Document of The World Bankfaspselib.denr.gov.ph/sites/default/files/DOCUMENTS/LAMP II... ·...
Transcript of Document of The World Bankfaspselib.denr.gov.ph/sites/default/files/DOCUMENTS/LAMP II... ·...
Document of
The World Bank
Report No: ICR3123
IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION AND RESULTS REPORT
(IBRD-72980)
ON A
LOAN
lN THE AMOUNT OF US$18.99 MILLION
TO THE
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
FOR THE
LAND ADMINISTRATION AND MANAGEMENT II PROJECT
March 18, 2015
Social, Urban, Rural and Resilience Global Practice
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 March 18, 2015)
Currency Unit = Philippine Peso (PhP)
US$1.00 = PhP44.63
FISCAL YEAR
January 1 – December 1
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
AF Additional Finance
AusAID Australian Agency for International Development
BIR Bureau of Internal Revenue
BLGF Bureau of Local Government Finance
CADT Certificate of Ancestral Domain Title
CAS Country Assistance Strategy
CCM Consolidated Cadastral Map
CPS Community Participation Strategy
DAO Department Administrative Order
DENR
DFAT
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (Australia)
DIS Development Impact Study
DoF Department of Finance
FAO Food and Agriculture Organization
FM Financial Management
GoP Government of the Philippines
HRMD Human Resource Management and Development
IBRD International Bank for Reconstruction and Development
ICR Implementation Completion and Results Report
IERR Internal Economic Rate of Return
IP Indigenous People
ISF Innovation Support Fund
ISR Implementation Status Report
KPI Key Performance Indicator
LAA Land Administration Authority
LAM Land Administration and Management
LAMP Land Administration and Management Project
LAMS Land Administration and Management System
LEI Land Equity International
LGAF Land Governance Assessment Framework
LGU Local Government Unit
LSFD Land Sector Development Framework
LTCP Land Titling Computerization Project
M&E Monitoring and Evaluation
MAG Mass Appraisal Guidebook
MTR Mid-Term Review
NCIP National Commission on Indigenous Peoples
NEDA National Economic and Development Authority
NSC National Steering Committee
NTRC National Tax Research Center
OSS One-Stop-Shop
PAD Project Appraisal Document
PDO Project Development Objective
PhP Philippine Peso
PPIO Provincial Project Implementation Office
PRF Project Result Framework
PSR Project Status Report
PVS Philippine Valuation Standards
QEA Quality at Entry Assessment
QSA Quality of Supervision Assessment
RESA Real Estate Services Act
RoD Registry of Deeds
RPT Real Property tax
SAFO Systematic Adjudication Field Office
SDGF Social Development and Gender Framework
SEBS Socio-Economic Baseline Study
SMV Schedule of Market Values
TA Technical Assistance
TTL Task Team Leader
UPOU University of the Philippines Open University
VRA
VS
Valuation Reform Act
Valuation Standards
Vice President: Axel van Trotsenburg
Country Director: Motoo Konishi
Global Practice Manager: Jorge A. Muñoz
Task Team Leader: Keith Clifford Bell and
Maria Theresa G. Quiñones
(Co-TTL)
ICR Team Leader: Keith Clifford Bell
ICR Primary Author Cecilia Zanetta
PHILIPPINES
LAND ADMINISTRATION AND MANAGEMENT II PROJECT
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 Project Performance in ISRs
H. Restructuring
I. Disbursement Graph
1. Project 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 ......................................................... 13
5. Assessment of Bank and Borrower Performance ..................................................... 15
6. Lessons Learned ....................................................................................................... 16
7. Comments on Issues Raised by Borrower/Implementing Agencies/Partners .......... 16
Annex 1. Project Costs and Financing .......................................................................... 17
Annex 2. Outputs by Component ................................................................................. 18
Annex 3. Economic and Financial Analysis ................................................................. 25
Annex 4. Bank Lending and Implementation Support/Supervision Processes ............ 31
Annex 5. Beneficiary Survey Results ........................................................................... 33
Annex 6. Stakeholder Workshop Report and Results ................................................... 34
Annex 7. Summary of Borrower's ICR and/or Comments on Draft ICR ..................... 35
Annex 8. Comments of Co-financiers and Other Partners/Stakeholders ...................... 47
Annex 9. Lessons Learned ............................................................................................ 61
Annex 10. List of Supporting Documents .................................................................... 76
Annex 11. People consulted as part of the ICR Mission
MAP
i
A. Basic Information
Country: Philippines Project Name:
LAND
ADMINISTRATION
AND MANAGEMENT
II PROJECT
Project ID: P073206 L/C/TF Number(s): IBRD-72980
ICR Date: 03/19/2015 ICR Type: Core ICR
Lending Instrument: SIL Borrower: REPUBLIC OF THE
PHILIPPINES
Original Total
Commitment: USD 19.00M Disbursed Amount: USD 15.31M
Revised Amount: USD 15.31M
Environmental Category: B
Implementing Agencies:
Bureau of Local Government Finance, Department of Finance
Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR)
National Tax Research Center
Cofinanciers and Other External Partners:
B. Key Dates
Process Date Process Original Date Revised / Actual
Date(s)
Concept Review: 06/10/2003 Effectiveness: 10/11/2005 10/11/2005
Appraisal: 07/28/2004 Restructuring(s):
11/11/2010
03/22/2011
03/15/2012
12/11/2012
09/27/2013
Approval: 05/31/2005 Mid-term Review: 04/11/2008
Closing: 03/31/2011 03/31/2014
C. Ratings Summary
C.1 Performance Rating by ICR
Outcomes: Moderately Satisfactory
Risk to Development Outcome: Substantial
Bank Performance: Moderately Satisfactory
Borrower Performance: Moderately Satisfactory
ii
C.2 Detailed Ratings of Bank and Borrower Performance (by ICR)
Bank Ratings Borrower Ratings
Quality at Entry: Moderately Satisfactory Government: Moderately Satisfactory
Quality of Supervision: Moderately Satisfactory Implementing
Agency/Agencies: Moderately Satisfactory
Overall Bank
Performance: Moderately Satisfactory
Overall Borrower
Performance: Moderately Satisfactory
C.3 Quality at Entry and Implementation Performance Indicators
Implementation
Performance Indicators
QAG Assessments
(if any) Rating
Potential Problem
Project at any time
(Yes/No):
No Quality at Entry
(QEA): None
Problem Project at any
time (Yes/No): Yes
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)
Central government administration 65 50
General agriculture, fishing and forestry sector 50
Sub-national government administration 30
Tertiary education 5
Theme Code (as % of total Bank financing)
Land administration and management 25 25
Law reform 13 13
Other public sector governance 25 25
Other rural development 13 13
Personal and property rights 24 24
E. Bank Staff
Positions At ICR At Approval
Vice President: Axel van Trotsenburg Jemal-ud-din Kassum
Country Director: Motoo Konishi Joachim von Amsberg
Practice
Manager/Manager: Jorge A. Munoz Mark D. Wilson
iii
Project Team Leader: Keith Clifford Bell Keith Clifford Bell
ICR Team Leader: Keith Clifford Bell
ICR Primary Author: Maria Cecilia Zanetta
F. Results Framework Analysis
Project Development Objectives (from Project Appraisal Document) There is a slight difference in the wording of the PDO between the PAD and the Loan
Agreement (LA). The latter is used for the purpose of this ICR as it is more detailed and
legally binding.
To increase land tenure security and improve land administration services (p. 2, PAD).
To increase land tenure security and improve the efficiency of the land titling and
administration system (Schedule 6, p. 36, LA).
Revised Project Development Objectives (as approved by original approving authority)
N.A.
(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 : Strengthened perception of land tenure security
Value
quantitative or
Qualitative)
Leyte: 82.9%
Bohol: 77.2%
Bukidnon: 65.9%
n.a.
Leyte: 83.6%
Bohol: 81.3%
Bukidnon: 96.3%
Date achieved 06/30/2007 06/30/2011 06/30/2013
Comments
(incl. %
achievement)
Substantial progress. Issuance of land titles under the Project increased the
survey respondents’ perception of land tenure security.
Indicator 2 : Reduced incidence of conflicting claims in project sites
Value
quantitative or
Qualitative)
Leyte: n.a.
Bohol: 74.2%
Bukidnon: 57.1%
n.a.
Leyte: 25.6%
Bohol: 40.0%
Bukidnon: 26.4%
Date achieved 06/30/2007 06/30/2011 06/30/2013
Comments
(incl. %
achievement)
Substantial progress. Percentage of respondents who observed cases of land
disputes in Bohol and Bukidnon has significantly gone down. This is partly
attributed to Project activities on survey validation, systematic adjudication, and
LGU-led titling.
Indicator 3 : Increase in diversification of incomes
Value
quantitative or
Qualitative)
0 N.A. N.A.
iv
Indicator Baseline Value
Original Target
Values (from
approval
documents)
Formally
Revised
Target
Values
Actual Value
Achieved at
Completion or
Target Years
Date achieved 06/30/2007 06/30/2011 06/30/2013
Comments
(incl. %
achievement)
Undetermined. Indicator was proposed to be dropped under the aborted AF—
beyond Project scope and affected by outside factors. Nevertheless, DENR's
proactive post-titling strategy is helping capitalize on potential economic impacts
of titling.
Indicator 4 : Increased investment in land property development
Value
quantitative or
Qualitative)
0 N.A.
W/ With
Leyte: 5% 13%
Bohol: 4% 13%
Bukidnon: 10% 6%
Date achieved 06/30/2007 06/30/2011 06/30/2013
Comments
(incl. %
achievement)
The Project's titling activities and the corresponding improvement in tenure
security contributed to the increase in investments by owners in the titled lands.
Indicator 5 : Increase in land values
Value
quantitative or
Qualitative)
100% N.A. 135%
Date achieved 06/30/2007 06/30/2011 06/30/2013
Comments
(incl. %
achievement)
Substantial progress. Results from a case study in 2 municipalities in Leyte
Prov. indicate that the ratio of land prices of titled versus untitled lands is 1.35.
Same applies for perceived prices for LAMP and non-LAMP beneficiaries in
Bohol and Bukidnon
Indicator 6 : Increase in formal land transactions
Value
quantitative or
Qualitative)
An average of 2,624 titles
issued per year N.A.
An average of 7,013
titles issued per year
under the Project.
Date achieved 06/30/2006 06/30/2011 06/30/2012
Comments
(incl. %
achievement)
Substantial progress. Project's strategies and resources (on systematic
adjudication, improved technical procedures, LGU participation, etc.)
significantly increased the volume and value of land titles being issued.
Indicator 7 : Increased satisfaction in land registration
Value
quantitative or
Qualitative)
Leyte: n.a.
Bohol: 88.2%
Bukidnon: 94.0%
N.A.
Leyte: 93.1%
Bohol: 91.2%
Bukidnon: 99.7%
Date achieved 06/30/2007 06/30/2011 06/30/2013
Comments
(incl. %
achievement)
Substantial achievement. Results of the Development Impact Study indicated
increased satisfaction with land registration as a result of the Project.
Indicator 8 : Increase in percentage of subsequent transactions registered in one-stop-shop
(OSS).
Value
quantitative or
Qualitative)
6,936 subsequent
transactions (e.g.,
subsequent sales,
N.A.
13,088 subsequent
transactions (e.g.,
subsequent sales,
v
Indicator Baseline Value
Original Target
Values (from
approval
documents)
Formally
Revised
Target
Values
Actual Value
Achieved at
Completion or
Target Years
inheritance, liens, etc.,
excluding registration of
new titles)
inheritance, liens,
etc., excluding
registration of new
titles)
Date achieved 06/30/2006 06/30/2011 06/30/2010
Comments
(incl. %
achievement)
Substantial progress. The OSS, which co-located different government offices
involved in land matters, has improved the public's access to land-related
services. The service standards put in place improved the processing of various
requests.
Indicator 9 : Decrease in informal and formal transactions costs in land registration.
Value
quantitative or
Qualitative)
Leyte: PhP6,380
Bohol: PhP3,112
Bukidnon: PhP14,396
N.A.
Leyte: PhP1,744
Bohol: PhP1,809
Bukidnon: PhP894
Date achieved 06/30/2007 06/30/2011 06/30/2013
Comments
(incl. %
achievement)
Streamlined titling procedures, reduced processing time, and dissemination of
transaction fees and service standards made transparent the requirements and
costs of transaction processing. (Values reflect only formal transactions costs)
Indicator 10 : Increase in collectible revenue from property and other land-related taxes
Value
quantitative or
Qualitative)
0 N.A.
W/ With
Leyte: 113% 114%
Bohol: 122% 129%
Bukidnon:112%
136%
Date achieved 06/30/2007 06/30/2011 06/30/2013
Comments
(incl. %
achievement)
Substantial progress. There was a significant increase in Real Property Tax
collections as a result of titling activities in Leyte, Bohol and Bukidnon and the
adoption of a market-based schedule of market values (SMV) in Naga City.
Indicator 11 : Reduce processing time in land registration process.
Value
quantitative or
Qualitative)
Leyte: 84 months
Bohol: 24 months
Bukidnon: 30 months
N.A.
Leyte: 7.2 months
Bohol: 6.1 months
Bukidnon: 5.3 months
Date achieved 06/30/2007 06/30/2011 06/30/2013
Comments
(incl. %
achievement)
Substantial achievement. The improved procedures and service standards
introduced by the Project resulted in drastic reductions in title processing time.
vi
(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
Indicator 1 : DENR Department Administrative Order (DAO) 98-12 revised by December 31,
2006, to provide for the amendment/updating of the Survey Manual.
Value
(quantitative
or Qualitative)
None Revised survey
manual.
DENR DAO 2007-
29
Date achieved 01/01/2006 12/31/2006 03/30/2014
Comments
(incl. %
achievement)
Achieved. Six (6) DAOs were issued by DENR defining and/or simplifying
survey procedures, including DAO 2007-29.
Indicator 2 : Draft Land Administration Code prepared and submitted to Congress by
December 31, 2008.
Value
(quantitative
or Qualitative)
None
Land
Administration
Code submitted to
Congress.
Land
Administratio
n Code
submitted to
Congress.
Draft Code
(proposed Bill)
completed and
under review;
awaiting results of
the proposed
institutional reform
of rural
development
agencies.
Date achieved 01/01/2006 12/31/2008 07/30/2010 03/30/2014
Comments
(incl. %
achievement)
Partially Achieved. Proposed Bill updated and under final review for submission
to the current Congress.
Indicator 3 : Department Administrative Order on the management of government land
developed and adopted by December 31, 2010.
Value
(quantitative
or Qualitative)
None
DAO on the
management of
government land
developed and
adopted.
Draft DAO on
"Guidelines in the
Development and
Institutionalization
of Foreshore
Administration and
Management Plan";
under final review.
Date achieved 01/01/2006 12/31/2010 03/30/2014
Comments
(incl. %
achievement)
Partially Achieved. The guidelines drafted are key for management of
government lands and included valuation aspects.
Indicator 4 : Department Administrative Order on Miscellaneous Sales Application revised by
March 2009 and issued by June 30, 2009
Value
(quantitative None
DAO on
Miscellaneous
DENR DAO 2009-
05 issued on April
vii
Indicator Baseline Value
Original Target
Values (from
approval
documents)
Formally
Revised
Target Values
Actual Value
Achieved at
Completion or
Target Years
or Qualitative) Sales
Application
issued.
21, 2009 as interim
measure to
facilitate titling of
residential lands.
Date achieved 01/01/2006 03/31/2009 03/30/2014
Comments
(incl. %
achievement)
Achieved. The addition of this indicator is critical and supported the imple-
mentation of the Residential Free Patent Act (Republic Act No. 10023) that was
subsequently passed, allowing for issuance of free patents to residential lands.
Indicator 5 :
Strategic Framework Plan outlining long-term priorities for the Land
Administration and Management Sector completed by March 2010 and endorsed
by NSC by June 2010
Value
(quantitative
or Qualitative)
None
Strategic
Framework
Plan
completed and
endorsed by
NSC.
Land Sector
Development
Framework (LSDF)
completed and
endorsed by the
National Steering
Committee (NSC).
Date achieved 01/01/2006 06/30/2010 03/30/2014
Comments
(incl. %
achievement)
Achieved. Achievement of this additional indicator addressed the needed
framework for land sector. Framework provides a 20-year vision, mission
statement, and policy statement and was a key input in preparation of the
Philippine Development Pan 2010-2016.
Indicator 6 :
Human Resource Management and Development (HRMD) Strategy, together
with appropriate training developed, adopted, and implemented by June 30,
2006.
Value
(quantitative
or Qualitative)
None HRMD
implemented
HRMD
implemented
Date achieved 01/01/2006 06/30/2006 03/30/2014
Comments
(incl. %
achievement)
Achieved. The HRMD Strategy and Plan, together with the appropriate training
programs were developed, adopted, and implemented by June 30, 2006.
Indicator 7 : Education programs in at least two (2) academic institutions for land
administration and management (LAM) fully operational by June 30, 2009.
Value
(quantitative
or Qualitative)
None
Education
programs in LAM
being offered by
two universities.
Education
programs
(academic
and/or
professional
development)
in LAM being
offered by two
universities.
Continuing
education, Diploma
and Masters
programs are being
offered by the
Visayas State
University and the
University of the
Philippines Open
University.
viii
Indicator Baseline Value
Original Target
Values (from
approval
documents)
Formally
Revised
Target Values
Actual Value
Achieved at
Completion or
Target Years
Date achieved 01/01/2006 06/30/2009 06/30/2010 03/30/2014
Comments
(incl. %
achievement)
Achieved.
Indicator 8 : Titles issued
Value
(quantitative
or Qualitative)
0
264,000 titles
issued if Free
Patent Act passed.
137,000 titles
issued if Free
Patent Act not
passed.
102,000
titles/tenure
instruments
issued.
101,793 new titles
registered
Date achieved 01/01/2006 06/30/2011 06/30/2011 03/30/2014
Comments
(incl. %
achievement)
Achieved. 99.8% achieved.
Indicator 9 : Records Management Strategy (RMS) prepared and adopted by June 30, 2006.
Value
(quantitative
or Qualitative)
Records Management
Strategy (RMS)
developed under LAMP I.
RMS developed
and adopted.
RMS developed,
adopted and under
implementation.
Date achieved 01/01/2006 06/30/2006 03/30/2014
Comments
(incl. %
achievement)
Achieved. In addition to RMS, a supporting Land Administration Management
System (LAMS) has been developed and rolled-out to all the 16 regions in the
country.
Indicator 10 : Community Participation Strategy (CPS) prepared and adopted by October 31,
2006.
Value
(quantitative
or Qualitative)
None CPS prepared and
adopted.
CPS prepared and
adopted.
Date achieved 01/01/2006 10/31/2006 03/30/2014
Comments
(incl. %
achievement)
Achieved.
Indicator 11 : Community participation rate of 80% in systematic titling.
Value
(quantitative
or Qualitative)
0 80%
Leyte: 71.96%
Bohol: 88.37%
Bukidnon:
83.69%
Average:
81.34%
Date achieved 01/01/2006 06/30/2011 06/30/2013
Comments
(incl. % Achieved.
ix
Indicator Baseline Value
Original Target
Values (from
approval
documents)
Formally
Revised
Target Values
Actual Value
Achieved at
Completion or
Target Years
achievement)
Indicator 12 : Minimum service standards of OSS developed, agreed and in place by June 30,
2006.
Value
(quantitative
or Qualitative)
None
OSS developed,
agreed and in
place.
OSS developed,
agreed and in place.
Date achieved 01/01/2006 06/30/2006 03/30/2014
Comments
(incl. %
achievement)
Achieved. Minimum service standards of OSS developed and agreed and a
monitoring system was in place by November 30, 2006.
Indicator 13 : OSS established in each selected Province, City, or Municipality no later than 12
months after said province, city or municipality has been selected.
Value
(quantitative
or Qualitative)
None
OSSs established
in participating
provinces.
OSS building
constructed and
operational in
Leyte.
Virtual OSS
operational in
Bohol and
Bukidnon (for
Consolidated
Cadastral Map and
patent registration
and distribution
activities.
Date achieved 01/01/2006 06/30/2011 03/30/2014
Comments
(incl. %
achievement)
Partially Achieved. The physical establishment of OSS buildings in Bohol and
Bukidnon was not pursued. Instead, a linkage between the information systems
of the various LAM agencies was agreed to be developed.
Indicator 14 : First Independent monitor appointed by September 30, 2008.
Value
(quantitative
or Qualitative)
None
Independent
monitor for OSS
Leyte appointed.
First
independent
monitor
appointed by
September 30,
2006 and
subsequent
independent
monitors to be
appointed by
no later than
six months
after
establishment
Independent
monitor for OSS
Leyte appointed in
Sept. 2008.
No monitor
appointed for Bohol
and Bukidnon, as
OSSs were not
established.
x
Indicator Baseline Value
Original Target
Values (from
approval
documents)
Formally
Revised
Target Values
Actual Value
Achieved at
Completion or
Target Years
of OSS in
other sites.
Date achieved 01/01/2006 09/30/2006 09/30/2008 03/30/2014
Comments
(incl. %
achievement)
Achieved.
Indicator 15 : OSS meeting 90% of service standards after three years of operation.
