1. BUKIDNON STATE UNIVERSITY
GRADUATE EXTENSION STUDIES
Surigao City Study Center
Lake Mainit Development Alliance
A Paper Requirement in PA 201
(Theories and Practice in Public Administration)
Submitted to:
DR. FLORENCIO F. SUNICO, JR., CESO VI
Submitted by:
JOHN S. NATAD
March 2009

2. ACRONYMS
AusAID - Australian Agency for International Development
AWFP - Approved Work and Financial Plan
BFAR - Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources
BOT - Board of Trustees
CBRMP - Community-Based Resource Management Project
DA - Department of Agriculture
DENR - Department of Environment and Natural Resources
DOST - Department of Science & Technology
DOT - Department of Tourism
EMP - Environmental Management Plan
FOCAS - Focal Community Assistance Scheme
FPE - Foundation for the Philippine Environment
GLAs - Government Line Agencies
GOPA - Governance of Philippines Agenda
HIPADA - Hinatuan Passage Development Alliance
IFAD - International Fund for Agricultural Development
LBDA - Lanuza Bay Development Alliance
LCE - Local Chief Executive
LGSP - Local Government Support Program
LGUs - Local Government Units
LMDA - Lake Mainit Development Alliance
MLGUs - Municipal Government Units
MSU - Mindanao State University
NEDA - National Economic Development Authority
NMCIREMP - Northern Mindanao Community Initiatives & Resource Management Project
NRM - Natural Resources Management
PLGUs Provincial Government Units
OMO - Operations Management Office
PACAP - Philippines-Australia Community Assistance Program
PIA - Philippine Information Agency
PCAMARD - Philippine Council for Aquatic Management and Resources Development
i

3. PMO - Program Management Office
ODA - Overseas Development Assistance
RDC - Regional Development Council
SEC - Security and Exchange Commission
SIPLAS - Siargao Island Protected Landscapes and Seascapes
SNCAT - Surigao del Norte College of Agriculture & Technology
TAG - Technical Advisory Group
TWG - Technical Working Group
VSO - Voluntary Services Organization
ii

4. INTRODUCTION
Brief Background of Alliance
The Lake Mainit Development Alliance (LMDA) is
an association created sometimes in March 1999
through a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) signed
among the eight municipalities, two provincial
government units (PLGUs) like Surigao del Norte and Agusan del
Norte and six government line agencies. The member local
government units (LGUs) are the Municipalities of Alegria,
Mainit, Tubod and Sison in the Province of Surigao del Norte and the
Municipalities of Kitcharao, Jabonga, Santiago and Tubay in the
Province of Agusan del Norte. The government line agencies (GLAs)
who are member of the Alliance is composed of the regional
government offices like National Economic Development Authority
(NEDA), Department of Agriculture (DA), Department of
Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), Bureau of Fisheries
and Aquatic Resources (BFAR), Department of Tourism (DOT), and
Philippine Information Agency (PIA). The Alliance
recognized by the Regional Development Council
through RDC Resolution No. 03 series of 2002.
Presently, Hon. Erlpe John M. Amante, the
Provincial Governor of Agusan del Norte is the Chairman of the Board of
Trustees (BOT), the highest policy-making body of the Alliance
which is composed of all member Municipal Mayors, Provincial
Governors and Regional Directors of member government
agencies. A Program Management Office (PMO) established and
hosted by the Municipality of Kitcharao managed by a Program
Director and his two administrative personnel with the technical assistance of
Technical Working Group (TWG) composed of the Action Officers and Point Persons
from the member LGUs and GLAs respectively. The BOT shall meet quarterly while
the TWG shall meet monthly or as need arises.
Fund of the Alliance
The Alliance shall have two sources of funds for project implementation and
its operations. These are (a.) contributions of the eight municipal and two provincial
LGUs as indicated in an approved work and financial plan; and (b.) other sources,
iii

