Document of The World Bank

Report No: ICR00003102

IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION AND RESULTS REPORT (IBRD-80850)

ON A

LOAN

IN THE AMOUNT OF US$ 500.00 MILLION

TO THE

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

FOR THE

DISASTER RISK MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT POLICY LOAN WITH A CATASTROPHE DEFERRED DRAWDOWN OPTION (CAT-DDO)

April 19, 2015

Social, Urban, Rural, and Resilience Global Practice Philippines Country Management Unit East Asia and Pacific Region

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS

(Exchange Rate Effective October 31, 2014)

Currency Unit = Philippines Peso (PhP) PhP 1.00 = US$ [.023] US$ 1.00 = PhP [44.88]

FISCAL YEAR

January 1 to December 31

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

AAA Analytic and Advisory Activities CAS Country Assistance Strategy CAT-DDO Catastrophe Deferred Drawdown Option CCA Climate Change Adaptation COA Commission on Audit CPS Country Partnership Strategy DBM Department of Budget and Management DepEd Department of Education DILG Department of the Interior and Local Government DOF Department of Finance DOH Department of Health DPWH Department of Public Works and Highways DRFI Disaster Risk Financing and Insurance DRM Disaster Risk Management DRRM Disaster Risk Reduction and Management DSWD Department of Social Welfare and Development GDP Gross Domestic Product GFDRR Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery GOP Government of the Philippines ISR Implementation Status and Results Report JICA Japan International Cooperation Agency KALAHI Kapit Bisig Laban sa Kahirapan (Hand in Hand Against Poverty) LDRRMF Local Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Fund LGUs Local Government Units NDRRMC National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council NEDA National Economic and Development Authority OCD Office of Civil Defense OPARR Office of the Presidential Assistant for Rehabilitation and Recovery PDNA Post-disaster Damage and Needs Assessment PDP Philippine Development Plan PMESD Project Monitoring and Evaluation System for DRM UNDP United Nations Development Program

Regional Vice President: Axel van Trotsenburg Country Director: Motoo Konishi

Senior Director: Ede Jorge Ijjasz-Vasquez Director: Marisela Montoliu Munoz

Practice Manager: Abhas Kumar Jha Task Team Leader: Jolanta Kryspin-Watson ICR Team Leader: Artessa Saldivar-Sali

PHILIPPINES

Disaster Risk Management Development Policy Loan with a Catastrophe Deferred Drawdown Option (CAT-DDO)

CONTENTS

Data Sheet A. Basic Information B. Key Dates C. Ratings Summary D. Sector and Theme Codes E. Bank Staff F. Results Framework Analysis G. Ratings of Program Performance in ISRs H. Restructuring

Main Report 1. Program Context, Development Objectives and Design ........................................ 1 2. Key Factors Affecting Implementation and Outcomes .......................................... 3 3. Assessment of Outcomes ........................................................................................ 7 4. Assessment of Risk to Development Outcome ..................................................... 17 5. Assessment of Bank and Borrower Performance ................................................. 17 6. Lessons Learned.................................................................................................... 20 7. Comments on Issues Raised by Borrower/Implementing Agencies/Partners....... 21 Annex 1. Bank Lending and Implementation Support/Supervision Processes ......... 22 Annex 2. Beneficiary Survey Results ....................................................................... 24 Annex 3. Stakeholder Workshop Report and Results ............................................... 25 Annex 4. Summary of Borrower's ICR and/or Comments on Draft ICR ................. 26 Annex 5. Comments of Cofinanciers and Other Partners/Stakeholders ................... 27 Annex 6. List of Supporting Documents .................................................................. 28

MAP

D A T A S H E E T A. Basic Information

Country: Philippines Program Name: Disaster Risk Management Development Loan with a CAT DDO

Program ID: P125943 L/C/TF Number(s): IBRD-80850 ICR Date: 03/30/2015 ICR Type: Core ICR

Lending Instrument: DPL Borrower: GOVERNMENT OF THE PHILIPPINES

Original Total Commitment:

USD 500.00M Disbursed Amount: USD 500.00M

Revised Amount: USD 500.00M Implementing Agencies: Department of Finance Cofinanciers and Other External Partners: B. Key Dates

Process Date Process Original Date Revised / Actual Date(s)

Concept Review: 03/16/2011 Effectiveness: 12/22/2011 12/15/2011 Appraisal: 05/10/2011 Restructuring(s): Approval: 09/13/2011 Mid-term Review: Closing: 10/31/2014 10/31/2014 C. Ratings Summary C.1 Performance Rating by ICR Outcomes: Satisfactory Risk to Development Outcome: Moderate Bank Performance: Satisfactory Borrower Performance: Satisfactory C.2 Detailed Ratings of Bank and Borrower Performance (by ICR)

Bank Ratings Borrower Ratings Quality at Entry: Satisfactory Government: Not Applicable

Quality of Supervision: Satisfactory Implementing Agency/Agencies: Not Applicable

Overall Bank Performance: Satisfactory Overall Borrower

Performance: Satisfactory

C.3 Quality at Entry and Implementation Performance Indicators

Implementation Performance Indicators QAG Assessments (if

any) Rating:

Potential Problem Program at any time (Yes/No):

No Quality at Entry (QEA): None

Problem Program at any time (Yes/No):

No Quality of Supervision (QSA):

None

DO rating before Closing/Inactive status:

Satisfactory

D. Sector and Theme Codes

Original Actual Sector Code (as % of total Bank financing) General water, sanitation and flood protection sector 100 100

Theme Code (as % of total Bank financing) Natural disaster management 100 100 E. Bank Staff

Positions At ICR At Approval Vice President: Axel van Trotsenburg James W. Adams Country Director: Motoo Konishi Bert Hofman Practice Manager/Manager: Abhas Kumar Jha N. Vijay Jagannathan Program Team Leader: Jolanta Kryspin-Watson Zoe Elena Trohanis ICR Team Leader: Artessa Saldivar-Sali ICR Primary Author: Artessa Saldivar-Sali F. Results Framework Analysis Program Development Objectives (from Project Appraisal Document) The development objective of the operation is to enhance the capacity of the Government of the Philippines to manage the impacts of natural disasters. Revised Program Development Objectives (if any, as approved by original approving authority)

(a) PDO Indicator(s)

Indicator Baseline Value

Original Target Values (from

approval documents)

Formally Revised Target

Values

Actual Value Achieved at

Completion or Target Years

Indicator 1 : DILG supports the establishment of functional DRRM units or offices. Value (quantitative or Qualitative)

4 provinces 14 provinces 80 provinces

Date achieved 05/13/2011 10/31/2014 06/17/2014 Comments (incl. % achievement)

Exceeded. 80 provincial DRRM offices have been established (571% of target).

Indicator 2 : NDRRMC develops a monitoring system to track disaster-related financing; updated guidelines on the use of LGU Local Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Funds (LDRRMF) are issued.

Value (quantitative or Qualitative)

Not developed Developed Developed

Date achieved 05/13/2011 10/31/2014 06/17/2014

Comments (incl. % achievement)

Achieved. The Project Monitoring and Evaluation and System for Disaster Risk Management (PMESD) was developed. DILG issued Memorandum Circular No. 2012-73 on April 17, 2012 to provide guidance on the use of Local DRRM Funds.

Indicator 3 : NDRRMC has rolled out training programs for government authorities to conduct post-disaster needs assessments and emergency preparedness drills.

Value (quantitative or Qualitative)

Not developed Developed Developed

Date achieved 05/13/2011 10/31/2014 10/15/2013 Comments (incl. % achievement)

Achieved. Fifteen sector-specific guidance notes were developed for PDNAs, training was provided and applied after Typhoons Pablo and Yolanda. Multi-sectoral disaster preparedness drills and training are conducted regularly.

Indicator 4 : Provinces have mainstreamed climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction measures into their Provincial Development and Physical Framework Plans (PDPFP).

Value (quantitative or Qualitative)

1 province 30 provinces 72 provinces

Date achieved 05/13/2011 10/31/2014 10/31/2014 Comments (incl. % achievement)

Exceeded. 72 provinces have mainstreamed climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction measures into their Provincial Development and Physical Framework Plans (240% of target).

Indicator 5 : Disaster risk reduction measures are mainstreamed into at least three sectors: health, transport, and social development.

Value (quantitative or Qualitative)

25 health facilities assessed; 0 bridges retrofitted/reconstructed; 0 communities trained; 0 DSWD Field Offices covered by a post-disaster response window

100 health facilities assessed; 10 bridges retrofitted/reconstructed; 1000 communities trained; 4 DSWD Field Offices covered by a post-disaster response window

199 health facilities assessed; 10 bridges retrofitted/reconstructed; 24026 communities trained; 16 DSWD Field Offices covered by a post-disaster response window

Date achieved 05/13/2011 10/31/2014 06/17/2014

Comments (incl. % achievement)

Exceeded. 199 health facilities (199% of target) 10 bridges (100% of target) 24026 (2403% of target) 16 DSWD Field Offices (400% of target)

Indicator 6 : Department of Finance has prepared its catastrophe risk financing strategy. Value (quantitative or Qualitative)

Not developed Developed Developed

Date achieved 05/13/2011 10/31/2014 07/02/2014 Comments (incl. % achievement)

Achieved. The Department of Finance has developed the Disaster Risk Financing and Insurance Strategy for the Philippines and has launched its implementation.

