Multinational Conference on Improving the Quality of Public Services
Moscow, Russia, June 28-29, 2011
Legislating Citizen’s Charters to Promote
Citizen-Centric Public Services
Magdalena L Mendoza
Senior Fellow
Development Academy of the Philippines
Outline of Presentation
• Introduction
• Legislating Citizen’s Charter
– Issue Formation
– Policy Formulation
– Policy Adoption
– Policy Implementation
• Evaluation and Conclusion
The Philippines
Location: Off the south-east coast of Asia and
sprawls between Asia mainland and Australia
between latitude 21°25'N and 4°23'N and
longitude 116°E and 127°E.
Land Area: Total land area approximately
343,448.32 sq. km.; one of the largest island
groups in the world (7,107 islands); divided
into three island grouping: Luzon, Visayas and
Mindanao.
Population: 88.57 million as of 2007, annual
growth rate of 2.04%
Religion: Predominantly Christian
Form of Government: Democratic
Branches of Government: Executive, Legislative
(bicameral), Judiciary (independent)
Source: NSCB 2011
Development Academy of the Philippines




Training
Education
Policy Research
Technical Services







Center for Governance
Center for Quality and Competitiveness
Center for Knowledge Management
Center for Sustainable Human Development
Graduate School of Public and Development Management
DAP sa Mindanao
DAP Tagaytay Conference Facilities
What is a Citizen’s Charter
• A Citizen’s Charter is an official document that
communicates in simple terms information on the
services offered by the government to its citizens.
• It describes the step-by-step procedure for availing a
particular service, and the guaranteed performance
levels that citizens may expect for that service.
• Initiative introduced in the United Kingdom by the
Conservative Government under John Major in 1991
• Adopted as a policy of over 20 countries to improve
quality in the delivery of public services
Citizens as “Customers”
“All public services are paid for by the individual
citizens, either directly or through taxes. Citizens are,
therefore, entitled to expect high quality services,
responsive to their needs, provided efficiently at a
reasonable cost. And where the state is engaged in
regulating, taxing or administering justice, these
functions too must be carried out fairly, effectively
and courteously.”
Source: UK Government
Legislating Citizen’s Charter:
The policy process
Issue
Formation
Policy
Evaluation
Policy
Agenda
Policy
Implementation
Policy
Formulation
Policy
Adoption
Issue Formation: Issue rhetoric and indicators elevated the
problem of red tape at the consciousness of the public
• Social Weather Surveys
– Corruption seen by many
Filipinos as an economic issue
since it hurts investments
– Perceived bribery in obtaining
local permits, paying taxes,
securing licenses from national
government
• Filipino Report Card
– Concern on quality,
affordability, adequacy and
responsiveness of pro-poor
services
• Worst Red Tape Survey
– Amplified concern on tedious
and costly business
transactions
• World Competitiveness
Yearbook
– Philippines among the least
competitive among 61
countries (2006)
• Doing Business Report
– Pronounced disparity in
number of procedures,
processing time, costs of doing
business compared to OECD
countries
• Corruption Perception Index
– Philippines received below
median rating
Red Tape and Corruption Nexus
“The bureaucratic process itself may be a source of delay
and other costs. In that case, incentives for corruption
arise as applicants try to get to the head of the queue or
otherwise get better service. To further exploit their
corrupt opportunities, officials may create or threaten to
create red tape as a means of extracting bribes. This
strategy is plausible in many real world applications
because even honest officials need to take some time
and trouble to process applications.”
Source: Rose-Ackerman 2006
Corruption in Public Service Delivery
“Lack of accountability can breed corruption
in service delivery programs because the
“exit mechanism” which is operating in a
market context does not work well in the
public sector.”