5. local or international, (loans, grants and donations fall into this category) as may be
accessed by the PMO (Manual of Operations, 1999). The Province of Surigao del
Norte through the Provincial Treasurer was the custodian of LMDA fund from 1999-
2001. In April 12, 2002, the BOT through its Resolution No. 03 approved the transfer
of fund to the Municipality of Kitcharao one year after the transfer of LMDA-PMO in
February 6, 2001 to Kitcharao, Agusan del Norte as the host municipality. The
Municipality of Kitcharao and the PMO shall co-manage the funds using the
government accounting procedures.
As agreed in the MOA, the two PLGU shall contribute an initial amount of
Php150,000.00 each while the eight MLGU shall give Php50,000.00 each
respectively. All these fund contributions will be deposited to LMDA trust fund, which
is under the custody of the Municipality of Kitcharao and the Municipal Treasurer as
the designated custodian.
Paper Research Methodology
This paper undertakes to present the feasible alternative policy on the Lake
Mainit Development Alliance concerning the fund contribution from the member local
government units and accessing of fund from other partners.
The research is primarily based on the actual interviews, reports, publication,
MOA, resolution and manual of operations of the Alliance.
iv

6. TABLE OF CONTENT
I. SOURCE AND BACKGROUND OF THE PROBLEM
A. Description of Problematic Situation ……………….1
B. Outcome of Prior Efforts to Resolve Problem ……………….2
C. Assessment of Past Policy Performance ……………….2
D. Significance of Problematic Situation ……………….3
II. THE POLICY PROBLEM
A. Problem Statement ……………….4
B. Approach to Analysis ……………….4
C. Major Stakeholders ……………….5
D. Goals and Objectives ……………….5
E. Measures of Effectiveness ……………….6
F. Potential Solutions ……………….6
III. POLICY ALTERNATIVES
A. Description of Alternatives ……………….8
B. Comparison of Alternatives ……………….8
C. Spillovers and Externalities ……………….9
D. Constraints and Political Feasibility ……………….10
IV. POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Criteria for Recommending Alternatives ……………….11
B. Description of Preferred Alternatives ……………….12
C. Outline of Implementation Strategy ……………….12
D. Provisions for Monitoring and Evaluation ……………….13
E. Limitations and Unanticipated Consequences ……………….13
REFERENCES ……………….14
v

7. POLICY PAPER ON FUND CONTRIBUTION
FOR LAKE MAINIT DEVELOPMENT ALLIANCE
I. SOURCE AND BACKGROUND OF THE PROBLEM
A. Description of Problematic Situation
The source of fund for Lake Mainit Development Alliance (LMDA) is
dependent largely from the contribution of the eight municipal local government units
(MLGUs) and two provincial government units (PLGUs). According to the approved
MOA signed in 1999, the PLGU shall initially contribute One Hundred Fifty Thousand
Pesos (Php150,000.00) while the MLGU shall contribute the amount of Fifty
Thousand Pesos (Php50,000.00) which are all deposited into the LMDA trust fund at
the Municipality of Kitcharao. Subsequently then, the BOT agreed that same amount
of contributions will be given to LMDA in annual basis.
Based on the status of the LGU contributions from year 1999-2008, the two
PLGUs are consistent with their annual contributions of Php150,000.00 each with a
total of Php3,000,000.00 within the span of ten years. However, some MLGUs did
not adhere to the agreement of contributing Php50,000.00 per year because of lean
budget and urgent priorities. With the span of 10 years, LMDA received a total
amount of Php 4,985,000.00 from the LGU fund contribution. The expected
Php 700,000.00 contribution per year or a total of Php7,000,000.00 within 10 years
was not realized. The supposed approved work and financial plan (AWFP) of the
Alliance was affected wherein some of the expected programs and services
especially to the MLGUs were not sufficiently delivered.
Surigao Del Norte
5,000,000.00
Agusan del Norte
4,500,000.00
4,000,000.00 Sison
3,500,000.00 Tubod
3,000,000.00 Mainit
2,500,000.00 Alegria
2,000,000.00 Kitcharao
1,500,000.00 Jabonga
1,000,000.00 Santiago
500,000.00 Tubay
0.00 TOTAL
Figure 1. Status of LGU Contribution for LMDA 1999-2008
1

