POOREST AREAS CIVIL SOCIETY (PACS) PROGRAMME - Four Years of - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – POOREST AREAS CIVIL SOCIETY (PACS) PROGRAMME - Four Years of PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: 14fac1-MDM1N



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

POOREST AREAS CIVIL SOCIETY (PACS) PROGRAMME - Four Years of

Description:

Women SHGs are main vehicle of project delivery. CBOs have total of 237,774 members ... 'A Giant Step Forward for the Marginalised and the Very Poor' ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:42
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 31
Provided by: SOS62
Learn more at: http://planningcommission.nic.in
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: POOREST AREAS CIVIL SOCIETY (PACS) PROGRAMME - Four Years of


1
POOREST AREAS CIVIL SOCIETY (PACS) PROGRAMME-
Four Years of Small Grants
  • Funding from DFID
  • Management by Development Alternatives
  • and PriceWaterhouse Coopers
  • August, 2005

2
Operations in 6 States
UTTAR PRADESH(20/70)
BIHAR(35/38)
JHARKHAND(19/22)
MADHYA PRADESH(20/45)
CHHATTISGARH(4/16)
Legend
MAHARASHTRA(11/35)
State Boundary
District Boundary
Note - Map not to Scale
(108/225) PACS Districts /
Total Districts
3
PACS Projects Status- as on January 2005
24
31
21
15
126
UTTAR PRADESH
BIHAR
24
JHARKHAND
MADHYA PRADESH
9
2
Cumulative
CHHATTISGARH
OTHERS
MAHARASHTRA
  • Note
  • 33 projects approved (awaitingDEAs approval)

Note - Map not to Scale
4
Distribution of Funds across States Cumulative
till July 2005
Total Commitment Rs. 118 Crores
5
Achievement Against Targets Project
GrantCumulative till July 2005
Amount in Rs. Lakhs
17 proposals valuing Rs. 1421 lakhs are subject
to approval of 14 PSC
6
SOS - PACS Scale of Operation
7
Programme Reach Running Projects
  • Highest number of network projects in Jharkhand
    (81)
  • Highest number of CSOs involved in PACS in
    Maharashtra (100)
  • Highest number of projects in UP (31)

8
Programme Reach - Geographical
Number of Villages
9
Programme Reach CBOs
  • Jharkhand has almost 44 of all PACS CBOs
    (16,817)
  • Women SHGs are main vehicle of project delivery
  • CBOs have total of 237,774 members

10
PACS Some Breakthroughs
  • Effective model for attack on poverty
  • Balanced approach to development support
  • Outsourced model of support to CSOs (state based
    resource organizations)
  • Intensive, supported interventions in clusters
  • Thematic
  • Geographic
  • Communication and advocacy initiatives
  • Learning system (MEAL) for a large program

11
PACS Cost-effectiveness
  • Disbursed Rs 103 cr
  • Overhead Costs 8
  • Entitlements realized Rs 1,000 cr (Est.)
  • SHG Funds Saved Rs 30 cr
  • Other Funds Mobilised Rs 100 cr
  • Project locations Poorest and Remotest
    villages in MP avg. road is 5 Km

12
Quotes from UK Governments Annual Reviews of
PACS
  • A Giant Step Forward for the Marginalised and
    the Very Poor
  • A rigorous and principled governance structure
    founded upon peer respect and recognition
  • PACS financial systems are strong and are
    based upon uncompromising integrity
  • Monitoring of finances is systematic and
    regular and subject to numerous checks and
    balances
  • MEAL also effectively completes the transfer
    of power to meso levels in the project

13
PACS Mandate
  • Goal
  • To empower the poor to exercise their
    entitlements
  • Strategy
  • By strengthening civil societys capacity
  • Outputs
  • Successful interventions
  • Governance, Livelihoods, Womens Empowerment
  • Self-help to meet basic needs, etc
  • Effective partnerships of civil society
  • Lessons learnt and disseminated

14
PACS Basic Givens
  • Budget
  • 25 Million (Rs 200 Crores) over 7 years
  • Region
  • 100 Poorest Districts in UP, Bihar, MP,
    Maharashtra, Jharkhand and Chhatisgarh
  • Activities Fundable
  • Capacity Building Training, Institutional Devt
  • Participatory, Knowledge Sharing, Advocacy
  • But NO Service Delivery

