Download - MSP Document 2013
-
8/13/2019 MSP Document 2013
1/33
Livelihood Support and Promotion of Community Infrastructure Project (LACI-P)
Integrated Development Planning at Village and Union Level
Embarking on practical methodology
Dr. Arjumand Nizami
Mehmood Hemani
Roshan Ara
Nadeem Bukhari
Islamabad
2013
-
8/13/2019 MSP Document 2013
2/33
2
Final draft June 5th
, 2013
-
8/13/2019 MSP Document 2013
3/33
3
Acknowledgement
PPAF is Pakistans leading organization in terms of taking innovative initiatives
for poverty reduction. This organization is highly committed to propel a large
scale impact from its work in the field and a consistent emphasis on MSP is
one step in achieving this direction.
The consultants team is highly grateful to Qazi Azmat Isa, the CEO of PPAF in
providing a conceptual outline on MSP and encouraging a process that is built on
earlier knowledge and experiences. Mr. Masood Khalid and his team have been
instrumental in extending all the cooperation and guidance in this process. We
also thank Mr. Nasurullah and Mr. Taimur Jahangir and several other colleagues
(who also attended the kick-off workshop on 17th
of April at PPAF) for theirpunctual support in providing relevant material for our work. We thank Herman
Mulder from Intercooperationfor peer reading this document and providing his
valuable comments. Thanks are also due to our LACIP colleagues Rana Sarwar,
Hayatullah and Mubashar for their day to day help during the mission and
finalization of this report.
We sincerely hope that this document will provide a useful framework for piloting
MSP in PPAF project areas and will generate learning for further improvement
into the process for the future.
The MSP Methodology Team,Islamabad, April 2013
-
8/13/2019 MSP Document 2013
4/33
4
Table of Contents
Chapter 01 ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 6
Introduction and background of this report ........................................................................... ............................................................................... .............................. 6
Chapter 02 ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 8
The Concept of Multi-Sector Planning (MSP) ......................................................................... ............................................................................... .............................. 8
Chapter 03 ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 10
The process and steps to conduct MSP ................................................................................................................................................................................................. 10
Chapter 04 ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 20
Piloting in the fieldproposed outline ................................................................................................................................................................................................. 20
Annex 1-7 ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................23-32
-
8/13/2019 MSP Document 2013
5/33
5
Acronyms
ADP Annual Development Plan (Government) LSO Local Support Organization
AHO Asian Humanitarian Organisation MER Monitoring, Evaluation and Research
AKRSP Aga Khan Rural Support Programme MDP Members Development Plan
APO Associate Partner Organization MIP Members Investment Plan
CIG Common Interest Groups MSP Multi-sector Plan
CPI Community Physical Infrastructure NRSP National Rural Support Programme
CO Community Organization OPM Operational Planning Manual
CMST Community Management Skill Training PO Partner Organization
DDF District Development Forum PPAF Pakistan Poverty Alleviation Fund
DRR Disaster Risk Reduction PSC Poverty Score CardFFO Farmers Friend Organization SDP Settlement Development Plan
GBIs Grant-Based Intervention SO Social Organizer
HH Household TNA Training Needs Assessment
KP Khyber Pukhtunkhwa UC Union Council
LACIP Livelihood And Community based Infrastructure support Programme UCDO Union Council based Development Organization
LEP Livelihood Enhancement and Protection UCDP Union Council Development Plan
LIP Livelihood investment Plan VDP Village Development Plan
LMST Leadership and Management Skill Training VO Village Organization
-
8/13/2019 MSP Document 2013
6/33
6
Chapter 1
Introduction and background of this report
PPAF as an organization believes in holistic approach in poverty alleviation and
therefore is striving for integrated development through building strong
institutions in the field. For PPAF, institutional strengthening in the field is the key
to ensuring sustainability of development effects in poverty stricken areas.
Therefore an idea of establishing community / village organizations for delivering
development services does not stop there it needs to be further accompanied
to achieve a wider understanding on development vision within a community for
inclusive development and a living plan identifying how to achieve this
development beyond interventions that are limited at individual household and
neighborhood levels. MSP is an idea in this direction encompassing village and
Union Council levels, taking multiple sectors into account, and ensuring that the
idea will be eventually supported by the measures provided in LG Act when
implemented.
A workshop was called by LACIP for further fine tuning the MSP concept and bring
all the concerned at PPAF on one page. This one day workshop was organized at
PPAF (workshop programme Annex 1). The entire day strived to achieve the
following objectives and expected outcomes:
Objectives:
- Collectively identify why MSP is neededwhat it isand what will be the
methodological steps to achieve this at a village or a UC level
- Understand the roles expected of various tiers (village, UC) for themselves
and towards other development actors
Expected outcome:
- An outline for partners orientation on the concept and methodologywill be
available as a result of the workshop
- Internal clarity among the team to move on in the field through partners
- Identification of the next steps
In total 28 Participants contributed to the workshop discussion in a highly
interactive manner. With pleasure we report, that all the relevant units were
present in the workshop which helped in taking the MSP agenda forward through
multiple inputs from experts in several development themes1. A list of
participants is attached in Annex 2.
1.1Workshop on 17thApril 2013 on MSP
Fine-tuning methodological steps and roles of different tiers in MSP
In his opening remarks, the CEO of PPAF highlighted the following as food for
thought for identifying methodological aspects of MSP:
- Often such plans are plagued by lack of ownership how to make sure that
the ownership from community, government, us and civil society is acquired
- Reality keeps changing, how to keep the flexibility in the plan to adjust to
changing reality
- To ground realities confronting us today:
o Insecurity in KP therefore conflict sensitive / resolution mechanisms
must be added in the plans
o Most of the partner districts are disaster prone therefore there is a need
to ensure that DRR remains integrated in the plan
- It is essential to consider social and ecological heterogeneity in the districts or
below since one plan doesnt fit to all
- Material for desk review must be identified for secondary data- Important to look at practical dimension, local culture and heritage are rich,
how to ensure that local knowledge, and indigenous systems may be
integrated in the plan
Followed by this, a presentation was made by GM special issues / file holder of
LACIP on how LACIP works and why MSP was seen as an important subject. The
1Including institutional development, health, Benazir Income Support Programme,
Livelihood, rural Credit, Education, Environment, infrastructure, DRR and so on
-
8/13/2019 MSP Document 2013
7/33
7
ingredients from his presentation have been included in the methodological
chapters of this document (the presentation is attached as Annex 3).
The day continued with several interactive sessions on what processes are
already undertaken by PPAF team and partners to found MSP process. This report
provides the essence of the discussion and elaborates the key ingredients of MSP
process identified during the workshop with the help of the participants in later
chapters.
