GUIDELINES ON THE USE OF THE

MONITORING AND EVALUATION OF

LOCAL LEVEL PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
PROTOCOL

National Nutrition Council

January 2022
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 RATIONALE 3

2.0 OBJECTIVES 3

3.0 WHAT IS MELLPI PRO? 4

4.0 KEY FEATURES OF MELLPI PRO FOR LGUs 4

5.0 KEY FEATURES OF MELLPI PRO FOR LOCAL NUTRITION 16

FOCAL POINTS

6.0 AWARDING CEREMONY 31

MELLPI Pro/Page 2 of 34/… January 2022

 GUIDELINE ON THE USE OF THE PPAN NUTRITION MONITORING AND EVALUATION SYSTEM
MONITORING AND EVALUATION OF LOCAL LEVEL PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PROTOCOL
OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE “MELLPI PRO”

1.0. RATIONALE

The National Nutrition Council, as the highest policy-making and coordinating body for nutrition
monitors and appraises the progress of the implementation of the Philippine Plan of Action for
Nutrition (PPAN) at various levels. This is done using various monitoring activities such as mid-term
assessment at the national level, annual program implementation review and Monitoring and
Evaluation of Local Level Plan Implementation (MELLPI) at regional and LGU levels. These activities,
together with activities that monitor the nutrition situation form part of the Philippine Nutrition
Surveillance System. The PNSS serves as the overall monitoring and evaluation system for the
nutrition sector.

The Monitoring and Evaluation of Local Level Plan Implementation (MELLPI) has long been the
monitoring and evaluation tool for local government units used at the national, regional and local
levels. It measures program efficiency in relation to program outreach, budget allocation and
expenditure, as well as policies issued. It also measures change in nutritional status among
preschool and schoolchildren for a period of three year. Alongside MELLPI is the BNS Evaluation
that measures the performance of the Barangay Nutrition Scholar in the management of nutrition
program and monitoring and referral of the malnourished children at the barangay level.

While the MELLPI and BNS Evaluation tools had been revised to address the developments over the
years, some aspects have remained the same such as emphasis program outreach and focus on
preschool and schoolchildren, among others. To address this, the NNC embarked on a project with
the University of the Philippines-Los Banos to update the existing monitoring and evaluation system
and eventually shifting to Results Based Monitoring and Evaluation (RBME)-based system.

In this way, the new monitoring and evaluation system shifts from emphasis to program outreach to
quality. The new system also expanded from preschool and schoolchildren to include the nutritional
status of pregnant women. This is parallel to first 1000 days of life as the focus of the Philippine Plan
of Action for Nutrition (PPAN) 2017-2022. The new monitoring and evaluation system for the local
government units also aims to measure the contribution of the LGUs to the PPAN targets and
outcomes. Likewise, it also appraises the performance of not only Barangay Nutrition Scholars but
also the performance of Nutrition Action Officers and Local Nutrition Program Coordinators as part
of developing capacities of local nutrition focal points.

The Monitoring and Evaluation of Local Level Plan Implementation (MELLPI) Pro is designed to
monitor and evaluate the performance of local government units (LGUs) and Local Nutrition Focal
Points (LNFPs) in promoting nutrition security vis-à-vis nutrition outcomes. Results of the MELLPI Pro
aim to guide policy and decision-makers enhance nutrition products, services and delivery systems
towards improved effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability.

This guideline shall be used by local nutrition committees and by the national and regional
evaluation teams. The MELLPI Pro covers two parts: (1) an institutional component which evaluates
various organizational attributes pertaining to nutrition governance in local governance units; and
the (2) a human resource component which evaluates management performance of frontline
nutrition staff at the local level.

2.0. OBJECTIVES

2.1 Monitor and evaluate local nutrition program implementation

2.2 Determine progress of implementation of PPAN priorities at the local level
2.3 Monitor and evaluate the performance of Local Nutrition Focal Points (LNFPs)
2.4 Determine good practices and challenges faced by LGUs and LNFPs in local nutrition
program implementation
2.5 Identify action lines for the local, regional and national level for improvement of
PPAN implementation

MELLPI Pro/Page 3 of 34/… January 2022

3.0. WHAT IS MELLPI PRO?

Monitoring and Evaluation of Local Level Plan Implementation Protocol (MELLPI Pro) is the
monitoring and evaluation mechanism for the implementation of the Philippine Plan of
Action for Nutrition at the local level. The MELLPI Pro is a local sub-system of the PPAN
Results Framework. The results chains, activity, output, outcome and impact are depicted in
the six dimensions within a local government context.

Activities and outputs in the MELLPI Pro are the local translation of the identified priority
policies, services and trainings expressed in the PPAN Results Framework. The outcome and
impacts in the sub-system on the other hand, refers to the conditional and behavioral
changes on the specific areas/ target groups and their contribution to the national targets.

MELLPI Pro can be described in four P’s:

1. Protocol. MELLPI Pro is a protocol, using a standard set of procedures and tools for
monitoring of performance,

2. Promotive. It promotes awareness and observance of existing law, rules and guidelines on
nutrition,

3. Progressive. Scores are determined based on the progress of nutrition program

implementation,

4. More Professional. It promotes a more objective review of evidence based on the

parameters set in each rating.

The MELLPI Pro has two components: the MELLPI Pro for LGUs and MELLPI Pro for local
nutrition focal points.

4.0. KEY FEATURES OF MELLPI PRO FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNITS

4.1 Who conducts the MELLPI Pro?

MELLPI Pro shall be conducted at least once a year. An interagency nutrition evaluation
team at the national, regional and local levels shall conduct MELLPI Pro. The team
composition is discussed in 4.5.1 Preparatory activities under 4.5 MELLPI Pro for Local
Government Units General Mechanics.

The nutrition evaluation team for the local government units are summarized in the matrix
as follows:

Table 1. Level of Monitoring and Evaluation, by Administrative Level

MELLPI Pro Regional Provincial City Municipal
Nutrition Nutrition Evaluation Evaluation
Evaluation Evaluation Team Team
Team Team
MELLPI Pro LGU
Province
Highly Urbanized/ Independent City
Component City
Municipality
Barangay

MELLPI Pro/Page 4 of 34/… January 2022

4.2 What is the report flow of the results of MELLPI Pro?

The MELLPI Pro is expected to produce the following documents:

1. Accomplished MELLPI Pro LGU scoresheets

2. Summary of MELLPI Pro LGU scores
a. Province
b. Municipality
c. Barangay

3. MELLPI Pro Regional Documentation Report

a. Summary of MELLPI Pro LGU Scores disaggregated by province and municipality
i. Percent of LGUs evaluated using MELLPI Pro tools
ii. Percent of LGUs with MELLPI Pro scores less than 80% and more than
80%

Results of MELLPI Pro LGU shall be submitted to the chair of the local nutrition committee or
local chief executive.

MELLPI Pro results shall be submitted to the next higher administrative level for monitoring
and databasing.

1. At the city and municipal levels, the database of the results of barangays shall be
maintained.
2. At the provincial level, the database of the results of the municipalities, component
cities and barangays shall be maintained.
3. The regional and national levels shall maintain the provincial and city/ municipal level
results.

A worksheet consolidating the annual MELLPI Pro results of an LGU shall be maintained by
the concerned LGU for monitoring its performance over the years. Another worksheet
consolidating MELLPI Pro result of all LGUs shall also be maintained by the higher
administrative level for monitoring of LGUs within its administrative jurisdiction (Figure 1).

All MELLPI Pro results from the sub-national levels shall feed into the Philippine Nutrition
Surveillance System, an information system that will be established to generate timely and
quality data relevant to nutrition. The MELLPI Pro results shall feed into the PNSS and
provide inputs to the PPAN Results Framework.

Figure 1. MELLPI Pro Results Report Flow Philippine Nutrition

Surveillance System
Nutrition
Surveillance
Division
NNC Regional MELLPI Pro
Office results by
Provincial MELLPI Pro region,
Nutrition Office results of by province, city,
City/ Municipal Provincial, City province, city, municipality
Nutrition Office and municipality
Component Municipality
City/ MELLPI Pro
Barangay Municipal results
MELLPI Pro MELLPI Pro
results results

4.3 What aspects are identified and reviewed in the MELLPI Pro for LGUs?

The MELLPI Pro for Local Government Units assesses performance of the local nutrition
organization along six dimensions that comprise a rationalized and effective nutrition
program management system:

MELLPI Pro/Page 5 of 34/… January 2022

 D1. Vision and mission
D2. Nutrition laws and policies
D3. Governance and organizational structure
D4. Local Nutrition Committee Management functions
D5. Nutrition interventions/services
D6. Change in the nutritional status in the LGU

These dimensions are mutually reinforcing describing an ideal nutrition scenario in the
locality (D1), through the related package of nutrition actions involving policy, structure, and
services (D2 to D5) which should logically bring about the desirable nutrition outcomes for
the locality (D6).

4.4 What tools support the MELLPI Pro LGUs and what purpose do these serve?

The MELLPI Pro for LGUs has four (4) forms to record performance data during the
monitoring and evaluation activity and three (3) forms to summarize results. The summary
of forms is reflected in Table 2.