(b) Intermediate Outcome Indicator(s)

Indicator Baseline Value

Original Target Values (from

approval documents)

Formally Revised Target

Values

Actual Value Achieved at

Completion or Target Years

G. Ratings of Program Performance in ISRs

No. Date ISR Archived DO IP Actual Disbursements

(USD millions) 1 02/27/2012 Satisfactory Satisfactory 497.50 2 09/10/2012 Satisfactory Satisfactory 497.50 3 04/02/2013 Satisfactory Satisfactory 497.50 4 12/24/2013 Satisfactory Satisfactory 497.50 5 07/12/2014 Satisfactory Satisfactory 497.50

H. Restructuring (if any) Not Applicable

1. Program Context, Development Objectives and Design 1.1 Context at Appraisal Macroeconomic Policy Framework at Appraisal

1. After a sharp slow-down in 2009, the Philippine economy experienced strong economic growth starting in 2010. With an estimated growth rate of 7.6 percent in 2010, the Philippines experienced its highest annual economic rate of growth in more than 30 years. This rapid recovery was largely attributable to the rebound in global trade and increased investor and consumer confidence, together with the Aquino administration’s strong focus on good governance and reducing the costs of doing business. In addition, the economic expansion at the time reflected temporary domestic stimulus policies that were held over from 2009, and election-related spending in early 2010.

2. Monetary policy was broadly accommodative: although the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) withdrew some of the liquidity-enhancing measures introduced in the immediate aftermath of the global financial crisis, its key policy rates were unchanged since August 2009. This policy permitted bank lending to increase modestly (to an annual growth rate of almost 10 percent, or slightly below nominal GDP growth) and help close the output gap. Increases in foreign portfolio inflows in 2010 helped strengthen the Peso, push up the stock market index and reduce interest rates. The stronger Peso helped to contain inflation, but the associated short term capital inflows also raised policymakers’ concerns about the rising risk of economic and financial disruptions in the event of sudden reversals. The central bank intervened successfully in late 2010, using its forward foreign exchange swap portfolio, to stem the rapid appreciation of the Peso.

3. The current account of the balance of payments yielded solid surpluses of 5.6 percent of GDP in 2009 and 4.2 percent in 2010. This robust performance reflected the strong contraction of imports in 2009, followed by a more modest recovery in 2010, and strong growth of goods and services exports, combined with steady remittance inflows. As a result, gross international reserves reached a record high of US$62.5 billion in December 2010, equivalent to more than 10 months’ worth of imports and to almost six times the country’s short-term external liabilities by residual maturity. Similarly, liquid reserves (as measured by the forward book of the BSP) exceeded US$17 billion in December 2010. Meanwhile, the external debt remained broadly stable at around 36 percent of GDP.

4. Based on the preceding considerations, the Bank assessed the Philippines’ macroeconomic framework at appraisal to be adequate. Even though the high public debt ratio posed a risk to macroeconomic stability, the gradual pace of fiscal deficit and debt reduction represented a compromise between several tradeoffs. In particular, the slower pace of deficit reduction helped facilitate the budgetary shift toward greater social sector spending starting with the 2011, instead of forcing the Government of the Philippines (GOP) to embark on a more austere spending program that could have resulted in spending cuts in some priority sectors.

Disaster Risk Management in the Government’s Development Agenda 5. The Philippines is among the most vulnerable nations in the world to natural hazards. It is ranked

fourth in terms of exposure to at least three hazards, fourth in mortality risk, and ninth in economic

1

impact to GDP, with an estimated 78.7 percent of GDP in areas at risk1. Government data indicated that the economic impacts of natural disasters were estimated at an average of PHP28 billion in direct damages, equivalent to 0.7 percent of GDP per annum from 1990 to 2008. Total historical impacts in that period could be greater since losses, particularly those borne by the private sector, have not been fully accounted for in the past (with the exception of the impact of Tropical storm Ondoy and Typhoon Pepeng in 2009, which resulted in 2.7 percent of GDP in damages and losses for the economy).

6. At the time of appraisal, a number of recent major natural disasters had had significant impacts on the Philippines’ macro-economy. In the aftermath of Tropical Storm Ondoy and Typhoon Pepeng in 2009, GOP took a more proactive approach to disaster risk management by passing the Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and Management (DRRM) Act in 2010. The DRRM Act (Republic Act 10121) emphasized the need for a comprehensive, integrated, and proactive approach to disaster risk management across levels and sectors of government, and among vulnerable communities (please see Section 3.1.a for further details).

7. Discussions regarding contingent credit were initiated by the GOP after the losses suffered from Typhoons Ondoy and Pepeng in 2009. The Catastrophe-Deferred Drawdown Option (CAT-DDO) on a Development Policy Loan (DPL) offers a source of immediate liquidity, in the form of a contingent loan, which can serve as bridge financing while other sources (e.g. concessional funding, bilateral aid or reconstruction loans) are being mobilized after a natural disaster. Borrowers have access to contingent financing in amounts up to US$500 million or 0.25% of GDP (whichever is less). The CAT-DDO has a “soft”, as opposed to “parametric” trigger, which means that funds become available for disbursement (up to the full loan amount, at the Borrower’s discretion, at any time within three years from loan signing) upon the occurrence of a natural disaster resulting in the declaration of a state of emergency (please see Section 2.1). The immediate availability of liquidity and the ‘soft trigger’, combined with the policy framework to improve the Government’s capacity to manage natural disaster impacts, are features of the instrument’s design that the GOP found to be relevant to the country’s context. Through a Letter of Development Policy from the Department of Finance (DOF) dated July 1, 2011, GOP requested the Bank’s support in the form of a CAT-DDO to complement other investment operations and the ongoing program of technical assistance.

1.2 Original Program Development Objectives (PDO) and Key Indicators (as approved) 8. The development objective of the operation was to enhance the capacity of the Government of the

Philippines to manage the impacts of natural disasters2. The prior actions were: i) the Enactment of the Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act (Republic Act No. 10121) in May 2010, and ii) the adoption of the Strategic National Action Plan for Disaster Risk Reduction (Executive Order No. 888) of June 2010.

1 World Bank. 2005. Natural Disasters Hotspots—A Global Risk Analysis. Washington, DC: World Bank. 2 As stated in the Loan Agreement, paragraph 5: “Program” means the program of actions, objectives and policies designed to enhance the Borrower's capacity to implement a disaster risk management program for adverse natural events and set forth or referred to in the letter dated July 1, 2011from the Borrower to the Bank declaring the Borrower’s commitment to the execution of the Program, and requesting assistance from the Bank in support of the Program during its execution.”

2

9. The Government’s establishment of an adequate ex-ante macroeconomic environment and the existence of a satisfactory disaster risk management framework constituted an enabling context that facilitated the Philippines’ eligibility for this DPL with a CAT-DDO. As captured in the Program Document, six key outcome indicators (please see Data Sheet) were agreed on by the Government and the Bank and expected at the time of the operation’s completion.

1.3 Revised PDO (as approved by original approving authority) and Key Indicators, and Reasons/Justification The Program Development Objective (PDO) and Key Indicators were not revised. 1.4 Original Policy Areas Supported by the Program (as approved) 10. The CAT-DDO was designed to enhance the capacity of GOP to manage the impacts of natural

disasters. The operation addressed three key disaster risk management policy areas prioritized in the 2010 Philippine DRRM Act:

• Strengthen the institutional capacity for disaster risk management efforts; • Mainstream disaster risk reduction into development planning; and • Better manage the Government’s fiscal exposure to natural hazard impacts.

1.5 Revised Policy Areas (if applicable) 11. The Policy Areas were not revised.

1.6 Other significant changes 12. No significant changes were made to the project.

2. Key Factors Affecting Implementation and Outcomes 2.1 Program Performance 13. This DPL with a CAT-DDO was a single tranche operation, for which the Prior Policy Actions

were fully implemented (Table 1). The drawdown trigger was that “a State of Calamity3 exists in the Borrower’s territory as a result of a natural disaster, which has been declared by the President through a Proclamation of Calamity duly published in the Official Gazette”, in accordance with the DRRM Act. A “state of calamity” is defined in the DRRM Act as a condition involving mass casualty and/or major damages to property, disruption of means of livelihoods, roads and normal way of life of people in the affected areas as a result of the occurrence of natural or human-induced hazard.

14. Tropical Storm Sendong (international codename: Washi) struck the southern Philippines on December 16, 2011, causing catastrophic human and economic losses4. There were a total of 1,268 fatalities, 6,071 injured and 181 reported missing. The total damage for all sectors was estimated

3 According to the 2010 DRRM Act, the declaration of a State of Calamity can be national or in part of the territory, in terms of clusters of barangays, municipalities, cities, provinces, and regions. 4 http://www.recoveryplatform.org/assets/publication/Final_PDNAReport_13June2012.pdf

3

at PhP 5,442,566,519 (US$126.6 million5) and the estimated total losses to the economy amounted to PhP 1,387,928,644 (US$32.3 million). Overall, the recovery and reconstruction needs were estimated at PhP 26,722,988,100 (US$621.4 million).

15. On December 20, 2011, President Benigno S. Aquino III declared a national State of Calamity. Presidential Proclamation No. 3036 was duly published in the Official Gazette on December 21, 2011, in fulfillment of the stipulations for withdrawal of loan proceeds. Upon receipt of the request from the Department of Finance on December 27, 2011 to withdraw funds, the balance of the loan proceeds (US$497,500,000) was disbursed to GOP within two days, on December 29, 2011, demonstrating the effectiveness of the fast-disbursing CAT-DDO.

16. The CAT-DDO instrument has a revolving feature, under which amounts repaid during the drawdown period become available for subsequent withdrawal. The three-year drawdown period may be renewed up to four times, for a total maximum period of 15 years. The Government of the Philippines did not avail of this revolving feature (please see Section 3.1.b).