1.2Documents / background material available and reviewed
In pursuit to prepare for the workshop and ensure that the methodological steps
are built on earlier knowledge, the following material was consulted by thefacilitating team of Intercooperation. This helped in founding a base of MSP:
1. An example of Village/ Settlement Development Plan (VDP/SDP), Farmers
Friend Organization (FFO) Sargodha
2. An example Village Development Plan: Mara Khurd, 4thJuly 2010
3. Checklist for assessing the quality of Community Organizations, Human and
Institutional Development Unit, PPAF
4. District Census report DI Khan, Chitral and Haripur
5. Draft Strategy Livelihood Enhancement & Protection Unit (August 30th
, 2012)
6. Integrated Development Visions (2008) DI Khan and Chitral, IUCN Pakistan
7. List of LACIPs partner Districts, project locations and Partner O rgnizations
8. Livelihood Investment Plan (LIP) PPAFPart 1
9. Local Government Act 2012, KP
10.Member Development Plan format, PPAF
11.MSP Approaches (KFW), proceedings of workshop (6thMay 2012)
12.Multi-sectoral Planning LACIP. Mission report Martin Dietz (23rd
January4th
February 2013), Helvetas Swiss Intercooperation
13.Operational Polices Manual for Grant-Based Intervention (GBIs), PPAF
14.Poverty Score Card, PPAF
15.Situation Analysis form, PPAF
16.Village Development Planning Manual (2012), Intercooperation and Forests
Department KP
1.3Major challenge encountered while defining MSP process
The facilitating team encountered the following challenges while elaborating the
processand would like to remind the PPAF team that similar challenges may be
faced by them in the field. It is therefore essential to remain aware of these while
making MSP a reality on ground:
1. MSP must capitalize on existing practices, experiences and tools that are
being used by Partner Organizations and other development partners in the
field. A process defining all the processes from scratch will never take off and
will not yield results.
2. There is a large range among Partner Organizations in terms of their capacityand history of working in a specific geographical region. The MSP process
however was defined keeping in view a lower denominator in view, which
means the organizations with lower capacity, little field experience and brief
history of presence in a specific district.
3. There was a varying understanding of the PPAFs internal processes, planning
tools and their linkages within the team the MSP methodological exercise
served an opportunity to clarify these elements within the team. A similar
challenge may be encountered at the field level with POs. An orientation
session for POs may be helpful at this stage.
Two examples of processes were presented during the workshop for inspiration
and discussion:
1. Recommendations on MSP process from Martin Dietzs report (January
2013): Annex 4
2. Village Integrated Development Planning process introduced by KP Forests
Department: summary Annex 5
MSP process explained in this document includes the elements of both the
examples.
-
8/13/2019 MSP Document 2013
8/33
8
Chapter 2
The Concept of Multi-Sector Planning (MSP)
2.1Why Multi-Sector Planning?
This question is closely connected to the discussion on what PPAF as an
organization is willing to achieve:
The PPAF aims to promote a holistic approach to poverty alleviation, which is
aligned closely with Pakistans commitment to the Millennium Development
Goals. It emphasizes multi-sector programmes that generate broad and deepimpacts at the community level.(Operational Policies Manual for GBIs, 2011).
PPAF is out in the field with its agenda for an inclusive development for poverty
alleviation. It is aimed at supplementing development actors in their effort to
enable communities in harnessing their potential for their self-development.
PPAF is highly committed to strengthen community based organizations at
various levels (including the ones visualized at apex level hopefully driving Union
Council development along with other development actors at that level).
MSP is a vehicle to effectively realize holistic development. So far, PPAF has been
successful in realizing community based development through COs, organized
within a village at a Mohalla or settlement level. However most of the
interventions had impact for individual households, or a neighborhood or a village
at the most. There is a need now to identify interventions at another scale that
may have consequences for a larger population, such as a village or a group of
villages or ideally a union council. This, however, is to be done without losingconnection with what is earlier done with the COs and individual households. The
MSP therefore serves as an umbrella for a partner UC and strives to bring synergy
among various development players, helps up-scaling PPAFs earlier experience,
and inculcate a longer-term development vision at community level. MSP is a
journey from a need based development to a potential based development
leaving enough room for multiple actors in development to play their due role in
the field.
The overall Goalfor Multi-sector Planning was identified as follows2:
Equitable and resilient socio-economic opportunities are identified and promoted
while ensuring ownership of stakeholders
Two objectives were identified for conducting MSP process:
Communities develop an inclusive area development vision / road-map
Institutions pro-actively mobilize resources for addressing socio-economicinterests and solidarity
These two objectives promote the idea of inclusive, long term, proactive
development however at the core of this are institutions, which own and
carry development plans at certain levels and collectively mobilize resources for
their realization. The MSP process has been perceived to realize this ambitious
vision of multi-sectoral planning. The key here would lie in selection of the
partners having base in the selected UCs incase capacities lack, a principal PO
shall be charged with strengthening the local organization within stipulated time
and handover the lead to them.
2.2MSP initially as a process internal to PPAF
It is highly encouraging that PPAF has started the process of multi-sectoral
planning through first achieving an internal integration within the organization.
Partner Organizations used to submit isolated proposals to PPAF for funding. Itwas often that these proposals maintained an independent relationship with
various units within PPAF and did not relate to each other. Similarly, each unit
approached potential Partner Organization rather independently for separate
projects and did not synergize on these efforts neither administratively nor
thematically. Now, with the restructuring within PPAF, the proposals are made in
a manner that all the Units sit together to appraise them and award funding. This
2Workshop 17
thApril 2013, LACIP, PPAF
-
8/13/2019 MSP Document 2013
9/33
9
has helped achieving integration within PPAF and at NGO partner level. This will
however not be complete till it is also achieved at the field level. E.g. various
partners or non partner development actors strive to achieve a shared vision in
development, and PPAF comes in as one of the contributors.
2.3MSP for whom?
It is essential to understand that MSP is not a panacea for achieving all
development aims at the field level; it does however contribute to enhancing:
- Acquiring a long term development vision
- Efficient delivery of development services in collaboration with community
- Inculcating a good reason to create / strengthen home-grown local
institutions that carry the development forward- Ensuring interventions at all possible scales (household, neighborhood, village
and union council) without duplication.
It is therefore, MSP is for all the development actors involved in a district / UC
such as:
Who? What
PPAF Inclusive development, larger impact, efficient delivery
PO A good platform to attract other donors (than PPAF) to become
part of development agenda not funded by PPAF
Local
Institutions
HH, CO, VO and UCDO have development interventions in a longer
term perspective; UCDO particularly have a tool to knock the door
of relevant development actors rather than passively wait for
someone to come for communitys aid
Government
actors at
local level
Government departments at UC / District levels will have a good
base to collaborate with the UCDO and meet their annual targets
possibly align their planning practices with MSP.
-
8/13/2019 MSP Document 2013
10/33
10
Dist
DDFA
CO +
Chapter 3
The process and steps to conduct MSP
The MSP at Union Council is the end result of a regenerative process that begins
from COs organized by POs of PPAF. It is important to understand that in this
process, we not only achieve a well thought multi-sectoral VDP and MSP at UC
levels but also the respective social organizations which own and contribute to
the preparation and realization of these plans.
1. Situation Analysis
This step is crucial for correctly preparing the MSP process in the field. The
situation analysis will be conducted at two levels in parallel:
- District / UC level using secondary information as well as primary
assessment on market / value chains
- Village level in close collaboration with the villagers based on PPAFs
exiting procedures.
The following table provides the detail to conduct this step. In short it is
summarized as follows:
1. As a first step, try to collect all necessary documents which are already
available and can provide secondary data regarding the district. The
examples include:
a. District census reports
b. District gazetteers produced by British government
c. Integrated development visions produced by IUCN or othersd. Any baselines / studies conducted by PO or other development
organization in the district
e. District plans / Annual Development Plans of various departments
(P&D Department)
2. The PO will engage an Associate Partner Organization already at this level
and support them to conduct a broader consultation within the villages
and identify key development issues.
3. Further down in the process, the PO or APO conducts Poverty Score Card
and wealth ranking, and based on data, identify potential clients for LIP at
household level.
4. It is important to use data (point 3) analyzed from PSC / wealth rankingfor conducting vulnerability context analysis of each socio-economic
group since this will lead us to activities that have significance for the
entire village or even at Union Council level, in case the vulnerability
trend is maintained in several villages of the same UC.
