Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Honourable Dean Allison and honourable members of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development, it is indeed an honour and privilege for me to be here today to share with you the work of CESO and its experience in public service collaboration and support around the world. I must thank you very much for asking us to participate and to share with you our best practices and some of our methodologies, which have worked for us. I'm not sure if many of you know about CESO or what we're about, so I'll briefly give you a bit of the background of CESO.
We were founded in 1967 and are a non-profit, volunteer-based development organization. Our vision is a world where there are sustainable and social economic opportunities for all.
Since our inception, we have completed over 46,000 assignments in over 120 countries around the world. We have a very strong track record in terms of helping the public sector and also the private sector, because our two main areas of focus are governance and private sector development. We all know that you cannot have successful, dynamic private sector business development without the enabling environment, which is provided by effective government, effective services, and strong regulatory frameworks that are conducive to business development.
Our motto is “Canadians sharing a lifetime of experience”. This is because our resource pool of more than 3,000 volunteer advisers are mainly retired and semi-retired volunteers from the civil service and senior level professionals from the private sector. They come with a lifetime of experience. Out of their own Canadian values of helping one another and promoting rights such as gender equality and environmental areas, they come to CESO to share with the rest of the world the experience they have gathered, and also to be ambassadors of Canada, in a sense, because not only are they representing CESO when they go abroad, but they are representing Canada.
When we were founded in 1967, it was for international development. Two years later, our board at that time felt that charity begins at home, so we also have a very strong national program. We work closely with the first nations communities across Canada, from east to west and in the northern provinces.
I will tell you a little bit about some of the work we've done because it's important to have context regarding our methodologies and why they work. In terms of our work in the public sector, we have carried out recent projects that are relevant to what you will be doing soon.
In Peru, we supported the Peruvian government's effort to reduce poverty and increase economic growth through public sector reform. The areas of focus included regulatory frameworks, decentralization procedures, policy development, and institutional strengthening. Our partner institutions in that project were an agency responsible for supporting free market economies, a land registry, an ombudsman office, and a statistical agency.
Most of the projects that we do right now are funded by the Canadian International Development Agency, so I'd like to acknowledge CIDA's financial support over the years of our existence.
In Bolivia, we also carried out a public sector reform support project. Again, the objective was to support the Bolivian government in modernizing the public sector and consolidating its decentralization initiatives. The areas of focus included improving technical and human capacity in developing and implementing financial, economic, social, and administrative policies. The partner institutions included regulatory agencies such as those for water, telecommunications, railways, and air transport. We also worked closely with the public service commission.
In the Philippines, we worked with municipalities. We still are, but we conducted a special project for two years. It was called “E-Governance for Municipal Development”. In that project, we built the capacity of 31 municipalities throughout the island of Luzon. We provided technical training and advisory services in the area of e-governance, specifically for the implementation of an electronic business licensing system. The partner institutions were the League of Municipalities of the Philippines, the department of trade and industry, and the national computer centre, and the many municipalities.
Going on now to our model of program delivery, we follow a partnership approach. It's a very organized, structured approach. It's a programmatic method of assistance over a long term, usually over a period of two to five years, because most of the projects are really five-year projects.
We carefully select partners based on selection criteria that will assure a successful outcome. Some of these criteria would include a commitment and a buy-in from a particular agency. In the case of Mongolia, from listening to what the officials have to say I can see that there's already buy-in and commitment from the leadership toward that. The criteria also include a minimum level of resources in order to implement the recommendations that our VAs provide.
We like the idea of having an MOU signed, just to put the commitment of each side in writing. Usually we appoint what we call a lead volunteer adviser to be the project manager. That person does a needs assessment, first of all, in collaboration with the partner. This is where the partner identifies their needs and goals or dreams of where they want to be in five years. Working back from the result that they would like to have, the lead VA and the partner develop an action plan.
We do a bottom-up approach, where our lead VA doesn't just speak to the minister or the head of the agency; they spend a week or two speaking to key players within that ministry or agency and other agencies that will interact, in order to get a holistic picture. So when they develop an action plan, it's a plan that involves assignments, as we call them, that build upon each other. It's a holistic approach, where they support each other. Whatever is implemented will not be in a vacuum, because there will be a supporting environment. It's a stakeholder approach, whereby all stakeholders are consulted before a plan of action is developed.
There is a series short-term assignments for us that usually average three weeks. The minimum is two weeks and the maximum may be a month to six weeks. The methodology is that the lead VA would actually do training and mentoring. It's different from a consultant, because they're passing on skills and experience and knowledge. They mentor the people they train as they do their work. It's hands-on, practical, on-site training, which is very different from consultants who go in and out and do a job based on their terms of reference.
We find that this method works well, because the success factors, as we like to call them, are around the whole idea of local ownership and the shared accountability. The partners are involved in setting their goals and identifying needs for capacity development, and they have a shared responsibility and accountability for implementing and ensuring that results are achieved. It's a collaborative approach between the lead VA, who develops that, and CESO. At all times, we monitor that and get feedback. Again, it's a program-oriented approach; it's not just ad hoc, where we go to different places with requests. It's a holistic program that we've put together, and there are different assignments built upon each other.
On program management, an ongoing relationship is developed between the lead VA and the partner over a year or two. At any point, the partner, who would identify a focal person or a focal department, can interact, even though the lead VA is back in Canada. They can interact by Skype or e-mail on an ongoing basis.
As each VA goes out to do an assignment based on the action plan, they are briefed by the lead VA on what to expect when they get there. They're given insights on personalities, and also on how to approach them culturally, because going on a holiday is different from going on an assignment and sitting every day in an office dealing with people. The lead VA also does a proper briefing of the VA who helps to implement the short-term assignment.
There is also a cultural briefing that is done by the Centre for Intercultural Learning, provided by CIDA, so that VAs who may not have had international experience go through an intensive two-day cultural training. They also have a briefing by someone from the country they're going to.
In the case of our program, whenever someone is going on an assignment to a particular country, we ask them to speak to many of our other VAs who have been there before so that they know what to expect and are properly prepared in terms of knowing more about the country, the culture, and the people. Also, when they come back, the VAs are debriefed by the lead VA to know how things went and where we can improve, because it's important to have feedback in order to improve.
In terms of having volunteers, I think it's an advantage, in that the partners and the clients really appreciate the fact that volunteers are not doing this for any personal gain. They're doing it because they want to share and out of the goodness of their hearts, so immediately there's trust between the volunteer and the partners because there's no political motivation. The partners know the volunteer will be impartial and they can ask questions as freely as they like. The working relationships that are developed are really important and are helped by the fact that they are volunteers and not consultants.
The VAs also bring new perspectives and usually are very open. They're willing to answer any questions, even if it's not part of their assignment. They're there as mentors.
In a nutshell, that's the way we operate. I can provide more information and answer questions as required in terms of the process. We have a process flow chart that we can share with you.
I'm not sure if I have more time.