Table 1. Policy Areas, Prior Actions and Status

Policy Areas Agreed Prior Actions Status I. Strengthen the institutional capacity for disaster risk management efforts. II. Mainstream disaster risk reduction into development planning. III. Better manage the Government’s fiscal exposure to natural hazard impacts.

Enactment of the 2010 Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act (Republic Act No.10121) of May 2010. This law seeks to mainstream risk reduction into development policies and processes. Focus has been expanded from ex-post actions and funding for emergency response, relief and recovery to include ex-ante actions and funding for risk reduction, preparedness, and prevention.

Fulfilled

Adoption of the Strategic National Action Plan for Disaster Risk Reduction (Executive Order No. 888) of June 2010.This is a 10-year plan to achieve commitments made under the Hyogo Framework of Action.

Fulfilled

Tranche # Amount Expected Release Date Actual Release Date Release

1 $497.5 million 12/29/2011 Regular 2.2 Major Factors Affecting Implementation: External Factors

17. The Bank provided a program of grant-funded Technical Assistance in order to support the achievement of the CAT-DDO policy targets. Approved in December 2011, the Support to the Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Agenda had the objective of enhancing the Government of the Philippines’ capacity to manage the impacts of natural disasters. This technical assistance program was designed in parallel with, and the activities were fully aligned with the policy action areas of, the CAT-DDO. Throughout the implementation period of the CAT-DDO, it supported

5 Bangko Sentral exchange rate of US1=PhP43.004, as of June 13, 2012. 6 http://www.gov.ph/2011/12/20/proclamation-no-303-s-2011/

4

the following major activities related to the CAT-DDO policy framework: development of the Project Monitoring and Evaluation System for DRM, capacity building for Post-disaster Damage and Needs Assessments, capacity building at the local government level for DRRM planning and preparedness including innovative decision support tools, catastrophe risk modeling to inform the development of the DOF’s Disaster Risk Financing and Insurance (DRFI) strategy, and advisory services to support the development of the DRFI Strategy. This program of technical assistance enabled a strong and continuous policy dialogue, despite the fact the CAT-DDO proceeds were fully disbursed within weeks of the loan’s effectiveness.

18. The year 2013 was devastating for the Philippines: a significant earthquake, then super Typhoon Yolanda, caused major damage and a substantial increase in poverty levels in affected areas. On October 15, 2013, the Central Visayas region experienced a magnitude 7.2 earthquake that affected 3.2 million people, caused 223 casualties, displaced over 355,000 people, and damaged over 69,000 homes. In November 2013, Yolanda, a Category 5-equivalent typhoon with winds speeds over 300 km per hour (the most powerful storm ever to make landfall), struck the central Philippines, affecting an estimated 12.2 million people and causing over 6,200 reported fatalities and almost 1,800 people missing7. The total damage and loss from Typhoon Yolanda were estimated at PhP571.1 billion (US$12.9 billion8). The poor were disproportionately affected, with an additional 2.3 million people (nearly half a million households) subsequently living below the poverty line. This corresponds to an increase in the poverty rate from 41.2% to approximately 55.7% in the worst-affected areas.

19. These major disasters at the beginning of the last year of CAT-DDO implementation required the Government’s full attention for recovery and reconstruction. Challenges associated with the Typhoon Yolanda recovery and reconstruction effort have led to new demands on the existing institutional structure and mandates, and areas of improvement were brought to light by this disaster of unprecedented intensity and scale of impact. In particular, the actions on strengthening the institutional capacity for disaster risk management efforts were constrained. Major challenges were faced, especially in post-disaster recovery and reconstruction. The function of recovery planning was assumed by the National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA), as the apex development planning agency and NDRRMC Vice-Chair for Rehabilitation and Recovery, which developed the Reconstruction Assistance on Yolanda9 (RAY) plan. Coordination and implementation of recovery and reconstruction, however, are functions that were not clearly defined in the DRRM Act. The existing institutional system had not been tested for a disaster of this magnitude and, as a result, the Office of the President issued Memorandum Order No. 62 (series of 2013)10 one month after the disaster, providing for the functions of the Presidential Assistant for Rehabilitation and Recovery.

20. The Office of the Presidential Assistant for Rehabilitation and Recovery’s (OPARR) mandate to exercise oversight, with respect to the implementation of the recovery plans and programs, affected the operationalization of the monitoring system developed for NDRRMC to track disaster-related financing. The magnitude of the recovery effort, variety of funding sources, and requirements for generating comprehensive financial and physical monitoring of post-disaster recovery and reconstruction spending significantly broadened the context for the CAT-DDO target on tracking disaster-related financing (see section 3.2 for further details).

7 Government of the Philippines. May 5, 2014. www.gov.ph/crisis‐response/updates‐typhoon‐yolanda/ 8 Bangko Sentral exchange rate of US1=PhP44.135, as of December 12, 2013. 9 http://www.gov.ph/downloads/2013/12dec/20131216-RAY.pdf 10 http://www.gov.ph/2013/12/06/memorandum-order-no-62-s-2013/

5

Factors under Government Control 21. The GOP drew down the full amount of the loan proceeds after Tropical Storm Sendong. The

full drawdown of the proceeds necessitated the use of other financing sources after Typhoon Yolanda. , The development of the DRFI strategy under the CAT-DDO supported the GOP to have a rational framework for considering the options for post-disaster financing instruments. The succeeding Programmatic AAA is further supporting the development of analytical tools for decision-making regarding utilization of available funds (e.g., timing, amounts, and combination of instruments).

22. The Government took a strong policy stance to promote resilient recovery from Typhoon Yolanda. The Reconstruction Assistance on Yolanda: Building Back Better plan, which was developed five weeks after the typhoon made landfall, is the Government’s strategic plan to “restore the economic and social conditions of these areas at the very least to their pre-typhoon levels and to a higher level of disaster resilience”. The Philippine Development Plan (PDP) Midterm Update (released in April 2014) similarly highlights the Government’s commitment to addressing the disaster-related aspects of poverty, focusing interventions on provinces chosen by poverty levels as well as vulnerability to natural disasters.

2.3 Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Design, Implementation and Utilization: 23. M&E Design. Indicators selected to monitor progress toward achievement of the PDO correctly

reflected defined areas of action and corresponded to the expected outcomes of the prior actions. They included an appropriate mix of specific qualitative and quantified targets, which were attributable, relevant, and time-bound, and were sufficient to enable effective monitoring of the project’s achievement of the PDO. Moreover, the action areas and outcome indicators in the policy framework were aligned with government priorities. The PDP 2011-2016 goal of “Enhanced resilience of natural systems and improved adaptive capacities of human communities to cope with environmental hazards including climate-related risks” 11 includes the following associated strategies: (1) Strengthen institutional capacities of national and local governments for CCA and DRRM, (2) Mainstream and integrate disaster risk reduction and CCA in national, sectoral, regional and local development plans, and (3) Devise cost-effective means to offset socioeconomic losses from disasters and provide information on possible funding sources. M&E of the key indicators were conducted using the regular systems of the relevant agencies.

24. M&E Implementation. Since the policy targets were part of regular government programs of several relevant agencies, the reporting mechanisms of these agencies were used and recorded. In addition, when a policy target was implemented under another World Bank investment operation, progress reporting for the related project was used in order to avoid duplication. Activities under the programmatic technical assistance were specifically designed to support action areas of the CAT-DDO, and enabled regular monitoring and evaluation of the operation’s outcome indicators through progress reporting on TA activities.

25. M&E Utilization. A key target in the Policy Matrix that enabled strong M&E was the development of the Government’s Disaster Risk Financing and Insurance Strategy. In order to develop the DRFI

11 http://www.neda.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/CHAPTER-10.pdf

6

strategy, the DOF convened a Technical Working Group consisting of the CAT-DDO stakeholder agencies as well as other oversight and line agencies. This group functioned as a platform for coordination and monitoring of the Policy Actions during project implementation, including taking actions to advance progress on the achievement of the targets. Furthermore, the M&E of CAT-DDO policy areas informed the next phase of the Bank’s engagement in DRM and DRFI (see Section 2.4).

2.4 Expected Next Phase/Follow-up Operation (if any): 26. The next phase of the Bank’s engagement is a new Programmatic DRM AAA (Reducing

Vulnerability to Natural Disasters), of which a key activity is support to the implementation of the Government’s Disaster Risk Financing and Insurance Strategy. This programmatic technical assistance includes: (i) the sunset review of the Philippine DRRM Act, and the associated regulatory and institutional framework for DRM and DRFI; (ii) the assessment of the cost of strengthening key public infrastructure, in support of climate and disaster resilience and risk reduction investments; (iii) resilience and protection of priority cultural heritage assets; (iv) disaster risk mitigation for public school facilities; and (v) analytical and capacity building activities to support the implementation of the Government’s DRFI strategy. These activities will directly contribute to sustaining benefits in the three CAT-DDO Action Areas.

27. Through this programmatic technical assistance, the Bank is supporting the implementation of the GOP’s DRFI Strategy through preparatory work to explore options for a market-based sovereign catastrophe risk transaction. In addition, the Bank is providing technical, legal, operational and institutional support and capacity building to design and implement a catastrophe risk insurance facility for LGUs, including the establishment of a catastrophe risk insurance pooling mechanism. The Bank is also supporting the Department of Education (DepEd) in the design of a catastrophe risk insurance program for public schools.

3. Assessment of Outcomes 3.1 Relevance of Objectives, Design and Implementation a. Relevance of Objectives 28. The relevance of the operation’s objectives is rated High. The objectives of the CAT-DDO were

directly relevant to the Philippine Development Plan, which emphasized disaster risk reduction as a core country priority.12 The project supported three key disaster risk management policy areas that were prioritized in the Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act 13, the National DRRM Framework and the associated DRRM Plan, thereby showing full alignment with the country’s priorities.