-
8/13/2019 MSP Document 2013
11/33
11
Stage Level Steps (major actions) Instrument / Output Remarks / Notes Who CapacityChange
required
Situation
Analysis
District / UC1. Market / Value Chain Assessment
UC level
Market actors and potential for
products / services (skills demand) in
UC
Ideally this is done at the time
of UC / District selection.
Subject
matter
specialist
on value
chain
New
Special TORs
to do this
and
supervision
District / UC
2. Collect and go through secondary
documents (census report,
gazetteers, met data, ADPs, other
documents etc.)
A broader view of the UC extracted
from the documents
Try to analyze trend - what
comes out as a key
development challenge?
UC / group of
villages
3. Identify and engage APOs
(specialized) and capacity building
Village /
Mohallah
4. Broader consultation / discussion
with Mohalla / Village with wider set
of stakeholders on development
context of the village
- Socio-economic and disaster
vulnerability context (Situation
Analysis Form) - including references
with secondary data
- Participatory Wealth Ranking
(ill/well being analysis)
- vulnerability assessment (e.g. SWOT)
with each socio-economic category
- mapping of major development
actors at UC level
Context built for activities that
go beyond village boundaries
(e.g. at UC level)
PO (SO,
MER)
Conducting
situation
analysis in
a holistic
manner
Budget for
pre-
interventions
Village for
each HH
5. Interviews with HH - Poverty Profile through Poverty
Score Card
However the VDP process
(next steps) move on based
on ill/well being analysis. PSC
is more for LIP / CIGsIndividual HH 6. Desk review of data- Identification of potential
beneficiaries for LIP
Existing processes - In case of large PO identifying APO
- Conducting vi llage consultation
- Poverty Score Card and Wealth Ranking
- Identifying potential beneficiaries for LIP but conduct LIP and provide assets in the next step
What is new - A strong emphasis on desk review of existing documents
- Conducting Market / Value Chain assessment and link identified economic potentials with other identified interventions
- Vulnerability assessment must be conducted within socio-economic categories
-
8/13/2019 MSP Document 2013
12/33
12
2. Social Mobilization
Primary data collection and analysis results in situational analysis report which
documents a detail profile of the area including its market / value chain
potentials. Based on these analyses social organization of the village is initiated in
order to carry out planning and interventions. An inclusive social mobilization is
closely connected with a good quality situation analysis, particularly Poverty
Score Card and wealth Ranking. At the moment two things happen at this step:
- The formation of Community Organizations (COs) is conducted based on
PPAFs existing procedures with due flexibility given to the Partner
Organization to allow CO process as per their geographical vicinity,
commonality of issues and their cultural bounds.
- Based on economic potentials, Common Interest Groups (CIGs) are formed
that mainly look into market based / value chain activities. CIGs are not
essentially organized on the basis of geographical contiguity (e.g. Mohallah).
Followed by CO / CIG formation, it is important to catalyze VO formation at village
level. A VO is supposed to be an all inclusive body of the villagers where all COs
are represented through their office bearers. There are three tiers of
organizations that lead to MSP process at Union Council level. Community
Organizations (COs), Village Organizations (VOs) and Union Council Development
Organizations (e.g. LSOs). Moreover, other management committees for specific
projects such as School Management Committees, operation and maintenance
committees in case of infrastructure projects and Common Interest Group (CIGs)
are also formed at operational level for the smooth running of the activities.
The geographical jurisdiction of a CO is a Mohallah (settlement) of a village/town.
COs in a large number already exist or had existed in most of the target villages,
which will be utilized largely after some structural review and refining if needed.
Where there are no existing COs, field teams of POs will facilitate the formation
of COs ensuring a democratic process have been followed. After the registration
of the COs, a joint bank account between COs and Partner Organizations (POs)
will be opened in the local banks according to the PPAF guidelines.
COs registration is mandatory for funds release by the POs for CIPs, LIPs and
MDPs. Once the COs have been formed and/or notified, different trainings such
as CMST, LMST, organizational record keeping and others will be carried out. A
Training Need Assessment (TNA) will also be conducted with the COs to identify
any other human & institutional development needs. It is necessary to identify all
the members of COs as General Body of the village before the next step of Village
Organization (VO) is undertaken.
In the next step VO will be constituted by COs. Office Bearers (President, GeneralSecretary, and Treasurer) of the COs will become members of the VO and
elect/select office bearers of VO among themselves. Constitution of VO is a pre-
requisite for developing a Village Development Plan (VDP) which includes
interventions of collective benefit. VDP process calls for participation of all
stakeholders (both internal & external) of the village and encompasses broader
population and long term activities. VO acts as custodian of VDP and ensures
equitable distribution of benefits, transparency and self accountability. VO shall
also formulate its Rules of Business during this phase.
Stage 1: CO Formation and Registration
(LIP, CIP, CIG at this stage)
Stage 2: VO formation
CO Members form a General Body while the
office bearers form membership
Joint Bank Account
(VDP and CIP / DRR activities at this stage)
-
8/13/2019 MSP Document 2013
13/33
13
Eventually at a later stage a support organizations at UC level will emerge which
will act as an advocacy group ensuring service delivery and community
leadership. Such an organization will anchor, lead and uphold the Multi Sector
Plan (MSP) process. It will serve as a platform for knowledge sharing, adoption,
replication and integration of development activities in other parts of the UC.
Stage Level Steps (major actions) Instrument / Output Remarks / Notes Who CapacityChange
required
Social
Mobilization
Mohalla: CO
Village: VO7. Constitution of COs (CIG), VOs Registration, bank account, etc.
Registration of CO required for
funds release by POs (OpM)
PO (SO)
Fund
transfer
subject to
registration8. Training of COs and VOs - Institutional Checklist
Registration VO is mandatory
to receive benefits of LG Act
(as an umbrella of COs)
- Organizational record keeping, CMST,
LMST, etc.
Existing processes - CO formation at Mohallah / settlement level
- CIG establishment based on common interests
- Registration of CO, administrative procedures such as opening of bank account
What is new - VO formation at village level (with an intention to do Village Development Planning)
- Essential for VO to have close links with CIG and CO as an umbrella organization of the village
- Registration of VO and opening of bank account
3. Village Development PlanningIn a number of consultative sessions, the VOs identify their key planning priorities
which are aimed at the overall development of the village. It is important at this
stage that they leave aside the individual household priorities which are already
being taken care of by LIPs prepared with the support of COs. All other CIP
activities and other village related development interventions need to be enlistedin this process. The expertise of Partner Organization in the consultative
processes with the VO is expected to yield a plan that is not a wish list but a
logical set of interventions that connects with the overall development vision for
the village. The village Development Plan is multi-sectoral in nature and envisages
contribution from multiple actors. Therefore MSP realization already starts at this
stage, albeit only at village level (village based MSPs). Our observation is that as
oppose to the current practice of conducting MIP/MDP preparation for the non-ultra-poor members in the community, their interests will be adequately address
in CIGs.
Stage Level Steps (major actions) Instrument / Output Remarks / Notes Who CapacityChange
required
Individual HH 9. Conduct LIP with ultra poor Use Poverty Score Card Results Immediate implementation PO/CO
-
8/13/2019 MSP Document 2013
14/33
14
VDP (xIPs)
Village
10. Village General body discussion on
potential interventions for Mohalla /
village.
