Canadian Municipalities

International Centre for Municipal Development
24 Clarence Street
Ottawa, Ontario
Canada, K1N 5P3
Email: international@fcm.ca
Internet: http://www.fcm.ca

This project was undertaken with the financial support of the Government of Canada provided
through the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA)

Kaakbay Project Team: Basile Gilbert, LGSP Governance Advisor (Team Leader); Ria Adapon, LGSP
Program Officer; Rizal Barandino, LGSP Program Officer; Rommel Martinez, EBJFI; Polly Dichoso, EBJFI;
Norio Alumno, LMP

Program and Guidebook Concept: Basile Gilbert, LGSP Governance Advisor; Sebastien Hamel,
Regional Manager Asia, FCM

Writers: Marilou Sabado, STRIDES, Inc.; Letty Tumbaga, STRIDES, Inc.

Editorial Team: Basile Gilbert, LGSP Governance Advisor; Myn Garcia, LGSP Communications Advisor;
Ria Adapon, LGSP Program Officer

Cover Art: Arnold Beroya

Cover Design and Lay-out: Redge Abos

The publication of this guidebook has been made possible by support from the Federation of
Canadian Municipalities (FCM), International Center for Municipal Development, and the coordination
efforts of the League of Municipalities of the Philippines, as well as the technical support of
the Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program with funding from the Canadian
International Development Agency (CIDA).
A JOINT PROJECT OF

SA KABUH
AAN AY
IW A
AS

N
NG

AT
MBANSANG PA

PAG
PAPAUNLA
PA

D
EP
NA

S
UB
L IK A N G P ILIP I

Department of the Interior National Economic and Canadian International

and Local Government (DILG) Development Authority (NEDA) Development Agency

IMPLEMENTED BY

Agriteam Canada Federation of Canadian

www.agriteam.ca Municipalities (FCM)
www.fcm.ca
contents
Preface 7
Foreword 9
Acknowledgments 11
Acronyms 13
Definition of Terms and Concepts 14

Chapter One: Introduction to the Guidebook

Background 1-3
Why undertake a replication program? A Wealth of Advantages 1-4
A Guidebook for Replicating Exemplary Practices in Local Governance 1-7
Objectives of the Guidebook 1-7
Who May Use the Guidebook 1-8
What the Guidebook Contains 1-9
Organization of the Guidebook 1-9

Chapter Two: Establishing a Program for Replicating Exemplary Practices in Local Governance

Overview of the Process: Five Major Tasks 2-3

Setting up a Replication Program: Tasks 1-3 2-5

Task 1: Deciding to Undertake a Replication Program and Determining its Modalities 2-5
Task 2: Identifying Exemplary Practices for Replication 2-12
Task 3: Offering the Exemplary Practices to Potential Replicators and Selecting Replicators 2-18

Summing up: Lessons and Insights 2-21

Chapter Three: Practical Tools for Local Government in Sharing Good Practices

Contents 3-5
Acronyms 3-7
Introduction
What is Replication? 3-9
Why Replicate Exemplary Practices in Local Government:
The Big Picture 3-9
What is the Peer-to-Peer Learning Approach to Replication? 3-10
What will you Find in this Chapter? 3-11
What can your Local Government Gain from Replicating or Hosting the
Replication of an Exemplary Practice? 3-11
What else do you Need to Know about Replication? Guiding Principles of
Replication 3-14
The Replication Process using a Peer-to-Peer Learning Approach: Overview 3-15
Doing It: The Replication Process 3-16

Pre-replication 3-16
Replication Using the Three Tools 3-17
Tool 1: Documenting the Exemplary Practice 3-22
Tool 2: The Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop Generic Agenda and Facilitator’s Guide 3-30
Tool 3: The Replication Workplan 3-39
Post Peer-to-Peer Workshop Activities: Validating and Implementing the Workplan 3-43
Monitoring and Evaluation 3-43

Summing Up: Lessons and Insights 3-48

Chapter Four: More on M & E and Ensuring Success in Replication at the Program Level

Importance of M & E in a Replication Program 4-3

Monitoring and Evaluation at the Program Level 4-4
Conclusion 4-14

References A-1
Appendices
(The Appendices of this manual are contained in the enclosed CD Rom)

Appendix A. Sample MOU and Forms used by Kaakbay A-7

A.1. Memorandum of Understanding between League of Municipalities of the

Philippines, League of Cities of the Philippines, Department of Interior and Local
Government and Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program A-9
A.2. Framework and Criteria for Identifying Exemplary Practices A-12
A.3. Kaakbay Template for Initial Documentation of Exemplary Practices A-14
A.4. General Information for Host LGUs A-16
A.5. Selection Criteria for Replicating LGUs A-19
A.6. General Information to Replicating LGUs A-20
A.7. Application Form for Replicating LGUs A-22
A.8. Initial Documentation of Exemplary Practices A-25
A.9. LGU Replication Cluster Memorandum of Agreement A-30

Appendix B. Sample Kaakbay Reference Document:

“Making Crime Prevention Everybody’s Business”
Bantay sa Kahusay Ug Kalinaw (BKK) (Peace and Order Watch) A-32

Appendix C. Kaakbay Brochure/Flyer A-40

Appendix D. Monitoring and Evaluation Guide Questions Used by Kaakbay A-49

D.1. Mid-Project Assessment Questions A-51

D.2. Progress Report Template A-53
D.3. End-Project Assessment Questions A-54

Appendix E. Replication Tools

E.1 Tool #1: Guidelines in Documenting an Exemplary Practice (for Host LGUs) A-59
E.2 Tool #2: Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop Facilitator’s Guide
and Generic Agenda A-63
E.3 Tool #3: Replication Workplan Template A-71

Appendix F. Sample Workplan of a Replicating LGU A-75

6
p r e f a cA.1
appendix e

Learning from Peers for Good Governance fleshes out ideas and concepts, emerging as strong
mechanisms for strengthening local government around the world—it is about local government
units learning from each other and sharing good practices to improve governance.

In the era of rapid growth, local authorities are increasingly challenged to ensure the wellbeing
of their constituents by providing shelter, health and education, job opportunities, managing
land use and waste disposal, and addressing the plight of the urban poor. Local governments are
more and more influential in determining the development and future of citizens. As globalization
increases, local authorities are also finding the opportunity to get in touch with one another,
exchanging information and resources.

International organizations have recognized in these trends, the potential of city-to-city exchange
and learning for improving local governance and the wellbeing of populations. CIDA’s Philippines-
Canada Local Government Support Program (LGSP), and the Federation of Canadian Municipalities
(FCM) as a partner in the implementation of the program have pioneered in this field, by piloting
programs on structured peer-to-peer learning for local government.

LGSP’s Kaakbay Pilot Program in the Philippines involving 30 local government units, is one such
effort based on initial approaches experienced in Canada and around the world.

The success of the Kaakbay Pilot Program became evident in the concrete benefits gained by
these LGUs and their communities. Better roads and infrastructure, effective processing of local
business permits, health care reaching more people, community involvement in solid waste
management, reduced crime incidence were all positive outcomes had by LGUs. In doing so, these
LGUs acquired a deep appreciation for peer-to-peer sharing to strengthen their ability to meet
their challenges.

This guidebook is a testament to the success of peer-to-peer sharing as an approach for replicating
practices to improve local governance. It is our hope that local governments as well as the
wide range of organizations which support them in one way or another take the information
opportunity presented by this guidebook to share and produce new knowledge and greater
capacities for serving communities around the world.

Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program

7
8
foreword

Learning from Peers for Good Governance is the product of a fruitful partnership between the
Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG), the League of Cities of the Philippines
(LCP) and the League of Municipalities of the Philippines (LMP), with the support of the
Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program (LGSP).

Given our individual mandates, DILG, LMP and LCP have been intensively pursuing developing
local government capacities to better address issues brought about by economic and population
growth, urbanization, and poverty.

The Kaakbay Pilot Program for replicating exemplary practices in local governance has allowed our
respective organizations to work together for a common cause. We were able to pool and share
resources and information, develop coordination mechanisms, and involve LGUs in a sustained
intervention to learn from each other while building our own organizational capacities and
partnership.

Through this initiative, we developed an innovative and cost-effective approach to local capacity
development through structured peer-to-peer learning and the replication of good practices in
local governance. Given the increasing challenge of mobilizing and building capacity, the Kaakbay
approach has emerged as a viable tool for improving local governance in the Philippines.

Learning from Peers for Good Governance captures our experience in undertaking the Kaakbay
Program, as it presents the tools and processes we developed and validated, and embodies our
common goal of promoting and disseminating this approach for local capacity development.

We are convinced that there is much value in sharing the richness of the experience and allowing
others to access the tools and approaches for their own use and benefit. Learning from Peers for
Good Governance is our way of contributing to such learning.

As we endorse the benefits of sharing good practices for responsive and effective governance, we
strongly encourage the use of this guidebook by local government organizations, institutions and
local governments as they embark in developing and implementing a replication program. And
as we jointly commit our support for replication in the Philippines, DILG, LMP and LCP will extend
necessary and appropriate assistance to help ensure the success of such initiatives.

9
Finally, we would like thank the Philippines-Canada Local Government Support program for its
invaluable partnership and pioneering spirit in making this project happen.

Angelo T. Reyes Ramon N. Guico, Jr. Francis N.Tolentino

Secretary National President National President
Department of the Interior League of Municipalities League of Cities
and Local Government of the Philippines of the Philippines

10
acknowledgments

The following individuals and organizations made invaluable contributions to this project:

• LGSP Governance Advisor Basile Gilbert for the conceptualization, overall project management
and technical expertise throughout the implementation of the Kaakbay Pilot Program and
publication of this guidebook;

• Sebastien Hamel of the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM), for having helped
conceptualize the Kaakbay Pilot Program and this guidebook;

• The Evelio B. Javier Foundation, Inc. (EBJFI) team led by Rommel Martinez and Polly Dichoso for
having contributed to the successful development and implementation of the Kaakbay Pilot
Program;

• The Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program (LGSP) team, led by Alix Yule and
Marion Maceda Villanueva for providing direction and support;

• Marilou Sabado and Letty Tumbaga of STRIDES, Inc., and Redge Abos and Arnold Beroya for
the writing, cover design and lay-out of this guidebook;

• Myn Garcia for providing technical and creative direction, and overall supervision of the
design, layout and production of this publication;

• Li-Ann de Leon of the League of Municipalities of the Philippines (LMP) for having coordinated
the LMP involvement and support to the development of this guidebook;

• Dir. Rolando Neri of Oroquieta City, Misamis Occidental, Mayor Melquiadez Azcuna of Lopez
Jaena, Misamis Occidental, Loleimer Egos of Magsaysay, Davao del Sur, Liberato M. Undan
of Banay Banay Davao Oriental, Norio Alumno of LMP, and Polly Dichoso of EBJFI for their
participation in the Focus Group Discussion/Consultation held for the guidebook;

• The 30 local government units that participated in the Kaakbay Pilot program and whose
experience instructed the final content of this guidebook;

• And finally, LGSP Program Officers Ria Adapon and Sef Carandang for overall technical
assistance.

11
12
acronyms

AO Administrative Order
BALAK Basura Atras Linamon Abante sa Kalamboan Program
(Exemplary Practice of Linamon, Lanao del Norte)
BKK Bantay sa Kahusay Ug Kalinaw
(Exemplary Practice of Oroquieta, Misamis Occidental)
CIDA Canadian International Development Agency
DBM Department of Budget and Management
DILG Department of the Interior and Local Government
EBJF Evelio B. Javier Foundation, Inc.
EO Executive Order
EP Exemplary Practice
FCM Federation of Canadian Municipalities
LCE Local Chief Executive
LCP League of Cities of the Philippines
LGOO Local Government Operations Officer
LGSP Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program
LG Local Government
LGU Local Government Unit
LMP League of Municipalities of the Philippines
LRP Local Resource Partner
M&E Monitoring and Evaluation
MOA Memorandum of Agreement
NSC National Steering Committee
PAC Paglilingkod Abot-Kamay Program
(Exemplary Practice of Magsaysay, Davao del Sur)
RCC Regional Coordinating Committee
SB Sangguniang Bayan (Municipal Council)
SP Sangguniang Panlalawigan/Panglunsod (City/Provincial Council)
TWG Technical Working Group
UNDP United Nations Development Programme
USAID United States Agency for International Development
VNG Association of Netherlands Municipalities or Vereniging van
Nederlandse Gemeenten

13
terms & concepts

Replication A systematic and supportive project implementation process that

involves learning from, and sharing with others, practices that are
proven to be effective solutions to common and similar problems,
so as to contribute to the sustainable wellbeing of citizens and
advancement of local government with the least possible cost and
effort.

Replication Program Undertaking replication within an overall program that entails a

management structure responsible for (a) organizing the various
activities and processes, (b) providing systematic support and
a mechanism to local governments before, during and after the
replication process, (c) monitoring progress, and (d) ensuring
adherence to program principles and strategies as well as the
proper use of the replication tools.

Kaakbay A pilot replication program undertaken in the Philippines

implemented by the League of Municipalities of the Philippines
(LMP), the League of Cities of the Philippines (LCP), the
Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) and
supported by the Philippines-Canada Local Government Support
Program (LGSP) to introduce peer-to-peer coaching and learning
as a capacity development methodology to replicate exemplary
practices in local governance; a Filipino term meaning “arm-in-
arm”.

Peer-to-Peer A learning or capacity development approach involving

Learning relationship amongst counterparts of the same professional sector.
For the purpose of this guidebook, peers are local government
officials learning from other local government officials.

Exemplary Practice (EP) A mechanism, process, or method that has been proven to be
an effective, efficient and relevant way of addressing a particular
issue/challenge of local governance and that can be easily
replicable by other local governments. Exemplary practices may
support local government management, administration or service
delivery and may have different levels of complexity.

Local Government/ A sub-national government unit, e.g. a city or municipality.

Local Government Unit
(LG/LGU)

Host LGU The local government whose exemplary practice has been selected
for replication and will participate in the replication process as host
to the replicating LGUs.

Replicating LGU/Replicator The local government unit replicating the identified exemplary
practice.

14
1-2
 CHAPTER one
introduction to the guidebook
introduction
to the guidebook

BACKGROUND

Celebrating Effective and Innovative Local Governance

Local governance has moved center stage in social development
and public decision-making. Changes toward devolution and
decentralization over the past two decades have placed greater
powers and responsibilities on local governments. At the same
time, rapid urbanization, population growth, resource depletion
and economic stagnation have created bigger problems at the local
level.

Local government units everywhere are proving themselves to be

worthy of the challenge. There is a growing amount of information
available on successful approaches by local government units,
community-based groups and other local stakeholders, individually
or in partnership, to address common challenges. Numerous
publications, websites, and other media detail successful local
government efforts at improving health care, housing, waste
disposal, resource conservation, ensuring peace and order, tapping
innovative sources of income, reducing poverty, and enhancing
participation in governance.

A Missing Link
Despite the abundance of best practices examples in local
governance, however, there is a dearth of replication programs
available for local government units (LGUs) wishing to exchange
knowledge or replicate such practices. While several international
donor organizations (for example, the Federation of Canadian
Municipalities) support exchange programs between local
government in developed and developing countries, there is
almost no support for similar replication or exchange programs
among local governments in developing countries. Thus, while the
information is available and a growing number of local governments
want to learn how to improve their localities, the resources and
opportunities for such remain scarce.

1-3
 A first effort at an exchange and replication program on local government best practices on
a national scale came with the implementation of the Kaakbay program in the Philippines.
The the first of its kind in the world, the Kaakbay program (arm-in-arm in Filipino) is a pilot
replication program undertaken by the League of Municipalities of the Philippines (LMP),
the League of Cities of the Philippines (LCP) and the Department of the Interior and Local
Government (DILG) supported by the Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program
(LGSP). The program identified 6 exemplary practices (EPs) in the Philippines and brought
together 30 local government units—10 that have successfully pioneered the practices and 20
to replicate them—in a one-year replication program.

In many ways, Kaakbay illustrated how local and external resources can be pooled together
to address “the missing link.” By successfully demonstrating that knowledge exchange and
replication can be possible and viable on a national scale, Kaakbay also showed how similar
programs can be successfully undertaken.

This guidebook advocates that the replication and dissemination of good local governance
practices will have greater chances of success and sustainability when undertaken as part of a
program with an appropriate support system and structures. It offers a mechanism that can be
used by organizations working with local government units wanting to share or replicate good
practices with peers.

WHY UNDERTAKE A REPLICATION PROGRAM?

A WEALTH OF ADVANTAGES

Why undertake a replication program? For institutions and organizations open to the idea of a
replication program, knowing its benefits and advantages may help you decide if you want to
implement such a program.

1. Be part of a growing trend in local governance towards replication as well as

production and exchange of knowledge.

Undertaking a replication program puts you in the midst of a current trend, riding on the
wave of an idea whose time has come. Pioneered by such organizations as the Federation
of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) and the Association of Netherlands Municipalities
(VNG) , small initiatives at peer-to-peer learning and replication among cities and
municipalities are increasingly being supported by such international organizations as
the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), Habitat, the United States Agency
for International Development (USAID) and the World Bank. Undertaking a replication
program for local government in the same country puts you on the cutting edge of such a
trend.

1-4
2. Provide the ‘missing link’ in knowledge production
and sharing.

Many replication efforts are still being done on a

small scale, such as between two or three cities,
implemented on an ad-hoc, piecemeal basis. Often,
efforts are also done off-the-cuff, with few guidelines
and without the benefit of programmatic support or
structured monitoring and evaluation.
As such, these efforts are not enriched by previous
experience and fail to build a solid base on which
future initiatives can take off. The processes used
and the lessons gained remain in the minds of those
involved, if at all, instead of being documented and
made available to others. A program that can help
organize and structure the exchange of knowledge
and learning can help ensure that learning takes place
at an optimal degree.
Why Undertake a Replication Program?
1. Be part of a growing trend in local
governance towards replication and the
exchange of knowledge.
2. Provide the ‘missing link’ in knowledge
production and sharing.
3. Use a common sense approach to
learning and capacity-development.
4. Adopt an approach that is cost-effective.
5. Promote inter-local government
cooperation.
6. Provide support to local governments
undertaking replication.
7. Offer recognized governance programs
as an additional incentive to LGUs.
8. Ensure sustainability and impact.
9. Use a tried and tested methodology.

3. Use a common sense approach to learning and

capacity-development.

A replication program embodies a common-sense

principle: do not re-invent the wheel. With local
governments operating in the same legal and
regulatory frameworks and often facing similar
challenges in finding better and more effective ways
of delivering services and organizing themselves, a
program on replicating successful practices ensures
that individual local government units will not have
to go through the same process, only to arrive at the
same answer.

4. Adopt an approach that is cost-effective.

Using approaches already tested by others offers

a chance to eliminate the unnecessary steps
and mistakes that may have been done while
implementing the practice the first time. This is
because good and innovative practices are often
perfected through trial and error, driven by informal
leadership and creativity. A champion has a good

1-5
 idea and is able to mobilize people to implement it. At this experimental stage, however,
the development of an innovative idea takes time and may involve unnecessary steps.
Nevertheless, through this informal process, the idea evolves into a practice that
addresses a perceived problem resulting in greater effectiveness and/or efficiency in local
government operations. Replication will do away with the errors made the first time as it
distills the lessons from the first experience.

Thus, replication of the innovative practice can be done with greater precision; it is
therefore faster and to-the-point, generally more cost-effective than starting from scratch.

From a national policy or program point of view, the dissemination of good practices
through replication programs offers an option for reducing capacity-development and
human resources development costs. More local governments can be reached with fewer
resources. It also offers a way to promote and mainstream local cost-effective practices,
thereby reducing national expenditure required to support inefficiencies in the system.

5. Promote inter-local government cooperation.

A replication program is an empowering and participatory method of capacity

development for local governments. Local governments that have successfully replicated
good practices are encouraged to appreciate other approaches and share their
accomplishments with others, ensuring a continuous and ever-widening circle of learning.
The inter-local government cooperation established through these relationships often
results in creating avenues for sharing a wide range of ideas and preoccupations.

6. Provide support to local governments undertaking replication.

The Kaakbay experience demonstrated that replicating local governance practices is more
effective when undertaken within a larger program for the following reasons:

• Local government units often need technical, financial and other forms of support in
undertaking replication. A program provides such a support system.

• Local government units also gain from having an external partner that can ensure
regular monitoring and evaluation of progress made in the replication process. This
often provides for an incentive to meet deadlines and tends to build effectiveness in
the implementation.

• A program can provide a structure/mechanism for managing relations between and

among local governments, help stave off potential conflict or negative dynamics and
ensure supportive modes of coordination.

1-6
7. Offer recognized governance programs as an additional incentive to LGUs.

A replication program organized by a recognized and respected entity is an added

incentive for local government units. Being part of a bigger program helps to “make
official” an endeavor as good, and gives everyone involved a sense of being part of
something bigger than their own locality. Also, when the idea of replicating a practice is
supported and promoted by legitimate organizations, it helps local decision makers and
stakeholders (legislative council, the executive branch, community representatives) reach
consensus and leave their differences behind.

8. Ensure sustainability and impact.

Most importantly, a program for replication ensures greater sustainability and impact.
Capacities of local governments, as well as those of the organizations managing such
programs are continuously enhanced. This ensures that the gains made last longer and can
impact on a larger number of local governments and communities.

9. Use a tried and tested methodology.

Undertaking replication within a program framework also allows the optimal use of a
tried and tested replication process with simple, proactive tools. The experience of the
Kaakbay replication program in the Philippines made it possible to refine such tools and
methodologies, which are now available for general use by institutions working with local
government.

A GUIDEBOOK FOR REPLICATING EXEMPLARY PRACTICES (EPs)

IN LOCAL GOVERNANCE

Given the many advantages of pursuing a replication program, this guidebook presents a set
of how tos in implementing a tested and structured methodology for replicating exemplary
practices in local government through a national or sub-national program. This methodology
should be able to provide a link between, on the one hand, the abundance of local
governments willing and eager to share their good practices, and, on the other hand, the even
bigger number of local government units that are demanding information and opportunities
to learn from others.

Objectives of the Guidebook

This guidebook therefore aims to promote the replication and dissemination of exemplary
practices in local governance as a way of building capacities and enhancing local governance.

1-7
 Specifically, the guidebook aims to:
A Chapter for the
Local Government Reader
While primarily targeting enabling
organizations, Chapter 3 of this
guidebook is packaged so that it
can be used by an individual local
government unit wanting to share
or replicate a particular practice
with one or more local government
units, outside the framework of a
larger replication program. Chapter
3, therefore, while an integral part of
the guidebook, can also be distributed
independently to individual LGUs.
• Introduce more peer-to-peer methodologies of
capacity development in the local government
sector
• Provide various organizations with tools,
guidelines, and processes to help organize,
coordinate, and manage a local government
exemplary practice replication program
• Present/share some of the lessons learned in
conducting a national program of replication of
exemplary practices
• Provide specific tools and insights to LGUs
wanting to get involved in the replication
and dissemination of exemplary practices,
specifically those practices that would require a
year to replicate and entail face-to-face contact
with host and replicating LGUs

Who may use the Guidebook?

For Organizations and Government Agencies working with

LGUs
The guidebook may be used by institutions,
organizations or government agencies working with
local government that are interested in managing, on
their own or in partnership with other organizations,
a program to support local government in sharing,
learning and replicating good governance practices.

These include:
1. Leagues or associations of cities, municipalities
or other sub-national government units
2. National, provincial or regional administrative
bodies in charge of local government
3. International or national foundations and
donor institutions

1-8
What the Guidebook Contains
The guidebook serves as a valuable practical tool in establishing a replication program for
exemplary practices in local governance because it offers the following:

1. A viable, structured peer-to-peer coaching and learning methodology in replicating

local government best practices that is based on a specific program experience-
Kaakbay
2. Generic, simple and practical tools and processes for replicating good governance
practice that range from simple to highly-complex

While the guidebook was inspired by the Filipino experience of the Kaakbay program, utmost
effort has been made to make the guidebook as generic as possible, so that it can easily
be adapted in different contexts and countries. Thus, while the guidebook is informed by a
distinctly Filipino experience, the tools and processes it presents are practical and easy-to-
follow, and can be conveniently adapted for use in other countries.

At the same time, this guidebook is specifically for the replication of practices that are
moderate-to-highly complex, meaning replication that would benefit from face-to-face
communication and exchange between host and replicating local government units and will
take from 6 to 18 months to replicate.

Organization of the Guidebook

The guidebook is divided into four chapters, each with an introduction and a summary of
important insights and reminders at the end.

Chapter One provides the general introduction and overview of the guidebook.

Chapter Two describes the first three major tasks and requirements in setting up a program for
managing peer-to-peer replication.

Chapter Three is a step-by-step guide to the replication process between and among local
governments at the local level. It is also the chapter that can be used independently from the
rest of the guidebook by individual local government units wishing to undertake replication
outside of a structured program.

Chapter Four is on monitoring and evaluation at the program level. It also concludes the
guidebook with key lessons about replication from Kaakbay participants and partners in the
Philippines.

1-9
1-10
 CHAPTERtwo
establishing a program for replicating
exemplary practices in local governance
2-2
establishing a program
for replicating exemplary practices
in
local governance
As a first step to establishing your own program for sharing and
replicating local governance practices, you need to determine the
program modalities that will suit your needs and situation. You also
need to acquaint yourself with the process of setting it up. This
chapter helps you do that, by providing you with:

1. A general overview of the entire program process and its

different components
2. A detailed description of the first three tasks in setting up
the program

OVERVIEW OF THE PROCESS: FIVE MAJOR TASKS

Setting up and managing a replication program essentially involves

five major tasks:

Task 1 Determining the modalities of the program

Task 2 Identifying exemplary practices that will be offered
for replication
Task 3 Selecting local governments that will replicate the
exemplary practices (EPs)
Task 4 Managing and supporting the actual replication
process among local government units
Task 5 Monitoring and evaluating the program

The rest of Chapter Two provides a more detailed discussion of

the first three tasks. Chapter Three focuses on Task 4 or Managing
and Supporting the Replication Process. Chapter Four discusses
Monitoring and Evaluation at the program level.

2-3
Tasks
Task 1
Determining the
Modalities of the Program
Task 2
Identifying exemplary
practices (EPs) for replication
Task 3
Offering the Exemplary
Practices (EPs) and selecting
local governments that will
undertake replication
Task 4
Managing and supporting the
actual replication process
among local government units
participating in the program
PROGRAM LEVEL
Task 5
Monitoring and evaluating
the program (program level
and local replication process)
2-4
Task Components Outputs and Tools
• Determining program set up Outputs:
• management structures 1. Management structure established.
• roles and responsibilities of partners 2. MOA among institutional partners.
• objectives, frameworks, principles and strategies 3. Procedures elaborated
• Mobilizing available and needed resources 4. Resources mobilized.
• Developing framework and criteria for identifying EPs Outputs:
1. Framework and criteria for
• Search initial documentation and identification of EPs
• Packaging of identified EPs for dissemination to prospective identifying EPs
2. Information package for potential
replicators
• Building relations/arrangements with host LGUs host LGUs
• Setting up mechanisms to continue the search for relevant 3. List of identified EPs and initial
exemplary practices (Knowledge management unit) documentation of EPs
4. Incentive and support package for
host LGUs
Outputs:
• Developing selection criteria for replicators 1. Selection criteria for replicators
• Information dissemination 2. Information package for potential
• Screening and selection of candidacies replicators
• Getting the commitment of replicators 3. Final list of replicators
• Clarifying roles and responsibilities of replicators and forms of 4. Support package for selected
support that the program can provide them replicators
• Building relations/arrangements with replicators
Pre-Replication: Outputs:
• Preparing for replication activities • MOA or similar instrument between host
• Building relations between host and replicating LGUs and replicating LGUs
Actual Replication: Peer-to-peer coaching through three main Tools Needed:
activities • 3 Replication Tools
• Documenting the exemplary practice as a guide for replication 1. Guidelines for Documenting the
• Conducting the peer-to-peer learning workshop among host and Exemplary Practice
replicating LGUs 2. The Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop
• Formulating the workplan Generic Agenda and Facilitators Guide
3. Workplan Template
Monitoring and evaluation at the LGU level • Assessment Tool for LGUs
REPLICATION LEVEL
• Monitoring and evaluation integrated throughout the replication Tools Needed:
process(program level and replication level) Program Assessment Tools
• Joint monitoring and evaluation by host and replicating LGUs at
replication level (either self-assessment by LGUs or facilitated by
program implementers)
• Program support for M & E at the local government level
• Use of monitoring and evaluation tools
SETTING UP A REPLICATION PROGRAM: TASKS 1-3

TASK 1
Determining the Modalities of your Replication Program

Task One includes the following activities:

1. Deciding to do it alone or in partnership with other organizations

You need to decide if your organization wants to set up the program independently or
in partnership with one or more organizations, for example, a government agency, an
international donor agency, an association of LGUs, or some other institution.

There are advantages and disadvantages in doing it on your own as well as in forming a
partnership or consortium.

Table 2.1. Advantages and Disadvantages of Forming a Partnership or Consortium

Advantages Disadvantages

More resources can be made available to the
program, as organizations can pool individual
resources to maximize them.
Having a partnership/consortium manage
the program may also lend a stronger profile/
cachet to the program and may attract funding
agencies to provide more support.
Having more than one organization manage
the program may diminish each organization’s
sense of responsibility and ownership, especially
if leadership and roles are not well-defined. This
can result in involvement tapering off for one or
more organizations, and the remaining group
pressured to take on most of the tasks.

Each institutional partner brings its own
strengths relative to its goals and objectives,
networks, and organizational structure. There is
potential for synergy and complementation.
A consortium can consolidate resources and
efforts by different groups and help avoid
duplication or multiplication of programs with
similar goals and objectives.
Having more than one organization manage the
program may give rise to conflicts or negative
dynamics that will have to be managed along
the way, especially if partners are working
together for the first time.
The decision making process may take more
time if consensus is required from institutions
with different backgrounds and paradigms.

2-5
 How Kaakbay did it:
Forming a Consortium of Institutions

The Local Government Support Program, a major capacity development program and
the flagship governance program of the Canadian International Development Agency
(CIDA) in the Philippines, recognized the need to develop replication methodologies
for local government in the Philippines. It mobilized the two main national associations
of local government, the League of Cities of the Philippines (LCP) and the League of
Municipalities of the Philippines (LMP), as well as the national agency responsible for local
government in the country, the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG),
to initiate a pilot program on replication with the intention of establishing a permanent
national replication program after the pilot program.

LCP and LMP represented all cities and municipalities in the country and had
solid communication networks linking their national secretariats to member local
government units throughout the country. They have both identified the replication and
dissemination of best practices as part of their strategic objectives but had not developed
the mechanisms required to implement it. The DILG was already implementing the
components of a framework to coordinate inputs of several national and international
stakeholders for the capacity development of LGUs throughout the country. The
department saw the replication of exemplary practices as one of several inter related
approaches to capacity development for LGUs in the country.

While the Kaakbay pilot program was officially implemented by three national
institutional partners, LGSP provided financial and technical assistance throughout
program implementation, assisted by the Evelio B. Javier Foundation (EBJF), a non
governmental organization primarily dedicated to local government strengthening in the
Philippines.

