Transcript Slide 1

NATIONAL PROGRAM FOR
COMMUNITY EMPOWERMENT
(PNPM MANDIRI)
Indonesia’s CDD Response to Rural Poverty
Indonesia
Background
Modeled on 2 former government programs:
• Kecamatan Development Program (KDP/PPK) &
• Urban Poverty Planning (UPP/P2KP).
Objectives
To Reduce Poverty, by:
• Providing cost-effective socio-economic
infrastructure and access to basic services
• Improving local governance & capacity
• Strengthening local institutions
• Increasing local employment opportunities
• Empowering communities
Indonesia’s population
The biggest poor population are living in Java-Bali (57%). 25% in the
Western regions, and 17% in the Eastern regions (the most lagging
regions). In total there are ~ 36 million poor population
Source: CPS Change Team
Indonesia’s economy
Source: CPS Change Team. Provincial’s size shows the proportion of provincial GDP relative to national GDP
CDD in Indonesia
Villagers plan and
decide on
investments, control
funds, implement
the projects
themselves, account
for funds, and
maintain facilities/
infrastructure built.
With facilitation and technical backstopping
Poverty Program ‘Clusters’
Cluster I: Social Safety and Protection.
Programs: Rice for the Poor (Raskin), School Operations
Support (BOS), Health Security for the Poor, Cash Transfers
& other social programs (post-disaster).
Cluster II: Community-based programs; now known as
PNPM Mandiri.
Cluster III: Strengthening small and micro enterprises:
Kredit Usaha Rakyat (KUR), Pengembangan Usaha Agribisnis
Perdesaan (PUAP), micro-finance services.
Source:pnpm-mandiri website
Key Principles
•
Decentralized
•
Pro-poor
•
Participatory
•
Transparent and Accountable
•
Sustainable
•
“Simple”
•
Open Menu (with allocations based on
prioritization of proposals decided on by village
representatives)
From Village Proposals to Funding
Decisions
Village
Meeting
Inter-Village
Prioritization
• To agree on 3 proposals (2 from women ) to be
brought to the inter-village forum
• To agree on 6 village reps (3 females), proposal
writing team & candidate for UPK etc
• Village Proposals discussed and ranked
• Forum officers elected
• UPK staff (re)elected
Designs &
Budgets
• Using standard templates, detailed (engineering )
designs and cost estimates prepared (villagers
involved in the process, consulted)
Inter-Village
Funding
Decisions
• Final decision made on funding for subprojects
• Reps elected for Kabupaten Planning (Musrenbang)
deliberations
Block Grant Cycle - PNPM Rural
FIELD ORIENTATION
AND ASSESSMENT
Inter Village Mtg
Dissemination
Evaluation
Nomination
of Village
Cadres,
Village
Committees
1
Revolving Fund
Management
Operation and
Maintenance
2
Village Meeting
Socialization
Training for
Village
Cadres,
Village
Committees
Village Meeting
Completion Report,
Hand Over
10
00
Last Transfer of Village
Funds & subproject
Completion
9
3
Special
Women
Meeting
4
Village Planning Meeting
Village Proposals
Supervision and
Cross Village
Visit
Transfer of Funds
& Sub-project
Implementation
Village Meeting
Report IVM
Results, discuss
work plan
District
Agencies
Forum
FGD: Collection of
Ideas
Village Accountability
Meeting (2X min)
Preparation for
Sub-project
Implementation
(procurement/
construction plan/
village training)
District
Development
Forum
Certification of
Completion,
Training of
O&M Team
8
- Proposal Ranking
- Link-up to District
Planning
5
Proposal Verification
2nd Inter Village Mtg 6
Prioritized Proposals
Inter Village Mtg
Final Funding
Decision
7
Proposal Writing
with/ without cost
estimate & design
Formation
of
Verification
Team
Final Proposal/
Design & Cost
Estimate
 Funding Options,
 Kecamatan
Representatives
Approx. Funding
(in US$ million, approx.)
PROGRAM
LOAN
KDP I
$273.2
KDP II
$344.3
PNPM 2007
$381.9
PNPM 2008
$226.1
PNPM 2009
$300
PNPM 2010
$785
GRANT
$70.8
$121.7
How Funds are Channeled and Disbursed
• Transferred by
KPPN (Govt
Treasury Office) to
village collective
accounts at the
kecamatan level.
• Villagers then use
these grant funds
for productive
infrastructure,
loans to existing
women’s groups
for working
capital, or for
social investments
in education and
health.