Value
(quantitative
or Qualitative)
0 n.a. 90% achieved in
Leyte
Date achieved 01/30/2006 06/30/2009 11/30/2013
Comments
(incl. %
achievement)
Achieved. Target achieved until Super Typhoon Haiyan severely disrupted the
operations of the Leyte OSS.
Indicator 16 : Valuation standards and guidelines for taxation purposes developed and adopted
by DoF by June 30, 2007.
Value
(quantitative
or Qualitative)
None
Valuation
standards and
guidelines issued.
Valuation
standards for
taxation
purposes
prepared by
June 2009 and
adopted by
December 31,
2009 (DAO
issued), and
associated
valuation
guidelines
developed and
issued by June
30, 2010
Philippine
Valuation
Standards (PVS)
issued (DoF DO37-
2009).
Mass Appraisal
Guidelines issued
(DoF DO10-2010).
Date achieved 01/01/2006 06/30/2007 06/30/2010 03/30/2014
Comments
(incl. %
achievement)
Achieved.
Indicator 17 :
One LGU adopts uniform valuation/appraisal processes and completes LGU-
wide property appraisals by mid-term review (MTR) and at least one more LGU
by June 30, 2009.
Value
(quantitative
or Qualitative)
None n.a.
One LGU
adopts
uniform
valuation/appr
aisal processes
and completes
Naga City adopted
market-based SMV
in 2008.
Iloilo City prepared
market-based
xi
Indicator Baseline Value
Original Target
Values (from
approval
documents)
Formally
Revised
Target Values
Actual Value
Achieved at
Completion or
Target Years
LGU-wide
property
appraisal by
MTR and at
least one more
LGU is ready
to adopt LGU
wide property
appraisal by
June 30, 2010.
SMVs; ready for
adoption.
Date achieved 01/01/2006 06/30/2009 06/30/2010 03/30/2014
Comments
(incl. %
achievement)
Achieved.
Indicator 18 : Education programs in property valuation in at least one academic institution
fully operational by June 30, 2009.
Value
(quantitative
or Qualitative)
None 1
Diploma, Master's
and continuing
education programs
in property
valuation in place
Date achieved 01/01/2006 06/30/2009 03/30/2014
Comments
(incl. %
achievement)
Achieved. The University of Philippines Open University instituted the
Continuing Professional Education on Property and Land Valuation in May
2010. Diploma and Master's courses on Property Land Valuation and
Management were approved in June 2011.
Indicator 19 : All project management structures are established and systems implemented by
start of the Project.
Value
(quantitative
or Qualitative)
Partial management
structure in place from
project preparation and
LAMP I
Management
structures are
established and
systems
implemented.
Management
structures are
established and
systems
implemented.
Date achieved 01/01/2006 06/30/2006 06/30/2006
Comments
(incl. %
achievement)
Achieved.
Indicator 20 : An effective Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) System is established by March
31, 2006.
Value
(quantitative
or Qualitative)
M&E System from
LAMP I
M&E System is
established
M&E System is
established
Date achieved 01/01/2006 03/31/2006 06/30/2006
Comments
(incl. % Achieved. LAMP II M&E framework was cited by AusAID as best practice.
xii
Indicator Baseline Value
Original Target
Values (from
approval
documents)
Formally
Revised
Target Values
Actual Value
Achieved at
Completion or
Target Years
achievement)
Indicator 21 : Initial baseline of socio-economic and environmental impact assessment study
completed by September 30, 2006 and the second survey by December 31, 2010.
Value
(quantitative
or Qualitative)
None
Baselines in 2006
Final assessment
in Dec. 2010
Baselines in 2007
and 2010; and final
impact assessment
in 2013
Date achieved 01/01/2006 12/31/2010 03/30/2014
Comments
(incl. %
achievement)
Achieved. The Socio-Economic Baseline Study (SEBS) was conducted in 2007
in Leyte and in 2010 in Bohol and Bukidnon. Final impact assessment was
completed in 2013.
Indicator 22 : A public relations strategy is adopted by June 30, 2006.
Value
(quantitative
or Qualitative)
None Strategy adopted
Social Mobilization
Strategy
implemented
Date achieved 01/01/2006 06/30/2006 03/30/2014
Comments
(incl. %
achievement)
Achieved. Social Mobilization Strategy developed and finalized in June 2007
and approved by the Bank in August 2007. Information materials developed and
disseminated.
Indicator 23 : A strategy and implementation plan establishing a framework for consolidating
and sustaining GoP commitment to LAM reform.
Value
(quantitative
or Qualitative)
None
Sustainability
strategy being
implemented
Sustainability Plan
under
implementation
Date achieved 01/01/2006 06/30/2011 03/30/2014
Comments
(incl. %
achievement)
Achieved. Sustainability Plan was developed in November 2009 and is under
implementation.
Indicator 24 : Innovation Support Fund (ISF) in place and operational by September 2006.
Value
(quantitative
or Qualitative)
None ISF in place and
operational
ISF was
implemented
successfully
Date achieved 01/01/2006 09/30/2006 03/30/2014
Comments
(incl. %
achievement)
Achieved. Operational Guidelines approved by DENR and AusAID in
September 2006.
Indicator 25 : At least ten (10) selected LGUs adopting LAM good practices, technologies, and
local innovations based on LGU needs and partnerships by December 2008.
Value
(quantitative
or Qualitative)
None
At least 10 LGUs
to adopt LAM
good practices
24 LGUs adopted
LAM good
practices
Date achieved 01/01/2006 06/30/2011 03/30/2014
xiii
Indicator Baseline Value
Original Target
Values (from
approval
documents)
Formally
Revised
Target Values
Actual Value
Achieved at
Completion or
Target Years
Comments
(incl. %
achievement)
Achieved. Ten LGUs participated in Phase I and 14 LGUs in an expansion
phase. LGU contributions to ISF projects totaled PhP72.55 million (US$1.61
million), representing 49% of total LAMP II ISF funding.
G. Ratings of Project Performance in ISRs
No. Date ISR
Archived DO IP
Actual
Disbursements
(USD millions)
1 12/21/2005 Satisfactory Satisfactory 0.09
2 01/12/2007 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately
Unsatisfactory 1.22
3 04/24/2007 Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory 1.56
4 08/29/2007 Moderately
Unsatisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 2.10
5 05/08/2008 Moderately
Unsatisfactory
Moderately
Unsatisfactory 3.24
6 08/20/2008 Moderately
Unsatisfactory
Moderately
Unsatisfactory 4.14
7 12/23/2008 Moderately
Unsatisfactory
Moderately
Unsatisfactory 4.72
8 06/04/2009 Moderately
Unsatisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 6.08
9 09/21/2009 Moderately
Unsatisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 7.38
10 12/16/2009 Moderately
Unsatisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 8.08
11 05/18/2010 Moderately
Unsatisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 9.69
12 06/29/2010 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 10.27
13 02/14/2011 Moderately Satisfactory Satisfactory 14.07
14 08/13/2011 Satisfactory Satisfactory 15.10
15 01/28/2012 Satisfactory Satisfactory 15.26
16 01/09/2013 Highly Satisfactory Highly Satisfactory 15.36
17 10/21/2013 Satisfactory Satisfactory 15.36
18 03/31/2014 Satisfactory Satisfactory 15.36
xiv
H. Restructuring (if any)
Restructuring
Date(s)
Board
Approved
PDO Change
ISR Ratings at
Restructuring
Amount
Disbursed at
Restructuring
in USD
millions
Reason for Restructuring &
Key Changes Made DO IP
11/11/2010 MS MS 12.43
Level 2 restructuring to address
slow pace of implementation,
including: (a) the partial
cancellation of loan funds; (b)
reduction of original titling
target; (c) land administration
service delivery to be
undertaken only in provinces
with systematic titling under the
project; (d) transfer of valuation
education from Component 2 to
Component 4 for better
alignment with responsible
implementing agency.
03/22/2011 MS S 14.20
Level 2 restructuring to extend
the closing date from March 31,
2011 to March 30, 2012 to
allow the full implementation of
Project activities.
03/15/2012 S S 15.30
Level 2 restructuring to extend
the closing date for the second
time from March 31, 2012 to
Dec. 31, 2012 to allow the full
implementation of Project
activities and the preparation of
Additional Financing (AF).
12/11/2012 S S 15.36
Level 2 restructuring to extend
the closing date for the third
time from Dec. 31, 2012 to
September 30, 2013 to enable
the negotiation of the AF.
09/27/2013 HS HS 15.36
Level 2 restructuring to extend
the closing date for the fourth
time from September 30, 2013
to March 31, 2014 to enable the
GoP to secure the final
documentation requirement to
complete the Negotiations of
the proposed AF.
xv
I. Disbursement Profile
1. Project Context, Development Objectives and Design
1.1 Context at Appraisal
The land administration system in the Philippines was characterized by weak and
inefficient institutional structures, rigid and outdated land laws and regulations, the co-
existence of multiple and inconsistent land valuation systems, and lack of transparency and
accountability in the land registration system. These weaknesses, in turn, undermined the
efficiency and effectiveness of the land administration system, resulting in severe land
insecurity and lower government revenues from land-related taxes and fees. About one-
third of rural parcels remained untitled, as obtaining an original title could take several
years, with the cost of obtaining a court-defendable title one of the highest in the world and
often in excess of the land value itself. Land insecurity was also exacerbated by poor land
records, arising from years of illegal alteration, fire and water damage, and misplacement
from transfers. The cadastral maps were in very poor condition and information searches
were costly and time consuming. These inefficiencies, combined with high land tax rates,
fueled informal land markets, imposed constraints on economic development, reduced
opportunities for the poor, and discouraged sustainable management of land resources.
Recognizing the need for a unified institutional approach to the delivery and management
of land administration services, the Government of Philippines (GoP) established a Land
Administration and Management (LAM) Task Force in 1999 to supervise the design and
implementation of a long-term (15-20 year) program to guide the implementation of the
land administration and management reform in the Philippines. The initial step was the
implementation of the first Land Administration and Management Project (LAMP I), a
learning and innovation loan (LIL) with support from the International Bank for
Reconstruction and Development (Word Bank) and the Australian Agency for
International Development (AusAID) 1 . LAMP I was designed to test alternative
approaches to accelerated land titling, including records management, and to build a sound
policy and institutional foundation for the implementation of the long-term land
administration and management program. This was instrumental in testing the existing
legal framework, procedures and institutional coordination among the various agencies,
and identified the necessary policy, legal framework and institutional reform agenda
required to establish a sustainable and efficient land administration system. Building on the
experience and lessons learned under LAMP I, the Second Land Administration and
Management Project (LAMP II) was designed and implemented in three initial provinces.
LAMP II was in full alignment with the GoP's LAM priorities and national development
plans and the Bank’s Country Assistance Strategy (CAS). In particular, it supported the
Medium-Term Philippine Development Plans (2001-2004 and 2004-2010) objectives of:
(a) promoting good and effective governance; and (b) socially equitable modernization of
agriculture and fisheries to achieve sustainable increases in rural in incomes, improved
1 Philippines’ First Land Administration and Management Project (FSLT-7034); September 26, 2000 to
December 31, 2004; US$4.79 million IBRD commitment.
access to land tenure, extension services, rural infrastructure, and credit. It was also
consistent with the Bank’s CAS (2003-2005 and 2006-2008) objectives of: (a) accelerating
environmentally sustainable rural development with social equity; (b) promoting good and
effective governance; and (c) reinforcing community participation processes.
1.2 Original Project Development Objectives (PDO) and Key Indicators
There is a slight difference in the wording of the PDO between the Project Appraisal
Document (PAD) and the Loan Agreement (LA). The PAD’s PDO statement reads
“increase land tenure security and improve land administration services though the
implementation of institutional and legal reform, the realization of an accelerated land
titling program and the establishment of a fair and uniform property valuation system” (p.
2, PAD).
Alternatively, the PDO statement indicated in the LA reads “increase land tenure security
and improve the efficiency of the land titling and administration system” (Schedule 6, p.
36, LA). The LA’s PDO statement is utilized for the purpose of this evaluation.
1.3 Revised PDO (as approved by original approving authority) and Key Indicators,
and reasons/justification
The PDO and corresponding key performance indicators (KPIs) remained unchanged
during the operation’s lifetime. Some intermediate indicators underwent minor changes
under the 2010 restructuring while additional ones were added to reflect implementation
progress and changing priorities.2
1.4 Main Beneficiaries
The Project’s direct beneficiaries were farmers with no tenure security who received land
titles under the Project, as well as existing landowners in the three participating provinces
who will benefit from a more effective LAM system. Indirect beneficiaries include the two
implementing agencies, i.e., Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR)
and Department of Finance (DOF) through the Bureau of Local Government Finance
(BLGF) and National Tax Research Center (NTRC), as well as participating Local
Government Units (LGUs) and local Registry of Deeds (RoDs), which received support
under the Project. In addition, the general population is expected to have benefited from
the increase in local government revenues from land-related taxes and fees, as well as a
more equitable taxation system resulting from an improved property valuation system.
1.5 Original Components
Component 1: Development of Land Policy and Regulatory Framework (US$2.3
million, equivalent to 2.6 percent of Project cost). This component provided support to
PDO 2 (improve the efficiency of the land titling and administration system) by supporting
2 Changes in intermediate indicators are noted in the Datasheet (pp. iv-ix).
the development of land policy, legislation and regulatory changes for the land
administration reform program. In particular, it supported: (a) policy, legislative and
regulatory activities initiated under LAMP I, including the preparation of a comprehensive
land administration law; (b) the development of a land management policy framework; and
(c) the transition to the new institution, i.e., the Land Administration Authority (LAA).
Component 2: Institutional Development and Capacity Building (US$3.89 million,
equivalent to 1.7 percent of Project cost). This component provided support to PDO 2 by
supporting the implementation of transparent, responsive, and more service-oriented
institutional arrangements for land administration and to the development of the capacity
of local academic institutions to provide land administration education and training. In
particular, it supported: (a) strengthening of existing land administration coordination
arrangements; (b) improvement in the transparency and accountability of land
administration; and (c) establishment of an education program in land administration and
management in one of the national universities in the Philippines in order to strengthen
land administration expertise.
Component 3: Tenure Security (US$21.51 million, equivalent to 76.5 percent of Project
cost). This component provided support to PDO 1 (increase land tenure security) through
an accelerated land adjudication program and the establishment of an efficient and
accessible land registration system. It provided support for: (a) community participation
and awareness campaign; (b) issuing free-patent titles in rural and urban areas in up to four
regions; and (c) streamlining the guidelines to facilitate the acceleration of issuing land
titles on demand. It also supported the establishment of functional land administration units
at LGU-level, including One Stop Shops (OSS), as well as the development and monitoring
of uniform service delivery standards.
Project Component 4 - Property Valuation (US$5.02 million, equivalent to 7.6 percent
of Project cost). This component provided support to PDO 2 by supporting actions aimed
at raising the quality of government and private sector property valuation performance,
achieving one single valuation base for taxation and ensuring sustainable improvement
through institutional and educational reform. In particular, it supported the formation of a
property valuation unit in the DoF to develop guidelines for the adoption of international
standards in property valuation, to provide support for selected LGUs for the application
of those standards, and to support the development of an appropriate valuation professional
body in the Philippines.
Component 5: Project Management (US$5.84 million, equivalent to 6.2 percent of
Project cost). This component aimed to establish administrative capacity, systems and
plans for the management of LAMP II. In particular, it provided support to DENR and DoF
to manage the Project, the establishment and implementation of a monitoring and
evaluation (M&E) system, and technical assistance at all levels to implement the Project.
1.6 Revised Components
In view of the Project’s poor initial performance, the Mid-Term Review (MTR) identified
the need to introduce several changes, which eventually were formalized in a Level 2
restructuring in 2010. The major modifications were: (a) cancellation of US$2.8 million in
loan funds; (b) reduction in the titling target to 102,000 (down from the original target of
265,000 which had been subsequently adjusted to 137,000 due to delayed passage of the
proposed amendment in the Free Patent legislation; (c) land administration service delivery
to be undertaken only in provinces with systematic titling under the Project; and (d) transfer
of valuation education from Component 2 to Component 4. Other changes to individual
components are summarized on Table 1.
Table 1. Changes in Individual Components under the 2010 Project Restructuring
Component Changes Introduced under 2010 Restructuring
1. Development of Land
Policy and Regulatory
Framework
Revision of some output delivery dates to reflect
implementation progress.
Addition of the Land Sector Development
Framework (LSDF) as a new activity and
intermediate outcome.
Allocation of funds to support activities previously
funded by AusAID Technical Assistance (TA)
Grant (given the closure of the grant).
Increase in the component cost from US$0.49 to
US$0.641 million.
2. Institutional Development
and Capacity Building Transfer of valuation education activities to
Component 4.
Increase in the component cost from US$0.33 to
US$0.736 million.
3. Tenure Security Reduction of participating provinces from four to
three.
Reduction of titling targets owing to the delayed
passage of the amendment of the Free Patent (FP)
from 264,000 to 102,000. A 50 percent reduction
(to 137,000 titles) had already been identified
during Appraisal in the case the FP would not be
passed in the first two years of Project
implementation.
Adjustments to the scheduling of OSS-related
activities.
Decrease in component cost from US$14.54 to
US$11.55 million.
4 - Property Valuation Transfer of valuation education activities from
Component 2.
Allocation of funds to support tax policy studies and
the adoption of valuation and taxation reforms in
LGUs (due to closure of the AusAID TA grant).
Increase in component cost from US$1.45 to
US$1.702 million.
5. Project Management Allocation of funds for the monitoring and
supervision of activities initiated under the
Innovation Support Fund (due to closure of the
AusAID TA grant).
Increase in component cost from US$1.186 to
US$1.469 million.
1.7 Other significant changes
DENR made the decision not to pursue the physical establishment of OSS buildings in
Bohol and Bukidnon in view of the construction of new RoD buildings under the Land
Registration Agency’s ongoing Land Titling Computerization Project (LTCP) and the
result of the OSS sustainability study in 2010. Instead, a linkage between the information
systems of the different LAM agencies was agreed to be developed, with the data from the
titles of the three provincial RoDs being captured by the project, providing users under the
Project a one-stop service point for consolidated cadastral caps, and patent registration and
distribution. This decision resulted in some cost savings and the reallocation of funds.
The project was restructured four times as shown in Section H of the ICR Datasheet for a
total of 36 additional months to, first, allow the full completion of all Project activities and,
from December 2012 onwards, enable the processing of Additional Financing (AF) at the
GoP’s request.
2. Key Factors Affecting Implementation and Outcomes
2.1 Project Preparation, Design and Quality at Entry
(a) Soundness of the background analysis. The operation adequately reflected lessons
learned in other land management operations in the region, while adapting them to the
Philippines context. For example, while the issuing of land titles was included under the
Project to ensure political support at the sub-national level, the number was significantly
more modest compared to other countries such as Cambodia and Indonesia. The operation
also incorporated the lessons learned from LAMP I, which was a key input in the design
of the reform strategy, particularly the use of free patent titling, and the identification of
priority areas of intervention under LAMP II. As mentioned earlier, the Project was fully
aligned with the strategic priorities of the GoP and the Bank’s CAS.
(b) Assessment of the Project design. The operation benefited from a sound technical
design. The Bank team correctly chose to limit the Project’s geographical scope in the
absence of the required nationwide institutional and legal framework. Likewise, although
the Project was designed to support the formation of the creation of a single land
management agency under the proposed legislation, it also included a set of alternative
actions aimed at enhancing the efficiency and efficacy of land administration systems in
the absence of new legislation; thus adequately mitigating such risk. There were some
minor weaknesses in the Project Results Framework (PRF), mainly its overly dependence
on an impact evaluation to measure the Project’s impact. There were also too many loan
covenants (over 20 legal covenants in the LA), which required a large percentage of
supervision resources without a corresponding payoff, as many of them were secondary
aspects of implementation that could have been included in the Operations Manual. The
Project was complemented with a Technical Assistance grant from AusAID.
(c) Adequacy of government's commitment. The GoP was largely committed to the
reforms supported by the operation. Although with delays, the Free Patent Act was
eventually approved as well as the Real Estate Services Act (RESA). The Land
Administration Authority (LAA) bill, however, was met with strong opposition from the
Land Registration Authority (LRA) and was not passed despite the strong support of
legislators and civil society at large. This, however, will be re-filed in this current Congress.
(d) Assessment of risks. The Project was correctly identified as High Risk at Appraisal.
The main risks were specifically indicated in the PAD such as the uncertainty regarding
the passage of legislation needed for more drastic reform and the inclusion of an alternative
target for the number of land titles issued in case of delays in the passage of enabling
legislation on free patent. After weighing the various options, including not proceeding
with the operation in the absence of such legislation, the Bank Team opted to support a
phased reform strategy to capitalize on the momentum that had been generated under
LAMP I. However, as denoted by the significant delays in Project start in the components
under the DENR’s orbit, the Bank team seems to have underestimated the complexity of
the planned institutional and legal reforms, which proved to be more challenging than
anticipated. As noted below, other factors such as excessive management turnover were
also important contributors to the initial delays in implementation. Likewise, as illustrated
by the negative impact of Typhoons Frank and Haiyan on implementation and
sustainability of the Project’s outcomes, the risk of natural disasters should have also been
taken into consideration at Appraisal.
The Bank's Quality Assurance Group did not evaluate Quality at Entry.
