Action Planning Building Block

a) Use the vision and objectives to develop strategies

Before developing specific actions, it can be useful to develop broad strategic directions for the City (See Vision, Objectives and Strategies Building Block for more information). A review of sustainable development practices in other South East Asian countries or elsewhere in the world may reveal possible strategies to address the objectives.

Example: Action planning, Hai Phong CDS Translating strategies into priorities for actionIn Hai Phong, the team developed a list of key strategic directions, which together would contribute to rapid and sustainable development of Hai Phong City. The key five strategies were:

1. Sea port development strategy

2. Infrastructure development strategy

3. Economic development strategy matching with the rapid growth economic triangle in the Northern

4. Good living environment development strategy

5. Good business environment development strategy

For each strategy, a set of priority actions were developed. For example, for the ‘Sea Port Development Strategy’, the following priorities were identified:

1. Re-planning Hai Phong sea port system, consists of deep sea ports

2. Channel improvement in term of water depth, terminal for ship spinning and avoiding traffic jams

3. Port technology

4. Port services

5. Planning transportation subsystem of port

6. Navigation planning

To develop a detailed action plan, each of these priorities would be considered and a long list of possible ways to address these priorities developed.

Example: Action Planning in Ha Long & Can ThoFor each theme the consultants have proposed initial steps /actions for implementation in the period 2007-2008. They have identified a lead or initiating Department/ agency within the city and also the other organisations and stakeholders whose involvement is necessary for effective implementation, including the private sector.

b) Prepare a list of possible projects (‘long list’)

Based on the long-term vision and strategy, a long-list of projects should be prepared for each theme that the city is focusing on. This list will likely include many of the ideas that the project team and key stakeholders, as well as the broader community, have suggested. It may be informed by best practice – observations of what other Vietnamese cities with similar characteristics have successfully implemented. This list could be added to through ‘brainstorming’ in workshops. Brainstorming is a useful technique because it focuses on ‘what could be’ rather than ‘what we should do’ – it invites participants to think creatively and add ideas in a supportive environment, rather than immediately considering the likely outcomes of trying to implement each idea.

c) Create criteria for prioritising projects (‘short list’)

Once a ‘long list’ of ideas has been generated, they need to be considered in more detail, against a set of criteria. It is important to spend time considering and then choosing your criteria because all decision making is based on something, whether they are stated or not. Stating the criteria means that you have a clear and agreed upon common set of features that you are looking for in your priority actions. It helps the project team come to consensus and makes the decision making process more transparent.

The following are questions that should be considered when making recommendations as for the action plan. These could be used to trigger discussions amongst the project team in prioritising, for example.

Based on prioritisation criteria, which reflect the interests of the stakeholders as well as a logical phasing plan, a short-list of projects is prepared, including the estimated investment costs and the sources of funding. These projects should include investment projects, institutional change and capacity building projects, revenue plans and incentives.

For each action, decide whether the action is:

• Strategic? Does the action being recommended support the objective(s) to be achieved?
• Feasible? Is the recommended action realistic or feasible to implement? Are the resources required to implement the action either available already or attainable within a reasonable time frame?
• Enough? Will the recommended action be adequate to achieve the stated objective or to support its achievement when combined with other actions?
• Supported? If the recommended actions require on-going efforts by any of the stakeholders, are these efforts likely to be sustained? Will the critical stakeholders make a commitment to support the action and work for its implementation?
• Beneficial? Will the proposed action benefit many people in the community or just a few? Are the poor or vulnerable members of the community going to benefit from this action?
• Cost-effective, considering all related costs? Are there indirect costs related to this action that might outweigh the benefits? Key examples are environmental clean up costs, health costs, lost revenue from tourism. Long term maintenance costs is another area that is often overlooked in project planning for infrastructure.
• Measurable? Will the team and others be able to evaluate the impact of the proposed actions?
• The best alternative? Are there similar or related actions that could achieve the same objectives, with lower costs (including lower impacts on the environment, lower risk) and greater benefit (including better results for poverty reduction, contribution to more than one objective).
• Compatible with other actions? It is important to think not just of individual actions, but also clusters of actions and how they might work together. There might be mutual benefits of having two actions take place at the same time, or there might be increased problems. The Strategic Environmental Assessment section of this guidebook highlights some potential ‘cumulative’ environmental problems to look out for with clusters of actions.

Adapted from UNDP Participatory Planning Handbook

Action planning, German Program for Small and Medium Enterprises Development, Viet Nam

Example of prioritisation:

Since local governments tended to propose too many projects, some methods for prioritisation were applied facilitated by the program’s consultants. Various voting techniques were applied to help in prioritisation, depending on the complexity of projects. In certain cases, the prioritisation using ‘Pareto law’ was conducted, which meant assuming that only 20% of the proposed topics could be implemented. Such a prioritisation process included two steps.

The first step involved prioritisation by local partners based on a list of criteria developed jointly by project coordinator and workshop participants. Among topics proposed as the result of the local issues analysis facilitated by a consultant, each participant had to select 30% of the topics that (they feel) met the criteria.

In the second step, the project expertise was brought in to review and shortlist the number of topics to only 20% of the original number. This step was focused on assuring that the final projects chosen were the most feasible and important to the local economic development according to the SMEDP objectives and resources. In some cases the final shortlist of projects were made up of those stated in the workshop prioritisation (the 30% first step).

In other cases, it was felt that the initial 30% had missed some more important and feasible possible projects; the shortlist included some projects from the original long list. In such cases, another workshop was organised for re-prioritisation. In such workshops, the project coordinator explained the reasons for the new selection and negotiated with local partners for agreeing on the 20% topics to be turned into projects implemented by them.

d) Assess financial capacity

The implementation of the short-list depends on funding and borrowing capacity of government. For this purpose, an assessment will need to be made of the financial capacity of the City and province. Whilst some actions might be of a scale that required additional investment beyond the city’s existing budget (eg. investment from donors or private business), it may be more realistic to focus the action plans on things that can be implemented by the City’s existing budget. Additional items that will only be actioned subject to additional funding should be clearly labelled as such.

Action planning, Nam Dinh CDS

Developing an action plan that is realistic and resourced

From its Vision, Nam Dinh went through a process of cascading a set of strategies for the city to 2020; identifying selected priority strategies for the initial period 2006–2010 and then preparing action plans for the first two years of implementation.

In order to prioritise the strategies a set of four criteria were developed and used:

1. Urgency:
2. Importance:
3. Feasibility: taking account of resources available and the institutional framework.
4. Contribution to poverty reduction:

Applying these prioritisation criteria, 21 strategies were selected for implementation during 2006–2010 in four broad strategy areas:

1. Economic Development
2. Living Environment
3. Government Management
4. Culture, Social, Healthcare and Education

In Nam Dinh the CDS Task Force and project team facilitated departments working out action plans to implement the selected strategies, using a common set of principles:

1. Participation by all staff of the department.
2. Action plans should be “actionable” (considering the resources available);
3. Action plans were to be broken down to concrete activities and tasks.
4. Expected outputs or results must be indicated clearly.

The departmental action plans were consolidated at the city level and a set of immediate action plans for implementation during the two years of 2006–2007 were then decided again based on a number of agreed criteria. Clear responsibilities and stakeholders for consultation were allocated for all actions.

Finally, the city leaders chose action plans for which they had the resources and the authority to implement fully in the immediate future (thus avoiding the optimistic wish lists of many earlier internationally lead CDSs in Viet Nam).

e) Detailing the plan

Action planning is the art of recommending actions that will be supported and implemented. In this action-planning step, the key challenge is to be specific.

For each action recommended, the plan should outline the following details:

• What steps are required to implement the proposed action?
• Who will take primary responsibility for each action? Someone needs to be in charge.
• Who else needs to be involved? Many actions require collaboration even though someone from another organisation might be in charge. Who are the significant collaborators for this action to be successful?
• What resources will be needed to carry out each action? These can include people, materials, money, equipment and skills.
• When will each action be complete? This includes not only how much time will be required but also a realistic date for completion.
• How will you know progress is being made toward carrying out each action? How will you know whether the proposed actions are contributing to the realisation of the intended results? What will be your sources of data, including key documents, that you will use to check progress?
• How will the final and ongoing impact of the recommended actions be assessed?

f) Get approval for the plan

It is important to get official approval for the priority actions in your action plan. This involves taking the Action Plan and CDS results into the official policy realm and if possible getting approval from the People’s Council.

g) Sequence planned events

The final stage of action planning is sequencing the various activities or what needs to be done in what order. One tool that is helpful in avoiding scheduling clashes is the “Gantt chart” (for example in Microsoft Project), a simple, horizontal bar chart that displays graphically the time relationships of various implementation steps. Gantt chart components include task statements, times to start and complete each task and their sequence relationships to each other.

Action planning, Hai Phong CDS

The critical need for participation in action planning

The strategies were prioritised in small workshops with participation of consultants, taskforce members and local officials. The criteria used for prioritisation include cost-benefits, budget availability and effectiveness.

The methodology for preparing the acting agenda has been that the taskforce/municipal departments provided the data and the sections of the document were prepared by the national and international consultants to a standard template. No outside consultation was built into the preparation of the action-agenda and hence, the CDS is owned principally by city officials. Their participation was intense enough that the ownership still exists 8 years later.

Another tool to help those who will manage task relationships and actions more effectively is Critical Path Method (CPM). Essentially, this method defines what has to be done at what point in time to assure that other steps in the action chain can be done when planned. Most participatory planning practitioners start at the date the project is to be completed and work backwards through the activities and events that must occur to reach that end point. The critical path will emphasise, for example, that sub-activity Z should not start before sub-activity Y has been completed. There are user-friendly computer software packages that can help organise project steps in the right sequence initially and update the critical path as new decisions are made and tasks completed.

Key individuals, teams and departments responsible for implementing CDS should be involved in sequencing for the action plan. By working out the scheduling together, they can appreciate the need to work together, collaborate and cooperate.

Confirmation and ownership

Before the final options are put into an action plan, it is important to brief major stakeholders one more time about what is being considered. It is an opportunity to get further feedback and to increase local government and implementor ownership and commitment to the planned activities.

Consultation on a draft action plan is an opportunity to:

• determine whether your proposed plans and strategies are realistic and viable
• check for commitment and acceptance of the new program on the part of the responsible officials
• get feedback on your recommended course of action and
• make adjustments in preparation for full implementation.
• improve co-ordination between implementation agencies

This type of testing and possible redesign will help your planning team and those responsible for implementation correct unforeseen problems before the plan becomes fully operational.