8. The LMDA has been using the annual fund contributions from each partner
LGUs in the implementation of the priority programs and services, which will be
returned to partner MLGUs in form of projects like agroforestry and riverbank
stabilization (Gidacan & Harting, 2008). However, some other environmental priority
projects will not be implemented due to lack of operations budget.
B. Outcome of Prior Efforts to Resolve Problem
The PMO brought and discussed to the TWG the issue about some MLGUs
lapses on their annual contributions to LMDA. The Action Officers from the MLGUs
and Point Persons from PLGUs and GLAs are members of the TWG. The Point
Person of PLGUs, who are also the Deputy Directors of the PMO primarily demand
during meetings for the fund contribution from the MLGUs to LMDA. The TWG as
the coordinating, planning and fund sourcing body of the PMO recommended that
the LMDA should implement and provide relevant projects and services to each
partner MLGUs especially those who consistently giving their share as part of
strategy. The PMO is expecting the favorable action of the concern Action Officers to
report and appeal to the concerned Local Chief Executive (LCE) to give their
committed contributions.
At the BOT level, the Chairperson of the board, who consistently contributed
the annual financial contribution to LMDA also appeal the municipal LCE to
contribute the needed funds. However, only some LCE respond to the call due to
some considerable reasons.
As part of the strategy, the PMO Director has been regularly visiting each
LGU partners to solicit feedbacks regarding LMDA operations and on the project
implementation (LGUMTP, 2008). This is strategy would somehow facilitate to
ensure the giving of LGUs annual contributions to LMDA. The LMDA also send
demand letter signed by the BOT Chairperson to partner LGUs regarding their fund
contribution. In spite of this, some MLGUs still have significant lapses in term of their
fund contribution to LMDA.
C. Assessment of Past Policy Performance
Engr. Kaiser B. Recabo, Jr., Director of LMDA, who is serving the Alliance
since LMDA’s inception in 1999 said that there is no strict policy as to the collection
of fund contribution from the partner LGUs and there is no new policy introduced. He
described the fund contribution policy as stated in the MOA to be “a loss or flexible
policy”. This is to give ample and favorable time for the LGU partners to provide their
committed financial contributions. This flexible policy would facilitate complimentary
considerations that will build positive relations and understanding among members
of the Alliance. There is no legal sanction or coercive action to those members who
neglected to pay their contribution because this would create adverse effect that will
lead the gradual abolition of the Alliance.
2

9. It is significant to note that there is no separate written policy with regards to
guidelines or procedure for fund collection from partner LGUs except that it was
stated in the MOA. The MOA serves as the basis on this policy while the actual
guidelines for such policy are based only on the “verbal gentlemen’s agreement”. In
here, the policy is considered as conservative policy.
This flexible policy may sometimes deem a workable policy since LMDA
highly considered those MLGUs who give their share. According to Engr. Recabo,
Jr., the LMDA will prioritize in giving projects and services to MLGUs based on their
fund contribution. It is for this reason that some MLGUs received more projects
compared to other member MLGUs. The concrete example of this is the
implementation of Focal Community Assistance Scheme (FOCAS) projects funded
by Australian Aid for International Development (AusAID) - Philippines-Australia
Community Assistance Program (PACAP), which are implemented in seven
municipalities except Tubay, Agusan del Norte. It was the fruit of complimentary
networking and collaborative effort of Province of Surigao del Norte and LMDA for
the inclusion of the Lake Mainit area as part of the AusAID-PACAP intervention.
It is remarkable that the municipalities of Sison and Mainit have two FOCAS
projects each with an estimated of Php5.9 million PACAP grant fund each
municipality. The municipalities of Santiago, Jabonga, Kitcharao, Alegria and Tubod
received an estimated of Php3 million PACAP grant fund each. This is the limited but
advantageous effect of the flexible policy. In this situation, the flexible or loss policy
would be considered as the positive-generous policy of LMDA.
Despite of the favorable effect of the flexible policy which accommodates
projects to MLGUs, this does not always follow that MLGUs are assured to provide
their regular fund contribution. Thus, in effect this erstwhile flexible policy would
somehow considered inefficient policy.
D. Significance of Problematic Situation
The significant momentary failure in the fund contribution by some partner
MLGUs will really effect the implementation of priority projects and services of LMDA
in Lake Mainit area (Gidacan & Harting, 2008). On the other hand, this has allowed
the LMDA pursuing flexible policy and accommodating partner MLGUs for the
delivery of limited projects and services. This would somehow encourage LGUs to
give their committed fund contribute.
While there are considerable lapses on fund contribution by some MLGUs,
this does not discourages LMDA but rather it significantly pushes LMDA to find
innovative but acceptable alternative policy.
3