2.2 Implementation
(a) Outside the Control of the Government
Natural disasters. Typhoon Frank hit the Philippines in June 2008, causing great
devastation in Iloilo City.3 This city was one of three cities piloting the adoption of
revised guidelines for property valuation. In view of the devastation and the losses
suffered by the population, local authorities decided to postpone the adoption of the
new valuation schedule. In addition, Typhoon Haiyan, one of the strongest tropical
cyclones ever recorded, hit the Philippines in November 2013. It had a devastating
effect in the island of Leyte, with an estimated death toll of 10,000 people. The Leyte
OSS, which had been financed under LAMP I was severely damaged as a result of the
storm and is currently not operational.
Global financial crisis. The 2008-2009 global financial crisis had a negative impact
on the Project, as the resulting fiscal constraints caused severe shortages of counterpart
funds and the government agencies’ inability to hire and retain competent staff, both of
which slowed implementation.
AusAID support. The Innovation Support Fund (ISF) under AusAID TA proved
invaluable in fostering innovation and generating systematic learning under the Project.
In particular, the ISF was critical in helping demonstrate the key role of LGUs in land
management and governance.
(b) Within the Control of the Government
Delayed restructuring. Project implementation started in 2005 and progress was very
slow until 2009. It was agreed during the Project’s MTR, which was undertaken jointly
by the World Bank and AusAID in 2008, that a restructuring was needed to improve
the Project’s implementation performance and disbursements, which amounted to only
21 percent after two-and-half years of implementation. In the event, GoP processing of
the request for loan fund cancellation and restructuring was delayed and the official
request was only submitted on March 19, 2010 - almost two years after it was initially
discussed. Nevertheless, Project implementation gained momentum following the
MTR, with performance and disbursements improved significantly, as illustrated by
3 Typhoon Frank resulted in over 1,300 deaths due to flooding and mudslides. In Iloilo City, 30,000 people
were forced to the rooftops when a nearby reservoir burst
(http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/hurricanes/archives/2008/h2008_fengshen.html).
the fact that by the time of the restructuring (November 2010), disbursements had
reached US$11.7 million (equivalent to 62 percent of the Loan amount).
Delays in the approval of critical legislation. The legislative and institutional reforms
proved more difficult than expected. The Residential Free Patent Act (Republic Act
No. 10023) was passed but only after substantial delays in 2010, which require to
reducing the titling targets at the MTR and subsequent restructuring. Two of the
anticipated laws, i.e., LAA bill and Valuation Reform Act (VRA) bill, were not
enacted, although the passage of the VRA bill is still likely. While the LAA bill had
the strong support of legislators and civil societies, it met strong opposition from the
LRA. In the absence of the LAA bill, the Project pursued an array of innovative
approaches to achieve operational improvements, including a collaborative partnership
with LGUs on land titling, the development of computerized records management
system within the DENR and the adoption of a new Land Sector Development
Framework (LSDF), thus illustrating that there are indeed multiple paths toward
reform.
Additional Financing (AF). As early as 2010, the GoP expressed interest in an
Additional Financing to the project to scale-up key reforms on land administration (viz.
computerization of public lands records and the national roll-out of the Land
Administration and Management System, LAMS, software) and property valuation
supported under the Project. As the partnership with LGUs on land titling was working
well, there was no need to include titling under the AF.
The actual Project implementation was substantially completed by 20114 , but the
closing date was extended two additional times to allow for AF preparation and internal
government approval processes. Jointly with the DENR and the DOF, the Bank Team
completed in April 2013 all preparation and clearance processes for an AF of US$61.47
million to be implemented over three years. However, finalization of the proposed AF
did not materialize on time and GOP has decided to finance the planned activities for
LAMP AF.
(c) Within the Control of the Implementing Agencies
Emphasis on LGU role in land management and administration (LAM). Although
conceptually envisioned at preparation, LGUs assumed a critical role during
implementation of titling activities under Component 3, not only as key partners in
titling activities but also by ensuring the coordination at the local level of the
interventions of LAM national agencies, which in the case of the Philippines are
fragmented and uncoordinated. LGU active participation in land-titling activities first
started in Bohol in 2009. Taking the new approach of training and deputizing local
government staff for titling activities from the Bayawan City experience, the Bohol
Provincial Project Implementation Office (PPIO) led a strong campaign on the benefits
4 By February 2011, the Project had disbursed 92 percent of loan proceeds. By January 2012, the level of
disbursement was 99.5 percent.
of cadastral maps and land survey and titling to the local government. Their efforts paid
off as within a year, nine Memorandum of Partnership Agreements were subscribed
with various levels of counterpart resources from LGUs totaling more than PhP 20
million. The Leyte and Bukidnon PPIOs also adopted this scheme, adopting it to local
conditions.
Frequent changes in leadership in DENR. There were five different DENR
Secretaries and eight LAMP II Executive Directors as well as the Project’s technical
staff (i.e., Financial Management, procurement, and M&E functions) during the
Project’s lifetime, which contributed to some of the delays in the Project’s
implementation.
Agency support and coordination. While coordination among implementing
agencies presented a challenge initially, the two participating national agencies (i.e.,
DENR and DOF, through BLGF and NTRC) demonstrated the ability to cooperate and
coordinate efforts. In addition, these two agencies were effective in coordinating efforts
with administrative units at the regional, provincial and city levels. While the Project
enjoyed the strong support of DOF, BLGF and NTRC, support from DENR authorities
was more uneven given the leadership changes mentioned above.
2.3 Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Design, Implementation and Utilization
(a) Design. Project implementation was supported by an adequate and operational M&E
system at various levels of government, with quality assurance systems in place in the three
participating provinces. AusAID cited the LAMP II M&E system as a best practice.
The Project Results and Monitoring Framework (PRF) was overly dependent on an impact
evaluation to measure the Project’s impact, as PDO indicators tended to reflect hypothetical
impacts of land titling on a wide array of variables. Moreover, some indicators were not
fully attributable to the Project. For example, an increase in the diversification of income
among those that received a title would depend on various factors and complementary
interventions beyond land titling per se and would only become evident after the lifetime
of the Project. In addition and as in the case with many older projects, PDO indicators did
not have quantified baselines, annual targets or target outcomes - for which measuring the
Project’s impact had been problematic as expected results had been more ambiguous.
Conversely, the definition of Intermediate Indicators was overly detailed, with an excessive
emphasis on dates, which required them to be changed during the MTR.
As mentioned above, the Project fully capitalized on its potential for generating systematic
learning and fostering innovation. A large number of studies were supported as part of
AusAID TA to test critical hypothesis about the impact of land titling on various variables
such as land value, land investments, etc. It also financed the impact evaluation to
systematically measure the impact of the Project.
(b) Implementation. In addition to monitoring progress, regular performance assessments
were held regularly. For the impact evaluation, Socio-Economic Baseline Studies (SEBS)
were conducted in 2007 in Leyte and in 2010 in Bohol and Bukidnon, well after Project
implementation had begun. Thus, some of the impacts, such as pre-Project satisfaction,
were not fully captured. In addition, there were changes in the composition of the control
and experimental groups, as some municipalities initially classified as “control areas”
during SEBS were eventually covered by LAMP II and vice versa. To compensate for these
shortcomings, the final survey, which was conducted in 2013, studied the initial impacts
of titling and land registration using both “before and after” and “with and without” Project
comparisons, the latter ones being less rigorous in terms of comparability (see Annex 5).
(c) Utilization. During implementation, studies conducted under AusAID TA served to
evaluate the impact of the Project and its cost-effectiveness. 5 The final Development
Impact Study (DIS) utilized a rigorous methodology to measure the Project’s impact in the
three participating provinces. In addition, the studies and wealth of information resulting
from LAMP I and II were critical inputs in the preparation of the Philippines’ Land
Governance Assessment Framework (LGAF), in particular the modules on land tenure,
land policy, land administration, and property valuation and taxation.6
2.4 Safeguard and Fiduciary Compliance
The Project triggered three safeguards: Environment, Involuntary Resettlement, and
Indigenous Peoples, and their compliance were satisfactory. The Project's Environmental
category was "Category B".
(a) Social Safeguards. The dropping of earlier planned infrastructures resulted in
cancellation of any potential triggers on involuntary resettlement policy. Lands covered by
applications for and fully-fledged Certificates of Ancestral Domain Titles (CADTs) as
certified by the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) were excluded from
the Project (titling operations for ancestral domains are the responsibility of the NCIP).
Nevertheless, Indigenous Peoples (IP) living in alienable and disposable lands outside
ancestral domains in the lowlands of Bukidnon Province received effective support for
Project participation through the integration of the IP Coordinators within the Provincial
Project Implementation Office (PPIO). The experience has been acknowledged by the
PPIO in facilitating the attainment of Project objectives in the province, despite a very real
threat of stoppage in the beginning.
(b) Environmental Safeguards. As identified in the PAD, the direct impacts on the
environment were minor and attributable to civil works. However, with the cancellation
of the establishment of the OSS in Bohol and Bukidnon, no other civil works were
undertaken. Indirect impacts identified were associated with investment and development
improvements of land, but may only be expected in the longer term beyond the Project life.
5 There were studies conducted on the impact of titling on land prices, investments, cost comparisons
between various titling modalities, etc. 6 LGAF (2013, p 31; http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTLGA/Resources/Philippines_Final_Report.pdf)
(c) Financial Management (FM). The Project was generally rated with moderately
satisfactory Financial Management (FM) performance rating and substantial to high FM
risk throughout the life of the Project. On one occasion, the project was rated as
unsatisfactory due to various issues identified during the implementation support mission
in October 2008. In the last two implementation support missions, the project received a
satisfactory FM rating.
Among the issues raised in October 2008 mission included: (i) several internal control
weaknesses noted such as the inaccurate reporting of the nature of expenditures in SOEs,
inaccurate classification of expenditure by category, absence of reconciliation of
expenditures reported in the SOEs, no internal audit coverage of the Project, and apparent
tampering of official receipts for petty cash fund replenishment; (ii) slow and inadequate
transfer of project funds to the field offices; (iii) delayed submission of quarterly Interim
Financial Reports (IFRs) and audited project financial statements; and (iv) lack of adequate
supervision by an FM Officer knowledgeable on government budgeting and accounting
policies and procedures. A time-bound action plan was agreed and based on subsequent
reviews, significant progress were made in addressing the FM issues, which brought the
Project back to a moderately satisfactory FM performance rating. An internal audit review
of the Project was taken as part of the plan to strengthen internal control. This included
review of official receipts/documents submitted for petty cash fund replenishment.
Appropriate action was taken based on the results of the internal audits.
The Project had two implementing agencies – the DENR and the DOF (through BLGF and
NTRC). The two implementing agencies were required to submit combined Interim
Financial Reports (IFRs) and a separate annual audited project financial statements for the
Project. Of the 27 IFRs submitted, the main implementing agency (DENR) incurred
various delays in the submission of IFR as follows: (a) 12 instances – 1-30 days; (b) 8
instances – 31-89 days; and (c) 7 instances – more than 90 days. For the submission of the
audited project financial statements, compliance by each implementing agency are as
follows:
DENR – For the components implemented by DENR, the annual audited project
financial statements were received with 3 to 4 months delays from CY2007 to
CY2010. This was deemed beyond the full control of the Project but an area for
improvement in terms of close coordination with the Commission on Audit (COA).
The delays in submission were reduced to few days during the last two years of
submission (CY2012 to CY2013). In the eight audit reports submitted, six have
qualified audit opinions and two have unqualified audit opinions. Issues raised by the
COA included the following: (a) unreliability of Cash – Disbursing Officers Account;
(b) unreliable balance of Property, Plant and Equipment account due to: (i) non-
submission of physical inventory; (ii) erroneous recording and classification of items;
(iii) non-maintenance of equipment ledger card and property card; and (iv) reconciled
accounting and property records; (c) unreliable year-end balance of inventory
accounts; (d) erroneous classification of transactions/expenditures resulted to
unreliable balances of several expense accounts; (e) overstatement of the Advances to
Officers and Employees account due to unliquidated but expended advances for travel
expenses; and (f) overstatement of receivables. The audit findings and the reasons for
qualifications raised by COA did not result in ineligible expenditures, and were
subsequently addressed by DENR. Follow up on the actions taken were also included
in the regular implementation support missions.
DOF – For the component implemented by DOF, through BLGF and NTRC, the annual
audited project financial statements were generally received on time except for four
instances where the audit reports were received from 7 days to one month after the
due date. All the audit reports submitted contained an unqualified audit opinion from
COA.
(d) Procurement. Although there were earlier lingering delays in procurement mainly
due to procurement capacity issue and frequent changes in the composition of the DENR
Central Bids and Awards Committee, Project procurement was reasonably in compliance
and accordance with the provisions of the Loan Agreement and completed satisfactorily.
The DENR Procurement Improvement Program was a result of the Bank analysis of
procurement weaknesses in a number of Bank-financed projects. It was implemented by
DENR, in 2009 and helped strengthen the procurement capacity of the Central Office and
the Regional Offices. The LAMP II Cadastral Survey procurement, customized and
successfully used for Bohol Province, was adapted by the DENR for the Bank-financed
contracts for the Political Boundary Survey contracts under the National Program Support
for Environment and Natural Resources Management Project. This resulted in increased
participation of bidders and significant lowering of prices (i.e., around 10 percent), which
allowed DENR to cover additional cadastral survey in more areas.
(e) Loan Covenants. By the end of the project, compliance with legal covenants was
generally satisfactory although there were issues of non-compliance early on.
2.5 Post-completion Operation/Next Phase
Although the AF did not materialize, DENR has advised that the activities that were
planned to be funded under AF have now be covered under government funds. In fact,
activities at the National Capital Region (Metro Manila) have started last year to serve as
pilot for the LAMS rollout nationwide. DENR has already allocated more than PhP100
million and has requested PhP1.2 billion in funding under the 2015 Government's
Appropriations Act to complete the rollout in all its field offices within the next three years,
as it had been planned under AF. Improvements in public land records management and
land valuation and Real Property Tax (RPT) collection by local governments are also ready
for mainstreaming. Local government-led land titling is proceeding on a national basis
under the government's own resources.
3. Assessment of Outcomes
3.1 Relevance of Objectives, Design and Implementation
Rating: Substantial
(a) Objective – Substantial. The importance of land management issues and related taxes
is explicitly acknowledged in the Philippines Development Plan (PDP) 2011-2016, as well
as the GoP’s Good Governance Program, the LSDF, and the DoF’s Roadmap for Valuation
and Real Property Tax Reform. It is important to note that the PDP is the first one to include
the land sector and draws upon the LSDF. The LSDF was prepared under LAMP II and its
coverage of the land-based sectors and the work under LAMP II was acknowledged by the
UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) as being international best practice and a
key contributor to the shaping and formulation of The Voluntary Guidelines on the
Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries, and Forests in the Context of
National Food Security.7
(b) Design – Substantial. Project design effectively supported PDO achievement in the
Philippine context, focusing on titling and valuation aspects both at an operational level as
well as at the legislative, regulatory, and administrative level. The continuous relevance of
the LAMP II design is manifested in the GoP’s commitment to continue to finance LAMP
II activities with its own resources (see Section 2.5).
(c) Implementation – Substantial. Project implementation effectively adapted to
implementation constraints, including adopting a regulatory approach to address delays in
the passage of supporting legislation. Active participation of LGUs in titling activities was
identified as a successful innovation and mainstreamed into the Project implementation.
3.2 Achievement of Project Development Objectives
Rating: Substantial
(a) PDO 1 – Increase land security
PDO Achievement: Substantial
Main Project Outputs (see Annex 2 for a detail description of Project Outputs by
Component)
The Project provided technical support and social mobilization activities that
contributed to the passage of the Residential Free Patent Law (Republic Act 10023).
Enacted in March 2010 and operationalized through the issuance of the associated
Implementing Rules and Regulations in May 2010, the Residential Free Patent Law is
now under implementation. It enables titling of residential properties without
7 Food and Agriculture Organization of The United Nations – FAO (2012), Voluntary Guidelines on the
Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests in the Context of National Food Security,
FAO, Rome.
encumbrance, in addition to agricultural lands. This law is expected to benefit about 40
million Filipinos who are currently living on unregistered land.
The Project supported streamlined land titling activities (also called systematic titling)
in the provinces of Leyte, Bohol and Bukidnon. The implementation of these activities
was underlined by: (a) streamlining of land titling guidelines to facilitate the
acceleration of issuing of land titles on demand; (b) development and implementation
of a comprehensive community participation strategy; (c) development and
implementation of a new records management strategy and supportive LAM system;
and (d) improvement of service delivery by the establishment of an OSS in Leyte and
a virtual one-stop service point in Bohol and Bukidnon.
Under its streamlined titling activities, the Project successfully rolled out systematic
titling in the three provinces, using more streamlined approaches, including conducting
survey and adjudication activities simultaneously, simplifying the requirements and
increasing the reliance on non-documentary forms of evidence to recognize long-term,
unchallenged possession.
Modifications were also introduced to land titling procedures to provide stronger
partnerships with LGUs, thus, reducing the costs to the national government and fast
tracking implementation. The Project worked in cooperation with 74 LGUs in the
provinces of Leyte, Bohol and Bukidnon (including 11 under the LGU-assisted titling
modality with LGUs having their own adjudication teams). It should be noted that prior
to LAMP, land-titling assistance by LGUs was virtually non-existent. LGUs
contributed over US$2 million of their own resources to titling activities under the
Project. The success of this partnership is highlighted by the Good Practice Awards
2012 of the National Economic Development Authority (NEDA) granted to the LAMP
II Project team under the “Strategies in Achieving Desired Outcome” category for its
entry on LGU-Led Public Land Titling Through Systematic Adjudication. In addition,
Maribojoc, the first LGU to work in partnership with the Bohol PPIO in systematic
titling activities, received a “Galing Pook”8 Award, presented by the President in
recognition of the remarkable results.
8Galing Pook traces its beginnings in 1993 when the first Galing Pook Awards was held. The Awards
Program was a joint initiative of the Local Government Academy–Department of the Interior and Local
Government, the Ford Foundation, and other individual advocates of good governance from the academe,
civil society and the government. The Asian Institute of Management administered the awards program until
2000. However, the Galing Pook Foundation was formally established as a private awards giving body in
1998 to sustain the Awards program. In its almost two decades of existence, Galing Pook has become a
leading resource institution continuously promoting innovation and excellence in local governance. It
proactively searches and recognizes best local government practices and facilitates their adoption in more
communities in the country. http://lga.gov.ph/bestpractices/galing-
pook.htmlhttp://lga.gov.ph/bestpractices/galing-pook.html
A total of 101,793 new land titles were registered utilizing these streamlined
procedures, successfully demonstrating their potential for cost-effective
implementation with shared responsibilities with LGUs. This represents a dramatic
improvement when compared to the situation before LAMP.
More than 180 LGUs have subsequently partnered with the Project which signaled the
strong interest on the part of local governments to play a more active role in LAM.
Project Outcomes. Evidence from the Development Impact Study (DIS) and other sources
indicate a strengthened perception of land tenure, a reduction in the incidence of conflicting
claims and an increase in formal land transactions as a result of the successful
implementation of systematic titling activities in the three participating provinces.
Evidence of the impact of land titling on investments and land prices is less conclusive,
suggesting that land titling is one of a myriad of factors affecting land markets and
landowners’ investment decisions.
While no targets were defined, three out of the six PDO Indicators showed significant
progress under the Project, while two showed mixed results (see Table 2). Progress of one
PDO indicator that was not fully attributable to the Project—i.e., diversification of
income—was undetermined. Specifically:
Strengthened perception of land tenure security. Survey respondents consistently
reported a strong sense of security as a benefit of having a land title. Although already
high at the time when the baseline was conducted, the perception of security of land
tenure continued to increase in the three provinces in which the Project was
implemented, from 82.9 to 83.6 percent in Leyte, from 77.2 to 81.3 percent in Bohol,
and from 65.9 to 96.3 percent in Bukidnon. 9
Reduced incidence of conflicting claims in project sites. “Before” and “After”
LAMP II comparisons indicate that the percentage of respondents who reported land
disputes decreased significantly in Bohol (from 74.2 to 40 percent) and Bukidnon (from
57.1 to 26.4 percent).10 The Project’s implementation revived old unresolved disputes
arising mostly from boundary conflicts, overlapping claims, duplication of technical
description and disagreements among heirs over inherited property. However, these
were addressed and resolved to a large extent under the Project through validation
surveys and adjudication work.
9 It is important to note that the baselines do not capture the perception of land tenure security prior to the
Project, as they were conducted only after the Project was well under implementation. In Leyte, LAMP II
implementation began in 2006 as an expansion of LAMP I, and the baseline was conducted in 2007. The
baselines for Bohol and Bukidnon were conducted in 2010, although Project implementation had begun in
late 2007 and 2009, respectively. 10 While there was no “Before the Project” measurement in Leyte, only 25.6 percent of respondents
reported land disputes “After the Project.”
Increased investment in land property development. Except in Bukidnon,11 the
percentage of those who invested in the development of their land in LAMP II areas is
higher compared to non-LAMP areas (13 and 5 percent for LAMP II and non-LAMP
II respondents in Leyte, and 13 and 4 percent for LAMP II and non-LAMP II
respondents in Bohol). Among the improvements introduced were the use of hand
tractor and planting materials. DENR has undertaken a proactive post-titling strategy—
so called “convergence strategy”—aimed at facilitating inter-agency cooperation to
help capitalize on the potential economic impacts of titling.
