Evaluation of the Payapa at Masaganang Pamayanan (PAMANA) Program

publish_ribbon
evaluation thumbnail

Title of Study:

Evaluation of the Payapa at Masaganang Pamayanan (PAMANA) Program

Name of Evaluator(s):

Innovations for Poverty Action

Commissioning Agency:

National Economic and Development Authority

Commissioning Office:

Regional Development Staff

Type of Evaluator:

Firm

Sectors:

Social Reform and Community Development

Evaluation Type:

Process

Date Started:

Jan 2019

Date Completed:

Nov 2019

Evaluation Budget (₱):

15,000,000

Evaluation Cost (₱):

18,301,498.87

Description

Since 2011, the Payapa at Masaganang Pamayanan (Peaceful and Prosperous Communities or PAMANA) program has been the Philippine government’s flagship development framework for conflict-affected areas. It was launched as part of the 2010–2016 Philippine Development Plan’s mandate to bring armed conflict to a peaceful resolution through negotiated political settlements and programs for addressing armed conflict from its roots.

To provide a comprehensive picture of PAMANA’s implementation and outcomes, the authors conducted high-level interviews and review of internal reports, case studies, representative surveys in intervention areas, and a time-series analysis of barangay (village)-level effects of the interventions on armed group presence, violence, and economic development. PAMANA achieved success both in addressing the root causes of conflict, including poverty, and in supporting peace negotiations with partner organizations in conflict-afflicted communities. However, decreased poverty did not uniformly lead to reduced local conflict, and the success of some interventions are hampered by delays and lapsed funds.

To build on PAMANA’s success in implementing development-for-peace efforts in conflict areas, its theory of change could be specifically spelled out based on the context and dynamics of each conflict line, and be more explicitly linked to conflict-reduction outcomes. The local community should also be more involved at all stages of the program—from planning, to implementation, and well into to monitoring—for greater ownership and support. Likewise, the program will benefit from streamlining reporting requirements and other bureaucratic processes to avoid delays in funding and implementation.