Main Document_reference_lgpms On Line Reports

Draft The LGPMS On-Line Reports (Analytics and Templates) Rizal M. Barandino

I.

Introduction

The LGPMS On-Line reports are part of the on-going improvements of the Local Governance Performance Management System. The On-Line Reports are innovations to further enhance the understanding of the value of the LGPMS as a primary tool for selfassessment and management among local government units (LGUs). Intended as a template report for LGUs, the LGPMS On-line reports are intended to be the basic LGU reporting facility in the LGPMS. Four main template reports are featured in the LGPMS On-Line Reports: 1. 2. 3. 4.

The State of Development Report (in full and summary reports) The State of LGU Governance Performance Report (SLGPR) (in full and summary reports) The LGU Financial Report Aggregate Reports (Report to the public at provincial, regional and national summaries)

The On-line reports highlight the basic interpretation of the LGU annual performances as gauge against the LGPMS standards. It shows the standard analysis of the LGPMS performance of individual or group of LGUs given the pre-identified indicators in the LGPMS. The On-line reports will be a standard feature of the revised LGPMS as an internet-based self-assessment system for LGUs. The LGPMS focuses with two self-assessment concerns. First, the LGPMS guides LGUs in assessing its socio-economic and environment development condition using a predefined set of development indicators. The self-assessment on this area is done every 3year covering a full-term of the elected officials. This report is called the State of Local Development Report (SLDR). Second, the LGPMS shows the LGUs performance by way of assessing its internal administrative capacity and productivity given a set of criteria or indicators. This particular self-assessment is done every year and is called the State of LGU Governance Performance Report (SLGPR).

Draft II.

The LGPMS Conceptual Framework: A review

The on-line reports are based on the revised LGPMS conceptual and assessment framework. The framework is briefly reviewed below: A.

State of Development Report

The socio-economic & environment development assessment, done every 3-year, covers the following sectoral concerns: 1.

Social Development • Health and Nutrition (i.e., malnutrition, mortality rate, etc) • Education (i.e., participation rate, graduation rate, literacy rate) • Housing and Basic Utilities (i.e., household with potable water, toilets) • Peace, Security and Disaster Preparedness (i.e., crime rate)

2.

Economic Development • Income (Family Income, Dependency Ratio) • Employment (Unemployment Rate, Underemployment, etc.)

3.

Environmental Health • Urban Ecosystem • Forest Ecosystem • Coastal Ecosystem • Freshwater Ecosystem

The assessment of the development condition is based on an overall assessment of the socio-economic and environment condition in the LGU. The assessment is not in any way directly attributed to the LGU performance alone. The development condition reflects the collective action or inaction of all stakeholders in the locality as determined based on the LGPMS performance standards. The state or condition is based on a predefined standard in the LGPMS largely coming from national statistical baseline or national target, or standard. Data for the state of development indicators could be sourced from primary data sources like LGU databases, survey results, CMBS data, researches, etc. and from secondary sources, e.g., DEPED for the education related indicators. Some indicators could be determined through consensus and collective agreement of the LGU assessment team of the prevailing condition in their locality, i.e., solid waste or the degree of pollution. The State of Development Report is a useful guide in LGU development programming and in synchronizing its plans towards a common development standard or benchmark. It is also a tool for mobilizing resources and stakeholders in collectively addressing primary development concern in the LGU.

Draft B.

