Technical Assistance Consultant’s Report

Project Number: 47213-001 October 2017

Cambodia: Process Review

Implementation of Social Accountability Framework (I-SAF) (Financed by the Asian Development Bank) Prepared by Process Review Team

The Asia Foundation

Phnom Penh, Cambodia

For the Asian Development Bank

This consultant’s report does not necessarily reflect the views of ADB, The Asia Foundation (TAF), or the Government concerned and ADB, TAF and the Government cannot be held liable for its contents.

ABBREVIATIONS

ADB Asian Development Bank

CAF Community Accountability Facilitator

CBO Community Based Organization

CCWC Commune Child and Women Committee

CIP Commune Investment Programme

CSC Community Scorecard

CSF Commune/Sangkat Fund

CSO Civil Society Organization

DFGG Demand for Good Governance Project

D&D Decentralization and De-concentration

EFA Education for All

FGD Focus Group Discussion

I4C Information for Citizen

IP Implementing Partner

I-SAF Implementation of the Social Accountability Framework

JAAP Joint Accountability Action Plan

KII Key Informant Interviews

LNGOs Local NGOs

MDG Millennium Development Goals

MOI Ministry of Interior

NCDD-S National Committee for Sub-National Democratic Development Secretariat

NP-SNDD National Program for Sub-National Democratic Development

NGO Non-Governmental Organization

NSA Non-State Actor

PSC Partnership Steering Committee

RACHA Reproductive and Child Health Alliance

RGC Royal Government of Cambodia

SNA Sub-National Administration

TAF The Asia Foundation

UNDP United Nations Development Program

WB World Bank

NOTE

In this report, "$" refers to US dollars.

CONTENTS

Page

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1

I. INTRODUCTION 4

II. BACKGROUND 6 A. History of Decentralization Policy in Cambodia 6 B. Service Delivery in Cambodia 7

III. RESEARCH METHODS 9 A. Study Limitations and Possible Sources of Bias 10

IV. FINDINGS & ANALYSIS 11 A. Recruitment of CAFs 11 B. I4C Dissemination 14 C. Citizen Score Card/Service User Assessment 19 D. Interface Meeting/JAAP preparation/JAAP Follow-up 21 E. Ensuring Effective Action & Sustainability 23

V. RECOMMENDATIONS 26

APPENDICES 31

Appendix 1: Terms of Reference 32

Appendix 2: Timeline, Activities and Deliveries of Process Audit 34

Appendix 3: Process Audit Questions 35

Appendix 4: List of Literature Reviewed 40

Appendix 5: I-SAF process adopted by 4 CSOs 42

Appendix 6: Second Learning Forum Agenda and Summary of Recommendations 45 FIGURES

FIGURE 1 SOCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY CYCLE 5

1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Overview This is the final report of the process review for the Implementation of the Social Accountability Framework (I-SAF). The Royal Government of Cambodia (RGC) formally adopted I-SAF under the Sub-National Democratic Development strategy on July 11, 2013. The review entailed three research phases including: 1) a preliminary consultation and document review; 2) a field review of key I-SAF processes; and 3) a second field review of processes with a focus on sustainability. The review was managed by The Asia Foundation (TAF) and funded by the Asian Development Bank (ADB).

I-SAF1 aims to empower citizens, strengthen partnerships between sub-national councils and administrations, and citizens, and enhance accountability of SNAs and local service providers. Specifically, I-SAF focuses on four components: 1) access to information and open budgets, 2) citizen monitoring, 3) facilitation and capacity building, and 4) learning and monitoring. Under I-SAF, social accountability activities cover three-local services including the health center, primary school, commune administration and will be implemented initially from 2016 to 2018 and subsequently scaled up to eventually cover at least 120 districts. Overall, the report assesses:

a. intervening factors that may have affected implementation and outcomes and constraints and/or difficulties faced by implementing partners from both the demand and supply side (i.e. CSOs and NCDD-S respectively) while implementing I-SAF guidelines;

b. the strategies and actions employed by CSOs and NCDD-S to address the constraints and difficulties encountered;

c. whether inclusive and constructive dialogues have been promoted among marginalized and excluded groups and communities such as women, youth, ethnic minorities and those with disabilities and ID poor.

The study also assesses factors that affect the sustainability of I-SAF focusing on the use of CAFs, effectiveness of information dissemination and monitoring, and how well I-SAF can respond to citizen priorities. Methods This study employed four research methods: 1) document review, 2) key informant interviews (KIIs), 3) focus group discussions (FGDs), and 4) observation. First, the team reviewed key project documents, to develop a targeted questionnaire. The document review included: policy documents related to decentralization and I-SAF, specifically; field reports prepared by the CSO coordinator; World Bank mission reports; and academic studies on social accountability, governance, and decentralization in Cambodia. The team conducted KIIs in order to gather data on the key I-SAF processes. To that end, the team selected stakeholders involved in each step of the I-SAF process. The KIIs were done in two rounds. This report draws on the second round of interviews when the team conducted 68 KIIs in the second round of field visits. In addition to the KIIs, the team conducted FGDs with community accountability facilitators and citizens. Through these discussions, the team gathered data on people’s experience with I-SAF. While

1 For a full description of I-SAF, please see Implementation of the Social Accountability Framework: A Plan for Implementation 2014-2016.

2

KIIs can result in targeted information on specific processes, they do not provide as much information on the dynamic of particular events. In order to study the quality of participation as well as the interactions between citizens, IPs and service providers, the team conducted observations of key SAF activities which, in this second round of the process audit, included a community scorecard (CSC) assessment meeting and an interface meeting. Key Findings CAF Recruitment: Given the high responsibility required, the recruitment of CAFs is an important and time-consuming process. Implementing partners (IPs) have had varying success with different strategies of recruitment. One approach that has been the most successful is to recruit CAFs from the IP’s network of CBOs or youth clubs. Other IPs have worked with savings groups, microfinance organizations, and CBOs affiliated with the forestry and fishery sectors to recruit CAFs. This strategy not only allowed them to find individuals who were willing to volunteer, but also many who had experience working with CSOs and local government officials as well as conducting outreach. CAFs affiliated with CBOs seemed to have a higher level of commitment than CAFs who were not part of any local organization, and even when they leave, they help to recruit their replacements. There is also a cadre of volunteers who have historically served as community leaders for various CSO and government projects, and who are self-motivated. The third category of recruits include new recruits, who have the greatest difficulty in facilitating I-SAF activities and, based on anecdotal evidence, are most likely to resign. Overall, the commune councilors have reported positive working relationships with the CAFs. They report that CAFs are an important link between the commune administration and the people. In some instances, it appeared that the commune councils rely on the CAFs to conduct outreach for commune initiatives. The commune’s engagement with CAFs suggests a measure of endorsement for this position. Many of the commune chiefs interviewed suggested that they were committed to finding funds for this position even after the end of this current round of I-SAF, but they also emphasized that they would require guidance from MOI. I4Cs: Overall, NCDD-S successfully prepared the I4Cs for the target districts. This involved developing forms for data collection from the three service providers, distributing and collecting the finalized forms, checking the data, entering the data into a database, and generating commune-level data for the posters. Given the scale of I-SAF implementation, mobilizing staff at the district level to collect and compile data involved a significant effort. Overall, I-SAF has undertaken a massive awareness raising exercise. As of September 2017, I-SAF implementing partners (IPs) have reached 146,539 people, including 109,328 women (75 percent of the total number) and 21,688 of youth (15 percent of the total).2 The greatest challenge in making sure that people who attend are representative of the village is ensuring that the people selected through the social mapping exercises come. Anecdotal evidence suggests that the participants are not always the ones who are pre-identified through social mapping. Based on the interviews and observation, lack of citizen involvement in the I-4C dissemination in some areas is due to a set of overlapping factors, including: 1) lack of understanding of the importance of I-SAF, 2) the technical nature of the information, 3) lack of engaging outreach style, 4) time required, and 5) competing priorities. Citizen Scorecard (CSC)/Service Provider Assessment: In total, IPs have implemented 334 CSC events across the field sites, suggesting that activity is on track. Approximately 9,176 people attended these events out of which 79 percent were women. After the second round of

2 See Report to the Project Steering Committee, September 2017. I-SAF CSO Coordinating Office.

3

implementation, it seems that community members are more comfortable with scoring the service providers. In the majority of cases, individuals are brainstorming their own indicators with the help of the IP. In other cases, CAFs suggest indicators, especially when the attendees are not participating. While the indicators vary, there is a fair bit of overlap between them. The service providers reported that they were comfortable in scoring themselves. As they undertake their own internal monitoring exercise, they felt that the service provider assessments were working smoothly. In some instances, the service provider assessment created an informal, internal peer pressure for staff members to improve their performance. JAAPs: Following the CSC and the service provider assessment, the communes finalized 382 JAAPs comprised of 6,109 priority actions as of September 2017. The actions comprised 3,960 internal actions or ones that can be completed by commune-level actors and 2,159 external actions, which require financial support or other support from the district, provincial, or national level. Service users and providers can generally agree on basic aspects of service delivery, or internal actions such as having clean facilities, but it is more difficult to develop priorities for core services. This dynamic is reflected in the interface meetings where the providers and users are seated on opposite sides of the room and rarely mingle. Before selecting action items, providers and users review their respective scores. The facilitators lead the participants in an informal voting for the priority areas. The negotiations around these priority areas are thin. Often people agree on the internal actions, but the list of external action is not negotiated deeply. The buy-in for the internal actions suggests a measure of agreement. However, the lack of negotiation on the external items may impede identifying priority areas for improvements in service delivery jointly. Over time, it would be important to track whether the actions implemented lead to meaningful improvements in primary services, such as quality of teaching or activities for the students. In the interface meeting that the study team attended, the CAF was able to successfully facilitate between users and providers. The IP explained the overall process, but the CAF was the main facilitator, which is an important measure of the increasing ability of the CAF to facilitate. Similarly, the team observed that both the user and provider were providing suggestions, suggesting that the meeting was inclusive. The JAAP committees were formed in all the communes, however, they had only met once at the time of the field work. According to the IPs and CAFs, these committees are largely inactive and are not following up on the JAAPs.

4

I. INTRODUCTION

1. This is the final report of the process review for the Implementation of the Social

Accountability Framework (I-SAF). The Royal Government of Cambodia (RGC) formally adopted I-SAF under the Sub-National Democratic Development strategy on July 11, 2013. The process review was comprised of three research phases including: 1) a preliminary consultation and document review, 2) a field review of key I-SAF processes, and 3) a final field review of processes with a focus on sustainability. A timeline of the review process can be found in Appendix 2. The review was conducted by the Process Review Team3, managed by The Asia Foundation (TAF) and funded by the Asian Development Bank (ADB).

2. I-SAF4 aims to empower citizens, strengthen partnerships between sub-national councils, sub-national administrations, and citizens, and enhance accountability of local service providers. Specifically, I-SAF focuses on four components: 1) access to information and open budgets, 2) citizen monitoring, 3) facilitation and capacity building, and 4) learning and monitoring. Under I-SAF, social accountability activities cover three local services including primary health centers, primary schools, and commune administrations. It will initially be implemented from 2016 to 2018 and scaled up to eventually cover 120 districts. A summary of the I-SAF cycle and processes is provided in Figure 1.

3. As of 2017, I-SAF has been implemented in 98 districts in 18 provinces5. Demand-side

activities are implemented by the implementing partners (IPs) that include: Care, Save the Children (Save), the Reproductive and Child Health Alliance (RACHA), Star Kampuchea, and World Vision International (referred to as World Vision). These IPs also work with a range of local partners at the provincial level. Through this process, I-SAF builds the capacity of civil society organizations to undertake outreach and implement social accountability tools. For this review, the study team focused on the implementation sites of Care, RACHA, Save, and World Vision.

4. This review focused on the core strategies, mechanisms, and tools of I-SAF. First, the team studied and mapped the key processes and activities implemented by the IPs under I-SAF. This includes providing access to information on standards, budgets, and performance under component 1 through the information for citizens (I4C) packs. The review also examined citizen-led monitoring and reporting of local performance and service delivery through the community scorecard (CSC) and the service provider self-assessment under component 2 on citizen monitoring. In addition, the review assessed how well state and non-state actors are working together to address the issues identified through the citizen monitoring, strategies captured in the commune-level joint accountability action plan (JAAP). Finally, the review assessed component 3, i.e. the capacity development, mentoring and coaching under the I-SAF. Specifically, the team reviewed the capacity of community accountability facilitators (CAFs), volunteers who disseminate information under I-SAF and facilitate the monitoring of service delivery. The

3 Process Review Team includes Mohan Das Manandhar, Mehr Latif, and Sopheap Kry. 4 For a full description of I-SAF, please see Implementation of the Social Accountability Framework: A Plan for Implementation 2014-2016. 5 ISAF has been implemented in Banteay Meanchey, Battambang, Kampong Cham, Kampong Thom, Kampot, Kampong Chhnang, Kampong Speu, Koh Kong, Kratie, Mondulkiri, Pailin, Prey Veng, Preah Vihear, Pursat, Rattanakiri, Siem Reap, Svay Rieng, and Tboung Khmum. See Report to the Partnership Steering Committee, September 2017. I-SAF CSO Coordinating Office.

