Azarcon, J. A. A. (2016). Management decision case: Transcending challenges in the implementation of the Bottom-Up-Budgeting (BUB) program in Tangalan, Aklan (Unpublished master's thesis). Public Management Development Program, Development Academy of the Philippines.

Public Management and Development Program. Batch 5 Senior Executives Class. Thesis (SEC)--Development Academy of the Philippines.

The National Oversight Agencies issued Joint Memorandum Circular (JMC) Nos. 1 to 7a from December 2012 to June 2016 for the purpose of laying down the policy guidelines for the implantation of the Bottom Up Budgeting (BUB) Process from 2013 to 2016 and onwards. When BUB was first implemented in 2013, the Municipality of Tangalan was not among the LGUs which qualified in the BUB inception phase. It was only in 2014 that Tangalan qualified for the BUB. LGUs were allowed to implement BUB Projects provided they met the eligibility standards, and LGUs which are eligible to implement BUB Projects like Tangalan were obliged to submit technical documents as basis for the release of funds, on top of the Memorandum Of Agreement (MOA) with each of the participating agency that the LGU must enter into. Considering the magnitude of the requirements in contrast to both the technical and administrative capabilities of Tangalan at the time, the LGU was in a quandary. To top their woes, several projects that the LGU proposed for construction or rehabilitation were either sitting on or traversing private properties. Under these constraints, it seemed that BUB project implementation in Tangalan would be jeopardized. The LGU had to address these concerns before it could even receive the funds and begin implementation of the projects. The LCE was in a dilemma as to how he would be able to get things in order. Being a second cycle implementer of BUB, Tangalan had the advantage of learning from the experiences of other LGUs in the previous year. With this advantage, the LCE realized that although the challenges were identical in most 4th to 6th class LGUs, the solutions adopted by the LCEs varied very significantly. However, regardless of the approaches employed there seemed to be something else missing since LGUs which employed different approaches stalled similarly. This prompted the LCE to look deeper into the processes and determined where the problem hinged. He had to make decision and strategize to make the decision work. Otherwise, he would be risking not being able to implement the projects, being answerable to the people, and not qualifying in the BUB Process in the succeeding year. There was so much to lose if he made the wrong decision or his strategy did not work, so he took to a different level common approaches in project implementation. He did not have to look far in search of rocket science solutions, but instead he looked deeper into the conventional practices and worked "away" from it. The results were remarkable. He was able to pull things through, implementing all his projects completely and on time; surpassing benchmarks. He was able to prove that a solution is about change in the way people think, processes, policy, and even technology and the implementation must address how to safely move these from the way it was to the way it needs to be. Solutions are typically not standalone but are reinstalled into an existing culture and system.