Form 1a contains detailed elements for each of the five of six dimensions identified above.
Within a dimension, detailed elements help better clarify the various facets a given
dimension may be portrayed by the LGU being evaluated.

Form 1b contains the summary for the performance rating and a radial diagram that shows
the computed scores for each dimension, each derived as an average of element scores.
This form complements Form 1a and offers a visual representation of performance across
dimensions as well as depicts divergence of actual vis-à-vis the ideal compliance.

Form 2a contains the detailed elements for the sixth dimension, the Change in Nutritional
Status in the Local Government.

Form 2b contains the summary for the performance rating for the sixth dimension and a
radial diagram to present the performance across the seven outcome indicators.

Form 3 is a matrix summary capturing reflections, learning, and action commitments flowing
from the discussion of MELLPI Pro results with the nutrition committee. This document
enables the monitoring and evaluation team and members of the nutrition committee to
better understand the underlying reasons for the performance.

In successes, the monitoring and evaluation team can draw inputs from members of the
local nutrition committee what were the reasons behind achievement. Similarly, for slack in
performance, underlying causes would be explored including possible ways forward for
corrective action. Discussions aim to clarify strengths, weakness, challenges and
opportunities to improve nutrition initiatives as well as nutrition outcomes at the local level.

Form 4 is the evaluation summary sheet where members of the monitoring and evaluation
team sign and finalize the findings and recommendations generated from the evaluation
process, for submission to the LGU and the NNC.

Forms 9 – 11 are the summary forms consolidating MELLPI Pro LGU results for the regional,
provincial, city and municipal levels.

Table 2. Summary of MELLPI Pro Forms

MELLPI Pro Form Title/ Code
MELLPI Pro for Local P: Province (Pi, P1a D1 – D5, P1b, P2a, P2b, P3, P4)
Government Units C/M: City/ Municipality (C/Mi, CM1a D1 – D5, CM1b, CM2a,
CM2b, CM3, CM4)
B: Barangay (Bi, B1a D1 – D5, B1b, B2a, B2b, B3, B4)
Form i LGU Profile

MELLPI Pro/Page 6 of 34/… January 2022

 MELLPI Pro Form Title/ Code
Form 1a D1. Vision-Mission
D2. Nutrition Laws and Policies
D3. Governance and Organizational Structure
D4. Local Nutrition Committee Management
D5. Nutrition Service Delivery
Form 1b Summary of Local Nutrition Monitoring
Form 2a D6. Change in Nutritional Status
Form 2b Summary of Changes in Nutritional Status
Form 3 Discussion Questions for Learning and Action
Form 4 Summary of Scores and Recommendations
MELLPI Pro Summary Forms
Form 9 9a: Regional Summary of Scores of Provinces and Highly
Urbanized Cities
9b: Regional Summary of Scores of Cities/ Municipalities
9d: Regional Summary of Scores of Barangay Nutrition Scholars
Form 10 10b: Provincial Summary of Scores of Cities and Municipalities
10d: Provincial Summary of Scores of Barangays
Form 11 11d: City/ Municipal Summary of Score of Barangays

4.5 How are the tools scored and analyzed?

Numerical scoring is applied in Forms 1a and 2a where specific elements are rated along a
Likert-scale with qualitative descriptors below1:

Form 1a:
1 - lowest level of compliance
2 - indicating partial compliance
3 - indicating general compliance
4 - indicating above average performance
5 – indicating outstanding performance

Note: A rating of 0 can be given to LGUs who have not met the lowest level of
compliance

Form 2a:
0 - lowest level indicating an increase in the prevalence of malnutrition
1 - indicating no change in the prevalence of malnutrition
2 - indicating a decrease in the prevalence of malnutrition in the past year
3 - indicating continuous decline in the prevalence of malnutrition in the past two
years
4 – indicating reduction/maintenance of prevalence of malnutrition to lower than
public health significance in the past two years

Each dimension briefly described below suggests a particular feature of the LGU’s
performance in terms of the state/quality of service delivery system and nutrition security
status:

Table 3. Description of MELLPI Pro Dimensions

Dimension Feature
1 Vision and Mission Presence of vision and mission statement
on nutrition and consideration in the
Executive and Legislative Agenda and
Annual Investment Program. Note that this
is distinct from the vision and mission of the
LGU in general.

MELLPI Pro/Page 7 of 34/… January 2022

 Dimension Feature
2 Nutrition Laws and Policies Adoption or implementation of nutrition
laws and policies and issuance of localized
nutrition laws and policies as necessary in
the locality
3 Governance and Organizational Presence of a well-functioning institutional
Structure structure for nutrition in the locality, i.e.
committee, functions, staffing, decision
making powers
4 Local Nutrition Committee Quality of nutrition management
Management Functions performance by the nutrition committee,
i.e. LNAP formulation, capacity
development, resource generation and
mobilization, monitoring and evaluation
5 Nutrition Interventions/Services Extent of provision by the LGU on package
of nutrition services
6 Changes in the nutritional status in the Key indicators of nutritional status, i.e.
LGU children, pregnant women, adults

Performance is indicated by a higher numerical rating and the monitoring and evaluation
team is encouraged to take note of the data source upon which the rating is based to
provide justification of the rating.

The final dimension scores are presented in a radial diagram to provide visual
representation of the overall results. Better performance is depicted by point scores closer
to the apex for each dimension being rated. An open radial suggests more favorable
evaluation results compared with a constricted radial which indicates relatively problematic
results based on the performance elements of the MELLPI Pro.

4.6 How is the tool analyzed and used for decision-making?

After all elements within a dimension are rated, an average is derived to represent the final
score for the dimension. The objective is to achieve the general compliance score of 3 in all,
if not most, dimensions.

It is also desired that #d1 to #d5 reveal results that are positively consistent with the #d6 to
suggest linkage or effective translation of service provision into desirable nutrition
outcomes. Inconsistent result between #d6 vis-à-vis #d1-#d5 suggests that nutrition actions
do not explain nutrition performance which could mean appropriate but inefficient
interventions due to some underlying operation issues, or efficient though inappropriate
interventions deceptively shrouded by favorable nutrition outcomes, among others.

Mixed scores across dimensions (#d1 - #d5) as well as within elements in a given dimension
are also useful in indicating various reasons that explain nutrition performance in the
locality. These provide objective basis to probe deeper, undertake an in-depth analysis of
specific reasons of success or failure, and therefore form basis for organizational action to
improve nutrition outcome.

4.5 MELLPI Pro for LGUs General Mechanics

4.5.1 Preparatory Activities

This involves all administrative and logistical preparations for the conduct of the M&E
and shall cover a period of at most one month prior to the commencement of the
evaluation providing the LGU enough time to prepare the documentary evidence.

MELLPI Pro/Page 8 of 34/… January 2022

4.5.1.1 Organization of the monitoring and evaluation team.

The monitoring and evaluation team shall be organized for the province, city,
municipality and barangay (P/C/M/B) consisting of representatives from the
evaluation teams of the nutrition committee and/or partners.

The team will consist of three to four members of which a leader will be elected to
ensure that the activities of the M&E are carried out as planned. Depending on the
coverage of the M&E especially in the case of large province/ city/ municipality/
barangay (P/C/M/B), the evaluation team of the nutrition committee has the
prerogative to create additional teams.

The interagency monitoring and evaluation team for LGUs shall be composed of at
least one staff from nutrition and the rest will come from other nutrition committee
members and/or partners.

Monitoring and evaluation at the regional and national levels shall likewise follow
the team composition as mentioned. The inter-agency evaluation team shall be
composed of three to four members preferably but not limited to one NNC staff and
two to three members from other agencies and/or partners.

4.5.1.2 Orientation of the Nutrition Evaluation Teams

The P/C/M Nutrition Office or the designated staff shall facilitate and serve as the
coordinator for all activities related to the MELLPI Pro, with the Nutrition Action
Officer (NAO) as lead responsible person.

An orientation of the monitoring and evaluation team shall be organized at least

one week prior to the scheduled M&E activity to level- off on the framework and
mechanics of the MELLPI Pro.

4.5.1.3 Required documents for evaluation.

The MELLPI Pro Forms 1a and 2a are anchored on evidence-based elements to judge
the locality’s nutrition security performance. Thus, listed below are the set of
minimum critical documents needed for the evaluation. The printed/ electronic
supporting documents shall be made available for review during the conduct of
MELLPI Pro. These documents should cover a three-year period from the time of the
evaluation visit. The reference period, however, does not apply to laws and policies
where adoption remains in effect from earlier acts of legislation. Printed or
electronic copy of local legislations are also included in the key reference
documents.

The evaluation teams should also refer to available reports from national
government agencies, regional agencies as well as provincial reports for cross-
referencing. Some of these reports include OPT Plus report, Supplementary feeding
report, FHSIS report, etc. The data from the reports at the local level should be
consistent with the data available at the higher administrative levels.

