Provincial Governance Strengthening Programme (PGSP)

GGoovveerrnnmmeenntt ooff tthhee RReeppuubblliicc ooff IInnddoonneessiiaa UUnniitteedd NNaattiioonnss DDeevveellooppmmeenntt PPrrooggrraammmmee

PPrroovviinncciiaall GGoovveerrnnaannccee SSttrreennggtthheenniinngg PPrrooggrraammmmee

((PPGGSSPP))

PPRROOJJEECCTT DDOOCCUUMMEENNTT

December 2009

Provincial Governance Strengthening Programme Project Document

Provincial Governance Strengthening Programme

United Nations Development Programme Country: Indonesia

Project Document

Brief Project Description

The revision of Law 32 / 2004 will probably continue to endorse dual functions – but devolved, de-concentrated and assistance tasks of provincial government need clearer distinction in formulation as well as implementation. Operationalization of the provincial roles and responsibilities specified in the regulatory framework needs focused attention which should include utilizing good governance principles. At the same time, national government has difficulty coordinating and supervising local government, and an intermediate level of government could carry those functions to enhance the achievement of decentralization objectives. An enhanced role for provincial executive and legislative functions in participatory regional economic and spatial planning is anticipated in the revised Law 32 and ways are needed to do this effectively with corresponding functions in districts/ cities. This may also support anticipated changes in national medium term planning and it could strengthen the provincial roles of coordination and guidance and enhance service delivery, benefiting the poor. Provincial government is currently unable to effectively monitor development outcomes and stakeholder engagement at provincial level is further weakened by vague description of provincial authority and low capacity for policy making and planning. Provincial governments often find it difficult to implement roles without hierarchical authority - ways are needed to enhance provincial government capacity, including through civil service reform. National, provincial and local governments are evolving ways of making provincial government work but there is only a limited amount of feedback into national and local decentralization policy and regulations. National (BAPPENAS, MOHA, MOF, MENPAN) and provincial agencies and others have confirmed the need for more attention to provincial government. Support to clarifying the role of provincial government is an acknowledged gap in donor support to decentralization in Indonesia. Discussion and analysis of these issues has enabled a statement to be formulated on the Intended Impact of the Project: Provincial government role and functions strengthened through effective participatory policy making, regional development planning and public service delivery, leading to realization of national development objectives and the improvement of quality of life for the poorest. In order to achieve the intended Project Impact, three sets of project outputs have been identified: (i) PGSP Output 1: Enhanced Policy and Regulatory Framework that further clarifies and strengthens role and functions of provincial government and council (DPRD); (ii) PGSP Output 2: Strategic regional economic development planning strengthened, effectively link planning and budgeting using HDI/HDR; with participatory decision-making mechanism in place; (iii) PGSP Output 3: Achievement of better development outcomes at provincial level through governance innovations: implementation of minimum service standards, civil service reform, participatory monitoring and evaluation and sustainable cross province learning. At the national level PGSP will work with BAPPENAS, Ministry of Home Affairs (MOHA), Ministry of Finance (MOF) and Ministry of Administrative Reform (MAR/MENPAN) to achieve Output 1. At the provincial level PGSP will work with three pilot provinces: Gorontalo, East Nusa Tenggara (NTT) and Bangka Belitung, to achieve Output 2 and 3, and some part of Output 1. These pilot provinces will represent some of the variety of characters of Indonesian provinces. The duration of PGSP will be 36 months, from January 2010 until December 2012. The budget of the project is approximately USD 8.3 million.


SIGNATURE PAGE

Country: Indonesia

Project Title: Provincial Governance Strengthening Programme (PGSP)

UNDAF Outcome: UNDAF Outcome 2: By 2010, pro-poor democratic governance is realized with enhanced accountability, capacity and participation in the 10 poorest provinces.

Expected Outcome: CP Outcome 3: By 2010, pro-poor democratic and participatory decentralization policies and mechanisms in place with public and private institutions adhering to the rule of law and international instruments. (PGSP will contribute to 2010 Outcomes; for 2011-2012 PGSP anticipates expanded and new aims to which PGSP may need to adapt).

Expected Output: CP Output (3.1): Strengthening decentralized governance practices and institutions focusing on increased capacity in public service delivery for the achievement of MDGs in line with existing policy framework CP Output (3.2): Active citizens' participation and civic engagement in democratic political governance at provincial level both directly and through national and district level participation.

Implementing Partner: Directorate for Regional Autonomy (BAPPENAS)

Responsible Parties: UNDP, BAPPENAS, Ministry of Home Affairs, and the Provincial Government where the project is present.

Project Period: 2009 – 2012 2010 AWP budget: USD 1,200,000 Programme Component: Promoting Democratic

Governance Total resources required: USD 8,295,050

Project Title: Provincial Governance Strengthening Programme

Allocated resources:

Atlas Award ID: 00057787 • Regular (UNDP TRAC): USD 800,000 Start Date: January 2010 • DSF USD 2,000,000 End Date: December 2012 PAC Meeting Date: 12 June 2009 Management Arrangement: NIM Unfunded budget: USD 5,495,050 Agreed by National Development Planning Agency (BAPPENAS): Implementing Partner: Max H. Pohan Agreed by UNDP: El-Mostafa Benlamlih


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section 1 – Summary 1-6 Section 2 – Situation Analysis and Project Rationale 1. Key Issues in Provincial Governance 2. Recent, Ongoing and Planned Relevant Decentralization Technical

Assistance 3. Summary of Situation Analysis

7-21

Section 3 – Strategy 1. Project Rationale 2. Intended Project Impact and Outputs 3. Project Strategy and Design

22-35

Section 4 – Results and Resources Framework 36-51 Section 5 – Annual Work Plan and Budget 52-72 Section 6 – Project Management Arrangements 1 Implementation Modality 2 Project Organization – Roles and Responsibilities 3 Financial Arrangement 4 Reporting, HACT Assurance Activities, Monitoring and Evaluations 5 Project Revision and Closure

73-86

Section 7 – Monitoring and Evaluation 1 Purposes 2 Monitoring 3 Evaluation

87-94

Section 8 – Legal Context 95 ANNEXES Annex 1: CPAP Document Not attached Annex 2: Supplemental Provisions to the Project Document Annex 3: Country Office Support Service Agreement

2-56-7

Annex 4: Description of UNDP Country Office Support Services 8 Annex 5: Terms of Reference for Project Management Roles and Responsibilities 9-24 Annex 6: Project Revision Process 25 Annex 7: Mechanism for Recording UNDP Grant Activities in DIPA Annex 8: Project Account Management Annex 9: Mechanism of Withdrawal of UNDP Grant Aid Annex 10: Selection of Participating Provinces Attachment: Outline of Letter to Candidate Provinces, in Bahasa Indonesia Annex 11: Risk Log

262728

29-3233-3435-37

TABLE AND FIGURES

Figure 5.1 Annual Plan and Budget

Figure 6.1 Project Organization Structure of PGSP

Figure 6.2 Project Organization Structure of PGSP and AGI

Table 1: Short-list of Candidate Provinces


LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AGI ART GOLD Indonesia programme (Articulating Governance and Local Development in Indonesia) programme APBD Annual Regional Revenues & Expenditures Budget APBN Annual National Budget (Anggaran Pendapatan dan Belanja Negara) AWP Annual Work Plan BAPPENAS National Development Planning Agency BPKP Badan Pengawasan Keuangan dan Pembangunan – Financial and Development Supervisory Board BRiDGE Building and Reinventing Decentralized Governance CA Capacity Assessments CB Capacity Building CDR Combined Delivery Report CSO Civil society organization CPAP Country Programme Action Plan (UNDP) Dekonsentrasi Deconcentration: regional support to national affairs DIPA Budget Implementation Document (Daftar Isian Pelaksanaan Anggaran) District Lowest tier of autonomous government, Kabupaten or Kota DPD Dewan Perwakilan Daerah - House of Regional Representatives DPR Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat - House of Representatives DPRD Provincial or District Legislative Body. DSF Decentralization Support Facility FACE Funding Authorization and Certificate of Expenditures FGD Focus Group Discussion GOI Government of Indonesia GMS General Management Support GRADE Governance Reform and DPRD Empowerment (GRADE) project HACT Harmonized Advance Cash Transfer HDI Human Development Indicators (IPM / indeks pembangunan manusia) HDR Human Development Report (particularly the provincial HDR) IP Implementing Partner IPAC Internal Project Assessment Committee ISS Implementation Support Services Kabupaten Predominantly rural District Kota Predominantly urban District Law 32 / 2004 Law on Regional Governance, replacing the original “Decentralization” Law 22 / 1999. MDG Millennium Development Goals MOF Ministry of Finance MOHA Ministry of Home Affairs M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MENPAN State Ministry of Government Apparatus Empowerment MSS Minimum Service Standards (Indonesian: SPM / Standar Pelayanan Minimum). Musrenbang Annual planning consultation process (Musyawarah Perencanaan Pembangunan) NAD Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam, the Province of Aceh (with special autonomy). NEX National Execution NGO Non-government organization NPD National Project Director OTDA Regional Autonomy PBB Performance-Based Budgeting (ABK / Anggaran Berbasis Kinerja) PERDA Peraturan Daerah: local government regulation RPJM Rencana Pembangunan Jangka Menengah (Medium-term Development Plan) PM, PMU Project Manager, Project Management Unit PMEU Project Monitoring and Evaluation Unit RENSTRA Strategic Plan (public sector national or regional) RRF Results and Resources Framework SC Steering Committee SEKDA Regional (province or district) Secretary SPM Standar Pelayanan Minimum (Minimum Service Standards) ToT Training for Trainers Tugas Pembantuan Assistance to National affairs tasked to province or district government. UNDAF United Nations Development Actions Framework.


UNDP United Nations Development Programme


PGSP Project Document – Draft 5F-Final Page - 1 -

SECTION 1 – SUMMARY 1. PGSP Rationale Government recognizes that the role of provincial government should be strengthened further and that provincial government should play enhanced roles which will further contribute to meeting national development objectives, including economic growth and achieving minimum service standards (MSS) and Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). There is an acknowledged lack of donor support to GoI to address this. Key Issues (i) The revision of Law 32 / 2004 will probably continue to endorse dual functions – but

devolved, de-concentrated and assistance tasks of provincial government need clearer distinction in formulation as well as implementation. Operationalization of the provincial roles and responsibilities specified in the regulatory framework needs focused attention which should include utilizing good governance principles.

(ii) At the same time, national government has difficulty coordinating and supervising local government, and an intermediate level of government could carry those functions to enhance the achievement of decentralization objectives.

(iii) An enhanced role for provincial executive and legislative functions in participatory regional economic and spatial planning is anticipated in the revised Law 32 and ways are needed to do this effectively with corresponding functions in districts/ cities. This may also support anticipated changes in national medium term planning and it could strengthen the provincial roles of coordination and guidance and enhance service delivery, benefiting the poor.

(iv) Provincial government is currently unable to effectively monitor development outcomes and stakeholder engagement at provincial level is further weakened by vague description of provincial authority and low capacity for policy making and planning.

(v) Provincial governments often find it difficult to implement roles without hierarchical authority - ways are needed to enhance provincial government capacity, including civil service reform.

(vi) National, provincial and local governments are evolving ways of making provincial government work but there is only a limited amount of feedback into national and local decentralization policy and regulations.

(vii) National (BAPPENAS, MOHA, MOF, MENPAN) and provincial agencies and others have confirmed the need for more attention to provincial government.

(viii) Support to clarifying the role of provincial government is an acknowledged gap in donor support to decentralization in Indonesia.



2. PGSP Intended Impact

Discussion and analysis of these issues has enabled a statement to be formulated on the Intended Impact of the proposed Project:

Provincial government roles and functions strengthened through effective participatory policy making, regional development planning and public service delivery, leading to realization of national and local development objectives and the improvement of quality of life for the poorest

3. PGSP Outputs In order to achieve the intended Project Impact, three sets of programmatic Project Outputs have been identified: ♦ PGSP Output 1: Enhanced Policy and Regulatory Framework that further clarifies

and strengthens roles and functions of provincial government and council (DPRD) Associated Targets: 1.1. Clearer distinction between devolved, de-concentrated and assistance

responsibilities of provincial governments provided in the revised Law 32 and RPJMN 2010-2014.

1.2. Distinct roles and functions of each level of government and there is no overlap between national, provincial and local levels clarified in GoI Implementing Regulations of the revised Law 32.

1.3. Alignment (synchronization and harmonization) of provincial and local legislation (PERDAs) with the revised Law 32 and its Implementing Regulations

1.4. Resource analysis undertaken and recommendations made, including input to the revision of Law 32.

1.5. Knowledge base developed and lessons learned disseminated.

♦ PGSP Output 2: Strategic regional economic development planning strengthened, effectively link planning and budgeting using HDI/HDR; with participatory decision-making mechanism in place Associated Targets: 2.1. Enhanced role of provincial government as mediator of planning based on

participatory needs assessments (bottom-up) and national targets (top-down). 2.2. Enhanced provincial capacity to coordinate / integrate various sectors across

administrative boundaries through economic and spatial planning, including through Enhanced RPJMD, RKP, RENSTRA SKPD and RTRW incorporating HDR/HDI.

2.3. Mechanisms for stakeholder engagement at provincial level strengthened in the planning process (focusing on the musrenbang at provincial level).

2.4. Knowledge base developed and provincial lessons learned disseminated. ♦ PGSP Output 3: Achievement of better development outcomes at provincial level

through governance innovations: implementation of minimum service standards, civil service reform, participatory monitoring and evaluation and sustainable cross province learning.



Associated Targets: 3.1. District initiatives facilitated by province to improve delivery of public services,

incorporating minimum service standards (on welfare sectors). 3.2. Mechanisms for multi-stakeholder engagement in monitoring and evaluation of

development outcomes are effectively in place at provincial level, applying HDI indicators and targets.

3.3. Provincial civil service reform and budgets are linked to re-defined roles and responsibilities.

3.4. Knowledge base developed and provincial lessons learned disseminated.

4. PGSP Activities to Achieve Outputs Project indicative activities have been formulated to represent activities required to achieve the Outputs and Intended Impact. ♦ To achieve Output 1

- Establishment of a policy advocacy and research team, officially involved in preparation of regulatory framework.

- Application of national and provincial lessons learned to formulation of RPJMN on Decentralization and Regional Development.

- Application of national and provincial lessons learned to formulation of GoI revised Law 32/2004.

- Application of national and provincial lessons learned to formulation of GoI Implementing Regulations and policies of the revised Law 32/2004

- Support to national and provincial governments / elected bodies to identify resources to implement revised Law 32/2004.

- Support to the alignment of provincial and local PERDA in participating provinces and their districts that are relevant to the re-positioning of the provincial government.

- Regular reviews by all stakeholders at regional and national levels, establishment of a knowledge base and dissemination of lessons learned.

- Participatory surveys/ Focus Group Discussions (FGD) with government/ non-government stakeholders on institutional, organizational, networking dimensions of provincial government.

- Promote documentation of current practice and mainstream good practice (through publication and awards) by national institutions and/or media.

♦ To achieve Output 2

- Support to the consolidation of the mediation role of provincial government in facilitating inter-district and inter-sector development planning processes.

- Support to the consolidation of coordination mechanisms of government and non-government stakeholders for the preparation and implementation of regional socio-economic development plans including consistency between RKP (Annual Plan), RENSTRA SKPD (Sectoral Offices Plan), RPJMD (mid-term or five yearly development plan) and RTRW (spatial plan), incorporating HDI indicators and targets.



- Support to ensuring effective multi-stakeholder engagement at provincial level in the planning process, with emphasis on the musrenbang process.

- Regular reviews by all stakeholders at provincial and district levels, establishment of a knowledge base and dissemination of lessons learned.

♦ To achieve Output 3

- Technical Assistance to Provincial Government to define MSS and determine annual targets, within the agreed provincial strategy.

- Technical Assistance from Provincial Government to Regencies/ Municipalities to define MSS and determine annual targets, within the agreed provincial strategy.

- Support implementation of participatory outcome monitoring and evaluation process, including application of HDI indicators and targets.

- Assistance to provincial civil service reform. - Support the identification and activation of resources available to the provincial

government to promote innovation in service delivery. - Support consolidation of regional network of expertise in good governance and

service delivery.

5. PGSP Strategy and Design The Project will have two Parts which will be undertaken in parallel (i.e. not sequentially). The basic assumption of PGSP is that the strengthening of provincial governance will be supported via enhancement of regional social and economic development policy making and planning. This underlying assumption is the theoretical basis of the already ongoing revision of Law 32/2004. The Project will run for 36 months, starting in January 2010 and ending in December 2012:

PART A –using capacity development efforts at provincial level across the country to discover ways in which provincial governments (executive and legislative functions) can best implement their policy and planning roles and to replicate or develop these. After promulgation of the revised Law 32, the capacity development efforts will also support the implementation of the revised Law and supporting regulations. The Project will be operational in three provinces representing provinces throughout Indonesia and will also learn from the experience of “resource provinces” which have relevant special experience of provincial governance1.

PART B - continuing support will be provided to relevant agencies in GoI to more clearly distinguish devolved, de-concentrated and assistance tasks of provincial government in the revision of Law 32/2004, RPJMN 2010-2014 and feeding the lessons learned at provincial level (through the work of PART A) into the formulation of implementing regulations for the revised Law 32 and sub-national regulations as well as longer term policy on provincial government reform. Part B will be responsible for liaising with the selected “resource provinces”. Part B will also support the dissemination of lessons learned more widely throughout Indonesia.

Year 1 (January 2010 – December 2010) PART A - with three participating provinces work on a range of specific capacity development efforts in each comprising core activities prioritized in the provinces; PART B – PGSP supports finalization of RPJMN 2010-2014, finalization of the revision of Law 32/2004 and the deliberation process in the parliament. This is enhanced by identification and evaluation of

1 For example Naggroe Aceh Darussalam which has special structures to facilitate crisis management.



practices in provincial governance in participating provinces and resource provinces and by lessons learned in PGSP activities to support the strengthening and institutionalization of innovations.

Year 2 (January 2011 – December 2011) PART A – PGSP continues to strengthen provincial governance capacity with a range of specific capacity development efforts; PART B – PGSP facilitates and contributes directly to the formulation of new implementing regulations based on revised Law 32/2004, and consolidates knowledge base and dissemination process for lessons learned.

Year 3 (January 2012 – December 2012) PART A – PGSP continues to support capacity development initiatives in the three provinces with initiatives reviewed annually and prioritized in the provinces; PGSP lessons learned institutionalized and disseminated. PART B – PGSP continues to support the formulation of new implementation regulations based on the revised Law 32/2004. The focus will shift to dissemination of regulations with relevant practices and experiences and PGSP will also begin to start supporting GoI with longer term provincial government reform. In this year Part B is expected to have found means to organize rewards in recognition of good provincial practices. Throughout the duration of the Project PART A and PART B will be directly linked with

quarterly meetings that ensure lessons learned are evaluated and fed into GOI’s policy-making process. Provincial capacity development initiatives will be selected (or continued) in agreement with provincial and district governments on an annual basis, to ensure responsiveness to (changing) provincial needs and priorities.

6. PGSP Inputs

PART A - in each participating province in each year an extensive range of capacity

development activities will be supported which will produce the outputs needed to achieve the agreed Project Outputs 2 and 3. The activities will be facilitated in each participating province by a Provincial Facilitator and the activities include investments in Technical Assistance, Specific Research, Legal Drafting, Technical Workshops and Surveys. Up to 200 person months of consultancy (in addition to the Provincial Facilitators) will be available to each participating province over the 36 months of the Project. In total Part A will require approximately US$ 7,000,000.

PART B – at national level a range of activities will be undertaken with up to 150 person

months of national and international consultants, to support the achievement of Output 1. The inputs will also include extensive range of Thematic Workshops, Policy Research and Advocacy as well as Surveys and will also include responsibility for liaison with Resource Provinces. In total Part B will require approximately US$ 1,300,000 over the course of the Project.

7. PGSP Management PGSP will be implemented under the framework of the UNDP Country Program Action Plan (CPAP) 2006 – 2010 and the new CPAP from 2010 onwards, applying National Implementation Modality (NIM) whereby the National Development Planning Agency (BAPPENAS) is designated as the Implementing Partner. The Project Board will comprise of two committees: a National



Steering Committee that will comprise of Senior Management of UNDP, Senior Managers from Donors and Echelon 1 officials from BAPPENAS, MOHA, MAR, MOF as well as the Governors from the participating provinces, and a Technical Committee that will comprise of Team Leader of Democratic Governance Unit UNDP, Senior Officers of Donors, Director for Regional Autonomy, BAPPENAS as the National Project Director (NPD), and Echelon 2 officials from MOHA and BAPPENAS representing the Senior Beneficiaries. To assist the NPD a Project Management Unit (PMU) will be established which will comprise of a Project Manager, a Senior Technical Advisor, Sector Coordinators and Project Management Support team. In a participating province, a Provincial Facilitator will lead the day to day implementation of the project. H/she will receive guidance from a Provincial Steering Committee which will comprise Senior Officials of the respective Provincial Government. 8. PGSP Costs

A 36 month Project starting in January 2010 and ending in December 2012; with up to 25

capacity development activities in 3 participating provinces, liaison with resource provinces, up to 15 policy research, advocacy and assistance activities to legislation and regulation reform activities undertaken by a national level policy team and with support by a Project management and administration system; will require approximately US$ 8.3 million.



SECTION 2 – SITUATION ANALYSIS AND PROJECT RATIONALE 1 Key Issues in Provincial Governance 1.1 Decentralization Regulatory Framework and Provincial

Government and Governance In the late 1990’s Indonesia embarked on an ambitious decentralization agenda. The

rationale was to ensure people’s welfare through improved delivery of public services and accelerated economic development. There was a radical revision of the role of the regions and the relationship between central government and governmental bodies at provincial and local levels. This involved transfers of extensive administrative and fiscal powers of central government to the third tier of government (district and municipality) and the introduction of direct local elections.

Decentralizing responsibility for service delivery to the third tier of government assumed

that the third tier already possessed adequate technical capacity for implementation of the new responsibilities and that the third tier could be held more directly accountable because of its close proximity to the local electorate. However, it is generally noted that the decentralization reforms to date have been progressive in principle, but incomplete and not sufficiently realized on the ground2. It is also generally considered that the 2004 revisions to earlier decentralization legislation have not helped to consolidate decentralization reforms as had been hoped.

One of the 2004 revisions was to transfer back decentralized powers to the second tier of

government, the provincial governments. The justification for this apparent retrenchment is that making use of provincial government could better enable central government to guide and supervise local governments and this is logical as if not supported by the provinces, the national government would have to deal with 471 districts. One central element in the definition of the provincial role is whether the provincial governor will continue bearing dual roles, representing both central government (de-concentration / dekonsentrasi and assistance / tugas pembantuan) as well as being head of an autonomous region / daerah otonom, or whether the Governor will assume just part or one of these roles. To date decentralization legislation has been ambiguous. Law No. 22/1999 and Law No. 32/2004 essentially follow two conflicting concepts. Law No. 22/1999 reinforces the notion of an autonomous province in which the provincial governor is elected by the people. Law No. 32/2004, on the other hand, describes a de-concentration role with functions delegated by the central government to the province and the governor acting as representative of the central government at the provincial level and at the same time retains the autonomous status of the province. In 2006 the Ministry of Home Affairs launched the Grand Strategy for Implementation of Regional Autonomy (based on Law 32 / 2004). The Grand Strategy specified generic elements of local government (functions, institutions, personnel, local finance, representation, public services and control / supervision) and strategic issues (special autonomy for Papua and NAD, regional subdivision and border districts). Targets were set for 2005-2009 for each of these activities: (i) 2005 mainly to complete PPs; (ii) 2006 for remaining PPs, guidelines and socialization; (iii) 2007-2009 for implementation, monitoring and evaluation. However these targets have only been partially achieved and continued support to the refinement of the Grand Strategy may be useful.

2 Stocktaking on Indonesia’s Recent Decentralization Reforms, prepared for the Donor Working Group on Decentralization by USAID Democratic Reform Support Program (DRSP). 2006.



In addition, since the “big bang” of decentralization a decade ago, there has also been a proliferation of new regions and the costs and benefits of this proliferation are unclear. Clarifying a role of the province as facilitator of regional cohesion may become more urgently needed as the regulatory framework for the proliferation of new regions is reviewed. It is recognized within GoI3 that there needs to be a clear distinction between devolved, de-concentrated and assistance tasks of provincial governments and the distinct roles and functions of each level of government need to be clarified. Law 32/2004 is currently being revised and it is hoped that the revisions will contribute to clarifying roles and responsibilities. The National Task Force for the revision of Law 32/2004 is considering a number of revisions which could include a stronger coordinating role for provincial government and a stronger provincial government role in strategic planning especially regional economic planning4. The Task Force will also consider the application of civil service reform measures in the consolidation of provincial government. It is also likely that the revised Law will continue to assume the dual functions of the Governor and ways will need to be found to make this work more effectively.

It is currently expected that the proposed revised Law will be submitted to the newly elected Parliament by the end of 2009. It is anticipated that because of time constraints on the new parliament in 2009, promulgation of the revised law can be expected in the second half of 2010. The completion and issuing of implementing regulations will follow. It is recognized by GoI that there is a role for the proposed Project in formulating the implementing regulations, if sufficient insight can be obtained of the ways in which provincial governments operationalize their roles viz a viz national and local governments. The indicative timing of the regulatory reforms is an important determinant in the design of the proposed PGSP. 1.2 Coordinating Regional Development Law 32/2004 describes the responsibilities of provincial government as: (i) undertaking de-concentrated functions of the national government; (ii) providing assistance on national government affairs; (iii) providing services that are provincial in scale; (iv) co-ordination of inter-district /municipality jurisdiction / regional affairs; (v) taking care of functions that local governments are not able to perform; and (vi) facilitating the functions of local governments.

Inter-district coordination is needed, particularly of regional development and spatial /

land use planning, environmental issues, transportation and disaster mitigation. In these areas, individual local governments are unlikely to be able and equipped to deal with the problems. National concerns also need the intermediary role of provinces – here mainly functioning as assistance to the formulation of and implementation of national policies and programs and with the Governor as representative of central government. However the role of the provincial government as facilitator and coordinator is weak and poorly developed partly because the 1999 legislation removed the hierarchical relationship between district and province, and partly because there is still a lack of clarity regarding the kinds of functions to be implemented by each level. A recent government regulation, PP38/2007, attempted to clarify some of the uncertainties regarding the roles and functions of the government at different levels, but ambiguities remain. GoI also recognizes that many development challenges may often be better tackled on a regional basis5. It is argued that strategic development planning, budgeting and monitoring for poverty alleviation, economic development, and human development can be more effective with a

3 To date PGSP Preparation Team meetings with representatives of BAPPENAS, Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Home Affairs and Ministry of Administrative Reform clearly confirm this. 4 Minutes of the National Task Force meeting with university, donor and other resource persons, July 4th – 6th 2008. 5 In most large countries, an intermediate level of territorial administration lies between the local and national level. For more details on the Indonesian context, see UNDP internal Issues Paper on the Role of the Province, June 2007.



strong regional approach. Similarly, inter-district collaboration can be more effectively carried out when a regional perspective can provide the basis for action6. Provinces have difficulty in undertaking the role of coordinator and facilitator of regional development with no direct supervisory authority. District and city administrations often by-pass the provincial government and go directly to the line-ministries at central level. The lack of multi-stakeholder facilitation skills at provincial level also contributes to the difficulties. Added to this provincial government is often perceived as being “re-centralist” in their efforts to compile plans and budgets into central government formats. In order to become an effective facilitator and coordinator of regional development, the province must re-position itself. It must show the district and municipality partners that although it no longer “instructs” them on what to do, it is willing to be an ally that can support, facilitate and lead equitable regional development. It is understood that the revision of Law 32 may include specific reference to a regional economic development planning role for provincial governments. A Project focused on strengthening core tasks of provincial government in response to clearer regulatory framework would be useful and timely. One of the key challenges faced by the provincial government7 is the coordination and harmonization of development plans and budgets for regional development. The elaborate government planning and budgeting process is at the core of this challenge. Planning and budgeting for regional development is a difficult task for the provinces to coordinate because: (i) plans and budget allocation is rarely based on in-depth needs assessments; (ii) staff often lack the necessary facilitation skills for managing complex planning processes; and (iii) staff lack the skills and tools to balance the diverse inputs ranging from peoples’ aspirations8 from across several villages and districts, to politicians’ visions, and to the more technocratic approach of using data and analysis. Currently national programs carried out by the provinces can virtually cover all sectors as some sector agencies are reluctant to cede responsibility for service provision. According to Law 32/2004, central government has six responsibilities: (i) foreign policy; (ii) defense; (iii) security; (iv) judicial matters; (v) national monetary and fiscal affairs; (vi) religious affairs. However provincial governments are often required to act as the representative of central government and be involved in national programs for health, education and environmental management services. The provincial government could perhaps play a role in helping the districts to gradually take up their service provision responsibilities whist persuading central government to cede responsibility. There could be a complementary provincial government role in guiding service provision to enhance the likelihood of achievement of minimum service standards (MSS) / MDGs at the local level9. 1.3 Stakeholder Engagement In the early days of decentralization regional autonomy was widely interpreted as freedom from central government control and provincial government interference. It was frequently stated that being directly elected by the people, district heads and mayors were more loyal to their party

6 Studies by SMERU suggest that the increase in local levies by districts without inter-district coordination and without assessing the potential effects had negative impacts on inter-district trade and investment, resulting in limited economic development in the region as a whole. The province of Gorontalo is an example of a province that has discouraged its districts to collect levies based on the negative economic impact it would have. 7 “Provincial government” in this context refers to both the legislative and executive branches. 8 The peoples’ aspirations often get lost in the lengthy bottom-up planning process and there is no effective feedback mechanism to ensure that the peoples’ aspirations are incorporated into plans. 9 Taking the case of Central Java, in 2006 activities to be de-concentrated plus those to be assisted by the regional governments (particularly the Province) amounted Rp 2.76 Trillion, larger than the direct investment portion (Rp 2.08 T) of the 2008 budget of the Province. This is not yet including Central government agency activities which are not or should not be de-concentrated or assisted.



than to national agencies and the public10. Even with heavy dependence on the centre for resources, district head or mayoral disregard of the provincial government has become common. This can be serious enough to become a threat to the orderly conduct of government11 and can be exacerbated by provincial official’s top-down attitudes inherited from pre-decentralization period. The starting point for consideration of stakeholder engagement at provincial level could be the role of the provincial council. Possible models of provincial government which consider the role of the provincial council have been put forward12 for debate. The first of the 4 models put forward suggests that the Governor is a political figure only, at provincial level. This implies that the provincial council is dropped and that the Governor is a central level representative and that only central level and district / city levels function. This model is highly contentious, not least amongst existing provincial DPRD members and provinces with strong provincial identity. The second model put forward is that the Governor is the representative of central government and operates in the de-concentration mode. The Governor would need a functioning administration to fulfill this role and essentially vertical agencies would be re-established. Dinas would be small and the provincial councilary role would be limited to the review of the modest provincial budget and it would have no role toward districts / cities. The third model put forward assumes that the province is an autonomous body and receives central government tasks which it undertakes in an “agency” mode. The role of Governor as the representative of central government is retained for special tasks and there would be no de-concentrated units under the Governor. This arrangement would require that tasks be funded from APBD sources and transfer of de-concentrated funds would need to occur for example to DAU / DAK or in the form of local tax assignments. The provincial council would have an enhanced role. The fourth postulated model is that political accountability is through district / city parliaments projected at provincial level. This also assumes functioning government only at central and district / city levels, although some functions are handled by agreements at provincial level, with accountability to a provincial council made up of chairs of district / city councils. This model does not eliminate de-concentration / autonomy conflicts and central government would still need an administration. The key issue is the relevance of the provincial council and the autonomy of the provincial government. This is a highly political issue and a Project like PGSP could contribute to longer term thinking on the characteristics of provincial government by producing evidence of what arrangements can be made to enable the existing dual roles to be implemented effectively and evidence which may contribute to GoI deciding on which kind of model is preferable in the longer term. Most participation of communities, civil society and the private sector is linked to planning and budgeting activities, as particularly required by UU 25/2004, KepMen 29/2001, SE Mendagri on PDPP, 2005. There is less attention to participation in program preparation and design and participatory monitoring and evaluation is much undeveloped. It is noted that participation is most effective at village scale where participation is an integral feature of all stages of the development cycle and includes community self-surveys, organization of teams for project design and proposal preparation, implementation and supervision). GoI is installing community-driven development processes into the National Program for Community Empowerment (PNPM).

10 Syarif Hidayat and Eko Prasodjo: “Bupatis and Mayors tend to mix-up practical politics with government” (Kompas, May 8, 2008). 11 For example: mutation of officials in Kab.Temanggung drew media attention and created friction with Central Java Vice-governor (Kompas, Jan.24, 2006); Governor of Maluku canceling installation of officials by Bupati of MTB/Maluku Tenggara Barat (2004). In the first case the bupati stated that rules were followed (PP8/2003). In the second case the bupati said no rules were violated but acknowledged lack of communication with the province. 12 For example by GTZ in a report for the Decentralization Support Fund “Exploring Reform Options for Functional Assignment.”