5

government also trained commune and district level councilors, administration staff, and local public service providers. While the review was not able to undertake a detailed review of supply-side capacity, the team will comment on capacity gaps of the supply side as well.

5. Overall, the report assesses: a. intervening factors that may have affected implementation and outcomes and

constraints and/or difficulties and faced by the both demand and supply-side implementing partners, including the National Committee for Sub-National Democratic Development Secretariat (NCDD-S), local partners, and volunteers;

b. the strategies and actions employed by CSOs and NCDD-S to address these constraints and difficulties; and,

c. whether inclusive and constructive dialogues have been promoted among marginalized and excluded groups and communities such as women, youth, ethnic minorities and those with disabilities and ID poor.

6. The study team studied the factors that affect the sustainability of I-SAF focusing on recruitment of CAFs, effectiveness of information dissemination and monitoring, and how well I-SAF can respond to citizen priorities.

FIGURE 1 SOCIAL ACCOUNTABIITY CYCLE

A cycle

of

activity

INFORMATION AND OPEN BUDGETS

Preparation and dissemination of I4Cs

Awareness building

Budget literacy training

CITIZEN MONITORING

Community scorecards

Interface meetings (O2Cs)

In-depth monitoring

Joint action plans (JAAPs)

EXISTING PLANNING PROCESS

Integrating results into

Commune Investment Plans

District Integration Workshops

LEARNING PLATFORM

CAPACITY AND

FACILITATION

SA activities organized to align and enhance existing Commune/District planning and implementation cycle.

Lessons learned from the field fed back for sharing and policy dialogue

Monitoring results

Capacity Building

Field activities supported by ongoing coaching and mentoring activities

MAY-

SEPTEMBER

JANUARY-APRIL

Learning lessons

OCTOBER-DECEMBER

6

II. BACKGROUND

A. History of Decentralization Policy in Cambodia

7. I-SAF has to be contextualized within the RGC’s decentralization program, which began with the 2002 election of commune/sangkat councils mandated under the Law on Commune and Sangkat Administrative Management (2001). The reform effort had three objectives including: 1) promoting participatory local democracy; 2) enhancing social and economic development; and, 3) reducing poverty. The 2001 Law established a system of direct elections establishing a commune council composed of 5 to 11 councilors whom are elected through a party list system. The commune clerk, a low-level civil servant, appointed by Ministry of Interior (MOI) supports the council.6 The 2001 law also created a commune investment programme (CIP), providing funds for the commune to implement small-scale infrastructure projects. Importantly, villagers are meant to play a role in identifying priorities for the CIP through village-level consultations facilitated by the village chiefs. The government’s espousal of this participatory approach has been critical to the design and implementation of I-SAF.

8. The RGC has also delegated administrative responsibilities to the commune, including civil registrations for marriage, births, and deaths and voter registration. For this reason, the commune is treated as a service provider along with the education and health departments under I-SAF. At present, the government transfers 3.6 percent of the national revenue to districts and communes (ADB 2016). The allocated annual budget for each commune has increased steadily since 2002 and the commune’s 2017 annual average budget is USD 56,762.7 Almost 40 percent of the expenditure is utilized for local small-scale development projects, while the remaining 60 percent is spent on administration and councilors’ allowances (MEF 2017).

9. In 2008, the Cambodian government passed the Law on Administrative Management of the Capital, Provinces, Municipalities, Districts and Khan (the Organic Law), which mandated the indirect election of district and provincial councils in 2009. Technically the district councils are accountable to the commune councils that elect them. At the same time, district governments are also upwardly accountable to the Ministry of Interior who appoint the district governors and their deputies. The passage of the Organic Law in part suggests the potential to deepen decentralization by establishing councils that could scale up service delivery efforts. While the government has made great progress in decentralization reform since its inception in 2001, it has been slow to transfer substantive functions to the district and provincial governments. The proposed pilot for transferring management of primary schools to the district level in Battambang was delayed. This delay underscores the ongoing debate between proponents for centralization and decentralization in the government. In addition, the government is confronting technical issues on functional assignment, including devolving budgets, establishing fund transfer mechanisms, and assigning technical staff.

10. In addition to its decentralization efforts, the government has made considerable investments in piloting strategies and tools to promote more transparent, effective, and accountable government. Going back to the CARERE 2’ (1996-2000, a project supported

6 While the clerk is a low-grade officer, he is an important member of the commune council. 7 The exact commune budget is calculated based on a government formula that includes population and poverty levels.

7

by the United Nations) and ‘Seila’ (a Royal Government of Cambodia policy experiment in decentralization), the government created mechanisms through which citizens could participate in local planning. While the legacy of the project is mixed, especially given the limited ability of the councils to deliver local services, such projects also created a cadre of professional government advisors who are well-versed in models and practices of good governance. Most recently the government implemented the Demand for Good Governance (DFGG) Project, which piloted both supply and demand side initiatives to promote access to information, undertake citizen monitoring and foster citizen engagement through models of participatory planning.

11. In May 2010, the RGC adopted the ten-year National Program for Sub-National

Democratic Development (NP-SNDD) and outlined the first three-year Implementation Plan (IP3) with its focus on the expansion of the reform and governance at the district/khan level.8 As part of the IP3, the Cambodian government made a commitment to implement the social accountability practices outlined under (ISAF). In this way, I-SAF is inextricably linked to the decentralization process.

B. Service Delivery in Cambodia

12. The establishment of the district and provincial tiers of government suggests that the Cambodia government recognizes the need to bring the government closer to the people and to initiate improvements in basic service delivery to build its legitimacy. Since 2000, Cambodia has focused on strengthening health centers and primary schools. To that end, Cambodia became a signatory to Education for All (EFA) and began education reform in 2000. The government also signed the millennium development goals (MDGs) to improve child health, maternal health and other communicable diseases like HIV/AIDS, malaria, tuberculosis, and others. Further, the adoption of I-SAF signals the government’s intent to improve access to information on government standards and performances, improve service-delivery, and establish mechanisms to monitor services.

13. The reform efforts initiated in 2000 have led to some improvements in health and education indicators. The maternal mortality ratio per 100,000 live births has decreased from 472 in 2005 to 161 in 2015 and under-five mortality rate has decreased from 83 per 1,000 live births in 2005 to 28.7 per 1,000 in 2015. Similarly, net enrollment in primary education increased from 82 percent in 1997 to 97 percent in 2015 (World Bank 2015).

14. While progress has been made, development in urban and rural areas has been

uneven. For instance, 33 percent of Cambodian children in rural areas have what health professionals describe as stunted growth. The quality of rural schools also lags behind urban ones. Faced with a shortage of qualified civil servants and teachers after the war, Cambodia allowed individuals without a teaching degree to become teachers. As a result, teaching standards, especially in rural areas, are poor and many rural schools are poorly equipped with classrooms, school supplies, and textbooks. Even today, the government continues to struggle with recruiting skilled staff in schools and health centers (Kitamura et al 2015).

15. The performance of Cambodian schools and health centers falls short of international

8 The Cambodian government is currently implementing the second IP3.

8

standards. EFA Review Reports indicate that although there is improvement in enrollment, the performance of students is poor. There is a high dropout rate and low school completion. In addition, studies show that overall utilization of public health institutions is very low (Annear and Ahmed 2012; Grundy et al. 2009; National Institute of Public Health 2012). While evidence is limited, according to a recent report, many citizens choose private health clinics over the government-sponsored clinics. Further, the same report cites many cases of misdiagnosis in the private sector due to lack of regulation (ESID 2014).9

9 The study “Political Economy of Inclusive Healthcare in Cambodia” found that 55 percent, 60 percent, 77 percent, and 93 percent of cases were misdiagnosed in public facilities, private facilities, small private consultation rooms, and the informal sector respectively (ESID 2014).

9

III. RESEARCH METHODS

16. The study team employed three primary research methods for this process review: 1)

key informant interviews (KIIs), 2) focus group discussions (FGDs), and 3) observation of key I-SAF processes. First, the team reviewed key project documents, so that they could familiarize themselves with the key aspects of I-SAF and develop a targeted questionnaire (See Appendix 3). The document review included: policy documents related to decentralization and I-SAF, specifically, field reports prepared by the CSO coordinator, World Bank mission reports, and academic studies on social accountability, governance, and decentralization in Cambodia.

17. The team conducted KIIs in order to gather data on the key I-SAF processes. The

interviews were done in two rounds. This report draws on the interviews conducted in the second round. To that end, the team selected stakeholders involved in each step of the I-SAF process. On the “demand side,” these included the implementing agencies (IPs), their local partners, community accountability facilitators (CAFs), and other civil society organizations (CSOs). On the “supply side,” the team interviewed key government actors, including: 1) officials from NCDD-S, who are managing I-SAF at the national level; 2) representatives of the education and health line ministries involved in I-SAF at the national, provincial, district, and local levels; and, 3) head of the district administration and relevant commune council officials, including the chief, councilors, and the clerk. Further, as the team’s second field mission was focused on sustainability, the team also interviewed officials form the provincial planning department. The team developed detailed questions for each category of stakeholder. In total, the team conducted 68 KIIs in the second round of field visits.10

18. In addition to the KIIs, the team conducted FGDs with I-SAF participants or citizens.

Through these discussions the team gathered data on people’s experience with I-SAF activities, challenges, successes, and recommendations on improvements.

19. While KIIs can result in targeted information on specific processes, they do not provide

as much information on the dynamics of particular events. In order to study the quality of participation as well as the interaction between citizens, IPs and service providers, the team conducted observations of key SAF activities, which in this second round of the process audit included a CSC assessment and an interface meeting. During the participant observation, a team member took detailed field notes based on a key set of questions and transcribed them.

20. In close coordination with both the demand and supply side, the team identified sites for

the field work based on where key activities were taking place. The team made sure to include sites where ethnic minorities reside. As a result, the team visited the following field sites where the key IPs were working: Siem Reap (RACHA and World Vision), Mondulkiri (Care), Battambang (RACHA), Kampong Thom (World Vision), and Prey Veng (Save) for the first round of process review and Kampong Thom and Prey Veng for the second round. Siem Reap was included because the initial I-SAF pilot was carried out there. The team was not able to visit the coastal provinces because implementation there has been limited.

10 The first report of the process audit discusses the data from the first round of interviews.

10

A. Study Limitations and Possible Sources of Bias

21. The research contained three possible sources of bias: 1) response bias; 2) limited time

for observation and interviews; 3) greater focus on the demand side; and 4) limited time to observe trainings. First, as NCDD-S and the IPs coordinated the field visits, there is the potential that local actors self-censored themselves in order to present a favorable impression of programming. For instance, the fact that local CSOs were interested in future funding may have introduced a positive bias in their responses. A similar response bias is possible on the government side. Second, as the team had limited time in the field, it was difficult to observe a significant number of local activities. In addition, the team’s greater focus was on the demand side activities, as the IPs play a greater role in leading activities at the local level. Finally, the team was not able to attend the trainings, and so can only comment on the capacity building efforts under I-SAF based on reports from the CAFs and perceived levels of capacity.

22. The team mitigated the response bias by selecting a large sample size, so that the

responses could be triangulated and a possible source of bias could be identified. The team also found that the respondents were sometimes critical of the process, suggesting minimal bias. While the team’s time in the field was limited, they were successfully able to meet with all relevant stakeholders, allowing for a comprehensive review of I-SAF processes. Finally, the team made every effort to interview both demand and supply side actors in order to get a holistic understanding of I-SAF.

11

IV. FINDINGS & ANALYSIS

23. This section will present the findings for how well each component of the I-SAF process

is working, including the: 1) dissemination of the I4Cs; 2) implementation of the community scorecard (CSC) and service provider self- assessment; 3) development of the JAAPs; and 4) formation of the JAAP committee and JAAP follow-up. The findings pertain to both the demand and supply sides. The findings will be followed by an analysis of each component.

A. Recruitment of CAFs 24. IPs have adopted four strategies to recruit CAFs: 1) working with commune and village

chiefs to identify and recruit CAFs; 2) direct recruiting through open advertisements; 3) recruiting members of CBOs and youth clubs; and, 4) working with their former volunteers. Some of these volunteers include members of the village health support group.

25. The relationship between the IPs and commune councils shapes how the recruitment takes place. According to local staff, in some communes, the chief gives them permission to recruit directly, but in other areas, the commune chief facilitates the process directly. The commune’s involvement in the process suggests its ownership over I-SAF. However, it can also suggest lack of autonomy of some demand-side activities under I-SAF. In such cases, the commune chief requests the village chief to raise awareness about this opportunity and to identify potential CAFs. After the candidates are identified, the IP interviews them to make sure they meet the criteria. CAF recruitment criteria include three main factors: 1) CAFs can read and write; 2) are seen to be independent actors (with no party affiliation); and 3) are willing to dedicate their time under I-SAF. In a few incidents, the village chiefs were among the list of candidates for CAFs, but in most cases, the IPs vetted the list of recruits to ensure that CAFs were independent and not seen as government actors or affiliated with the local government authorities.

