Transcript Workshop 1: The Desired SAc Situation in Indonesia

Affiliated Network for Social Accountability
in East Asia and the Pacific
. . . connecting citizens to improve governance
Focus Areas
1. Mainstreaming SAc in public sector
–
–
–
–
–
–
Environment
Extractive industries
Health
Education
Infrastructure
Social welfare
C a m b o d i a

I n d o n e s i a

P h i l i p p i n e s

M o n g o l i a
Affiliated Network for Social Accountability
i n E a s t A s i a a nPUBLIC
d t h e P SECTOR
acific
. . . connecting citizens to improve governance
Environment,
EI, Health, Education, Infrastructure,
Social Welfare
GOVERNMENT
(Specific Government Agencies on Envt., EI, etc.)
Planning
Budgeting
Citizen
Groups/
MCG
members
C a m b o d i a

Exp. Mgt.
Approach: Focus
on a specific
program or
activity per
sector per year
Output: An
evaluation of
specific public
sector using
Performance
scoring – To what
Assessment
extent is SAc
practiced
Citizen
Groups
MCG
member
MCG
Develop tools for monitoring
Build the capacity of CGs
I n d o n e s i a

P h i l i p p i n e s

M o n g o l i a
Affiliated Network for Social Accountability
in East Asia and the Pacific
. . . connecting citizens to improve governance
• Public sector
• SAc in public service delivery
– Monitoring how revenues from EI are used for
public service delivery (planning, budgeting,
expenditure management, performance/scoring)
– Scoring tool
C a m b o d i a

I n d o n e s i a

P h i l i p p i n e s

M o n g o l i a
Affiliated Network for Social Accountability
in East Asia and the Pacific
STRENGTHS
WEAKNESSES
. . . connecting citizens to improve governance
• Committed and active members of CG
• Gaps in SAc knowledge and information
• CG got organized by law
• SAc not clearly defined
• CG has 3 research orgs (as members)
• Lack of awareness on SAc in other
• CG multistakeholder representation:
countries
research, EI, health, education, PM, budget • Lack of funding
• Network is well-organized
• Lack of tools on awareness raising and
• There are good practices among NGOs
advocacy of SAc (simple but informative)
• Good capacity of CG to convey SAc
• Some NGOs lack the capacity and the
messages in the education sector
resources, including technical capacity
• Good exchange of information thru
• Currently no strategic plan
networks
• No concrete, tangible work
• Network has lots of experience in
• Not good understanding between NGOs
procurement and budget monitoring
and govt at the grassroots level, but good
• Participation-based action/activity
at national level (threat?)
• Champion in health sector (Ualmbayar from • Some problems among NGOs/networks
CDHU)
with regards to not taking responsibilities,
• Opportunity to engage with govt thru
e.g. time/delays
Demo
• Feedback and followup from members are
• Technical & funding support from ANSA
weak
• Conducting SAc mapping study in a
participative way
C a m b o d i a

I n d o n e s i a

P h i l i p p i n e s

M o n g o l i a
Affiliated Network for Social Accountability
in East Asia and the Pacific
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
OPPORTUNITIES
THREATS
. . . connecting citizens to improve governance
Majority of citizens support democracy and
• Tendency to look up to the govt
its values
• People have welfare orientation/mind
Representative democracy
• Lower capacity of taking responsibility at the
There is basic fundamental laws, e.g.
individual and institutional levels
constitution
• Weak human rights education
Good cooperation between NGOs/CSOs at
• Govt and citizens do not have clear
grassroots and provincial level
understanding of SAc
Existing situation livelihood situation as an
• Governance issues, e.g. highly centralized,
opportunity to organize community groups
corruption
Projects for the implementation of MDG
• Duties of govt public officers re SAc is unclear
Govt promised commitment to join
• Govt workers working with community: their
international treaties and other
duties need to be clarified, esp referring to
commitments
SAc duties
CS Council engage the govt towards open
• No budget allocation for SAc activities
hearing (but nothing to do with govt – but
• No clear tools and mechanisms of SAc
transition towards democracy)
• Unclear govt structures to accommodate SAc
Other networks operating aside from MCG
• Government’s lack of capacity to evaluate
Opportunity to learn best practices from
programs and projects
other countries
• Limited access to information
International orgs interested to support CSOs • Weak sharing of SAc experiences from other
Good literacy level
countries (e.g. study tours, field visits, etc)
Some SAc initiatives can be funded by govt
C a m b o d i a

I n d o n e s i a

P h i l i p p i n e s

M o n g o l i a
A f f i l i a t e d N e t w o r k MISSION
for Social Accountability
in East Asia and the Pacific
Creating the mechanism that facilitates citizens’ engagement, advocacy,
. . . connecting citizens to improve governance
monitoring and evaluation to mainstream SAc in governance
VISION
Citizen monitors/oversight – accountable governance
The foundation for the
enabling envt. for SAc
established
C a m b o d i a
SAc network expanded at
the national level

I n d o n e s i a

P h i l i p p i n e s
Evaluation mechanism on
SAc developed and
implemented

M o n g o l i a
Affiliated Network for Social Accountability
in East Asia and the Pacific
. . . connecting citizens to improve governance
SAc network expanded and capacitated at
the national level
• By 2010, the capacity bldg training for network members will have been
conducted 2 to 3 times
• By 2010, the network members will have studied the experiences and best
practices of other ANSA member countries (study tours, workshops,
experience-sharing trips)
• By 2012, the branches of the network shall have been established in 3
provinces.
• By 2013, capacity bldg training shall have been conducted 3X in rural areas.
• By 2013, the database of the SAc shall have been created.
C a m b o d i a

I n d o n e s i a

P h i l i p p i n e s

M o n g o l i a
Affiliated Network for Social Accountability
in East Asia and the Pacific
. . . connecting citizens to improve governance
The foundation for the enabling policy
environment for SAc is advocated
• By the end of 2010, the legal envt for SAc will have been identified and
assessed. (the data will mainly come from the SAc mapping exercise)
• By the end of 2011, the negotiations for creating favorable legal envt shall
be reached based on the cooperation of all stakeholders. (includes govt,
donor agencies, etc.)
• By the end of 2012, the network will have participated in the working group
to develop the draft on administrative procedure law to be submitted to
parliament for approval.
C a m b o d i a

I n d o n e s i a

P h i l i p p i n e s

M o n g o l i a
Affiliated Network for Social Accountability
in East Asia and the Pacific
. . . connecting citizens to improve governance
Evaluation mechanism on SAc developed and
implemented
• By 2010, SAc criteria and tools and shall have been developed, revised and
approved. (who will approve? – MCG with ANSA assistance) MCG’s unique
criteria – in the long run, involve the govt
• By 2011, 2 to 3 govt agencies shall have been selected and evaluated in
terms of SAc according to the criteria (to be discussed by the public) –
piloting and benchmarking
• By 2012, 5 to 6 focus areas shall have been selected and monitored on SAc
practices on an ongoing basis throughout the year. (election year – a
potential risk?)
• Social accountability index of Mongolia’s govt agencies shall be produced and
publicized. (SAc has 2 actors, govt and CGs. Index to assess performance of the 2
actors, not only govt – but here the priority for assessment will be govt.) – focus
on govt responsiveness also maybe access to information
C a m b o d i a

I n d o n e s i a

P h i l i p p i n e s

M o n g o l i a