Fomilenio must make concerted efforts to address all constituencies. The successful experience of incorporating participation into the compact development process led to high expectations of continued rigorous consultation throughout compact implementation. After the compact was signed, however, Fomilenio’s focus was on meeting the fiscal and regulatory requirements leading up to entry-into-force. After EIF, the focus shifted to establishing contracts and getting procurement underway. There have been few consultations and the establishment of the Advisory Council, an independent oversight body whose role is to monitor civic participation, was delayed by several months. The work plan of this body was submitted in August 2007 and has not been prioritized by the Advisory Council. While this can be partly explained by the push for EIF and quick ramp-up in implementation, the delay caused frustration. Fomilenio must debunk the perception that participation is not a priority and close the feedback loop—from poor beneficiaries to the members of the diaspora community. This can be accomplished in large part by providing easily accessible information on program activities and participatory forums. Coordination with the CND, which has already invested extensive time and resources in the consultative process, should continue with an eye to putting in place a framework for participatory development throughout the life of the compact.
A more robust and cohesive communications strategy is essential. A robust and cohesive communications strategy is the cornerstone of information provision. At a minimum, Fomilenio should improve its communications strategy to better convey where the consultative process will be vital and strategic, and where it will play less of a role. The degree of consultation will be largely dictated by the stage and requirements of a given project: for example, after the road design is complete and the cadastral and environmental evaluations are underway, there is little role for civic input into such scientific and technical reviews. While it may be a challenge to provide this educative information to the beneficiaries in the Northern Zone due to lack of technology and distance from the capital, Fomilenio should communicate the compact activities to potential partners so as to avoid incidents like the anemic launch of the productive development pilot program. Any consideration of opening an office in the Northern Zone should include the benefits of local communications and outreach aspects. A comprehensive and clearly articulated information strategy will minimize inquiries and empower stakeholders to take advantage of information through established channels, such as through an improved Fomilenio website which is less cumbersome and more user-friendly to better access information. Publication of illustrative pamphlets, organizational structure with contact information, and office accessibility would also further transparency, accountability and dialogue. Ultimately a more robust communications and outreach strategy will ease the burden on the Fomilenio communications staff as well as build upon the expertise of the CND for participatory consultations.
A transparent and comprehensive consultative process should be implemented. The participation aspect of the consultative process will be vital for successful implementation which meets the needs of beneficiaries as intended in program design. Northern Zone mayors meet regularly, and usually require extensive travel to another municipality; this could be supplemented by additional outreach such as local radio programming. The work plan for the Advisory Council should be approved as soon as possible so that the already-designed consultative process for implementation can proceed. Fomilenio could adopt more of an open-door or open-information policy to foster public participation where appropriate. These could all be encompassed in comprehensive consultative process which, per the MCC’s policies, should be implemented as the compact progresses since the provision of participation in the compact is not limited to proposal development. As transparency is an important focus of the MCC, an institutionalized means for consultations and participation could address both of these requirements. While the MCC has championed the use of the consultative processes in compact development, it has yet to meet its own standards for consultation during the implementation phase. A redoubled effort to implement participatory processes after EIF should also link to efforts at MCC headquarters, where the recent publication of economic rates of return and promises to publish counterpart beneficiary analysis is an unprecedented step for a U.S. foreign assistance agency.[26] In light of potential compact restructuring and as portfolio reviews lead to implementation changes (such as revised disbursement projections), the MCC must strive to fulfill its own policies with regards to participation. Consultative processes need to be incorporated as such revisions factor into project planning alterations and affect beneficiaries in countries such as El Salvador.
Next Section: Conclusion
26. See the MCA Monitor blog on the release of ERRs http://blogs.cgdev.org/mca-monitor/archives/2008/05/mcc_and_errs_tu.php as well as the CGD ERR event /content/calendar/detail/15807.