Overview / Holistic VDP (more than
LACI-P/ PPAF mandate) - inform about
market finding
3-5 yrs vision
1 year priority planCO / VO
VO / CO / CIG
11. Economic intervention planning
with CIGs, prioritization of activities
related to collective vulnerabilities
MDP/Sectoral/sub-sectoral income
enhancement plan (CIG), etc.Training
of CIG members in related topics
CO/ VO/
POVO
12.If VO already exists, look into
restructuring of VO if needed
All inclusive VO that represents CO
interests
VO / CO / CIG
13. Social sector (CPI, soft elements)
Intervention planning with COs and
VO, prioritization
VDP format to be developed VDP is owned by VO
Existing processes - LIP is retained independent of VDP planning due to its nature to address immediate needs at HH level and upgrade ultra
poor to contribute to social organization and planning processes- CIP projects conducted at CO level
What is new - Village development planning that encompasses activities at CO and HH level and provides an umbrella for all the
interventions including those that are beyond CO level
- MIP dropped
4. Resource MobilizationAs said in the preceding section, the VDP envisages a multi-actor support for the
realization of interventions. This suggests that linkages and resource mobilization
are crucial for the realization of the village plan. These resources (financial or
non-financial) may be internally raised within the village or attracted from
outside, but are deployed for achieving the plan over a period of time.It is
important to note that the village plans in all the villages are prepared in a
parallel process to save time and ensure connectivity in the activities. An example
may be a DRR scheme in one village that may affect another downstream. A
parallel process for VDP preparation will ensure that such mutual issues may be
dealt with carefully through a dialogue.
Stage Level Steps (major actions) Instrument / Output Remarks / Notes Who CapacityChange
required
Resource
Mobilization
Village14. Implementation of Village Plans- begin funding PPAF/LACI-P mandate
Proposals by PO/APOCO / VO
PO
Village15. Establish relevant Scheme
committees.Community groups CO/ PO
Village /
district
16. Linkage Development (Networking
- DDF, Dev. Partners, Line Dept.)
-
8/13/2019 MSP Document 2013
15/33
15
Existing processes - POs submit project proposals to PPAF for funding
- In few cases, POs approach government line agencies to create service linkages with the COs
What is new - A rather systematic identification of development actors at Village / UC level
- Establishment of linkages with development actors and reflect into the plan document
5. Networking / ClusteringOnce a number of village organizations have been established in the village and
village development plans prepared by them, it is time to cluster VOs into a union
council based organization. Only in few cases in which the Partner Organizations
have taken the initiative to organize village member based Local Support
Organizations at UC level. In most of the cases however there are no such
umbrella organizations on ground. In a few cases there may be apex organizations
for specific sectors such as Water Users Associations, Production or Market
Associations, or Seed Growers Associations and so on. Such organizations must
be included in the process as an entry point for forming such a cluster at UC level.
Stage Level Steps (major actions) Instrument / Output Remarks / Notes Who CapacityChange
required
Networking /
ClusteringVillage / UC
17. Constitute LSO/UCDO (if does not
exist)
UC overview / oversight / advocacy
groupRegistration
Existing processes - In some cases, POs have established Local Support Organizations
What is new - In several cases an apex / UC based development organization does not exist. The best is to make an apex of member
villages and form one.
- Ensure that existing LSO (which act more as an APO or NGO at the UC level) and the intended UCDO of villages whose
development plan is in question do not have conflict of interest3
3Mostly the existing LSOs offer themselves as project implementers and therefore a risk lies that an LSO has perceived a multi-sector project for donors funding that they
themselves implement. An apex body of the villagers however perceives such a plan with a clear vision that it is the service that is important for them, and not from where it isfunded (e.g. a donor, government line agency, collective funding e.g. chanda, etc.)
-
8/13/2019 MSP Document 2013
16/33
16
6. MSP formation at UC levelWith the formation of a cluster organization, we are very close to identifying
multi-sector priorities at UC level. These development priorities are funneled
down from VDPsbut at the same time, take account of an overall development
trend in the UC such as vulnerability to a specific disaster, drought, water scarcity
or abundance, a specific agriculture product, etc. Like in case of VDP, UC multi-
sectoral plan needs to take into account the overall vision for UC development in
a longer term and must provide space for multi-actors in development to extend
support.The UC level development organization is the custodian of this plan and
needs to be trained to act as an advocacy body to pursue major targets given in
the plan with relevant development actors.
Stage Level Steps (major actions) Instrument / Output Remarks / Notes Who CapacityChange
required
UC (Multi-
sectoral) Plan
16. Collate key elements of VDPs in UC Ownership is with UCDO/LSO LSO17. Trend Analysis regardinghealth,
education, disasters, conflicts, etc.LSO +
expertUnion Council
18. Augment Strategic elements -
secondary data, mapping other
initiatives, other players (L/Dep)
Mapping other initiatives, other players
(Line departments)
19. Disseminate and follow-up MSP LSO
Use / follow-
up of UC Plan
(MSP)
21. Constitute District Development
Forum (pilot in a few cases)LACI-P
Union
Council
22. Collate UC Plans (MSP) at District
Levels
- Strategic Adjustments by PPAF /
Projects / Line Depts.PPAF?
23. Advocacy in DDF and with L/Dep.,
other actors for inclusion of MSP/VDP
elements in ADP
LSOs
Existing processes - Not at the moment
What is new - Several VDPs at UC level and the overall trends found during situation analysis lead to a living MSP plan / priorities
- Linkages with MSP, dissemination of document
- Hopefully DDF (at least first one or two examples) will give impetus to MSP implementation
- Local support organization of member villages take the plan implementation forward
-
8/13/2019 MSP Document 2013
17/33
17
Frequently Asked Questions
Questions Deliberation / Answers / Potential Solutions
How do you ensure consensus building? How
to ensure that all possible social groups
including deprived have a voice during
consultationon development priorities
reflected in the VDP?
- A major entry point to achieve this is the CO formation. If CO is formed in an inclusive manner and participation of all
the members has been ensured, there is a chance that they will respect each other.
- VDP preparation does not entail a one-time consultation. Consultation can be conducted in smaller groups and where
necessary, triangulation of priorities may be achieved though consulting with men and women, and in repeated
sessions.
- If consensus building is problematic, a Plan B must entail a consultation with only a relevant group.
What is it in these steps that PPAF does not
do?
- The entire process up to the CO formation is already institutionalized by PPAF through partners agreements.
- However at this stage, vulnerability assessment is not taken into accountas well as value chain / market assessment
are not conducted- It is more about the depth of process and linking every activity to the next higher level at least up to the UC level.
Is MSP need based or? The term need is self defying and is against the entire philosophy of PPAF as well as MSP concept. MSP must be based on
existing potentials within the community and therefore is a mix of community aspirations and strategic elements that are
identified based on development potentials.
The idea is to work on causes of poverty and pull people out of poverty cycle rather than giving a temporary relief.
How to ensure that the plans are built on
long term development objectives?
- Since the plans are aimed at harnessing community potential, there is a vision that guides the identification of
interventions as oppose to an existing offer for a project / service / charity.
- The social organization is the keycommunity institutions set and own the plan priorities and essential synergies for
their relevant constituency (e.g. village or UC) and not an external expert.
- However, the facilitating experts knowledge counts they are the one to guide communities in this process.
Does this promote a specific model for
replication in all the partner districts?
- It is not a blue print for the districts to follow. It is however essential to provide an outline of the process that is sized
according to the situation.
