- Guidelines on the Evaluation and Approval of Organic Agriculture Project Proposals
- DA Administrative Order No. 04-12
February 9, 2012
DA ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 04-12
|SUBJECT||:||Guidelines on the Evaluation and Approval of Organic Agriculture Project Proposals|
SECTION 1. Objective. To ensure the effective and efficient implementation of the activities supporting the promotion, propagation, and development of organic agriculture in the Philippines pursuant to
Eligible Projects and Project Proponents
SECTION 1. Eligible Project Proponents. Eligible project proponents for FUNDS assistance would include any of the following:
1. People's Organizations such as farmer's and fisherfolk organizations, cooperatives, federations and/or consortia of these groups;
2. Agribusiness enterprises including industry associations;
3. Non-profit organizations such as NGOs and foundations;
4. Government organizations such as local government units (LGUs), government corporations, and other local and national government agencies; and
5. Academic and educational institutions such as State Universities and Colleges (SUCs) and private academic institutions. ECTAHc
SECTION 2. Eligibility of Projects.
1. Eligible Projects. Projects eligible for funding shall be limited to those which are directly related to:
(a) National Organic Agriculture Programs (NOAP);
Specifically listed are those projects and activities that shall support the National Organic Agriculture Programs:
i. Research and development such as policy analysis and advocacy studies, socio-economic, market or scientific research, technology development and dissemination among others;
ii. Certification and Accreditation;
iii. Advocacy and Policy;
iv. Marketing infrastructure;
v. Provision of market information;
vi. Retraining and extension services; and
vii. Infrastructure projects shall include construction or rehabilitation and/or upgrading of existing ones.
(b) Enhancing the global competitiveness of Philippine organic agricultural product;
(c) Projects that shall have organic sector/industry-wide impact such as the establishment of common service facilities; and
(d) Projects which shall cater to the disadvantage sector such as indigenous people, tribal communities among others. DAHSaT
2. Public-private partnership initiatives. Public-private partnership initiatives shall be encouraged to institutionalize and sustain organic agriculture project development, implementation, monitoring, and evaluation in government programs subject to proper authorization of the government.
SECTION 3. Minimum Project Criteria. The projects that shall qualify for FUNDS assistance, shall, at minimum be consistent with the policies and priority thrusts under
1. Be complementary to, supportive and not duplicative of the various and current funding assistance windows/programs of DA and other government institutions;
2. Exhibit market, technical, financial, socio-economic, ecological, and organizational viability and feasibility;
3. Enhance the competitiveness of target project beneficiaries or sector(s), especially the small farmers and/or fisherfolk;
4. Provide product/service competitiveness in the local and/or foreign markets in terms of product/service prices/fees and quality;
5. Promote upstream and downstream linkages with related and/or complementary agricultural activities;
6. Provide clear and verifiable proof of sustainability of operations; and
7. Beneficial to most, and not only selected, firms or groups within a sector.
PART II *
Organic Project Evaluation Executive Committee
SECTION 1. Composition. There Organic Project Evaluation Executive Committee shall be composed of the members of the National Organic Agriculture Board (NOAB). aAHDIc
SECTION 2. Functions. The Organic Project Evaluation Executive Committee shall perform the following functions:
1. Review, approve, and prioritize project proposals/feasibility studies recommended by the Technical Working Group on Organic Agriculture Project Proposal Evaluation (herein referred to as the TWG);
2. Forward to the Office of the Secretary the list of approved project proposals together with their respective work and financial plans for the corresponding release of Special Allotment Release Order (SARO) and Notice of Cash Allocation (NCA) to corresponding Implementing DA agencies and DA RFUs;
3. Approve and/or cause the review of guidelines relevant to the identification and prioritization of project proposals as well as the methods and procedures for project evaluation, appraisal and monitoring; and
4. The NOAB may preferably set a regular meeting to deliberate project proposals and/or review and approve guidelines. The Chair the alternate Chair of the NOAB may however opt to cancel the regular meeting and/or call for a special meeting; and/or with written notice, delegate to another member the authority to preside over a meeting in case of his/her absence.
