About Me


Rev. Beltran Esrame Pacatang

General Secretary

Monday, July 28, 2008

Scholarship Proposal

CONSORTIUM OF CHRISTIAN ORGANIZATION FOR RURAL-URBAN
DEVELOPMENT (CONCORD), Inc.
Zone 6, Barra Opol, Misamis Oriental
PHILIPPINES



A Project Proposal


i. IDENTIFYING INFORMATION


Project Title Scholarship for Education and Development of
Communities ( SEDEC ) II

Project Proponent CONCORD Incorporated
Zone 6 Barra, Opol, Misamis Oriental
PHILIPPINES
C/o Rev. Beltran Pacatang
General Secretary

Duration of the Project Six (6) Calendar School Years Beginning in SY 2008-2009

Total Project Cost Php 68,648,380.00

Local Counterpart Php 14,399,076.00

Requested Fund Php 54,249,304.00

Nature of Assistance Grant


BACKGROUND OF CONCORD SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM

The scholarship program of the Consortium evolved from the staff development programs in its early years in the 1980`s . Needing to improve the skills and capacity of the early staff, selected personnel underwent training and formal education. The governing board played a major role in the screening process. By 1984 a partnership with the Ecumenical Scholarship Program of Germany established, the program was expanded into the Scholarship for Poor and Deserving Students (SPADES) with the sole aim of supporting college education. In 1995 it was renamed as Deserving But Poor ( DBP) Scholarship Program but with the same rationale and objectives.

Due to some feedbacks regarding the DBP program implementation, an evaluation was initiated in 1999. The major recommendation of this evaluation study was to reiterate that the program was intended to support the human resource development programs of its member agencies and the broader communities of the consortium served. It also emphasized that the consortium need to continuously guide and assist the scholars according to its orientation and philosophy, the CONCORD should pursue continuing extra-curricular programs that will impart its pro-people, patriotic and God-fearing values, attitudes and commitment on the scholars, according to the October 1999 final report. The extra curricular program was to ran parallel to the formal scholarship program before, during and after the formal scholarship periods. Hence, in October 1999, the DBP became the Scholarship for Education and Development of Communities (SEDEC).

In 2000, SEDEC was implemented until 2006. Based on the latest report to the CONCORD General assembly in February 2007 and Committee meetings much remains to be desired in the program implementation. It was even difficult to determine if the 1999 evaluation recommendations were achieved or even implemented. As a matter of fact, some of the scholars for one reason or the other were still studying as of the lat report well beyond the 4-year prescribed period, others dropped out from the schools and less than 30 % were absorbed by the member agencies.

It is therefore the goal of this SEDEC II to implement the 1999 recommendations with more intent and purpose. Hence, an implementation mechanism will be followed integrating the scholarship program with the existing organizational set-up of the consortium. A conscientious, diligent and deliberate promotion of concepts, principles and transparent organization policies at all levels and periods of the program implementation shall be ensured. The program is extended for six years because of the lessons learned during the SEDEC I implementation.

OBJECTIVES

General Objectives

Develop a human resource pool of properly oriented and committed individuals; a leadership pool composed by professionally and academically qualified personnel

Specific Objectives

Determine the human resources development needs of availing member agencies and peoples` organizations especially those participating in this program;
Design and install organizational management mechanisms at the CONCORD governing body level to ensure program oversight and directions;
To hold a program at the CONCORD level for the continuing education of the scholars covering the pre-schooling, during the schooling and post schooling periods;
Attend to the welfare of the scholars in cooperation with the member agencies, peoples` organizations and families;
Assist scholars with potentials who have dropped out from schooling for justifiable reasons.

SEDEC II BENEFICIARIES

A maximum of 5 candidates per member agency will be accepted or a total of 145 scholars for 29 member agencies. The scholarship program will be intended for graduate, college and technical courses levels. Every MAs and its peoples` organization could avail the scholarship support program depending on the determination of their human resources needs.
The candidates for scholarship must be poor but deserving active member of the church, community organization or networks and MAs personnel which are part of their staff development program or developed to become MAs future administrators or leader.