The elaborate government planning and budgeting process inhibits stakeholder engagement. Guidelines exist for the provincial administration on the development planning process including the mandated series of bottom-up public consultations that are required. In practice however, the planning and budgeting processes are often treated as separate activities and the current people’s participation mechanism is not effective. In particular the musrenbang / development planning consultation process which is intended to encourage participation at all levels by all stakeholders is not yet functioning effectively. As acknowledged by GoI13 up to now the musrenbang process has been conducted more as a ceremonial than as a democratic resource allocation procedure. There are practical problems including the timing of the availability of information on transfers and de-concentration funds and lack of synchronization with the musrenbang process. Local governments have no option but to prepare estimates based on previous years or with unofficial information from the ministries. The inevitable budget revisions are confirmed in around September in the “perubahan anggaran” / budget adjustment meetings. In addition there is often delay in the last stage of local council approval. The stages of planning that involve the public (starting with ‘jaring aspirasi’ / gathering citizen aspirations through focus group discussions (FGDs) need to be institutionalized further. The idea of a multi-stakeholders forum is being applied regularly by several local governments with various formats and have effectively elicited citizen input to medium term and annual plans (among others the Depok forum, forum Kota Yogya, Kabupaten Bogor, forum Mahkota in Kota Tasikmalaya). Few local governments and no provincial governments have put the musrenbang stages into local regulations as has Kota Depok with a decree scheduling sessions with stakeholders including the forum kota and a short and long list of local NGOs to be engaged. Generally representation of communities depends much on initiatives by NGOs to organize them and invite them to the musrenbang sessions. However, substantial input is often received from community representatives, especially when sessions are split into small thematic discussion groups before plenary discussions. A different sort of musrenbang is emerging with the growth of multi-stakeholder fora / forums, driven by the introduction of stakeholder engagement methods introduced by programs like the PDPP (Bangda / MoHA) or donor-supported programs like KDP / Kecamatan Development Program (PPK) and the UPP / Urban Poverty Project (P2KP). A recurrent problem continues to be the continuity of processes, where concensus on priorities is not maintained by the legislators or the Panitia Anggaran / Budget Committee – because of other intervening interests or lack of understanding. When the results of the musrenbang are eventually submitted or reported each quarter14 to the Province, the contents may have changed substantially. The private sector is usually well-represented in local planning if invited (mostly the KADIN / local Chamber of Commerce). At the district level, issues brought forward tend to be narrow in content, while the bigger decisions are discussed outside the forum. Involvement at the provincial level should be more significant as associations are usually located in the provincial capital. There are several examples of NGO-Province interactions, both in the positive sense as well as negatively. Advocacy by a consortium of NGOs in Surabaya succeeded to get the Province’s approval (even while the municipality / Kota Surabaya objected to the idea) to give a chance to communities along the riverbank to reorganize their settlement instead of being evicted. In other cases the province may be unapproachable for the civil society (example B)15.

13 BAPPENAS, RAPBN Conference 2008 14 According to PP 39/2006, SKPDs of the kabupaten / kota have to submit quarterly reports through the head oh the kab / kota to the governor. 15 Example A: NGOs and CBOs (‘Jerit’ and UPC) promoting rights of communities along the river bank in Surabaya (“Stren Kali”) succeeded in convincing the Dinas Pengairan / Irrigation agency of East Java which is in charge of management of the main waterways, and got a 2 year chance to plan and rearrange the riverside slums Initially the municipality of Surabaya objected against the idea, but is now participating.



1.4 Monitoring Development Outcomes at Provincial Level Another core challenge faced by the provincial government is monitoring service delivery in terms of development outcomes. In practice, monitoring is often treated as a separate activity not related to the regular planning process and there is no established mechanism for citizens’ participation in monitoring government services. Support from provincial government for monitoring development outcomes is of value to district governments and to national government. As noted national government has difficulty coordinating and supervising local government and an intermediate level of government could carry those functions to enhance the achievement of decentralization objectives and supporting districts with monitoring development outcomes is one of those functions. Monitoring of development outcomes is particularly difficult for the province because: (i) there is no direct supervisory authority; (ii) there is no clear framework for undertaking monitoring and evaluation of development outcomes; and (iii) there is an underlying lack of effective checks and balances between the provincial administration as the technical monitoring unit (administrative oversight mandate) and the peoples’ representatives making up the elected oversight institution (political oversight mandate). The successful implementation of the role of facilitator and coordinator of regional development by provincial governments will significantly depend on their capacity to provide an effective monitoring framework for development programs implemented at district level. PP8/2008 stipulates the organization and procedures for the evaluation of local government performance and determines the aspects of performance for evaluation. A team set up by the national government, Tim Evaluasi Penyelenggaraan Pemerintah Daerah (Tim EPPD), consisting of government experts in various fields will do the evaluation and the EPPD team to evaluate districts and municipalities is led by the Governor.16 Local governments that have adopted Performance-Based Budgeting (PBB / ABK / Anggaran Berbasis Kinerja) as promoted by Kep Mendagri 29/2002 have generally been very satisfied with the result and this provides an opportunity for a program like PGSP. MSS have been introduced in the health and education sectors and general administration and Public Works have since introduced standards for toll-roads. Government regulation PP65 / 2006 provides guidelines for the preparation of MSS, and assigns the task to Provinces to monitor and guide local government’s achievement of MSS. A general concern is that local governments will not be able to meet MSS and the PP hints that MSS can be achieved incrementally with annual targets. Provinces can also help local governments to plan their progressive achievement of MSS. Achievement of long term development targets could be encouraged by provincial government, encouraging local governments to look for long-term and more sustainable solutions instead of meeting short-term interests. The short or medium-term horizon of local government heads with their 5 year tenure can be an obstacle to the attainment of long-term goals. It would be useful for PGSP to help provincial and local find ways of identifying the beneficiaries of investments. This may help local governments to define their MSS and at the same time prioritize investment activities to ensure achievement of the MSS and MDGs. Many quality of life indicators are not dependent on particular local governments but are cross-boundary and collective among regions. This is particularly true for education: pupils from rural areas go to schools in the city. Added to this is the phenomenon that teachers prefer to work

Example B: Farmers in Karawang, West Java complain about main irrigation channels being opened to industries by the provincial irrigation agency, resulting in bad yields. 16 Kapuspen Depdagri, March 13, 2008: “the main material for evaluation will be the local government management report (LPPD)”.



in the urban areas. Actual outcomes of the minimum “20% spending for education” are then contributed by the combined resources of neighboring jurisdictions. This phenomenon also occurs in the health sector. This trend indicates the urgency of relating regional planning with the subdivision of regions and the distribution of facilities. For basic services, locations at urban centers also bring opportunities for the private sector, so that the local governments / regional governments can encourage participation of private capital. It is also an implicit responsibility of provinces to assist the less well-endowed districts in keeping up with the other districts in the province. In theory, part of local government activities might be taken over by the province if the local government is not capable to carry them out (as far as is known this has not yet happened). In such a case, the local government would need provincial technical assistance to regain control over their affairs. There are numerous examples of training initiated by provinces for districts or other structures in their area. The DPRD of East Kalimantan invited districts for a training on performance-based budgeting with BIGG. Sumatera Barat organized training for the traditional Nagaris so that they could organize participatory village planning.

1.5 Cross-cutting Issue – Civil Service Reform The civil service is the basis for making decentralization work and reforming the civil service is essentially a way to re-organize the government towards a more efficient and effective management of human resources with focus on performance17. Effective human resource management and institutional arrangements are two of the key underlying challenges affecting the functions of the provincial government administrations. In particular, civil service reform at the province level includes: organizational restructuring, effective recruitment procedures, job descriptions, and performance evaluations linked to advancements and incentive payments. At the moment the possible approach that can be taken by the provincial government in reforming the civil service in their province is by establishing models of effective, efficient, transparent and accountable civil service at provincial level first. Through this strategy credibility of the provincial government can be built. The credibility could then be used as legitimacy for them to persuade their respective district governments to follow the path of civil service reform. Making the Provincial Civil Service more effective and responsive will require time and multiple efforts including revising legal framework, capacity development of existing civil service agencies, the BKD and Staff Training Board. As the new and enhanced roles and functions of the Province in the formulation of regional zoning policies and regional economic development planning are clarified (and in which the achievement of MDGs /MSS is a part), there is a pressing need to continue individual skills development of professional staff of local councils, planners of BAPPEDA, and job assessment specialists for regional civil service agencies. Addressing these challenges requires a national program focusing on the legal framework on provincial civil service as well as capacity of the Provincial Civil Service Agency (BKD) to formulate human resource policy and planning for the regional governments. A reform of the legal framework (Law 32/2004) is underway and the positions of main stakeholders are quite clear that is to strengthen the roles and functions of the provincial government in a decentralized governance framework. Within this existing set-up donor agencies should focus on providing technical assistance in the drafting of Law 32/2004 and the revision of Government Regulations. A special Chapter on provincial civil service is being prepared in the revision of Law 32/2004 and is expected to serve as a legal foundation for civil service reform at provincial level. UNDP and bilateral donor agencies have taken an active role in the revision of this Law. Future support has to take into account the fact that reforming the regional civil service system cannot be 17 This section is drawn largely from the PGSP Thematic Paper on Civil Service Reform prepared by Professor Sofyan Effendi.



done without changes in the national system of civil service. For this reason, the plan to include a special chapter on provincial civil service should be done in close cooperation with revision of Law 43/1999. For this, there is a need for a forum for task-forces from various ministries, BKN and LAN-RI to meet and share ideas concerning the directions and scope of decentralization of governance and the related civil service reform. 2 Recent, On-going and Planned Relevant Decentralization

Technical Assistance Since 1999, a wide range of development partners have been involved in providing assistance to national and regional governments with the operationalization of decentralized government. These partners include bilateral donor agencies such as USAID, AusAID, GTZ, JICA, and CIDA and multilateral organizations such as UNDP, World Bank, and Asian Development Bank. Regional government associations such as ADKASI, APKASI, and ADEKSI, and various Indonesian civil society organizations have also participated. It is recognized18 that support to provincial level governance is a gap in donor support to decentralization. However, among the various programs supporting local governments (districts and cities) most have involved the province as a point of entry and some have included the province in selection of target local governments and provincial staff has contributed to training. Other essentially district oriented projects and programs have recently started to intensify activity at provincial level. The (BRiDGE) project is implemented by UNDP. BRiDGE was designed to support GoI in enhancing the capacity of local government in pilot areas to support democratic governance. BRiDGE was specifically focused on governance at the sub-national level - on 86 cities and 348 regencies. The focus has been firmly on local good governance and therefore does not address issues or aspects which are the responsibility of central government. The challenge of BRiDGE was to improve governance, to introduce democratic governance practices and values by strengthening existing and installing new processes of representation, decision-making, planning and control and oversight by the different governance actors: parliament, government, civil society and the media. BRiDGE has contributed to improvements in social welfare and access to basic services. The UNDP supported Partnership for Governance Reform in Indonesia (PGRI) is an example of a partnership approach based on 3 pillars of good governance and including integrated support of donor agencies. The provision of a mechanism to assist institutions with the complex processes of reform was the main objectives of PGRI. Areas of the overall national reform agenda in which PGRI focused included: (i) judicial sector; (ii) civil service; (which was subsequently refined to include police); (iii) electoral systems and management; (iv) legislative support; (v) civil society and media; (vi) corporate sector; (vii) decentralization and regional autonomy; and (viii) anti-corruption. The Articulating Governance and Local Development (ART-GOLD) program aims to support national policies and local practice in the field of regional development, as a means to contribute to the achievement of MDGs and to facilitate coordination and effectiveness of external aid at the Provincial level. ART-GOLD will provide support at the local level, to facilitate provincial strategic development plans formulation, implementation and monitoring comprising 5 thematic areas, linked to the MDGs: Democratic Governance, Local Economic Development, Welfare Services and Public Facilities, Environmental Protection and Territorial Planning, Education and Cultural Development. The program will also provide support at the national level,

18 Stocktaking of Indonesia’s Recent Decentralization Reforms: Report prepared by USAID democratic Reform Support programme for the Donor Working Group on Decentralization.



to identify national development priorities, promote policy improvements -based on lessons learned- and to expand the implementation of project tools and methodologies to additional areas. The support will be provided through program technical assistance, specialized technical assistance (through centers of excellence throughout the world) and financial co-financing resources to provincial development plans and national activities. The program will be operational from 2008 -2010 with an estimated budget of US$6m and a committed budget of US$3m. The program will be operational in Gorontalo and NTT initially. There are strong linkages between this program and the proposed PGSP and especially in the role of the province in supporting strategic planning. The UNDP supported Governance Reform and DPRD Empowerment (GRADE) project supports the Government of Indonesia in advancing institutionalized democratic governance through enhancing the capacity of regional parliamentary systems and structures. The innovative components and instruments of the project encourage the involvement of a broad range of stakeholders. GRADE addresses three issues hampering the country’s democratic transition: (i) ineffective regional parliaments but a demand for effective local issue-based democratic processes; (ii) the lack of institutionalized support mechanism to carry out the process of regional parliamentary development as part of local democratic governance building; (iii) the absence of regional-based political process which can effectively aggregate and register local and regional issues into national political debates, while remaining within the context of democratic national process.

GRADE has been working to: (i) introduce and develop parliamentary systems that are adopted and sustained by the regional parliamentary stakeholders; (ii) establish regional support facilities for parliamentary capacity building to be sustained by regional stakeholders; and (iii) institutionalization of lessons learned. PGSP is well placed to consolidate lessons learned and to continue selected GRADE initiatives. UNDP and associated UN agencies promote the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)19 The MDGs / MSS bring a wide range of decision and opinion-makers together in support of a common development agenda and Indonesia’s decentralization process offers opportunities to ensure the country’s efforts remain attuned to local needs. Substantial support is needed in order to achieve the MDGs / MSS – advocacy, expertise and resources. UNDP has experience in supporting provincial governance reforms considering the large provincial program in Aceh, Papua and Gorontalo (which also provides an opportunity to learn from experiences in provinces with special autonomy). It has been noted20 that the UNDP support for provincial government institutions and organizations, in particular the executive branch, has occurred in the Papua and Aceh programmes. The large CSO component of the UNDP supported Papua programme and the UNDP supported programme in Aceh focuses primarily on service delivery; and a new large UNDP supported programme (AGTP) focuses mainly on support for the executive. Meanwhile: (i) support for local councils through the GRADE programme (see below) is ending and new programmes only have limited focus on the representative institutions; (ii) support through the BRiDGE programme (see below) in 5 provinces is also ending and the work on accountability / responsiveness and facilitation of linkages between government, citizens and other actors is only planned to be continued in one province and only as one of several components. The proposed PGSP could

19 It has been noted by some observers that the principle Indonesian response to MDGs is the ongoing effort to establish and implement Minimum Service Standards 20 Summary Note of Issues Discussed by UNDP RCB Regional Policy Advisor on Support for Development of PGSP and Papua Programmes, Jakarta, July 2008: here a shift is perceived from governance to support to provincial executives (but this perception does not necessarily represent UNDPs view).



respond to this situation – on the one hand by further developing and strengthening provincial support approaches in a more general context while making use of the rather specific Papua and Aceh experiences and on the other hand by continuing the BRiDGE and GRADE endeavors with complementary provincial content. It has also been noted that in the past, supporting local governance, UNDP (corporately) has tended to focus on participatory processes (mainly planning) without sufficient attention to the capacity of local government institutions to deliver in response to the plans and demands. Very strong program pillars for policy reform and capacity development for the governor’s offices and sectoral departments have been developed, and UNDP could now pay additional attention to the formulation (within PGSP for example) of components which will effectively support mechanisms through which people can participate in governance and hold their local governments to account, and provide actual support to community and civil society groups for people to exercise this right. This perception has influenced the design of PGSP and as described in the following Sections, the proposed Project emphasizes accountability aspects of governance whilst also addressing organizational and institutional issues of provincial government. USAID has had a long history of supporting decentralization with sequential programs which built a significant body of knowledge on local government operations. Programs include PERFORM, which built on the results of a previous USAID-supported program ‘CLEAN-Urban’, and which supported Directorate General BANGDA / MoHA and MoF at central level and local governments. The aim was to learn particularly from the experience of implementing the Program Dasar Pembangunan Partisipatif21 at local level to inform aspects of decentralization policy formulation at central level. As this is the initial concept for the PGSP it is particularly relevant. To inform PGSP design it is noted that the links between the implementation of capacity development work at the district level and the national level policy work in PERFORM were not well established and the links between the policy formulation work in MOHA and MoF were also weak. It is not considered that the program concept was faulty, but that detailed Program design did not ensure central government was ready to receive the lessons learned from the districts (and from a program which was generally considered very useful at district level). Also of interest to PGSP, PERFORM (and the subsequent LGSP) helped local universities and professional associations to form local centers or pools of service providers at provincial level. Another worthwhile experience of PERFORM was its effective cooperation with other projects, especially BIGG (developing budgeting skills) and HPN / health service provision.

The USAID supported BIGG project helped local governments to apply performance-based budgeting, supporting the implementation of Kepmen 29/2001. BIGG included workshops, training and on-the-job training and mentoring. “PBB clinics” were used during annual budget preparation, where many agencies were involved and needed assistance. When the counterpart agency (usually the BKPD / Bag.Keuangan, sometimes the BAPPEDA) became familiar with methodology, they also acted as mentors. BIGG also promoted partnerships between American and Indonesian districts. The USAID supported Local Governance Support Project (LGSP) is a sequel to PERFORM and BIGG. LGSP is currently active in 10 provinces and about 100 local governments and includes work with provincial governments. The LGSP assumes that provinces should be able to guide the local governments and vice versa. Relevant program components include: (i) assessment of 100 local governments using self-assessment tool22 to determine future program 21 The PDPP was used to develop five main deliverables: (i) top-down vision for the district’s development over 3-5 years; (ii) bottom-up community needs assessment; (iii) medium-term investment program; (iv) institutional management action plan (focusing on human resource needs in particular); (v) financial management action plan (focusing on funding the investment in particular). Activities are based on LG and local stakeholder priorities. 22 UNDP has also encouraged the development and use of another self-assessment tool for application by local governments. The Capacity Assessment and Capacity development (CA-CD) tool can be used for self assessment at the



activities; (ii) strengthening democratic governance; (iii) strengthening core competencies of local administration, including planning and budgeting; (iv) strengthening (civil society) strategic partners and local civil society; (v) strengthening local media; (vi) supporting local elections; (vi) establishing a Local Government Data Bank; (vii) providing feedback on decentralization policy, in collaboration with GTZ.. LGSP has recently begun to intensify provincial level activities working on the principle that it is the province that has the capacity to maintain practices, regardless of change of district leadership. LGSP considers that the province should be at least as capable as the most advanced district in the region, so as to be able to disseminate practices, monitor performance and maintain quality - in line with Law 32/2004. The CIDA supported Governance Reform Support II (GRSII) is enhancing accountability and transparency for the Aceh rehabilitation and reconstruction effort by introducing computerized accounting across all districts in Aceh province. By enhancing the capacity of selected agencies, ministries and related organizations to conceive, plan and implement decentralization reforms, the project contributes to the promotion of good governance, human rights and democratic development at the central and regional levels to foster greater equity and the effective involvement of civil society. As of June 2007: 7 local governments in Aceh have adopted computerized support tools for modernized financial management. Training has also been provided to 750 staff members in all local governments, which has helped them prepare their 2007 budget. Computerized support tools are now being extended to all governments in Aceh province. The Aceh Local Governance Program (ALGAP) II is a three year (2007-2009) project funded by the European Union and implemented by GTZ. The objective of the program is to strengthen local and provincial governments and make them more responsive to needs of the Acehnese people thereby contributing to a lasting and durable peace in the region. ALGAP II will enhance the capacity of Naggroe Aceh Darussalam (NAD) and local authorities to execute their core competencies in the context of the new Law on Governing Aceh and principles of good governance. As agreed by the Provincial Government of NAD and GTZ in December 2006, AlGAP II facilitated a Capacity development Needs Assessment (CBNA) and Capacity development Action Plan (CBAP) for all 23 cities and districts in NAD. The project design is based on the following ten principles: (i) enhancing all local governments in NAD and coordinating all capacity development efforts for all stakeholders; (ii) binding the local governments to an NAD “Implementation Strategy”, helping stakeholders tackle locally prioritized governance objectives, building unity and cooperation; (iii) promoting integration and social cohesion, principally with respect to the reintegration of GAM members and protection of basic human rights; (iv) paying cross-cutting attention to gender, with regards to aspects of participation of women / men in governance; (v) including government and non-government stakeholder, to nurture checks and balances in local governance; (vi) enhancing cooperative relationships between the executive and legislative branches of province and local governments, to strengthen democratic processes and attain consistent regional policies; (vii) building on ALGAP change agents, contracts and awareness, to tap into established goodwill, lending legitimacy to the new initiative and speeding progress; (viii) tailoring governance initiatives capacity development plans to specific needs of local governments (within an overall province wide strategy), to spur local stakeholders to become involved and maximize local opportunities; (ix) using and building local partnerships, to strengthen the capacity of institution that can provide services to local governments.

organizational level. The global UNDP Strategic Plan 2008-2011 reaffirms that support to capacity development constitutes the overarching contribution of UNDP in assisting efforts of programme countries to achieve internationally agreed development goals, including MDGs.



Through the “Advisory Service Support for Decentralization” (ASSD) which seeks to support greater coherence of the governance policy framework and its implementation, GTZ continues to support the revision of Law 32 / 2004. Whilst PGSP can contribute to the later stages of Law 32 revision (and Law 33 as appropriate) in support of GTZ and other contributors, the main complementary role of PGSP will be support to the formulation of the implementing regulations of the revised law, especially if the PGSP was able to gain insights into strategies being devised by provincial governments to operationalize their current mandates. In addition the GTZ supported Good Local Governance” (GLG) that supports the development, piloting, replication and institutionalization of innovative structures, regulations, processes and professional competences of governance at the district, city and province levels so that government organizations in cooperation with stakeholders better fulfill their core functions. It is intended that improved governance capacity will positively impact on the achievement of the MDGs / MSS which in particular address poverty, hunger, disease, illiteracy, environmental degradation, and discrimination against women. GLG is complementary to the ASSD. GLG promotes pilot measures on governance related tools and instruments to support capacity development for local and regional government organizations and for stakeholders from the private and civic sectors. The services being addressed include health, economic development and environmental protection). Successful practices are disseminated to other local governments by means of peer-to-peer learning networks moderated by GLG, in cooperation with intermediary organizations. Together with ASSD the lessons learnt are evaluated and injected into the national policy formulation process to inform and influence national decision-makers. Thus the framework for decentralization can be adjusted to local governments’ needs, and the cooperation between different levels of governance is improved. GLG addresses inter-related issues of good local governance: (i) Planning and Budgeting (helping local governments implement performance oriented budgeting which reflects the objectives of development and spatial planning; (ii) Provision of Public Services (supporting local governments increase the degree of coverage and the quality of selected public services); (iii) Disaster Risk Management (advising national and regional governments to develop and implement guidelines for disaster risk management.

The local governments’ capacities to deliver their core functions are enhanced through a range of governance related products and services: (i) Local Development Planning (the application of planning procedures which improve the opportunities for public participation and enhance the consistency between the various planning streams is supported. A method such as CAP (Community Action Planning) stimulates planning processes within local communities, leading to result-oriented, time-bound and location-specific action plans for participatory local development); (ii) Local Economic Development (pro-poor economic development is promoted through practical tools such as pro-poor value-chains analysis and the establishment of economic stakeholder forums); (iii) Public Consultations (local planning and decision-making processes are improved by holding public consultations with experts, relevant organizations from the private and civic sector, and local communities; (iv) Spatial Planning Tools (spatial planning processes at local level are strengthened through tools such as urban planning competitions and integrated urban infrastructure planning; (v) Budgeting and Financial Management (the preparation, implementation and evaluation of performance based budgets which provide transparent and measurable targets for the delivery of public services is a key instrument in local governance capacity development; (vi) Inter-regional Cooperation (inter-regional approaches for collaboration in the provision of public infrastructure, transport, waste disposal, and spatial planning are developed; (vii) Disaster Risk Management Plans(municipalities are advised to incorporate geo-risks in spatial/urban planning and to formulate local disaster risk management action plans); (ix) Peer-to-Peer Learning Networks (learning networks among local government organizations and officials to assist and consult other local governments across Indonesia are established).



The Indonesia - Australia Specialized Training Project (IASTP) contributes to promoting good governance through improved economic management, improved governance practices and the enhanced delivery of basic social services (health and education) consistent with Indonesia's development needs and priorities. It provides specialized short-term training and capacity development initiatives at the central, provincial and district levels, mainly in Eastern Indonesia. Action plans are the key mechanism used to align training with organizational planning and organizational change. Mentors provide a vital link between the project and GoI agencies, and are actively involved in each stage of the training cycle. Capacity development training is designed to enhance the skills and abilities of mentors. Courses include district and provincial planning, district and provincial economic planning, small enterprise trade and export promotion, economic governance, public accountability, human rights, women's empowerment and mainstreaming, environmental law, local councilary procedures drafting, journalism, legal development, IAINS teacher development, HIV/AIDS with a focus on drug abuse prevention/intervention, basic health service management, basic education services and the training cycle. Partnerships between sub-contracted Australian and Indonesian training providers are strongly encouraged, and the project designs and delivers training courses that specialize in gender awareness, mainstreaming and analysis. The Initiatives for Local Governance Reform Project (ILGR) is supported by the World Bank and seeks to improve local governance and service delivery at the district level, and boost investment in needed rural infrastructure. The ILGRP project-wide reforms build local support and ownership for the governance reform agenda through improved transparency, accountability, civic participation, and local level poverty analysis. The project leverages better use of the district budget through complementary investment support for poverty programs. ILGRP also supports a series of district level poverty reduction strategies, which are piloted in selected districts. These strategies are being developed using participatory poverty assessment (PPAs) techniques to encourage broad local partnerships and ownership of the local poverty agenda. The development objective of the ILGRP is to support governance reform in 40 district governments selected on a competitive basis. The project supports a series of graduated reforms in public disclosure and civic participation in local budget planning and execution, development of enhanced local poverty alleviation strategies, improvements in financial management and procurement and improvements in local revenue generation. Investment support is also being provided to finance priority rural infrastructure identified through participatory local government poverty alleviation strategies. Through improved governance and capacity development interventions, the project supports the overarching goal of poverty reduction in Indonesia. There are five major areas where the Bank adds value through this project: (i) the cross sector approach builds on strong sector: the Bank supported program has for the past few years worked in a decentralized environment through a number of sector programs (basic education, provincial health project, water and sanitation for low income communities) that have helped develop relationships, capacity and some reform (albeit sectoral) at the local level; (ii) mobilizing substantial grant and investment funds: the Bank is able to mobilize substantial grant and investment funds to help finance district capacity development and development budgets; (iii) the Bank has invested in substantial economic and sector work through the work on local institutions, decentralization (Regional Public Expenditures and GDS surveys as examples), monitoring impact of user fees and poverty; (iv) complementing activities in the urban sector: the urban governance program provides a counterpart experiment for the city governments not covered by ILGRP and provides an important area for cross-fertilization and exchange of experience; (v) building on the global knowledge base: the project builds on the lessons learned from the Banks global knowledge base on decentralization, good governance and anti-corruption. Information on on-going operations in other countries provides valuable inputs and opportunities for cross-country knowledge exchange.



The project supports advances in good governance initiatives at the district level through: (i) provision of specialized packages of technical assistance, general facilitation and capacity development to help broaden and deepen the reforms already underway in the relatively more progressive districts in the 9 ILGR provinces, or facilitate implementation of minimal reforms in other reform minded districts participating in this project; (ii) the project rewards good governance at the district level by providing incremental investment funds to districts that complete a set of prescribed reforms in areas of public participation, transparency, financial management and procurement, as well as giving visible recognition of these reform initiatives; and (iii) the project will disseminate the best good governance practices emerging from the districts so that the lessons learned can help to influence reforms in other districts not participating directly in ILGR. The Decentralization Support Facility (DSF) is a partnership of international donor agencies and concerned Indonesian agencies, principally the Government of Indonesia (both central and sub-national), but also civil society and community groups, that focuses on the decentralization agenda. The objective of the DSF is to support Indonesian effort to implement systematic and coherent decentralization policies and accountability mechanisms through a harmonized, coordinated, and aligned international development effort. The DSF is financed through a multi-donor Trust Fund managed by the World Bank. DSF has four priorities23 namely public services, fiscal decentralization and capacity development, governance reform and planning and performance measurement. Each priority has objectives as well as success criteria and indicators. PGSP will be well placed to contribute to Priority One (Public Services), Priority Three (Governance Reform) and Priority Four (Planning and Performance Measurement)24. Within each Focal Area that DSF provides three core functions: (i) the DSF provides the Government of Indonesia and other Indonesian clients with evidence (based upon DSF-sponsored interventions including research and knowledge generation and pilot studies) to improve the impact of decentralization in the defined Focal Areas; (ii) the DSF supports improved harmonization and coordination of existing international development assistance initiatives around decentralization to facilitate more effective and appropriate delivery of public services to Indonesia’s population, with a particular focus on the poor; (iii) the DSF works with the international development community and its Indonesian partners to design major new interventions in support decentralization in support of decentralization in the three Focal Areas The multi-donor Support Office for Eastern Indonesia (SOfEI) was launched in September 2004 to support the development of Eastern Indonesia. Offices are located in Makassar, South Sulawesi, which has the best transport links to other parts of Eastern Indonesia. SOfEI includes the Eastern Indonesia Information Exchange (BaKTI) and SOfEI plans to establish BaKTIs in each of Eastern Indonesia provinces. SOfEI is funded by several donors, including the Australian Agency for International Development (AusAid), the UK Department for International Development (DFID) and the Netherlands Development Cooperation. Funds are administered by the World Bank Office in Jakarta. SOfEI accounts for the use of its funds using World Bank procedures and standards. SOfEIs actions are guided by the Eastern Indonesia Forum, which represents a broad cross-section of stakeholders from Eastern Indonesia. SOfEI offers support to development initiatives in Eastern Indonesia in the areas of knowledge exchange, networking, facilitating and convening, capacity enhancement and training, supervision, monitoring and evaluation, as well as project preparation. BaKTI is a public facility where people interested in the development of Eastern Indonesia can meet and consult documents and data. SOfEI mobilizes the knowledge and experience of its staff and the information contained in the BaKTI database to make an active contribution to the development of Eastern 23 See for example the recently revised DSF Logframe. 24 As noted especially by BAPPENAS.



Indonesia. SOfEI offers a range of services to development initiatives that fulfill the criteria for SOfEI support. In addition, SOfEI makes its meeting facilities and office available to development agents and aims to become a central meeting point for all who are working for the development of Eastern Indonesia. Partial funding from SOfEI for the Eastern Indonesian activities of PGSP could be sought. 3 Summary of Situation Analysis Key issues identified in the Situation Analysis and complemented by lessons learned from relevant decentralization Technical Assistance have been analyzed, using a Problem Tree Analysis25. The analysis identified a key problem concerning the roles and responsibilities of provincial government and clusters of linked contributory problems. ♦ FOCAL PROBLEM

Achievement of national and local development targets (including MSS and MDGs) is inhibited by the unclear role / functions at provincial level and weak capacity at provincial level to implement roles.

♦ CONTRIBUTORY PROBLEMS

Regulatory framework does not clearly state roles and functions of provincial government. - There is no clear distinction between devolved, de-concentrated and assistance

task of provincial governments - The distinct roles and functions of each level of government is not clear - The regulatory framework is ambiguous (especially on supervisory

responsibilities) - There is overlap between provincial and local levels of government Planning and budgeting for coordinated regional development is weak - Provincial budgets need to reflect provincial roles - Plans and budgets are not based on in-depth needs assessments nor linked to

national development targets (MSS / MDGs) - Planning skills need to be strengthened at provincial level

Mechanisms for stakeholder engagement at provincial level are weak - Representation of civil society needs to be enhanced - Meaningful community/civil society participation in the provincial musrenbang

are yet to happen. - A participatory approach to M&E needs to be implemented Monitoring of development outcomes at provincial level is weak - District initiatives need to be supported by provinces - Performance evaluation needs to shift to outcomes (from spending, i.e. inputs) - Performance indicators and targets need to be established and a process for

establishing / monitoring performance targets introduced

25 Full details and a copy of the Problem Tree are available in the PGSP Programme Proposal 1st Draft, July 18th 2008



SECTION 3 – STRATEGY 1 Project Rationale Government recognizes that provincial government and governance should be strengthened further and that provincial government / governance should play enhanced roles which will further contribute to meeting national development objectives, including economic growth and achieving MDGs / MSS. There is an acknowledged lack of donor support to GoI to address this directly and relevant GoI agencies have expressed strong interest in the formulation of a donor supported Project which will contribute to the clarification of provincial roles and responsibilities and to strengthening provincial government and governance. Accordingly a Project should be designed which will support efforts to clarify the roles and responsibilities of provincial government reflected both in policies at national level and in practice in participating provinces. While changes to the national policy framework are essential for changes to be sustainable, there is also a need to strengthen government capacities at provincial level for them to better understand, fulfill and take charge of the mandated role as a facilitator of regional development and to achieve the MDGs / MSS at sub-national level. A Project which also supports consolidation of provincial governance is particularly important because of the expected expanded role of the province, in particular in guiding economic development and spatial planning. However, the provision of basic services as needed for achieving the MDGs / MSS is likely to remain in the hands of the district and sub-district governments, accordingly and to be effective the PGSP will need to have capacity in two development themes: (i) to strengthen government (focusing on organizational and institutional issues and especially the links between government levels) and; (ii) to strengthen governance (including the role of the local councils and provincial councils and their capacity to effectively represent citizen interests) and direct participation (and accountability) in governance. Support to strengthening a regional development role will cover both government and governance themes and the governance element will need to encourage participation across the entire ‘service delivery cycle’ and, most fundamentally, the development of mechanisms which will lead to real accountability and responsiveness, in particular to the most vulnerable. In both themes PGSP can draw on extensive experience gained (albeit mostly at district level) in relevant decentralization technical assistance as indicated above and should complement ongoing activities. For example and in support of the strengthening governance PGSP theme, PGSP can include elements of the UNDP supported GRADE programme (e.g. basic training, support to develop constituency relations, democratic oversight, capacity of secretariats etc.). An intervention in support of provincial governance is required which fully takes in to account the development context (changing regulatory environment, possibly re-ordered national development priorities in the forthcoming medium term national plan and the very extensive body of knowledge which now exists in Indonesia on the ways in which local governments are adapting to meet the challenges of decentralization. This approach will ensure harmonization. A Project is also required which is geared towards: (i) strengthening the sharing among provinces, analysis of lessons learned, and providing policy advice at the national level especially with inputs for the revisions of Law 32/2004, RPJMN 2010-2014 and their implementing regulations and; (ii) developing national approaches to provincial governance capacity development, and provide support for implementation of priority elements complementing existing programs.