26. Given the high level of responsibility required, the recruitment of CAFs is an important

process. It is also time-consuming, as in some cases, it is difficult to find recruits. IPs have had varying success with the different strategies. One approach that has been the most successful is to recruit CAFs from the IPs’ networks of CBOs or youth clubs. For instance, World Vision has sponsored youth clubs in their target areas and has been able to successfully recruit from existing youth clubs. Other IPs have recruited CAFs by working with CBOs, such as saving groups, microfinance organizations, and CBOs affiliated with the forestry and fishery sectors. This strategy not only allowed them to find individuals who were willing to volunteer, but also many who had experience working with CSOs and local government officials as well as conducting outreach.

27. In other instances, some of the IPs have been working in the target areas for a long time, so they have very good connections within the village as well as a cadre of trained volunteers. IPs have also had success in recruiting individuals who have historically served as community leaders for various CSO and government projects. Many of these CAFs report serving under I-SAF as they want to improve the conditions of their village. As such individuals live in the village and have worked with other organizations and are committed to the goals under I-SAF, they have a high level of commitment. The third category of recruits include new recruits, who have the greatest difficulty in facilitating I-

12

SAF activities and, unsurprisingly based on anecdotal evidence, are most likely to resign.

28. Overall, the commune councilors have reported positive working relationships with the

CAFs. They note that CAFs are an important link between the commune administration and the people. In some instances, it appeared that the commune councils rely on the CAFs to conduct outreach for commune initiatives.

29. The IPs successfully trained a new cadre of volunteers. In the first half of 2017, the IPs

trained 3,820 CAFs of which 2,201 were women.11 Some IPs also integrated empowerment for women into the trainings as well as other themes around service provision, such as sanitation. CAFs reported that they found training to be comprehensive, but almost all of them wanted refresher trainings, as they were new to the material and found it to be highly technical. Even though the trainings are designed to be comprehensive in separate modules, given the nature of the material, an iterative approach is necessary to build the confidence of the CAFs. Some members also emphasized that they would like additional background information about role and functions of the commune and service providers. For instance, knowing how the commune develops its budget would help CAFs to contextualize information about the annual commune budget for the citizens.

30. Some IPs report that after one year of service some CAFs drop out because they leave the village for economic opportunities or because they find their responsibilities to be burdensome, as it requires a high time commitment and is difficult. Many CAFs also note that their compensation for their expenses is inadequate given the level of effort required. Based on the development model that has been implemented in Cambodia since the 1990s, many CAFs expect compensation for their time and expenses and added incentives, such as snacks in meetings. As I-SAF wanted to foster self-sustaining accountability mechanisms, compensation was not built into the I-SAF model. Instead, IPs reimburse the volunteers for their transportation expenses (rates differ among IPs and range from $5-8 per day), but they do not receive additional incentives or snacks. Some IPs provide snacks for CAF trainings and other events, but there is limited budget for snacks for village-level events. According to the IPs, this part of the design has led to pushback from the CAFs, especially given the extensive responsibilities of the CAF discussed further below. Based on data reported from the partners, at present, there are 3,726 CAFs (2,263 women and 1,506 men) with 529 CAFs (or 14 percent) dropping out.12

31. In addition to the inception workshop and the trainings, some IPs successfully organized

mentorship opportunities for the CAFs. Mentorship activities included: 1) organizing reflection workshops among CAFs and 2) providing informal coaching during I-SAF events. Reflection workshops created an opportunity where the CAFs could share their experiences, allowing the staff of the IPs to discover gaps in their capacities and other difficulties in implementation. In addition, some CAFs reported that they received informal coaching and support from the staff of the IPs who guided them through particular events, such as a service provider self-assessment. Such forms of coaching not only allowed CAFs to develop their skillset but also to gain confidence in working with local government officials. Ultimately, this form of capacity building is highly

11 See Report to the Partnership Steering Committee, September 2017. I-SAF CSO Coordinating Office. 12 See Report to the Partnership Steering Committee, September 2017. I-SAF CSO Coordinating Office.

13

successful in enhancing the skills and confidence of the CAFs. IPs also linked CAFs to others working in their area, a strategy that may allow for more inexperienced CAFs to be mentored by ones with more experience.

32. In addition to mentoring, some local partners also implemented networking activities,

such as linking CAFs to other CBOs. Such linkages can introduce CAFs to other local resources and forms of support at the commune level. While this is an important step, such networking opportunities were limited during the first year of implementation.

33. One of the greatest challenges to the sustainability of I-SAF is the ongoing recruitment,

training, and retention of CAFs, who are key to I-SAF’s implementation. IPs emphasize that recruiting new volunteers is difficult, as volunteerism for the social good is a relatively recent phenomenon in Cambodian culture. IPs have had greater success in recruiting the youth given their engagement and mobilization in the youth clubs. Further, these new recruits seem to have less expectation for compensation as compared to the older volunteers, as they are less familiar with the old development model and have less responsibility for their family’s expenses. According to reports, the youth members are highly committed and can serve as effective CAFs. While analysts report that Cambodia has an age bias, where citizens defer to older villagers and residents who are expected to serve as community leaders, the I-SAF experience indicates that the youth can serve as effective community leaders. At the same, it is important to note that there is significant turnover in this category of CAFs, as many youth recruits move away for school and employment. Initial evidence suggests that some youth recruits have played a role in finding their replacements.

34. Overall CAFs that have previous experience working with the IPs, especially in areas of

governance have a higher commitment to I-SAF. There are two reasons for this. First, individuals that have previous experience are more likely to buy into the goals of I-SAF, and, thus volunteer their time. This is relevant to consider in designing training modules going forward. The existing training design successfully trains CAFs on I-SAF processes and accountability mechanisms, but aspects of social mobilization and empowerment remain elusive. Aspects of social change and empowerment are included in modules 1 and 4 of the I-SAF training program, which include topics such as: becoming a community leader, introduction to citizen rights and social accountability, good governance and citizen rights, citizen-state relations, and active citizenship. However, given the more immediate focus on the implementation of I-SAF tools, the rights-based message may be lost during implementation. As a result, some CAFs do not make a link between improved service provision and their rights as citizens. Further, as these are abstract and new concepts for many CAFs, they need to be reinforced consistently through the program cycle. For I-SAF to be sustainable in the long-run, IPs need to emphasize basic aspects of citizenship and citizen engagement in their trainings, which will help emphasize the importance of I-SAF to people’s lives.

35. Peer-support networking, such as creating a buddy system for CAFs, has worked well in empowering them, allowing them to undertake effective outreach. CAFs report that conducting outreach together was also less intimidating than individually. IPs report that by working together CAFs feel a sense of camaraderie and belonging, which is key in sustaining further involvement. Further, they derived great confidence from being able to jointly troubleshoot. Such networking may also allow IPs to develop mentorship opportunities in the future with more experienced CAFs working with new recruits to train them in facilitating I-SAF tools.

14

36. There are additional opportunities to develop a local support network for the CAFs by

linking them to CBOs. Some IPs invite other CBOs to the inception meeting, but few are pursuing these links in a meaningful way. Such links could help the CAFs access additional resources and support especially when they receive push back from service providers or the community. Finally, the use of more networking and coordination would ensure that CAFs are able to get recognition for their work, which may also improve their retention.

37. CAFs are successfully serving as a link between citizens and the commune council. The

commune’s engagement with the CAFs, especially while coordinating outreach sessions, suggests a good measure of acceptance and endorsement for this position. At the same time, the CAFs are able to conduct activities independently of the commune. Going forward, it would be critical to maintain close ties to the commune as the commune is the local coordinator for I-SAF, but at the same time, ensure that the CAFs have autonomy. According to CAFs, being seen as independent was critical in gaining the confidence of citizens.

38. Communes were generally supportive of the idea of supporting CAFs down the line. For

instance, many of the commune chiefs interviewed suggest that they were committed to finding funds for this position in the absence of donor financing, but they also emphasized that they would require guidance from MOI. Some commune chiefs and members of the district administration also suggested that the commune councilors could be trained to undertake outreach under I-SAF.

B. I4C Dissemination

39. I4C Preparation: Overall, NCDD-S successfully prepared the I4Cs for the target districts. This involved developing forms for data collection from the three service providers, distributing and collecting the finalized forms, checking the data, entering the data into a database, and generating commune-level data for the I4C posters. Given the scale of I-SAF implementation, mobilizing and building the capacity of staff at the district level to undertake these tasks involved a significant effort. This involved appointing an I-SAF focal person at the district level who coordinated the data collection. The I-SAF focal person per district varied; in some cases, the deputy governors played this role and in other instances, an I-SAF advisor was appointed.

40. Government officials reported different strategies in collecting the data. There were two major variations. In some instances, the focal person for I-SAF at the district level traveled to the relevant service providers and directly collected the data or helped the service provider fill out forms. In other instances, the official sent the forms to the commune level and requested them to be submitted to him. Given these differences, it seems that at present the process of data collection is ad hoc. This gives the appearance that the data collection is not routine work, but additional work that must be completed by the service providers.

41. According to a district-level interview, some service providers, for example from a

school, were reluctant to present their budget and needed convincing. That is, as there is little or no tradition of sharing information at the commune level, some service providers resisted filling in these forms.

15

42. Some officials at the commune level also reported that they did not receive very much advance notice before completing the forms, as little as one day. Given the limited number of staff, the lack of advance notification made it difficult for them to respond. Despite the lack of warning, the majority of interviewees reported that the forms were relatively easy to fill out. The greatest area of difficulty was related to the budget, especially filling out salary information and the budget related to in-kind costs. As the central ministry directly transfers salaries for local employees, school directors reported that they are not able to fill out this information. In addition, schools also receive in-kind support from CSOs and parents; however, they were not clear on how to report this on the existing form. Many emphasized the need for refresher training on these forms.

43. To date, the government reported that in the first six months of 2017, 780 men and 173

women had been trained under I-SAF (total of 953 participants).13 There was no data on who had been trained, so it is difficult to say if the people completing the forms were the ones being trained. Many service providers requested refresher training on how to complete the I4C forms. Overall, the respondents reported that their training had lasted a day in comparison to the extensive demand-side training, and overall, they feel unprepared for fulfilling their responsibilities under I-SAF. Further, it seemed that much of the training focused on the roles of the service providers under I-SAF. However, less emphasis was placed on contextualizing the larger mandate of I-SAF, which may also limit their buy-in.

44. Some implementers noted that the posters contained inaccurate data, as there were

some errors in data entry, and suggested that the process to verify the data collected needed to be strengthened. It is not clear where this process is breaking down. In some cases, IPs suggested that verification is not taking place due to limited staff responsible for a high number of communes.

45. The study team found that some officials at the provincial level in the ministries involved in I-SAF and associated ministries, such as the ministry of planning and education were not aware of I-SAF or the I4C. To ensure that information collection and other I-SAF activities are implemented smoothly and develop synergies with ongoing government opportunities, staff involved in I-SAF recommended greater awareness raising on I-SAF at the provincial and district levels.

46. To build awareness of the I-SAF, IPs organized inception meetings in the target

implementation areas. In total 189 meetings were organized with 4,633 participants of which 1,438 were women.14 However, many of these meetings are at the commune level, and key participants from the provincial and district are not invited or not able to attend.

47. I4C Awareness-raising: Overall, I-SAF has undertaken a massive awareness raising

exercise. To date, the IPs have reached 146,539 people, including 109,328 women (75 percent of the total number) and 21,688 of youth (15 percent of the total).15

13 13 See Report to the Partnership Steering Committee, September 2017. I-SAF CSO Coordinating Office. 14 See Report to the Partnership Steering Committee, September 2017. I-SAF CSO Coordinating Office. 15 See Report to the Partnership Steering Committee, September 2017. I-SAF CSO Coordinating Office.

16

48. Based on the interviews conducted during the second round of field visits, IPs are undertaking a fairly comprehensive social mapping exercise to make sure that the people participating in I-SAF activities are representative of the local social groups. However, it is not clear whether the people identified during this exercise are the people who eventually attend the I4C meetings. The IPs noted that their social mapping entails identifying target villages to ensure that the participants draw from the entire geographic area of the commune. Next, they try to identify a sub-set of the population including a mix of socio-economic households, (including the ID poor, households that the government classifies as poor), ethnic minority populations where relevant, youth, women, and disabled people. The IPs are drawing on local knowledge from the CAFs, their program staff, commune councilors, and village chiefs to classify households. The study team did not have the opportunity to witness and verify the process, but it appears that theoretically, the IPs have a good idea of how to sample the local population.

49. The greatest challenge in making sure that people who attend are representative of the

overall population is ensuring that the people identified from social mapping attend. Based on interviews with IPs and local government officials, as well as the team’s own observations, the people who finally come are the ones who are available, but not necessarily the ones selected through the social mapping process. For instance, on one occasion, the team noticed that there were very few people in the I4C meeting, and as a result, the CAF had to approach the neighboring households to recruit participants for the event. Given the limited time in the field, the team is not clear whether this was an anomaly or standard practice. However, all stakeholders from both the demand the supply sides note that it was quite difficult to recruit participants for I-SAF.

50. Based on the interviews and observation, the lack of community participation in I4C

meetings is based on a set of overlapping factors, including: 1) lack of understanding of the importance of I-SAF, 2) the technical nature of the information, 3) lack of engaging outreach style, 4) time required, and 5) competing priorities.