The process of determination of such needs and screening requirements shall be determined by the CONCORD Board of Trustees in consultation with the member agencies and peoples` organizations.

Policies covering the program shall be inclusive of past applicable policies and principles cited below. Patronage will be disallowed and the candidate and the member agency, peoples` organization or families shall be required to shoulder a counterpart based on respective capacities.

The maximum number of five (5) candidates per member agency and PO ma not be actually filled up depending on an appraisal of the human resources development plan and actual needs of the availing organization or institution. Such decision could be reached in a collegial discussion between the CONCORD Board of Trustees and the concerned member agency or peoples` organization.

PRINCIPLES

People are the prime movers for change not the technology or tools which are instruments to serve human needs;
Human resources must be pro-people, patriotic and God-fearing;
Human resources have passion for truth, justice and freedom;
Education brings about life, not the degree obtained
Students should enroll or study in school and colleges that sustain an academic environment which promotes social development;
Gender sensitivity and poverty alleviation;
Serving local communities and those in need;
Preference for learning institutions which are near their residence;
Non-theological courses- science and mathematics;
No bias/ prejudice- race, religion, political, creed, dropouts, scholastic performance, etc;
Principles of consortium support for one another; weak MAs priority, strong MAs to give way or support weaker MAs.

SEDEC II FRAMEWORK

The preliminary phase of the program would include:
· The selection of candidate-scholars by the member agencies and peoples` organizations.
· The information should be properly disseminated within the organization.
· The program committee shall receive them and process the application based on its institutional processes and needs.
· The candidate scholar should be fully aware about the objectives, principles and requirements of the program.
· The final action of the MA would come in the form of a recommendation to the Scholarship Committee of the CONCORD BOT. The later will process the screening and request for other requirements.
With the selection of the candidate, the scholar will be required to join a community immersion and learning programs and the duration to be determined by the CONCORD program. The process should include a written self-appraisal by the prospective as well as an appraisal by the hosting community. The documents shall be included in the candidate appraisal. This will be processed collegially among the candidate-scholars to be facilitated by the Cluster Coordinator. The latter will prepare a summary report on the candidates` attitudes and aptitude which shall form part of the candidates` individual life.

During the actual schooling process, the student shall provide the area cluster coordinator the semestral class schedules and other needs covered by the budget of this program. The student shall be visited by the area coordinators as well as the organization or family or MA as part of the regular visits.

Scholastic performance such as grades, participation of in-campus student activities, violations of campus rules shall be requested from school authorities, etc. The student-scholar will be asked to make an annual report to the MA, PO and CONCORD exclusive of his/ her academic performance. Such individual performance shall be kept with the personal file at the CONCORD office.

In-between extended long school breaks or when the area cluster coordinator deems that the scholars can convene or even tap them individually for some activities without affecting their academic attendance, such should be programmed. A fellowship or alumni association maybe even considered to instill a sense of camaraderie and companionship among themselves.

A post graduation activity sustaining the the level of fellowship and communication among the graduates will be the responsibility of the CONCORD secretariat. Follow ups through retreat processes or other forms should be encouraged.

Hence, no secretariat will be hired or appointed. The monitoring and follow ups of the scholars will be a part and parcel of CDW and area cluster coordinator’s responsibilities. Budget in the draft for personnel will be used to implement the parallel, extra-curricular program of CONCORD. The amount should be supplemented with other sources from the regular programs of the CONCORD Secretariat.

VI. The implementing Structure

The CONCORD General Assembly


Board of Trustees
Executive Committee

Scholarship Committee

MAs CORD or Task Force

Area Cluster Coordinator -------------------- Community Development Worker

Role and Functions:

CONCORD Board of Trustees/ Executive Committee

a) Set directions of the scholarship program.
b) Approves policies covering the implementation of the Scholarship Program.
c) Acts on recommendations forwarded the the Scholarship Committee.
d) Makes final approval on all candidates to the program
e) With schools, colleges and universities.