29. This CAT-DDO Development Policy Loan (DPL) was consistent with the Bank Group’s Country Assistance Strategy (CAS) for the Philippines covering the period July 1, 2009 to June 30, 2012. The subsequent CAS update was discussed by the Board on May 19, 2011 and extended to June 30, 2013. The CAS that was in effect during project preparation and appraisal was anchored in the PDP

12Ibid. http://www.neda.gov.ph/?p=1128 13 http://www.gov.ph/2010/05/27/republic-act-no-10121/

7

for 2004-2010, and carried the theme of ‘Making Growth Work for the Poor’. Moreover, the operation directly related to Strategic Objective 4 (Reduced Vulnerabilities14) of the 2004-2010 CAS, which included improving disaster risk management.

30. At the time of appraisal, a number of recent major natural disasters had had significant impacts on the Philippines’ macro-economy. Following Tropical Storm Ondoy and Typhoon Pepeng in 2009, GOP took a more proactive approach to disaster risk management by passing the Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and Management (DRRM) Act in 2010. The DRRM Act (Republic Act 10121) and its Implementing Rules and Regulations emphasized the need for a coherent, comprehensive, integrated, and proactive approach to disaster risk management across levels and sectors of government, and among vulnerable communities. The Act provided for the development of a National DRRM Framework15 for a comprehensive, all-hazard, multi-sectoral, inter-agency and community-based approach to disaster risk reduction and management.

31. The PDP Midterm Update released in April 2014 recognized the continuing role of DRM and climate change adaptation (CCA) in safeguarding hard-won development gains. It includes key strategies to build the country’s resilience. DRM and CCA are cross-cutting themes, with resilience issues incorporated in various sections of the updated PDP, including social development, agriculture, environment and natural resources, and infrastructure.

32. Disaster risk management and resilience to climate change are key priorities for the Bank under the current Country Partnership Strategy for FY15-18. The fourth engagement area of the CPS identifies ‘High exposure and vulnerability to current and growing disaster and climate change risks’ as one of the country’s development constraints. In order to respond to this, ‘Increased physical and financial resilience to natural disaster and climate change impacts’ is a strategic outcome for the Bank’s engagement over the next three years.

b. Relevance of Design and Implementation 33. The relevance of the design and implementation is rated Substantial. The Action Areas and

implementation arrangements were consistent with the Program’s stated objectives. All the agreed targets under the policy framework were met due to the Government’s strong commitment to the DRM agenda and the consultative process for the development of the action areas. However, the minor shortcoming in implementation was that the full drawdown of the proceeds after Tropical Storm Sendong did necessitate the mobilization of other financing sources after Typhoon Yolanda (see paragraph 37).

34. The CAT-DDO was designed to enhance the capacity of GOP to manage the impacts and risk of natural disasters. The operation addressed the three key disaster risk management policy areas prioritized in the 2010 Philippine DRRM Act. The National DRRM Plan similarly prioritizes outcomes with which the CAT-DDO policy framework is aligned. The key outcomes of the Plan include: (i) increased DRRM and CCA capacities at all levels; (ii) comprehensive national and local preparedness policies, plans and systems developed and implemented; (iii) DRRM and CCA mainstreamed and integrated in national, sectoral, regional and local development policies, plans and

14 Reduce vulnerabilities by expanding and rationalizing the country’s social safety net, improving disaster risk management, piloting climate change adaptation measures and expanding climate change mitigation programs. 15 http://www.ndrrmc.gov.ph/attachments/article/227/NDRRMFramework.pdf

8

budgets; (iv) increased disaster resilience of infrastructure systems; and (v) access to effective and applicable disaster risk financing and insurance.

35. The policy targets were designed to supplement the Act and gaps in the Implementing Rules and Regulations. For example, the target regarding issuance of updated guidelines on the use of Local Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Funds was intended to provide the necessary guidance to implement the requirements of the Act at the local level. The Implementing Rules and Regulations have been further supplemented by various instructions from the NDRRMC, in the form of protocols, memorandum circulars and other issuances from the member agencies.

36. The relevance of the operation’s design is demonstrated by the focus for the remaining years of the PDP (until 2016) on interventions that will increase the resilience and adaptive capacities of communities. As outlined in Chapter 9 of the Midterm Update, the PDP aims for an annual increase in the level of investments for climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction and management. This will entail promotion of climate/disaster resilient infrastructure for which innovative financing will need to be designed. The government is also set to invest in developing and adopting more effective vulnerability assessment tools to identify highly susceptible communities and prevent and mitigate potential disaster impacts.

37. The GOP has expanded the use of financial instruments to build financial resilience at the sovereign level, as a major step toward managing the Government’s fiscal exposure to natural hazard impacts. In 2014 the GOP signed a US$500 million contingent line of credit with the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) 16 , US$150 million of which it drew down to support Typhoon Yolanda recovery efforts. This instrument was modeled by JICA on the World Bank’s CAT-DDO, illustrating the continuing relevance of such instruments to the GOP, as part of its broader disaster risk financing strategy (developed under the CAT-DDO).

38. GOP elected neither to renew nor avail of the revolving feature of the loan because the JICA contingent credit instrument was developed and became available with more favorable pricing conditions. Furthermore, prepayment of the loan would have been necessary for renewal. The improved fiscal space and emergency loans from both the Asian Development Bank and the World Bank after Typhoon Yolanda further supported the decision not to renew the CAT-DDO.

39. The DPL with a CAT-DDO was complemented by other World Bank activities, notably, the Bank’s Programmatic Technical Assistance (Support to the Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Agenda). It was aligned with the targets identified for DRRM and CCA as part of the CAS for FY10 - FY13, as well as the policy areas of the CAT-DDO, through the activities mentioned in Section 2.2, paragraph 17.

3.2 Achievement of Program Development Objectives 40. The DPL with a CAT-DDO enhanced the Government’s capacity to manage the impacts of

natural disasters in accordance with the National DRRM Plan and the goals outlined in the Philippine Development Plan 2011-2016. While establishing a direct causal relationship between

16 http://www.jica.go.jp/english/news/press/2013/140319_03.html

9

policy actions supported by the project and the Government’s capacity to manage disaster risk is complex, the standard three-year implementation period of the CAT-DDO instrument enabled a sustained DRM policy dialogue led by the Department of Finance. The DOF’s role as implementing agency for the CAT-DDO provided the impetus for their deep involvement in the coordination of DRM-related policy actions across both oversight and line agencies, despite not being one of the four Vice-Chairs of the National DRRM Council. This also stimulated action in the new policy area of financial protection against the impacts of disasters, as an integral part of both broader disaster risk management as well as the Government’s overall fiscal risk management strategy. The operation’s three Policy Action Areas had linked indicators that are the bases for assessing the achievement of the PDO. The program has achieved or exceeded the key outcome indicators, as formulated in the Program Document, and described in further detail below.

Action Area 1: Strengthen the institutional capacity for disaster risk management efforts Rating: Substantial

• All 80 provinces of the country have established fully functional DRRM offices with the corresponding budget allocations and at least four statutory DRRM positions in every province, substantially exceeding the CAT-DDO target of 14 provinces. Similarly, over 1,487 cities and municipalities have established Local DRRM Offices. The National DRRM Council (NDRRMC), DILG, the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) and the Civil Service Commission issued Joint Memorandum Circular No. 2014-1 in April 201417, setting forth the implementing guidelines for the establishment of Local DRRM offices and Barangay DRRM Committees in LGUs. DILG is monitoring progress in the functionality of the Local DRRM Offices through the annual Seal of Good Local Governance.

• NDRRMC developed a monitoring system to track disaster-related financing. In order to enhance NDRRMC’s monitoring capacity, an online software platform called the Project Monitoring and Evaluation System for DRM (PMESD) was designed in 2011 and development was completed in September 2013. Training has been provided to the Office of Civil Defense to manage and operate the system on behalf of the NDRRMC. The PMESD was designed to be an organizational tool for OCD, with an immediate objective of allowing the agency to systematize relevant information. The underlying design of the PMESD was based on OCD workflows, including but not limited to PFM requirements (primarily budgeting and reporting), disaster impact monitoring, and rescue and response actions (per OCD’s mandate under the DRRM Act). However, fundamental challenges pertaining to OCD’s organizational capacity constrained the full operationalization of PMESD. This was compounded by challenges associated with the Typhoon Yolanda response and reconstruction effort, which have led to new demands and requirements for generating comprehensive financial and physical monitoring of post-disaster recovery and reconstruction spending. In this context, three related engagements have emerged – Foreign Aid Transparency Hub (FAiTH), http://www.gov.ph/faith/, and Open Reconstruction (http://openreconstruction.gov.ph/), and e-Management Platform: Accountability and Transparency Hub for Yolanda (eMPATHY). eMPATHY was developed within OPARR (with assistance of the UNDP) and uses the same technology as the PMESD. The Bank has recommended that it would be optimal for the systems to be linked, inter-operable and to share

17 http://www.ndrrmc.gov.ph/attachments/article/1173/JMC2014-1%20_LDRRMOs.pdf

10

data as part of an overall DRM information system. The leadership for DRRM expenditure tracking is increasingly being provided by the Department of Budget and Management, which (as an oversight agency) has the authority to promote coordination on fiscal spending. The DBM’s involvement improves the sustainability of progress related to monitoring disaster-related financing.

