- The document discusses areas of concern and recommendations for improving project development, monitoring and evaluation, reportorial requirements, financial matters, and mentoring/technical assistance for NGO and PO partners. - It notes a need to involve experts in project development, provide assistance to partners in developing proposals, and standardize indicators. Approval timelines should be extended to 3 years. - Reporting periods should be increased to 6 months to reduce burden, and electronic reporting should be accepted. Retention amounts may be reduced. - Mentoring and technical assistance can be improved through more frequent visits, tapping expertise, and using technology for training.

1. PARTNERS’ WORKSHOP 1 OUTPUT

2. Areas of concern: Project Development
Good practice
• NGOs and POs are tapping experts in project development and those NGO and
PO doesn’t have knowledge should tap experts either from academe and non-
academe experts
• Existing project formats and guidelines and grant guidelines
• Orientation of POs and NGOs on grant guidelines and guidelines
• Process allows dialogue and discussions (i.e. budget etc.)
Need improvement
• Open minded in assessing project and opposed to messiahnic complex and too
much pride
• Make it three years in approval and not 1 year
• Assist POs and NGOs in developing project proposals

3. Areas of concern: Project Development
Need to start
• Assist/Link/Provide partners need in best practice (i.e. link with FPE partners
institutions)
• Require POs and NGOs to include experts (non-EAP) from the academic as
member of their research team to have quality research
Need to stop
• Approved project proposal with unsound methodology and not involving EAP
in project development
• No reasons have been communicated to partner(s) why the project was
disapproved
• Delayed communications on the status of the project

4. Areas of concern: Monitoring and Evaluation
Need improvement
• Gawing 6 months ang reporting and not 3 months
• Monitoring and evaluation should be done 2x a year
• Mentors involved in M&E should do it more frequently-every month
Need to start
• Standardize the indicators
• Hire additional project development staff that should be different from person
doing the M&E
• Project partners need FPE to visit, check their implementation from time to
time; mentoring is crucial to POs but hindered by lack of staff
• The EAP assisting the NGO in project development should also do the M&E in
tandem with FPE staff to check if the project is properly implemented
• Mentoring and technical assistance tapping EAP members
• Identify areas of expertise that can be shared
• Develop mechanisms in mentoring and the provision of technical assistance

5. Areas of concern: Reportorial Requirements
Good practice
• The simplified chart matrix for reporting is fine/ okay
• Less paper requirements, start accepting e-copy of reports as basis for
assessment and processing for the next tranche

6. Areas of concern: Financial Matters
Good practice
• Orientation before the project starts and mentoring/ coaching during the
project implementation
• Faster processing of projects tranche, friendly accommodating finance staff
Need improvement
• The 10 per cent retention is too much1

7. Areas of concern: Mentoring and technical assistance
Good practice
• Open communication and transparency
• Being realistic and practical balancing goals and knowing the limitations at the
same time
• Being open for improvement
Need improvement
• Use power of technology and animation. This will leverage the effort pf the
project development unit group in mentoring indigenous people of the
standard how to’s of the things they need to learn: a lecture program that
can be replicated not just by the indigenous people but also students and
young professionals for general awareness

8. General Recommendations:
• Fund releasing every six months
• Explore partnerships with government through MOU/MOA defining roles of
the agency and FPE in terms of mentoring and technical assistance on
scientific area of expertise; and conduct of joint activities such as conferences,
forum/advocacy undertakings
• More publication from research grants
• Pursue partnerships with funding agencies who are into social enterprise
• Shorten the query channel partners and members of the organization can
contact each other more easily like a Facebook/ email group account where
everyone can talk/discus urgent and updated ideas/questions with each other.
Not every 2 years-faster communications
• Upon submission of report release of retention tranche

9. General Recommendations:
• Assist partners in assessing funding windows for social enterprise
• Review counter-parting requirements in grants
• Cumulative scoring system in project evaluation must be modified/stopped use
tiers of graduated/ hierarchal criteria
• Higher cap on funding