Scholarship Committee
a) Collates and consolidates all existing policies related to the
implementation of the Scholarship Program.
b) Receives and study the list of candidate-scholars as to
compliance with set requirements and human resources need(s) of the member agency, peoples’ organization, families. (for BOT approval)
c) Draft policies and/or revise existing ones that have an
effect on the scholarship Program. ( for BOT approval)
` d) Draft a list of accredited schools, colleges and universities.
d) Study and monitor the complimentary extra-curricular
program of the CONCORD Secretariat for the scholars.
e) Receives progress reports from the scholars and the
CONCORD secretariat on the development updates.


Member Agencies, Peoples” Organizations (its committees, governing bodies, CDWs
a) Submission of Human Resource Development Plan of
manpower Plan.
b) Selection and initial processing of candidate-scholar(s)
According to each MAs stipulated processes.
c) Submission of format of MOA or covenant exclusive of terms of
covering academic requirements, responsibilities of the candidates, before, during and after schooling period. Commitment of counterpart shall be included in the MOA or covenant.
c) Provide regular update report to the CONCORD Board of
Trustees thru the Office of the General Secretary.

CONCORD Secretariat
a) Assists the MAs and Peoples’ organization in providing
orientation on the scholarship Program within their
respective area of responsibility
b) Assists in the processing of candidate-scholars at the MA
And/or peoples’ organization levels.
c) Draft an extra-curricular program for the scholars before,
during, and after the schooling period for submission to the Scholarship Committee.
d) Prepares a progress report on the status and welfare of the
scholars with recommendations.
e) Prepare a collated semestral and annual reports to the
Scholarship Committee and BOT before submission to ESP Germany
f) Establish a working relations with the accredited schools,
colleges and universities.
g) Performs other tasks related to the program
implementation as requested by the CONCORD BOT.



VII. Budget

No comments:

INTERNAL ASSESSMENT: Terms of Reference


CONCORD Evaluation
June 2008
1 of 5
TERMS OF REFERENCE
Consultancy Plan for the Internal Evaluation of the
Consortium of Christian Organizations for Rurban Development
(CONCORD, Inc.)
1. Consultancy Mission Statement
On July 2008, The 18-month phase out period of the Integrated Development
Program for Mindanao (IDPM VI) Project with EED ends. For the Consortium of
Christian Organizations for Rurban Development (CONCORD), the occasion
marks more than 25 solid years of partnership with EED (formerly EZE) and over
15 years of integrated program planning for the 25 Consortium members.
In the Board meeting of December 2007 and the subsequent 38th General
Assembly last February 2008, the need to evaluate the whole Consortium was
identified. The 38th General Assembly called for new directions with renewed
challenges as brought about by the major change in the Consortium’s long
strategic resource partnership with EED.
Essentially, the evaluation-consultancy will be an internal review of the recent
programs operations with emphasis on identifying the institutional, organizational
and governance aspects impinging on the optimum pursuit of the Consortium’s
vision, mission, goals and programs. Such an evaluation has not occurred since
the IDPM III 1998 midterm exercise.
An external person will be commissioned to facilitate the internal evaluation of
CONCORD.
2. Problem Statement
EED phasing out of the partnership is a major juncture in CONCORD’s life as an
organization. It will be an opportune time to review, reflect and seek new
directions. Direction-setting and its pursuit is a function of leadership and
governance. Finding directions is a function of weaving vision and reality.
Emanating from the General Assembly, the Board of Trustees is mandated to
perform the function.
The emergent concern for CONCORD is forging new strategic resource partners
and future learning to deal with a host of donors, which unfortunately the
consortium has not undergone in the last 2 decades as it had a special almost
exclusive relationship with EED.
Another subject of concern is the dilemma of governance. With regards to joint
program such as the IDPM, who governs whom and on what matters? What are
the priorities in the multiplicity of Consortium and member goals? How are
CONCORD Evaluation
June 2008
2 of 5
performance accountabilities defined and distributed? What is the Consortium
Secretariat’s pertinent decision-making span?
As a consortium, it is said to be “congregational in heritage, autonomous in polity
and devolved in operation” (1998 IDPM III Evaluation Report.) In terms of
Consortium leadership and management, this may need to be operationally laid
out.
This evaluation is being initiated in order to help the Board to find new courses of
action not only in program goal terms but to include the development and
maintenance of the consortium-building function itself. The evaluation exercise
should help the Board define and address leadership and management issues in
a consortium such as CONCORD.
3. Boundaries
a. The evaluation engagement will focus the Consortium Secretariat and
Board and pertinent program-functional relationships with the Member
Agencies as defined in General Assembly terms.
b. The review will neither examine nor analyze the operations of individual
member agencies, which are not covered by prior agreements. They will
be dealt with as clusters or aggregate.
c. The engagement will provide a periodic feedback and report of the
process and recommendations to the General Secretary and/ or the
Internal Evaluation Project Committee.
d. The engagement will not examine nor analyze the financial operations of
the Consortium.
e. The proposed structure & policy changes arising from engagement is
recommendatory and subject to approval by the appropriate decisionmaking
bodies and authorities.
4. Specific Issues to be Addressed
The evaluation will:
a. With the IDPM as platform, analyze the strengths and weaknesses, the
facilitating and hindering factors that influence the degree of
consortium joint programming, its implementation and delivery
b. Identify the issues related to management and implementation
processes of the consortium (institution) building programs
CONCORD Evaluation
June 2008
3 of 5
c. Identify the good practices and the lessons learned from selected
consortium intervention and approaches.
d. Analyse and list the requirements and demands of the memberagencies
and various stakeholders to be defined in consultation with
the Secretariat.
e. Analyse and list the requirements of policies generating from the Board
members and the General Assembly
f. Consult with allied NGOs and agencies who can help provide advice
and assistance on the social issues and contexts CONCORD wishes
to address.
g. Analyse the existing organizational strategic resource levels to
ascertain if institutional resources are at optimum to conform to the
relevant future consortium goals.
h. Ascertain the demands placed on the Secretariat to guide the Board in
their governance and support function.
i. Prepare and submit report to the General Secretary and or the
Evaluation Project Committee.
5. Methodology
The proposed evaluation shall use a combination of methods as follows:
a. Review of Documents
• Review of literature: proposals, reports, program conceptual and
planning papers, feasibility studies, evaluation reports and other
relevant documents.
• Review of Existing Performance Information Sources. Identify the
existence and availability of relevant performance information sources,
such as performance monitoring systems and/or previous evaluation
reports. A summary of the types of data available, the time frames, and
an indication of their quality and reliability will be requested by the
evaluation research team to build on what is already available.
b. Key Informant Interviews
• Interviews will be conducted with persons who have direct participation
in program management and implementation. This includes trainerCONCORD
Evaluation
June 2008
4 of 5
resource persons, board members, members as well as former
executives who can provide pertinent information for the evaluation.
c. Focus Group Discussions
• FGDs will be conducted among representatives of the member
agencies in clusters, participants, staff, local church and community
leaders that have participated in the program. These will be held one
each for each of the four clusters.
d. Survey of Service Delivery and Member agency perceptions.
6. Evaluation Work Plan
Activities Week
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Proposed
Dates
Finalization of Contract x June
Start-up & review of project documents x June
Field work to conduct interview & focus
group discussions, survey
x x x x June 10-30*
(Staggered)
Cluster 1
Cluster 2
Cluster 3
Cluster 4
Feedback & Initial Analysis x July 7/8
Write-up of draft report
Validation meeting with core staff and
Board or representatives
July 28
Final Report Submission x August 1
* Specific dates/itinerary to be worked out
CONCORD Evaluation
June 2008
5 of 5
7. The Cost of the Engagement
For the above services, we will charge a professional fee in the amount of three
hundred thousand pesos (P300,000.00). We request for a down payment of 50%
of the amount upon signing of the agreement, 30% upon the submission of the
draft report and the payment of the balance upon the submission of the Final
Report. Out of pocket expenses such as required travel to sites will be billed as
incurred or at the end of the engagement.
If the terms of this proposal are acceptable to you, please signify your
concurrence by signing on the space provided on the two copies of this letter and
returning the duplicate copy to us at a convenient time.
We thank you for this opportunity to offer our services to you and we look forward
to working with you on this engagement.
Truly yours,
CONFORME:
Delfin Teodulo A. Borrero II Rev. Beltran Pacatang
Evaluation Team Leader General Secretary
CONCORD