Improving Local Govs' Performance (PH0037)

Status quo - There exists a continuing challenge for local governments to perform better, and achieve a desirable condition where local governments are able to:
 Sustain the practice of transparency and accountability in the use of public funds;
 Prepare for challenges posed by disasters;
 Demonstrate sensitivity to the needs of vulnerable and
marginalized sectors of society
 Encourage investment and employment;
 Protect constituents from threats to life and security; and
 Safeguard the integrity of the environment. The objective is to stipulate good governance behavior among local governments specifically in: a) the proper utilization of public funds; b) providing exemplary services to local communities; and c) promoting transparency, accountability and participation. Relevance - This commitment is relevant in advancing transparency and citizen participation through the various performance criteria required for eligibility of the SGLG. This seeks to improve government service delivery by fostering opennes and participation through compliance with the Full Disclosure Policy and representation of sectors in local decision bodies; and improve governance and capacity of local governments.
The Seal is a demonstration that transparency and accountability work for the interest of the citizen, not only in knowing the financial health of the local government and the range of services it provides, but also where citizens are able to draw local information and engage in good service delivery. Ambition - Raising the performance benchmarks of LGUs intends to improve aspects of local governance, such as transparency in local plans and budgets and mandatory representation of CSOs in local special bodies.

For Commitment details, see https://www.opengovpartnership.org/documents/philippines-mid-term-progress-report-2015-2017.

9. Enhance performance benchmarks for local governance

Commitment Text:

Status quo or problem/issue to be addressed

There exists a continuing challenge for local governments to perform better, and achieve a desirable condition where local governments are able to:

· Sustain the practice of transparency and accountability in the use of public funds;

· Prepare for challenges posed by disasters;

· Demonstrate sensitivity to the needs of vulnerable and marginalized sectors of society

· Encourage investment and employment;

· Protect constituents from threats to life and security; and

· Safeguard the integrity of the environment

Main Objective

The objective is to stipulate good governance behavior among local governments specifically in: a) the proper utilization of public funds; b) providing exemplary services to local communities; and c) promoting transparency, accountability and participation. Brief Description of Commitment From its pilot run in 2010, the Seal of Good Housekeeping (SGH) promotes transparency and accountability in local operations. In 2012, 84% of provinces, cities and municipalities were conferred with the SGH. This indicates readiness of local governments to take on greater challenges. In 2014, the Department scaled up the Seal of Good Housekeeping into the Seal of Good Local Governance (SGLG), a recognition of good performance of provincial, city and 31 municipal governments, not only on financial housekeeping, but also on other areas that directly benefit the people. These performance areas are: good financial housekeeping, disaster preparedness, social protection for the basic sector, business friendliness and competitiveness, environmental management, and law and order and public safety.

OGP challenge addressed by the commitment

· Improving Public Services

· Increasing Public Integrity

· More Effectively Managing Public Resources

Relevance: This commitment is relevant in advancing transparency and citizen participation through the various performance criteria required for eligibility of the SGLG. This seeks to improve government service delivery by fostering openness and participation through compliance with the Full Disclosure Policy and representation of sectors in local decision bodies; and improve governance and capacity of local governments. The Seal is a demonstration that transparency and accountability work for the interest of the citizen, not only in knowing the financial health of the local government and the range of services it provides, but also where citizens are able to draw local information and engage in good service delivery.

Ambition: Raising the performance benchmarks of LGUs intends to improve aspects of local governance, such as transparency in local plans and budgets and mandatory representation of CSOs in local special bodies.

Responsible institution: Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG)

Supporting institutions: Commission on Audit, Commission on Human Rights, Council for the Welfare of Children, Department of Budget and Management, Department of Education, Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Department of Finance, Department of Health, Department of Social Welfare and Development, Department of Trade and Industry, Government Service Insurance System, Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board, National Council on Disability Affairs, National Council on Indigenous People, National Economic and Development Authority, National Police Commission, Office of Civil Defense, Philippine Chamber of Commerce and Industry Philippine Commission on Women Philippine Health Insurance Corporation Philippine National Police, Union of Local Authorities in the Philippines, Center for Disaster Preparedness, Jesse M. Robredo Institute of Governance, Philippine Partnership for the Development of Human Resources in Rural Areas, Transparency and Accountability Network

Start date: January 2015

End date: April 2017

Commitment Aim

The commitment aimed to encourage good performance among local governments through the Seal of Good Local Governance (SGLG). The SGLG recognizes good performance among provincial, city, and municipal governments in areas that directly benefit people. This includes good financial housekeeping, disaster preparedness, social protection for the basic sector, business-friendliness and competitiveness, environmental management, and peace and order. To achieve its desired objective, the commitment aimed to enhance the performance scales of SGLG, assess 1,653 provinces, cities, and municipalities (PCMs) annually from 2015-2017, confer Seals to all qualified PCMs, and ensure representation of CSOs in the SGLG assessment team.