- The process in this document give major building blocks essential to design MSP
- The name multi-sectorsuggests that we are not stuck to a model with pre-defined sectorsbut are open to complex
phenomenon of poverty and multiple options.
Resource mobilization how shall we dothat?
- It is essential to first look within the village and then within the union council. Make an inventory of actors available andthe services they can extend.
- The next is to look into various development agencies (including NGOs, development projects and funding agencies as
the PO may know)and pursue them
- A factually correct mapping of actors (ideally done before a proposal is moved by a PO or at least at situation analysis
stage)leads to proper follow up. While one member of the UC development organization feels comfortable engaging
with the government line agencies, another may knock the door of a development project to present the plan priorities.
- Once the plan is there and the organization is ready with its basic administrative settings (including training on LMST,
etc.), it may be worthwhile to train them on how to prepare development proposals and manage to raise funds.
-
8/13/2019 MSP Document 2013
18/33
18
What is the core inspiration for MSP? MSP provides a longer term vision for development planning and interventions at certain level. For PPAF, MSP is an effective
entry point to promote holistic development in pursuit to achieve Millennium Development Goals and eventually post MDG
development agenda (Sustainable Development Goals)
How much time it is going to take MSP - This is subject to the situationkey question: How much ground experience already exists?
- Roughly 4-5 months with three parallel teams in a new district,where number of selected villages within a UC remain
within 10 or below. This is a district where nothing exists on ground (including PSC, and organized CO)
- In an existing district with existing COs and PSC data available, it may take about 4months (with about 10 VDPs, 1 UC
plan) with three parallel teams.
- It is important to keep in mind that this is the minimum investment before we have in our hand a long term,
comprehensive development agenda to continue. During this process, LIP and some of the CIP activities at CO level will
not stop.
How much staff is required? - Each team comprises at least 1 female and 1 male SO. This intensity is needed for 6 months only till the MSP and VDPs
are achieved.- In addition, during the MSP process, 1 office based support is needed for data analysis
- 1 mentor / manager with multi-sector orientation is essential during this period to guide the process
- One team who conducts rapid market / value chain appraisal in the beginning
- It is essential to understand that the VDP and MSP preparation will be an intensive task spread over 6 months. Once the
plans are there, try to shift most of the burden to the social organizations
Who will own the plans? CO: LIP with ultra poor
VO: VDP. It is however necessary that the UC administration recognizes this plan
LSO / UC development organization: UC MSP. It is however necessary that this plan is also recognized by district authorities
Funding level and funds flowsfrom PPAF now
and late?
- Currently the funds flow to registered COs for LIP and CIP
- In case of VDPfor larger schemes the funds will flow to the registered VOs as well
- In case PPAF is keen to also fund part of UC plan, the funds will flow to a registered union council based organization for
a particular scheme
Legal status of community organizations? All the three tiers of organizations are to be registered under the existing laws in Pakistan. They must put together their
Rules of Business at relevant level (what will be the role of CO, VO and LSO and responsibilities / obligations towards each
other in a downward accountability system).
Who will conduct rapid market / value chainappraisal
Needs to be carefully defined who will conduct this technical task (PO? A special team of PPAF or consultants engaged byPPAF or PO)
What are major risks / concerns? Mitigation strategy?
Concerns / Risks Mitigation Strategy
At union council level, it is essential to have a Local Support
Organization or a similar institution as an umbrella
representative of the villages. However they do not exist
In such cases initiate organizing such organizations, drawing strength and membership from Village
Organizations
Sector focused organizations (e.g. WUA on a watershed level) could also be an entry point to form
-
8/13/2019 MSP Document 2013
19/33
19
everywhere such an umbrella institution
PO often donot encourage LSOs formation since they may fear
being replaced by them
Administrative strategy: Make POs contractually obliged and organize funds flow with a necessary
frame condition
Development strategy: It is essential for PO to help LSO in identifying its Rules of Business whereby
an LSO and PO complement each other and do not overlap each other in their roles.
POs have to acquire an understanding that their role must change in a longer run (see Annex 5, SRSP
LSO concept).
LSO may see LG bodies with fear after the implementation of
LG Act 2012
Perhaps initially but it is a misnomer; they need LG bodies for effective advocacy of MSP implementation
When one PO is expected to facilitate for a number of VDPs
within a UC say 10), there is a fear to Cut and Paste from one
VDP document
Active supervision by mentors, participatory monitoring, regular feedback meetings with teams will
help understand that specificities among villages have been understood and addressed in the VDP
process
A review at UC MSP level will require that all the VDPs will also be reviewed to funnel key activities.The Cut and Paste dynamics will be caught at that stage
PO: COs are mine: Stamped COs / VOs attitude confronting
multi-actor support
COs are owned by the people. The POs must understand how COs are embedded in the VO and not
the PO organization set up
It is imperative that multiple-actors may count on POs earlier presence and understanding on
development issuesthe PO will be happy to attract them for support in the UCs where they
function.
Disbursement pressure vs quality of process what if
compromises are made
We insist that LIP and CIP activities limited to CO must continue during the process of MSP
preparation.
Even if done before VDP / UC MSP materialize, it is essential though to reflect CIP activities in the
documents (past progress etc.). Once the MSPs (Village and UC) are final and priorities are set, field
implementation at various scales (CO, VO, UC) has a potential to pace up dramatically.
Security impediments It is essential to remain in close coordination with the district authorities and community influential.
We assume that the POs are mostly from within the district and therefore are well connected to the
information sources leading to asses risks for the teams (which is relatively less intensive for local
staff due to their social acceptance).In case the POs come from outside, we consider it highly essential to engage local APOs at an early
stage
Monitoring of progress in the field by PPAF / LACIP may suffer due to security impediments; it may
be worthwhile to engage consultants hailing from relevant districts to provide such services to the
projects
-
8/13/2019 MSP Document 2013
20/33
20
Chapter 4
Piloting in the fieldproposed outline
Following the agreement on the major steps for developing the MSP, the
participants, while discussing the next steps, suggested to pilot it in few places.
Some of the criteria for choosing a UC/District put forth are:
a) Strength/maturity of the POweak and strong/experienced partner
b) Social capitalUC where CO/VO exists and new area to build from scratch
c) Securitystable work conditions and less secure district
No prior agreement was made on final number or locations for piloting, however,
it was agreed in the workshop that LACIP-PMU shall do the piloting first and makerecommendations.
Since LACIP is in its 2nd
year of a 4-year phase/life (including one year extension)
it is envisaged that coverage will further expand from current 36 UCs in 5 districts.
The overall outreach is forecasted to reach to 60 UCs in KP through LACIP. At
present PPAF has contracted 19 POs with varying levels of capacities, coverage,
and progress (Annex 6, list of POs and locations). With such a diverse set of
engagement parameters, piloting in many locations would thinly spread the
energies of the technical support team who would not only devise/improvise
processes and instruments but also build enhance practical skills of the
stakeholders to ensure realization of the conceptual benefits of MSP at all level.
The chief among multifold purposes of MSP is to define practice guide and distill
lessons for up-scaling.
Though the OPM (para 3.6-a) states that 50% HHs in the UC shall be addressed
under the MSP but in terms of % of villages in a UC, the OPM is silent. A certainminimum village coverage in a UC would be essential for aadequately
representative MSP (UCDP). It is understood that as yet the current modalities
both contractual and policy/operational guidelines, do not clearly delineate the
minimum coverage the PO shall/must strive to develop first draft representative
MSP at UC level. It is suggested that PMU shall have a detailed look into the
current contracts and clarify the current and intended coverage to ascertain a
certain (adequate) minimum coverage for piloting MSP.
