ALL DSWD FIELD OFFICE DIRECTORS DSWD FO 1-CARAGA STANDARDS UNIT HEADS SOCIAL MARKETING UNIT HEADS

Transcription

1 a Republic of the Philippines Department of Social Welfare and Development IBP Road, Batasan Pambansa Complex, Constitution Hills, Quezon City 1126 Telephone Nos. (632) to 07; Telefax (632) Website: 29 February 2016 FOR ATTN FROM ALL DSWD FIELD OFFICE DIRECTORS DSWD FO 1-CARAGA STANDARDS UNIT HEADS SOCIAL MARKETING UNIT HEADS The Undersecretay, Institutional Development Group Head, CSO Accreditation Committee SUBJECT Use and distribution of FACT SHEET for JR & JR Please find attached FACT SHEET for use and distribution to all DSWD Filed Offices, partner Civil Society Organizations and Government Agencies with regard to the accreditation of CSOs as Implementing Entity and Beneficiary CSOs. For your appropriate action. Thank you. ANGE11I11m Y. GREGORIO-MEDEL cc: Dir. Joel Espejo, Social Marketing Service

2 FACT SHEET: A GUIDELINE ON THE ACCREDITATION OF am AS IMPLEMENTING ENTITIES AND BENEFICIARIES OF GOVERNMENT-FUNDED PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS I. Background On October 2013, alleged wide scale misuse of public funds was reported involving fund transfers to legitimately registered Non-Government Organizations (NGOs), whose Board of Trustees were alleged as mere "dummies" of corrupt government officials malversing billions of pesos1. In response, the Government, through the 2014 and 2015 National Budget ensured that government agencies (GAs) shall only partner with legitimate civil society organizations (CSOs). The Department of Social Welfare and Development was mandated as the only government agency that will accredit CSOs to be eligible to receive public funds as implementing entities of government programs and projects (PAPS). On December , the Commission On Audit (COA), Department of Budget and Management (DBM) and the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) jointly issued a resolution (Res ) entitled "Guidelines for Accreditation of Civil Society Organizations as Implementing Entities of Government or Public Funds" to ensure that government programs are properly and efficiently carried out in partnerships with legitimate CSOs and that funds are properly guarded against misuse. The Joint Resolution (JR) paved way for the policy issuance of DSWD's Memorandum Circular 05 on April 07, This provides for the implementing procedures of accrediting reputable, qualified and capable CSOs to be as implementing partner and recipient of government funds. On December 29, 2015, the JR entitled "Supplemental Guidelines for CSO Accreditation" was published covering CSOs receiving public funds as "CSO Beneficiary" complementing the earlier JR specifically for CSOs as implementing entity only. II. CSOs as an "Implementing Entity" and as a "Beneficiary" Basically, CSOs as an Implementing Entity refer to CSOs who are organizationally structured and registered with mandated government regulating bodies' found to be reputable, qualified and capable. On the other hand "CSO Beneficiary" refers to "a group of individuals directly affected by a calamity, crisis or a particular social condition or problem, who have undergone social preparation to become responsible implementers of a particular government program or project using public funds'. 1 Also known as the Pork Barrel Scam or the Napoles Scam 2 These are those government regulatory bodies such as SEC, CDA, DOLE & HLURB 3 Joint Resolution , Section 1.6 1