2 Intended Project Impact and Outputs

PGSP Impacts and Outputs have been based on the findings of the Situation Analysis as synthesized in a Problem Tree26. The identified Impact assumes that the Project can directly address the perceived Focal Problem. In the same way the identified Outputs assume that the contributing causes of the Focal Problem can also be directly addressed by the Project. In the process of Project design the 4 sets of Contributory Problems were synthesized into 3 Outputs (at the suggestion of BAPPENAS).

PGSP INTENDED IMPACT

Provincial government roles and functions strengthened through effective participatory policy making, regional development planning and public service delivery, leading to realization of national and local development objectives and the improvement of quality of life for the poorest

♦ PGSP Output 1: Enhanced Policy and Regulatory Framework that further clarifies

and strengthens roles and functions of provincial government and council (DPRD) Associated Targets: GoI Implementing Regulations of the revised Law 32 and provincial government

regulations provide clearer distinction between devolved, de-concentrated and assistance responsibilities of provincial governments.

GoI Implementing Regulations of the revised Law 32 and provincial and local government regulations clarify distinct roles and functions of each level of government and there is no overlap between national, provincial and local levels.

GoI Implementing Regulations of the revised Law 32 identifies resources to implement revised provincial roles and responsibilities

Alignment (synchronization and harmonization) of provincial and local legislation (PERDAs) with the revised Law 32 and its Implementing Regulations

Resource analysis undertaken and recommendations made, including input to the revision of Law 32.

Development of knowledge base and dissemination of lessons learned ♦ PGSP Output 2: Strategic regional economic development planning strengthened,

effectively link planning and budgeting using HDI/HDR; with participatory decision-making mechanism in place Associated Targets: Enhanced role of provincial government as mediator of planning based on participatory

needs assessments (bottom-up) and national targets (top-down). Enhanced provincial capacity to coordinate / integrate various sectors across

administrative boundaries through economic and spatial planning. Mechanisms for stakeholder engagement at provincial level strengthened in the

planning process (focusing on the musrenbang). Enhanced RPJMD, RKP, RENSTRA SKPD and RTRW incorporating HDR/HDI. Development of knowledge base and dissemination of provincial lessons learned

26 A Problem Tree was formulated in the Situation Analysis. The Key Problems identified earlier in this section are based on the Problem Tree Analysis and this was presented in earlier drafts of this ProDoc.



♦ PGSP Output 3: Achievement of better development outcomes at provincial level through governance innovations: implementation of minimum service standards, civil service reform, participatory monitoring and evaluation and sustainable cross province learning. Associated Targets: - Improvement of public service delivery at provincial level, incorporating minimum

service standards - District initiatives facilitated by province to improve delivery of public services,

incorporating minimum service standards. - Effective mechanisms for multi-stakeholder engagement in monitoring and evaluation

of development outcomes at provincial level, applying HDI indicators and targets. - Provincial civil service reform and budgets are linked to re-defined roles and

responsibilities. - Development of knowledge base and dissemination of provincial lessons learned

3 Project Strategy and Design 3.1 Strategy With confirmation of the justification of the Project, identification of the intended Impact and the associated Outputs it is possible to devise a strategy to tackle the issues, gaps and problems identified in the Section 2. Three possible strategies27 to achieve these Impacts and Outputs have been evaluated by GoI, the strategies all being based on variations of a project which will address both the regulatory / policy framework and practices at provincial levels for demonstration and direct impact. The GoI preferred strategy is based on the perception of PGSP as a Project with nationwide impact on provincial government policy analysis / advocacy. The Project will support national level regulatory reform and this will be informed on the basis of pilot projects undertaken in a selection of participating provinces which are representative of types of provinces throughout Indonesia. In this Option three provinces would participate in PGSP capacity development pilot activities. The design of the capacity development approach of the Project has been guided by the capacity development approach of the UNDP which includes the view that capacity development is primarily endogenous and domestically driven. It is an inherently political and complex process that cannot be rushed and outcomes cannot be expected to evolve in a controlled and linear fashion. A number of PGSP capacity development activities have been identified which address identified issues but a process of stakeholder evaluation of these initiatives is also included and the PGSP design has sufficient flexibility for capacity development initiatives to be refined or replaced. 3.2 Programme Components PGSP will have two parts:

(i) PART A – PGSP will engage in strategic areas at the province level. The capacity development component will target the executive and legislative branches of government. Overall, the Project puts emphasis on collaboration among a wide range of partners and stakeholders including the legislative and executive branches of government. Civil society organizations and academia will be important partners at the province level. The Project will not directly address capacity issues at the third tier of government. Such issues will be addressed indirectly with the province and national level government.

27 Fully described in 1st Draft PGSP Programme Document July 18th 2008



(ii) PART B - PGSP will support the national government and provincial administrations in conducting policy analysis and capturing relevant lessons and experiences particularly those generated by PART A activities. Support will be provided to facilitate dialogue and debates on ways of improving the regional autonomy framework. At national level, key partners include central government, donors as well as civil society organizations and academic institutions. Dissemination of lessons learned will be an important activity.

The overall Project has been designed with flexibility that allows provincial stakeholders to identify the specifics of capacity development in each partner province year by year. All activities selected will still need to be within the overall Project Framework and contribute to the achievement of the overall Outcomes. 3.3 Implementation Period It is understood that the revision of Law 32 that is of central concern to this Project will continue to be drafted throughout 2009, with Promulgation expected sometime after the elections and possibly by mid- 2010. Regulations linked to the new Law will be completed after promulgation. It will be necessary to confirm that PGSP will have an acknowledged role as a contributor to the formulation of these regulations. Given that the revised Law may not be promulgated until mid-2010 and that capacity development requires long-term engagement, a three year Project is recommended with a start in January 2010. In three years it will be possible to: (i) influence key “drivers of change” in partner provinces; (ii) support provincial partners to take charge of future capacity development efforts; (iii) influence implementing regulations of the revised Law 32 insofar as they relate to provincial government; (iv) provide evidence to government of informal and formal operational agreements between government levels which will inform the continuing policy dialogue on the role of provincial governments over the next 5 to 10 years. 3.4 Number of Participating Provinces and Depth of Project It is proposed that the PART A activities of the Project are undertaken in three provinces overall. This will allow a reasonable opportunity for representation of types of provinces as is required to implement the preferred Option (see above). The management of a Project in three provinces should not be difficult and there is much experience of managing larger projects and programs in Indonesia. Within each participating province it is proposed that indicative project activities are undertaken to address all three PGSP Outputs and that these activities will be supported by a Facilitator in each province with responsibility for acting as a catalyst for Project activities with all stakeholders. It is considered that this will provide sufficient depth to the Project for it to be effective. 3.5 Phasing .

Year 1 (January 2010 – December 2010) PART A - with three participating provinces work on a range of specific capacity development efforts in each comprising core activities prioritized in the provinces; PART B – PGSP supports finalization of RPJMN 2010-2014, finalization of the revision of Law 32/2004 and the deliberation process in the parliament. This is enhanced by identification and evaluation of practices in provincial governance in participating provinces and resource provinces and by lessons learned in PGSP activities to support the strengthening and institutionalization of innovations.



Year 2 (January 2011 – December 2011) PART A – PGSP continues to strengthen provincial governance capacity with a range of specific capacity development efforts; PART B – PGSP facilitates and contributes directly to the formulation of new implementing regulations based on revised Law 32/2004, and consolidates knowledge base and dissemination process for lessons learned.

Year 3 (January 2012 – December 2012) PART A – PGSP continues to support capacity development initiatives in the three provinces with initiatives reviewed annually and prioritized in the provinces; PGSP lessons learned institutionalized and disseminated. PART B – PGSP continues to support the formulation of new implementation regulations based on the revised Law 32/2004. The focus will shift to dissemination of regulations with relevant practices and experiences and PGSP will also begin to start supporting GoI with longer term provincial government reform. In this year Part B is expected to have found means to organize rewards in recognition of good provincial practices.

3.6 Outputs Indicative outputs are presented in the PGSP Results and Resources Framework in Section 4. Indicative project activities to achieve the outputs have been formulated which represents the minimum sets of activities required to achieve the Outputs and Intended Impact. The following details the activities which are summarized in the Results and Resources Framework. ♦ OUTPUT 1: Enhanced Policy and Regulatory Framework that further clarifies and

strengthens roles and functions of provincial government and council (DPRD)

INDICATIVE PROJECT ACTIVITIES - Establishment of a policy advocacy and research team, officially involved in

preparation of regulatory framework. - Application of national and provincial lessons learned to formulation of RPJMN

on Decentralization and Regional Development. - Application of national and provincial lessons learned to formulation of GoI

revised Law 32/2004. - Application of national and provincial lessons learned to formulation of GoI

Implementing Regulations and policies of the revised Law 32/2004 - Support to national and provincial governments / elected bodies to identify

resources to implement revised Law 32/2004. - Support to the alignment of provincial and local PERDA in participating

provinces and their districts that are relevant to the re-positioning of the provincial government

- Regular reviews by all stakeholders at regional and national levels, establishment of a knowledge base and dissemination of lessons learned.

- Participatory surveys / Focus Group Discussions (FGD) with government / non-government stakeholders on institutional, organizational, networking dimensions of provincial government.




The object of attention will be the exertion of provincial roles through devolved, de-concentrated and assistance tasks and their achievement of development objectives. The national component of PGSP includes observation of efforts of the PGSP Provinces and Resource Provinces to interpret the regulatory environment and apply these into distinct roles and functions of the province. It will also study relationships with the roles and functions of the national sector agencies and district governments.

At the national level, the PGSP team is responsible for the consolidation of experience

generated by PGSP activities in the provinces and for systematically feeding them into the national policy and regulation process. The PGSP team will have a state-of-the-art knowledge on the current status of regulations as well as those in the formulation process. PGSP will maintain good communication with related the national agencies, institutions or organizations as well as programs that are working on the subject. PGSP implementation in the provinces is expected to regularly provide empirical information to teams working at the national level. The PMU will structure the field feedback into a systematic database and report these to a Policy Team (which comprises of technical advisor, researchers and other policy specialists, and will act as the main arm of PGSP to achieve Output 1).

At the beginning of the project, PGSP will facilitate a Strategic Planning workshop with

MOHA and BAPPENAS as well as with the three participating provinces. The strategic planning workshop will discuss the reality of governance in each participating province and how PGSP can be best utilized to address the specific governance problems in each participating province. From this workshop programmatic fine-tuning which would set out the direction of PGSP vis a vis the specific needs of the province is expected. The result of this workshop will be a complementary programmatic reference to the PGSP RRF.

At the national level, the PGSP policy team is responsible in facilitating assistance to

BAPPENAS to formulate RPJMN 2010-2014. PGSP policy team is also responsible for supporting the engagement of both executive and legislative branches including the process at DG Regional Autonomy level (MOHA), the process in DPOD, the process in Badan Legislasi DPR, and the process in Panitia Ad Hoc DPD. Strategic engagement will be implemented from early 2009 with larger section of the executive government and from October 2009 with both the new DPD and DPR and PGSP will support the process of deliberation of the draft law when it is tabled to the new parliament.

PGSP will facilitate inter-provincial and national learning processes that will ensure the

quality of policy recommendations produced by the system. This will include joint research activities facilitated by PGSP, study missions, exchange, and possibly internships by selected senior provincial government officials in national or international institutions. The results of all these activities will also feed in to the regular reviews in, for example, formal formats like a conference on provincial roles in Indonesia’s decentralization to be held in Year 2 and Year 4 of the Project. Inasmuch as possible, the exchange and comparative study and the dissemination of lessons learned will be carried out jointly with AGI.

Development of network of centers of good governance practices at the provincial level

can be developed together with the provincial governments and the state-owned universities in the provinces. This will probably be a responsibility of Part A of the Project; however, substantive input for initiation of the establishment will have to come from Part B, the Policy and Research Team.

The Policy Team will communicate the developments into the process of national

regulation drafting or policy-making. With the PGSP Steering and Technical Committee, the



Policy Team may also suggest areas for assistance to provinces and participate in further policy agenda-setting to strengthen the provinces.

As far as project resources allow, some more indicative activities can be implemented to

get more evidential support and increase weight for advocacy. Participatory surveys, systematic focus group discussions / FGDs or larger fora for dialogue (workshops, seminars) with a wide range of governmental as well as non-governmental stakeholders will substantiate local team findings. Areas of concern may cover among others: (i) institutional issues related to distribution of tasks, coordination and collaboration among agencies; (ii) organizational issues of roles and functions, including personnel and budget implications; (iii) relationships among various jurisdictions (including national with local agencies, with other provinces); (iv) achievement and impacts of the implementation of certain functions by various actors may be assessed by surveys 28.

Another role may be played by the PGSP policy team to support documentation of current

practice done by some institutions, and support them to mainstream good practice through publications and media. Currently a number of media or national organizations (especially Jawa Pos and KPPOD) are publishing champions and good practices, and provide official awards.

The project’s initial situation in the fourth quarter of 2009 may need to be updated, to

provide the correct baseline. Current 2008 conditions have the following features: - Distinction between devolved, de-concentrated and assistance functions of the

province is still unclear; sectoral agencies often devise and carry out projects that are within the scope of provincial as well as district functions.

- Overlap between provincial and other levels exist and are mostly unresolved.

♦ OUTPUT 2: Strategic regional economic development planning strengthened, effectively link planning and budgeting using HDI/HDR; with participatory decision-making mechanism in place

INDICATIVE PROJECT ACTIVITIES - Support to the consolidation of the mediation role of provincial government in

facilitating inter-district and inter-sector development planning processes. - Support to the consolidation of coordination mechanisms of government and non-

government stakeholders for the preparation and implementation of regional socio-economic development plans including consistency between RKP (Annual Plan), RENSTRA SKPD (Sectoral Offices Plan), RPJMD (mid-term or five yearly development plan) and RTRW (spatial plan), incorporating HDI indicators and targets .

- Support to ensuring effective multi-stakeholder engagement at provincial level in the planning process, with emphasis on the musrenbang process.

- Regular reviews by all stakeholders at provincial and district levels, establishment of a knowledge base and dissemination of lessons learned.

The core activity focuses on strengthening of coordination mechanisms for the preparation and implementation of annual provincial plans and other due plan preparations, reviews, updating or/and evaluation of latest plans. In provinces where both PGSP and AGI are active links will be developed on strategic planning. The possible PGSP activities in planning and budgeting for

28 If starting in the first year and continued, may provide time-series data.



coordinated regional development is compatible with the AGI strategy at the provincial level, where Provincial Working Group (PWG) is tasked with the Provincial Development Guidelines for International Cooperation. Based on the Provincial Development Guidelines that will be identified locally, each PWG will elaborate its Annual Work Plan; this work plan will be the direct result of the Planning exercises that will take place locally in support and complementariness with the Musrenbang.

At all levels the planning exercise should be responsive to issues of poverty, cross-cutting through all human development indicators and MDGs. At this level the province has an opportunity to bring local-specific characteristics to the surface and with the districts build on these in the formulation of policies and solutions. It is also essential to consolidate links between planning and budgeting. The activity includes the mandated “Development Planning Consultation Forum” / musrenbang, and in addition, planning for a selected sector agreed on by local government and non-government stakeholders, propagation of vision and mission if the governor is newly installed, or support to the musrenbang of the Provincial medium-term development plan / RPJM involving Kabupaten / Kota teams. Developing effective dialogue between districts and the province – including non-government stakeholders - is an essential part of this activity. For the musrenbang and other multi-stakeholders meetings at the provincial level, there is no common precedence yet on who the non-government stakeholders should be. Therefore, support needs to be provided to identification of non-government stakeholders, methods to invite and prepare these, evaluate their effectiveness, improve mechanisms and institutionalize them. Special effort may be required to improve information flow and channels between district and provincial agencies as well as between citizens and government agencies or legislators. Continuous effort to maintain consistency between RKP (annual government workplan), Renstra SKPD (sectoral plan), RPJMD (mid-term development plan) and RTRW (regional spatial plans) will need to be integrated into the processes, and extend further into monitoring and evaluation of their implementation. A widespread need for updating spatial development plans is anticipated, including the improvement of procedures that ensure consistency between spatial plans and plans of each sector. The indicative project activities will acquire increased significance in strengthening the province’s role if combined with complementary activities that deal with province-scale or cross-jurisdictional issues, or provide needed resources and capacity improvement to districts, and/or increase the skills of the provincial work-units and staff, and/or activate citizen participation in the planning and budgeting process. Complementary to the indicative project activities, specific areas of planning may be selected:

- Regional economic development (LED) is a strategic issue that concerns every district and is dependent on the synergy of all districts in the Province as whole in providing services in various sectors and initiating investments; the Province may also pro-actively coordinate with other provinces.

- Planning exercises for selected, strategic sectors may be chosen to achieve critical MDGs. For those sectors where the province’s are lowest will need special attention.

- Spatial planning and policies are closely inter-relating with environmental issues and problems and achievements of every sector of regional development. However, there is still a great lack of linkage between spatial decisions and sectoral decisions29.

29 In agriculture, particularly concerning land issues.



Based on demand, technical assistance may be linked to the project indicative activities to set up systems or strengthen skills, or carry out the activity(ies) further to a next stage. For this purpose, the PGSP Provincial Facilitator may propose (and discuss with the Province or other regional stakeholders) additional project support in the form of technical on the job support to preparation of plans, data gathering, training of involved personnel, organizing work-sessions among provincial agencies or province with districts and other stakeholders. Qualified local experts or CSOs may be hired for these tasks. Grants to carry out relevant specific and new activities may be proposed, though not covering honoraria or fees for government staff. Potential activities may include on the job and on-demand support to strengthen participatory planning & budgeting, by the Provincial Facilitator with support from local expert teams, including: (i) on-the-job assistance for consistency between RKP, Renstra SKPD, RPJMD, and RTRW; interpretation of national spatial & regional plans; prioritization; (ii) use of the Human Development Report / HDR in planning; performance-based budgeting; financial reporting; promotion of transparency and public information on plans and the annual budget; (iii) developing the local communication network and timely updated database; help the province to activate or initiate a regional center for budget training 30. Focused activities will have a better probability of resulting in innovation and satisfaction of involved parties. Therefore, intensive work with selected agencies is preferred, for instance Bappeda and a few agencies directly involved in a selected sector, which enables the team to engage with related non-government stakeholders. Similarly when assisting the budgeting process, only a few agencies / SKPDs like the BPKD / finance dept, BAPPEDA and one selected public service agency may be involved. Later on, involved agencies, legislators or CSOs can be assisted to act as mentors for other agencies or peer groups through agency consultations, mentoring or ‘clinics’. Citizen participation in participatory planning is an essential element; this will include all stakeholders relevant to the selected sector(s). Through the initial planning exercises, locally appropriate or available mechanisms can be activated to involve every relevant party in the process. Technical support may be required in identification of non-government stakeholders Community Based Organizations (CBOs), interest groups, business associations) and methods to gather public aspirations and involvement in decision making (including preparation of non-GoI stakeholders i.e. through preliminary / local planning sessions). The DPRD should be involved early and formally, to safeguard planning results as well as implementation of plans and budgets, which also includes the consensus on various human development targets (or when possible, translated into targets of MDG achievement). It is widely accepted that effective participation by all parties and ‘public ownership’ in planning and budgeting will also guarantee increased transparency and accountability of implementation processes. While the activities are being carried out, regular assessment of staff and institutional capacities may be necessary, to help the Province in defining job descriptions and positions. The partner Province and the PMU can agree on eventual support in civil service reform, to be assisted by a specially recruited consultant or team.

Current 2008 conditions (will need updating at commencement of the project, in the fourth quarter of 2009) have the following features:

- Provincial annual, medium- and long-term plans are not yet consistent with each

other. The planning processes do not link with each other.

30 To note, the Ministry of Finance has developed a special training program on accounting (KKP Khusus) that can be further disseminated by regional trainers.



- Relationship between medium, long-term and annual plans of districts (kabupaten/kota) to provincial and national plans are limited to main policies but not synchronized, and not worked out in concert with other districts within the province.

- Projects implemented are not consistent with plans. - Overlap between provincial and other levels exist and are mostly unresolved. - Skills and current methods & mechanisms are insufficient to handle the complex

issues at the Province level. ♦ OUTPUT 3: Achievement of better development outcomes at provincial level through

governance innovations: implementation of minimum service standards, civil service reform, participatory monitoring and evaluation and sustainable cross province learning.

INDICATIVE PROJECT ACTIVITIES - Improvement of selected provincial level public service delivery, incorporating

minimum service standards (MSS). - Technical Assistance to Regencies/Municipalities to define MSS and determine

annual targets, within the agreed provincial strategy. - Support implementation of participatory outcome monitoring and evaluation

process, including application of HDI indicators and targets. - Assistance to provincial and district agencies civil service reform. - Support the identification and activation of resources available to the provincial

government to promote innovation in service delivery. - Support consolidation of regional network of expertise in good governance and

service delivery.

Improvements in service delivery are to be supported by two interlinked core activities, (a)

finding out a number of resources that are available to the province to encourage service improvement by districts – and therefore reinforce the Province’s legitimacy as facilitator to districts, and (b) devise monitoring procedures and programs that actively involve stakeholders and therewith can provide direct feedback on user satisfaction and invite user participation in the management as well.

Ideally the Province exerts its facilitative role via activities that help synergize activities of

all or part of the districts related by common needs and ventures (e.g. agriculture, markets & commodities) or interdependent (e.g. urban district - rural district interdependencies in water supply, drainage & flood control, port & transport facilities, solid waste management).

The province has a range of personnel, equipment and financial resources as well as assets

that may be utilized to support initiatives at the district level. PGSP relies on the Provincial Facilitator’s creativity and her/his local counterparts to support the identification and activation of resources available to the provincial government to promote innovations in service delivery. To note, almost all public services that touch the lives of citizens directly are at the districts level. Among the innovations already observed in the regions are: (i) direct technical-assistance to district agencies in crucial affairs, design & engineering, MSS; (ii) incentives to well-performing districts; (iii) competitive project support for districts; (iv) provincial DAK for poor districts; (v) provincial support (technical assistance, maybe financing) to LG public service units / agencies who apply for ISO 14000 (or other) certification.



PGSP support to performance evaluation and monitoring will help local agencies to apply quantitative measurement of outputs and outcomes, rather than limited to reporting based on expenditures (input). In general, stakeholder participation can be observed in the early planning stages, but fades away around the time that the Budget Committee (Panitia Anggaran) scrutinizes the RAPBD. Participation in implementation, even more monitoring and evaluation by any non-government entity is very rare (except for contractors), although a few districts have come with innovations in this field. The overall baseline is therefore practically 0%. Considered crucial for improvement of performance, support to participatory monitoring will become an important activity in the PGSP. It is expected that at the end of the Project at least 50% of service-providing agencies have regular monitoring on-going and institutionalized in a number of public services (covering more than 15% of the APBD) of the province31. These targets will be calibrated in the early stages of the Project and especially with the results of initial surveys.

The indicative activities are centered on the province’s role as facilitator to the member

districts as well as on the province’s own portion of public services. They will be relying on specific authorities of the province on monitoring which will eventually lead to evaluation, a task of the province by law. The province’s role in support to de-concentration activities of national ministries or agencies, or implementation of assistance tasks (Tugas Pembantuan) may or may not necessarily be part of the work plan, depending on the results of the revision of Law no. 32/2004 in regards to role and functions of the province vis a vis de-concentration and assistance tasks assignments.

The provincial government will need to set some good examples on how to improve their service delivery through the incorporation of MSS. Improvement of selected provincial level service delivery can be utilized for this purpose. Then assistance to regencies/ municipalities to define MSS and determine their annual targets can be a strategic activity, within the agreed provincial strategy. Determination of MSS targets in time will help the specific service agencies to set their annual targets and budgets. At the province level, targets of the districts accumulate into total achievement of the particular services, which on their part contribute to meeting a number of MDGs. If required by the work plan, the Provincial Facilitator is expected to be ready for assisting the province in determining MSS for one or more selected services, and plan progressive targets for the medium term. The PMU is expected to provide backup, especially in communication with national agencies. Regardless of the inclusion or not of MSS targeting in the work plan, provincial achievements in 2010 - 2012 will be noted, as performance in service delivery will also be influenced by other activities.

If resources are available, the province prioritize certain activities among a variety of actions to increase stakeholder participation in implementation, monitoring and evaluation, to be carried out by additional facilitators or in collaboration with CSOs or academic affiliation units to: (i) promote organization and education of stakeholders in services management like regular discussions at the district level, user associations, village and neighborhood meetings, farmer groups, water / irrigation management or women’s associations; (ii) assist consolidation of management information system using HDI and focused on public services.

Optional capacity development activities for the Province to improve performance of local agencies in coping with public service challenges may be directed to the Province’s own work-units and personnel (who will become trainers on their part) as well as to district agencies and personnel. The following kinds of activities may illustrate possible PGSP contribution: (i) on-the-job assistance to service delivery management (outsourced to experts or teams); (ii) assistance to provincial civil service reform, including assessment of service delivery capacities. Assistance to personnel performance evaluation, merit and position-based, gender sensitive, non-primordial,

31 Links between PGSP participatory monitoring activities and participatory monitoring activities of other projects will need to be identified and the activities should be complementary. This includes projects in preparation, including that of the Poverty Reduction Unit, UNDP.



accessible for People with Disabilities (PWDs); (iii) support consolidation of regional network of expertise in good governance and service delivery focusing on centers of excellence in provincial level universities in each of the participating provinces; (iv) consolidation, management of, and financial reporting on local government assets.

From sources presently available, there are a few provinces that manage to significantly influence the performance of districts and thereby the performance of the province as a whole. The following would describe the present majority of provinces:

- HDR will be evaluated as a potential monitoring tool and especially experience

with the application of the HDR will be assessed. Lessons learned will be applied to ensure effective enhancement of the tool.

- Limited facilitation by Province for services at district level; limited to coordination of overlapping functions. This varies among provinces, so that PGSP provinces may each start from a different status (this information will be part of pre-project assessment during verification of candidate provinces).

- No interrelation between provincial and district targets of performance. - Stakeholder involvement in implementation and evaluation of services is limited

to media; feedback / complaint / grievance handling systems are generally not in place or not operational.

- In general, provincial agency scope of works / ‘Tupoksi’ and staff job descriptions do not yet relate to clear roles and functions such that performance can be measured directly.

3.7 Coordination and Synchronization with Sister Project (AGI) PGSP is a UNDP-GOI support that shares a common objective with another UNDP-GOI

project ART GOLD Indonesia (AGI) to reinforce the provincial government in their role as facilitators and promoters of regional development. AGI support will be provided at three levels namely at the sub-national, national and international levels. By the time this project document is written, AGI will be operational in 2 provinces. An inter-project collaboration at provincial, national and internal levels are sought for both PGSP and AGI. The collaboration is geared towards the achievement of the following outputs:

(i) At the provincial level, PGSP and AGI have successfully combined synergies in

reinforcing the roles and functions of provincial government;

(ii) At the national level, PGSP and AGI have created a common pool of knowledge and expertise in issues such as good governance and decentralization; and

(iii) At the international level, PGSP has benefited from the international technical expertise and study visits from decentralized cooperation networks facilitated by ART International.

Policy and plan coordination and synchronization are required during the course of project

implementation, especially during the following critical stages:

(i) Annual/quarter planning and evaluation as well as activity adjustments that are done prior to activity implementations;

(ii) Preparation of financing supports both for the project in general and for particular activities;

(iii) Development of a knowledge base and dissemination of lessons learned; and



(iv) Implementations of certain activities that require inter-project collaboration either at provincial, national, and/or international level.

To ensure coordinated guidance to both projects, PGSP and AGI share some parts of

project organization structure, which will be further described in Section 6.

3.8 Inputs

PART A - in each participating province in each year an extensive range of capacity

development activities will be supported which will produce the outputs needed to achieve the agreed Project Outputs 2 and 3. The activities will be facilitated in each participating province by a Provincial Facilitator and the activities include investments in Workshops and Surveys. Up to 200 person months of consultancy (in addition to the Provincial Facilitators) will be available to each participating province over the 36 months of the Project. In total Part A will require approximately US$ 7,000,000.

PART B – at national level some activities will be undertaken with up to 150 person

months of national and international consultants, to support the achievement of Output 1. The inputs will also include extensive Workshops and Surveys and will also include responsibility for liaison with Resource Provinces. In total Part B will require close to US$ 1,300,000 over the course of the Project.

A 36 month Project starting in January 2010 and ending in December 2012; with up to 25

capacity development activities in 3 participating provinces, liaison with resource provinces, up to 15 policy research, advocacy and assistance activities to legislation and regulation reform activities undertaken by a national level team and with support by a Project management and administration system; will require approximately US$ 8.3 million.

A breakdown of the Project costs by Year, Output and Activity is provided in Section 5.

3.9 Risks • National and sub-national government ownership is a precondition for an effective PGSP.

Care needs to be taken to ensure that PGSP is not overly donor-driven.

• It is recommended that the start date is agreed based on: (i) technical issues (i.e. synchronization with planning and budget cycles at provincial level and the demand for Implementing Regulations of the Law 32 revision at national level); and (ii) practical issues, the start date is subject to funding being available, the timing of funding availability and meeting Project Management requirements linked to the funding mechanism(s).

• A three year Project may be too short for significant contribution to achieving the Intended Impact. It is considered that three years will be sufficient to effectively contribute to Output 1. Outputs 2 and 3 at provincial level in three provinces will also have sufficient exposure to PGSP encouragement of relevant initiatives.

• To achieve Output 1 it will be necessary to confirm that PGSP will have an acknowledged official role as a contributor to the formulation of these regulations (similar in nature to the current successful arrangement for the GTZ funded contribution to Law 32 Revision).

• To achieve Outputs 2 and 3 provincial governments will need to commit to the core capacity development programs specified in the Project design.

• The Project has been designed to undertake activities linked to Outputs 2 and 3 in three provinces. There is a risk that this number of provinces will be too small to act as a



representative selection of provinces on which to base much of the work of PART B. The risk is mitigated by the use of other provinces as “Resource Provinces” i.e. special case provinces including Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam, which has been given extraordinary powers to be able to respond to the post-tsunami reconstruction needs, and Papua.

• There is a risk that Output 2 and 3 activities in three provinces will stretch Project resources too thinly and in depth capacity development which will identify lessons learned in “coping mechanisms” of provincial stakeholders. This risk is limited and the use of senior Facilitators in the Provinces is intended to “catalyze’ initiatives form the stakeholders, rather than use extensive PGSP consultancy.

• There is a risk that Provincial Facilitators of sufficient quality will not be available. In other Projects where reliance has been placed on Provincial Facilitators this has not been a problem.

• It is clear that innovations happen at the district level. This implies that the province: (i) have to be able to encourage innovation and disseminate; and (ii) has to be careful not to inhibit innovation by any means.

• PGSP advocacy for local execution of affairs will need to be accompanied by careful selection of supporting activities. Demonstrating that local governments are able to carry out key activities in all sectors is an important element, especially in view of promoting MDG achievement at local level. However, there may be risks concerning this approach. Resistance on the part of national institutions may appear, especially when concerning activities that are already being executed by national agencies (even in elaboration of MSSs).

• Other risks may be faced in PGSP implementation: on the one hand, possible excess of authority by provincial agencies / the governor, leading to loss of initiative of district governments and lack of cooperation from the civil society. On the other hand, a possibility of the governor being too dependent on sector advice from national agencies, leading to ‘business as usual’.

• It also needs to be considered that what is promoted by the law and bylaws does not necessarily appeal to the districts and that district initiatives or local innovations will not necessarily be supported by the existing legal framework. The PGSP assumes that the developing regulatory framework is to be promoted in the regions and is open for feedback, while regional innovations similarly need response at national level. This top-down and bottom-up learning process may occur throughout the PGSP.

• Sustainability may be achieved if stakeholders are genuinely involved. This may be further safeguarded by providing them legal strength, like PERDAs or Governor Decrees.

• Program support to establish and strengthen pools of local ‘service providers’ (as done through LGSP) is a useful contribution to local capacity development and provides sustainability.

• Local governments tend to expect incoming TA as grants to the local government and then set up separate teams, “pokja” and the like, where the fortunate members can get extra honoraria. A few local governments have got rid of this practice, but a general tendency to consider each project as a different exercise (and establish separate counterpart teams) is still strong. PGSP needs to find ways to integrate its activities into the job description / “tupoksi” of every related unit / agency.



SECTION 4 – RESULTS AND RESOURCES FRAMEWORK Intended Outcome as stated in GoI Policy 32 • Revitalization of the Decentralization and Regional Autonomy Process: (i) attained synchronization and harmonization of regulations; (ii) enhanced

cooperation among regional governments; (iii) effective, efficient and accountable regional governments; (iv) established capacity in management of resources by professional and competent regional government apparatus; (v) transparent, accountable and professional management of funds and development funding; and (vi) reformed new autonomous regions.

• Creating Clean and Credible Governance. • Realization of Increasingly Solid Democratic Institutions. Expected Outcomes of the UN Assistance Framework and the UN Country Program and Action Plan: By 2010, pro-poor democratic governance is realized with enhanced accountability, capacity and participation in the 10 poorest provinces. By 2010, pro-poor participatory decentralization policies and mechanisms in place with public and private institutions adhering to the rule of law and

international instruments. Note: Along with other projects, PGSP is to contribute to 2010 outcomes; for 2011-2012, the project anticipates expanded and new aims to which the Project may need to adapt. Intended PGSP Impact: Provincial government roles and functions strengthened through effective participatory policy making, regional development planning and public service delivery, leading to realization of national development objectives and the improvement of quality of life for the poorest

32 National Medium-term Plan 2004-2009, chapters 13 - 15 related to governance.



Project Title: Provincial Governance Strengthening Programme (PGSP)

Intended Outputs

Output Targets for 2010 -2012

Indicative Activities 33

Responsible parties

Inputs

OUTPUT 1: Enhanced Policy and Regulatory Framework that further clarifies and strengthens roles and functions of provincial government and council (DPRD) Baseline 1.1. Distinction between devolved, de-concentrated and assistance functions of provincial government is unclear and often ignored by sector agencies. Indicators 1.1. • Number of policy

recommendations on provincial government’s role and functions delivered to the decision makers.

