OCTOBER 24, 2007 This publication was produced for review by the United States Agency for International Development. It was prepared by ARD, Inc. PERU E XTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM FINAL REPORT AUTHORS: Patricia Zárate Ernesto Herrera Carolina Trivelli Raúl Hernández Asensio Peru Pro-Decentralization (PRODES) Program USAID Contract No. 527-C-00-03000-4900 Implemented by: ARD, Inc. 159 Bank Street, Suite 300 Burlington, VT 05401 USA Tel: (802) 658-3890 Fax: (802) 658-4247 Email: ard@ardinc.com ARD Contact: Rhys Payne, Senior Technical Advisor/Manager rpayne@ardinc.com EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM FINAL REPORT OCTOBER 2007 DISCLAIMER The authors’ views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States Government. EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM i CONTENTS Acronyms ...................................................................................................................iii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..............................................................................................v I. PRODES’ MAIN ACHIEVEMENTS ................................................................. V II. PRODES’ WORK WITH NATIONAL GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS.................... V III. IMPACT OF TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROVIDED TO REGIONAL GOVERNMENTS ......................................................................................... VI IV. IMPACT OF TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROVIDED TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS ....................................................................................... VII V. IMPACT OF SUPPORT TO CIVIL SOCIETY LEADERS.......................................VIII VI. CONTRIBUTIONS TO USAID/PERU´S PROGRAMS AND STRATEGIC PARTNERS ...............................................................................................VIII VII. LESSONS LEARNED..................................................................................... X VIII. RECOMMENDATIONS................................................................................. XII INTRODUCTION ..........................................................................................................1 1.0 CHARACTERISTICS OF THE EVALUATION ......................................................3 1.1 PURPOSE OF THE EVALUATION .....................................................................3 1.2 PROGRAM DESCRIPTION..............................................................................3 1.3 CONTEXT....................................................................................................4 2.0 PRODES IMPACT ON THE DECENTRALIZATION PROCESS ..........................6 3.0 IMPACT OF WORK CARRIED OUT WITH NATIONAL GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS.............................................................................9 3.1 TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROVIDED TO NATIONAL GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS............................................................................................10 3.2 CREATING ENCOUNTER AND DEBATE SPACES..............................................14 4.0 IMPACT OF SPECIALIZED DATA PRODUCED BY PRODES..........................16 5.0 IMPACT OF WORK PERFORMED WITH USAID/PERU’S PROGRAMS AND STRATEGIC PARTNERS.....................................................................................19 ii EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM 6.0 IMPACT OF TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROVIDED TO REGIONAL GOVERNMENTS ..................................................................................................21 6.1 TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE RELATED TO THE MANAGEMENT OF THE REGIONAL PARTICIPATORY BUDGETING PROCESS ......................................................22 6.2 TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROVIDED TO THE EXECUTIVE APPARATUS OF REGIONAL GOVERNMENTS..........................................................................23 6.3 STRENGTHENING THE LEGISLATIVE CAPACITY OF REGIONAL GOVERNMENTS .26 6.4 COMPETITIVENESS PLANS .........................................................................28 7.0 IMPACT OF TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROVIDED TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS ..................................................................................................30 7.1 STRENGTHENING OF MUNICIPAL TECHNICAL TEAMS (ETM).........................31 7.2 INSTITUTIONALIZATION OF MECHANISMS FOR CITIZEN PARTICIPATION IN THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESSES...................................................................34 7.3 DESIGN, PUBLICATION, AND DISSEMINATION OF TRAINING MATERIALS ...........35 8.0 IMPACT OF WORK PERFORMED WITH LOCAL TECHNICAL TEAMS (ETL)..................................................................................38 9.0 IMPACT OF WORK PERFORMED WITH LEADERS OF THE CIVIL SOCIETY ............................................................................................41 9.1 STRENGTHENING THE CAPABILITIES OF CIVIL SOCIETY REPRESENTATIVES AT THE LOCAL AND REGIONAL COORDINATION COUNCILS................................41 9.2 STRENGTHENING GRASSROOTS ORGANIZATIONS.........................................43 ANEXOS.....................................................................................................................46 Anexo 1. Metodología - matriz diferenciada ..........................................................47 Anexo 2. Departamentos, provincias y distritos visitados según criterios de selección...............................................................................................50 Anexo 3. Entrevistas en Lima .................................................................................52 Anexo 4. Relación de personas entrevistadas en las regiones seleccionadas.56 Anexo 5. Relación de ETL entrevistados...............................................................61 Anexo 6. Beneficiarios según tipo de capacitación y región de intervención de PRODES 2004 - 2007............................................................................62 Anexo 7. Programa de Formación Diseñado por PRODES.................................65 Anexo 8. Resultados electorales, regionales ........................................................67 Anexo 9. Departamentos, subsedes y ETL que ejecutan PRODES. 2004 - 200768 Anexo 10. Relación de integrantes de los ETL que actualmente desempeñan cargos públicos (autoridades o funcionarios) o son consultores de entidades públicas............................................................................70 EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM iii ACRONYMS AD USAID/Alternative Development APRENDES Decentralization Innovations and Active Schools CAPRODES Strengthening Capabilities for the Decentralization Process Program CCL Local Coordination Councils CCR Regional Coordination Councils CEPLAN National Center for Planning CND National Decentralization Council CONSODE Democratic Society Consortium COPRE Presidential Commission for the Reform of the Executive Power COSUDE Swiss Cooperation for Development Programs CTAR Regional Management Transitory Councils DGPM General Directorate for Multi-Annual Programming of the Public Sector DNPP National Directorate for Public Budget ETL Locally Based Technical Teams ETM Municipal Technical Team ETR Regional Technical Team IEP Instituto De Estudios Peruanos LOPE Organic Law of the Executive Power MEF Ministry of Economy and Finance MASAL Soils and Water Sustainable Management on Slopes MIMDES Ministry of Women and Social Development NGO Non-Governmental Organizations iv EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM OTI Office of Transition Initiatives PCM Presidency of the Council Of Ministers PDA Proyecto de Desarrollo Alternativo PDC Participatory Strategic Plan PRA Reduction and Relief from Poverty Project/USAID PRODES Pro-Decentralization Program RFP Request for Proposal SD Decentralization Secretariat SIAF Integrated System for Financial Administration SNIP National Public Investment System UNIA Universidad Intercultural de la Amazonia USAID United States Agency For International Development EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM v EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PRODES is a program of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) supporting the Government of Peru and selected regional and municipal governments1 in deepening the decentralization process. The objective of the program has been to improve democratic governance by strengthening the institutional capabilities of government—national, regional, and local—to fulfill their main functions and responsibilities, and fortifying the pro-positive capabilities of civil society organizations. The strategy has been to engage these local actors in participatory processes, particularly budgeting and public accountability, to build stable democratic governance. After five years of implementation, the program will finally close in February 4, 2008. As a result, USAID has contracted for an external evaluation of PRODES conducted by a four-person team largely affiliated with the Instituto de Estudios Peruanos. The following represents a summary of the findings of the performance and impact evaluation of PRODES at the national and sub-national levels. The findings are of a qualitative nature obtained through extensive interviews and focus groups of program counterparts and beneficiaries, and through direct observation of technical assistance programs. I. PRODES MAIN ACHIEVEMENTS During its five years of presence, PRODES has largely achieved the Strategic Objectives established at the beginning of the program. The Project has: • Strengthened democratic governance in Peru by the provision of effective management and administrative tools to national and sub-national authorities. • Institutionalized participatory decision making (participatory budgeting and public accountability) and greater inclusion in 536 municipal and 7 regional governments. • Indirectly laid the basis for sustained local development through the training of sub-national authorities in more effectively fulfilling functions and responsibilities (specifically on issues related to the SNIP). • Ameliorated social exclusion through the training of civil society leaders, including the leaders of highly marginalized groups (women, indigenous communities) in effective participation in the decision-making processes. • Generated greater synergies between USAID/Peru’s programs and other strategic partners working in the area of decentralization (PRODES support of the USAID-financed Alternative Development Program (PDA) is particularly notable). II. PRODES WORK WITH NATIONAL GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS During the five-year program, PRODES has proven itself an efficient and reliable partner to many national and sub-national governmental institutions (with different impacts, depending on the institution), 1 Regional and Municipal Governments of the Departments of Ayacucho, Cuzco, Huánuco, Junín, Pasco, San Martín, and Ucayali. vi EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM including the Consejo Nacional de Descentralización, the Presidencia del Consejo de Ministros, the Ministerio de Economia y Finanzas, and the Congreso de la Republica. PRODES´ impact at the national level has been especially notable in: • Providing policymakers and other interested parties with an annual overview of the State of the Decentralization Process (Balance de la Descentralización), and a way of analyzing the multi￾pronged process as organized by eight key dimensions: 1. Establishment of Regions and Territorial Organization 2. Transfer of Responsibilities 3. Fiscal Decentralization 4. Economic Decentralization 5. Democratization of Decision Making 6. Modernization of Administrative Systems 7. Institutional Strengthening 8. Information PRODES’ production of specialized information and analysis of the decentralization process has been one of its most import contributions to the decentralization process. The Balance has become an inevitable reference quoted and utilized by public officials, civil society and NGOs, and officials of agencies of international cooperation. The methodology used in elaborating the document—the result of a broad consultation effort including representatives of both State and Civil Society—at both the national and sub-national levels—produces key data (i.e., the more technical aspects of the decentralization process, such as the transfer and accreditation processes) which was otherwise unavailable. As a result, the Balances have achieved great legitimacy. PRODES’ analysis, elaboration of technical proposals, and support for public hearings has also served to improve the quality of public decision making. PRODES’ work at the national level has also resulted in a general strengthening of the decentralization community, a self-sustaining group of public officials, politicians, civil society leaders and institutions, and international cooperation entities. III. IMPACT OF TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROVIDED TO REGIONAL GOVERNMENTS With PRODES support, Regional Governments have improved relations with civil society and their capabilities to face the challenges of the decentralization process in those technical areas where PRODES assistance has been focused. However, there is much more work to be done before Regional Governments become efficient managers of sub-national resources. • With PRODES support, Regional Governments have been able to institutionalize mechanisms for citizen participation (budgeting, public accountability, Vigilance Committees, Regional Coordination Councils) and successfully articulate the participatory budgeting process at the regional level. • Significant progress has been made in strengthening the capabilities of the Regional Government Executive Branch through training of officials (particularly in the elaboration of public EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM vii investment projects in accordance with the Sistema Nacional de Inversión Publica (National System for Public Investment - SNIP). The Evaluation Team has documented concrete impacts among sub-national officials: the strengthening technical abilities, improvements in awareness of prevailing legislation, better management of administrative procedures, and a more ample vision of their functions and of problems they may have to encounter. • Significant advances have been documented in the strengthening of Regional Legislatures (Consejos Regionales) through PRODES’ pioneering Training Program for Regional Councilors, carried out jointly with the Ombudsman Office. Main achievements of the program are Regional Councilors reporting a better understanding of their functions, improved performance in leading commissions, and improved quality of discussions and debates. • Impacts were somewhat more limited in PRODES´ elaboration of Regional Competitiveness Plans. Although not included in the original design of the program, PRODES, at USAID/Peru’s request, assumed the task. Its limited impact is mainly due to external factors, particularly unionization and the lack of a stable civil service. IV. IMPACT OF TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROVIDED TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS The Evaluation Team has determined that at the municipal level, PRODES has: • Provided universal coverage to the 476 district municipalities and 61 provincial municipalities in the seven regions where the Program operates. Full coverage has been attained through both direct assistance and the dissemination of training materials. These efforts were sustained over a three-year period. During this last year, the Program has prioritized direct assistance to provincial municipalities. • Improved governability in the municipal governments where it has intervened. Improvements have been noted in local government—civil society relations through the institutionalization of participatory budgeting and public accountability practices. Local officials who formerly managed administrative matters only have learned negotiating skills and how to improve relations with civil society; authorities who were reluctant or afraid of public participation, “overcame their fears”; and representatives of civil society became more conscious of difficulties encountered by local governments. PRODES’ experience at the local level demonstrates the importance of producing concrete administrative tools and instruments in providing support to local management. In this sense, the usefulness and relevance of materials produced by PRODES has been decisive. Each of these materials has been elaborated with, and has obtained the backing of, the relevant public institution (CND, SD, MEF, MIMDES, PROINVERSION). Materials produced by PRODES maintain their relevance through the present and are a continuing source of consultation for many public officials and authorities, both local and regional. Nevertheless, the processes are still flawed in aspects such as participatory strategic plan planning, articulation between sub-national levels, and the linkage between citizen participation and development. However, this is a relatively new process with some lingering design problems. No one national governmental entity is monitoring the process; ensuring overall quality of management will require more time and effort—time that for a comprehensive program such as PRODES has proved to be relatively short. viii EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM V. IMPACT OF SUPPORT TO CIVIL SOCIETY LEADERS The PRODES program has had the following impacts in this area: • Made significant progress in strengthening the capabilities of civil society representatives to Regional Coordination Councils. • Contributed to the generation of local solutions to local problems through the diploma course “Decentralizing the Decentralization.” • In a number of instances, the Program has incorporated projects presented by native (indigenous) community leaders into the participatory budgeting process, especially in the regions of San Martin and Ucayali. • The ¨Community Leaders Training Program¨ created by PRODES has significantly impacted leaders of native communities and other representatives of grassroots organizations. However, this impact is still somewhat weak at the quantitative level. VI. CONTRIBUTIONS TO USAID/PERU´S PROGRAMS AND STRATEGIC PARTNERS With regard to coordination with USAID/Peru’s partners and programs, the following aspects should be pointed out: • In working with the Alternative Development Program (PDA), PRODES has played an important role in transforming PDA relations with local governments. PRODES elaborated a dedicated work plan in support of PDA to provide priority support to 48 PDA priority municipalities. The Program, for example, succeeded in institutionalizing PDA donations in municipal governments, providing guidance and support in the introduction of donations into municipal budgets. As a result, municipalities are more accountable for the use of these funds. • Moreover, the Program liaised with the MEF in prioritizing PDA municipalities for the receipt and installation of the “Integrated Financial Management System” (Sistema Integrada de Administracion Financiera - SIAF). PRODES supervised the work of MEF technicians in the application of the SIAF in the municipalities and established a special quota for local government officials within the PDA ambit to receive training at the SNIP. Achievements made on this issue have been significant. The PDA at the local level (Tarapoto) also highlights the coordination efforts performed with PRODES and achievements attained. • For strategic partners such as PRA and APRENDES, PRODES stands out as a program “always ready to provide assistance” and as a good partner in decentralization issues. The most important contribution made by PRODES to decentralization relates to its integrated and constant vision of the process. • It should be pointed out that the relation between PRODES and APRENDES in the regional ambit of San Martin has produced very important results. Thanks to the initial convincing work vis-à-vis the regional government developed by PRODES to allow the presentation of APRENDES in the participatory budgeting process and the subsequent accompaniment of its actions, APRENDES succeeded in obtaining the approval of a capabilities development project. This approval could not have been achieved without the support of PRODES at the local level. EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM ix Impact of Work Performed with Organizations’ Suppliers of Technical Assistance and Training – Local Technical Teams During 2003, PRODES carried out a thorough prognosis of local capabilities in the seven regions where the Program is being implemented. Subsequently, PRODES convoked a public contest to choose among these institutions those that would be designated as locally based technical teams (ETLs). According to the Evaluation Team: • A strong difference prevails between the unclear market of local service suppliers faced by PRODES at the beginning of its operations and the present situation. Many members of ETLs have begun to work in an autonomous fashion with local governments. • Working with PRODES had a significant impact on the generation of capabilities within the member entities al the local level. Work performed on participatory local management bears special significance, particularly the assistance provided to participatory budgeting. In this aspect, the awareness and performance of institutions acting as ETLs has been rather uniform. • Homogenization of an intervention methodology with local governments has been accomplished, overcoming differences in the approaches and methodologies of diverse institutions that formed the ETLs. • NGOs without experience in providing assistance to municipalities have developed: (i) a different perspective since they are now able to look from within municipal management without being limited by critical visions from the outside; (ii) capability to establish a long-term working relationship with some municipalities that currently try to contact these NGOs to facilitate the development of workshops/seminars on participatory budgeting. • In the case of small NGOs, the work performed with PRODES has allowed a larger projection, in face of potential local partners (other NGOs, authorities, the civil society). In the case of NGOs of greater dimension, the work performed with PRODES has allowed the geographic horizon enhancement of its actions. Impact of Formation Programs In most cases, participants interviewed during the evaluation process point out the quality of training courses received. SNIP course participants, as well as individuals from the MEF linked to the conduct of the course, indicate that there are no other training courses comparable to the one provided by PRODES. During the field work, the Evaluation Team verified a series of concrete impacts among participants attending these courses: strengthening of technical capabilities, better level of awareness of prevailing legislation, better understanding of administrative processes, and a more extensive vision of their functions and of other problems to be encountered. Likewise, the team found out that the majority of individuals interviewed make reference to a positive impact within their institutions: • A better management positioning where participants work, within the corresponding entity. • The concretization of projects stemming from the dictation of courses, both in the case of project formulation courses (the SNIP course) and in the investment promoters course (PROINVERSION Course). • Negotiations made toward the strengthening of the Agency for the Promotion of Private Investment (PROINVERSION) and the Office for the Promotion of Private Investment, within regional governments and the elaboration of a promotion plan for private investments. x EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM VII. LESSONS LEARNED PRODES leaves behind a series of useful teaching, from program design to intervention strategies, relevant to the design of future decentralization programs. • A program to support a process as crucial as decentralization must have the flexibility to respond to the expressed needs and opportunities as they present themselves. In this sense, it is counterproductive to focus support exclusively on one actor responsible for the process. Rather, the program should interact with all involved actors. Certainly, PRODES’ experience in working cooperatively with all public institutions demonstrates the effectiveness of this strategy. PRODES has demonstrated a significant capability to identify concrete issues and opportunities to exercise influence with corresponding probabilities of success. This success is due to PRODES’ flexible intervention scheme, allowing the insertion of new issues as they arise within a given juncture and the definition of a team with the capability to respond swiftly with a technical opinion on different issues (or identify such opinion outside of PRODES). PRODES was immersed in the debate of the process; it otherwise would not have attained this type of contribution. The project, in other words, was able to attain projected mid-term objectives with an active day-after-day participation in the process. • A program in support of a highly politicized process, such as decentralization, needs to maintain a level of autonomy while working closely with State institutions. In this sense, PRODES emphasized the need to work with “a look from the inside,” but maintaining ample functional autonomy, without being subsumed as a program inside a State institution. This positioning allows compliance with a double objective: an objective appreciation and consideration of daily problems of public administration (something usually nonexistent among the majority of excessively “autonomous” programs), and the greater flexibility and independence