Module 3 - DROM Operationalization Through
Accelerated CEAC
CEAC (Regular & Accelerated) Overview
Session Objectives:
1. describe CEAC as KC-NCDDP’s approach by
analyzing a sample success story;
2. explain basic concepts of DROP;
3. discuss the objectives, major activities and
outputs in each of the 4 stages of
accelerated CEAC in the context of
addressing needs for early recovery and
rehabilitation in disaster-affected
barangays;
4. compare regular CEAC with accelerated
CEAC;
5. explain strategic adjustments to CEAC based
on assessments conducted; and
Community Empowerment Activity Cycle or
CEAC as KC-NCDDP’s Strategic Approach
a five-stage community development process
• enables control of community groups over:
 planning decisions and
 investment resources
for the:
o planning,
o allocation,
o implementation ,and
o management of….
LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
Activity 2: Matching and Sequencing Cards on
Accelerated CEAC Stages and Main Activities
Processing Questions:
• How did you feel during the game?
• What did you find easy to do? Difficult?
Why?
• How do you plan to respond to the
difficulties you encountered in matching
major activities with the appropriate
accelerated CEAC stages in this training?
• How essential is the knowledge and
understanding of accelerated CEAC stages,
and major activities to you and your work
as ACT members?
KC-NCDDP Field
Implementation:
using Enhanced CEAC
CEAC as a Process
• creates opportunities for local people to work
together in a purposively progressive manner
• guides communities through a comprehensive
and systematic problem-solving process.
• covers
 clarifying local situations to identifying
issues,
 developing solutions to address these
issues,
 carrying out activities to implement the
solutions, and
 monitoring solutions’ contributions to
improving local conditions.
Standard/Regular CEAC
Stage
Stage
Stage
Stage
1
2
3
4
Community Action
Planning (BA)
Accountability
Reporting
Community-managed
implementation of
projects
Functionality Audit
and Sustainability
Evaluation
Municipal Orientation
PSA – BDP
integration
Criteria Setting
WS
Social Investigation
Feedback to BA
Community
Consultation (BA)
Participatory Situation
Analysis
Proj. Dev’t. WS
MDC multi-year
MDP/LPRAP
MIAC Tech.
Review
Comm’ty.
Consultation
MIBF
prioritization
Formation of
Comm’ty. Org. for
O&M
CEAC Cycles, Stages ,and Main Activities
• KC-NCDDP will be implemented in four
cycles, depending on the performance and
commitment of the LGU.
• Each community undergoes the CEAC four
times, one for each cycle of the program.
Changes including transformational
changes achieved at the end of a cycle in
the next cycle.
• Stages in each cycle must be implemented
in sequence.
Disaster Response Operations
Procedures
Disaster Definition Under RA 10121
(DRRMA 2010)
“A disaster is … a serious disruption of the
functioning of a community or a society involving
widespread human, material, economic and
environmental losses and impacts, which exceeds
the ability of the affected community or society to
cope using its own resources. Disasters are also
described as a result of the combination of the
exposure to a hazard; the conditions of
vulnerability that are present; and insufficient
capacity or measures to reduce or cope with the
potential negative consequences.”
Classified as natural and human-induced, and
hence covers armed conflict.
Use of the DROP is……
1. Triggered by a Declaration of state of
calamity by;
• The President
• The Mayor and Sangguniang Bayan or
the Barangay Captain and Sangguniang
Barangay (localized disaster)
In force for one (1) year, unless otherwise
lifted.
2. Confirmed by a decision to use the
procedures
Process for Deciding on the Use of Disaster
Response Operations Procedures
under KC-NCDDP
Application Coverage:
1. All 554 municipalities affected by Typhoon
Yolanda.
2. All municipalities with declaration of
calamity still in force at the time of KCNCDDP enrollment.
3. Subsequent areas to be covered by a
declaration of state of calamity.
What Are Triggered by the Use of DROP
Under KC-NCDDP?