Table 4. Reference Documents per Dimension

Dimension Key Reference Documents
Local Government Nutrition Monitoring Component

1 Vision and mission • Comprehensive Development

2 Nutrition laws and policies Plan
3 Governance and organizational • Local Nutrition Action Plan
structure • Sangguniang Panlalawigan/Bayan
Resolutions on Nutrition and
Related Concerns

MELLPI Pro/Page 9 of 34/… January 2022

 Dimension Key Reference Documents
• Approved Annual Investment
Program
• Approved Annual Budget
• Minutes of meeting attesting to
adoption/ compliance to national
laws for local implementation
• Line item budget for specific
nutrition actions
• Documentation Report
• Organizational Chart
4 Local nutrition committee • Local Nutrition Action Plan
management functions • Highlights of Meetings
• Accomplishment Reports
• Sangguniang Panlalawigan/Bayan
Resolutions on Nutrition and
Related Concerns
• Organizational Chart
• Project/Activity Documentation
Reports
• Annual Investment Program

5 Nutrition interventions/services • Local Nutrition Action Plan

• Project/Activity Documentation
Reports
• Masterlist of Beneficiaries
6 Nutrition status in the LGU* • Local Nutrition Action Plan
• Operation Timbang Plus Report
• Health Office Reports
• School Weighing Reports
• Prenatal Records
*Provinces with OPT Plus Report whose coverage is less than 80% may utilize the ENNS
data provided that ENNS data for the three-year reference period are available

4.5.1.4 Schedule of M&E Visits.

Evaluation shall take place at least once a year during the first semester. The
evaluation process for one locality is estimated to run for two (2) days, exclusive of
travel time for the monitoring and evaluation team, covering the courtesy call, desk
review, meeting with stakeholders and submission of results.

4.5.1.5 Administrative Arrangements

Schedule of monitoring and evaluation visits shall be coordinated with the local
government to be monitored or evaluated for concurrence.

Members of the evaluation teams may choose among the schedules concurred by
the local government unit and/or local nutrition focal points.

Members of the Regional and National Evaluation Teams shall be provided with
travelling allowance by the National Nutrition Council to cover meals and
accommodation subject to usual auditing rules. The National Nutrition Council shall
likewise provide allocation to cover fares and/or transportation costs incurred by
the Regional and National Evaluation Teams during the regional/ national
evaluation.

MELLPI Pro/Page 10 of 34/… January 2022

4.5.2 Implementation Stage

This involves the conduct of actual monitoring and evaluation by the monitoring and
evaluation team using the MELLPI Pro forms and tools to assess nutrition outcome,
services covered by the evaluation. A full cycle of the implementation stage per locality
proceeds in three sequential steps: (1) desk review and rating; (2) meeting with the
local nutrition committee; and the (3) exit meeting with local nutrition officials. Below is
a sample program for the schedule of activities:

Table 5. Sample Program for MELLPI Pro for LGUs

Day Activity
Day 1 Courtesy Call
AM (1 hour)
Introduction of Local Nutrition Committee
Opening Remarks
Regional Nutrition Program Coordinator/ Representative
Overview of the Activities
National Evaluation Team Leader
Closing Remarks
LNC Chairperson/ Representative
Photo opportunity
Desk review
NET Members and Representative from the LNC
LUNCH BREAK
PM Continue desk review
NET Members and Representative from the LNC
End of Day 1
Day 2
AM
Site visits (for face-to-face evaluation)
Continue desk review and consensus building
NET Members
LUNCH BREAK

PM Finalization of feedback
NET Members
Photo opportunity
Feedback
NET Members and LNC
Response
Nutrition Action Officer
Local Chief Executive (as applicable)
Closing Remarks
Regional Nutrition Program Coordinator/ Representative
End of Day 2

4.5.2.1 Step 1: Desk Review

The monitoring and evaluation team decides on role assignment and the mechanics
of producing the rating to accomplish Forms 1a and 2a.

The monitoring and evaluation team shall agree among themselves specific roles in
order to facilitate the rating process. Key roles would be the following: facilitator,
document locator, document assessor and report presentor. The facilitator guides
discussion of the team item by item through Forms 1a, 2a then records the final
rating; the document locator sieves through the records for evidence; the
document assessor gives the initial assessment of the score, based on which the
team deliberates for concurrence or to rate otherwise, for final recording. The

MELLPI Pro/Page 11 of 34/… January 2022

 presentor is responsible for facilitating discussion results with the local nutrition
committee which will take place on Day 2 of the evaluation process.

All member of the monitoring and evaluation team shall score by consensus. Under
no circumstances should the monitoring and evaluation team divide among
themselves the assessment of items.

Dimension scores are processed to Forms 1b, 2b which contain the radial
presentation of the results.

For the organizational component, one radial will represent Dimensions 1 to

Dimension 5 (nutrition service delivery services); while the other radial will
represent Dimension 6 (nutrition outcomes).

The monitoring and evaluation team reviews, deliberates and confirms the results
and take note of justifications/limitations observed for the ratings in preparation for
Step 2.

4.5.2.2 Step 2: Meeting with stakeholders

The monitoring and evaluation team, through its designated presentor, will discuss
the radial diagrams to the local nutrition committee for easy visualization of
evaluation results.

Results will be presented to the local nutrition committee members. The

presentations shall follow a standard format of content and flow which include an
overview of the process of evaluation, overall results, annotated by highlights of
findings per dimension. Outstanding reasons that explain the scores based on the
MELLPI Pro instrument will primarily be given emphasis. Note that at this stage,
submission of documents will only be accepted for notation but no longer in any
way alter the scoring.

The nutrition committee members are encouraged to share their thoughts on the
results (success or shortfall) especially those that may not be readily discernible or
captured in the review of documents. Future action to sustain successes and
remedial actions for failure are documented in Form 3.

4.5.2.3 Step 3: Submission of results

The monitoring and evaluation process concludes with the monitoring and
evaluation team convening for a final deliberation and finalizing of the evaluation
report summarized in Form 4. The said forms shall be submitted in printed and
electronic format to the Local Chief Executive or the chair of the local nutrition
committee.

The monitoring and evaluation team should ensure constructive feedback by

maintaining as much as possible a positive tenor in the statement of “major
findings” and “recommendations” to encourage forward action. Positive
observations should be highlighted first before pointing out deficient or problematic
findings.

The monitoring and evaluation team shall keep a record of the same files in
electronic format for submission to NNC for databasing

4.5.3 Post monitoring and evaluation activities

This refers to the post monitoring and evaluation activities such as dissemination of
results and submission of client feedback form.

MELLPI Pro/Page 12 of 34/… January 2022

4.5.3.1 Dissemination of results

In addition to submission of the MELLPI Pro results to the Local Nutrition

Committee, the provincial, city, or municipal monitoring and evaluation team may
convene separate meetings with nutrition action officers and city/municipal/ district
nutrition coordinators and with Barangay Nutrition Scholars to discuss the MELLPI
Pro results of the city/ municipality/ barangay.

MELLPI Pro results will also be discussed in the annual PPAN Program
Implementation Review to identify dimensions with generally low ratings and
determine interventions and next step to improve performance.

4.5.3.2 Databasing of results.

As discussed in the 4.2 Report flow of MELLPI Pro results, the succeeding higher
administrative level shall maintain the MELLPI Pro results of LGUs for its monitoring.
LGUs monitored shall likewise maintain their MELLPI Pro results to monitor annual
performance.

LGUs with partial to low compliance shall be closely monitored and provided with
interventions (as necessary) by the province for the succeeding year for improved
performance. Should there be no positive changes in the one-year close monitoring
period, the NNC Regional Office shall support the province thereafter to
determining appropriate policy, capacity development or service delivery
interventions.

Provinces and Highly Urbanized and Independent Cities with low to partial
compliance shall likewise be closely monitored by NNC Regional Office and provide
appropriate policy or capacity development interventions to improve performance.

The Nutrition Surveillance Division shall likewise consolidate the results and shall
identify the needed policy or capacity development interventions that shall be
disseminated to the Nutrition Policy and Planning Division and Nutrition Information
Division for their further analysis and recommendation.

At the regional and national levels, the summary of the MELLPI Pro LGU scores of
municipalities, cities and provinces shall be maintained in the database for a
maximum of six years. This shall be applicable to local government units who
continuously advance from the 1st year of receipt of the Green Banner Seal of
Compliance until receipt of the Nutrition Honor Award.

MELLPI Pro data of local government units who will fall short of advancing the
succeeding levels (Green Banner Year 2 and so on…) shall be included in the second
data set Data shall be moved to the archive for local government units who have
reached the Nutrition Honor Award or to those who will revert back to compliance
to the Green Banner.

4.5.3.3 MELLPI Pro Client Feedback Form

To further improve the conduct of MELLPI Pro, the LGUs shall accomplish the
feedback form (Annex 2). Evaluation of the Regional Nutrition Evaluation Team can
be emailed to the chief of the Nutrition Surveillance Division within five (5) working
days after the validation visit and shall be communicated the Regional Nutrition
Program Coordinator (RNPC). The evaluation of the National Evaluation Team on the
other hand, shall be emailed to the RNPC who shall transmit the evaluation to the
chief of the Nutrition Surveillance Division

MELLPI Pro/Page 13 of 34/… January 2022

 4.5.4 Monitoring and Evaluation of Past Nutrition Honor Awardees.

NHA recipients may use the MELLPI Pro to conduct self-assessment for monitoring of
their local nutrition program. Provinces may also use the MELLPI Pro among the
municipalities who have received the NHA for their monitoring.

MELLPI Pro results for NHA recipients will be collected by NNC’s Nutrition Surveillance
Division to determine baseline data among past Nutrition Honor Awardees for the
development of the Presidential Award for Nutrition.