to define actions, propose issues, etc. (something nonexistent among programs “incorporated” within State institutions). • A program in support of a process in which the technical design involves matters of great complexity (and high potential controversies) needs a team integrated by professionals with direct and thorough knowledge on how public administration functions. PRODES has worked very efficiently in the identification of partners based on a realistic diagnostic of public administration operations. Within these institutions, the program has been able to identify those individuals who: (i) can be more responsive to cooperation and technical assistance proposals; and (ii) have a real capacity to exercise influence on the generation of public policies, inside and outside of their institution. This is particularly relevant in the case of the Ministry of Economy and Finance and in the Congress of the Republic. PRODES (in partnership with other actors of the civil society and international cooperation entities) succeeded in becoming a technical support consulted by a “decentralist congressional group” which is responsive to its proposals and which, at the same time, tries to position the decentralist agenda within parliamentary activities. • A program in support of a process as complex as decentralization, must start from the previous identification of key aspects on which it focuses its influence. Thus, PRODES organizes its work by the previous identification of a series of concrete objectives to focalize its range of influence. For example, while working with the Congress of the Republic, PRODES identified a set of laws considered key factors for the advancement of decentralization. At the local level, PRODES identified a series of key issues on which program efforts can be focalized, in the assumption that progress made on these issues will mean a step forward toward the attainment of program global objectives (for example, the program worked in participatory budgeting in the assumption that this would allow the democratization of decision-making processes at the local level). This focalization, within a short-term framework to attain projected goals, is key to defining the program’s global success in two ways: objective (relating compliance with projected goals), and subjective (relating to the recognition granted by its partners and counterparts). EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM xi • A program in support of a process such as decentralization—where a vast number of actors is involved with varied expectations—requires the use of multiple “languages” and “codes” (of public administration, of NGOs, of politicians, etc.) and the capabilities to move among them. Counting on a key team made up of professionals with appropriate technical level, capable of performing the role of key actors and familiar with the use of “languages,” is a decisive element in determining the likely success of the program. In other words, the team’s professionalism, but also its connection and relationship with key actors (above all politicians), and their command of languages and of communication channels with specialized actors (technicians, grassroots and civil society representatives, etc.) is determinate. In this sense, one of the factors of PRODES’ success has been its skill in closing the language gap between national government officials and officials and authorities at the sub-national levels, through (i) the elaboration of validated materials and those materials made official; and (ii) the promotion of opportunities for face-to￾face encounters (especially decentralization courses). • A program in support to decentralization conceived with a limited, transitory horizon (five years) requires a rapid positioning strategy allowing it to attain a high degree of trustworthiness on the part of its potential partners in a very short time. On that score, PRODES has proven to be successful in identifying the needs within the decentralization community and positioning itself by granting coverage to these needs, especially in three aspects: (i) providing specialized data to monitor the decentralization process; (ii) providing specialized data for decision making; and (iii) establishing spaces for discussion, with vast summoning power, for the different actors. As for working with sub-national governments, the main impact relates to the creation of Municipal Technical Teams and the institutionalization of citizen participation mechanisms in the elaboration of participatory budgets. The institutionalization of local participatory management represents an important success: participatory management with a more inclusive approach and compliance with legal standard provisions on accountability issues. This has been possible thanks to: • The breadth of coverage, in terms of an institutional strengthening program serving more than 500 municipalities simultaneously, implies the need to focalize interventions on certain local management issues. PRODES focused on local participatory management. • A program in support of decentralization conceived with an extensive territorial coverage must pay special attention to identifying reliable local partners. On that score, working with institutions committed to the improvement of citizen participation in local government has proved to be decisive. The selection criteria of these institutions took into account the capacity and legitimacy of these institutions in the areas of intervention, allowing PRODES to quickly provide assistance in highly heterogeneous areas. This strategy has also provided an associated benefit: the strengthening of many locally based and resident ETL staff and organizations, thereby professionalizing a market for consultant services, leaving a strengthened a broader market than existed at the beginning of PRODES’ activities. • A program in support of decentralization based on partnerships with local institutions must take into account the heterogeneity of the ETL capabilities. On that score, one of the keys to PRODES’ success is (i) the strict criteria for the selection of partners at the local/regional level, originating from investigative work mapping and classifying potential partners; and (ii) emphasis on the induction work of these partners, establishing a global approach and core for the program. The induction workshop-seminars agglutinated these NGOs under one single methodological approach (training in core aspects for PRODES’ work), while giving these institutions the opportunity to reciprocate and share experiences among each other, generating a cycle of mutual learning. This is an invaluable aspect of PRODES’ strengthening of local capabilities. • PRODES’ experience shows that, at the local level, a key element for positioning the project toward authorities and officials is the production of concrete and operational instruments to support local management. Thus, the materials produced by PRODES fulfill a decisive purpose. xii EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM Each material counts on the backing of the responsible, national public institution. Many public officials and local/regional authorities continue to rely upon and consult materials produced by PRODES. In interviews, the International Cooperation has noted as a best practice PRODES’ emphasis on making official the aforementioned materials, and are including them in their own work routines. VIII. RECOMMENDATIONS PRODES’ impact on the decentralization process is positive and highly valued by actors involved in the process. It is essential to point out that the context in which PRODES developed its work has impeded the achievement of even greater impact. Many of these elements relate to the political context, the institutional weakness of the State apparatus, and to the program design itself. Among these elements, the team points out the following: • PRODES started to work in the intervention zones within an incipient decentralization process and with regional authorities elected by universal vote for the first time in the country’s history. • Regional governments are elected on the basis of Departments instead of regions and, administratively, they rely on the structure of the former Transitory Regional Administration Councils (CTAR). • PRODES had to work within a highly heterogeneous ambit of Departments. • Local governments where PRODES intervenes depend to a great extent on central government transfers and show great administrative precariousness with frequent staff turnovers. • PRODES must respond to a program design aimed at the improvement of sub-national governments’ capabilities to respond to citizens while working simultaneously on various fronts: sub-national State administration, civil society, grassroots organizations of most marginalized groups, oftentimes dispersing work efforts. Thereby, the Evaluation Team presents the following recommendations: • Establish mechanisms ensuring the adequate dissemination of specialized teachings generated. Many of the specialized consultation studies contracted through PRODES by client-institutions, especially the CND, have enjoyed limited divulgation due to scant interest shown by the institutions requesting the studies. This has diluted the impact of a considerable volume of specialized teachings, which if placed in the public domain, may have produced results of great interest. Future programs in support to decentralization must contemplate mechanisms to guarantee that teachings generated are publicly available. • Establish mechanisms to ensure the sustainability of efforts within sub-national governments. Program design must take into account the electoral cycle and the subsequent high degree of staff turnovers of authorities and public officials, aiming at other internal sustainability factors (for example, incentives for municipal technical teams to fulfill their tour of duty at the municipality of regional government). • Greater emphasis granted to work with regional governments. Considering that the ultimate objective is strengthening the State’s capabilities to implement the decentralization process, it is recommended that USAID/Peru rebalance support to local and regional governments. While a significant number of institutions exist that for years have provided support to local governments, comparatively few provide support to regional governments. • Provide a permanent support team for the work performed by ETLs. The team believes that future public management assistance programs should provide permanent support for the work performed by ETLs. The existence of a specialized team of professionals providing support to EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM xiii interventions at the local level (which could be decentralized or not) would relieve the project’s core team from having to solve a multitude of daily problems. • Greater emphasis granted to the acknowledgement and visualization of good governance practices. In 2005, an Innovation on Management and Good Governance contest was held with the participation of regional and local governments with whom the program had worked during the previous year (318 municipalities and six regional governments) to acknowledge and award innovative initiatives and good governance practices. Seventeen (17) local governments were recognized and awarded prizes. However, this initiative was discontinued for reasons beyond PRODES’ control. The team considers that similar initiatives should be fostered in future programs. • Emphasize the generation of learning spaces. In the program design, the generation of learning spaces allowing for the verification of which intervention strategies were most appropriate to increase management effectiveness in sub-national governments was not prioritized. During recent years, a certain number of programs and institutions have focused on providing technical assistance to sub-national governments. However, the team still does not count on an adequate learning threshold on how to attain efficient interventions in this matter. • Provide mechanisms aimed at reducing the pressure on the Program’s operator. The cooperation formula chosen by USAID/Peru implies the existence of incentives allowing the commissioned entity (ARD) to comply with program implementation. In several interviews, especially in the case of public officials, PRODES’ insistence on the obligation to fulfill their objectives was noted as generating a climate of “pressure,” which could occasionally undermine the mutual trust needed to comply with the program’s main objective. This pressure for results is a phenomenon that usually occurs as a “cascade” event: while PRODES’ core team feels the pressure to obtain results from USAID/Peru, ETLs feel themselves under pressure from PRODES, and the local teams in turn convey this pressure to public officials and local authorities, thus generating a negative circle. • Regulate verification mechanisms, especially as related to work performed with rural municipalities. Verification procedures established by PRODES were bothersome and expensive. The obligation to comply with these procedures is a negative incentive for counterpart institutions. From the team’s standpoint, this is an element which should be subject to review in the design of future programs. Our recommendation does not aim at eliminating these mechanisms, since a positive impact on the degree of commitment of all parties involved is also observed, but to amend them to provide them with greater flexibility and lesser cost. EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM 1 INTRODUCTION The Pro-Decentralization Program (PRODES) of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) was designed to strengthen the decentralization process in Peru by providing support to both the national and sub-national (regional, provincial, and district) governments of seven Departments. PRODES’ actions are aimed at strengthening democratic governability by promoting the institutionalization of good governance practices and by improving the capabilities of the corresponding public institutions and civil society organizations to contribute in an effective fashion to the decentralization process. After five years of intervention, USAID/Peru requested a final evaluation of the program. This evaluation was carried out between the months of August and September 2007, by a professional team integrated by Patricia Zárate, Ernesto Herrera, Carolina Trivelli, and Raul Hernández Asensio. The report presented herein incorporates the comments and suggestions of USAID/Peru and PRODES to the two preliminary versions of the evaluation report and is divided into 11 sections: 1. Characteristics of the evaluation 2. PRODES impact on the decentralization process 3. Impact of work performed with National Government institutions 4. Impact of specialized data produced by PRODES 5. Impact of work performed with other USAID/Peru’s programs and strategic partners 6. Impact of technical assistance provided to regional governments 7. Impact of technical assistance provided to local governments 8. Impact of work performed with Local Technical Teams 9. Impact of work performed with the civil society EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM 3 1.0 CHARACTERISTICS OF THE EVALUATION 1.1 PURPOSE OF THE EVALUATION2 The purpose of this study is to produce a performance and impact evaluation of PRODES’ work in strengthening the decentralization process in Peru, both at the national and sub-national levels in the seven Departments where the Program intervenes, while identifying lessons learned and the best practices of the Program. PRODES has designed and put into practice several strategies and methodologies appropriate to the needs of various levels of government. This evaluation attempts to redeem the lessons learned from all actors involved in the decentralization process. 1.2 PROGRAM DESCRIPTION PRODES is a program of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) designed to provide support to the Government of Peru and to its regional and local governments in target areas in their efforts to further the decentralization process. In 2002, USAID/Peru issued a Request for Proposal with the purpose of selecting a contractor to operate such program. ARD, Inc.’s proposal was selected to carry out the aforementioned project. This action gave birth to the corresponding four-year contract between USAID/Peru and ARD, with an optional fifth year. This fifth extension was ultimately approved by USAID/Peru, and the Program completes five years of work in early 2008. The general strategic objective of the PRODES Program is to strengthen the responsiveness of sub￾national governments in the face of citizen demands, as well as the pro-positive capabilities of social organizations in the Departments of San Martin, Ucayali, Huanuco, Junin, Pasco, Ayacucho, and Cuzco. The Program carries out its activities within the framework of the following intermediate strategic results of USAID/Peru: • Authorities and resources transferred to the most appropriate levels of sub-national governments. • Sub-national governments’ mechanisms established to attain citizen participation and surveillance in the established decision-making process. • Improved capabilities of sub-national governmental institutions to fulfill their main duties. • Increased capabilities of grassroots community organizations representing traditionally marginalized groups, to participate and oversee operations (management) of local governments. 2 The evaluation methodology is presented in Annex 1. 4 EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM The Program attempts to strengthen management capabilities of regional and local governments to respond in an efficient manner to the needs of their citizens. To that end, PRODES develops and implements a participatory sub-national public management proposal aimed at fostering the development and strengthening of capabilities among sub-national actors. It implements its proposal through individuals and local institutions, previously screened and trained (ETLs) in such a way as to make them capable of offering an adequate services market according to the needs of sub-national governments. PRODES began its activities in 2003, with a first stage of preparation and installation of the program. During this period, PRODES established an organizational model which has been maintained through the present, including two clearly delineated programmatic areas: Normative Institutional Strengthening and Local Capabilities Strengthening. PRODES’ headquarters in Lima maintains a small staff charged with the coordination of all components and activities. Each of the Departments has a regional coordinator, who is responsible for organizing, counseling, and supervising the work of Local Technical Teams (ETLs). The ETLs are local entities contracted by PRODES to implement the Program at the sub-national level. In the majority of cases, ETLs are NGOs, NGO consortiums, or municipal associations. 1.3 CONTEXT At the outset of PRODES activities, the legal framework of the process had been broadly defined and the first regional authorities had been elected and installed as of January 2003. Many complementary aspects of the process, however, are still to be defined, such as the model for transferring functions and duties, the modalities for economic and fiscal decentralization, the model for territorial demarcation, etc. There are, therefore, several elements to keep in mind in the evaluation of the Program: • The directorship of the decentralization process has been entrusted to the National Decentralization Council (CND), an entity created in 2003 with special by-laws. The CND responds directly to the President of the Republic. During its almost entire existence until its recent deactivation in January of 2007, the presidency of this organization was held by Luis Thais who became the visible face of the decentralization process. • At the beginning, the decentralization process had the consensual support of all political forces, as well as the backing of the National Government. However, there is no consensus with regard to the scope and details of the process. The approved design and the standard framework have not been followed, due perhaps to a lack of leadership of the CND, the decreasing political will of the Executive and the loss of consensus due to the proximity of the electoral process, which hinder the completion of the standard framework. • The decentralization process receives the support of congressmen of diverse political parties who, as a group, politically sustain the process. Each, however, have different points of view with regard to the nature, stages, and characteristics of the process. • The initial, broad-based support for decentralization began to dissipate during the latter years of Alejandro Toledo’s government. The failure of the referendum makes evident the lack of vision and leadership of the CND, as well as the lack of institutions at the sub-national level to effectively influence the process. The feebleness of the majority of regional governments, together with the imminence of national and regional elections of 2006, are the cause and consequences of this progressive dissolution of political support initially granted to the decentralization process. EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM 5 • In 2006, elections were carried out at the national and sub-national levels. The new government deactivated the CND and opted for a model that prioritizes direct relations between executive institutions and regional governments. During the early years of the decentralization process, several initiatives of the civil society and of international cooperation entities aimed at supporting decentralization. 6 EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM 2.0 PRODES IMPACT ON THE DECENTRALIZATION PROCESS During its five years of life, PRODES has significantly contributed to the attainment of USAID/Peru’s strategic objectives. In that connection, the Program has: • Strengthened democracy by providing the tools necessary for the Central Government and regional/local authorities to confront the decentralization process with greater probabilities of success. • Strengthened governability, especially at the municipal level, to the extent that it manages to institutionalize inclusive decision-making mechanisms (participatory budgeting and, to a lesser extent, accountability). • Sustained economic development indirectly, to the extent that the training of local/regional authorities and key officials at the sub-national government level now exercise their duties in a more effective way (particularly in connection to SNIP). • Overcome social gaps whereas it makes possible the training and participation in decision-making processes of a number of civil society leaders belonging to less favored groups (women, indigenous communities). • Created synergies between USAID/Peru’s programs and other strategic partners working on decentralization issues (the work performed in support of PDA and APRENDES is particularly important). PRODES has positioned itself as a reliable and efficient partner of institutions at all government levels. It is an outstanding partner of the decentralized community supporting the process. PRODES has positively contributed to: • The conceptualization of the decentralization process and its acceptance as a global process for the State’s reform and modernization. In this regard, PRODES’ contributions have been decisive. PRODES’ Balances de la Descentralización, bulletins, and reports have structured debate on the decentralization process by analyzing the process in each of its multiple dimensions. • The consolidation of a decentralization community (comprised by public officials, politicians, civil society organizations and institutions, and by members of the international cooperation community) capable of overseeing and contributing to the decentralization process. PRODES’ contribution has been substantial, creating spaces for debate and making data and documentation available to supervise the process and nurture the debate. • Offering relevant data to key institutions of the Peruvian State, which has improved the design of complex aspects of the decentralization process (transfers and accreditations, fiscal decentralization process, territorial demarcation, for example). This information has influenced EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM 7 decision making on significant dimensions of the process, favoring the adoption of decisions based on technical considerations.3 • The institutionalization of participatory mechanisms in decision making at local and regional governments. The work performed on participatory budgeting, a new allocation of resources mechanism within the Peruvian context, has shown positive impacts at the local management level. • Attenuating the language gap between national government entities (above all at the MEF) and the authorities and public officials from sub-national government levels. In other words, linkages between selected institutions of the national government and sub-national governments have improved due to PRODES. The methodology used and the documents elaborated by PRODES have contributed to greater acceptance of systems such as the SNIP, and to reducing the level of mistrust between national authorities and public officials in each of the seven regions. • Improving the capabilities of 29 institutions of the civil society and sub-national NGOs to influence issues related to the decentralization process and local governments’ management. These institutions and organizations are currently better able to exercise supervision of, and contribute to, the decentralization process. • The creation of local markets of service suppliers and consulting services on topics related to the decentralization process, including participatory municipal management. • Share a series of teachings, namely in the methodological ambit (e.g., elaboration of materials) with the international cooperation community. Some of these practices have been adopted for replication by bi-lateral and multi-lateral donors. PRODES develops its activities within a context where other programs, national institutions, and foreign cooperation agencies also support the decentralization process. In this sense, we can refer to an accrued impact since individualizing impacts (attributed to interventions) is something very complex and usually unfair. Therefore, it is complicated to talk about a concrete impact generated exclusively by PRODES by itself. Nevertheless, PRODES’ contribution to the mentioned processes is quite significant. During this whole process, a large amount of specialized learning has been generated both at national and regional levels, related to practices as well as to studies on diverse components of the decentralization process. All of this represents an accumulated capital that must not be squandered facing the years to come. The team recommends that continuity mechanisms be put into place in such a way that the transition from PRODES to subsequent programs does not dilute these learnings, avoiding the loss of progress made and the need to start anew. It is of utmost importance that elements such as the Web Page or the elaboration of the Balance analyzing the dimensions of the decentralization process, highly valued by all persons interviewed, are assumed by USAID/Peru or its programs. From a more practical standpoint, these products represent the best letter of introduction for the institution or institutions to provide support to the decentralization process in the future. In the following pages, we analyze in a more concrete fashion PRODES’ impact on various levels of work, focusing on the following aspects: 3 An example is the PCM´s refusal to create a pilot-region in the year 2007. PRODES had advised against the creation of a pilot￾region, which may have influenced the PCM to change its position on the issue. 