Replenishement
Withdrawal
request & financial
statement
3 stages: 40%40%-20%
UPK
Expenditure &
progress report
Work plan &
progress based
Program Staffing of PNPM Rural
National
• National Management Consultants – 75 specialists
• Regional Mgt Consultants
Province
• Provincial Oversight Coordinators (32)
• Team of 10 specialists/province, on average
Kabupaten
• 3 Kabupaten Facilitators (Social, Technical and Financial)
• Plus assistants and computer operators
Kecamatan
• At least 2 Kecamatan Facilitators (Social and Technical)
• A Financial Mgt Unit (UPK) and Local Asst Facilitator(s)
Village
• At least two Village Cadres (one of the two must be female)
• Elected Village Implementation Committee
Results
Between 1999 – 2007, villagers built or
rehabilitated over:
65,500 km of roads
• 9,000 bridges
•
•
11,000 irrigations systems
•
28,300 drinking water systems and almost
17,500 sanitation facilities (MCK)
•
6,950 schools (and provided almost 120,000
scholarships to poor students)
•
5,700 health posts
Impacts of PNPM Rural
have been positive
• Household welfare
Increase in consumption per capita 5% greater
in PNPM locations compared with control.
• The same impact is 5% impact among poorest
20% households.
• Impact increases to 19% in the poorest 20% of
kecamatan.
• Households moved out of poverty (2.3% more
likely than control areas) and reduction in risk
of households falling into poverty.
•
Impacts of PNPM Rural
•
(cont.)
Employment Generation
•
•
•
1-2% greater chance of escaping unemployment.
Unemployment already very low (<4%).
Provides temporary jobs during slack season for
agricultural laborers and the poor (>72 million
person-days for >6.1 million villagers)
Impacts of PNPM Rural
•
Physical Economic Infrastructure
•
•
•
•
Creates greater access to markets and services
(roads) and increases productivity (irrigation)
Improves access to and quality of health and
education services (health centers, schools)
Strong impact on expansion of access to health
services (5% more than control areas)
Proven Track Record of Low Misuse of
Funds (< 1%)
Impact
Participation of women and poor is generally high
(about 45%)
 Poverty targeting is successful (Alatas, 2005)
 Rural PNPM forums reduce conflict (Barron)
 Rated beneficial--as expected or better: 92%
 Satisfied with results: 96%
 Infrastructure fully functional (years after
construction): 94%
 No serious environmental impact or safeguards
issues
 Rural PNPM construction costs are 30% – 56%
less than alternative means (ie. construction by
contractors)

Aceh
The Using KDP/PNPM Rural
As “Vehicle” for Other Funds
For example:
1. KDP-IOM, IDR 50 million per village for 230 villages
and 350 villages in conflict-affected areas in Aceh;
2. KDP-BRA, to channel funds to conflict victims in 67
sub-districts (IDR 217.38 billion)
3. KDP-BRR, to built infrastructure for community
settlements in 72 sub-districts (IDR 116.274 billion)
Aceh
The Using KDP/PNPM Rural
As “vehicle” for Other Funds
For example:
4. CARE, to built sanitation in Peukan Bada Subdistrict, Aceh Besar
5. AUSAid, development Meunasah & Village Halls in
108 villages in 8 sub-districts, Aceh Besar
6. Village Surveys, 2005/2006, surveyed more than
5,900 villages to identify damages and changes
post-tsunami and -conflict
Aceh
PNPM-BKPG—integration of
community development programs
In 2009 Aceh allocated > Rp. 962 billion for block grant investment
funds to every village and linked its funds to PNPM Rural. Aceh’s
BKPG also links musrenbang planning to more transparent &
participatory BKPG + PNPM community planning, as shown
below:
2009
June-Oct
Nop
2010
Dec
Implementation of PNPM-BKPG
Each village produces a
RPJM & RKG (annual
work plan) and
budget/APBG
January
February
March
Period of Musrenbang until Kec (March)
Base d on its RPJM,
each village reviews &
prepares an RKG
(annual work plan)
Musrenbang Kec and
MAD II of BKPG +
PNPM can be done
together
Infrastructure
Infrastructure Project: Bridge at
Siwalubanua Village
Pati-iron bridge
Suspension
Bridges
Infrastructure
Road in Central Java
Subak Road, Tabanan, Bali
SCHOOL
TK (Kindergaten ) in
Magetan
Exterior of a School (and KDP
Notice Board) in Kairatu
Irrigation channel at
Lamatewelu , Kec.
Adonara Timur, Kab.
Flores Timur, NTT
Clean Water Project at
Pengotan, Kec. Bangli, Bali
Women actively participating in
building a road in Garut
SAVING & LOANS
SPP beneficiary shows
her fish crackers, Parit
Baru, Selakau, Sambas,
Kalbar
First Loan Disbursement at
Cikeusal
New Polindes in Magetan
Socialization in a kecamatan
Challenges/Issues
•
The delay of DIPAs every year (mutli-year
budgeting, carry-over, PMK 168 rules, etc.)
•
Technical Assistance (too little training, too
late and too many empty TA positions)
•
Better inter-sectoral support & coordination
needed going forward
•
Intensive routine supervision required
•
Better pro-poor targeting—more grant
funds to poor, remote areas
Recommendations
PNPM can serve as an effective “vehicle” to build
village infrastructure, provide employment
opportunities, reduce poverty and help provide a
safety net in times of crisis:
•
The architecture and program machinery in place &
process familiar (facilitators trained and in place)
•
Poverty-targeted (larger block grants for poor
kecamatan)
•
The funds provided proven to result in cost-efficient
village infrastructure & local employment
opportunities, reducing poverty in poor areas.