51. The IPs report that local residents do not always see the relevance of I-SAF to improving

their daily lives. On a related note, historically local residents have seen service provision as the responsibility of the government not citizens. For example, citizens often report that they do not participate in local committees, such as the school committee, as they see schools as the business of the government. Along those lines, people may not participate in I4C sessions, as they don’t think they have much to do with local service delivery.

52. Participants, CAFs, IPs, and the local government officials often cite that the technical

nature of information impedes participation. For instance, the I4Cs include data on ratios, proportions, and other statistics that are intimidating to the participants, as many do not encounter such statistics in their daily lives. According to one CAF: “people have trouble analyzing the data.” Others cite that Cambodia lacks a reading culture and for this reason, the I4C posters alone are not sufficient as outreach tools. This is a particular problem for areas where there is a high level of indigenous people, such as Stung Treng, where the CAFs and participants do not read and speak limited Khmer. As the I4C posters are entirely in Khmer with limited pictures, they are not effective outreach tools in such areas. As there is a high level of illiteracy among the indigenous population, translated posters would not necessarily improve outreach. Some IPs are using images and orally presenting the material in the indigenous languages. Citizens emphasize that overall having easy-to-understand graphics and a narrative format would help people

17

understand the information. While some of the IPs have developed innovative approaches on I4C dissemination, they have not discussed it amongst themselves. To capture all the lessons learned, it would be helpful to have a reflection session on conducting outreach.

53. Participants of I4C sessions also stated that the information dissemination conducted is

not particularly engaging. There was some evidence that perhaps not all CAFs are adequately versed in the statistics themselves, so some of the data is not relayed clearly or in a compelling way. Many of the CAFs whom the team interviewed had primary school education, so their prior exposure to government policies, information about budgets, and standards was limited. While the training is comprehensive, some CAFs need additional mentoring to increase their comfort-level given the technical nature of the I4C data. The CAFs from the ethnic minority populations are especially challenged given the use of Khmer and low levels of education, and were the most hard-pressed to present the information. While some IPs have developed strategies such as comedy shows as well as disseminating information through radio shows, tuk tuks and boats with speakers, the majority are simply relying on the posters, which makes it difficult to recruit villagers to attend the I4C sessions.

54. Much of the information regarding the three sectors of I-SAF is presented to the citizens

in one day, which can also be overwhelming, limiting participation. Finally, according to CAFs, one of the primary reasons for the lack of participation is competing work. As people work during the day, they are reluctant to take time out of their busy schedules to attend.

55. Some CAFs suggested that the number of posters provided were insufficient, especially

as the CAFs split up for the I4C sessions, but are given only one poster to share at the village level. Therefore, additional materials would be helpful in improving outreach. CAFs also reported that sometimes the posters get damaged in the rain, so they may need a kiosk to preserve them. It is important, however, to place them in a central location where people can see them.

56. As the overall numbers indicate, approximately 75 percent of those attending were

women. In some instances, more women attend the I4C sessions because they are the ones who are available, as the men migrate for work or else are in the fields. However, the high level of women attendance is not necessarily a problem, as many women are the ones responsible for managing trips to the health center and their children’s school. Therefore, it is appropriate that they represent their families in these sessions. This would only be a problem if the people attending are not the decision-makers of their households; however, the team does not have data on this issue. It would be worthwhile to investigate this issue further.

57. The fact that fifteen percent of the participants are youth is important, as it shows that

the I4C data is reaching the new generation. Further, IPs and CAFs report that the youth are more engaged and less afraid of engaging with and holding the local service providers to account. In many instances, respondents emphasized that the youth can serve as role models for wider community.

58. Raising interest in the I4C dissemination and ensuring the buy-in of citizens is key to

sustainability. The government officials interviewed, including the district governors and commune chiefs, were worried about the lack of participation and emphasized that they

18

would need to see increased participation from local residents to justify their investment in this activity. The government is more likely to direct resources for an activity that is seen as popular.

59. The IPs and the CAFs emphasized the important role of the commune chief and village

chief in publicizing and convening the information dissemination sessions. According to the CAFs, the commune chief notifies the village chief, who, in turn, informs the villagers. As the village chief remains an important center of information at the village level, his participation is key in mobilizing the villagers. It is not clear how well the village chief understands I-SAF, but sensitizing the chief may lead to improved coordination.

60. In some instances, it appeared that other CSOs operating in the I-SAF target area were

not aware of I-SAF and its mechanisms. As many of the CSOs are involved in networks, which could promote I-SAF and provide a venue to recruit CAFs, it would be important to include them during outreach.

61. The location of the I4C meeting also makes a difference. For example, some venues are

well-lit and airy, and as a result, it is far more pleasant to participate in those sessions. In contrast, other venues have been dank without enough places to sit. The implementing partners often rely on the spaces that are available locally, and so are constrained in the selection of venue. However, a careful selection of the meeting venue can improve the quality of participation and help to foster the feeling that people are engaged in a worthwhile activity.

62. The preparation of the I4Cs is working well. Some respondents suggest that this process

could be streamlined by developing particular guidelines both to ensure that the information is collected in a timely manner and is reviewed and validated prior to publishing. The findings on which data was helpful to the citizens was less clear. Overall, citizens appreciated knowing about service delivery standards and how well service providers were following those guidelines.

63. While there have been some challenges in mobilizing participants, and bringing the

CAFs up to speed, overall the I4C dissemination has been successful. As the Cambodian government has not traditionally posted information about service standards and performance, the I4Cs are an effective tool to make the workings of the government and information about service-delivery more accessible to the people. Through I-SAF, the IPs have successfully reached a significant number of people, and it would be worthwhile to continue the dissemination to increase the number of people who are well-versed on the local government’s performance. According to IPs, it would be useful to compare outreach strategies across the IPs and conduct some focus group discussions to identify additional tools that can be employed for each respective target population.

64. Despite these challenges to boosting participation, according to CAFs, there was a marked difference between the first and second round of outreach sessions. Once some of the participants attended and realized the applicability of the data to their everyday lives, attendance improved overall. Even simple information made a significant impact. For instance, one participant emphasized that sessions were helping him understand how service providers are supposed to behave toward citizens. This finding was repeated often. In this way, I-SAF can empower people; improve their interactions with service providers; and in this way, have a tangible impact on their lives. It is possible that there was a positive response bias in terms of how successful subsequent I4C sessions

19

were, but as all the stakeholders revealed this finding, it appears that to some extent, repeated exposure to I4C information helped to deepen awareness. There are several reasons for this, in some instances, people had a chance to develop a relationship with the CAF, which made attending I4C sessions less intimidating. Further, participants were motivated to participate in subsequent sessions, as they heard from other villagers how useful they had been.

65. As the team did not attend many I4C sessions in the second round, it is not clear how successfully CAFs are leading this initiative. According to reports from IPs and CAFs, CAFs are increasingly confident in leading village-level outreach and I4C sessions. This suggests that this is one area of I-SAF that CAFs could lead independently from the IPs. However, CAFs emphasize the need for refresher courses in the interim period. It would be also good to assess the knowledge and approach used by CAFs through checklists and through simple surveys of I4C participants and CAFs.

C. Citizen Scorecard (CSC)/Service User Assessment

66. In the second year of implementation, the IPs have implemented 334 CSC events

across the field sites, suggesting that activity is on track. Approximately 9,176 people attended these events out of which 79 percent were women.16 As the CSC has been implemented twice, it seems that community members are increasingly comfortable with scoring the service providers. In the majority of cases, individuals are brainstorming their own assessment criteria with the help of the CAFs. In some instances, this is not happening in spite of the I-SAF guidelines, as citizens are unsure of what indicators to pick, and at times, the CAFs take a lead in suggesting indicators. While the indicators vary, there is a fair bit of overlap between them. For instance, the behavior of the service providers and environment of the service facility is something frequently repeated across the three sectors and geographic areas.

67. It is not clear whether the people completing the CSC are the same ones attending the I4C sessions. It is important that this happen, so that the CSC scores the government based on established performance guidelines. In some instances, IPs reported that due to difficulties in participation, the two are not the same, but in other instances, IPs reported that 75 percent of the people who attend the I4Cs also participate in the scorecard. One strategy to ensure that the CSC involved a representative sample of people was to hold three different meetings, so that it was easier for people to access. But, based on the interviews, it seemed that the scores from the three meetings were aggregated. It was not clear what methods were used to aggregate the scores for the interface meeting. It is important to note that the CSC methodology in the Operational Manual emphasizes not to aggregate scores, so that they remain meaningful to the community.

68. In the initial stages of the scorecard, the greatest difficulties came from identifying

relevant indicators. It seems that the IPs play an important role in helping the participants identify the indicators. This is an area where the CAF also needed support. However, in subsequent sessions, the participants were more comfortable with selecting their own indicators. While selecting their own indicators provides ownership to the participants, one respondent noted that it prevented the findings from being compared across the different communes, as the indicators were not consistent.

16 See Report to the Partnership Steering Committee, September 2017. I-SAF CSO Coordinating Office.

20

69. Overall participants seem to be empowered to score the service providers. One IP also

noted that some participants were initially reluctant to score service providers, but across the board, the majority said that over time, they felt more comfortable scoring the government. For instance, in Kampong Thom, the average score for the commune administration was approximately 2.6; 2.29 for schools; and 2.78 for health centers (on a scale of 1 to 5). These low figures suggest that the residents are not afraid of giving the commune a low score.

70. According to some CAFs, people hesitate to vote against the majority due to a cultural

bias favoring the collective voice. Some CAFs noted that some individuals found it difficult to assign a numeric score for each indicator. In some cases, many individuals simply copied the score of the person before them, suggesting that they did not want to be perceived as an outlier or critical of the government. To restore their confidence, the IP in this case suggested voting on each indicator by raising their hands. They noted that this was less intimidating and also saved time. However, it seems that raising hands may also create peer pressure to vote based on the majority vote. Other IPs cited that strategies where by people voted by placing straws in opaque cups, so their scores were not disclosed or voting behind a sheet were effective. The findings suggest that additional observation is necessary as to how the scoring strategy shapes individual’s confidence and the wider group dynamic.

71. To date, there have been 211 service provider self-assessments attended by 1,764

people of which 58 percent are women.17 According to the implementing partners, there was some initial pushback from the service providers on completing their self-assessments. But when they learned that this was a government program, they were more inclined to participate. In the initial stage of implementation, some service providers complained to the IPs that the IP “provokes citizens to check their work”. NCDD-S’ letter to the provincial governments issued in December 2016 played an important role in fostering the buy-in of service providers, suggesting how the direct engagement of NCDD-S and the Ministry of Interior is critical in ensuring smooth implementation.

72. The commune councils are meant to facilitate the overall I-SAF process at the commune

level, especially among service providers. However, after the 2017 commune election, there was a change in the composition of many commune councils. As the government has not trained the new officials, they have limited ability to manage the process or coordinate on I-SAF. Further, the commune chief and councilors emphasize that it is difficult for the commune to coordinate among the various service providers. While the commune has a new role in oversight of local services, they do not have a defined role in actual service delivery. As a result, they feel hesitant to engage in the work of the service providers, especially as they are seen to have more technical skills than the commune councilors. As the commune is not directly engaged in this process, the IPs have been coordinating among the service providers by default, as many of them have existing relationships with them.

73. The service providers reported that the service provider assessments were smoothly

managed. There was some concern as to the facilitation. According to a district governor, the head of a health center is almost a doctor, so s/he may not respond to a

17 See Report to the Partnership Steering Committee, September 2017. I-SAF CSO Coordinating Office.

21

CAF. CAFs similarly pointed out that they were nervous in facilitating the scores by the service provider and that the IP plays a vital role in coordinating between them. While the ability of the CAFs to manage CSCs has improved, some CAFs emphasized that they needed the IP support to get the service providers to complete the service provider assessments.

74. In other instances, the service providers reported that they were comfortable in

completing the self-assessments directly, especially as they already complete their internal monitoring reports.

75. In some instances, the service provider assessment created an informal, internal peer

pressure for staff members to improve their performance. For example, in one school, the teachers felt that the tardiness of one teacher was reflecting badly on all of them. According to them, the scoring process in the service provider assessment created peer pressure for the wider staff to keep better timings.

76. Representatives from a few health centers noted that there were sufficient existing

accountability mechanisms, including the social accountability box, so they were unclear as to why they needed I-SAF. It is important to note that the social accountability boxes were established in Cambodia in the mid-2000s to gather feedback, but studies have shown how they are now defunct. Further, they noted that their own internal monitoring mechanisms were more sophisticated than the ones under I-SAF, as they were oriented around service delivery standards rather than a perception of services delivered. However, an official at the district administration office also noted that often times the priorities of the citizens and the health center overlap, which complements and can contribute to internal monitoring.

77. There was the common perception among citizens that the service providers were

scoring themselves higher as compared to the citizens. The study team did not have access to the service provider assessments, but the initial evidence on response bias is mixed.