8 EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM • Impact of work performed with National Government institutions. • Impact of specialized data produced by PRODES. • Impact of work performed with other USAID/Peru’s programs and strategic partners. • Impact of technical assistance provided to regional governments. • Impact of technical assistance provided to local governments. • Impact of work performed with Local Technical Teams. • Impact of work performed with the civil society. EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM 9 3.0 IMPACT OF WORK CARRIED OUT WITH NATIONAL GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS During the five years of implementation, PRODES has provided technical assistance to national government institutions involved in the decentralization process. This component is inserted within Strategic Objective 1 (SO1) “Authorities and resources transferred to most appropriate levels of sub￾national governments.” Impact has been particularly significant as it relates to: • Providing a general overview of the decentralization process starting with the eight key dimensions identified by PRODES. This analysis has structured debate on the implementation of key actions of national importance and created an awareness and specific technical proposals which have helped to improve the quality of decisions made and to deepen discussions on the decentralization process. • Strengthening a decentralization community composed of public officials, politicians, civil society’s celebrities and institutions, and members of international cooperation entities. PRODES, by itself, has not created this community, but it has contributed in an important fashion to its strengthening. An important number of institutions of the Peruvian State participate in these activities, although those institutions directly responsible for the decentralization process have been prioritized, including: • The National Decentralization Council (CND), the entity responsible for conducting the decentralization process from 2003 through its deactivation in January 2007. • The Presidency of the Ministerial Council (PCM) and its two technical dependencies, Secretariat for Public Management and Decentralization Secretariat, responsible for the political direction of the decentralization process and related processes, such as State Modernization (Presidential Commission for the Reform of the Executive Power - COPRE) and Territorial Demarcation (National Technical Directorate for Territorial Demarcation). • The Ministry of Economy and Finance (MEF), in particular, the National Directorate for Public Budget (DNPP) and the General Directorate for Multi-annual Programming of the Public Sector (DGPM), responsible for the transfer of competences and resources to sub-national government entities. 10 EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM • The Congress of the Republic, especially the Committee for Decentralization, Regionalization, Local Governments and Streamlining of State Management, the key entity for the creation of a Standard Framework of the process.4 In addition to these four institutions, which are the axis of the decentralization process at the national government level, PRODES also works with other institutions of the State that are involved in the decentralization process. • The Ombudsman’s Office, through the Decentralization and Good Governance Program. • The Ministry for Women and Social Development (MIMDES) with whom the issue of transfers of social programs to local governments is coordinated. • ProInversión, responsible for strengthening the economic management skills of sub-national authorities and selected ministries. PRODES’ work is carried out within a context of loosely defined responsibilities for the conduct and support of the decentralization process. Decentralization is a gradual reform with a medium- and long￾term horizon. A second consideration is that the national and sub-national elections of 2006 influenced relations with national government institutions, particularly as a result of key staff turnover and changes to the political direction of the process. As we shall see, it is possible to differentiate two stages of PRODES’ work, before and after the 2006 elections. In evaluating PRODES’ work, one should consider the extremely heterogeneous capabilities and willingness of state institutions to engage a large-scale decentralization process. Public officials with very dissimilar personal styles coexist, with divergent academic and professional backgrounds and vision about the nature, scope, and objectives of their work. Occasionally, in some sectors, one perceives resistance to change and apprehension of the loss of power, while regional governments are gradually beginning to understand their roles. The heterogeneity is multiplied as PRODES began work soon after the transition from the authoritarianism of Alberto Fujimori. 3.1 TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROVIDED TO NATIONAL GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS5 PRODES’ direct assistance to national governmental institutions employs two modalities: (i) at the request of national institutions, offering counsel and expert opinion about concrete aspects of the decentralization process in debates and specialized commissions, and (ii) financing ad hoc studies related to key aspects of the decentralization process. The advice provided by PRODES is considered appropriate and of quality recognized by client-entities. In the majority of cases, PRODES’ high-level of professionalism and training was recognized as a strong asset, as well as its sense of responsibility in the fulfillment of commitments. PRODES’ team members have been asked to serve as members of various ad-hoc commissions at key moments of the decentralization process: by the Decentralization Commission of the Congress of the Republic during the debates of the Organic Law of the Executive Power (LOPE), the Accreditations System Law, and others. In the case of the CND, PRODES participated in the evaluation of technical 4 Among others, the State Reform Bill, the Executive Power Organic Act, the Public Employees Act, etc., were subject to debate. 5 In Annex 4, a table summarizing the impact of PRODES’ technical assistance at this government level is included. EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM 11 dossiers for the creation of regions and, in certain instances, in workshop-seminars for the CND’s strategic planning (in 2003 and 2006.). There are several precisions to be made since one can observe very significant differences in the relationship depending on the client-institution. The relationship between PRODES and the CND is extremely delicate due to the internal dynamics of the National Decentralization Council itself. The institution’s management style, the lack of an integrated vision for decentralization, the absence of internal and external leadership, and the existence within the CND of sectors with different ideas about the role the institution should play, configured a complex situation in which PRODES was forced to act cautiously. At every stage PRODES generated strategies to support the CND on strategic issues. PRODES highlighted the technical profile of the relationship to avoid susceptibilities within the CND with respect to PRODES’ role. From the standpoint of the Evaluation Team, in spite of these difficulties, PRODES became an effective ally of the CND; for example, on issues such as the identification of the eight basic dimensions of the decentralization process or on more specific aspects linked to the process of municipalities’ transfer of functions and accreditations. PRODES also provided support to the CND on issues such as the decentralization of responsibilities in the transportation, agriculture, and housing sectors; the elaboration of accreditation criteria for the agriculture, industry, tourism, energy, and hydrocarbons sectors; in the elaboration of guidelines for the evaluation of technical dossiers to evaluate the viability of proposed regions to be included in a public referendum; as well as in precisions and amendments to the standard framework for the structuring of regions,6 many of which now serve as the basis for the current normative framework. All the same, these efforts were ultimately unable to dispel the mistrust of those in charge of the CND, vis-à-vis PRODES. Despite its efforts, PRODES was seen at times as a competitor, rather than an ally—a situation which made cooperation with the CND less productive than it could have been, should the CND have had a different attitude toward PRODES. With respect to the other client-institutions beyond the CND, relations were more fluent. PRODES’ identification and recruitment of potential partners within other institutions is significant and has allowed for more fluent and continuous work. This is especially the case with the Ministry of Economy and Finance (MEF) and its National Directorate for Public Budget (DNPP) and General Directorate for Multi-annual Programming of the Public Sector (DGPM). With these two offices, PRODES has contributed in the elaboration of methodological materials to disseminate standard provisions governing participatory budgeting, as well as the characteristics and operation of the Public Investment National System (SNIP). Decentralized courses have, moreover, been dictated to train municipal and regional officials on these issues (analyzed below). 6 As an example of this cooperation effort, during 2004, PRODES provided support to the CND on aspects such as technical/legal review of bylaws of the Law 28273 Bill (through the services of a consultant); also technical accompaniment to various sectors (three consultants); elaboration of accreditation criteria (ex-ante and export indicators) for agriculture, industry, tourism, and energy and hydrocarbons (four consultants); the design of an information module about 2004 transfers (one consultant); and the design and implementation of the accrediting entities’ registries (one consultant). In 2005, from the activities prioritized in the work plan, it provided support on issues such as the evaluation system of the municipal management performance (one consultant); activities linked to the bill presented to introduce an amendment to the Organic Law of Regional Governments (one consultant); the elaboration of an Argumentation Document (“argumentario”) and one glossary for the decentralization process (one consultant); and preliminary works for the elaboration of the decentralization year-book (one consultant; among others.) 12 EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM An important element in PRODES’ performance is its contribution to a rapprochement of the MEF and PROINVERSION with sub-national governments. In the first case, we are referring to a State institution unfamiliar in working closely with the international cooperation (rather, its experience is with bilateral or multilateral banking institutions). In the second case, we make reference to a State institution with offices only in the Capital of Lima, departmental capitals of Arequipa and Piura. In interviews, staff of both institutions recognized the advantages of working jointly with PRODES. In the case of the MEF, the clarity of PRODES’ objectives was emphasized as well as its institutional capacity to become a high-level sponsor of the work developed by the Ministry. In the case of PROINVERSIÓN, it is worth mentioning that PROINVERSION now has a greater departmental presence, thanks to PRODES’ technical support. In both cases, PRODES´ training methodologies and elaboration of high-quality and accessible training materials stand out. In the cases of the MEF and PROINVERSIÓN, PRODES’ main contribution resides on deepening the linkages between these highly technical institutions and the authorities and officials of sub-national governments through the use of methodologies and instruments which respond to the needs of sub￾national governments. In other words, PRODES has reduced the mutual mistrust which oftentimes exists between national ministries and sub-national governments, with the former perceived as insensitive and elitist, and the latter insufficiently trained to face the challenges of decentralization. . Favorable timing has contributed to PRODES’ achievements, as well. The program began activities when civil society and the international cooperation were considering plans to influence the MEF—an institution considered reluctant to this type of opening. The existence of direct communication between PRODES and the MEF, and the support of USAID/Peru have been two decisive elements of the success attained in this field. As a result, PRODES is acknowledged as a strategic partner with a unique value added of high-level and quality professional expertise with a clear agenda supporting these institutions to perform at a higher level and attain greater impact. Another significant aspect of PRODES’ work during these years is its influence on legislation through the Congress of the Republic. As with the MEF, one may emphasize that PRODES “has opened a path”; in other words, it has created an innovative model of productive cooperation for all actors, whose effectiveness and originality are acknowledged by the majority of interviewees. Traditionally, the Congress of the Republic (like the MEF) has been reluctant to cooperate with other entities. Before PRODES, the work performed by the international cooperation with the Congress was focused, on one hand on bilateral cooperation, and on the other hand, through direct support programs, which attained only limited results.7 PRODES’ counseling to the Congress began with the identification of a number of legal provisions considered crucial for the structuring and good performance of the decentralization process. It starts with the assumption that decentralization is part of a process of internal restructuring of the administrative apparatus of the State, whose ultimate objective is to achieve greater efficiency of state services and greater capabilities of citizens to oversee and participate in the decision-making process. To achieve these objectives, the Program tries to influence the Congress of the Republic through two mechanisms: (i) the production of data and analysis to provide Congress members with information to understand the interrelatedness of the decentralization process and related actions; and (ii) the 7 In 2002, support provided by the Office of Transition Initiatives/Peru (OTI), financed a reform project for the Congress to increment its response and accountability capabilities vis-à-vis citizens. Later on, a project presented by the New York State University was also financed by USAID/Peru providing technical assistance to the Congress. Almost simultaneously with PRODES, the Democratic Society Consortium (CONSODE), financed by USAID/Peru, was aimed at creating synergies between the Congress and sectors of the civil society with the purpose of encouraging an effective and efficient parliamentary management. EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM 13 organization and facilitation of encounters and debates on sensitive issues between decision makers and experts capable of providing information on key issues. These two mechanisms are closely related. A best practice of PRODES is having institutionalized a practice whereby each debate session was followed by a written product—an aide-memoire—distributed to attendees ensuring follow-through. The importance of these products in the subsequent political debates has been pointed out by numerous interviewees. The Congress of the Republic (CND) is the principal government entity responsible for the decentralization process, and PRODES provided a range of support for the parliament's role in regards to the evolving decentralization process. When the aforementioned problems restrained cooperation with the CND, PRODES’ team evaluated other alternative means to attain its objectives. After a complicated negotiation with USAID, the decision was taken—without abandoning the work with the CND—to strengthen new spaces (or reinforce the existing ones) with other institutions.8 The work performed with the Congress reached its peak in 2004 and 2005. The other element that influenced the intensity of efforts is the diminution of receptivity on the part of the Congress to cooperate after the 2006 elections. The balance of power in the new Parliament is less receptive to decentralizing initiatives. On top of this, while the Executive has modified the conduct of the process, it has not defined a new decentralization model. In this sense, the current decentralization management style aims at: (i) a more direct linkage of the Executive with sub-national governments, resulting in the deactivation of the CND in January 2007; and (ii) a greater emphasis on the technical components of the process, to the detriment of its political components.9 PRODES’ work with the PCM changed once the CND was deactivated. Relations at first were discrete, circumscribed to concrete issues and specific areas of collaboration. An example is the work carried out with the National Technical Directorate for Territorial Demarcation. Territorial demarcation is one of eight key dimensions, as defined by PRODES, of the decentralization process. Although the responsible national institution has been strengthened during recent years, it has little public projection. This office has scarce resources to press its legislative agenda. Due to its extremely technical nature, the institution belongs to a field with few civil society institutions capable of making contributions to the debate. PRODES’ work with the above-mentioned office has opened a door for public debate about the legal framework to govern territorial demarcation under decentralization: demarcation of boundaries, rationalization of sub-national government entities through the merging of small districts, and channeling the demand for new jurisdictional instances. Nevertheless, it is a highly politicized issue with great political resonance, the reason for which little progress has been made to date. The dismembered CND was absorbed by a recently created Decentralization Secretariat within the PCM. This office has assumed some of the management competencies of the CND, although with a lower governmental rank and, therefore, with far less institutional political and leadership capabilities. During the last year, PRODES worked with this office, contributing to key aspects by: (i) tracking the application of the 20 administrative decentralization measures approved by the government of Alan Garcia in the 8 In the USAID/Peru’s terms of reference, working with other national government entities was included. However, the work with the CND was prioritized understanding that this was a new entity (which needed support to help it attain a good performance), and also the directing entity responsible for the decentralization process. 9 This does not mean that PRODES has not continued working with the Congress. During the first semester of 2007, three notes referring to the Organic Law of the Executive Power, to the Amendment to the Municipalities Organic Law, and the Amendment to the Public Investment National System Law were sent to this organism. 14 EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM spring of 2006; and (ii) technical assistance related to the normative agenda of the decentralization process, and on basic aspects of the law.10 PRODES worked with the Presidential Commission for the Reform of the Executive Power (COPRE), on State reform initiatives, especially on decentralization. PRODES quietly provided debates and technical studies which generated the confidence of the PCM through the conclusion of the program. During the last year, PRODES has provided specialized data through the Decentralization Secretariat to the PCM, thereby influencing issues such as the possible institutionalization of a pilot-region, a position assumed by the PCM although against the advice of PRODES, and the delegation of responsibilities for demarcation to regional governments. Synergies were found with the Ombudsman’s Office whereby both institutions mutually reinforce the impact of their initiatives by mutual association, which made it possible to carry out a significant number of joint initiatives, particularly as it relates to debates both in Lima and interior Departments. The Ombudsman’s Office Decentralization and Good Governance Program, largely financed by USAID/Peru, was created almost simultaneously with PRODES, to provide support and oversee regional governments’ processes and the transfer process. To a certain extent, it was a program fulfilling comparable and complementary functions to those implemented by PRODES. With the Ombudsman’s Office, PRODES carried out several decentralized workshop-seminars to debate the process and accreditation system (with the support of PHR Plus Health Project, now PRAES), on guidelines for educational decentralization (with the support of the Education National Council), and other issues. The Ombudsman’s Office highly valued this mutual cooperation as a significant contribution to the legitimacy of the Decentralization and Good Governance Program, particularly the convocation ability of PRODES among municipal and regional officials—a group of people who oftentimes sees the Ombudsman as its “adversary” because of the surveillance work it performs. PRODES’ participation in these events has allowed the office to overcome this initial mistrust and make it possible for recently elected regional authorities to participate in a training program for regional counselors developed in 2007. 3.2 CREATING ENCOUNTER AND DEBATE SPACES A second component of PRODES’ work with national government actors is facilitating encounters and debates, allowing an interchange of ideas and feedback between the sectors involved in the decentralization process: public officials and institutions of civil society, international cooperation agencies, journalists, academicians, etc. PRODES’ work has opened spaces for dialogue between actors in a political context of improvisation for the decentralization process. The program began its activities at a moment when the normative framework was incomplete, contravening the decentralization process as defined by law. PRODES is an important actor (not the only actor, but definitely a leading actor) in the creation of a “decentralization community,” a group of distinguished individuals from the public sector and the civil society who, between 2002 and 2006, supported and sustained the decentralization process by promoting the creation of the required legal framework and pressuring for the efficient implementation of reforms. 10 Another specific support consisted in the reactivation of the Uchiza – Tocache Connectivity Project, with PRODES financing through USAID/Peru, as part of the Huascaran Project which had remained stagnated. EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM 15 Although with different approaches, this was a group characterized by a shared interest in the success of the process. PRODES’ participation was important for the appearance of this group, as a facilitator of encounters and supplier of information (especially, technical) for reflection and analysis. The impact of working breakfasts organized by PRODES to discuss concrete aspects of the decentralization process was important. For example, during 2004, 10 of these working breakfasts were held; in 2005, four discussions took place: on the pending agenda of the regionalization process, the debate on standards related to the reform of public employment (two), and discussions on urgent normative reforms needed prior to the referendum on regional integration. Sessions were also held over several years, consolidating themselves as a practice within the framework of the decentralization community. Debates facilitated by PRODES have allowed public sector specialists, NGOs, and civil society representatives to make contributions which subsequently have become the basis for key decentralization bills. In other words, the power of PRODES to convoke broad participation, especially among the public sector and institutions such as the Congress of the Republic, which previously were reluctant to solicit advice from the international cooperation community, is worth particular mention. 