10. II. THE POLICY PROBLEM
A. Problem Statement
The loss or flexible policy of LMDA with contented “verbal gentlemen’s
agreement” regarding to fund collection on the LGU contribution has hamper the
delivery of programs and services of LMDA based on the approve AWFP.
Nevertheless, LMDA has able to counter the problem on the collection of fund by
giving some kind of privileges to MLGUs in form of projects, which is resulted from
the positive-generous policy. This motivational strategy has somehow gained
favorable effect to MLGUs who might entice to give their committed fund
contribution. However, it takes time and lot of effort for LMDA to wait for their
contribution since partner MLGUs are not regularly paying that certain amount of
contributions as expected. Thus, the flexible policy of fund collection is not always
considered efficient and effective.
In order to achieve the efficient and effective policy on fund collection, it is
sine qua non that the LMDA shall:
1. Introduced and apply another acceptable but written alternative policies
that will be useful to supplement and/or enhance the operative and
resourceful fund collection; and
2. Institute an independent, effective and efficient strategy and policy for
accessing of fund from external agencies other than present multi
stakeholders (e.g. foreign donors) that would complement or intensify the
present flexible policy.
B. Approach to Analysis
To come up with the possible policy options, LMDA needs the Mixed
Scanning or the combination of Incremental Approach and the Rational-
Comprehensive Approach.
Incremental Approach
Since LMDA needs to have acceptable policies, there is a requirement of
considering the old but prevailing flexible policy with customary oral gentlemen’s
agreement. And in order to reinforce such kind of verbal covenant, it has to be put in
the black and white document. A written policy and mechanism to be published is
the incremental value of the customary gentlemen’s agreement.
Other possible policy options must be explored and presented which shall
either contribute to the augmentation of the present flexible policy or contribute to the
complementation to the gentlemen’s agreement. It could be also necessary to
consider searching for reliable strategy and policy that could facilitate not only to
supplement the current policy (i.e. flexible policy with customary gentlemen’s
agreement on fund collection to LGUs) but also has incremental value that
4

11. contributed to the general goal of the policy which is dependable fund sourcing and
accessing independent from LGU fund contribution.
Rational-Comprehensive Approach
After considering all the possible policy alternatives, LMDA is necessary to
select the best policy option with the greatest reliable value and/or incremental
value. Criteria should be set while considering the comparison of advantages and
disadvantages of each alternative. Presentation of difference of policy options will be
thoroughly discussed in Comparison of Alternatives.
C. Major Stakeholders
In accordance to the membership of the Alliance being strengthened by MOA,
the LGUs and the GLAs are the major stakeholders of LMDA. Additional
stakeholders have been involved in the Alliance like the Civil Society Organizations
(i.e. including Non-Government Organizations and People’s Organizations),
Academic Institutions (e.g. SNCAT and MSU-Naawan) and business sector
considering the vision of LMDA which is about the preservation of Lake Mainit
ecosystem and resources sustainably managed by the empowered citizen. These
stakeholders especially the LGUs and GLAs have played significant role in shaping
strategies and policies towards the realization of vision, goals and objectives of the
Alliance. However, they are also the reason for the inefficient implementation of the
policy.
D. Goals and Objectives
The Alliance has implicitly defined the goals and objectives of its policy
particularly on fund collection on their MOA and Manual of Operations. However, it
could be understood that the Alliance was successfully established as the
coordinating body for the Lake Mainit LGUs and the fund to be collected from LGUs
are necessitate in the operation and delivery of relevant programs and services
which are anchored from the goals and objectives of the Alliance.
The goal of the Alliance is to properly manage the Lake Mainit ecosystem and
develop potential resources in order to reduce poverty and improve the quality of life
in the area. Specifically, the Alliance is aiming to:
1. Conserve aquatic resources and enhance their economic, ecological and
recreational value;
2. Properly manage forestland and improved the land cover within the
watershed; and
5