See Appendix A.1 for Memorandum of Agreement between LGSP, LCP, LMP and DILG.

2. Setting up management structures

Identify the management structures that you want to establish by determining the scope
and coverage of the program, its objectives and strategies. It is important to have at least
two basic structures:

• A decision-making/policy-making body
• An implementation team

The decision-making body will be the higher body that sets the general direction and
oversees the entire program. The implementation team is your program workhorse. It
implements the program activities, manages the day-to-day operations and activities,

2-6
provides secretariat functions, and trouble-shoots problems. It can also develop plans and
recommend policy changes for approval by the decision-making body.

If you are implementing the program as a consortium, the decision-making and

implementing bodies can be composed of two to three representatives from each
member of the consortium. Representatives from the leadership of each organization
will form part of the decision-making body along with other members you may identify.
Key staff members with experience in handling related local governance programs can
become part of the implementing body.

Once you have set up your management structures, they will need to do the following:

• Develop objectives, principles, framework and criteria for selecting EPs and replicators,
as well as mechanisms for coordination and communication, reporting, information
dissemination, monitoring and evaluation, process documentation and others
• Manage/undertake the search and selection of EPs (including information
dissemination, screening)
• Manage and oversee the actual replication process among local governments and
ensure the achievement of program objectives within the given timeframe
• Monitor and evaluate the program
• Provide overall management and coordination of the program

How Kaakbay did it:

Setting Up Management Structures

Three structures were set up by Kaakbay:

• National Steering Committee (NSC)– the policy-making and oversight body for the
program; composed of 2-3 representatives of the four partner organizations (LCP,
LMP, DILG and LGSP), including the executive heads of the organizations.
• Technical Working Group (TWG)- the group undertook secretariat functions, drafted
policies for approval by the NSC, and took care of the day-to-day operations and
overseeing of the replication processes.
• Regional Coordinating Committees – composed of regional office representatives
of the DILG, LMP and LCP; undertook information dissemination and pre-screening
functions, as well as provided coordination at the regional level.

2-7
 3. Formulating objectives, policies, principles and framework/criteria to guide the program
The management structure/s you set up will formulate the following for the program:

• General program objectives

• Program policies
• General guidelines on how to undertake the program

To do this, your implementing team can draft the needed documents for the decision-
making body to discuss, modify and approve.

How Kaakbay did it

Kaakbay set the following objectives:

• To introduce organized and structured methodologies in replicating exemplary

practices in local governance as an approach to building capacities of local
governments in improving the general wellbeing of their constituents with the least
possible cost and effort
• To promote the dissemination and replication of exemplary practices through a
structured, peer-to-peer learning approach that involves sharing and learning from the
experiences of local governments

4. Leveling off on roles and functions among those involved in the program
Leveling off on roles and functions is important, particularly if you are doing this as a
consortium. Keeping in mind the key functions that you need to undertake in the program,
level-off on roles and functions of the management structures as a whole, the individual
member-organizations, and the individual representatives.

2-8
 How Kaakbay did it:
General List of Roles and Responsibilities

In the Memorandum of Understanding of the Kaakbay consortium, LCP, LMP, DILG and
LGSP committed to undertake the following roles and responsibilities:

1.1. DILG

a. Designate/appoint a coordinator/technical staff at national and local levels who will

work with the Secretariat to implement the overall project in between meetings of the
Project Steering Committee.
b. Designate Local Government Operations Officer (LGOO) and/or province-level staff to
coach and monitor the implementation of the replication projects in LGUs.
c. Provide in-kind contribution in the implementation and management of the project.

1.2. LCP and LMP

a. Play an active role in disseminating information required to support the

implementation of the KAAKBAY Project among members.
b. Provide in-kind contribution in the implementation and management of the project.
c. Provide financial support for the implementation of at least 1 replication cluster.
e. Disseminate information about the success and results of the project as well as about
specific exemplary practices being replicated.

1.3. LGSP

a. Provide financial assistance for the overall project implementation as well as for the
four (4) Replication Clusters.
b. Provide technical assistance and secretariat/administrative support for the
implementation and management of the project.
c. Designate a representative to the Project Steering Committee and play an advisory
role in the implementation of the project.

See Kaakbay Memorandum of Agreement on Appendix A.1.

2-9
 5. Developing mechanisms and systems for the following is crucial:

a) Management
b) Coordination (among partners in a consortium/partnership and among team
members (in a single organization) as well as with LGUs)
c) Monitoring and evaluation
d) Program support to hosting and replicating local governments

At this stage, you need to agree on systems and mechanisms for managing the program
and coordinating with each other. These include the following:

• Modes of decision-making—what decisions can the implementing team make on its

own and which decisions need the approval of the decision-making body?
• Modes of communication and reporting—meetings, email, reports

Tasks Two & Three of this Chapter tackle the process of identifying support mechanisms for
local government units. The process of setting up mechanisms and developing systems for
monitoring and evaluation will be taken up in Chapters 3 & 4.

6. Developing a workplan
After you have laid down the basic parameters and modalities, a good next step will be to
develop an initial workplan covering all program activities for a period of at least one year
or till a first round of replication is completed at the local government level. Developing a
workplan helps you situate the program within a concrete timeframe, identify the needs
and activities within each step of the plan as well as the resources that will be needed.

A workplan also helps identify internal and external factors that can affect program
activities (elections, local government processes like budgeting, holidays) as well as give
partners a chance to integrate the program activities within the other activities and
programs of their respective organizations.

2-10
 How Kaakbay did it:
The Kaakbay Pilot Program Workplan
Activities Nov-Dec Jan- Apr- Jul- Oct- Jan-Mar Apr-
02 Mar Jun Sep Dec 04 Jun
03 03 03 03 04
Inception Phase

Formation of consortium /
management structure
Formation of National Steering
Committee
Identification of Key Areas for
Replication
Identification of Exemplary
Practices / Host LGUs
Selection of Local Resource Partners
(LRPs)
Gathering of Reference
Documentation
Selection of LGUs for Replication

Implementation of
Replication Process
Joint Inception/Exposure Workshop
(Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop)
Establishment of Replication Project
Committees
Signing of MOAs among Replication
Clusters
Formulation of Replication Work
Plans
Implementation of Replication
Projects
Joint Mid-Project Progress
Assessment Workshop
Joint Final Assessments

Finalization of Program
Methodology Manual
Develop strategies to establish a
permanent national program based
on the pilot program experience

7. Identifying and leveraging resources needed and available

An important consideration in determining the modalities of your program is resources—
human, technical and financial. You need to identify what resources you can mobilize and
what you can do, given the resources you have. If you want to cover a large geographical
area, you would need more people and more funds for travel and other costs. Selecting a
bigger number of exemplary practices and replicating local government units would also
entail more funds and people to manage.

2-11
 How Kaakbay did it:
Mobilizing Resources for the Program

Funding for the Kaakbay pilot program was primarily provided by the Philippines-Canada
Local Government Support Program (LGSP) with financial and in-kind contributions from
the two national associations of local governments-LCP and LMP. The DILG provided in-
kind contributions mainly by dedicating staff to the program. Host LGUs also provided
staff time and other resources such as meeting rooms, community volunteers, etc.

TASK 2
Identifying Exemplary Practices for Replication

To undertake TASK 2, both the implementing team and the decision-making body will have
to be involved in the tasks outlined below. You can also decide to form a smaller group with
representatives from these two bodies that will focus on the tasks involved (especially if you
are managing the program as a consortium) or have the entire implementing team undertake
it (in case you are doing it as a single organization.) These tasks are:

1. Developing a mechanism for identifying relevant EPs (Knowledge

Management Unit)
2. Developing a framework and criteria for identifying exemplary practices
3. Conducting the search to identify EPs
4. Building relations with host LGUs

Let us take each task in turn.

1. Develop a mechanism for identifying relevant EPs

(Knowledge Management Unit)
An ongoing program for replicating and disseminating EPs requires a continuous process
for identifying relevant practices for the improvement of governance. The choice of
exemplary practices to be promoted for dissemination in a given context is likely to be
rooted in strategic orientations of your organization. Thus, a knowledge-management unit
needs to be established to manage the selection of EPs and link them to your strategic
orientations.

Key issues to be taken into account here are:

• The unit should be comprised of members of your organization with policy-related
or strategic responsibilities. The work of this unit involves analysis and a deep
understanding of the local government environment and its capacity development
needs.

2-12
 • Members of such a unit need to be in a position to link the identification of EPs with
the strategic orientations of the respective organizations involved.

• Depending on the magnitude of your program, a data base could be developed

as a tool to manage EPs. Such a database would require regular updating thereby
identifying new practices to be promoted as well as removing ones that are no longer
relevant.

2. Develop a framework and criteria for identifying exemplary practices

This includes identifying the following:

a. Categories of EPs you would like to offer for replication.

You may choose to limit your selection to practices that address specific orientations,
goals and objectives of your organization, namely: poverty reduction, waste
management, resource mobilization, urban development, government administration.
Establishing categories will help to focus your identification of EPs and will also
facilitate documentation and packaging of the same.

The categorization may also point to specific conditions or contextual characteristics

important to its replication. A practice related to coastline rehabilitation for example
would only be proposed to coastal towns; a practice related to developing industrial
activity would be suitable for cities with potential industrial growth.

b. Geographical scope of your selection

You may choose to select EPs from across the country, within certain regions, or within
your area of work or jurisdiction to facilitate program implementation.

c. Degree of difficulty entailed in replicating the EPs

Some EPs are easier to replicate than others. There may be practices that can be
replicated within one or two months and will require few or no additional resources
at all to replicate, such as streamlining the issuance of business permits. Others may
require substantial resources to replicate, and may entail promoting changes in
attitudes and behavior of local government personnel and community residents such
as a comprehensive community based waste reduction program.

Categorizing EPs in terms of degrees of difficulty to replicating them is important.

d. Timeframe for replication

Related to establishing limits to the degree of difficulty in replicating EPs, it is also
critical to establish a timeframe for replication. How long will it take local governments
to replicate the selected EPs? Six months? A year? Two years? Setting up a timeframe
will help you manage and monitor the replication process as well as help the host and
replicating LGUs manage their time and activities.

2-13
 Based on the lessons of the Kaakbay experience, it is best that you limit your choice of
exemplary practices to those that would take no more than one year to replicate. Practices
that require more than a year to replicate may entail greater difficulties to manage: local
government units may lose momentum or enthusiasm in the process and monitoring may be
less effective given the longer period.

e. Generic Exemplary Practices (EPs)

Selected EPs should also be generic enough so that replicating LGUs can modify and adapt
them to their own situation. EPs that are too context-specific or require too many pre-
conditions or are subject to a lot of external factors may be difficult to replicate.

f. Cost-effectiveness
One of the principles of replication is that it should require the least effort and amount of
resources. Thus, selected EPs should have proven their cost-effectiveness in terms of achieving
their objectives vis-à-vis the amount of resources that went into the practice.

g. Number of EPs to be offered

You will also need to determine how many EPs you would like to offer for replication, based
on the amount of resources you have in documenting and packaging them, and in terms of
managing the replication process.

h. Potential involvement of the LGU having experienced the EP

Lastly, if your replication program involves engaging the host in sharing its experience, a
critical consideration is the level of institutional commitment a local government having
initiated the exemplary practice is willing to give to the program.

How Kaakbay did it:

Identifying Exemplary Practices of LGUs

Kaakbay developed a framework for identifying exemplary practices in local governance. The
framework and criteria focused on the following considerations:

Criteria for Identifying Exemplary Practices

Necessary Criteria

• LGU-initiated. The exemplary practice has been/can be initiated by a LGU at the city or
municipal level. The initiative should be sustainable and not dependent for its success,
implementation or resources on any other program/project or agency. This being the case,
the initiative should demonstrate LGU ownership and is socially accepted by its targeted
beneficiaries.

• Simple and implementable in a short time frame (a maximum of 18 months). The

initiative is easily replicable and can progress to the “application stage” in a relatively short
timeframe.

2-14
 • Proven and effective solutions to the problems encountered. The exemplary prac-
tice has operationally demonstrated and proven to be an effective response to the
identified needs of its target beneficiaries. It also means that the initiative has signifi-
cantly contributed to improving the social and material conditions of the beneficiaries.

• Demonstrated level of sustainability. The following indicators may help determine

the level of sustainability of the initiative: 1) it has been in place for a considerable
period of time; 2) it survived the entry of a new administration; 3)it has become a per-
manent program or structure in the LGU; 4)the community as well as executive and
legislative bodies are involved in / supportive of it; and 5) related legislation is in place
in the LGU.

• Least possible cost and effort to replicate. The exemplary practice does not require
huge amounts of resources or funding to replicate and is easy to implement. It’s a
“common sense idea” as opposed to a capital-intensive project. It also means the ex-
emplary practice was able to mobilize and maximize the use of indigenous resources.

Desirable Criteria

• Practices which are conducive to achieve results addressing the Millennium

Development Goals (MDGs)

• Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger • Improve maternal health

• Achieve universal primary education • Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria, and other diseases
• Promote gender quality • Ensure environmental sustainability
• Reduce child mortality • Develop a global partnership for development

• Potential for multiplier effect or further replication. The practice addresses

a problem or situation encountered in many LGUs. The success of the practice
demonstrated in a few LGUs may incite other LGUs to adopt the same practice.

• Documented exemplary practice. In order to reduce overall program costs,

preference will be given initiatives that have existing documentation of the benefits,
key milestones, success and hindering factors, results, key stakeholders, processes and
mechanisms.

“Host” LGUs
While the exemplary practice or initiative may manifest the foregoing features or criteria,
the city or municipal LGUs who have experienced the exemplary practice and will serve as
host in the replication process, should likewise have:

• The will and interest ( LCE and SB/SP support) to take part in an institutional sharing
process
• The presence of resource people with the ability to contribute/ articulate their
experience
• Readiness to start as soon as possible so that the initiatives are completed or are
underway before the 2004 local elections
• Existing documentation of the exemplary practice preferred

See Kaakbay Framework and Criteria for Identifying EPs in Appendix A.2.

2-15
 3. Conducting the Search to Identify EPs

Once you have formulated your framework, you can begin the search for exemplary practices.

a. Beginning the search for EPs

• Issue a general call for EPs.
• Tap into networks such as leagues or associations of local governments or
government agencies to get recommendations for potential EPs.
• Conduct research on existing literature on exemplary practices or get lists from
institutions that provide support to local governments or grant awards and
recognition to LGUs with exemplary practices.
• Produce and disseminate a brief concept paper that contains the following – basic
information about the program, the criteria for identifying EPs, and ways of contacting
your organization/s for LGUs wanting to offer their good practices for replication.
• If a comprehensive local government performance measurement system exists where
you are establishing your program, assess the feasibility of identifying good practices
related to high performing LGUs in specific service areas. This approach may require
additional research and processes to make the link between the indicators of high
performance and the practices associated to those high performance levels in the LGU
operations.

b. Screening and initial documentation

After compiling an initial list of potential EPs from recommendations and/or the
results of your research, designate teams or individuals that will undertake the
screening of potential EPs on your list. These can be region-based teams/individuals.
They may consider visiting the local governments under consideration and conduct
initial documentation of potential EPs. For this, you need to develop a template for
documentation that will provide you with the essential information you will need in
assessing each EP.

After documenting basic information on the EPs, screen the list you have made based on
your criteria and make a final list of your identified EPs.

How Kaakbay did it

Kaakbay implementors developed a template that was used to document potential
EPs. The information obtained was then used for screening and selecting the EPs to be
included in the program.

See Kaakbay Template for Identifying and Initial Documentation of EPs in Appendix A.3.

2-16
 c. Packaging information about EPs for dissemination to potential replicators
Once you have finalized your list of identified EPs, package the information about the
EPs for dissemination to potential replicators. You can do this by producing animated
audio-visual presentations (in powerpoint CD formats, for example), brochures or
pamphlets (See Appendix C for sample Kaakbay brochures). The EP package should
include most of the information that potential replicators will need:

• To determine if a specific EP represents a solution to a challenge or problem in

their own LGU
• If the characteristics of the LGU that implemented it apply to their LGU
• In deciding if they can benefit from replicating such a practice and
• If they have the capacity and prevailing conditions for replication

How Kaakbay did it

To document and disseminate information on the exemplary practices offered for

replication, Kaakbay used the same template it developed to initially document and
screen its EPs. A lesson learned by the program was that additional efforts may have
been made to “market” the EPs to other LGUs.

See Kaakbay Template for Initial Documentation of EPs in Appendix A.3.

4. Building Relations/Arrangements with Host LGUs

This essentially entails the following:

a. Getting the institutional commitment of the host LGU to participate in the replication
process
b. Providing information on the benefits of taking part in the replication process as a
host
c. Clarifying roles and responsibilities of the host LGUs in the replication process

Roles and Responsibilities of host LGUs that need to be clarified with them include the
following:

• Collaborate in documenting their exemplary practice following the guidelines set

by the program,
• Cooperate in the preparation of the peer-to-peer learning workshop (mobilize
champions, partners, beneficiaries; prepare presentations and field visits, etc),
• Undertake the peer-to-peer learning workshop,
• Establish modes of coordination and communication with the replicating LGUs;
• Participate in the monitoring and evaluation activities.

2-17
 d. Putting together a support and incentive package for host LGUs
Forms of support can include technical assistance in undertaking specific tasks of host
LGUs (e.g. documenting their practice, facilitating the peer-to-peer learning workshop),
financial support (such as travel and accommodation expenses if needed), honoraria
for the time spent taking part in the sharing process, and any other creative approach
to providing incentives.

How Kaakbay did it

Kaakbay put together an information package that was disseminated to LGUs with
exemplary practices to provide details on their roles and responsibilities in the program.

See Kaakbay General Information Sheet for Host LGUs on Appendix A.4.

Task 3
Offering Exemplary Practices (EPs) for Replication and Selecting Replicators

Selecting replicators involves undertaking a process similar to identifying your EPs.

• Develop criteria for selection of replicating LGUs
• Establish modes and media for disseminating information about the program and the
EPs proposed for replication
• Screen applications and finalize the selection
• Build relations/arrangements with replicating LGUs

1. Developing a criteria for selecting replicating LGUs or replicators

In developing criteria for selection, you need to take the following into consideration:

a. Degree of need of LGU

You may want to prioritize LGUs that have a greater need for improving their condition,
as this will also help generate greater commitment to the program.

b. Level of interest and commitment for a specific EP

At the same time, just because an LGU needs a certain project does not always mean
they are really interested in implementing it. LGUs must express a high level of interest
for a specific practice because they recognize that it corresponds to a particular
challenge or problem in their organization or locality. Furthermore they should be
willing to undergo the replication process and follow the program guidelines and
procedures.

2-18
c. Level of capacity/readiness to replicate
This includes:
• Willingness to provide resources (human, technical, financial) for replication
• Presence of pre-requisites or pre-conditions needed to replicate a particular project

d. Geographical scope and number

You may also choose to limit replicators to a certain number within an area or region to
facilitate the management.

How Kaakbay did it:

Selection Criteria for Replicators
Kaakbay developed a selection criteria that put emphasis on the following qualities of
potential replicators:

• Need for assistance. LGUs demonstrating greater need for assistance will be prioritized
in the selection.

• Demonstrate the will to replicate a specific practice. The recipient LGU should have the
daring and the intense desire and interest to pursue the exemplary practice proposed to
them. Replication should also meet their identified needs.

• Be willing to take part in an institutional cooperation process with other LGUs. The
participating LGUs will be asked to formally bind themselves in a collaborative agreement
with other LGUs to pursue the replication process. The support of the individual LGUs’
Local Chief Executive and the respective local councils will be required.

• Have the readiness to implement the exemplary practice. The recipient LGUs should
have the political support, basic capacity and required equipment, among others, as well
as the readiness to start the replication process at the soonest possible time.

• The will to provide the resources required for the replication process. While LGSP will
provide a small support fund to the Kaakbay Project, recipient LGUs are expected to buy-
in into the replication process and provide the majority of resources required as well as
other in-kind contributions

• Have a competently strong LGOO assigned in the LGU. The LGOO, with support from a
local resource partner (LRP), is expected to coach the LGU through the replication process.
The Kaakbay project will take this factor into consideration when selecting specific LGUs
for the Kaakbay project.

• Minimum pre-requisites for a specific practice already in place. The recipient LGU has
the necessary facilities, human resources and equipment required to replicate the specific
exemplary practice. Those resources are available for utilization/deployment.

• Be willing to abide by, and commit to the roles and responsibilities within the
Kaakbay replication cluster.

See Kaakbay Selection Criteria for Replicators in Appendix A.5.

2-19
 2. Information dissemination
Establish strategies and modes for disseminating the information package you have
produced to potential replicators. Again, there are several ways of doing so:

• Tap your and other networks, including leagues of cities, municipalities, or provinces,
government agencies
• Advertise in commercial media or in local government newsletters, occasional
publications and websites
• Get recommendations from government agencies, leagues and other organizations
• Take advantage of existing local government events or gatherings to promote the
program

The information package you disseminate should include the following:

• Basic information about the program

• The packaged information on the EPs
• Overview of the requirements and steps in the replication process
• Application forms
• Information on the potential benefits of replication

How Kaakbay did it

Kaakbay put together an information package that was disseminated to potential

replicators through the regional offices of the partner organizations. This package
included a general information sheet about the Kaakbay program including the roles
and responsibilities of replicators (see Appendix A.6); an application form (Appendix A.7);
the initial documentation of the offered EPs that can help the LGUs choose what practice
they want and need to replicate (Appendix A.8); and the selection criteria for selecting
replicating LGUs. (Appendix A.5)

See Appendices A.5-A.8.

2-20
3. Selection of applicants
Establish a selection committee that will go through the applications and compile
a shortlist of applicants. After shortlisting, the committee may invite applicants for
individual meetings or interviews or visit the areas/local governments short-listed before
finalizing the selection.

4. Building Relations/Arrangements with the Replicating LGUs

As with building relations/arrangements with host LGUs, this essentially entails the
following:

• Confirming the institutional commitment of the replicating LGU to participate in

the selection process
• Identifying forms of support to be provided by the program to the replicating
LGUs. Forms of support can include technical assistance in undertaking specific
tasks of replicating LGUs, financial support, and others
• Clarifying roles and responsibilities of the replicating LGUs in the replication
process

Roles and Responsibilities of replicating LGUs that need to be clarified with them include:

• Ensuring institutional commitment and developing capacity/readiness to

undertake replication
• Establishing modes of coordination and communication with the host LGUs
• Participating and following the process and procedures set by the program for
replication
• Participating in the monitoring and evaluation activities

SUMMING UP: LESSONS AND INSIGHTS

After undertaking Tasks 1 to 3, your management structures will be in place. You will also have
a list of exemplary practices to replicate and a group of replicating LGUs ready to begin the
replication process.

To ensure success in undertaking these first tasks, particular emphasis should be placed on
the following:

• Ensure a demand-driven approach to the replication process. Replication of a specific

practice should correspond to a felt need by the local governments you select, not
merely a response to your invitation to take part in the program or a passing whim or
inclination. When local governments have a real and recognized need to replicate a
particular project, they are more inclined and committed to the process.

2-21
 • Adhere strictly to the criteria you have set in identifying exemplary practices and
selecting replicating LGUs. Once you agree on a criteria, stick to it. It helps avoid future
problems, such as LGUs suddenly dropping out of the process, delays and longer-
than-expected project duration, logistical difficulties, and others.

• Ensure a supportive environment for replication by providing various forms of support

to both host LGUs and replicating LGUs. At the same time, ensure that host and
replicating LGUs have a clear understanding of their roles and responsibilities.

• Keep to the principle of cost-effectiveness in replication. If a replication project takes

longer and costs more to do than the original project, then it loses its value.

Consider good timing when implementing the program. Timing may not be everything, but it
is critical. It would be best to time the start of the program or the replication process right after
an election. This enhances prospects for the replication being completed and institutionalized,
and minimizes the chances that it will be disrupted by changes in local government leadership.

2-22
 Learning from
Peers for
Good
Governance
Practical Tools
for Local
Government in
Sharing Good
Practices
Chapter 3 of the Guidebook on Establishing a
Program for Replicating Exemplary Practices
in Local Government
Learning from Peers for Good Governance
Copyright © 2004
Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program (LGSP)
All rights reserved

The Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program (LGSP) and Federation of the Canadian
Municipalities (FCM) encourage the use, translation, and adaptation and copying of this material for
non-commercial use, with appropriate credit given to LGSP and FCM.

Although reasonable care has been taken in the preparation of this handbook, neither the publisher
and/or contributor and/or writer can accept any liability for any consequence arising from the use
thereof or from any information contained herein.

ISBN 971-92687-7-8
Printed and bound in Manila, Philippines

Published by:

Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program

Unit 1507 Jollibee Plaza
Emerald Avenue, Pasig City
1600 Philippines
Tel. Nos (632) 637 3511- 13
www.lgsp.org.ph

Federation of the Canadian Municipalities

International Centre for Municipal Development
24 Clarence Street
Ottawa, Ontario
Canada, K1N 5P3
Email: international@fcm.ca
Internet: http://www.fcm.ca

This project was undertaken with the financial support of the Government of Canada provided
through the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA)

Kaakbay Project Team: Basile Gilbert, LGSP Governance Advisor (Team Leader); Ria Adapon, LGSP
Program Officer; Rizal Barandino, LGSP Program Officer; Rommel Martinez, EBJFI; Polly Dichoso, EBJFI;
Norio Alumno, LMP

Program and Guidebook Concept: Basile Gilbert, LGSP Governance Advisor; Sebastien Hamel,
Regional Manager Asia, FCM

Writers: Marilou Sabado, STRIDES, Inc.; Letty Tumbaga, STRIDES, Inc.

Editorial Team: Basile Gilbert, LGSP Governance Advisor; Myn Garcia, LGSP Communications Advisor;
Ria Adapon, LGSP Program Officer

Cover Art: Arnold Beroya

Cover Design and Lay-out: Redge Abos

The publication of this guidebook has been made possible by support from the Federation of
Canadian Municipalities (FCM), International Center for Municipal Development, and the coordination
efforts of the League of Municipalities of the Philippines, as well as the technical support of
the Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program with funding from the Canadian
International Development Agency (CIDA).
While this chapter is part of a larger guidebook, it is also a stand alone booklet on how to
undertake a program for replicating exemplary practices (EPs) among local government
units. It is based on the experience of the Kaakbay pilot program for replicating exemplary
practices in local governance, undertaken by the Philippines-Canada Local Government
Support Program(LGSP), the League of Municipalities of the Philippines (LMP), the
League of Cities of the Philippines (LMP) and the Department of the Interior and Local
Government (DILG).

Replication can be undertaken within or outside a replication program. Enterprising local

government units (LGUs) interested in replicating a particular practice can undertake a
replication process on their own, without being part of a larger program.

This chapter of the larger guidebook was written with these LGUs in mind. It presents
guidelines and tools in managing and supporting the replication process among local
governments doing it on their own.

For organizations or government agencies undertaking replication as a program, this

chapter is a continuation of the earlier chapters that outline the process of managing and
supporting a replication program. This chapter, however, repeats a few important points
from previous chapters so that LGUs that will read this chapter as a separate booklet from
the Guidebook can still have an appreciation of the rationale and value of replication
programs.
3-4
contents

ACRONYMS 3-7

INTRODUCTION 3-9

What is Replication? 3-9

Why Replicate Exemplary Practices in Local Government:
The Big Picture 3-9
What is the Peer-to-Peer Learning Approach to Replication? 3-10
What will you Find in this Chapter? 3-11
What can your Local Government Gain from Replicating or Hosting the
Replication of an Exemplary Practice? 3-11
What else do you Need to Know about Replication? Guiding Principles of
Replication 3-14

THE REPLICATION PROCESS USING A PEER-TO-PEER LEARNING APPROACH: OVERVIEW 3-15

DOING IT: THE REPLICATION PROCESS 3-16

Pre-replication 3-16
Replication Using the Three Tools 3-17

Tool 1: Documenting the Exemplary Practice 3-22

Tool 2: The Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop Generic Agenda
and Facilitator’s Guide 3-30
Tool 3: The Replication Workplan 3-39

Post Peer-to-Peer Workshop Activities:

Validating and Implementing the Workplan 3-43
Monitoring and Evaluation 3-43

SUMMING UP: LESSONS AND INSIGHTS 3-48

3-5
 Appendices
(The Appendices of this manual are contained in the enclosed CD Rom)

Appendix A. Sample MOU and Forms used by Kaakbay A-7

A.1. Memorandum of Understanding between League of Municipalities of the

Philippines, League of Cities of the Philippines, Department of Interior and Local
Government and Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program A-9
A.2. Framework and Criteria for Identifying Exemplary Practices A-12
A.3. Kaakbay Template for Initial Documentation of Exemplary Practices A-14
A.4. General Information for Host LGUs A-16
A.5. Selection Criteria for Replicating LGUs A-19
A.6. General Information to Replicating LGUs A-20
A.7. Application Form for Replicating LGUs A-22
A.8. Initial Documentation of Exemplary Practices A-25
A.9. LGU Replication Cluster Memorandum of Agreement A-30

Appendix B. Sample Kaakbay Reference Document:

“Making Crime Prevention Everybody’s Business”
Bantay sa Kahusay Ug Kalinaw (BKK) (Peace and Order Watch) A-32

Appendix C. Kaakbay Brochure/Flyer A-40

Appendix D. Monitoring and Evaluation Guide Questions Used by Kaakbay A-49

D.1. Mid-Project Assessment Questions A-51

D.2. Progress Report Template A-53
D.3. End-Project Assessment Questions A-54

Appendix E. Replication Tools

E.1 Tool #1: Guidelines in Documenting an Exemplary Practice (for Host LGUs) A-59
E.2 Tool #2: Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop Facilitator’s Guide
and Generic Agenda A-63
E.3 Tool #3: Replication Workplan Template A-71

Appendix F. Sample Workplan of a Replicating LGU A-75

3-6
acronyms

AO Administrative Order
BALAK Basura Atras Linamon Abante sa Kalamboan Program
(Exemplary Practice of Linamon, Lanao del Norte)
BKK Bantay sa Kahusay Ug Kalinaw
(Exemplary Practice of Oroquieta, Misamis Occidental)
CIDA Canadian International Development Agency
DBM Department of Budget and Management
DILG Department of the Interior and Local Government
EBJF Evelio B. Javier Foundation, Inc.
EO Executive Order
EP Exemplary Practice
FCM Federation of Canadian Municipalities
LCE Local Chief Executive
LCP League of Cities of the Philippines
LGOO Local Government Operations Officer
LGSP Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program
LG Local Government
LGU Local Government Unit
LMP League of Municipalities of the Philippines
LRP Local Resource Partner
M&E Monitoring and Evaluation
MOA Memorandum of Agreement
NSC National Steering Committee
PAC Paglilingkod Abot-Kamay Program
(Exemplary Practice of Magsaysay, Davao del Sur)
RCC Regional Coordinating Committee
SB Sangguniang Bayan (Municipal Council)
SP Sangguniang Panlalawigan/Panglunsod (City/Provincial Council)
TWG Technical Working Group
UNDP United Nations Development Programme
USAID United States Agency for International Development
VNG Association of Netherlands Municipalities or Vereniging van
Nederlandse Gemeenten

3-7
3-8
managing and supporting
the replication process

INTRODUCTION

What is Replication?
Replication is a systematic and supportive process that involves
learning from, and sharing with others, practices that are proven
to be effective solutions to common local government problems.
It aims to contribute to the sustainable wellbeing of citizens and
advancement of local government with the least possible cost and
effort.