4.5.5 Computation of Scores

1. MELLPI Pro Province

Total ScoreProv = (D1 + D2 + D3 + D4)/4*(0.60) + (D5)*(0.10) + (D6)*(0.30)

2. MELLPI Pro City/ Municipality

Total ScoreCity/Mun = (D1 + D2 + D3 + D4 + D5)/5*(0.60) + (D6)*(0.40)

3. MELLPI Pro Barangay

Total ScoreBgy = (D1 + D2 + D3 + D4 + D5)/5*(0.60) + (D6)*(0.40)

4.5.3 Green Banner Seal of Compliance

The LGU with an average rating lower than 60% per dimension and an overall rating of
the at least 85% shall be conferred with the Green Banner Seal of Compliance.

The Green Banner Seal of Compliance replaces the Green Banner where only the LGU
with the highest score in each administrative level can qualify. In the Green Banner Seal
of Compliance, all LGUs reaching the minimum overall rating provided it doesn’t have
an average rating of less than 60% any of the dimensions shall receive the seal.

4.6 MELLPI Pro Awards for Local Government Units

4.6.1 General Mechanics

The evaluation visits for the MELLPI Pro Awards shall follow the general mechanics of
MELLPI Pro for LGUs. It shall adopt the preparatory and implementation activities.

4.6.2 MELLPI Pro Awards for Local Government Units

The MELLPI Pro Awards for Local Government Units can be divided into five levels
following the receipt of the Green Banner Seal of Compliance:

1. Consistent Regional Outstanding Winner in Nutrition (CROWN) Award.

This is open to the LGU-recipients of the Green Banner Seal of Compliance for three
consecutive years whose rating is at least 90% on the third year. Qualified LGUs shall
be subject to mechanics for validation of the Regional Nutrition Evaluation Team in
4.6.4.

2. First Year CROWN Maintenance Award

This is open to all CROWN awardees of the previous reference year subject to
validation of the National Evaluation Team. A minimum score of 90% is needed to
receive the award.

MELLPI Pro/Page 14 of 34/… January 2022

3. Second Year CROWN Maintenance Award

This is open to all First Year CROWN Maintenance awardees of the previous
reference year subject to validation of the National Evaluation Team. A minimum
score of 93% is needed to receive the award.

4. Nutrition Honor Award (NHA)

This the highest award to date. It is open to all Second Year CROWN Maintenance
awardees of the previous reference year subject to validation of the National
Evaluation Team. A minimum score of 95% is needed to receive the award.

5. Presidential Seal of Good Nutrition

This is a highly anticipated award which shall be open to all Nutrition Honor
Awardees. The guidelines and tools are yet to be developed, subject to approval of
the NNC Governing Board and for consideration and approval of the Office of the
President.

4.6.3 MELLPI Pro Awards Provincial Validation

1. The computation of scores shall follow the same formula as in the Green Banner
Seal of Compliance.
2. The province shall determine the municipality/ component city who will qualify
for the shortlist for the Consistent Regional Outstanding Winner in Nutrition
(CROWN) at the regional level
3. To qualify for the shortlisting, the municipality/ component city should be:
a. A recipient of the Green Banner Seal of Compliance for three
consecutive years
b. The highest-ranking LGU in the province and whose rating is at least
90% for its third (3rd) year

4.6.4 MELLPI Pro Awards Regional Validation

1. The NNC Regional Office shall prepare a short list of highest-ranking LGUs in the
region to determine the contenders for the CROWN award, specifically:
a. Provinces and cities who qualified for the Green Banner Seal of
Compliance for three consecutive years with a rating of at least 90% on
the third year
b. Highest-ranking municipality/ component city in each province who
qualified for the Green Banner Seal of Compliance for three consecutive
years with a rating of at least 90% on the third year.

2. The NNC Regional Office shall conduct validation visits to the three (3) highest-
ranking municipalities in the region to complete the shortlist of highest ranking
LGUs
3. The computation of scores shall follow the same formula as in the Green
Banner.
4. Results of the RNET validation visit to the top 3 highest-ranking component
cities and municipalities along with the results of RNET evaluation of provinces
and cities shall be discussed and finalized during the RNET deliberation meeting
5. The highest-ranking province/ city/ municipality in the region with a minimum
score of 90% shall be conferred the CROWN award

6.2.3 MELLPI Pro Awards National Validation

1. The NNC Nutrition Surveillance Division shall prepare the list of Consistent
Regional Outstanding Winner in Nutrition (CROWN) and Nutrition Honor Award
(NHA) contenders for the National Evaluation Team (NET) validation visits

MELLPI Pro/Page 15 of 34/… January 2022

 2. The NET shall conduct validation visits to the CROWN and NHA contenders

3. The computation of scores shall follow the same formula as in the Green Banner
with the following cut-off scores:

Table 6. MELLPI Pro Awards for LGUs Cut-off scores

Category Cut-off score
st
1 Year CROWN Maintenance Award 90%
2nd Year CROWN Maintenance Award 93%
Nutrition Honor Award 95%

4. At the end of the validation visit, the NET shall submit the initial overall rating to
the LGU, subject to the endorsement of the rest of the NET members during the
deliberation and approval of the NNC Technical Committee

5. Upon approval, the Nutrition Surveillance Division shall prepare a written

communication to the LGU for the MELLPI Pro results

5.0. KEY FEATURES OF MELLPI PRO FOR LOCAL NUTRITION FOCAL POINTS

5.1 Who are covered by the MELLPI Pro for Local Nutrition Focal Points?

The MELLPI PRO for LNFP covers Nutrition Action Officers (NAOs), City/ Municipal/ District
Nutrition Program Coordinators (C/M/DNPCs) and Barangay Nutrition Scholars (BNSs) with
at least two years of service.

5.2 Who conducts the MELLPI Pro for Local Nutrition Focal Points?

MELLPI Pro shall be conducted at least once a year. An interagency nutrition evaluation
team at the national, regional and local levels shall conduct MELLPI Pro . The team
composition is discussed in 5.8.1 Preparatory stage under 5.8 MELLPI Pro for Local Nutrition
Focal Points General Mechanics.

The nutrition evaluation team for the local government units and local nutrition focal points
are summarized in the matrix as follows:

Table 7. Level of Monitoring and Evaluation, by Administrative Level

MELLPI Pro Regional Provincial City Municipal
Nutrition Nutrition Evaluation Evaluation
Evaluation Evaluation Team Team
Team Team
MELLPI Pro Local Nutrition Focal Points
Provincial Nutrition Action Officer
City Nutrition Action Officer
(Highly Urbanized City)
City Nutrition Action Officer
(Component City)
District Nutrition Program Coordinator
Municipal Nutrition Action Officer
Municipal Nutrition Program
Coordinator
City Nutrition Program Coordinator
Barangay Nutrition Scholar

MELLPI Pro/Page 16 of 34/… January 2022

5.3 What is the report flow of the results of MELLPI Pro for Local Nutrition Focal Points?

The MELLPI Pro is expected to produce the following documents:

1. Accomplished MELLPI Pro Local Nutrition Focal Points scoresheets

2. Summary of MELLPI Pro Nutrition Focal Points scores
a. Provincial Nutrition Action Officers
b. City/ Municipal Nutrition Action Officers
c. Barangay Nutrition Scholars

3. MELLPI Pro Regional Documentation Report

a. Summary of MELLPI Pro scores of all local nutrition focal points
i. Percent of local nutrition points evaluated using MELLPI Pro tools
ii. Percent of local nutrition points with MELLPI Pro scores less than 80%
and more than 80%

Results of MELLPI Pro for Local Nutrition Focal points shall be submitted to the local
nutrition focal point and to his/her immediate supervisor.

MELLPI Pro results shall be submitted to the next higher administrative level for monitoring
and databasing.

1. At the city and municipal levels, the database of the results of barangays shall be
maintained.
2. At the provincial level, the database of the results of the municipalities, component
cities and barangays shall be maintained.
3. The regional and national levels shall maintain the provincial and city/ municipal level
results.

A worksheet consolidating the annual MELLPI Pro results of local nutrition focal point shall
be maintained by the concerned LGU for monitoring its performance over the years.

All MELLPI Pro results from the sub-national levels shall feed into the Philippine Nutrition
Surveillance System, an information system that will be established to generate timely and
quality data relevant to nutrition. The MELLPI Pro results shall feed into the PNSS and
provide inputs to the PPAN Results Framework.

Figure 2. MELLPI Pro Results Report Flow

Philippine Nutrition
Surveillance System
Nutrition
Surveillance
Division
NNC Regional MELLPI Pro
results by
Office
Provincial MELLPI Pro region,
results of by province, city,
Nutrition Office
City/ Municipal Provincial, City province, city, municipality
and municipality
Nutrition Office
Component Municipality
City/ MELLPI Pro
Barangay Municipal results
MELLPI Pro MELLPI Pro
results results

5.4 What aspects are identified and reviewed in the MELLPI Pro?

The MELLPI PRO for Local Nutrition Focal Points assesses the performance of frontline
nutrition staff in carrying out their core functions in line with delivering nutrition services in
the locality. Performance is defined in about seven management dimensions:

MELLPI Pro/Page 17 of 34/… January 2022

1. Coordination 5. Monitoring and evaluation
2. Advocacy 6. Resource generation
3. Planning 7. Documentation and record keeping
4. Implementation 8. Capacity building

These dimensions were presented in the Training Needs Analysis Study of Local Nutrition
Focal Points. They were also used in the Nutrition Program Management Manual as the
priority actions of various nutrition focal points in different levels of the nutrition hierarchy –
Barangay Nutrition Scholar (BNS), District/City/ Municipal Nutrition Program Coordinator
(D/CNPC), City/Municipal Nutrition Action Officer (C/MNAO), and the Provincial Nutrition
Action Officer (PNAO).