12. 3. Promote greater involvement of the government, private sector, local
communities and other stakeholder in the sustainable management of the
lake and other critical resources.
Its objectives are explicitly stated per major component programs concerning
the protection, preservation and promotion on:
• Upland & Lowland Development & Management
• River Management
• Lake Management
• Urban Settlement Areas
• Institutional Management and Strengthening
Generally, the policy of LMDA highly considers the above-mentioned goals
and objectives of the Alliance.
E. Measures of Effectiveness
As explained earlier, the verbal-flexible policy of LMDA concerning fund
collection from partner LGUs are highly considered as conservative and positive-
generous policy but it also inefficient policy. In effect, the expected programs and
services of LMDA as approved in the AWFP, which are culled and highly considered
from the goals and objectives of the Alliance were not sufficiently delivered.
The endurance and determination of LMDA has been challenged by the
meager financial supports from LGUs. Nonetheless, LMDA has been successfully
managing the constraint budget.
F. Potential Solutions
In spite of financial constraints, LMDA has successfully delivering its mandate
with the financial assistance from the foreign-funded project. This is the upshot of the
effective and continuous networking and accessing of funds from other funding
donors which has happen due to the endurance and determination of LMDA-PMO.
LMDA has been successfully initiating relevant project and services and
become an active partner in the implementation of projects. The meager budget for
the operations of PMO has considerably amplified with the presence of foreign-
funded projects (Gidacan & Harting, 2008) and other funding from the national
government.
For the span of ten years, LMDA has successfully delivered relevant projects
and services with the help of PLGUs, GLAs and funding donors. The following are
some funding donors that significantly complemented and contributed to the
6

13. implementation of LMDA priority programs and services to partner MLGUs and Lake
Mainit communities:
Funding Donor Projects & Services Rendered
Philippines-Australia Community Assistance Natural Resource Management
Program (PACAP) thru Focal Community (NRM) project like Agroforestry;
Assistance Scheme (FOCAS) & Responsive sustainable organic agriculture;
Assistance Scheme (RAS) capability building trainings;
enterprise/ livelihood, IEC and
advocacy
Department of Science & Technology (DOST) Limnological study; profiling of
thru Philippine Council for Aquatic Management Lake Mainit; and Sustainable
and Resources Development (PCAMARD) Fishery Program for Lake Mainit
conducted by Mindanao State
University (MSU) at Naawan
Voluntary Services Organization (VSO) Provision of volunteers with high
technical services and researches
especially on the study of lake
resources and stock assessments
International Fund for Agricultural Development Infrastructure (e.g. water &
(IFAD) thru Northern Mindanao Community irrigation systems, farm-to-market
Initiatives & Resource Management Project roads, multi-purpose building);
(NMCIREMP) NRM; enterprise; capability
building
Local Government Support Program (LGSP) Enhancement of Lake Mainit
“Localization of Governance of Philippines Environmental Management Plan
Agenda 21 (GOPA 21) for Fresh Water (EMP) and mainstreaming Civil
Ecosystem” Society Organization (CSO) in the
LMDA structure
World Bank thru Community-Based Resource Infrastructure (e.g. water system);
Management Project (CBRMP) NRM; enterprise; IEC and
advocacy; capability building
Foundation for the Philippine Environment (FPE) NRM, Biodiversity Monitoring &
thru Lake Mainit Community-Based Biodiversity Evaluation, capability building,
Conservation Project alternative livelihood
Nevertheless, there are some foreign donors who are hesitant in establishing
partnership with LMDA for simple reason that LMDA is not yet registered to Security
and Exchange Commission (SEC) or any government registering agencies which will
give the Alliance the legal personality. This issue should be highly considered as the
policy option since it will affect the fund policy concern of LMDA.
7