Why Replicate Exemplary Practices in Local Government:

The Big Picture

1. Replication embodies a common-sense principle: Do not re-

invent the wheel. Local governments operate in the same legal
and regulatory frameworks and often face similar challenges.
Using approaches already tested by others offers a chance to
eliminate the unnecessary steps and mistakes.

2. Replicating exemplary practices in local governance is

a practical, innovative and proven way of building local
capacities, addressing local government needs and challenges,
and generally enhancing local governance.

3. A replication program is an empowering and participatory

method of capacity development for local governments. Local
governments that have successfully replicated good practices
are encouraged to appreciate other approaches and share
their accomplishments with others, ensuring a continuous and
ever-widening circle of learning. The inter-local government
cooperation established through these relationships often
results in creating avenues for sharing a wide range of ideas
and concerns.

4. A replication program can contribute to greater effectiveness

and/or efficiency in local government operations.

3-9

Why replicate exemplary
practices in Local
Government?
1. Use tested solutions to local
government problems
2. Adopt an innovative and
proven way of building LGU
capacities
3. Empower and enjoy a
participatory method of
capacity development
4. Contribute to greater
effectiveness and efficiency.
5. Become more cost-effective.
6. Reduce costs.
3-10
5. The replication of the innovative practice, because
informed by previous experience, can be done with
more precision and therefore, the replication is faster
and to-the-point, generally more cost-effictive than
starting from scratch.
6. From a national policy or program point of view, the
dissemination of good practices through replication
programs offers an option for reducing capacity
development and human resources development
costs. More local governments can be reached with
fewer resources. It also offers a way to promote and
mainstream local cost-effective practices, thereby
reducing national expenditure required to support
inefficiencies in the system.
What is the Peer-to-Peer Learning Approach to
Replication?
While replication as a concept presents a great number
of benefits, there are also different ways of undertaking
replication, some more effective than others in producing
results. This guidebook introduces the Peer-to-Peer
Learning Approach to Replication.
Used in the Kaakbay pilot program for replicating exemplary
practices among 30 local governments in the Philippines,
this approach was pioneered by the Federation of Canadian
Municipalities in its municipal exchange programs.
The approach features the matching of 2 or more local
government units, with similar situations and facing similar
challenges. Concretely, one of the LGUs (the host LGU) has
a practice that was successful in addressing a particular
problem, such as solid waste management, low revenues,
bad roads, inadequate infrastructure, or limited services to
remote areas. Two or more LGUs having the same problem
will then be matched with the host LGU so that they can
learn about the successful practice and adapt and replicate it
in their locality.
The pair or group of host and replicating LGUs then go
through the replication process together, following the
guidelines and tools developed, with the host LGU coaching
the replicators as needed, and the replicators designing and implementing their replication
projects.

Both host and replicating LGUs will jointly monitor progress in the replication process and
resolve problems and issues together.

What will you find in this Chapter?

The replication process featured in this chapter is specifically for the replication of practices
that are moderate-to-highly complex. This means replication that requires face-to-face
communication and exchange between host and replicating local government units and will
take from 6 to 18 months to replicate.

This chapter presents the actual replication process that takes place at the local government
level, between the host LGU (the LGU that has an exemplary practice and is hosting its
replication) and the replicating LGU (the LGU replicating the practice of the host LGU). It
presents a step-by-step guide to undertaking replication and the generic, practical tools that
will be used in the process.

What can your Local Government gain from Replicating or Hosting the Replication of an
Exemplary Practice?
Local government units new to the idea of replication may be ambivalent or unconvinced of
the value of such an effort.

Others may hold the view that replicating may prove ineffective because government units
have differing situations, needs and capacities that are not transferable. As such, they may
believe that a practice that works in one area will not work in another.

Some may view replicating the practices of others as copying or imitating. Since each local gov-
ernment unit may have their own unique way of doing things and necessarily takes pride in their
own corporate initiative, they may be reluctant to replicate other LGUs’ practices as this may cast
a negative light on their efforts.

LGUs with replicable innovative practices may not see any benefit in sharing their experience;
rather, they may see it as an added burden on their resources and personnel.

However, the experiences of many local governments that have participated in replication
efforts and programs mostly testify to the manifold benefits of replication. Here are some of
them:

3-11

Benefits for LGUs Sharing
their Exemplary Practice with
other LGUs
1. It will enhance your
reputation and prestige.
2. It’s a potential source of
income.
3. It provides professional
development opportunities
for staff.
3-12
Benefits for LGUs Sharing their Exemplary Practice
with other LGUs
1. It will enhance your reputation and prestige.
For host LGUs, sharing their expertise and
innovativeness makes for a more prestigious profile
and reputation. It increases the visibility of the LGU
nationally and possibly internationally. The LGU
becomes known for good governance among its
peers and other institutions. Greater prestige and
reputation, in turn, can make it easier for an LGU to
promote its locality and attract potential business
investments. In addition, it can help increase credit
worthiness and eligibility to various national or
international support programs.
2. It’s a potential source of income.
As the experience of some LGUs show, replication
can also be a potential source of income for host
LGUs. Showcasing your exemplary practice and
coaching others in replicating can be a regular
service that you can provide to other LGUs for a
reasonable fee. The income earned can then be used
to experiment with other projects that can turn out
to be equally exemplary practices.
3. It provides professional development opportunities
for staff.
Local government officials and personnel involved
in sharing their expertise often develop new skills
as part of the process. They must analyze their
experience, take part in the documentation process,
sharpen their presentation skills and gain from
the feedback their peers offer them. Most local
governments involved in such exercises find ways
of improving their own processes when they share
them with others.
Benefits for Replicating LGUs
1. It is an effective and innovative way to build your LGU’s
capacities.
Replication is innovative because it features
firsthand, peer-to-peer learning, a new approach
 to LGU capacity development. Instead of long,
highly technical and expensive training programs
whose impact may be limited to a few individuals,
you get to learn new practices from peers, people
who are like you, who have been through the
same experiences, face the same limitations and
challenges and can share good practices firsthand. Benefits of Replicating LGUs

Replication makes learning and capacity 1. It is an effective and innovative

development more interesting and exciting because way to build your LGU’s capacities.
the process is highly personal and participatory. You 2. It is cost-effective.
get to see the practice and its benefits firsthand. You 3. It is participatory and
get to meet new people and hear them share their empowering.
experience. Then you identify the consequences of, 4. It improves governance.
and requirements for adopting the practice in your
own context, designing and implementing your
own project with the help of those who have done
it before you. You are also not buying an unknown
product; you know it works because you have seen it
in operation.

At the same time, it involves the LGU as a whole

to make the institutional changes required to
adopt a new way of delivering a service or a new
management process.

2. It is cost-effective.
Because you are not starting from scratch, you have
a clearer idea of the work involved, the resources
needed and the time it takes to do it. This makes
it faster and less costly. You also avoid making the
mistakes that the host may have made since you will
have the support of knowledgeable people who
have gone through the same experience.

3. It is participatory and empowering.

Replication needs the involvement of the entire LGU,
not just a few individuals. An LGU has to provide
institutional (legislative and executive) commitment
and support, and a project management team needs
to be on hand to undertake the process.

3-13
 4. It improves governance.
Most importantly, replication can greatly improve
local governance. The experience provides multiple
opportunities for officials and personnel in both
host and replicating LGUs to gain new knowledge
and skills. They are both exposed to a greater variety
of experiences and situations beyond their locality.
Host LGUs, for example, develop newfound skills in
hosting and coaching replication. In turn, improved
capacities translate to better services, higher
revenues, more efficient administration, improved
wellbeing for constituents, and greater prospects for
growth and development.

What else do I need to know about replication?

Guiding Principles of Replication
Guiding Principles of Replication Before describing the replication process, it is critical
1. Seeing is believing.
to review some key principles in replication as they
2. Replicating is innovating. serve as guideposts in ensuring the effectiveness of the
3. Follow the methodology. replication process.
4. Replicate at least possible effort.
1. Seeing is believing.
Firsthand learning is one of the best ways to share
and transfer knowledge and skills. Thus, replication
must ensure that LGUs learn first hand about the
exemplary practice they wish to replicate. Seeing
it in action, so to speak, talking to the people who
have successfully implemented it or benefited from
it and finding tangible evidence of its benefit are
exciting, participatory ways of learning as well as
powerful incentives to replicating.

2. Replicating is innovating.
Replicating can be a genuinely creative process.
It challenges you to expand your vision beyond
your locality and see the situations and efforts of
others. Then, it compels you to shift perspective and
skillfully transform this information into a viable,
original project that will suit your locality’s unique
needs and conditions.

3-14
3. Don’t under-estimate the importance of the process, follow the methodology.
A structured, organized process of replicating ensures the best chances of achieving
results. First hand learning and innovative replication may diminish in value without the
benefit of an effective methodology that is properly followed by host and replicating LGUs.
Work planning is a crucial part of the replication process.

Under a replication program, it is the Management Team’s task to ensure that the
replication methodology featured in this manual is adequately adapted to guide the
replication effort. For individual LGUs, following the replication methodology will greatly
help you manage the process on your own.

4. Replicate at least possible cost and effort.

Replication loses its value if it is done at great expense and effort. The underlying principle
of replication is to avoid reinventing the wheel and benefiting from already tested
solutions.

THE REPLICATION PROCESS USING THE

PEER-TO-PEER LEARNING APPROACH: OVERVIEW

The Process
Under this approach, host and replicating LGUs undergo the following process:

1. Pre-Replication
1.1. Preparing for replication
1.2. Building relations between host and replicating LGUs

2. Replication using Three Key Tools

2.1. Documenting the exemplary practice (by host LGUs and/or their facilitator -
support institution) using Tool 1 (Guidelines for Documenting the Exemplary
Practice)
2.2. Conducting the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop, using Tool 2 ( Generic Agenda
and Facilitator’s Guide)
2.3. Developing and Implementing a Replication Workplan (by the replicating LGU)
using Tool 3 (Replication Workplan Template)

3-15
 Figure A. The Replication Process at a Glance

Pre –Replication
Build Capacities for Replication (mainly for host LGUs)
Build Relations Between Host and Replicating LGUs

Actual Replication

Document Conduct the Workshop Implement the

the Exemplary Workplan
Practice
By host LGU To be organized Validate and Finalize
and /or support by host LGU and the Workplan
institution - participated in by
facilitator replicating LGU

Formulate a Implement the

Replication Workplan Workplan

2 weeks to 1 month 2-3 days 6 months – 18 months

DOING IT: THE REPLICATION PROCESS

Pre-replication
Pre-replication involves two activities: 1) preparing for replication and 2) building relations
between host and replicating LGUs.

1. Preparing for replication

To ensure your readiness to undertake the process and increase your chances for
success, an LGU needs to build some level of capacity in hosting or replicating a local
government practice.

However, initial capacity development takes different forms for the host and replicating
LGUs. LGUs hosting replication or sharing their exemplary practice with others will
need to do more work at the start of the process. Replicating LGUs will take on greater
responsibility when they are actually replicating the practice.

3-16
Table A. Preparing to Host or Replicate an Exemplary Practice

For Host LGUs For Replicating LGUs

• Ensure institutional support in hosting
the replication of your exemplary practice
by passing an executive order or a similar
document declaring your intention
to host other local governments in
replicating a practice pioneered by your
LGU. Allocate initial funds if required
• Designate a team to take the lead in
hosting
• Become familiar with the replication tools
and process and
• Plan the replication activities (including
the documentation of the exemplary
practice and the conduct of the Peer-to-
Peer Learning Workshop)
• Get the approval of the City Council or a
similar legislative body of your intention
to undertake replication in the form of a
Resolution or similar order
• Designate a core group of 3 to 5 members
within the LGU to take the lead in the
project. Ensure that team members
have the needed competence and
adequate authority to make decisions
and undertake activities called for by the
replication process. You can expand or
change members as you go along to suit
the changing needs of the process
• Start considering the level of effort
needed for replication ( in terms of
financial, human and other resources, time
needed, etc) so that these can be planned
and appropriated

2. Building relations/arrangements between host and replicating LGUs

This means initial communication and coordination between LGUs through email,
telephone, fax, or letter. Initial communication would involve introducing the host and
replicating team to each other, arranging for the conduct of the Peer-to-Peer Learning
Workshop and clarifying questions and expectations.

Replication using the three key tools

Three key replication tools, designed to facilitate the conduct of the three key steps in the replica-
tion process, guide the Peer-to-peer Learning approach. These tools ensure simplicity, ease and ef-
ficiency in replication.

3-17
 Table B. Steps, Replication Tools and Who Will Use Them

Steps in the Replication Process Key Replication Tools Who will use the Tool?

1. Documenting the Exemplary Tool 1. Guidelines for Host LGU

Practice (by the host LGU)
2. Peer-to-Peer Learning
Workshop (for host and
replicating LGUs))
3. Formulating and
Implementing the Replication
Workplan
Documenting the
Exemplary Practice
Host LGU
Tool 2. Peer-to-Peer Learning
Workshop Generic Agenda
and Facilitator’s Guide
Tool 3. Replication Workplan Replicating LGU
Template

The first two steps (and tools) will be done by the host LGU. The host LGU will document
their exemplary practice in order to share it with the replicating LGU. They will also conduct
a Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop. During the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop, the spotlight
will shift to the replicating LGU, as they formulate their project workplan and then proceed to
implementing it.

In terms of a timeline, steps 1 and 2 will be two short steps that may take from 1-2 months to
complete while Step 3 will cover the rest of the replication period of 6-18 months.

Because the three steps in the replication process directly lead one to the other, the three
tools proposed by this manual are likewise designed to facilitate this connectedness and flow.
Key sections of the three tools correspond to one another and help the LGUs organize the
information in such a way to facilitate the work planning for the replicating LGUs. Abiding by
the instructions of the respective tools can therefore ensure ease and efficiency in undertaking
the replication process.

For LGUs undertaking replication

on their own, you may need to look
into getting external assistance (such
as getting a technical consultant)
in facilitating the process and using
the three tools. For organization/s
managing a replication program, you
will need to facilitate and manage
this process in support of your host
and replicating LGUs.

3-18
Step 1
Documenting the Exemplary Practice using Tool 1:
Guidelines to Documenting Your Exemplary Practice (GDEP)

a. Who will use the tool?

Tool 1 is used by the Host LGU and/or their facilitator/support institution in
documenting (putting on paper) their exemplary practice to make pertinent
information about the implementation of the practice available to the replicating LGU.

b. Objective:
Documenting the practice to be replicated serves the following purpose: Make
available essential information about the practice and present it in a way that will
facilitate its use by the replicating LGU in developing its work plan and implementing
its replication project

c. Output: The Reference Document

The output of Tool1 will be a Reference Document that will be shared with the
replicating LGU/s and will serve as reference in undertaking the next two steps of the
replication process preparations (i.e. Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop and Replication
project Work plan, tools 2 & 3).

The Reference Document will contain the following information:

• Objectives of host LGU in implementing the practice

• Conditions in the LGU/locality prior to implementing the practice (Rationale)
• Key Steps in implementing the practice
• Resources used in implementing the practice
• Results/Impact to the LGU/community of implementing the practice
• Analysis: Lessons learned and Insights gained in implementing the practice
• Samples of the specific forms, plans, tools, etc used by the host LGU in implementing
its project

The Reference Document will help replicating LGUs understand the practice they are
about to replicate, and provide them with a ready template to modify in developing
their own replication project.

The Guidelines and their output, the Reference Document, will thus provide the
needed anchors for structured learning and implementation to take place.

d. How to use Tool 1

The team or individual designated by the host LGU will take charge of documenting
the exemplary practice. This will include data gathering (review of documents and
interviews) to get the information required under the Guidelines and writing up

3-19
 the Reference Document. If no one in the organization has time to put a Reference
Document together, you may need to involve a writer or external persons (from a local
university, for example) to do it for you using Tool 1 as their guide.

e. Pointers in Documenting your Exemplary Practice

From the perspective of replication, the “Key Implementation Steps “ are likely
the most important part of the guidelines. These steps constitute the actual
implementation process of the initial project and will be adopted/modified by the
replicating LGUs. Documenting the implementation steps may require a meeting with
the key implementers of the practice in the host LGU. It requires that the facilitator
or writer exercises judgment and helps the implementers of the initial practice “take a
step back” and objectively analyze their implementation process.

One of the principles of replication as an approach to innovation in the LGU is to

implement a solution to a common problem at the least possible cost and effort. This
implies that the replicating LGU may implement the project implemented in the host
LGU more effectively, likely in a shorter timeframe, and avoiding the mistakes made by
the host LGU in the first place. The writer of the Reference Document may therefore
use his or her judgment to simplify the replication process by avoiding some steps
implemented by the host but that may have proven un-necessary in retrospect.

In modifying any step undertaken by the host however, the writer must be sure it
will lead to the same results. Similarly, the writer may choose to identify a step that
the host may have omitted but that is common sense and appears beneficial to the
successful implementation of the project. For example, it may be good to recommend
the formation of a small project implementation team at the beginning of the project
even though the host may not have had one. Such changes would usually require a
discussion with the host LGU representatives so that they can agree on the value of the
suggested change to the implementation process.

Documenting an exemplary practice requires time and a series of interactions with the
individuals having implemented the project in the first place. Several meetings may be
required to properly document an exemplary practice.

Since different sections of the guidelines correspond to specific sessions of the Peer-
to-Peer Learning Workshop, it is important to divide the information as suggested in
the guidelines i.e. separate the rationale, objectives, implementation steps, results, etc.
Most people involved in the process, especially hosts having previously shared their
experience with others in their own manner, may not understand the importance of
dividing the information in the way the guidelines are suggesting it. The rationale for
this is to make the tool more didactic and easily understood by others.

3-20
Since local government people tend to be practical, generally need to get the job done
quickly and seldom have time to read lengthy papers, the reference document should
be short, focused on implementation and written in a simple manner. Adding visual
elements and pictures is important.

Preparing the Reference Document may be inter-related with the preparation of the
Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop. Since the sections of the Reference Document
correspond to presentations members of the host LGU will need to do during the Peer-
to-Peer Learning Workshop, it may be easier to ask them to prepare their respective
presentations and the writer can then integrate this information in the respective
sections of the Reference Document.

3-21
Replication Tool 1: GUIDELINES TO DOCUMENTING THE EXEMPLARY PRACTICE

Replication Tool 1:
GUIDELINES TO DOCUMENTING THE EXEMPLARY PRACTICE
Introduction

I. Background
These guidelines are aimed at helping the Local Government Unit that is hosting the replication
project (Host LGU) put together a Reference Document that will describe the Exemplary Practice. The
Reference Document will serve as the main project description to help replicating LGUs understand
the various aspects of the Exemplary Practice and how it was implemented.

If you look closely, The Reference Document has several sections which correspond to various
sections of other tools proposed for use in this Guidebook that will help replicating LGUs through the
replication process: namely: the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop (Tool 2) and Replication Workplan
(Tool 3). To ensure full and effective use of these tools, it is recommended that these Guidelines be
strictly followed to facilitate the completion of the next two tools.

At the same time, the Reference Document should contribute to the production, dissemination and
promotion of information about exemplary practices in local governance. It should be written so it
can be used again and again as a reference and an information source.

Objectives of the Reference Document

The Reference Document should:

• Provide simple information about each step of implementing the Exemplary Practice to
facilitate the Replicating LGUs’ development of a workplan
• Provide a common reference/outline for the various stakeholders involved in the project
• Contribute to promoting innovative approaches of local government management and service
delivery among peers and stakeholders of the local government sector

The writer must develop the Reference Document in consultation with the team involved in the
actual project implementation. If the host LGU does not have a writer it can find outside resources to
develop the LGU involvement is essential.

Total Length of Document

The document should be short, to the point and simply written so it is easy to understand, particularly
by LGU personnel who do not have time to go through elaborate documents. Ideally it will be 8 to
10 pages. Additional materials relevant to the replication process such as training materials, sample
MOAs, technical specifications, etc. can be provided as appendices to the Reference Document.

You can add visuals (photographs, maps, charts and graphs) to help tell the story, as they are powerful
aids in helping the replicating LGUs get a fuller understanding of the project. For example, if there are no
photographs already available, make time to take new ones to complete the Reference Document.

II. Proposed Parts and Content of the Reference Document

1. Title
The title should reflect the major theme of the project and be short and to the point. It should also
include the name of the LGU

3-22
 Replication Tool 1: GUIDELINES TO DOCUMENTING THE EXEMPLARY PRACTICE

2. Summary (300 words or 1⁄2 page)

This section should give a general overview of the project/initiative.

• Describe the project and the area/LGU where it was implemented.

• Explain the strategy and methodology used, and the various stakeholders involved in the
process.
• Note the major accomplishments and point out the global impact on the LGU and the
community

3. Project Description (300 words or 1⁄2 page)

This section should state the reason or the purpose for the project

• Describe the situation before starting the project - Point out the main problems, the
consequences and the attempts to deal with them, as a rationale for the project
• Present the purpose and priorities of the project, for instance:

* Satisfying basic human needs

* Involving women in the development process
* Supporting good governance, and so on

• Present the project objectives

4. Project History (150 words or 1⁄4 page)

• Describe how the project was initiated; who championed it.

• Explain the process for setting goals and determining the strategy and methodology (how, by
whom)
• Indicate over which period the project was implemented

5. Project Results (300 words or 1⁄2 page; include photos to show some of the results)
This section should have a catchy title that highlights the main accomplishments

• Describe to what extent the purpose and objectives were met

• Outline the indicators used to evaluate the results
• Identify the effects of the project in certain key areas? For instance:

* Relations between the LGU and the community

* Improvement of institutional capacity in the LGU and among the project stakeholders
* Significance of the outputs for the citizens
* Change in decision-making processes
* Change in the use and distribution of human, technical and financial resources

• Insert some participants’ comments on the impact of the project

6. Key Implementation Steps (up to 2,400 words or 4 pages; use photos to illustrate some of the key steps)
This section of the Reference Document is particularly important to help other LGUs appreciate
the chronological chain of events in the implementation of the project. It requires that the writer/s
analyze the sequence of activities in the implementation of the project and present each step with

3-23
Replication Tool 1: GUIDELINES TO DOCUMENTING THE EXEMPLARY PRACTICE

its respective outputs and resources. This is best done through a consultation with the project
implementation team. LGUs wanting to replicate the practice will refer to this section to determine
their own implementation plan for the replication of the practice.

Describe the main implementation steps / milestones in chronological order and provide a detailed
breakdown of the output; individuals / stakeholders involved; resources required; and tools,
procedures, systems which need to be in place for each key implementation step.

A typical LGU project may have 5 to 8 main implementation steps and each of these steps can be
broken down in more detail with a few sub steps or activities relating it.

To sum up:
Present the main Implementation Stages / Milestones in chronological order.
Each key implementation stage should be detailed with related sub steps and activities.

For each main step and/or sub step, the following should be presented:
• Main output: committee created; Training activity; Small infrastructure / equipment put in place;
Education campaign to the citizens; etc
• What procedures, tools, techniques, systems or structures need to be in place: examples: an
Executive order; committee TOR or procedures; specific forms to collect information about citizens; a
specific computer program; training modules and materials; the reconfiguration of office space; etc
• Who needs to be involved and why (LGU staff, volunteers, institutional partners, etc): (a)
describe the involvement of other institutional partners, organizations, and the community.; (b)
What was their respective role? How is it complementary to the LGU’s contribution to the project?
• What budget is required and when: estimate or provide actual costs for each component, which
requires a specific budget allocation.
• Other resources required (facilities, equipment, meeting halls, etc)
• Lessons learned, What worked / What didn’t: Throughout the implementation of the project, the
implementers may have learned from errors and successes. These lessons learned become valuable
information for other LGUs wanting to replicate the exemplary practice. For example:
(a) Some critical pre-requisites needing to be in place
(b) What should be the ideal timing of a specific activity? (for example, scheduling activities with
the agricultural community after the harvest season; establishing new procedures about
business permits in relation with the LGU licensing cycle)
(c) Ensuring community or political support

7. Analysis and Lessons Learned (1200 words or 2 pages)

This section should have a catchy title

• Identify specific opportunities and limitations, and solutions applied

• Put an emphasis on sustainability factors:

* Cultural: respect and consideration for attitudes, behaviours and traditions

* Social and economic: involvement of and benefit to both women and men, inclusion of and
benefit to cultural minorities or economically disadvantaged groups
* Environmental: reduced dependence on non-renewable resources (air, water, soil, energy, and
so on); change in methods of production and consumption

3-24
 Replication Tool 1: GUIDELINES TO DOCUMENTING THE EXEMPLARY PRACTICE

* Financial: use of available resources; contributions by various stakeholders; terms for

repayment of loans; etc

• Explain the importance and significance of the project/activities relative to the context it was
implemented in:

* Example 1 - Support for a consultation process in a municipality/country with traditionally

little co-operation between the elected representatives and the population
* Example 2 - Improvement to the recovery of taxes with the use of automated data in a context
where there is little computerization

• Describe any general lessons learned about the whole project and their influence on
subsequent planning.

* Were these lessons used later to change policies/strategies/plans, and so on

* What aspects should be changed, avoided? What pitfalls should be prepared for and avoided?

• Describe the exemplary value of this activity, and the elements that make it so.
• Indicate what type or class of LGU would most benefit from this project? What specific
conditions or target group can benefit from such a project?
• Describe which are the generic aspects/components of the project (easily transposable to
other contexts) and which ones might require more adaptation to the specific conditions of
another LGU/context
• Where relevant, identify what is the core activity or component and which components may
or may not be implemented in another LGU (for example, the composting component of a
comprehensive waste management project may be more important to some LGUs than others
because of the specific amounts of organic waste generated in their communities)
• If the project was implemented over a long period of time, provide an indication of the
minimum amount of time required to replicate it.
• Identify any known cases of successful replication of this practice by other LGUs so far

8. Use of photos / Illustrations

Do not forget to use photos (at least 3) and available illustrations to illustrate the process and the
accomplishments (e.g. photos of training sessions, community participation, illustration used in
advocacy campaign, equipment provided, renewed infrastructures, etc.). Photos can be included in
the Implementation Steps section or the Results section.

See Appendix B for sample Reference Document developed and used by Kaakbay

3-25
 Step 2
Steps in the Replication Conducting the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop using
Process
Tool 2: The Facilitator’s Guide and Generic Agenda
1. Documenting the After documenting the exemplary practice, the host LGU needs
Exemplary Practice (by the to plan, prepare for and conduct the Peer-to-Peer Learning
host LGU) Workshop.
2. Peer-to-Peer Learning
Workshop (for host and
replicating LGUs)) a. Objectives
3. Formulating and Why a Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop? The Peer-to-Peer
Implementing the Learning Workshop has four objectives:
Replication Workplan

a. Allow the host LGU to present and share their

exemplary practice to the replicating LGUs
b. Deepen the understanding and appreciation of
replicating LGUs for the exemplary practice (through
the host LGU presentations and seeing the practice
for themselves)
c. Provide a venue for replicating LGU/s to formulate
a first draft of their replication workplan with the
inputs from the host LGUs
d. Forge partnership and commitment of host and
replicating LGUs to the replication project (through
the signing of a formal agreement, personal
interaction, agreeing on modes/mechanisms for
communication and coordination, and leveling off on
roles and expectations)

The Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop may be the first

opportunity for host and replicating LGUs to meet and
get to know each other. It should therefore be structured
in a way that affords the greatest opportunity to build
a solid foundation and take-off point for the replication
process.

Tool 2 will guide the preparations and conduct of the

Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop. By providing an agenda
and facilitator’s guide, Tool 2 helps host and replicating
LGUs undergo the activity by simplifying the procedure,
setting clear tasks for both and ensuring that optimum
results are achieved.

b. Who will use Tool 2?

The designated teams of the Host LGU will use Tool 2
in preparing and conducting the Peer-to-Peer Learning

3-26
 Workshop. The host LGU can decide to get the services of an external/professional facilitator
to help them facilitate the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop. Selected members of the host
and replicating LGUs will then participate in the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop.

c. Output
The actual conduct of the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop will be the output of using the
faciltator’s guide. The Replication Workplan will also be an output of the replicating LGU
during the workshop (Tool 3).

Table C. Steps to Take for Tool #2

Conducting the Workshop Within For individual LGUs Hosting Replication

a Replication Program Outside a program

Under a program, the management team will
undertake the following tasks:
• organize the activity and ensure logistical
arrangements
• assist the host LGU in preparing their
presentation ensure participation of host and
replicating LGU teams
• help facilitate the workshop
The host LGUs will undertake the following tasks:
• organize the activity and ensure logistical
arrangements
• coordinate the invitations and ensure the
participation of relevant representatives to the
workshop
• prepare the presentations needed in various
parts of the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop (see
Tool #2) on the exemplary practice;
• assign presenters within the host LGU for each
presentation
• facilitate the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop

Option: Forming Replication Clusters Option: Assigning a Facilitator

To facilitate the conduct of the activity and the
replication process in general, you can opt to
group LGUs into replication clusters. Each cluster
can consist of one host LGU and 3 or more LGUs
that are replicating the same practice.
As host to the replicating LGU, the host LGU will
organize the conduct of the Peer-to-Peer Learning
Workshop and appoint an overall facilitator. The host
LGU can choose to appoint someone from the local
government staff to act as facilitator or, if necessary,
obtain the services of an external facilitator to help
conduct the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop.

3-27
 How is Tool #2 linked to Tool #1?
The flow of the respective sessions of
the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop
Generic Agenda generally follows that
of the Reference Document. The various
sessions of the Peer-to-Peer Learning
Workshop introduce various aspects of
the exemplary practice in an organized
manner. Thus, if Tool #1 was properly
used and followed, the host LGU will
have a good Reference Document
that can be used as basis for their
presentation of their exemplary practice
in the various sessions of the Peer-to-
peer Learning Workshop.

3-28
 THE PEER-TO-PEER LEARNING WORKSHOP
GENERIC AGENDA

The Generic Agenda proposes a flow for the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop. It is recommended that
the general chronological order of the presentations and activities be followed but the organizers of the
workshop can adapt it to their specific situation with actual starting times for presentations, names of
presenters, etc. The adapted or personalized version of the agenda can be distributed to the participants from
the replicating LGUs.