On the basis of the preliminary review of documents (a couple of proposals /
contracts) and discussion with the existing partners it is proposed that the pilot
should be carried out in Khot and ParowaUCs in districts of Chitral and Dera
Ismail Khan respectively. In addition, an area in the newly selected district of
Haripur is proposed for trying out the approach from scratch. Thus in total, pilot
in 3 UC would greatly aid in drawing learning for various categories of target
areas and partners. This piloting envisages all the VDPs in the UC, collating
these into a UC level MSP and in parallel work on the social organizations that
will serve as pre-requisite to arrive at such plans.
Irrespective of the final decision about UC/District, defining the complete process
leading up to MSP as per the OPM guideline is MSP submitted to PPAF for
approval and funding within six months of signing the contract. While this
condition would remain intact for all current and future PPOs the challenge in
essence is to figure out the process for existing and new areas.The OPM also use
the term batches of MSPsonce every month which is somewhat misleading
and requires clarification. The interpretation used for piloting is that a multi-
sectoral sense in planning is already reflected at VDP level and thus we take that
it is actually a Village MSPwhere all discussions on MSP have been understood
to be a UC level planthat might be called UCDP or MSP at UC level. Terminology
therefore needs to be well defined.
This required that the steps defined in Chapter 3 a re viewed from action lens to
determine the sequencing and feasible timeframe as well as the personnel
requirements from start to end. Final decisions with regard to the concerns raised
above would have bearing on the number of teams (described in FAQs, chapter 3)to be deployed in the field by the partners.
Overall, the table in Annex 7 depicts the key processes for a new UC/District laid
out on weekly basis ensuring that 1st draft MSPs are ready by the end of 4
th
month. The suggested approach relies on working on multiple processes in
parallel, maximally utilizing the staff of the PO. This saves nearly 2 months from
the 6 month timeframe defined in the OPM.
-
8/13/2019 MSP Document 2013
21/33
21
Use at
Use at
Use
Use
While preparing the scheduling chart, special attention was given to separate the
steps of planning from implementation, however, where time and staffing
permit parallel actions have been planned for both domains.
For instance, the rapid market assessment (step-1), analysis of secondary data
(2a), PO+APO staff orientation (2b), distilling broad potential opportunities and
investment needs (2d) would be carried out in parallel to the situation analysis at
villages (3).
The next block of steps related to the VDP development (4), community
institutions building (5) would be carried out in parallel to the filling of the PSCs
and identification of potential beneficiaries for LIP (7). Followed by LIPs
development (7a), LSO/UCDO constitution (6a) and collation of the VDPs (6b)
would be done in parallel.
At this stage the POs would be in position to start making the proposals for
funding of HH and collective benefit interventions/investments. In parallel to this
the trend analysis of VDPs (6c) and further augmentation of the UC level
information from the secondary & market data (6d) would be taken up,
culminating in the Draft MSP/UCDP (6e).
In order to add value and enhance the ownership of all involved (esp. line
department, other NGO and development actors) a series of steps are suggested.
These include a joint workshop to validate the MSP (6e) followed by alignment of
the VDPs (6f), if major strategic elements are added by other actors. At this stagethe MSP is technically ready, but to promote its use second joint sitting is
suggested to develop annual priority list (6e) for various resource (services)
providers. This would aid in follow-up of the MSP with various actors.
Moreover, the process attempts to ensure use of the learning in the subsequent
steps, this is shown by means of arrows showing flow of information. For instance
in both the VDP and LIP making the market potential would enrich the
communitys / HHs understanding to evaluate their aspirations. Thus,
classical/typical requests being made would be replaced with more meaningful
and lasting interventions is expected. In the existing/current UCs the pilot would
not revisit the PSCs and LIPs already implemented.
The detailed snapshot of piloting is given in the following. The diversity among
piloting regions poses a challenge, albeit essential to build a case for up-scaling in
a confident manner:
-
8/13/2019 MSP Document 2013
22/33
22
Chitral D.I. Khan Haripur
Union Council Khot Union Council Parowa Union Council: open
Number of villages: 09 Number of villages: 20 Number of villages: open
PO: AKRSP PO: AHO PO: NRSP
Population: Population: 28,216
We recommend moving on with the support of an APO right
from the start. There is an organized and registered LSO
called MID in this Union Council. We anticipate that a Union
Council based Development Organization may already be
present in the UC. The AKRSP is active in all the villages, has
organized a number of COs however village organizations
are not active in the area. With mature experience of AKRSP,
a convenient access to secondary data, we anticipate that the
process of 9 VDPs,UC MSP and cross checking of VDPs
alignment with the MSP will be completed within 4 months.
This is taking the account of long distances and remote
locations of the villages and weather factor.
Team requirement:
- 1 rapid market / VC appraisal will be conducted in the UC
at the beginning (consultant Helvetas / Intercooperation)
- Three teams are required including 2 social organizers: 1
male and 1 female. (PO)
- 1 lead facilitator will be provided by the consultant to
guide social organizers (Helvetas / Intercooperation)
- Support for data entry and analysis (PO)
- 1 person (manager level) will go through the existing
documents and suggest development trends at the stage
of VO/UC planning. The same person + teammates will
help in networking with other development actors (PO).
We strongly recommend engaging an APO from the
locality since AHO does not have local roots in the
district. Parowa is a rather large scale UC and a piloting
exercise can be a real challenge due to a large expected
coverage by LACIP. AHO is not active in all the villages,
therefore it is a question whether or not to include all
the villages in the process. The process of 20 villages will
have to begin from scratch with hardly any social
capital on ground. We therefore anticipate that the
entire process may take a little over 4 months before a
UC plan can be furnished. One should notice that at the
moment DI Khan is also not the easiest in terms of
security of NGO staff.
Team requirement
- Six teams are required including 2 social organizers:
1 male and 1 female- only if all 20 villages are to be
covered (PO)
- 1 lead facilitator will be provided by the consultant
to guide social organizers
(Helvetas/Intercooperation)
- Support for data entry and analysis (PO or APO)
- 1 person (manager level) will go through the existing
documents and suggest development trends at the
stage of VO/UC planning. The same person +
teammates will help in networking with other
development actors (PO).
Haripur is a new addition in the LACIP districts, therefore
PPAF procedures may be new for the district. Our experience
however, suggests that Haripur is a highly organized and
enterprising district, with aware and outgoing communities
who received ample exposure from various development
agencies including Intercooperation and RSPs. Therefore we
count on an existing social capital and prior exposure of NRSP
to PPAFs way of holistic working. We anticipate that the
entire process of VDP and MSP planning will be accomplished
in 4 months.
Team requirement
- 1 rapid market / VC appraisal will be conducted in the UC
at the beginning (consultant Helvetas /
Intercooperation)
- Three teams are required including 2 social organizers: 1
male and 1 female (PO)
- 1 lead facilitator will be provided by the consultant to
guide social organizers (Helvetas/Intercooperation)
- Support for data entry and analysis (PO /APO)
- 1 person (manager level) will go through the existing
documents and suggest development trends at the stage
of VO/UC planning. The same person + teammates will
help in networking with other development actors (PO).