• The revised Law 32 made a particular section about provincial government’s role and functions

• RPJMN 2010-2014 contains the role and the functions of provincial government.

Target 1.1. The revised Law 32 and RPJMN 2010-2014 provided clearer distinction between devolved, de-concentrated and assistance responsibilities of provincial governments 2010/Q1-Q2 PGSP at national level, Steering Committee and PMU mobilized. - Policy Team established. - Priority research areas and funding for 2009

agreed; mechanisms for provincial PGSP feedback established.

2010/Q1 to Q4 Substantive discussions on the process of formulation of RPJMN take place on inputs/ recommendations produced by research on provincial and local level experiences. Substantive discussions on the process of revision of Law no.32/2004 take place based on inputs/recommendations produced by research on provincial and local level experiences.

2010/Q1-Q2 Establishment of a policy team, officially involved in preparation of regulatory framework of decentralization in Indonesia (revision of Law 32/2004 and its implementing regulations). 2010/Q1 to Q4 Application of national and provincial lessons learned to formulation of RPJMN: - Series of research on provincial or local

level experiences to produce policy/ working papers as inputs/recommendations to the process of formulation of RPJMN.

Application of national and provincial lessons learned to formulation of revised Law 32/2004 (in the early stages of the Project): - Series of research on provincial or local

level experiences to produce policy/working papers as

Output 1: - National Steering

Committee - National

Technical Committee

- Directorate of Regional Function, MOHA

- PMU (in collaboration with Provincial Stakeholders including Resource Provinces).

Output 1 from 2010 to 2012: Approximately USD 1 ,342 ,000

33 Consultation with Province or other stakeholders may bring more options.



Intended Outputs



Responsible parties

Inputs

inputs/recommendations to the process of revision of Law no 32/2004.

- Facilitation of inter-ministerial discussions on the revision of Law no.32/2004

- Support to the process of deliberation of the revision of Law no.32/2004

- Regulatory Impact Assessment (RIA) of the revision of Law no.32/2004 in one of the pilot provinces

Baseline 1.2. Overlap between provincial and other levels unresolved. Indicators 1.2. Number of implementing regulations of the revised Law 32 drafted regarding provincial role and functions.

Target 1.2. GoI Implementing Regulations of the revised Law 32 clarified the distinct roles and functions of each level of government and there is no overlap between national, provincial and local levels 2010 – - Substantive discussions on the process of

development or revision of implementing regulations of revised Law no.32/2004 take place based on inputs/recommendations produced by research on provincial and local level experiences.

- Preliminary draft of GoI Implementing Regulations (PP, Permen, Perda) for the revised Law no.32/2004, incorporating PGSP research findings and lessons learned from PGSP provincial activities and resource provinces.

2011 - Draft of GoI Implementing Regulations (PP,

Permen, Perda) for the revised Law 32, incorporating PGSP research findings and lessons learned from PGSP provincial activities.

Application of national and provincial lessons learned to formulation of GoI Implementing Regulations of the revised Law 32: - Series of research on provincial or local

level experiences to produce policy/ working papers as inputs/recommendations to the process of development or revision of implementing regulations of the revised Law no.32/2004

2010 – - Facilitation of inter-ministerial discussions

on the development of specific implementing regulations for the revised Law no.32/2004



Intended Outputs



Responsible parties

Inputs

Baseline 1.3. Law 32 is being revised and the relevant provincial and local legislations are to be aligned with the revised Law 32. Indicators 1.3. Number of local legislation (PERDAs) aligned with the policy changes in national level.

Target 1.3. Alignment (synchronization and harmonization) of provincial and local legislation (PERDAs) with the revised Law 32 and its Implementing Regulations

2010 – - Support to the alignment (synchronization

and harmonization) of provincial and local PERDA in participating provinces and their districts.

Baseline 1.4. Revision of Law 32 is on going and there is limited input recommendations to the revision of Law 32. Indicators 1.4. Number of reports and policy papers for the revision of Law 32

Target 1.4. Resource analysis undertaken and recommendations made, including input to the revision of Law 32 2010 – Research and mapping results provided to identify programmatic and financial resources to ensure adequate GoI funding for implementation of revised Law 32 and its implementing regulations (PP, Permen, Perda). 2011 Agreement reached with GoI agencies and other donors for collaborative works in regards to ensuring adequate GoI funding for implementation of the revised Law 32 and its implementing regulations (PP, Permen, Perda). 2012 Agreement reached with GoI agencies and other donors for collaborative works in regards to ensuring adequate GoI funding for implementation of revised Law 32 and its implementing regulations (PP, Permen, Perda).

2010 – Research and Mapping to support national and provincial governments / elected bodies to identify programmatic and financial resources to implement revised Law 32 and its implementing regulations (PP, Permen, Perda). 2011 Discussions and negotiation with national and provincial governments / elected bodies as well as donors on potential of collaboration in ensuring adequate GoI funding to implement the revised Law 32 and its implementing regulations (PP, Permen, Perda). 2012 Discussions and negotiation with national and provincial governments / elected bodies as well as donors on potential of collaboration in ensuring adequate GoI funding to implement revised Law 32 and its implementing regulations (PP, Permen, Perda).



Intended Outputs



Responsible parties

Inputs

Baseline 1.5. Knowledge base and lessons learned on strengthening roles and functions of provincial government and council (DPRD) is still inadequate. Indicators 1.5. • Number of policy research

produced • Number of public discussion

(i.e. FGD, conference, seminar) organized

• Number of cross-region or cross-country knowledge exchange organized.

Target 1.5. Knowledge base developed and lessons learned disseminated 2010/Q1 National Workshop on the Role of the Province is organized, with strong involvement of the Pilot Provinces 2010 – - Lessons learned from PGSP provincial activities

in 2009 and from resource provinces available - Reviews undertaken at regional and local levels,

knowledge base established and initial dissemination of lessons learned.

- Priority research for 2011 agreed. 2011 - Lessons learned from PGSP provincial activities

in 2010 and from resource provinces available. - Reviews undertaken at regional and local levels,

knowledge base consolidated and dissemination of lessons learned.

- Priority research for 2012 agreed.

2010/Q1 Joint organising of a national workshop on the role of the province with the selected provincial governments and BAPPENAS to agree on the agenda of work for three and half years of PGSP. 2010 – - Regular reviews by all stakeholders at

regional and national levels, establishment of a knowledge base and dissemination of lessons learned. Inasmuch as possible, this activity will be carried out jointly with AGI. (*) 34

- Second round of participatory surveys / FGDs undertaken on institutional, organizational, networking dimensions of provincial government.

2011 - Regular reviews by all stakeholders at

regional and national levels, establishment of a knowledge base and dissemination of lessons learned. Inasmuch as possible, this activity will be carried out jointly with AGI. (*)

- Third round of participatory surveys / FGDs undertaken on institutional, organizational, networking dimensions of provincial government.

34 Activities with asterisk (*) will be inasmuch as possible co-implemented by PGSP and AGI.



Intended Outputs



Responsible parties

Inputs

2012 - Lessons learned from PGSP provincial activities

in 2011 and from resource provinces available. - Reviews undertaken at regional and local levels,

knowledge base consolidated and dissemination of lessons learned.

- PGSP independently evaluated. 2010-2012, annually: - Documentation of provincial practice in

governance on-going and available at national, provincial and district levels.

- Concrete forms of appreciation (e.g. media coverage, awards) awarded to provinces that applied good practice in previous years.

2012 - Regular reviews by all stakeholders at

regional and national levels, establishment of a knowledge base and dissemination of lessons learned. Inasmuch as possible, this activity will be carried out jointly with AGI. (*)


OUTPUT 2: Strategic regional economic development planning strengthened, effectively link planning and budgeting using HDI/HDR; with participatory decision-making mechanism in place Baseline 2.1. • Lack of relationship between the

medium-term, long-term and annual plans of district, provincial and national levels of government.

• Overlap between provincial roles and other levels exist and mostly unresolved.

Indicators 2.1. • Number of technical assistance

that are given to provincial government as mediator and

Target 2.1. Enhanced role of provincial government as mediator of planning based on participatory needs assessments (bottom-up) and national targets (top-down) 2010 / Q1 to Q2 - Inconsistencies and gaps between musrenbang

results, medium- or long-term plans identified. - Overlaps and gaps in roles and functions of

provincial and other levels, identified - Capacity deficiencies and potential local

resources of expertise, identified.

Support to the consolidation of the mediation role of provincial government: - Policy Team to map out baseline problems

in development planning process in the pilot provinces.

- Technical Assistance to Provincial Govt in facilitating and coordinating inter-district and inter-sector planning cycle and mechanisms. Inasmuch as possible, the planning facilitation and coordination will be carried out jointly with AGI. (*)

- Technical Assistance to establish, develop and enhance the capacity of Forum of



Technical Committee

- Provincial Steering Committee

- BAPPENAS - PMU - Provincial

Governments - DPRD - Civil Society

organizations / NGOs, Academic institutions

Output 2 from 2010 to 2012: Approximately USD 3,660,000



Intended Outputs



Responsible parties

Inputs

coordinator organized. • Number of technical rules and

regulatory products produced that support the coordination and mediation role of provincial government in regional planning.

2010 - Design and mechanism for Provincial Govt to

facilitate and coordinate inter-district and inter-sector planning cycle and mechanisms produced and agreed with the provincial government and respective district governments

- Design and mechanism for the establishment and/or strengthening of Forum of BAPPEDAs produced and agreed with the provincial government and respective district governments

- Design and mechanism for the establishment and/or strengthening of Forum of SKPDs produced and agreed with the provincial government and respective district governments

2011 - Mechanism for Provincial Govt to facilitate and

coordinate inter-district and inter-sector planning cycle and mechanisms is in place and operational

- Mechanism for the establishment and/or strengthening of Forum of BAPPEDAs is in place and operational

- Mechanism for the establishment and/or strengthening of Forum of SKPDs is in place and operational

2012 - Mechanism for Provincial Govt to facilitate and

coordinate inter-district and inter-sector planning cycle and mechanisms has been reviewed and modified as necessary.

- Mechanism for the establishment and/or strengthening of Forum of BAPPEDAs has been reviewed and modified as necessary.

- Mechanism for the establishment and/or strengthening of Forum of SKPDs has been reviewed and modified as necessary.

BAPPEDAs, consisting of the Provincial BAPPEDAs and the District-level BAPPEDAs, to ensure institutionalization of inter-district coordination and harmonization.

- Technical Assistance to establish, develop and enhance the capacity of Forum of Provincial level SKPDs to ensure institutionalization of inter-sector coordination and harmonization.

- Technical Assistance to synchronise the Provincial level RPJMD with the Provincial level Spatial Plan (RTRW).



Intended Outputs



Responsible parties

Inputs

Baseline 2.2. • Provincial annual, medium and

long-term plans are not yet consistent with each other and processes are not linked.

• Projects implemented are not consistent with plans.

Indicators 2.2. • Number of technical assistance

to facilitate and coordinate inter-district and inter-sectoral planning organized.

• Number of on-the-job assistance from experts organized.

• Technical guideline on facilitating inter-district and inter-sectoral planning produced.

• Provincial Human Development Report formulated.

• Logical framework and working mechanism to integrate the use of HDR/HDI in development plans (RPJMD, RKPD, RENSTRA SKPD, RTRWP) produced.

Target 2.2. Enhanced provincial capacity to coordinate / integrate various sectors across administrative boundaries through economic and spatial planning, including through enhanced RPJMD, RKP, RENSTRA SKPD and RTRW incorporating HDR/HDI 2010 / Q1 to Q2 - Inconsistencies and gaps between APBD and

plans of selected sectors identified. - Capacity deficiencies and potential local

resources of expertise, identified. - RPJMD process and strategy for enhancement

(including the incorporation of HDR agreed with participating provinces) identified.

2010 - Design and mechanism for synchronization of

RPJMD and RTRW produced and agreed with the provincial government and council (DPRD).

- Logical Framework and Working Mechanism to synergize the use of HDR/HDI, MDG report and PEACH in enhancing development planning is produced and accepted by stakeholders.

- Framework for Review and Enhancement of RPJMD, RENSTRA SKPD and RTRW incorporating HDI/HDR is produced and accepted by stakeholders

2011 - Mechanism for synchronization of RPJMD and

RTRW is in place and operational , supported by both the provincial government and council (DPRD) with a legal framework (Perda).

- A comprehensive framework to synergize the use of HDR/HDI, MDG report and PEACH has been tested and is incorporated in enhancing provincial development planning mechanism

Support to the consolidation of coordination mechanisms of government and non-government stakeholders for the preparation and implementation of regional socio-economic development plans including consistency between Annual Plan (RKP), RENSTRA SKPD, RPJMD and spatial plans (RTRW): - Technical Assistance to develop Provincial

level HDI/HDR and to develop a framework to synergize the use of HDR/HDI, MDG report and the WB’s PEACH in order to enhance Provincial Development Planning Framework. Inasmuch as possible, this will be carried out jointly with AGI. (*)

- Technical Assistance to Provincial Govt to develop, review or enhance Mid-term Development Plan (RPJMD), RENSTRA SKPD and RTRW with the incorporation of HDI/HDR as bench marking framework.



Intended Outputs



Responsible parties

Inputs

- Framework for Review and Enhancement of RPJMD, RENSTRA SKPD and RTRW incorporating HDI/HDR has been tested and is incorporated in enhancing provincial development planning mechanism

2012 - Mechanism for synchronization of RPJMD and

RTRW has been reviewed and modified as necessary. supported by both the provincial government and council (DPRD) with a legal framework (Perda).

- The comprehensive framework to synergize the use of HDR/HDI, MDG report and PEACH has been reviewed and modified as necessary as well as legalized by a Governor Decree (SK Gubernur)

- Framework for Review and Enhancement of RPJMD, RENSTRA SKPD and RTRW incorporating HDI/HDR has been modified as necessary and legalized by a Governor Decree (SK Gubernur)

Baseline 2.3. Participatory strategic planning and economic planning skills and techniques are inadequate. Indicators 2.3. • Stakeholders of Provincial

Musrenbang identified. • Mechanism and guidelines for

multi-stakeholders engagement in Provincial Musrenbang drafted.

• Number of technical assistance to strengthen the role of multi-stakeholders mechanism in Provincial Musrenbang

Target 2.3. Mechanisms for stakeholder engagement at provincial level strengthened in the planning process (focusing on the musrenbang at provincial level) 2009 / Q1 to Q2 Mechanisms for stakeholder engagement identified 2010 The design of mechanism to ensure effective participation of civil society in decision-making processes of Provincial and District-level Musrenbang, RPJMD, RKP, RENSTRA SKPD and RTRW is identified and agreed by government and non-government stakeholders.

Support to ensuring stakeholder engagement at provincial level in the planning process, with emphasis on the musrenbang process: - Technical Assistance to establish

mechanism to ensure effective participation of civil society in decision-making processes of Provincial and District-level Musrenbang as well as in the formulation or enhancement of RPJMD, RKP, RENSTRA SKPD and RTRW. Inasmuch as possible, this will be carried out jointly with AGI. (*)



Intended Outputs



Responsible parties

Inputs

supported.

2011 Mechanism to ensure effective participation of civil society in decision-making processes of Provincial and District-level Musrenbang, RPJMD, RKP, RENSTRA SKPD has been tested and is incorporated in the above-mentioned planning framework. 2012 Mechanism to ensure effective participation of civil society in decision-making processes of Provincial and District-level Musrenbang, RPJMD, RKP, RENSTRA SKPD has been reviewed and modified as necessary.

Baseline 2.4. Knowledge base and lessons learned on strengthening roles and functions of provincial government and council (DPRD) is still inadequate. Indicators 2.4. Knowledge products (i.e. books, repots, etc) on provincial government’s capacity development on regional strategic development planning.

Target 2.4. Knowledge base developed and provincial lessons learned disseminated

2009 / Q1 to Q2 Working mechanism in conducting the regular reviews as well as the logical framework for the establishment of the knowledge base is identified and agreed upon by all programme stakeholders. 2010 Knowledge base established and dissemination strategy identified and agreed with participating provincial agencies (including local universities as appropriate). 2011 Knowledge base and dissemination strategy has been reviewed and modified. 2012 Knowledge base and dissemination strategy has been consolidated. Provincial PGSP independently evaluated.

Regular reviews by all stakeholders at provincial and district levels, establishment of a knowledge base and dissemination of lessons learned. Inasmuch as possible, the dissemination of lessons learned will be carried out jointly with AGI. (*)



Intended Outputs



Responsible parties

Inputs

OUTPUT 3 Achievement of better development outcomes at provincial level through governance innovations: implementation of minimum service standards, civil service reform, participatory monitoring and evaluation and sustainable cross province learning. Baseline 3.1. • Limited facilitation by

provincial governments for services at district level (varies among target provinces and needs pre-project assessment).

• No interrelation between provincial and district targets of performance.

Indicators 3.1. • Baseline mapping on capacity

and readiness of districts to implement MSS on welfare sectors, produced.

• Number of technical assistance to districts from provincial government.

• Number of MMS formulated and number of sectors and institutions implemented MMS on welfare sectors.

Target 3.1. District initiatives facilitated by province to improve delivery of public services, incorporating minimum service standards (on welfare sectors). 2010 / Q1 to Q2 - Provincial RJMD is reviewed and revised to

ensure the incorporation of Policy Framework for the achievement of MSS.

- Provincial Legal Framework (Governor Decree/SK Gubernur) as legal basis for achievement of MSS at provincial level issued.

- Work Plan for Provincial SKPDs to achieve full implementation of MSS in sectoral development produced and adopted as Renstra SKPD 2009 – 2012 and RKP 2010.

- Budgetary framework and projection in regards to the achievement of full implementation of MSS produced and legalized as Governor Decree/SK Gubernur.

2010 Public Service Targets and Minimum Service Standards adopted and used in monitoring of services: - Partial Implementation of MSS in most strategic

sectoral offices of Provincial Government. - Establishment of the Provincial Office to

operationalize Complaint Handling Mechanism. - Work Plan for Provincial SKPDs to achieve full

Technical Assistance to Regencies/ Municipalities to define MSS and determine annual targets, within the agreed provincial strategy: - Technical Assistance to undertake

participatory survey and research to define MSS at the provincial and district level.

- Facilitation for budget allocation and confirmation in regards to fulfillment of MSS.

- Technical Assistance to SKPDs in establishing working mechanisms to achieve MSS.

- Technical Assistance to establish Complaint Handling Mechanism in regards to fulfillment of MSS.

- Public and Media Advocacy to develop awareness on the importance of the incorporation of MSS.



Technical Committee

- MOHA - Provincial

Steering Committee

- PMU - Provincial

Governments - Civil Society

organizations / NGOs, Academic institutions.

Output 3 from 2010 to 2012: Approximately USD 3,300,000



Intended Outputs



Responsible parties

Inputs

implementation of MSS in sectoral development produced and adopted as RKP 2011

2011 MSS achievements evaluated and utilized in service improvement action-plans: - Full Implementation of MSS in most strategic

sectoral offices of Provincial Government. - The Provincial Office on Complaint Handling

Mechanism is operational and able to serve public.

- Work Plan for Provincial SKPDs to achieve full implementation of MSS in sectoral development produced and adopted as RKP 2012.

2012 MSS achievements evaluated and utilized in service improvement action-plans: - Full Implementation of MSS in most strategic

sectoral offices of Provincial Government. - The Provincial Office on Complaint Handling

Mechanism is operational and able to serve public.

- Work Plan for Provincial SKPDs to achieve full implementation of MSS in sectoral development produced and adopted as RKP 2013

- Exit strategy for the operationalization of MSS is formulated.

Baseline 3.2. Stakeholder involvement in implementation and evaluation of services is limited to media; feedback / complaint handling system generally not working. Indicators 3.2. • Provincial Human Development

Report formulated.

Target 3.2. Mechanisms for multi-stakeholder engagement in monitoring and evaluation of development outcomes are effectively in place at provincial level, applying HDI indicators and targets. 2010 Mechanisms for stakeholder participation evaluated, improvements adopted into operational procedures:

Support implementation of participatory outcome monitoring and evaluation process, including application of HDI indicators and targets: - Technical Assistance to Establish

Provincial SKPD’s participatory monitoring and evaluation mechanism.

- Technical Assistance to establish effective public participation in provincial govt monitoring and evaluation activities.



Intended Outputs



Responsible parties

Inputs

• HDI applied to monitor and evaluate development outcome at pilot provinces.

• Guidelines on participatory M&E applying HDI, developed.

• Regulatory framework on participatory M&E applying HDI, drafted.

- Mechanism to establish Provincial SKPD’s participatory monitoring and evaluation agreed and adopted as PERDA.

- Mechanism to establish effective public participation in provincial govt inter-sectoral monitoring and evaluation system agreed and adopted as PERDA.

- Mechanism to establish effective public participation in relation to oversight function and mechanism of Provincial DPRD agreed and adopted as PERDA.

2011 Stakeholder participation in implementation, monitoring and evaluation have become regular and institutionalized in a number of public services (covering 15% of the APBD) of the province: - Provincial SKPD’s participatory monitoring and

evaluation mechanism is operational. - Mechanism for effective public participation in

provincial govt inter-sectoral monitoring and evaluation system is operational.

- Mechanism for effective public participation in relation to oversight function and mechanism of Provincial DPRD is operational.

2012 Stakeholder participation in implementation, monitoring and evaluation have become regular and institutionalized in a number of public services (covering 15% of the APBD) of the province: - Provincial SKPD’s participatory monitoring and

evaluation mechanism is operational. - Mechanism for effective public participation in

provincial govt inter-sectoral monitoring and evaluation system is operational.

- Mechanism for effective public participation in relation to oversight function and mechanism of Provincial DPRD is operational.

- Exit strategy for the operationalization and

Inasmuch as possible, this might use the established AGI’s working groups as a platform. (*)

- Technical Assistance to establish effective public participation in relation to oversight function and mechanisms of Provincial DPRD

- Public and Media Advocacy to develop awareness on the importance of the incorporation of participatory processes and public participation in government monitoring and evaluation system.



Intended Outputs



Responsible parties

Inputs

enhancement of participatory monitoring and evaluation system and mechanisms is formulated

Baseline 3.3. Agency and staff functions and their budgets not directly or clearly related to their roles and functions in delivering services. Indicators 3.3. • Capacity assessment,

performance evaluation and capacity development strategy, carried out and formulated.

• Local government regulations (PERDAs) and other regulation produced to support civil service reform in public services at provincial level.

Target 3.3. Provincial civil service reform and budgets are linked to re-defined roles and responsibilities. 2010 Conceptual and Operational Framework for Civil Service Reform at provincial level is adopted: - Strategy Paper for Civil Service Reform is

agreed between the Provincial Government and DPRD and adopted in the process of development or revision of RPJMD.

- Capacity Assessment and Formulation of Capacity Development Strategies for most strategic offices of Provincial Government implemented as foundation work for Civil Service Reform.

2011 Operational Framework for Civil Service Reform at provincial level is adopted: - Perda on Civil Service Reform is operational and

review, re-structuring and re-profiling of assignments, functions, responsibilities, and recruitment system of provincial government offices are implemented.

- Research/survey on remuneration reform for the provincial government are implemented.

2012 Operational Framework for Civil Service Reform at provincial level is adopted: - Perda on Civil Service Reform is operational and

review, re-structuring and re-profiling of assignments, functions, responsibilities, and recruitment system of provincial government offices are implemented

- Research/survey on remuneration reform for the

Technical Assistance to provincial and district agencies civil service reform: - Participatory capacity assessment and

formulation of capacity development strategies for most strategic offices of provincial govt. Inasmuch as possible, this might involve the established AGI’s working groups. (*)

- Review, Re-structuring and Re-profiling of assignments, functions, responsibilities, and recruitment system of provincial government offices.

- Research/survey on remuneration reform for the provincial government.

- Public and Media Advocacy to develop awareness on the importance of the adoption and implementation of civil service reform at the provincial level.



Intended Outputs



Responsible parties

Inputs

provincial government are implemented - Exit strategy on the sustainable management of

civil service reform is formulated.

Baseline 3.4. Knowledge base and lessons learned on strengthening roles and functions of provincial government and council (DPRD) is still inadequate. Indicators 3.4. • Guidelines on concept and

model of innovative provincial governance, produced.

• Number of knowledge products (i.e. proceeding, journal, book, report) produced.

• Number of public discussion (a.o. FGD, seminar, conference, workshop) organized.

• Number of cross-region or cross-country knowledge exchange organized.

Target 3.4. Knowledge base developed and provincial lessons learned disseminated. 2010 / Q1 to Q2 Design of a Clearing House/Resource Center on best practices of good governance and public service delivery at provincial level is agreed by the provincial partners 2010 Regional Network of Expertise in Good Governance and Public Service Delivery at Provincial Level: - Effective Research Network on best practices of

good governance and public service delivery at provincial level

- A Clearing House/Resource Center on best practices of good governance and public service delivery at provincial level is operational and supported by the provincial partners

- Exchange and comparative study between pilot and resource provinces on public service delivery and good governance facilitated and implemented.

2011 Regional Network of Expertise in Good Governance and Public Service Delivery at Provincial Level: - Effective Research Network on best practices of



- Exchange and comparative study between pilot

Support consolidation of regional network of expertise in good governance and service delivery: - Technical assistance to establish effective

research network and Clearing House on best practices of public service delivery and good governance at provincial level. Inasmuch as possible, the research network can benefit from AGI’s ART international network with Centre of Excellence in Europe and other countries. (*)

- Facilitation of exchange and comparative study between provinces in Indonesia on public service delivery and good governance. Inasmuch as possible, the exchange and comparative study will be carried out jointly with AGI. (*)

Support the identification and activation of resources available to the provincial government to promote innovation in service delivery: - Research on Formulation of Exit Strategies

in regards to the transfer of management of MSS, Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation System and Mechanism, Civil Service Reform and Cross-Learning System and Mechanisms, from PGSP to the Provincial Governments.



Intended Outputs



Responsible parties

Inputs

and resource provinces on public service delivery and good governance facilitated and implemented.

2012 Regional Network of Expertise in Good Governance and Public Service Delivery at Provincial Level: - Effective Research Network on best practices of



- Exchange and comparative study between pilot and resource provinces on public service delivery and good governance facilitated and implemented.

- Exit strategy on the operationalization of the Resource Center and facilitation of cross-learning activities is formulated.

Provincial PGSP independently evaluated.



SECTION 5 – ANNUAL PLAN AND BUDGET Figure 5.1 provides a Work Plan and Budget for the proposed PGSP.



Figure 5.1 Annual Plans and Budget Annual Work Plan Budget Sheet (US$) Year 20110

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4Source of

Funds Amount

x x x x UNDP TRAC 71400 Contractual services - individual 48,170$ x x x x UNDP DSF 75100 General Management Support 30,333$

10102 Establishment of a policy team x x x x UNDP DSF 71400 Contractual services - individual $ 54,000 x x x x 71400 Contractual services - individual $ 117,553 x x x x 71600 Travel 2,723$ x x x x 72200 Equipment and furniture 1,950$ x x x x 72500 Supplies 1,489$ x x x x 73100 Office rent 9,699$

Indicators 1.1 x x x x 73100 Utilities 6,225$ - Number of policy recommendations on provincial government’s role and functions delivered to the decision makers.

10104

Joint organizing of a national workshop on the role of the province with the selected provincial governments and BAPPENAS to agree on the agenda of work for the duration of PGSP

x x UNDP DSF 72100 Workshop $ 30,000

x x 72100 Facilitation Activities 36,000$ x x x x 71600 Travel 7,000$ x x x x 72500 Supplies 3,000$ x x x x 74500 Miscellaneuos 4,000$

$ 352,143

x x x x UNDP TRAC 71400 Contractual services - individual $ 48,170 x x x x UNDP DSF 75100 General Management Support $ 30,333 x x x x 71400 Contractual services - individual $ 35,851 x x x x 71600 Travel $ 2,723 x x x x 72200 Equipment and furniture $ 1,950 x x x x 72500 Supplies $ 1,489 x x x x 73100 Office rent $ 9,699 x x x x 73100 Utilities $ 6,213 x x BAPPENAS DSF 72100 Workshop $ 25,000

20102 x x Gorontalo DSF 72100 Technical assistance activities $ 25,000

Indicators 2.1.

20103 x x DSF 72100 Technical assistance activities $ 15,000

20104 x x NTT TRAC 72100 Technical assistance activities $ 25,000

20201 x x x x DSF 72100 Technical assistance activities $ 75,000

20202 x x x x Gorontalo DSF 72100 Technical assistance activities $ 50,000

Indicators 2.2.20203 x x BAPPENAS DSF 72100 Workshop $ 50,000

- Logical framework and working mechanism to integrate the use of HDR/HDI in development plans (RPJMD, RKPD, RENSTRA SKPD, RTRWP) produced

20301 x x Gorontalo DSF 72100 Technical assistance activities $ 25,000

20302 x x DSF 72100 Technical assistance activities $ 10,000

Indicators 2.3.

OUTPUT TARGET

Technical assistance to establish mechanism to ensure effective participation of civil society in decision-making processes of Provincial and District-level Musrenbang as well as in the formulation or enhancement of RPJMD, RKP, RENSTRA SKPD and RTRW (Bangka-Belitung)

Technical assistance to develop a framework to synergize the use of HDR/HDI, MDG report and the WB’s PEACH in order to enhance Provincial Development Planning Framework (Gorontalo)

Disseminate a framework/ model to synergize the use of HDR/HDI, MDG report and the WB’s PEACH in order to enhance Provincial Development Planning Framework (National)

UNDP TRAC

Bangka-Belitung

Bangka-Belitung

TRAC

PLANNED BUDGETRESPON- SIBLE PARTY

TIME FRAMEPLANNED ACTIVITIESAct ID

PMU Running Cost10103

20102 PMU Running Costs

UNDP

Output 1: Enhanced Policy and Regulatory Framework that further clarifies and strengthens roles and functions of provincial government and council (DPRD) [Project ID: 00071518]

Output 2: Strategic regional economic development planning strengthened, effectively link planning and budgeting using HDI/ HDR; with participatory decision-making mechanism in place [Project ID: 00071519]

Budget Description*

Target 1.1: The revised Law 32 and RPJMN 2010-2014 provided clearer distinction between devolved, de-concentrated and assistance

10101

Bangka-Belitung via

UNDP

Technical assistance to establish mechanism to ensure effective participation of civil society in decision-making processes of Provincial and District-level Musrenbang as well as in the formulation or enhancement of RPJMD, RKP, RENSTRA SKPD and RTRW (Gorontalo)

- Stakeholders of Provincial Musrenbang identified

- Mechanisms for stakeholder engagement identified

Target 2.3. Mechanisms for stakeholder engagement at provincial level strengthened in the planning process (focusing on the musrenbang at provincial level).

Policy Team to map out baseline problems in dev't planning process (incl. musrenbang) in pilot provinces

20101

Technical assistance to provincial govt in facilitating and coordinating inter-district and inter-sector planning cycle and mechanisms (Gorontalo)

Technical assistance to develop Provincial level HDI/HDR (Bangka-Belitung)

Technical assistance to provincial govt in facilitating and coordinating inter-district and inter-sector planning cycle and mechanisms (Bangka-Belitung)

- Inconsistencies and gaps between musrenbang results, medium-term, long-term and annual plans of district, provincial and national levels of government identified

10105

- RPJMN 2010-2014 contains the role and the functions of provincial government.

- Provincial Human Development Report formulated.

Technical assistance to provincial govt in facilitating and coordinating inter-district and inter-sector planning cycle and mechanisms (NTT)

- Number of technical assistance that are given to provincial government as mediator and coordinator organized

Facilitation of finalization of RPJMN: 2010 - 2014 BAPPENAS DSF

Project Assurance

Target 2.1 Enhanced role of provincial government as mediator of planning based on participatory needs assessments (bottom-up) and national targets (top-down)

20101

Target 2.2. Enhanced provincial capacity to coordinate / integrate various sectors across admin've boundaries through economic and spatial planning, including through enhanced RPJMD, RKP, RENSTRA SKPD and RTRW incorporating HDR/HDI.

Subtotal of Output 1

Project Assurance



Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4Source of

Funds Amount

20401 x x x x BAPPENAS DSF 72100 Workshop $ 50,000

Indicators 2.4.- Working mechanism in conducting the regular reviews as well as the logical framework for the establishment of the knowledge base is identified and agreed upon by all programme stakeholders

$ 486,429

x x x x UNDP TRAC 71400 Contractual services - individual $ 48,170 x x x x UNDP DSF 75100 General Management Support $ 30,333 x x x x 71400 Contractual services - individual $ 35,851 x x x x 71600 Travel $ 2,723 x x x x 72200 Equipment and furniture $ 1,950 x x x x 72500 Supplies $ 1,489 x x x x 73100 Office rent $ 9,699 x x x x 73100 Utilities $ 6,213

30103Technical Assistance to undertake participatory survey and research to define MSS at provincial level and district level (Bangka-Belitung)

x x x Babel DSF 72100 Technical Assistance Activities $ 20,000

30104Technical Assistance to undertake participatory survey and research to define MSS at provincial level and district level (Gorontalo)

x x x Gorontalo DSF 72100 Technical Assistance Activities $ 20,000

30105 Facilitation for budget allocation and confirmation inregards to fulfillment of MSS (Bangka-Belitung)

x x x Babel DSF 72100 Facilitation Activities $ 20,000

30106 Facilitation for budget allocation and confirmation inregards to fulfillment of MSS (Gorontalo)

x x x Gorontalo DSF 72100 Facilitation Activities $ 20,000

30107Public and Media Advocacy to develop awareness on theimportance of the incorporation of MSS (Bangka-Belitung) x x x Babel DSF 72100 Advocacy Activities $ 20,000

30108 Public and Media Advocacy to develop awareness on theimportance of the incorporation of MSS. (Gorontalo)

x x x Gorontalo DSF 72100 Advocacy Activities $ 20,000

30109Public and Media Advocacy to develop awareness on theimportance of the incorporation of MSS. (NTT) x x x NTT TRAC 72100 Advocacy Activities $ 25,000

Target 3.2 Mechanisms for multi-stakeholder engagement in monitoring and evaluation of development outcomes are effectively in place at provincial level, applying HDI indicators and targets.