5.5 What tools support the MELLPI Pro for Local Nutrition Focal Points and what purpose
do these serve?

The MELLPI Pro for Local Nutrition Focal Points has four (4) forms.

Form 5 contains the about 5 – 8 eight elements based on the nutrition focal points’
performance of their functions. Each element comes with parameters to determine the
performance rating for each element.

Form 6 contains the summary of performance rating and a radial diagram that visualizes the
computed scores for each element of nutrition focal point performance, derived as an
average of element scores. This form complements Form 5 and compares level of nutrition
focal point performance across elements as well as depicts the divergence between actual
vis-à-vis the ideal performance.

Form 7 is a matrix summary capturing reflections, learning, and action commitments flowing
from the discussion of results by the monitoring and evaluation team with the nutrition
focal points. This document enables the monitoring and evaluation team to better
understand the underlying reasons for the nutrition focal point’s performance.

Form 8 is the evaluation summary sheet where members of the monitoring and evaluation
team sign and finalize findings and recommendations on the results of the nutrition focal
point’s evaluation, for submission to the immediate supervisor of the local nutrition focal
point and to the local nutrition committee member representing the department/ division
the local nutrition focal point is affiliated with.

Since there could be specific variation in the nature and scope of the task per local nutrition
focal point, the monitoring and evaluation team shall use different sets of forms
corresponding to evaluation for the PNAO, C/MNAO, D/CNPC and BNS, respectively.

MELLPI Pro Summary Forms

Forms 12 – 15 are the summary forms consolidating results of MELLPI Pro for Local Nutrition
Focal Points for the regional, provincial, city and municipal levels.

Table 8. Summary of MELLPI Pro Forms

MELLPI Pro Form Title/ Code
Form 12 12a: Regional Summary of Scores of Provincial Nutrition Action
Officers
12b.1: Regional Summary of Scores of City Nutrition Action Officers
12b.2: Regional Summary of Score of Municipal Nutrition Action
Officers
12c: Regional Summary of Scores of City/ District Nutrition Program
Coordinators
12d: Regional Summary of Scores of Barangay Nutrition Scholars
Form 13 13b: Provincial Summary of Scores of City/ Municipal Nutrition Action
Officers
MELLPI Pro Form Title/ Code
13c: Provincial Summary of Scores of City/ District Nutrition Program
Coordinators
13d: Provincial Summary of Scores of Barangay Nutrition Scholars
Form 14 14c: City Summary of Scores of City Nutrition Program Coordinators
14d: City Summary of Score of Barangay Nutrition Scholars
Form 15 15c: Municipal Summary of Scores of Municipal Nutrition Program
Coordinators
15d: Municipal Summary of Scores of Barangay Nutrition Scholars

5.6 How are the tools scored and analyzed?

In any of the category of local nutrition focal points subjected to the MELLPI Pro evaluation,
numerical scoring is applied only in Form 5 where specific elements within each dimension
are rated along a Likert-scale with the following qualitative descriptors2:

1 - lowest level of compliance/ inconsistent initiative and performance of function

along the identified task
2 - minimum compliance suggests performance of duties and responsibilities but
less exercise of and consistency in demonstrating interaction, initiative and
decision-making
3 - satisfactory compliance suggests performance of duties and responsibilities
with moderate exercise of and consistency in demonstrating interaction,
initiative and decision-making
4 - very satisfactory compliance suggests consistent diligence in the performance of
duties and responsibilities with positive results most of the time
5 - excellent compliance suggests performance of duties and responsibilities with
full exercise of and consistency in demonstrating interaction, initiative and
decision-making always with positive results

The final dimension scores are presented in a radial diagram to provide visual
representation of the overall results. Better performance is depicted by point scores closer
to the apex for each dimension being rated. An open radial suggests more favorable
evaluation results compared with a constricted radial which indicates relatively problematic
results based on the performance elements of the MELLPI Pro.

5.7 How is the tool analyzed and used for decision-making?

After all elements within a dimension are rated, an average is derived to represent the final
score for the dimension. The objective is to satisfactory compliance score of 3 in all, if not
most, dimensions. The relative scores across dimensions and elements will indicate specific
management functions where the nutrition focal point is found strong as well as areas
where assistance or mentoring is further needed.

The monitoring and evaluation team should probe on the underlying causes of both
strengths and weaknesses to provide basis for constructive feedback at the level of
individual focal points as well as human resource development and policy revisiting at the
organizational/institutional level.

MELLPI Pro/Page 19 of 34/… January 2022

5.8 MELLPI Pro for Local Nutrition Focal Points General Mechanics

5.8.1 Preparatory Activities

This involves all administrative and logistical preparations for the conduct of the M&E
and shall cover a period of at most one month prior to the commencement of the
evaluation providing the LGU enough time to prepare the documentary evidence.

5.8.1.1 Organization of the monitoring and evaluation team.

Local Nutrition Focal Points shall be monitored and evaluated by not more than
three members of the evaluation team of the Nutrition Committee. The composition
by the local nutrition focal point evaluated are as follows

1. The evaluation team for Provincial Nutrition Action Officers, City Nutrition
Action Officers (HUC and CC) and District/ City (HUC)/ Nutrition Program
Coordinators shall be composed of the three members of the Regional
Nutrition Evaluation Team.

2. The evaluation team for Municipal Nutrition Action Officers shall be

composed of the three members of the Provincial Nutrition Evaluation Team.

3. The evaluation team for City (CC)/ Municipal Nutrition Program Coordinators
shall be composed of member of the CNET (CNPC) and MNET (MNPC).

4. The evaluation team for Barangay Nutrition Scholars shall be composed of

the City/ Municipal/ District Nutrition Program Coordinator and/or Nutrition
Action Officer as immediate supervisor/s, and one to two members of the
local nutrition committee preferably but not limited to those actively
involved in provision of technical assistance/ trainings to Barangay Nutrition
Scholars.

Monitoring and evaluation at the regional and national levels shall likewise follow
the team composition as mentioned. The inter-agency evaluation team shall be
composed of three members preferably but not limited to one NNC staff and two
members from other agencies and/or partners.

5.8.1.2 Orientation of the Nutrition Evaluation Teams.

The P/C/M Nutrition Office or the designated staff shall facilitate and serve as the
coordinator for all activities related to the MELLPI Pro, with the Nutrition Action
Officer (NAO) as lead responsible person.

An orientation of the monitoring and evaluation team shall be organized at least

one week prior to the scheduled M&E activity to level- off on the framework and
mechanics of the MELLPI Pro.

5.8.1.3 Required documents for evaluation.

The MELLPI Pro Forms are anchored on evidence-based elements to judge the
locality’s nutrition program implementation performance. Table 9 lists the
minimum set of documents for the evaluation but not limited to references
indicated. The printed/ electronic supporting documents shall be made available for
review during the conduct of MELLPI Pro. These documents should cover a three-
year period from the time of the evaluation visit. The reference period, however,
does not apply to laws and policies where adoption remains in effect from earlier
acts of legislation. Printed or electronic copy of local legislations are also included in
the key reference documents.

The evaluation teams should also refer to available reports from national
government agencies, regional agencies as well as provincial reports for cross-
MELLPI Pro/Page 20 of 34/… January 2022
 referencing. Some of these reports include OPT Plus report, Supplementary feeding
report, FHSIS report, etc. The data from the reports at the local level should be
consistent with the data available at the higher administrative levels.

Table 9. Reference Documents per Dimension

Dimension Key Reference Documents
Local Nutrition Focal Points Monitoring Component

1 Planning • Local Nutrition Action Plan

• PPAN Accomplishment Reports
2 Organizing • Minutes of the meetings
• Documentation Report
3 Advocacy for nutrition focal points • Masterlists
and committees • Capacity Map
4 Coordination • MELLPI Pro results

5 Resource generation

6 Documentation and record keeping

7 Monitoring and evaluation

5.8.1.4 Schedule of M&E Visits.

Evaluation shall take place at least once a year during the first semester. The
evaluation process for one locality is estimated to run for two (2) days, exclusive of
travel time for the monitoring and evaluation team, covering the courtesy call, desk
review, meeting with stakeholders and submission of results.

5.8.1.5 Administrative Arrangements.

Schedule of monitoring and evaluation visits shall be coordinated with the local
government and local nutrition focal point to be monitored or evaluated for
concurrence.

Members of the evaluation teams may choose among the schedules concurred by
the local government unit and the local nutrition focal points.

Members of the Regional and National Evaluation Teams shall be provided with
travelling allowance by the National Nutrition Council to cover meals and
accommodation subject to usual auditing rules.