16 EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM 4.0 IMPACT OF SPECIALIZED DATA PRODUCED BY PRODES One of PRODES’ main impacts is in its role as generator of quality data related to the advances and limitations of the decentralization process. The following aspects are worth pointing out: • The impact of annual balance sheets relating to the decentralization process is, in Lima, quite significant. This data has become the primary reference document on the decentralization process. Outside Lima, the impact is less notable and found primarily in those spaces directly linked to the decentralization process (especially among large NGOs). • The production of issue-specific documents, oftentimes these documents deal with pioneering studies covering gaps in specialized expertise. The impact depends on the client-institution. • With regard to the Web Page, easy consultation makes it a useful tool for other members of the decentralization community. Annual studies on the Balance of the Decentralization Process (Balance de la Descentralización), have become an unavoidable reference document, cited and used by public officials, members of civil society organizations, NGOs, and the international cooperation. To appreciate the importance of PRODES’ annual reports, one must underscore the difficulties the Peruvian State has in generating specialized and high-quality data, which is generally considered a marginal function left in the hands of civil society organizations whose capabilities vary greatly depending on the issue: great level of commitment on issues of human rights, citizen participation and/or surveillance, but more limited with regard to those aspects requiring specialized technical knowledge, particularly related to financial management systems and follow-up of decision-making processes surrounding legislative efforts. PRODES’ annual Balances are valued as a product of a very comprehensive consultative process (which includes both State and civil society representatives). In contrast, the balance sheets prepared by Participa Peru consults primarily with civil society representatives. PRODES’ approach makes it possible to include data (for example, the more technical aspects of the transfers and accreditation process) which other institutions were not willing or were unable to generate by themselves. For these reasons, the balance sheets enjoy a mantle of great legitimacy compared to similar initiatives. Another outstanding element is the global vision of the process provided by the balance sheets and the fact that they allow a broad understanding of the status of centralization process and not only certain components of the same. In summary, we can say that the elaboration methodology is appraised to the same extent as the final product itself. The impact of the balance sheets is very significant in Lima, where they have positioned themselves as the basic source of reference for (i) the international cooperation; (ii) civil society institutions and EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM 17 distinguished personalities involved in the decentralization process; and (iii) to a lesser extent, for State officials who are political actors.11 PRODES Balances have become an indispensable source of reference and attention for the international cooperation. This fact was noted by the majority of persons interviewed, who cited that these balance sheets have been utilized as the basis for internal debates, for the preparation of their own materials, and even for dissemination purposes in other foreign countries. Outside of Lima, the balance sheets seem not to have attained the same impact. From our interviews, we can infer that the annual balance sheets have not (with several specific exceptions) become a significant reference document among regional and local public officials. As for the civil society in those territories, the impact is limited to those institutions directly linked to the decentralization process (for example, the Bureau of Agreement to Combat Poverty [Mesa de Concertación de Lucha contra la Pobreza]), to important NGOs, and, more concretely, among those who have worked with PRODES or other programs financed by USAID/Peru. PRODES´ Team diagnosed and tried to rectify the problem prioritizing initiatives such as (i) the design of a diploma course to build up a critical mass of professionals more informed and prepared to contribute to the decentralization process, and (ii) the organization of decentralized events to present such documents. To complement the annual balance sheets, PRODES has produced quarterly bulletins—distributed electronically or printed (3,000)—with critical data on progress made by the decentralization process. In 2007, the last year of Program implementation, bulletins reached a community of 2,600 key actors, including authorities, public officials, specialists, journalists, and civil society leaders nationally and in PRODES’ seven regions. These dispatches are linked to a database elaborated by the institution containing more than 4,000 registrations. In addition, PRODES made available to the public technical data and analysis through the distribution of bulletins and through its Web Page. This information has been considered useful and relevant and especially well-timed. The ease of use of the Webpage has made it a useful tool for the decentralization community and international cooperation agencies, which recommend it to anyone who wishes to understand the decentralization process in Peru. During important junctures, PRODES, in partnership with other institutions, has nurtured public debate on the decentralization process through widely distributed printed materials. An example is the information primer published before the referendum on the conformation of regions, supported by the Ombudsman’s Office, the Bureau of Agreement to Combat Poverty (Mesa de Concertación de Lucha contra la Pobreza), and the CND, of which more than 90,000 copies were distributed.12 In many instances, these documents proved to be valuable references for public debate, informing public opinion about the decentralization processes and its different stages. This aspect was mentioned in several interviews, especially in Lima among members of NGOs and professionals working for international cooperation entities. 11 Among those individuals who were responsible for managing the CND during the administration of Alejandro Toledo, the team identified a critical vision about the importance of the reports. At some point it was said that PRODES “boycotted the work of the CND” by belittling the work performed by the public institution charged with the conduction of the decentralization process who had the responsibility of preparing its own balance sheets of the decentralization process. At any rate, this was not reflective of the intention of PRODES but, to the contrary, to the CND’s lack of capacity to play its role as the main character in the decentralization process. 12 Fifth eight thousand (58,000) of these information primers were financed by PRODES. Thirty thousand (30,000) of them were handed over to the CND for their distribution. 18 EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM With regard to PRODES’ specialized analyses, over and above the annual balance sheets, the quality of the products has allowed them to become referents on matters subject to analysis. These analyses are oftentimes pioneering works covering gaps in existing knowledge. An example is the document titled: “Territorial Demarcation and Organization. Findings and Recommendations Report” (January 2007), which is one of the first works on this highly specialized issue (with little or no local experts). The mid-term impact of these reports depends basically on the client-institution and the receptivity of public officials. Retaking the previous example, the difficulty encountered by the National Technical Directorate for Territorial Demarcation to gain influence on the executive and legislative agenda has prevented the implementation of many of the recommendations contained in the document. The results in the case of materials for the Ministry of Economy and Finance, an institution with greater autonomy and capacity to influence policy, have been more favorable. PRODES’ reports are considered as definitive references on issues, such as the design of a transfer process. The importance of PRODES’ support to the MIMDES as it relates to the competencies and transfers matrix elaborated to guide the process has also been highlighted. EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM 19 5.0 IMPACT OF WORK PERFORMED WITH USAID/PERU’S PROGRAMS AND STRATEGIC PARTNERS One of PRODES´ objectives is to create positive synergies on decentralization with other USAID programs and strategic partners. In this connection, the team can identify the following main achievement and impacts: • PRODES is regarded as a program “always willing to help.” It is a good partner for an alliance on the decentralization issue. • PRODES plays a very important role in transforming relations of the Alternative Development (PDA) with local governments. It made it possible for PDA’s economic contributions to be handled in an institutional manner and to hold municipalities more accountable for their work. • PRODES coordinated the work of professionals at the MEF in the application of the Integrated System for Financial Management (SIAF) in support of PDA. A special quota was assigned to local governments within the PDA ambit to receive PRODES training on the SNIP. • The relationship between PRODES and APRENDES in San Martin has produced very important results in the area of education. APPRENDES is now integrated into the participatory budgeting process and the subsequent accompaniment of actions thereof. PRODES became a member of the working group named USAID’s Partners in Decentralization. This group was created in recognition that many programs financed by USAID/Peru include activities aimed at supporting both the normative political reform for decentralization and specific programs providing support to sub-national governments. This group has been holding sessions in a formal and periodic fashion since November 2004 to interchange information, to identify complementarity of efforts at the local and regional levels, and to identify common strategies to influence in the design and implementation of policies related to the decentralization process. The group started with 20 participants and, at present, 11 of them remain active. In addition, USAID/Peru identified as strategic partners: the National Decentralization Council (CND), the National Education Council (CNE), the Ministry of Education (MINEDU) and the Ministry of Health (MINSA). PRODES has participated in this group and has coordinated in Lima with USAID/Peru’s programs on issues related to the decentralization process. With the Health and Education Sectors, it has worked on issues linked to the transfer of competencies and functions to sub-national governments. Both sectoral programs praised PRODES’ technical contributions to training at the sub-national level. In the case of the Health Sector, there has been a greater level of coordination, particularly with strategic partners on health issues, as noted below. 20 EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM The Alternative Development Program (PDA) highlighted its satisfaction with PRODES’ work, mentioning its very important role in transforming PDA’s relations with local governments. PRODES developed an ad-hoc plan to provide support to the PDA’s work in 48 prioritized municipalities.13 It allowed PDA’s economic contributions at the municipal level to be managed in an institutional fashion by municipalities; in other words, allowing these projects to be formally included in municipal budgets, and in this way making municipalities accountable for the use of budgeted resources. Moreover, PRODES coordinated the work of consultants at the MEF in the application of the SIAF (Financial Management Integrated System) in municipalities, with PDA priority municipalities receiving a special quota to receive PRODES’ SNIP training. Achievements attained in this connection have been significant, although it was noted that there are still weaknesses in local governments. The PDA at local level (Tarapoto) also points out the coordination work of PRODES and achievements attained.14 Strategic partners such as PDA and the PRA highly praise PRODES’ work, particularly in light of factors exogenous to the Program which might limit impact (such as a limited budget to meet the needs of all municipalities within the ambit of the PDA, and the election of authorities making the impact and sustainability of any program difficult). According to the opinion of strategic partners, PRODES stands out as a program “always willing to help” and as a good partner for alliances on the issue of decentralization. The most significant contribution to decentralization of PRODES relates to the fact it has an integrated and permanent vision of the process. As mentioned above, strategic partners in the health sector maintained a close relationship with PRODES. Among other activities, they participated in working breakfasts to discuss the Accreditations Law and coordinating the presentation of suggestions for the preparation of the bylaws for this law. Moreover, they point out that PRODES developed a map of competencies for the Ministry of Women and Social Development (MIMDES), including a transfer methodology which has been applied in the health sector jointly with the USAID-financed PRAES health project. At the sub-national level, interesting coordination experiences took place between PRODES and USAID/Peru’s programs and strategic partners. One of these points of encounter has been PRODES’ training program courses related to SNIP. In general, local partners of the programs have used the materials and guidelines elaborated by PRODES. In the case of San Martin, a region where many of the programs and partners converge, local operators developed shared work plans. At the beginning, PRODES and APRENDES (Decentralization Innovations and Active Schools) convoked coordination meetings, but this initiative was deactivated with time. It is worth mentioning, however, that the relationship between PRODES and APRENDES in San Martin has produced excellent results. Thanks to the initial efforts of PRODES vis-à-vis the regional government to allow a presentation of APRENDES related to the participatory budgeting process and the subsequent accompaniment of its actions, APRENDES succeeded in the approval of a capabilities development project. This would not have been achieved without PRODES support.15 Behind these achievements there was a very positive lobbying experience recognized both by APRENDES and by the Education Program. 13 “PRODES ‘ad-hoc plan’ to provide support to the PDA” (ms). 14 At the meeting held with them, a special presentation of its work was made and on which aspects they had coordinated with PRODES. Both the head of this office and the person responsible for working with local governments had experience and sensitivity to the need to develop participatory local management work. The professional in charge of the work with local governments of the PDA was member of a PRODES ETL. 15 Subsequently, the work performed by APRENDES has had significant impact at the San Martin Region level, with the announcement that the Regional Educational Plan is expanding the regional space in all aspects of the proposal of APRENDES. EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM 21 6.0 IMPACT OF TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROVIDED TO REGIONAL GOVERNMENTS PRODES’ work with regional governments has attained significant impacts, among which the following are worth highlighting: • Significant progress has been made in the conduct of the participatory budgeting process. PRODES has managed to institutionalize citizen participation mechanisms and insert the participatory budgeting articulation issue in the regional agenda. • Progress also has been made in strengthening the executive branch of regional governments by provid￾ing training to public officials (basically through the SNIP course). During field work, the Evaluation Team verified a series of concrete impacts among participants in these courses: reinforcement of technical skills, improved awareness of prevailing legislation, better information of administrative processes, and a more comprehensive vision of their functions and of problems to be confronted. • Important progress has been made to strengthen the capabilities of the legislative apparatus of regional governments, thanks to the Regional Councilmember’s Training Program carried out jointly with the Ombudsman’s Office. This is a pioneering course. Main achievements are better knowledge of regional counselors’ functions, better performance of commissions managed by these counselors, and improved quality of debates and discussions within the Regional Council. • The impact of planning instruments such as the elaboration of Regional Competitiveness Plans is more limited. Although this activity was not contemplated in the Program’s original design, PRODES, at the request of USAID/Peru, assumed this responsibility. Its impact has been limited due to external factors: entrepreneurial unionization weakness and frequent staff turnover among economic development managers have hindered the continuity of work. Technical assistance provided to regional governments started in 2003 and includes the following aspects: • Counseling on the conduct of the regional participatory budgeting process, with special emphasis on the articulation among regional, provincial, and district governments. • Strengthening the capabilities of the executive apparatus of regional governments: training public officials (basically on the SNIP courses) and the dissemination of informational materials. • Strengthening the capabilities of the legislative apparatus of regional governments through the Training Program for Regional Counselors—men and women (hereinafter the Counselors Program). • Strengthening the capabilities of civil society representatives to the Regional Coordination Councils (Years 2006-2007). • Facilitation of processes of regional scope for the elaboration of planning instruments, like the elaboration of Competitiveness Plans. 22 EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM Beginning in 2006, a specific working team was formed to work with regional governments. This team was integrated by one half-time, direct hire professional from PRODES and various consultants. This team coordinated with the areas of Institutional Normative Strengthening and Capabilities Training. This staff was incremented and reduced, in terms of the number of consultants, according to requirements related to the work with regional governments. The consultants selected to work with regional governments came both from Lima as well as from the targeted zones. This was the case, especially, on the issue related to the capabilities strengthening of the civil society within the CCR. In the Departments of San Martin and Cuzco, consultants came from the same target area, while, in other regions, PRODES decided to interchange consultants. For example, a consultant from Huanuco was contracted to work in Pasco. Above all, this interchange responds to the fact that, at times, residents are suspicious of local consultants. In this way PRODES reinforces capabilities but avoids possible local reticence. 6.1 TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE RELATED TO THE MANAGEMENT OF THE REGIONAL PARTICIPATORY BUDGETING PROCESS This component includes several steps: • At the beginning, Regional Public Fora were held for the promotion of accountability and participatory budgeting processes, marked by massive public attendance. These fora were the initial stage of the process, focused on gaining agreements and consensuses related to the dynamics of work, distribution of resources, etc. Issues emphasized by PRODES referred to the need to maintain political commitments and the need for participatory processes to be carried out in an articulated fashion. • Later, the technical assistance and accompaniment of the process was initiated. During the present year, work has been performed directly with Ucayali, Pasco, Junin, Ayacucho, and San Martin and, in the cases of Cuzco and Huanuco, support has been more delimited. Direct technical assistance is provided through consultants working with a liaison staff member designated by each regional government. In the five regions, the working methodology has been the same. Results attained vary according to local capabilities and to the degree of commitment of the regional government vis-à-vis the process. • With respect to the ETRs. - Junin stands out, thanks to the fact that the former President of the Region incorporated direct hire staff within the ETR. The ETR continues in force and is well prepared. - In the case of Cuzco, the current Regional President is unresponsive to the participatory budgeting process, but the ETR feels itself capable and remains part of the regional government. Moreover, the PRODES Coordinator in Cusco provides ongoing support to the ETR. - In the case of San Martin, the trained ETR staff had been hired by the former regional administration and, subsequent to the elections, did not continue. According to the PRODES Coordinator in San Martin, the current ETR is weaker than its predecessor. This has limited the effectiveness of the process, given the ETR’s lack of experience and lack of participation of the Regional President in key stages. - In Ucayali, the process requires the continued support of an external. A former member of the ETL CIPA is present within the ETR; however, the team as a whole is still consolidating. EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM 23 • With respect to the articulation of the participatory budget. Articulation of the participatory budget among the various levels of sub-national governments is still incipient due to the absence of a national sector entity responsible for its direction (theoretically CEPLAN should fulfill this function) and the lack of coordination on the part of the Executive Branch (MEF) related to the terms for its formulation. Despite PRODES’ limited (two years) support, this issue has been positioned within the regional agenda. Junin is the region where articulation of the participatory budget process has made the most progress by modifying its timetable. The ETR, together with PRODES, has developed creative strategies to ensure articulation: timetable amendments and building in flexibility to the timeline, and anticipating MEF amendments to the process. 6.2 TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROVIDED TO THE EXECUTIVE APPARATUS OF REGIONAL GOVERNMENTS In 2005, PRODES included in its package of assistance to sub-national governments activities training programs with the purpose of strengthening specific specialized skills of authorities, public officials, technical staffers of regional governments, and representatives of the civil society.16 This program counts on the support from State entities, local universities, and civil society institutions. Two courses in this program are directly involved in training public officials at regional level: • Training Trainers in Investment Projects Course – National Public Investment System (SNIP) (SNIP Course) • Investment Promoters Training Course (PROINVERSIÓN Course). Table 1: SNIP and ProInversión Courses Beneficiaries in the Departments wherein it intervenes PRODES 2004 – 200717 Course Department Year Authorities Officials Civil Society Others Total 2005 0 28 14 0 42 SNIP 7 regions 2006 0 104 33 4 141 2007 1 131 45 2 191 Total 1 263 92 6 374 Percentage 0.3 70.3 24.6 1.6 100.0 7 regions 2006 0 21 3 0 24 Proinversión Huánuco￾Pasco 2007 0 14 12 2 28 Total 0 35 15 2 52 Percentage 0.0 67.3 28.8 3.8 100.0 Source: PRODES 16 Annex 5 contains the complete list of courses included in this program. 17 The first editions of SNIP and ProInversión courses, called “pilot-courses” by PRODES, also included participants from other regions outside PRODES’ area of intervention. These participants have not been considered in this table. 24 EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM Local and regional government public officials participated in both courses together with university teachers. Members of local chambers of commerce also participated in the ProInversión courses. To a great degree, participants interviewed during the evaluation, emphasized the high quality of the courses offered. Both SNIP participants and MEF representatives indicated that there exists no course of comparable quality to that offered by PRODES. These extremely favorable opinions can be explained above all by the methodology used to develop the course and organization in its implementation. Each course begins with an intensive preparation of materials, coordinated by PRODES and involving MEF personnel. A mechanism is established for the constant improvement of each of the modules. Participants in the ProInversión course convey the same impression as to the quality of the offered courses, although in this latter case, fewer replications were carried out (excepting the Huanuco-Pasco course). An important lesson is the working methodology of training programs. Both the SNIP and ProInversión courses involve an arduous process of elaboration, methodological improvement, and corrections, both in PRODES (with MEF personnel) and during the development of the course18 itself. This experience has nurtured the design of other PRODES training programs. From the Evaluation Team’s standpoint there are several highlights: • The methodology emphasizes technical aspects but insists on practical issues and applications in concrete projects. • The excellence of the coursework staff. - The Exhibitors. The speakers have demonstrated expertise on the issues addressed. They possess practical experience since they generally labor on aspects linked to the issues they present. Many of the exhibitors work for the public sector. This makes it possible to bring national government public officials nearer to those officials who implement the processes on a daily basis. This generated an additional positive effect on national government officials. - The Facilitators. On-site sessions were intense and facilitators needed to keep participants attentive. As problems arose (caused by strong personalities or by individuals pretending to be more knowledgeable than others), the facilitators tried to keep the groups united despite their internal differences, allowing them to bring forward the assigned tasks. Moreover, they articulated the relation between the exhibitor and the pupils, acting as a hinge and creating a dynamic and participatory working climate. - The Tutors. The persons charged with the follow-up of the course and providing counseling to pupils have been responsive to the demands made by participants. - The Board of Examiners. Participants are particularly satisfied at the rigor of the examiners. The presence of a demanding panel of judges improves the quality and profundity of the projects, making their arguments stronger. - Materials were available in a double sense: Access to them was easy (physically obtainable) and they were user-friendly. Even now, after the course, the participants employ the materials in their work in their own institutions. 