-
8/13/2019 MSP Document 2013
23/33
23
Annex 1
One-Day workshop
Livelihood and Community physical Infrastructure support Project (LACIP)
Fine-tuning methodological steps and roles of different tiers in Multi-Sectoral Planning (MSP)
S. No. Content Lead
09:30 Opening- Welcome note and Workshop Objectives- Round of introduction- Further understanding in the plenary on why this workshop?- Opening remarks
Masood KhalidFacilitatorFacilitatorQazi Azmat Isa
10:00 What is LACIP, key targets, implementation challenges Masood Khalid
10:30 What is MSP and why? Ideas / Considerations Plenary
10:45 Martins report major recommendations (recap) Dr. Arjumand Nizami
11:30 Coffee / tea break
11:45 An example of VDP process Syed Nadeem Bukhari
12:15 Synthesisplenary brainstorming on MSP outlines Facilitator
13:15 Lunch / Prayers
14:00 How to go about MSP process in the field (options) 3 groups
15:00 Summarizingkey conclusions Facilitator / participants
15:30 Next steps Participants16:30 Closing remarks Qazi Azmat Isa
The background of the workshop:
PPAF as an organization believes in holistic approach in development and therefore is striving for integrated
development through building strong institutions in the field. For PPAF, institutional strengthening in the field is the key
to ensuring sustainability of development effects in poverty stricken areas. Therefore an idea of establishing
community / village organizations for delivering development services does not stop there it needs to be further
accompanied to achieve a wider understanding on development vision within a community for their development
and a living plan identifying how to achieve this development. MSP is an idea in this direction encompassing village
and Union Council levels, taking multiple sectors into account, and ensuring that the idea will be eventually supported
by the measures provided in LG Act when implemented. This workshop was identified for further fine tuning the MSP
concept and bring all the concerned at PPAF on one page.
Objectives:
- Collectively identify why MSPwhat it isand what will be the methodological steps to achieve a plan in a
village or a UC
- Understand the roles expected of various tiers (village, UC) for themselves and towards other development
actors
Expected outcome:
- An outline for partners orientation on the concept and methodology will be available as a result of theworkshop
- Internal clarity among the team to move on in the field through partners
- Identification of the next steps
Participants:
- LACIP PMU
- Dr. Allah Nawaz
- 2 members, LEP
- 1 member, health
- 1 member energy
- 1 member, MER
- Two members from Helvetas
- Facilitator MahmoodHemani supported by Roshan Ara
-
8/13/2019 MSP Document 2013
24/33
24
Annex 2
Fine Tuning Methodology Steps & Roles in Different Tiers in MSP
Jinnah Hall, PPAF Office, Islamabad
17th April 2013
S
# Name Designation Organization
1 Qazi Azmat Isa CEO PPAF PPAF
2 Masood Khalid GM-LACIP PPAF
3 Taimur Jehangir SME-LACIP PPAF
4 Fahd Usman SME-Kfw (PMU) PPAF
5 Zeeshan Azam Consultant-Kfw (PMU) PPAF
6 Muhammad Ayaz ME-PMU PPAF
7 Engr. Hayatullah Khan SNE-LACIP (PMU) PPAF
8 Zaheer-ud-Din Taj ME-WECC PPAF
9 Khurram Shahzad SM-MER PPAF
10 Ahsan UllahBaig ME-EHN PPAF
11 Waqas Nazir ME-EHN PPAF
12 Nasrullah Khan Consultant-LACIP PPAF
13 Ms. Tehseen Rafi Manager-LEP PPAF
14 Muhammad Shahid Khan SME-ID PPAF
15 Dr. Anwar Butt Consultant PPAF
16 Muhammad Riaz Manager-LEP PPAF
17 Ms. Anila Naimat ME-ID PPAF
18 Ms. SumairaGul ME-ID PPAF
19 Ms. Farzana Nadeem ME (GIS)-WEU PPAF20 Dr. Rubina Ashfaq SME-LACIP PPAF
21 Muhammad Shahbaz Shafique Manager-BISP PPAF
22 Anwar Mahmood Consultant PPAF
23 Ms. Roshan Ara Consultant Intercooperation
24 Dr. Arjumand Nizami Consultant Intercooperation
25 Nadeem Bukhari Consultant Intercooperation
26 Mahmood Hemani Consultant Intercooperation
27 Lt. Col. Zeeshan NLC
28 Maj. Humayun NLC
-
8/13/2019 MSP Document 2013
25/33
25
Annex 3
LIVELIHOOD SUPPORT & PROMOTION OF SMALL
COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT
(LACIP)
LACI-P
Total Project Amount is EUR 31.56 Million
Commencement of Project Implementation: April 2012
Completion of Project Implementation: Dec 2015
Project Districts: 6 (Charsadda, Buner, Swabi, Chitral, D.I.
Khan and Haripur)
Number of Union Councils: 60
The Project will benefit approximately 600,000 people
Per Person Average investment Cost is PKR 6,000
PROJECT OBJECTIVES
Increased access to sustainable
social, economic and physical infrastructure
Increased employment and income
opportunities, especially for the poor
Development / Strengthening of local civil
society institutions
Enhanced participation of the population in
decision making
PROJECT COMPONENTS
Small and Medium Scale community infrastructure
Improvement and renovation of existing Health and
Education Units
Asset Transfers to the Vulnerable and Ultra Poor's
TARGETS
Activities TargetSmall and M edium Scale Infrastructureprojects
2,000
kill trainings for transitory poors 6,000Livelihood support for ultra poors 7,000Health and edu cation projects 120
ACHIEVEMENTS
Sr. No Project Type
Progress Up till
March 2013
1 Smalland Medium Scale Infrastructure Projects Initiated 378
2 Smalland Medium ScaleInfrastructure Projects Completed 113
3 Community Organizations 1177
5 Village Organizations formed 61
6 Livelihood Investment Plans completed 2819
7 Sk ill T ra in ings 1817
8 Assets Transferred 1427
-
8/13/2019 MSP Document 2013
26/33
26
CHALLENGES
Poor planning
security situation in KPK
Repercussions of Afghanistan after
2014
Disaster Prone target areas
Issues of Female Representation
CONTINUED
COs Bank account opening issues
POs/POs staff capacity, TNA
required
Pressure to increase utilization
CONTINUED
Anticipating Political Pressures after the May 11,
2013 Elections in Pakistan
LACIP PMU Field Monitoring issues due to
security risks Value Chain tools needed at PO level to enhance
their vision to create linkages and further
growth in respective markets
CONTINUED
Anticipating Political Pressures after the May 11,
2013 Elections in Pakistan
LACIP PMU Field Monitoring issues due to
security risks Value Chain tools needed at PO level to enhance
their vision to create linkages and further
growth in respective markets
WHY MSPWhere are you goingHow w ill you get there
hat will tell you that youvearrived
A MSP m odel is your program ROAD MAP
-
8/13/2019 MSP Document 2013
27/33
-
8/13/2019 MSP Document 2013
28/33
28
Annex 4:
Summary of recommendations on steps for village development planning and towards MSP
Martin Dietz Mission (collectively prepared with Dr.Robina Ashraf, Mr.FahadUsman, Mr.TaimurJehangir,
Mr. Martin Dietz, Mr. Klaus Euler)
1. Consult with key stakeholders at village, union council and district level to inform and get consent
It will be important to inform stakeholders from local government bodies and other local bodies of the MSP
processes right at the outset and get their consent.
2. Formation of inclusive planning group from within the LSO at UC level
LSOs should form an inclusive planning group at UC level. This group will initiate inclusive planning groups at
village level.
3. Capacity building of community facilitators (village development plan facilitator)
Planning should be seen as an ongoing activity. Plans need to be updated and further detailed. Therefore, local
expertise is required to accompany the planning process in future. For this purpose, it is proposed to train
community facilitators to accompany, support and facilitate the process. It is suggested to train at least two
persons per union council area.