PART : INTRODUCTION

Opening Ceremony (15 min)

Presentation of Participants (10 min)
Participants’ Expectations (20 min)
Workshop Overview (10 min)
By the facilitator/Host LGU
Overview of the Exemplary Practice (20 min)
By the Mayor of the Host LGU
Fellowship Activity (evening)
Facilitator to be identified

PART 2: APPRECIATION OF THE EXEMPLARY PRACTICE:

SEEING IS BELIEVING

“Exemplary Practice Title” : What is it? (60 min)

By the Project Manager
Seeing the Practice in Operation (half day)
Guided by the Project Manager with presentations by stakeholders
Participants’ Reflections on the Exemplary Practice (60 min)
Facilitator

ANALYZING THE EXEMPLARY PRACTICE

Rationale and Purpose of the Exemplary Practice (20 min)

By the main Project Manager (City/Municipal Manager / Department Head)
Key Implementation Steps and Related Resources (1 hr 30 min)
By the main Project Manager (City/Municipal Manager / Department Head)

PART 3: IMPLEMENTING THE EXEMPLARY PRACTICE IN THE REPLICATING LGU

Managing the project in your LGU (45 min)

By the facilitator
Formulating the workplan (120 min)
By the facilitator
Working as Partners – Memorandum of Agreement (45 min)
By the facilitator
Next Steps ( 45 min)
By the facilitator/replicating LGU member

Conclusion of the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop

3-29
Replication Tool 2: FACILITATOR’S GUIDE TO THE PEER-TO-PEER LEARNING WORKSHOP

Replication Tool 2:
FACILITATOR’S GUIDE TO THE PEER-TO-PEER LEARNING WORKSHOP

The facilitator’s guide is the Generic Agenda with detailed notes on conducting the Peer-to-Peer Learning
Workshop for the facilitator.

The Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop is divided into 3 distinct parts:

Part 1: Introduction
Part 2: Appreciating the Exemplary Practice: Seeing and Analyzing
Part 3: Implementing the practice in the Replicating LGUs

For the Host LGU:

As host to the replicating LGU, the host LGU will organize the conduct of the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop
and appoint an overall facilitator. The host LGU can choose to appoint someone from the local government
staff to act as facilitator or, if necessary, obtain the services of an external facilitator to help conduct the
activity. If replication takes place under a program, the program implementing team helps organize the
activity and, if the host LGU agrees, designate a program staff to act as overall facilitator

For the Replicating LGU:

A discussion should be held with the Host LGU project implementers to determine which personnel of the
replicating LGU should attend the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop. Since the replication of an Exemplary
Practice is a LGU organizational process, the host LGU can best suggest who in the LGU should attend the
activity: i.e. the Mayor or local chief executive, the concerned department head, legislative member, technical
personnel, etc. To minimize costs, it is suggested that the delegation to visit the host LGU comprises a
maximum of 3 or 4 members. If carefully chosen considering the relevance of their work / position for the
specific exemplary practice, they should be able to adequately share what they learned with others of their
LGU. They should then be able to mobilize others for the implementation of the replication project.

PART 1: INTRODUCTION

1. Opening Ceremony (15 min)

2. Presentation of Participants (10 min)

• Host LGU
• Replicating LGU(s)

3. Participants’ Expectations (20 min)

Process to be determined by the Facilitator

4. Activity Overview (15 min)

• Objectives
• Sequence of the sessions
• Support materials available
• Outputs

3-30
 Replication Tool 2: FACILITATOR’S GUIDE TO THE PEER-TO-PEER LEARNING WORKSHOP

If the replication project is part of a larger replication program, include the following sessions:

Introduction to the Replication Program/ (30 min)

• Rationale / Background of the program/project

• Project Steps and Methodology

5. Overview of the Exemplary Practice (20 min; by the Mayor or prominent leader of the Host LGU)

• Inspirational Presentation by the Mayor of the Host LGU

• Main Achievements
• Benefits / Results

Notes to the Presenter:

OVERVIEW OF THE EXEMPLARY PRACTICE

This presentation is to provide an overview of the Exemplary practice keeping in mind that the practice
will be presented in detail during the next days.

The presentation should provide the Chief Executive’s or a prominent leader’s perspective. It is meant as a
primer to get the participants excited about the project. It should last about 20 minutes and cover:

• How did the LGU decide to implement this project? (history of the project)
• Who was the instigator? Who was the champion of this project?
• How important was this project for the LGU?
• What were the main achievements?
• Most important results and benefits of the project to the citizens

6. Fellowship Activity (evening; facilitator to determine how to conduct this session)

• Activity for participants to get to know each other

• Building the host and replicating LGUs’ collaborative relationship
• Possible activity: humorous presentation of each LGU

PART 2: APPRECIATION OF THE EXEMPLARY PRACTICE

I. SEEING IS BELIEVING

1. “Exemplary Practice Title”: What is it? (60 min; by the Project Manager/head)

• More detailed presentation of the EP as an introduction to the site visits

• Implementers, Stakeholders and Beneficiaries
• How was it implemented
• General level of effort
• Introduction to the specific sites/groups to be visited

3-31
Replication Tool 2: FACILITATOR’S GUIDE TO THE PEER-TO-PEER LEARNING WORKSHOP

Notes to the Presenter:

“EXEMPLARY PRACTICE TITLE”: WHAT WAS IT?

This presentation provides the participants with a basic understanding of the practice prior to the site
visits. It should provide the information that participants need to maximize their appreciation during
the site visits. The level of detail of this presentation should take into account what was presented by
the Mayor the previous day. Depending on the project’s focus, it could present the basic concept of the
practice, and should emphasize the main implementers, stakeholders and beneficiaries.

It should last about 30 minutes and allow for a question period.

The presentation should cover:
• The basic concept of the project/practice; what are the most important aspects the practice; why
this project?
• What was the general/relative level of effort of the LGU to implement this project?
• Who are the implementers and main stakeholders; Who were the key LGU staff to take part in the
implementation
• Beneficiaries: Which target group was the project intended for (a specific Barangay, segment of the
LGU’s citizens, the city staff, etc)
• What were the key benefits to:

* The specific target group

* The LGU as a whole (revenues saved, providing a much needed new service to the citizens,
better relations with citizens, etc.)
* The LGU staff

2. Seeing the Practice in Operation (half day)

Guided by the Project Manager/Head with presentations by stakeholders and beneficiaries

• Visits to the implementation sites:

* Observation of the Exemplary Practice (EP) in action (the Host schedules an activity for the
group where pertinent)
* Inter-action with project implementers & stakeholders
* LGU departments involved
* Partner organizations collaborating in the implementation (Local government sub-units,
NGOs, community organizations, etc)
* Facilities & Equipment in place or contributing to the project
* Visible results/benefits of the project

• Inter-action with the Beneficiaries:

* Perspectives from different groups of beneficiaries (the LGU itself, citizens, staff, local
officials involved, etc)
* Main results to them
* Interviews with beneficiaries

3-32
 Replication Tool 2: FACILITATOR’S GUIDE TO THE PEER-TO-PEER LEARNING WORKSHOP

Notes to the Presenters:

BENEFITS OF THE EXEMPLARY PRACTICE

Citizen / Community Group:

• As a citizen, how do you benefit from this initiative of the LGU? (Better service, better access to the
service, better information from the LGU, safer/ cleaner community?, etc)
• What was your situation before the existence of this service by the LGU? How is your situation
now? What changed?
• Why is this service important to you? How significant is it for you and your family?
• If you were involved in the implementation of the project, how did that happen? What was your
contribution? How did the LGU relate with you during the implementation?
• If your LGU were to implement this project again, what would you recommend they change?
What could they do better?

Stakeholders / Institutional Partners;

• Why did your organization get involved in the project?
• What was the specific role of your organization in the project?
• What was your relationship with the LGU? Did you have a protocol agreement or Memorandum
of Agreement (MOA) with the LGU outlining the respective roles and responsibilities of your
respective organizations?
• What were the benefits of the project for your organization?
• From your perspective, what were the most important benefits to the citizens?

LGU Employees:
• What do you see as the most important benefits to the citizens?
• Why is this project important for the LGU? How different is the LGUs approach in this area
compared to how it was before?
• How has your work changed as a result of this initiative? Are you saving time? How is the LGU
more efficient in this area?
• What new knowledge, skills and aptitudes have you learned from this initiative?
• Are you relating to citizens in a different way?
• What would you recommend your LGU to do differently if it was to implement this project again?

3. Participants’ Reflections on the Exemplary Practice (60 min; facilitator)

This session allows the facilitator to do a diagnosis of the participants’ appreciation and
understanding of the Exemplary Practice so far. It also allows the participant to revise and process
the observations from the visits.

• Participants share their understanding of the EP following the site visits

• Host resource people help the group clarify what they saw and heard from various
presentations during the day
• Facilitators summarize the key points and lessons learned during the visits

The facilitator should determine if this session would add value to the learning process or not at
this particular stage of the workshop. Depending on the specific dynamics of the particular group
and their apparent appreciation and understanding of the practice, the facilitator can choose to do
this session or not. The following sessions will also allow a deepening of the understanding of the
practice through a more in-depth analysis.

3-33
Replication Tool 2: FACILITATOR’S GUIDE TO THE PEER-TO-PEER LEARNING WORKSHOP

II. ANALYZING THE EXEMPLARY PRACTICE

1. Rationale and Purpose of the Exemplary Practice (20 min; by the main Project Manager: City/
Municipal Manager / Department Head)

This session aims at helping the participants analyze and understand the situation before and
after the Exemplary Practice was implemented. From this session, the participants will be able to
formulate the Goal, Objectives and Expected Results of their Replication project in their own
context.

This session covers:

• Prevailing conditions before the Project

• Situation after the project was implemented / when the practice is in place What
changed?
• The objectives of the practice
• Sort term and long term results/impact

After the presentation, 10 to 15 minutes should be given to the participants so they can compare
how the rationale and purpose of the Exemplary Practice in the Host LGU is comparable to the
context of their own LGU. The participant thereby starts thinking about how the project can be
implemented in his/her LGU.

2. Key Implementation Steps and Related Resources (1 hr 30 min; by the main Project Manager
(City/
Municipal Manager / Department Head)

The session should cover:

• Main Implementation Stages / Milestones in chronological order

• Each key implementation stage should be detailed with related sub steps and activities,
resources, etc.

This session is particularly important to help the participants appreciate the chronological chain of
events in the implementation of the project. It requires from the Host LGU to analyze the sequence
of activities in the implementation of their project and present each step with its respective outputs,
and resources.

The session prepares the participant for developing his/her Implementation Plan to replicate the
exemplary practice.. After each key step or at the end of the session, the facilitator should provide
time for the participant to determine how those implementation steps are relevant to the recipient
LGU context. The following guide questions could be asked:

• Would those implementation steps and activities be appropriate for the recipient LGU?
• If not, what should be changed?
• What specific procedures, systems and tools need to be developed?
• Who are the people (LGU staff, community representatives, Partner organizations) you need
to involve in your LGU?

3-34
 Replication Tool 2: FACILITATOR’S GUIDE TO THE PEER-TO-PEER LEARNING WORKSHOP

Notes to the Presenters:

KEY IMPLEMENTATION STEPS AND RELATED RESOURCES

The session should cover:

• Main Implementation Stages / Milestones in chronological order
• Each key implementation stage should be detailed with related sub steps and activities

For each main step and sub step, the following should be presented:
• Main output : committee created; Training activity; Small infrastructure / equipment to put in
place; Education campaign to the citizens; etc
• What procedures, tools, techniques, systems or structures need to be in place:
examples: an Executive order; committee TOR or procedures; specific forms to collect information
about citizens; a specific computer program; training modules and materials; setting up
agricultural technology for demonstration purposes; the reconfiguration of office space; etc
• Who needs to be involved / Why? (LGU staff, volunteers, institutional partners, etc)
(a) Describe the involvement of other institutional partners, organizations, and the community.
(b) What was their respective role? How is it complementary to the LGU’s contribution to the
project?
• What budget is required and when? Estimate or provide actual costs for each component,
which requires a specific budget allocation.
• Other resources required (facilities, equipment, meeting halls, etc)
• Enabling Measures, What worked / What didn’t

Throughout the implementation of the project, the implementers may have learned from errors and
successes. These lessons learned become valuable information for other LGUs wanting to replicate the
exemplary practice. For example:
* Some critical pre-requisites needing to be in place
* What should be the ideal timing of a specific activity? (for example, scheduling activities with the
agricultural community after the harvest season; establishing new procedures about business
permits in relation with the LGU licensing cycle)
* Ensuring community or political support

PART 3: IMPLEMENTING THE EXEMPLARY PRACTICE IN THE REPLICATING LGU

1. Managing the project in your LGU (30 min; by the Host LGU project manager or project team member

• Forming a Core Management Team

• Designating a Contact Person with the host LGU
• The 4 capacity development and project implementation stages
• Implementing the project within a specific timeframe
• Workplan: main implementation guide
• Introduction to the Workplan Template
• Monitoring and Reporting

2. Formulating the workplan (120 min; by a Facilitator/Host LGU member)

(Note: This session is where there is real value added in having an outside facilitator with management
experience. Not all host LGUs will have a resource person comfortable with facilitating this session for the

3-35
Replication Tool 2: FACILITATOR’S GUIDE TO THE PEER-TO-PEER LEARNING WORKSHOP

replicating LGUs.)
In this session the participants start writing the draft workplan for implementing the replication of
Exemplary Practice in their LGU. The Facilitator presents the Project Workplan Template.

• Adapting the Exemplary Practice to your LGU’s Situation

• Drafting the Work plan:

* Goal, Objectives and Expected Results

* Implementation plan:

- Main steps in Chronological order

- Human Resources
- Financial and in-kind resources

* Coordination, monitoring and Evaluation

* Budget

3. Working as Partners – Memorandum of Agreement (45 min; by the Facilitator

In this session, the facilitator talks about the potential sharing and support opportunities offered
by working as with one or more LGUs. A template Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) or similar
instrument may be drafted before hand and introduced during the workshop for approval. If
approved, the instrument can then be signed by the host and replicating LGUs to show their
commitment to the project. (See Appendix D, for a sample MOA used under Kaakbay.) A MOA may
detail commitments between host and replicating LGUs with regard to the following:

• Support system among peers (including modalities of requests to Host LGU expertise)
• Common time frame & activities
• Sharing of resources
• Mechanisms for communication/coordination
• Deriving lessons learned about replication

4. Next Steps (45 min; by the facilitator/replicating LGU member)

• Mobilizing the core management team & other stakeholders

• Validating the Work plan and securing necessary legislative support from the local council
• Finalizing the work plan
• Getting feedback on the workplan from the host LGU
• Monitoring and evaluation activities?
• Communications and coordination mechanisms

5. Conclusion of the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop

(Note: If replication occurs within the framework of a replication program and not just between individual
LGUs, the program implementing team can facilitate the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop, including the
actual planning. If you decide to take on the Kaakbay model of setting up replication clusters with one host
LGU and several replicating LGUs in one cluster, then the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop is conducted per
cluster. Part of the program support to the host LGU, then, would be in providing the necessary assistance in
helping them organize and prepare for the activity.)

3-36
Step 3
Formulating and Implementing the Replication Workplan using
Tool 3: Workplan Template
Following the presentation and sharing of the exemplary practice, the second part of the
Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop involves the formulation of the Replication Workplan by the
replicating LGU/s, with the help of the host LGUs. Tool 3, which is a template for the Workplan is
recommended as a guide to workplan formulation.

a. Objectives
Tool 3 serves four purposes:

a. Provide the replicating LGU with a simple, yet comprehensive template in

designing their workplan for replicating the exemplary practice
b. Guide the replicating LGU in identifying their objectives for replication, who
should be involved, key replication steps and activities, needed resources, potential
problems, constraints and issues and ways of resolving them
c. Provide replicating LGUs with a plan by which to monitor progress and identify
delays, milestones and accomplishments in the replication process
d. Set modes and mechanisms for coordination between host and replicating LGUs,
as well as monitoring and evaluation

b. Output
The result of using this template is a WORKPLAN, which is a key document for the
replicating LGU to use as a main reference in implementing the project. The workplan
lays down the following key components for replication:

• Context for replication

• Objectives and expected results
• Implementation plan/key implementation steps
• Coordination mechanisms between host and replicating LGUs
• Monitoring and evaluation

At the same time, it is comprehensive enough to be used as a communication tool

for any interested stakeholder (members of council, department heads, community
representatives, partner government agencies, etc) to understand what the replication
project is all about.

c. Who will use Tool 3?

The replicating LGUs will use Tool 3, with inputs and support from the host LGU.
Again, under a program, the management team will support the replicating LGU
in formulating the workplan. Individual LGUs undertaking replication outside the
program may opt to avail of the services of an external facilitator/consultant to help in
formulating the workplan.

3-37
 How is Tool3 linked to Tools 1 and 2?
Tool 3 also closely follows the format/
outline of Tool 1 and 2. As such, it makes
it easier for the replicating LGU/s to
develop their own workplan; replicating
LGUs can simply follow the flow and
format of Reference Document and
materials from the presentations of the
Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop and
convert/translate it into a Workplan with
their own innovations.

3-38
 Replication Tool 3: REPLICATION WORKPLAN TEMPLATE

Replication Tool 3:
REPLICATION WORKPLAN TEMPLATE

COVER PAGE

Title of Project

Project Work Plan, Municipality / City, Logo

Project start date (mo, year) – project end date (mo, year)

WORKPLAN PROPER
Preamble/Executive Summary (Maximum 1 page): Give a short description of the context for this
project. Include:

• a statement on why this project is important for your LGU. How it is linked to the LGUs strategic
orientations and priorities
• description of replication process, including

* start date of project

* focus area of the project
* which host LGU has implemented this project successfully
* what other Recipient LGUs are replicating the project as part of the replication cluster
* brief reference to how the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop and relations with the host LGU
helped define this workplan

• project workplan description: aim, duration, main results

• signature of the Mayor or relevant authority

• date

1.0 Project Title

2.0 Rationale, Goal, Objectives, and Results

2.1 Rationale
Explain why the project should be carried out. Include:

• a brief explanation of the importance of the area that the project will address for your LGU
(for example, solid waste management, traffic control, etc.)
• what is the current situation (or prevailing conditions) in your LGU (weaknesses, problems)
that the project will help address
• what capacity building needs of your LGU will this project help address.

2.2 Goal
State the aim of this project.

2.3 Objectives
State the specific objectives of the project.

3-39
Replication Tool 3: REPLICATION WORKPLAN TEMPLATE

2.4 Expected Results

State what you expect will be achieved by the project. Include:

• Short term results or outputs

Ex. Components of infrastructure in place; new practice established in the LGU; reorganization
of a LGU department; citizens trained in basic heath care; etc

• Medium and long term results as consequence of the outputs (outcomes and impact)
Ex. Better accessibility to a service; better collaboration between the LGU and citizens;
increased LGU revenue; more services delivered to citizens; safer community; cleaner
environment; healthier citizens; improved living conditions for the citizens; etc

3.0 Implementation Plan

Provide the schedule and details for the activities in your project. Include key implementation
steps with corresponding completion dates in chronological order. For each step include:

• What procedures, tools, systems or structures will be put in place

• Who needs to be involved / Why? (staff, volunteers, institutional partners, etc)
• Other resources required (facilities, equipment, meeting halls, etc)
• Monitoring and evaluation measures

GANTT CHART

4.0 Coordination, Monitoring and Evaluation

Contact Person / Coordinator

Identify the Contact Person. The contact person is the main coordinator of the project in
the LGU. He/She coordinates all Replication activities. Communications with the following
individuals / groups are channeled through him/her:
• All project participants and stakeholders within the LGU
• The contact person in the Host LGU
• The contact persons of other Rereplicating LGUs
• (the program implementing team, in case of replication within a program)

Core Management Team

Identify the members of the project core management team. This is a small team of 3 to 5
members who may oversee the project implementation.

Monitoring progress and reporting

Indicate a reporting schedule (usually a short progress report after each key implementation
step or project activity). The reports are used to inform the Mayor, the legislative council (and
the program implementing team in case of replication within a program) and the of project
implementation progress.

3-40
 Replication Tool 3: REPLICATION WORKPLAN TEMPLATE

Evaluation
Indicate the joint evaluation plan in collaboration with the host LGU and replicating LGU (and
the program implementing team, in case of replication within a program.). Include:

• planned date of evaluation

• evaluation team composition (who will take part in the evaluation process?

5.0 Budget

Provide a budget for the project. The budget should include the direct expenditures required
for the LGU to implement the Exemplary Practice.

3-41
 Table D. How Tools 1-3 are Linked to Each Other
Tool 1: Guidelines for
Documenting the Exemplary
Practice with the Reference
Document as Output
Purpose of the Tool:
Allows for the documentation of
the following information about
the exemplary practice
Parts of the Tool/Data Required by
the Tool
History; how the practice was
developed/evolved
Conditions prior to implementing
the practice
Objectives for implementing
exemplary practice
Key implementation steps
and resources used during the
implementation of the practice in
the host LGU
Results/Impact to the LGU and the
Community
Analysis: Lessons Learned and
Sustainability measures
3-42
Tool 2: Peer-to-Peer Learning
Workshop Generic Agenda and
Facilitator’s Guide
Purpose of the Tool:
Repeats the information provided
in the various sections of the
Reference Document with
personal touches by implementers,
stakeholders and beneficiaries
Allows for the sharing and learning
of the exemplary practice following
the flow of the Reference Document
Parts of the Tool/Data Required by the
Tool
History; how the practice was
developed/evolved
Conditions prior to implementing
the practice
Objectives for implementing the
practice
Key implementation steps
and resources used during the
implementation of the practice in
the host LGU
Results/Impact to the LGU and the
community
Analysis: Lessons learned and
sustainability measures
Tool 3: Replication Workplan
Template
Purpose of the Tool:
Allows for the formulation
of a Replication Workplan by
the Replicating LGU based
on and adapting from the
Reference Document and the
various Peer-to-Peer Learning
Workshop presentations
Parts of the Tool/Data Required
by the Tool
Context for replication, related
initiatives by replicating LGU;
description of need/importance
for replicating exemplary
practice
Conditions currently prevailing
that surface the need for the
exemplary practice
Objectives of Replication
Implementation Plan/Key
Implementation Steps to
Replication and resources/
budget needed
Expected Results
Monitoring and Evaluating
Results
Sustainability measures
POST-PEER-TO-PEER LEARNING WORKSHOP ACTIVITIES:
VALIDATING AND IMPLEMENTING THE WORKPLAN

The workplan can then serve as the overall project implementation guide, as it sets the
mechanisms, processes and activities for the project.

It facilitates and allows LGUs to:

• Identify the situation prior to the replication process

• Define specific needs for the project and objectives
• Determine the key steps and activities to undertake
• Identify the required resources
• Set key areas to monitor during project implementation

The draft workplan produced by the replicating LGU team that participated in the Peer-
to-Peer Learning Workshop will need refinement and approval from stakeholders and
relevant authorities. Further consultation of various stakeholders, verification of available
resources, additional budget information, further adaptation to the specific conditions of
the replicating LGU will be necessary.

The delegation that took part in the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop can take the lead in
consulting other colleagues, stakeholders and decision makers, adapt and build consensus
on the project workplan and finally having it approved by the appropriate authorities,
executive and legislative.

Once the workplan is refined and approved, the LGU is finally ready to replicate its choice
exemplary practice as outlined in their workplan.

MONITORING AND EVALUATION

1. Rudiments on LGU M & E of a Replication Program

Monitoring and evaluation is an important part of the replication process. Monitoring
serves to measure the extent to which the workplan is being implemented, what
difficulties are encountered as you go along, what measures can be taken to address these
difficulties, what additional steps are needed or can be skipped. Evaluation helps gauge
how successfully an LGU has replicated the practice based on the objectives set at the start
and what lessons can be derived from the experience.

In the replication process, there are four key concerns to monitor and evaluate:

• Understanding and use of the three replication tools

• Effectiveness or appropriateness of the implementation steps outlined in the
Replication Workplan

3-43
 • The ability of the LGU to implement the replication process
• The results achieved and lessons learned

For LGUs undertaking replication outside

a program, monitoring and evaluation
will be in the form of self-assessment by
replicating LGUs, perhaps with some degree
of advice from the host LGUs. In case of
replication within a program, the program
implementing team can facilitate the work
of developing the assessment tools and
the conduct of assessment activities. While
replicating LGUs would be most concerned
with monitoring and evaluating their
replication process, host LGUs can also take
part in M & E activities, to provide lessons
learned in hosting replicating projects and
giving inputs/advice to replicating LGUs.

2. Putting a Monitoring System in Place

Replication Tool #3 recommends the making of a short monitoring report at the end of
each implementation step to record progress made with regard to the workplan and
timeframe, difficulties and delays, and what measures were undertaken or planned to
address these challenges.

Replicating LGUs can do at least one or two evaluation activities (e.g. an evaluation
workshop) for a 6- to 18- month replication period to assess your accomplishments
vis-à-vis your objectives and the lessons learned by your LGU in the process, using an
assessment tool that you can develop or adapt from the one presented here.

The important thing to remember here is whether you decide on monthly monitoring
reports and one or two evaluation activities (using an assessment tool) or other
alternatives, you need to put in place a monitoring and evaluation system (with
assessment tools, procedures and timetable) that you will undertake throughout the
replication process.

3-44
 Monitoring and Evaluation Tool for Local Governments
to assess the Replication Process and Outcomes

This is a pool of guide questions that can be used by the replicating LGUs the replication process they
implemented. It can be accomplished by replicating LGUs on their own or with the help of an external
facilitator. Under a replication program, the program implementing team can organize and facilitate the
assessment activities.

I. Choosing An Exemplary Practice to Replicate to Address Needs in your LGU

• Did the practice your LGU is now replicating provide a solution to the challenge your LGU was /
is facing?
• How relevant is/was the exemplary practice in addressing the challenge your LGU was facing?
• Did the executive (Mayor) and legislative council in your LGU support the idea of replicating
the exemplary practice before you started the project? Did this contribute to the success of
the project?

II. Accomplishments/Gains

• What were the major gains/accomplishments/breakthroughs in your LGU as a result of

implementing this project, both expected and unexpected?
• What has been the importance (level of effort/results) of this replication project relative to
other activities of your LGU?

III. Difficulties/Issues

• How far did your LGU go in replicating the exemplary practice? What components/steps were
implemented? Were not implemented? Why? Will your LGU continue with the steps that were
not implemented?
• What difficulties were encountered by your LGU in replicating the exemplary practice? In using
the tools? At each implementation step?
• What measures were taken to address such difficulties?
• How successful were these measures in overcoming the difficulties?
• What recommendations would you have in case of future replication projects (or as you
continue with the replication process) to avoid these same difficulties from recurring?

IV. Factors that Facilitated / Hindered the Replication (generic to any practice)

• What are the factors that facilitated the replication of the exemplary practice in your LGU?
• What are the factors that hindered the replication of the exemplary practice in your LGU?
• What recommendations would you make to LGUs wanting to replicate an exemplary practice
initially implemented by another LGU?

V. Lessons Learned

• What lessons has your LGU (or individual members) learned in implementing this replication
project?
• How closely did you follow/use the replication tools? What deviations from/innovations in the
methodology and tools did you undertake and why?

3-45
 VI. Sustainability

• What structures/procedures/tools/systems has your LGU put in place to apply the exemplary
practice?
• How rooted are these structures/procedures/tools/systems in your LGU’s operation? Are there
legislative measures/ordinances to support these?
• What are the chances that these structures/procedures/tools/systems remain as regular
functions of the LGU?
• Are the key project implementors (departments/units, partner agencies, community
representatives) likely to remain in place as implementors/supporters of the project in the
future? Please identify.
• What needs to be done (at executive, legislative, community levels) to ensure continuity of the
new practice/budget/project finalization before and after the elections?
• From your LGU’s perspective, has this replication project been a success? Why? Why not?
• Do you believe the exemplary practice proposed to your LGU was appropriate for rapid and
effective replication? Why so?
• Upon the termination of the project, what additional support (i.e. technical assistance,
coaching, on-going inputs from host, other incentives, etc.) from external sources would your
LGU require to ensure your replication project’s completion/continuity?

3-46
 How Kaakbay did it:
Towards Sustaining Efforts

Perceived in an LGU capacity development perspective, the replication process amongst

LGUs should go through four main development stages to enhance their chances of
sustaining the effort.

The Four Stages of Capacity Building in Replicating LGUs

Stage 1: Consensus Building

This involves building consensus within the local government unit to make an
institutional commitment to replicate a practice. This includes building a consensus that
a specific practice has been identified as a solution or answer to a concrete challenge/
issue faced by the LGU and that replicating this practice is how they choose to address
this challenge/issue. There should also be a general understanding of and commitment
to the level of effort required to complete replication (financial and human resources,
community participation, etc) as well as to following the steps in the replication process
within the timeframe specified.

Stage 2: Capacity Enhancement

This stage entails that the LGU achieves the necessary know -how to replicate the
identified practice. . This capacity is gained through the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop
where the replicating LGU undertakes an exposure visit to the host LGU, to better
understand and appreciate the practice it is planning to replicate and also begin the
process of thinking about how to apply the practice in their own context and developing
a workplan to replicate it.

Stage 3: Application
This is where you test your LGU’s capacity by actually implementing the workplan you
have developed. This involves following the step-by-step procedure you have mapped
out, including mobilizing people and other resources, making changes when necessary
and monitoring your progress and evaluating if the practice you have replicated has
actually met its objectives and improved governance in your locality.

Stage 4: Institutionalization
After you have successfully implemented your workplan and seen for yourself the definite
benefits of the practice you have replicated, you need to take necessary measures to
institutionalize the practice, making it a permanent function of the LGU by enacting
appropriate ordinances, informing and mobilizing citizens, ensuring institutional
commitment through institutional funding and support, ensuring that it lives beyond the
terms of the current administration.

3-47
 SUMMING UP

In summing up, we need to emphasize that managing the replication process requires four
critical tasks:

1. Ensure a supportive environment and the needed institutional support for replication, in
terms of making available human, technical and financial resources for the program.

2. Clarify roles and expectations of both host and replicating LGUs, to avoid potential
conflicts, misunderstandings and delays.

3. Manage relations and dynamics between host and replicating LGUs by ensuring constant
and open communication through well-set coordination mechanisms.

4. Establish a monitoring system to ensure the success of your replication initiative.

3-48
 CHAPTER four
more on M & E and ensuring success in
replication at the program level
4-2
more on M & E and ensuring success
in replication at the program level

Sustained and meaningful monitoring and evaluation (M & E) that is

integrated in the program and undertaken at key periods is critical to
the success of a program for replicating exemplary practices in local
governance. Thus, while Chapter 3 discusses M & E at the level of
local governments participating in replication, this chapter provides
a more detailed discussion of M &E for institutions implementing a
replication program.

IMPORTANCE OF MONITORING AND EVALUATING

A REPLICATION PROGRAM

For a replication program, monitoring and evaluation essentially

serves the purpose of assessing the effectiveness of the program as
a mechanism to disseminate exemplary practices amongst LGUs.