18 PRODES dictated a pilot-course in Lima, jointly with the Universidad Del Pacifico, with the participation of experts from the seven regions of the Program’s area of intervention. The MEF and PRODES teams developed the course and wrote down every error or setback as the case may be, trying to correct them immediately. EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM 25 - Relationship with other regions. The courses have allowed participants to learn about experiences in other regions. This occurred in all courses. In addition to the SNIP and ProInversión courses, the Departments within the ambit of PRODES appreciated examples from the more developed Departments—those with greater experience on development and private investment projects. The participants interviewed found it difficult to identify any material weaknesses in either of these two courses. In the case of the SNIP course, there are two aspects worth mentioning which are contradictory between them but useful for discussion purposes: (i) although the methodology has been open-minded and the course is replicable, officials at the MEF responsible for this issue said it was financially expensive to replicate as PRODES has done it (with equipment, personnel, exhibitors, facilitators)19; (ii) the course has been designed on the assumption that only one person (in the praxis) will impart all three training modules instead of considering alternative means to implement an interdisciplinary effort.20 As for the ProInversión course, three elements noticed by the participants are worth pointing out: (i) the first edition of this course, in Lima, excluded participants from district municipalities, who also bear responsibility related to investments (although, selected provincial municipalities did participate) 21; (ii) participants recommend including, as part of the course, internships and concrete and successful experiences of private investment processes (especially of concession agreements). During the field work, the Evaluation Team verified a series of concrete impacts among participants in these courses: strengthening of technical skills, better knowledge of the law, better understanding of administrative processes, and more comprehensive understanding of their functions and the problems they must confront. In a similar way, although no follow-up actions have been deployed on participants to measure the real impact of the courses on the work performed, we confirmed that the majority of participants interviewed point out the positive impact of the courses within their institutions, including: • A better management of responsibilities within the corresponding entity where participants worked. • The concretization of projects, stemming from the courses, both in the case of the SNIP course and in the case of the Investment Promoters Course.22 19 It is not our purpose to measure the cost of the SNIP course, rather we simply note the perceptions of the interviewees. For a program with the dimensions of PRODES, the cost would not have been high; however, for a local university or for the State sector, this would probably be the case. According to the MEF, it is complicated to replicate the course to the same extent, although its project under the name of “Voices of the Poor” (“Voces de los Pobres”) is dictating a quite similar course. In San Martin, AMRESAM together with the PDA plan to offer the course in the same manner it was developed by PRODES. 20 Social Science professionals should take part in the Identification Module, in order to generate a better matrix of those involved. The Training Module should be imparted to specialists on each type of project. If one refers to a road, one should engage the services of a civil engineer; in the case of an agriculture project, the professional contracted should be an agronomist, etc. Last but not least, the Evaluation Module should be developed by economists or by professionals linked to project evaluation. This interdisciplinary aspect was incorporated into the SNIP course developed by PRODES jointly with the Health Program of USAID/Peru and its strategic partners. 21 In the edition of the course currently imparted in Huanuco – Pasco, district municipality’s officials do participate. For this evaluation, these pupils were not interviewed. 22 For example: (i) Financing in the amount of S/. 20,000 was obtained from FONCODES for a project made viable during one of the SNIP courses, benefiting a poor district in Cuzco (Ccorca); (ii) the Regional Government of San Martin has added incentives to the SNIP course by awarding prizes for the implementation of the three best projects. In the case of the ProInversión course, negotiations to award the concession agreement for the construction of the Port of Pucallpa, have begun. Initially this project was not considered worth it, but the participants in the course were able to sustain the project and persuade local authorities. 26 EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM • Negotiations aimed at strengthening the Private Investment Promotion Agency (Agencia de Fomento de la Inversión Privada) at the regional government level. • Elaboration of the Private Investment Promotion Plan. In a specific case, in Junin, one of the participants prepared a working plan for the promotion of private investments as a result of the course that was presented to the regional government Economic Development Management in March 2007. In addition, a consultants market has been in formation at the local level with professionals trained in the formulation of projects by the SNIP. In the case of the regional government of San Martin, the services of former students of this institution have been requested to make viable, through the participation of SNIP, a series of projects for the present year prioritizing regional participatory budget, which at present do not have complete technical dossiers. Furthermore, the impact may also be seen in the replications of the course by other institutions. Currently, both the MEF and ProInversión are working on a decentralized training program. “Voices of the Poor” replicates PRODES’ courses within its area of geographic influence. In the second case, with the sponsorship of the Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD), courses applying the PRODES methodology are offered for 120 officials (bi-regional meetings, on-site, and virtual phase, etc.). However, these are not the only replications of the PRODES courses. UNICEF has replicated the SNIP course in the Departments of Cuzco and Ayacucho; in the Departments where PRODES intervenes, there have been several contacts made aimed at the replication of the PRODES course; the regional governments of Ancash and Cajamarca will replicate the course even though these Departments are not part of PRODES’ intervention zones. It is very likely that these replications will continue after PRODES’ closure. This impact represents an improvement of local capabilities that will be appreciated in the short and medium term. 6.3 STRENGTHENING THE LEGISLATIVE CAPACITY OF REGIONAL GOVERNMENTS During 2007, PRODES carried out a training program for regional counselors in partnership with the Ombudsman’s Office Decentralization and Good Governance Program. In the ambit of PRODES, this is the only course addressed exclusively to regional legislators. It is a pioneering course on the matter. It departs from the diagnostic made by PRODES and by the Ombudsman’s Office, of the lack of a legislative culture within sub-national governments, which subsequently leads to a neglect of responsibilities. As in all courses designed by PRODES, special care has been taken in the elaboration of training and technical assistance materials for Regional Counselors and in guidelines for two essential aspects of the work of Regional Counselors: (i) normative production, and (ii) oversight. These materials were validated by the Regional Counselors of two regional governments of the Departments where PRODES intervenes. Both the participants themselves and the Ombudsman’s Office accord on the positive results of the course. The participants note the quality of the speakers and board of examiners, the quality and usefulness of materials, as well as the opportunity to establish relations with counselors from other regions. This latter aspect has induced some counselors to consider organizing a national encounter of regional counselors. The course has gathered all the counselors of the seven regions where PRODES works (68 in total). The dropout rate has been very low if we consider that elected authorities also need to fulfill their regional obligations. Ninety two percent (92%) of the counselors (63 out of 68) participated in the course, which 76% completed satisfactorily. EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM 27 The contents of the course emphasize the need to contribute to the strengthening of the Regional Council members’ leadership, organizational, negotiations, and oversight skills. From the Evaluation Team’s standpoint, the main impacts of this course are: • Improved awareness regarding the functions of Regional Counselors. Counselors have better knowledge of the three basic functions foreseen by the law: supervisory, normative, and representative functions.23 • Improved performance at the commissions where counselors have responsibility. In this sense, counselors interviewed point out the differences between those who attended the course and those who did not. • Usefulness of guidelines. To many, the PRODES’ Guidelines have become a permanent consultation material.24 • Improved level of debates and discussions within the Regional Council. The course allows a more informed discussion within regional governments. The result of this is the production of higher￾quality regional ordinances.25 • Enhancement of horizons. The course has allowed council members to discover and value the experiences of counselors from other regions. In this sense, it has enriched the participants’ experience. Among the limitations hampering the attainment of an even greater impact, we mention the • Heterogeneity of the counselors’ abilities. While some participants were lawyers, others were professionals with no experience in legislation, and several without any professional training. Furthermore, with the exception of one counselor from Cuzco, all other participants were first￾time councilors. • Absence of a module related to regional management. This would have been useful in the understanding that when counselors have greater knowledge of administrative performance and regional government procedures, their normative and supervisory functions at the regional government level improve. In the case of Ucayali, although six of seven counselors participated in the course, none passed. In this case, the lack of experience in public administration and the regional political juncture26 produced results that were less successful than in the other regions. To obtain a better result, it may be necessary to conduct a preliminary course to homogenize a basic standard of knowledge. 23 They are entitled to demand accountability from the regional president. They also know their limits relating to the operational aspect of the regional government. 24 In the San Martin government, counselors have an office at each of the provinces they represent and, during our visit to Tocache, the counselor we interviewed affirmed that he considered PRODES material as “his Bible” and he had it on the table to use it as a permanent consultation material. 25 “In the past we used to debate about national laws and we wanted to vote for them” (Counselor of Junín). 26 One of the presentational sessions was held during a general strike in Ucayali and the counselors had to choose between escorting their voters and attending the course. Those who attended the course were later publicly criticized for having been away during a key moment of the regional strife. 28 EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM 6.4 COMPETITIVENESS PLANS While not contemplated in the original design of the program (PRODES Terms of Reference27 indicated that this activity would be carried out under other USAID/Peru’s programs), PRODES at the request of USAID/Peru assumed the task. The process comprises two stages: • A preliminary diagnostic performed by a specialized consultant offered the following recommendations that regional governments: (i) should establish a climate propitious for investments; (ii) hire trained staff; (iii) unfold actions oriented explicitly to the promotion of investment; and (iv) establishment public/private fora allowing for public-private initiatives. • Contracting consulting services of Goberna SAC to offer technical assistance and accompaniment to regional governments in the elaboration of competitiveness plans during the February-October 2004 period. During these months, the team identified a design phase, a pilot-stage in Ucayali, a training stage (workshop-seminars with members of government of the other five regions explaining methodologies and experiences in Ucayali); a redesigning stage based on lessons learned; and an implementation stage developed during the September-October 2005 period in the other five Departments. Two workshop-seminars: sensitization (one-and-a-half days) and planning (two days). At each of these stages, the formulation of a plan was conceived as a participatory process. The plans were completed by the consulting firm. From the Evaluation Team’s standpoint, these plans were an interesting systematization exercise in regional economic development. Their elaboration motivated regional actors who found a space to reflect on needs and expectations. Its impact has been somewhat limited primarily due to two external elements: • The weakness of guilds which is notorious in the majority of the Departments. This was the why those entrepreneurs who participated in the elaboration of the plans were not more representative of the private sector as a whole. • Frequent changes among economic development managers have hindered the continuity of work. In summary, with respect to the work performed with regional governments, there are several points worthy of being highlighted: • In spite of the fact that PRODES’ offer of assistance to regional governments has had the participatory management as background, as in the case of local governments, it has proven to be the most specialized of assistance. This assistance has focused on the articulation of the participatory budget and the training of public officials on issues related to the formulation of projects, investments, and to the decentralization process. In addition, it had, in contradistinction to the assistance provided to local governments, courses aimed at the legislative apparatus of the regional government. • The work performed has allowed regional governments to improve their relationship with civil society and their capabilities to confront the challenges of the decentralization process on concrete aspects where PRODES’ assistance has been focused. However, there is still a long way to go before regional governments become efficient managers of resources. 27 “Other USAID programs may provide complementary assistance related to improving the role of local governments in administering or overseeing specific services (such as education or health) or with the development and implementation of strategic plans (i.e., related to the environment or economic development)” – (p. 14). EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM 29 A crucial obstacle to deepening the decentralization process is the Reform of the State. Regional governments continue to act on the basis of Departments, according to the administrative pattern of the former Regional Management Transitory Councils (CTAR). They have been unable to streamline and restructure, which is key to improving services offered to the population. Evidently, confronting these obstacles lies beyond the possibilities of the international cooperation. Between 2002 and 2006, none of the seven regions where PRODES worked had regional governments with strong wills to transform.28 Moreover, it was about the first experience in the decentralization process. Everything was new, everything remained to be done, and the regional governments lingered to understand their role within the reform. 28 See Annex 6. Regional Elections Results. 30 EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM 7.0 IMPACT OF TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROVIDED TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS Beginning in 2003, PRODES contractually committed to working with 537 local governments within a short timeframe. These local governments were located in very different regions, largely located in rural areas with a very high degree of institutional heterogeneity. Main results of this work were the following: • Improvement in the relation of local governments with the civil society using participatory budgets and accountability. • Improved relationships of administrative officials with civil society. The authorities lost their reluctance and fear to public participation. • Improved environment for governability in sub-national governments. • Universal coverage in the seven regions where the program works: 476 district municipalities and 61 provincial municipalities in the year 2005. To have an idea of the coverage of PRODES’ assistance in its area of intervention, below we present the following table. Table 229: PRODES’ Beneficiaries According to Intervention Departments 2004 – 2007 Region Authorities Officials Civil Society Others Total Ayacucho 3175 2363 4982 106 10626 Cuzco 9748 10531 29298 2879 52456 Huánuco 6226 6262 7585 810 20883 Junín 13219 14814 18543 2978 49554 Pasco 3295 3494 4510 631 11930 San Martín 7722 9072 8973 1900 27667 Ucayali 1366 2472 7208 894 11940 Through the ETL Total 44751 49008 81099 10198 185056 29 Annex 7 includes detailed data of beneficiaries. EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM 31 Region Authorities Officials Civil Society Others Total Ayacucho 11 54 47 3 115 Cuzco 13 59 78 3 153 Huánuco 12 57 41 4 114 Junín 7 52 53 3 115 Pasco 7 16 11 0 34 San Martín 11 69 11 0 91 Ucayali 6 14 45 6 71 Training Program Total 67 321 286 19 693 TOTAL 44818 49329 81385 10217 185749 Source: PRODES To design its local intervention strategy, PRODES was supported by an inter-institutional team of professionals from various institutions (especially from NGOs) to work on three key issues: participatory management, participatory budgeting, and program implementation strategy. For on-site implementation, PRODES selected institutions, called Local Technical Teams (ETLs) to implement the intervention strategy. Not all the members of the selected ETL participated in the project; rather, a group, or in certain cases ad-hoc personnel, is engaged to complement the efforts of members of the target institution. Each ETL maintains an office in the intervention region (within selected provincial and district municipalities30), where Municipal Technical Teams (ETM) are established. The ETMs are integrated by officials and/or local authorities and are the counterpart of counseling services provided by the ETLs. We can distinguish local governments’ technical assistance strategy in three aspects: • Direct technical assistance for the strengthening of ETM. • Institutionalization of citizen participation mechanisms in decision-making processes. • Design, publication, and dissemination of training materials. 7.1 STRENGTHENING OF MUNICIPAL TECHNICAL TEAMS (ETM) The Municipal Technical Teams (ETM) are the counterpart to, and beneficiary of, the ETLs, integrated by municipal officials and authorities with decision-making power on issues related to the intervention. In 2004, the first full year of PRODES’ direct intervention at the sub-national level, the program reached 322 municipalities. In many of these municipalities, the adequacy or elaboration of management instruments was emphasized as a requirement for the accreditation of municipalities to receive transferred social programs. At the same time, PRODES initiated work on participatory budgeting and public accountability. 30 The list of ETLs per year and per subsidiary offices under their area of responsibility is shown in Annex 8. 32 EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM PRODES’ performance in the 2004 and 2006 has quantitatively exceeded foreseen goals. The conformation of ETMs attained the rate of 100% in 2006. Table 3: Percentage of Municipal Technical Teams incorporated by year of intervention 2004 2005 2006 Goal 60% (of 314 gl) 70% (of 504 gl) 80% (of 232 gl) Performance 76% (239/314) 89% (451/504) 99% ( 229/232) Source: PRODES Our interviews detected that the participatory budgeting and public accountability training provided by PRODES to the ETMs continues to be used by the municipalities, even in those municipalities whose authorities were replaced as a result of the 2006 elections. In the majority of municipalities, ordinances have been issued regulating participation in these processes. An issue that has been addressed, but which from the Evaluation Team’s standpoint still presents significant challenges, is the articulation of participatory budgets; this being understood in two senses: • Participatory budget and concerted development plans31 within a municipality need to be articulated; even though, in some cases, PRODES has modernized development plans, it is true that participatory budgets are seen more as a sum of projects. In this sense, the issue of participatory strategic plan planning and budgeting has been left aside and have been replaced by a rationale more closely linked to projects, which is the rationale applied by the Ministry of Economy and Finance (MEF). 32 • Articulation should exist among district, provincial, and regional participatory budgets. This point is addressed as part of the technical assistance provided to regional governments. We emphasize, however, that PRODES has included the need for this articulation in both local and regional agendas. These issues are similar to those previously identified in PRODES’ intermediate evaluation and highlighted at the Regional Public Forum held in Huanuco33: the weak articulation of concerted development plans, the prioritization of works instead of development projects or the strengthening of capabilities, etc. With regard to the impact of PRODES’ work: • PRODES’ work better consolidates participatory budgeting and accountability processes when working with municipal staff with previous professional formation (economists, accountants, administrators) and experience with participatory processes. This occurs especially in urban municipalities (provincial and district municipalities, or at least with staff with extensive experience in municipal management.) 31 In addition, the PDCs are rather weak. As pointed out by the Mayor of Rio Negro: “I have great respect for the work of the facilitators. However, one sees the PDC of Rio Negro and one sees it merely as a list of weaknesses. The first PDC was made by a consultant. The second PDC was made by Caritas and PRODES.” 32 The MEF was not working on the articulation of the participatory budget with the participatory strategic plan planning. What interests them is an improvement in project prioritization based on the five priorities established by the PCM: child nutrition, education, access to roads, mother-child health, and identity issues. 