Increase in land values. Regression results from a case study focusing two
municipalities in Leyte Province indicate that the ratio of actual land prices of
comparable titled versus untitled lands is 1.35.12
Results from the DIS in terms of land values are less conclusive and methodologically
weak. The average market value of agricultural lands in Leyte and Bukidnon, as
estimated by the surveyed landowners, was higher in LAMP II sites compared to the
estimates generated for non-LAMP areas (i.e., greater by 195 and 5 percent,
respectively). These results, however, do not hold for Bohol, where the reported land
values were smaller for LAMP II respondents with respect to non-LAMP respondents
(i.e., equivalent to 65 percent). This is, of course, having reported land values for titled
parcels be lower than those for untitled ones, which is an unintuitive result. It is also
important to note that in the case of the DSI, the land values were not actual market
values but, instead, they only indicate perceived values. In addition, DIS results reflect
the difference between “with and without Project,” in which the comparability of the
experimental and control groups is not fully guaranteed. At the same time, results
might point to the myriad of factors affecting land markets beyond land titling.
Increase in formal land transactions. Based on ROD data collected during the
SEBSs, the number of titles issued before LAMP in the three provinces averaged only
some 2,624 per year. The titling performance more than doubled (i.e., 267 percent)
during LAMP II with an average issuance of 7,013 free patent titles per year.
11 The fact that Bukidnon shows a different behavior than Leyte and Bohol in terms of increased investments
in land improvements might be explained by the predominance of indigenous population as well as ancestral
domains and territories, which were protected under LAMP II. 12 LEI (2010).
Table 2. PDO Indicators - Increasing Land Security
Note: In the case of PDO Indicators 1, 2, and 6, the comparison is between “before” and “after” the Project, while for PDO Indicators 3, 4 and 5 is for “without” and “with” Project. Source: LAMP II Development Impact Study – DIS (2013); LEI (2010) for case study of Leyte’s land values.
(b) PDO 2 – Improve the efficiency of titling and land management systems
PDO Achievement: Substantial
Project outputs (see Annex 2 for a detail description of Project Outputs by Component)
The Project provided technical support and social mobilization activities in support of
priority policy, legislation, and regulatory changes to support land administration
reform at the national level. As discussed above, it contributed to the passage of the
Residential Free Patent Act. The Project also contributed to the enactment of the Real
Estate Service Act (Republic Act No. 9646 – RESA in June 2009. This law, which is
now under implementation, requires the licensing of real estate appraisers, including
the local government assessors. The Property Valuation Office is being operationalized
as the organization responsible for valuation and land tax reform.
The formulation of the LSDF, which provides a 20-year vision, mission statement and
policy statement for the sector is also considered a key output of this component. It also
effectively supported the adoption of other LAM regulations conducive to the
harmonization of LAM systems and procedures (see Annex 2 and Datasheet).
The Project has also provided support to the development of policy on management of
government lands, including a comprehensive policy on foreshore administration and
management.
The Project supported the rollout of Land Administration and Management Systems
(LAMS) to computerize the public land application and survey records in regional
DENR offices in the three participating provinces. These systems have been
mainstreamed within DENR as well as implemented in all 16 regional offices and they
are ready to be rolled-out nationally to all DENR field offices.
With Project support, the BLGF promulgated/issued the Philippine Valuation
Standards (PVS), and the Mass Appraisal Guidebook (MAG), which provide detailed
guidance on correct market valuation given existing market conditions affecting the
property market.
The Project partnered with three cities to pilot the new procedures and methodologies
prescribed for the reform valuation process. Naga, one of these cities, successfully
implemented and adopted a Schedule of Market Values (SMV) based on these
procedures, which resulted in a substantial fiscal impact (see Annex 3).
A total of 30 additional provinces and 52 cities have updated their SMVs during the
Project’s lifetime. A roadmap for valuation reform is included under the LSDF with
the full support of the DoF as part of its broader strategy geared toward real property
tax reform.
With Project support, educational programs for land administration and valuation are
now underway at three universities, providing for the first time in the Philippine formal
continuing education, diploma and masters programs in these areas (see Annex 2).
Project Outcomes. The improved efficiency of titling and land management systems is
illustrated by a decrease in titling transaction costs and processing times, as well as
increased real property related taxes as a result of titling and updating SMVs. In turn, these
improvements are reflected in the public’s increased satisfaction with land registration.
Specifically:
While not all indicators have baselines or targets were defined in the project appraisal
document, the five PDO indicators associated with PDO 2 show significant progress (see
Table 3). Specifically:
Increase satisfaction in land registration. Results of the DIS showed that the
percentage of respondents satisfied with land registration increased during the Project,
with more than 90 percent of respondents in all three provinces expressing satisfaction
(see Table 3).
Increase in percentage of subsequent transactions registered in OSS. The number
of subsequent transactions (e.g., subsequent sales, inheritance, liens, etc.) almost
doubled in Leyte’s OSS between 2006 and 2010, with the number of land transactions
recorded increasing from 6,936 to 13,088, excluding the registration of new LAMP II
titles (see Table 3).
Decrease in informal and formal transactions costs in land registration. The
average transaction cost reported by respondents was significantly lower under LAMP
II compared to the baseline, i.e., 6.2 percent in Leyte, 27.3 percent in Bohol, and 58.1
percent in Bukidnon (see Table 3). These reductions are the result of streamlined titling
procedures and reduced processing time. However, some of the reduced costs are also
the result of activities subsidized by the Project (e.g., surveys, mapping) and may not
always be provided in post-LAMP II titling activities. A detailed cost study conducted
in Bohol indicated that private expenditures required to obtain a title under LAMP II
were 11.6 percent of those under regular procedures (see Annex 3). Changes in
informal transaction costs were undetermined, although there is evidence that there was
still some involvement of third-party “facilitators” in titling activities continued during
the Project.
Increase in collectible revenue from property and other land-related taxes. There
was a significant increase in Real Property Tax collections as a result of titling activities
in Leyte, Bohol and Bukidnon and the adoption of a market-based SMV in Naga City.
In the case of Naga City, there was also a substantial increase in Property Transfer Tax
at the LGU level as well as at the central level with the Bureau of Internal Revenue also
adopting the new SMV (see Table 3).
Reduce processing time in land registration process. There were drastic reductions
in title processing time under LAMP II. In Leyte, DIS respondents reported that it took
an average of about 7 years to secure a title prior to LAMP II, and only about 7 months
under the Project. For Bohol, the experience before LAMP II was 2 years, while it only
took an average of about 6 months to complete the transaction under the Project. In
Bukidnon, the difference in average time was equivalent to about two years.
Table 3. PDO Indicators - Improve the Efficiency of Titling
and Land Management Systems
Control Group LAMP II
% %
7. Increase satisfaction in land registration
Leyte n.a. 93.1%.
Bohol 88.20% 91.20%
Bukidnon 94.00% 99.70%
8. aIncrease in percentage of subsequent transactions registered in OSS
Leyte6,936
transactions 13,088 transactions
9. aDecrease in informal and formal transactions costs in land registration
Leyte PH$6,380 PH$1,744
Bohol PH$3,112 PH$1,809
Bukidnon PH$14,396 PH$894
10. development (i.e., respondents who invested in land improvements)Increase in collectible revenue from property and other land-related taxes
Leyte 113% 114.50%
Bohol 122.30% 129.30%
Bukidnon 112.10% 135.80%
11. aReduce processing time in land registration process
Leyte 84 months 7.2 months
Bohol 24 months 6.1months
Bukidnon 30 months 5.3 months
PDO 2 - Improved efficiency of land tilling and administration system
Note: In the case of PDO Indicators 7, 8, 10 and 11, the comparison is between “before” and “after” the Project, while for PDO Indicator 10 is for “without” and “with” Project. Also to be noted, Indicator 9 reflects only formal transactions costs, as informal transaction costs could not be determined. Source: LAMP II Development Impact Study (2013)
3.3 Efficiency
Rating: High
At appraisal, the total project cost was estimated at US$40.6 million, financed by the
US$19.0 million IBRD loan, a US$19.31 million AusAID grant, and US$2.29 million in
Government co-financing. After restructuring, the Project cost was reduced to roughly
US$35.0 million, of which US$15.36 million was from proceeds of the IBRD loan,
US$15.3 million from the AusAID grant, and approximately US$2 million from GoP (see
Annex 1). In addition, LGUs contributed approximately US$2.3 million of their own
resources to systematic adjudication activities. A total of US$3.64 million of loan funds
were cancelled in 2010 due to reduced titling activities due to delays in the passage of the
Residential Free Patent Act as well as the decision not to construct OSSs for land
administration services delivery in Bohol and Bukidnon Provinces due to LRA’s
construction of new RoDs in these provinces. The revised loan proceeds were fully
disbursed.
The Project made highly efficient use of the loans proceeds. When taking into
consideration both the costs of producing and obtaining a title (i.e., the costs incurred by
public agencies in producing a title and the costs incurrent by applicants to obtain a title),
the unit cost of a LAMP II title was just a fraction (i.e., 21.6 percent) of a DENR-CARP
title (see Annex 3).
The project’s economic efficiency is deemed to be high, as the Project’s actual Internal
Economic Rate of Return (IERR) is estimated to be significantly higher than the one
estimated at the 2010 restructuring. Specifically, while the number of registered titles was
in line with that anticipated at restructuring, the increases in property value as a result of
having a title are expected to be higher than compared to the 10 percent that was assumed
for the economic analysis conducted at the time of the restructuring (i.e., up to 35
percent).13 Results from a sensitivity analysis indicate a high economic efficiency, with the
IERR ranging from 22 percent for a 5 percent increase in land values as perceived in
Bukidnon, to 93 percent for a 35 percent, as determined by a case study in Leyte that
examined differences in market prices between titled and untitled agricultural land.
The Project’s Fiscal impact is also deemed to be high and the Project has resulted in an
increase in fiscal revenues at both the local and national level as a result of: (a) titling
activities; and (b) the adoption of a market-based SMV in the pilot city of Naga. As shown
in Annex 3, LAMP II municipalities show stronger increases in real property taxes and less
dependence on transfers from the central government than their peers. The fiscal benefits
will continue to increase, as other LGUs are adopting the titling and valuation practices
developed under the Project. Likewise, the adoption of the new SMV in Naga City and the
13 LEI (2010).
Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) has resulted in the sustained growth in Real Property
Tax (RPT) and Property Transfer Tax collections at the local and central level of
government (see Annex 3).
3.4 Justification of Overall Outcome Rating
Rating: Moderately Satisfactory
Project performance is deemed moderately satisfactory, based on its substantial ratings in
terms of relevance and efficacy and high rating in terms of efficiency.
3.5 Overarching Themes, Other Outcomes and Impacts
(a) Poverty Impacts, Gender Aspects, and Social Development
Poverty. It is estimated that more than 40 percent of the respondents in Leyte and
Bohol fall below the 2009 poverty threshold level while in Bukidnon, about 20 percent
are below the poverty line. In Bukidnon, it is estimated that about 36 percent of title
recipients belonged to various IP communities, which are considered among the
disadvantaged groups of society. For most of the poor in the Philippines, as in
developing countries in general, land is the primary means for generating a livelihood
and a main vehicle for investing, accumulating wealth, and transferring it between
generations. Although securing a land title does not automatically reduce poverty, by
helping poor beneficiaries secure property rights to land they already possess, the
Project has provided a first step toward unlocking their potential to increase their wealth
by fostering increased investments in land and housing and access to credit.14
Gender. Gender Mainstreaming Guidelines and Social Development and Gender
Framework were developed under the Project to promote an inclusive, cohesive and
accountable approach to LAM in support of social and gender equality and inclusion
among participating communities, other stakeholders and LAM agencies in general. In
addition, titling procedures included an investigation to determine whether possession
was acquired through the male or female spouse, and the title was recorded accordingly.
However, this practice is not widely implemented outside the participating provinces.15
The Philippines’ National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) has
classified LAMP II as “gender responsive” according to its Harmonized Gender and
Development Guidelines, ranking fourth out of the 14 projects in the Philippines IBRD
portfolio.16
14 Payne, G., Durand-Lasserve, A., Rakodi, C. (2009), "The limits of land titling and home ownership",
Environment and Urbanization 21 (2), pp. 443-462. 15 While the law does not discriminate the registration of properties in the name of women owners, either
individually or jointly, in practice titles are issued in the name of the head of the family, usually the male
member. 16 The harmonized GAD guidelines seek to promote the twin goals of gender equality and women’s
empowerment. Specifically, these aim to: (a) provide NEDA, donors, Philippine government agencies, and
(b) Institutional Change/Strengthening. Through technical support and its social
mobilization activities, the Project has been instrumental in supporting the passage of the
Free Patent Act, RESA and the Philippines Valuation Standards. It also provided direct
support to the design and implementation of regulations and systems aimed at harmonizing
and increasing the efficacy and efficiency of land administration and management within
the DENR and fostering integration with LGUs and RoDs in the three participating
provinces. In addition, two major bills have been submitted to Congress as a result of
LAMP’s work: (a) the LAA Bill, which aims to address the systemic constraints affecting
service delivery in land administration; and (b) the Valuation Reform Act (VRA) Bill,
which would require the adoption of market-based valuation of properties by LGUs and
the National Government.
(c) Other Unintended Outcomes and Impacts. The implementation of LAMS in the
Leyte province illustrated the importance of computerizing land records to mitigate the risk
of physical records being destroyed by natural disasters. In addition to the massive loss of
lives and property, Typhoon Haiyan caused the almost total destruction of land records in
Leyte’s OSS in November 2013. LAMS computerized records have served to lessen the
impact of the loss and provide a foundation for the future reconstruction of the land registry. 3.6 Summary of Findings of Beneficiary Survey and/or Stakeholder Workshops
See Annex 5 for Beneficiary survey.
4. Assessment of Risk to Development Outcome
Rating: Significant
There are several factors that support the sustainability of the outcomes under LAMP II,
including:
As noted earlier, key enabling legislative and administrative framework is now in place.
The LSFD constitutes a road map for sustaining the momentum of the reform process
and the benefits of LAMP II in a programmatic manner over the medium and long term
through 2030. The LSDF, which sets out the land sector strategy until 2030, was
endorsed by government. It supports an innovative harmonization agenda being
pursued to progress the institutional reform without the passage of key legislation
(LAA Bill). It also works for the harmonization of systems, land service delivery and
alignment of the land reform and land fiscal reform agendas.
development practitioners with a common set of analytical concepts and tools for integrating gender concerns
into development programs and projects; and (b) help achieve gender equality in, and empower women
through, projects and programs.
Main tools and processes developed under the Project have been mainstreamed within
DENR and BLGF (i.e., standards, systems). The nationwide rollout of LAMS will
result in the computerization and modernization of DENR’s land records management,
including surveys and public land applications. DENR’s LAMS will complement other
ongoing investments in LAM systems and tools, including the LRA’s LTCP, which has
recently completed the computerization of 85 percent of the country’s RoD offices, and
DENR’s ongoing efforts to complete all cadastral surveys in the country by 2016.
Active engagement of LGUs in land administration and improving overall land
governance, including titling and mapping, is increasing, as the importance of land
titling is seen as essential for local government planning and land taxation. More than
180 municipalities have already adopted LGU partnerships, which signal the strong
interest on the part of local governments to play a more active role in LAM.
Formal higher education programs and continuing professional development courses
on land valuation and management programs will provide proficient human resources
in these areas. However, these programs need to be sustained to fully address the
capacity gap in the sector. While RESA has laid out the policy and human resource
framework to achieve the professionalization agenda, the operational structures and
implementation arrangements have to be set in a sustainable fashion.
The DENR has undertaken a proactive post-titling strategy (“convergence strategy”)
aimed at facilitating inter-agency cooperation to help capitalize on the potential
economic impacts of titling.
Conversely, there are other factors that might undermine their sustainability, including:
The existence of multiple agencies at the national level with conflicting and duplicate
mandates results in the fragmentation of land management functions. These systemic
constraints affecting service delivery in land administration would be addressed under
the LAA bill, which approval has been elusive, despite having the support of the
President and key congressmen, including the former President who is now a member
of Congress. This risk is considered significant.
The absence of passage of Valuation Reform Act, which proposes the adoption of
market-based valuation of properties by LGUs and the National Government, as well
as the political resistance to adopt SMV in the absence of such legislation.17 This risk
is considered significant.
Weak technical and institutional capacity at the local level constitutes a serious
limitation to the scaling-up of titling and valuation activities. The ambiguous mandate
of LGUs in these areas also presents a challenge. Both DENR and BLGF need to have
17 The proposed VRA would provide authority to the Secretary of Finance to approve SMVs in order to
remove the political influence in the updating of SMVs. In addition, the VRA includes a provision by which
LGUs that do not update their SMVs would lose their authority to collect taxes.
adequate budgets to provide continuing support and oversight for LAM activities at the
local level. This risk is considered significant.
There are several factors limiting the registration of subsequent transactions. These
include the lack of information and understanding about registration procedures and
high transactions costs, in particular the cost of registering the transfer with the RoD,
which has increased significantly due to the newly imposed IT service fees. There
might be some room for rationalization of both registration processes and fees to make
it more accessible and affordable to property owners. This risk is considered significant.
Improving the currently weak flow of LAM information across LGUs, DENR offices,
and the RoD is a necessary condition for ensuring that the massive LAM information
systems (i.e., LAMS, cadaster mapping, and LTCP) currently being developed. This is
to fully capitalize on their potential impact, including land use planning, and property-
based fiscal revenues and do not become quickly obsolete. This risk is considered
significant.
A special note has to be made with regard to the sustainability of Leyte’s OSS, which was
established under the Project. This OSS was operating successfully, achieving at least 90
percent of the newly defined OSS service standards after three years of operation according
to the reports from an independent monitor. In addition, there was a steady increase in
formal land transactions recorded until late 2013. However, the OSS was severely damaged
by Typhoon Haiyan in November 2013, which has destroyed much of the building, its
equipment and infrastructure and, as a result, disrupted its regular operations and reporting.
Six months after the catastrophe, the OSS (just like other damaged government
infrastructures in the area) continues to be in total disarray. Unless it receives adequate
resources and support from DENR, the massive loss of physical land records seems
unavoidable. At this point, the risk to its sustainability is considered high.
5. Assessment of Bank and Borrower Performance
5.1 Bank Performance
(a) Bank Performance in Ensuring Quality at Entry Rating: Moderately Satisfactory
The Bank adequately identified, facilitated preparation and appraised the operation,
ensuring consistency with policies and safeguards. The Project Team prepared a
technically sound operation, fully capitalizing on the experience and the momentum built
under LAMP I as well as relevant lessons learned in related projects in other countries.
However, several issues proved more challenging than originally envisioned, including
ensuring political will for legislative reforms, and the complexity of implementing
arrangements. More problematic, however, was the failure to capture adequate data on
some baseline indicators during project preparation. That being said, the Project
substantially achieved most of its development objective and maintained the momentum
for LAM reform despite the lack of enabling legislation. It is also important to credit the
Team for including an experimental impact evaluation under the operation’s original
design. Although the evaluation was delayed due mainly to procurement issues, it
ultimately generated important information for validating the outcomes of the project.
(b) Quality of Supervision Rating: Moderately Satisfactory
The Project Task Team provided close and regular supervision, maintaining strong
collaboration with AusAID and the implementing agencies. Supervision missions were
conducted regularly and were well documented through Aide Memoires and
Implementation Status Reports (ISRs). Field visits were routine, which allowed the Project
Task Team to observe first-hand the challenges being faced during implementation. Having
a co-Team Task Leader (TTL) based in the country and the continuity of the TTL helped
with fluid and consistent communications between the Bank and the implementing
agencies. Furthermore, supervision was very much enhanced by having a continuity of
the same TTL from the time of appraisal to the ICR. Project supervision also benefited
from the strong support of FAO, which provided the same technical expert from
preparation through project closing. The team also provided intensive procurement support
including assistance in strengthening the DENR’s Procurement Unit and large-scale
procurement training ultimately improving overall implementation
The Project had a slow start, primarily due to legislative delays and need for implementing
agency agreements. Starting in Jan 2007, the Project consistently received Moderate
Unsatisfactory/Unsatisfactory ratings. A MTR in April 2008 proved critical in reorienting
the Project, recommending substantial changes in the Project that eventually materialized
in the 2010 restructuring (see Section 1.6). As noted, while the formal restructuring was
significantly delayed due to a lengthy Government approval process, counterparts
immediately began work to turn the project around following the MTR, demonstrating the
effectiveness of strong implementation support work by the Bank Task Team. It should be
noted that while additional changes could have been introduced under the restructuring,
including modifications to the PDO objectives, this was not considered feasible by the
Borrower (NEDA in particular) and thus was not pursued.
The Project Task Team also worked very closely to support the Borrower during the
preparation of the AF. However, recurrent delays in the processing of the AF by the
Government led to multiple extensions of the project several years after activities were
substantially completed. In retrospect, although the Bank could have closed the project
earlier and pursued other options, it continued to support the client in the preparations for
Additional Financing.
(c) Justification of Rating for Overall Bank Performance
Rating: Moderately Satisfactory
Overall Bank Performance is rated moderately satisfactory to reflect its performance during
project preparation and supervision phases.
