Preliminary Draft Not for Quotation

CDD in Indonesia:
Lessons Learned from the Implementation of NUSSP
Muhammad Syukri

The SMERU Research Institute

The views expressed in this paper are the views of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Asian Development Bank (ADB), or its Board of Governors, or the governments they represent. ADB does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this paper and accepts no responsibility for any consequence of their use. The countries listed in this paper do not imply any view on ADB's part as to sovereignty or independent status or necessarily conform to ADB's terminology.

www.smeru.or.id

Outline
Project background

Preliminary Draft Not for Quotation

Methodology
Main findings
Participation during the subproject implementation

Institutionalizing participation after subproject completion

Transparency and accountability

Policy implications

Objective of The Study

Preliminary Draft Not for Quotation

The study focused on the lessons learned from the Neighborhood Upgrading and Shelter Sector Project (NUSSP), particularly on its contribution to institutional capacity building of local government and community Indentified challenges and opportunities for institutionalizing participation and good governance The aim of this study was not to assess NUSSP rather than to examine the dynamic of community participation triggered by CDD model.

Project Background

Preliminary Draft Not for Quotation

The main objective of the project is to deliver infrastructure in a participatory manner (and not to institutionalize participation) The common subprojects of NUSSP are: improvement of slum areas, road conjunction, drainage, waste management system, sanitation, clean water, road lighting, and microcredit for building/renovating modest housing. NUSSP provided grant to communities. NUSSP encouraged community participation at planning, executing, and monitoring stages of the proposed project. Community could execute construction work (SP3), or, in certain circumstances, they could contract third party (SP2) The project had improved 6800 Hectares of urban slum in 800 neighborhood, in 32 cities, and benefited 3 million people

Project Cycle OC Mobilization & Training

Verification of Targeted Location

Preliminary Draft Not for Quotation

Facilitator Recruitment & Training

Reflection on Settlement Neighborhood

Kecamatan Workshop & Early Socialization

Community meeting, TPM election & training

Preparation at local level

Preparing & Drafting RP4D

Preparing Community institution (FGD of institution & leadership) Institutional setup & Election for collective leader BKM & UP-UP training

Determining Priority for Slum Area

Housing Planning

Kampung Self-Survey (SKS) Drafting NUP & Technical Design

Housing Technical Planning

Preparing Sp3 Document

Implementation of NUSSP
5

Methodology

Preliminary Draft Not for Quotation

It was a qualitative study with total of 18 FGDs, 180 HH respondents, and about 70 informants. The sample sites were included : 3 urban villages in Jogjakarta (Suryatmajan, Brontokusuman, Bener), and 1 urban village (Blimbing ) and 2 rural villages in Kabupaten (District of ) Lamongan (Tugu, Deket Wetan). The sub-project were completed in 2007-2008 The field work was conducted in May 2011.

Participation During Subproject Implementation (1)

A.

Preliminary Draft Not for Quotation

Socialization and planning NUSSPs process encouraged community participation NUSSP process gave urban community an alternative forum which facilitated direct communication and, in turn, fostered their togetherness and solidarity. Participation at this stage varied: Participation in rural villages were more intensive compare to that of urban villages. The reasons, among others were: the rural villagers had more time and relatively had stronger solidarity. B. Decision making process Decision-making meeting was attended mostly by the local public figures. In urban areas, individual with high human capital and welfare status were less active in participating in public decision-making process.

Participation During Subproject Implementation (2)

C. Implementation

Preliminary Draft Not for Quotation

Community participation, particularly men, were high in SP3 projects Participation in terms of financial contribution was high (Lamongan, more than 70% of local government sharing fund) Community members involved in non-skilled jobs:
For compulsory involvement in the case of Tugu Village, involvement of all community members is a must. For voluntary involvement, mostly the poor was involved For the paid labor, only the poor was involved

Community members who involved in the non-skilled jobs were paid below market rate. It was counted as community contribution. There was monitoring by Neighborhood Management Unit (UPL) of BKM. Especially for SP2 type of NUSSP sub-project, community members in general had less access to monitor.

D. Monitoring

Womens Participation

Preliminary Draft Not for Quotation

Womens participation in NUSSP sub-project socialization and planning was relatively higher than that of implementation. This can be explained by the preexisting gender role in local community. Women participated during the implementation stage was mainly in providing snacks for those who were engaged in project implementation. Women who participated in the decision making meeting were usually part of the higher social and economic status.

Institutionalizing Participation after Sub-Project Completion

Preliminary Draft Not for Quotation

Community Self-help Groups (BKM) established by the project at the village level did not active after the subproject completion. The lack of resources prohibited BKM from active involvement in operation and maintenance. Ordinary residents performed maintenance using their own resources There were no observed differences regarding operation and maintenance between urban and rural community

10

The Local Context

Preliminary Draft Not for Quotation

The level of community participation in local development after project completion had been influenced by initial conditions, including: local institutions were dominated by elite local norms: persistence of traditional gender roles inhibited women participation time availability of the community

11

Preliminary Draft Not for Quotation

Transparency and Accountability (1)

NUSSP project implementer was transparent and accountable.
Sub-project progress was widely informed Sub-project financial statement was made publicly available

The head of RT/RW was transparent and accountable.

All information received by RT/RW was disseminated to the community RT/RWs financial status (including public donation and its usage) was made available to the community, usually announced at local mosque just before Friday noon prayers.

12

Preliminary Draft Not for Quotation

Transparency and Accountability (2)

People received information directly from village government at formal and informal meetings, and through written announcement. Information on development programs and public services was easily accessible. The level of transparency of the village governments varied.
Some village governments did not make budgets information available to the villagers (except to the elite). Some village governments did not widely disclose the criteria for beneficiaries of social protection programs.

Some village governments were suspected of corruption.

13

Policy Implications

Preliminary Draft Not for Quotation

Design mechanism for greater integration of poor residents and women in the sub-project cycle Provide seed capital for operation and maintenance Need more time for empowerment and capacity building activities Greater capacity building for facilitators.

14