P213: Urban Plan Implementation

William Cureg Talaue

Marked Assignment No. 1b
Faculty In-Charge: Dr. Proscoro Ervin Mundo, EnP
Learning Center: UPOULC HQ, Laguna

REACTION PAPER: NEDA Guidelines for updating 2017-2022 Public Investment Program,
2020-2022 Three (3)-Year Rolling Infrastructure Program as input to the FY 2020 Budget
Preparation, its implication to Urban Plan Implementation

As a planner, one of the most important parts to consider in a plan is the realization of
the vision and in particularly in the outcomes and output of the programs and projects. These
can only be realized if the required strategic funds are available. These funds can be
strategically outsource from the different financial institutions (international/national) both on
government and private sectors. In fact, our country still belong on the economic policy
circles which is the “Washington Consensus” mainly applied to the third world borrowing
countries by the World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF). Philippine is belonging
to the circle of the third world and it is irrefutable that the country borrows money to that two
giant financial institutions for its socio-economic development, which greatly influenced
planners to reshape or align their planning system as reflected to the policies of the
consensus. In the local context, these three NEDA policy guidelines must align planners in
the process, rules and regulations most specifically on financial aspects.
In the Philippine setting, the National Economic Development Authority (NEDA) is
the country’s premier socioeconomic planning body, highly regarded as the authority in
macroeconomic forecasting and policy analysis and research. Responsible for coordination of
activities such as formulation of policies, plans, and programs to efficiently broad parameters
for national and sub-national and local development. Thus, these three (3) memoranda
documents rolled out for budget preparation in all agencies concerned as stated therein. These
can guide help the planners on how to align the process, timetable, rules and regulations as
prescribed in the policy guidelines in making their propose plans and financial aspects.
There are important contents drawn in the three documents that is a must to consider
by a planner and these would be highlighted as follows:

a. The Public Investment Program (PIP) as a Programming Document

The updated PIP is a medium-term program under a current administration and must
always linked or anchored on societal goal and targets on the Philippine Development Plan
(PDP). The Priority Programs and Projects (PAPs) may be financed by the National
Government funds, Government-Owned and Controlled Corporations (GOCC), Government
Financial Institution (GFI), Private sectors and the Official Development Assistance (ODA).
These financial sources can be tapped when making project proposals or feasibility studies, it
can be served as outsource for possible funding of potential programs and projects.
The PIP has subsets of three main parts, the Core Investment Program (CIP), the Non-
CPIs and the Three (3) Year Rolling Infrastructure Program (TRIP). The TRIP is a National
Government Funded priority infrastructure and it is the basis of the DBM to include in the
National Budget and serves as a mechanism to monitor progress on the NG’s target to
increase infrastructure spending as a percentage of the country’s gross domestic product.

b. The Content of the Updated PIP

It is always to consider that the priority PAPs for inclusion in the updated PIP must
satisfy and responsive in the current PDP-Result Matrices and the 10 point socioeconomic
agenda, the readiness of the PAP and Typology of PAP that can be included in the PIP. There
are also exclusion on the updated PIP such as the recurrent cost on the general operations of
the government and guarantee-related activities to private institutions; PAP’s to be financed
purely from LGU funds and independent projects of the private sector; administrative capital
outlay and reorganization-related activities; roadmap, masterplan, ISSP of implementing
agencies; stand-alone preparatory activities for infrastructure PAP’s such as resettlement
action plan, ROW acquisition, pre-FS, F/S, and detailed engineering (DED). However, those
priority projects requiring preparatory activities that are responsive to the PDP and RM can
be included in the PIP.
Based on the NEDA detailed timetable on the updating of the PIP and TRIP for FY
2021 Budget preparation, it is on the schedule that by October 14 to November 29, 2019 is
the final review and processing of the PIP/TRIP submission in the PIPOL System. This
timetable of the NEDA is a must to see of planners.
The problem with the current PIP applies to the previous Comprehensive and Integrated
Infrastructure Program (CIIP) which according to World Bank (2011) has a long list of infrastructure
projects many of which are yet to be implemented. An objective prioritization process is needed to
select a shorter list of projects within budget ceilings and supportive of the current government’s
agenda. It suggests to use studies that prioritize projects based on technical and socio-economic
analysis. At present, some agencies’ PIPs are simply long wish lists with no clear prioritization and
sequencing.