• Guidelines on the use of the Local Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Fund (LDRRMF) were issued. The DILG issued Memorandum Circular No. 2012-73 on April 17, 201218 to provide guidance on the eligible expenditures to be supported by the LDRRMF. This was followed by the Commission on Audit (COA) Circular No. 2012-002 dated September 12, 2012 19 , which stipulates the reporting and accounting procedures for the LDRRMF. Joint Memorandum Circular No. 2013-1 was issued by the NDRRMC, DBM, and DILG on March 25, 201320 to clarify the allocation and utilization of the LDRRMF for ex-ante (70%) and ex-post (30%) measures (Quick Response Fund). It further clarified provisions in the DRRM Act regarding the establishment of a trust fund for unspent LDRRMF proceeds that may accumulate over five years. These guidelines enable LGUs to provide budgets for their DRRM plans, and account for these budgets in accordance with government rules and regulations.

• NDRRMC has rolled out training programs for government authorities to conduct post-disaster needs assessments and emergency preparedness drills. Fifteen sector-specific Guidance Notes were developed and have been locally adopted to become the framework for the Philippine post-disaster needs assessment methodology. These Guidance Notes were used in a formal training program for OCD staff, followed by training roll-out and application of the methods by staff of various member agencies of the National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council during the PDNAs conducted after Typhoons Pablo in 2012 (international codename: Bopha) and Yolanda. The PDNAs constituted the real-life application of the training, and the NDRRMC/OCD will continue the capacity building as part of the OCD’s regular training and emergency preparedness drill program. Multi-sectoral disaster preparedness drills and training are conducted periodically by the member agencies of the NDRRMC, as part of the National DRRM Plan’s long-term goal on disaster preparedness. Key training activities under the Plan include simulation of scenario-based preparedness and response plans, and incident command and communication systems.

41. The Philippines has made important progress in strengthening institutional capacities for disaster risk management. Policy frameworks, institutions, and national and local plans to manage the risks of natural disasters have been introduced and strengthened over the CAT-DDO implementation period. Substantial progress has been made by the Government in shifting emphasis from emergency response to disaster preparedness, risk reduction and financial protection. Moreover, there has been a noticeable increase in DRM awareness, knowledge, and practice across various sectors and levels of government. The Government has invested substantial resources for ex ante initiatives, particularly in the area of LGU capacity building.

42. National government agencies have provided support to local governments for disaster risk reduction. DILG has recently expanded its assessment of LGU performance to include DRM

18 http://www.dilg.gov.ph/PDF_File/issuances/memo_circulars/DILG-Memo_Circular-2012423-8a32c95747.pdf 19 http://www.coa.gov.ph/whats_new/2012/coacir/COA_C2012-002.pdf 20 http://www.dbm.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/Issuances/2013/Joint%20Memorandum%20Circular/JMC2013-1.pdf

11

preparedness in their Seal of Good Local Governance. A block grant (through the Grassroots Participatory Budgeting Program) will be provided to LGUs to support identified priorities such as construction of evacuation centers, disaster preparedness audits, and guidelines on the preparation of Local Climate Change Action Plans. LGUs (through the established DRRM offices) are now integrating disaster risk considerations into local plans using guidelines recently issued by the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board on risk-informed land use planning.

43. The National Community Driven Development program (implemented by DSWD) targets 900 of the poorest municipalities in the country. A number of the National CDD program’s innovations that are linked to the CAT-DDO policy framework have increased local government capacity for DRM, including: (i) improving inclusion of vulnerable areas by strengthening diagnostic tools and facilitation skills; (ii) encouraging investments that address disaster risks; and (iii) broadening partnership arrangements, particularly with the Department of Interior and Local Government, linking CDD to local government planning processes.

44. LGU capacity to build on national government support and resources was enhanced by the CAT-DDO policy actions on developing Local DRRM Offices and clear guidelines on the use of Local DRRM Funds. For example, there has been significant improvement in LGUs’ ability to prepare for disasters through the use of: (i) forecasts provided by the Philippine Atmospheric, Geophysical and Astronomical Services Administration (PAGASA) to guide LGUs and communities; (ii) better hazard maps, particularly for LGUs located along major river basins; and (iii) pre-disaster risk assessments implemented by the Office of Civil Defense through the deployment of teams to provide advice to LGUs on preparedness actions.

45. Experience from recent major events offer an illustration of steadily improving disaster preparedness and management. Before Typhoon Yolanda made landfall in November 2013, about 27,000 families (over 125,000 people) were evacuated to 109 evacuation centers in 22 provinces in the affected regions. DSWD pre‐positioned PhP 195 million worth of emergency relief resources consisting of standby funds, family food packs and other relief items. Four days after Yolanda cleared the Philippines, DPWH was able to clear major roads of debris, which compares favorably with international good practice.

46. This 2013 performance can be compared to the preparedness measures in December 2014, when Typhoon Hagupit (international code name: Ruby) was forecast to be the strongest storm of that year in the world. Prior to Hagupit's landfall, about 150,000 families (over 700,000 people) sought refuge in approximately 150-200 designated evacuation centers spread across 49 provinces. Particular emphasis was placed on forecast-based evacuations along the typhoon's projected path, especially in highly exposed zones (such as coastal, low-lying and other flood-prone areas). DSWD mobilized emergency relief resources worth PhP 405 million. According to the UN, this was one of the largest peacetime emergency evacuation operations in history21. Casualties and economic losses were minimized and community-level recovery could start as early as possible.

21http://www.unog.ch/unog/website/news_media.nsf/%28httpNewsByYear_en%29/5435489DF4BAFF91C1257DA500470450?OpenDocument

12

Action Area 2: Mainstream Disaster Risk Reduction into development planning Rating: High

• Seventy-two of 80 provinces have mainstreamed climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction measures into their Provincial Development and Physical Framework Plans (PDPFP), exceeding the CAT-DDO Policy Matrix target of 30 provinces. Sixty-nine of the 72 provinces have already had their plans approved by their respective Governors and Provincial Planning and Development Councils (PPDC), while the remaining three are awaiting their Governors’ approval. NEDA is leading a very intensive exercise of risk assessment, prioritization, and budgeting, which has led to various reforms at the provincial level, including review of land use plans and establishment of new zoning regulations. Implementation of the plans is strongly influenced by local leadership and capacities.

• Disaster risk reduction measures have been mainstreamed into three sectors: health, transport, and social development.

i. Health: The Department of Health (DOH) has expanded coverage of its Safe Hospitals Program in accordance with WHO guidelines. It has conducted functional and structural assessments of 199 hospitals in Luzon, exceeding the CAT-DDO target of 100 health facilities. These hospitals, both in the public and private sectors, were evaluated based on agreed indicators of structural, non-structural, and functional capacities in order to inform investment decisions for meeting the identified gaps. The DOH is also planning to undertake a similar assessment for the Visayas and Mindanao regions.

ii. Transport: The Department of Public Works and Highways has completed retrofitting/reconstruction of 10 bridges in Metro Manila22, meeting the target specified in the Policy Matrix. In 2011, DPWH conducted a structural vulnerability assessment of all bridges along national roads in Metro Manila and identified 56 bridges for retrofitting, major repair and/or reconstruction, of which 18 have been funded, and the aforementioned 10 have been completed. In 2013, DPWH completed an assessment of the structural condition of all bridges along national roads throughout the country to further inform prioritization and budgeting.

iii. Social Development: Community development and social protection programs continue to be enhanced to better address disaster risks through the Department of Social Welfare and Development’s (DSWD) flagship poverty reduction programs, Pantawid Pamilya (4Ps) and KALAHI-CIDSS/National Community Driven Development Program (KC-NCDDP). The target of 1,000 communities identified in the Policy Matrix for DRRM training was substantially exceeded, with over 24,000 communities covered through the DRRM module in DSWD’s Family Development Sessions (FDS). DSWD has now prepared a new Disaster Response Operations Manual that provides more comprehensive training to communities under KC-NCDDP. Between October and December 2014, an initial 14,000 plus communities in over 550 municipalities were trained on DRRM using the new manual.

22 DPWH has completed retrofitting/reconstruction for the following 10 bridges in Metro Manila: (1) Spine, (2) Honorio Lopez, (3) Deparo – Camarin, (4) Mariablo I, (5) Catmon, (6) MNDR Flyover crossing NLEX, (7) Lingunan, (8) Viente Reales, (9) Malinta-Santolan, and (10) Estrella.

13

In addition, DSWD has established community-based post-disaster response windows in the four target field offices under the KALAHI-CIDSS program and the roll-out of post-disaster windows to 16 regional DSWD field offices commenced in July. This allows for emergency procedures (expediting sub-project approval) to be activated upon the declaration of a state of calamity, enabling CDD funds to be used for relief, response and recovery.

47. Provincial level investment planning is increasingly mainstreaming resilience to natural disasters. Through the integration of climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction measures into 72 Provincial Development and Physical Framework Plans, both spatial and investment planning is informed by exposure and vulnerability to disasters. An M&E tool in the form of a results matrix for mainstreaming DRR and CCA was issued by the National Economic and Development Authority to guide investment decisions at the provincial level.

48. Resilience to natural disasters has likewise been mainstreamed into planning for key sectors. In the health and transport sectors, the CAT-DDO policy framework has supported vulnerability assessments and structural audits of hospitals and infrastructure to prioritize risk reduction investments such as retrofitting and structural upgrading. A similar prioritization study was conducted for public schools in Metro Manila through technical assistance from the Bank (see Section 3.5 (c)).

49. The DSWD’s Pantawid Pamilya Conditional Cash Transfer (CCT) Program helped the government respond rapidly after Yolanda. As part of the CAT-DDO policy framework, the Pantawid program enables conditions for cash transfers to be suspended upon the declaration of a State of Calamity. With a delivery mechanism already in place, the Government was able to target and channel post-disaster humanitarian efforts better. The network of CCT implementers and the leadership in municipalities assisted in identifying families that could be enrolled for various recovery programs, such as cash-for-work and cash-for-asset rebuilding. The Philippines’ use of social protection systems as a platform to deliver assistance after a disaster demonstrates the depth of integration of DRM in the Government’s regular programs.