30201

Public and Media Advocacy to develop awareness on theimportance of the incorporation of participatory processesand public participation in government monitoring andevaluation system. (Babel)

x x x Babel DSF 72100 Advocacy Activities $ 20,000

Indicators 3.2 Public Awareness on participatory M&E shown 30202

Public and Media Advocacy to develop awareness on theimportance of the incorporation of participatory processesand public participation in government monitoring andevaluation system. (Gorontalo)


Target 3.3 Provincial civil service reform and budgets are linked to re-defined roles and responsibilities.

30301Public and Media Advocacy to develop awareness on the importance of the adoption and implementation of civil service reform at the provincial level.

x x x Babel DSF 72100 Advocacy Activities $ 20,000

Indicators 3.3 Capacity assessment, performance evaluation and capacity development strategy are socialized

30302Public and Media Advocacy to develop awareness on the importance of the adoption and implementation of civil service reform at the provincial level.


$ 361,429

1,200,000$ Breakdown by responsible party:BAPPENAS 175,000$ Pilot Province: Bangka-Belitung 200,000$ Pilot Province: Gorontalo 200,000$ Pilot Province: NTT 50,000$ UNDP 575,000$ Total: 1,200,000$

Breakdown by funding source:UNDP TRAC 450,000$ DSF 750,000$ Total: 1,200,000$

Budget Description*OUTPUT TARGET Act ID PLANNED ACTIVITIES

TIME FRAME RESPON- SIBLE PARTY

PLANNED BUDGET

UNDP TRAC

Target 3.1 District initiatives facilitated by province to improve delivery of public services, incorporating minimum service standards (on welfare sectors).

Indicators 3.1: Baseline mapping on capacity and readiness of districts to implement MSS on welfare sectors, produced.

Subtotal of Output 2

Output 3: Achievement of better development outcomes at provincial level through governance innovations: implementation of minimum service standards, civil service reform, participatory monitoring and evaluation and sustainable cross province learning [Project ID: 00071520]

Target 2.4. Knowledge base developed and provincial lessons learned disseminated.

Establishment of a knowledge base

TotalSubtotal of Output 3

30102 PMU Running Cost

30101 Project Assurance



Annual Work Plan Budget Sheet (US$) Year 2011 (PART A = 3 PROVINCES)

EXPECTED OUTPUTS

and indicators including annual

targets

PLANNED ACTIVITIES

TIMEFRAME RESPONSIBLE PARTY

PLANNED BUDGET

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Source of

Funds

Budget Descriptio

n

Amount

OUTPUT 1: Enhanced Policy and Regulatory Framework that further clarifies and strengthens roles and functions of provincial government and council (DPRD) TARGETS GoI

Implementing Regulations of the revised Law 32 and provincial government regulations provide clearer distinction between devolved, de-concentrated and assistance responsibilities of provincial governments.

GoI Implementing Regulations of the revised Law 32 and provincial and local government regulations clarify distinct roles and functions of each level of government and there is no overlap between national, provincial and local levels.

GoI Implementing Regulations of the revised Law 32 identifies resources to

INDICATIVE PROJECT ACTIVITIES

1.1 Operationalization of a policy team, officially involved in preparation of regulatory framework of decentralization in Indonesia (revision of Law 32/2004 and its implementing regulations).

X X X X 100,000

1.2 Application of national and provincial lessons learned to formulation of RPJMN: Series of policy seminars on provincial or local experiences to produce policy/working papers

BAPPENAS

1.3 Application of national and provincial lessons learned to formulation of GoI Implementing Regulations of the revised Law 32 : Series of research on provincial or local level experiences to produce policy/working papers as inputs/recommendations to the process of development or revision of implementing regulations of the revised Law no 32/2004

X X X MOHA 100,000

1.4 Participatory surveys / FGDs undertaken on institutional, organizational, networking dimensions of provincial government

X X MOHA 50,000

1.5 Support to the process of deliberation of the revision of Law no. 32/2004

MOHA



EXPECTED OUTPUTS


targets

PLANNED ACTIVITIES


PLANNED BUDGET


Funds

Budget Descriptio

n

Amount

implement revised provincial roles and responsibilities



Development of knowledge base and dissemination of lessons learned

Baseline: 1.1. Distinctio

n between devolved, de-concentrated and assistance functions of provincial government is unclear and often ignored by sector agencies.

1.2. Overlap between provincial and other levels unresolved.

1.6 Regulatory Impact Assessment (RIA) of the revision of Law no 32/2004 in one of the pilot provinces

X MOHA 20,000

1.7 Facilitation of inter-ministerial discussions on the development of specific implementing regulations of the revised Law no. 32/2004

X MOHA 25,000

1.8 Support to the alignment of of provincial and local PERDA in the pilot provinces and their respective districts

X MOHA 20,000

1.9 Research and Mapping to support national and provincial govts/elected bodies to identify programmatic and financial resources to implement revised Law 32 and its implementing regulations

X X MOHA 15,000

1.10 Regular reviews by all stakeholders at regional and national levels, establishment of a knowledge base and dissemination of lessons learned.

X MOHA 15,000

1.11 Promote documentation of current practice and mainstream good practice (through publication and awards) by national institutions and/or media.

X MOHA 15,000



EXPECTED OUTPUTS


targets

PLANNED ACTIVITIES


PLANNED BUDGET


Funds

Budget Descriptio

n

Amount

1.12 Support to Project Monitoring, Review and Independent Evaluation (Project Assurance, National Steering Committee, Natonal Technical Committee, Monitoring and Evaluation)

X X X X 50,000

OUTPUT 2 Strategic regional economic development planning strengthened, effectively link planning and budgeting using HDI/HDR; with participatory decision-making mechanism in place TARGETS Enhanced role

of provincial government as mediator of planning based on participatory needs assessments (bottom-up) and national targets (top-down).

Enhanced provincial capacity to coordinate / integrate various sectors across administrative boundaries through economic and spatial planning.

Mechanisms for stakeholder engagement at provincial level strengthened in the planning process (including the musrenbang).

CORE PROJECT ACTIVITIES

Support to the consolidation of the mediation role of the provincial government:

2.1 Policy Team to map out baseline problems in development planning process in the pilot provinces.

2.2 Technical Assistance to Provincial Govt in facilitating and coordinating inter-district and inter-sector planning cycle and mechanisms

X X X X BAPPENAS and Provincial Govt

200,000

2.3 Technical Assistance to establish, develop and enhance the capacity of Forum of BAPPEDAs, consisting of the Provincial BAPPEDAs and the District-level BAPPEDAs, to ensure institutionalization of inter-district coordination and harmonization.


175,000

2.4 Technical Assistance to establish, develop and enhance the capacity of Forum of Provincial level SKPDs to ensure institutionalization of inter-sector coordination and harmonization.


175,000



EXPECTED OUTPUTS


targets

PLANNED ACTIVITIES


PLANNED BUDGET


Funds

Budget Descriptio

n

Amount

Enhanced RPJMD including the incorporation of HDR in planning and budgeting.

Development of knowledge base and dissemination of provincial lessons learned

Baseline: Provincial

annual, medium and long-term plans are not yet consistent with each other and processes are not linked.

Lack of relationship between the medium-term, long-term and annual plans of district, provincial and national levels of government.

Projects implemented are not consistent with plans.

Overlap between provincial roles and other levels exist and mostly unresolved.

Participatory strategic planning and economic planning skills and techniques are inadequate.

2.5 Technical Assistance to synchronise the Provincial level RPJMD with the Provincial level Spatial Plan (RTRW).


150,000

Support to the consolidation of coordination mechanisms of government and non-government stakeholders for the preparation and implementation of regional socio-economic development plans including consistency between Annual Plan (RKP), RENSTRA SKPD, RPJMD and spatial plans (RTRW):

2.6 Technical Assistance to develop Provincial level HDI/HDR and to develop a framework to synergize the use of HDR/HDI, MDG report and the WB’s PEACH in order to enhance Provincial Development Planning Framework

X X X X UNDP, BAPPENAS and Provincial Govt

200,000

2.7 Technical Assistance to Provincial Govt to develop, review or enhance Mid-term Development Plan (RPJMD), RENSTRA SKPD and RTRW with the incorporation of HDI/HDR as bench marking framework.


200,000

Support to ensuring stakeholder engagement at provincial level in the planning process, with emphasis on the musrenbang process:



EXPECTED OUTPUTS


targets

PLANNED ACTIVITIES


PLANNED BUDGET


Funds

Budget Descriptio

n

Amount

2.8 Technical Assistance to establish mechanism to ensure effective participation of civil society in decision-making processes of Provincial and District-level Musrenbang as well as in the formulation or enhancement of RPJMD, RKP, RENSTRA SKPD and RTRW.


150,000

2.9 Regular reviews by all stakeholders at provincial and district levels, establishment of a knowledge base and dissemination of lessons learned.


25,000

Support to Project Monitoring, Review and Independent Evaluation:

2.10 Project Assurance, National Steering Committee, Natonal Technical Committee, Monitoring and Evaluation

X X X X UNDP 50,000

OUTPUT 3 Achievement of better development outcomes at provincial level through governance innovations: implementation of minimum service standards, civil service reform, participatory monitoring and evaluation and sustainable cross province learning TARGETS District

initiatives facilitated by province to improve delivery of public services, incorporating


Technical Assistance to Regencies/Municipalities to define MSS and determine annual targets, within the agreed provincial strategy:

3.1 Technical Assistance to undertake participatory survey and research to define MSS at the provincial and district level.

3.2 Facilitation for budget allocation and confirmation in regards to fulfillment of MSS.

X X X X MOHA and Provincial Govt

96,000



EXPECTED OUTPUTS


targets

PLANNED ACTIVITIES


PLANNED BUDGET


Funds

Budget Descriptio

n

Amount

minimum service standards.

Provincial government facilitates performance monitoring and evaluation by outcomes, applying HDI indicators and targets.

Mechanisms for stakeholder engagement at provincial level strengthened in implementation and outcome monitoring and evaluation.

Provincial civil service reform and budgets are linked to re-defined roles and responsibilities.


Baseline: Limited

facilitation by provincial governments for services at district level (varies among target provinces and needs pre-

3.3 Technical Assistance to SKPDs in establishing working mechanisms to achieve MSS.


123,500

3.4 Technical Assistance to establish Complaint Handling Mechanism in regards to fulfillment of MSS.


133,500

3.5 Public and Media Advocacy to develop awareness on the importance of the incorporation of MSS.


96,000

Support implementation of participatory outcome monitoring and evaluation process, including application of HDI indicators and targets:

3.6 Technical Assistance to establish Provincial SKPD’s participatory monitoring and evaluation mechanism.


96,000

3.7 Technical Assistance to establish effective public participation in provincial govt monitoring and evaluation activities.


96,000

3.8 Technical Assistance to establish effective public participation in relation to oversight function and mechanisms of Provincial DPRD


96,000



EXPECTED OUTPUTS


targets

PLANNED ACTIVITIES


PLANNED BUDGET


Funds

Budget Descriptio

n

Amount

project assessment).

No interrelation between provincial and district targets of performance.

Stakeholder involvement in implementation and evaluation of services is limited to media; feedback / complaint handling system generally not working.

Agency and staff functions and their budgets not directly or clearly related to their roles and functions in delivering services

3.9 Public and Media Advocacy to develop awareness on the importance of the incorporation of participatory processes and public participation in government monitoring and evaluation system.


96,000

Technical Assistance to provincial civil service reform:

3.10 Participatory capacity assessment and formulation of capacity development strategies for most strategic offices of provincial govt.


96,000

3.11 Review, Re-structuring and Re-profiling of assignments, functions, responsibilities, and recruitment system of provincial government offices


96,000

3.12 Research/survey on remuneration reform for the provincial government.

3.13 Technical assistance for planning provincial civil service reform

3.14 Public and Media Advocacy to develop awareness on the importance of the adoption and implementation of civil service reform at the provincial level.

Support consolidation of regional network of expertise in good governance and service delivery:



EXPECTED OUTPUTS


targets

PLANNED ACTIVITIES


PLANNED BUDGET


Funds

Budget Descriptio

n

Amount

3.15 Technical assistance to establish effective research network and Clearing House on best practices of public service delivery and good governance at provincial level.


96,000

3.16 Facilitation of exchange and comparative study between provinces in Indonesia on public service delivery and good governance.


96,000

Support the identification and activation of resources available to the provincial government to promote innovation in service delivery:

3.17 Research on Formulation of Exit Strategies in regards to the transfer of management of MSS, Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation System and Mechanism, Civil Service Reform and Cross-Learning System and Mechanisms, from PGSP to the Provincial Governments.

Support to Project Monitoring, Review and Independent Evaluation


X X X X UNDP 50,000

TOTAL 3,002,000



Annual Work Plan Budget Sheet (US$) Year 2012 (PART A = 3 PROVINCES)

EXPECTED OUTPUTS


targets

PLANNED ACTIVITIES


PLANNED BUDGET

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Source of

Funds

Budget Descripti

on

Amount

OUTPUT 1: Enhanced Policy and Regulatory Framework that further clarifies and strengthens roles and functions of provincial government and council (DPRD) TARGETS GoI

Implementing Regulations of the revised Law 32 and provincial government regulations provide clearer distinction between devolved, de-concentrated and assistance responsibilities of provincial governments.

GoI Implementing Regulations of the revised Law 32 and provincial and local government regulations clarify distinct roles and functions of each level of government and there is no overlap between national,

PROJECT ACTIVITIES

1.1 Operationalization of a policy team, officially involved in preparation of regulatory framework of decentralization in Indonesia (revision of Law 32/2004 and its implementing regulations).

X X X X UNDP 200,000

1.2 Second round of participatory surveys / FGDs undertaken on institutional, organizational, networking dimensions of provincial government

X X MOHA 125,600

1.3 Facilitation of inter-ministerial discussions on the development of specific implementing regulations of the revised Law no. 32/2004

X X X X MOHA 25,000

1.4 Discussions and negotiation with national and provincial governments/elected bodies as well as donors on potential of collaboration in ensuring adequate GoI funding to implement the revised Law 32 and its implementing regulations

X X X X MOHA 20,000

1.5 Support to the alignment of regional and local PERDA in participating provinces and their districts.

X X X X MOHA 30,000



EXPECTED OUTPUTS


targets

PLANNED ACTIVITIES


PLANNED BUDGET

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Source of

Funds

Budget Descripti

on

Amount

provincial and local levels.

GoI Implementing Regulations of the revised Law 32 identifies resources to implement revised provincial roles and responsibilities

Alignment (synchronization and harmonization) of provincial and local legislation (PERDAs) with the revised Law 32 and its

1.6 Promote documentation of current practice and mainstream good practice (through publication and awards) by national institutions and/or media.

X MOHA 10,000

1.7 Regular reviews by all stakeholders at regional and national levels, establishment of a knowledge base and dissemination of lessons learned.

X MOHA 70,000

1.8 Support to Project Monitoring, Review and Independent Evaluation (Project Assurance, National Steering Committee, Natonal Technical Committee, Monitoring and Evaluation)

X X X X 100,000



EXPECTED OUTPUTS


targets

PLANNED ACTIVITIES


PLANNED BUDGET

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Source of

Funds

Budget Descripti

on

Amount

Implementing Regulations


Development of knowledge base and dissemination of lessons learned

Baseline: 1.3. Distincti

on between devolved, de-concentrated and assistance functions of provincial government is unclear and often ignored by sector agencies.

1.4. Overlap between provincial and other levels unresolved.

OUTPUT 2 Strategic regional economic development planning strengthened, effectively link planning and budgeting using HDI/HDR; with participatory decision-making mechanism in place


Support to the consolidation of the mediation role of the provincial government:

2.1 Policy Team to map out baseline problems in development planning process in the pilot provinces.



EXPECTED OUTPUTS


targets

PLANNED ACTIVITIES


PLANNED BUDGET

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Source of

Funds

Budget Descripti

on

Amount

TARGETS Enhanced role

of provincial government as mediator of planning based on participatory needs assessments (bottom-up) and national targets (top-down).

Enhanced provincial capacity to coordinate / integrate various sectors across administrative boundaries through economic and spatial planning.

Mechanisms for stakeholder engagement at provincial level strengthened in the planning process (including the musrenbang).

Enhanced RPJMD including the incorporation of HDR in planning and budgeting.

Development of knowledge

2.2 Technical Assistance to Provincial Govt in facilitating and coordinating inter-district and inter-sector planning cycle and mechanisms


275,000

2.3 Technical Assistance to establish, develop and enhance the capacity of Forum of BAPPEDAs, consisting of the Provincial BAPPEDAs and the District-level BAPPEDAs, to ensure institutionalization of inter-district coordination and harmonization.


250,000

2.4 Technical Assistance to establish, develop and enhance the capacity of Forum of Provincial level SKPDs to ensure institutionalization of inter-sector coordination and harmonization.


225,000

2.5 Technical Assistance to synchronise the Provincial level RPJMD with the Provincial level Spatial Plan (RTRW).


250,000



EXPECTED OUTPUTS


targets

PLANNED ACTIVITIES


PLANNED BUDGET

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Source of

Funds

Budget Descripti

on

Amount

base and dissemination of provincial lessons learned

Baseline: Provincial

annual, medium and long-term plans are not yet consistent with each other and processes are not linked.

Lack of relationship between the medium-term, long-term and annual plans of district, provincial and national levels of government.

Projects implemented are not consistent with plans.

Overlap between provincial roles and other levels exist and mostly unresolved.

Participatory strategic planning and economic planning skills and techniques are inadequate.

Support to the consolidation of coordination mechanisms of government and non-government stakeholders for the preparation and implementation of regional socio-economic development plans including consistency between Annual Plan (RKP), RENSTRA SKPD, RPJMD and spatial plans (RTRW):

2.6 Technical Assistance to develop Provincial level HDI/HDR and to develop a framework to synergize the use of HDR/HDI, MDG report and the WB’s PEACH in order to enhance Provincial Development Planning Framework [Cost sharing for data collection (BPS) by provincial government]

X X X X UNDP, BAPPENAS and Provincial Govt

250,000

2.7 Technical Assistance to Provincial Govt to develop, review or enhance Mid-term Development Plan (RPJMD), RENSTRA SKPD and RTRW with the incorporation of HDI/HDR as bench marking framework.


250,000

Support to ensuring stakeholder engagement at provincial level in the planning process, with emphasis on the musrenbang process:



EXPECTED OUTPUTS


targets

PLANNED ACTIVITIES


PLANNED BUDGET

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Source of

Funds

Budget Descripti

on

Amount

2.8 Technical Assistance to establish mechanism to ensure effective participation of civil society in decision-making processes of Provincial and District-level Musrenbang as well as in the formulation or enhancement of RPJMD, RKP, RENSTRA SKPD and RTRW.


250,000

2.9 Regular reviews by all stakeholders at provincial and district levels, establishment of a knowledge base and dissemination of lessons learned.


50,000

Support to Project Monitoring, Review and Independent Evaluation:


X X X X 100,000

OUTPUT 3 Achievement of better development outcomes at provincial level through governance innovations: implementation of minimum service standards, civil service reform, participatory monitoring and evaluation and sustainable cross province learning. TARGETS District

initiatives facilitated by


Technical Assistance to Regencies/Municipalities to define MSS and determine annual targets, within the agreed provincial strategy:

3.1 Technical Assistance to undertake participatory survey and research to define MSS at the provincial and district level.



EXPECTED OUTPUTS


targets

PLANNED ACTIVITIES


PLANNED BUDGET

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Source of

Funds

Budget Descripti

on

Amount

province to improve delivery of public services, incorporating minimum service standards.

Provincial government facilitates performance monitoring and evaluation by outcomes, applying HDI indicators and targets.

Mechanisms for stakeholder engagement at provincial level strengthened in implementation and outcome monitoring and evaluation.

Provincial civil service reform and budgets are linked to re-defined roles and responsibilities.


Baseline:

3.2 Facilitation for budget allocation and confirmation in regards to fulfillment of MSS.

3.3 Technical Assistance to SKPDs in establishing working mechanisms to achieve MSS.

X X X X MOHA and Prov. Government

137,950

3.4 Technical Assistance to establish Complaint Handling Mechanism in regards to fulfillment of MSS.


137,950

3.5 Public and Media Advocacy to develop awareness on the importance of the incorporation of MSS.


137,950

Support implementation of participatory outcome monitoring and evaluation process, including application of HDI indicators and targets:

3.6 Technical Assistance to Establish Provincial SKPD’s participatory monitoring and evaluation mechanism.


71,750

3.7 Technical Assistance to establish effective public participation in provincial govt monitoring and evaluation activities.


137,950



EXPECTED OUTPUTS


targets

PLANNED ACTIVITIES


PLANNED BUDGET

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Source of

Funds

Budget Descripti

on

Amount

Limited facilitation by provincial governments for services at district level (varies among target provinces and needs pre-project assessment).

No interrelation between provincial and district targets of performance.

Stakeholder involvement in implementation and evaluation of services is limited to media; feedback / complaint handling system generally not working.

Agency and staff functions and their budgets not directly or clearly related to their roles and functions in delivering services

3.8 Technical Assistance to establish effective public participation in relation to oversight function and mechanisms of Provincial DPRD


137,950

3.9 Public and Media Advocacy to develop awareness on the importance of the incorporation of participatory processes and public participation in government monitoring and evaluation system.

X X X X U MOHA and Prov. Government

137,950

Technical Assistance to provincial and district agencies civil service reform:

3.10 Participatory capacity assessment and formulation of capacity development strategies for most strategic offices of provincial govt.

3.11 Review, Re-structuring and Re-profiling of assignments, functions, responsibilities, and recruitment system of provincial government offices.

66,200

3.12 Research/survey on remuneration reform for the provincial government.


71,750

3.13 Technical assistance for planning provincial civil service reform


75,000



EXPECTED OUTPUTS


targets

PLANNED ACTIVITIES


PLANNED BUDGET

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Source of

Funds

Budget Descripti

on

Amount

3.14 Public and Media Advocacy to develop awareness on the importance of the adoption and implementation of civil service reform at the provincial level.


137,950

Support consolidation of regional network of expertise in good governance and service delivery:

3.15 Technical assistance to establish effective research network and Clearing House on best practices of public service delivery and good governance at provincial level.

X X X X UNDP, MOHA and Prov. Government

137,950

3.16 Facilitation of exchange and comparative study between provinces in Indonesia on public service delivery and good governance.

X X X X UNDP, MOHA and Prov. Government

137,950

Support the identification and activation of resources available to the provincial government to promote innovation in service delivery:

3.17 Research on Formulation of Exit Strategies in regards to the transfer of management of MSS, Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation System and Mechanism, Civil Service Reform and Cross-Learning System and Mechanisms, from PGSP to the Provincial Governments.

66,200



EXPECTED OUTPUTS


targets

PLANNED ACTIVITIES


PLANNED BUDGET

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Source of

Funds

Budget Descripti

on

Amount

Support to Project Monitoring, Review and Independent Evaluation


X X X X 100,000

TOTAL 4,143,050



SECTION 6 – PROJECT MANAGEMENT ARRANGEMENTS 1. Implementation Modality

The project may implement under the framework of the UNDP Country Program Action Plan (CPAP) 2006 – 2010 applying National Implementation Modality (NIM) whereby the National Planning Board (BAPPENAS) is designated as the Implementing Partner. The Implementing Partner will implement the project on behalf of the Government of Indonesia (GoI) and is fully responsible and accountable for successfully managing and delivering PGSP project outputs according to the rules and regulation of UNDP for NIM and the terms and conditions described in this document as well as accompanied annexes for detailed arrangement. For daily implementation, Implementing Partner will appoint Director of Regional Autonomy at BAPPENAS as the National Project Director (NPD) to assume the responsibility.35

The NPD may contract other entities, defined as Responsible Parties, to undertake specific project tasks through a process of competitive bidding. Competitive bidding does not apply if the Responsible Party is another government institution or a United Nations agency. Project implementation may require the sub-contracting of specific activities to civil society organizations (CSOs), either through procurement or grant agreements.

At the national level, beside NPD, there will be sector agencies who will implement the

project activities based on the objectives agreed by the NPD. Ministry of Home Affairs especially at Directorate of Regional Governance Functions and Directorate for De-concentration and Cooperation has been identified as the main Government counterpart for implementation of Output 1 on Policy and Regulatory Framework and Output 3 on Innovation for Development Outcomes, respectively. Therefore, National Sector Coordinators need to be established at Ministry of Home Affairs36.

At the pilot province where PGSP is implemented, Implementing Partner will delegate the

implementation of project activities in the province to the respective Governor.37 To make management decisions for project activities implemented in the province, a Provincial Technical Committee is established. The Provincial Technical Committee is chaired by a Chairperson who is appointed by the Governor38 and is tasked to coordinate the provincial institutions that are related and dealing with the project components. In addition to ensuring the alignment of project activities with provincial development programmes and institutional mandate, the Provincial Technical Committee Chairperson is responsible for financial integrity and accountability on grants disbursement made in the respective province.

Upon the request of the Implementing Partner, UNDP will provide Country Office

Support Services, in which UNDP will be responsible for (i) the identification and recruitment of project and program personnel, (ii) procurement of goods and services, (iii) the administration of financial donor contributions, and (iv) the monitoring & evaluation. This results from the need to follow a single coordinated approach for the recruitment, procurement and grant agreements of project-related resources, services and goods which may not be guaranteed by the multitude of government institutions involved in the project implementation. By following UNDP regulations and procedures, UNDP will ensure transparent and efficient processes in the short timeframe of

35 Through Ministerial Decision (Surat Keputusan Menteri) or other appropriate internal agency arrangement. 36 The Ministry of Home Affairs will be engaged through a Ministerial Decision (Surat Keputusan Menteri) of the Implementing Partner which will spell out the National Sector Coordinator’s role and responsibility 37 Through a letter or other appropriate internal agency arrangement. 38 Through Governor Decision (Surat Keputusan Gubernur) or other appropriate internal agency arrangement.



project implementation. In providing these services, UNDP will apply its rules and regulations. The Support Services and conditions to them are described in the Country Office Support Service Agreement in Annex 3 and Annex 4.

2. Project Management Structure – Roles and

Responsibilities

The project management structure lays out different roles and responsibilities that will be used for effective and accountable project implementation. The project management structure will be established as shown (Figure 6.1). In the provinces where both PGSP and AGI are operational, the proposed project management structure is shown in Figure 6.2. Detailed terms of reference of the key roles can be found in the Annex 5.

Figure 6.1 Project Organization Structure of PGSP



Figure 6.2 Project Organization Structure of PGSP and AGI

2.1 Implementing Partner

The Implementing Partner shall sign the project document with UNDP and designate a National Project Director (NPD). In the event of a change of NPD, the Implementing Partner shall officially inform UNDP, providing supporting documentation that attests to the official status/designation of new appointee in the implementing partner. The Implementing Partner shall ensure that Project staff is provided with infrastructure and logistical support for its daily operations (for example, office space, furniture, etc). The Implementing Partner is responsible for registering the Project with the Ministry of Finance and recorded it into their DIPA (government budget document) according to the Government Regulation (PP) 2 / 2006 on the Management of Foreign Loan and Grant and its derivatives. The process is described in the Annex 7. The Implementing Partner is also responsible for managing the project bank account in line with relevant government regulation and reporting to the national treasury for the utilization / realization of the grant as expenditures in consultation with UNDP on regular basis. The process is described in the Annex 8.

2.2 National Steering Committee and National Technical Committee /

National Project Board PGSP shares a common objective with AGI Project to reinforce the provincial government

in their role as facilitators and promoters of regional development. Policy and planning coordination is required during the course of project implementation. To ensure coordinated guidance to both projects, PGSP and AGI share one National Steering Committee and one National Technical Committee.



The National Steering Committee provides strategic policy guidelines to the National Technical Committee. The National Steering Committee will review and approve project annual work plan (AWP) when required. Based on the approved annual work plan, the National Technical Committee will review and approve project quarterly plans when required and authorizes any major deviation from these agreed quarterly plans.

Composition of National Steering Committee contains the designated official representing the proposed Implementing Partner namely Directorate General for Regional Autonomy and Regional Development BAPPENAS, who will chair the Committee. Other members represent Ministry of Home Affairs, Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Administration Reform, and Governors representing the pilot provinces.

The National Technical Committee is the Project Board at the national level and is responsible for making executive management decisions for a project when guidance is required by Project Manager, including recommendation for UNDP/Implementing Partner approval for project plans and revisions. The National Technical Committee will meet quarterly to provide guidance to the Project Manager or whenever required. The National Technical Committee monitors and guides the implementation of project activities, ensuring that the project achieves expected results according to schedule and within budget. The National Technical Committee arbitrates on any conflicts within the project or negotiates a solution to any problems between the project and external bodies. National Technical Committee decisions should be made in accordance to standards that shall ensure management for development results, best value money, fairness, integrity, transparency and effective international competition. In case a consensus cannot be reached within the Committee, final decision shall rest with the UNDP.

The members of the National Technical Committee contain the standard members of a

Project Board which include: (1) an Executive to chair the Committee. (2) Senior Supplier to provide guidance regarding the technical feasibility of the project and to represent the interest of the parties who provide funding. (3) Senior Beneficiary to ensure realization of project benefits. During the Project Appraisal Committee meeting, the proposed National Steering Committee members and National Technical Committee members will be confirmed. Composition of National Technical Committee: 1. Chair: The National Technical Committee will be chaired by the National Project Director

(NPD) as Project Executive. 2. Senior Beneficiaries: Representatives from BAPPENAS and Ministry of Home Affairs.

Government official with Echelon II rank will sit as the representative from each agency. There is scope for the National Technical Committee to include future members from other entities as appropriate and decided by the National Technical Committee.

3. Senior Suppliers: UNDP’s Democratic Governance Unit Team Leader and and if necessary representatives of donor agencies.

Terms of Reference for the National Steering Committee and the National Technical

Committee is attached in Annex 5 of this project document.

2.3 National Project Director (NPD) Representing the Implementing Partner in the National Technical Committee as Executive,

the NPD is fully responsible and accountable for project management and implementation, ensures that a Project Management Unit (PMU) in charge of managing day-to-day project activities within the Implementing Partner is in place and operational. He/she implements annual work plans and substantive project revisions after review by the National Technical Committee.



(i) The NPD provides strategic and policy guidance to the PMU within the context of the Project Document.

(ii) The NPD ensures that actions financed by the Project are undertaken in strict compliance with expected project results, resources, work plan and applicable norms and procedures and certifies substantial progress and financial reports (FACE form).

(iii) The NPD is responsible for the safekeeping, use, maintenance and good operational condition of the goods received by the Project. In case of loss and/or robbery, the NPD is responsible for taking the necessary action to recover the goods, informing UNDP of the administrative and/or legal steps that have been taken. The NPD is responsible for certifying the inventory of asset acquired for the project.

(iv) The NPD signs the Combined Delivery Report (CDR) of project expenditures on behalf of the Implementing Partner on annual basis and a final CDR upon closure of project.39

(v) In addition to signing asset inventory list and CDR, the NPD certifies and signs audit follow-up action plan and project cash position on annual basis. 40

(vi) The NPD may, from time to time, be invited to participate in the meetings of the Outcome Board41.

(vii) The NPD may delegate his authority to the DNPD (Deputy of National Project Director) and shall accordingly inform UNDP42.

Terms of Reference for the National Project Director is attached in Annex 5 of this project

document.

2.4 National Sector Coordinator (NSC) The NPD is assisted by three National Sector Coordinators from the Ministry of Home

Affairs and BAPPENAS, appointed by the institution. The main role of the National Sector Coordinators is to ensure alignment of project activities with MOHA and BAPPENAS programmes or institutional mandate, and to provide programmatic inputs to the project via the NPD. To achieve this, the National Sector Coordinators will become the counterpart of the Project Manager and Sector Coordinators of the PMU in their respective sector. The NSC will review annual work plan and quarterly work plan formulated by its respective Sector Coordinator before it is submitted to the NPD for approval. The National Sector Coordinators will be responsible for the quality of project planning, activity implementation and disbursement in their respective sector. In addition to this, the National Sector Coordinators will also be responsible for clearance of financial obligations in their respective sector before the NPD approves payments.

39 The Combined Delivery Report constitutes the official report of project expenditures for a given period. 40 If the project is audited nationally by BPKP, the CDR, Cash position, inventory list and audit follow-up action form will be countersigned by designated UNDP officer (Unit Head) and BPKP. 41 Outcome Board consists of government representatives and UNDP Senior Management that responsible for monitoring the realization of expected outcomes by managing interdependency of different projects that contribute to the realization of the outcome. Where groups or committees have been previously established to perform functions similar to the Outcome Board, they are ideally situated to fulfill the role of the Outcome Board. In other words, a separate Outcome Board need not be established where an existing mechanism can suit the purpose and fulfill the role of the Outcome Board. 42 The Implementing Partner may issue a decree to assign NPD and D-NPD and clarify specific responsibility of each. Another option would be to produce a Standard Operation Procedure (SOP) to clarify the functions of NPD and D-NPD, once the project document is signed. The SOP will be endorsed by NPD and UNDP. A possible division of tasks between NPD and D-NPD are as follows: NPD approves annual and quarterly work plan, quarterly financial report, quarterly substantive report, and endorses CDR; while D-NPD is tasking for day-to-day management such as signing cheques.



Each NSC will ensure the attainment of an output, as indicated in the Results & Resources

Framework. A National Sector Coordinator in the Directorate for Regional Governance Functions MOHA will be established to ensure the attainment of Output 1 on Policy and Regulatory Framework. A National Sector Coordinator in the Directorate for Regional Autonomy BAPPENAS will be established to ensure the attainment of Output 2 on Regional Development Planning. Finally, a National Sector Coordinator from Directorate for De-concentration and Cooperation MOHA will be established to ensure the attainment of Output 3 on Innovation for Development Outcome.