78. Overall, this component of I-SAF is working well. Users and providers are fairly

comfortable with their respective assessments. The two sets of exercises are fairly time-consuming, but users and providers report they are important to document performance of service providers and ways in which the community can support them. While participation has improved overall, some evidence suggests that it is impeded by a collective bias discussed above where people assign similar scores to particular services. Additional research is necessary to identify pros and cons of different scoring strategies for the CSC to ensure that the scoring process is meaningful.

D. Interface Meeting/JAAP preparation/JAAP Follow-up

79. Following the CSC assessments and the service provider self-assessments, by mid-

2017, the communes finalized 382 JAAPs comprised of 6,109 priority actions.18 The actions comprised 3,960 internal actions or ones that can be completed by the communes, health centers, and schools themselves and 2,159 external actions, which require financial support or other support from the district, provincial, or national levels.

18 See Report to the Partnership Steering Committee, September 2017. I-SAF CSO Coordinating Office.

22

80. In the interface meeting that the study team attended, the CAF was able to successfully facilitate between users and providers. In a session attended by the study team, the IP explained the overall process, but the CAF was the main facilitator, which is an important measure of the increasing ability of the CAF to facilitate. Similarly, the team observed that both the users and providers were providing suggestions, indicating that the meeting was inclusive.

81. Based on the team’s observations, the user and provider suggestions are presented in

various tables, which some citizens reported as being confusing to follow. Second, the final list of actions selected for the JAAP is not presented in a complete list. The IPs later compile the list in their office to save time. Based on citizen feedback, it would be helpful to have the IPs compile and present the final JAAP at the event, so that participants have a visual reference to the JAAP. Without this, the JAAP remains abstract to the citizens.

82. Service users and providers can generally agree on the most basic aspects of service delivery, such as having a clean environment, but it is difficult to develop priorities pertaining to the core, technical aspects of service-delivery. In the meeting the study team observed, citizens and providers had their own priorities. For instance, schools that are understaffed often emphasize the need for a teacher, as not having enough staff increased their workload, whereas citizens emphasize the needs for new books for their children. To identify the joint priorities, the CAF asked the providers and users to vote on key priorities. Both sides accept the priorities identified through voting, underscoring how JAAP formation successfully results in a compromise between users and providers. However, in some instances, the priorities are not negotiated deeply and thus do not necessarily reflect a joint understanding of priorities. This dynamic is reflected in the interface meetings where the providers and users are often seated on opposite sides of the room and rarely mingle.

83. While users and providers do not necessarily focus on similar aspects of service delivery, some IPs suggest that the interface meeting is an important form of empowerment, as it allows citizens and service providers to come together to discuss issues of common concern. According to an IP: “They (citizens) express their opinion more strongly because we give them opportunity to speak and their feedbacks are used to improve the service.”

84. Based on the JAAPs that the study team has seen, the internal actions of the JAAPs

represent the low hanging fruit. These internal actions ranged from ones that focused on changing the behavior of the staff to changing the environment of the service provider. External actions include the need for more resources such as textbooks as well as more facilities, such as having a toilet constructed or another school building. Often times the internal actions were the only actions that were implemented, as the communes lacked funding. Internal actions that are easy to implement can help to build the confidence of the users and providers in the process. However, by including items in the JAAP that cannot realistically be implemented can create a high level of frustration among citizens and service providers alike, which may shape their future participation.

85. An analysis of both citizen and service provider priorities suggest that on many issues,

citizens and service provider priorities are aligned. For instance, service providers and users are aligned on the importance of increasing information between citizens and communes and holding regular meetings. Many believed that I-SAF creates an important

23

platform at the commune level to reflect on service delivery needs.

86. Based on instructions from NCDD-S issued in September 2016, the majority of communes have integrated the JAAP into the Commune Investment Programme (CIP), that identifies the priorities for the commune/sangkat budget. However, as the commune has limited ownership of the JAAP, integrating the JAAP into the CIP does not ensure that it will get the commune’s attention or resources. To that point, during the second round of field visits, the study team discovered that few of the communes had a copy of the JAAP. According to them, the IPs usually keep the final copy of the JAAP. This is not in line with the I-SAF Operational Manual, which emphasizes that the JAAP must be kept in the community. As the commune chief and the CAFs did not have a copy of the JAAP, they were hard-pressed to remember what was prioritized aside from one or two examples. In some instances, the commune chief or other members of the JAAP were not re-elected, so their positions lie vacant. In other cases, where the commune chief had participated in the I-SAF process, he could similarly not recall the JAAP action items, suggesting that it was not a policy priority. As the commune chief is the head of the JAAP monitoring committee, the fact that several commune chiefs interviewed by the study team do not have ownership over the JAAP is problematic for effective follow-up.

87. Overall, there seems to be limited buy-in to the JAAP committee structure by the

commune and service providers. Based on the interviews, in some instances, the JAAP committee has only met once in 2016 at the request of the IPs. Further, the communes have not followed up on the JAAP using the existing commune meeting structure. The commune chief holds a regular monthly meeting that is intended to the give updates on the CIP completion. Even though the JAAP is a part of the CIP, interviews indicated that it is not discussed in the regular meeting.

88. In some instances, it appeared that the service users were able to lobby the commune

officials to implement JAAP items. In this way, the JAAP is serving as an accountability tool to improve service delivery. In one commune, while the commune did not have funds directly, they were able to fundraise from influential villagers. Similarly, another commune presented the need for a roof for the health center, and was able to get CSO funds through the district integration workshop (DIW), where all communes present their completed CIPs.

89. The DIW is an important forum to get funding from higher levels of government as well

as from CSOs who are present. For example, one commune chief reported that he received funds from an NGO to construct a toilet in the health center, a priority which was identified in the JAAP. However, the funds only covered the cost of one toilet, so in the subsequent year, the commune funded the construction of the second toilet through the CIP. Such examples show how the JAAP can successfully highlight citizen priorities.

E. Ensuring Effective Action & Sustainability

90. Ensuring Sustainability through Commune-level Mechanisms: According to KIIs,

service providers, IPs, and citizens are frustrated that expectations of reform/improvements are not consistent with their ability to implement. According to some CAFs, after a year of implementation, some citizens expressed frustration that implementation of JAAP actions are not yet meeting the expectations of citizens. Service providers are similarly frustrated that people’s expectations are very high, such as requesting a new health center, which they are not able to deliver as they have little say

24

over their budgets.

91. While frustrations remain, in some cases, external JAAP items have been funded through three channels, which could improve future sustainability including: 1) CIP funds; 2) budgets of the respective service providers; and 3) local sources of funding.

92. Sustainability through the Commune/Sangkat Fund: As discussed above, one

strategy that the IPs emphasize for increasing the chances that external JAAP actions are funded is to integrate them into the CIP. The inclusion of the JAAP into the CIP is an important mechanism to formalize the JAAP. At the same time, there have been some delays in the implementation of external actions. First, in 2016, JAAPs were prepared after the formalization of the CIP, and so they were not integrated into the CIP. Second, the inclusion of external JAAP items in the CIP does not guarantee their funding. The commune/sangkat fund typically has been used to fund infrastructure projects, and for this reason, the existing decision-making structure continues to support infrastructure and JAAP items are not prioritized. Third, CIP activities are organized in particular budget categories, and the JAAP items do not perfectly align with the existing CIP budget categories, and thus are not funded.

93. While integrating the JAAP into the CIP is important, there is little evidence so far to suggest that the JAAP is used to inform the planning processes of the schools or health centers. In a few cases, service providers in schools and the health center reference the JAAP especially when it coincides with their own priorities. In this regard, the service providers are drawing on the JAAP in an informal way. However, it is important to emphasize how the JAAP can contribute more broadly to the annual plans of the service providers.

94. In some instances, CAFs reported that they were able to work with committees within

the school or health center in order to implement the JAAP. For instance, the CAF has taken a JAAP action to a school committee in order to address issues such as a landfill or a fence for the school.

95. Respondents also emphasized the need to overall coordinate better between service

users and providers. For instance, they emphasized that often the government was not aware of service-delivery initiatives implemented by CSOs and vice versa. In this regard, the district administration has an important coordination role to play.

96. Community-level Fundraising: In some instances, citizens have successfully raised

funds for JAAP items. Citizens report that they can fund-raise in three ways, through: 1) traditional means such as fund-raising through the pagoda; 2) individual donations; and 3) in-kind labor. In one commune, the commune chief directly raised funds from citizens in order to cover the costs of a tuk-tuk to take people to the health center. In another case, a health center chief donated personal funds to fill a gaping hole in the grounds of the health center where water would collect in the rainy season. In another instance, the commune used a combination of funds from the CSF and a personal donation to build a fence around the school. This suggests that the JAAP is used to mobilize local fund-raising.

97. Sustainability of CAF Engagement: In order to examine the sustainability of CAFs

related to issues of retention, it’s important to examine who joins and why. As discussed above, CAFs include: 1) members of youth clubs and CBOs; 2) seasoned volunteers;

25

and 3) new members. According to the IPs, it’s important to examine incentives for the CAFs to participate, such as getting them formal recognition for their contributions from the commune as well seeing how their participation in I-SAF could build useful professional skills. Also, as the CAFs play a critical role, but one that requires a high level of effort, IPs have experimented with ways to reduce their burden, such as linking CAFs to each other as well as to CBOs. If CAFs work together, they are able to cover for each other, allowing them to manage their responsibilities more easily. They are also able to troubleshoot, which eases the burden on them. Further, recognition, such as providing CAFs with t-shirts, hats, and raincoats has worked well. But, such items have not been distributed in all field sites due to shortfalls in the IPs’ budgets. Where they have been distributed, they have helped to instill pride and ownership in the role of the CAFs.

98. Some of the communes have started to consider ways in which they can support CAFs.

One district official mentioned that there is a precedent for the commune supporting volunteers. For instance, in communes where there is no woman councilor, the commune funds the position of a woman representative to the Commune Committee for Women and Children (CCWC). The commune also emphasized using existing volunteers, such as the village health support group, as well as the commune councilors to undertake outreach. An IP suggested that linking the CAFs to the commune would allow for them to be seen as legitimate actors and to coordinate with the wider village during the organization of the I4Cs and the monitoring activities. However, this proposal requires further reflection and discussion as the “neutrality” (real and perceived) of CAFs is key in allowing them to play the role of local facilitators.

26

V. RECOMMENDATIONS

99. The recommendations outlined in this section address each of the key processes regarding I-SAF. We begin with some overall recommendations. The team was tasked with assessing each process as well as looking at sustainability overall. In part the recommendations on sustainability are limited, as all of the IPs are implementing the key I-SAF processes according to the I-SAF guidelines. While this creates coherence in the program, there is little evidence for processes that deviate from the model. For instance, changing the frequency and steps may reduce costs and improve sustainability. However, there is little empirical evidence to show that changing the processes would still result in the same outcomes. For this reason, the study team recommends that the IPs experiment with the processes and the tools described below in the next phase of implementation in order to create an evidence base for design options that may streamline implementation and, in the long run, improve sustainability.

100. Some of the implementers suggested experimenting with the frequency of I-SAF

implementation. It is important to note that these recommendations are preliminary and have not been tested. As I-SAF is implemented every year, it becomes challenging to sustain. Reducing the costs involved could include: 1) staggering the components 1 and 2 in alternate years and 2) implementing the full I-SAF every one or two years and selecting a target priority in the interim years; and 3) Clustering service providers into groups (Group A and Group B) and alternating the years when citizen monitoring and action plans are done. In the first instance, as components 1 and 2 require significant field time and expenses, IPs could conduct I4C dissemination and monitoring in alternate years. It is important to note that components 1 or 2 are linked so not implementing them in tandem may result in: 1) monitoring being undertaken by people who have not participated in the I4C sessions; 2) the monitoring is not responsive to service providing guidelines as the information is forgotten or outdated. However, staggering them would allow for CAFs to spend more time on building a local knowledge base prior to implementing the CSC. This strategy would only work if there were a stable number of committed I-SAF volunteers who could be consistently engaged between I-SAF cycles. It would also be important to undertake civic engagement in the interim years, so that citizens do not lose interest.

101. Under the second option, all three sectors could be monitored every one or two

years, and each year participants could pick a target sector, such as education, so that the I4C sessions and monitoring would only take place within that sector. It would be important if the selection of the priority sector was done with consultation of citizens and service providers to ensure their buy-in. This would reduce the field costs as well as the burden on IPs, CAFs, and service providers, improving their sustainability.

102. Under the third option, implementers would stagger the implementation of

component 2 by sector. I4C posters should be produced every year, but community outreach by CAFs could be part of the alternating package as well. That is, outreach would not take place for the sector not included. In the off-year, JAAPs could be followed up, allowing sufficient time for the implementers to make headway on the JAAPs.

103. Overall, I-SAF would benefit from increased coordination among the service

providers and the demand side. One strategy could be to empower the district focal point to play this role.