Source: Reinika and Svensson 2006
Promoting Citizen-Centric Public Services
through Citizen’s Charters
G
o
v
e
r
n
m
e
n
t
CITIZEN’S CHARTER
Public trust
Citizen
Satisfaction
 Services offered
 Obligations of citizens
 Service standards
 Statement of
guarantee
 Contact list
 Suggestion and
complaints procedure
 Redress mechanism
Information
Value for
Taxpayers’
Money
C
i
t
i
z
e
n
s
Policy Stream: Legislative Track
Timing
Proposals
Salient provision
11th Congress House Bill No. 3409
(1998-2001)
Defining and penalizing “fixing”
12th Congress House Bill No. 3947
(2001-2004) House Bill No. 532
House Bill No. 766
Limiting number of signatories
Cutting red tape
Amendment of RA 6713
House Bill No. 3309
House Bill No. 3776
Senate Bill No. 46
Congress Senate Bill No. 1934
(2004-2007) Senate Bill No. 2546
Senate Bill No. 2561
13th
Providing information on government services
Transactions reengineering, service standards,
Citizen’s Charter, Report Card Surveys, criminalizing
fixers
Cutting red tape
Cutting red tape
Providing information on government services
Transactions reengineering, service standards,
Citizen’s Charters, Report Card Surveys, criminalizing
fixers
Senate Bill No. 2589 Consolidated version of SB 46, SB 1934, SB 2546, SB
2561, HB 3309, HB 3776
Policy Stream: Non-legislative Track
Timing
Policy
Salient provision
Mid-1990s
Mamamayan Muna, Hindi Mamaya
Na (Citizens First)
Citizen Complaint Handling
2000
Comprehensive Framework and
Program Strategy to Fight Corruption
under the Estrada Administration
Mandated Citizen’s Charter
2001
First State of the Nation Address by
President Arroyo
Signature Reduction
2003
Office of the President
Memorandum Circular No. 23
Posting of Service Guides and
Workflow Charts
2005-2006
2007
Pilot adaptation of Citizen’s Charters
Executive Order No. 605
Adoption of ISO-QMS Standards in
the Public Sector, establishment of
Citizen’s Charter as manifestation of
service guarantee
John Kingdon’s Organized Anarchy Model
Problem Stream
Indicators
• Social Weather Surveys
• Competitiveness Reports
• Doing Business Reports
• Worst Red Tape Survey
Tilt effect:
Events: Edsa Dos
Political Stream
• National mood: heightened
level of intolerance to
corruption
• Organized move of the
business sector to pressure
government to cut red tape
• Anti-corruption of a key plank
of administration
Unique window
of opportunity in
2006
Consensus
building of
various
stakeholders
Policy Stream
• Formulation of government antired tape program
• Anti-red tape policy
entrepreneurs from academe,
business, Congress
Consolidation of
House and Senate
Bills
RA No. 9485
or Anti-Red
Tape Act
(mandating
Citizen’s
Charter)
enacted in
2007
Republic Act No. 9485 (Anti-Red Tape Act of 2007)
An Act to Improve Efficiency in the Delivery of Government Service to the Public
by Reducing Bureaucratic Red Tape, Preventing Graft and Corruption and
Providing Penalties Therefor
Corruption = Monopoly + Discretion – Accountability*
Factor that
induce
corruption
Strategy to reduce
vulnerability
Some features of Citizen’s Charter
Monopoly
power
Remove monopoly of
information
Publication of procedures,
document, requirements,
processing times, fees
Discretion
Circumscribe discretion in
evaluation
Prescribed action times
Formal notice in case of disapproval
Accountability
Collect information about
agent’s performance
Complaints and feedback
mechanism
* Heuristic formula of Robert Klitgaard
Agency Compliance
Type of government agency
• National government
• Local government units
• Government corporations
• State universities and
colleges
• Local hospitals and local
schools
TOTAL
Percent compliance
70%
95.7%
79.4%
75.3%
58%
79.8%
Source: Civil Service Commission, March 2011
Factors that Affected Implementation
• Difficulty in the identifying frontline services
and segregating simple vs complex transaction
because of tight requirements
• Reluctance of agencies to publish services
standards which may not be realizable given
their current level of resources
• Gentle learning curve did not allow ample
time for thorough transactions reengineering
Report Card Survey in 2011
In terms of service quality, respondents expressed satisfaction with the correctness and accuracy
of the service being provided by the agencies than the time it took to complete a transaction.
In all the areas measuring the satisfaction with service providers, majority of the respondents
said they were either satisfied or very satisfied though a few dissatisfactions was also recorded.
Source: Civil Service Commission, 2011
Report Card Survey in 2011
Among the six indicators for measuring the satisfaction with the frontline service providers, the
respondents were most satisfied with the adherence of the service providers with the “First
come-first served” principle though a few dissatisfaction was also recorded. Moreover, the
respondents are more satisfied with the service quality in terms of correctness and accuracy
than the time it took to complete a transaction.
Policy Evaluation: Sub-optimal results
• Citizen’s Charters creating islands of good
practices on citizen-centric services
– Mandated reengineering translated in
simplification of some procedures
– Made government processes transparent
– Initiated citizen focus
– Government agencies more conscious of service
standards
• But fragmentation in service delivery persists
Reduced
to 2 days
in 2010
Reduced
to 38
days in
2010
Conclusion
• Legislating Citizen’s Charters, while a necessary
step, is a necessary but not a sufficient condition
to establish a citizen-centric government.
• There is a limit to what efficiency improvements
agencies can do on their own (“silo” effect).
• To strengthen citizen focus, Citizen’s Charter
should be complemented with “smart regulation”
and “horizontal government”.
Thank you and Mabuhay!