Digital Information for Monitoring and Evaluation (DIME) Project (PH0070)

Brief Description of the Commitment

The Digital Information for Monitoring and Evaluation (DIME) Project leverages the use of modern technologies such as satellites, drones and geotagging in monitoring and evaluating the status, progress, and activities of big-ticket government projects. It is aimed at augmenting the monitoring capabilities of national government agencies as well as enhance the transparency and accountability in government programs and projects.

Problem Definition

1. What problem does the commitment aim to address? ● This commitment aims to address the delayed implementation of selected government infrastructure programs and projects. Government infrastructure projects and initiatives have been implemented and finished with significant delays, which has resulted in a delay in delivering products and services to the general people. These delays were brought on by recurring issues that act as roadblocks and prevent completion within the allocated period. The most frequent of these challenges include, but are not limited to, bid failure, unusable sites, land ownership and ROW acquisition concerns, delayed engineering design preparation, unfavorable peace and order situations, and subpar contractor performance. If there had been adequate planning, consultation, and regular monitoring of the programs/projects, these challenges would have been avoided or mitigated. Regular tracking of progress in terms of scheduling, resource allocation and usage, and accomplishment of intended aims and outputs is possible through routine monitoring time frame and potential engagement with civil society and citizens. ● The DIME distinguishes itself from other available government systems by being the sole platform that enables the simultaneous monitoring of both financial metrics and actual project images and status. This unique capability sets Project DIME apart, offering a comprehensive approach that integrates financial data with visual documentation and status. This ensures a more holistic and precise evaluation of project dynamics, setting a new standard in monitoring and evaluation systems.

2. What are the causes of the problem? ● Siloed M&E system leading to inadequate performance information at the program/project level Insufficient monitoring and evaluation remains to be a challenge in the Government of the Philippines (GOP) despite the issuance of supporting legal and regulatory framework thereon such as the National Budget Circular (NBC) No. 565, s. 2016 (Adoption of a Results-Based Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting / RBMER Policy). There are also different stand alone M&E systems on each government agency which makes it hard for the Filipino citizens to monitor different projects from different applications, thus leading to low citizen participation. The RBMER policy framework aims to “strengthen the use of evidence-based results for decision-making and improve government performance on the delivery of goods and services for greater transparency and accountability in the allocation and use of government resources.”8 In fact, this was the impetus for the launching of the Project DIME in March 2018. However, the project was terminated in December 2021 in view of the expiration of the Memorandum of Agreement with the Department of Science and Technology (DOST) on the use of digital imaging technologies. Like its precursor, the proposed commitment, the revival of the Project DIME, through its interactive transparency website and application, will still serve as a platform to involve the general public in monitoring activities by soliciting feedback regarding the covered programs and projects in their local communities, strengthening the government's monitoring function and raising the standard of information on program and project performance. One of the problems facing oversight bodies is the lack of information regarding the real physical and financial status of programs and projects. There is data on the agency's financial situation, but there is little information, particularly on the physical achievements at the program or project level. The availability of precise and timely monitoring data on the program/financial project's and physical status is essential for project managers to make informed decisions regarding, among other things, implementation adjustments/strategies changes, catch-up plans if the project falls behind schedule, and program/project discontinuation or expansion. ● Lack of access to data, public accountability, and capacity of citizens and CSOs to participate in monitoring and evaluation This pertains to the need to improve the Filipino citizens’ access to any underlying data, processes and projects of the Philippine Government because there is no single source of truth due to fragmented systems which leads to corruption, trust issues and weak decision making. This translates to the lack of citizen participation in monitoring and evaluation and the insufficient involvement of the general public in the process of assessing and gauging the effectiveness, efficiency, and impact of various projects, policies, or programs implemented by governmental or non-governmental entities. Stakeholder accountability should ideally be created at the beginning of the program with full understanding and support. This agreement must be in writing and be monitored and assessed for compliance and effectiveness throughout the duration of the program in order to be effective. Stakeholder engagement is weak especially in the consultation process during the planning stage for programs, projects, and activities. The absence of ownership can lead to a number of serious issues, among them is slow progress on various initiatives. Nobody will be driving the project if they don't feel like they own it, and it will eventually become stale. References: "The Philippines' National Evaluation Policy Framework, Evaluation Practice, Challenges and Prospects”, 3 Feb., 2022 / https://www.mofa.go.jp/policy/oda/evaluation/seminars_and_workshops/pdf/Session4_2-3.pdf