5.2 Borrower Performance
(a) Government Performance Rating: Moderately Unsatisfactory
Government performance is rated moderately unsatisfactory to reflect the uneven
availability of counterpart funds, the substantial delays in processing the request for
restructuring after the MTR and the protracted process and eventual dropping of the request
for Additional Financing, two years after requesting it from the Bank.
(b) Implementing Agency or Agencies Performance Rating: Moderately Satisfactory
Performance of DOF (through BLGF and NTRC) is deemed satisfactory, and that of DENR
is deemed moderately satisfactory. Both implementing agencies demonstrated the ability
to cooperate and coordinate efforts among themselves and maintain a close working
relationship with the Bank and AusAID. In addition, these two agencies were effective in
coordinating efforts with administrative units at the regional, provincial and city levels.
While the Project enjoyed the strong support of BLGF, NTRC and DoF leadership
throughout the Project’s lifetime, the frequent rotation of managers at both the Project level
and at DENR in general was detrimental to the Project’s implementation.
The successful implementation of systematic titling activities under Component 3 has to
be largely credited to the Bohol Provincial Project Implementation Office (PPIP) and the
Systematic Adjudication Field Offices (SAFOs). Taking the approach of training and
deputizing local government staff for titling activities from the Bayawan City experience,
the Bohol PPIO led a strong campaign on the benefits of cadastral maps and land survey
and titling to local governments. Their proactivity and dedication paid off. Within a year,
counterpart funds were secured from nine municipalities, totaling more than PhP20 million.
The Leyte and Bukidnon PPIOs also acted proactively when subsequently replicating the
Bohol approach under local conditions. Specifically, from 2011 onwards, Leyte focused
on residential lots, capitalizing on the passage of the Residential Free Patent Act in 2010.
It also worked in partnership with land surveyors since many lots required subdivision.
Bukidnon, in which a big part of the provincial territory is claimed as ancestral domain
land, formally included Indigenous Peoples into the systematic titling process in the
process through Partnership Agreements.
(c) Justification of Rating for Overall Borrower Performance
Rating: Moderately Satisfactory
The overall rating is moderately satisfactory, reflecting BLGF/NTRC’s strong satisfactory
rating (particularly towards the end of project implementation), and DENR’s moderately
satisfactory performance.
6. Lessons Learned18
Lessons of Wide General Application
For the potential benefits of land titling and valuation to accrue, other
complementary interventions ranging from agricultural support to tax
administration also need to be pursued. As shown by the international experience
on the impact of land tenure programs on poverty, economic development, and fiscal
strengthening, land tenure constitutes just a first step and a more complex set of
institutional reforms, poverty alleviation and economic development initiatives and
fiscal and fiscal administration reforms are needed to fully capitalize on its potential
benefits.
Legislative enactment as precondition of projects creates operational risk. Enabling legislation and institutional reform, while critical to achieving reform goals,
is an internal government matter and seldom driven by the needs of external projects.
Projects like LAMP II that weave into their project design the enactment of certain laws
or a change in institutional arrangements create an operational risk for project
implementation.
There is more than one path toward reform. In the case of LAMP II, many of the
benefits that were originally perceived as requiring the establishment of the LAA (i.e.,
more effective service delivery, reduced time and cost of titling, improved property
valuation and taxation leading to increased revenues) have been achieved through other
policy, administrative, technical, and training interventions and, most notably, through
facilitating partnerships between national LAM agencies and LGUs at the sub-national
level.
The reform initiatives that have been achieved by LAMP II have largely come
about through partnerships between change agents recruited by the Project from
the private sector, advocacy groups and academic circles. The change agents,
whether national or international, have played a central role in: (a) introducing the
reforms to the executive of the national LAM agencies and in shepherding the policy
reform bills through the Congress and the Senate; and (b) developing the Executive and
Administrative Orders in support of the reforms and the systems, and technology and
training programs for the improvement of LAM service delivery.
It is also critical to identify executive champions in the national LAM agencies and
in the Congress and the Senate. In parallel with the development of the policy agenda,
committed political champions, preferably a Committee Chairperson in the Senate and
Congress, needs to be identified as well as other key officials and gatekeepers of the
legislative process.
18 For an extended discussion on the lessons learned under LAMP II, see Annex 7 (Borrower’s ICR) and
Annex 9 (Lessons Learned under LAMP II, prepared by Keith Bell, TTL).
As shown by the LAMP II experience, there is great potential in the active
participation of LGUs in titling activities. However, the DENR has a critical role to
play in providing close supervision to the titling activities carried out by LGUs to
ensure transparency and technical soundness.
Experience has shown that greater efficiency is achieved in municipalities where
LGUs are actively involved in titling. Thus, in planning for the rollout, it is more
important to consider the LGU’s commitment to partner than the proportion of untitled
parcels in a municipality.
The adoption of SMVs at the local level is constrained not just by technical and
capacity limitations. Equally important is to obtain the support of strong champions
at the local level committed to advancing property valuation reforms. Moreover, the
systematic adoption of market-based SMV by all local governments, rather than just
by those with a vocation toward reform, needs to be a requirement from the central
government that is adequately enforced. This is particularly important given the
perceived political cost attached to the increase in property assessments.
Project-Specific Lessons
A solid M&E framework with quantifiable baselines, annual targets to measure
progress, and clear end-of-project expectations is a critical component of a
project’s design. Specifically, performance indicators should reflect the scope of the
Project rather than hypothetical impacts that depend on factors outside the orbit of the
Project. While Impact Assessment Studies can enhance the project results framework,
they should not constitute the sole basis for assessing Project’s efficacy to avoid
unnecessary risks. Likewise, baselines should be constructed during preparation or
early stages of implementation.
7. Comments on Issues Raised by Borrower/Implementing Agencies/Partners
(a) Borrower/implementing agencies See Annex 7.
(b) Co-financiers See Annex 8.
(c) Other partners and stakeholders N.A.
Annex 1. Project Costs and Financing
(a) Project Cost under IBRD Financing by Component (in USD million equivalent)
Components Appraisal Estimate
(USD millions)
Actual/Latest Estimate (*) (USD millions)
Percentage of Appraisal
1. Development of Land Policy and Regulatory Framework
0.49 0.15 30.6%
2. Institutional Development and Capacity Building
0.33 0.11 33.3%
3. Security of Land Tenure 14.54 11.26 77.4%
4. Property Valuation 1.45 1.70 117.2%
5. Project Management 1.19 1.98 166.3%
Total Baseline Cost 18.00
Unallocated 0.90
Front-End Fee 0.10 0.10 100%
Total Financing Required 19.00 15.30 80.5% (*) Note: The Borrower did not provide Actual Cost by Component. The amounts shown here reflect actual
loan disbursements weighted by the proportional cost by component determined at restructuring, which is
considered to provide a close approximation to the actual executed values.
(b) Financing
Source of Funds Type of
Co-financing
Appraisal Estimate
(USD millions)
Actual/Latest Estimate
(USD millions)
Percentage of Appraisal
Australian Agency for International Development (AusAID)
Grant 19.31 15.3 44.9%
Borrower Co-financing 2.29 2.0 86.0% International Bank for Reconstruction and Development
Loan 19.0 15.3 80.5%
Local Government Units Voluntary contributions
0.0 2.3 --
Annex 2. Outputs by Component
Component 1: Development of Land Policy and Regulatory Framework
The operation effectively provided support to priority policy, legislation and regulatory
changes at the national level to support land administration reform. Most notably, through
its policy dissemination and consensus-building activities, LAMP II has supported the
passage of the Free Patent Residential Act, which enhances the process of tenure security.
It also effectively supported the adoption of other LAM regulations conducive to the
harmonization of LAM systems and procedures (see Table below).
The formulation of the Land Sector Development Framework (LSDF) that provides a 20
year vision, mission statement and policy statement for the sector is also considered a key
output of this component. The framework plan was completed in March 2010 and approved
by the National Steering Committee (NSC) in June 2010. NSC Resolution No. 2010‐01
endorsed the adoption of LSDF. While no formal adoption at the Office of the President
was issued, the LSDF became the key reference document for the preparation of the
Philippines Development Plan 2010-2016, which, for the first time, includes a section on
Land Administration. Emphasis has been given to the completion of the cadastral survey,
partnership with LGUs and computerization of land records.
The Project has also provided support to the development of policy on management of
government lands, foreshores in particular. A comprehensive policy on foreshore
administration and management (i.e., draft DAO on “Guidelines in the Development and
Institutionalization of Foreshores Management and Disposition Maps”) has been
developed and presented to DNER’s Policy Technical Working Group (PTWG). Its
approval was postponed to allow for another round of revisions to take into consideration
the experience under typhoon Haiyan (known as Yolanda in the Philippines), which hit the
Philippines in November 2013, causing catastrophic damage throughout cities and towns
in the islands of Leyte. The management of government lands has also been given high
priority within the LSDF, with an emphasis on: (a) the devolution and decentralization of
public land management; (b) the adoption of sustainable land management strategies
focusing on biodiversity conservation, preservation, rehabilitation and sustainable use of
the country’s forestlands as one of the highest development priority in the country’s future
national development agenda and sustainable development; and (c) optimizing the use of
disposable public and government land assets and resources based on best uses balancing
economic, environmental, and social development objectives.
The enactment of the proposed Land Administration Authority (LAA) Bill has proved
elusive. At the close of the 16th Congress, the LAA Bill (Senate Bill No. 2776) was still
pending in the Committee of Environment and Natural Resources. There are indications
that this measure will be pursued in succeeding sessions of Congress. The recognition of
its importance however continue to grow with no less than the President issuing
Administrative Order (AO) 34 to determine the best institutional arrangement for delivery
of LAM services and even mentioned its urgency in the 2013 State of the Nation Address.
Component 1: Development of Land Policy and Regulatory Framework
a. Policies to Promote LAM Reforms
Republic Act 10023 – Free Patent Residential (March 2010)
The newly enacted law aims to ease the requirements and procedures in the titling of residential lands. Under the Public Land Act, free patent is the acquisition of public lands by means of an administrative confirmation of imperfect title. It is intended to legalize the land rights of Filipinos who are founded to be occupying and cultivating such lands for a certain period of time. This law is expected to benefit about 40 million Filipinos who are living on unregistered land today. This law amended RA 9176, otherwise known as the Public Land Act.
The most salient features include:
It reduces the period of eligibility for titling from 30 years to 10 years.
Any Filipino who has paid all the real estate taxes for 10 years shall be entitled to free patent for such parcel of land in all municipalities and cities.
The Law avoids the lengthy and tedious process of acquiring a title through the courts under the Public Land Act which usually takes a long period of time.
In order to qualify, the land should not exceed 200 square meters if it is in a highly urbanized city, 500 meters in other cities, 750 meters in first-class and second-class municipalities, and 1,000 meters in third-class municipalities.
The law allows the issuance of free patents without payment of outstanding real estate taxes and removal of restrictions after issuance of free patents.
Local government units may also apply for a free patent for public land being used for public schools, municipal halls, public plazas or parks, and other government institutions for public use.
The Law provides security of the property rights of the owner and will also facilitate the title holders to credit facilities of banks and other financial institutions using their land titles as collateral for loans.
With the new law signed, landowners can now apply with the DENR to acquire a title through a free patent.
DENR DAO 2011-06 (May 23, 2011)
Adopts the LGU partnership approach as the new strategy of the DENR to fast track the completion of land titling activities nationwide.
DENR DAO 2010 – 12 (May 5, 2010)
Provides the implementing rules and regulations for the issuance of FPs in residential areas
DENR Memorandum Circular 2010 – 11 (May 31, 2010)
Prescribes the forms for the processing of FP applications under RA 10023
DENR DAO 2010 – 18 (June 23,2010)
Defines the policy on land information management, including custodianship, updating, and sharing of information. It adopts LAMS as the platform for the management of all land information in DENR.
DENR DAO 2010 – 05 (March 9, 2010)
Prescribes the revised regulations on land surveys
DENR Special Order 2010 – 397 (May 20 , 2010)
Establishment of LAMS Task Force to lead in the roll out of LAMS to DENR regional offices and selected CENROs
DENR DAO 2009-05 (April 21, 2009)
Simplified the requirements and streamlined the procedures for issuance of Miscellaneous Sales Agreements in residential properties under Republic Act 730
DENR DAO 2007 – 29 (July 31, 2007)
Revised regulations on land surveys
DENR DAO 2007 – 10 (June 18, 2007)
Modifies the survey process for LAMP II areas and provides guidelines for its implementation
DENR DAO 2007 – 09 (June 18, 2007)
Prescribes the Systematic Adjudication process to simplify, fast track the disposition of public alienable and disposable lands through Free and Homestead Patents
b. Management of Government Land
Draft DAO on “Guidelines in the Development and Institutionalization of Foreshores Management and Disposition Maps”
A comprehensive policy on foreshore administration and management has been developed and presented to DNER’s PTWG. Its approval was postponed to allow for another round of revisions to take into consideration the experience under typhoon Haiyan.
Management of government lands has also been given high priority under the LSDF
The LSDF guiding principles for the management of government lands are:
the devolution and decentralization of public land management;
the adoption of sustainable land management strategies focusing on biodiversity conservation, preservation, rehabilitation and sustainable use of the country’s forestlands as one of the highest development priority in the country’s future national development agenda and sustainable development; and
the optimum use of disposable public and government land assets and resources based on best uses balancing economic, environmental, and social development objectives.
Component 2: Institutional Development and Capacity Building
This component supported the implementation of more transparent, responsive and
service-oriented institutional arrangements for land administration. This component also
supported the development of the capacity of local academic institutions to provide land
administration education and training. Specifically:
Component 2 – Institutional Development and Capacity Building
a. Institutional Strengthening and Coordination of Arrangements for Land Administration
Human Resources Management and Development (HRMD) Strategy and Plan, together with the appropriate training programs were developed, adopted and implemented. HRMD procedures were used in the recruitment of 715 regular and contract staff.
The Institutional Development and Capacity Building (IDCB) strategy and plan developed and adopted.
Policies, systems and guidelines for human resource development and management developed, including recruitment, development of competency-based standards, and procedures for training targeted more effective use of staff resources.
Competency standards for various skills for titling, adjudication and title records management functions developed.
Center for Land Administration Management – Philippines (CLAMP) established. The CLAMP is a specialized unit of LMB to integrate, propel and sustain technology and knowledge transfer, with a Field Training Site in DENR-RO8.
Standardized technical training programs for mainstreaming innovations for surveying and titling (including paper-based and e-based learning materials) to be delivered by CLAMP developed.
Staff trained on, among other skills, dispute resolution, LAM system technologies, gender sensitivity, consensus building and valuation system, tax policy, and others.
Organizational assessment of the Land Management Bureau (LMB) completed and endorsed.
Organizational assessment of the Bureau of Local Government Finances (BLGF) completed and endorsed. Institutional strengthening plan for LMB completed.
b. LAM Education and Training
A one-year Diploma in Land Administration and Management (DLAM) leading to a two-year Master in Land Administration and Management (MLAM) or a Master in Science in Land Administration and Management (MSLAM) is now being offered by Visayas State University (VSU). A total of 39 students have enrolled. A plan to offer the course online is being finalized to allow more students from other regions to enroll.
The University of the Philippines - School of Urban and Regional Planning (UPSURP) has enhanced its existing Graduate Diploma and Master degree in Urban and Regional Planning (URP) by the injection of land administration and management topics, theories, principles and examples. This was started in July 2010.
Component 3: Security of Land Tenure
This component supported the implementation of an accelerated land adjudication program
and the establishment of an efficient and accessible land registration system in the three
participating provinces of Leyte, Bohol and Bukidnon. The component contributed to
strengthening land tenure security in participating provinces by: (a) supporting community
participation and awareness campaign; (b) issuing free-patent titles in rural and urban areas
in the three participating provinces; and (c) streamlining the guidelines to facilitate the
acceleration of issuing land titles on demand.
A total of three provinces (as opposed to four as originally anticipated) participated in the
Project. Project activities first started in Leyte in 2006, subsequently expanded to new
municipalities, and tater to the other two provinces of Bohol, and Bukidnon. The selection
of new sites involved assessment of potential of provinces for titling, support of provincial
LGUs and, the cooperation of local RoD offices. Bohol was selected in mid-2006 and
operations began January 2007, with the first titles being issued in September 2007.
Bukidnon was selected in February 2008, but did not start to operate till September of that
year due to the lead-time needed in the establishment of Regional Project Implementing
Units (RPIUs)
The specific outcomes under the Project can be summarized as follows:
Component 3–Security of Land Tenure in Participating Provinces
a. Community Participation
A program Community Participation Program was implemented, in partnership with LGUs and other government agencies, to promote community participation and awareness of land rights, responsibilities, and the benefits of land titling and improved tenure.
High levels of community participation were achieved under the Project, with the 81.34 percent average of the three provinces exceeding the 80 percent target (i.e., Leyte with 71.96 percent, Bohol with 88.37 percent, and Bukidnon with 83.69 percent. Community participation was defined as the number of applications in an LGU relative to the total number of workable lots, i.e., those lots that had not yet been titled.
b. Systematic Titling
A total of 103,064 titles were processed and transmitted to the Register of Deeds (RoD), of which 101,793 (equivalent to 99.8 percent of revised target) were registered. Of them, 96,356 were distributed to property owners.
The successful implementation of Component 3 in terms of systematic titling was mainly the result of an expanded partnership with LGUs in patent generation that first started in Bohol in 2009. Taking the new approach of training and deputizing local government staff for titling activities from Bayawan City experience, the Bohol Provincial Project Implementation Office (PPIO) led a strong campaign on the benefits of cadastral maps and land survey and titling to the local government. Their efforts paid off—within a year, nine MOPAs were subscribed with various levels of counterpart resources from LGUs totaling more than PhP 20 million. In 2010, Bohol PPIO was able to issue more than 25,000 patents (combined output from LAMP and CARP). In fact, the first municipality (Maribojoc) to work in partnership with the Bohol PPIO received a “Galing Pook” Award from the President because of the remarkable results.
Participating Provinces Number of Patents Leyte Bohol Bukidnon Total
Patents submitted to RoD 37,032 51,750 14,282 103,064 100% Registered 36,022 51,659 14,112 101,793 99 % · Distributed 34,089 48,673 12,594 95,356 93% · Unclaimed 1,933 2,986 1,518 6,437 6% Unregistered 1,010 91* 170 1,271 1%
Source: DENR (2014)
The Leyte and Bukidnon PPIOs also adopted this scheme with some variations depending on the potential lots and level of commitments from LGUs. Leyte focused on residential lots and added partnership with land surveyors in the scheme since many lots require subdivision. Bukidnon on the other hand brought the IP participation in the process since the entire province is claimed as ancestral domain land.
c. Land Registration and Service Delivery Standards
As implementation arrangements were adapted to local conditions, LGU partnerships emerged as a promising implementation modality. Thus, under the Project DENR worked more closely with LGUs to not only facilitate the systematic adjudication and titling process but also improve land records management and service delivery through the rollout of LAMS to DENR’s LMS regional offices.
The Records Management Strategy (RMS) developed under LAMP I was adopted and is being implemented. A supporting Land Administration Management System (LAMS) has been developed and adopted. It has already been deployed to all 16 DENR regions and the capturing of land records has already begun. DENR is committed to completing the implementation of LAMS throughout the country within the next three years.
A One-Stop Shop (OSS) was established in Leyte and was operational, with staff and records of LAM agencies located in the building. The Leyte RD continued to hold office in the building. Coordination between the ROD and PENRO has been sustained. It has been independently monitored since 2009, and was achieving at least 90 percent of the newly defined OSS service standards after three years of operation. There was a steady increase in formal land transactions recorded until 2012. However, the OSS office in Leyte was severely damaged by Typhoon Haiyan in November 2013, which has disrupted its regular operations and reporting.
In view of the construction of new twin RoDs under the Land Registration Agency’s ongoing LTCP and the result of the OSS sustainability study in 2010, DENR decided not to pursue the physical establishment of OSS buildings in Bohol and Bukidnon. Instead, a linkage between Philares and LAMS systems was agreed to be developed instead, providing users under the Project a one-stop service point for Consolidated Cadastral Maps (CCM), and patent registration and distribution.
Component 4: Property Valuation
This component contributed to raising the quality of government- and private sector
property valuation performance, including achieving considerable progress toward one
single valuation base for taxation as well as the required institutional and educational
reform. This component was implemented by the Department of Finance (DoF), through
the Bureau of Local Government Finance (BLGF) and the National Tax Research Center
(NTRC). Specifically:
Component 4–Property Valuation
a. Institutional Development and Policy Formulation for Property Valuation
The Valuation Reform Act (VRA) Bill approved by the House of Representatives as House Bill No. 6044, with pending approval by Senate. The VRA bill is the centerpiece legislative reform proposal to establish a regulatory regime towards the adoption of uniform, market-based valuation system that is governed by globally accepted valuation standards, techniques, and best practices. It seeks to amend key provisions in the Local Government Code of 1991.