To do so, it must look at the following dimensions:

1. Assess if the program itself was developed with the appropriate

structures and processes to generate the dissemination of
exemplary practices
2. Assess if the methodology and tools proposed to the LGUs
undertaking replication are effective and lead to actual
replication
3. Identify gains and accomplishments from the process, as well as
lessons learned by program implementors and LGU participants
that can inform future program implementation

In the replication methodology offered in this guidebook, M & E

emerges as an integral part of the program, meaning each of the five
major tasks to program implementation provides clear anchors for
monitoring and evaluating. For example, by developing frameworks
and criteria for identifying EPs and selecting replicators, you are able
to measure how valid your choices of EPs and replicators are. You
can also check the correctness of the bases for your selection. Since

4-3
 LGUs replicating an exemplary practice develop a workplan, you can monitor the following:

• The changes that occur in the LGU and the community as a result of replicating the practice
• The progress in undertaking replication based on the implementation steps and activities
outlined

And, by having a set of Replication Tools to follow, you are able to review the process each
step of the way, identifying which activities were followed, which were not and what the
corresponding results were.

MONITORING AND EVALUATION AT THE PROGRAM LEVEL

At the program level, monitoring and evaluation focuses on the following program issues and
concerns:

Table 4.1. Key Issues and Questions for Program Level Assessment

Program Tasks Program Issues/ Key Questions To Ask

Concerns to Monitor
Determining Program Institutional Partnership
Modalities evolved (in case of partnership/
consortium)
Is the partnership being fully realized? Are
partners playing the roles they have committed
to? What are the gaps and how can they be
addressed? Is each partner adequately benefiting
from being part of the program?

Management structures Are the management structures appropriate?

What needs to be changed?

Program objectives and Are the program objectives and framework

framework relevant? What needs to be added/modified?

Program workplan Is the workplan realistic? What changes need to

be made and why?

Resources Are the resources being properly used? How can

they be better maximized? What other resources
are needed and have yet to be tapped?

Methodology/processes How effective are the processes and tools used

(partnership-building, decision-making, problem-
solving, resource mobilization, planning)? What
can be done to improve them (lessons learned)?

Monitoring strategy Is the approach set up for monitoring progress

effective?

4-4
 Program Tasks Program Issues/ Key Questions You may ask
Concerns to monitor

Identification of EPs Framework and criteria for Are the framework and criteria helping your
- ensuring participation identifying EPs organization meet its objectives? Which EPs
of Host LGUs are proving more difficult to replicate than
- providing support to expected and why? Can the criteria be improved
Host LGUs for future use? What can be done to learn more
about types of EPs to promote for replication for
different types of LGUs?

Support/incentive package for What difficulties are host LGUs having and how
host LGUs can these be addressed? What other support is
needed and the program can provide for host
LGUs?

Methodology/processes How effective were the processes and tools

undertaken (communication, info dissemination,
identification process)? What can be done to
improve them (lessons learned)?

Selection of Replicators Selection criteria for replicators Is the selection criteria appropriate and effective?
- ensuring commitment Is the criteria helping to identify the right LGUs
- providing support to for participation in the program?
replicators
Support for replicators What difficulties are replicators having and how
can then be addressed? What other support
is needed and the program can provide for
replicators?

Methodology/Processes How effective are the processes and tools used

(info dissemination, screening, communication,
etc)? What can be done to improve them (lessons
learned)?

4-5

Putting in Place a Monitoring
and Evaluation System at the
Program Level
1. Identify strategic timepoints
for monitoring and
evaluation
2. Develop and use standard
tools that can be used
by LGUs and program
implementors
3. Conduct the M&E activities
jointly with program
partners
4-6
Program implementors in consultation with the participating
LGUs undertake program-level monitoring. This means that the
experience and information provided by the LGUs will inform the
program assessment.
Putting in Place a Monitoring and Evaluation System
As discussed in Chapter 3, monitoring and evaluation of the
replication process among local governments should be in the
form of self-assessments by replicating LGUs, perhaps with some
degree of advice from the host LGUs. The program implementing
team can facilitate the work of developing the assessment tools
and the actual assessment activities. While replicating LGUs
would be most concerned with monitoring and evaluating their
replication process, host LGUs can also take part in M & E activities,
to provide lessons learned in hosting replicating projects and
giving inputs/advice to replicating LGUs.
To ensure that these activities are effectively done, it is important
to put in place a monitoring and evaluation system. This means
integrating the following considerations in the program:
1. Identifying strategic points/stages in the process when
you will undertake monitoring and evaluation activities,
whether monthly, quarterly, or end-project. As a minimum,
in addition to regular monitoring, you may need to do at
least one or two more formal assessment activities for a six
month- to- one year replication program period.
During the replication process, Replication Tool 3
recommends the making of a short monitoring report by
replicating LGUs at the end of each implementation step
to record progress made with regard to the workplan and
timeframe, difficulties and delays, and what measures were
undertaken or planned to address these challenges.
It is also recommended that you do at least one or two
evaluation activities (e.g. an evaluation workshop) for
a 6- to 18- month replication period to assess your
accomplishments vis-a-vis your objectives and the lessons
learned by your LGU in the process, using an assessment
tool that you can develop or adapt from the one presented
here.
 2. Developing and using standard tools for self-assessment by LGUs and for program
assessment by program implementors. (You can use or innovate from the Kaakbay
tools presented in this chapter). Structured assessments maximize learning and ensure
that lessons learned are not lost in the end.

3. Ensuring that monitoring and evaluation activities are conducted jointly between
host and replicating LGUs to maximize and sustain peer-to-peer learning and that the
results are documented and easily available for future reference.

End-project joint assessment

At the end of the replication process and as one of the final activities in your replication
program, it is recommended that you undertake an end-project evaluation workshop/activity
among host and replicating LGUs. A representative of the host LGU visits the replicating LGU
for a one-day joint self-assessment of the replication process. Using a tool your program
has developed (which you can adapt from the one presented here), this joint end-project
assessment will go a long way to assessing the effectiveness of your program and glean
lessons that can inform your efforts when you undertake a similar program in the future.

4-7
 How Kaakbay did it

M & E by Cluster
To facilitate program implementation and monitoring, the Kaakbay program grouped
host and replicating LGUs into replication clusters. Each cluster consisted of one host
LGU and 3 to 5 replicating LGUs, all replicating the same practice in the host LGUs.
M & E activities, therefore, were also undertaken per cluster. The results were then
consolidated to inform program-level assessment.

Kaakbay program implementors facilitated the conduct of M & E activities at the LGU
level. Kaakbay developed the assessment tools and facilitated workshops where the
tools were used. The results of the assessments were then consolidated.

M & E at two points in time: Mid- project and end-project

As a one-year pilot program on replication, Kaakbay undertook M & E at two points
mid-project and end-project.

A key principle guiding the assessment is that both the host and respective replicating
LGUs take part in the assessment.

Mid-project Assessment
The mid-project assessment focused on assessing the effectiveness of the replication
methodology being piloted by Kaakbay. A set of guide questions were developed and
answered by each cluster in a workshop facilitated by a program monitor (members
of the Kaakbay implementing team).

At the program level, program institutional partners and implementors also reviewed
selected program issues, including the frameworks and criteria, institutional
partnerships, governance structures, LGU capacities, methodologies and processes.

The end-project assessment used another set of guide questions to assess the overall
replication process and the tools Kaakbay developed and were used by the different
LGUs.

For example, Kaakbay developed the tool presented below. The replication clusters in
the assessment workshops used the results of the posed questions to guide their M &
E process.

These questions are presented here as a pool of potential questions which may be
used or may inspire implementers of replication programs.

4-8
 KAAKBAY AND M & E TOOLS:
Getting Involved in the Program:
The Overall Replication Process Suggested by Kaakbay

Getting involved in the Program

• Did the practice your LGU is now replicating provide a solution to a key
challenge your LGU was / is facing?
• How relevant is the exemplary practice in addressing the challenge your LGU is
facing?
• Did both the executive (Mayor) and legislative (Sanggunian) leadership of your
LGU support the idea of replicating the exemplary practice before your project
started? Was this a critical factor for the success of the project?
• Was the information provided by the Kaakbay program sufficient for our LGU to
understand what it was getting involved in?
• What recommendations can you make regarding any aspect of the application
process your LGU undertook to get involved in the Kaakbay program?
• Is the practice your LGU is replicating a good practice for replication? Why?

The overall Replication Process Suggested by Kaakbay

(application to replicate a specific practice; being part of a cluster; Peer-to-Peer Learning
Workshop; replication in your LGU; on-going host support; mid-project assessment
workshop; etc)

• What general comments can you make about the process suggested by Kaakbay
as a mechanism to facilitate the replication of an LGU practice corresponding to
a need/challenge you have in your LGU?
• Is the period of 9 months for replicating your project an appropriate time frame
for the replication to be effective?
• Are there steps/components of the process that are not necessary?
• How close is the practice you are implementing in your LGU to the exemplary
practice that inspired it? Do you think you are really replicating the practice as it
was first implemented by the other LGU?

Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop

• Was the Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop conducive to helping your LGU
replicate this practice?
• What aspects of the workshop helped (or not) the replication of the practice in
your LGU?
• Was the workshop too long? Too short?
• What recommendations would you have about the Peer-to-Peer Learning
Workshop for it to further maximize the appreciation and replication of the
practice in your LGU?

3-9
 The Workplan Template
• How effective was the use of this template to facilitate the development of a
workplan for your LGU to replicate the exemplary practice?
• How effective was the use of this workplan to facilitate the replication of the
practice in your LGU?
• What suggestions can you make to improve this template?

The Reference Document

• Did you use the reference document as a guide as you were replicating your
practice?
• Do you feel this document adequately reflects the practice you are/were
replicating?
• Is the outline of the document (rationale, objectives of the practice, results,
implementation steps, etc) contributing to your understanding of how project
should be implemented?
• What improvements could you make about the reference document?

The Cooperation Between the Host and the Recipient LGUs

• How frequently did you relate with the host LGU in the overall replication
process?
• Did the Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop provide a sufficient amount of
exchange with the host to help you replicate or did you require further
exchanges?
• How did you collaborate after the workshop? Visits? (e.g. telephone calls,
request for additional materials) Other means?
• How important was your relationship with the host LGU in helping you
replicate the practice?
• What recommendations can you make about the relations with the host to
support the implementation of your replication project?

Factors that Facilitated / Hindered the Replication

• What are the factors that facilitated the replication of the exemplary practice
in your LGU?
• What are the factors that hindered the replication of the exemplary practice in
your LGU?
• What recommendations would you make to LGUs wanting to replicate an
exemplary practice initially implemented by another LGU?

3-10
Based on the results of the cluster assessments, the program monitors wrote progress
reports per cluster using the template below. These progress reports were then
consolidated and summarized.

Mid-project Assessment
Replication Cluster Progress Report
(Template used by program monitors)

I. Project Title : (Exemplary Practice being replicated)

II. Host LGU :

III. Recipient LGUs :

IV. Brief Description of the Practice

V. Summary of the Status of Replication Process

1. Based on the implementation of the individual work plan of the recipient

LGUs, what major outputs can be considered as breakthroughs of the
replication process?
2. What were the key implementation steps of the practice adopted by
the recipient LGUs that have been implemented as planned? Did these
produce the desired outputs? What didn’t work?
3. What were the problems/difficulties encountered by the recipient LGUs
in the implementation of their respective work plan?

VI. Lessons Learned to Date

1. Based on the major outputs/breakthroughs, what insights (beneficial or

otherwise) could be derived from the implementation of the practice?
2. On the problems/difficulties encountered by the recipient LGUs,
what measures/mechanisms should have been in place prior to the
implementation of various activities of the project? What type of
interventions should have been done to minimize difficulties?

For the end-project assessment, Kaakbay program monitors conducted cluster visits to
apply the Guide Questionnaire developed. Two questionnaires were answered, one for the
host LGUs and one for the replicators or recipient LGUs.

3-11
 End-Project Assessment
GUIDE QUESTIONNAIRE FOR THE FINAL ASSESSMENT VISITS
(for Recipient LGUs)

I. Work Plan Implementation

• Based on your workplan, what were/are the major results/ breakthroughs of the
project being replicated by your LGU?
• How far did your LGU go in replicating the exemplary practice? What components/
steps were implemented? Were not implemented? Why? Will your LGU continue with
the steps that were not implemented?
• What key/implementation steps produced the desired results? Which ones did not?
Why?
• What has been the importance (level of effort/results) of this replication project
relative to other activities of your LGU?
• Was the period (July to February) sufficient to bring the replication project to
application stage?

II. Sustainability

• What structures/procedures/tools/systems has your LGU put in place to apply the

exemplary practice?
• How rooted are these structures/procedures/tools/systems in your LGU’s operation?
Are there executive orders, ordinances, or other means to support these?
• What are the chances that these structures/procedures/tools/systems will remain as
regular functions of the LGU?
• Are the key project implementors (departments/units, partner agencies, community
representatives) likely to remain in place as implementors/supporters of the project in
the future? Please identify.
• What needs to be done (at executive, legislative, community levels) to ensure
continuity of the new practice after the elections?
• From your LGU’s perspective, has this replication project been a success? Why? Why
not?
• Do you believe the exemplary practice proposed to your LGU was appropriate for rapid
and effective replication? Why so?
• After the termination of the Kaakbay project (March 30, 2004), what additional support
(i. e. technical assistance, coaching, on-going inputs from host, other incentives, etc.)
from external sources would your LGU require to ensure your replication project’s
completion/continuity?

3-12
 GUIDE QUESTIONNAIRE FOR THE FINAL ASSESSMENT VISITS
(for Host LGUs)

• As host LGU, please estimate (in person-days) the general level of effort your LGU has
committed to the Kaakbay replication process. (mayor? senior staff? support staff?)

• What has been the value of participating in the Kaakbay replication process as host?
(staff development, visibility, knowledge gained, improvements in operation, etc.)

• Outside of the official activities of Kaakbay (i.e. Exposure Visit and Workshop, mid-
project assessment, validation visit), how much request for assistance did you receive
from recipient LGUs?

• Would your LGU want to continue acting as host for other LGUs wanting to replicate
your exemplary practice? On your own? As part of an official national replication
program?

3-13

Five Major Tasks to Implementing
a Replication Program
Task 1: Determining the modalities of
the program
Task 2 : Identifying exemplary
practices that will be offered for
replication
Task 3: Selecting local governments
that will replicate the exemplary
practices
Task 4: Managing and supporting the
actual replication process among
local Government units
Task 5: Monitoring and evaluating
the program
Essential Ingredients to Successful
Replication
1.Ensure a demand-driven frame-
work for replication
2. Ensure the commitment and
political will of local government
leaders in the program.
3. Formulate relevant, appropriate
and viable frameworks and criteria
for identifying EPs for replication.
4. Use or develop a replication
process that is adapted to your
clientele.
5. Ensure that monitoring and
evaluation is integral to program
implementation.
6. Successful replication breeds
further replication, thus expanding
good governance practices beyond
your program expectations and
immediate sphere of influence.
4-14
CONCLUSION: GOING FOR IT
Monitoring and Evaluation rounds up the five
major tasks in undertaking a Replication Program on
Exemplary Practices in Local Governance. Undertaking
each of the five tasks effectively, understanding
their rationale and the accompanying tools and
guidelines with an eye to innovation, will ensure the
success of your replication program.
Undertaking a replication program on good
practices in local governance puts you on a path
that has not been taken before, except by Kaakbay
implementors in the Philippines. This presents
an exciting and unique challenge for which this
guidebook attempts to prepare and guide you
through.
At the same time, since pioneering in local
governance replication can be a daunting and
lonely task. There are few examples to learn from
and mobilizing resources for a new idea may pose a
challenge.
Also, for many local governments, dealing with
the day-to-day minutiae of managing local
bureaucracies, working with small budgets, and
following routine transactions can stunt creativity
and visionary work, hampering local government
officials from enlarging their vision and signing up
for such an innovative effort as replication.
As a conclusion to this guidebook, we revisit key
principles in program implementation as guideposts
along the way and offer words of inspiration and
guidance from the Kaakbay program implementors,
whose experience has closely informed the making
of this guidebook.
National government officials, program
implementors, mayors, and local planners point out
the essential ingredients to successful replication
and testify to the concrete gains in replicating
exemplary practices and the effectiveness of a peer-
to-peer learning approach. Keeping these insights
in mind will help you on your way to a successful
replication program and a greater contribution to
improving local governance in your area.
1. Ensure a demand-driven framework to replication.
Replication must be an expressed demand of local
governments. The practice LGU replicators choose to
replicate should represent a solution to a problem or
situation they are seeking to resolve. The LGU replicators
you select should clearly and strongly identify the need to
replicate a particular practice. This will ensure sustained
commitment and active participation of replicating LGUs
and, consequently, greater prospects for success. Caution
must be exercised when involving LGUs in your program.
Do not jeopardize the quality of your program because
you need to meet deadlines or expenditure targets.
Apply the criteria you set out. Poorly selected LGUs can
lead to early dropouts or lackluster participation.
2. Ensure the commitment and political will of local
government leaders in the program.
This was a recurring lesson and insight throughout the
Kaakbay program process. The lack of sustained support
and political will of the mayor or chief executive and
the local legislative body (council) can spell the failure
of a replication project. As program implementors,
therefore, leadership support and commitment needs to
be a key criterion in choosing replicators. Sustaining this
commitment through program activities that encourage
leadership participation should also be integrated in the
program.
3. Formulate relevant, appropriate and viable
frameworks and criteria for identifying EPs for
replication.
Ensure that identified practices may be realistically
replicated by other LGUs. Poor criteria for identifying EPs
may result in your EPs not being suitable for replication.
Categorize EPs in terms of their degree of complexity
in being replicated (time, resources, capacities of LGU).
Replication makes most sense if it is cost-effective.
EPs that prove more difficult than expected can place
greater burdens on replicating LGUs in terms of time and
resources and may ultimately result in LGUs abandoning
the project. Similarly, poorly-selected replicators may
cause a high percentage of dropouts in the program,
which will waste the time and effort put in by host LGUs
as well as the program.
Replication should be a demand and a
need. It should be something that LGUs
really want to do, are eager to do. This way,
they will really be involved, they will be
pro-active in finding the needed resources,
they will not bemoan the time, money and
effort involved, and they will not be easily
discouraged when problems arise. — Lilian
de Leon, Executive Director, League of
Municipalities of the Philippines (LMP)
One of the vital elements that will ensure
its success is the political will of the local
officials, strong management team and
community support. — Hon. Melquiadez
Azcuna, Jr., Mayor, Lopez Jaena Misamis
Occidental_, CAP Cluster
Developing criteria for identifying the
EPs was a very important element of our
replication program. I think that if we did
not have the criteria we used or simply
chose practices we already knew of or
the ones recognized by existing award
programs, the program may not have been
as successful as it was. Not all practices
are good to propose for replication. The
criteria we developed made it easier
for the program stakeholders to better
appreciate what should be replicated
and what shouldn’t. The criteria are also
critical to make links to the objectives of the
implementing organizations or to national
priorities. — Basile Gilbert, Governance
Advisor, Local Government Support
Program (LGSP)
4-15
 Definitely, the tools, particularly
the way the Exposure Visit and
Peer-to-Peer Learning Workshop
were organized, encouraged the
mayors to replicate; it served to
inspire and educate and made the
LCEs realize that learning from
another municipality’s experience
can be a good way of resolving
one’s problems. — Engr. Zoilo
C. Gudin Jr., City Planning and
Development Officer, Panabo
City Davao del Sur, Balak cluster
We kept revisiting our frameworks,
criteria and tools based on the
lessons we learned and the
feedback from the LGUs. We revised
our criteria and tools, narrowed
them down and made them
more specific and relevant. Every
new experience, every difficulty,
and every breakthrough showed
the way towards improving our
tools and processes. — Rommel
Martinez, Executive Director,
Evelio B. Javier Foundation, Inc.
Given our government’s thrust
for good governance, peer-to-
peer learning emerges as a good
strategy for building capacities of
LGUs. It is relatively less expensive
than other modes of capacity
development because it builds
its own momentum, generating
synergies between stakeholders. The
resources you provide for an initial
program can actually spread and
benefit many LGUs.
— Hon. Austere A. Panadero,
Assistant Secretary, DILG
4-16
4. Use or develop a replication process that is adapted
to your clientele.
In the Kaakbay pilot program, the three interconnected
tools prescribed were developed based on knowledge of
Philippine LGUs and their capacity development needs.
Study tours were common practice but rarely structured
to maximize fast appreciation; local government
officials would return to their respective towns but often
without knowing how to apply what they learned. The
tools address these gaps and are generic enough to be
adapted to many different contexts. Thorough study and
familiarization with the three tools, their purposes and
contents, how they relate to one another, are important to
maximize their use.
5. Ensure that monitoring and evaluation is integral to
program implementation.
Because a replication program is an innovation,
monitoring and recording your own experience in
program development as well as the experience of LGUs
replicating helps your organization build its capacity
for undertaking similar programs in the future. It also
contributes to the larger endeavor of disseminating good
governance practices and building effective programs
for replicating and disseminating good practices in local
governance.
6. Ensure the effectiveness and success of your
replication program.
Enriched by their experience, LGUs that have successfully
replicated good practices are often eager to do more.
They may even be interested in sharing their own
experience. Thus, ensuring the effectiveness of your
program helps you achieve more than your targets
and contribute to improving governance in general.
Successful replication will breed further replication. This
will expand good governance practices beyond your
program expectations and immediate sphere of influence.
references

___. 2003. A Framework for Identifying Exemplary LGU Practices for Replication. Produced under the Kaakbay
pilot program for replicating LGU exemplary practices. Philippines.

___. 2004. All for One and One for All. Building LGU Alliances for Infrastructure Development. The KABALIKAT
PALMA Infrastructure Project of the PALMA Alliance: Pigcawayan, Alamada, Libungan, Midsayap, and Aleosan,
Cotabato Province. Kaakbay Reference Document produced under the Kaakbay pilot program for replicating
LGU exemplary practices. Philippines.

___. 2002. Background and Context to City-to-City Cooperation. In City to City Cooperation: Issues Arising
from Experience.

___. 2004. Bringing Government Services Closer to People. Paglilingkod-Abot-Kamay Program, Magsaysay,
Davao del Sur. Reference Document produced under the Kaakbay pilot program for replicating LGU
exemplary practices. Philippines.

___. 2003. Cabuyao Replication Progress Report. Produced under the Kaakbay pilot program for replicating
LGU exemplary practices. Philippines.

___. 2003. Cluster Memorandum of Agreement. Produced under the Kaakbay pilot program for replicating
LGU exemplary practices. Philippines.

___. 2003. Final Assessment Visit Questionnaire. Produced under the Kaakbay pilot program. Philippines.

___. 2003. General Information for Recipient LGUs. Paper produced under the Kaakbay pilot program for
replicating LGU exemplary practices. Philippines.

____. 2003. General Observations on the Kaakbay Pilot Program So Far. Kaakbay program paper for replicating
LGU exemplary practices. Philippines.

___. 2003. Get your Business Permit in One Hour at Cabuyao’s One-Stop Shop. Reference Document produced
under the Kaakbay pilot program for replicating LGU exemplary practices. Philippines.

___. 2004. Guidelines in Documenting your Exemplary Practice. Produced under the Kaakbay pilot program
for replicating LGU exemplary practices. Philippines.

___. 2004. Inception Workshop Facilitator’s Guide. Produced under the Kaakbay pilot program for replicating
LGU exemplary practices. Philippines.

___. 2004. Inception Workshop Generic Agenda. Produced under the Kaakbay pilot program for replicating
LGU exemplary practices. Philippines.

___. 2003. Kaakbay Application Form. Produced under the Kaakbay pilot program for replicating LGU
exemplary practices. Philippines.

___. 2002. Kaakbay: Replicating LGU Exemplary Practices. Concept Paper for Kaakbay pilot program for
replicating LGU exemplary practices. Philippines.

____. 2003. Kaakbay. Replication and Dissemination of LGU Exemplary Practices. Brochure produced by the
Kaakbay program for replicating LGU exemplary practices.

A-1
 ___. 2004. Making Crime Prevention Everybody’s Business, Bantay sa Kahusay Ug Kalinaw (BKK), Peace and Order
Watch, Oroquieta City, Misamis Occidental. Reference Document produced under the Kaakbay pilot program
for replicating LGU exemplary practices. Philippines.

___. 2003. Memorandum of Understanding. Kaakbay pilot program for replicating LGU exemplary practices.
Philippines.

___. 2003. Mid-Project Assessment Workshop Report. Produced under the Kaakbay pilot program for
replicating LGU exemplary practices. Philippines.

___. 2003. Mid-Project Assessment Workshop Report. BALAK Cluster. Produced under the Kaakbay pilot
program for replicating LGU exemplary practices. Philippines.

___. 2003. Mid-Project Assessment Workshop Report for CAP Replication. Produced under the Kaakbay pilot
program for replicating LGU exemplary practices. Philippines.

___. 2003. Mid-Project Assessment Workshop Report. PAK Cluster. Produced under the Kaakbay pilot program
for replicating LGU exemplary practices. Philippines.

___. 2003. Minutes of the January 20 Steering Committee meeting, Kaakbay pilot program for replicating LGU
exemplary practices. Philippines.

___. 2003. Minutes of the March 26 Steering Committee meeting, Kaakbay pilot program for replicating LGU
exemplary practices. Philippines.

___. 2003. Observations on Local Replication Process. Produced under the Kaakbay pilot program for
replicating LGU exemplary practices. Philippines.

___. 2003. PALMA Cluster Progress Report. Produced under the Kaakbay pilot program for replicating LGU
exemplary practices. Philippines.

___. 2003. Project Workplan Template. Produced under the Kaakbay pilot program for replicating LGU
exemplary practices. Philippines.

____. 2004. Purok Power for Primary Health Care. The Countryside Action Program of Balilihan, Bohol.
Reference Document produced under the Kaakbay pilot program for replicating LGU exemplary practices.
Philippines.

___. 2003. Replication cluster Progress Report Guiding Questions. Produced under the Kaakbay pilot program
for replicating LGU exemplary practices. Philippines.

___. 2003. Role of the Host LGU in the Kaakbay Replication Process. Paper produced under the Kaakbay pilot
program for replicating LGU exemplary practices. Philippines.

___. 2003. Selection Criteria for Recipient LGUs. Produced under the Kaakbay pilot program for replicating
LGU exemplary practices. Philippines.

___. 2003. Summary and Highlights of Kaakbay Methodology Assessment. Produced under the Kaakbay pilot
program for replicating LGU exemplary practices. Philippines.

___. 2004. UNDP-Brief on City to City Cooperation.

A-2
Kaakbay Participants in a Focus Group Discussion on Kaakbay Guidebook Development
27 February, 2004:

Alumno, Norio, Research Head, League of Municipalities of the Philippines

Dichoso, Apolinar, Program Officer, Evelio B. Javier Foundation, Inc.
Egos, Lolemeir, Community Development and Information Officer, City Government of Magsaysay,
Davao del Sur
Garcia, Myn, Communications Advisor, Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program
Gilbert, Basile, Governance Advisor, Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program
Martinez, Rommel, Executive Director, Evelio B. Javier Foundation, Inc.
Neri, Rolando, City Director, Departmentof the Interior and Local Government – Oroquieta City
Undan, Liberato, Municipal Planning and Development Officer, Banay-Banay, Davao Oriental

A-3
 app endices
Appendix A: Sample MOU and Forms used by Kaakbay A-7

A.1. Memorandum of Understanding between A-9

League of Municipalities of the Philippines,
League of Cities of the Philippines, Department of Interior and
Local Government and Philippines-Canada Local Government
Support Program
A.2. Framework and Criteria for Identifying A-12
Exemplary Practices
A.3. Kaakbay Template for Initial A-14
Documentation of Exemplary Practices
A.4. General Information for Host LGUs A-16
A.5. Selection Criteria for Replicating LGUs A-19
A.6. General Information to Replicating LGUs A-20
A.7. Application Form for Replicating LGUs A-22
A.8. Initial Documentation of Exemplary Practices A-25
A.9. LGU Replication Cluster Memorandum of Agreement A-30

Appendix B. Sample Kaakbay Reference Document A-32

“Making Crime Prevention Everybody’s Business”
Bantay sa Kahusay Ug Kalinaw (BKK) (Peace and Order Watch)

Appendix C. Kaakbay Brochure/Flyer A-40

Appendix D. Monitoring and Evaluation A-49

Guide Questions Used by Kaakbay

D.1 Mid-Project Assessment Questions A-51

D.2. Progress Report Template A-53
D.3. End-Project Assessment Questions A-54

Appendix E: Replication Tools A-57

E.1 Tool #1: Guidelines in Documenting A-59

An Exemplary Practice (for Host LGUs)
E.2 Tool #2: Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop A-63
Facilitator’s Guide and Generic Agenda
E.3 Tool #3: Replication Workplan Template A-71

Appendix F: Sample Work Plan of a Replicating LGU A-75

A-6
appendix A
kaakbay sample MOU and forms

A-7
A-8
appendix A.1
Memorandum of Understanding between League of Municipalities of the
Philippines, League of Cities of the Philippines, Department of Interior and Local
Government and Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program

Kaakbay: Replication and Dissemination of Exemplary Practices

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING

KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:

This Memorandum of Understanding is entered into by and between:

THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT with main office at Francisco Gold II, Edsa
corner Mapagmahal Street, Barangay Pinyahan, Quezon City and represented in this Agreement by Honorable
Secretary Jose Lina, hereinafter referred to as the “DILG’;

THE LEAGUE OF CITIES OF THE PHILIPPINES, with its office at Suite 1209 Cityland, C 10, Tower 2, H.V. de Ia Costa
cor. Valerlo Sts., Makati City and represented by its National President, Honorable Mayor Francis N. Tolentino,
hereinafter referred to as the “LCP”.

THE LEAGUE OF MUNICIPALITIES OF THE PHILIPPINES, with its office at 265 Ermin Garcia St., Quezon City and
represented by its National President, Honorable Mayor Ramon N. Guico, Jr. hereinafter referred to as the
“LMP”;

THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT SUPPORT PROGRAM II a Philippine-Canada Bilateral Program with its office at Unit
1507, JoIlibee Plaza, Emerald Avenue, Ortigas Center

WHEREAS, DILG, LCP and LMP have the appropriate combined set of roles, responsibilities and networks to
maximize the implementation of a pilot project to experience replication methodologies;

WHEREAS, LMP during its 12th National Assembly has passed a resolution in favor of establishing a national
program for replication and dissemination of exemplary practices of local government units which include
among others development of methodologies and guidelines as well as documentation of other best
practices not so far recorded in collaboration with DILG, LCP, NEDA and funding institutions;

WHEREAS, the LCP has been implementing replication of best practices among member cities and generated
experiences and learnings from the undertaking;

WHEREAS, the DILG is promoting and encouraging LGUs to replicate exemplary practices through their LGU
Capability Building Program being implemented nationwide;

WHEREAS, a partnership between DILG, LCP and LMP will implement the KAAKBAY project and derive lessons
learned to develop a national program to address dissemination and replication of Exemplary Practices
national wide;

WHEREAS, the goal the of the program is to assist the Philippines in realizing its objectives of equitable
growth and poverty reduction through more effective local governance, with enhanced stakeholder
participation in Regions VI, IX, X, XI, XII, XIII and the Autonomous Region in Muslim M1i9~nao;

WHEREAS, the dissemination and replication of exemplary practices were established as key elements of the
LGSP Implementation Strategy;

A-9
 NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above premises, the parties have arrived at an understanding on
the following:

Title of the Project

“KAAKBAY: Replication and dissemination of Exemplary Practices”

Objectives

• To develop and experience simple replication methodologies for the dissemination of “best” or
exemplary practices in the Philippines through a partnership between DILG, LCP and LMP
• To determine the best possible arrangements and mechanisms for knowledge management about
exemplary practices for replication and dissemination in the country.
• To develop a strategy to establish a national program for the dissemination of exemplary practices
in the Philippines.