33 PRODES. Contributions to the Debate on Decentralization Issues Nº 5 – Year 2006. EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM 33 • Rural municipalities generally begin with both very weak experiences and processes. Any external support is beneficial and improves the processes to a large degree. However, the sustainability of work is correspondingly less. This finding happens not only with PRODES, but to all programs and projects carried out in the selected regions.34 With the changeover of authorities after the 2006 elections, numerous ETM members moved on to other municipalities. This has always been a recurrent phenomenon. Employees and/or public officials who were interviewed often have had previous working experience in two or three other municipalities. Employees rotate to other municipalities in the same region and, hence, they may be able to maintain and apply to a certain extent what they have learned. Sometimes, however, these same employees do not retain a similar decision-making level. These changes are almost always detrimental to the effective transfer of municipal management.35 PRODES anticipated this problem; for the 2006 electoral year and expected turnover of personnel, PRODES drafted, published, and disseminated guidelines (Let’s carry out an orderly transfer of municipal administration and management) for ensuring an orderly and transparent transfer of administrative and management responsibilities within the existing normative framework. In this effort, it was joined by the Government of Spain: CAPRODES (Strengthening Capabilities for the Decentralization Process Program). These programs, together with the CND, edited and published these guidelines. An issue already addressed by PRODES, but which has emerged as a recommendation by several authorities and local public officials for future programs in support of decentralization, is to provide an integrated approach for efficient municipal management and more training on decentralization issues. The issues highlighted were basically: (i) support on planning (all municipalities interviewed acknowledge that their PDCs are obsolete or, at best, a sum of projects and are not taken into consideration when elaborating budgets); (ii) more transparent management through better use of the SIAF36; (iii) better elaboration of municipal budgets (which does not end solely with the participatory budgeting aspect of it); and (iv) training for the improved management of issues related to the decentralization process, such as territorial demarcation.37 34 For example, the Mayor of the District of Pinto Recodo (Province of Lamas in the Department of San Martin) affirms that he was unable to implement PDA’s projects (five of its eleven communities implement projects with the PDA) because he is short of technical staff. This municipality has SIAF (it was one of the municipalities benefiting from PRODES’ work financed by USAID/AD ); however, until last year, the municipality had only one direct hire employee (the Mayor). A second staffer was incorporated during the current year. 35 A remark made by a member of the NGO “Guaman Poma de Ayala” (former ETL in Cuzco) is interesting: “The lack of a civil service career inhibits sustainability. On top of this are problems related to the transfer of municipal management transfers. Even if the outgoing administration has been successful, they do not want that the upcoming administration to be successful. The transfer process is not transparent. For example, we, as an external institution, have had to hand over the documents to the new administration. This affects adversely the strengthening process of municipalities. Then essential tasks surge again.” 36 Selected municipalities have SIAF but rely on the expertise of external accountants to function since they do not possess the institutional capabilities to the work by themselves. 37 ETLs interviewed point out that, in spite of the fact that it was agreed that technical assistance would address certain specific issues (participatory budgeting and accountability, basically), the municipalities have additional needs such as the improvement of their budgets and of procurement of goods and services, the SIAF among others. These issues were not included in their working commitments with PRODES. 34 EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM 7.2 INSTITUTIONALIZATION OF MECHANISMS FOR CITIZEN PARTICIPATION IN THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESSES Both PRODES’ self-evaluation and interviews conducted document a high performance in institutionalizing mechanisms for citizen participation. As seen below, PRODES has exceeded its established goals almost every year. Table 4: Institutionalization of Citizen Participation Mechanisms at Local Governments According to Years of Intervention (2004-2006) Year Proposed Goal PRODES’ Performance 2004 80% (of 314 mm) 86% (270/314) 2005 80% (of 504 mm) 90% (456/504) Local Governments having implemented citizen participation mechanisms in planning and budgeting 2006 80% (of 232 mm) 100% (232/232) 2004 80% (of 314 mm) 73% (229/314) 2005 80% (of 504 mm) 92% (462/504) Local Governments having institutionalized participatory budgeting 2006 80% (of 232 mm) 100% (232/232) 2004 80% (of 314 mm) 84% (264/314) 2005 80% (of 504 mm) 63% (319/504) Local Governments having approved participatory budgets with the population’s participation 2006 80% (of 232 mm) 87% (203/232) 2004 80% (of 314 mm) 58% (183/314) 2005 80% (of 504 mm) 29% (147/504) Local Governments having institutionalized accountability mechanisms 2006 80% (of 232 mm) 88% (205/232) Source: PRODES “Systematized Results 2003-2006, PRODES Program.” The institutionalization of participatory budgets is a growing reality in the country. It is difficult to ascribe this effect solely to PRODES’ work. It is necessary to take into account the interest and will of authorities, the prevailing normative framework,38 previous experiences of citizen participation at the municipality,39 and the work carried out by other institutions.40 However, the PRODES program has attained universal coverage in the municipalities of the seven intervention regions. At present, there is no similar impact produced by any other program, project, or institution that we know. PRODES’ progress in the institutionalization of the participatory budgeting process is significant, with the improved relations between civil society and sub-national governments, the enhancement of spaces for public discussion and debate, the dissemination of learning and teachings related to public 38 The institutionalization of these mechanisms is part of the decentralization normative framework: the Basis for Decentralization Act, the Organic Law for Regional Governments, the Organic Law for Municipalities, and the Law for Participatory Budget Framework. 39 “We have had to establish norms on what we previously applied. At present we consult. The population knows when there is a budget. They know which works will be implemented. It helps us to avoid criticism afterwards” (Economic Development Manager of the Provincial Municipality of Urubamba). “Accountability reports were prepared and presented from 2003 and that grants great legitimacy to the government. At the beginning of PRODES’ intervention, the team helped us organizing the best way to develop program components and how to organize the commissions. They helped us design ordinances in a participatory fashion. PRODES reinforces this experience” (former Planning Manager of the District Municipality of Soritor). 40 “The institutionalization process is a phenomenon with several participants. PRODES lays the seed and the other institutions contribute to make the implementation viable” (Planning and Public Works Manager of the District Municipality of Shunte). EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM 35 management, and contributions made to develop a trained and well-informed citizenry, especially civil society’s leaders and representatives. It is true that flaws in these processes remain, in areas such as participatory strategic plan planning, articulation of sub-national spaces, citizen participation, and prioritization linked to development. However, this is still a relatively new process, with some design problems. There is no single national entity responsible for monitoring the process.41 In order to attain a standard level of quality management, more time and efforts (participatory strategic plan planning, articulation between sub-national spaces, citizen participation, and prioritization linked to development) are needed. In the case of PRODES, its life and scope have been relatively brief The degree of impact depends, above all, on the analysis framework. At the regional level, civil society is now better trained to participate in an effective manner in the participatory budget and accountability processes. This does not always happen, however, at the district level. While public accountability is commonly practiced in those municipalities that were visited by the Evaluation Team, it did not enjoy the capacity of participatory budgeting in convoking a large number of participants, and content must still be improved. Those authorities interviewed, however, emphasize the positive results of informing the population and expounding on progress made. In general, PRODES has improved the relations of local governments with civil society through accountability and participatory budgeting processes. Public officials who previously handled only administrative tasks have now learned how to negotiate and improve relations with civil society; authorities who were reluctant to allow for public participation to “overcome their fears”; and representatives of civil society better understood, from within, the hardships of local governments. PRODES has created an improved environment for governability among those sub-national governments where it intervenes. 7.3 DESIGN, PUBLICATION, AND DISSEMINATION OF TRAINING MATERIALS The publication and dissemination of materials providing analysis are another mechanism by which PRODES tries to improve local governments’ capabilities to face the challenges of decentralization.42 Its usefulness is particularly important to close the language gap between national government institutions and authorities and public officials at sub-national levels. At the sub-national level, there are two significant materials: the institutional strengthening and the participatory budgeting/accountability training modules. The usefulness and relevance of these materials for local governments was ascertained during field work, especially for rural municipalities where the standard of trained public officials is somewhat less and where there is a dearth of training materials and services. In many cases, these materials continue to serve as references for the members of ETMs, even subsequent to the changeover of authorities after the 2006 local elections. An outstanding practice is the methodology PRODES applies to the elaboration and validation of materials, which produces user-friendly training materials relevant to the needs of their audiences. An initial technical review of the contents of each document guarantees their suitability, standardization, and 41 The PCM’s Decentralization Secretariat does not comply with this objective; the institution assigned this task is the Strategic Planning National Center (CEPLAN). The MEF, from its viewpoint, provides only a follow-up to the process although now it seems to be more interested in budgeting for results. 42 PRODES has always been attentive to the needs of municipalities and never lost sight of its areas of intervention. When it was unable to work (because of USAID/Peru’s policies) with selected municipalities, it managed to provide them with training materials through its dissemination strategy. 36 EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM functionality for their established purpose. For example, CND staffers reviewed the first PRODES modules (participatory budgeting and accountability), provided comments, and the CND subsequently adopted these documents by providing their logo on the publication. In the induction workshop-seminars held by PRODES every year, participants, particularly those ETL members with experience on local management and on-site issues and end-users who will make use of the materials, validate the materials in a participatory manner. These practices ensure the adequacy of materials, their references, and contents to heterogeneous regional contexts and avoid errors; particularly, for example, for those materials that were translated into native languages. The program counted on the support of institutions such as the CIPA in Ucayali and other NGOs in San Martin in these complex processes. Thanks to the experience of these institutions in the preparation of inter-cultural materials, the program attained an appropriate level of dissemination among native populations in these regions. Another highlighted practice is the importance the program gave to the official adoption of materials by national government institutions. The determination of PRODES to validate and make official all its materials is something that, according to words expressed by one of the interviewees, “has created schooling,” especially within the international cooperation community. The quality and, over all, the usefulness of final products, has led this methodology to be used and accepted progressively by other institutions, both by international cooperation entities as well as others at the local level. One of the most outstanding examples is the Orientation Guidelines on the Functioning of the SNIP addressed to both authorities and local officials. These guidelines wanted to address the overabundance of low-quality municipal projects and confusion over the proper roles of the different institutions responsible for the system’s operation. The result was a poor appreciation of the value of the SNIP, not only among local authorities, but also among certain political circles where this mechanism is branded as excessively “bureaucratic” and “centralist.” The process for the elaboration of these guidelines was developed between the first months of 2004 and ended in January 2005. The SNIP is a relatively new system still under construction. During the elaboration process of these guidelines, meetings were held between the General Directorate for Multi￾Annual Programming of the Public Sector’s (DGPM) team and specialists contracted for that purpose, in order to specify those definitions or aspects that still were not clear (“maintenance,” “sustainability”). From this perspective, the guidelines have fortified the SNIP by allowing the different actors to understand organizational aspects of the system and how each relates to each other (formulating unit, programming and investments office). They also made local officials allies for the system, who, even though they believed in the system, encountered obstacles in its application or lacked the necessary tools for its proper functioning. Another interesting case is the Investment Promotion Guidelines for regional governments, produced in support of ProInversión. These guidelines were elaborated through a lengthy consultation process between this institution and PRODES. Although the process could have been “more efficient administratively,” in the words of interviewees, the final product is worthy of praise. The guidelines served as the basic reference material for training courses carried out jointly with local and regional officials, which have subsequently served as the reference for a second cycle of training courses conducted by ProInversión in partnership with ESAN. These guidelines are now being updated for use in Lima, Arequipa, and Puno, where the institution has subsidiary offices. Numerous PRODES materials, especially the training modules (institutional strengthening, participatory budgeting, etc.) have been re-edited and financed by other institutions, such as the international cooperation and the Bureau of Agreement to Combat Poverty (Mesa de Concertación de Lucha contra la EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM 37 Pobreza). These institutions have distributed copies in areas other than where PRODES intervenes. These alliances have multiplied the dissemination of PRODES materials and lessons-learned at no cost to the program. 38 EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM 8.0 IMPACT OF WORK PERFORMED WITH LOCAL TECHNICAL TEAMS (ETL) To operate locally, PRODES contracts the services of existing local institutions to serve as Local Technical Teams. The work of these ETLs has had the following impacts: • An improvement in the market for local services from the beginning of PRODES to the present. • A significant impact on the provision of assistance in participatory budgeting through PRODES’ training of ETLs. • The standardization of an intervention methodology for supporting local governments, overcoming differences between the approaches and methodologies of the various ETLs. • The development of the capacity of local NGOs with little experience in working with local government, to provide a different perspective and long-term technical assistance and training to municipalities. • Greater projection of small NGOs vis-à-vis their potential local partners. During 2003, PRODES performed an exhaustive diagnostic of the capabilities of local organizations in the seven regions of program intervention. This diagnostic gathered data from diverse institutions. PRODES subsequently conducted a public and competitive bidding process to select those institutions to form its ETL.43 Among the criteria for selection were: (i) institutional and professional capabilities; (ii) demonstrated capacity to generate synergies with other ongoing programs; (iii) legitimacy; and (iv) viability of partnerships with other institutions in the zone of implementation, related to participatory processes between local governments and the civil society. An important element to consider is that the ETLs are institutionally heterogeneous. They already have ample experience working on municipal management, and others on local citizen participation (for example, elaboration of development plans). PRODES’ work was initially intensive but, in public, scarcely visible. PRODES’ objective was first to articulate the methodological proposals of various ETLs to attain an approach coherent with the program’s objectives. In March 2004, the first induction workshop-seminars of local teams were 43 The RFP proposed that ETLs be structured as consortiums of institutions including NGOs, chambers of commerce, and universities. On the ground, however, the difficulty of this strategy became clear and PRODES opted to work with individual institutions, generally small and large NGOs, although in some cases the work of ETLs has been performed by Municipal Associations. EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM 39 conducted, focusing on three aspects: (i) program approach, (ii) decentralization and participatory processes, and (iii) cross approaches articulating the program (inclusion, gender, inter-culturality). From the Evaluation Team’s standpoint, points worthy of being highlighted include: • The selection process allowed for an adequate selection of local partners in the majority of cases. • PRODES demonstrated the capacity to homogenize the work of entities that initially were quite heterogeneous.44 • The great importance of the work and assistance in participatory local management and participatory budgeting. The knowledge and performance of institutions acting as ETLs is fairly uniform. In the cases analyzed, a consensus was generated among the various actors at the local level on the demonstrated capacities of the ETLs. As for the institutions themselves, which integrate the ETLs, PRODES’ work has been enriching in several aspects: • NGOs with little experience in providing assistance to municipalities have developed: (i) a different perspective, being capable now of working from the inside on municipal management, rather than being a critical vision from the outside45; (ii) the capacity to establish a longer-term working relationship with a few municipalities which now seek out these NGOs to facilitate the performance of workshop-seminars on participatory budgeting. • PRODES’ work has allowed for greater projection of small NGOs vis-à-vis their potential local partners (other NGOs, authorities, civil society). • In the case of larger NGOs, PRODES’ work has enhanced their geographical reach.46 • Working with PRODES has allowed a horizontal interchange between ETLs. A debate community on decentralization and municipal management issues has progressively developed between ETLs and several coordinators. To this end, the role and capabilities of the Program’s regional coordinators has been fundamental. ETLs interviewed in each of the four Departments the team visited highlighted the positive role played by the current coordinators. • Work with PRODES has also allowed some ETL members, especially those who already had some experience with the public sector, to improve their career prospects after being engaged to work with municipalities. Work with PRODES has given them prestige as specialized consultants. The list of PRODES’ ETL former members who are now working in the public sector or who have consolidated their professional activities as consultants on SNIP and local management issues is shown in Annex 9. 44 Since the ETLs’ knowledge of public management was heterogeneous (according to several consultants who attended the induction workshop-seminars), PRODES’ training on institutional strengthening modules was more limited than it might have been. 45 “PRODES has allowed us to interact and to perceive other ways to see development. We envisioned everything from the civil society perspective. PRODES has allowed us to go into the inside of municipalities” (ETL Cuzco). “As professionals we did not appreciate the operational issues and thanks to PRODES we gained this experience since we were given an internal look” (ETL Junín). 46 “We must see PRODES intervention from the opportunity side. All NGOs valued participatory budgeting and accountability. The NGOs wanted to work but did not have the resources to do so. And our incidence capability keeps getting better (ETL Cuzco￾CBC). 40 EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM An aspect consensually lauded by ETL members is PRODES’ working methodology. Induction workshop-seminars are especially valued. This methodology and the materials linked thereto have been very useful for the NGOs that are partners of the Program. As pointed out here, these induction workshops will continue to be programmed until the closure of PRODES. Also valued is that PRODES focuses training on practical rather than theoretical issues and has brought the normative process for decentralization closer to the public. The Evaluation Team noted during fieldwork the absence of a space to debate the decentralization process understood as a multidimensional process. Apart from certain exceptions (NGOs with greater background, for example), the ETLs identify the decentralization process with citizen participation and prioritize this issue in detriment to the other aspects included in the eight decentralization dimensions identified by PRODES. This lack of a debate space can be explained by the following two reasons: • Citizen participation is a highly valued issue among NGOs, and within each process is identified as the core element. • The PRODES M&E system required a great deal of effort to comply with verification. ETLs oftentimes felt they had lost time in search of a signature, for example, losing sight of the process as a whole on many occasions. To this extent, it is perceived (by them and by other local actors) that the system leaves scant space for reflection and is excessively focused on attaining quantitative results. In addition, it was pointed out that the system was not very realistic in terms of the costs involved (time and money47) which the ETLs had to invest.48 All of these issues were also included in the intermediate evaluation study, where it was said that ETLs should not have to pursue the authorities or public officials for signatures. In summary, we can point out that there is a marked difference between the hazy local services market which PRODES confronted at the beginning of its program and the situation today. Numerous ETL staff have gone to work for local government entities. Municipalities are even now engaging the services of NGOs to carry out participatory budgeting processes. In this sense, PRODES has clearly improved this local service market as intended. However, a future program to support decentralization, working through ETLs, should consider an integrated technical support vis-à-vis the ETLs, with technical capabilities more readily available. 47 “We had one person dedicated exclusively to the monitoring system and to respond to PRODES’ requirements and that represented an additional cost; and PRODES didn’t tell us to “pay a secretary’” (ETL) 48 Authorities summon the ETLs to meetings, but sometimes they make themselves present at the agreed upon date and hour and oftentimes the ETL must return. EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM 41 9.0 IMPACT OF WORK PERFORMED WITH LEADERS OF THE CIVIL SOCIETY Throughout its five years, PRODES has provided direct training to more than 81,000 civil society leaders in the Departments where it carried out its interventions, from representatives of CCLs and CCRs to leaders of grassroots organizations, especially those from marginalized groups. Although difficult to quantify impact, we can point out the following: • Significant advances in strengthening the capabilities of civil society representatives in Regional Coordination Councils. • Creation of a critical mass to debate the decentralization process, beginning with the Diploma Course “Decentralizing the Decentralization.” • In several cases, the incorporation of projects presented by native community leaders into the budget, especially in the San Martin and Ucayali regions. • The Leaders Program created by PRODES has achieved an outstanding impact on the native community leaders as well as on representatives from other grassroots organizations. PRODES has also worked at the national level with diverse civil society institutions and also with the Bureau of Agreement to Combat Poverty (Mesa de Concertación de Lucha contra la Pobreza) and contributed to efforts made by the Participatory Budgeting Inter-institutional Collective (Colectivo Inter￾Institucional del Presupuesto Participativo) of which it became a part. In this section, we will take into account only two aspects of this work: the strengthening of capabilities of civil society representatives in the CCL and CCR and the strengthening of the pro-positive capabilities of the leaders of grassroots organizations. 