27

104. Recommendations on specific aspects of the I-SAF are listed below. 105. Sustainability of CAFs: The CAF dropout rate of 14 percent is not very high

considering the high demands placed on the CAF and local migration patterns. Based on our interviews we recommend four strategies to promote higher retention of the CAFs: 1) develop training that enhances professional skills; 2) provide formal recognition of CAF efforts; 3) create a sustainable mentoring, buddy and networking system for CAFs; and 4) experiment with different models with an aim to reducing the burden on the CAFs. Based on interviews, the study team hypothesizes that if CAFs see I-SAF as a mechanism to enhance their professional skills, they would be more likely to stay. For this reason, adding a component of the training that emphasizes professional skills, including communication skills and knowledge of government policies and laws would be important and in line with requests for more training from the current CAFs. The training should be designed based on a survey of the CAFs and targeted toward their future employability. Similarly, a formal acknowledgement of CAF services, such as a certificate from the commune council could enhance their ability to apply for professional opportunities in the future. It is not clear if professional opportunities would provide sufficient incentive given the CAFs’ requests for ongoing support for their compensation. Some IPs believe that over a period of time, they could build a spirit of volunteerism and professional opportunities that would be sufficient to incentivize CAFs to participate.

106. In addition to creating incentives for them to join, retention of CAFs may be

enhanced by supporting them in their key responsibilities so that participation in I-SAF is seen as less burdensome. IP partners who have put in place a buddy system, whereby CAFs work together to undertake outreach and facilitation, report that it works well. In this system, two CAFs are assigned a similar geographic area, which enables them to share the workload and troubleshoot jointly. Further, in future, it may be possible to have a more experienced CAF mentor a more junior one to help them develop effective facilitation skills, deeper knowledge of I4Cs, and how local government works. This would also reduce the training burden on the IPs. CAFs could also be connected to ongoing initiatives, such as the women’s empowerment program of the UNDP, which employs a rights based approach to promote the social position of women. Linking CAFs to ongoing development opportunities could also create incentives to stay.

107. Commune councils emphasized that there are a number of volunteers who have

worked with government, including members of the village health support group, members of the CCWC among others. While experimenting with sustainability models, it may be good to pilot I4C dissemination through such actors as well as councilors. Such volunteers could work alongside CAFs and raise information on specific areas related to the councilor’s portfolio. At present, there is a division of labor among the commune councilors and drawing them in strategically may reduce outreach costs as well as build greater ownership. It is possible that citizens may not be entirely at ease in information dissemination sessions led by people seen to work with the state, so this approach would have to be piloted.

108. While the IPs have created important links to CBOs and other CSOs in the

inception meetings, ongoing networking could help to raise awareness of I-SAF activities, such as the I4Cs, and recruit CAFs. That is, IPs could leverage additional networks and platforms to raise awareness of the I4Cs. Additional outreach efforts are needed at the district and provincial levels.

28

109. I4Cs: While overall the I4C process is working well, it may be possible to enhance sustainability by increasing demand. As discussed above, in many instances demand is low because the dissemination approach is too technical, not engaging, and in some instances, people do not recognize the value of the I4Cs. It is important to remember that information about citizen rights is taking place in a context where citizens consider public services to be a core function of government. To that end, it is necessary to build the idea of a public good and the importance of civic engagement. Moving forward, the I-SAF IPs could consider experimenting with basic civic engagement concepts, such as introducing a component of the I4C that includes basic information on the commune council, its office-holders, rights of citizens to engage the councils, and also sharing success stories from I-SAF. It would be important to test this approach and associated material in some implementation areas before replicating it.

110. In addition to addressing civic engagement, the IPs could also experiment with

outreach strategies including when they hold the outreach sessions, trying to hold night or week-end sessions for people who work. It seems that there is immense collective knowledge on outreach among the IPs, and it would be important to organize reflection sessions to systematically capture the lessons learned. It would also be important to build an engaging narrative around I-SAF, storylines with particular actors, and how their lives change through I-SAF. Exchanging success stories from around the country may also incentivize people to participate. It would also be important to review successful outreach strategies employed by other demand-based programs in order to boost participation in I-SAF.

111. The supply-side needs to further streamline and develop a process of data

collection in order to ensure that local service providers have enough time to complete the forms and verify the data. A more formal process may also help to ensure that the data production is seen to be part of the ongoing responsibilities of the service providers and is not perceived as an extra burden. It also seems that the service providers could use refresher training on the forms, especially how to fit their budgets into the form. Greater attention needs to be paid on how to verify the data.

112. CSC/service provider assessment: For the CSC and service provider self-

assessments to sustain, it is critical to incentivize the commune councils to manage the process. One incentive could be to instill a sense of competition among communes to improve their basic services. In order to do this, I-SAF could introduce CSCs that are comparable across communes. At present, as each group of citizens determines their own indicators, the scores are not necessarily comparable across sites. To address this, IPs could experiment adding broader indicator categories, which are the same across all implementation sites. This would help create indicators that are comparable. Line ministries could complement this with performance standards and financial incentives such as performance grants that reward service providers for improved performance. Alternatively, IPs could create a common set of indicators based on indicators that the citizens identified during the first two rounds of the CSC as well as indicators specific to a particular community. Being able to compare communes may introduce a spirit of competition among communes, which may incentivize communes to continue the scoring on their own. It would be also important for the IPs to emphasize how CSCs are meant to complement internal monitoring efforts. This should be included in all outreach with the service providers.

113. JAAPs: To ensure that the JAAPs emerging from the CSC and service provider

29

assessment process are effective, it is key to build greater buy-in by the commune chief and councils. At present, the chief is the head of the committee, but few chiefs have taken ownership of this role. To do this, it may be good to further mentor the chiefs to play this role and provide financial incentives if their commune score improves. Such experiments through the DFGG program were successful. For instance, an IP ran a project that ran a commune-level competition in one province, where improvements in performance were rewarded with office supplies. This project reported improvements in service delivery. Further, there needs to be greater awareness-raising of the I-SAF within the commune council to build their understanding, a sense of ownership and encourage them to use the commune meetings to raise awareness of I-SAF.

114. While the JAAP committee is mandated under I-SAF, there is little instruction to

the commune on coordinating this committee. As the commune relies on instruction from the NCDD-S, short guidelines from them on committee facilitation and procedures could significantly strengthen the JAAP committee structure. In addition, it would be important to provide guidelines for the citizen representatives of the JAAP, so that they can coordinate with the CAFs to follow up on JAAP actions on a periodic basis and raise particular issues with the rest of the committee. At present, the citizen representatives seem to play a minimal role, as they often do not take action without the commune chief. Some IPs recommend a formal role for the CAF on this committee.

115. At present, I-SAF IPs are focusing on ensuring JAAP sustainability through the

CSF. While the CSF is an important source of local funds, it is a limited source. Instead, it would be important to build links between the commune level and district and provincial governments. As the JAAP is part of the CIP, it is presented at DIW; however, there is little attempt to raise awareness or to find appropriate funders. It would be good to explore funding opportunities at the district level from government and civil society sources.

116. In order to make the most efficient use of funds from the CSF, it would be

worthwhile to provide additional guidance to the communes on which JAAP items are appropriate to include within the CIP.

117. The CSF is not a good source for all JAAP items, as many items directly pertain

to the respective service provider, such as the request for more teachers and textbooks. However, there is no clear linkage between the JAAP and the planning processes of schools and health centers. It would be necessary to better align the JAAP with all three planning processes, so that citizen priorities can be taken into account in the government’s annual planning processes. Teachers emphasize that linking the JAAP to their own planning process can help them further refine their priorities. To do this, it would be important to use the platform of the I-SAF partnership steering committee (PSC), the I-SAF decision-making body, to raise awareness at the highest level of the ministry and opportunities to participate. There may be a need to create an I-SAF committee within each ministry. There is interest by the partner ministries to play a greater role as exhibited by the education ministry issuing a letter to change the indicators employed by I-SAF to match the new ministry guidelines. It would also be important to follow up with outreach sessions at the provincial and district level to build further ownership and technical understanding of I-SAF, and ways in which it can contribute to the planning of the ministry itself.

118. Over time, it would be important to track the issues identified in the JAAP and

30

see if they have evolved from factors that focus on simple priorities such as the behavior of service providers to ones that focus on core aspects of service delivery, such as quality of teaching or activities for the students. Tracking the kinds of issues that become priorities could provide insights into how well the JAAP negotiation process is working.

31

APPENDICES

32

Appendix 1: Terms of Reference Position: Team Leader I-SAF Social Audits Duration: January 26 – September 30, 2017 Location: Phnom Penh with frequent trips to provinces Expected working days: 78 Background As a key aspect of the Royal Cambodia Government’s Decentralization and Deconcentration (D&D) reform program, a policy was adopted to empower citizens to engage in local discussions on the provision of public services to strengthen the overall quality of these services. Cambodia’s Social Accountability Framework (SAF) policy and 3-year implementation plan is perhaps one of the first fully integrated public sector–civil society partnership programs using social accountability mechanisms to empower citizens to improve public service delivery. The program provides citizens with information on performance and budget of local service providers (schools, health centers, and communes); provides a forum for citizen monitoring; and encourages government’s responsiveness to citizens’ needs. Internationally, it is one of the few countries taking a joint civil society/government approach. On the demand (civil society) side, several nongovernment organizations (NGOs) are facilitating citizen engagement across a range of locations and geography. NGOs are using somewhat different techniques and have been encouraged to innovate. As this is the first year of the 3-year Implementation of Social Accountability (I-SAF), there will be much to learn about the practical application of the program design. From a policy and program efficiency perspective, it is essential to find out what is working best, what is not working, to disseminate these lessons across implementers, and to incorporate design improvements into the implementation guidelines to improve the effectiveness of implementation in years 2 and 3, and onward. To best understand the complex local dynamics involved in implementation, it is important to go beyond the reporting of the implementing partners to have an unbiased, analytical perspective. As such, a neutral, third party would be best placed to undertake such analysis. Similarly, the program has begun implementation in only a few sectors: communes (in particular the “general mandate” of the lowest tier of local government), health centers and primary schools. In the future, the program will need to determine which sectors it should be extended to (and why) and how the program can be sustained. This activity is considered “seed capital” for further work in expanding the I-SAF, in learning about its efficiency, effectiveness, and sustainability in other sectors, at district level and in an urban environment from 2018 onwards. The project will also inform ADB’s support to the Royal Cambodia Government’s D&D reform program, where government sub-national authority will be strengthened through Project Number: 49266-001 Proposed Programmatic Approach, Policy-Based Loan, and Project Loan for Subprogram 1 Cambodia: Second Decentralized Public Service and Financial Management Sector Development Program. Key partnerships. ADB and the Foundation have agreed to cooperate to contribute toward improving Cambodia’s Social Accountability program implementation (efficiency, effectiveness, etc.) and the likelihood of long run sustainability by identifying lessons learned. The lessons learned will be utilized for design improvements, innovation, and expansion of the program into new areas. This initiative will also feed into the ADB and government’s decentralization and public service partnership Decentralized Public Services and Financial Management, as the Cambodian Government has an ongoing program loan with ADB. The parties will be collaborating to review, evaluate, and report on the progress of

33

the Cambodia’s Social Accountability Framework (SAF) policy from the civil society’s implementation perspective thereby strengthen development effectiveness in Asia and the Pacific through improving services provided to the community, resulting from greater civil society organization (CSO) engagement. This initiative directly supports the review of the SAF implementation through a number of approaches including audit and consultation workshops, training, mentoring, and field research conducted in Cambodia, and will ensure that the partners will work closely together in supporting civil society engagement in the SAF, helping to address service delivery bottlenecks through the use of SAF. The research/project will be executed by TAF as a nongovernment body that is not involved in the implementation of the I-SAF but has the background and understanding of the I-SAF framework. TAF will conduct independent analysis and make evidence-based recommendations. About TAF. TAF has over seven years hands-on experience in setting up, implementing, and assessing social accountability mechanisms in Cambodia. TAF implemented both then on-state actor component of Demand for Good Governance (DFGG) as well as the World Bank-funded Program to Enhance Capacity in Social Accountability (PECSA). This includes developing the theoretical work on refining social accountability tools for Cambodia, building the capacity of Cambodian CSOs, and culling best practices and other lessons learned. TAF has conducted policy research on social accountability, and has turned policy recommendations into executable policy frameworks, notably in regards to the I-SAF. Specifically, TAF has conducted previous research on social accountability (Voice, Choice, and Decision (VCD) I, VCD II, and other related Activity Outputs/Deliverables Phase I Phase II B. Activity Objectives The objective of the activity is to improve program implementation (efficiency, effectiveness, etc.) and the likelihood of long run sustainability of I-SAF by identifying lessons learned, which result in design improvements, innovation, and potential expansion of the program into new areas. C. Scope and Time The assigned work will take place from January 2016 and will be completed in June 2017. Exact delivery dates may be revised in the inception report.