1. Accelerated CEAC (including use of
Damage Assessment and Needs Analysis
– DANA);
2. Increased grant allocation (frontloading),
and waiving of LCC;
3. Emergency Procurement Procedures;
4. Positive list;
5. Coordination (resource mobilization,
information management);
6. Simplified/rapid (push and pull)
monitoring and reporting;
7. Grievance resolution;
8. Restructuring of teams (redeployment,
augmentation, emergency hiring, etc.)
Accelerated CEAC
Technical Review and
Approval for fund
release
Formation of
Comm’ty. Org. for
O&M
TRANSITION
to Standard CEAC
(Cycle 2)
Project Proposal
Development
Community-managed
implementation of
projects
Functionality Audit
and Sustainability
Evaluation
Municipal Orientation
Municipal Forum
Community Action
Planning (BA)
Accountability
Reporting
Stage
Stage
Stage
Stage
1
2
3
4
Community
Consultation (BA)
Consultation meeting
on disaster impact
and barangay ranking
and allocation
Municipal Orientation
Standard CEAC
Community
Consultation (BA)
Guide Questions for Generalization on
Accelerated CEAC Stages and Main Activities
• After seeing the major activities in each
accelerated CEAC stage in Cycle 1, what
are your
 reactions?
 conclusions?
 questions?
• In one sentence, describe accelerated
CEAC.
Enhanced CEAC incorporates
key development themes
• Disaster response
• Indigenous peoples
• Environmental
management
• Promotion of gender equity
• Peace building
Accelerated CEAC
Technical Review and
Approval for fund
release
Formation of
Comm’ty. Org. for
O&M
TRANSITION
to Standard CEAC
(Cycle 2)
Project Proposal
Development
Community-managed
implementation of
projects
Functionality Audit
and Sustainability
Evaluation
Municipal Orientation
Municipal Forum
Community Action
Planning (BA)
Accountability
Reporting
Stage
Stage
Stage
Stage
1
2
3
4
Community Action
Planning (BA)
Accountability
Reporting
Community-managed
implementation of
projects
Functionality Audit
and Sustainability
Evaluation
Community
Consultation (BA)
Consultation meeting
on disaster impact
and barangay ranking
and allocation
Municipal Orientation
Social Investigation
Community
Consultation (BA)
PSA – BDP
integration
Feedback to BA
Proj. Dev’t. WS
Community
Consultation (BA)
Participatory Situation
Analysis
Standard CEAC
Criteria Setting
WS
MDC multi-year
MDP/LPRAP
MIAC Tech.
Review
Comm’ty.
Consultation
MIBF
prioritization
Formation of
Comm’ty. Org. for
O&M
General Comparison of Regular and Accelerated CEAC in
Terms of Time Frame
Modality 1: Regular CEAC
 Stage 1: social preparation stage
takes about 4 months
 Stage 2: community planning
takes about 2 months
 Stage 3: community managed
implementation and CBO
formation takes about 6-8
months
 Stage 4: monitoring takes about
4 days
 Stage 5: transition takes about 6
days.
 regular cycle covering 5 stages
takes about 12 - 15months
Modality 2: Accelerated CEAC
 Each stage is fast-tracked.
 Some activities and subactivities are waived or
modified to hasten the
process of approval of
sub-projects
 project identification to
project implementation
takes about 1 – 2 months
Enhancements and Adjustments on CEAC Based
on Implementation Experience and Lessons Learned
from the Project’s Impact Evaluation
1. Greatest gains in poverty reduction were realized in
the poorest areas and when social preparation was
combined with capital investments.
Action Taken/Agenda:
enhance its poverty targeting to include:
• national coverage of all poor communities
• block grant allocations based on population numbers,
municipal classification and poverty levels, with an
increasing per capita allocation as the poverty
incidence increases.