Project Management Arrangement

a. The Kaakbay Project shall be directed and administered by a Project Steering Committee composed
of representatives from DILG, LCP, LMP and LGSP.
b. The Project Steering Committee shall be supported by a Technical Working Group to be organizec
for the purpose composed of technical staff designated by each partner.

IV. Roles and Responsibilities of Parties

1.1. DILG
a. Designate representative in the Project Steering Committee.
b. Contribute and share studies and examples of “best” or exemplary practices in the area of
poverty alleviation and resource mobilization.
c. Participate actively in the formulation of selection criteria, selection of host and recipient
LGUs and development of methodologies for the dissemination and replication of “best” or
exemplary practices.
d. Designate/appoint coordinator/technical staff at national and local levels who will work
with the Secretariat to implement the overall project in between meetings of the Project
Steering Committee.
e. Designate LGOO and/or provincial staff to coach and monitor the implementation of the
replication projects in LGUs.
f. Provide in-kind contribution in the implementation and management of the project.

1.2. LCP
a. Designate representative in the Project Steering Committee.
b. Designate/appoint coordinator/technical staff who will work with the Secretariat in
between meetings of the Project Steering Committee.
c. Contribute and share studies and examples of “best” or exemplary practices in the area of
poverty alleviation and resource mobilization.
d. Participate actively in the formulation of selection criteria, selection of host and recipient
LGUs and development of methodologies for the dissemination and replication of “best” or
exemplary practices.
e. Play an active role in disseminating information required to support the implementation of
the KAAKBAY Project among members.
f. Provide in-kind contribution in the implementation and management of the project.
g. Provide financial support for the implementation of 1 replication cluster in the amount
P600,000.
h. Disseminate information about the success and results of the project as well as about
specific exemplary practices being replicated.

A-10
 1.3 LMP
a. Designate representative in the Project Steering Committee.
b. Designate/appoint coordinator/technical staff who will work with the Secretariat in
between meetings of the Project Steering Committee.
c. Contribute and share studies and examples of “best” or exemplary practices in the area of
poverty alleviation and resource mobilization.
d. Participate actively in the formulation of selection criteria, selection of host and recipient
LGUs and development of methodologies for the dissemination and replication of “best” or
exemplary practices.
e. Play an active role in disseminating information support the implementation of the
required to KAAKBAY Project among members.
f. Provide in-kind contribution in the implementation and management of the project
g. Provide financial support for the implementation of 1 cluster. LMP will provide an amount
of P300,000. and will secure additional financial support from the Federation of Canadian
Municipalities (FCM) so that the total amount provided by LMP, with the support obtained
from its institutional partner, is at least P600,000.
h. Disseminate information about the success and results of the project as well as about
specific exemplary practices being replicated

1.4. LGSP
a. Provide financial, assistance up to an amount of Philippine Pesos 5 Million for the overall
project implementation as well as four (4) Replication Clusters.
b. Provide technical assistance and secretariat/administratiye support as an in-kind
contribution to the implementation and management of the project.
c. Designate representative in the Project Steering Committee and play an advisory role in
the implementation of the project.

1.5 The Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG)

Designate representative in the Project Steering Committee and play an advisory role in the
implementation of the project.

This Memorandum of Understanding shall take effect upon its signing and shall remain in full force until the
end of the project.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereunto signed presents on this 21th day of February 2003 at Philippines

A-11
 appendix A.2
Framework and Criteria for Identifying LGU Exemplary Practices

This framework and criteria were developed by Kaakbay partners to guide the search for exemplary practices

INTRODUCTION
The KAAKBAY Project is a pilot experience designed to develop simple, organized and structured
methodologies for the replication of “best” or exemplary practices among local government units (LGUs)
in the Philippines. Using a methodology based on a coaching approach among peers, the project is seen
as a partnership between and among DILG, the League of Cities and the League of Municipalities of the
Philippines. The proposed project envisions institutional partnerships to be developed between one “host”
LGU and several “recipient” LGUs for the replication of a specific practice. The key partners in each replication
process are the LGUs having experienced the “exemplary practice” acting as host; the LGUs wanting to
replicate an exemplary practice as recipient LGUs; national and local league representatives; representatives
from the regional offices of DILG as well as the LGOOs associated with each municipal or city LGU.

The Kaakbay Project will involve some 16 to 20 LGUs either as host or recipient LGUs. Of this number, 75% will
be municipalities and 25% will be cities.
The project hopes to help explore the best possible mechanisms for managing knowledge on exemplary
practices for dissemination throughout the country in the future.

The Project initially will be financially supported by the Local Government Support Program (LGSP) with in-
kind contributions from DILG and the Leagues.

REPLICATION DEFINED
A systematic and supportive project implementation process that involves learning from, and sharing
with others practices that are proven and effective solutions to common and similar problems, so as to
contribute to the sustainable wellbeing of citizens and advancement of local government with the least
possible cost and effort.

IDENTIFYING EXEMPLARY PRACTICES OF LGUS

The Kaakbay Project is fully cognizant of the fact that LGUs, being nearest to the grassroots, are in the best
position to identify their needs and the initiatives they want to replicate. The project is also aware that there
have been truly deserving LGU practices that have been recognized over the years by several award-giving
bodies, but whose replication in other LGUs have been few, short-lived or have never been tried. When
following a supply-driven approach, the Kaakbay Project will suggest such initiatives as exemplary practices
for replication by interested LGUs. In addition, the project may also allow LGUs to “demand” for recognized
initiatives that respond to their specific needs. This latter approach would require a cluster of contiguous
LGUs to determine their common needs so that the Kaakbay project may help identify an appropriate
exemplary practice to be replicated within the project timeframe and logistical parameters.

In identifying exemplary practices of LGUs, preference (at least for the first phase of the project) will be on
those initiatives that focus on issues that address poverty alleviation and resource mobilization. Considered
among the priority thrusts of the national government, these issues are also among the felt needs of local
communities and are being actively pursued by all the institutional partners of the Kaakbay Project namely,
DILG, LCP, LMP and LGSP. Exemplary practices of LGUs to be considered for replication under the KAAKBAY
Project are those initiatives that possess as many as possible of the following features or characteristics:

• Municipal or city LGU-initiated. The exemplary practice should have been initiated by a LGU at
the city or municipal level. The initiative should be sustainable and not dependent for its success,
implementation or resources on any other program/project or agency. This being the case, the
initiative should demonstrate LGU ownership and is socially accepted by its targeted beneficiaries.

• Creative Use of LGC powers. The exemplary practice should demonstrate the creative use of
governmental and/or corporate powers provided to LGUs by the Local Government Code of 1991.
In the area of resources mobilization for example, these include activities such as : enactment of tax

A-12
 ordinances/revenue codes; assessment and reclassification of real properties; land use planning and
land reclassification; organizing community assemblies for tax information campaigns; establishing
linkages with the private sector, NGOs and POs in generating resources service delivery, local
development programs and projects; mobilizing community-based organizations and barangay
officials in monitoring the cost-effectiveness of development program and projects as well as
establishment of local economic enterprises; local credit financing; private sector participation in
BOT/PT schemes, joint ventures, etc

• Simple and implementable in one year. The initiative is easily replicable and can progress to the
“application stage” in a relatively short timeframe. This also means that the replication must start
ASAP so that the initiatives are completed or are well underway before the next local elections.

• Proven and effective solutions to common or similar problems. The exemplary practice has
operationally demonstrated and proven over a reasonable period to be an effective response to
the identified needs of its target beneficiaries. It also means that the initiative has significantly
contributed to improve the social and material conditions of the beneficiaries.

• Demonstrated level of sustainability. The following indicators may help determine the level of
sustainability of the initiative: it has been in place for a considerable period of time; it survived the
arrival of a new administration; it has become a permanent program or structure in the LGU; the
community as well as executive and legislative bodies are involved in / supportive of it; related
legislation is in place in the LGU.

• Least possible cost and effort to replicate. The exemplary practice will not require huge amounts
of resources or funding to replicate and is easy to implement. It’s a “common sense idea” as opposed
to a capital-intensive project. It also means the exemplary practice was able to mobilize and
maximize the use of indigenous resources.

• Potential for multiplier effect or further replication. The processes and approaches of the
exemplary practice have the potential to address other needs or deliver services beyond those
originally targeted or intended. This also means that the initiative manifests a relatively high
potential for success achievement. The success of the practice demonstrated in a few LGUs may
incite other LGUs to adopt the same practice.

• Documented exemplary practice. Conceding other features of the exemplary practices to be

equal, preference will be given initiatives that have existing documentation of the benefits, key
milestone, success and hindering factors, results, key stakeholders, processes and mechanisms.

While the exemplary practice or initiative may manifest the foregoing features or criteria, the city or municipal
LGUs who have experienced the exemplary practice, and will serve as host in the replication process, should
likewise have:

• The will and interest ( LCE and SB/SP support) to take part in an institutional sharing process
• The presence of resource people with the ability to contribute/ articulate their experience
• Readiness to start ASAP so that the initiatives are completed or are underway before the 2004 local
elections
• Existing documentation of the exemplary practice preferred

Recognizing that playing host to other LGUs could be arduous and difficult, the Kaakbay project is proposing
a methodology that will minimize the level of effort required from the host LGU. As the initiator of the
exemplary practice, the host LGU/LCE will have the opportunity to “showcase” its good work and success,
which may prove to be an effective promotional vehicle as we approach local election time. The sharing
process will increase the LGU’s local and national visibility and can serve as a learning opportunity for staff to
develop their skill and capacities (teaching to others offers the opportunity to take a different look at what
we already know). Participating in the Kaakbay Replication Cluster can also serve as a continuous learning
process that could further enhance a LGU’s service delivery mechanism. The opportunity to host other LGUs
may eventually lead to more development partnerships and a chance at collectively addressing needs and
concerns that may seem gargantuan or insurmountable if a LGU were to address them by itself.

A-13
 appendix A.3
Kaakbay Template for Initial Documentation of Exemplary Practice Used by Host LGU

Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG)

League of Cities of the Philippines (LCP)
League of Municipalities of the Philippines (LMP)
With Support from
The Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program (LGSP)

Description of Exemplary Practices Proposed for Replication

NOTES IN CAPITALS IN EACH BOX ARE MEANT TO HELP THE WRITER OF THE DESCRIPITON UNDERSTAND WHAT INFORMATION
TO PROVIDE FOR EACH ITEM OR CRITERIA. THEY ARE GUIDE QUESTIONS. THESE NOTES SHOULD BE REMOVED FROM THE FINAL
DESCRIPTION.

Title: TITLE SHOULD DESCRIVE / REFLECT THE ESSENSE Local Government Unit(LGU):
OF THE ACTIVITY

Program Category: POVERTY ALLEVIATION OR LGU Region:

RESOURCES MOBILIZATION

Purpose: PURPOSE OF THE PROJECT OR EP

Brief Description :
THIS SECTION SHOULD PROVIDE A SHORT NARRATIVE DESCRIPITON OF THE PROJECT OR EP, IT SHOULD
DESCRIVE:
- HOW THE ACTIVITY WAS IMPLEMENTED OR WHAT THE LGU DID TO IMPLEMENT THE PROJECT
- WHO ARE THE KEY STAKEHOLDERS, IMPLEMENTORS AND BENEFICIARIES
-DOES THE PRACTICE INVOLVE SIGNIFICANT EDUCATION OR CULTURAL CHANGE ON THE PART OF
STAKEHOLDERS FOR IT TO ACHIEVE SUCCESS?
- IT SHOULD BE WRITTEN FROM THE PERPECTIVE OF THE LGU (EX. WHICH LGU DEPARTMENT WAS
PARTICULARLY INVOLVED, WHY IS THIS PRACTICE IMPORTANT FOR THE LGU, HOW IT HELPED THE LGU
ACHIEVE ITS OBJECTIVES, ETC)
- APPROX. 2 PARAGRAPHS OR HALF A PAGE

Key Results
WHAT WERE THE MOST INPORTANT RESULTS OF THE PROJECT OR EP?
-WHAT NEW SERVICE DID THE LGU PROVIDE WITH THIS PRACTICE IN PLACE OR WHAT SERVICE WAS
ENHANCED?
-WHAT STAFF DEVELOPMENT OCCURRED THROUGH THIS PRACTICE?
-WHICH SPECICIC CITIZEN GROUPS BENEFITED FROM THIS EP?
-HOW DID THE CITIZENS BENEFIT?

Main Implementation Steps

5 OR 6 BULLETS IDENTIFYING WHAT ARE THE KEY STEPS OR MAJOR ACTIVITIES REQUIRED TO
IMPLEMENT THE PROJECT. THIS WILL GIVE AN LGU WANTING TO REPLICATE THIS PRACTICE AN
IDEA OF HOW EASY OR DIFFICULT THE REPLICATION MAY BE

A-14
 Compliance with Selection Criteria

Title: Local Government Unit(LGU):

Region:

Prevailing Conditions for the Specific Practice

WHAT SPECIFIC CONDITIONS WERE IN PLACE IN THE LGU FOR THIS PRACTICE TO BE IMPLEMENTED
A CHAMPION PROPOSING THE IDEA?
A SPECIFC PROBLEM TO ADDRESS?
CITIZENS OR COMMUNITY GROUPS PARTICULARLY COMMITTED TO THE IDEA?
ETC

Sustainability
HAS THE PRACTICE BEEN SUSTAINED OVER TIME? FOR HOW LONG HAS THIS PRACTICE BEEN ON PLACE?
DID OR DOES IT HAVE FULL SUPPORT BY THE EXECUTIVE AND LEGISLATIVE BODIES, AS WELL AS THE
COMMUNITY?
DID IT SURVIVE A CHANGE IN ADMINISTRATION?
IS IT STILL PROCUCING THE LEVEL OF RESULTS ANTICIPATED?
ETC

Support to Implementation
DID THE ACTIVITIY REQUIRE SUPPORT FROM A NATIONAL GOVERNMENT AGENCY?
MUST THE PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT GET INVOLVED?
WAS THE ACTIVITY THE RESULT OF A DONOR SUPPORTED PROGRAM?
WHAT DID THE LGU HAVE TO INVEST IN CASH OR IN-KIND?
WAS TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE REQUIRED FROM OUTSIDE SOURCES?
ETC

Estimated cost to Implement

EVEN WITHOUT SPECIFIC FIGURES AVAILABLE, WHAT TO WE ESTIMATE THE COST OF IMPLEMENTATION IN
ANOTHER LGU TO BE?
WHAT ARE THE RECURRING COSTS TO MAINTAIN THIS PRACTICE IN PLACE?

Time needed to Implement

WHAT REALISTIC TIME PERIOD IS REQUIRED TO REPLICATE THIS PROJECT? CAN IT BE DONE IN 1 YEAR WITH A
RESSONABLE LEVEL OF RESULTS?

Impact On Citizens
WHAT IS THE IMPACT ON CITIZENS? WHAT SEGMENT OF THE POPULATION WILL BENEFIT?
HOW DIRECT IS THE IMPACT OF THIS PRACTICE ON CITIZENS?

Pre-Requisites for Replication

WHAT ARE THE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS WE MAY BE LOOKING FOR IN LGUS WANTING TO REPLICATE THIS
PRACTICE?
CAN IT BE REPLICATED BY ONE LGU? DOES THE PRACTICE INVOLVE COOPERATION WITH OTHER LGUs?
IS IT STRRICTLY FOR COASTAL LGUs, URBAN LGUs, UP-LAND, ETC?

Remarks
ANY ADDITIONAL REMARK HELPING TO DESCRIBE THE PRACTICE AND ITS POTENTIAL REPLICATION IN OTHER LGUs.
APPROXIMATE DEGREE OF DIFFICULTY TO REPLICATE?
CAN IT BE REPLICATED IN BOTH CITIES AND MUNICIPALITIES?
HAS IT ALLREADY BEEN REPLICATED?
ETC

The above criterion is meant to help analyze the practices and help guide the selection of eventual recipient LGUs. It should not
be perceived as absolute pre-requisites for the selection process.

A-15
 appendix A.4
General Information for Host LGUs

This form was disseminated to host LGUs after their exemplary practice has been identified by Kaakbay for
replication under the program

GENERAL INFORMATION TO HOST LGUS

What is the Kaakbay Project?

Kaakbay is a project initiated by DILG, LMP and LCP proposing simple methodologies to help cities and
municipalities easily adopt best or “Exemplary Practices” experienced in other LGUs. The Kaakbay project
helps LGUs work together to replicate practices that are simple, effective and proven solutions to common
LGU challenges.

How does it work?

The Kaakbay project identifies Cities and Municipalities having experienced simple and innovative ways
of addressing LGU challenges. In the Kaakbay project, these are called Exemplary Practices and the
LGUs having experienced them may become Host LGUs. The host LGU is invited to share its know-how in
implementing its Exemplary Practice with a small group of LGUs wanting to learn from them in a clearly
defined replication process.

Once several Exemplary Practices are identified, they are proposed to LGUs wanting to replicate them and
Replication Clusters are formed. A Replication cluster is formed of one Host LGU and two to four Recipient LGUs.
The Host LGUs play an important role in sharing their experience with LGUs wanting to learn from them.

KAAKBAY REPLICATION CLUSTER

Recipient LGU
(Replicating)
LGOO Coaching
CLUSTER LGU REPLICATION
WORKSHOP WORKPLAN
Host LGU Recipient LGU
Exemplary Practice (Replicating)
LGOO Coaching

Recipient LGU
(Replicating)
LGOO Coaching

The 1 year replication process starts with the Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop in the host LGU and helps
determine how the practice may be replicated in other LGUs. During this workshop the host helps Recipient
LGUs learn about the key steps to implement the practice; the success factors and difficulties in implementing
it; who are the key stakeholders and how they contributed; what to avoid; how long it takes to implement;
and what are the main benefits in implementing the practice. The host also agrees with the Recipients on
how they will work together as a cluster of LGUs and what the host contribution will be help replicate the
practice. The host therefore takes part in a 1 year process starting in April-May 2003 supporting other LGUs
implement a practice the host LGU has been very successful in.

A-16
Benefits to the Host LGU
As the initiator of the exemplary practice, the host LGU will:

• Have the opportunity to “showcase” its good work and success. In the long run, this will increase the
LGU’s local, national and even international visibility and may prove to be an effective promotional
vehicle to build additional support from constituents and perhaps even attract investors and tourists

• Host LGUs will be highly recognized for their professionalism in local governance as information
about the Kaakbay project will be disseminated though DILG, LMP and LCP newsletters, conferences
and other public information vehicles.

• Since replication methods are drawing much attention from most government agencies
and international donors, Host LGUs will be recognized for contributing to a pioneering local
government capacity development initiative and network.

• The sharing process can serve as a learning opportunity for LGU staff to develop their own skills,
capabilities and confidence as the learning process provides the opportunity to take a fresh look
at what they are doing. Teaching to others helps develop analytical and inter-personal skills.
Participating in the Kaakbay Replication Cluster can serve as a continuous learning experience that
could further enhance or multiply the Host LGU’s service delivery mechanism.

• The opportunity to host other LGUs may eventually lead to more development partnerships and a
chance to collectively address needs and concerns that may seem insurmountable if an LGU were to
address them by itself

• Being a Kaakbay host may prove to be economically advantageous. The host LGU may be able to
charge fees from other LGUs for transferring a technology that has been proven to work effectively/
successfully.

What is expected from the host LGU?

Host LGUs under the Kaakbay Project are expected:

• to be a part of an institutional cooperation process. The host and recipient LGUs will bind themselves
in a collaborative agreement to pursue a replication process requiring the support of their respective
local councils or Sanggunian.

• To be willing to abide by, and commit to the roles and responsibilities assigned to them as part of
the Replication cluster

• Selected members of the Host LGUs are required to take part in 2 three-day cluster workshops and
may undertake short term (2 or 3 day) visits to share their experience. Host LGUs will therefore
mobilize staff and community/ beneficiaries for specific activities of the replication process
according to a pre-determined schedule within the one year project implementation period.

Support from the Kaakbay Project to Host LGUs

Recognizing that playing host to other LGUs could be demanding and difficult, the Kaakbay Project is
proposing a methodology that will minimize the level of effort required of the host LGU.

Kaakbay will provide:

• Financial and logistical support to host LGUs for all activities they will be involved in. This includes
the cost of travel and accommodation of its staff should they be required to travel as well as the
costs of hosting representatives from other LGUs.

Kaakbay is developing a mechanism through which the host LGU may be able to be compensated
for the time of its staff taking part in the project

A-17
 • The Kaakbay Project will propose a specific methodology, provide tools and technical assistance for
the replication process. This will include processes and measures to help channel the demand for
information from the host LGU to ensure it is not over-burdened by its involvement the Kaakbay
replication process.

Kaakbay will assist the Host LGU in documenting its experience so that it can be easily shared with
other LGUs.

A-18
appendix A.5
Selection Criteria for Replicating LGUs

Kaakbay used the term Recipient LGUs for LGUs who were selected to replicate the identified exemplary
practices. Recipient LGUs were selected based on this criteria.

CRITERIA FOR SELECTION OF RECIPIENT LGUS

Recipient local government units for the Kaakbay Project are municipal and/or city LGUs who want to
take part in an institutional sharing process for the replication and dissemination of exemplary practice/s.
The Kaakbay project would create “clusters” of LGUs for replicating exemplary practices. A cluster may
be composed of a group of LGUs which may or may not be geographically contiguous with each other.
The project will involve some 16 to 20 LGUs either as host or recipient LGUs. Of this number, 75% will be
municipalities and 25% will be cities. For the first phase of the project, these LGUs are to be located in Region
X or Region XI. The candidate LGUs should have the initiative, commitment and the resources to replicate
exemplary practices. Specifically, recipient LGUs should:

• Need for assistance. LGUs in demonstrating greater need for assistance will be prioritized in the
selection.

• Demonstrate the will to replicate a specific practice. The recipient LGU should have the daring
and the intense desire and interest to pursue the exemplary practice proposed to them. Their will
to work on a replication project in a specific area should respond to one of their identified needs or
priorities.

• Be willing to take part in an institutional cooperation process with other LGUs. The
participating LGUs will be asked to formally bind themselves in a collaborative agreement with
other LGUs to pursue the replication process. The support of the individual LGUs’ Local Chief
Executive and the respective local councils or Sanggunians will be required.

• Have the readiness to implement the exemplary practice. The recipient LGUs should have the
political support, basic capacity and required equipment, among others, as well as the readiness to
start the replication process ASAP so that initiatives are completed or are well underway before the
2004 local elections.

• The will to provide the resources required for the replication process. While LGSP will provide
a small project support fund support to the Kaakbay Project, recipient LGUs are expected to buy-in
into the replication process and provide the majority of resources required as well as other in-kind
contributions

• Have a competently strong LGOO assigned in the LGU. The LGOO, with support from a local
resource partner (LRP), is expected to coach the LGU through the replication process. The Kaakbay
project will take this factor into consideration when selecting specific LGUs for the Kaakbay project.

• Minimum pre-requisites for a specific practice already in place. The recipient LGU has the
necessary facilities, human resources and equipment required to replicate the specific exemplary
practice. Those resources are available for utilization/deployment.

Be willing to abide by, and commit to the roles and responsibilities within the Kaakbay replication cluster.

A-19
 appendix A.6
General Information for Prospective Replication LGUs

What is the Kaakbay Project?

Kaakbay is a project initiated by DILG, LMP and LCP proposing simple methodologies to help cities and
municipalities easily adopt best or “Exemplary Practices” experienced in other LGUs.
Filipino LGUs are experiencing numerous excellent practices recognized through various award programs and
these practices can be replicated by municipalities and cities facing similar issues and problems. The Kaakbay
project helps LGUs work together to replicate practices that are simple, effective and proven solutions to
common LGU challenges.

KAAKBAY REPLICATION CLUSTER

Recipient LGU
(Replicating)
LGOO Coaching
CLUSTER LGU REPLICATION
WORKSHOP WORKPLAN
Host LGU Recipient LGU
Exemplary Practice (Replicating)
LGOO Coaching

Recipient LGU
(Replicating)
LGOO Coaching

How does it work?

Two or three LGUs will be selected to replicate each specific exemplary practice. Cities and Municipalities
taking part in the project will visit the LGU having implemented the best practice and will take part in the
“Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop” to determine how they will replicate it as part of the Kaakbay project.
During this visit they learn about the key steps to implement the practice; the success factors and difficulties
in implementing it; who are the key stakeholders and how they contributed; what to avoid; how long it
takes to implement; and what are the main benefits in implementing the practice. They also sit down and
determine how they will work together as a cluster of LGUs to replicate the practice. Finally, they develop
a workplan identifying how they will implement the exemplary practice in their municipality or city. The
projects will be replicated within a period of one year (April 2003 to April 2004).

The project will provide technical assistance and monitoring to help your LGU implement the replication
project and achieve the targeted results within the timeframe identified.

How can my LGU benefit from taking part in the Kaakbay project?
If one of the Exemplary Practices proposed by the Kaakbay project corresponds to a challenge your LGU is
facing, no need to reinvent the wheel. The Kaakbay project will help your LGU implement a simple project
to introduce the practice that is proven to be an effective solution to help address that challenge. Your LGU
will take part in a peer-to peer exchange project in which your staff, your Sangunian members and your
community will learn new ways of addressing common problems with less effort and at lower cost.

A-20
Within a 1 year period or less, your LGU will have implemented and instituted the new practice. The practice
(new service to your citizens, more efficiency and effectiveness in the way you deliver a service, etc) will be
applied in your LGU and your constituents should start benefiting from it before April 2004.

How can I take part?

The Regional Office of DILG in collaboration with your League of LGUs (LMP or LCP) will be providing
information on pre-selected Exemplary Practices that your LGU may consider for replication. You may review
these practices and determine if your LGU would benefit from replicating one of them.

If so, your LGU may apply to the project by filling in the form provided for this purpose. In the application
process, you will be required to specify which Exemplary Practice your LGU wants to replicate. The application
of your LGU must be supported by a Sangunian resolution supporting the LGU’s participation on the project.
In addition, your LGU will be required to demonstrate its commitment to the project with an appropriate
financial and/or in-kind contribution.

Time Frame
The selection process will take place between March 27 and April 25. Selected LGUs will be notified by March
26nd The first activity is the Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop. The 4 day workshop will take place between
May 15 and May 30. Your LGU will have until April 2004 to implement the replication process. The final
Assessment workshop with other cluster LGUs will occur between March 1 and April 2004.
What is my LGU’s contribution?
Your LGU’s will and commitment to implement the replication project is the key contribution to the Kaakbay
project. Staff time and community resources are the usual main contribution to the project. Your LGU may
also need to demonstrate it has the financial resources required to support the project. Those resources will
vary according to the Exemplary Practice selected.

The Kaakbay project will provide technical assistance in the project implementation as well as the costs of
your LGU representatives in the cluster workshops with other LGUs.

A-21
 appendix A.7
Application Form for Replicating LGUs

This form was disseminated together with the General Information for Recipient LGUs to potential replicators.

APPLICATION FORM
For Recipient LGUs

INSTRUCTIONS
The Kaakbay Project Steering Committee has identified a list of Exemplary Practices being proposed to
Municipalities and Cities of Regions X & XI for replication as part of the Kaakbay project. Your LGU may
determine if the replication of one of these Exemplary Practices can help address one of your LGU’s key
challenges.

If you think your LGU (a) is willing to take part in an institutional cooperation process with other LGUs;
(b) has the readiness to implement a specific exemplary practice; and (c) has the ability to provide the
resources required for the replication process, your LGU may apply as a Recipient LGU to the Kaakbay
Project. Deadline for application is on March 21, 2003. Your application may be submitted in English
or Filipino.

Should your LGU be selected, a Sanggunian Resolution supporting your LGU’s participation in the
Kaakbay project for the specific practice will be required.

Please submit completed application form to:

C/O Kaakbay Regional Coordinating Committee
DILG Regional Office XI
Matina, Davao City
FAX: 297-2600
Email: region11@dilg.gov.ph

For further information or assistance, please contact Mr. Danilo Lunapas, 297-2604

SUBMISSION DEADLINE: March 21, 2003 Application No.____

1. Name of LGU:
City Municipality

2. Financial Classification of LGU

___ first class ___ second class ___ third class

___ fourth class ___ fifth class ___ sixth class

A-22
3. From among the menu of exemplary practices, which specific practice is your LGU applying for? What
particular needs do you wish to address in your LGU by replicating the practice you have chosen? Why?
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________

4. How does this Exemplary Practice relate to your LGU strategic orientations, priorities, or Executive
Agenda?
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________

5. To successfully implement the replication process, what resources required by the implementation
of the exemplary practice are readily available for deployment and utilization by your LGU (financial,
material, human)?
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________

6. What other resources can be committed to this Project?

______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________

A-23
 ______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________

7. Other comments in support of your LGU’s application to take part in the Kaakbay project?
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________

Your LGU may submit additional documentation in support of your LGU’s application to this project.

A-24
appendix A.8
Sample of the Initial Documentation of an Exemplary Practice

Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG)

League of Cities of the Philippines (LCP)
League of Municipalities of the Philippines (LMP)
With Support from
The Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program (LGSP)

Proposed Exemplary Practices for Replication

Title: Delivering Primary Health Care Through Purok Local Government Unit(LGU):
Balilihan, Bohol

Program Category: Resource Mobilization/Poverty Alleviation Region:

Purpose
As major component of the countryside action program, the primary health care through the purok
system intended to mobilize and organize local government, rural health unit and agencies tasked to
deliver basic services to the community.

Brief Description

The Primary Health Care through Purok is a system and mechanism for the delivery of health services under
the Balilihan Countryside Action Program (CAP). It aims to :

1. Raise the health consciousness of purok residents

2. Organize team trained purok volunteers who will assist the municipal health team in maximally
providing basic services to the purok.

3. Encouragement of the design and implementation of purok-level livelihood projects such as organic
gardening, home industries, etc.

4. Involvement and mobilization of both manpower and material resources in the purok and also
networking with other government and non-government agencies for the effective planning, design
and implementation as well as monitoring and evaluation of community-based health programs.

A-25
 The Purok Primary Health Care was initially implemented in 1983 with limited scope and coverage due to
the compartmentalized view that health programs were the sole concern of the health sector. In 1988, when
the new mayor was elected (Mayor Chatto) it was expanded and transformed into Balilihan Countryside
Action Program (CAP) covering 31 barangays of the municipality.

The CAP framework departed from the usual top-down approach. The personnel in the municipality and
barangays underwent a number of training programs to equip them with new skills and attitudes before
carrying out the program. Armed with new skills and attitudes, the municipal and barangay machinery
was ready to engage the municipality as partners in development. CAP was launched with its purok
system, giving spirit to empowerment through community organizing, mobilization and human resource
development.