Technical Working Group on Organic Agriculture Project Proposal Evaluation
SECTION 1. Composition. The TWG on Organic Project Proposal Evaluation shall be composed of the following:
|Chair||Chief, Policy Advocacy & Legislative Support Division|
|Vice-Chair||Director, Project Development Service|
|Representative, Field Operations Service (FOS)|
|Representative, Bureau of Soils and Water Management (BSWM)|
| *Representative from BPI, BAI, BFAR and other concerned agencies |
such as DILG, DENR, DepEd, DAR, DTI and DOH (as needed)
SECTION 2. Functions. The TWG shall perform the following functions:
1. Review and recommend to the NOAB for approval the pre-qualified project proposals;
2. Develop a set of criteria for evaluating projects for approval by the NOAB;
3. Conduct of interviews when necessary to ensure veracity of the data or information contained in the project proposals;
4. Rank and prioritize proposals for endorsement to NOAB based on project feasibility/acceptability indicators and the minimum project requirements listed in Section I.C.3 of this Order;
5. Review and recommend for NOAB approval budget requirements for Organic Project Evaluation administrative, operational, monitoring, and evaluation concerns as submitted by the Secretariat.
Organic Project Evaluation Secretariat
SECTION 1. Composition. The Bureau of Agriculture and Fisheries Product Standards (BAFPS) of the Department of Agriculture shall serve as the technical secretariat of the Organic Project Evaluation (herein referred to as the Secretariat) in addition to its functions as the national technical and administrative secretariat of the NOAB.
SECTION 2. Functions. The Secretariat shall perform the following functions: SCEDAI
1. Undertake initial screening and pre-appraisal of the project proposals (e.g., whether all necessary requirements/documents as indicated in Annex A of this order are submitted prior to Evaluation Meetings by the TWG) with representative from the DA Office of Special Concern;
2. Inform and update the proponents on the status of the application of project proposals;
3. Facilitate processing of fund transfer to implementing agencies and DA Regional Field Units (RFUs) for approved projects;
4. Prepare regular reports to NOAB of the status of the implementation of the approved project proposals;
5. Maintain database of approved and disapproved project proposals including assessment, monitoring, and completion reports.
SECTION 1. Project Identification and Formulation.
1. Projects for possible assistance shall be identified and formulated by prospective project proponents from the private, government sector, and non-governmental sector;
2. A substantive project proposal following the minimum criteria, prescribed project concept note (Annex B), together with other application requirements as requested by the TWG other than specified in Annex A of this Order, shall be prepared and submitted to the (a) Regional Field Unit for proposals not greater than PhP1.5M or (b) the Secretariat for proposals greater than PhP1.5M;
3. Project proposal (Annex C) shall only be developed after the project concept note is approved by the TWG; CHEIcS
4. Concerned DA Units, Bureaus and/or Attached Agencies/Corporations may be consulted in the conduct of feasibility studies whose coverage are within their respective jurisdictions and/or mandates. However, the conduct of feasibility studies should be the responsibility of the proponent. These studies may be internally generated if the proponent has the capability to do so or outsourced;
5. If necessary, corresponding assistance shall be tapped to assist small farmers/fisherfolks groups in the preparation of their project proposals.
SECTION 2. Evaluation.
1. The submitted project concept notes and documents shall be initially screened and pre-appraised by a) Regional Field Unit for proposals not greater than PhP1.5M or (b) the Secretariat for proposals greater than PhP1.5M with a representative from the Office of Special Concern, as to the conformity of these documents with Annexes A and B as well as all other provisions of the guidelines herein;
2. Project concept notes that have passed the initial screening and pre-appraisal process shall be evaluated and pre-qualified by the TWG (either regional or national) using Quality Assessment Framework (QAF) found in Annexes D & E of this Order;
3. Project concept notes that have failed the initial screening and pre-appraisal process shall be returned to the proponent for improvement in accordance to the recommendations of the TWG;
4. Proponents of disapproved concept notes shall be notified. Proponents of approved concept notes shall be requested to develop the complete proposal based on the format found in Annex C for further evaluation of the TWG using the same QAF;
5. The Regional Field Units through their local TWG for the evaluation of proposals are given the authority to decide on the approval/disapproval of the projects. The RFU, through its Regional Executive Director shall inform the NOAB of the approved projects for confirmation of the latter. LLjur
6. A short list of project proposals that have passed the evaluation and pre-qualification process including the QAF report by the TWG shall be submitted to the NOAB for review and endorsement to the Secretary for approval;
7. Project proposals that have failed the TWG evaluation and pre-qualification process shall also be submitted to the NOAB for information.
