Updated Guidelines for Institutional Development and Innovation Grants (IDIG) under the K to 12 Transition Program

April 7, 2017

CHED MEMORANDUM ORDER NO. 012-17

 

In accordance with the pertinent provisions of Republic Act No. 7722 of the Higher Education Act of 1994, the Commission on Higher Education released CHED Memorandum Order (CMO) No. 33, series of 2016, entitled Guidelines for the Institutional Development and Innovation Grants under the K to 12 Transition Program as amended by CMO No. 63, s. 2016. In line with the Commission's continued efforts to refine, nuance, and increase the responsiveness of its policies, CMO No. 33, s. 2016 is hereby further amended as follows. TIADCc

SECTION 1. Section 4 of Article V of CMO No. 33, s. 2016 as amended by CMO No. 63, s. 2016, is hereby amended to read as follows:

"Article V

Qualifying and Selection Process

xxx xxx xxx

4. Project proposals shall be evaluated based on the following criteria: (1) technical merit; (2) relevance and developmental nature or the value-added by the project (3) capacity of the proponent/s to successfully deliver the stated goals; and (4) soundness of the work and financial plan. Proposals that will not reach 70 percent of the total score at the regional level will not be endorsed to the NVP for evaluation. (Refer to Appendix 8: Selection Criteria)

xxx xxx xxx"

SECTION 2. Sections 1 and 4 of Article VI of CMO No. 33, s. 2016 as amended by CMO No. 63, s. 2016, are hereby amended to read as follows:

"Article VI

Financial Privileges

1. A maximum amount is set for the Grant Categories, and shall be subject to annual review and possible revision by the Commission, taking into consideration inflation rate and other factors. These amounts are as follows:

a. Five hundred thousand pesos to five million pesos Php500,000.00-Php5,000,000.00) for the Institutional Development category; and

b. Eight million pesos to twelve million pesos (Php8,000,000.00-Php12,000,000.00) for the Institutional Innovation category.

2. x x x

3. x x x

4. HEI campuses applying for the Grant through the regular application process may have a minimum of one (1) project to a maximum of three (3) projects funded at a time in accordance with the following qualifications:

a. HEI campus with 1 to 1999 enrollees — one (1) grant

b. HEI campus with 2,000 to 9,999 enrollees — two (2) grants, but only one (1) Innovation Grant at a time

c. HEI campus with 10,000 or more enrollees — three (3) grants, but only one (1) Innovation Grant at a time

Institutions with ongoing projects under the Grant at the time of Call for Proposals may still apply provided that the maximum number of grants to be awarded shall be limited to what is stated above. HEIs also remain eligible to implement programs under CHED-initiated projects for IDI Grants even if they have received funding from the Grant.

xxx xxx xxx"

SECTION 3. Article VIIIA of CMO No. 33, s. 2016, as amended by CMO No. 63, s. 2016 is hereby amended as follows:

"Article VIIIA

HEI Grantees awarded with Grants under CMO No. 33, s. 2016, as amended by CMO No. 63, s. 2016, prior to the issuance of these amendments, shall be governed by the present transitory provisions.

1. For Grantees that have initiatives under the Research, Development, and Extension component of the Institutional Innovation category, notwithstanding the repeal of the provisions in CMO No. 33, s. 2016, they shall be allowed to complete their grants according to the terms of their existing Grant Agreements.

2. Existing Grantees may now apply for more than one grant, following the rules and guidelines set forth in Article VI, provided that any signed agreement which prohibits the same is amended.

SECTION 4. Appendix8 is hereby amended and shall now follow the format prescribed in Annex A of this CMO.

SECTION 5. Repealing Clause. — CMO No. 33, s. 2016 as amended by CMO No. 63, s. 2016 and all other CHED Memorandum Orders or parts thereof which are inconsistent with the Act are hereby repealed, amended or modified accordingly. All other provisions of CMO No. 33, s. 2016, as amended by CMO No. 63, s. 2016 that are not affected by this amendment shall remain valid and in force.

SECTION 6. Separability Clause. — If any part of this Order is declared unconstitutional or invalid, such parts or provisions thereof not so declared shall remain valid and subsisting. AIDSTE

SECTION 7. Effectivity Clause. — This policy shall take effect immediately after its issuance. Immediate dissemination of and strict compliance with this Order is directed.

Issued this 7th of April, 2017 in Quezon City, Philippines.

(SGD.) PATRICIA B. LICUANAN, PH.D.Chairperson

Appendices:

Annex A. Appendix 8: Selection Criteria

References:

1. CHED Memorandum Order No. 33, s. 2016

2. CHED Memorandum Order No. 63, s. 2016

ANNEX A

"Appendix 8: Selection Criteria

The following factors will be considered when vetting the proposals:

1. Project's technical merit;

2. Relevance and developmental nature or the value added by the project;

3. Demonstrated capacity of HEI/s to successfully deliver the stated goals; and

4. Soundness of the Work and Financial Plan

These criteria shall be used to evaluate whether the project proposals submitted by the HEIs meet expected qualities of a project under the Grants. Proposals shall be evaluated by each member of the respective vetting panel (from a score of one (1) to five (5) with one (1) being the lowest and five (5) being the highest). Afterwards, the total score from each vetting panel member shall be averaged in order to reach the Regional/National Vetting score.

Project Title
Proponent HEI/s

Evaluation Criteria

1

2

3

4

5

Project's Technical Merit (25)	• The project has clear, relevant, and well-defined objectives
• The project has clear, sound, and feasible methodology, with notable indicators and concrete outcomes
• The project is original and its results differ significantly from current approaches, methods, or processes of the HEI
• The project exhibits coherent component and activities
• The project timeline is reasonable and feasible
Relevance and Developmental Nature or the Value-added by the Project (30)	• The impact of the project in a specific area/niche is demonstrable
• The project is consistent with the thrusts of the Institutional Development and Innovation Grants and responds to regional and/or national priority areas
• The project responds to the adverse impact/s of the K to 12 Transition Period, particularly on labor
• The project contributes to the development of the HEI, its personnel, and stakeholders and is consistent with its vision, mission, and institutional goals
• The project exhibits strong potential to create enabling mechanisms for the efficient and effective delivery of HEI's processes
• The project has high potential of being utilized or replicated by other institutions
Demonstrated Capacity of HEI/s to Successfully Deliver of the Stated Goals (20)	• The proponent-HEI exhibits high percentage of equity to be able to sustain the proposed project beyond the grant period
• There is notable breadth and depth of team expertise in the proposed fields of activities
• The allocation of personnel and material resources for the project is adequate and clearly defined
• The sustainability strategy of the project is clear, including how the expected results will be sustained beyond the grant period.
Soundness of the Work and Financial Plan (25)	• Financial plan is based on a realistic work plan
• Financial allocation per line item budget is in line with the work plan
• Proposed line item budget of expenditures are presented clearly and with details of estimation
• Sufficient and reasonable resources are allocated to ensure project implementation
• The need for engaging external expertise, equipment purchases, expenses involving travels (local and international) are justified and the costs are realistic