2.5 Project Manager and Sector Coordinators

The Project Manager is responsible for day-to-day management and decision-making for the project as well as leading the PMU. The Project Manager’s prime responsibility is to ensure that the project produces the results specified in the project document, to the required standard of quality and within the specified constraints of time and cost. The Project Manager leads the process of developing annual and quarterly work and budget plans involving relevant stakeholders for the Project Board approval. The Project Manager is also obliged to follow up recommendations that arise from internal monitoring and evaluation, and audit. Project Manager will be recruited by UNDP and has a dual reporting line, both to the NPD and to the Team Leader of Democratic Governance Unit via the Programme Manager for Decentralization. Terms of Reference of Project Manager is attached as Annex 5 of this project document.

The Project Manager will be supported by three Sector Coordinators who will be

responsible for delivering their respective output, as indicated in the Results & Resources Framework, namely Output 1 on Policy and Regulatory Framework, Output 2 on Regional Development Planning, and Output 3 on Innovation for Development Outcome. Each Sector Coordinator will report to the Project Manager. Terms of Reference of Sector Coordinators is attached as Annex 5 of this project document.

When developing annual and quarterly work and budget plans for Outputs 2 and 3, Sector

Coordinators provide inputs and advice to Provincial Facilitators. The annual and quarterly work plan of the pilot provinces will be reviewed by Provincial Technical Committee, prior to submission to National Technical Committee through Project Manager for further approval process.

Sector Coordinator for Output 1 develops annual and quarterly workplan for Output 1, and

submit to Project Manager for further discussion and clearance, prior to submission to National Technical Committee. Each Sector Coordinator will consult their respective National Sector Coordinator to ensure the substance-related inputs are taken into account.

When necessary, an international Senior Technical Advisor to be based in Jakarta will

work with National Project Director and the Project Manager to ensure technical support to project execution including responsibility for producing reports and other outputs.

In areas where PGSP and AGI agree to implement joint activities, Project Manager will

have a close coordination with AGI Chief Technical Advisor (CTA) to harmonize inputs and outputs of the activity.

2.6 Project Management Unit

A professional project management unit (PMU), which consists of technical staffs, will be established. Under the overall direction of the NPD and day-to-day guidance of the Project Manager, they will be responsible for the day to day implementation of the project activities. The three outputs – Policy and Regulatory Framework, Regional Development Planning, and



Innovations for Development Outcomes – will be led by Sector Coordinators who will directly report to the Project Manager.

The Project Manager and PMU are accountable to the NPD for sound administrative and

financial management of the project as well as effective delivery of project activities. Accountabilities of project management are formally presented to the NPD by timely completion of annual and quarterly work plans and reports with required supporting documents.

At the national level, PGSP and AGI will establish one common team for project

implementation support to increase cost efficiency and facilitate eventual joint activities coordination. Common support staff will be co-supervised by both AGI CTA and PGSP Project Manager, based on previous agreement between both on priorities and time-management of the involved staff. This arrangement will be reviewed in six-month time and adjusted if necessary.

The PMU will provide technical and financial guidelines to support Provincial Facilitators

to ensure well implementation in the pilot provinces. 2.7 Provincial Structure

In each pilot province where PGSP is implemented, a provincial structure might be

created, that will be responsible for making by consensus based management decisions for project activities that are implemented in the respective province when guidance is required by the Provincial Facilitator, in order to ensure alignment of project activities with provincial development programmes and institutional mandate. The structure in the province will be further elaborated in the manual / SOP of project implementation procedures.

2.8 Provincial Facilitator

At the province level, implementation of all activities will be managed by a Provincial Facilitator and will be assisted by administrative & financial personnel. The work and budget plans will be approved by NPD through the Project Manager. Based on the approval provided by NPD through Project Manager, provincial initiative and activities will be implemented by the Provincial Facilitator.

The main role of Provincial Facilitator is to stimulate innovative activities and to facilitate

better coordination among the stakeholders at the province and national level. The main counterpart of the Provincial Facilitator is the Provincial Chairperson. The Provincial Facilitator will receive guidance from the Project Manager with a close consultation and coordination with Sector Coordinators and report their activities directly to the Project Manager. Terms of Reference of the Provincial Facilitator is attached as Annex 5 of this project document.

In pilot province where both PGSP and AGI are implemented, if possible, a common

office will be established. In the case of joint activities, Provincial Facilitator will work closely with AGI Area Manager under the guidance from Project Manager.

2.9 Provincial Project Management Unit

In pilot province, a provincial project management unit (PPMU) which consists of technical staffs will be established. Under the overall direction of the Provincial Chairperson and day-to-day guidance of the Provincial Facilitator, they will be responsible for the daily implementation of the project activities in the province.

The Provincial Facilitator and Provincial PMU are accountable to the Provincial

Chairperson for sound administrative and financial management of the project as well as effective delivery of project activities in the province. Accountabilities of project management are formally



presented to the Provincial Chairperson by timely completion of annual and quarterly work plans and reports with required supporting documents.

The National PMU in Jakarta will provide technical and financial guidelines to support

Provincial PMU to ensure well implementation in the pilot provinces.

2.10 Project Assurance Project Assurance is the responsibility of each Project Board member, but the role is

delegated to the Decentralization Programme of UNDP. The designated Programme Manager and Officer will support the Project Board by carrying out objective and independent project oversight and monitoring functions. This role ensures that appropriate project management milestones are managed and completed.

3. Financial Arrangement

Prior to the implementation of the project, a Harmonized Advance Cash Transfer (HACT)

assessment shall be carried out to determine the project management capacity of the Implementing Partner, and the appropriate modality of cash transfer to the project. Cash transfer modality includes three methods, namely, (1) direct cash transfer (UNDP transfers fund to Implementing Partner against approved work plan); (2) reimbursement (Implementing Partner disburse first and request UNDP to reimburse authorized expenditures); and (3) direct payment (payment from UNDP directly to vendors).

Subject to the recommendation of the HACT assessment, UNDP will transfer funds to the

Implementing Partner against approved annual and quarterly work plans using one or mixture of above three methods. If direct cash transfer is recommended, the Implementing Partner is required to open a project bank account to receive the fund from UNDP.43

The Implementing Partner (NPD) is accountable for: - Managing UNDP resources to achieve the expected results specified in the Project

Document - Maintaining up-to-date accounting system to ensure accuracy and reliability of

financial reporting - Sending expenditures reports on a quarterly basis to UNDP.

UNDP uses the Funding Authorization and Certificate of Expenditures (FACE) form

for financial disbursement and reporting. It is designed for the use of Implementing Partners and UNDP in order (1) to request the disbursement of funds; (2) to authorize an Implementing Partner to incur expenditures up to a certain amount; (3) to report on expenditures incurred in the reporting period; (4) to certify the accuracy of the data and information provided by the Implementing Partner; and (5) for UNDP to approve the amount to be disbursed. The form allows the tracking of budget lines, cash advances, expenditures, settlement of the expenditures by Implementing Partner, and remaining balance. Certified FACE form is submitted to UNDP every quarter to settle project advances, request for a new advance, and every time the project makes a request for direct payment from UNDP to a selected vendor.

Financial transactions will be recorded and monitored in UNDP’s Enterprise Resource

Planning System, ATLAS. UNDP will prepare a Combined Delivery Report (CDR) at the end of each year which constitutes the official report of project expenditures for a given period and which

43 For the detailed steps for project bank account opening, please refer to the Annex 8.



is subject to annual audit. The Implementing Partner (NPD) exercises its financial accountability by signing the quarterly financial reports (FACE form), CDR, and cash position at the end of year.

UNDP will recover costs for managing the basket fund in the form of a percentage of the

disbursed project budget. The General Management Support (GMS) applies to all non-UNDP resources and is governed by UNDP’s cost recovery policy. Based on the UNDP Executive Board decision 2007/18 the GMS percentage is 7 per cent of non-UNDP resources. These costs are linked to general management functions performed by UNDP through the various Headquarters units, Regional Centre and Country Offices. Services covered by GMS include:

- Support of the execution modality definition and institutional arrangements based

on capacity needs assessment - Project administration and financial management support - Legal support - General project monitoring - Access to global knowledge networks and databases of services providers - Organizational, operational, financial and technological systems and structures

that ensure effectiveness, efficiency and transparency in overall project and financial management processes

UNDP supports activities directly related to project implementation, called Implementation

Support Services (ISS). ISS costs usually apply to project personnel recruitment, procurement and financial transactions. These costs will vary according to the agreed scope of service and the complexity of the processes. As such these costs are not recovered on the basis of a percentage fee but are charged to the project per transaction according to the ISS mechanism.

In addition to the above, UNDP will recover costs incurred in providing capacity

development and assurance support to the project. This includes portions of the personnel costs of UNDP Programme staff whose functions are directly related to providing capacity development and assurance support to the project.

UNDP funded assets (equipment, vehicles, etc.) will remain UNDP property until formally

transferred or disposed of. This applies irrespective of who undertakes the procurement of the assets. Assets may be transferred at the end of the project, or at any time during the life of the project. Disposal of assets, including transfer to any entity or other project(s), and final decision thereon, is made by the UNDP Resident Representative, in consultation with the Project Board. The asset transfer or disposal will be reviewed by UNDP internal committee for adherence to rules and regulations and documented for official record.



4. Mechanism for Funds Channeling

Regulatory Basis This section explains the mechanism for channelling the funds from UNDP to the

Implementing Partner. The proposed fund channelling mechanism is based on the prevailing regulations of the Government of Indonesia concerning the management of funds obtained from foreign grants and/or loans, which include the following:

(i) Law No. 17 / 2003 on State Finance;

(ii) Law No. 1 / 2004 on the State Treasury;

(iii) Law No. 15 / 2004 on State Finance Inspection, Management, and Accountability;

(iv) Government Regulation No. 2 / 2006 on Procedures for Conducting Loans and/or Obtaining Grants and Continuing Foreign Loans and/or Grants;

(v) Presidential Decree No. 42 / 2002 on Implementation of the State Budget, revised through Presidential Decree No. 72 / 2004 on Revision to Presidential Decree No. 42 / 2002;

(vi) Minister of Finance Regulation No. 143/PMK.05/2006 on Procedures for Withdrawal of Foreign Loans/Grants;

(vii) Minister of Finance Regulation No. 57/PMK.05/2007 on Management of State Ministry/Agency/ Office/Work Unit- Owned Account; and

(viii) Regulation of Director General for the Treasury Department of Finance No. Per-67/PB/2006 on Procedure for Accounting and Validation of Directly Executed Government Foreign Grant realization.

General Principles

Based on the applicable provisions for foreign grants management, the general principles to

be satisfied are as follows: (i) All state revenues and expenditures under state obligations in a given fiscal year

must be incorporated into the APBN (State Budget).

(ii) The total or portion of foreign loans and/or grants stipulated in the foreign loan and/or grant agreement document (NPPHLN) will be embodied in the DIPA document.

(iii) In case of the determined APBN, the amount or portion of the foreign loan/grant amount should be embodied in the APBN-Revision.

(iv) In case of a direct cooperation between UNDP and a non-governmental organization, the grant aid should not be provided through the state budget but rather directly between UNDP and the said organization. Thus, the channeling of grant aid funds to non-governmental organization will not be recorded as state revenue.

(v) In the case of a direct cooperation between UNDP and another UN agency and not to be further “sub-contracted”, the grant aid shall be reported as grant aid included in the state budget but may or may not be channeled through state mechanisms depending on the policies and procedures of the UN agency concerned as applicable in such cases.

Based on the above, it is concluded that the management of foreign loans/grants should be

recorded in APBN mechanism that is in effect in Indonesia.



The advantages of such recording include the following: • Access to the Tax exemption facility related to implementation of government

activities that in part or in whole are funded by foreign grants and,

• UNDP’s grant can recorded as government revenue in APBN.

In relation to Government Regulation No. 2 / 2006 on Procedures for Conducting Loans and/or Obtaining Grants and Continuing Foreign Loans and/or Grants, the Budget User/Budget User Proxy (PA/Kuasa PA) of BAPPENAS will register the Grant Agreement (Project Document) to Ministry of Finance. In the same manner, in relation to Regulation of Director General for the Treasury Department of Finance No. Per-67/PB/2006 on Procedures for Accounting and Validation of Directly Executed Government Foreign Grants, BAPPENAS and Ministry of Home Affairs will enter the grant funds received into the DIPA of the respective institution according to the provisions in effect. The grants that are already received but are not yet been entered in the DIPA/budget implementation document, may be processed for entry through the DIPA revision mechanism.

In addition to the above mentioned provisions and based on the Minister of Finance

Regulation No. 57/PMK.05/2007 on Management of State Ministry/Agency/Office/Work Unit-Owned Account, Budget User/Budget User Proxy (PA/Kuasa PA) of BAPPENAS will open project bank account.

The Implementing Partner will be able to open a bank account with approval from the State

Treasurer. The State Treasurer is the Minister of Finance. The power and authority to issue approval can be conferred to the representative of the State Treasurer at the central level and representative of the State Treasurer at the regional level. At central level, this is the Director General for Treasury Affairs, whereas in the regions it is the Head of the Office for Treasury Services (KPPN).

UNDP shall have no connection to the opening or closing of a bank account, in which no

UNDP staff shall be included as signatory person for the account opened. The bank account opened will be a project account and not a UNDP account. The Implementing Partner shall have tight control over all matters pertaining to flow of funds of the bank account opened.

Reporting and endorsement of realized grand aid funds will be done according to the

Regulation of the Director General for Treasury Affairs of the Department of Finance No. Per-67/PB/2006 on the Procedure for Bookkeeping and Endorsement of Realised Foreign Government Grant Aid.

The role and responsibility of PA (Pengguna Anggaran/Budget User) is Sestama Bappenas

and MOHA’s Secretary General, while PPK (Pejabat Pembuat Komitmen/Committing officer) will be according to the provisions in effect in the respective institution. Further elaboration is to be clarified in the project SOP.

Subject to the recommendation of the HACT assessment, UNDP can allow the UN direct

cash transfer modality to be used for Implementing Partner-owned, project-specific bank account(s). The withdrawal or cash transfer of UNDP grant aid funds should be undertaken in line with PMIG. In detail, important points to be observed with regard to withdrawal of UNDP grant funds through Direct Cash Transfer (DCT) modality are as follows:

(i) Based on the approved Annual Work Plan, the NPD presents the Quarterly Work

Plan (QWP) of the project and the estimated amount of funds required, using the FACE (Funding Authorization and Certificate of Expenditure) form. The FACE Form must be signed by NPD and will be delivered to the UNDP at the latest in 15 days after the end of the quarter.



(ii) The UNDP Country Office designated official shall make an assessment of the submitted QWP and FACE form with attached approved AWP and may make changes to the amounts of the Direct Cash Transfer for a particular activity result in the appropriate column. Based on the actual UNDP approved amount signed off by the designated UNDP official, UNDP will physically transfer the approved funds to the Implementing Partner’s designated Project Account. (Assessment of the QWP will review activities and outputs against the approved Annual Work Plan)

(iii) The NPD and other Project Teams under his or her authority shall implement the project activities as planned in the QWP approved by the National Technical Committee (National Project Board) or UNDP. At the end of implementing the QWP, the Project Manager or other AWP designated official shall report the result of implementation and submit the next quarterly work plan (QWPn+1) with an estimation of the funds required to carry out the activities. The Project Manager can only request the next Direct Cash Transfer of funds when withdrawal from the preceding Direct Cash Transfer has already reached 90 percent or more.

(iv) UNDP will then assess the FACE report, usually in parallel with the corresponding Quarterly or other period Progress Report containing narrative achievements and monitoring related information in accordance with the UNDP Running a Project Processes on QWP implementation and the next QWP and FACE form. If the Project Board or UNDP approves the QWP Report and approves the next QWP, UNDP will transfer the required funds to the Project Account. (Assessment of the QWP will review activities and outputs against the agreed Annual Work Plan and the Project Document)

(v) Each FACE Form submitted by the NPD or other designated official must include a copy of bank statement showing the closing cash balance for the quarter-year concerned, reconciliation of expenditure against the cash balance in a format adjusted to the FACE Form.

(vi) The NPD shall be obligated to make bank reconciliation every month and to manage all documents related to the bank account.

(vii) Any Bank interest is a part of grant aid and should be entered into the FACE Form and it should be recorded against UNDP account code 74510 as a credit.

(viii) During the project closing process, the Implementing Partner shall be obligated to return any remaining grant aid funds reported in the last and final FACE Form, to UNDP in a timely manner in accordance with UNDP policies and procedures.



5. Reporting, HACT Assurance Activities, Monitoring and Evaluations

PMU will be required to prepare quarterly and annual work plans, budgets and progress

reports. The Quarterly Progress Report (QPRs) would provide a brief summary of the status of input procurement and output delivery, explain variances from the work plan and present work plans for each successive quarter for review and endorsement. The QPRs will include financial statements (and completed FACE form) and the work plan for the subsequent quarter. The PMU will also prepare and submit an annual project review reports to UNDP. The annual review report would provide a more in-depth summary of work-in-progress, measuring performance against both implementation and output/outcome indicators. Any adjustments in project approach will be reported to the Project Board who will evaluate and approve the adjustments recommended as long as such adjustments are still within this project document RRF. A final project report will be completed prior to the completion of the project detailing achievements and lessons learned. When National Technical Committee (National Project Board) holds quarterly and annual meetings, PMU is required to report the progress of the project towards the targets. The quarterly and annual reports must be submitted to the participants at least two weeks before the Board meeting.

UNDP will implement the following assurance activities within the context of HACT implementation.

- Periodic spot check reviews of the financial records for provided cash transfers.

These should be conducted and documented on a routine basis, or when warranted due to concerns over the functioning of internal controls.

- Programmatic monitoring of activities supported by cash transfers—following UNDP standards and guidance for site visits and field monitoring.

- Scheduled Audit: UNDP projects are audited regularly and the audit findings are reported to the UNDP Executive Board. The audit of projects provides UNDP with assurance that resources are used to achieve the results described in the Project Document and that UNDP resources are adequately safeguarded. As required by UNDP guidelines, all project components will be subject to audit on expenditures made by Implementing Partner (Cash Transfer, Reimbursement and Direct Payment). Audit of nationally implemented project components can be done by BPKP or private auditor. Internal Auditor (Office of Audit and Investigation/OAI of UNDP) or External Auditor (UN Board of Auditors) will audit project components implemented by UNDP based on the Country Office Support Services.

- Special Audit: an audit that responds to special demand.

The results of the assurance activities may lead to changes in the procedures and modalities for disbursing cash transfers, and the type and frequency of future assurance activities.



6. Maintenance and Transfer of Assets

The implementing partners must maintain an up-to-date inventory of project assets and must provide quarterly to UNDP an inventory of equipment financed by UNDP. UNDP will keep separate records for equipment and vehicles purchased for the purposes of this project. As per UNDP rules and regulations, equipment purchased with project funds will remain UNDP property until formally transferred or otherwise disposed of at the end of the project. The asset disposal strategy shall be discussed between UNDP and the implementing partners at the conclusion of the project. 7. Project Revision and Closure

In the course of project implementation, the Project Manager can propose to the National Technical Committee (National Project Board) adjustments to the approved annual work-plan and quarterly work-plan. The Project Board will review and approve the proposed adjustments as long as they are still in line with the scope of Project Document Result and Resource Framework. However, if the proposed adjustments are significant in terms of objectives, outputs, duration of project and budget, it will constitute a substantive revision, which requires Steering Committee approval. The process of substantive revision is described in Annex 6.

Once the project delivered all planned outputs and activities at the end of project duration

or based on the Project Board decision and Project Board approval of early termination, the NPD has the overall responsibility of closing the project both operationally and financially with the support of the Project Manager. Once there are no more planned activities implemented under the project, the project will be closed operationally. It will be still financially open in order to make outstanding payments and conduct project closing activities such as final evaluation, reporting, stakeholder meetings for project review, etc. The Project Manager will prepare the following documents for NPD review and certification:

- final project report focusing on the achievements of planned outputs, contribution

to outcome, positive and any negative impact, lessons learned and best practices - final financial report (FACE form) with full attachment (bank statement, evidence

for return of remaining fund in project bank account, etc.) - final CDR - final inventory list and recommendation for asset transfer for consideration of

NPD and ultimately UNDP Resident Representative Once there are no more outstanding obligations, all project closing activities are done, and

all the documentation is completed (including asset transfer), the project will be financially closed.



SECTION 7 – MONITORING AND EVALUATION 1. Purposes

Monitoring and Evaluation will be aimed at every project component, to provide the Steering Committee (involving the government and UNDP) with timely indications of progress in achieving intended results, to allow for corrective actions on obstacles, new opportunities or irregularities, and consolidate the learning generated by the project.

Monitoring and Evaluation will aim at: - Knowledge of project status and progress at any point during the project life-time. - Regularly assess efficiency and effectiveness of project, to enable technical,

administrative and financial response. - Detection of important developments, changes, innovations and obstacles, for

timely response and corrective actions, and if necessary, adjustment to project schedules and / or design.

Monitoring and Evaluation is a responsibility of the PMU as well as the National

Technical Committee (National Project Board) to be accountable toward stakeholders, covering all aspects of project implementation. Aside of the project outputs and annual targets as presented in the Results and Resources Framework (Section 4), project financing and management will also be reviewed. 2. Monitoring

Monitoring of the PGSP will continually observe progress in achieving the expected outputs by measuring their indicators as targeted during the project timeframe (see Section 4 on project outputs and targets). Regular recording in quarterly intervals will provide time–series data for analysis by the National Technical Committee (National Project Board) and PMU.

Monitoring will be done by observation of progress in the field by the project personnel of the PMU, as well as and regular data transfer from the Provincial PMU and Provincial Facilitators to the PMU. As part of this activity, progress will be regularly reported to the PMU, enabling them to timely detect important developments or obstacles. As for monitoring of targeted project outputs for Output 1, this will refer to the respective targets for this output in the Logical Framework (Section 3); this will mainly provide evidence on progress at the national level. For Output 2 and 3 which are occurring at the provincial level, targets for the respective outputs may be referred to in the same table. ♦ Preparation for monitoring, at Project Initiation:

- Within the first six month of the project, an M&E consultant will be recruited by the PMU / Project Manager. Based on an updated results and resources frame / log-frame, the M&E consultant will complete a M&E data guide, and with the PMU develop a general activity monitoring plan.

- An initial baseline assessment will be done during selection of the partner Province based on the data guide, to be finalized by the Provincial Facilitators with each Province in the 2nd month of their work plan. Initial work in the first two months in each additional target local government will include the completion of baseline data with related agencies and other stakeholders.



In accordance with the Programming and Operations Policies and Procedures (POPP), the project will be monitored through the following: ♦ Within the annual cycle

- On a quarterly basis, a quality assessment shall record progress towards the completion of key results, based on quality criteria and methods captured in the Quality Management table below.

- An Issue Log shall be activated in Atlas and updated by the Project Manager to facilitate tracking and resolution of potential problems or requests for change.

- Based on the initial risk analysis submitted44, a risk log shall be activated in Atlas and regularly updated by reviewing the external environment that may affect the project implementation.

- Based on the above information recorded in Atlas, the Project Manager shall submit a Quarterly Progress Reports (QPR) to the National Project Board through Project Assurance, using the standard report format available in the Executive Snapshot.

- a project Lesson-learned log shall be activated and regularly updated to ensure on-going learning and adaptation within the organization, and to facilitate the preparation of the Lessons-learned Report at the end of the project

- a Monitoring Schedule Plan shall be activated in Atlas and updated to track key management actions/events

- In several Provinces the support program may include optional activities related to civil service reforms. Here the UNDP Participatory CA / capacity assessment may be applied repeatedly in time (preferably annual) to measure changes in capacities of agencies / work units in each of the target provinces. The tool may develop into a self-assessment tool for local governments to be used on a regular basis, as well as a tool for the regional group of expertise and consultancy to do an independent capacity assessment.

♦ Annually - Annual Review Report. The Project Manager shall prepare an Annual Review

Report and share it with the Project Board and the Outcome Board. As minimum requirement, the Annual Review Report shall consist of the Atlas standard format for the QPR covering the whole year with updated information for each above element of the QPR as well as a summary of results achieved against pre-defined annual targets at the output level.

- Annual Project Review. Based on the above report, an annual project review shall be conducted during the fourth quarter of the year or soon after, to assess the performance of the project and appraise the Annual Work Plan (AWP) for the following year. In the last year, this review will be a final assessment. The Project Board shall drive the review, which may involve other stakeholders. The review shall focus on the extent to which progress is being made towards outputs, and that these remain aligned to appropriate outcomes.

♦ Quality Management for Project Activity Results

A more developed framework will be developed during implementation of the project, however, it is anticipated that the following types of indicators will be tracked to measure project impact:

44 See Annex 11.



Output One: Enhanced Policy and Regulatory Framework that further clarifies and strengthens roles and functions of provincial government and council (DPRD)

OUTPUT 1: Enhanced Policy and Regulatory Framework that further clarifies and strengthens roles and functions of provincial government and council (DPRD) Target 1.1 (Atlas Activity ID)

The revised Law 32 and RPJMN 2010-2014 provided clearer distinction between devolved, de-concentrated and assistance responsibilities of provincial governments

Start Date: 2010 End Date: 2011

Purpose

To provide policy recommendations to the formulation of the revised Law 32 and RPJMN 2010-2014 on chapter on decentralization revitalization and local autonomy process.

Description Mobilize experts, organize studies and conduct seminar or workshops. Quality Criteria Quality Method Date of Assessment • Activities completed consistent with

the Workplan • Number of policy recommendations

on provincial government’s role and functions delivered to the decision makers.

• The revised Law 32 made a particular section about provincial government’s role and functions

• RPJMN 2010-2014 contains the role and the functions of provincial government.

• Project management records (reports, minutes of meeting, progress reports)

• Policy briefs • The revised Law 32 • RPJMN 2010-2014

Each quarter in project quarterly progress report starting the 1st quarter 2010


GoI Implementing Regulations of the revised Law 32 clarified the distinct roles and functions of each level of government and there is no overlap between national, provincial and local levels


Purpose

To assist GoI to draft relevant Implementing Regulations of the revised Law 32 on roles and functions of each level of government


the Workplan • Number of Implementing

Regulations of the revised Law 32 drafted regarding provincial role and functions.


• The draft of Implementing Regulations





Purpose

To assist the pilot province(s) to align local legislation (PERDAs) with the policy changes in national level, i.e. the revised Law 32

Description Mobilize experts, organize studies and conduct seminar or workshops. Quality Criteria Quality Method Date of Assessment • Activities completed consistent with • Project management records Each quarter in project



the Workplan • Number of local legislation

(PERDAs) aligned with the policy changes in national level

(reports, minutes of meeting, progress reports)

• The draft of local legislation (PERDAs)

quarterly progress report starting the 1st quarter 2011


Resource analysis undertaken and recommendations made, including input to the revision of Law 32


Purpose

To carry out studies or analysis and produce reports and policy papers for the formulation of the revised Law 32


the Workplan • Number of reports and policy papers

for the revision of Law 32 produced


• Policy briefs/papers



Knowledge base developed and lessons learned disseminated


Purpose

To develop knowledge base on the strengthening roles and functions of provincial government and council (DPRD) and disseminate lessons learned collected from the practice in pilot provinces as well as resource provinces

Description Mobilize experts, conduct seminar or workshops, and develop knowledge base Quality Criteria Quality Method Date of Assessment • Activities completed consistent with

the Workplan • Number of policy research produced • Number of public discussion (FGD,

conference, seminar) organized • Number of cross-region or cross-

country knowledge exchange organized



Output Two: Strategic regional economic development planning strengthened, effectively link planning and budgeting using HDI/HDR; with participatory decision-making mechanism in place OUTPUT 2: Strategic regional economic development planning strengthened, effectively link planning and budgeting using HDI/HDR; with participatory decision-making mechanism in place Target 2.1 (Atlas Activity ID)

Enhanced role of provincial government as mediator of planning based on participatory needs assessments (bottom-up) and national targets (top-down)


Purpose

To carry out technical assistance to the pilot provinces on the role of provincial government as mediator and coordinator

Description Mobilize experts, organize technical assistance and conduct seminar or workshops Quality Criteria Quality Method Date of Assessment • Activities completed consistent with

the Workplan • Number of technical assistances that

are given to provincial government as mediator and coordinator organized.





• Number of technical rules and regulatory products produced that support the coordination and mediation role of provincial government in regional planning

OUTPUT 2: Strategic regional economic development planning strengthened, effectively link planning and budgeting using HDI/HDR; with participatory decision-making mechanism in place Target 2.2 (Atlas Activity ID)

Enhanced provincial capacity to coordinate / integrate various sectors across administrative boundaries through economic and spatial planning, including through enhanced RPJMD, RKP, RENSTRA SKPD and RTRW incorporating HDR/HDI


Purpose

To carry out technical assistance to the pilot provinces on the role of provincial government to coordinate economic and spatial planning, incorporating human development perspective

Description Mobilize experts, organize technical assistance and conduct seminar or workshops. Quality Criteria Quality Method Date of Assessment • Activities completed consistent with

the Workplan • Number of technical assistance to

facilitate and coordinate inter-district and inter-sectoral planning organized.

• Number of on-the-job assistance from experts organized.

• Technical guideline on facilitating inter-district and inter-sectoral planning produced.

• Provincial Human Development Report formulated.

• Logical framework and working mechanism to integrate the use of HDR/HDI in development plans (RPJMD, RKPD, RENSTRA SKPD, RTRWP) produced


• The draft Provincial Human Development Report


OUTPUT 2: Strategic regional economic development planning strengthened, effectively link planning and budgeting using HDI/HDR; with participatory decision-making mechanism in place Target 2.3 (Atlas Activity ID)

Mechanisms for stakeholder engagement at provincial level strengthened in the planning process (focusing on the musrenbang at provincial level)


Purpose

To carry out technical assistance to the pilot provinces on strengthening stakeholder engagement at provincial level


the Workplan • Stakeholders of Provincial

Musrenbang identified. • Mechanism and guidelines for

multi-stakeholders engagement in Provincial Musrenbang drafted.

• Number of technical assistance to strengthen the role of multi-stakeholders mechanism in





Provincial Musrenbang supported. OUTPUT 2: Strategic regional economic development planning strengthened, effectively link planning and budgeting using HDI/HDR; with participatory decision-making mechanism in place Target 2.4 (Atlas Activity ID)

Knowledge base developed and provincial lessons learned disseminated


Purpose

To develop knowledge base on regional strategic development planning and disseminate lessons learned collected from the practice in pilot provinces as well as resource provinces


the Workplan • Knowledge products (i.e. books,

repots, etc) on provincial government’s capacity development on regional strategic development planning



Output Three: Achievement of better development outcomes at provincial level through governance innovations: implementation of minimum service standards, civil service reform, participatory monitoring and evaluation and sustainable cross province learning. OUTPUT 3: Achievement of better development outcomes at provincial level through governance innovations: implementation of minimum service standards, civil service reform, participatory monitoring and evaluation and sustainable cross province learning Target 3.1 (Atlas Activity ID)

District initiatives facilitated by province to improve delivery of public services, incorporating minimum service standards (on welfare sectors)


Purpose

To assist the pilot provinces to facilitate technical assistance to district(s) on improving delivery of public services, incorporating MSS on welfare sectors)


the Workplan • Baseline mapping on capacity and

readiness of districts to implement MSS on welfare sectors, produced.

• Number of technical assistance to districts from provincial government.

• Number of MMS formulated and number of sectors and institutions implemented MMS on welfare sectors.


• Draft of MSS


OUTPUT 3: Achievement of better development outcomes at provincial level through governance innovations: implementation of minimum service standards, civil service reform, participatory monitoring and evaluation and sustainable cross province learning Target 3.2 (Atlas Activity ID)

Mechanisms for multi-stakeholder engagement in monitoring and evaluation of development outcomes are effectively in place at provincial level, applying HDI indicators and targets


Purpose

To carry out technical assistance to the pilot provinces on strengthening multi-stakeholder engagement in M&E of development outcomes




the Workplan • Provincial Human Development

Report formulated. • HDI applied to monitor and evaluate

development outcome at pilot provinces.

• Guidelines on participatory M&E applying HDI, developed.

• Regulatory framework on participatory M&E applying HDI, drafted


• Draft of Provincial Human Development Report

• Draft of guidelines



Provincial civil service reform and budgets are linked to re-defined roles and responsibilities


Purpose

To carry out technical assistance to the pilot provinces on provincial civil service reform


the Workplan • Capacity assessment, performance

evaluation and capacity development strategy, carried out and formulated.

• Local government regulations (PERDAs) and other regulation produced to support civil service reform in public services at provincial level




Knowledge base developed and provincial lessons learned disseminated


Purpose

To develop knowledge base on regional strategic development planning and disseminate lessons learned collected from the practice in pilot provinces as well as resource provinces


the Workplan • Guidelines on concept and model of

innovative provincial governance, produced.

• Number of knowledge products (i.e. proceeding, journal, book, report) produced.

• Number of public discussion (a.o.





FGD, seminar, conference, workshop) organized.

• Number of cross-region or cross-country knowledge exchange organized

3. Evaluation

PGSP evaluations are expected to provide in-depth knowledge of program effectiveness and outcomes, and consolidate lessons learned from the governance support processes. In particular, a final or end-of-project evaluation will be assigned to an independent consultant; this evaluation is expected to provide knowledge on the project effects and outcomes, its contribution to achievement to regional development goals - whenever possible in quantitative terms. At the same time evaluation needs to show how project outputs have been accepted by stakeholders and acquired sustainability.

- In-house evaluation: Evaluation will be done annually by the project team, in the last quarters of years 2010 and 2011 and included in the annual project report to stakeholders through the National Technical Committee (National Project Board).

- Annual reporting: Issues regarding substance as well as project management and administration will be covered and need to be supported by monitoring data. The Project Manager will highlight issues that require PMU or project unit attention, and hold a review on these for eventual follow-up by the PMU. This may involve action plan as well as budget adjustments. Record values for each year, to be compared with the targets. As required by involved donor organizations, apart from the technical monitoring and evaluation, financial audits may be requested.