14. III. POLICY ALTERNATIVES
A. Description of Alternatives
Generally, the possible alternatives for the effective and efficient contribution
of fund for LMDA is favorably complementing and contributing to the present flexible
policy of LMDA to ensure its acceptability to all concerned partners. But in here, the
alternative policy should be put in a black and white document which is quite formal
and logical policy to fortify the traditional flexible-verbal policy.
Innovative-incremental policy especially on establishing external policy to
generate reliable funds also demonstrates the potential policy of LMDA which would
enhance dependable and sustainable funds for the operations of LMDA-PMO.
B. Comparison of Alternatives
Policy Option #1: Ensure adaptable and flexible continuation of LMDA funding
arrangement with active participation of major
stakeholders and also ensure that the amount fund
received is commensurate with the amount needed to
undertake only priority services equally delivered to all
partner LGUs and its communities.
This policy ensures the implementation of the current policy which will be
enhanced or supported with proper black and white documentation after revisiting
the flexible policy.
Advantage:
• Acceptable by all partner LGUs.
• It provides ample and elastic time for the partner LGUs to pay the
committed contribution.
Disadvantage:
• Ineffective and unproductive collection of funds.
• Insufficient and poor delivery of services to all partners.
• No assurance for LGUs to regularly contribute their funds.
• More efforts for LMDA for the collection of fund contribution.
Policy Option #2: Ensure strict and inclusive continuation of LMDA funding
arrangement with active participation of major
stakeholders and also ensure that the amount fund
received is commensurate with the amount needed to
undertake only priority services delivered to only
8

15. consistent partner LGUs and its communities who
significantly contribute.
In here, the revisited policy will be strictly implemented with the concealed
policy which is to give priority privileges to consistent partners while covert
sanctioned policy for those who are inconsistent partners.
Advantage:
• Guarantee LGUs to contribute regularly in return of adequate and
appropriate projects and services.
Disadvantage:
• It is rigorous policy which might result to the unwillingness of partners to
contribute and in effect would lead to steady and drastic termination of the
alliance.
Policy Option #3: Ensure expandable continuation of LMDA funding structure
with active participation of major stakeholders and
institutionalized fund arrangement with other funding
donors to ensure that the amount fund is commensurate
with the amount needed to undertake priority services to
all partners LGUs and its communities.
It is highly considered that LMDA in this policy should be registered to any
government registering agency like Security and Exchange Commission (SEC) to
secure financial assistance from other funding agencies like foreign donors/official
development assistance.
Advantage:
• Allows LMDA to access additional external and equitable funds for
projects to be implemented to all partner LGUs.
• Ignite partner LGUs motivation and active support which may include
regular financial contribution to LMDA.
Disadvantage:
• Extra endeavor for LMDA to make and establish efficient and effective
linkage and networking activities.
C. Spillovers and Externalities
The continue existence of LMDA for 10 years in building partnership with
major stakeholders and complementally working as the coordinating body of both
government and non-government organizations in Lake Mainit area has been
considered a successful indicator that influences and replicates other focal areas
9