Action Area 3: Better manage the Government’s fiscal exposure to natural hazard impacts Rating: High

• The Department of Finance has prepared its Disaster Risk Financing and Insurance (DRFI) strategy. The DRFI Strategy, the associated Action Plan, and an investment plan for donor consideration were presented by the Secretary of Finance at the Political Champions Group Insurance Initiative in July 2014. The Strategy has the overarching goal of increasing the financial resilience of the government and communities to natural disasters, and sets forth strategic priorities to support this goal, namely: (i) improving, at the national level, the financing of post-disaster emergency response, recovery, and reconstruction needs; (ii) providing local governments with funds for post-disaster recovery and reconstruction; and (iii) empowering poor and vulnerable households and small and medium enterprises to quickly restore their livelihoods after a disaster. These priorities will be achieved with a combination of risk financing instruments to protect the different levels against events of different frequency and severity. The combination and design of the specific instruments is currently being supported by the World Bank Group through an integrated program of technical assistance.

14

50. GOP’s DRFI Strategy was underpinned by the Catastrophe Risk Assessment for the Philippines, supported through the Bank’s Programmatic DRM AAA. This assessment is a state-of-the-art probabilistic model of the natural catastrophe risk faced by the country, and provides the GOP with an overview of potential disaster losses to public and private assets. It provides an in-depth analysis to help understand the long-term average annual expected losses from disasters and the corresponding contingent liability and social impacts. The model allows GOP to analyze the costs and benefits of various risk financing instruments as well as their optimal combination, and is the technical basis for the design of sovereign risk finance instruments.

51. The Government is progressively reducing its fiscal exposure to natural disasters through expanded options for risk financing. The DRRM Act allows for the DRRM Fund to be used for disaster risk reduction purposes (e.g., preparedness and mitigation programs, training and procurement of equipment, construction of evacuation centers and other facilities, payments for insurance policies), in addition to post-disaster relief and rehabilitation. The allocation to the Fund increased from approximately PhP2.7 billion in 2006 to PhP7.5 billion in 201323.

52. Implementation of the Disaster Risk Financing and Insurance strategy developed by the Government under the CAT-DDO policy framework has been launched through an Action Plan to establish risk financing mechanisms. The newly initiated Programmatic DRM AAA (2014-2016) will support the continued use of catastrophe risk modeling as the analytical basis for DRFI applications and policies, in accordance with the Government’s DRFI strategy. This will be complemented by continuing technical assistance on DRFI, in the areas of: (i) Improving the financing of post-disaster emergency response, recovery, and reconstruction needs through market based risk transfer and a fiscal risk profile for the national government; (ii) Providing local governments with funds for recovery and reconstruction after a disaster through the design of parametric insurance for emergency losses and indemnity-based insurance for public assets; and (iii) Risk analysis tools to enable evidence-based decision making and to support the design and placement of catastrophe risk insurance products.

3.4 Justification of Overall Outcome Rating Rating: Satisfactory 53. The objectives of the CAT-DDO were highly relevant, the relevance of the design and

implementation were substantial, and all policy targets of the CAT DDO were achieved.

3.5 Overarching Themes, Other Outcomes and Impacts (a) Poverty Impacts, Gender Aspects, and Social Development 54. The DPL with a CAT-DDO supported the mitigation of the poverty impacts of disasters through

the linkage of the policy matrix with the Bank’s ongoing social development operations. This was achieved through the enhancement of the National CDD Program as well as the Pantawid Pamilya Conditional Cash Transfer Program to better address disaster risks. As mentioned in the previous section, these social protection systems are being used as a platform to deliver assistance after disasters,

23 World Bank. 2012. Disaster Risk Finance Mechanisms in the Philippines: A Stocktaking Exercise.

15

most notably after Typhoon Yolanda. Pantawid Pamilya provided 100,000 households with an additional cash support of PhP 1,300 per family per month for December 2013 and January 2014, over and above the regular DSWD grant that beneficiaries received24. The assistance covered some 60 municipalities in the hardest-hit provinces of Leyte, Samar and Panay Island.

55. The operation was prepared in 2010 (prior to the current institutional requirements regarding gender analysis) and the policy targets were not gender focused. However, the program was informed by the Post-Disaster Needs Assessment after Typhoon Ondoy in 2009, which included the gender and social impacts of the disaster.

(b) Institutional Change/Strengthening

56. The DPL with a CAT-DDO supported substantial increases in government capacity at the national and local government levels. Institutional capacity was strengthened through the establishment of the DRRM offices at the provincial level as well as in cities and municipalities. NDRRMC training programs on Post-Disaster Needs Assessments were repeatedly applied, most notably after Typhoons Pablo and Yolanda. DOF is now fully conversant with the principles of Catastrophe Risk Modeling, and how these can be used as the analytical basis for DRFI applications and policies. GOP is also demonstrating increased capacity for engagement with the international reinsurance and capital markets.

57. The NDRRMC has triggered the process for the review of the DRRM Act, in accordance with its sunset clause25. At the request of NEDA, this review is being supported by the Programmatic DRM AAA for 2015. The Vice Chairs of the NDRRMC are gathering the information necessary to facilitate a more effective review, including documentation of lessons learned from Yolanda, experiences related to post-disaster assessments, coordination and partnership, a new or improved institutional model for DRM in the Philippines, more effective implementation arrangements and modalities for recovery and reconstruction, among others.

(c) Other Unintended Outcomes and Impacts (positive or negative, if any) 58. The Bank’s Programmatic Technical Assistance that was provided during project

implementation supported dialogue with the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH), the Department of Education, and other key line agencies on improving the resilience of critical infrastructure and public facilities to natural disasters. A prioritization methodology for upgrading and retrofitting of critical assets in Metro Manila was developed under this engagement. Preliminary results of the prioritization show that by systematically strengthening the most vulnerable public school buildings in Metro Manila, the number of projected fatalities from the M7.2 Metro Manila Earthquake Impact Reduction Study 26 scenario earthquake can be greatly reduced. Strengthening the most vulnerable 5% (200) of school buildings can reduce the number of student fatalities by 25% (over 6,000 student lives saved). The Department of Education has requested support

24 http://www.dswd.gov.ph/2014/01/dswd-wfp-give-cash-aid-to-pantawid-pamilya-beneficiaries-in-yolanda-areas/ 25 Republic Act 10121. Section 27. Sunset Review. - Within five (5) years after the effectivity of this Act, or as the need arises, the Congressional Oversight Committee shall conduct a sunset review. For purposes of this Act, the term "sunset review" shall mean a systematic evaluation by the Congressional Oversight Committee of the accomplishments and impact of this Act, as well as the performance and organizational structure of its implementing agencies, for purposes of determining remedial legislation. 26 http://www.phivolcs.dost.gov.ph/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=419:mmeirs&catid=66

16

from the Programmatic AAA for the development of mechanisms to mobilize the design and construction community to ensure that appropriate designs, standards, and practices are adhered to both for new construction and for reconstruction of classrooms and school buildings.

3.6 Summary of Findings of Beneficiary Survey and/or Stakeholder Workshops Not Applicable

4. Assessment of Risk to Development Outcome Rating: Moderate

59. There is a Moderate risk that the frequency and magnitude of natural disasters in the Philippines, particularly in light of climate change, may strain the Government’s capacity to manage the impacts of these events. Implementation of the DRFI strategy will reduce the Government’s fiscal exposure to natural disasters, and mitigate such impacts as the need to re-allocate resources from development programs to humanitarian response and recovery efforts after a disaster. The Government is also making a sustained effort to decrease losses from disasters over time. The Government’s commitment to, and the CAT-DDO’s support for, the decentralization of disaster risk management to Local Government Units also mitigates the risk to the projects outcomes.

60. The DPL with a CAT-DDO supported the institutionalization of the Government’s capacity to manage the impacts of natural disasters, thus enabling the sustainability of the development outcomes. The Government provided funding to support the policy action areas, and ownership of the program among national and local government agencies was ensured by aligning the policy framework with their regular programs. The NDRRMC and DOF both took the lead on coordinating policy actions, and parallel technical assistance was provided by the Bank to strengthen institutional capacity at both the national and local levels. Disaster risk management remains a cross-cutting area within the Philippine Development Plan, as reinforced through the Midterm Update released in April 2014. The risk of loss of continued Government commitment and support to disaster risk management is low.

5. Assessment of Bank and Borrower Performance 5.1 Bank Performance (a) Bank Performance in Ensuring Quality at Entry Rating: Satisfactory

a. Quality at Entry: 61. The project design was robust, as it built upon lessons learned in other operations to ensure that

it was driven by the Government, with clear commitment to, and ownership of, the policy actions among the stakeholders. The Policy Matrix was well aligned with the Philippine DRRM Act, Framework and Plan. The strategic relevance of the CAT-DDO was ensured by aligning the policy action areas with the strategic objectives of the Government’s own policy framework, which the Bank reviewed and found to be adequate. Accountability for the outcomes was in accordance with the National DRRM Framework and the institutional setup of the National DRRM Council. The sole trigger for disbursement of the CAT-DDO was a Presidential Declaration of a State of Calamity, providing immediate liquidity in the aftermath of a disaster.

17

62. At appraisal, the Bank correctly assessed that the country had a sound macroeconomic policy framework. Even though the high public debt ratio at the time posed a risk to macroeconomic stability, the gradual pace of fiscal deficit and debt reduction represented a compromise between several tradeoffs. In particular, the slower pace of deficit reduction helped facilitate the budgetary shift toward greater social sector spending that was initiated in the 2011 budget, instead of forcing the Government to embark on a more austere spending program that could have resulted in spending cuts in priority sectors. This approach enabled the Government to support its sectoral programs that were embedded in the CAT-DDO policy framework.