4. Conduct a situation analysis / develop village profile
Planning has to be based on a good situation analysis. Attention needs to be given to a sound analysis of the
social and economic situation of a village. In an initial step data from secondary sources can be used; they
need to be verified through FGDs and / or key informants. The community facilitator and PO staff will take a lead
role for this step.
This baseline exercise will also include identification of ongoing and planned development initiatives and
resources. Use a simple data base format and mechanisms for its regular update.
The situation analysis should consider the following sectors: agriculture, forestry, education,
employment & enterprise, health, irrigation, drinking water, transport, infrastructure and OD/ID.
PPAF already has a guideline / list for conducting a situation analysis. This should be reviewed to ensure that it
will suit the actual purpose of MSP.
4. Identifying priority sectors of the village
The situation analysis must provide a good insight to the importance of the different sectors, considered in the
situation analysis, for the economy and livelihood of the population in the village. Taking on all sectors for detailed
planning may be a task that is beyond the capacities of a community. It is therefore proposed to select 3 to 4 sectors
for detailed planning while the remaining sectors will be touched in the planning process with less depth. The main
criterion for the selection of the priority sectors will be their role and contributions to the livelihood of the majority
of the population, specifically of disadvantaged communities and the economy of the village.
5. Development Goals to be achieved long-term (vision)
At the outset of the process the inclusive planning group with the support of the facilitator will identify long term
goals for their village. These goals should be cross-sectoral and relate to the envisaged overall changes of the village
over the coming 5 to 7 years.
6. Drawing up strategic (periodic) plans
For the identified priority sectors the Planning Group will develop simple, and as far as possible SMART medium term
goals (3 years). The goal statement should be complemented by describing the strategies which will outline how
these goals will be achieved. Setting the strategies should be based on an analysis of the problems that were
identified earlier. Jumping from problems to solutions should be avoided.
7. Drawing up annual plans and budgets
-
8/13/2019 MSP Document 2013
29/33
29
The strategic, medium term plan will be the base for drawing up an annual plan for the village. Projects / activities
will be planned for the coming year that contributes towards achieving the medium term goals of the village / UC.
These interventions should be selected by using criteria such as for instance:
High impact in short time;
Large number of people to benefit, completion with in one year;
Benefits for economically and socially disadvantaged are to be given high priority.
UCs / VOs should be supported to develop budgets for the planned projects and activities. This will be the realitycheck for the community planning.
8. Collating key elements of village development plans into a MSP of the Union Council
The LSO/APO will collate village development plans (periodic and annual) to develop a UC MSP. Such an MSP should
feed into district planning and be used to seek funding for UC projects identified through the MSP.
9. Interactions of UC with development actors
Link LSOs with development agencies (government, bilateral, INGOs and NGOs) in appropriate forums to present
their periodic and annual plans. Such interactions will provide opportunities for UCs to communicate their
development priorities and invite development actors to take up opportunities for development.
The recently approved legislation on Local Government by the KP Provincial Parliament may provide opportunity for
PPAF to embed MSP into a legal framework and promote this approach as mainstream throughout in KP.
Next steps towards preparing MSP
1. Discuss and further elaborate the issue within PPAF / LACI-P and finalized the concept
2. Identify a small working group within PPAF / LACIP and HELVETAS which will accompany field testing / piloting
3. Assess the details of the recently approved Local Government legislation to assess how MSP can fit best into this
legislation
4. Briefly assess and summarize ongoing village level planning work by some POs. Identify good practices that can be
incorporated into MSP
5. Identify potential and competent POs for piloting
6. Get feedback from POs on the concept
7. Consider to involve relevant officials from the KP Provincial Government early in the process
8. Develop details of the planning process, train PO staff and community facilitators (HELVETAS will be able to
support this part and share experience from other countries)
9. Identify one or two UCs
10. Get consensus from local stakeholders, including stakeholders at district level
11. Develop a monitoring system to ensure that learnings can be drawn from the pilots
12. Run the pilot
13. Evaluate, upscale, mainstream
-
8/13/2019 MSP Document 2013
30/33
30
Annex 5
Table 1: Guiding Principles of Integrated Village Planning (Government of KP, Forests Department)
Guiding Principles Check list
Participation All owners and users of NRs have been approached for initial information and in the rest of
the process
Rights of households from all village sections are knownVDC and WO include representatives from all community sections and hamlets
The VDC reaches consensus on objectives, division into management units and
interventions
Women, landless, poor in the community contribute in the village planning and decision
making
Poor and remotely located sections are also represented in management committees
All sections have a chance to participate in the monitoring committees established from
time to time
Integrated
approach
Initial information is collected about all land uses
A land use map is prepared with the consensus of the villagers
Representatives from forests and other line agencies participate in planning process
Interventions identified in the plan for all land uses and social services
Responsibilities for forest and other line agencies identified in the plan as per interventions
Responsibilities for the VDC, JFMC, WO and other management committees identified
Responsibilities of the beneficiaries identified
Sustainable use of
natural resources
Management plans include village regulations for controlled use (e.g. nagha)
Use intensities and timing compatible with growing cycles of vegetation
Use intensities and timing compatible with the needs of the people
Timber is not the only valued resource indicated in the plan there are interventions for
other sources of livelihoods as well
Pro-poor Household typology conducted in the village to identify different socio-economic groups in
the village
Poor and poorest identified through household typology are alsorepresented and
participate in VDC/WO as members
Contributions / benefit sharing of different sections agreed upon between themselves
Interventions are included in the plan which specially benefit the poorest / poor
Self accountability
and transparency
The entire planning process was inclusive and consultative
All sections of communities were involved in identifying interventions
Responsibilities are clearly identified in the plan (e.g. community, service providers)The plan document is villagers property, is open and accessible to all in the village
VDC identifies beneficiaries / locations of interventions in open meeting
Periodically the plans implementation progress is presented in general body by AMC
-
8/13/2019 MSP Document 2013
31/33
31
Annex 6:
List of partner NGOs and respective Union CouncilsLACIP
District- Wise PO's, PO's Funding and UCs Information
# District PO's Name of UC's Funding (Rs) In
Million
Total
1 Swabi SWWS Checknodha, Anbar 230.14 702.21
NRSP Asota, Bachai, Parmolai 207.1
SDF Sara Cheena, Yaqobi 128.63
GBTI Kohata, Batakra 136.34
2 Chitral AKRSP Yarkhoon, Khot, Oveer, Koh, Mulkhow, Chitral II 293.71 477.59
SRSP Arandu, Ashurait, Shishikoh 160.3
MIED Yarkhoon, Khot, Oveer, Koh, Mulkhow, Chitral II 23.58
3 Charsadda SRSP HisaraNehri, Hassanzai, Madani 201.19 234.47
SPADO Prang 33.28
4 Buner HADAF Mukhranai, Amazai 138.64 525.59
MGPO Chagalai, Ghorghosto 156.6
RDP Gulbandi 63.87
CGN-P Chaghlai,Mukharani, Gulbandi 30.14
EPS Koga, Nawagai 136.34
5 D.I Khan SERVE Shorekot 56.87 369.88
CUP Korai, Yarik 125.2
SABAWON Daraban, Chaudhwan 114.58
AHO Mehra 33.86
CIE Korai, Yarik, Daraban 39.37
Total 2309.74
-
8/13/2019 MSP Document 2013
32/33
-
8/13/2019 MSP Document 2013
33/33