Several research and studies were undertaken to develop policy reform proposals on the national and local land-related taxes and fees to balance the tax impact of increases in property valuation, particularly for property transfer taxes imposed by the national government.
b. Development and Implementation of Guidelines, Standards and Procedures for Property Valuation
Development and promulgation of the Philippine Valuation Standards based on the International Valuation Standards (DoF DO37-2009). In addition to its required adoption by all local government assessors and other government agencies conducting mass appraisal of real property for taxation purposes, the PVS have also been voluntarily adopted by the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas and the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Mass Appraisal Guidebook (MAG) developed and issued through DoF Do. No. 10-2010 on 25 May2010. Basic Course on Mass Appraisal (BCMA) modules and attendant materials developed, piloted, and finalized in March 2012.
Market-based valuation was piloted in the cities of Naga, Iloilo, and Mandaue, and a revised SMV was developed for each site. Naga City completed the whole process of developing market-based values (using validated sales data), including adoption, and tax implementation and collection, earning the distinction of being a model LGU in the country with harmonized and market-based valuation.
Drawing from the experience from these pilots, the cities of Alaminos, Bayawan, Legazpi, San Carlos and Tayabas completed extensive trainings on market-based valuation procedures and are now in the process of finalizing the new SMVs. With the new manual and standards in valuation, other provinces and cities have also on their own initiative started the groundwork for updating their property values.
Two prototype information systems on property valuation were designed in support of the pilot implementation in the LGUs. These are the Valuation Database and Information System (VDIS) and the electronic Field Appraisal and Assessment Sheet (eFAAS). The VDIS is a data storage facility for capturing sales transactions in the LGUs. The eFAAS, on the other hand, is a computerized real-property tax administration and records management system designed for low-income class LGUs to back-up and manage all assessment records currently in manual forms, and to generate computer-based tax declaration, assessment roll, notice of assessments, and other external reports.
Under the LAMP II Innovation Support Fund, spatial information and revenue generation systems were implemented in selected LGUs on demand basis. By 2010, all of the 16 participating LGUs had operational revenue systems, ten of which adopted eTRACS, while other LGUs upgraded their current commercial systems. The use of parcel-based GIS system and DCDB was also adopted by 14 LGUs and the systems were further expanded towards developing tax, social, and geo-hazard maps.
c. Establishment of a Recognized Valuation Professional Body
Enactment of the Real Estate Service Act (Republic Act No. 9646 - RESA), which professionalizes and regulates the country’s real estate service practice (real estate consultancy, appraisal, and brokerage). It aims to develop and nurture through proper and effective regulation and supervision a corps of technically competent, responsible and respected professionals. The law requires the establishment of a bachelor’s degree in real estate, the licensure and regulation of real estate consultants, appraisers and brokers, and the accreditation of real estate persons.
The implementation of RESA is under the Professional Regulation Commission, through its Professional Regulatory Board of Real Estate Service. As of December 2012, there were 3,902 licensed appraisers, half of them from the government sector.
RESA marks an important milestone in the LAM reform program as it provides the human resources regulatory regime to support the real property valuation reforms in the Philippines. It requires the positions
in national and local government service to be filled only by licensed and professional real estate appraisers. In 2012, the Civil Service Commission modified the qualification standards for all positions in the government performing appraisal functions in view of RESA. Even if the appointing authority remains with the local chief executives, RESA ensures appointments of assessors who are technically qualified and equipped to perform the job.
d. Property and Land valuation Education and Training
The University of Philippines Open University (UPOU) instituted the Continuing Professional Education on Property and Land Valuation (CPEPLV) in May 2010. The Diploma and Master’s courses on Property Land Valuation and Management (PLVM) were approved in June 2011. These courses have been included in the UPOU course offerings since November 2011, with 80 enrolled students in the first cohort.
Component 5: Project Implementation
Activities under this component supported the effective and efficient implementation and
management of the Project, including monitoring and evaluation, as well as fluid
communication with key stakeholders. Specifically:
Component 5–Project Implementation
Appropriate organizational structures and mechanisms were established at the national, provincial and LGU levels, including the formation of committees and coordination and communication lines between and among the participating agencies.
M&E framework was formulated in 2006 and it became the basis for the monitoring progress under the Project. M&E tools were developed and implemented; regular assessments of performance held regularly. SAT QA systems were in place in Leyte, Bohol, and Bukidnon. LAMP II M&E system was cited as a best practice by AusAID.
Impact evaluation completed. The Socio-Economic Baseline Study was conducted in 2007 in Leyte, and in 2010 in Bohol and Bukidnon. Final impact assessment completed in 2013.
Social Mobilization Strategy developed and finalized in June 2007 and approved by the Bank in August 2007. Information materials were widely developed and disseminated.
Sustainability Plan was developed in November 2009 and is currently under implementation.
Ten LGUs participated in Phase I of LAMP II Innovation Support Fund, and an additional 14 LGUs in an expansion phase, resulting in the widespread adoption of model LAM tools and practices (see Component 4.b). LGU contributions to ISF projects totaled PhP 72.55 Million (US $ 1.61 M), representing 49 percent of total LAMP II ISF funding.
Annex 3. Economic and Financial Analysis
Economic Impact
Project costs - At appraisal, the total project cost over four years was estimated at US$55.2
million to be financed by a US$18.99 million IBRD loan, US$19.31 million from a
AusAID grant, and US$2.2 million in Government co-financing. The restructured project
cost was roughly US$19.31 million, of which US$15.36 million was from proceeds of the
IBRD loan, US$15.3 million from the AusAID grant, and approximately US$2 million
from GoP (see Annex 2). In addition, LGUs that contributed approximately US$2.3 million
of their own resources to systematic title adjudication activities. A total of US$3.64 million
of loan funds were cancelled in 2010 due to reduced titling activities as a result of delays
in the passage of the Residential Free Patent Act as well as the decision not to construct
One-Stop-Shops for land administration services delivery in Bohol and Bukidnon
Provinces. The revised loan proceeds were fully disbursed.
Unit costs - The Project made highly efficient use of the loans proceeds. When taking into
consideration both the costs of producing and obtaining a title (i.e., the costs incurred by
public agencies in producing a title and the costs incurrent by applicants to obtain a title),
the unitary cost of a LAMP II title being just a fraction (i.e., 21.6 percent) of a DENR-
CARP title (see Table 3.1).
On the public end, the cost of producing a tile under Component 3, which represented 72
percent of the total loan after restructuring, were comparable in the case of Leyte (only 3.5
percent higher) or substantially lower than in Bukidnon (i.e., 43.5 percent) than the cost of
producing a title under DENR-CARP-funded traditional free patent titling approach.19
These cost calculations, which include the entire production chain from social mobilization
to title distribution, were based on an exhaustive cost study that took into consideration
salaries and benefits of both regular and contracted employees as well as maintenance and
operating expenses under the two modalities, and shown in the following table (LEI,
2010a).
19 The DENR-CARP-funded traditional free patent titling approach had been in existence prior to LAMP
implementation. Under this procedure, free patent title applications are sporadically processed in response
to individual requests filed at the CENRO offices.
Table 3.1 Public and private cost of titling under LAMP II and DENR-CARP
Source: LEI (2010)
Private expenses (i.e., those incurred by applicants) were significantly lower under LAMP
II than those issued under DENR regular titling procedures. Specifically, expenses incurred
by LAMP II beneficiaries in processing fees and professional services were only 11.3
percent of those typical under the DENR-CARP modality. These fees do not include any
payments to fixers, which could exacerbate the difference between the two modalities even
more. Likewise, other out-of-pocket expenditures such as transportation and food
associated with the need to mobilize as part of the application process were also
substantially lower under LAMP II (i.e., 11.6 percent).
There were also significant differences in the time to obtain a title. In Bohol, 48 percent of
LAMP II participants received their title in four months or less, and 99 percent in tem
months or less. Also in Bohol, only 32 percent of those applying for a title under DENR-
CARP received it in six months or less, and only 60 percent in nine months or less. In
Bukidnon, the average processing time to secure approval for a free patent application from
date of filing to distribution under LAMP II was roughly four months, with the longest
being six months and the shortest duration being two months. Also in Bukidnon, the
average time to process a free patent application from date of filing to approval at the
PENRO level under the DENR-CARP modality was roughly six months. The shortest
processing time was one month while the longest is 7.8 years.
Internal rate of return -The Project’s Economic Efficiency is deemed to be high. The
Project’s actual Internal Economic Rate of Return is expected to be above 15 percent
estimated at the 2010 restructuring. While the number of registered titles was in line with
that anticipated at restructuring (i.e., 95,356 titles distributed to landowners), there are
indications that the value of land may be higher than the 10 percent estimated at
restructuring, reaching up to 35 percent.20
An economic analysis was conducted as part of this ICR utilizing the same assumptions of
the economic analysis conducted at restructuring, which are considered adequate and of
continuous relevance. As the Project’s focus was primarily on agriculture land, the
20LEI (2010).
economic analysis took into consideration benefits from improved land productivity as a
result of potentially expanded access to credit, greater propensity to invest in land
improvements and a second-round intensification of inputs. In turn, increased land
productivity is reflected in the higher land prices, which capture the increases in the future
stream of land-yielded outputs. As in the economic analysis presented in both PAD and at
restructuring, increases in land value are phased over a 5-year period and be in effect over
a 35-year time period. The same assumptions were used in terms of plot sizes by province
(0.71 ha in Leyte, 0.6 ha in Bohol, and 1.25 in Bukidnon), as well as land prices
(PhP100,000/ha), which were adjusted by the actual number of titles that were granted and
the current exchange rate (PhP43.82/USD1.00) to derive benefits. Another benefit was the
time savings (two days at PhP100 per day) in the application process accrued by title
applicants (95,356 landowners).
Costs included Component 3 of the Bank’s loan (equivalent to 66.8 percent of the total
proceeds), the same percentage (66.8 percent) of AusAID TAL (US$15.3 million) and the
GoP contribution (USD2 million), and the full amount of LGU contributions (2.3 million).
In terms of recurrent costs, management costs equivalent to 2 percent of the initial costs of
issuing a title were also included in the analysis, being phased over 5 years.
Results from a sensitivity analysis indicate a high economic efficiency, with the IERR
ranging from 22 percent for a 5 percent increase in land values as perceived in Bukidnon,
to 93 percent for a 35 percent, as determined by a case study in Leyte that examined
differences in market prices between titled and untitled agricultural land. These results are
consistent with Bank estimates for similar projects in other countries. For example, in the
case of Ghana, the ERR was estimated around 38 percent; in the case of Thailand, the ERR
was estimated around 34 percent.21
21 LAMP II PAD (2005).
Fiscal Impact
The Project’s fiscal impact has been high, both as a result of the titling activities conducted
in municipalities in the provinces of Leyte, Bohol and Bukidnon, as well as well as in Naga
city, which has adopted and implemented a market-based Schedule of Market Values
(SMV).
Component 3 – Land Titling: The increase in Real Property Tax (RPT) revenues under
LAMP II was the result of two sources: (i) payment of unpaid RPTs as a condition of title
registration; and (ii) improved RPT collection as a result of new Real Property Units (RPU)
registered under the correct owner. The evolution of RPT revenues for LAMP II and non-
LAMP II municipalities in the provinces of Bohol, Leyte and Bukidnon between 2009 and
2012 indicates that LAMP II had a substantial fiscal impact among participating
municipalities in the Bohol, Leyte and Bukidnon provinces. The average growth in RPT
revenues between 2009 and 2012 was higher in municipalities that had systematic titling
activities under the Project in all three provinces (see Table 3.2). While the difference is
only slight in the case of Leyte (equivalent to 1.4 percent), it is larger in the case of Bohol
(5.5 percent) and Bukidnon in particular (21.1 percent).
Table 3.2 Average Change in RTP Revenues for Participating and Non-participating
Municipalities 2009-2012
A stronger growth in RPT revenues results, in turn, in municipalities’ greater reliance on
own-source revenues. Thus, as expected, dependence on fiscal transfers from the central
government (i.e., Internal Revenue Allotments – IRA) has decreased more in LAMP II
municipalities than in non-LAMP II ones between 2009 and 2012, except for Bukidnon
where LAMP II municipalities were already less IRA dependent than their non-LAMP II
peers (see Table 3.3).
Average change in RPT Revenues
2009-2012
Bohol
LAMP II municipalities * 129.28%
Non-LAMP II municipalities ** 122.52%
Leyte
LAMP II municipalities *** 114.48%
Non-LAMP II municipalities **** 112.94%
Bukidnon
LAMP II municipalities ***** 135.80%
Non-LAMP II municipalities 112.12%
Source: Based on data from BLGF (2014).
** Based on data for 13 out of 15 municipalities, for which there was a complete 2009-2012 data series.
*** Based on data for 19 out of 27 municipalities, for which there was a complete 2009-2012 data series.
**** Based on data for 12 out of 14 municipalities, for which there was a complete 2009-2012 data series.
***** Based on data for 12 out of 13 municipalities, for which there was a complete 2009-2012 data series.
* Based on data for 25 out of 32 municipalities, for which there was a complete 2009-2012 data series.
Table 3.3 Average Change in IRA Dependence for Participating and Non-participating Municipalities 2009-2012
Source: Based on data from BLGF (2014).
Component 4 – Property Valuation: Naga City adopted its market-based SMV in October
2008 via City Council Ordinance No. 2008-080. The same Ordinance provided an
implementation strategy to soften the tax impact on the taxpayers. As a result of the 12-
year gap in the SMV revision of Naga City, real property values increased significantly
under the new SMV, with increases in land values reaching 150-400 percent for residential,
16-171 percent for commercial and 42-209 percent for agriculture. The same ordinance
prescribed several measures to ameliorate the impact on tax payers, including a capping
scheme that set maximum increases in RPT based on 2008 tax due and collectible.
With the 10 percent cap, total RPT collectibles in Naga City increased gradually since the
adoption of the new SMV, by 7 percent in 2009, 16 percent in 2010, and 23 percent in
2011. Although actual collections initially grew at a slower pace (4.5 percent in 2009),
perhaps as a result of an initial reticence on the part of taxpayers to the new assessments,
they grew steadily from 2010 onward (see Table 3.4).
The Bureau of Internal Revenues (BIR) based in Naga City also adopted the new SMV and
implemented new zonal values which approximate more or less the new Naga SMV. The
BIR tax for property transfers had no capping. Zonal values were applied directly; thus, the
net effect was a much more significant increase in property transfer taxes (see Table 3.4).
Table 3.4 Collections of RPT and Property transfer tax for Naga City and the Bureau of Internal Revenues 2008-2011
Source: Office of the City Treasurer, Naga City, as reported by OIDC (2013)
As shown on Table 3.5, in spite of the capping that was imposed to ameliorate the increase
in RPT among taxpayers, the implementation of the revised SMV has contributed to Naga
City’s fiscal soundness, as shown by its good rankings in terms of IRA dependence and the
ratio between own-source revenues and external taxes.
Table 3.5 IRA dependence and own-source versus external taxes in Naga City
Source: BLGF (2014)
A total of 30 additional provinces and 52 cities have updated their SMVs during the
Project’s lifetime as a result of the issuance of DoF-DILG JMC No. 2010-01 enjoining
LGUs to update their SMVs and conduct general revision of property assessments.
Local Government
Unit Income Class Ordinance/
Resolution No. Effectiveness
Provinces with Revised SMVs
Benguet 2 10-139 2014 Iloilo 1 2002-045 2012 Agusan Del Norte 3 236-2008 2013 Rizal 1 008 s. 2010 2011 Romblon 3 12-2010-85 2012 Tawi-Tawi 3 004 S.2011 2014 Cavite 1 09-004 2011 Nueva Vizcaya 2 2009-002 2011 Mountain Province 4 150 2014 Pangasinan 1 146-2010 2011 Abra 3 151 s. 2010 2011 North Cotabato 1 480 2012 Agusan Del Sur 1 68 s. 2011 2012 Compostela Valley 1 08-2011 2012 South Cotabato 1 11-02 2012 Nueva Ecija 1 01-s-2011 2012 Laguna 1 1 s. 2011 2012 Oriental Mindoro 2 016-2011 2012 Camarines Norte 2 08-11 2012 Sorsogon 2 01-2011 2012 Capiz 1 001 s. 2011 2012 Negros Occidental 1 11-003 s. 2011 2012 Siquijor 5 2011-132 2012 Surigao Del Norte 2 01-2012 2013 Catanduanes 3 008-2011 2013 Cebu 1 2011-26 2013 Davao Del Sur 1 12-64 2013 Northern Samar 2 13 s. 2011 2013 Kalinga 3 2013-002 2014 Lanao Del Norte 2 237-2012 2014 Cities with Revised SMVs
Tarlac City 1 04-009 2012 Puerto Princesa City 1 501 2012 Cabadbaran City 2 123-2003 2012 Iloilo City 1 2011-060 2012 Santiago City 1 6th CC-27 2011 Bacoor City 1 09-004 2011 Bayawan City 2 7 2011 Imus City 1 09-004 2011 Cabuyao City 1 1 s. 2011 2012 Passi City 4 2011-070 2012 Kabankalan City 1 2009-012 2011 Trece Martires City 4 2009-161 2011 Antipolo City 1 2010-412 2011 Calapan City 3 016-2011 2011 Pagadian City 2 2K10-313 2011 Tagaytay City 2 2010-09 2011 Cadiz City 2 02-2011 s. 2011 2012 Cavite City 4 2011-3328 2012 Palayan City 5 19-B s. 2010 2012 Santa Rosa City 1 1729-2011 2012 Talisay City (Negros Occidental)
4 11-001 2012
Vigan City 4 5 s. 2010 2012 Zamboanga City 1 2010-159 2012 Biñan City 1 06-(2011) 2012
Digos City 2 11-72 2012 Himamaylan City 3 2011-26 2012 Koronadal City 3 922 2012 La Carlota City 4 2011-103 2012 Lapu-Lapu City 1 123-2011 2012 Marawi City 4 11 s. 2011 2012 Ozamis City 3 1030-11 2012 Sorsogon City 3 018 2012 Talisay City (Cebu) 3 2011-14 2012 Tangub City 4 2011-09-0030 2012 Victorias City 4 07 s. 2011 2012 Balanga City 4 29 s. 2011 2013 Bislig City 3 2012-01 2013 Escalante City 4 11-040 2013 Masbate City 4 140-2012 2013 Science City of Muñoz 4 90, S-2011 2013 Surigao City 2 335-2012 2013 Tagum City 1 558,s-2012 2013 Cauayan City 3 8 s. 2012 2013 Muntinlupa City 1 12-081 2013 Batangas City 1 20-S 2013 2014 Calamba City 1 544-S. 2013 2014 Candon City 4 634 S. 2013 2014 Iligan City NC 13-5985 2014 Manila City Special 8330 2014 San Pablo City 1 2013-16 2014 Angeles City 1 - 2014
Annex 4. Bank Lending and Implementation Support/Supervision Processes
(a) Task Team Members Names Title Unit Responsibility/
Specialty Lending
Keith Clifford Bell Senior Land Policy Specialist
TTL, Land Administration and Geospatial Information Technologies
Wael Zakout Lead Operations Officer Past TTL
Maria Theresa Quinones Operations Officer Co-TTL
Li Guo Agricultural Economist Economist
John Bruce Sr. Land Tenure Counsel Land law
Anthony Toft Chief Counsel Legal
Dominic Aumentado Procurement Specialist Procurement
Joseph Reyes Financial Management Specialist FM
Ernie Diaz Sr. Financial Management Specialist FM
Brenda Phillips Program Assistant Program Assistance
Andrew Mendoza Team Assistant Program Assistance
Hilarion Bruneau Sr. Finance Officer Disbursements
Hung Kim Phung Sr. Finance Officer Disbursements
Mei Wang Sr. Counsel Legal
Josefo Tuyor Environmental Specialist Safeguards
Idah Pswarayi-Riddihough Lead Natural Resource Management Program Coordination
Mary Judd Sr. Social Development Specialist Safeguards
Kevin Nettle Land Registration Consultant Land Registration
Chris Grant Land Administration and Surveying Consultant
Land Titling and Surveying
Paul Munro-Faure Chief, FAO Land Tenure Service FAO
Valuation and Land Taxation
Neil Pullar Land Administration Consultant FAO
Surveying Mapping and IT
Supervision/ICR
Keith Clifford Bell Sr. Land Administration Specialist
EASPS
TTL, Land Administration and Geospatial Information Technologies
Maria Theresa G. Quinones Sr. Operations Officer EASPS Co-TTL
Preselyn Abella Sr. Finance Officer CTRLN FM
Agnes Albert-Loth Sr. Financial Management Specialist EASFM FM
Kristine May San Juan Ante Program Assistant EACPF Program Assistance
Fabrizio Bresciani Sr. Agriculture Economist EASIS Economist
Peter J Mallari Carreon Team Assistant EACPF Program Assistance
R. Cynthia Dharmajaya Program Assistant EASER Program Assistance
Fnu Hanny Program Assistant EASER Program Assistance
Victoria Florian S. Lazaro Operations Officer EASPS Safeguards
Andrew Garcia Mendoza Investigative Assistant INTOP Program Assistance
Joseph G. Reyes Financial Management Specialist EASOS FM
Esperanza Sadiua Program Assistant IEGCS Program Assistance
Srinivas Shivakumar Mahalingam M&E Consultant EASNS M&E
Noel Sta. Ines Sr. Procurement Specialist EASR1 Procurement
Tomas JR. Sta. Maria Financial Management Specialist EASFM FM
Josefo Tuyor Sr. Environmental Specialist EASDE Safeguards
Sukanya Venkataraman Online Communications Assistant BPSVP Program Assistance
Kevin Nettle Land Registration Consultant Land Registration
Paul Munro-Faure Chief, FAO Land Tenure Service FAO
Valuation and Land Tax
Michael Barry Land Administration Consultant FAO
Land Administration and Education
Cecilia Zanetta ICR Consultant FAO ICR Author
(b) Staff Weeks No. of staff weeks USD Thousands
(including travel and consultant costs)
Lending FY03 2.76 9.59 FY04 32.25 139.15 FY05 33.32 118.76 FY06 0.00 0.06 FY07 0.00 0.01
Total: 68.33 267.57
Supervision/ICR FY06 8.17 20.57 FY07 14.71 49.77 FY08 24.02 67.74 FY08 25.22 90.72 FY09 28.04 105.11 FY10 24.88 101.73 FY11 24.72 117.20 FY12 (*) 7.15 38.91 FY13 (*) 14.40 79.83 FY14 0.00 0.02 FY15
Total: 171.31 671.6
(*) Includes Additional Financing.