State of LGU Governance Performance Report

The second LGPMS assessment focus area involving ‘LGU Performance’ is directly attributed to LGU activities and operation. The ‘LGU Performance’ is measured in terms of the administrative capacity and service delivery (also known as the input and output indicators respectively) performances. ‘LGU Performance’ is benchmark in a preidentified administrative capacity and service delivery indicators in the LGPMS. These indicators are clustered into the 5 governance areas namely: 1) fundamentals of good governance; 2) administrative governance; 3) social governance; 4) economic governance; and 5) environmental governance. LGU administrative capacity refers to the availability and functionality of LGU structure, presence of plans and programs, availability of staff and management capacity, tools, equipment and resources necessary for the LGU to function effectively and efficiently. Service delivery, on the other hand, is the result or the extent of coverage and reach of service provision of the LGU. The LGU administrative capacity and service delivery productivity is annually assessed against the norms and standards of the LGPMS. The result of the LGU examination against the LGPMS standard forms the basic foundation of the analysis of LGU performance with LGUs either performing above or below the LGPMS norms and standards. Since ‘LGU Performance’ directly relates to the LGU operation, the assessment should reflect the consensus and collective measurement by the LGU of its performance. The religious and truthful conduct of the annual assessment of the administrative capacity and service delivery should provide the performance norms and standards over the years to which the LGU will have to continuously improve thereby also improving overall LGU performance. The LGPMS assessment concerns are illustrated in the table below: Areas of Coverage Indicator Type Assessment & Sources LGU Input & Output • Administrative • Fundamentals Performance indicators Capacity of Good Governance • Productivity • Administrative Primary data Governance from LGU self• Social assessment Governance • • LGU

•

Development

•

Economic Governance Environmental Governance Social

Outcome,

Frequency Annual

Every 3

Draft Development

Condition • •

III.

Basic Analysis

A.

State of Development Report

Development Economic Development Environmental Health

Impact, Result data

years

Primary and 2ndary data – based on available information

The ‘State of Development Report’ is based on a straightforward analysis of the LGU development condition as benchmark in the LGPMS. Using the standard 5 point scale, each of the pre-identified development indicators is gauge based on a normal performance range with performance level 3 as the benchmark. The benchmark is calibrated with either the national target set in the Philippine Medium Term Development Plan (MTPDP) or on a national ‘baseline’ average in a given census or statistical year. The LGPMS state of development is, therefore, a comparison of the prevailing LGU condition with a national target or with a baseline average data. In the sample performance matrix below for instance, development indicator number 1 on the “percentage of children below normal weights”, the LGPMS benchmark level 3 of 21% to 25% is based on the national MTPDP target. Thus if the LGUs malnutrition situation is below this range, i.e., above 26%, the LGU would be at low development situation or below benchmark, as compared with the LGPMS standards which also means that the LGU malnutrition state is below the national target/baseline. Development Indicator Health and Nutrition % of children below 1 normal weights 2 Morbidity Rate 2.1 Tuberculosis

3

2.2 HIV 2.3 Malaria 2.4 Diarrhea 2.5 Heart and vascular diseases Crude death rate

4 5 6

Maternal mortality rate Infant mortality rate Under 5 mortality rate

5 (Very High)

LGPMS Performance Level 4 3 2 (High) (Benchmark) (Low)

1 (Very Low)

10 or below

11-20

21 - 25

26 - 35

Above 36

Below 13

Above 14

Below 2 Below 70

13 - 14 Less than 1% but not 0 2-3 70 - 75

Below 6 2-3

6-7 4-5

Above 7 5-6

Above 6

0.4 - 0.6 6 - 14 11 - 29

0.7 - 0.9 15 - 17 30 - 33

1.0 - 1.5 18 - 30 34 - 40

Above 1.5 Above 30 Above 40

None

Below 2 0.3 or below 0-5 10 or below

Above 1% Above 3 Above 75

Draft In addition, the LGPMS also provides an overall development index for each of the subgovernance areas which correspond to the overall state or condition of a development sector. The index report is an important report as it provides an overall sectoral condition in the LGU given the pre-identified set of development indicators. This is illustrated in the table below. Indicators • • • • • •

% of children below normal weights. Morbidity rate Crude death rate Maternal mortality rate Infant mortality rate Under 5 mortality rate

State of Development Very Low (1) High (4) High (4) Benchmark (4) Low (2) Low (2)

Development Index Low Health & Nutrition Condition (2.66)

The development index is generated by averaging all the indicator level performances or condition. Thus, the development index report is an approximation of the state of development in the LGU by sector. The index report is highlighted in the LGPMS State of Development On-line Reports. B.