No Activities Date

1. Document review, preliminary consultation with program coordinator of 4 CSOs and preparing Inception Report

26 January – 7 February, 2017

2. Field Visit: Data collection in province, district and commune council with key actors and key informants

8 – 13 February, 2017 28 February – 15 March, 2017

3. Data processing, compilation and analysis March 2017

4. First Learning Forum 17 March 2017

5. Second Field Visit: Detail data collection of critical steps and role of key actors

24 July – 11 August 2017

6. Second Learning Forum 11 August 2017

7. Draft report and two policy brief write-ups & submission for feedback

4 September 2017

8. Finalization of report and policy briefs and submission 25 September 2017

Descriptions of deliverables Inception report. The inception report outlines the methodology to be used for the process

34

audits, provides a list of feasible “evaluative questions” to answer (reviewed by the Partnership Steering Committee), and presents a timeline for the activities under the audit. This will include the timetable for the implementation and design of the process audit instruments, and training of team to carry out the process audits. The explanation of the methodology will include rationale for site selection and underlying assumptions. Included will be plans, human resource requirements and timetables for two process monitoring field missions and summary findings reports and one learning report from the learning forum. Review and support (such as training or mentoring the field research team) the testing of impact evaluation mechanisms, when the baseline survey instrument and field work will be conducted. Process Audits – Round One. A process audit conducted according to developed methodology, in a selection of target districts, representing implementation by all four key NGO implementing partners, CARE, World Vision, Save the Children and RACHA. Field work is to be conducted at the time that key I-SAF activities are taking place in the field, : awareness building on I-SAF Information for Citizen Posters (I4C) posters by NGOs; community scorecard meetings for the three different service providers; Joint Accountability Action Plan (JAAP) meetings and JAAP monitoring meetings. Learning Forum – Round One. Results of Round One Process Audits will be presented jointly to the government–civil society, I-SAF Partnership Steering Committee in March 2017 in an I-SAF district/province. The forum will contain approximately 40 people. The forum will incorporate lessons learned from the process reviews and audits described above, as well as the experience of a range of stakeholders extracted through facilitated discussions. Process Audits – Round Two. Select two NGO implementing partners to conduct a second round of process audits to drill down on findings from round one and the first learning forum. Learning Forum – Round Two. Based on round one and round two results, the learning forum held in August 2017 in Phnom Penh will draw on analytical work to explore additional themes including expansion plan for new sectors, urban areas and districts, and sustainability plans. Final learnings will be reviewed and launched at the forum to discuss key findings and recommendations. The forum will have approximately 60 participants. Final Report and Policy Briefs. A draft final evaluative report and two policy briefs generated and submitted by September 25. Comments from reviewers will be provided to the Team Leader by September 20 and the final report will be completed by September 25. D. Implementation Arrangements The Team Leader will work closely with TAF’s Project Coordinator, Chy Terith, and Field Researcher, Kry Sopheap. The Team Leader will have frequent discussions with the Partnership Steering Committee, which has the overall responsibility for program implementation and policy. TAF will then report to RETA 8595 project officer (Christopher Morris) and the ADB’s Cambodia Resident Mission (CARM) CSO Anchor focal person (Mia Hyun).

34

Appendix 2: Timeline, Activities and Deliveries of Process Audit

Phase Timeline Activities Deliveries

Inception* 27th January to

13th February

2017

• Document review

• Preliminary consultation with Program Coordinator of 4 CSOs1

• Field Visit for data collection from key actors and key informants in province,

district and commune council (8th to 11th February 2017)

Inception Report

Second 28th February to 16th March 2017

• Intensive meetings with government and implementing agencies (CSOs)

• Interviews with the main stakeholders including donors

• Field visits in five provinces (Siem Reap, Kampong Thom, Prey Veng, Mondulkiri

and Battambang) for observation of Inception Meetings, Orientation and

Trainings, JAAP Review Meetings and I4C; key Informants Interview with

communes, districts, government offices and CSOs; and Focus Group

Discussions with citizen groups (2nd to 14th March 2017)

• Presentations of the initial findings in the First Learning Forum on March 16,

2017 in Phnom Penh.

(During the first round of process audit, the team had 3 focus group discussions

with citizens and consultations with more than 100 people.)

First Field

Mission Report

Last June 27th – July

1st 2017

July 29th -

August 9th 2017

August 25th and

26th

• Intensive meetings with government, implementing agencies (CSOs) and other

stakeholder for in-depth study of the issues raised in the first learning forum

• Field visits in five provinces (Siem Reap, Kampong Thom, Prey Veng,

MondulKiri and Battambang) for observation of Citizen Score Card Assessment

Meeting, Service Providers’ Self-Assessment Meeting, Interface Meeting and

JAAP preparation meeting; key Informants Interview with communes, districts,

government offices and CSOs; and Focus Group Discussions with citizen

groups. (27th June to 1st July 2017, 30th July to 9th August 2017 and 25th to 26th

August 2017)

• Presentations of the findings in the Second Learning Forum on 11thAugut 2017

in Phnom Penh

(During the first round of process audit, the team had 3 focus group discussions

with citizens and consultations with more than 100 people.)

i) Second Field

Mission Report

ii) Final Report

iii) Policy Briefs

35

Appendix 3: Process Audit Questions Second round of SAF Process Audit

Target stakeholder

Issue Area Questions

NCDD-S Technical Team

Integration of the SAF into the local planning process

1. To what extent has the SAF been integrated into the local planning process at commune/district/provincial levels?

a. What has worked well? b. What are existing challenges? Provincial/district

government understanding

2. How well do the provincial and district government officials understand the SAF?

3. How well is the information-transfer mechanism for the I4Cs working?

Commune-level understanding

4. How well does the commune administration understand the SAF? On a scale of 1 to 5, how would you rate the understanding of the commune staff on the SAF with 1 being low and 5 being high?

5. On a scale of 1 to 5, how would you rate the understanding of the service providers of the SAF with 1 being low and 5 being high?

a. What are gaps in their understanding (referring to commune/service providers)?

Commune participation

6. To what extent does the commune administration participate in the SAF processes? Detail participation by SAF process e.g. I4C, service user assessment, JAAP?

a. Do communes participate in the CAF recruitment?

b. Do commune chiefs preside over the service provider assessment? If not, who represents the commune?

c. What opportunities exist to increase participation by the commune/district officials?

d. Do commune/district officials see the SAF as a burden?

JAAP 7.What factors are guiding the JAAP decision-making process?

a. What challenges exist in integrating citizen and service provider priorities?

b. How does the prioritization process take place?

c. What items are integrated into the CIP? d. What items are funded/supported? By

the CIP? By the district? By the province? e. Are there different funding mechanisms

36

available? Any examples? Sustainability 8. What are the biggest challenges to

sustainability? 9. What are existing opportunities? Best practices 10. Based on ongoing implementation, are

there best practices that we can implement?

Other 11. Are there other issues you would like to flag in terms of sustainability or implementation?

Provincial/District Government

Role in I-SAF 1. What has been your role in the implementation of the SAF?

2. What aspects of the process are working well?

3. What aspects are not working well? 4. Who participates from the

government/community in the I4C/scorecard/JAAP? What impediments to participation? Are the right people participating?

5. On a scale of 1 to 5, how would you rate the understanding of the commune administration of the SAF with 1 being low and 5 being high?

6. On a scale of 1 to 5, how would you rate the understanding of the commune-level service providers (insert relevant service provider) of the SAF with 1 being low and 5 being high?

7. Do you think the commune has a role in citizen engagement? If so, what could that role be?

8. What do you think of using commune/district funds to support citizen outreach? Is it feasible?

Decision-making 9. Has the SAF been helpful to the government/department? If so, how?

10. Do you think that the SAF can support the government’s/department’s planning process? If so, how?

11. How can the SAF be more useful to the government/department?

Data Gathering only for district level

12. How well can the district government collect data for the I4Cs? Is there particular data that is more difficult to collect?

Scorecard process 13. Have you participated in/observed the scorecard/service user assessment?

a. If so, how well is the scorecard/service user assessment process working?

b. Are there any challenges in the implementation of the two?

c. Has the scorecard/assessment provided

37

the government/relevant department with useful data?

d. Does the staff see it as a burden? e. Are the right people participating? DIW integration

workshop/planning 14. How did the JAAP inform the CIP planning process?

15. Was the JAAP presented at the DIW? How did it shape district/provincial governments planning for service delivery? Did it lead to funding?

17. In the future, how should the JAAP be integrated into the DIW?

18. Are there examples of JAAP items being funded/supported by the district and provincial budgets? If so, what led to these arrangements?

19. What is the role of the government (district/provincial) in follow-up of the JAAP?

Impact 20. Do you notice any changes in service provision after the SAF?

a. Do you see any successes? b. Do you see any challenges? Relationship with

NGO 21. On a scale of 1 to 5, how well does the NGO partner understand social accountability with 1 being a low level of knowledge and 5 being high?

22. How can NGO partner better support the commune administration/service provider/district government?

Support needed 23. Is there additional support that the district/commune levels need in order to improve the implementation of the SAF?

Other 24. Are there other issues you would like to flag in terms of sustainability or implementation?

NGO Experience 1. Have you implemented SA approaches

prior to the SAF? 2. On a scale of 1 to 5, how prepared do

you feel to implement the SAF with 1 being not prepared and 5 being very well prepared?

CAF recruitment 3. How do you recruit your CAFs? 4. Why do CAFs typically join the SAF? 5. What challenges do you face in

recruiting them? 6. What role does the commune

play/should play in recruitment? 7. In your experience, what CAFs are the

most successful? 8. What do you think about involving the

youth in this process? 9. Can former CAFs help with recruitment

38

efforts? 10. Do what extent do CAFs help each

other during implementation CAF performance 11. Is the CAF able to lead I4C/CSC? a. What is the role of the NGO? b. What is the role of the CAF? 12. Can the CAF facilitate the discussion

and get people to participate? 13. What do the CAFs think of the process

and their role? 14. Has participation in the project helped

improve the life chances of the CAFs? Commune 15. What is your working relationship with

the commune administration? Other departments?

16. How do they support the SAF? 17. How has the JAAP shaped the

commune’s decision-making, e.g. the CIP? Has it influenced the district and provincial planning process? If so, how?

18. Did you have relationships with these departments before the project? If so, did they help with your implementation of project?

19. Do the right people participate from the government from the in the service user assessment, JAAP integration, and JAAP follow-up?

What is the role of district/provincial governments in the JAAP follow-up?

Impact 20. Has any aspect of the JAAP been implemented by the commune? The NGO? Other donors? If so, what led to this change?

21. How has the SAF changed the relationship/interaction between commune authority (and service providers) and the people?

22. Are there any tangible improvements in service delivery? If so, what has changed? What has led to this change?

Participation 23. On average, do people attend I4Cs,

CSC? 24. How do you identify/invite participants?

And make sure that the I4C discussions are inclusive and the CSC is representative?

25. What incentives do they have to participate?

26. Have you undertaken any innovations to promote participation?

27. What role does the village/commune chief play in promoting participation?

39

28. If there are minority groups in the area, do they attend?

29. What are common reasons why people don’t participate? Is there an important stakeholder that does not participate?

30. How well do people understand social accountability? What are successful ways of explaining SA?

31. What do people think of the information that they receive? Is there any evidence that they use this information?

32. What is the quality of participation during the I4C/CSC processes?

33. What are the biggest challenges to participation?

Expansion 34. Do people want to implement the SAF in another sector?

Other 35. Is there anything else you would like to add?

36. Is there additional support that you need? From government? From implementing partners (for local partners?

40

Appendix 4: List of Literature Reviewed

ADB (2016). Report and Recommendation of the President to the Board of Directors, Proposed Policy-Based Loan and Project Loan for Subprogram 2Kingdom of Cambodia: Decentralized Public Service and Financial Management Sector Development Program. Asian Development Bank.

ADB (2012). Kingdom of Cambodia: Decentralized Public Service and Financial Management Sector Development Program. Asian Development Bank. Annear, P. L. and Ahmed, S. 2012. “Institutional and Operational Barriers to Strengthening Universal Coverage in Cambodia: Options for Policy Development'. Working Paper Series. Melbourne: Nossal Institute for Public Health. Grundy, J., et al. (2009). “Health System Strengthening in Cambodia: A Case Study of Health Policy Response to Social Transition.” Health Policy, 92, 107-115. Kelsall, Tim and Seiha Heng. 2014. “The Political Economy of Inclusive Healthcare in Cambodia.” ESID Working Paper No. 43. Manchester: ESID. Kelsall, Tim, Sothy Khieng, Chuong Chantha and Tieng Tek Muy (2016). “The Political Economy of Primary Education Reform in Cambodia.” ESID Working Paper No. 58 (Manchester: ESID). Kitamura Yuto, D. Brent Edwards Jr., Chhinh Sitha, and James H. Williams, (eds.) (2015). “The Political Economy of Schooling in Cambodia.” New York; Palgrave MacMillan. Marija Babovic and Danilo Vukovic (2014). Social Accountability in Cambodia: JSRP and The Asia Foundation. MEF 2017. “National Workshop on 2017 Activity and Finance of NCDD.” Phnom Penh: 24-25 November 2016. National Institute of Public Health. 2012. “Literature Review of the Cambodian Healthcare System: Strengths, Weaknesses, and Future Research Opportunities.” Phnom Penh: NIPH. NCDD-S (2014). Gender Audits for the IP3 - Final Report. Phnom Penh, Cambodia. NCDD-S (2016). The Implementation Plan for Social Accountability Framework for Sub National Democratic Development (2016 – 2018). Phnom Penh, Cambodia. Plummer, Janelle and Gavin Tritt (eds.) (2011). Voice, Choice and Decision: A Study of Local Governance Processes in Cambodia. Phnom Penh: The World Bank and The Asia Foundation. RGC (2013). Strategic Plan on Social Accountability for Sub-National Democratic Development, Phnom Penh: Royal Government of Cambodia, National Committee for Sub-National Democratic Development. TAF and WB (2013). “Voice, Choice and Decision: A Study of Local Basic Service Delivery in Cambodia.” Phnom Penh: The Asia Foundation and the World Bank. Tariq H. Niazi (2011). “Deconcentration and Decentralization Reforms in CambodiaRecommendations for an Institutional Framework.” Asian Development Bank.