The target population of CAP was the 14,527 residents in 31 barangays of Balilihan. These people were
mostly marginal farmers of rice, corn and other staples.

Each of 31 barangays was divided into six (6) puroks composed of 10-25 adjacent households, resulting to
a total of 186 puroks of the entire town. The main feature of the program that mobilized the community to
participate was the construction of Kiosk made up of indigenous materials. The Kiosk had the features of a
typical home and served as a model of the members. Each Kiosk had the following:

1. Meeting/teaching area
2. Kitchen
3. Water sealed toilet
4. Seed houses
5. Compost pit/pile
6. Vegetable garden
7. Herbal garden

Key Results
The CAP has established 186 puroks with 1,302 sectoral volunteers, acting as semi-autonomous extensions
of the government. With these purok-level organizations nearly 1 out of every six adult Balilihan was a
sectoral volunteer.

Each purok had an income-generating project to augment from the municipal government and other
agencies.

At the start, construction of kiosk was merely a rallying point, a project to prove to the residents that they
could effect change through collective effort. In time, the purok kiosk served as venue for human resource
development. It was a meeting place, a classroom, and a social hall.

Once a year, the best purok per barangay was chosen. Criteria were set for the assessment of the program

A. On Health and Nutrition

1. The primary health care has been strengthened indicated by the effective delivery of health
services to the community.
2. Propagated herbal medicines
3. Extended the expertise of the volunteers BHWs
4. Established 2 boticas (BINHI) ran by BHWs with a plan to establish a botica for every 6 barangays
5. Accomplished of at least 95% of its 1996 performance targets.

B. On Livelihood and Agriculture

1. Established communal farms using SALT, municipal nursery, vegetable and herbal gardens.
2. Established bigasan sa purok – buy and sell, babuyan (swine raising) sa purok, paluwagan and
rootcrop raising.

A-26
Main Implementation Steps

A. Preparatory Phase:
1. Training and Orientation of the Bureaucracy

B. Community Organizing Phase

1. Revitalizing the Purok. From loose social group, the purok was upgraded into a more functional
unit. One Barangay Council member was assigned per purok and served as its chairperson, one
Barangay Health Worker as its Vice-chairperson.

2. Purok Mobilization through Kiosk Construction. Indigenous materials were used for the
construction of purok kiosks to avoid financial burden on the volunteers. Puroks were often built
as temporary structures on the land of the Purok Chairperson.

3. Setting-Up the Organizational Structure. The Purok organizational structure is composed of the
following:

a. Chairperson
b. Vice-chairperson
c. Secretary
d. Treasurer
e. Auditor
f. 7 Sectoral volunteers representing health, agriculture, infrastructure, education, peace and
order, livelihood and environment and youth and sports.

C. Operational Phase

Puroks began holding monthly “problem-solving” meetings to discuss relevant issues on health service
delivery. In time, puroks were initiating activities that were either health-related, such as:

1. Operation Timbang
2. Nutri-Feeding for maltnourished chlidren
3. Immunization and First Aid

A-27
 Compliance with Selection Criteria

Title: Delivering Primary Health Care Through Purok Local Government Unit(LGU): Balilihan, Bohol

Region:

Prevailing Conditions for the Specific Practice

• Presence of purok (dormant) as a loose social group

• Purok initiative for community-based primary health was being implemented in a limited scope and
coverage but had made little progress apart from the construction of kiosk and training of Barangay
Health Workers
• Health program had little support from other government agencies

Sustainability
In 1997, the municipal government of Balilihan approved an ordinance institutionalizing the purok
system in every barangay. Though the purok was a highly functional extension unit under Mayor Chatto’s
administration, the purok still did not have any official and permanent role in the municipal government. It
was conceivable that a new mayor could refuse to recognize the puroks and deprive of the opportunity to
work in partnership with the government. To prevent this from happening, Municipal ordinance No.97-07
was enacted, further strengthening the CAP and assuring the community of its sustainability even after the
term of the politicians.

The purok system was even applied at the provincial level when the mayor after two terms was elected vice-
governor.

Support/Implementation
• Contribution and donation from citizens
• Technical assistance from different line agencies
• Conisederable staff time for citizen’s education activities.

Estimated cost to Implement

• For the construction of Kiosk it cost 3,000 in 1989
• For the Health and Sanitation Program P10,000 in 1989 and P100,000 in 1996

Time needed to Implement

• One- two years

Impact On Citizens
• Out of their initiatives they started all sorts of projects with little or no support from the municipal
government
• Purok became a social institution among others.
• During election, a candidate, performance in his/her respective purok became an important critierion
for voters
• It also enhanced socialization because it became social hall.

A-28
Pre-Requisites in Place for Replication
• Barangay Council members who are willing and ready to revitalize/restructure/reorganize their puroks
and implement pilot project and share counterpart
• Available packages of training and transfer of technology programs and pool of municipal trainors for
community health volunteer workers
• Piece of land/space for each purok for the construction of temporary kiosk
• Strong desire and will of the LCE to utilize the innovative approaches in order to deliver the services to
a large number of beneficiaries/client.
• Supportive Sangguniang Bayan members

Remarks
Can be replicated in any LGU. In fact, seven municipalities of Bohol has been replicating the Balilihan Model.

A-29
 appendix A.9
LGU Replication Cluster Memorandum of Agreement

This agreement was signed by the members of the replication clusters formed among host and replicating LGUs
under the Kaakbay program. Each replication cluster consists of one host LGU and 3-5 replicating LGUs.

CLUSTER MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT

KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:

This Memorandum of Agreement is entered into by and between:

The municipalities ________________ represented herein by the Mayors:_______________hereinafter

referred to as “Recipient LGUs”;

The Municipality __________________, host of the Exemplary Practice, represented herein by Hon._________
__hereinafter referred to as the “Host LGU”.

WHEREAS, KAAKBAY Project has been identified as a pilot experience to develop simple methodologies for the
dissemination and replication of “best” or exemplary practices in the Philippines.

WHEREAS, the Exemplary Practice, __________________ of the municipality of ______________has been

identified and adopted for replication by the municipalities of ________________.

WHEREAS, the recipient LGUs the municipalities of ___________ have agreed to enter into a Memorandum of
Agreement between and among as part of the institutional cooperation process in the replication process of
exemplary practice of ______________________under the KAAKBAY project.

WHEREAS, the Host LGU has agreed to assist the recipient LGUs in the replication process.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above premises, the parties arrived at an agreement on the
following:

THAT, the recipient LGUs will undertake the following:

1. Finalize and secure LGU support for the work plan in consultation with other stakeholders;

2. Ensure the implementation of the activities outlined in the approved work plan;

3. Keep a record of the implementation of the various activities of the project;

4. Attend and participate in the Mid-Project Cluster Workshop;

5. Attend and participate in the Recipient Project Evaluation Missions;

6. Attend and participate in the Final KAAKBAY Assessment Workshop;

7. Provide KAAKBAY Project documented information on the status of implementation of the project every

other month; and

A-30
8. Implement specific measures to ensure the institutionalization of the project beyond Kaakbay and into

the next administration.

THAT, the Host LGU of the exemplary practice ______________________ will designate a Senior Technical

Staff to undertake the following:

1. Recipient work plan confirmation visits;

2. Responses to occasional queries of Recipient LGUs;

3. Attend and participate in the Mid-Project Cluster Workshop;

4. Attend and participate in the Recipient Project Evaluation Missions; and

5. Attend and participate in the Final KAAKBAY Assessment Workshop

THAT, the Host LGU and the Recipient LGUs shall initiate efforts on the following:

1. Establishment of mechanism for the exchange and sharing of learning experiences in the implementation
of innovative practices between and among themselves.
2. Serve as resource institutions for other LGUs that expressed interest in implementing their models.

3. Initiate the establishment of mechanisms for the continuation of institutional cooperation in the
dissemination and replication of exemplary practice beyond the KAABAY project.

In WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereunto signed presents on this ______ 2003 at ___, Philippines.

A-31
 appendix B
Reference Document
This is one of 6 Reference Documents developed by host LGUs using the Guidelines for Documenting the LGU
Exemplary Practice (Replication Tool 1) with assistance from the Kaakbay program. It documents the exemplary
practice of Oroquieta City, Misamis Oriental, one of 11 host LGUs in the Kaakbay program.

“Making Crime Prevention Everybody’s Business”

Bantay sa Kahusay Ug Kalinaw (BKK)
(Peace and Order Watch)

Oroquieta City, Misamis Occidental

Summary
Oroquieta City in Misamis Occidental is rich in natural bounties, with rivers, waterfalls, forest areas and wildlife.
Its name, in fact, translates to “where gold is found” (in Spanish, oro means gold while quieta means “to find.”)
With rapid urban growth, however, Oroquieta slowly woke up to the growing threat to its natural wealth. Forest
areas were dwindling due to logging, wildlife was disappearing, and pollution was on the rise.

In addition to the environmental threat, Oroquieta also came to be known as a place of crime and communist
insurgency. In the 1980s, more than half of its 47 barangays were classified by the police and military as
influenced, infiltrated or threatened by insurgency and criminality.

The rise in crime and insurgency was largely caused by the presence of organized crime syndicates in
neighboring cities, inadequate police personnel, and the indifferent attitudes of residents to law enforcement.
As a result, the city was periodically rocked by waves of violence and crime, especially in the months of
September through December, as well as during elections.

Alongside these problems, however, is the city’s success record in implementing effective programs. Foremost
of these is the city-wide Barangay Self-Sufficiency Program or BSSP which not only brought about a cleaner
and ‘greener’ Oroquieta, but also improved agriculture and food security.

To sustain the gains of BSSP that were being threatened by the unstable peace and order situation, Oroquieta
launched the Bantay sa Kahusay ug Kalinaw or BKK (Peace and Order Watch). BKK is a barangay-based,
city-wide network of volunteers that carries out a two-pronged approach to crime in the city – a) crime
prevention through advocacy and a neighborhood watch and early warning system and b) a quick response
team for acting on actual crime cases in the communities.

Like BSSP, BKK has proven to be a success. It has two effective strategies – 1) barangay-based community
action and involvement using the spirit of the Bayanihan tradition (volunteerism) and 2) strong capacity
building of the barangay-based groups through special training and the provision of such equipment of
radios, patrol vehicles and operations center.

Through BKK, crime incidents in Oroquieta have gone down to 10 a month from 30-40, remarkable for a
rapidly growing city of 80,000 residents. BKK has reduced juvenile delinquency and drug abuse, as well as
petty theft and burglary. BKK has also helped hinder the Balik-Masa program of communist rebels to recruit
residents.

For its BKK initiative, the city government received an award for having the Most Outstanding Lupong
Tagapamayapa (barangay justice system). With the awakening of vigilance and the formation of structures,
preventing crime has become everybody’s business in Oroquieta.

A-32
A. ABOUT BKK

Project History: Addressing Crime to Sustain Economic Gains

In 1992, the city government, then under the leadership of Mayor Ernie Flores Bandala, confronted the
environmental problems of the city by launching the Barangay Self-Sufficiency Program or BSSP. From a simple
“clean and green” program, the BSSP has successfully expanded into a comprehensive program that has helped
improve agriculture and food security in the city.

City officials soon realized, however, that BSSP’s gains will not be sustained if it does not address its peace and
order problems. Thus, in 2000, 8 years after BSSP was launched, Oroquieta turned its attention to crime, by
launching the Bantay sa Kahusay Ug Kalinaw or BKK. While BSSP focused on developing the local economy,
BKK targeted crime response and crime prevention.

Giving birth to the BKK: Who, when, how

The City Peace and Order Council (CPOC) gave birth to the BKK. Inundated with countless reports of crime
and insurgency movements, while at the same time instructed by the DILG to address its peace and order
problem, the CPOC began conceptualizing the program. The city mayor, who chairs the CPOC, asked DILG
to help develop a conceptual and operational framework. Through DILG’s assistance, BKK was evolved
and adopted by the city government and endorsed to the Sangguniang Panglungsod (SP) for approval.
The SP enthusiastically approved the program and allocated a budget for it. On November 30, 2000, BKK
was launched in a parade participated in by more than 5,000 volunteers and members of the support
organizations.

Project Description: Bayanihan for crime prevention

BKK placed the barangays at the forefront of the fight against crime and insurgency. Recalling the tradition and
spirit of ‘bayanihan,’ an old social practice where community members voluntarily contribute their labor when
needed by a neighbor, BKK was founded as a volunteer network to address crime at the barangay level

BKK Objectives
BKK had the following objectives:
1. Harness the people of the barangay in the prevention of crime, disaster preparedness and assistance
in law enforcement;

2. Revive and sustain the time-honored tradition of Bayanihan and value of cooperation among
barangay folks through volunteerism in the maintenance of peace and order;

3. Establish a mechanism in the barangay that will prevent the occurrence of crime or quick response in
solving crimes;

4. Establish a coordinated monitoring and information-gathering network in every barangay.

BKK Strategies: Harnessing Barangay Volunteer Action and Building Capacities

As the title says, BKK operates successfully on the principle that crime prevention and action should be the
concern and responsibility of each resident, instead of being a matter for the police or the military alone. But
how did the first champions and promoters of the BKK got this principle accepted, internalized and translated
into action?

The first strategy is basing the initiative at the barangay level and harnessing systematic barangay-level action
around the problem. This includes 1) the formation of barangay level structures, which helped institutionalize
the program 2) structuring and systematizing the needed response, first into action and prevention, and
second, by formulating such mechanisms as a neighborhood watch and alert (early warning) systems/
groups (Alarma Tagongtong), quick response teams to respond to actual crimes (Pasa Bilis), a reporting and
documentation system (Bakukang) and a monitoring and evaluation mechanism. Anchoring the program on
the principle of volunteerism or ‘bayanihan” recognized the key role and capacity of barangay officials and
residents preventing and responding to crime.

A-33
 Along with mobilizing people around the issue of crime, the second strategy is the strong effort made to
build their capacities and mobilize resources for capacity building. Aside from undergoing training on crime
prevention and quick response, BKK volunteers are also equipped with the following:

• establishment of an operations center in each barangay as base for their operations

• radios for easier and faster communication
• patrol vehicles for a quicker response

Operationalizing BKK: How it works

The Bantay sa Kahusay Ug Kalinaw (BKK) was founded on the following operational framework:

BKK Operational Framework

1. Crime prevention is everybody’s concern, safety is everybody’s duty
2. The best crime fighting unit is the organized community itself
3. Crime can be effectively prevented and safety can be ensured through concerted efforts of the
community, LGU, government agencies, police and media.
4. The local PNP and its resources cannot keep pace with the growing population and rising crime rate
5. A program to facilitate quick response to call for assistance and emergencies is imperative
6. A forum to educate the citizenry on crime prevention is necessary before any response can be
effected

From this framework, BKK has 2 main components: pro-active and re-active.

BKK Components
1. The Pro-active Component is focused on crime prevention. This consists of advocacy, education, organization
of a neighborhood watch structure, activation and coordination of a citizen’s alarm and feedback system
for intelligence and crime detection. The barangay-level pro-active unit has the following functions:

• Prediction. the ability to predict the likelihood of crises and emergencies through
continuous gathering/updating of information from intelligence reports and analyzing
events.
• Prevention. advocacy, organizing information drives and periodic drills to continuously
raise the alert level of the identified crime and disaster zones.

• Preparation. planning for probable crisis situations, organization and training and
stockpiling of equipment and supplies needed.

Each purok has its own pro-active unit that operationalizes the early alarm and warning system.
These volunteers constantly patrol and watch the streets and the neighborhood in the absence
of the police.

2. The Re-active Component is the quick response function for detecting crime and dealing with actual crime
incidents. This consists of organizing mobile patrol groups of Barangay Tanods and Volunteer Working
Groups that assist the police during crime scene responses. These groups constantly patrol the streets
and public areas. The Operations Center serves as coordinating center with rescue teams and a legitimate
reaction force.

Simplified Information and Warning Systems. BKK uses 3 simplified warning, information and reporting
systems:

• Pasa-Bilis – involves the instantenous relay of information at early stages of crime commission, using
community means like tricycles, vendors, habal-habal. This mobilizes community residents.

• Alarma Tagungtung is an early warning and alert code that mobilizes everyone in cases of crime or
crises.

A-34
 • BAKUKANG – is short for 4Ws and 1 H. translated from the Visayan, it stands for BA-barangay, K-kanusa
(what), U-unsa (where), K –kinsa (who), A-asa (where), N –ngano (why), G – guinsa (how).

BKK Organizational Structure. The BKK is governed by the City Peace and Order Council, headed by the mayor
with members from the law enforcement agencies and NGOs concerned with peace and order. The daily
operation is managed by the BKK Management Team chaired by the DILG Officer and co-chaired by the Chief
of Police.

CPOC
(chaired by the mayor)
CPOC Secretariat

BKK Management Team

PNP 117 Operations BKK Monitoring Team

BPOC

BKK Operations Center

BKK Re-Active Unit BKK Pro-Active Unit

Purok BKK Purok BKK Purok BKK Purok BKK

The other members of the BKK Management Team includes City Chapter President of the Liga ng mga
Barangay, SP Chairpersons on Peace and Order Committee and SP Appropriation Committee. The Team
Leader of the BKK Monitoring Team also sits with the BKKMT.

At the barangay level, the Barangay Peace and Order Council (BPOC) oversees the operations of the BKK.
The barangay-level BKK is composed of barangay officials, barangay tanods and citizen volunteers. General
policies and procedures for BKK operation are laid down in a barangay ordinance that are then implemented.

A-35
 Policies and Procedures that can be included in a Barangay Ordinance on BKK:

1. Criteria, recruitment process and deployment of BKK volunteers

2. Schedules of duty of BKK members/volunteers
3. Fines for BKK members for failing to fulfill responsibilities
4. Confidentiality of logbook entries
5. Speed and secrecy in monitoring
6. Contact mechanism for every BKK member
7. Alertness and inter-support in case of crises
8. Establishment of Alarma Tagongtong in every household
9. Installation and implementation of boom system
10. Regular conferences to evaluate operations
11. Reporting systems and procedures

Recruitment of BKK volunteers is done by the Barangay Peace and Order Committee based on
recommendations of purok leaders. The barangay chair issues an appointment paper to BKK volunteers prior
to their deployment in their respective purok or areas of assignment and responsibility.

BKK Recruitment. BKK volunteers are recruited and accepted based on the following criteria:

1. Has resided in the barangay for at least six (6) months

2. Of good moral character
3. Has no pending criminal or civil case
4. Is not more than 60 years old
5. Knows how to read and write
6. Is physically fit

Monitoring and Evaluation. The monitoring and evaluation is done by the city level organization. The BKK
Monitoring Team composed of CPOC members and ABC members conduct the following activities on a
regular basis.

Project Results: Reaping the fruits of peace and development

BKK’s success is evident in several ways.

1. A Much Lower Crime Rate

Owing to the effectiveness of the BKK as a mechanism of crime detection and prevention, the city
of Oroquieta has registered only ten crimes a month, thus creating a favorable business climate and
unhampered flow of commerce. It is also an emerging safe haven for travelers for their stop-overs.

2. Rise in Volunteerism in the Community

The spirit of bayanihan and volunteerism is now a pride of Oroquieta City Government and the people of
Oroquieta. In general, the greatest gain of the BKK is the heightened vigilance of every barangay folk in
keeping their own security and safety; crime prevention is everybody’s business, and not just of the police
and the military.

3. More Anti-Crime Mechanisms in the City

BKK structures are now present in all the 47 barangays of Oroquieta. And their success as crime detection
and prevention groups has inspired other groups within the city itself to replicate this anti-crime mechanism.
Business and religious organizations, as well as NGOs, for example, have organized groups within their sectors
to replicate/complement the BKK. Among those spurred by BKK are the following:

• Oroquieta Chamber of Commerce

• Oroquieta Bankers Association
• Oroquieta Council of Churches
• Oroquieta Integrated Market Vendors Association
• School Administrators Association of Oroquieta
• Integrated NGOs of Oroquieta

A-36
 • Federated Students of Oroquieta
• Oroquieta Inter Fraternities League
• Radio Communicators Group like REACT, PASABAY, BBRA

4. Expanding BKK scope beyond crime prevention

So successful has the BKK been, in fact, that its functions have gone beyond crime detection and prevention,
to encompass disaster preparedness and rescue operations particularly in the coastal areas during the rainy
season.

B. Replicating BKK
BKK is now being replicated by several local governments and communities, following the key
implementation steps identified and learning from the lessons learned by Oroquieta in implementing the
project.

Key Implementation Steps

Based on the experience of Oroquieta, the following were identified as key steps to follow in establishing and
implementing a BKK system for crime prevention and action.

1. Conceptualize and Gain Approval

This first step includes a series of preparatory activities to actual BKK implementation:

a. Holding consultations with key POC officials to build consensus for adopting BKK- Chief of
Police, DILG, SP chair on Peace and Order, ABC President and SP Committee on Appropriation

b. Holding a consultation with all Barangay Chairs through an ABC assembly, to orient them about
the program and get their support

c. Conceptualizing and Preparing the Program Proposal

d. Getting Approval and Resources for the program. The POC has to adopt the program and
endorse it to the Sangguniang Panglungsod (SP). The SP then enacts a Resolution Adopting the
Program and Appropriating a budget for implementation.

e. Conducting Barangay Action Planning for establishing and operating the BKK at the barangay
level.

2. Form the BKK Organization and Structure.

For a period of three months, the BKK organizational structure is formed from the city level down to the
barangay level. The CPOC with technical assistance from the DILG, can take the lead in BKK formation,
which consists of the following:

a. Forming the BKK Management Team with members from the City Chapter President of the Liga
ng mga Barangay, SP Chairs on Peace and Order Committee and SP Appropriation Committee.
The Team Leader of the BKK Monitoring Team also sits with the BKKMT.

b. Identifying, orienting/briefing city and barangay officials on preparations for organization of

BKK and training of Barangay Coordinators;

c. Organizing of BKK barangay structures in all barangays and integrating such structures in the
Barangay Council structure;

d. Enacting a barangay ordinance creating BKK, and providing for schedule of duty and duty
personnel;

e. Creating of Peace and Order Monitoring Group at the City level composed of members of the
CPOC and ABC members.

A-37
 3. Conduct Capacity Building of BKK Volunteers. BKK volunteers in Oroquieta underwent the
following seminars and training workshops:

• Administrative and organizational management of BKK

• Reporting, recording and duty procedures
• Instituting and making citizens arrest, gathering and handling evidence, law enforcement
procedures, proper handling of witnesses and self-defense
• Information gathering and reporting; Familiarization with simplified reporting called
“BAKUKANG” - a concise writing of four W’s and one H
• Operationalizing “Pasa Bilis” and “Alarma Tagongtong”

4. Establish the Operations Center and Operationalize BKK at the Barangay Level.
After the capacity building of the BKK members, they can go into operationaling their BKK in their
barangay. This consists of the following actions:

a. Identifying the site for the BPOC operations center

b. Constructing the center and acquiring/setting up equipment, including:

• Boom
• Radio/cellphone
• Logbook for reporting of crimes and BKK activities
• Flashlights/searchlights
• Kitchen
• Batuta (police baton)
• Vehicle/motorcycle (optional)

c. Forming and operationalizing the Pro-Active and Reactive Teams/Units.

5. Conduct Information, Education and Communication (IEC) Campaign. Information campaign on

the role and functions of the BKK as well as on crime prevention and action can be done through the
following venues:

a. Barangay assembly
b. Purok meetings or assembly
c. Barangay Council meetings.
d. Program Launching. All the Barangay councils, BKK volunteers, law enforcers were
mobilized to a parade with complete uniforms, slogans and streamers. The launching
culminated in a program participated in by more than 5,000 tanods, volunteers and
members of the support organizations. It was launched during the crime prevention week.

6. Undertaking Monitoring and Evaluation. The monitoring and evaluation is done by the city
level organization. The BKK Monitoring Team composed of CPOC members and ABC members
conduct the following activities on a regular basis:

a. Visit barangays individually to check implementation of the standard operating procedures

and gather all concerns and problems encountered by the implementors
b. Gather all oral and recorded reports, consolidate, analyze and submit reports to the CPOC
for evaluation during their meeting
c. Reports that require immediate action are submitted directly to the PNP Chief or CPOC
chair.

Lessons and Insights for Replication

Oroquieta’s experience in implementing BKK presents several important lessons for that can help LGUs
wishing to replicate the project. For Oroquieta, the following factors are key to establishing a successful BKK.

A-38
 1. Strong support and commitment of the LGU leadership, especially at the beginning of the project.

2. Participation and support of barangay officials

3. Capacitating community members

4. Building all necessary structures and resources (operations center, communications network,
personnel and volunteers, recording and reporting systems, funding and other resources)

5. Constant supervision and monitoring and evaluation to identify strong and weak points and address
mistakes and shortcomings

6. Addressing crime should not stop at solving crimes committed. Prevention is always better than
cure.

Reference Matrix for Replication

Implementation Steps Timeframe Budget/Resources Needed

(approximate)

1. Conceptualizing and Gaining Approval Logistics for consultations at the

city/municipal and barangay level

City level 1 month Php 5,000

Barangay level 1 month 15,000

2. Forming the BKK organization and 3 months Php 20,000

structure
*City level formation of BKK
Management team to include
Enactment of ordinances down down
to the Barangay level as basis for
organization

3. Conducting Capacity Building for BKK 1 month Resources for training and seminars
members and volunteers. identified
*Barangay level only Technical assistance from DILG, other
sources
Est: Php 200,000

4. Establishing the Operations Center and 1 month Php 200,000

Operationalizing BKK at the barangay
level

5.Conducting Information, Education and 1 month Resources for the development and
Communication (IEC) campaigns production of IEC materials
Php 5,000-10,000

6.Conducting Monitoring and Evaluation After full operation- Php 20,000-50,000

M & E is conducted
throughout the year

A-39
 appendix C
The Kaakbay Brochure

A-40
A-41
A-42
A-43
A-44
A-45
A-46
A-47
A-48
appendix D
Monitoring and Evaluation Guide Questions Used by Kaakbay

A-49
A-50
appendix D.1
Mid-project Assessment Questions

These guide questions were answered by replicating LGUs per cluster as part of the mid-project assessment.

Guiding Questions to Help Assess / Improve

the Kaakbay Methodology

Getting involved in the Program

• Did the practice your LGU is now replicating provide a solution for a key challenge your LGU was / is
facing?
• How relevant is the exemplary practice to address the challenge your LGU was facing?
• Did both the executive (Mayor) and legislative (Sanggunian) leadership of your LGU support the idea
of replicating the exemplary practice before your LGU started the project? Was this a critical factor
for the success of the project?
• Was the information provided by the Kaakbay program sufficient for our LGU to understand what it
was getting involved in?
• What recommendations can you make regarding the any aspect of the application process your LGU
undertook to get involved in the Kaakbay program?
• Is the practice your LGU is replicating a good practice to have been proposed for replication? Why?

The overall Replication Process Suggested by Kaakbay

(application to replicate a specific practice; being part of a cluster; Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop;
replication in your LGU; on-going host support; mid-project assessment workshop; etc)

• What general comments can you make about the process suggested by Kaakbay as mechanism to
facilitate the replication of an LGU practice corresponding to a need/challenge you have in your
LGU?
• Is the period of 9 months for replicating your project seem like an appropriate time frame for the
replication to be effective?
• Are there steps/ components of the process that are not necessary?
• How close is the practice you are implementing in your LGU to the exemplary practice that inspired
it? Do you consider you are really replicating a practice that was first implemented in another LGU?

Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop

• Was the Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop conducive to help your LGU replicate this practice?
• What aspects of the workshop helped (or not) for the replication of the practice in your LGU.
• Was the workshop too long? Too short?
• What recommendations would you have about the Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop for it to further
maximize the appreciation and replication of the practice in your LGU.

The Workplan Template

• How effective was the use of this template to facilitate the development a workplan for your LGU to
replicate the Exemplary practice?
• How effective was the use of this workplan to facilitate the replication of the practice in your LGU?
• Was suggestions can you make to improve this template?

The Reference Document

• Did you use the reference document as a guide as you are replicating your practice?
• Do you feel this document adequately reflects the practice you are replicating?
• Is the outline of the document (Rationale, objectives of the practice, results, implementation steps,

A-51
 etc) helpful to help you understand ho to implement / replicate the practice in your LGU?
• What improvements could you make about the reference document?

The Cooperation Between the Host and the Recipient LGUs

• How frequently did you relate with the host LGU in the overall replication process?
• Did the Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop provide a sufficient amount of exchange with the host to
help you replicate or did you require further exchanges?
• How did you collaborate after the Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop? Visits? Telephone calls? Request
for additional materials? etc
• How important was your relationship with the host LGU to help replicate the practice.
• What recommendations can you make about the relations with the host to support the
implementation of your replication project?

Factors that Facilitated / Hindered the Replication (generic to any practice)

• What are the factors that facilitated the replication of the exemplary practice in your LGU?
• What are the factors that hindered the replication of the exemplary practice in your LGU?
• What recommendations would you make to LGUs wanting to replicate an exemplary practice
initially implemented by another LGU?

A-52
appendix D.2
LGU Replication Cluster Progress Report Template

The form was used in making the cluster reports on the results of the mid-project assessment.

Replication Cluster Progress Report

(Template for the Monitors)

I. Project Title : (Exemplary Practice being replicated)

II. Host LGU :

III. Recipient LGUs :

IV. Brief Description of the Practice

V. Summary of the Status of Replication Process

1. Based on the implementation of the individual work plan of the recipient LGUs, what major
outputs can be considered breakthroughs of the replication process?

2. What were the key implementation steps of the practice adopted by the recipient LGUs that have
been implemented as planned? Did these produce the desired outputs? What didn’t work?

3. What were the problems/difficulties encountered by the recipient LGUs in the implementation of
their respective work plan?

VI. Lessons Learned to Date

1. Based on the major outputs/breakthroughs, what are the insights (beneficial or otherwise) could
be derived from the implementation of the practice?

2. On the problems/difficulties encountered by the recipient LGUs, what measures/mechanisms

should have been in place prior to the implementation of various activities of the project? What
type of interventions should have been done to minimize difficulties?

A-53
 appendix D.3
End-Project Assessment Guide Questions

Sample End of Replication Process Assessment Tool

Guide Questions in Assessing the Replication Process
I. Getting involved in the Program
1. Did the practice you are replicating provide a solution for a key challenge your LGU was / is facing?
2. How relevant was the exemplary practice in addressing the challenge your LGU was facing?
3. Did both the executive (Mayor) and legislative (Sanggunian) leadership of your LGU support the idea
of replicating the exemplary practice before your LGU started the project? Was this a critical factor
for the success of the project?
4. Was the information provided by the program sufficient for our LGU to understand what it was
getting involved in?
5. What recommendations can you make regarding the any aspect of the application process your LGU
undertook to get involved in the program?
6. Is the practice your LGU is replicating a good practice to have been proposed for replication? Why?