Status

Midterm: Substantial

Substantial progress had been made by the midterm, with three of the four deliverables completed. In January 2016, the Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG) issued a guideline that upgraded the assessment criteria and indicators for compliance.[Note: The Seal of Good Local Governance 2016 Awardees http://www.dilg.gov.ph/PDF_File/issuances/memo_circulars/dilg-memocircular-2016111_e820585515.pdf. ] In 2015, 1,676 PCMs were assessed[Note: In 2016, 1,673 LGUs were assessed for 2016 SGLG according to corrected data provided by the Bureau of Local Government Supervision (BLGS) of the DILG. At the time of writing the IRM Progress Report 2015-2017, only the 2015 figures were available.],[Note: PH-OGP. Midterm Self-Assessment Report; Zara, Girlie, LGOO VII, Bureau of Local Government Supervision (BLGS) - Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG). Interview on 24 October 2016 at DILG Office, Quezon City.] and 306 were awarded the Seal using the upgraded criteria. XX[Note: Seal of Good local Governance 2016 Awardees http://www.dilg.gov.ph/PDF_File/reports_resources/dilg-reports-resources-20161027_8441b747a6.pdf. ]XX This was a 20 percent increase from the 254 PCMs awarded the Seal in 2015. All SGLG assessment teams included CSO representatives for the 2015 and 2016 evaluation rounds.[Note: For details, see Aceron, Joy. 2017. Philippines Progress Report, 2015-2017. Open Government Partnership Independent Reporting Mechanism. ] At the time of writing the progress report, the assessment of PCMs for 2016 was ongoing and so this could not be marked as complete.

End of term: Complete

This commitment has been completed. The government used the upgraded criteria to assess 1,671 PCMs during the period, more than the targeted number of 1,653 PCMs. The other deliverables were completed in the first year of implementation.

Did It Open Government?

Public Accountability: Major

The state of development and governance in local governments across the country varies. Some local governments continue to struggle, while a few are performing well but inconsistently. This commitment encouraged local governments to improve performance as measured by criteria and indicators that are important to the development and growth of their constituencies. The increase in the number of recipients of SGLG Seals shows the improvement in local governments according to the standards set by SGLG. The fact that there has been a decrease in the number of local government units (LGUs) with adverse findings from COA[Note: Zara, Girlie, LGOO VII, Bureau of Local Government Supervision (BLGS) - Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG). Interview on 24 October 2016 at DILG Office, Quezon City.] on issues related to budget allocations and responsiveness indicates continued improvement in the financial management of LGUs. Girlie Zara, the DILG official responsible for this commitment, attributes the 100 percent assessment coverage to the political support of the former secretary, as well as and improvements in the system (i.e. a pre-existing structure, personnel, and linkages). XX[Note: Ibid. ]XX The awareness campaign of the Union of Local Authorities in the Philippines also helped to generate local government participation.[Note: For details, see Aceron, Joy. 2017. Philippines Progress Report, 2015-2017. Open Government Partnership Independent Reporting Mechanism. ]

This commitment has not been coded as outstanding because challenges remain in how data can be used by citizens to pressure local governments to perform better. While there has been an increase in number of local governments receiving the SGLG seal, there are still many LGUs that are not compliant. Input on the SGLG assessment of LGUs from civil society on the ground might help to ensure accuracy of the assessment and serve as leverage for civil society in pushing for sustained improvements to performance.

Carried Forward?

The SGLG has not been carried forward in the next action plan. According to the representative of PH-OGP, there is a need for DILG to clarify how their deliverables will build on its current accomplishments in the third action plan.[Note: Marianne Fabian, PH-OGP Secretariat, DBM. In a roundtable discussion on ‘Did it Open Government’ organized by Government Watch. October 12, 2017.] As recommended in the IRM progress report, the SGLG would benefit from another platform that could monitor and advocate for it. The SGLG could be integrated with other programs that make use of the information it generates and then leverage it to pass relevant reform measures. Deliverables should focus on the engagement and use of external stakeholders of the SGLG process and results. It should also be harmonized with other related performance assessment systems and tools.