41

World Bank (2015). Cambodia 2014 Demographic and Health Survey, Key Findings. Phnom Penh: World Bank. WB, TAF, SC and WVI (2014), Operational Guidelines for NGO Partners Implementation of the Social Accountability Framework (I-SAF) 2015-2018. Phnom Penh, Cambodia.

World Bank (2017). Latest Update on Overview of Cambodia. http://www.worldbank.org/en/country/cambodia/overview

42

Appendix 5: I-SAF Process Adopted by 4 CSOs I. RACHA’s I-SAF Implementation Process

1. Inception meeting • Provincial level • District level (RACHA does not do it in 2017. RACHA did it in 2016) (No commune level)

2. Recruit CAF 3. ToT (5 days for M1, M2, M3, M4) to RACHA staff and government officials at

provincial level and district level official by NCDD-S’s I-SAF national trainer and RACHA’s I-SAF trainer.

4. I-4C training (3 days) for HC, PS, CC and CAF 5. I-4C sessions in the village 6. Training on scorecard (3days) for CAF 7. Scorecard in the village 8. Self-assessment 9. Interface meeting 10. Joined Accountability Action Plan (JAAP) development 11. JAAP Committee organization (JAAPC) 12. JAAP integration into CIP 13. JAAP follow up meeting 14. Reflection at district level (few places do this)

II. WORLD VISION INTERNATIONAL’s I-SAF Implementation Process

1. Provincial level workshop on I-SAF - This workshop was included in 2016. 2. District level workshop on I-SAF – In 2017 World Vision starts I-SAF process with

this workshop. It does not conduct the provincial workshop. 3. Commune meeting on I-SAF 4. CAF recruitment 5. Village cluster 6. CBO mapping 7. CBO linkage (World Vision does this in 2017) 8. I-4C training for CAF 9. I-4C dissemination in the village

• Kios • Mobile dissemination • Loud speaker

10. Scorecard training to CAF 11. CAF self-preparation 12. Commune inception meeting 13. Self-assessment 14. Community scorecard 15. Interface meeting

• JAAP development 15. JAAP Committee formation 16. JAAP integration into CIP 17. JAAP follow-up meeting 18. Monthly district level reflection 19. Semester provincial reflection

Note: The supply side conducts ToT for government officials at provincial level and district

43

level and demand side is also invited to join the training. III. CARE’S I-SAF Implementation Process

1. ToT to horizontal NGO (horizontal partners) 2. CAF recruitment (led by IP and LNGO) 3. ToT to implementing LNGO partners (IP) – 5 days for M1&M2, 5 days for M3 &

M4 4. Inception meeting 5. Training for CAF (M1 and M2, 8 days, 4 days each Module) 6. I4C awareness in the village 7. Training for CAF (M3 and M4, 8 days) 8. Inception meeting at commune for citizen scorecard 9. Self-assessment 10. Citizen scorecard in the village (conduct) 11. Conduct interface (1st and 2nd session)

• JAAP development 12. Formation of JAAP Committee 13. Integrate JAAP in CIP 14. JAAP Committee meeting (JAAP follow-up) 15. Quarterly meeting of ACT with IPs 16. Monthly meeting of IP and CAF 17. Learning and monitoring (annual provincial workshop on learning)

Note: The supply side conducts ToT for government officials at provincial level and district

level and demand side is also invited to join the training. CARE does not have budget for JAAP follow-up meeting. This meeting is said to be organized by supply side and IP will attend it upon request from supply side.

IV. SAVE the CHILDREN’s I-SAF Implementation Process

1. ToT to IP (5 days for M2&M2, and 5 days for M3&M4) 2. CAF recruitment 3. I-4C training to CAF (4days for M1 and 4 days for M2) 4. Awareness raising of I-SAF 5. Radio talk-show 6. I-4C dissemination in the village

• Kios • Loud speaker

7. Inception meeting at commune level 8. Training to CAF (4 days for M3) on scorecard 9. Citizen scorecard 10. Service provider self-assessment 11. Training to CAF (4 days for M4) 12. Interface meeting

• JAAP development 13. JAAP Committee formation 14. Integrate JAAP into CIP 15. JAAP follow-up meeting 16. Annual provincial and district feedback and learning forum

Note: Save the Children does not have inception meetings at provincial and district level, but the supply side conducts ToT at the provincial level in which the IP participates.

44

ACTOR OF I-SAF IMPLEMENTATION ON DEMAND SIDE

CARE Save the Children

Phnom Penh

World Vision Phnom Penh

Local Partner (LP)

World Vision in province

Implementing Partner

(IP)

CAF/CC

CAF/CC CAF/CC

Villagers

Villagers Villagers

RACHA Phnom Penh

RACHA in province

CAF/CC

Villagers

Save the Children in province

Note: World Vision also funds AFD – local NGO in Kampong Thom Province to do I-SAF in the districts outside its coverage area and in Preah Vihear Province.

National-level

Provincial Level

45

Appendix 6: Second Learning Forum Agenda and Summary of Recommendations

2ND LEARNING FORUM IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY FRAMEWORK (I-SAF)

11 August 2017, 8:00 am - 4:30 pm

Sunflower Ballroom, Himawari Hotel, Phnom Penh Purpose:

• To discuss initial findings from the second round of field work of the learning component

• To allow the I-SAF partners to share lessons learned and updates on implementation and innovations, which will be incorporated into the second progress report

• To strategize on how to address issues of sustainability from the demand and supply sides

Agenda

Time Activity Remark

8:00 - 8:30am

Registration

8:30-9:00am Welcome

-- Welcome Remarks by Ms. Meloney C. Lindberg, Country Representative, Asia Foundation

-- Remarks by Mr. Samiuela T. Tukuafu, Country Director, Cambodia Resident Mission, Asian Development Bank -- Opening Remarks by Mr. Soeung Saroeun Executive Director of Cooperation Committee for Cambodia (CCC) and Deputy Chairman of I-SAF Partnership Steering Committee (PSC)

9:00-9:10am I-SAF Overview by Mr. Chea Sophearin

9:10-10:05am

Community Facilitation and Feedback

– Brief presentation of initial findings from the learning team (5 minutes)

– Facilitated Plenary Discussion considering the following (50 minutes):

1) What have been some successful strategies in recruiting & retaining Community Accountability Facilitators (CAFs), including financing options? 2) What do CAFs need to successfully fulfill their roles? 3) How well is citizen feedback incorporated into ministry monitoring and performance assessment?

The discussion should consider both: • Short-term

recommendations to improve I-SAF

• Longer-term recommendations for how I-SAF should evolve and look over time

Break – 10:05-10:15am

46

10:15-11:15 am

More Informed Citizens

– Brief presentation of initial findings from the learning team (5 minutes)

– Facilitated Plenary Discussion considering the following (50 minutes): 1) What are successes/challenges in collecting Information for Citizen (I4C) data at the commune/district levels? 2) What strategies have worked to deepen understanding of service standards? 3) How to ensure effective use of I4C data by citizens, communes, and districts?

The discussion should consider both: • Short-term

recommendations to improve I-SAF

• Longer-term recommendations for how I-SAF should evolve and look over time

11:15am-12:00pm

More Effective Action

– Brief presentation of initial findings from the learning team (5 minutes)

– Facilitated Plenary Discussion considering the following (40 minutes): 1) What approaches have worked well to ensure that priorities from both users and providers are represented in the Joint Accountability Action Plans (JAAP)? 2) What do JAAP committees need to successfully fulfill their roles? 3) What are successes/challenges in implementing JAAPs, including accessing Commune/Sangkat (C/S) & District/Municipality (D/M) funds and integrating the JAAP with the Commune Investment Plan (CIP)?

The discussion should consider both: • Short-term

recommendations to improve I-SAF

• Longer-term recommendations for how I-SAF should evolve and look over time

Lunch – 12:00-1:30 pm

1:30-2:30pm Small group work

Purpose: To reflect on key challenges to sustainability (identified by the group) and to brainstorm solutions/recommendations (15 minutes introduction, 45 minutes group discussion). (7 groups of approximately 7-8 people).

Potential themes (final themes to be decided by the group (suggest each group pick 1 theme):

• How to promote “buy in” and effective participation on the part of local officials/service providers?

• How to promote and support effective coordination/collaboration between supply-side and demand-side actors (at all levels)?

• How to deepen commune-level understanding of the SAF and citizen engagement?

• How to develop understanding of citizenship and associated rights and responsibilities?

• How to ensure equitable representation/

47

participation of less vocal, less empowered groups?

• How to support and sustain the training and activities of CAFs in the long-term?

• How to promote implementation of JAAP priorities in all three sectors?

• How to sustain the SAF beyond 2018?

Break – 2:30-2:45 pm

2:45-4:00pm Recommendations to address key challenges Summary of top 4-5 recommendations from each group (35 minutes), followed by 40 minutes discussion of overall recommendations

4:00-4:15pm Wrap up

4:15-4:30pm Closing remarks, H.E Ngy Chanphal, Secretary of State, MoI and Chairman of I-SAF Partnership Steering Committee (PSC)

48

Outcome of Group Work on Sustainability

GROUP 1: How to sustain I-SAF beyond 2018? RESPONSE:

• Continue strengthening capacity, technicality and budget stage by stage to sub-national level;

• Integrate I-SAF in priority projects of sub-national level; • Create national level committee to respond to JAAP; and

• Increase commune/Sangkat fund to implement I-SAF. GROUP 2: How to deepen commune-level understanding of I-SAF and citizen

engagement? RESPONSE:

• Put I-SAF in the development plan and investment program of the commune and district;

• Build capacity of commune council, clerk, and CAF on I-SAF; • Ensure the supports of all levels of local authorities and cooperation from NGOs, and

involving units in carrying out dissemination of I-SAF to the citizens; • Concerned local authorities must be active in follow-up, monitoring and assessing I-

SAF in accordance with guideline and procedure; • Put I-SAF priorities in the agendas of monthly meeting of council and other programs

like public forum, meetings R etc.; • Display billboard of I4C at populated areas; • Continue engagement of village chief, deputy village chief and CAF in regular

dissemination in the village; and • Create programs to disseminate I-SAF to school of all levels frequently or integrate I-

SAF agendas in education program. GROUP 3: How to develop understanding of citizenship and associated rights and

responsibilities? RESPONSE:

• Joint training for CAF and service provider on citizen rights and responsibilities and citizenship;

• Produce materials on citizen rights and responsibilities such as video, poster, and pictures;

• Put CAF and service provider together in conducting dissemination in the field; and

• Conduct joint dissemination through: village meeting, mobile loudspeaker, short show in the public, and display information using Kios.

GROUP 4: How to promote “Buy in” and effective participation on the part of local

officials/service providers? RESPONSE:

• Conduct dissemination of I-SAF broadly to community and service providers; • Provide encouragement and incentive in materials, budget, and opportunity for

training and implementation; • Have high commitment in implementing involving in I-SAF activities; • Show the importance and advantages of I-SAF; • Have broad supports from national level;

49

• Have responsibility from relevant institutions; • Create mechanisms for monitoring and follow-up with all relevant parties (the three

sectors and national level); • Give reward and incentive to commune in which primary school or health center do

well with I-SAF; and • Conduct experience exchange through study visit, meeting, forum etc.

GROUP 5: How to support and sustain the training and activities of CAFs in the long-

term? RESPONSE:

• Make CAF becomes permanent committee of the commune; • Make budget plan to support I-SAF implementation: Commune Invest Plan (CIP),

partner NGO, and CBO; • Build capacity authorities of provincial level, and district level on I-SAF, public

service, planning, budgeting R etc.; • Ensure encouraging and valuing of CAF from government officials in involving in

development activities in the commune; and • Have district level officials involved in facilitating CAF; follow-up and assessing CAF

performance.

GROUP 6: How to promote implementation of JAAP priorities in all three sectors? RESPONSE:

• Strengthen JAAP Committee (training on planning, follow-up, and dissemination); • Integrate JAAP priorities in bi-monthly meeting of commune council; • Submit JAAP implementation progress report to line ministry, and provincial, district

administration; • Put JAAP into annual plan of line ministry and follow up on its progress; and • Seek supports from national level in implementing principles, legal document and

budget). GROUP 7: ENGLISH SPEAKING GROUP Feedbacks

• Should prioritize decentralization and link performances based evaluation of staff (health and education) to be linked to how well they perform. Give funding based on performance;

• CAF sustainability – the need to incentivize CAF; should CAF be reporting to commune? Help CAF to see results to make them feel encouraged. Should CAF be a part of local government?

• People do not feel that they can go to commune meetings. How can we get people, including CAF to the commune meeting?