63. The Bank designed the operation on the basis of analytical work to determine priority policy areas at both the national and local levels. Economic and sector work (Natural Disaster Risk Management in the Philippines: Enhancing poverty alleviation through disaster reduction27) was undertaken in 2004 to determine gaps in the Government’s capacity to mitigate disaster risks. Since 2008, a GFDRR-supported technical assistance program had been in place, which identified the most vulnerable provinces in the country, assessed gaps in mechanisms for disaster recovery financing, and proposed systems and tools for LGUs to improve their capacities for disaster risk management. The CAT-DDO was designed (together with the DRFI team and World Bank Treasury) based on these and other key analytical work on international good practice in disaster risk management and disaster risk financing. The policy targets are comprehensive and address the five pillars of effective disaster risk management28, namely: (i) risk identification; (ii) risk reduction; (iii) preparedness; (iv) financial protection; and (v) planning for disaster recovery.

(b) Quality of Supervision Rating: Satisfactory

64. The Bank undertook regular supervision missions and implemented linked DRM Technical Assistance activities to provide support throughout implementation. The Bank maintained a close policy dialogue with the Government and relevant stakeholders during the implementation of the program. The Bank conducted regular implementation support missions (at least semi-annually) to carry out substantive reviews, including progress assessments of the policy framework, in order to identify and address threats to the achievement of the development outcomes. Continuous dialogue and technical assistance were provided to support the integration of the PMESD with the broader public financial management system after Typhoon Yolanda. Multi-sectoral policy actions, as well as targets involving the development of strategies for financial protection against disasters were monitored and supported through close collaboration between Bank operational staff, DRFI Team and World Bank Treasury.

65. Implementation Status and Results reports (ISRs) were filed regularly to document progress, even after the loan proceeds were fully disbursed (when Bank systems reported the operation as closed and did not required ISRs). Adequate transition arrangements have been put into place through the Bank’s Programmatic DRM AAA for 2014 – 2016, which will carry forward the action areas of the CAT-DDO and support the sustainability of the development outcomes.

27 http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTEAPREGTOPENVIRONMENT/Resources/PH_Disaster_Risk_Mgmt.pdf 28 The five pillars of disaster risk management are outlined in the World Bank-GFDRR Sendai Report: Managing Disaster Risks for a Resilient Future (http://www.gfdrr.org/sites/gfdrr/files/publication/Sendai_Report_051012_0.pdf).

18

(c) Justification of Rating for Overall Bank Performance Rating: Satisfactory

66. Overall Bank Performance is rated satisfactory, based on the combined ratings of Quality at Entry and Quality of Supervision.

5.2 Borrower Performance (a) Government Performance Rating: Satisfactory

67. Government performance is rated satisfactory. The Government ensured the quality of preparation and implementation through sustained dialogue with the Bank. Senior officials of the Department of Finance were appointed to coordinate policy actions under the CAT-DDO framework, particularly the implementation of the DRFI strategy, which is continuing beyond loan closing. The enabling environment included supportive macro-economic, sectoral, and institutional policies that were appropriate to country circumstances. Despite the global financial crisis the government maintained a sound macro-economic environment, posting sustained economic growth. The Department of Finance convened a Technical Working Group consisting of the CAT-DDO stakeholder agencies, as well as other oversight and line agencies. The TWG functioned as a platform for coordination and monitoring of the Policy Actions during project implementation.

68. Toward the achievement of the development outcomes in each policy area, and in accordance with the National DRRM Plan: a. NDRRMC and DILG strengthened institutional capacities for DRM at both the national and local

levels. The administration of the Office of Civil Defense experienced a number of changes during project implementation, including reductions in technical staff. While this posed challenges to a few policy actions, all targets were still substantially met.

b. NEDA progressively integrated DRM in provincial and sectoral planning. c. Line agencies (the Departments of Health, Public Works & Highways, and Social Welfare &

Development) all substantially exceeded their respective targets under the CAT-DDO policy framework and are continuing to expand on these actions through their regular programs.

d. DOF launched implementation of actions to support the DRFI strategy, thereby reducing fiscal exposure to natural disasters.

69. In general, the Government showed strong commitment to the implementation of the disaster risk management agenda. Moreover, the government maintained considerable fiscal space to make investments to catalyze private ventures, restore public goods and services, and fund social programs. These were all aimed at reducing the poverty impacts of disasters and moving forward with resilient recovery and reconstruction.

(b) Implementing Agency or Agencies Performance Rating: Not applicable

(c) Justification of Rating for Overall Borrower Performance Rating: Satisfactory

19

70. Since there is no Implementing Agency, the overall rating is the same as that for Government Performance.

6. Lessons Learned 71. For DRM policy frameworks with multiple action areas across different sectors, a dialogue

should be initiated with various line agencies during project preparation and implementation. A wide range of stakeholders including line agencies, civil society, the private sector, and academia, can contribute to DRM through their regular programs. A strong consultation process to develop outcomes based on Government priorities can raise awareness of DRM across sectors. The process of designing the operation and convening of stakeholders, via a Working Group, can provide a venue for mainstreaming DRM in sectoral development.

72. Development Policy Operations with CAT-DDOs can provide an entry point for introducing broader concepts for Disaster Risk Financing and Insurance. As a form of contingent credit, the CAT-DDO is an affordable source of financing29 and complements existing market-based disaster risk financing instruments such as insurance, catastrophe bonds, reserve funds, etc. These instruments can be used in combination to retain the risk from smaller, more frequent events, or to transfer the risk from less frequent, higher-impact events, based on an assessment of risks, desired coverage, available budget, and cost efficiency. These assessments can be supported through technical assistance, and implemented as part of a country’s overall DRFI strategy.

73. The ‘soft trigger’ for disbursement, which is a standard feature of the CAT-DDO instrument, needs to be supported by strong analytics in order to optimize the timing of drawdowns. While full appreciation of contingent credit was developed during the policy dialogue on DRFI under the CAT-DDO, the characteristics of the instrument were very novel for the GOP at the time of the operation’s effectiveness. However, as the DOF and other agencies in the Technical Working Group gained a better appreciation of DRFI principles over the lifetime of the CAT-DDO, decision-making has become better informed. The DRFI Strategy helped DOF to develop a rational framework for considering the various options for post-disaster financing instruments, including amounts, timing and combinations (including the use of the more favorably priced contingent credit instrument signed with JICA).

74. Department/Ministry of Finance’s role as implementing agency for CAT-DDOs can provide the impetus for their deeper involvement in the coordination of DRM-related policy actions. As a DPL, CAT-DDOs provide the opportunity to elevate DRM issues to oversight agencies (in particular, Departments of Finance, Economic Development/Planning and Budget) that may not otherwise be deeply engaged in the policy dialogue.

75. The implementation of a programmatic technical assistance engagement to support the policy areas of the CAT-DDO can facilitate substantive policy dialogue and effective implementation even after full disbursement of the loan. It is important for the Bank to allocate adequate resources for implementation assistance and technical assistance to support achievement of project outcomes

29 Preliminary analyses of the CAT-DDO instrument (in general) estimate that the expected net present value of the cost of the CAT-DDO is at least 30% lower than the cost of insurance for medium risk layers (that is, a disaster occurring once every three years), depending on market conditions (http://www.gfdrr.org/sites/gfdrr.org/files/documents/DRFI_CatDDO_ProductNote_Jan11.pdf).

20

and leverage the TA engagement to sustain the policy dialogue with a broad set of stakeholders relevant to disaster risk management.

76. Complementarity between ongoing World Bank investment projects and the CAT-DDO can generate mutual leverage for achieving development objectives. This was particularly well illustrated by the policy actions related to addressing disaster risks in Community Driven Development and Conditional Cash Transfer operations, whereby the CAT-DDO provided the policy framework to pursue reforms which were implemented through the investment projects.

7. Comments on Issues Raised by Borrower/Implementing Agencies/Partners (a) Borrower/Implementing agencies 1. The Borrower commented that the Disbursement amount should be the entire US$500 million rather than US$497.5 million net of upfront fee for consistency. The full Disbursed Amount of US$500 million is reflected in Table A (Basic Information) of the Data Sheet. 2. The Borrower commented that with all the six (6) indicators achieved way beyond targets, rating should be better than Satisfactory (that is, Highly Satisfactory). The Bank, even in international fora, often highlights the GOP experience in tapping CAT DDO as a good liquidity instrument during disaster. GOP is also often being showcased as a good practice model in the region in terms of DRRM and DRFI which resulted from good collaboration with the Bank, among other development partners. While the operation achieved its objectives and, in many cases, exceeded targets, the Satisfactory rating is retained due to minor shortcomings in the operationalization of the monitoring system to track disaster-related financing. 3. The Borrower commented that Indicator 6 should reflect that this is "Achieved" inasmuch as the DOF has already developed and put in place as the guiding principle the DRFI strategy. This has been reflected in Section F.(a) of the Data Sheet. 4. The Borrower commented that renewal of CAT DDO for Yolanda rehabilitation was not made not only because of the JICA loan that was contracted in March 2014 but also because the facility (CAT DDO) was fully drawn in 2014 and the only way to exercise the revolving feature of the loan is to prepay. The Borrower further commented that it made no sense to prepay the CAT DDO during the aftermath of Yolanda to allow renewal. Also, the improved fiscal space which was also recognized by the report provided more resources for Yolanda rehabilitation and recovery. In addition, emergency assistance loans from ADB and WB totaling US$1.0 billion were also made available immediately after Yolanda. This comment has been reflected in Section 3.1.b, Relevance of Design and Implementation. (b) Cofinanciers