9.1 STRENGTHENING THE CAPABILITIES OF CIVIL SOCIETY REPRESENTATIVES AT THE LOCAL AND REGIONAL COORDINATION COUNCILS PRODES aimed at a civil society with greater pro-positive capacity. Thus, it provided assistance to strengthen civil society representatives’ capabilities in the CCL and CCR allowing them to learn their roles and responsibilities and participate actively in the participatory budgeting and accountability processes. The impact of PRODES’ work in this area depended on the region where it worked. At the regional level, PRODES expressly designed and implemented an Induction workshop-seminar addressed to professionals engaged to provide technical assistance to civil society representatives. These consultants worked with the civil society representatives in the CCR. PRODES also elaborated ad-hoc 42 EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM materials for working with the CCRs, such as the document: “CCR: Guidelines for an active participation.” At the local level, work with civil society leaders was channeled through the ETLs to provide them with better knowledge of decentralization and governance norms and of their own reality. The objective was to ensure more effective participation of civil society in both participatory budgets and accountability issues as well as to help them understand local management instruments such as the MOF, ROF, etc. Another important strategy was PRODES’ dissemination of the various materials contributing to augment critical participation capabilities, such as decentralization’s balance sheets and standard provisions, which have improved the performance of CCL/CCR civil society representatives. We would also like to mention the Diploma Course: “Decentralizing the Decentralization” which has strengthened the capabilities of civil society, both among members of the CCR and CCL, as well as in a more general sense.49 Table 5: Beneficiaries of Diploma Course “Decentralizing the Decentralization” 2006 – 2007 Year/ 2006 2007 Total Participants Department Cuzco Huánuco Ayacucho Ucayali Total Percentage Authorities 0 3 0 0 3 1.9 Officials 3 12 8 0 23 14.7 Civil Society 38 20 19 42 119 76.3 Others 3 1 3 4 11 7.1 Total 44 36 30 46 156 100.0 Source: PRODES PRODES believes, as do the authors of this evaluation, that five of the seven regions where it works (Cuzco and Junin being the exceptions) lack a critical mass of well informed and trained professionals to provide follow-up to the decentralization process. The Diploma Course tries to generate programs with local universities oriented toward improving local public management. The hope is that these courses will be institutionalized in the universities even after PRODES. The program conducts a public call for participants, including authorities, public officials, local leaders, representatives of political parties, academicians, social communicators, and individuals committed to the decentralization process, particularly the representatives of indigenous communities. PRODES has also established quotes on the profiles of participants to reflect the demographic structure of each department.50 The content of the Diploma Course is ambitious, from explaining the role of the State through the dimensions of the decentralization process. Expectations generated by the course are equally diverse; from the concrete application of the transfers’ process and a better communication with officials through an improved understanding on the part of the civil society of the decentralization process. Observations made are also different according to expectations and/or experiences with other types of courses. 49 We have included the Diploma Course since the major part of its student body has been integrated by representatives of the civil society (76.3%, as shown in the Table 3.3). 50 In Ucayali, they try to get a greater quota for women (40%) in the civil society group and 25% for the indigenous population. In Ayacucho 25% of professionals from public institutions is foreseen, the same as in Huanuco. However, Huanuco prioritizes the participation of authorities and political parties (25%). This explains the diversity of the public but a diversity previously designed and assessed by PRODES. EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM 43 Consensually, participants interviewed expressed their satisfaction with both the teachers and facilitators. Reading materials, training on the SIAF, through review on the Internet were emphasized. We would like to highlight the following achievements stemming from this initiative: • Participants have improved their knowledge of national and regional public management. • The participants, including professionals and public officials, have improved their knowledge of how the state functions and how the public budget is elaborated, at both the national and regional levels. • In the case of civil society, it has improved the quality of participation in those instances where they act, whether in the Bureau of Agreement to Combat Poverty (Mesa de Concertación de Lucha contra la Pobreza), in the CCR or in the university. The Diploma Course has better informed them of the State, to know the limits of demands, how to exercise oversight, for example. The Diploma Course has enhanced the perspective and vision of participants. The Diploma Course has been developed in Ayacucho, Cuzco, Huanuco, and Ucayali. To a great extent the impact depends on the location. At the only location we paid a direct visit (Ucayali), the Diploma Course was still underway. This is why it is too soon to compare this case with results attained in the other regions. In the case of Ucayali, from the total number of participants registered in the Diploma Course, we found more than 70% who continued in the course. From this group, 30% had attended all on-site sessions. Some participants, especially the indigenous leaders, had dropped out after they were assigned the first tasks. This fact was noted both by PRODES’ coordinator and by other participants in the course. The organization of the Diploma Course in Cuzco was entrusted to the Universidad Andina del Cuzco, who after the successful experience with PRODES conducting the SNIP course, decided to carry on this initiative. The organizers were satisfied with this decision since it has granted them a greater regional projection. Furthermore, USAID gained a strengthened relationship with the local university. More than half of the student body was made up of members of the Universidad Andina, thereby guaranteeing the transfer of the methodology and subsequent replication of the Diploma Course after PRODES’ closure. At present, the Universidad Andina is negotiating with PRODES at implementing a second edition of the Course. In the case of Ucayali, the Diploma Course has been entrusted to a new university: the Inter-cultural Amazonian University [Universidad Intercultural de la Amazonia (UNIA)]. Although the University was willing to host the course because of the prestige of working with PRODES, it has not been efficiently organized in logistical terms. 9.2 STRENGTHENING GRASSROOTS ORGANIZATIONS PRODES’ provides assistance and training to selected actors in the decentralization process. Although work with community grassroots organizations was included in the design phase of PRODES, both USAID/Peru and PRODES have noted the limited budget to implement actions of great scope. In spite of this limitation, the program conducted numerous trainings and provided assistance to community grassroots organizations. The issue of Inclusion was integrated into ETL trainings, induction workshop-seminars, and in technical assistance provided to local and regional governments and in training materials. Within the range of activities, however, the Community Leaders Program stands out. PRODES began implementing this 44 EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM program during 2006. The impact of this initiative, even though limited quantitatively, has been qualitatively significant. As for the work with traditionally marginalized groups and specifically with indigenous populations, we found interesting experiences in the Departments of San Martin and Ucayali. In the Department of San Martin, the three existing native groups51 have associated within a large federation: the CODEPOSAM (Coordinating Agency for the Advocacy and Development of Indigenous Populations in San Martin), which successfully introduced two projects in the regional budget (2005 and 2006). Although NGOs have been working with native communities and indigenous populations for years, PRODES’ interventions improving the quality of their participation in the regional participatory budgeting process was decisive. PRODES’ elaboration of materials closely considered inter-culturality, shared participation costs (transfer and refreshments expenses), and effectively facilitated these processes.52 In the case of Ucayali, the work performed by the Amazonian Research and Promotion Center (CIPA) stands out. This NGO acted as a PRODES’ ETL in the region during all the years of the Program. Furthermore, it has previous experience in citizen participation issues. Among CIPA’s members who worked as PRODES’ ETL, we found native leaders who received training and now serve as important liaisons with the native population. CIPA was able to combine its tasks, in an effective fashion, as a PRODES’ ETL and, later on, as the operator of Participa Peru.53 The Leaders Program trains social leaders to contribute to the construction of more sustainable development initiatives. PRODES joined efforts with MASAL and APODER54 [Swiss Cooperation for Development Programs – (COSUDE)] to structure a proposal to train community leaders capable of both contributing to local governability and mobilizing a social base to sustain the process of institutional change at the local level. In this way, the program sought to improve the pro-positive capabilities of leaders, by encouraging their negotiation skills with authorities, public officials, and other community leaders as well. Qualitatively, the program had a remarkable impact, although the impact was small in quantitative terms.55 The Evaluation Team spoke with participants in this program in the District of Rio Negro in Satipo: town councilors from a native community, native leaders, and settlers-leaders. The course allowed 51 Aguarunas (Upper Mayo), kechwas (Lamas), and shayahuitas (Lower Huallaga) and two federations: FEPIKRESAM (Federation of Kechwas Indigenous Communities in the Department of San Martin) and FERIAM (Awuajun Regional Indigenous Federation of Upper Mayo). 52 NGOs interviewed assert that this achievement was primarily due to the influence of NGOs and not to a greater empowerment of these groups. Language is a persistent hindrance to the effective participation of these groups in the decision-making process. Even though information was published in Aguaruna (posters and radio spots) during the participatory budget process, the participation of these groups was hindered by such diverse factors as logistics (travel costs) to difficulties to integrate different perspectives on the role of the State. 53 As part of the work with Participa Peru, a radio broadcast live bilingual program was aired, focusing on the citizen participation issue including interviews made to whoever came from Lima and above all, the indigenous candidates. This radio program attained great popularity among the population. 54 MASAL [Soils and Water Sustainable Management on Slopes (Manejo Sostenible de Suelo y Agua en Laderas)] is a project that promotes the design, validation, and dissemination of techniques and methodologies for a concerted management of productive natural resources through the participation of local governments and local management organizations in the Departments of Cuzco and Apurimac. APODER [Support to Decentralization in Rural Spaces (Apoyo a la Descentralización en el Espacio Rural)] is a program oriented to strengthening the decentralization process mainly at the local level in the Departments of Apurimac, Cajamarca, and Cuzco. 55 Two courses have been developed: one in Cuzco with the participation of 24 leaders; and a second one in Junin where there were 36 participants. EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM 45 leaders to reflect on their situation and identify problems and creative and participatory solutions. The participants particularly valued the internships they performed at various parts of the country, especially in Ayacucho and Villa El Salvador, and the opportunity to familiarize themselves with other organizations and successful experiences. The course ended with a projects competition where leaders themselves had to elaborate a project, presenting innovative proposals.56 Despite these achievements, there persists a significant and unsatisfied need for training. The demand occurs in two senses: • Civil society and NGOs have persistently expressed a request for greater attention. Local partners of PRODES perceived that PRODES’ design focuses more on institutional work with regional and municipal governments.57 • Regional (specifically in San Martin) and selected municipal governments have requested more assistance to civil society, since they consider that the latter is not yet sufficiently prepared to participate in the participatory budgeting elaboration process. They perceive that civil society representatives choose to atomize the budget and lack a broad development vision. In summary, civil society organizations involved in the participatory budgeting process have made great progress on citizen participation. Even so, all interviewees coincided that this is a lengthy process that has only just begun. Not all members of the civil society participating in these processes are sufficiently prepared, and PRODES has been encouraged to look deeply into this effort (as pointed out before in the intermediate evaluation). All parties involved emphasize PRODES’ role in the process, a role which is shared with other institutions at the national level and, in some zones, with other local institutions. 56 Among projects submitted, the one presented by a native young woman leader who proposes to work on teenage pregnancy prevention is worth mentioning. 57 This is an issue claimed both by USAID/Peru and by professionals who carried out the intermediate evaluation study. 46 EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM ANEXOS EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM 47 ANEXO 1. METODOLOGÍA - MATRIZ DIFERENCIADA Actividades Preguntas Ilustrativas Metodología 1. Identify Program Lessons￾Learned and Best-Practices ƒ What are the lessons-learned and best practices of the program which would inform the design of a follow-on program in support of the Peruvian decentralization process? ƒ What are the lessons learned and best practices of the program to be shared with the Government of Peru for deepening and strengthening the decentralization process. ƒ What PRODES operational instruments/practices adopted by key public, private and non￾profit sector institutions contribute to the effective decentralization of selected responsibilities to sub-national governments ƒ What generalized factors, if any, might have contributed to, or hindered, the achievement of program impact? ƒ Revisión de Información Secundaria o Documentación Interna PRODES o Estudios PRODES o Materiales de Capacitación PRODES o Información de contexto ƒ Recolección de Información Primaria – entrevistas, reuniones de trabajo, grupos focales involucrando o Personal PRODES o Gobierno nacional o USAID/Perú o Socios estratégicos USAID o Cooperación internacional o Sociedad civil/CCR-L o Gobiernos subnacionales o Participantes/Beneficiarios o ETL o Organizaciones que replican los instrumentos, metodologías PRODES ƒ Observación directa 2. Conduct a comprehensive evaluation of the performance and impact of PRODES´: a. Good￾governance practices (Gestión Local Participativa) ƒ What has been the impact of PRODES support to sub￾national counterparts in institutionalizing mechanisms for citizen participation in budgeting and oversight of ƒ Revisión de Información Secundaria o Documentación Interna PRODES o Estudios PRODES 48 EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM Actividades Preguntas Ilustrativas Metodología decision-making? ƒ Have PRODES´s sub-national counterparts demonstrably improved their budgeting and social control processes? ƒ Has PRODES´ strengthening of the governance and management capabilities of both Locally-Based Technical Teams (ETLs) and municipal technical teams (ETMs) positively and sustainably impacted local governance practices? ƒ What do PRODES-assisted CSOs and marginalized populations perceive as the impact of the PRODES on improved local governance. o Materiales de capacitación PRODES o Información de contexto ƒ Recolección de Información Primaria – entrevistas, reuniones de trabajo, grupos focales involucrando o Personal PRODES o Gobierno nacional o USAID/Perú o Socios estratégicos USAID o Cooperación internacional o Sociedad Civil/CCR-L o Gobiernos Subnacionales o Participantes/Beneficiarios o ETL o Organizaciones que replican los instrumentos, metodologías PRODES ƒ Observación Directa b. Technical assistance to national institutions in transferring authorities to the most appropriate levels of sub￾national government (PRODES Sub￾IR 1) ƒ Has PRODES provided useful and quality technical assistance to the responsible Executive and Congressional institutions in preparing specific legislative or regulatory initiatives in strengthening the normative and regulatory framework for decentralization? ƒ What has been the contribution and/or value of the PRODES Annual Analysis on the Status of the Decentralization Process (Balance) to informing the work of decision makers and other interested parties. ƒ Have PRODES studies, manuals, administrative instruments, management tools, etc. supported national level institutions to strengthen key national systems, policies and/or methodologies. ƒ Entrevistas, reuniones de trabajo a funcionarios y ex-funcionarios del Poder Ejecutivo y Legislativo que tuvieron relación con el trabajo de PRODES, incluyendo: o PCM o Sec. Descentralización o CND o Congreso de la República o MEF o MIMDES o PROINVERSION o Defensoría del Pueblo o Participantes (Sociedad Civil) en los Talleres-Desayunos EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM 49 Actividades Preguntas Ilustrativas Metodología c. Technical Courses: ƒFormando Formuladores de Perfiles de Proyectos de Inversión - Sistema Nacional de Inversión Pública, ƒDiplomado: ¨Descentraliza ndo la Descentralizac ión”; ƒFormación de Promotores de Inversion ƒ How would participants and cooperating institutions (MEF, local universities, PROINVERSION) characterize the relevance, operational utility and quality of PRODES training courses? ƒ Have training courses demonstrably improved the managerial/administrative skills of participants? ƒ Did the training courses respond to a perceived priority need of its intended beneficiaries? ƒ Did PRODES training courses complement and reinforce Government of Perú policy? ƒ What impacts are there the evaluators able to identify? ƒ Revisión de Información Secundaria o Documentación Interna PRODES incluyendo evaluaciones de participantes y un estudio de los trabajos elaborados o Materiales de Capacitación PRODES o Información de contexto ƒ Recolección de Información Primaria – entrevistas, reuniones de trabajo, grupos focales involucrando o MEF o Universidades y Profesores o PROINVERSION o Organizaciones que replican los instrumentos, metodologías PRODES o Participantes/Beneficiarios ƒ Observación directa 50 EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM ANEXO 2. DEPARTAMENTOS, PROVINCIAS Y DISTRITOS VISITADOS SEGÚN CRITERIOS DE SELECCIÓN Dpto Provincia Distrito Pobla￾ción a/ Ámbito geográ￾fico b/ Canon 2006 c/ Transferen￾cia de com￾petencias d/ Años de trabajo con PRODES e/ Santiago 66277 urbano 5,674,449 No 2005 y 2007 Cuzco Cuzco 103836 urbano 7,667,896 Sí 2005-06-07 Urcos Quispi- 10402 rural 1,451,600 No 2005-06-07 Canchi Cusipata 4444 rural 1,189,032 No 2005 y 2007 Cuzco Urubamba Urubamba 18348 rural 2,202,926 No 2005-06-07 Huancayo Huancayo 104117 urbano 1,104,797 Sí 2005-06-07 Satipo 33508 urbano 863,874 No 2003-04-05 y 2007 Río Tambo* 27793 rural 1,049,440 Sí 2003-04-05 y 2007 Río Negro 17448 rural 800,898 Sí 2003-04-05 y 2007 Junín Satipo Pampa Hermosa* 6459 rural 246,075 No 2003-04-05 y 2007 Pinto Recodo 8704 rural 4,767 Sí 2003-04-05-06- 07 Lamas Lamas 14092 urbano 4,165 Sí 2003-04-05-06- 07 Moyobamba Moyobamba 58836 urbano 19,551 Sí 2003-04-05 y 2007 San Martín San Martín Tarapoto 63945 urbano 8,415 Sí 2003-04-05 y 2007 EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM 51 Dpto Provincia Distrito Pobla￾ción a/ Ámbito geográ￾fico b/ Canon 2006 c/ Transferen￾cia de com￾petencias d/ Años de trabajo con PRODES e/ Morales 21657 urbano 4,920 No 2003-04-05 y 2007 Tocache 25974 urbano 18,908 Sí 2003-04-05-06- 07 Tocache Shunté* 870 rural 1,117 No 2003-04-05-06- 07 Ucayali Coronel Portillo Calleria 208292 urbano 15,150,048 Sí 2003-04-05 y 2007 Fuente: PRODES Nota: Los datos de esta tabla se basan en información proporcionada por PRODES, tanto en su base consolidada de distritos como en su base de intervención. * Se visitó las oficinas de coordinación de estas municipalidades (Río Tambo y Pampa Hermosa en Satipo y Shunté en Tocache) en la capital de la provincia a/ Fuente: INEI Censo de Población y Vivienda 2005 b/ Fuente: Mapa de pobreza del MEF, año 2001 (http://www.mef.gob.pe/ESPEC/mapa_pobreza.php) c/ Fuente: http://ofi.mef.gob.pe/transferencias/gl/default.aspx. Incluye Canon y similares 2006. La información se basa en el Portal de Transparencia Económica del MEF (Sección Transferencias a los organismos del Gobierno Nacional y a los Gobiernos Regionales y Locales). Esta información sólo consigna el Monto Acreditado del 2006 en cuanto a Cano, sobrecanon, regalías y participaciones (no participaciones en aduanas). d/ Se utiliza como base la hoja que en este archivo se llama TRANSFERENCIAS que intenta ordenan la acreditación de los Gobiernos provinciales y distritales. La última información ingresada es la vinculada a las Resoluciones de la Secretaría de Descentralización: Nº 12 y 14-PCM/SD) e/ Esta columna se refiere al trabajo de asistencia técnica directa a través de ETL. 52 EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM ANEXO 3. ENTREVISTAS EN LIMA ANEXO 3.1: CANTIDAD DE ENTREVISTADOS EN LIMA SEGÚN SECTOR E INSTITUCIÓN QUE REPRESENTAN Sector Institución Cantidad Personal directivo y profesional 6 Profesores programas de formación 3 Consultores en las regiones 4 PRODES Consultores - estudios 3 Ministerio de Economía y Finanzas 4 Presidencia del Consejo de Ministros 3 Consejo Nacional de Descentralización 3 Congreso de la República 3 Defensoría del Pueblo 2 PROINVERSIÓN 1 Gob. Central CONSUCODE 1 USAID/PERÚ 12 Socios estratégicos 6 Cooperación internacional Cooperación internacional 5 ONG 9 Sociedad civil Cámara de Comercio de Lima 1 Total 64* * La suma es inferior al total (66) porque dos entrevistados están considerados en categorías diferentes. EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM 53 ANEXO 3.2: ENTREVISTADOS EN LIMA SEGÚN SECTOR E INSTITUCIÓN QUE REPRESENTAN Sector Institución Dirección - Oficina - Cargo Persona Secretaría de Descentralización Grover Pango Dirección Nacional Técnica de Demarcación Territorial Omar Landeo Presidencia del Consejo de Ministros Secretario de Gestión Pública Juan Chau Presidente Luis Thais Raúl Molina Consejo Nacional de Descentralización Gobiernos Locales David Bastidas Comisión de Descentralización (Ex Presidente) Juan Carlos Eguren Asesor Eduardo Gonzalez Congreso de la República Centro de investigación parlamentaria / Asesor de Carlos Valencia Fernando Paredes Dirección General de Programación Multianual - Capacitación Eloy Durand Dirección Nacional del Presupuesto Público (Ex director Nelson Shack Dirección Nacional del Presupuesto Público Róger Salhuana Ministerio de Economía y Finanzas Jefe de Gabinete de Asesores Carlos Casas PROINVERSIÓN Jefe de Promoción de Inversiones Harry Chang Jefa del Programa de Descentralización y Buen Gobierno Elena Alvites Defensoría del Pueblo Programa de Descentralización y Buen Gobierno (ex Jefe) Gerardo Távara Gobierno Central CONSUCODE Proy. Transparencia en Adquisiciones estatales Ana Teresa Revilla Catie Lott Larry Sacks Sobeida Gonzáles Oficina de Iniciativas democráticas Claudia Rohrhirsch Michael Green Programa de Desarrollo Alternativo Jennifer Vernooy Lucy López Programa de Salud Luis Seminario USAID/PERÚ 54 EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM Sector Institución Dirección - Oficina - Cargo Persona Cristina Olive Programa de Educación Fernando Bolaños Jeremiah Carew PDP Miriam Choy David Valenzuela CHEMONICS Alfonso Falla Proyecto de Reducción y Alivio a la Pobreza - PRA José Iturríos Promoviendo Alianzas y Estrategias - PRAES Midori de Habich Iniciativas en salud (ex Policy) Patricia Mostajo Socios estratégicos USAID/Perú Consejo Nacional de Educación Emma Yep GTZ - Programa Gobernabilidad Iván Castillo Luis Puentes Agencia Española de Cooperación Internacional - AECI Patricia Cáceres Artemio Pérez Cooperación internacional Cooperación internacional Agencias de cooperación internacional COSUDE José Ventura Participa Perú Luis Chirinos Escuela Mayor de Gestión Local José Pisconte Red Perú Julio Díaz Palacios Luis Egúsquiza Transparencia Fabiola Arce Grupo Propuesta Ciudadana Javier Azpur Asociación Servicios Educativos Rurales Javier Torres IEP - Municipio al día María Isabel Remy ONG Colectivo Interinstitucional de Presupuesto Participativo Roxana García Bedoya Sociedad civil Otro Cámara de Comercio de Lima Mónica Watson Director Tom Reilly Personal directivo Sub directora Violeta Bermúdez Fortalecimiento Nacional Institucional Elena Conterno Patricia Carrillo Cecilia Aldave Personal de planta (oficina central) Fortalecimiento de capacidades Ingrid Guzmán* Curso SNIP Arturo Perata Johnny Zas Fris Programa de formación Diplomado: ¨Descentralizando la Descentralización” Nelson Shack Actualmente en PRODES Néstor Ríos PRODES Consultores en las regiones Jaime Rojas EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM 55 Sector Institución Dirección - Oficina - Cargo Persona GRADE Lorena Alcázar Ciudadanos al Día Juan Carlos Cortez Consultores – estudios Governa Mayen Ugarte * LA ENTREVISTA SE REALIZÓ EN CUZCO 56 EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM ANEXO 4. RELACIÓN DE PERSONAS ENTREVISTADAS EN LAS REGIONES SELECCIONADAS ANEXO 4.1: ENTREVISTADOS EN LAS REGIONES SEGÚN SECTOR E INSTITUCIÓN QUE REPRESENTAN Sector Cuzco Junín San Martín Ucayali Total Gobierno local 8 11 11 2 32 Gobierno regional 6 7 5 5 23 CCL/CCR 2 3 2 7 MCLCP 1 1 1 3 Gob. subnacional ONG 11 7 5 4 27 Universidad local 2 1 3 Líder organización 0 3 1 4 Sociedad civil 1 3 4 Asoc. M i i lid d 1 1 Coop. Internacional 1 1 Sociedad civil Programas USAID 6 6 Dirección Regional 2 2 Gob. Central Gob. Central 1 1 Defensoría del Pueblo 1 1 2 PRODES Coordinador regional 1 1 1 1 4 Total 31 35 34 21 120 EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM 57 ANEXO 4.2: ENTREVISTAS REALIZADAS EN CUZCO Provincia Sector Nombre Institución / cargo PRODES Boris Mújica Coordinador Regional de Cuzco CCR/CCL Carlos Dávila Decano del Colegio de Economistas Gob. Local Rosa Castillo