The National Nutrition Council shall likewise provide allocation to cover fares and/or
transportation costs incurred by the Regional and National Evaluation Teams during
the regional/ national evaluation.

5.8.2 Implementation Activities

This involves the conduct of actual monitoring and evaluation by the monitoring and
evaluation team using the MELLPI Pro forms and tools to assess local nutrition focal
points performance in the localities covered by the evaluation.

A full cycle of the implementation per locality proceeds in three sequential steps: (1)
desk review and rating; (2) meeting with the local nutrition committee; and the (3) exit
meeting with local nutrition officials. Below is a sample program for the 2- day activity
subject to changes as agreed by the nutrition evaluation teams and the local nutrition
committee/ local nutrition focal point.

MELLPI Pro/Page 21 of 34/… January 2022

Table 10. Sample Program for MELLPI Pro for LNFPs
Day Activity
Day 1 Courtesy Call
AM (1 hour)
Introduction of Local Nutrition Committee
Opening Remarks
Regional Nutrition Program Coordinator/ Representative
Overview of the Activities
National Evaluation Team Leader
Closing Remarks
LNC Chairperson/ Representative
Photo opportunity
Desk review
NET Members and Local Nutrition Focal Point
LUNCH BREAK
PM Continue desk review
NET Members and Local Nutrition Focal Point
Interview/ Written/ Practical Exam (as applicable)
NET Members and Local Nutrition Focal Point
Continue desk review
NET Members and Local Nutrition Focal Point
End of Day 1
Day 2
AM
Site visits (for face-to-face evaluation)
Continue desk review and consensus building
NET Members
LUNCH BREAK

PM Finalization of feedback
NET Members
Photo opportunity
Meeting with the Stakeholders (Feedback)
NET Members and LNC
Response
Local Nutrition Focal Point
Local Chief Executive (as applicable)
Closing Remarks
Regional Nutrition Program Coordinator/ Representative
Submission of results
End of Day 2

5.8.2.1 STEP 1: Desk Review.

The monitoring and evaluation team decides on role assignment and the mechanics
of producing the rating to accomplish Form 5.

The monitoring and evaluation team shall agree among themselves specific roles in
order to facilitate the rating process. Key roles would be the following: facilitator,
document locator, document assessor and report presentor. The facilitator guides
discussion of the team item by item through Form 5 then records the final rating;
the document locator sieves through the records for evidence; the document
assessor gives the initial assessment of the score, based on which the team
deliberates for concurrence or to rate otherwise, for final recording. The presentor
is responsible for facilitating discussion of results with the local nutrition committee
which will take place on Day 2 of the evaluation process.

MELLPI Pro/Page 22 of 34/… January 2022

 All member of the monitoring and evaluation team shall score by consensus, under
no circumstances should the monitoring and evaluation team divide among
themselves the assessment of items.

Scores are processed to Forms 6 which contain the radial presentation of the results.

Results from the MELLPI Pro Form 8 will be combined with scores derived from LGU
scores, interviews, written/ practical tests as applicable. Details of which are
discussed in 5.8.5 Computation of Scores for regular monitoring and evaluation and
5.9.3 Search for Outstanding Local Nutrition Focal Points at the city/ provincial/
regional and national levels

The monitoring and evaluation team reviews, deliberates and confirms the results
and take note of justifications/limitations observed for the ratings in preparation for
Step 2.

5.8.2.2 Step 2: Meeting with stakeholders.

The monitoring and evaluation team, through its designated presentor, discuss the
radial diagrams to the local nutrition committee and concerned focal points for easy
visualization of evaluation results.

The nutrition focal point evaluated is encouraged to share thoughts on the results
(success or shortfall) especially those that may not be readily discernible or captured
in the review of documents and peer interviews. Future action to sustain successes
and remedial actions for failure are documented in Form 7.

5.8.2.3 Step 3: Submission of results.

The monitoring and evaluation process concludes with the monitoring and
evaluation team convening for a final deliberation and finalizing of the evaluation
report summarized in Form 8. The team shall leave a copy of the feedback to the
supervisor of the local nutrition focal point before they leave the area.

The monitoring and evaluation team should ensure constructive feedback by

maintaining as much as possible a positive tenor in the statement of “major
findings” and “recommendations” to encourage forward action. Positive
observations should be highlighted first before pointing out deficient or problematic
findings.

The monitoring and evaluation team shall keep a record of the same files in
electronic format for submission to NNC for databasing.

5.8.3 Post monitoring and evaluation activities

This refers to the post monitoring and evaluation activities such as dissemination of
results and submission of client feedback form.

5.8.3.1 Dissemination of results

In addition to submission of the MELLPI Pro results to the Local Nutrition

Committee, the provincial, city, or municipal monitoring and evaluation team may
convene separate meetings with nutrition action officers and city/municipal/ district
nutrition coordinators and with Barangay Nutrition Scholars to discuss the MELLPI
Pro results of the city/ municipality/ barangay.

MELLPI Pro results will also be discussed in the annual PPAN Program
Implementation Review to identify dimensions with generally low ratings and
determine interventions and next step to improve performance.

MELLPI Pro/Page 23 of 34/… January 2022

 5.8.3.2 Databasing of results

As discussed in the 5.3 Report flow of MELLPI Pro results, the succeeding higher
administrative level shall maintain the MELLPI Pro results of LNFPs for its
monitoring.

LNFPs with partial to low compliance shall be closely monitored and provided with
interventions (as necessary) by their LGUs for the succeeding year for improved
performance.

The Nutrition Surveillance Division shall likewise consolidate the results and shall
identify the needed policy or capacity development interventions that shall be
disseminated to the Nutrition Policy and Planning Division and Nutrition Information
Division for their further analysis and recommendation.

5.8.3.3 MELLPI Pro Client Feedback Form.

To further improve the conduct of MELLPI Pro, Local Nutrition Focal Points shall
accomplish the feedback form (Annex 3). Evaluation of the Regional Nutrition
Evaluation Team can be emailed to the chief of the Nutrition Surveillance Division
within five (5) working days after the validation visit and shall be communicated the
Regional Nutrition Program Coordinator (RNPC). The evaluation of the National
Evaluation Team on the other hand, shall be emailed to the RNPC who shall transmit
the evaluation to the chief of the Nutrition Surveillance Division

5.8.5 Computation of Scores

MELLPI Pro scores for Local Nutrition Focal Points at the Local Level

(Provincial/ City/ Municipal level)

1. MELLPI Pro PNAO, C/MNAO, C/M/DNPC

Total ScoreNAO/ DNPC = (MELLPI Pro Score*0.90) + MELLPI Pro LGU Score*0.10)

2. MELLPI Pro BNS (Province/ City)

Total ScoreBNS = (MELLPI Pro Score*0.80) + (OBNS Exam*0.20)

3. MELLPI Pro BNS (Municipality)

Total ScoreBNS = MELLPI Pro Score

5.9 MELLPI Pro Awards for Local Nutrition Focal Points

5.9.1 General Mechanics

The evaluation visits for the MELLPI Pro Awards shall follow the general mechanics of
MELLPI Pro for Local Nutrition Focal Points. It shall adopt the preparatory and
implementation activities.

In addition to the desk review of the evaluation of Local Nutrition Focal Points,
additional metrics will be administered to the following nutrition focal points:

1. Nutrition Action Officers and City/ Municipal/ District Nutrition Program

Coordinator: Interview
2. Barangay Nutrition Scholar: Written and practical exam and Interview

MELLPI Pro/Page 24 of 34/… January 2022

5.9.2 Search for Outstanding Local Nutrition Focal Points

The MELLPI Pro Awards for Local Nutrition Focal Points can be divided into five
categories:

1. National Outstanding Provincial Nutrition Action Officer (NOPNAO)

This is open to all Provincial Nutrition Action Officers (PNAOs) who will be
declared as Regional Outstanding PNAO based on the results of the evaluation
conducted by the Regional Nutrition Evaluation Team following the mechanics
in 5.9.3.1

A validation visit of the National Evaluation Team based on the mechanics in

5.9.3.2 shall determine the winning PNAO.

2. National Outstanding City/ Municipal Nutrition Action Officer (NOCNAO)

This is open to all City or Municipal Nutrition Action Officers (C/MNAOs) who
will be declared as Regional Outstanding City/ Municipal Nutrition Action Officer
based on the results of the evaluation conducted by the Regional Nutrition
Evaluation Team following the mechanics in 5.9.4.2.

A validation visit of the National Evaluation Team based on the mechanics in

5.9.4.3 shall determine the winning NAO.

3. National Outstanding District Nutrition Program Coordinator (NODNPC)

This is open to all District Nutrition Program Coordinators (DNPCs) who will be
declared as Regional Outstanding District Nutrition Program Coordinator based
on the results of the evaluation conducted by the Regional Nutrition Evaluation
Team following the mechanics in 5.9.5.1.

A validation visit of the National Evaluation Team based on the mechanics in

5.9.5.2 shall determine the winning DNPC.

4. National Outstanding City/Municipal Nutrition Program Coordinator

(NOC/MNPC)

This is open to all City and Municipal Nutrition Program Coordinators (C/MNPCs)
who will be declared as Regional Outstanding City/ Municipal Nutrition Program
Coordinator based on the results of the evaluation conducted by the Regional
Nutrition Evaluation Team following the mechanics in 5.9.6.3.