- Independent Evaluation: In the end of 3rd quarter of the last project year (2012), or at least two months before the project closure in year 3, a final evaluation will be conducted by an independent evaluator, involving target governments and related local stakeholders. Results of this will be included in the End-of-Project report. The result of this final evaluation will summarize the latest outcomes of the project, its feedback to national policy, and contribute findings related to capacity-building strategies and methods.



SECTION 8 – LEGAL CONTEXT This document together with the CPAP signed by the Government and UNDP which is incorporated by reference constitute together a Project Document.

(a) The Revised Basic Agreement for Technical Assistance signed 29 October 1954 between the United Nations, the International Labour Organisation, the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation, the International Civil Aviation Organisation, and the World Health Organisation and the Government of the Republic of Indonesia,

(b) The Standard Agreement on Operational Assistance signed 12 June 1969 between the

United Nations, the International Labour Organisation, the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation, the International Civil Aviation Organisation, the World Health Organisation, the International Telecommunication Union, the World Meteorological Organisation, the International Atomic Energy Agency, the Universal Postal Union, the Inter-Governmental Maritime Consultative Organisation and the United Nations Industrial Development Organisation and the Government of the Republic of Indonesia,

(c) The Agreement signed 7 October 1960 between the United Nations Special Fund and the Government of the Republic of Indonesia, and

(d) all CPAP provisions apply to this document.

Additionally, this document together with the CPAP signed by the Government and UNDP which is incorporated by reference constitute together the instrument envisaged in the Supplemental Provisions to the Project Document, attached hereto as Annex 2. Consistent with the above Supplemental Provisions, the responsibility for the safety and security of the implementing partner and its personnel and property, and of UNDP’s property in the implementing partner’s custody, rests with the implementing partner. The implementing partner shall: a) put in place an appropriate security plan and maintain the security plan, taking into account the

security situation in the country where the project is being carried; b) assume all risks and liabilities related to the implementing partner’s security, and the full

implementation of the security plan. UNDP reserves the right to verify whether such a plan is in place, and to suggest modifications to the plan when necessary. Failure to maintain and implement an appropriate security plan as required hereunder shall be deemed a breach of this agreement. The implementing partner agrees to undertake all reasonable efforts to ensure that none of the UNDP funds received pursuant to the Project Document are used to provide support to individuals or entities associated with terrorism and that the recipients of any amounts provided by UNDP hereunder do not appear on the list maintained by the Security Council Committee established pursuant to resolution 1267 (1999). The list can be accessed via http://www.un.org/Docs/sc/committees/1267/1267ListEng.htm. This provision must be included in all sub-contracts or sub-agreements entered into under this Project Document.”

PPrroovviinncciiaall GGoovveerrnnaannccee SSttrreennggtthheenniinngg PPrrooggrraammmmee

ANNEXES


PGSP Project Document – Draft 5F Annexes, Page - 1 -

Annex 1 Signed CPAP Document



Annex 2 SUPPLEMENTAL PROVISIONS TO THE

PROJECT DOCUMENT45

The Legal Context

General responsibilities of the Government, UNDP and the executing agency

1. All phases and aspects of UNDP assistance to this project shall be governed by and carried out in accordance with the relevant and applicable resolutions and decisions of the competent United Nations organs and in accordance with UNDP's policies and procedures for such projects, and subject to the requirements of the UNDP Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting System.

2. The Government shall remain responsible for this UNDP-assisted development project and the realization of its objectives as described in this Project Document.

3. Assistance under this Project Document being provided for the benefit of the Government and the people of Indonesia, the Government shall bear all risks of operations in respect of this project.

4. The Government shall provide to the project the national counterpart personnel, training facilities, land, buildings, equipment and other required services and facilities. It shall designate the Government Co-operating Agency named in the cover page of this document (hereinafter referred to as the "Co-operating Agency"), which shall be directly responsible for the implementation of the Government contribution to the project.

5. The UNDP undertakes to complement and supplement the Government participation and will provide through the Executing Agency the required expert services, training, equipment and other services within the funds available to the project.

6. Upon commencement of the project the Executing Agency shall assume primary responsibility for project execution and shall have the status of an independent contractor for this purpose. However, that primary responsibility shall be exercised in consultation with UNDP and in agreement with the Co-operating Agency. Arrangements to this effect shall be stipulated in the Project Document as well as for the transfer of this responsibility to the Government or to an entity designated by the Government during the execution of the project.

7. Part of the Government's participation may take the form of a cash contribution to UNDP. In such cases, the Executing Agency will provide the related services and facilities and will account annually to the UNDP and to the Government for the expenditure incurred.

(a) Participation of the Government

1. The Government shall provide to the project the services, equipment and facilities in the quantities and at the time specified in the Project Document. Budgetary provision, either in kind or in cash, for the Government's participation so specified shall be set forth in the Project Budgets.

2. The Co-operating Agency shall, as appropriate and in consultation with the Executing Agency, assign a director for the project on a full-time basis. He shall carry out such responsibilities in the project as are assigned to him by the Co-operating Agency.

3. The estimated cost of items included in the Government contribution, as detailed in the Project Budget, shall be based on the best information available at the time of drafting the project proposal. It is understood that price fluctuations during the period of execution of

45 In this Annex, the old terms of “Government” and “Executing Agency” are corresponding to the new terms “Coordinating Agency” and “Implementing Partner” as used in the body of this Project Document.



the project may necessitate an adjustment of said contribution in monetary terms; the latter shall at all times be determined by the value of the services, equipment and facilities required for the proper execution of the project.

4. Within the given number of man-months of personnel services described in the Project Document, minor adjustments of individual assignments of project personnel provided by the Government may be made by the Government in consultation with the Executing Agency, if this is found to be in the best interest of the project. UNDP shall be so informed in all instances where such minor adjustments involve financial implications.

5. The Government shall continue to pay the local salaries and appropriate allowances of national counterpart personnel during the period of their absence from the project while on UNDP fellowships.

6. The Government shall defray any customs duties and other charges related to the clearance of project equipment, its transportation, handling, storage and related expenses within the country. It shall be responsible for its installation and maintenance, insurance, and replacement, if necessary, after delivery to the project site.

7. The Government shall make available to the project - subject to existing security provisions - any published and unpublished reports, maps, records and other data which are considered necessary to the implementation of the project.

8. Patent rights, copyright rights and other similar rights to any discoveries or work resulting from UNDP assistance in respect of this project shall belong to the UNDP. Unless otherwise agreed by the Parties in each case, however, the Government shall have the right to use any such discoveries or work within the country free of royalty and any charge of similar nature.

9. The Government shall assist all project personnel in finding suitable housing accommodation at reasonable rents.

10. The services and facilities specified in the Project Document which are to be provided to the project by the Government by means of a contribution in cash shall be set forth in the Project Budget. Payment of this amount shall be made to the UNDP in accordance with the Schedule of Payments by the Government.

11. Payment of the above-mentioned contribution to the UNDP on or before the dates specified in the Schedule of Payments by the Government is a prerequisite to commencement or continuation of project operations.

(b) Participation of the UNDP and the executing agency

1. The UNDP shall provide to the project through the Executing Agency the services, equipment and facilities described in the Project Document. Budgetary provision for the UNDP contribution as specified shall be set forth in the Project Budget.

2. The Executing Agency shall consult with the Government and UNDP on the candidature of the Project Manager46 a/ who, under the direction of the Executing Agency, will be responsible in the country for the Executing Agency's participation in the project. The Project Manager shall supervise the experts and other agency personnel assigned to the project, and the on-the-job training of national counterpart personnel. He shall be responsible for the management and efficient utilization of all UNDP-financed inputs, including equipment provided to the project.

3. The Executing Agency, in consultation with the Government and UNDP, shall assign international staff and other personnel to the project as specified in the Project Document, select candidates for fellowships and determine standards for the training of national counterpart personnel.

4. Fellowships shall be administered in accordance with the fellowships regulations of the Executing Agency.

5. The Executing Agency may, in agreement with the Government and UNDP, execute part or all of the project by subcontract. The selection of subcontractors shall be made, after

46 May also be designated Project Co-ordinator or Chief Technical Adviser, as appropriate.



consultation with the Government and UNDP, in accordance with the Executing Agency's procedures.

6. All material, equipment and supplies which are purchased from UNDP resources will be used exclusively for the execution of the project, and will remain the property of the UNDP in whose name it will be held by the Executing Agency. Equipment supplied by the UNDP shall be marked with the insignia of the UNDP and of the Executing Agency.

7. Arrangements may be made, if necessary, for a temporary transfer of custody of equipment to local authorities during the life of the project, without prejudice to the final transfer.

8. Prior to completion of UNDP assistance to the project, the Government, the UNDP and the Executing Agency shall consult as to the disposition of all project equipment provided by the UNDP. Title to such equipment shall normally be transferred to the Government, or to an entity nominated by the Government, when it is required for continued operation of the project or for activities following directly therefrom. The UNDP may, however, at its discretion, retain title to part or all of such equipment.

9. At an agreed time after the completion of UNDP assistance to the project, the Government and the UNDP, and if necessary the Executing Agency, shall review the activities continuing from or consequent upon the project with a view to evaluating its results.

10. UNDP may release information relating to any investment oriented project to potential investors, unless and until the Government has requested the UNDP in writing to restrict the release of information relating to such project.

Rights, Facilities, Privileges and Immunities

1. In accordance with the Agreement concluded by the United Nations (UNDP) and the Government concerning the provision of assistance by UNDP, the personnel of UNDP and other United Nations organizations associated with the project shall be accorded rights, facilities, privileges and immunities specified in said Agreement.

2. The Government shall grant UN volunteers, if such services are requested by the Government, the same rights, facilities, privileges and immunities as are granted to the personnel of UNDP.

3. The Executing Agency's contractors and their personnel (except nationals of the host country employed locally) shall:

(a) Be immune from legal process in respect of all acts performed by them in their official capacity in the execution of the project;

(b) Be immune from national service obligations; (c) Be immune together with their spouses and relatives dependent on them from

immigration restrictions; (d) Be accorded the privileges of bringing into the country reasonable amounts of

foreign currency for the purposes of the project or for personal use of such personnel, and of withdrawing any such amounts brought into the country, or in accordance with the relevant foreign exchange regulations, such amounts as may be earned therein by such personnel in the execution of the project;

(e) Be accorded together with their spouses and relatives dependent on them the same repatriation facilities in the event of international crisis as diplomatic envoys.

4. All personnel of the Executing Agency's contractors shall enjoy inviolability for all papers and documents relating to the project.

5. The Government shall either exempt from or bear the cost of any taxes, duties, fees or levies which it may impose on any firm or organization which may be retained by the Executing Agency and on the personnel of any such firm or organization, except for nationals of the host country employed locally, in respect of:

(a) The salaries or wages earned by such personnel in the execution of the project; (b) Any equipment, materials and supplies brought into the country for the purposes

of the project or which, after having been brought into the country, may be subsequently withdrawn therefrom;



(c) Any substantial quantities of equipment, materials and supplies obtained locally for the execution of the project, such as, for example, petrol and spare parts for the operation and maintenance of equipment mentioned under (b), above, with the provision that the types and approximate quantities to be exempted and relevant procedures to be followed shall be agreed upon with the Government and, as appropriate, recorded in the Project Document; and

(d) As in the case of concessions currently granted to UNDP and Executing Agency's personnel, any property brought, including one privately owned automobile per employee, by the firm or organization or its personnel for their personal use or consumption or which after having been brought into the country, may subsequently be withdrawn there from upon departure of such personnel.

6. The Government shall ensure: (a) prompt clearance of experts and other persons performing services in respect of

this project; and (b) the prompt release from customs of:

(i) equipment, materials and supplies required in connection with this project; and

(ii) property belonging to and intended for the personal use or consumption of the personnel of the UNDP, its Executing Agencies, or other persons performing services on their behalf in respect of this project, except for locally recruited personnel.

7. The privileges and immunities referred to in the paragraphs above, to which such firm or organization and its personnel may be entitled, may be waived by the Executing Agency where, in its opinion or in the opinion of the UNDP, the immunity would impede the course of justice and can be waived without prejudice to the successful completion of the project or to the interest of the UNDP or the Executing Agency.

8. The Executing Agency shall provide the Government through the resident representative with the list of personnel to whom the privileges and immunities enumerated above shall apply.

9. Nothing in this Project Document or Annex shall be construed to limit the rights, facilities, privileges or immunities conferred in any other instrument upon any person, natural or juridical, referred to hereunder.

Suspension or termination of assistance

1. The UNDP may by written notice to the Government and to the Executing Agency concerned suspend its assistance to any project if in the judgment of the UNDP any circumstance arises which interferes with or threatens to interfere with the successful completion of the project or the accomplishment of its purposes. The UNDP may, in the same or a subsequent written notice, indicate the conditions under which it is prepared to resume its assistance to the project. Any such suspension shall continue until such time as such conditions are accepted by the Government and as the UNDP shall give written notice to the Government and the Executing Agency that it is prepared to resume its assistance.

2. If any situation referred to in paragraph 1, above, shall continue for a period of fourteen days after notice thereof and of suspension shall have been given by the UNDP to the Government and the Executing Agency, then at any time thereafter during the continuance thereof, the UNDP may by written notice to the Government and the Executing Agency terminate the project.

3. The provisions of this paragraph shall be without prejudice to any other rights or remedies the UNDP may have in the circumstances, whether under general principles of law or otherwise.



Annex 3 COUNTRY OFFICE SUPPORT SERVICE

AGREEMENT

STANDARD LETTER OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN UNDP AND THE GOVERNMENT

FOR THE PROVISION OF SUPPORT SERVICES

Dear Sir, 1. Reference is made to consultations between officials of the Government of Indonesia / Bappenas (Implementing Partner) (hereinafter referred to as “the Government”) and officials of UNDP with respect to the provision of support services by the UNDP country office for nationally managed programmes and projects. UNDP and the Government hereby agree that the UNDP country office may provide such support services at the request of the Government through its institution designated in the relevant Project support document, as described below. 2. The UNDP country office may provide support services for assistance with reporting requirements and direct payment. In providing such support services, the UNDP country office shall ensure that the capacity of the Government-designated institution is strengthened to enable it to carry out such activities directly. The costs incurred by the UNDP country office in providing such support services shall be recovered from the administrative budget of the office. 3. The UNDP country office may provide, at the request of the designated institution, the following support services for the activities of the Project:

(a) Identification and/or recruitment of project and programme personnel and technical expertise;

(b) Procurement of goods and services to undertake agreed activities; (c) Administration of the donor basket fund; (d) Management of grant agreements and related disbursements for project-related

activities; (e) Develop and implement monitoring and evaluation mechanism.

4. The procurement of goods and services and the recruitment of Project personnel by the UNDP country office shall be in accordance with the UNDP regulations, rules, policies and procedures. Support services described in paragraph 3 above shall be detailed in an annex to the Project support document or project document, in the form provided in the Attachment hereto. If the requirements for support services by the country office change during the life of a Project, the annex to the Project support document is revised with the mutual agreement of the UNDP Country Director and the designated institution. 5. The relevant provisions of the Revised Basic Agreement for Technical Assistance signed 29 October 1954 between the United Nations, the International Labour Organization, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, the International Civil Aviation Organization, and the World Health Organization and the Government of the Republic of Indonesia, the Standard Agreement on Operational Assistance signed 12 June 1969 between the United Nations, the International Labour Organization, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, the International Civil Aviation Organization, the



World Health Organization, the International Telecommunication Union, the World Meteorological Organization, the International Atomic Energy Agency, the Universal Postal Union, the Inter-Governmental Maritime Consultative Organization and the United Nations Industrial Development Organization and the Government of the Republic of Indonesia and the Agreement signed 7 October 1960 between the United Nations Special Fund and the Government of the Republic of Indonesia including the provisions on liability and privileges and immunities, shall apply to the provision of such support services. The Government shall retain overall responsibility for the nationally managed Project through its designated institution. The responsibility of the UNDP country office for the provision of the support services described herein shall be limited to the provision of such support services detailed in the annex to the Project support document. 6. Any claim or dispute arising under or in connection with the provision of support services by the UNDP country office in accordance with this letter shall be handled pursuant to the relevant provisions of the above mentioned agreements. 7. The manner and method of cost-recovery by the UNDP country office in providing the support services described in paragraph 3 above shall be specified in the annex to the Project support document. 8. The UNDP country office shall submit progress reports on the support services provided and shall report on the costs reimbursed in providing such services, as may be required. 9. Any modification of the present arrangements shall be effected by mutual written agreement of the parties hereto. 10. If you are in agreement with the provisions set forth above, please sign and return to this office two signed copies of this letter. Upon your signature, this letter shall constitute an agreement between your Government and UNDP on the terms and conditions for the provision of support services by the UNDP country office for nationally managed projects.

Yours sincerely,

________________________ Signed on behalf of UNDP

Håkan Björkman Country Director

_________________________ For the Government (Name) (Title of the Implementing Partner47)

47 Implementing Partner is the signatory of the project document.



Annex 4 DESCRIPTION OF UNDP COUNTRY OFFICE

SUPPORT SERVICES (Name) Team Leader, Democratic Governance Unit Assistant Country Director UNDP Indonesia Date (…) Dear (….), Subject: UNDP Country Office Support Services for Implementation of ... Project Reference is made to consultations between BAPPENAS, the institution designated by the Government of Indonesia and officials of UNDP with respect to the provision of support services by the UNDP country office for the nationally managed project PGSP, “the Project”.

In accordance with the provisions of the letter of agreement signed on ……….. and the project document, the UNDP country office shall provide support services for the Project as described below. Support services to be provided:

Support Services Schedule for the provision of the support

services

Amount and method of reimbursement of UNDP

(where appropriate)

1. Identification and recruitment of all project and Project personnel, including national and international consultants

Throughout the project period.

Using ISS mechanism

2. Procurement of goods and services


Using ISS mechanism

3. Administration of the project basket fund


Using ISS mechanism

4. Administration and management of the CSO grant scheme, including grant agreements with CSOs.


Using ISS mechanism

Yours sincerely,

(Name)

(Position)

National Project Director



Annex 5 TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR PROJECT

MANAGEMENT ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

1. National Technical Committee / National Project Board 2. National Steering Committee 3. Deputy National Project Director (DNPD) 4. Project Manager 5. Sector Coordinator (SC) 6. Provincial Facilitator (PF) 7. Project Assurance 8. Project Support 1. National Technical Committee / National Project Board

Overall responsibilities: The National Technical Committee is the group responsible for

making by consensus management decisions for a project when guidance is required by the Project Manager, including recommendation for UNDP/Implementing Partner approval of project plans and revisions. The National Technical Committee will receive strategic policy guidance and advice from the National Steering Committee. In order to ensure UNDP’s ultimate accountability, National Technical Committee decisions should be made in accordance to standards48 that shall ensure best value to money, fairness, integrity transparency and effective international competition. In case a consensus cannot be reached, final decision shall rest with the UNDP Programe Manager. Project reviews by this group are made at designated decision points during the running of a project, or as necessary when raised by the Project Manager. This group is consulted by the Project Manager for decisions when PM tolerances (normally in terms of time and budget) have been exceeded.

Based on the approved annual work plan (AWP), the National Technical Committee may

review and approve project quarterly plans when required and authorizes any major deviation from these agreed quarterly plans. It is the authority that signs off the completion of each quarterly plan as well as authorizes the start of the next quarterly plan. It ensures that required resources are committed and arbitrates on any conflicts within the project or negotiates a solution to any problems between the project and external bodies. In addition, it approves the appointment and responsibilities of the Project Manager and any delegation of its Project Assurance responsibilities.

Composition and organization: This group contains three roles, including: (i) An Executive: individual representing the project ownership to chair the group.

The Executive role will be held by Director for Regional Autonomy BAPPENAS, serving as the National Project Director.

48 UNDP Financial Rules and Regulations: Chapter E, Regulation 16.05: a) The administration by executing entities or, under the harmonized operational modalities, implementing partners, of resources obtained from or through UNDP shall be carried out under their respective financial regulations, rules, practices and procedures only to the extent that they do not contravene the principles of the Financial Regulations and Rules of UNDP. b) Where the financial governance of an executing entity or, under the harmonized operational modalities, implementing partner, does not provide the required guidance to ensure best value for money, fairness, integrity, transparency, and effective international competition, that of UNDP shall apply.



(ii) Senior Supplier: individual or group representing the interests of the parties concerned which provide funding and/or technical expertise to the project. The Senior Supplier’s primary function within the National Technical Committee is to provide guidance regarding the technical feasibility of the project. The Senior Supplier role will be held by UNDP Team Leader for Democratic Governance Unit and Donors.

(iii) Senior Beneficiary: individual or group of individuals representing the interests of those who will ultimately benefit from the project. The Senior Beneficiary’s primary function within the Committee is to ensure the realization of project results from the perspective of project beneficiaries. The Senior Beneficiary role will be held by Ministry of Home Affairs especially at Directorate of Regional Governance Functions and Directorate for De-concentration and Assistance Functions.

Proposed members of the National Technical Committee are reviewed and recommended

for approval during the PAC meeting. Representative of other stakeholders can be included in the Committee as appropriate and decided by the National Technical Committee.

Specific responsibilities: Defining a project Review and approve the Initiation Plan (if such plan was required and submitted to

the PAC). Initiating a project Agree on Project Manager’s responsibilities, as well as the responsibilities of the

other members of the Project Management team; Delegate any Project Assurance function as appropriate; Review the Progress Report for the Initiation Stage (if an Initiation Plan was

required); Review and appraise detailed Project Plan and AWP, including Atlas reports

covering activity definition, quality criteria, issue log, updated risk log and the monitoring and communication plan.

Running a project Provide overall guidance and direction to the project, ensuring it remains within

any specified constraints; Address project issues as raised by the Project Manager; Provide guidance and agree on possible countermeasures/management actions to

address specific risks; Agree on Project Manager’s tolerances in the quarterly plans when required; Conduct regular meetings to review the Project Quarterly Progress Report and

provide direction and recommendations to ensure that the agreed deliverables are produced satisfactorily according to plans.

Review Combined Delivery Reports (CDR) prior to certification by the Implementing Partner;

Appraise the Project Annual Review Report, make recommendations for the next AWP, and inform the committee members and the National Steering Committee about the results of the review.

Review and approve end project report, make recommendations for follow-on actions;

Provide ad-hoc direction and advice for exception situations when project manager’s tolerances are exceeded;



Assess and decide on project changes through revisions;

Closing a project Assure that all Project deliverables have been produced satisfactorily; Review and approve the Final Project Review Report, including Lessons-learned; Make recommendations for follow-on actions to be submitted to the Outcome

Board; Commission project evaluation (only when required by partnership agreement) Notify operational completion of the project to the Outcome Board.

1.1 Executive / National Project Director (NPD)

The Executive is ultimately responsible for the project, supported by the Senior Beneficiary and Senior Supplier. The Executive’s role is to ensure that the project is focused throughout its life cycle on achieving its objectives and delivering outputs that will contribute to higher level outcomes. The Executive has to ensure that the project gives value for money, ensuring a cost-conscious approach to the project, balancing the demands of beneficiary and supplier.

Specific Responsibilities (as part of the above responsibilities for the National Technical Committee)

Ensure that there is a coherent project organization structure and logical set of plans

Set tolerances in the quarterly work plans and other plans as required for the Project Manager

Monitor and control the progress of the project at a strategic level Ensure that risks are being tracked and mitigated as effectively as possible Brief Project National Technical, National Steering Committee and relevant

stakeholders about progress of the project Organize and chair National Technical Committee meetings Organize National Steering Committee meetings

The Executive is responsible for overall assurance of the project as described below. If the

project warrants it, the Executive may delegate some responsibility for the project assurance functions. 1.2 Senior Beneficiary / National Sector Coordinator (NSC)

The Senior Beneficiary is responsible for validating the needs and for monitoring that the solution will meet those needs within the constraints of the project. The role represents the interests of all those who will benefit from the project, or those for whom the deliverables resulting from activities will achieve specific output targets. The Senior Beneficiary role monitors progress against targets and quality criteria. This role may require more than one person to cover all the beneficiary interests. For the sake of effectiveness the role should not be split between too many people.


Ensure the expected output(s) and related activities of the project are well defined Make sure that progress towards the outputs required by the beneficiaries remains

consistent from the beneficiary perspective



Promote and maintain focus on the expected project output(s) Prioritize and contribute beneficiaries’ opinions on National Technical Committee

decisions on whether to implement recommendations on proposed changes Resolve priority conflicts

The assurance responsibilities of the Senior Beneficiary are to check that: Specification of the Beneficiary’s needs is accurate, complete and unambiguous Implementation of activities at all stages is monitored to ensure that they will meet

the beneficiary’s needs and are progressing towards that target Impact of potential changes is evaluated from the beneficiary point of view Risks to the beneficiaries are frequently monitored

Where the project’s size, complexity or importance warrants it, the Senior Beneficiary

may delegate the responsibility and authority for some of the assurance responsibilities (see also the section below) 1.3 Senior Supplier

The Senior Supplier represents the interests of the parties which provide funding and/or technical expertise to the project (designing, developing, facilitating, procuring, implementing). The Senior Supplier’s primary function within the National Technical Committee is to provide guidance regarding the technical feasibility of the project. The Senior Supplier role must have the authority to commit or acquire supplier resources required. If necessary, more than one person may be required for this role. UNDP and donor(s) would be represented under this role.


Make sure that progress towards the outputs remains consistent from the supplier perspective

Promote and maintain focus on the expected project output(s) from the point of view of supplier management

Ensure that the supplier resources required for the project are made available Contribute supplier opinions on National Technical Committee decisions on

whether to implement recommendations on proposed changes Arbitrate on, and ensure resolution of, any supplier priority or resource conflicts The supplier assurance role responsibilities are to: Advise on the selection of strategy, design and methods to carry out project

activities Ensure that any standards defined for the project are met and used to good effect Monitor potential changes and their impact on the quality of deliverables from a

supplier perspective Monitor any risks in the implementation aspects of the project

If warranted, some of this assurance responsibility may be delegated (see also the section

below) 2. National Steering Committee

Overall responsibilities: The National Steering Committee is the group responsible for

providing strategic policy guidance and advice for the project when guidance is required by the



National Technical Committee. The policy guidance and advice is needed to ensure the relevance of the project to GOI priorities and synergies with other initiatives and to ensure the coordination between the provincial initiatives and those at the national level, in particular the alignment of this project to the relevant national programmes.

The National Steering Committee may review and approve the annual work plan (AWP)

when required and authorizes any major deviation from these agreed project document. Based on the approved annual work plan (AWP), the National Technical Committee will review and approve project quarterly plans.

Composition and organization: This group contains the designated official representing

the proposed Implementing Partner namely Directorate General for Regional Autonomy and Regional Development BAPPENAS, who will chair the Committee. Other members are Ministry of Home Affairs, Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Administration Reform, and Governors representing the pilot provinces.

Specific responsibilities: Running a project Provide direction and guidance to the National Technical Committee; Provide strategic policy guidance and advice to ensure the relevance of the project

to GOI priorities and synergies with other initiatives by GOI and other stakeholders;

Review and approve the annual work plan (AWP); Ensure that the GOI and other relevant stakeholders are engaged in establishing

priorities and strategies adopted by the project; Guide and support in managing the interface and coordination with other

stakeholders; Guide and support to securing resources required to fund the project; Review the relevant project reports for providing feedbacks and guidance; and Review and approve the annual work plan proposed by the National Technical

Committee.

Closing a project Review the Final Project Review Report, including lessons-learned; Make use of project lessons-learned for policy making and replication.

3. Deputy National Project Director

Overall responsibilities: The Deputy National Project Director (D-NPD) receives delegated authority from NPD to carry out NPD’s tasks on day-to-day basis.

Specific responsibilities would include: Supervise project implementation on daily basis; Provide guidance and direction to the project on day-to-day basis; Manage staff performance; Countersign cheques for activity implementation prior to signing by NPD; Review substantive report and financial report prior to submission to NPD; Update and provide advice to NPD on project implementation’s status and issues; Any other tasks that assigned by NPD.



4. Project Manager Overall responsibilities: The Project Manager has the authority to run the project on a

day-to-day basis on behalf of the National Technical Committee within the constraints laid down by the Committee. The Project Manager is responsible for day-to-day management and decision-making for the project. The Project Manager’s prime responsibility is to ensure that the project produces the results specified in the project document, to the required standard of quality and within the specified constraints of time and cost.

The Project Manager has both management and substantive functions. On the management

level s/he is tasked to develop and manage the Project Management Unit (PMU) in Jakarta and ensure positive rapports with the national level governments and the provincial governments in pilot provinces and donor.

On the substantive level he/she is tasked with providing detailed input into the project content and design and overseeing its implementation. This includes the appraisal of technical documentation and the production of technical reports. The Project Manager will be assisted by the PMU team (including the International Senior Technical Advisor when necessary) as well as consultants for specific tasks in implementing the work.

The Implementing Partner appoints the Project Manager, who should be different from the

Implementing Partner’s representative in the Committee members.

Specific responsibilities would include: Project Management Overall project management: Manage the realization of project outputs through activities; Provide direction and guidance to project team(s)/ responsible party (ies); Liaise with the National Technical Committee or its appointed Project Assurance

roles to assure the overall direction and integrity of the project; Identify and obtain any support and advice required for the management, planning

and control of the project; Responsible for project administration; Liaise with any suppliers; May also perform Team Manager and Project Support roles;

Preparation work: Prepare implementation plan of the program including timeframe, budget, human

resources, stages, steps, etc. In coordination with Decentralization Cluster of Democratic Governance Unit and

Chief Technical Advisor (CTA) of AGI, ensure establishing a solid PMU and provincial teams with effective delegation of authority and reporting lines for optimal management and implementation.

Ensure that each staff receives appropriate training / briefing to fulfill his/her role. Ensure that province-based staff and Jakarta-based staff develop the same

understanding of the program concept, objectives and ethical working principles of the program.

Running a project



Manage UNDP’s commitments within the UNDAF Results Matrix, ensures effective application of RBM tools, monitors work plans, programme and project effectiveness and achievement of results.

Organize joint planning meetings involving Implementing Partners, UNDP and other relevant parties to develop annual work plan and a corresponding budget plan with clearly stated milestones contributing to the achievement of outputs defined in the Project Document and submit it to the National Technical Committee for approval.

Develop quarterly work plans and expenditure plans based on the agreed annual work plan.

Ensure overall oversight and coordination of work planning and budgeting exercises within the PMU and provincial teams.

Plan the activities of the project and monitor progress against the initial quality criteria.

Mobilize goods and services to initiative activities, including drafting TORs and work specifications;

Monitor project procurement and recruitment as determined in the Procurement Plan and Recruitment Plan, and update the plans as required;

Manage requests for the provision of financial resources by UNDP, using advance of funds, direct payments, or reimbursement using the FACE (Fund Authorization and Certificate of Expenditures);

Monitor financial resources and accounting to ensure accuracy and reliability of financial reports;

Develop a monitoring and evaluation framework and plan that are in line with the requirements of UNDP, Implementing Partner and donors and that can ensure a bottom-up process of capturing lessons learned and best practices.

Monitor project progress against annual and quarterly work plan and budget plans. Manage and monitor the project risks as initially identified in the Project

Document appraised by the PAC, submit new risks to the National Technical Committee for consideration and decision on possible actions if required; update the status of these risks by maintaining the Project Risks Log;

Be responsible for managing issues and requests for change by maintaining an Issues Log.

Prepare the Project Quarterly Progress Report (progress against planned activities, update on Risks and Issues, expenditures) and submit the report to the National Technical Committee and Project Assurance;

Prepare the Annual review Report, and submit the report to the National Technical Committee;

Based on the review, prepare the AWP for the following year, as well as Quarterly Plans if required.

Closing a Project Prepare Final Project Review Reports to be submitted to the National Technical

Committee; Identify follow-on actions and submit them for consideration to the National

Technical Committee; Manage the transfer of project deliverables, documents, files, equipment and

materials to national beneficiaries; Prepare final CDR/FACE for signature by UNDP and the Implementing Partner.



Advisory and Advocacy Services Policy and knowledge services Advocates for UNDP with Government counterparts and ensures access to best

available expertise. In coordination with Programme Manager for Decentralization, working together

with the Policy Coordinator to prepare a strategy to ensure consultations with relevant partners on potential policy activities to be undertaken by the policy and research team.

Help identify strategic entry points to influence policies at national and sub-national level.

Supervise the analytical and policy development work of the policy and research team and ensure high quality policy or knowledge products. Promote the substantive quality of all knowledge products, reports and services.

Together with the policy and research manager, prepare policy briefs on key developments in the policy sphere on decentralization and regional autonomy in Indonesia, including direction of relevant strategic policy currently in the making by key government partners.

Ensure that PGSP lessons are documented and analytical work captured in reports. Ensure that such reports and documents are of high quality and that they are shared effectively with relevant partners including government at national and local level, civil society and donors supporting decentralisation efforts in Indonesia.

Donor relations and resource mobilization In coordination with Programme Manager for Decentralization, play an active role

in donor relations and resource mobilization as a joint effort with the Implementing Partner and other relevant stakeholders.

Update and develop reports to the donors on progress and result of implementation of activities and funding status.

Communications, networking and coordination Ensure open and inclusive communication with partners and stakeholders. Ensure regular communication among all PGSP units and area-based teams.

Based on project experiences recommend policy-related work for the policy unit and work with the policy unit (Output 1) to undertake research, organize debates or other policy-related activities.

Represent the NPD and the Implementing Partner as required in relevant networks and events.

Assist the NPD and the Implementing Partner in organizing meetings of National Steering Committee, National Technical Committee and other consultative or advisory group meetings with project partners, donors, UNDP, etc. as required.

Qualifications would include:

Education: Master’s degree in international development, public administration, business

administration, public policy or other relevant social sciences.



Experience: A minimum of 10 years of relevant experience in development in a governmental,

multilateral or civil society organization in a multi-cultural setting, preferably in a developing country environment, in the areas of decentralization, political development and democracy.

At least 5 years of large scale programme and project management experience. Experience in managing decentralisation projects and in preparation of project

reports, especially in UNDP formats. Strong understanding of and experience in programming and capability to

translate needs into project document. Experience in working and collaborating with governments, civil society

organizations, and public international organizations. Preferably, some experience in working in the Indonesian context, an in-depth

knowledge and understanding of electoral issues and political dynamics in Indonesia. Understanding of Government systems and procedure is a plus.