15
PACS Decision Structure
  • DFID Nil (Reps in NAB and PSC)
  • NAB Overalll Policy
  • PSC Project Selection
  • DA Day-to-day Operations
  • PwC Financial Accountability

16
PACS Programme Structure and Functions
17
PACS Management Structure
  • Development Alternatives 8 Professionals
  • PriceWaterhouse Coopers 6 Professionals
  • Partners in Each of 6 States 6 Resource Orgs
  • (Each State has about 16 development consultants
    to provide CSOs with Project Development,
    Supportive Supervision, MEAL and Communication)

18
Development Alternatives
  • Provides for Grant-making Process
  • Basic Design of Entire System
  • Data Systems for Managing Projects
  • GIS Support for Tracking and Reporting
  • Provides to PACS Management
  • Infrastructure and Intellectual Supports
  • Substantive Project Appraisal Services
  • Concept and Design of MEAL System

19
Development Alternatives
  • Provides to Projects in the Field
  • Technical Support
  • Livelihood Options
  • Network Connections for
  • Governance Projects
  • Inclusion-oriented Projects
  • Training and Capacity Building

20
PACS State Level Structure and Functions
Management Consultants
State Anchor (MC)
State Core Group
Programme Support Team (PST)
  • Strategic direction
  • Capacity building
  • Regional/ state level initiatives
  • Plan, monitor
  • Research, innovation
  • State level liaison
  • Advocacy and networking

CSO
  • MEAL Implementation l
  • Analysis and synthesis
  • Feedback and communication
  • Co-ordination at State level

21
Achievements shown by
  • Programme reach and coverage
  • Effectiveness of programme strategies
  • Innovations in programme systems
  • Programme innovations and best practices
  • Achievement of stated objectives
  • Programme impact and cost effectiveness
  • New ideas for development praxis

22
Model for Outsourcing Management
  • 21 vibrant State based resource organizations
    strengthened to
  • Provide effective support system for CSOs
  • Be constructively flexible in its own work
  • Identify core developmental issues in the State
    and align PACS objectives with them
  • Conduct rigorous monitoring evaluation
  • Spearhead advocacy efforts at State Level

23
Uniqueness and Strength of PACS Strategies
24
Programme Elements
  • Programme and Management Systems
  • Rigorous process, procedures, docn
  • Aggressive Outreach for New Projects
  • Project Development Support
  • Project Implementation Backstopping
  • Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning
  • Continuous, Dynamic Improvement
  • Reporting, Communication, Networking

25
PACS Supports Unorthodox Projects
  • Integrated
  • Cross-cutting, multi-faceted, result-oriented
  • Flexible
  • Responsive to community needs
  • No constraint by pre-conceived budget lines
  • Encourages innovation and risk-taking
  • Process-oriented
  • Wide range of methodologies
  • Self-monitoring

26
PACS - A Value based Programme
  • Integrity and Accountability
  • Substantive and Financial
  • Accountability built integrally into systems
  • Transparency
  • Encourage sharing of successes and failures
  • Actively permits mid-course redesign of projects
    based on experiences and learning
  • Respect
  • Putting the last first
  • Incorporate local knowledge and perceptions
  • Participative programme and project design

27
MEAL The Cutting-Edge Monitoring, Evaluation
and Learning System
  • An integrated methodolgy
  • An integral part of every intervention
  • At all levels Process, Program, Project and
    Activity
  • A systemic method to improve
  • Reflection and learning within and externally
  • Generation and management of decision information
  • Adapted for PACS from DA Groups systems

28
Key Success FactorsProgramme Design
  • Donor flexibility and acceptance of innovative
    grantmaking process
  • 1st year allowed for planning and system design
  • Long-term commitment (no FY lapsing of funds)
  • Large Provision for Capacity Building of Partners
  • Rigorous but User Friendly Procedures
  • Clear and Detailed Documentation
  • Competent Project Selection Committees

29
Concept Papers Mobilisation and Appraisal
05
30
Key Success FactorsProgramme Delivery
  • Highly Responsive Grant-making Processes
  • Focused Project Mobilisation Strategy
  • Decentralised Project Management Systems
  • Highly Transparent Processes
  • Programme Management Highly Accessible
  • Rigorous Monitoring and Accountability
  • Low Overhead Costs, High Level Support
About PowerShow.com