A validation visit of the National Evaluation Team based on the mechanics in

5.9.6.4 shall determine the winning DNPC.

5. National Outstanding Barangay Nutrition Scholar (NOBNS)

This is open to all Barangay Nutrition Scholars (BNSs) who will be declared as
Regional Outstanding Barangay Nutrition Scholar (ROBNS) based on the results
of the evaluation conducted by the Regional Nutrition Evaluation Team
following the mechanics in 5.9.7.4.

A validation visit of the National Evaluation Team based on the mechanics in

5.9.7.5 shall determine the NOBNS.

MELLPI Pro/Page 25 of 34/… January 2022

5.9.3 National Outstanding Provincial Nutrition Action Officer (NOPNAO)

5.9.3.1 Regional Level

1. The Regional Nutrition Evaluation Team (RNET) shall conduct a validation visit to
the each of the PNAOs
2. Computation of scores shall use the following formula:

Total ScorePNAO = (MELLPI Pro Score*0.80) + (Interview*0.20)

3. Results of the RNET validation visit shall be discussed and finalized during the
processing meeting.

4. The highest-ranking PNAO with a rating of at least 90% shall be conferred as the
Regional Outstanding Provincial Nutrition Action Officer (ROPNAO)

5. The highest-ranking can only be conferred the regional award for two
consecutive years.

6. The highest ranking PNAO conferred for two consecutive years may again be
conferred the regional award subject to the ROPNAO criteria after one year of
local monitoring.

5.9.3.2 National Level

1. The National Evaluation Team shall conduct a validation visit to the top 50 + 1%
of the ROPNAOs

2. Computation of scores shall use the same formula as in the regional level

3. The highest-ranking PNAO with a rating of at least 92% shall be conferred as the
National Outstanding Provincial Nutrition Action Officer (NOPNAO)

4. At the end of the validation visit, the National Evaluation Team (NET) shall
submit the initial overall rating to the PNAO and his/ her supervisor or to the
Provincial Nutrition Committee, subject to the endorsement of the rest of the
NET members during the NET deliberation meeting and approval of the NNC
Technical Committee

5. Upon approval, the Nutrition Surveillance Division shall prepare a written

communication to the LGU for the MELLPI Pro results

5.9.4 National Outstanding City/ Municipal Nutrition Action Officer (NOC/MNAO)

5.9.4.1 Provincial Level (MNAOs)

1. The Provincial Nutrition Evaluation Team (PNET) shall conduct a validation visit
to the each of the MNAOs
2. Computation of scores shall use the following formula:

Total ScoreMNAO = (MELLPI Pro Score*0.80) + (Interview*0.20)

3. Results of the PNET validation visit shall be discussed and finalized during the
processing meeting.

4. The highest-ranking MNAO shall be conferred as the Provincial Outstanding

Municipal Nutrition Action Officer (POMNAO)

MELLPI Pro/Page 26 of 34/… January 2022

 5.9.4.2 Regional Level (C/MNAOs)

1. The highest ranking MNAOs with at least 90% shall also qualify for the regional
shortlist

2. The Regional Nutrition Evaluation Team shall conduct a validation visit to the
each of the CNAOs of Highly Urbanized Cities (HUCs) and Component Cities (CC)
and to the MNAOs in the regional shortlist

3. The computation shall use the following formula:

Total ScoreC/MNAO = (MELLPI Pro Score*0.80) + (Interview*0.20)

4. Results of the RNET validation visit shall be discussed and finalized during the
processing meeting.

5. The highest-ranking C/MNAO with a rating of at least 90% shall be conferred as

the Regional Outstanding City or Municipal Nutrition Action Officer
(ROC/MNAO)

6. The highest-ranking C/MNAOs can only be conferred the regional award for two
consecutive years.

7. The highest-ranking C/MNAO conferred for two consecutive years may again be
conferred the regional award subject to the ROC/MNAO criteria after one year
of local monitoring.

5.9.4.3 National Level

1. The National Evaluation Team shall conduct a validation visit to the top 50 + 1%
of the ROC/MNAOs

2. Computation of scores shall use the same formula as in the regional level

3. The highest-ranking C/MNAO with a rating of at least 92% shall be conferred as

the National Outstanding Provincial Nutrition Action Officer (NOC/MNAO)

4. At the end of the validation visit, the National Evaluation Team (NET) shall
submit the initial overall rating to the C/MNAO and his/ her supervisor or to the
City/Municipal Nutrition Committee, subject to the endorsement of the rest of
the NET members during the NET deliberation meeting and approval of the NNC
Technical Committee

5. Upon approval, the Nutrition Surveillance Division shall prepare a written

communication to the LGU for the MELLPI Pro results

5.9.5 National Outstanding District Nutrition Program Coordinator (NODNPC)

5.9.5.1 Regional Level

1. The Regional Nutrition Evaluation Team (RNET) shall conduct a validation visit to
the each of the DNPCs
2. Computation of scores shall use the following formula:

Total ScoreDNPC = (MELLPI Pro Score*0.80) + (Interview*0.20)

3. Results of the RNET validation visit shall be discussed and finalized during the
processing meeting.

MELLPI Pro/Page 27 of 34/… January 2022

 4. The highest-ranking DNPC with a rating of at least 90% shall be conferred as the
Regional Outstanding District Nutrition Program Coordinator (RODNPC)

5. The highest-ranking can only be conferred the regional award for two
consecutive years.

6. The highest ranking DNPC conferred for two consecutive years may again be
conferred the regional award subject to the RODNPC criteria after one year of
local monitoring.

5.9.5.2 National Level

1. The National Evaluation Team shall conduct a validation visit to the top 50 + 1%
of the RODNPCs

2. Computation of scores shall use the same formula as in the regional level

3. The highest-ranking DNPC with a rating of at least 92% shall be conferred as the
National Outstanding District Nutrition Program Coordinator (NODNPC)

4. At the end of the validation visit, the National Evaluation Team (NET) shall
submit the initial overall rating to the DNPC and his/ her supervisor or to the
Provincial Nutrition Committee, subject to the endorsement of the rest of the
NET members during the NET deliberation meeting and approval of the NNC
Technical Committee

5. Upon approval, the Nutrition Surveillance Division shall prepare a written

communication to the LGU for the MELLPI Pro results

5.9.6 National Outstanding City/Municipal Nutrition Program Coordinator (NOC/MNPC)

5.9.6.1 City Level

1. The City Nutrition Evaluation Team (CNET) shall conduct a validation visit to the
each of the CNPCs
2. Computation of scores shall use the following formula:

Total ScoreCNPC = (MELLPI Pro Score*0.80) + (Interview*0.20)

3. Results of the CNET validation visit shall be discussed and finalized during the
processing meeting.

4. The highest-ranking CNPC shall be conferred as the City Outstanding Nutrition

Program Coordinator (COCNPC)

5.9.6.2 Provincial Level

1. The Provincial Nutrition Evaluation Team (PNET) shall conduct a validation visit
to the each of the MNPCs
2. Computation of scores shall use the following formula:

Total ScoreMNPC = (MELLPI Pro Score*0.80) + (Interview*0.20)

3. Results of the PNET validation visit shall be discussed and finalized during the
processing meeting.

4. The highest-ranking MNPC shall be conferred as the Provincial Outstanding

Municipal Nutrition Program Coordinator (POMNPC)

MELLPI Pro/Page 28 of 34/… January 2022

 5.9.6.3 Regional Level

1. The highest-ranking C/MNPCs with at least 90% shall also qualify for the
regional shortlist

2. The Regional Nutrition Evaluation Team shall conduct a validation visit to the
each of the C/MNPCs in the regional shortlist

3. The computation shall use the following formula:

Total ScoreC/MNPC = (MELLPI Pro Score*0.80) + (Interview*0.20)

4. Results of the RNET validation visit shall be discussed and finalized during the
processing meeting.

5. The highest-ranking C/MNPC with a rating of at least 90% shall be conferred as

the Regional Outstanding City or Municipal Nutrition Program Coordinator
(ROC/MNPC)

6. The highest-ranking C/MNPC can only be conferred the regional award for two
consecutive years.

7. The highest-ranking C/MNPC conferred for two consecutive years may again be
conferred the regional award subject to the ROC/MNPC criteria after one year
of local monitoring.