Annex 5. Beneficiary Survey Results
An extensive survey of LAMP II beneficiaries was conducted as part of the Development
Impact Study (DIS) conducted in 2013. 22 A total of 1,264 LAMP II beneficiaries
participated in the study in the provinces of Bohol, Leyte and Bukidnon. Results from the
DIS, which focused on the impact on LAMP II on the various variables that were
operationalized as PDO indicators under the Project Result Framework are reported under
the PDO Achievement section of this ICR.
The DSI’s main aspects in terms of sampling methodology, characteristics of the
respondents, and main results are summarized as follows:
Sampling Methodology
A total of 1,904 households were covered by the household survey conducted as part of the
Development Impact Study for the titling component in the three provinces. For the
selection of the sample, the survey respondents were classified into four groups:
1) Group 1: Households consisting of baseline survey respondents (in 2007 and 2010)
who were issued free patents under LAMP2. This was qualified to mean all SEBS
respondents who were classified in the ULTP under the following categories:
completed, completed/numbered, or LAMP titled.
2) Group 2: Households who were not baseline survey respondents and were issued free
patents under LAMP2. These households were located either in the baseline barangays
or in other barangays covered by LAMP2 but within the baseline municipality. This
was qualified to mean all non-SEBS respondents in the SEBS-covered barangays who
were classified under completed, completed/ numbered, or LAMP titled. In cases where
the SEBS-covered barangays were not covered by LAMP, the group was expanded to
include LAMP-covered barangays in SEBS-covered municipalities;
3) Group 3: Households in baseline barangays or municipalities who had pending
applications for free patent under LAMP2, irrespective of whether or not they were
respondents in the baseline survey. This includes respondents with LAMP-applied title
or applied with lacking documents. Again, in cases where the SEBS-covered barangays
were not covered by LAMP, this group was expanded to include LAMP-covered
barangays in SEBS-covered municipalities; and
4) Group 4: Households in barangays not covered by LAMP2. This set of households
served as the control group.
22 Orient Integrated Development Consultants, Inc. – OIDC (2013), Second Land Administration and
Management Project: Development Impact Study – Final Report, Bohol, Bukidnon, Leyte and Naga City,
September 2013, Manila.
Sample selection gave priority to Group 1 as these households were covered in the baseline
survey. In cases where Group 1 households were not sufficient to meet the target sample,
Group 2 households were considered. Group 3 households were considered only to meet
shortfalls in the target sample size or for replacement of Groups 1 and 2 household
respondents.
The target sample size for the “with project” areas was 423 households per province. The
required sample size was distributed proportionately across the barangays (or
municipalities) based on the number of titles issued. The actual selection of households
entailed sampling of barangays per municipality first, and the barangays having bigger
number of beneficiaries were given a higher probability of selection.
For the control group, a simple random sampling of 206 respondents was done from the
total SEBS respondents was performed to determine the sample composition for the DIS.
In cases where the sample size was not met because the HH respondents were no longer
available, replacements were identified from the same SEBS barangays where these
respondents were surveyed during the SEBS.
Structured questionnaires, patterned after the data capture instrument used in the 2007 and
2010 SEBS were used in the household survey. Primary data relevant to the identified
impacts from secured tenure and improved titling procedures were gathered. These include
awareness of the process of obtaining a title, cost and time spent, experiences and problems
met from the application to the release of the title, level of satisfaction on the delivery of
services as well as general perceptions and attitudes to land. Socio-economic
characteristics, access to services, credit practices, and information on land mortgage and
sale were also collected.
Several problems were encountered during the conduct of the study, as follows:
The sampling design that was finally adopted for the DIS differed significantly from
that used in the SEBS in view of changes in LAMP2 project sites, as SEBS control
municipalities actually became project sites and other SEBS municipalities classified
at that time as project areas were eventually excluded under LAMP II. The change in
sampling design affected the plan of analysis, limiting the application of the “before
and after” analysis because of the difference in the composition of the SEBS and DIS
respondents.
These problems also affected the classification of respondent households as belonging
to Project or Control area, the size of the universe from where the samples were taken,
the type of respondents actually sampled, and the type of analysis that could be done
on the resulting database.
Characteristics of the beneficiary population
The household survey generated a profile of the 1,277 title applicant/recipient households
in the sample, which made up 67% of the total respondents in the three provinces. It shows
that the project generally covered a large number of rural poor households, including the
IPs in Bukidnon.
The profile of title applicants/recipients based on these selected parameters shows the
following:
The level of educational attainment is generally low. Those without education and those
who only attended elementary school constituted 54% of title applicants/ recipients.
Only about 37% have easy access to water supply (i.e., their own faucet).
Majority has only one farm parcel (except Bohol), with the average farm size a little
over a hectare.
Farming is the main source of income for 54% while about 17% have no means
of livelihood and income.
Main Results
Project outcomes/impacts of titling at the household level are also generally positive but
some indicators will require a longer period to fully establish the impacts.
Savings due to reduced transaction time and cost, and less need to engage fixers
Improved awareness and knowledge of formal land registration process
Reduced boundary and land ownership conflicts
Strengthened sense of security over their titled asset
Increased land values although based mainly on perception and estimates
Increased access to credit but this is limited by the 5-year prescription period.
Initial investments on farm improvements but observed to be low
Study results indicate that the overall performance of LAMP is deemed positive from the
perspective of beneficiaries and compared to “before LAMP” and “non-LAMP” conditions.
Time and cost of titling significantly reduced in LAMP areas as compared to non-
LAMP areas and to the baseline data.
Awareness level is generally higher in LAMP areas than in non-LAMP areas
Satisfaction levels are higher in LAMP than in non-LAMP areas
LAMP covered households give their assets a higher value than non-
LAMP respondents (except in Bohol).
Annex 6. Stakeholder Workshop Report and Results
(Not Applicable)
Annex 7. Summary of Borrower's ICR and/or Comments on Draft ICR
A. Executive Summary of the Borrower’s Project Completion Report (July 29,
2014)
1. Background
The implementation of the Second Land Administration and Management Project (LAMP
II) towards the end of 2005 signify the firm commitment of the government to pursue a
long-term reform of the century old yet problematic LAM system of the country.
The last phase saw the successful testing of a systematic approach to land titling, a working
model of one-stop-shop for land transactions, development of a national land records
management strategy and formulation of effective tools for updating schedule of market
values. The major policy studies that were conducted also highlighted the need for
institutional and legal reforms, with the Land Administration reform bill and the early
version of Valuation Reform bill already sponsored by some lawmakers during the middle
part of the 12th Congress. The need to expand the coverage of free patent to residential and
commercial lands and removal of the five-year restriction were also deemed important to
remove disincentives for formalization of these urban lands and spur further development.
Taking off from the strategies developed and innovations pilot tested under LAMP1, the
goal of the second phase is to reform the land administration system so that it contributes
to the country’s socio-economic development goals. The design approach is an expanded
but limited replication of the innovations tested under the learning and innovation phase
while pursuing the priority institutional and legislative reforms in parallel. The second
phase was funded through a loan from World Bank and Technical Assistance from AusAID.
2. Project Results
After eight years of implementation, LAMP II is largely credited for putting the land sector
back as one of the agenda in the Philippine Development Plan (PDP) for 2010 to 2016. The
Land Sector Development Framework (LSDF) and Valuation Road Map which were
produced under the Project served as key reference documents in its preparation, resulting
in the increased awareness of the executive officials and law makers on the importance of
the reform agenda. It also caused the allocation of substantial resources for land
administration activities such as completion of cadastral surveys of about PhP 9 billion and
computerized land records management system which is estimated at PhP 2 billion.
In spite of the setbacks in the early and middle stages of implementation and the continuing
delays in the passage of key institutional reforms that it proposed (i.e. the Land
Administration and Valuation Reform bills), the project was able to institute important
innovations to improving land governance through the development of a stronger
partnership between national and local government. These have clearly demonstrated the
benefits that can be derived from the shared cadastral information and the
collaborative approach to land titling, valuation and land use planning that includes
transparency and effective cooperation between key implementing agencies and land
owners. These are eventually translated to improved land services and revenue generation
at the municipal and provincial level.
The effectiveness of local government’s active role in land titling for example was
highlighted by the phenomenal issuance of 25,000 patents in just a single year in the
province of Bohol. As of this day, this partnership has already spread beyond LAMP II
areas, being adopted in the provinces of Cebu and Ilocos Norte, and is now totaling more
than 180 across the nation. If fully mainstreamed, it is expected to multiply the
government's manpower for land titling by up to 10 times and substantially reduce the time
required to complete the remaining work across the nation.
Indeed, the above approach is just the vehicle needed for the titling of residential lands that
benefited from the passage of R.A. 10023, known as the Residential Free Patent Act of
2009. The law that was achieved mainly through the advocacy effort of the project,
provides for free titling for these lands (estimated at about 3-6 million parcels). It was
hailed by local leaders as very timely for their constituents. The Department of
Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) started to expand titling activities on these
lands, initially targeting an average of 60,000 residential patents per year since 2012.
Not to be overlooked is the potential inclusion of an Indigenous Peoples (IP) component
in the above setup based on the interesting experience of DENR with an IP group in
Bukidnon in discovering workable arrangement for implementing land titling activities in
areas with IP presence.
Strongly complementing these on the valuation side is the successful updating of the
Schedule of Market Values (SMV) in Naga City in 2008 to a nearly uniform level with the
zonal and true market values, which also highlighted another critical area for increasing
the potential income of national and local government in land transactions, hence indicating
the need for pursuing further reforms on this aspect of land administration. The late
Secretary Jesse Robredo who was then the Mayor when this was instituted had actually
foreseen the prospective benefits of these innovations on titling and valuation. When he
became the DILG Secretary in 2010, he issued a memorandum to all local executives to
encourage the adoption of DENR DAO on LGU Partnership. DOF also issued the
Philippine Valuation Standards in line with the passage of the Real Estate Service Act
(RESA) to improve valuation practices and profession. The joint policy of DILG and DOF
(JMC No. 2010-01) further enjoined LGUs to update their SMVs and conduct general
revision of property assessments using the valuation standards and guidelines supported by
the Project.
The above outcomes clearly underpin the importance of complete access to spatial
information for effective land governance at all levels. With the adoption of the gender
sensitive Land Administration and Management System (LAMS) by DENR for its land
records and services, the foreseen benefits of linking computerized systems and
information from land administration agencies will continue to be pursued, thus providing
the alternative for the One-Stop-Shop (OSS) concept earlier tested under LAMP1. OSS,
with all the good intentions at the field level was proven to be difficult to sustain without
the legislated institutional integration needed at the central level as envisioned in the
proposed in the Land Administration and Land Administration Reform Act (LARA).
The successful experience of the Innovation Support Fund (ISF) in addressing LAM
challenges at the local level through 16 pilot LGUs also opened another avenue where both
titling and valuation reforms can be integrated in an incremental approach. Bayawan City
has modeled how a LAM framework can be steered by a progressive minded local Chief
Executive.
Recognizing the importance of sustaining all the reform effort and innovations introduced
under LAMP II and the need to pursue the other important reforms together with the
education and capacity building support that will be required in parallel, strategic
partnership and offices were established. The Land Management Bureau set up the Center
for Land Administration and Management Philippines (CLAMP) to manage the training
requirements for DENR. The Bureau of Local Government Finance also set up the
Valuation Office. In addition, the project also established partnership with academic
institution such as Visayas State University (VSU) in Leyte and the UPOU to offer Land
Administration and Management Diploma and Masters courses in Land Valuation and
Management respectively.
Furthermore, an Asian Development Bank (ADB) funded project in 2011 has picked up
the lessons from ISF for expansion of support to Bayawan City and replication of
programmatic support to 9 new LGUs, while an NGO named Foundation for Economic
Freedom also partnered with LMB in 2011 to provide capacity building support to more
than 150 LGUs for the adoption of LGUs partnership at various levels.
The effort of the government to improve land governance through LAMP II and other
initiatives has already gained local and international recognitions, having received best
practice awards from the National Economic Development Authority (NEDA), invitations
to conferences and recognition from Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and World
Bank (WB). This has also resulted in a number of visits from Vietnam, Sri Lanka, Bhutan
and Indonesia land administrators for benchmarking purposes, recognizing the valuable
lessons from the Philippine experience.
3. Next Steps
Project sites from tenure security, valuation and ISF components have experience
significant improvement on land governance with reported positive impact on land related
revenues. The combined benefits of systematic titling, an updated schedule of market
values and land use plans done in partnership between national and local government is
therefore seen as an ideal scenario providing both local executives and their constituents,
access to cadastral information, security of tenure and better capability to address the
opportunities and challenges of managing their land.
With the effect of climate change and growing population expected to put bigger challenges
requiring adoption of new policies and land management technologies by both local and
national leaders, the government is faced with the need to pursue the reforms and expand
the adoption of the innovations developed under LAMP II. Mainstreaming the new
approaches in land titling, valuation and support to land use planning with all potential
LGUs and putting in place necessary assessment and monitoring tools will clearly boost
the government’s effort in improving land governance and revenue generation. This will
however require substantial resources for training and capacity building as majority of
LGUs particularly those in the rural areas lacks this expertise.
Land management policies that address tenure issues in forest, protected areas and
foreshore lands also need to be given focus as the recent experience on the effect of climate
change points to the need for such a holistic and spatially supported approach in addressing
the challenges it poses to land governance. The pursuit of major institutional and legal
reforms should not be abandoned as laid down in the Land Sector Development Framework
(LSDF). Against these, the LAMP II achievements have provided the government with
important tools and maps to a still long and difficult journey to a world class land
administration and management system that it envisions.
DENR and DOF are deeply grateful to the overall Technical Assistance provided by
AusAID and particularly in developing the LGU partnership approach, Valuation
technologies, the Land Administration and Management System, courses for Academic
partnership and the LSDF and Valuation Roadmap. The support of World Bank in guiding
the project all throughout its inception to its completion is very much appreciated.
4. Lessons Learned
The following lessons are culled out from the Activity Completion Report (ACR) of the
Technical Advisers Team of AusAID together with project counterparts prepared in 2010.
4.1 General Lessons
The reform initiatives which have been achieved by LAMP II have largely come about
through partnerships between Change Agents recruited by the project from the private
sector, advocacy groups and the academe and Executive Champions located in the national
LAM agencies and in the Congress and the Senate. The change agents, whether national or
international, have played a central role in:
• Introducing the reforms to the executive of the national LAM agencies and in
shepherding the policy reform bills through the Congress and the Senate; and
• Developing Executive and Administrative Orders in support of the reforms, systems
and technology, and training programs for the improvement of LAM service delivery.
For their part, the Executive Champions have taken responsibility for ensuring the reforms
progress through the bureaucracy and, if required, through the Congress and the Senate.
Without capacity to continue to engage external change agents in any future program of
LAM reform, Executive Champions will find it difficult to sustain the current reform
momentum. The reform process is only in its infancy and national LAM agencies still have
a long way to go in addressing the issues of institutional inertia and vested interest
ingrained in their organization and management structures.
4.2 Policy Development
(a) While the LAM reform agenda has generated wide support among stakeholders and
developed champions among legislators, there are no guarantees that Bills will be passed.
Law making in the Philippines is a highly political process that can only be influenced to
some degree by external players.
(b) Without abandoning the legislative track, it is prudent to consider alternative means of
introducing reforms through administrative measures such as Departmental Administrative
Orders (DAO), which while achieving more modest results at least advance the reform
process administratively. Improvement of existing titling approaches through amendments
of existing procedures and harmonizing LAM agency programs should be explored to the
fullest extent.
(c) Experience has shown that policy and legislative reforms that target the rationalization
of several government agency functions under a single authority such as the LAA is a long
and difficult process. Partners must be prepared to sustain advocacy and address the
interests of those to be affected. The reform process is more easily expedited through
rationalization of the systems and procedures of a single agency as demonstrated by the
passage of the Free Patent Amendment through DENR and the RESA through the DOF/
BLGF). Other forms of harmonizing and integrating the systems are alternatives that can
be explored in the short term to progressively achieve results.
(d) Despite the existence of Presidential Orders mandating reforms be implemented,
national LAM agencies have avoided confronting institutional coordination issues. To
break the deadlock, there would need to be higher level or direct Presidential intervention.
(e) Policy studies, which are the prelude to legislative reform, must be initiated and
developed with clear participation, consensus and ownership of implementing partner
agencies. Technical assistance and advice must be directed and guided by the implementing
partners to ensure that ownership and integration of these policies are achieved within the
institution. However, while consensus on policy and implementation issues ultimately rests
with the stakeholders themselves, the process of consensus building can be greatly assisted
by the presence of third party advocates, facilitators and technical advisers acting as
intermediaries.
(f) A decision to pursue policy studies into legislation must be a determined and sustained
effort that is supported logistically, organizationally, technically and politically. In
particular, those agencies initially prepared to sponsor this support must be prepared to
‘stay the distance’ and not prematurely withdraw from legislative process they have helped
to initiate simply because the agreed project period has come to an end. There needs to be
a sustained effort by the agency, through its own legislative agenda. A case in point is the
passage of the Valuation Reform Act (VRA) that has a good chance of being passed in the
next Congress.
(g) The work for the approval of legislation cannot be limited only to technical presentation
and arguments by the implementation agencies. Other non-technical means, i.e. political
networking, sustained support to partner advocates and stakeholders, and media/social
marketing activities also have to be applied.
(h) It is best that the commitment and ability of stakeholders, especially from NGOs/CSOs,
and basic sector groups, to pursue advocacy activities be translated into a clearly
determined agenda and activities of these groups, and internally resourced. Contracting of
services for consensus building or provision of grant fund mechanisms to support
stakeholder activities needs to be carefully managed, so as not to lose the essence of
partnership.
(i) In parallel with the development of the policy agenda committed political champions,
preferably a Committee Chairperson in the Senate and Congress, needs to be identified as
well as other key officials and gatekeepers of the legislative process.
(j) Sustained support to these champions and their staff are critical during the final approval
processes (i.e. 2nd/3rd reading deliberations and bicameral conference) of the bill in order
to maintain momentum.
(k) Working closely with technical staff of key legislators facilitates and guides the
marshalling and internal processing of proposed bills and drafts.
(l) Once a Bill is passed every effort must be taken to ensure the key implementation
agencies have sufficient resources to implement and roll-out the approved policies
throughout the organization and their field staff.
4.3 Institutional Development and Capacity Building
(a) There are critical HR elements that must be present at the start of a Project to ensure its
efficient and effective implementation:
• First is to have clearly defined, competency-standards based HRMD systems and
procedures, particularly for recruitment/selection, performance assessment and training,
to ensure that the right type of human resources are available at the right time to
implement Project activities. Having and implementing a good recruitment and selection
system becomes more cost-effective for the Project as staff need little or no training
before being able to produce as expected.
• Second is to have Managers that are also recruited based on the D systems and procedures.
In the absence of such process, detailed personnel have to undergo standardized Project
Management and Human Resource Management training programs before even
implementing any Project activity. While a Project Management training does include
modules in managing human resources, it has been the experience in LAMP that some
managers and supervisors are more conscious of control measures for financial and
physical resources as part of over-all operations; while human resource management is
largely left to the HR staff (or addressed only when performance or staff problems are
present). In most cases, staff detailed to managerial or supervisory positions in Projects
comes from technical units/positions with little or no managerial/supervisory
background. Such initiatives will ensure that management of the Project activities and
control of Project resources is standard/consistent across the sites.
(b) In a Project where the sector under study is as complex as LAM and institutional
development and capacity building is a major component, it is important to have an
implementation structure that looks at both the strategic and operation levels. An inter-
agency Technical Working Group represented by all possible categories of organizations
comprising the institution will be able to provide the needed oversight and strategic
directions to ensure that component interventions are appropriate to the requirements of
the sector. A small, dedicated group of staff at each site to handle implementation is also
necessary to ensure continuity and standard delivery of services.
(c) The use of detailed staff in a Project is preferable over contract staff. In this manner,
government is assured that any capacity that is built for these detailed staff will accrue to
government when the staff returns to their stations/mother units. Sustainability of gains
achieved during Project life will then be built into the process. It is recognized, however,
that detailed staff may not be available in all cases and that Projects would need to resort
to hiring contract staff. In such cases, Projects must, as far as possible, make sure that: (a)
detailed staff work along-side contract staff, preferably in managerial or supervisory
positions; and (b) contract staff are asked to participate as trainers in technology/
knowledge transfer initiatives for other government staff not assigned to the Project.