c. The TRIP as a subset of the PIP

On October 27, 2014 the NEDA Board on Committee on Infrastructure
(INFRACOM) approved the reinstitution of the Three (3) – Year Rolling Infrastructure
Program (TRIP) in order to build the pipeline of strategic and other projects needed to
sustain inclusive economic growth. It synchronize the infrastructure planning, programming,
budgeting and execution processes of the government both at the oversight and
implementing agency level. The TRIP also must be consistent with the priorities and
strategies in line with the PDP. It is submitted by the NEDA to the DBM upon approval or
confirmation of the NEDA Board-INFRACOM for the determination of program spending
levels for approval of the Development Budget Coordination Committee (DBCC).
The TRIP reporting process follows the two-tier budgeting approach of DBM. A new
or expanded program or project submitted for budget allocation in the TRIP shall describe
the objective, problem/issue being addressed, the resulting increase in operational efficiency
with the adoption of technology improvements, the risk mitigation strategy, monitoring and
evaluation plan, and expected outcomes/outputs.
 As a planner, it is understood and aware on the guidelines of the TRIP is imperative
mostly likely for projects propose to be implemented through Public-Private Partnership
(PPP) which require subsidies or amortization payments or other support from the National
Government, likewise the amount and timing of the subsidy and amortization payment is
accordingly indicated in the project. TRIP is intended to ensure that the agencies’ annual
budget ceilings are optimized and utilized in the funding of priority infrastructure programs
and projects which are likewise responsive to the outcomes and outputs under the PDP.

The Role of the PPP Center and its process

The role of the Public-Private Partnership (PPP) Center in the process is to assist
implementing agencies, which submit their inputs to the PIP in identifying the potential PPP
projects. Once a potential PPP project is identified among the PIP projects, the PPP Center
helps the implementing agencies in conducting feasibility studies, through the procurement
of a transaction adviser (TA) who will do the feasibility studies, and assists the
implementing agencies get the approval of the Project Development and Monitoring Facility
(PDMF) Committee. In the ICC approval process, the PPP Center acts as the Secretariat of
the ICC for PPP projects, and convenes the technical working group (TWG) composed of
the PPP Center, DOF, NEDA, and DENR. In the TWG, the PPP Center does the bankability
and value-for-money analysis; DOF looks at the financial and risk allocation aspects; NEDA
examines the alignment to the PDP; and DENR assesses the PPP project’s environmental
impact. In other words, the TWG does a holistic evaluation of projects. From the PPP
Center, the PPP project appraisal process goes to the ICC Cabinet Committee, and if it
passes this hurdle, it goes up to the NEDA Board Committee for final approval. The
implementing agencies can seek the help of the PPP Center in the bidding process. (PPP
Center 2016).
Thus, the vetting process for all foreign-assisted projects and for large locally funded
projects that are required to get ICC approval, follows a two-track flow, after hurdling all
previous steps.

Conclusions and Recommendations:

These three (3) policy guidelines as instituted public expenditure management
systems tools to address the need to synchronize infrastructure planning, programming,
budgeting, monitoring and evaluation has its strength and weaknesses. The strengths are the
recent reform orientation of the oversight agencies and their policy coordination. The
weaknesses are the inconsistency in the oversight program and output indicators, and the
institutional weakness of the project approval process.
It is highly recommended that they have to study more and adopt the international
best practices in capital projects planning and programming. In this case, institutional reforms
can be strengthen, technical man/professional, expertise are fitted to the works and less
bureaucratic system of employment. This can minimize that the public investment
management system will not be leading to fiscal constraints in a situation that the required
funding in the development plan is not matched by the approved budget.
 References

Department of Budget and Management – National Economic Development Authority

(DBM-NEDA). Joint Circular No. 2016-01. January 29. Manila, Philippines.
National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA). 2017a. Formulation of the 2017-
2022 Public Investment Program (PIP). Memorandum from Secretary Ernesto M.
Pernia. January 20. Pasig City, Philippines: NEDA.
National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA). 2017b. Philippine Development
Plan: 2017-2022. Pasig City, Philippines: NEDA.
National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA). 2015. AmBisyon Natin 2040: A
Long-Term Vision for the Philippines. Pasig City, Philippines: NEDA.
National Economic Development Authority (NEDA). 2018. Updating of the 2017-2022
Public Investment Program (PIP)/Formulation of the Fiscal Year (FY) 2020-2022
Three (3)-Year Rolling Infrastructure Program (TRIP) as input to the FY2020 Budget
Preparation. Memorandum from Secretary Ernesto M. Pernia. September 10. Pasig
City, Philippines: NEDA.
National Economic Development Authority (NEDA). 2018. Guidelines for the Updating of
the 2017-2022 Public Investment Program (PIP) as input to the FY 2020 Budget
Preparation. Memorandum from Secretary Ernesto M. Pernia. September 10. Pasig
City, Philippines: NEDA.
Peet R., and E. Hartwick. 2009. Theories of Development “Contention, Arguments,
Alternative”. (2nd Edition). New York: Guilford Press.
PPP Center. 2016. Guidelines and procedures for appraisal of public-private partnership
(PPP) projects. Policy Circular No. OIA-2016. March 7. Quezon City Philippines:
PPP Center.
World Bank. 2011. 2011 Philippines development report. Washington, D.C.: World Bank.