8. Proponents of non-endorsed project proposals by the NOAB shall be notified. Proponents may submit their revised and/or improved proposal for REAPPLICATION.
9. Any fraudulent submission of documents by a prospective proponent shall cause the disqualification of the said proponent to avail of any assistance and future funding.
SECTION 3. Approval and Financing.
1. All approved project proposals shall be given Project Code for documentation purposes;
2. Proponents shall be notified immediately of evaluation result and shall be requested to submit final Work and Financial Plan (WFP) based on the approved funds within one month to the Secretariat upon receipt of approval notice;
3. Proponents shall be required to sign a Memorandum of Agreement with the Implementing Agency;
4. The approved project proposals and their corresponding WFP shall be endorsed by the Secretary to Department of Budget and Management, to enable the latter to issue the corresponding SARO/NCA for the endorsed projects to the Implementing DA Agencies;
5. The release of funds and disbursement procedures shall follow existing government accounting, auditing rules and regulations.
SECTION 4. Implementation, Monitoring and Post-Project Evaluation. CAacTH
1. All projects shall be monitored by the Implementing Agency to ensure that they are progressing in line with the timeframes, budgets, and methods specified in the approved project proposal;
2. The regular monitoring of the actual implementation of projects shall be done by the Implementing Agencies and RFUs, to include but not limited to the following:
a. Actual usage of total funds released;
b. Status of implementation/completion of project;
c. Status of project operations;
d. Competitiveness aspect of the project;
e. Employment generated and other social benefits gained;
f. Value-added on project;
g. Gender concern;
h. Other relevant information.
3. The Implementing Agency shall also monitor environmental/ecological impact of the project, pursuant to
4. The Implementing Agency shall facilitate the conduct of an external audit in monitoring the operational, financial, and management aspects of all assisted projects;
5. All monitoring activities shall be done by the Implementing Agency in coordination with concerned DA Units including the Commission on Audit (COA), based on a set of monitoring guidelines (Annex F) to be approved by NOAB;
6. All projects must submit a completion report (Annex G);
7. Project monitoring and completion reports shall be submitted to NOAB through the Secretariat; ADCEaH
8. Completion reports are due within 2 months after the completion of the project as indicated by the proponent in their project proposal. A project is deemed completed after all DA Funds have been utilized;
9. DA through NOAB shall be notified of projects that have failed to provide a completion report;
10. Any Implementing Agencies, RFUs, and Proponents whose projects have not met the Monitoring and Completion Report requirements shall be ineligible to submit any future project proposal for prioritization;
11. All completed projects should be given final appraisal by NOAB and TWG on Project Success.
SECTION 1. Annexes. The following documents are deemed part of this guidelines.
1. Annex A Application Requirements
2. Annex B Project Concept Note Template
3. Annex C Organic Agriculture Project Proposal Format
4. Annex D Quality Criteria for Assessing Organic Agriculture Project Proposals
5. Annex E Project Quality Assessment Framework (QAF) Assessment of Project Proposal
6. Annex F Project Monitoring Report
7. Annex G Project Completion Report
8. Annex H MOA
9. Annex I Summary Evaluation Procedure ESTaHC
SECTION 2. Subsequent Assistance. Successful Project Proponents may again avail of financial assistance for other projects provided:
1. Funds previously received has been properly liquidated;
2. Previous project has passed evaluation satisfactorily; and
3. The project proponent submits a favorable recommendation from the implementing agency of the previous project.
SECTION 3. Penalty Clause. A proponent shall be black listed and perpetually banned from receiving financial assistance under the Organic Agriculture program under the following grounds:
1. Failure, without justifiable cause, to submit completion report after receiving at least three (3) formal requests by the Implementing Agency or the NOAB; and
2. Failure, without justifiable cause, to liquidate funds previously received.
SECTION 3. Separability.
Should any provision of this order or any part thereof be declared invalid, the other provisions, so far as they are separable, shall remain in force and in effect.
SECTION 4. Effectivity.
This order shall take effect immediately.
(SGD.) PROCESO J. ALCALA
Department of Agriculture