3 III. Difference between Accreditation and Selection In essence, accreditation is the process done by DSWD to determine whether a CSO/NGO is legitimate and in good standing. Those accredited will then be "eligible" to be selected by Government Agencies (GA) as its partner to implement government programs and/or projects. Selection, on the other hand, is a separate process carried out by the GA to select its partner CSO from the pool of CSOs accredited by the DSWD. IV. Criteria for Accreditation CSOs wanting to be accredited as an Implementing Entity must satisfy the following criteria: Must have operated' for at least three (3) years prior to application in the geographical area(s)5 of activity and technical area(s) of activity6 being applied for; Must not have any organizer, director, trustee, officer or key personnel related within the fourth civil degree of affinity and consanguinity to any DSWD official involved in the processing of its accreditation specifically the official members of the DSWD Accreditation Committee. or any official of the GAs funding or implementing the program or the project to be implemented by the CSO; Must not have any derogatory record with any GA; and Must not be in default or delay in liquidating funds received from the GA. Operational is different from existence. A CSO may be existing for more than 3 years but may have no operations at all. The Geographical Areas of Activity are the place(s) where the CSO is operating 'Technical Areas of Activity simply mean the Area of Technical Expertise of the CSO applicant In a separate note, CSOs wanting to be accredited as a Beneficiary must satisfy the following criteria: Must be organized and composed of individuals directly affected by the problem or crisis; Must have undergone social preparation specific to the proposed project; Must be in good standing with all GAs from which it has received funds; and Must not be in default or delay in liquidating any funds received from any GA. V. The Accreditation Committee The Accreditation Committee (AC) is tasked to evaluate the applications of CSOs and to provide recommendation for the DSWD Secretary's decision. The Accreditation Committee is composed of the following: Chair: Undersecretary for Institutional Development Group Vice Chair: Director, Standards Bureau Members: Representatives from the Legal Service, Internal Audit Service and the Office of the Secretary To ensure transparency, the DSWD COA Auditor and DSWD Resident Ombudsman or their representatives are present during the deliberations in an observer capacity7. The AC is only a recommending body. They shall recommend approval, denial and blacklisting as the case may be, based on their evaluation to the DSWD Secretary. While COA and OMB representatives are in an observer capacity, they provide meaningful insights that add guidance to the AC's recommendations. 2

4 VI. The Accreditation Committee Secretariat The Secretariat holds office and is under the supervision of the DSWD-Standards Bureau. It is the central channel of all communications of the Accreditation Committee. The Secretariat receives CSO applications for accreditation and all other communications pertaining to the accreditation process including protests, appeals and inquiries as the case may be. VII. The Accreditation Process In brief, the following are the stages that comprise the entire process including the processing time as applicable: Submission The filing application is centralized at the DSWD Central Office, although CSO applicants may also file their applications with the DSWD Field Offices, which shall then be forwarded to the Accreditation Committee at the DSWD CO. CSO applicants must satisfy the documentary requirements set forth in Annex A of JR reiterated in Article VI of DSWD MC05. The CSO applicant may also employ technical assistance of its partner GA to ensure compliance to all requirements prior to submission. Initial Examination and Posting Upon submission, the application shall be subject to initial desk review for three (3) days to ensure that submitted documents are complete and meets all the required information8. If submission is complete, it shall be endorsed for validation within five (5) days. Assessors from the Secretariat are randomly selected to conduct initial desk review of the CSO application Simultaneously, the CSO application shall be posted at the DSWD website for twenty one (21) days9 open for public viewing and scrutiny if there are derogatory reports against the CSO applicant. In case of receipt of derogatory reports, the AC, will require the CSO to respond to the report and make necessary evaluation and action within two (2) days. Validation & Ocular Inspection After the completion of the initial desk review, the concerned DSWD-Field Office shall conduct validation to verify its existence and scope of operations to ascertain truthfulness of projects implemented or being implemented as declared in its submission. In cases where CSO implemented projects using government funds, FO shall validate if the CSO is not in default or delay in liquidating funds received from the GA. The DSWD-FO shall complete and submit the validation report within five (5) days from the date of request and submit it to the CSO Secretariat. Secretariat shall then prepare an abstract report synthesizing findings from the initial desk review and validation report of the FO for evaluation and deliberation of the AC. Evaluation & Deliberation The AC shall meet once a week to evaluate and deliberate on applications endorsed by the Secretariat considering all information on hand contained in the documents submitted 9 As per MC05, the timeline consist of 5 days (validation & ocular), 5 days (assessment & examination), 5 days (finalization of AC recommendation) and 3 days for Secretary's decision. 3