5.9.6.4 National Level

1. The National Evaluation Team shall conduct a validation visit to the top 50 + 1%
of the ROC/MNPCs

2. Computation of scores shall use the same formula as in the regional level

3. The highest-ranking C/MNPC with a rating of at least 92% shall be conferred as

the National Outstanding City/ Municipal Nutrition Program Coordinator
(NOC/MNPC)

4. At the end of the validation visit, the National Evaluation Team (NET) shall
submit the initial overall rating to the C/MNPC and his/ her supervisor or to the
City/Municipal Nutrition Committee, subject to the endorsement of the rest of
the NET members during the NET deliberation meeting and approval of the NNC
Technical Committee

5. Upon approval, the Nutrition Surveillance Division shall prepare a written

communication to the LGU for the MELLPI Pro results

5.9.7 National Outstanding Barangay Nutrition Scholar (NOBNS)

5.9.7.1 Municipal Level

1. The Municipal Nutrition Evaluation Team (MNET) shall conduct a validation visit
to the each of the BNSs
2. Computation of scores shall use the following formula:

Total ScoreBNS = MELLPI Pro Score*0.80

3. Results of the MNET validation visit shall be discussed and finalized during the
processing meeting.

MELLPI Pro/Page 29 of 34/… January 2022

4. The highest-ranking BNS with a minimum score of 88% shall qualify for the
shortlist of contenders for the Provincial Outstanding Barangay Nutrition
Scholars (POBNS)

5.9.7.2 City Level

1. The City Nutrition Evaluation Team (CNET) shall conduct a validation visit to the
each of the BNSs

2. Computation of scores shall use the following formula:

Total ScoreCOBNS = (MELLPI Pro Score*0.80) + (OBNS exam*0.20)

3. Results of the CNET validation visit shall be discussed and finalized during the
processing meeting.

4. The highest-ranking BNS with a minimum score of 88% shall be conferred as the
City Outstanding Barangay Nutrition Scholar (COBNS)

5.9.7.3 Provincial Level

1. The Provincial Nutrition Evaluation Team (PNET) shall conduct a validation visit
to the each of the BNSs
2. Computation of scores shall use the following formula:

Total ScorePOBNS = (MELLPI Pro Score*0.80) + (Interview*0.20)

3. Results of the PNET validation visit shall be discussed and finalized during the
processing meeting.

4. The highest-ranking BNS with a minimum score of 88% shall be conferred as the
Provincial Outstanding Barangay Nutrition Scholar (POBNS)

5.9.7.4 Regional Level

8. The highest-ranking BNSs with at least 90% shall also qualify for the regional
shortlist

9. The Regional Nutrition Evaluation Team shall conduct a validation visit to the
each of the BNSs in the regional shortlist

10. The computation shall use the following formula:

Total ScoreROBNS = (MELLPI Pro Score*0.70) + (Exam*0.20) + (Interview*0.10)

11. Results of the RNET validation visit shall be discussed and finalized during the
processing meeting.

12. The highest-ranking ROBNS with a rating of at least 90% shall be conferred as
the Regional Outstanding Barangay Nutrition Scholar (ROBNS)

13. The highest-ranking ROBNS can only be conferred the regional award for two
consecutive years.

14. The highest ranking BNS conferred for two consecutive years may again be
conferred the regional award subject to the ROBNS criteria after one year of
local monitoring.

MELLPI Pro/Page 30 of 34/… January 2022

 5.9.7.5 National Level

6. The National Evaluation Team shall conduct a validation visit to the top 50 + 1%
of the ROBNs

7. Computation of scores shall use the same formula as in the regional level

8. The highest-ranking ROBNS with a rating of at least 92% shall be conferred as

the National Outstanding Barangay Nutrition Scholar

9. At the end of the validation visit, the National Evaluation Team (NET) shall
submit the initial overall rating to the BNS and his/ her supervisor, subject to the
endorsement of the rest of the NET members during the NET deliberation
meeting and approval of the NNC Technical Committee

10. Upon approval, the Nutrition Surveillance Division shall prepare a written
communication to the LGU for the MELLPI Pro results

6.0. AWARDING CEREMONY

6. 1 Nutrition Awarding Ceremony

1. Awards for the regional winners shall be conferred during the Regional Nutrition
Awarding Ceremony (RNAC)
2. Awards for the national winners shall be conferred during the National Nutrition
Awarding Ceremony (NNAC)
3. Funds for the regional and national awarding ceremony including cash awards
shall be charged to the National Nutrition Council General funds.
4. Additional funds from other NGAs for the regional awarding ceremony maybe
utilized subject to applicable auditing rules.
5. Local Government Units can also conduct their own nutrition awarding
ceremonies to recognize their local governments and their Local Nutrition Focal
Points charged to local funds.

6. 2 Awards and Incentives

1. The winning LGUs and Local Nutrition Focal Points shall be awarded a trophy/
medal and cash awards as prescribed in Annexes 1-3.
2. Cash awards shall be provided to winning LGUs subject to the Guidelines on the
Utilization of Cash Awards.
3. Cash incentives for Local Nutrition Focal Points shall serve as token for their
outstanding service for the local nutrition program.
4. The amount of incentives and cash awards shall be reviewed every five-year
planning cycle based on current prices and shall be amended as necessary.
5. Cash awards from the local government for outstanding nutrition focal points at
the local level, if any, shall be subject to local government guidelines.

Prepared by: Recommending Approval:

Jasmine Anne DF. Tandingan Rita D. Papey, MSW

Nutrition Officer III Deputy Executive Director for Technical Services
Nutrition Surveillance Division

Reviewed by: Approved:

Ellen Ruth F. Abella Azucena M. Dayanghirang, MD, MCH, CESO III

Nutrition Officer IV and OIC Assistant Secretary and Executive Director
Nutrition Surveillance Division

MELLPI Pro/Page 31 of 34/… January 2022

 ANNEX 1

Annex 1. MELLPI Pro Awards Cut-off Points and Incentives for LGUs
Category Criteria Incentive and
Cash Award
1. Consistent Regional Green Banner Seal of Compliance recipient for Trophy
Outstanding Winner in three consecutive years with a rating of not lower P500,000.00
Nutrition (CROWN) than 60% (rating of 3) per dimension and highest
ranking LGU whose overall rating of at least 90%
on the third year
2. 1st Year CROWN CROWN awardees from the previous year with a Certificate
Maintenance Award rating of not lower than 60% (rating of 3) per P100,000.00
dimension and an overall rating of at least 90%
st
3. 2nd Year CROWN 1 Year CROWN awardees from the previous year Certificate
Maintenance Award with a rating of not lower than 60% (rating of 3) P200,000.00
per dimension and an overall rating of at least
93%
nd
4. Nutrition Honor Award 2 Year CROWN awardees from the previous year Trophy
with a rating of not lower than 60% (rating of 3) P1,000,000.00
per dimension and an overall rating of at least
95%

MELLPI Pro/Page 32 of 34/… January 2022

 ANNEX 2

Annex 2. MELLPI Pro Awards Cut-off Points and Incentives for Nutrition Action Officers
and Local Nutrition Program Coordinators
Level of Recognition Awards Criteria Incentive

Regional Outstanding Highest-ranking Provincial Medal

Provincial Nutrition Nutrition Action Officer in the Cash award
Action Officer (Region) region with an overall rating of at (Php 35,000.00)
least 90%
Regional Outstanding Highest-ranking City/ Municipal Medal
City/Municipal Nutrition Nutrition Action Officer in the Cash award
Action Officer region with an overall rating of at (Php 30,000.00)
Regional
least 90%
(Regional Nutrition
Regional Outstanding Highest-ranking District Nutrition Medal
Awarding Ceremony)
District Nutrition Program Coordinator in the Cash award
Program Coordinator of region with an overall rating of at (Php 25,000.00)
the Year least 90%
Regional Outstanding Highest-ranking City/Municipal Medal
City/Municipal Nutrition Program Coordinator in Cash award
Nutrition Program the region with an overall rating (Php 20,000.00)
Coordinator of at least 90%
National Outstanding Highest-ranking Provincial Medal
Provincial Nutrition Nutrition Action Officer in the Cash award
Action Officer (PNAO) country with an overall rating of (Php 70,000.00)
at least 92%
National Outstanding Highest-ranking City/Municipal Medal
City/Municipal Nutrition Nutrition Action Officer in the Cash award
Action Officer country with an overall rating of (Php 60,000.00)
National
at least 92%
(National Nutrition
National Outstanding Highest-ranking District Nutrition Medal
Awarding Ceremony)
District Nutrition Program Coordinator in the Cash award
Program Coordinator country with an overall rating of (Php 50,000.00)
at least 92%
National Outstanding Highest-ranking City/Municipal Medal
City/Municipal Nutrition Program Coordinator in Cash award
Nutrition Program the country with an overall rating (Php 40,000.00)
Coordinator of at least 92%

MELLPI Pro/Page 33 of 34/… January 2022

 ANNEX 3

Annex 2. MELLPI Pro Awards Cut-off Points and Incentives for Barangay Nutrition Scholars
Level of Awards Criteria Incentive
Recognition
Regional City Outstanding Highest-ranking Barangay Medal
(Regional Nutrition Barangay Nutrition Nutrition Scholar in the city Cash award
Awarding Scholar (COBNS) with an overall rating of at (Php 6,000.00)
Ceremony) least 88%
Provincial Highest-ranking Barangay Medal
Outstanding Barangay Nutrition Scholar in the Cash award
Nutrition Scholar province with an overall (Php 8,000.00)
(POBNS) rating of at least 88%
Regional Outstanding Highest-ranking Barangay Medal
Barangay Nutrition Nutrition Scholar in the Cash award
Scholar (ROBNS) region with an overall rating (Php 20,000.00)
of at least 90%
National National Outstanding Highest-ranking Barangay Medal
(National Nutrition Barangay Nutrition Nutrition Scholar in the Cash award
Awarding Scholar (NOBNS) country with an overall rating (Php 150,000.00)
Ceremony) of at least 90%

MELLPI Pro/Page 34 of 34/… January 2022