1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

(Note: This Management Plan was approved prior to the passage of RA 9154, declaring Mt. Kanlaon a Natural Park and authorizing PNOC-EDC to enter into 169 hectares of a so called "buffer zone" for the purpose for geothermal exploration and development. In this 2001 Management Plan, there is no room for PNOC-EDC's geothermal development. The plan is included in full in this website because it is closer to an ideal of how the plan should be. )

Mt. Kanlaon Natural Park

Management Plan: June 2001 (Con't)

   8.0       MONITORING PLAN

 8.1       Monitoring System

The management plan is a dynamic document that is subject to review every 5 years. It requires the engagement of an M and E Officer that is privy with the contents of the plan. Minor changes in the plan required to address the changes in issues and concerns will have to be incorporated in the annual activity/implementation plan as an addendum to the 5- year plan. This strategy will prevent repetition of the planning process and thereby minimize the time spent in discussing the points for deliberation. Plan iteration will be officially undertaken by the end of the 5^th year.

The implementation of the management plan will be  monitored by the PAMB and the DENR Regional Office using Form No. 1 shown below: 

M and E Form No. 1

Date ____________

Site  ____________

·        Approximation

__________________

        M & E Officer

The Monitoring System focuses on the activities as they relate to PA goals and objectives. The % accomplishment is an estimation  of rate of progress as reckoned from a 100% accomplishment target. A cumulative rating analysis will be applied to measure the progress of implementation. The remarks section describes in brief presentation the reasons for the rate of accomplishments (results from discussion between the Monitoring Officer and Project Manager).

The set of activities (6 months in scale) is a prescriptive way of solving constraints to the planned activities rather than as additional activities. This column forces the management to pursue the defined activities over and above the planned activities for the implementation period. This section must clearly distinguish the menus of action to be referred to PAMB/PASu and those to be referred to DENR.

The monitoring frequency is twice a year. The report must be presented in very simple description of project trajectory. The rating of an activity subsumes clarity of progress using, as much as possible, indicators particularly for those activities with results that can be realized at a much longer period, that is more than one year (such as in the case of IEC and other socially related programs). Where activities can be physically measured rating the status is on the basis of physical accounting of targets e.g. number of hectares prepared for tree planting (given standard planting method, spacing, species selection and seedling quality).

The monitoring system must also be able to capture the sequencing of activities so that standard processes leading to the attainment of targets are properly observed.

The financial monitoring system to be applied is the standard used by GOP, but where CPPAP and other project apply their systems will be applied independent of that of the GOP systems. Integration of activities, however, constrains the various systems to establish connectivity in consideration of goals and objectives that are common amongst implementors.

8.2       Evaluation System 

The evaluation system adopts a direct analysis of the quality by which the implementation is being carried out. On a per activity basis, monitoring results are analyzed covering  a wide range of management variables that are perceived to carry certain influences on plan implementation. Such variables include, among other things, the following: 1) Timeliness and volume of financial releases; 2) Timeliness of demanded administration and political support from PAMB/DENR; 3) Availability or timeliness of dispatching the logistics; 4) Quality of PA management vis-à-vis administrative protocols; 5) Reliability of field measurements; 6) Applicability of policies and interventions and 7) Accuracy of management prescriptions.

The evaluation form below will be used by the evaluation officer subject to improvement in due time.

*          Reliability and accuracy in addressing issues and concerns

On the financial evaluation, the s- curve or  more simpler methods will be used to measure the efficiency of project management vis-à-vis input-output relationship.

The M and E systems is anchored on a simplified framework shown below. As the M and E Officer becomes familiar with the plan and the system, the M and E scheme can be improved to capture the uniqueness of the site on the basis of specific issues, concerns and opportunities.

This framework illustrates the simple nature of the M and E system underpinning the needs to capture accurately the feedback results from M and E system application  and processing the recommended actions for review and approval of the PAMB.

Simplified M & E framework for the MKNP.

9.0       REFERENCES

Collar, N.J. and P. Andrew. 1988. Birds to watch:  The IBCP World Checklist of Threatened Birds. Cambridge, U.K.:  International Council for Bird Preservation, Techn. Publication 8.

DENR. 1988. Philippine-German Forestry Resources Inventory:  National Forestry Resources of the Philippines. DENR-Manila.

DENR. 1989. Master Plan of Forestry Development (Philippines). DENR-Manila

DENR. 1990. Philippine Strategy for Sustainable Development. DENR-Manila.

DENR Administrative Order No. 30, Series of 1992. National Integrated Protected Areas System (NIPAS). Implementing rules and regulations. DENR-Manila.

DENR Memorandum Circular No. 03, Series of 1993. General outlines for the formulation of site specific management manual and management plan. DENR-Manila.

DENR Memorandum Circular No. 04, Series of 1993. Guidelines for the adoption of the IPAS general management planning strategy (GMPS). DENR-Manila.

DENR Memorandum Circular No. 12, Series of 1994. Setting aside of a fund to be used for the organization of the PAMB. DENR-Manila.

DENR Memorandum Circular No. 46, Series of 1994. Creation of protected area management board (PAMB). DENR-Manila.

DENR Administrative Order No. 28, Series of 1995. Composition and Authority of PAMB Executive Committee and the role of PASU. DENR-Manila.

Environmental Management Bureau. 1990. The Philippine Environment in the Eighties. EMB-Quezon City.

Haribon Foundation. 1988. Development of an Integrated Protected Areas System (IPAS) for the Philippines. Metro Manila.

Heaney, L.R., P.C. Gonzales, and A.C. Alcala. 1987. An annotated checklist of the taxonomic and conservation status of the land mammals in the Philippines. Silliman Journal. 34:32-66.

Heaney, L.R. and P.D. Heideman. 1987. Philippine fruit bats, endangered and extinct. Bats 5: 3-5 pp.

Ingle, N.R. and Heaney, L.R. 1992. A key to the bats of the Philippines Islands. Fieldiana: Zoology, 69: 1-44.

Kintanar, R.L. 1984. Climate of the Philippines. PAG-ASA, Philippines.

Office of the Congress. 1992. Republic Act No. 7586. National Integrated Protected Areas System of 1992. An act providing for the Establishment and Management of National Integrated Protected Areas System.

Parks and Wildlife Bureau. 1989. Profile of National Parks in the Philippines. PAWB-Metro Manila.

Wildlife Conservation Society of the Philippines, Inc. 1997. Philippine red data book: Red list of threatened animals. Book-mark Makati City. 262 pp.

World Bank. 1987. Forestry, Fisheries and Agricultural Resources Management. Philippines World Bank.

World Bank. 1989. Philippines Environmental and Natural Resources Management Study. Washington D.C., U.S.A.

 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20