(c) Other partners and stakeholders (e.g. NGOs/private sector/civil society)

21

Annex 1 Bank Lending and Implementation Support/Supervision Processes (a) Task Team members

Names Title Unit Responsibility/ Specialty

Lending Zoe Elena Trohanis Senior Urban Specialist GSURR Task Team Leader Issam Abousleiman Country Manager LCCCO Treasury

Victor Dato Senior Infrastructure Specialist GTIDR Transport

Patricia Fernandes Senior Social Development Specialist GSURR Social Development

Stephen Paul Hartung Financial Management Specialist GGODR FM

Demilour Reyes Ignacio Program Assistant GWADR Operations/Team support Minneh Mary Kane Lead Counsel LEGES Legal Eric LeBorgne Lead Economist GMFDR Political Economics Miguel Navarro Martin Lead Financial Officer FABBK Treasury Christopher T. Pablo Senior Urban Specialist GSURR Urban

Maria Loreto Padua Senior Social Development Specialist GSURR Social Development

Roberto Antonio F. Rosadia Health Specialist GHNDR Health

Tomas Sta. Maria Financial Management Specialist GGODR FM

Zuzana Stanton-Geddes Operations Analyst GSURR Operations/Team Support

Matthew Stephens Senior Social Development Specialist GSURR Social Development

Karl Kendrick Tiu Chua Senior Economist GMFDR Political Economics

Josefo Tuyor Senior Environmental Specialist OPSOR Safeguards

Catherine Vidar Disaster Risk Management Specialist

GSURR Disaster Risk Management

Yan F. Zhang Senior Urban Economist GSURR Urban Ivailo Ivorski Practice Manager GMFDR Peer Reviewer

Christoph Pusch Lead Disaster Risk Management Specialist GSURR Peer Reviewer

Jose C. Joaquin Toro Landivar Senior Disaster Risk Management Specialist GSURR Peer Reviewer

Supervision

Jolanta Kryspin-Watson Senior Disaster Risk Management Specialist

GSURR Task Team Leader

Christopher C. Ancheta Senior Sanitary Engineer GWADR Operations/Engineering

Abigail Baca Infrastructure Specialist GSURR Disaster Risk Finance and Insurance

Victor Dato Senior Infrastructure Specialist GTIDR Transport

22

Demilour Reyes Ignacio Program Assistant GWADR Operations/Team Support

Maria Loreto Padua Senior Social Development Specialist GSURR Social Development

Hector Ibarra Pando Lead Financial Officer FABBK Treasury Lynette Perez Senior Education Specialist GEDDR Education Roberto Antonio F. Rosadia Health Specialist GHNDR Health Artessa Saldivar-Sali Municipal Engineer GSURR Resilient Infrastructure

Benedikt Lukas Signer Financial Sector Specialist GFMDR Disaster Risk Finance and Insurance

Matthew Stephens Senior Social Development Specialist GSURR Social Development

Mari Anne Trillana Team Assistant GWADR Operations/Team Support

Catherine Vidar Disaster Risk Management Specialist

GSURR Disaster Risk Management

Felizardo Virtucio Jr. Operations Officer GFADR Agriculture

Deanna Therese Villacin Consultant Disaster Risk Finance and Insurance

Cameron Wilson Consultant Operations/Team support (b) Staff Time and Cost

Stage Staff Time and Cost (Bank Budget Only)

No. of staff weeks USD Thousands (including travel and consultant costs)

Lending FY11 21.56 96,255.56 FY12 2.18 5,135.43

Total: 23.74 101,360.99 Supervision/ICR FY12 12.33 70,123.15 FY13 10.25 36,080.95 FY14 12.59 38,981.90 FY15 13.32 49,360.65

Total: 48.49 194,546.65

23

Annex 2. Beneficiary Survey Results Not Applicable

24

Annex 3. Stakeholder Workshop Report and Results Not Applicable

25

Annex 4. Summary of Borrower's ICR and/or Comments on Draft ICR The report is very informative and covered quite a lot of areas, demonstrating that CAT DDO came at just the right time to brace ourselves from the upcoming "new normal" phenomena. The Program went beyond its financing relevance as it can be considered a catalyst in not only initiating policies towards better DRRM and developing DRFI strategy, but more so on Government taking the lead role while mainstreaming these in the over-all development planning even at the sub-national levels. Nonetheless, let us share some observations: 1. Disbursement amount should be the entire US$500 million rather than US$497.5 million net of upfront fee for consistency. 2. With all the six (6) indicators achieved way beyond targets, rating should be better than Satisfactory. The Bank, even in international fora, often highlights the GOP experience in tapping CAT DDO as a good liquidity instrument during disaster. GOP is also often being showcased as a good practice model in the region in terms of DRRM and DRFI which resulted from good collaboration with the Bank, among other development partners. Indicator 6 should reflect that this is "Achieved" inasmuch as the DOF has already developed and put in place as the guiding principle the DRFI strategy. 3. Renewal of CAT DDO for Yolanda rehabilitation was not made not only because of the JICA loan that was contracted in March 2014 but also because the facility (CAT DDO) was fully drawn in 2014 and the only way to exercise the revolving feature of the loan is to prepay. It made no sense to prepay the CAT DDO during the aftermath of Yolanda to allow renewal. Also, the improved fiscal space which was also recognized by the report provided us more resources for Yolanda rehabilitation and recovery. In addition, emergency assistance loans from ADB and WB totaling US$1.0 billion were also made available immediately after Yolanda.

26

Annex 5. Comments of Cofinanciers and Other Partners/Stakeholders Not Applicable

27

Annex 6. List of Supporting Documents

1. Commission on Audit Circular: Accounting and Reporting Guidelines for the Local Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Fund (LDRRMF) of Local Government Units (LGUs), National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Fund (NDRRMF) given to LGUs and Receipts from Other Sources (http://www.coa.gov.ph/index.php/2013-06-19-13-06-41/1-circulars/category/4454-cy-2012)

2. Declaration of a State of National Calamity after Tropical Storm Sendong (http://www.gov.ph/2011/12/20/proclamation-no-303-s-2011/)

3. Department of the Interior and Local Government Memorandum Circular No. 2012-73 on Utilization of Local Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Fund (http://www.dilg.gov.ph/PDF_File/issuances/memo_circulars/DILG-Memo_Circular-2012423-8a32c95747.pdf)

4. Department of Interior and Local Government Program Briefer: Enhancing LGU Capacity on Disaster Risk Reduction and Management and Climate Change Adaptation

5. Department of Health Pocket Emergency Tool (2012) with Guidelines for Post-Disaster Needs Assessments

6. Department of Public Works & Highways Infrastructure Projects – National Capital Region (http://www.dpwh.gov.ph/infrastructure/pms/ncr.asp)

7. Implementing Guidelines for the Establishment of Local DRRM Offices or Barangay DRRM Committees in Local Government Units (http://www.dbm.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/Issuances/2014/Joint%20Memorandum%20Circular%20/JMC2014-1%20_LDRRMOs.pdf)

8. Joint Memorandum Circular No. 2013-1 on Allocation and Utilization of the Local Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Fund (http://www.dbm.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/Issuances/2013/Joint%20Memorandum%20Circular/JMC2013-1.pdf)

9. Memorandum Order No. 62 Providing for the Functions of the Presidential Assistant for Rehabilitation and Recovery (http://www.gov.ph/2013/12/06/memorandum-order-no-62-s-2013/)

10. National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Framework (http://www.ndrrmc.gov.ph/attachments/article/227/NDRRMFramework.pdf)

11. National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Plan (2011-2028) (http://www.dilg.gov.ph/PDF_File/reports_resources/DILG-Resources-2012116-420ac59e31.pdf)

12. Official Gazette, General Appropriations Act (FY2010): Budget of the Department of Public Works and Highways

13. Official Gazette, General Appropriations Act (FY2012): Budget of the Department of Public Works and Highways

14. Official Gazette, General Appropriations Act (FY2013): Budget of the Department of Public Works and Highways

28

15. Philippine Development Plan 2011-2016 (http://www.neda.gov.ph/?p=1128)

16. Philippine Development Plan 2011-2016 Midterm Update (http://plans.neda.gov.ph/pdp)

17. Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act of 2010 (http://www.gov.ph/2010/05/27/republic-act-no-10121/)

18. Program Document: Report No. 60950-PH (http://wbdocs.worldbank.org/wbdocs/drl/objectId/090224b0827a3ea8)

19. Project Concept Note (http://wbdocs.worldbank.org/wbdocs/drl/objectId/090224b080b36dc7)

20. Reconstruction Assistance on Yolanda (http://www.gov.ph/downloads/2013/12dec/20131216-RAY.pdf)

21. Safe Hospitals in Emergencies and Disasters – Philippine Indicators for Level 1 to 4 Hospitals (http://www.hems.doh.gov.ph/uploads/publication_attachments/1c93ee7879774fea1ec32f87bbf80716a4ec39db.pdf)

22. Signing of Japanese ODA Loan Agreement with the Republic of the Philippines: Immediate support for urgent financial requirement for recovery from natural disasters, together with capacity enhancement on disaster risk reduction and management (http://www.jica.go.jp/english/news/press/2013/140319_03.html)

23. Tropical Storm Sendong Post-Disaster Damage and Needs Assessment (http://www.recoveryplatform.org/assets/publication/Final_PDNAReport_13June2012.pdf)

29

MAP

I N S E R T

M A P

H E R E

IBRD 33466R4 (cleared by Map Unit on February 2, 2015)