5 requirements, initial desk review, FO validation report and derogatory reports as the case may be. During this stage, the AC may do the following if necessary: Require additional documents; Interview key personnel of CSO applicant or any person with past or present substantial dealing with the applicant; and Conduct further validation and Invite Resource Person (s) to shed light on received derogatory report, if any ' 0. Applicants may submit photocopies of required documents. However, the Accreditation Committee may require submission of originals or certified copies of questionable documents. The AC shall determine if the CSO applicant is qualified or not within five (5) days and shall endorse its recommendation for the DSWD Secretary's approval or denial. Issuance of Certification Within three (3) days from the receipt of endorsement from the AC, the DSWD Secretary or the authorized representative shall take final action on the application. If the applicant meets all the requirements, applicant shall be granted and issued a Certificate of Accreditation. If the applicant fails to meet any of the criteria, the DSWD Secretary shall deny the application and/or blacklist the CSO applicant, as applicable, indicating the grounds thereof. Notification The secretariat shall inform the following of the decision whether approval or denial: 'There is no prescribed timeline in case the Accreditation Committee avails any of the enumerated bullets during the evaluation and deliberation stage. CSO applicant; and The partner GA of the CSO where it is expecting to receive funds; In case of approval, the Secretariat shall also update the Registry of Accredited CSOs and coordinate with the CSO for the conduct of orientation on its roles and responsibilities within three (3) days. The issuance of the Certificate of Accreditation shall be valid only for the approved geographical and technical areas of activity for three (3) years. VIII. Verification & Reporting It should be noted that within the validity period, the Secretariat and concerned DSWD-FO shall conduct unannounced spot checks to validate any statement or information in any document that the applicant submitted. In addition, upon entering into an agreement with any GA, the CSO must submit a copy of the said Agreement to the AC three (3) days from entering into the same. Likewise the GA shall also submit to the AC a copy of its Agreement with any CSO and inform the DSWD if it comes into knowledge of any fact that may constitute ground for revocation of the partner CSOs accreditation. IX. Publication The DSWD through the Secretariat shall maintain current and updated in its website she following: List of CSOs applying for accreditation List of accredited CSOs List of CSOs with revoked certifications List of Blacklisted CS0s,1 It is important to note that all GAs must access the information above from time to time for their reference. 11 All of the identified listings are maintained updated by the CSO Secretariat 4

6 X. Revocation of Accreditation The AC, in case it discovers or receives a derogatory report provided there is basis/evidence, shall conduct revocation proceedings. It shall require a sworn explanation from the subject CSO within three (3) days upon start of the revocation process on the grounds against it. The CSO must reply to the AC within three (3) days from receipt of notice. Hearings For CSOs whose certificate was revoked for the first time, it shall be disqualified to apply for accreditation for one year. However, for second offense and/or if the ground for revocation is misrepresentation, falsification or violation of any law, the CSO shall perpetually disqualified. For further inquiries, you may contact the CSO Division Secretariat at Contact No: , or loc.111 I The AC shall conduct a hearing12 ten (10) days from receipt of CSOs sworn statement and deliberate on the matter inviting the author of the derogatory report, the representative of the concerned CSO and representative of the umbrella group where the CSO is affiliated, if applicable. After the conduct of the hearing(s), the AC shall endorse its finding to the DSWD Secretary which shall issue a resolution to dismiss the complaint or revoke the certification if there is substantial ground for such. Xl. Disqualification & Blacklisting.11P If during the initial desk review and validation, the Secretariat has found and verified that the CSO applicant had submitted falsified document(s), the application shall not be returned and be used as evidence during AC deliberations. The CSO may file an appeal. However, if proven guilty, the applicant shall be blacklisted for one (1) year With regard to the revocation process, a series of hearings may take place. 13 The CSO applicant shall be given the chance to provide an explanation in writing, or if warranted an audience with the AC. In any case, the applicant shall be duly notified of the decision of the Accreditation Committee. 5