2. Gains in local level knowledge and skills
(particularly of volunteers) were not being
extended beyond the project participants to the
community members in general
Action Taken/Agenda: broaden outreach at
community level
• Revision in the CEAC Process
 Adjustments in the PSA
 Greater focus on inclusion & participation
of vulnerable and marginalized groups
• Improve monitoring and evaluation
3. positive impacts on household consumption,
reduction in poverty rates, improvements on
access to services and social capital, control of
elite capture & greater impacts on poorer
households
Action Taken/Agenda:(for greater impact)
• Improve poverty targeting
• Increase level of subproject investment
• closer integration with GPBP
• conduct more studies to improve knowledge
base and improvements to project procedures
• deploy more staff to barangay and municipal
level
4. some aspects of the CEAC process were
too complex or time-consuming for
communities to fulfill their intended roles
and responsibilities
Action Taken/Agenda:
• Streamline sub-project preparation and
implementation cycle
• Simple how-to notes will be developed
5. Adaptations in Working with Marginalized
Groups and Vulnerable Communities
Action Taken/Agenda:
•
•
•
•
Subproject prioritization will rely on fixed criteria
for greater weigh/priority to activities benefitting
poorer barangay, IP and conflict affected areas
Regions with enhanced CEAC modules to further
reduce the number of barangays per CF
Specific facilitation modules for disaster response,
conflict, IP communities and gender were developed
& included in the training of ACTs
Reflected enhancements in the Operations Manual
6. Most MLGUs are interested in and can take
direct responsibility for management of K-C but,
sustaining staff levels could be difficult for the
poorest municipalities.
Action Taken/Agenda:
• Earlier hand-over of direct management to
MLGUs involved in 4-year project cycle
• Consider governance and anti-corruption
considerations including lessons learned in the
overly rapid transfer of management
responsibilities
7. MLGU being the focal point for
harmonization across sectoral programs with
GPBP is key driver of the process.
Action Taken/Agenda:
• Pursue close linkages with GPBP
• align CEAC and LPRAP processes
• promote use of K-C principle on direct
community management of resources in the
execution of GPBP
8. While fiduciary and governance safeguards
appear to be working well, greater governance
risks are perceived due to scale-up and intended
transfer to MLGU-led management.
Action Taken/Agenda:
• Maintain personnel levels commensurate with
project scale-up
• Establish a standard set of criteria for project
prioritization to reduce possible manipulation
of sub-project selection
• Apply incremental eligibility criteria to MLGUs
to fully take over control of KC-NCDDP
• Enhance independent reviews of sub-projects
9. Grievance Redress System (GRS) showed
limited uptake in complaints, limited awareness
and knowledge of the system, difficulties in
handling the direct cases of corruption and in
engaging with legal system and concerns on
hand-over to MLGUs.
Action Taken/Agenda:
•
•
•
•
•
Increase recording of grievances presented at BA
Improve training and guidance materials
Standardize & simplify GRS procedures
Translate materials to local languages
Automate entry of SMS grievances Support the role of
existing conflict resolution mechanisms
10. Gender Assessment of K-C indicates the
project performed well in terms of female
participation throughout the sub-project cycle
except for the paid labor component.
Action Taken/Agenda:
• Additional PSA tools
• Further capacity building of CVs and women’s
groups wherever relevant based on PSA
findings
• Greater attention to women’s involvement in
paid labor activities (25% target)
11. Forms have been simplified & new MIS
have been made to K-C. However, given the
scaling-up there is a need to further streamline
the systems and strengthen capacities of
stakeholders involved
Action Taken/Agenda:
• Further review quantity and quality of data
to be collected and inputted
• Review IT structure, analysis and
dissemination of results
Adjustments in field
implementation for disasteraffected communities
1. Accelerated implementation
2. Frontloading of municipal grant allocation in
Cycle 1
 Twice the regular amount for poor
municipalities
3. Only in-kind LCC required in Cycle 1
(minimum requirement)
4. Positive list of community projects for
disaster response or early recovery, e.g.,
shelter, resettlement, tools (including
chainsaws)
Key Message 1
CEAC cycles and stages are
comprehensive, systematic, and
purposively progressive. CEAC
process promotes integration of
changes (including
transformational changes) in
succeeding cycles.
Key Message 2
CEAC embodies a wealth of
experience, significant learning,
and successes over challenges in
community-driven development
and community empowerment.
Key Message 3
Operationalizing Disaster Response
Operations Management (DROM)
through accelerated CEAC is one
among the KC-NCDDP strategic
adjustments in response to PostHaiyan needs and concerns