Gerente de Desarrollo Económico de la M. distrital de Edgar J. Zecenaro M. Consejero del Gobierno Regional (Cuzco) Adolfo Estrada Consejero Delegado del Consejo Regional Carlos Cuaresma Ex Presidente Regional Fernando Romero Gerente de Planeamiento, Presupuesto y Washington Coello Director Regional de Producción Gobierno regional Martha Bautista Á. Sub Gerente de Desarrollo Social MCLCP Alberto Delgado Aráoz Coordinador Departamental de la MCLCP Inés Fernández Baca COINCIDE Eldi Flores Guamán Poma de Ayala Wilfredo Fernández Alfredo Tapia Deza Adrián Álvarez Vilma Tumpe Centro Bartolomé de las Casas Estela Vignate IMAGEN (Coincide) Ebert Molina Romero Ccaijo (Coincide) María Fernández Baca COINCIDE Hernán Sulca Sergio Pacheco ADEAS QULLANA ONG Rosario Salazar Amauta Raymundo Espinoza Vicerrector Administrativo de la Universidad Andina del Cusco Cuzco Universidad local Analesia Fuentes Universidad Andina del Cusco CCR/CCL Alain Alanota Miembro del CCL de la M. provincial de Quispicanchi Javier Zanabria Quilca Jefe de la oficina de planeamiento y presupuesto de la municipalidad provincial de Quispicanchi Domingo Huytocollo Alcalde de la municipalidad provincial de Quispicanchi Felipe Cornejo Cusihuamán Alcalde de la Municipalidad distrital de Cusipata Nancy Contreras Regidora de la Municipalidad distrital de Cusipata Quispi￾canchi Gobierno local Rubén Adolfo Beingoa Figueroa Asesor del alcalde de la Municipalidad distrital de Cusipata (provincia de Quispicanchi) Raymundo Romero Gerente de Desarrollo Económico de la Municipalidad provincial de Urubamba Urubamba Gobierno local Roberto Carlos Tapia Asistente de planificación y presupuesto de la Municipalidad provincial de Urubamba 58 EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM ANEXO 4.3: ENTREVISTAS REALIZADAS EN JUNÍN Provincia Sector Nombre Institución / cargo Mario O. Rodríguez L. Miembro del CCL M. Provincial de Huancayo CCR/CCL Juvencio Huamán Borja Miembro del CCL M. Provincial de Huancayo Raúl Aliaga Saltachín Miembro del CCR Gobierno Regional Jorge Camborda Municipalidad Distrital de Pucará - Alcalde Gobierno Julio Mucha Sánchez M. Distrital de Ahuac (Prov. Chupaca) Gerente Munic. local Nelly Vela Bejarano M. Prov. de Huancayo - Gerente de Planificación y Presupuesto Moisés Vásquez C. Consejero Regional Dora Verástegui Olivera Consejera Regional Walter López Rosales Recursos naturales Alejandro Obregón Secretario Concejo Regional Hugo Medrano Gerente Desarrollo Social Julio Meza Sub Gerente de Planeamiento y Cooperación Técnica Gobierno regional Max Camarena Jefe de la OPI MCLCP Washington Mori MCLCP - Coordinador Regional Ana Cosme IDEL Soledad Rivas SEPAR Moisés Coronado Salazar Coordinadora Rural - Coordinador Ejecutivo ONG Ana Espejo SEPAR - Resp Proyecto Participa Peru PRODES Miguel Ponce Gonzalez Coordinador Regional de Junín Sociedad civil Jackeline Salazar Consorcio Junín - Asistente Técnico Huancayo Universidad Efraín Campos Universidad Nacional del Centro del Perú Sandro del Castillo M. Distrital Río Tambo - Jefe de Planificación Enrique Canchari Espinoza Municipalidad Distrital Pampa Hermosa - Sub Gerente de Infraestructura y Desarrollo Social Grudy Galindo Municipalidad Distrital Pampa Hermosa - Alcalde Mario Velarde Espinoza Municipalidad Provincial de Satipo - Gerente de Planeamiento y Presupuesto Edgard Zeballos Ramírez Municipalidad Distrital Río Negro - Alcalde Fernando Díaz C. Municipalidad Distrital Río Negro - Regidor Demetrio Mariño Gonzáles Municipalidad Distrital Río Negro - Regidor Gobierno local Santiago Contoricón Antúnez Actual 1er Regidor de la Provincia de Satipo. Ex Alcalde del Distrito de Río Tambo Teodoro Vivanco Ricra Cercado Río Negro Silvio López Pauro Comunidad nativa Boca Chenic Líder comunitario Yessely Parra Unchupaico Río Negro - Delegada líderes del cercado Nancy Jorge Chávez Hilda Barja Herrera Satipo ONG Elena Espinoza Cano Cáritas Satipo - Atalaya EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM 59 ANEXO 4.4: ENTREVISTAS REALIZADAS EN SAN MARTÍN Provincia Sector Nombre Institución / cargo Víctor Sifuentes Provincia de Lamas - Alcalde Abel Guevara Sánchez M. Provincial de Lamas - Contador Carlos A. Supinguahua M. Provincial de Lamas - Jefe de Infraestructura Oscar Pinedo Morales M. Provincial de Lamas - Gerente Municipal Jorge Vela Ríos M. Distrital Pinto Recodo - Secretario General Lamas Gobierno Local Goethe Angulo G. M. Distrital Pinto Recodo - Alcalde Gobierno César Villanueva Presidente Regional regional Jorge Rengifo Secretario General Rubén D. Ninahuanca Paz y Esperanza – Área de incidencias en cc.nn. Moyobamba ONG Evert Rimarachín ITDG Asoc. Municipalidades Genaro Sánchez Secretario Técnico AMRESAM CCR/CCL Víctor Rojas Zambrano CCL - Municipalidad Distrial Morales Defensoría del Pueblo Nicolás de la Cruz Defensoría del Pueblo Gobierno Local José Iberico Distrito de Morales - Gerente Municipal Gob. Regional César Rengifo Ex Gerente General (enero-agosto 2007) César Torre Jefe de Planeamiento y Presupuesto MCLCP Janina Cotrina MCLCP - Secretaria Ejecutiva Betty Leveau Cinty Directora CEPCO ONG Máximo Pérez Coord. ADRA Tarapoto Miriam Guevara CAAAP- Coordinadora Ejecutiva PRODES José Luis Carranza Coordinador Regional de San Martín Teócrito Pinedo Sub Director de APRENDES (Ex Coordinador MCLCP) Darwin del Aguila PDA - USAID San Martín USAID José Delgado PDA - USAID CCR/CCL Edith Grandez Montejo CCL Municipalidad Provincial de Tocache Coop. Internac. Janette Guerrero PRODATU David Bazán Arévalo Alcalde Municipalidad Provincial de Tocache Rufo Núñez Salas Gerente Municipalidad Provincial de Tocache Luis Castro M. Distrital de Shunté - Gerente de planificación Gobierno local Fernando Monge S. Alcalde de Shunté Gob.Regional Marden Rodríguez Consejero Regional (Tocache) Jaime Martín William Cecilio Tocache USAID/Perú (PDA) Luis Castillo PDA Tocache 60 EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM ANEXO 4.5: ENTREVISTAS REALIZADAS EN UCAYALI Provincia Sector Nombre Institución / cargo Defensoría Margot Quispe Anaya Representante de la Defensoría del Pueblo en Ucayali José Guerrero Dirección de industria de la Dirección Regional de la Producción. Roberto del Águila Dirección regional agraria: Dirección de promoción agraria Dirección Regional Noé Lozano Missle DIRESA Gob. Central Sonia Mamani MIMDES-Wawa wasi Andrés Flores Gonzalez Gerente de desarrollo económico de la Municipalidad provincial de Coronel Portillo Gobierno local Miguel Sánchez Analista de inversiones. Antes fue subgerente de promoción de inversiones (2006). Jorge Ruíz Marina Gerente regional de planificación y presupuesto, y acondicionamiento territorial Néstor Seijas Valderrama Subgerente de planes y programación de inversiones y de la OPI Ivonne Maldonado Molina Subgerente de presupuesto y tributación Luigui Vargas Mera Subgerente de acondicionamiento territorial Gobierno regional Enrique Ampudia Da Silva Subgerente de desarrollo institucional Sonia Ríos CIPA - Directora Franklin Mendoza CIPA - Responsable del área de proyectos ONG Hilda Amasifuén CIPA Miriam Soria Gonzalez CIPA PRODES Guillermo Chirinos Coordinador Regional de Ucayali Shankar Sánchez Presidente de la Red de Jóvenes de Ucayali Ángel López Panduro Frente de Defensa de Ucayali Coronel Portillo Sociedad civil Iris Silva Comunicadora/directora (e) diario Ahora EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM 61 ANEXO 5. RELACIÓN DE ETL ENTREVISTADOS Departamento ETL Personas IDEL Ana Cosme SEPAR Soledad Rivas Caritas Satipo Atalaya Nancy Jorge Chávez Hilda Barja Herrera Elena Espinoza Cano Junín Guamán Poma de Ayala Eldi Flores CBC Wilfredo Fernández Alfredo Tapia Deza Adrián Alvarez Vilma Tumpe Cuzco IMAGEN Estela Vignate COINCIDE Ebert Molina Romero (Ccaijo) María Fernández Baca Inés Fernández Baca Adeas Qullana Hernán Sulca Sergio Pacheco ADRA Janette Guerrero Máximo Perez San Martín CEPCO Betty Leveau Cinty AMRESAM Genaro Sánchez Ucayali CIPA Sonia Ríos Franklin Mendoza Hilda Amasifuén Miriam Soria Gonzalez Caritas Satipo Hilda Barja Herrera (entrevistada en Satipo) Nota: Estos entrevistados están incluidos en los anexos 4.1 a 4.4 dentro del sector sociedad civil. No todos continúan integrando los ETL de PRODES. Además, no todas las instituciones mencionadas continúan como ETL de PRODES. 62 EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM ANEXO 6. BENEFICIARIOS SEGÚN TIPO DE CAPACITACIÓN Y REGIÓN DE INTERVENCIÓN DE PRODES 2004 - 2007 Dpto. Año Programa / Curso de Capacitación Autori￾dades Funcio￾narios Sociedad civil Otros Total 2004 ETL (Talleres) 1772 1129 3768 0 6669 ETL (Talleres y AT) 1084 1052 1044 106 3286 2005 Curso SNIP (Curso Piloto) 0 2 3 0 5 ETL (AT)* Curso SNIP descentralizado 0 17 10 0 27 2006 ProInversión 0 3 1 0 4 ETL (Talleres y AT) 319 182 170 0 671 Curso SNIP descentralizado 0 24 14 0 38 Diplomado 0 8 19 3 30 2007 Prog. Consejeros Reg. 0 11 0 0 11 Ayacucho Total 3175 2428 5029 109 10741 ETL (Talleres y AT) 4818 5472 13754 1201 25245 2005 Curso SNIP (Curso Piloto) 0 6 3 0 9 ETL (AT) 4792 4982 15405 1678 26857 Curso SNIP descentralizado 0 25 6 0 31 Diplomado 0 3 38 3 44 2006 ProInversión 0 4 0 0 4 ETL (Talleres y AT) 138 77 139 0 354 Curso SNIP descentralizado 0 21 7 0 28 Prog. Consejeros Reg. 0 13 0 0 13 2007 Formación de Líderes Comunit. 0 0 24 0 24 Cuzco Total 9748 10604 29376 2882 52610 EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM 63 Dpto. Año Programa / Curso de Capacitación Autori￾dades Funcio￾narios Sociedad civil Otros Total 2004 ETL (Talleres) 534 506 1606 0 2646 ETL (Talleres y AT) 4991 5022 4451 631 15095 2005 Curso SNIP (Curso Piloto) 0 5 2 0 7 ETL (AT) 518 546 1354 179 2597 Curso SNIP descentralizado 0 13 3 1 17 Diplomado 3 12 20 1 36 2006 ProInversión 0 1 1 0 2 ETL (Talleres y AT) 183 188 174 0 545 Curso SNIP descentralizado 0 14 3 0 17 ProInversión 0 12 12 2 26 2007 Prog. Consejeros Reg. 0 11 0 0 11 Huánuco Total 6229 6330 7626 814 20999 ETL (Talleres) 552 677 3519 0 4748 2004 ETL (Talleres y AT) 8856 10117 7813 899 27685 2005 Curso SNIP (Curso Piloto) 0 6 1 0 7 ETL (AT) 3522 3653 6872 2079 16126 2006 Curso SNIP descentralizado 0 16 8 2 26 ProInversión 0 4 0 0 4 ETL (Talleres y AT) 289 367 339 0 995 Curso SNIP descentralizado 0 26 8 1 35 Prog. Consejeros Reg. 0 9 0 0 9 2007 Formación de Líderes Comunit. 0 0 36 0 36 Junín Total 13219 14875 18596 2981 49671 2004 ETL (Talleres) 510 506 2087 0 3103 ETL (Talleres y AT) 2652 2864 2293 631 8440 2005 Curso SNIP (Curso Piloto) 0 1 1 0 2 ETL (AT)* 2006 Curso SNIP descentralizado 0 5 0 0 5 ProInversión 0 2 0 0 2 ETL (Talleres y AT) 133 124 130 0 387 Curso SNIP descentralizado 0 6 10 0 16 ProInversión 0 2 0 0 2 2007 Prog. Consejeros Reg. 0 7 0 0 7 Pasco Total 3295 3517 4521 631 11964 64 EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM Dpto. Año Programa / Curso de Capacitación Autori￾dades Funcio￾narios Sociedad civil Otros Total 2004 ETL (Talleres) 1604 1127 2064 0 4795 ETL (Talleres y AT) 5574 6923 5972 1695 20164 2005 Curso SNIP (Curso Piloto) 0 4 3 0 7 ETL (AT) 324 776 776 205 2081 2006 Curso SNIP descentralizado 0 23 5 0 28 ProInversión 0 3 0 0 3 ETL (Talleres y AT) 220 246 161 0 627 2007 Curso SNIP descentralizado 1 39 3 0 43 Prog. Consejeros Reg. 0 10 0 0 10 San Martín Total 7723 9151 8984 1900 27758 ETL (Talleres y AT) 925 1770 4477 623 7795 2005 Curso SNIP (Curso Piloto) 0 4 1 0 5 ETL (AT) 385 612 2485 271 3753 2006 Curso SNIP descentralizado 0 5 1 1 7 ProInversión 0 4 1 0 5 ETL (Talleres y AT) 56 90 246 0 392 Curso SNIP descentralizado 0 1 0 1 2 Diplomado 0 0 42 4 46 2007 Prog. Consejeros Reg. 0 7 0 0 7 Ucayali Total 1366 2493 7253 900 12012 TOTAL 44755 49397 81385 10217 185794 EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM 65 ANEXO 7. PROGRAMA DE FORMACIÓN DISEÑADO POR PRODES Curso Objetivo y coordinación Procedencia de los participantes Lugares donde se desarrolló Formando Formuladores de Proyectos de Inversión - Sistema Nacional de Inversión Pública (SNIP) Preparación de estudios de pre-factibilidad en coordinación con el MEF (y en menor medida con el CND) Lima, San Martín, Cuzco, Huánuco, y municipalidades del VRAE Piloto 2003 (Lima) Primer curso 2005: Lima Los siguientes cursos se desarrollaron de manera descentralizada Siete regiones y Ancash, Arequipa, Cajamarca, La Libertad, La Libertad, Lambayeque, Loreto, Piura, Tacna Primer curso: Lima Formación de Promotores de Inversión Promover la inversión privada en los niveles subnacionales (regional, provincial y distrital). En coordinación con ProInversión y Cámaras de Comercio locales Huánuco y Pasco Segundo curso: Huánuco – Pasco Diplomado “Descentralizando la Descentralización” Fortalecer la capacidad de analizar, reflexionar críticamente y generar propuestas sobre el proceso de descentralización y el rol del Estado. En cooperación con universidades locales Huánuco, Cuzco, Ayacucho y Ucayali Piloto (Huanuco) 1er Diplomado: Cuzco 2do. Diplomado: Ayacucho 3er. Diplomado: Ucayali Programa de entrenamiento para Consejeros y Consejeras Regionales Fortalecer las capacidades de liderazgo, organización, producción normativa, negociación y fiscalización de los consejeros regionales. En coordinación con la Defensoría del Pueblo Siete regiones del ámbito de PRODES Lima 66 EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM Curso Objetivo y coordinación Procedencia de los participantes Lugares donde se desarrolló Programa de Formación de Lídes comunitarios Contribuir a la formación de varones y mujeres líderes comunales que se ubiquen con capacidad propositiva y tengan cualidades para la negociación frente a los diferentes actores como autoridades, funcionarios así como otros líderes. En coordinación con MASAL y APODER. Cuzco, Huánuco y Junín Cuzco, Huánuco y Junín * EL CURSO FUE PENSADO INICIALMENTE PARA PARTICIPANTES DE UCAYALI TAMBIÉN, PERO POR DIFERENTES RAZONES, LOS PARTICIPANTES DE UCAYALI SE HAN RETIRADO DEL CURSO Y SÓLO EGRESARÁN LOS ALUMNOS DE HUÁNUCO Y DE PASCO EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM 67 ANEXO 8. RESULTADOS ELECTORALES, REGIONALES Región Lugar Candidatos Partido Votos válidos Diferen￾cia % 2006 Diferen￾cia % 2002 1º Isaac Molina Frente Independiente Innovación Regional 25.2 Aya￾cucho 2º Werner Quezada Partido Aprista 18.9 6.2 7.7 1º Hugo Gonzáles Unión Por el Perú 32.6 Cuzco 2º Máximo San Román Movimiento Regional Inka Pachakuteq 27.5 5.1 2.2 1º Jorge Espinoza Frente Amplio Regional 27.0 Huá￾nuco 2º Máximo Garay Movimiento Político Hechos y no Palabras 17.9 9.1 10.0 1º Vladimiro Huaroc Convergencia Regional Descentralista (CONREDES) 25.8 Junín 2º Alcides Chamorro Movimiento Independiente Fuerza Constructora 17.7 8.1 2.8 1º Félix Serrano Movimiento Nueva Izquierda 25.9 Pasco 2º Víctor Espinoza Concertación en la Región 20.0 6.0 14.5 1º César Villanueva Nueva Amazonía 44.5 San Martín 2º Julio Cárdenas Partido Aprista Peruano 22.7 21.8 2.1 1º Jorge Portocarrero Integrando Ucayali 34.1 Ucayali 2º Manuel Vásquez Partido Nacionalista Peruano 30.6 3.5 6.7 Fuente: Meléndez, Carlos y Sofía Vera. “Si “todos perdieron”, ¿quién ganó?” En: Argumentos Nº 8. Lima: Instituto de Estudios Peruanos, 2006. MELÉNDEZ CARLOS. ÚLTIMO MAPA POLÍTICO. ANÁLISIS DE LOS RESULTADOS DE LAS ELECCIONES REGIONALES DE NOVIEMBRE DEL 2002. LIMA: INSTITUTO DE ESTUDIOS PERUANOS, 2003. 68 EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM ANEXO 9. DEPARTAMENTOS, SUBSEDES Y ETL QUE EJECUTAN PRODES. 2004 - 2007 Año de Ejecución Departamento Institución Subsede en la que se ejecuta PRODES 2004 2005 2006 2007 Chupaca-Concepción x x Huancayo x Huancayo-Chupaca-Concepción x IDEL Jauja x Cáritas Huancayo Huancayo x Caritas Ch h Chanchamayo - Satipo x x Junín-Tarma-Yauli x x SEPAR Jauja x x Caritas Satipo Tarma-Yauli x Atalaya Chanchamayo-Oxapampa-Satipo￾Atalaya x Junín Labor Pasco Junín x Guamán Poma Anta-Calca-Urubamba x Anta -Calca-Urubamba x Centro Bartolomé de Las Casas Anta-Calca-Urubamba-La Convención x IMAGEN Acomayo-Canas-Paruro x x Cuzco-Quispicanchi-Paucartambo x x COINCIDE Cuzco-Paucartambo-Quispicanchis￾Paruro-Acomayo x Canchis-Chumbivilcas-Espinar x x ADEAS QULLANA Canas-Canchis-Chumbivilcas￾Espinar x Cuzco AMUVRAE La Convención x x Cangallo-Huancasancos x ADRA Huamanga-Huanta-La Mar x Sucre x Parinacochas Paucar Del Sara Sara x AMUVRAE Huanta-La Mar-La Convención x x Ayacucho CODEAC Cangallo-Huancasancos x EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM 69 Año de Ejecución Departamento Institución Subsede en la que se ejecuta PRODES 2004 2005 2006 2007 SER Lucanas x Sucre x Agenda Sur Parinacochas Paucar Del Sara Sara x CEPRODEP Huamanga-Huanta-La Mar x Huamanga-Huanta-La Mar￾Vilcashuamán x Lucanas-Parinacochas-Paúcar Del Sara Sara CEISA x Cangallo-Víctor Fajardo￾Huancasancos-Sucre x IPAZ Victor Fajardo-Vilcashuamán x x ANDES Daniel Alcides Carrión x x LABOR PASCO Pasco x x Pasco-Daniel Alcides Carrión x Pasco Caritas Chancha￾mayo Oxapampa Oxapampa x x Huánuco-Ambo-Pachitea-Yarowilca x x Leoncio Prado-Huamalies x x Huánuco-Ambo-Pachitea-Leoncio Prado Caritas Huánuco x Lauricocha-Dos De Mayo￾Huamalies-Yarowilca x Huacaybamba x x x Caritas Huari Marañon x x x Dos De Mayo-Lauricocha x x Huánuco AJUPRODH Puerto Inca x x x ADRA Bellavista-Huallaga- Mariscal Castilla- Tocache x x x x ITDG Moyobamba-Rioja x x CEPCO El Dorado -Lamas x x x Picota-San Martín x x x x San Martín AMRESAM Moyobamba-Rioja-El Dorado￾Lamas x Coronel Portillo - Padre Abad x x x* Purús ** x x Coronel Portillo-Padre Abad-Puerto I x CIPA Yurúa (Atalaya) x Ucayali Caritas Satipo Atalaya x x Fuente: PRODES * CIPA intervino en la provincia de Padre Abad y los distritos de Campo Verde y Nueva Requena. ** Hubo intervención directa de PRODES en esta provincia. 70 EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM ANEXO 10. RELACIÓN DE INTEGRANTES DE LOS ETL QUE ACTUALMENTE DESEMPEÑAN CARGOS PÚBLICOS (AUTORIDADES O FUNCIONARIOS) O SON CONSULTORES DE ENTIDADES PÚBLICAS Años como ETL Departamento Institución Nombre 2004 2005 2006* 2007 Cargo que desempeña actualmente Nestor Navarro Trejo x Municipalidad Provincial de Huamanga. Subgerente de Transporte y Viabilidad. ADRA PERÚ Edgard Manuel Abarca P. x Consultor en gestión Local, P.P. y PDC. - Ancash AGENDA SUR Giovanni Elliot Arias x Municipalidad Distrital de Pichari - Gerente de Palneamiento Ivan Cisneros Quispe x x Municipalidad Distrital de Kimbiri - Gerente Municipal Hernán Palacios Tinoco x Municipalidad Distrital de La Convención - Gerente de la OPI Félix Huamán Mejía x x Consultor SNIP - VRAE y Huamanga Adrián Huamaní Roca x Municipalidad Provincial de Vilcashuamán - Gerente Municipal Nelson Aybar x Municipalidad Provincial de Huancasancos - Gerente Municipal Freddy B. Vega Benites x Consultor PRODES. Consultor temas de gestión local, Lima y Ayacucho. Ayacucho AMUVRAE Kromer Cárdenas x Consultor en temas de gobiernos locales - Tingo María EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM 71 Años como ETL Departamento Institución Nombre 2004 2005 2006* 2007 Cargo que desempeña actualmente Cirilo Pacheco x M. Provincial de Huancasancos - Alcalde Alcides Quispe x Gobierno Regional de Ayacucho - Vicepresidente Regional. Juan Andres Amao Aparicio x x Municipalidad Distrital de Ayna - La Mar. Gerente Municipal. Carlos Oriundo x Gobierno Regional de Ayacucho - Subgerente de Turismo Nery Huayllani x Cooperación Alemana - Coordinadora en Gestión Local (Huanta) Ruddy Murillo Gutiérrez x Ministerio de Energía y Minas, Agencia de Ayacucho - Consultor en formulación de Proyectos con impacto social CEPRODEP Alicia Carrasco Gutierrez x Secretaria Técnica Red de Mun. Rurales de Ayacucho (REMUARAY) Edwin López x ONPE - Promotor de Participación de la mujer en los procesos electorales. IPAZ Carlos Aparicio x ONPE - Jefe de ODP, Región Ucayali Carlos Córdova x Consultor temas de gestión local - Lima Sandra Rojas x M. Provincial de Lucanas - Regidora Luis Lizarbe x M. Provincial de Lucanas - Regidora Fernando Tincopa x M. Provincial de Lucanas - Alcalde SER Freddy Garamendi x Consultor en temas de gestión local - Ayacucho, Sucre. ADEAS QULLANA Ricardo Vega V. x Teniente Alcalde de Chumbivilcas Ivan Cisneros Quispe x x Gerente Municipal de la M. Distrital de Kimbiri Hernán Palacios x x Asesor de MP La Convención Benito Alarcón x Municipalidad de Echarate Freddy Bartolomé Vega Benites x Consultor PRODES. Consultor Temas de Gestión Local, Lima y Ayacucho. Hernan de la Torre x x Alcalde de la MP de La Convención Hernán Gavilán Yaranga x MCLCP – VRAE AMUVRAE Michel Mozombitt Huamán x Municipalidad Distrital de Kimbiri - Consultor del Frente de Defensa de Kimbiri. Ilse Alvizuri Cazorla x x Gerente de Desarrollo Social de M. Distrital de Santiago COINCIDE Jorge Aranya Mayta x x Gerente Municipal de la M. Distrital de Ocongate Cuzco 72 EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM Años como ETL Departamento Institución Nombre 2004 2005 2006* 2007 Cargo que desempeña actualmente Washington Coello Tairo x Gobierno Regional - Director Regional de Producción Alipio Ramos Villares x Asesor de municipalidades Guamán Poma de Ayala /CBC Teresa Tupayachi Mar x x Gerente Municipal de la Municipalidad distrital de San Jerónimo IMAGEN Benicio Ríos Ocsa x Alcalde de la Municipalidad Provincial de Urubamba Kelly Luciano Aguilar x x Resp. de Prog. Sociales de la M. Dist. de Pilcomarca (Huánuco) y Consultora de PP de la M. Dist. de Chaglla –Pachitea Aldo Reyes Viviano x x x Consultor externo de la Municipalidad de Conchamarca y San Francisco de Cayrán para el PP 2008 Aquiles Zevallos Rivera x x x Consultor Externo para la fomulación de proyectos de inversión pública del Gobierno Regional Neptali Aquino Berrospi x x Responsable de Monitoreo de Provías Rural – Huánuco Yuri S. Valdiviezo Cubillas x x Responsable del Centro de Capacitación de la Cámara de Comercio e Industrias de Huánuco Abel Canchari de la Cruz x x Secretario Ejecutivo de la MCLCP Regional de Huánuco Juan José Pardavé Trejo x x Supervisor Regional del Programa Juntos - Huánuco Elmer José Lozano Regalado x Consultor de la Municipalidad de San Marcos – Huari Huánuco Caritas Huánuco Denis Pereyra Díaz x Comisionado adjunto para la Paz y Desarrollo de Tingo María José Alminco Estela x Coordinador de Desarrollo Local - Oficina PDA Aguatía Carmen Canales Hernández x Consultora de UNIFEM / PRODES y Directora ejecutiva del Instituto de Participación y Desarrollo Social PARADIGMA Caritas Huánuco Joibert Feliciano Chagua León x Director Municipal de Pilmarca – Huánuco María Elena Salgado Alegre x x Responsable de Administración de la Municipalidad Provincial de Ambo Juan Estela y Nalvarte x x Gerente General del Gobierno Regional de Huánuco Mario Sánchez y Figueroa x Responsable de administración de la Municipalidad Distrital de Chinchao – Huánuco Huánuco AJUPRODH EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM 73 Años como ETL Departamento Institución Nombre 2004 2005 2006* 2007 Cargo que desempeña actualmente Flavio Cajaleón Cotrina x x x Responsable de proyectos de la Dirección Regional de Educación / Consultor de la UNDAC Jorge García Zorrilla x Responsable de la OPI de la Municipalidad de Leoncio Prado Enma Ramos Bautista x Funcionario Munn. Prov. De Oxapamapa IDEL Luis Alberto Beraún Zárate x Formualdor de Perfiles Cáritas Huancayo Jesús Navarro Balvín x Ex Gerente General M. Provincial de Huancayo Walter López Basilio x Funcionario Gobierno Regional Junín Ana Espejo López x Res proyecto Participa Perú Luis Morales Nieva x Alcalde Provincia de Tarma SEPAR Rosa Urdánegui x Funcionaria Mun. Prov Jauja Yakelin Sudario Remigio x Municipalidad de Yanacancha Junín ANDES Aurea Berrospi Palacios x x Programa Juntos Promotora Diógenes T. Sanchez Ricra x x Municipalidad Provincial de Pasco Hugo I. Yauri Espinoza Pasco - LABOR x x Municipalidad Simón Bolivar Hugo Sosa Santiago x Regidor de la Municipalidad Simon Bolivar Pasco Cáritas Chanchamayo Humberto Hermoza Guerra x x Gerente Planificacion Municipalidad Prov De Oxapampa. Actualmente Forma parte del ETL que trabaja en junín. César Augusto Delgado Pizarro x Equipo PRODES Lima. Actualmente consultor para el Banco Mundial César Augusto Paz Fernandez x x x Gerente de Desarrollo Económico Local de la MP Provincial de San Martín. Napoleón Seijas Valles x x x x Asesor de la Municipalidad Distrital de Pajarillo, en Mariscal Cáceres Manuel H. Santos Montoro x x Jefe de la unidad de Planificación de la UGEL San Martín ADRA PERÚ Abel Guevara Sánchez x Actualmente trabaja en contabilidad de la MP de Lamas José Enrique Delgado Mesía x x Trabaja en PDA, en el área de Gobiernos Locales San Martín ITDG Claudia Vásquez Panduro x Gerencia de Desarrollo Social de la MP San Martín. 74 EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF THE USAID/PERU PRO-DECENTRALIZATION (PRODES) PROGRAM Años como ETL Departamento Institución Nombre 2004 2005 2006* 2007 Cargo que desempeña actualmente Luis A. Pretel P. x x x Jefe de A Trabajar Urbano Tarapoto Hugo Pinchi Ramirez x x Para el 2004 estuvo en la nómina de Amresam / Jefe de Planificación de la MP San Martín. Noe Manuel Poma Montalván x Consultor de varios gobiernos locales y consultor de PRODES para el CCR CEPCO Gustavo Padilla Pinedo x x M. Provincial Tocache Rufo Arnaldo Nuñez Salas x x x x Gerente M. Provincial Tocache Genaro Alejandro Sánchez Ramos x x x x Director Ejecutivo AMRESAM Amilcar Rodriguez del Aguila x x Asistente de la Gerencia General del GR. AMRESAM José Iberico C. x x Gerente General MD Morales Sonia Rios Daza x x x x Coordinadora Mesa de Concertación para la Lucha Contra la Pobreza en Ucayali Franklin Mendoza Muñoz x x x x Consultor privado y asesor técnico del PP 2008 de la M. Provinc.de Padre Abad Sofía Marina Gutierrez Gonzalez x Comisionada - Jefe de Área de Primera Línea de la Defensoría del Pueblo de Junín. Manuel Cuentas Robles x Consultor Externo en Desarrollo social del Gobierno Regional de Ucayali Luis Portocarrero x Consultor Privado, proyecto para la demarcación territorial de Atalaya Zoila Fernández x Funcionaria de la Dirección regional de Salud de Ucayali CIPA Segundo Manuel Mojalot Dávila x Director de Planeamiento y Presupuesto de la M. Provincial de Padre Abad Ucayali Caritas Satipo Atalaya Maria Esther Paredes Kriete x Responsable de programas sociales, municipalidad de Satipo * En el año 2006 no se interviene con ETL ni en Ayacucho ni en Pasco. U.S. Agency for International Development 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20523 Tel: (202) 712-0000 Fax: (202) 216-3524 www.usaid.gov