Pilot community-based evaluation for development programs (ID0114)

What is the public problem that the commitment will address? Community involvement in the development process has been opened in the planning process starting from the village to the national level, for example, through the Development Planning Conference (Musyawarah Perencanaan Pembangunan - Musrenbang). Unfortunately, community involvement often only stops at that stage. The public has not been much involved in the process of program implementation, monitoring, and evaluation. Communities, as beneficiaries of government programs, should be directly involved in assessing whether the program is useful, needs to be continued, reviewed, or should be stopped and replaced with a more appropriate program. This public assessment is to ensure that development program activities have been carried out. It is also a mechanism to assess the impact of these programs and feedback to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the use of public budgets. This mechanism allows direct community involvement in assessing the impact and benefits of a development program. It is possible because Community-Based Evaluation for Development Programs is implemented using community involvement in an open process between the community and the government. There is a structured discussion with policy managers, communities, and experts to produce assessments and recommendations related to ongoing programs. 19 What is the commitment To introduce and encourage the community-based evaluation for development programs in several pilot project areas. How will the commitment contribute to solving the public problem? Implementing the Community-Based Evaluation focuses on evaluating the benefit and impact of the program for the community. However, it does not include the technocratic evaluations such as budget absorption and administrative order. The Community-Based Evaluation aims to be able to evaluate development programs according to community needs. Therefore, communities can use available resources more efficiently for programs that provide benefits to the community. Why is this commitment relevant to OGP values? This commitment is aligned with the Open Government value, namely accountability and participation within the government activity. Public participation and involvement in evaluating government programs will increase government accountability in carrying out development programs. Besides, this commitment supports open government reforms because it allows the public to have a say in determining whether a program is appropriate to continue, continue with improvements, or should discontinue. Why is this commitment relevant to Indonesian Medium-Term National Development Plan (RPJMN) and SDGs? This program will support the 16th SDGs Goal, namely Peace, Justice and Resilient Institutions, especially indicator 16.7, which ensures responsive, inclusive, participatory, and representative decision making at all levels and 16.6, namely developing effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels. With the 2020-2024 RPJMN, this commitment encourages the strengthening of the Coordination of Policy Implementation and Evaluation of Public Services to monitor the implementation of the Community Satisfaction Survey in the public service delivery unit. Additional Information Canada and Japan have implemented the Community-Based Evaluation method with positive results. By implementing the program in the 90s, Canada’s Government succeeded in achieving a balance and even 20 a surplus in the state income and expenditure balance and an increase in Gross National Product (GNP). In Japan, the Community-Based Evaluation method has contributed to reforming the civil service bureaucracy and saving government spending. The Community-Based Evaluation aims to promote good governance and accountability through active community involvement, increase budget efficiency and performance of the State Civil Service in implementing government programs and increase public awareness regarding the transparency and accountability of development programs. This program will collaborate with the Japan Initiative for funding support from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Japanese Government in two stages: socialization and initial implementation. Milestone Activity with a verifiable deliverable Start Date End Date 1. Strengthening the capacity of Village Government, Village Consultative Body, village assistants, and the community to understand the concept of Community-Based Evaluation which focuses on participation, transparency, social accountability, and innovation in the two pilot project villages. January 2021 December 2022 2. Implementing the pilot project of the Community-Based Evaluation for Development Programs in two villages. January 2021 December 2022 21

Action Plan Review

Commitment 4: Community-Based Evaluation for Development Programs

Results Report

Commitment 4. Community-Based Evaluation for Development Programs

● Verifiable: Yes

● Does it have an open government lens? Yes

● This commitment has been clustered as: Community Development Programs (Commitments 4 and 12)

● Potential for results: Modest

● Completion: Complete

● Did it open government? Marginal

This commitment fully implemented its planned community-based evaluations of two village development programs, with pilots in Guwosari and Sriharjo Villages in the Bantul Regency of Yogyakarta. The project was developed based on lessons learned from a comparable Japanese CSO’s local government program review. ^[42] Prior to the evaluations, local implementers participated in capacity building activities from November 2021 to January 2022. This process partially took place online due to COVID-19. ^[43] Tifa Foundation and local partner Alterasi Indonesia ran the evaluation projects from February 2022 to May 2022, involving randomly selected citizens in reviewing two development programs on providing supplemental food for toddlers and the rehabilitation of uninhabitable homes. ^[44] Implementation benefited from collaboration with the Japan Initiative and the Ministry of Village, Development of Disadvantaged Regions, and Transmigration, but there were reportedly communication difficulties with the Ministry of Home Affairs. ^[45] Prior to this commitment, development programs in the targeted villages were perceived as the purview of the elite. This project introduced an oversight role for ordinary residents and tested a new approach to local civic engagement in Indonesia. However, limited geographic scope restricted its overall impact.