PROCESS TO DEVELOP THE April 2007-March 2008 Annual Work Plan

Consultations with Partners

An important part of the process to develop each Annual Workplan is the consultation with various program stakeholders. Primary among these are the LGUs, key ARG representatives and CSO partners. Since the November 2006 Program Steering Committee meeting, inputs were gathered from PSC members during informal discussions as well as formal meetings to determine possible areas of further focus and consolidation.

LGSPA Program Officers met with better performing LGU stakeholders to go over potential areas of support in the new fiscal year. LRP reports on the various projects were studied and the updated LGSPA Performance Information System was reviewed in preparation for the annual work planning process. The 2006 readiness assessment for each LGU was also examined to determine if any LGUs could move into another category of readiness.

For the Enabling Environment component, LGSPA held consultation sessions with CSO representatives and key ARG partners regarding concerns, problems encountered and to examine progress. The results analysis and rating assessment of PIS elements and indicators were also reviewed to determine progress made and in which areas and identify necessary subsequent interventions.

Thematic Priorities

Results of these various consultation sessions were brought to the Annual Workplanning Management Team session and Implementation Team Planning Workshop held during the first week of February 2007. With the help of a professional facilitator, a strategic planning process was used to go over the Program?s accomplishments and compare these to the commitments and expected target outputs; to determine the effectiveness and efficiency of the strategies used in implementing the program; to develop a common understanding of the challenges that the program faces given the situation in ARMM in particular and the country in general; and to build consensus on a realistic and doable work plan given the assessment of strengths and weaknesses as well as the opportunities and threats that the program faces.

Each focus area was reviewed in terms of progress towards targets, what strategies worked or did not work and why. The larger enabling governance environment in ARMM and the national situation were discussed and how it may possibly impact on ARMM. Discussion of the many ground realities and considerations were examined. These included LGU, ARG and ARMM CSO readiness factors, upcoming May 2007 elections, MILF-GRP peace talks, legitimacy and priorities of current national administration, LGU absorptive capacity, availability and willingness of LRPs to work in ARMM, LGSPA expenditure trends, security issues, other donor programs, the possibility of Canada?s joining the IMT, and others.

From this analysis, strategic objectives were developed for the new fiscal year and corresponding indicative strategies identified. This Strengths-Weaknesses-Opportunities-Threats (SWOT) analysis was validated by the full implementation team and details of the indicative strategies further fleshed out.

Three Thematic Objectives were identified for the 2007-08 fiscal year: 

1. Leadership Development (11 Projects) - To inspire and popularize open, collaborative and accountable leadership among ARMM leaders
2. Civil Society Strengthening (8 Projects) -  To enhance ARMM civil society capacities to significantly contribute to democratic and transformative governance; and
3. Promoting Peace and Human Security ( 14 Projects)- To promote awareness and cooperation of multistakeholders for the peace process in Mindanao and strengthen agencies to better respond to aid effectiveness and human security in ARMM.

Other indicative strategies were further discussed to identify project interventions that would respond to these thematic objectives. This meant trying out new approaches and methods, tapping new resources as well as the discontinuation of some activities that were not producing the kind of progress towards results that was expected.

back