Commitment description

1. What has been done so far to solve the problem? ● Project DIME was committed to in the 2019 National Action Plan for the Philippine Open Government Partnership (PH-OGP), which was endorsed by both government and non-government partners. A website was developed in the same year and presented at the Open Government Partnership Global Summit, which took place in Ottawa, Canada, in May 2019. The website was only functional at this project phase, allowing users to access a small amount of data and participate in civic life by leaving comments on the projects that were displayed. The DIME Transparency Website was intended to be both a participatory platform and a central repository, or one-stop-shop, for all things related to Project DIME, including the results of each program's monitoring efforts and a display of the set of satellite images acquired on a project-by-project basis. The DIME Project was terminated due to the expiration of the Memorandum of Agreement with the Department of Science and Technology – Advanced Science and Technology Institute (DOST-ASTI) and with the Memorandum for the Officer in Charge that’s state the termination of Project DIME effective December 31, 2021 due to change of plan because of the Covid-19 pandemic. Different government agencies also try to create their own M&E system that monitors performance but the lack of integration of this fragmented system makes it hard for the Filipino citizens to monitor and proactively participate in the government initiatives.

2. What solution are you proposing? ● To improve the monitoring and evaluation of government infrastructure projects, the DBM and its CSO cocommitment holders aim to enhance the current DIME Portal by utilizing the power of data science to do smarter surveys using machine learning applications, satellite images, and artificial intelligence to replicate traditional surveys. Projects that will be covered include airports, railways, school buildings, and bridges among others. ● Digital transformation offers the opportunity to gather the data we need to implement resilient infrastructure assets. That data can be drawn from a range of sources, including a business’ buildings, processes and people, or from specially installed Internet of Things (IoT) sensors. This will help in improving access to data among stakeholders. ● The GOP will also enhance Project DIME by making it a mobile application to make it more accessible to the public and integrate it to different government systems (eg. UACS and URS) to make it a one stop shop for monitoring, evaluation and possible validation. ● To improve citizen participation and public accountability, we also propose capacity building programs for stakeholders and the expansion of collaborative engagements with different sectors, such as other government oversight agencies, grassroots organizations, academic institutions, and business groups. The said sectors can conduct research, develop new ideas, and evaluate the effects of the projects.

3. What results do we want to achieve by implementing this commitment? ● To provide an interactive transparency website as a monitoring, validation, and reporting system for government infrastructure projects and programs that is effective, efficient, and participative. ● Timely and pertinent generation and utilization of information on the performance of government programs and projects, as well as the issues that cause implementation delays, would be made easier through routine monitoring and reporting. Early identification of possible issues will enable the concerned implementing agencies (IAs) to take the appropriate steps/actions for their prompt and effective resolution. ● Improved public debate and government decision making ● Increased citizen engagement in the design and implementation of government monitoring and evaluation systems ● Greater accountability and transparency ● Based on the results of the MOnitoring how do we address the delayed and pre

Additional Information

● The DIME will support the strategic direction of open government partnership, as provided in Executive Order (EO) No. 31 (Institutionalizing the Philippine Open Government Partnership And For Other Purposes) dated June 20, 2023. ● The efficiencies and transparency created by the DIME iterates the importance of open data and real-time monitoring and evaluation to support the government’s pursuit of ambitious and game-changing digital strategies for the integrated financial management information systems (IFMIS) and the government’s digital transformation roadmap. ● The DIME is also driven by the need to align with the current administration’s strategic direction to instill bureaucratic efficiency as provided in its 8-point socioeconomic agenda which aims to capitalize on digitalization solutions to enable efficient and effective public service. ● Moving forward, the DIME Portal can incorporate projects beyond large ticket infrastructure projects including projects by local government units

Commitment Analysis

1. How will the commitment promote transparency? ● Transparency - public disclosure on agency performance at the program/project level shall be made available by providing access to information on physical accomplishments matched with financial utilization being reported by the different government agencies to DBM and validated using science-based methods and tools.

2. How will the commitment help foster accountability? ● Accountability - The commitment engages DBM and concerned government agencies to resolve identified service delivery gaps, based on the physical accomplishment and financial data they had reported. It has a welldefined target objective that pushes for good performance in timely service delivery.

3. How will the commitment improve citizen participation in defining, implementing, and monitoring solutions? ● Participation - the project promotes partnerships and collaboration among DBM and other oversight agencies, implementing agencies, civil society and other stakeholders, including the general public. They shall be engaged in a feedback loop intended to improve the implementation strategies of selected priority programs and projects.

See action plan for commitment milestones and expected outputs.

Action Plan Review

Commitment 2A: Expanding and enhancing Justice Zones

Justice Sector Coordinating Council (JSCC), Supreme Court, Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG), Department of Justice (DOJ), Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP), and Public Attorney’s Office (PAO).

For a complete description, see Commitments 2A in the Philippines’ 2023–2027 action plan.