State of LGU Performance Report

The revised LGPMS performance indicators are similar to a series of test questions or criteria that LGUs must directly respond. The LGU will have to assess whether the questions or criteria represents the actual LGU situation or operation during a performance year. Each response to the criteria represents a corresponding performance level based on the standard 5 point scale in the LGPMS. But unlike in the ‘State of Development Report’ which directly measures each of the development indicators, i.e., range of the malnutrition, the ‘LGU Performance’ is based on either a direct indicator assessment or through the assessment of sub-indicators or through responding to qualifying criteria. This is illustrated in the matrix below in the sub-governance area of Participation. The service area of Participation is measured by 3 indicators namely (1) participation of NGOs, PO’s and PSO in the Local Special Bodies; (2) Presence of feedback mechanism; and (3) NGO, PO & PSO participation in LGU project implementation. The first 2 indicators relate to LGU administrative capacity while the 3rd indicator relates to a result of operation or service delivery strategy. These two sets of indicators are what the LGPMS refer to as the input or administrative capacity and output indicators or the service delivery performance or output/productivity of the LGU. Of these 3 indicators, the first indicator on ‘NGO representation in LSB’ is measured based on the 4 sub-indicators. Each of the sub indicators is represented by criteria or elements which then would be the basis for either a high performance (level 5) if all

Draft elements/criteria are fulfilled or partial (level 3) if criteria is partially fulfilled or low performance (level 1) if majority of the criteria is not fulfilled. Indicator

Sub-Indicator

Performance Levels 5 4 3 2 1

Participation

1. Are the NGOs, People’s Organizations and/or Private Sector represented in the following Local Special Bodies?

1.1 Local Development Council 1.2 Local Health Board 1.3 Local School Board

Yes

1.4 Peace & Order Council

2. Was your LGU able to set up a feedback mechanism to generate citizens’ views on the reach and quality of your LGU’s services? 3. Are NGOs, POs or the Private Sector involved in the implementation of LGU development projects (especially those that are funded out of the 20% component of IRA)? If yes, what was the extent of involvement of NGOs, POs or the private sector?

Partial

No

Yes Yes

Partial

No No

Yes

Partial

No

Yes

No

Yes

No

High

Mediu m

Lo w

On the other hand, indicator # 2 on the ‘presence of a LGU feedback mechanism’, the indictor is directly answered by yes (level 5) or no (level 1). In this particular indicator, level 5 would translate to the implementation of the indicator criteria while level 5 is nonperformance of the indicator. Indicator # 3 is another variation in the indicator level assessment. In this particular indicator a qualifying question is first applied, i.e., are NGOs involved in project implementation, before determining the LGU ‘performance’ representing the extent of NGO participation, e.g., high, medium, or low, at the sub-indicator level. Given the variation in the assessment process, analyzing indicator level ‘performance’ in the ‘LGU State of Local Governance Performance’ would be a bit tedious, especially if one is to go into the detailed explanation for the performance attribution. Thus, in the On-Line Reports, the performance index report is introduced as way coming up of a consolidated assessment to all the indicator criteria, regardless of the assessment process. The performance index represents the average indicator (and sub-indicator level)

Draft assessment of the LGU using the 5-point scale in the LGPMS at the service area/subgovernance area level. The index in the On-line report is categorized into 2 – high performance and low performance categories. The high and low categories is based on the performance scaling in the LGPMS for input and output indicators which is based only in either presence or absence (level 5 and level 1) performance respectively. Partial performance (level 3) is categorized as low performance. An interpretation table is provided to give a basic description of each performance index at each service area. In addition to the performance index report, the LGPMS On-Line report also introduced the performance zones to illustrate the difference between inputs or administrative capacity indicators and the service delivery or productivity indicators. Administrative capacity indicators as input indicators are normally predictive in nature, i.e., LDC membership, and thus make adjustment to performance easy based on results. Presence of administrative capacity is important but is not a guarantee of a good service delivery. Service delivery or productivity indicators on the other hand are measures that focus on results at the end of the assessment year, e.g., revenue generation. In the performance zones, a combination of high capacity and high productivity; high capacity and low productivity; low capacity and high productivity; and low capacity and low productivity indices are added as an analytical tool in the interpretation of the LGPMS performance results.

Annexes Interpretation Table – State of Development Interpretation Table – LGU Performance Template On-Line Reports On Line Report – LGU Performance (Summary and Full Report) On Line report – State of Development (Summary) On Line Report – State of Development (Full Report) On Line Report – Financial Performance Report On Line Report – General (Aggregated) Reports