16. who encourage to establish its own alliance. Example of this is the Lanuza Bay
Development Alliance (LBDA), which established on August 25, 2004
(http://www.lbda.ph/background.htm) and the recently institutionalized Hinatuan
Passage Development Alliance (HIPADA).
In Surigao del Norte, the intervention of AusAID-PACAP through FOCAS
projects are divided on three cluster areas namely, the Siargao Island Protected
Landscapes and Seascapes (SIPLAS), HIPADA and LMDA. The SIPLAS area
covers all municipalities in Siargao Island while HIPADA composed on main land
municipalities like Malimono, San Franciso, Taganaan, Placer, Bacuag and Claver
and the city of Surigao (http://surigaofocas.wordpress.com).
With the sharing of LMDA experience being the only successful and existing
alliance in Surigao del Norte and Agusan del Norte, the city of Surigao and
municipalities along Hinatuan Passage agreed to formally institutionalized HIPADA.
And with the assistance from AusAID-PACAP, HIPADA was successfully established
in October 10, 2008. Like LMDA, the HIPADA has similar policy of fund contribution
which partner municipalities shall contribute an initial amount of fifty thousand pesos
(Php 50,000.00) each and shall be deposited to a trust fund of the host municipality.
They have the HIPADA Council composed of City and Municipal Mayors; the
Technical Advisory Group (TAG) composed of City/Municipal Planning and
Development Coordinators and representatives from Province of Surigao del Norte
and GLAs; and the Operations Management Office (OMO) manage by an Executive
Director.
The institutionalization of HIPADA is one of the productive milestone
activities of PACAP-FOCAS intervention in Surigao del Norte and the positive spill
over effect of LMDAs significant experience as functional alliance.
The LGUs and its communities will be benefited with the potentials of Lake
Mainit’s eco-tourism, agroforestry, hydro electric power and other relevant projects
which have been identified by some funding donors and investors. These potentials
have been made due to the existence of LMDA. Likewise, the agroforestry, NRM
and enterprise development projects funded by AusAID-PACAP have spill over
effects to economic and environmental aspects in Lake Mainit that give benefits not
only to the areas where the project implemented but to the entire Lake Mainit
ecosystem.
D. Constraints and Political Feasibility
The changes in LGUs direction and priorities may hinder the effective
implementation of contribution policy of LMDA. It has been an experience by LMDA
that there are some newly elected LCEs who have indifferent understanding about
the Alliance. Gidacan & Harting (2008) explains that, “newly-elected LCEs have sets
of priorities for their respective LGUs which may or may not support the overall
attainment of LMDA’s goals on sustainable development”.
10

17. IV. POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Criteria for Recommending Alternatives
1. Effectiveness. One of the desired result to say that LMDA policy
effectiveness is that all partners are demonstrate consistency in giving
their committed counterparts for LMDA to effectively provide relevant
services in return.
2. Efficiency. Partner LGUs shall diligently contribute their share on regular
schedule at a given period of time (assigned month or quarter of the year).
It is expected that LMDA has less effort in collection of funds from
partners.
3. Acceptability. Policy should no condition of coercion and should be clear
and understandable so that it will be acceptable to all partners especially
the newly elected officials.
4. Adequacy. Most partners are expected to have inadequate fund
resources –a reason that opt them to ignore their financial obligation. But
this might be solved if there is sufficient and proficient information
regarding the policy to all concern in the LGUs especially the offices of the
Mayor, Governor, Planning & Development Coordinator, the Sanggunian,
and other concerned offices to ensure that budget for contribution to
LMDA is available and appropriated for example in LGUs 20%
development fund.
5. Flexibility. It is wise consideration that given timeframe of fund
contribution should be flexible and the amount of fund itself should be paid
in stagger schedule since not all partners have stable and adequate
money in their coffers.
6. Equity. As coordinating body, LMDA should always provide fair and just
delivery of programs and services to all concerned partners. This must be
defined and explicitly stipulated in the policy.
7. Responsiveness. The need for economic benefits and development is
the main and crucial direction and priorities of the partners. Thus, it is
imperative that the policy should ensure efficient and just delivery of
programs and services in response to this essential development agenda,
vision and mandate of the partners.
8. Appropriateness. It is appropriate that there is black and white document
for a formal implementation of the policy. Registration of LMDA to SEC is
extremely appropriate for LMDA to have legal personality.
9. Complementation. The policy should harmonize and work with the
acceptable policy of the partners (vision, mission, mandates, and
development agenda) and the customary policy of LMDA.
11