Context and objectives

The World Justice Project assigned the Philippines an overall score of 0.46 in its 2023 Rule of Law Index. [18] This score is well below the global average of 0.55 and marks the lowest the country has received in the past eight years. The delivery of criminal justice (score: 0.31), effectiveness of the correctional system in reducing criminal behavior (score: 0.19), impartiality of the criminal system (score: 0.25), and effective guarantees to the right to life and security (score: 0.18) are among the key factors that contribute to the assessment results. [19] Aware of the fragmented approach to delivering justice among relevant law enforcement actors, the government began implementing the Governance in Justice (GOJUST) program with financial support from the European Union, technical support from the British Council, and project management support from the United Nations Office for Project Services. [20]

Continuing this program, this commitment seeks to enhance the administration of justice by establishing an intra-agency coordination mechanism between the judiciary (Supreme Court), prosecution (Department of Justice), and local governments (Department of the Interior and Local Government) while expanding and enhancing Justice Zones across the country. [21] Justice Zones are areas where local justice sector actors (police, prosecutors, public attorneys, judges, and prison staff) collaborate and coordinate to identify common problems. The commitment was initiated through official communications with the Office of the Chief Justice, as the Supreme Court found PH-OGP’s objectives consistent with the Strategic Plans for Judicial Innovations (SPIJ) launched in 2022. The co-creation process helped broaden the Supreme Court’s civil society network and expose them to new perspectives, such as on the economic implications of the dispensation of justice. [22]

Potential for results: Modest

This commitment addresses fragmentation across police, prosecutors, courts, and prisons in the Philippines, offering a step toward improving access to justice. However, it carries modest potential for open government results because many milestones continue existing practices and may entail redundancies with the GOJUST program. [23] 

To ensure long-term sustainability of the Justice Zones, stakeholders plan for efforts to institutionalize the Justice Sector Coordination Council (JSCC) by submitting a bill to the congress or, in its absence, developing local government ordinances (Milestone 3)—although the commitment does not fully clarify the intended scope of the bill or ordinances. At present, the basis for JSCC is a memorandum of agreement between the Supreme Court, the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG), and the Department of Justice (DOJ). To date, the initiative has relied on funding from international development partners as well as a convergence fund provided to the Supreme Court. [24] The absence of a legal framework would continue to affect the JSCC negatively, with lack of a permanent secretariat, uneven responsibilities across the three agencies, and different local implementation levels for Justice Zones. In the interim, strong implementation of Justice Zones by local government units is mostly incentivized by the political motives of increasing public trust and visibility of local administration projects.

To enhance its transparency, the JSCC intends to establish a Justice Zone Transparency Board in all 12 existing Justice Zones (Milestone 5). However, the pilot project in Naga City indicates a plan to simply provide statistics (e.g., jail population, caseload, investigation updates, important announcements) for each court within the zone on a digital platform. [25] While this represents a new practice, it will not enable non-government actors to “assess the performance of each court and its staff” as set out in the action plan. [26]

The JSCC also plans to establish 16 new Justice Zones (Milestone 1) and establish a monitoring and evaluation metric for the 12 existing zones (Milestone 2). On 25 March 2024, the JSCC formally launched Dagupan as the 13th Justice Zone, meeting its target of one new zone per quarter. [27] No new Justice Zone was launched by the end of the second quarter in June 2024. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court noted that while there are plans to publish the evaluation results of the existing zones, the judiciary will carry out the process internally. [28] Relatedly, the JSCC’s plans to implement projects aimed at reducing prison overcrowding and replicating Balanga City’s psychosocial rehabilitation program (Bataan Cares) for individuals suffering from drug dependence in other Justice Zones (both under Milestone 4) are important efforts but are not relevant to OGP values.

Based on initial reports, institutionalizing Justice Zones could improve access to justice. Anecdotally, when a Cebu detention facility faced a water crisis, rather than leaving it to the Bureau of Jail and Management Penology alone, an executive judge assembled a sectoral team and convinced the water board to deliver the necessary water. [29] The findings of a 2021 survey and 2022 qualitative study commissioned by the GOJUST Programme showed early indications that people in Justice Zones had more positive dispute resolution experiences, with more markedly improved experiences of justice for marginalized communities, as compared to the rest of the Philippines—although further research is needed. [30] Institutionalizing Justice Zones through a congressional bill or local ordinances could offer sustainability to promising access to justice practices, beyond the current funding period.

Opportunities, challenges, and recommendations during implementation

This commitment’s results will rely on the passage of a robust congressional bill or local ordinances to institutionalize Justice Zones beyond their current funding period. Considering that the commitment builds on an existing initiative, it is important for the commitment holders to distinguish how the OGP process adds value to improving the administration of and access to justice. In particular, the OGP platform can provide the opportunity to incorporate public participation in determining the next steps for Justice Zones in the Philippines. For the implementation period, the IRM recommends: