J
NINETEENTH CONGRESS OF THE 
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES 
First Regular Session
)
•( rtif
.SEP21 P5 23
SENATE 
s.No. iS43
Introduced by Senator Loren B. Legarda
AN ACT
INSTITUTIONALIZING A RESULTS-BASED NATIONAL EVALUATION
POLICY
EXPLANATORY NOTE
Sound policies and programs are necessary to improve access and quality of 
services as these are determinants in meeting national goals effectively, efficiently, 
equitably, and sustainably.
To strengthen the role and enhance the relevance of institutions, there is a need 
to ensure that initiatives and resources are responsive under present circumstances 
and address key challenges. Thus, systematic, and context-specific evaluation of 
pohcies and programs is important.
In the Phihppines, evaluation has not been integrated into the processes and 
systems of government. Selected programs and projects have conducted an evaluation 
on the initiative of international development agencies, such as the National Economic 
and Development Authority and the Department of Budget and Management Joint 
Memorandum Circular No. 2015-01 which established an evaluation pohcy 
framework to govern the practice of evaluation of programs and projects receiving 
budgetary support from the government. The Circular apphes to the agencies of the 
Executive Branch, such that it does not warrant a systematic investigation of the merit, 
worth, or significance of policies and programs of other branches of government.


Recognizing the importance of evaluation to a country's good governance, 
transparency, and accountability, some jurisdictions have institutionahzed a National 
Evaluation Policy (NEP) that appHes to all branches and levels of govermnent, while 
many other coimtries are in the process of establishing their NEP1. A National 
Evaluation Policy can facilitate the development of an enabling environment and the 
institutional and individual capacities for evaluation to reach its full potential.
This bill seeks to establish a National Evaluation Policy to strengthen the legal 
and institutional framework for the regular conduct of monitoring and evaluation 
(M&E) of the results of public policies, programs, and other forms of government 
intervention intended to improve institutional capacities, promote sustainable 
development, and uplift the living standards of all Filipinos.
In view of the foregoing, the passage of this bill is earnestly sought.
EN LEGARDA
1 Diwakar, Y. De Mel, R. & Samarasinghe, H. (20 Septemlx>r 2021). A Study on the Status of National Evaluation Policies and 
Systems in Asia Pacific Region. Retrieved from https://www.evalforward.org/sites/default/files/2021- 
09/A%20study%20on%20the%20status%20of%20national%20evaluation%20policies%20and%20systems%20in%20Asia%20Paci 
fic% 20Region.pdf


2
3
4
5
6
7
8 
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
o( tijf
NINETEENTH CONGRESS OF THE 
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES 
First Regular Session
)
SENATE
s. No. i 3 4 3
SEP21 P5 23
f»eavs»iyt
Introduced by Senator Loren B. Legarda
AN ACT
INSTITUTIONALIZING A RESULTS-BASED NATIONAL EVALUATION
POLICY
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Republic of the Philippines in 
Congress assembled:
Section 1. Title. This Act shall be known as the "Results-Based National Evaluation 
Policy (RBNEP) Act."
Sec. 2. Declaration of Policy. - It is the policy of the State to ensure the relevance, 
efficiency, effectiveness, coherence, and impact of laws, policies, strategies, and 
programs, activities, and projects (PAPs) of the government, through the regular 
conduct and use of credible evaluations of its interventions to achieve its inclusive 
development and poverty reduction goals.
Sec. 3. Policy Objectives. The RBNEP intends to achieve the following objectives:
a) Facilitate the mstitutionaHzation of an integrated evaluation system of 
the government;
b) Ensure the timely provision to government decisionmakers of credible 
and useful evaluations in support of results-based formulation, 
planning, budgeting, unplementation, and oversight of government 
interventions;
c) Ensure the systematic utilization of evaluation findings and 
recommendations for the continuous improvement of government


1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20 
21 
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
interventions; and
d) Promote greater transparency and accountability for results of 
government departments, agencies, and other instrumentalities.
Sec. 4. Definition of Terms. The terms used m this Act are defined as follows:
a) Government Interventions refer to the laws, policies, strategies, and 
programs, activities, and projects (PAPs) of the government 
departments, agencies, and other instrumentalities.
b) Results refer to changes in a state or condition due to a government 
intervention. There are three types of such changes-outputs, outcomes, 
and impacts-which can be intended or unintended, positive and/or 
negative.
c) Evaluation refers to the systematic and impartial assessment of the 
results of government interventions. It provides credible information on 
the efficiency, effectiveness, relevance, coherence, impact, and 
sustainabihty of government interventions, enabling the incorporation 
of lessons learned into the decision-making process.
d) Monitoring refers to a continuous and systematic collection of data on 
key results indicators to track progress in achieving the objectives of 
government interventions.
e) Outputs refer to the goods and services delivered to the external 
stakeholders of government departments, agencies and other 
instnunentalities implementing government interventions.
f) Outcomes refer to the short-term and medium-term benefits to cHents, 
beneficiaries, and stakeholders, as a result of the outputs of government 
interventions.
g) Impacts are higher-level sectoral and societal benefits and other 
consequences of government interventions. Impacts take place long 
after target individuals, groups, systems or organizations have 
experienced the outputs and outcomes of government interventions.
Sec. 5. Coverage. The RBNEP shall apply to the following:
a) All departments, agencies, and other instrumentalities of the national 
government, including state universities and colleges (SUCs),


1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20 
21 
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
constitutional commissions, and government-owned and/ or controlled
corporations (GOCCs); and legislative and judicial branches of the 
government;
b) All government interventions formulated and implemented by the 
above entities including those funded by Official Development 
Assistance (ODA) and those contracted to and executed by local 
government units (LGUs), private sector and civil society organizations.
Sec. 6. Guiding Principles for Evaluation. The credibihty, quahty, and usefulness 
of evaluation shall be ensured through adherence to the following principles:
a) Utility. In commissioning or conducting an evaluation, there shall be a 
clear intention to use the evaluation findings and recommendations for 
results-based formulation, planning, budgeting, implementation, and 
oversight of government interventions. The design and timing of 
evaluations shall address the mformation needs of government 
decision-makers.
b) Applying evaluation criteria. Evaluations shall assess and report on the 
relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, coherence, impact and sustainability 
of government interventions in accordance with internationally 
accepted evaluation criteria. The use of these criteria shall be responsive 
to the needs of decision-makers, and to the purpose and context of 
evaluation.
c) Observing evaluation standards. Evaluation shall be consistent with 
internationally accepted evaluation norms, standards and best practices, 
including the use of evaluation designs and methodologies capable of 
attributing observed outputs, outcomes and impacts to government 
interventions being evaluated. Evaluation reference groups and other 
mechanisms shall be established and strengthened to ensure the 
generation of credible, quality and useful evaluations.
d) Independence and Impartiality. The independence of the evaluation units 
of departments, agencies and other instrumentahties shall be ensured at 
all times. Those who design, manage, and conduct evaluations shall be 
shielded from any undue influence that will undermine the credibihty


1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20 
21 
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
of evaluations. They shall be provided with adequate resources to 
produce credible, high-quality and useful evaluation. Evaluation shall 
be conducted with the highest degree of impartiality. In case third-party 
evaluators are commissioned to ensure impartial evaluation, they shall 
be selected from a wide and diversified pool according to objective 
criteria.
e) Evaluation Competencies. Evaluations shall be conducted by 
organizations and individuals having the required knowledge, skills, 
and other evaluation competencies. Capacity-building initiatives shall 
be implemented to strengthen the evaluation competencies of 
orgamzations and individuals who commission, design, manage, 
conduct, communicate and use evaluations.
f) Ethics. Individuals and organizations who commission, manage, design, 
and conduct evaluations shall observe accepted ethical standards 
including integrity, fairness, gender sensitivity, respect for culture and 
behefs, and protection of the rights of evaluation participants.
g) Transparency. The implementation of RBNEP shall promote 
transparency crucial to ensuring credible, high-quality and useful 
evaluations. To the greatest extent possible, all information required for 
evaluation shall be made available to evaluators, subject to existing laws 
and regulations governing the confidentiality and nondisclosure of 
information.
Those who commission or manage evaluation shall ensure the 
selection of evaluators with no conflict of interest with the evaluation to 
be undertaken. Potential evaluators of government interventions shall 
disclose possible conflict of interest that may undermine the credibility 
of evaluation. They shall disclose the identities of the members of the 
evaluation team.
Evaluators shall disclose to government decision-makers and 
other stakeholders the purpose, design, implementation, results and 
utihzation, including possible constraints or limitations of an evaluation. 
Complete evaluation reports shall be made easily accessible to


1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20 
21 
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
government decision-makers, relevant stakeholders, and the public.
h) Accountability. Entities responsible for the commissioning, managing, 
and conducting evaluations shall ensure that evaluations are credible, 
quahty, useful and timely. Key findings and recommendations of 
completed evaluations shaU be communicated clearly by the same 
entities to government decisionmakers and other stakeholders. The 
covered entities of the RBNEP shall incorporate the use of evaluations 
in results-based formulation, planning, budgeting, implementation, and 
oversight of government interventions.
Sec. 7. Establishment of a National Evaluation Council. A National Evaluation 
Council (NEC) is hereby established to oversee the implementation of the RBNEP.
Sec. 8. Composition of the National Evaluation Council. The NEC shall have the 
following seven (7) voting members:
a) Secretary of the National Economic and Development Authority 
(NEDA), or his/her authorized representative, as Chairperson. The 
representative of the NEDA Secretary shall be an Undersecretary in 
charge of monitoring and evaluation in NEDA;
b) Secretary of the Department of Budget and Management (DBM), or 
his/her authorized representative, as co-chairperson. The 
representative of the DBM Secretary shaU at least be an Assistant 
Secretary in charge of monitoring and evaluation in the DBM;
c) Secretary of the Phihppine Senate or his/her authorized representative 
who shall at least be a career Director in charge of pohcy, planning, 
research and/ or evaluation in the Senate;
d) Secretary General of the House of Representatives or his/her duly 
authorized representative who shall at least be a Career Director in 
charge of policy, planning, research and/or evaluation in the House of 
Representatives;
e) Court Administrator of the Supreme Court or his/her authorized 
representative who shall at least be a career Director in charge of pohcy, 
planning and / or performance monitoring and evaluation;
f) Chairperson of the Commission on Audit (COA) or his/her authorized


1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20 
21 
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
representative who shall at least be a career Director in charge of policy, 
planning and / or performance monitoring and evaluation; and
g) Head of the Presidential Management Staff or his/her authorized 
representative who shall at least be a career Director in charge of policy, 
planning and / or performance monitoring and evaluation.
The NEC shall meet at least once every quarter or as often as necessary. To 
ensure that the NEC is guided by inputs of evaluation experts, the following shall 
attend the NEC meetings as non-voting members:
a) The head of the Phihppine Institute of Development Studies (PIDS) or 
his/her duly authorized representative who shall at least be a career 
Director in charge of policy, planning, and/ or performance monitoring 
and evaluation;
b) The head of the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA) or his/her duly 
authorized representative who shall at least be a career Director in 
charge of policy, planning, and/or performance monitoring and 
evaluation; and
c) Representative from the voluntary organizations for professional 
evaluation (VOPES).
Sec. 9. Functions of the National Evaluation Council. The NEC shall perform the 
following functions to operationalize the RBNEP:
a) Provide overall policy direction on the implementation of the RBNEP;
b) Approve the basic guidelines for the conduct of evaluation;
c) Review and approve the National Evaluation Strategy (NES) and ensure 
its implementation;
d) Review, approve, and ensure the implementation of, the costed 
evaluation agenda of covered entities;
e) Provide oversight on the conduct of evaluation by covered entities and 
their management response to evaluation recommendations;
f) Issue the basic guidelines on the formation and operation of lEUs of 
covered entities; and
g) Approve and implement a program to strengthen the evaluation 
capacity of lEUs and government decision-makers.
6


1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20 
21 
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
Sec. 10. NEC Secretariat and its Functions. The NEC Secretariat shall be 
established within the NED A. The existing staffing complement of the NED A shall be 
augmented to undertake the functions of the NEC Secretariat. The NEC Secretariat 
shall:
a) Formulate and recommend basic guidelines for the conduct of 
evaluation;
b) Prepare the National Evaluation Strategy;
c) Review and make recommendations on the costed evaluation agenda of 
covered entities;
d) Monitor the implementation of the entities' evaluation agenda and their 
management response to evaluation recommendation in support of the 
oversight function of the NEC;
e) Formulate the basic guidelines on the formation and operation of lEUs 
of entities covered;
f) Provide quality assurance of evaluations conducted by covered entities;
g) Facilitate the dissemination to decision-makers of key findings, lessons 
learned, and recommendations from completed evaluations;
h) Maintain a public website containing the evaluation plans and reports 
of covered entities;
i) Develop a program to strengthen the evaluation capacity of covered 
entities and govenunent decisionmakers;
j) Prepare and submit to the DBM the annual funding requirement of the 
program to strengthen the evaluation capacity of the govenunent; and
k) Carry out other directives of the NEC, as necessary.
Sec. 11. National Evaluation Strategy. The National Evaluation Strategy (NES) 
shall identify the priority areas for evaluation in line with the Philippine Development 
Plan. It shall guide the formulation of evaluation agenda of the covered entities.
Sec. 12. Organization of Independent Evaluation Units (lEUs) of Covered Entities. 
Each covered entity shall organize an lEU that shall report directly to the head of the 
entity. The head of the entity shall ensure that the lEU can perform its evaluation 
functions independently and objectively.
Sec. 13. Functions of lEUs. The lEUs shall:


1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20 
21 
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
a) Coordinate the formulation and approval of the costed evaluation 
agenda of the covered entity;
b) Manage or conduct evaluations identified in the costed evaluation 
agenda;
c) Submit evaluation plans and final evaluation reports to the entity's head 
and to the NEC Secretariat in accordance with prescribed guidelines;
d) Disseminate the key findings and recommendations of completed 
evaluations to the head of the entity, decision-makers and other 
stakeholders;
e) Facihtate the formulation of the management response to key findings 
and recommendations from the completed evaluations;
f) Monitor the entity's progress in implementing the management 
response;
g) Establish quality assurance and participatory mechanisms for 
evaluation; and
h) Provide inputs to results-based formulation, planning, budgeting, and 
implementation within the entity.
Formulation of the Costed Evaluation Agenda. Each covered entity shall 
formulate a sbc-year costed evaluation agenda ahgned with the NES. The head of 
entity shall submit the costed evaluation agenda to the NEC.
Sec.15. Utilization of Evaluation Findings and Recommendations. The head of a 
covered entity shall incorporate the use of evaluations in results-based formulation, 
planning, budgeting, implementation, and oversight of government interventions. He 
or she shall submit to the NEC the management response to evaluation 
recommendations and ensure its implementation.
Sec. 16. Funding for the Implementation of the RBNEP. The funding requirement 
for the implementation of the RBNEP, including the budget for the conduct of 
evaluation indicated in the costed evaluation agenda, NEC Secretariat, and lEUs shall 
be included in the General Appropriations Act (GAA).
Sec. 17. Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR). The NEDA, in consultation 
with the prospective members of NEC, shall promulgate the IRR to operationahze the 
guiding principles of the RBNEP and to implement its specific provisions within 60
8


1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 
9
10
11
12
13
days upon the approval of this Act.
Sec. 18. Amendment. This Act shall be evaluated three years after its initial 
implementation. The results of such evaluation shall guide the proposed amendments 
of this Act and its IRR.
Sec. 19. Repealing Clause. All laws, decrees, orders, rules and regulations or 
other issuances or parts thereof inconsistent with the provisions of this Act are hereby 
repealed or modified accordingly.
Sec. 20. Separability Clause. If any portion or provision of this Act is declared 
imconstitutional, the remainder of this Act or any provision not affected thereby shall 
remain in force and effect.
Sec. 21. Ejfectivity. This Act shall take effect after fifteen (15) days following the 
completion of its publication in the Official Gazette or in a newspaper of general 
circulation in the Philippines.
Approved,