18. B. Description of Preferred Alternatives
Based on the comparison of alternatives, the Policy Option #3 is most
appropriate and favorable policy which is highly recommended and to be
undertaken. This policy help ensure dependable financial resources for LMDA
provided however that LMDA must ensure extra effort needed for the networks and
linkage to the funding donors other than the LGUs. Nevertheless, it is an important
requirement that LMDA should be first registered to government registering agencies
such as to SEC as this is one of the best considerations needed in establishing
partnership with the funding donors especially the Overseas Development
Assistance (ODA)
The very crucial criterion for the Policy Option #3 is that it complements and
supports to the old policy which is more considerate, flexible, and acceptable by the
LGUs which would later produce into strong and dynamic Alliance with the policy
that are then efficient, effective, equitable, responsive and appropriate.
C. Outline of Implementation Strategy
Regular activities of LMDA such us meetings, proper coordination and
courtesy with the partner LGUs must always be ensured. This is to give enough and
favorable ways for the implementation of the policy. Below are some considerable
activities in the strategy implementation of policy:
Activity Timeframe Logistics Responsible Output
Inquiry for SEC April Travel documents, LMDA-PMO Acquisition of pro-
registration allowances forma of legal
documents and
relevant information
TWG meeting May-June Communication LMDA-PMO, Policy paper,
letter, venue & Action Officers registration paper,
logistics, meeting and Point endorsement to
kits including policy Persons BOT
BOT meeting July Communication LMDA-PMO, BOT resolution for
letter, venue & Action Officers the approval of
logistics, meeting and Point LMDA registration,
kits including policy Persons, commitment
& registration Mayors, resolution
documents Governors,
Regional
Directors
Finalization of July Relevant LMDA-PMO Complete
registration documents documents
documents
LMDA registration August Travel documents, LMDA-PMO Approved SEC
to SEC registration registration papers
documents,
allowances
12

19. Activity Timeframe Logistics Responsible Output
Presentation to September Travel documents, LMDA-PMO, Obtained RDC
RDC Meeting approved SEC NEDA-Caraga resolution
registration, endorsement
allowances
Information September Relevant LMDA-PMO Publication to The
dissemination to documents, policy Lake Mainit
partners paper, Chronicle and to
communication LMDA websites
letter
Staff Development
• Hiring of October Job qualification LMDA-PMO 1 Project
Project standard & other Development
Development hiring documents Officer hired
Officer
• Training on November- Training design, NEDA-Caraga Training conducted
Project December funding, venue and
Proposal other logistics
Preparation
Project proposal January Project proposals LMDA-PMO, Submitted project
submission NEDA-Caraga proposal to ODA for
funding
considerations
Multi-Stakeholder February Workshop design, LMDA-PMO, Identification of
Project Proposal funding supports, ODA fund donor priority projects
Workshop venue and other proposals,
logistics commitment of fund
donor for the
project
implementation
D. Provisions for Monitoring and Evaluation
The PMOs Administrative staff shall regularly monitor on monthly bases the
contribution payments of the partner LGUs. The PMO Director shall ensure the
effectiveness and efficiency of the newly hired Project Development Officer base on
the number of project proposal formulated and submitted.
Accomplishments updates and issues and problem must be discuss and
resolve at the TWG level during the regular meetings. The TWG shall help ensure
the effectiveness and efficiency of the LMDA policies and plans.
E. Limitations and Unanticipated Consequences
Lack of political will and support and lean financial resources of the partner
LGUs will really affect and hinder the implementation of LMDAs policies and plans.
13

20. REFERENCES
BOT Resolution No. 03 S. 2002 “Approving the transfer of funds to the Municipality
of Kitcharao from the Province of Surigao del Norte”
Gidacan, E. Z & Harting, G. C. 2008. A Case on Networking for the Conservation of
a Shared Lake Ecosystem: Lake Mainit Development Alliance (LMDA) in the
Caraga Region (Local Government Unit Management Training Project
Benchmark Case Study # 10). Local Government Unit Management Training
Project and National Economic and Development Authority – Caraga.
Lake Mainit Environmental Management Plan
Lake Mainit Executive Agenda
LMDA Status of LGU Contribution 1999-2008
Manual of Operations of Lake Mainit Development Alliance, April 1999
Memorandum of Agreement forming Lake Mainit Development Alliance, 1999
RDC Resolution No. 11 S. 1999 “Resolution officially recognizing the Lake Mainit
Development (LMDA)”
Internet Sources:
About LMDA, http://lmda.wordpress.com/about-lmda/ Date accessed: February 25,
2009
Background of Lanuza Bay Development Alliance http://www.lbda.ph/background.htm
Date accessed: March 27, 2009
Lake Mainit Development Alliance http://lmda.blogspot.com/ Date accessed:
February 25, 2009
Surigao del Norte FOCAS, http://surigaofocas.wordpress.com Date accessed:
February 23, 2009
14