Familiarity with UNDP NEX project implementation, UNDP project document and results and resource framework, and relevant UNDP policies and procedures.

Understanding of UNDP systems and procedure is an advantage. Language Requirements: Demonstrated analytical skills and fluency in English and Bahasa Indonesia with

excellent verbal and drafting skills. 5. Sector Coordinator

Overall responsibilities: The Sector Coordinator will support Project Manager and be responsible for delivering one of PGSP outputs, namely Output 1 on Policy and Regulatory Framework, Output 2 on Regional Development Planning, and Output 3 on Innovation for Development Outcome. The Sector Coordinator will report to Project Manager.

Specific responsibilities would include: Project Management

Preparation Work Assist the Project Manager to facilitate the delivery of the respective Output with

concerned national and provincial authorities. Prepare implementation plan of the respective Output including timeframe,

budget, human resources, stages, steps, etc. Ensure that province-based staff and Jakarta-based staff develop the same

understanding of the program concept, objectives and ethical working principles of the program.

Specifically for Sector Coordinator of Output 2 and 3, in coordination with PGSP Project Manager manage initial capacity needs assessments in PGSP pilot provinces. For Gorontalo province, translate and utilize the findings of Gorontalo Capacity Assessment.

Specifically for Sector Coordinator of Output 2 and 3, in coordination with PGSP Project Manager, working together with provincial Facilitators to formulate the capacity development strategies and nurture start-up activities.



Planning In coordination with Project Manager, provide inputs and advice to Provincial

Facilitators when developing an annual work plan and a corresponding budget plan for respective Output with clearly stated milestones contributing to the achievement of outputs defined in the Project Document and get it approved by the National Technical Committee.

In coordination with Project Manager, provide inputs and advice to Provincial Facilitators when developing quarterly work plans and expenditure plans for respective Output based on the agreed annual work plan.

Advise the NPD and Project Manager on revisions to the work plan and budget plan based on the operational and strategic appreciation of project implementation with given conditions.

Ensure overall oversight and coordination of work planning and budgeting exercises within the PMU and Provincial PMU on the respective Output.

Implementation Daily coordination and management of the implementation of the activities of the

respective Output. Provide leadership and supervision to direct staffs, consultants, and Provincial

Facilitators with regard to the respective Output. Prepare Terms of References (TORs) for required inputs for the respective Output

(individual and institutional consultancy services, procurement of goods and services, organization of training, seminars, etc.), with expert technical support as required.

Ensure that required inputs for the respective Output are processed in a timely and transparent manner and mobilize competent national and international expertise as required.

Confirm and attest to the timeliness of submission and the quality of goods and services procured for the project for the respective Output.

Provide strategic inputs and advice to the Project Manager with regard to the program implementation and on matters that need immediate attention.

Ensure smooth handover of project documentation and files of the respective Outcome to the Implementing Partner or beneficiary at the project closure.

Monitoring and Evaluation Assist the Project Manager to develop a monitoring and evaluation framework and

plan that are in line with the requirements of UNDP, Implementing Partner and donors and that can ensure a bottom-up process of capturing lessons learned and best practices.

Monitor project progress of the respective Output against annual and quarterly work plan and budget plans.

Monitor and evaluate activities of the respective Output implemented by partners. Assist the Project Manager to liaise with the Implementing Partner and UNDP on

the conduct of project evaluation and ensure access by the evaluators to project documentation, personnel and institutions involved in the project.

Reporting, Project Closing and Audit Prepare project progress reports (quarterly and annual / financial and substantive)

and annual review reports of the respective Output against set targets and



indicators, with an analysis of evidence of progress towards planned outputs according to schedules, budgets, and inputs provided by the project.

Assist the Project Manager to prepare a final project report, with an analysis of progress towards expected results as defined in the Project Document and subsequent work plans and budgets. Together with UNDP, organize final project review meeting.

Establish and maintain a systematic filing system of key documents (in hard copy and soft copy) of the respective Output in line with audit requirements.

Assist the Project Manager and UNDP Programme Manager/Officer in closing projects operationally and financially in accordance of rules and regulations of UNDP and in close coordination with implementing partners.

Liaise with UNDP on the conduct of project audit and ensure access by auditors to project documentation, personnel and institutions involved in the project. Ensure that audit recommendations are complied with follow-up actions confirmed by NPD.

Advisory and Advocacy Services

Policy and Knowledge Services Specifically for Sector Coordinator of Output 2 and 3, working together with the

Sector Coordinator of Output 1 to prepare a strategy to ensure consultations with relevant partners on potential policy activities to be undertaken by the policy and research team.

Help identify strategic entry points to influence policies at national and sub-national level on the issue of the respective Output.

Specifically for Sector Coordinator of Output 2 and 3, working together with the Sector Coordinator of Output 1 to prepare policy briefs on key developments in the policy sphere on provincial-level issues, including direction of relevant strategic policy currently in the making by key government partners.

Ensure that PGSP lessons on the respective Output are documented and analytical work captured in reports. Ensure that such reports and documents are of high quality and that they are shared effectively with relevant partners incl. government at national and local level, civil society and donors supporting decentralization efforts in Indonesia.

Donor Relations and Resource Mobilization Assist the Project Manager to engage in donor relations and resource mobilization

as a joint effort with the Implementing Partner and other relevant stakeholders. Update and develop reports to the donors on progress and result of implementation

of civil service reform activities and funding status.

Communications, Networking and Coordination Ensure open and inclusive communication with partners and stakeholders.

Establish and maintain effective and timely communications and information mechanisms.

Ensure regular communication among all PGSP components, provincial teams and AGI teams. Based on program experiences recommend policy-related work for the policy unit and work with the policy unit to undertake research, organize debates or other policy-related activities.

Promote convergence between the different development interventions in the relevant area and also with the work of the different development agencies.



Identify opportunities to enhance team-work within and across various government agencies and with the other relevant institutes.

Identify and establish relations with national and international networks that could provide technical and advisory support to efficient and effective project implementation on the respective Output.

Represent the Project Manager, the NPD and the Implementing Partner as required in relevant networks and events.

Assist the Project Manager, the NPD and the Implementing Partner in organizing meetings of the National Technical Committee (National Project Board) and other consultative or advisory group meetings with electoral stakeholders, project partners, donors, UNDP, etc. as required.


Education: Master’s degree in political or social sciences, public administration or or other

relevant social sciences Experience: At least 7 years of practical experience in managing projects, preferably in a

developing country environment, in the areas of decentralization and good governance.

Experience in managing decentralization projects and in preparation of project reports, especially in UNDP formats.

Strong understanding of and experience in programming activities to reflect project document.

Experience in working and collaborating with governments, civil society organizations, and public international organizations.

In-depth knowledge and understanding of Indonesian decentralization issues and political dynamics. Understanding of government systems and procedure is a plus.

Familiarity with UNDP NEX project implementation, UNDP project document and results and resource framework, and relevant UNDP policies and procedures. Understanding of UNDP systems and procedure is an advantage.

Language Requirements: Demonstrated analytical skills and fluency in English and Bahasa Indonesia with

excellent verbal and drafting skills.

6. Provincial Facilitator

Overall responsibilities: The main role of Provincial Facilitator is to stimulate innovative activities and to facilitate better coordination among the stakeholders at the province and national level. Provincial Facilitator will be responsible for overall management and implementation of the PGSP in pilot province. The Provincial Facilitator will establish and maintain trusted relationships with counterparts in pilot province. The Provincial Facilitator will be responsible for bringing the perspectives and needs from the province to the national level of the PGSP to ensure that appropriate support is mobilized and provided to the province within the PGSP framework.

Specific responsibilities would include:



Implementation of PGSP in the pilot province: In coordination with Project Manager in Jakarta, ensure establishing a solid

Provincial PMU and provincial teams with effective delegation of authority and reporting lines for optimal management and implementation.

Plan and manage PGSP implementation in the pilot province, ensuring transparent and consultative processes of planning and implementation, and timely implementation of activities.

Ensure that a practical monitoring framework is set up specifically for the pilot province and implemented.

Assist the Project Manager and the Sector Coordinators in organizing joint planning meetings involving Implementing Partners, UNDP and other relevant parties to develop annual work plan and a corresponding budget plan with clearly stated milestones contributing to the achievement of outputs defined in the Project Document and submit it to the Provincial Technical Committee for review, prior to submission to National Technical Committee through Project Manager for further approval process.

In coordination with the Jakarta-based Sector Coordinators, develop quarterly work plans and expenditure plans for activities to be implemented in the pilot province based on the agreed annual work plan.

Liaise with PMU in Jakarta, implementing partners, and other partners to ensure timely quality technical assistance to the Province partners as per agreed work-plans.

Ensure smooth implementation of PGSP activities in the pilot province. Identify and address implementation bottlenecks when they arise.

General Management: Supervise Provincial PMU staff, evaluate work progress and effectiveness and

ensure high quality performance. Prepare quarterly budgets and plans for activities in the pilot province and

coordinate with PMU colleagues in Jakarta. Produce reporting material (substantive and financial) of the project and related

documentation for the activities at local level in close collaboration with the local counterparts.

Regularly review project expenditure reports and ensure that expenditures are legitimate and accurate.

Develop and maintain an effective team. Hold regular team meetings, ensure that the team members are well informed of the Program’s objectives and plans and actively participate in the development and establishment of team’s objectives and work plans.

Arrange training and other learning opportunities, ensure that the team members have adequate access to facilities and equipment to perform their duties satisfactorily.

Ensure that open and transparent procedures, in line with UNDP Rules and Regulations, are applied by all program staff in assigned area (i) recruitment of the local program personnel; (ii) disbursement of payments (iii) the tendering, the evaluation of tender bids and the awarding of the contracts; (iv) the monitoring of sub-project implementation, and (v) the certification of outputs.

Coordination:



As a principle – ensure open and inclusive communication with partners and stakeholders. Establish and maintain effective and timely communications and information mechanisms.

Ensure on a continuous basis the dialogue with other international partners working in the pilot province, to ensure appropriate synergy and complementary activities.

Ensure coordination and regular communication with the PGSP policy unit (Output 1) in Jakarta. Based on the pilot province’s experiences recommend policy-related work for the policy unit and work with the policy unit to undertake research, organize debates or other policy-related activities.

Advise and assist the Jakarta-based Project Manager and Sector Coordinators in donor relations and international activities concerning fund raising specifically for the pilot province.

Support the Project Manager and Sector Coordinators in coordinating resources available from different networks of cities internationally and other potential partners. Ensure adequate information is available so that all relevant and potential contributors are informed of development needs and priorities in the pilot province;

In pilot province where both PGSP and AGI are implemented, in the case of joint activities, Provincial Facilitator will work closely with AGI Area Manager under the guidance from Project Manager.

As requested, facilitate and/or participate in events, seminars, ad hoc working groups, etc. and perform other duties as required during program implementation.


Education: Master’s degree in international development, international relations, political

sciences, public administration, economics or other relevant social sciences. Experience: Minimum 8 years experience working in the areas of decentralization and good

governance, preferably based in sub-national level. Experience and good understanding of the Indonesian decentralization challenges

and opportunities. Proven experience working with government in Indonesia and other Indonesian

partners at sub-national level. Proven experience in using participatory planning techniques. Strong organizational, planning, and budgeting skills. Previous experience with an international development institution such as UNDP

is an advantage, but not essential. Experience using computers and office software packages (MS Word, Excel, etc)

and knowledge of spreadsheet and database packages. Experience using UNDP’s ATLAS software an advantage, but not requirement. Highly effective communication skills essential (speaking and writing).

Language Requirements: Fluency in written and spoken Indonesian and English.



Proven ability to produce narrative and financial reports of high quality in English and Indonesian language.

7. Project Assurance

Overall responsibility: Project Assurance is the responsibility of each National Technical Committee member. However, the role can be delegated. The Project Assurance role supports the National Technical Committee by carrying out objective and independent project oversight and monitoring functions. This role ensures appropriate project management milestones are managed and completed.

Project Assurance has to be independent of the Project Manager; therefore the National

Technical Committee cannot delegate any of its assurance responsibilities to the Project Manager. A UNDP Programme Manager and Programme Officer typically hold the Project Assurance role.

The implementation of the assurance responsibilities needs to answer the question “What

is to be assured?” The following list includes the key suggested aspects that need to be checked by the Project Assurance throughout the project as part of ensuring that it remains relevant, follows the approved plans and continues to meet the planned targets with quality.

Maintenance of thorough liaison throughout the project between the members of the National Technical Committee.

Beneficiary needs and expectations are being met or managed Risks are being controlled Adherence to the Project Justification (Business Case) Projects fit with the overall Country Programme The right people are being involved An acceptable solution is being developed The project remains viable The scope of the project is not “creeping upwards” unnoticed Internal and external communications are working Applicable UNDP rules and regulations are being observed Any legislative constraints are being observed Adherence to RMG monitoring and reporting requirements and standards Quality management procedures are properly followed National Technical Committee decisions are followed and revisions are managed

in line with the required procedures

Specific responsibilities would include: Initiating a project Ensure that project outputs definitions and activity definition including description

and quality criteria have been properly recorded in the Atlas Project Management module to facilitate monitoring and reporting;

Ensure that people concerned are fully informed about the project Ensure that all preparatory activities, including training for project staff, logistic

supports are timely carried out

Running a project Ensure that funds are made available to the project;



Ensure that risks and issues are properly managed, and that the logs in ATLAS are regularly updated;

Ensure that critical project information is monitored and updated in ATLAS, using the Activity Quality log in particular;

Ensure that Project Quarterly Progress Reports are prepared and submitted on time, and according to standards in terms of format and content quality;

Ensure that CDRs and FACE are prepared and submitted to the National Technical Committee;

Perform oversight activities, such as periodic monitoring visits and “spot checks”. Ensure that the Project Data Quality Dashboard remains “green”

Closing a project Ensure that the project is operationally closed in ATLAS; Ensure that all financial transactions are in ATLAS based on final accounting of

expenditures; Ensure that project accounts are closed and status set in ATLAS accordingly.

8. Project Support

Overall responsibilities: The Project Support role provides project administration, management and technical support to the Project Manager as required by the needs of the individual project or Project Manager. The provision of any Project Support on a formal basis is optional. It is necessary to keep Project Support and Project Assurance roles separate in order to maintain the independence of Project Assurance.

Specific responsibilities: Some specific tasks of the Project Support would include: Provision of administrative services: Set up and maintain project files Collect project related information data Update plans Administer the quality review process Administer Project Steering Committee meetings.

Project documentation management: Administer project revision control Establish document control procedures Compile, copy and distribute all project reports

Financial management, monitoring and reporting Assist in the financial management tasks under the responsibility of the Project

Manager Provide support in the use of Atlas for monitoring and reporting

Provision of technical support services Provide technical advices Review technical reports Monitor technical activities carried out by responsible parties

The implementation of PGSP will be managed in the national as well as provincial level.



Annex 6 PROJECT REVISION PROCESS

BAPPENASDit. Sector

Stage UNDP Technical Department

FinDept Ditjen Debt

Management

Indonesia

Implementing Partner (NPD )

BAPPENASDeputy VIII

BAPPENASDit. 8.4

Joint Letter on Revised Project

Document Attached : • Justification for revision • Change G/A • Summary of revision

Signing the Revised Project Document

Revision To Project Document

Memo Revised ProDoc

Input

Result of Discussing

Revised Project Document

Approved Revised Project

Document

FinDeptDit PHLN






(UKE I)


( UNDP CountryDirector)

Discussion


Document


Document(UNDP Country

Director )


Document


Document(NPD & UKE I)



Annex 7

MECHANISM FOR RECORDING UNDP GRANT AID ACTIVITIES IN DIPA

PHASES UNDPImplementing

Partner*

Department of FinanceDebt

Management Budget Treasury

Signing of the Prodoc/AWP and Grant

Aid Agreement

Grant Aid Registration

Recorded inDIPA

Opening a Project Bank Account

Project Document

Project Document forwarded to DoF and constitutes the Grant aid Agreement

Application forRegistration

Process of Registration

RegistrationDocument

Application forRecording in DIPA( Planning Bureau)

Process of Recording the grant

in DIPA

Certification of Recording Number

in DIPA

Incorporated in RKA

DIPA

Request to Open a Bank

Account

Approval to Open a Bank

Account

Process of Issuing DIPA

Evaluation of Application

Coordination

Coordination



Annex 8

PROJECT ACCOUNT MANAGEMENT

M / A/ Office/ W.Unit ( PA/KPA)

Phase State Treasurer / State Enterprise Rep.

Central Bank / Commercial Bank

/Post Office

Request to open an Account

.

Attach : • copy of budget

document• Statement on

use of the account .

Evaluation of Request

Approval to open an Account

.

Application to open Account

:

Evaluation of Application

Project Account

Reporting the Account

( .

Account Report

Financial Reporting

:

Financial Report

Approval To Open Account

Application To Open

Account

Reporting the Account

Financial Reporting



Annex 9 MECHANISM FOR WITHDRAWAL OF

UNDP GRANT AID

The diagram below shows the process for Direct Cash Transfer modality.

Type of Withdrawal UNDP

VendorResponsible Parties

Indonesia

Implementing Partner (PM)

Quarterly Work Plan and Face Form.( n)

Direct Cash Transfer( Account )

Implementation of QWP n

Evaluation of QWPn

Transfer Funds Project Bank Account

Report QWPn

and submit QWP and Face form

n+ 1

Evaluation of QWPn Implemen -

tation & QWPn+1



Annex 10 SELECTION OF PARTICIPATING

PROVINCES Outline

To ensure project impact and relevance, the government and UNDP have devised a selection process and produced a short-list of candidate provinces to select from. Although the total number of provinces is small, further assessment of the short-listed provinces will be necessary, to find out their readiness to participate in the project.

The selection of partner provinces will be conducted through the following steps: 1 2 3 4 5 Shortlist & ranking -- Information Letter -- Evalu Field verification - Selection [Poverty, HDI, [to be responded with ation [needs & prospect Revenue/capita] letter of interest] criteria] 1. Shortlist.

17 provinces were considered eligible to be short-listed (see Table 1). Sixteen provinces were excluded on the following basis:

a) provinces with a special autonomy status would reduce replicability. b) provinces that would have an election scheduled before mid-2010 would have less

than 2 years of PGSP support 49, which is considered the minimum for institutionalizing practices. A new governor might change policies drastically before innovations have become regularized or enforced by local regulations / Perda’s and the like.

Based on the following criteria, a simple scoring method was applied to the provinces,

resulting in a ranking of provinces: • HDI and percentage of poor population; the lower HDI and the higher percentage

of poor families are considered more relevant for technical support and significance of impact;

• provincial spending per capita; although not directly proportional to the population, the provincial APBD still reflects the challenges that is faced by a province and the resources that are available.

The ranking of provinces is not necessarily used; only if evaluation of province responses

produces identical scores for a number of provinces, then the scores may be applied to select the higher scoring provinces. 2. Letter from the NPD:

49 Assuming that provincial support (Part A) commences at least in July-August 2009.



With a letter from the NPD, provinces on the short-list will be requested to express their interest to participate in the PGSP and provide further general information (see Indonesian outline, Appendix …) within a certain time limit.

The questions include (1) the Province’s efforts to improve or innovate services, (2)

aspirations toward participation in governance, (3) opinion on division of provincial-district roles & responsibilities in their region, (4) statement on current public participation in governance in the province, (5) opinion on their current skills in planning & budgeting, and (6) monitoring and evaluation of district perfomance being done, according to the Province. The letter also requests summary information on regional plans, budgets and socio-economic statistics. 3. Evaluation:

In-coming responses from Provinces will be evaluated on their seriousness of interest and their apparent need for assistance. The following table with scoring is suggested. The essential criteria determine whether a province is to be considered for participation or not. The following criteria concerning probability of success and needs will assign scores to each of the provinces. No. Criterion Score ESSENTIAL (Yes or No participation) Pre-requisites 0. Expression of willingness to participate in

capacity building pilot projects and contribute to provincial government reform.

IF NO EXPRESSION OF WILLINGESS, THE PROVINCE IS NOT INCLUDED

Q. no.1.

There have been demonstrable provincial governance innovations in past 5 years, (whether or not linked to donor funded programmes)

AT LEAST MORE THAN ONE RECENT EFFORT TO IMPROVE PERFORMANCE OR INNOVATE, UNDER THE CURRENT GOVERNOR

2. The provincial government welcomes participation in all processes of governance.

THE PROVINCE IS EXPECTED TO POSITIVELY RESPOND TO THIS QUESTION (see question #2, Appendix)

PROBABILITY OF SUCCESS Criteria of Provincial Readiness 3. Is there a clear distinction of roles &

responsibilities between provincial and district / municipalities?

Max.20 points. Description needed, and the clearer the distinction,the higher the score). This wil become a potential basis for learning.

4. Please note civil society and community participation in provincial government activities (what kind and how regular is).

Max. 20 points. Assumption: the higher level of participation, the more chance for success, relevance and positive outcomes.

NEEDS Contrary to the “probability of success” criterion, these are gaps where assistance can achieve significant impact.

Criteria Concerning Relevant Needs for PGSP Support

5. Lack of strategic planning skills need to be strengthened at provincial government level.

Max. 20 points.

6. The provincial government monitors and evaluates district level activities, including service delivery performance, using performance targets.

Max. 20 points, to be described.

* data

Plans and budgets are based on in depth needs assessments (district based, bottom-up) and are linked to national development targets (central government based, top-down).

Max.20 points. Description of provIncial plans and budgets needed. The more the plan and budget do not link bottom-up with top-down, the higher the score.

TOTAL – 100 POINTS



4. Verification in the provinces:

Verification by GoI and the PGSP team will confirm the accuracy of information provided in the response letters, and if necessary gather more data for final selection. If the number of candidate provinces has reduced to 6 or less, verification may not be necessary anymore.

5. Selection

Verification of the candidate provinces is expected to provide all necessary information and insights to decide on a final selection.

In case the number of suitable candidates exceeds three provinces and success probability

as well as needs criteria produce provinces with identical scores, it is suggested to apply the following principles, as agreed with GoI50:

For the sake of relevance and replicability, selection of participating provinces should be

distributed proportionally: a) among the regions (Sumatra/Kalimantan-Sulawesi/Java/East Indonesia); b) among the various sizes of provinces (number of districts) reflecting spans of

control (small: 5-8 districts; small-medium borderline: 9; medium: 10-12; medium-large borderline: 13-14; large: 15-39 districts).

The final list of participating provinces will be confirmed by GOI.

6. Resource Provinces:

Provinces with outstanding innovations will be regarded as resource provinces although not selected as participant provinces; PGSP will facilitated these provinces to document good practice, and when necessary, in taking actions to institutionalize the practice.

As explained in the main text of the ProDoc and shown in Table 1 , a number of provinces

with interesting experience have not been proposed for participation because special characteristics. Other well-performing provinces were excluded because of the presence of other provincial support, like West Sumatra (being facilitated by LGSP) and South Sulawesi (USDRP). However, they will remain important resources for learning by other provinces and for policy input. The PGSP will include a special activity component that assists provinces in consolidation of good practices and arranges for experience sharing and dissemination.

50 Review of 2nd Draft ProDoc, Bogor, August 11, 2008; meeting between Bappenas, UNDP, BRIDGE and Pro-doc teams.



1) Shortlist

Table 1 - SHORT-LIST OF CANDIDATE PROVINCES TO PARTICIPATE IN PGSP Province Region Span of control Note

1. NTB / West Nusatenggara Eastern Indonesia medium-small 2 . NTT / East Nusatenggara Eastern Indonesia large Selected as Pilot Province 3. East Java Java-Bali large Resource Province 4 . Lampung Sumatera medium 5 . Central Java Java-Bali large Resource Province 6 . Gorontalo Kalimantan-Sulawesi small Selected as Pilot Province 7. West Java Java-Bali large Resource Province 8 . South-East Sulawesi Kalimantan-Sulawesi medium 9 . West Kalimantan Kalimantan medium 10 . Banten Java-Bali small 11 . South Sumatra Sumatera medium-large 12 . Maluku Eastern Indonesia small 13 . North Sumatra Sumatera large 14 . Bali Java-Bali medium-small 15 . Bangka Belitung Sumatera small Selected as Pilot Province 16 . Riau Sumatera medium Case for revenues / resource

management 17 . East kalimantan Kalimantan-Sulawesi medium

Other Resource provinces, not included in list:

DIY-Yogyakarta NAD - Aceh Papua West Papua

Excluded for special status of autonomy.

South Sulawesi Other provincial support programme ongoing (USDRP)

West Sumatra Pilkada to be held in June 2010; provincial support ongoing (LGSP).

NOTES: 2) With a letter from the NPD, provinces on this short-list will be requested to provide further general

information and express their interest to participate in the PGSP. 3) The list follows ranking of provinces from highest to lowest scores. Scores are the result of following criteria:

HDI and % of poor population, provincial spending per capita. 4) For the sake of relevance and replicability, selection of participating provinces should be distributed

proportionally: a) among the regions (Sumatra/Kalimantan-Sulawesi/Java/East Indonesia); b) among the various sizes of provinces (number of districts) reflecting spans of control (small: 5-6

districts, large 5) The following provinces are excluded:

c) Provinces with unique characteristics that would reduce replicability (special autonomy regions). d) Provinces that would have an election scheduled before finishing their 2nd year of PGSP support: for

batch 1, before the 3rd quarter of 2011; for batch 2, before 3rd quarter - 2012. This is assuming start of PGSP in the second quarter of 2009 with Part B. and start of batch 1 provincial support (Part A.) in the 3rd quarter of 2009.

6) Provinces with outstanding innovations will be regarded as resource provinces although not selected as participant provinces; PGSP will facilitated these provinces to document good practice, and when necessary, in taking actions to institutionalize the practice.

7) The Riau province was considered by GoI as an important candidate, to study and facilitate its coping with issues of revenue management between province and districts.



Appendix 1: Outline of letter to candidate provinces, in bahasa Indonesia.

GARISBESAR SURAT PENJAJAGAN MINAT KEPADA PEMDA PROVINSI

A. Bappenas mengirim informasi garisbesar tentang PGSP51 kepada daerah-daerah yang termasuk dalam Daftar-Pendek / shortlist, dan menanyakan minat Provinsi untuk berperanserta dalam kegiatan tersebut.

B. Minat propinsi dinyatakan melalui surat balasan Kepala Daerah yang menyatakan keinginan provinsi yang bersangkutan untuk difasilitasi melalui PGSP.

C. Di samping pernyataan minat Provinsi, dimohon tanggapan Provinsi terhadap pertanyaan-pertanyaan di bawah ini: 1) Upaya apa saja yang telah dilakukan Propinsi dalam 5 tahun terakhir untuk meningkatkan kinerja daerah secara keseluruhan maupun masing-masing Kabupaten/Kota di Propinsi ini? Kegiatan Mulai Hingga

(atau masih

berjalan)

Instansi pelaksana

Peserta atau kelompok

sasaran

Hasil (mis. produk hukum atau organisasi yang terbentuk)

2) Apakah Propinsi berharap dapat meningkatkan peranserta masyarakat, swasta dan masyarakat sipil / LSM di tahun anggaran 2010 mendatang? Bila ya, pada proses mana Pemerintah

Propinsi ingin melibatkan peranserta masyarakat dan swasta? (mohon tandai): □ Perencanaan □ Pelaksanaan □ Evaluasi

51 Atau nama lain untuk PGSP yang mudah diingat dan mencerminkan cita-cita atau kegiatan program ini.



3) Menurut Pemda, apakah pembagian peran dan tanggungjawab di antara Provinsi dan Kabupaten / Kota di wilayah anda sudah cukup jelas? Y / T

4) Dalam bentuk apa saja masyarakat / swasta dan LSM selama ini terlibat dalam tata-pemerintahan Provinsi? □ .... [ mohon tuliskan kegiatan, forum, serta frekuensinya ] □ …

5) Apakah menurut pemda Provinsi terdapat kendala dalam kemampuan Provinsi dalam

□ menyusun rencana (rencana tahunan, rencana jangka-menengah, rencana strategis)? □ menyusun anggaran?

6) Apakah kegiatan dan pencapaian kinerja pelayanan publik oleh Kabupaten / Kota sudah terpantau oleh Provinsi? Y / T

7) Lain-lain catatan Pemda Provinsi, yang berkaitan dengan inisiatif apa yang akan dilakukan Pemda dalam rangka kerjasama dengan PGSP.

Mohon lampirkan data Provinsi yang berkaitan dengan » Statistik kependudukan, sosial – ekonomi terakhir (bila tersedia, dalam bentuk buku), per wilayah administratif. » Hasil Musrenbang Kab/Kota 2008, 2009 » Rekapitulasi APBD 2008 dan RAPBD 2009. » Ringkasan RPJMD, Renstra Propinsi.

Catatan untuk Bappenas: Di sini tidak diminta ”dana pendamping”, karena kegiatan PGSP diharapkan tidak menjadi kegiatan terpisah melainkan mendukung kegiatan Provinsi yang telah dialokasi

dalam APBD dalam rangka peningkatan pelayanan publik, peningkatan kapasitas, penyusunan regulasi dan sebagainya. Juga tidak diharuskan pembentukan pokja / tim ad hoc untuk PGSP dan sebagainya (apalagi dengan honor tersendiri), karena semua kegiatan yang dilakukan seharusnya

sudah tercakup dalam tupoksi SKPD terkait. Bila ada, dukungan dari Pemda untuk PGSP dapat mencakup misalnya perubahan APBD untuk dapat mengerahkan tenaga akademik atau LSM, atau kontribusi ’in kind’

untuk penyelenggaraan lokakarya, penyebaran poster. Niat Pemda seperti ini dapat dinyatakan di no. 6.



Annex 11 RISK LOG

Project title: Provincial Governance Strengthening Programme Award ID: 00057787 Date: July 2008 No Description Date

Identified Type Impact & Probability Countermeasures/ Management

response Owner Last

Update Status

1 National and sub-national government ownership is a precondition for an effective PGSP.

September 2008

Organizational It will cause slow-down in the preparation and implementation of PGSP and the sustainability of the project impact once it is phasing out. P = 3 I = 5

National and sub-national government involves since the design of the project document. The project management arrangements place representative from national government as National Project Director and from sub-national governments as the Provincial Chairperson, to ensure the government’s ownership to PGSP.


N/A Factored into project design and implementation.

2 To achieve Output 1 it will be necessary to confirm that PGSP will have an acknowledged official role as a contributor to the formulation of these regulations (similar in nature to the current successful arrangement for the GTZ funded contribution to Law 32 Revision)

September 2008

Strategic The lessons and knowledge taken from the implementation of Output 2 and 3 might be difficult to be fed into the formulation of the regulations including the Law 32 Revision. P = 1 I = 3

As early as possible, PGSP needs taking part in the teams that formulating the regulations, including the Law 32 Revision.


N/A Factored into project design and implementation.

3 To achieve Outputs 2 and 3 provincial governments will need to commit to the core capacity development programs

September 2008

Organizational It will cause low sub-national ownership for obtainaing effective PGSP’s impact and sustainability. P = 1 I = 3

To ensure that the Provincial Chairperson is appointed and involved in the subtantive and managerial decisions of the project. The Provincial Chairpeson needs to coordinate the activities with the


N/A Factored into project implementation.



No Description Date Identified

Type Impact & Probability Countermeasures/ Management response

Owner Last Update

Status

relevant stakeholders (SKPD) in the province.

4 The Project is designed to undertake activities linked to Outputs 2 and 3 in limited to three pilot provinces.

September 2008

Strategic The number of pilot provinces will be too small to act as a representative selection of provinces on which to base much of the work of PGSP’s Part B. P = 5 I = 1

Three pilot provinces are selected based on specific criteria and represented the variety of provinces throughout Indonesia. The use of other provinces as “Resource Provinces” i.e. special case provinces including Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam (which has been given extraordinary powers to be able to respond to the post-tsunami reconstruction needs), Papua, and any other provinces suggested during the project implementation.


N/A Factored into project formulation as a key design critera and into project implementation.

5 Output 2 and 3 activities in three provinces will stretch Project resources too thinly and in depth capacity development which will identify lessons learned in “coping mechanisms” of provincial stakeholders.

September 2008

Operational This might have an impact on the identification and compilation of lessons learned. P = 2 I = 3

The use of senior Facilitators in the Provinces is intended to “catalyze’ initiatives from the stakeholders, rather than use extensive PGSP consultancy.


N/A Factored into project implemenation

6 There is a risk that Provincial Facilitators of sufficient quality will not be available.

September 2008

Operational The activities linked to Outputs 2 and 3 in three pilot provinces might not be achieved as intended. P = 3 I = 3

Ensure that the advertisement of the post is as wide as possible. Close coordination between Provincial Facilitators and Sector Coordinators of Output 2 and 3 that based in PMU Jakarta.


N/A Factored into project implementation

7 Risk of misuses or misappropriation of funds.

September 2008

Financial

The project will support to enhance capacity for financial monitoring of all UNDP portfolios as a whole, with emphasizes on the field validation of outputs, beneficiaries interview, and review of financial expenditure. It will affect and can cause delay of the

The project’s financial resources will be managed and controlled through application of UNDP internal control framework. All financial transaction will be monitored, recorded, analyzed, and reported through UNDP’s ATLAS Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system.


N/A

Factored into project design and implementation of monitoring system



No Description Date Identified

Type Impact & Probability Countermeasures/ Management response

Owner Last Update

Status

implementation project. P = 1 I = 3

8 Recurrence of new government regulation

January 2009 Regulatory

It will create uncertainty in regulatory environment that may cause slow-down in the preparation and implementation of new projects / programmes. P = 3 I = 1

It remains possible that further new regulation will occur that could result in a continued predominant focus of project preparation process and longer initiation period. To accommodate this prospect, dedicated staffing and activities have been formulated specifically for facilitating the initiation process.


N/A Factored into project formulation as a key design criteria.

.

Provincial Governance Strengthening Programme (PGSP)

Documents

Transcript of Provincial Governance Strengthening Programme (PGSP)