MARLON CORNELIO Convenor for ICT Global Youth Anti-Corruption (GYAC) Network Presentation Outline: Social Accountability (SAc) Global Youth Anti-Corruption (GYAC) Network The Experience of CheckMySchool and Universidad Coherente SAc and ICT SAc 2.0 [Amplifying Social Accountability through ICT]

Social Accountability (SAc) Organized and capable citizens constructively engaging with government to monitor its decisions and actions toward better delivery of public services, improvement of people’s welfare, and protection of people’s rights. enabling environment for SAc to be effective: organized and capable citizens government openness access to information cultural sensitivity and context appropriateness

The Global Youth Anti-Corruption Network – young activists, journalists, artists, musicians & ICT enthusiasts from all over the globe – Platform for learning from and sharing experiences, strategies, tools, and lessons in fighting corruption and promoting good governance through social accountability Initiatives of GYAC Members in amplifying social accountability through ICT – CheckMyShool (Philippines) – Universidad Coherente (Peru)

1 3 2 Start up Access to information law Vibrant student movements Process Students complain about education services School admin cites lack of budget (clash between students and school admin) UC collects finance reports from government UC organizes and popularizes reports Students reflect on reports Students inquire from their school admin Risks Technical financial reports; Disinterest among students  infographics; thought provoking comparisons; CB Resistance from school admin  use of official reports; TA Results Budget transparency mechanisms; Greater demand for budget efficiency and rationalization Information-based engagement between gov’t and students Increased awareness and interest among students; debates Sustained monitoring of public university budgets

Show video Start up active CSO consortium for education long-time partnership with DepEd; champions Process Field offices submit reports to national office National office collates data and uses it for evaluation and planning (internal data) (complaints from clients) Gov’t provides data to CMS CMS processes, organizes, and publishes data Volunteers validate; submit feedback to CMS CMS collates feedback, forwards to DepEd, local partners DepEd/local artners respond to feedback CMS publishes reports Risks Report integrity  local partners Center-heavy operations  local partners; CB Digital divide  local ICT infra-based design; infomediary Results Greater transparency; client-validated data Quicker feedback, shorter response time Greater coverage (initial 8/44 T schools; tap new constituency) Community ownership, competition and empowerment Reduced resource req’t for monitoring (outsourcing)

Summary Organized and capable citizens vibrant student movements in Peru active CSO consortium for education in the Philippines ICT tools for coordination, reaching out to more, and outsourcing Access to information FOI in Peru Information-based engagement ICT makes information accessible and useful to stakeholders; provides mechanism for client validation Government Openness Long-time partnership with DepEd and government champions ICT provides governments pressure and opportunity to open up and be more responsive to their citizens Cultural sensitivity and context appropriateness Infographics; virals Infomediaries Local ICT infra-based design; ICT as tool and not end SAc is amplifiable through ICT Complementation of tried and tested organizing with ICT tools for greater impact Risks and challenges can be addressed by either ICT tools or traditional organizing

Guide questions Do the flexibility and novelty of technical platforms restrict substantive engagement between stakeholder groups? What are the risks posed by technology in terms of inclusiveness in social accountability initiatives? - How can technology enhance the quality of partnership in social accountability initiatives. restrict partnership-building and multi-stakeholder participation? Are public officials more reluctant to engage with new technologies than with traditional modes of stakeholder engagement? What kind of impact does a client-based business model have on assessment work for social accountability? How can government leverage existing channels of interaction with the public to increase the effectiveness of public service delivery?