II. The overall Replication Process Suggested by Kaakbay

(application to replicate a specific practice; being part of a cluster; Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop;
replication in your LGU; on-going host support; mid-project assessment workshop; etc)

1. What general comments can you make about the process suggested by Kaakbay as mechanism to
facilitate the replication of an LGU practice corresponding to a need/challenge you have in your
LGU?
2. Is the period of 9 months for replicating your project seem like an appropriate time frame for the
replication to be effective?
3. Are there steps/ components of the process that are not necessary?
4. How close is the practice you are implementing in your LGU to the exemplary practice that inspired
it? Do you consider you are really replicating a practice that was first implemented in another LGU?

III. Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop

1. Was the Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop conducive to help your LGU replicate this practice?
2. What aspects of the workshop helped (or not) for the replication of the practice in your LGU?
3. Was the workshop too long? Too short?
4. What recommendations would you have about the Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop for it to further
maximize the appreciation and replication of the practice in your LGU?

IV. The Workplan Template

1. How effective was the use of this template to facilitate the development a workplan for your LGU to
replicate the Exemplary practice?
2. How effective was the use of this workplan to facilitate the replication of the practice in your LGU?
3. Was suggestions can you make to improve this template?

V. The Reference Document

1. Did you use the reference document as a guide as you are replicating your practice?
2. Do you feel this document adequately reflects the practice you are replicating?
3. Is the outline of the document (Rationale, objectives of the practice, results, implementation steps,
etc) helpful to help you understand ho to implement / replicate the practice in your LGU?
4. What improvements could you make about the reference document?

A-54
VI. The Cooperation Between the Host and the Recipient LGUs
1. How frequently did you relate with the host LGU in the overall replication process?
2. Did the Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop provide a sufficient amount of exchange with the host to
help you replicate or did you require further exchanges?
3. How did you collaborate after the Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop? Visits? Telephone calls? Request
for additional materials? etc
4. How important was your relationship with the host LGU to help replicate the practice.
5. What recommendations can you make about the relations with the host to support the
implementation of your replication project?

VI. Factors that Facilitated / Hindered the Replication (generic to any practice)
1. What are the factors that facilitated the replication of the exemplary practice in your LGU?
2. What are the factors that hindered the replication of the exemplary practice in your LGU?
3. What recommendations would you make to LGUs wanting to replicate an exemplary practice
initially implemented by another LGU?

A-55
A-56
appendix E
Key Replication Tools

A-57
A-58
appendix E.1
Tool 1: Guidelines in Documenting an LGU Exemplary Practice

Introduction
The replication and dissemination of Exemplary Practices amongst LGUs is a powerful tool for development.
Kaakbay is a project initiated by DILG, LMP and LCP proposing simple methodologies to help cities and
municipalities easily adopt best or “Exemplary Practices” experienced in other LGUs. The Kaakbay project
helps LGUs work together to replicate practices that are simple, effective and proven solutions to common
LGU challenges.

In the Kaakbay replication process, the Reference Document is the main project description document to
help recipient LGUs understand the various aspects of the Exemplary Practice and how it was implemented.
The document has several sections corresponding to various sessions of the Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop
as well as sections of the Workplan that Recipient LGUs will develop to replicate the practice in their own LGU.
It can therefore be used as a key tool in the replication process.

More specifically, the Reference Document contributes to:

• Promoting innovative approaches of local government management and service delivery among
peers and stakeholders of the local government sector;
• Providing simple information about each step of project implementation to facilitate the Recipient
LGUs’ development of a workplan to replicate the practice;
• Providing a common reference / outline for the various stakeholders involved in the project;
• Maximising the effectiveness of replication and dissemination of Exemplary Practices among LGUs
in the Philippines and around the world

To ensure consistency in the way Exemplary Practices are documented and to maximize knowledge transfer,
the Kaakbay project has prepared these guidelines for those who have to write the Reference Document .

Total length of document

The document should be short, to the point and simply written so as to be accessible to LGU staff and officials
who are practical and don’t have time to go through elaborate documentation. Ideally it will be 8 to 10 pages.
Additional materials relevant to the replication process such as training materials, sample MOAs, technical
specifications, etc. can be provided as appendices to the reference document.

Title
The title should reflect the major theme of the activity and be short and to the point. It should also include
the name of the LGU and Province it is located in.

Summary (300 words or 1⁄2 page)

This section should give a general overview of the project/initiative.

• Describe rationale and objectives of the project.

• Explain the strategy and methodology used, and the various stakeholders involved in the process.
• Note the major accomplishments and point out the global impact on the LGU and the community

Introduction (300 words or 1⁄2 page)

This section should state the reason or the purpose for the project

• Describe the situation before starting the project - Point out the main problems, the consequences
and the attempts to deal with them.
• Present the purpose and priorities of the project, for instance:

A-59
 * Satisfying basic human needs
* Involving women in the development process
* Supporting good governance, and so on

• Present the project objectives

Results (300 words or 1⁄2 page)

This section should have a catchy title that highlights the main accomplishments

• Describe to what extent the purpose and objectives were met

• Outline the indicators used to evaluate the results
• Identify the effects of the project in certain key areas? For instance:

* Relations between the LGU and the community

* Improvement of institutional capacity in the LGU and among the project stakeholders
* Significance of the outputs for the citizens
* Change in decision-making processes
* Change in the use and distribution of human, technical and financial resources

• Insert some participants’ comments on the impact of the project

Project History (150 words or 1⁄4 page)

• Describe how the project was initiated; who championed it.

• Explain the process for setting goals and determining the strategy and methodology (how, by
whom)
• Indicate over which period the project was implemented

Key Implementation Steps (up to 2,400 words or 4 pages)

This section of the reference document is particularly important to help other LGUs appreciate the
chronological chain of events in the implementation of the project. It requires that the writer analyze the
sequence of activities in the implementation of the project and present each step with its respective outputs,
and resources. This is best done through a consultation with the project implementation team. LGUs
wanting to replicate the practice will refer to this section to determine their own implementation plan for the
replication of the practice.

Describe the main implementation steps / milestones in chronological order and provide a detailed
breakdown of the output; individuals / stakeholders involved; resources required; and tools, procedures,
systems which need to be in placefor each key implementation step.

A typical LGU project may have 5 to 8 main implementation steps and each of these steps can be broken
down in more detail with a few sub steps or activities relating it.

To sum up:
Present the main Implementation Stages / Milestones in chronological order. Each key implementation stage
should be detailed with related sub steps and activities. For each main step and/or sub step, the following
should be presented:

• Main output
* committee created; Training activity; Small infrastructure / equipment to put in place; Education
campaign to the citizens; etc
• What procedures, tools, techniques, systems or structures need to be in place
* examples: an Executive order; committee TOR or procedures; specific forms to collect
information about citizens; a specific computer program; training modules and materials;
setting up agricultural technology for demonstration purposes; the reconfiguration of office
space; etc

A-60
 • Who needs to be involved / Why? (LGU staff, volunteers, institutional partners, etc)
* Describe the involvement of other institutional partners, organisations, the community.
* What was their respective role? How is it complementary to the LGU’s contribution to the
project?
• What budget is required and when?
* Estimate or provide actual costs for each component which required a specific budget
allocation.
• Other resources required (facilities, equipment, meeting halls, etc)
• Lessons learned, What worked / What didn’t
Throughout the implementation of the project, the implementers may have learned from errors and
successes. These lessons learned become valuable information for other LGUs wanting to replicate
the exemplary practice. For example:
* Some critical pre-requisites needing to be in place
* What should be the ideal timing of a specific activity? (for example, scheduling activities with
the agricultural community after the harvest season; establishing new procedures about
business permits in relation with the LGU licensing cycle)
* Ensuring community or political support

Analysis (900 words or 1.5 page)

This section should have a catchy title

• Identify specific opportunities and limitations, and solutions applied

• Put an emphasis on sustainability factors:

* Cultural: respect and consideration for attitudes, behaviours and traditions

* Social and economic: involvement of and benefit to both women and men, , inclusion of and
benefit to cultural minorities or economically disadvantaged groups
* Environmental: reduced dependence on non-renewable resources (air, water, soil, energy, and so
on); change in methods of production and consumption
* Financial: use of available resources; contributions by various stakeholders; terms for repayment
of loans; etc

• Explain the importance and significance of the project/activities relative to the context it was
implemented in:

* Example 1 - Support for a consultation process in a municipality/country with traditionally little

co-operation between the elected representatives and the population
* Example 2 - Improvement to the recovery of taxes with the use of automated data relative to
developed lands

Lessons learned and replicability of the experience (300 words or 1⁄2 page)

• Describe any general lessons learned about the whole project and their influence on subsequent
planning.

* Were these lessons used later to change policies/strategies/plans, and so on

* What aspects should be changed, avoided?

• Describe the exemplary value of this activity, and the elements that make it so.
• Indicate what type or class of LGU would most benefit from this project? What specific conditions or
target group can benefit from such a project?
• Describe which are the generic aspects/components of the project (easily transposable to other
contexts) and which ones might require more adaptation to the specific conditions of another LGU/
context
• Where relevant, identify what is the core activity or component and which components may or
may not be implemented in another LGU (for example, an agricultural demo farm where some of

A-61
 the technologies presented might have a stronger impact than others, 2 or 3 technologies may be
complementary but others, while adding value, are not critical to the results or context)
• If the project was implemented over a long period of time, provide an indication of the minimum
amount of time required to replicate it.
• Identify any known cases of successful replication of this practice by other LGUs so far

Use of photos / Illustrations

Use photos (at least 2) and available illustrations to illustrate the process and the accomplishments (e.g.
photos of training sessions, community participation, illustration used in advocacy campaign, equipment
provided, renewed infrastructures, etc.). Photos can be included in the Implementation Steps section or the
Results section.

A-62
appendix E.2
Tool 2: Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop Facilitator’s Guide and Generic Agenda

Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop Facilitator’s Guide

The Inception workshop is divided 3 distinct parts:

Part 1: Introduction
Part 2: Appreciating the Exemplary Practice: Seeing and Analyzing
Part 3: Implementing the practice in the Recipient LGUs

Recipient LGU Participants:

For each Exemplary Practice, a discussion should be held with the Host LGU
project implementers to determine which participants should attend the
Inception Workshop. Since the replication of an Exemplary Practice is a LGU
organizational process, the host LGU is the best to suggest which positions
in the LGU should attend the workshop: i.e. the Mayor, the concerned
department head, a Barangay Captain, a technician, etc.

PART 1: INTRODUCTION

Opening Ceremony (15 min)

Presentation of Participants (10 min)

• Host
• Recipients
• Kaakbay Team

Participants’ Expectations (20 min)

Process to be determined by the Facilitator
Workshop Overview (15 min)
By a Kaakbay Technical working Group Member

• Objectives
• Sequence of the sessions
• Support materials available
• Outputs

Introduction to the Kaakbay Project (30 min)

By a Kaakbay Technical Working Group Member

• Rationale / Background
• Kaakbay: a Pilot Project
• Selection Process of Participating LGUs
• Working in a Cluster – Host & Recipients
• Project Steps

A-63
 Overview of the Exemplary Practice (20 min)
By the Mayor or prominent leader of the Host LGU

• Inspirational Presentation by the Mayor of the Host LGU

• Main Achievements
• Benefits/Results

Notes to the Presenter:

OVERVIEW OF THE EXEMPLARY PRACTICE

This presentation is to provide an overview of the Exemplary practice keeping in mind that the practice
will be presented in detail during the next days.
The presentation should provide the Chief Executive’s or a prominent leader’s perspective. It is meant as
a primer to get the participants excited about the project. It should last about 20 minutes and cover:
• How the LGU decided to implement this project? Whose idea was it?? (history of the project)
• Who was the instigator? Who was the champion of this project?
• How important was this project for the LGU
• What were the main achievements
• Most important results and benefits of the project to the Citizens

Fellowship Activity (evening)

Facilitator to determine how to conduct this session

• Activity for participants to get to know each other

• Building the cluster collaborative relationship
• Possible activity: humorous presentation of each LGU to the other members of the cluster

PART 2 – APPRECIATION OF THE EXEMPLARY PRACTICE:

• SEEING IS BELIEVING

“Exemplary Practice Title”: What is it? (60 min)

By the Project Manager

• More detailed presentation of the EP as an introduction to the site visits

• Implementers, Stakeholders and Beneficiaries
• How was it implemented
• General level of effort
• Introduction to the specific sites/groups to be visited

A-64
 Notes to the Presenter:
“EXEMPLARY PRACTICE TITLE”: WHAT WAS IT?

This presentation provides the participants with a basic understanding of the practice prior to the site
visits. It should provide the information participants need to maximize their appreciation during the site
visits. The level of detail of this presentation should take into account what was presented by the Mayor
the previous day. Depending on the project’s focus, it could present the basic concept of the practice, and
should emphasize the main implementers, stakeholders and beneficiaries.

What were the key benefits to:

• The specific target group
• The LGU as a whole (revenues saved, providing a much needed new service to the citizens, better
relations with citizens, etc.)
• The LGU staff

It should last about 30 minutes and allow for a question period.

The presentation should cover:

• The basic concept of the project/practice; what are the most important aspects the practice; why this
project?
• What was the general/relative level of effort of the LGU to implement this project?
• Who are the implementers and main stakeholders; Who were the key LGU staff to take part in the
implementation
• Beneficiaries: Which target group was the project intended for (a specific Barangay, segment of the
LGU’s citizens, the city staff, etc.

Seeing the Practice in Operation (half day)

Guided by the Project Manager with presentations by stakeholders and beneficiaries

• Visits to the implementation sites:

* Observation of the EP in action (the Host schedules an activity for the group where
pertinent)
* Inter-action with project implementers & stakeholders
* LGU Department-s involved
* Partner organizations collaborating in the implementation (Barangays, NGOs, etc)
* Facilities & Equipment in place or contributing to the project
* Visible results/benefits of the project

• Inter-action with the Beneficiaries:

* Perspectives from different groups of beneficiaries (the LGU itself, citizens, staff, Barangay
Officials, etc)
* Main results to them
* Interviews with beneficiaries

A-65
 Notes to the Presenters:
BENEFITS OF THE EXEMPLARY PRACTICE

Citizen / Community Group:

• As a citizen, how do you benefit form this initiative of the LGU?
(Better service, better access to the service, better information from the LGU, safer/ cleaner
community?, etc)
• What was your situation before the existence of this service by the LGU? How is your situation
now? What changed?
• Why is this service important to you? How significant is it for you and your family?
• If you were involved in the implementation of the project, how did that happen? What was your
contribution? How did the LGU relate with you during the implementation?
• If your LGU was to implement this project again, what would you recommend they change? What
could they do better?

Stakeholders / Institutional Partners;

• Why did your organization get involved in the project?
• What was the specific role of your organization in the project?
• What was your relationship with the LGU? Did you have a protocol agreement or MOA with the
LGU outlining the respective roles and responsibilities of your respective organizations?
• What were the benefits of the project for your organization?
• From your perspective, what were the most important benefits to the citizens?

LGU Employees:
• What do you see as the most important benefits to the citizens?
• Why is this project important for the LGU? How different is the LGUs approach in this area
compared to how it was before?
• How has your work changed as a result of this initiative? Are you saving time? How is the LGU
more efficient in this area?
• What new knowledge, skills and aptitudes have you learned from this initiative?
• Are you relating to citizens in a different way?
• What would you recommend your LGU to do differently if it was to implement this project again?

Participants’ Reflections on the Exemplary Practice (60 min)

Facilitator

This session allows the facilitator to do a diagnosis of the participants’ appreciation and understanding of the
Exemplary Practice so far. It also allows the participant to revise and process the observations from the visits.

• Participants share their understanding of the EP following the site visits

• Host resource people help the group clarify what they saw and heard from various presentations
during the day
• Facilitators summarize the key points and lessons learned during the visits

A-66
 ANALYZING THE EXEMPLARY PRACTICE

Rationale and Purpose of the Exemplary Practice (20 min)

By the main Project Manager (City/Municipal Manager / Department Head)

This session aims at helping the participants analyze and understand the situation before and after the
Exemplary Practice was implemented. From this session, the participants will be able to formulate the Goal,
Objectives and Expected Results of their Replication project in their own context.

This session covers:

• Prevailing conditions before the Project
• Situation after the project was implemented / when the practice is in place What changed?
• Sort term and long term results/impact

After the presentation, 10 to 15 minutes should be given to the participants so they can compare how the
rationale and purpose of the Exemplary Practice in the Host LGU is comparable to the context of their own
LGU. The participant thereby starts thinking about how the project can be implemented in his/her LGU.

Key Implementation Steps and Related Resources (1 hr 30 min)

By the main Project Manager (City/Municipal Manager / Department Head)

The session should cover:

• Main Implementation Stages / Milestones in chronological order
• Each key implementation stage should be detailed with related sub steps and activities, resources,
etc.

This session is particularly important to help the participants appreciate the chronological chain of events in
the implementation of the project. It requires from the Host LGU to analyze the sequence of activities in the
implementation of their project and present each step with its respective outputs, and resources.

The session prepares the participant for developing his/her Implementation Plan in the workplan
document. After each key step, the facilitator should provide time for the participant to determine how those
implementation steps are relevant to the recipient LGU context. The following guide questions could be
asked:

• Would those implementation steps and activities be appropriate for the recipient LGU?
• If not, what should be changed?
• What specific procedures, systems and tools need to be developed?
• Who are the people (LGU staff, community representatives, Partner organizations) you need to
involve in your LGU?

A-67
 Notes to the Presenters:
KEY IMPLEMENTATION STEPS AND RELATED RESOURCES

The session should cover:

• Main Implementation Stages / Milestones in chronological order
• Each key implementation stage should be detailed with related sub steps and activities
For each main step and sub step, the following should be presented:

• Main output
* committee created; Training activity; Small infrastructure / equipment to put in place;
Education campaign to the citizens; etc

• What procedures, tools, techniques, systems or structures need to be in place

* examples: an Executive order; committee TOR or procedures; specific forms to collect
information about citizens; a specific computer program; training modules and materials;
setting up agricultural technology for demonstration purposes; the reconfiguration of office
space; etc

• Who needs to be involved / Why? (LGU staff, volunteers, institutional partners, etc)
* Describe the involvement of other institutional partners, organisations, the community.
* What was their respective role? How is it complementary to the LGU’s contribution to the
project?

• What budget is required and when?

* Estimate or provide actual costs for each component which required a specific budget
allocation.

• Other resources required (facilities, equipment, meeting halls, etc)

• Enabling Measures, What worked / What didn’t

Throughout the implementation of the project, the implementers may have learned from errors
and successes. These lessons learned become valuable information for other LGUs wanting to
replicate the exemplary practice. For example:
* Some critical pre-requisites needing to be in place
* What should be the ideal timing of a specific activity? (for example, scheduling activities with
the agricultural community after the harvest season; establishing new procedures about
business permits in relation with the LGU licensing cycle)
* Ensuring community or political support

PART 3: IMPLEMENTING THE PRACTICE IN THE RECIPIENT LGUS

Managing the project in your LGU (30 min)

By a Kaakbay Technical Working Group Member

• Core Management Team

• Contact Person
• The 4 capacity development and project implementation stages
• Implementing the project within the timeframe
• Workplan: main implementation guide
• Introduction to the Workplan Template
• Technical Assistance by the Kaakbay project team
• Monitoring and Reporting

A-68
Writing the workplan (120 min)
By a Kaakbay Technical Working Group Member /Facilitator

In this session the participants start writing the draft workplan for implementing the replication of Exemplary
Practice in their LGU. The Facilitator presents the Project Workplan Template.

• Adapting the Exemplary Practice to your LGU’s Situation

• Drafting the Work plan:
* Goal, Objectives and Expected Results
* Implementation plan:
• Main steps in Chronological order
• Human Resources
• Financial and in-kind resources
* Kaakbay Cluster Activities
* Coordination, monitoring and Evaluation
* Budget

Working as a Cluster – Memorandum of Agreement (45 min)

By a Kaakbay Technical Working Group Member

In this session, the presenter talks about the potential sharing and support opportunities offered by working
as part of a cluster of LGUs. A template MOA can be introduced and signed by the cluster members.

• Support system among peers (including modalities of requests to Host LGU expertise)
• Common time frame & activities
• Sharing of resources
• Deriving lessons learned about replication

Next Steps ( 45 min)

By a Kaakbay Technical Working Group Member

• Mobilizing the core management team & other stakeholders

• Validating the Work plan and securing support by the SB
• Finalizing the work plan
• Getting feedback on the workplan from the host LGU
• Mid-project Workshop
* Dates
* Which Recipient LGU?
• Communications to, and support form the Kaakbay project team

Conclusion of the Workshop

A-69
 PEER-TO-PEER LEARNING WORKSHOP GENERIC AGENDA
This form is a simply a short version of the longer Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop Facilitator’s Guide, with the
notes to facilitation taken out.

PART 1: INTRODUCTION

Opening Ceremony (15 min)

Presentation of Participants (10 min)

Participants’ Expectations (20 min)

Workshop Overview (10 min)

By a Kaakbay Technical working Group Member

Introduction to the Kaakbay Project (30 min)

By a Kaakbay Technical Working Group Member

Overview of the Exemplary Practice (20 min)

By the Mayor of the Host LGU

Fellowship Activity (evening)

Facilitator to be identified

PART 2 – APPRECIATION OF THE EXEMPLARY PRACTICE: SEEING IS BELIEVING

“Exemplary Practice Title” : What is it? (60 min)

By the Project Manager

Seeing the Practice in Operation (half day)

Guided by the Project Manager with presentations by stakeholders

Participants’ Reflections on the Exemplary Practice (60 min)

Facilitator

ANALYZING THE EXEMPLARY PRACTICE

Rationale and Purpose of the Exemplary Practice (20 min)

By the main Project Manager (City/Municipal Manager / Department Head)

Key Implementation Steps and Related Resources (1 hr 30 min)

By the main Project Manager (City/Municipal Manager / Department Head)

PART 3: IMPLEMENTING THE PRACTICE IN THE RECIPIENT LGUs

Managing the project in your LGU (45 min)

By a Kaakbay Technical Working Group Member

Writing the workplan (120 min)

By a Kaakbay Technical Working Group Member

Working as a Cluster – Memorandum of Agreement (45 min)

By a Kaakbay Technical Working Group Member

Next Steps ( 45 min)

By a Kaakbay Technical Working Group Member

Conclusion of the Workshop

A-70
appendix E.3
A.1
Tool 3: Replication Workplan Template

Title of Project

Project Work Plan, Municipality / City

Project start date (mo, year) – project end date (mo, year)

A-71
 PREAMBLE /EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

Give a short description of the context for this project

Include:
• a statement on why this project is important for your LGU. How it is linked to the LGUs strategic
orientations and/or Executive Agenda.
• description of Kaakbay process, including
* start date of project
* focus area of the project
* which host LGU has implemented this project successfully
* what other Recipient LGUs are replicating the project as part of the replication cluster
* brief reference to how the Peer-to-peer Learning Workshop and relations with the host
LGU helped define this workplan
• project workplan description: aim, duration, main results

(Maximum 1 page)

Signature of the Mayor Date

A-72
1.0 PROJECT TITLE

2.0 RATIONALE, GOAL, OBJECTIVES, AND EXPECTED RESULTS

2.1 Rationale
Explain why the project should be carried out. Include:

• a brief explanation of the importance of the area which the project will address for your LGU
• what is the current situation (or prevailing conditions) in your LGU (weaknesses, problems) that
the project will help address
• what capacity building needs of your LGU will this project help address.

2.2 Goal
State the aim of this project.

2.3 Objectives
State the specific objectives of the project.

2.4 Expected Results

State what you expect will be achieved by the project. Include:

• Short term results or outputs

• end-of-project results or outcomes, and
• results achieved long after the project is completed or impacts.

3.0 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

Provide the schedule and details for the activities in your project. Include:

• Key implementation steps with corresponding completion dates in chronological order. For each
step include:

* What procedures, tools, systems or structures will be put in place

* Who needs to be involved / Why? (staff, volunteers, institutional partners, etc)
* Other resources required (facilities, equipment, meeting halls, etc)

• Kaakbay progress Workshop

• Project support activities by the Kaakbay project team

A template will be provided so that LGUs can present their sequence of activities in the form of a gant chart or
“work flow”.

4.0 COORDINATION, MONITORING AND EVALUATION

Contact Person / Coordinator

Identify the Contact Person. The contact person is the main coordinator of the project in the LGU. He/She
coordinates all Kaakbay Replication activities. Communications with the following individuals / groups are
channelled through him/her:

• All project participants and stakeholders within the LGU

• The contact person in the Host LGU
• The contact persons of other Recipient LGUs within the Replication Cluster
• The Kaakbay project team (DILG, LMP, LCP, LGSP)

Core Management Team

Identify the members of the project core management team. This is a small team of 3 to 5 members who may
oversee the project implementation.

A-73
 Monitoring progress and reporting
Indicate a reporting schedule (usually a short progress report after each key implementation step or
project activity). The reports are used to inform the Mayor, the SB and the Kaakbay project team of project
implementation progress.

A progress report will also be presented at the Mid-project Cluster Workshop and a final report will be
presented at the Final Assessment Workshop.

Evaluation
Indicate the joint evaluation plan in collaboration with the host LGU and Kaakbay project team. Include:

• planned date of evaluation

• evaluation team composition (who will take part in the evaluation process? One host LGU
representative and one Kaakbay team member will join the process)

5.0 BUDGET
Provide a budget for the project. The budget should include the direct expenditures required for the LGU to
implement the Exemplary Practice. It does not need to reflect staff time or in kind contributions required.

A-74
appendix F
Sample Work Plan of a Replicating LGU

KAAKBAY: REPLICATION AND DISSEMINATION OF DELIVERING

PRIMARY HEALTH CARE THROUGH PUROK SYSTEM

Title of Project: Villanueva Primary Health Care Program through Purok

Project Work Plan, Municipality/City: Municipality of Villanueva, Misamis Oriental

Project Start Date: July 2003 – March 2004

PREAMBLE/EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

____________________________
HON. JULIO T. UY
Mayor

A-75
 1.0. PROJECT TITLE: Villanueva Primary Health Care Program through Purok
2.0. RATIONALE, GOAL, OBJECTIVES AND EXPECTED RESULTS

2.1. Rationale
• No intra-inter sectoral linkages
• Insufficient assistance to emergency needs
• Insufficient affordable drugs
• Less community participation in health related activities

2.2. Goal
Well- developed community based Primary Health Care with strong inter-sectoral collaboration, delivering
accessible, acceptable and affordable health services promoting good health habits and practices towards a
self sustaining community.

2.3. Objectives
a. To sustain better health education program towards health consciousness of Purok residents.
b. To strengthen the Purok system through volunteers.
c. To promote the design and implementation of purok level livelihood in order to augment income of Purok
residents.
d. To foster strong inter-agency collaboration and linkaging among agencies, LGU, Barangay and Purok in
delivering primary health care.

2.4. Expected Results

Short term:
a. Kiosks constructed in all Puroks
b. Organized cluster of households in Puroks
c. Trained LGU officials and personnel, barangay officials and Purok volunteers on Primary Health Care
Service Delivery
d. Purok system and guidelines of operations
e. Defined structure of an inter-agency collaboration

Medium and Long Term:

a. Better collaboration between and among LGU, agencies and citizenry in promoting good health
habits and practices
b. Accessibility and acceptability of health services, projects and programs
c. Empowered community
d. Improved economic and health condition
e. Well informed and educated citizenry

3.0. IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

3.1. Time Frame: July 2003 – March 2004
3.2. Procedures, Tools, Systems

1. Preparation Phase:
• Creation of the Program
• Presentation of the program/ project outline to LCE and SB
• Project proposal/Project Outline
• Executive Order/SB Resolution
• Creation of the Management Team

2. Organizational Strengthening Phase

a. Capability building town level
b. Strengthening of the MDC and all Agency for proper coordination
c. Assignment of one Kagawad to one barangay.

A-76
3. Capability building at the Barangay level
a. Strengthening of the ABC to enhance barangay linkages
b. Barangay administration capability building
c. Livelihood and environmental protection, peace and order, infrastructure and youth and sports
capability building and transfer of technology.
d. Yearly evaluation and planning to sustain the organization

4. Purok level
a. Purok Chairmen, Secretaries, Treasurers & Barangay Health Workers Leadership Training
b. Purok Health Workers Training on Primary Health Care for Capability Building and Technology
Transfer on health programs.
c. Establishment of Purok kiosks or activity centers

5. Mobilize People/Ensuring Peoples Participation

a. Holding of regular monthly meeting for a well organized cluster of houses in purok
b. Holding of re- orientation capability building seminars to capacitate the different members of the
sectoral committees
c. Sustain the activities of the purok to have a well-organized community and NGOs and POs to
support the community.

6. Monitoring and Evaluation

HUMAN RESOURCES:
• LCE
• SB Member
• Barangay Captain
• Barangay Kagawad/ Purok Chairpersons
• Head of Offices
• Health Personnel
• Barangay Health Worker
• Barangay Secretaries/Treasurers

RESOURCES:
Audio-visual room, funds from LGU, community contribution

MID YEAR EVALUATION: October 2003 ( Mid-Year Progress Workshop with Kaakbay Project Team and
Host LGU)

PROJECT SUPPORT ACTIVITIES BY THE KAAKBAY PROJECT TEAM AND HOST LGU:
• Countryside Action Program “ Delivery Primary Health Care Through Purok” Training and Workshops

A-77
A-78
4.0 COORDINATION, MONITORING AND EVALUATION
Contact Person: Municipal Mayor
Core Municipal Management Team
Chairperson: Vice Mayor Bienvenido Valcurza
Vice Chairperson: Kag. Jose Oliver Ello
Secretary: Erma P. Mar
Member: Kag. Adelaida Baconguis
Member: Kag. Leocio Abejo

Monitoring Progress and Reporting:

Purok level – monthly
Barangay level – monthly
Municipal level – semi annual

Evaluation: Mid Year – 3rd week of October 2003

Year end: 3rd week of March 2004

5.0. BUDGET: Php 100,000

A-79
A-80
Learning from Peers
for Good Governance
is a practical guide to implementing an innovative and cost-effective
approach to promoting good local governance.

The approach is the structured replication of good practices in local

government through peer-to-peer learning. Under a replication program,
local governments learn from other local governments about proven
solutions to common challenges such as raising revenues, providing
housing, managing land use and waste disposal and reducing crime.

“Learning from Peers…” offers a step-by-step guide on establishing and

managing such a program, from setting up your management structures,
to identifying what good practices to replicate and selecting local
governments that will replicate them.

It also provides three key tools that can be used by local governments in
replicating good practices independently or within a larger program.

The peer to peer learning approach featured in this guidebook is a tried

and tested methodology; the approach was used in the Philippines through
Kaakbay, a replication program involving 30 cities and municipalities.

The success of the Kaakbay experience has inspired the production of this
guidebook, as another contribution to the dissemination and promotion of
good practices in local governance.

Though culled from the Kaakbay experience, the guidebook has been
made as generic as possible, the tools and guidelines simple and easily
adaptable. Thus, it can be used to implement replication programs in
localities and countries with conditions different from the Philippines.

Institutions, associations of local government units and other organizations

working with local government will find in this guidebook a valuable tool
in pursuing efforts to enhance local governance and helping LGUs face the
growing challenges in the world today.