(d) Good human resource management practice dictates that staff should be compensated
well and on time. In the case of GOP Projects, compensation levels are controlled and
cannot be changed. However, the Project should at least ensure that whatever amount has
been set is given on time, especially for contract staff who do not have security of tenure
nor any of the benefits of their detailed counterparts. Delays and uncertainties in terms of
salaries have led to staff turnover in the Project and, consequently, loss of developed
capacities. This has proved to be inefficient as new staff have to be re-trained (drawing on
more training monies) and learning curves have to be hurdled (resulting in some loss in
productivity).
(e) Any institutional development and capacity building component within an over-all
sector reform project is primarily a support component to those that are tasked to develop
the actual systems and technological changes. Its work commences by first preparing the
organizations that will adopt the systems and technologies; then progresses to supporting
them in the actual adoption of the systems and technologies; and finally looks at the
continued use and further development of these systems and technologies through other
support structures. So, long after the systems and technological changes within a Project
structure have been developed, tested and completed, a support component like IDCB will
still only be half-way done to completing its task and confirming the effects of its
interventions.
(f) Interventions that relate to establishing new qualifications, formal or non-formal, take
time. Education and training authorities, and even managers of academic and training
institutions, must first be convinced that there is a viable, long-term demand for the new
qualifications being supported. In the case of LAMP where the demand is actually being
created along-side reforms to the sector, education authorities and institutions usually take
a more conservative stance and, more often than not, expect that development costs for the
new qualifications are front-ended by a third party such as the Project. Developing new
qualifications also have to follow set systems and timetables within education authorities
and institutions. All these must be taken into consideration when planning for similar
interventions in the future.
(g) Developing and expanding the body of knowledge on a given sector through research
also takes time. Support for small research grants during the life of a Project would only
start the process of generating interest in LAM as a researchable area among a small group
of people. Sustained support over the medium term for researches in the sector, managed
by a known research institution such as DOST, would bring this a step further.
4.4 Tenure Security
(a) The current approach to systematic titling of rural lands has been proven effective.
Experience (Bohol) has shown that targets can be achieved provided adequate levels of
resources are made available, and there is commitment to follow procedures with strong
management of operations.
(b) There are opportunities for broadening the reach and further reducing the cost to
national government of titling through the following models: (i) LGU led initiatives as
demonstrated through the ISF experience (Bayawan); (ii) direct engagement with LGUs in
funding the systematic adjudication and titling process (Bohol); and (iii) cost sharing with
LGUs (Bukidnon and Bohol).
(c) Related to the above, experience has shown that greater efficiency is achieved in
municipalities where LGUs are actively involved in titling. In planning for the roll out
therefore, it is important to consider the LGU commitment to partner as a priority over the
need to cover all the municipalities in the province with high proportion of untitled parcels.
(d) The OSS model of co-locating DENR and LRA services to expedite the issuance and
roll-out of the titling process, while improving the performance of agency service delivery,
has not proven successful as an interagency administrative model because of the lack of
LRA support. The OSS experience is, however, being adapted through the development of
LGU front desks and information offices under the ISF for the purpose of assisting clients
improve their access to national LAM agency information and services (refer Bayawan,
Olongapo, Nabunturan).
(e) The issuance of Mother CLOAs by DAR is a constraint to tenure security given
ownership is vested with the occupying group rather than at an individual household level.
The linkage with DAR in the next roll out of titling should be strengthened to ensure there
is alignment of activities and value added through titling and other services offered by
LAMP.
(f) As demonstrated in the ISF LAM Sector Medium Term Development Plans (refer
Bayawan), achieving convergence between the process of land titling and enhanced social
and economic development for title holders is more likely to be facilitated through LGU
led LAM initiatives than through the functional activities of the principal LAM agencies
(DENR, DAR and the LRA). The reason being – LGUs have a vested interest in increasing
title coverage within their constituencies to enhance RPT collection. Increased RPT
collection enables LGU investment in social and economic infrastructure, which may
benefit titleholders directly.
(g) The assumption that titling will result in increased incomes of title holders through
increased investments in property development; stimulate the land market, and thereby
contribute to economic growth; may not hold true for rural agricultural parcels which are
very small, are under shared ownership, have imperfect rights39, and in rural economies
where public investments on agricultural development is low. In these areas, the social
benefits of secure rights are valued higher compared to the expected financial and
economic benefits. Future roll out of titling will have to carefully consider the relative
importance of social vs. economic objectives in order to give priority to sites, which will
bring about these expected benefits.
4.5 Property Valuation and Taxation
(a) Legislative processes take considerable time and sometimes reforms cannot wait before
the enactment of the law. In such cases when sector reforms require the establishment of
institution to shepherd the reform process, the use of administrative statutes such as EO,
DAO at the time the legislation is being processed, provide significant foothold to pursue
reforms.
(b) Continuing and regular communication with stakeholders and advocates is needed to
address problems as they appear. Face to face interaction proved to be the most effective
approach to getting support for reform proposals. In addition, good advocacy requires:
Acquaintance with the legislative procedures and with the officials involved in the
processing of the legislation.
Expert knowledge on the subject (valuation and taxation, VRA, RESA,
practitioners).
Effective linkage with agencies and offices involved in the subject early on
(oversight agencies).
Stakeholders to be convinced that what is advocated is beneficial to them directly
– they must be informed that they are participating in the reform process; must have
ownership of the reform process.
Need to document agreements especially during consultations, hearings.
(c) Simulation Study and SRP activities have highlighted the major inequities in the current
systems and disparity in the tax burden and have demonstrated appropriate solutions in line
with international best practices. The studies show that it is possible to demonstrate how
inequities can be rectified. The program also provided the evidence to support the
development of tax policy options for LGUs through tax compliance and tax impact study
procedures developed by NTRC. The decision of Component 4 to mainstream lessons
learned from the simulation activities in Iloilo and Naga led to the development of more
insights on improved SMV revision. The Mandaue experience which is more diverse in
terms of property types benefited from the experiences in Naga and Iloilo.
(d) There is a need for coordinated local and national taxation efforts in respect to the
application of reforms in valuation, particularly on SMV revision. To date, while the issue
has been addressed in an individual case (Naga) the broader national issue remains to be
resolved.
(e) When reforms benefits are clearly demonstrated, demand for capacity development
soars and it should be responded to avoid loss of motivation from key supporters.
(f) The success in delivering the Naga revision highlighted the critical importance of
developing a coordinated strategy to inform the community of imminent changes
incorporating a combination of tax compliance, valuation, tax impact, outcomes and the
development of appropriate tax policy options. A coordinated strategy to cover the tax
implications of SMV revision should therefore be integrated into the reform process.
(g) Public hearings and consultations are critical activities to build community awareness
and seek feedback, on the valuation and taxation reforms. Adequate understanding in turn
engenders support and greater compliance to the proposed measures. Examples of these
include Information caravans and local networking interventions which have exposed the
reforms to a wide audience, and increased awareness. These efforts have generated new
partnerships and adopters of reform technologies.
(h) The valuation and taxation systems and procedures developed by the Project have been
demonstrated to benefit LGUs with higher level incomes. Future roll out of SRP would
need to customize these tools to work in settings in lower income LGUs.
(i) In some municipalities, titling activities in Leyte did not lead to the expected increase
in local revenues through greater tax compliance, and updating of LGU tax maps. The
study on revenue impacts of titling in Leyte suggest that efforts at tenurial security would
need to be accompanied with strengthening capacities of Assessors’ Offices, amendment
of BIR policy requiring payments of capital gains taxes before LGU tax records can be
updated, and parallel efforts on intensified tax collection.
4.5 Lessons related to the development of the ISF approach:
(a) Not all LGUs are suitable candidates for pursuing LGU led LAM initiatives. Some
Mayors and their administrations are not highly motivated by the prospect of LAM reform
while some national LAM agencies rigidly interpret their mandated roles and
responsibilities and are reluctant to collaborate and share information with the LGU and
each other. Screening of LGUs and their LAM agency partners to determine their
preparedness and capacity to collaborate in the LAM reforms process is essential prior to
offering any formal assistance in promoting LGU led LAM initiatives.
(b) While many LGUs see benefit in leading and resourcing LAM initiatives most don’t
know where and how to start. In response to this situation the ISFGU developed a graduated
modular approach for the development and roll-out of LAM initiatives at the LGU level
(refer ISF Strategy and Implementation Plan 2009-2010). This approach has greatly
assisted LGUs and national LAM agencies in reaching agreement on the LAM priorities,
and allocation of resources. The modular approach has also assisted in maximizing LGU
returns on investment by initially concentrating on improving tax mapping and revenue
generation before moving on to tackle the more complex issues of titling, property
valuation and land use planning. This approach has engendered cooperation, confidence
and revenues for further LGU investment in LAM related systems and technologies.
(c) The adoption of LAM systems and technologies does not come without cost to the
LGU. Initial LGU investment in LAM through a single agency such as the City Planning
and Development Office is relatively simple and manageable. However, as the LGU seeks
to extend connectivity to other agencies the management of IT systems becomes more
complex and costly and can only really be effectively managed within the framework of
an LGU Information Systems Strategic Plan (ISSP) which addresses the long-term
technical and D requirements to sustain the network. A number of LGUs (Puerto Princesa,
Olongapo, Nabunturan and Bayawan are already investing in the development of ISSP to
consolidate and develop their initial LAM investments in the belief that the returns from
increased property and business taxes will more than offset additional investment in ISSP.
(d) Unlike the National Steering Committee (NSC) which gave special status to the DENR
and the DOF in the implementation of LAMP II, the establishment of ISF sponsored LGU
LAM Steering Committees (LSC) under the chair of the Mayor places all LAM agencies
(DENR, ROD, DAR) on an equal footing. In this context the relationship between the
national LAM agencies operating at the LGU level is more manageable than at the national
level.
(e) Initially, LGUs require significant management and technical support to mobilize their
LAM initiatives. Any attempt to sponsor the roll-out of LGU led LAM initiatives nationally
will have to be accompanied by adequate management and technical support.
4.6 Project Management
(a) The experience of LAMP II under the TA has proven the benefits of having built in
flexibility to re allocate resources in the face of challenges, and yet produce the desired
outcomes through other means.
(b) It is essential that Project Managers are appointed based on their competencies and
merits. The Project’s existing HRMD policies and guidelines should be strictly adhered to
in order to ensure there is always a team of high quality staff to support LAMP sites.
(c) Establishment of independent M&E has been valuable in providing information to
management, enables timely remedial actions, and generally supports project transparency
and accountability. Management appreciation of the importance of M&E is important for
this function to contribute to improving performance and accountability.
(d) A number of important activities and outputs were not achieved by the Project due to
issues with interagency cooperation. Design of future projects in the LAM sector should
be built around conservative assumptions of agency cooperation so as not to compromise
achievements. Adjustments can then be made in project implementation strategy and
objectives as relevant agencies become ready and willing to cooperate.
(e) Effective management of large operations can be achieved if there is timely and
sufficient cash flow and good procurement performance. The Project’s deficiencies in these
two areas have hampered the achievement of titling targets, and the efficiency of
implementation. Addressing these two key functions will be pre requisite to a successful
roll out.
(f) Executive management cannot operate effectively if it is constantly changing. The lead
agency should ensure that some stability in management is in place, to sustain momentum
in implementation.
5. Conclusion and Recommendations
5.1 Overall Assessment of Performance
Even with the startup difficulties and the inability to step up and gain momentum midway
in the implementation that led to a restructuring, LAMP II clearly recovered in the other
half of implementation and was able to finish strong and in a satisfactory manner.
Component 1 was able to deliver important policies and advocacy support to the passage
of R.A. 10023 that helped in setting up the new directions and future strategies in achieving
reforms in the land sector. Putting an estimated 3 million residential for titling potentials,
adopting LGU partnership supported by computerized LAMS for DENR that will enable
future linkage with computerized registration made some “next steps” clear for the
government. Capturing all these and other initiatives of the government in a 20-year
development framework practically gave our land administrators a blue print to follow.
Component 2, on the other hand, was able to provide the necessary capacity building
support throughout project operation and even beyond with the partnership with academe
and establishment of CLAMP.
Component 3 provided a major discovery in improving the fragmented and tedious work
in land titling through the more transparent and effective ‘LGU partnership’ approach
which is seen to potentially reduce the remaining work by more than half the time required.
In spite of the clearly unsustainable co-location of offices in the OSS approach (until
LARA is passed), the highly possible linking of systems provided an interim solution that
will also deliver the needed improvement of records management and delivery of land
related services.
Component 4 was able to put in place successful demonstration of reforms in valuation
with the experience of Naga City and the adoption of standards and improved guidelines.
The offering of online Masters Course on Land Valuation and Management also paved the
way for more opportunity to develop experts in the field of valuation, having RESA already
in place.
Whilst the pursuit of Valuation Reform bill continues to be an uphill battle, organizational
strengthening of BLGF have put it in a strong position to support local government units
in improving overall land governance.
5.2 Sustainability of Outcomes
The last two extension of LAMP II enabled the further strengthening of efforts to make
LAMP II innovation more sustainable. This can be seen in the following;
The clear replication of LGU partnership in almost the entire of Ilocos Norte and
other LGUs. The approach is being adopted in both CARP and regular titling
activities for residential lands.
The allocation of more than 100 million to support records inventory, sorting and
grooming activities in all DENR land records, the updating and installation of
LAMS in all 16 Regions and the building of new record facilities.
The use of LSDF as key document in the preparation of PDP 2010-2016
5.3 Validity of Project Hypotheses Based on Outcome from LAMP II
While some (Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) in the project design may take longer to
take place and with others even appearing to be not directly impacted by the reforms
instituted by the project, the important role of good land tenure governance in poverty
alleviation and socio economic development is clearly recognized, particularly at the
municipal level (Stories of Our Land). The importance of access to land and cadastral
information is critical not only for security of tenure but for revenue generation and
development and investment planning purposes of local governments.
The project also proved that a systematic, decentralized approach to land titling contributes
to a more transparent, effective and participatory process that lessens time and cost to
secure title. It can however expand opportunities for fixers if not monitored closely.
5.4 Major Recommendations
The Philippines population continuous to grow and has now breached the 100 million mark.
Housing remains a big challenge with still backlog to deliver for its rapidly urbanizing
cities and municipalities. This will surely impact on its continuing quest for rice sufficiency
even as farmers clamor for security of tenure and more subsidy and support. The threat of
climate change related disasters is not likely to leave to country but is expected to put an
even stronger challenge given our country’s geographical situation and archipelagic nature.
On the other side however, our economy is moving positively, with strong governance and
potential investments that will require better access to land information and balanced
development planning. LAMP II has provided tools and strategies that can help the
government address both these.
Hence, the government should continue to pursue the reform directions and strategies set
forth in the Land Sector Development Framework. The current funding of Cadastral survey,
data conversion activities for DENR land records as part of the full operationalization of
LAMS and eventual paperless transaction, the mainstreaming of LGU partnership in land
titling and the updating of schedule of market values are all in the right directions as these
are helpful in developing spatially enabled national and local land governance that are
environmentally sensitive.
Land governance however has broad dimension, a continuing effort to analyze, assess and
monitor appropriate indicators of improvement should be made.
Annex 8. Comments of Co-financiers and Other Partners/Stakeholders
The Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (Co-financier) provided the
following comments:
1. The Australian Government congratulates the World Bank and the Philippine
Government for a comprehensive Independent Completion Report on LAMP II. The
coverage of the report is extensive and appropriately covers the various elements of the
project.
2. Overall, we are pleased to note that the report reflected the achievements made by
the Philippines government in addressing the centuries-old and highly complex issues in
land management and governance. It reflects our perspective that the program has
achieved considerable outcomes amidst a complex sector and a fluid political
environment.
3. We are encouraged by the report’s findings. The Australian Government
(formerly AusAID) has significantly contributed to developing the technical knowledge
and capacity-building elements of the LAMP II in close coordination with the Philippine
Government and in collaboration with the World Bank. Much of the lessons of the
Innovations Support Fund, funded entirely through Australian grant, have and continues
to provide valuable lessons in forging partnerships with local governments as a feasible
alternative to move the reforms within policy, structural and organisational
limitations. We also note that the Philippine Government has fully taken on board
lessons which they have highlighted in their own completion assessment.
4. The intended outcomes of LAMP II is as relevant now as it was when it started. It
is worth noting that the Government has invested its own resources to fully mainstream
some of the systems that we have developed in LAMP II. This augurs well for the
continued engagement of the government and of other stakeholders in improving land
governance in the country.
B. Borrower’s Comments on the Draft ICR Report.
Detailed edits were receive from both DENR and DENR in the format of “track changes”
to the draft ICR Report. These edits were adopted and the submissions placed on the
Bank’s project files.
Annex 9. Lessons Learned
1. . Project Design and Preparation Lessons
Project Baseline. The Baseline should be completed prior to, or during project preparation
to ensure that factors identified in the Baseline study can influence the areas to be addressed
in the project design and implementation. The Baseline needs to be appropriately
enumerated, enabling impacts to be evaluated effectively.
Project assumptions need to be validated. The hypothesis that removing the constraint
of land tenure insecurity would somehow lead to increased investment and/or
diversification of incomes poverty alleviation was not conclusively proven under the
project. Certainly, this requires a longer-term view, beyond the duration of project
implementation. Furthermore, it cannot be assumed that all poor people, just because they
have land title, will either seek to, or even know how to use their small land holdings
productively. The social and psychological benefits of certainty and peace of mind, and not
having to deal with conflicts, are the primary concerns for many. For rural lands, there is
probably no place in the world where small holders prosper without subsidies and/or off-
farm income. Thus, it is not surprising that until constraints to agriculture and the realities
of life in rural areas (for example, lack of infrastructure, policy biases against agriculture,
information problem and covariant risks) are overcome the process of registering land,
which takes time and is expensive, may not be a high priority for the poor. LAMP II has
demonstrated that giving people private property rights in land is not the catalyst everyone
expected.
2. Reform Lessons
Champions for Reform. In parallel with the development of the policy agenda committed
political champions, preferably a Committee Chairperson in the Senate and Congress,
needs to be identified as well as other key officials and gatekeepers of the legislative
process.
The reform initiatives that have been achieved by LAMP II have largely come about
through partnerships between Change Agents recruited by the project from the private
sector, advocacy groups and the academe and Executive Champions located in the national
LAM agencies and in the Congress and the Senate. The change agents, whether national or
international, have played a central role in: (i) introducing the reforms to the executive of
the national LAM agencies and in shepherding the policy reform bills through the Congress
and the Senate; and (ii) developing the Executive and Administrative Orders in support of
the reforms and the systems, and technology and training programs for the improvement
of LAM service delivery.
For their part, the Executive Champions have taken responsibility for ensuring the reforms
progress through the bureaucracy and, if required, through the Congress and the Senate.
Without capacity to continue to engage external change agents in any future program of
LAM reform, Executive Champions will find it difficult to sustain the current reform
momentum. The reform process is only in its infancy and national LAM agencies still have
a long way to go in addressing the issues of institutional inertia and vested interest
ingrained in their organization and management structures.
Legislative enactment as precondition of projects creates operational risk. Enabling
legislation and institutional reform, while critical to achieving reform goals, is an internal
government matter and seldom driven by the needs of external projects. Projects like
LAMP II that weave into their project design the enactment of certain laws or a change in
institutional arrangements creates an operational risk for project implementation. With
LAMP II, for example the LRA was willing to cooperate with the project but only if this
cooperation did not lead to its demise. A project as complex as LAMP II should develop
effective risk management measures that anticipate and manage all types of project risks,
including those relating to legislation and institutional reform. The failure to past he LARA
Bill is clear evidence of this. It stymied efforts to establish the LAA—the institution that
was to bring together various functions of several land agencies under one umbrella to
speed up the provision of land administration services.
Future project designers need to work within current legal frameworks, especially if the
project being designed is relatively short-term. At the same time as using existing
government institutions, agencies and units, the project designers must also work with
government to ensure that donor funding is protected from political intrusion or caprice.
Pursuit of Non-legislative Approaches to Reform. While the LAM reform agenda has
generated wide support among stakeholders and developed champions among legislators,
there are no guarantees that Bills will be passed. Law making in the Philippines is a highly
political process that can only be influenced to some degree by external players. Without
abandoning the legislative track, it is prudent to consider alternative means of introducing
reforms through administrative measures such as Departmental Administrative Orders
(DAO), which while achieving more modest results at least advance the reform process
administratively. Improvement of existing titling approaches through amendments of
existing procedures and harmonizing LAM agency programs should be explored to the
fullest extent.
The LAMP II experience has shown that policy and legislative reforms that target the
rationalization of several government agency functions under a single authority such as the
LAA is a long and difficult process. Partners must be prepared to sustain advocacy and
address the interests of those to be affected. The reform process is more easily expedited
through rationalization of the systems and procedures of a single agency as demonstrated
by the passage of the Free Patent Amendment through DENR and the RESA through the
DOF- BLGF. Other forms of harmonizing and integrating the systems are alternatives that
can be explored in the short term to progressively achieve results.
Fiscal Reform is Highly Politically Sensitive. Updating of current Schedules of Market
Values (SMV) is politically sensitive. Mandaue City, with SMV now 25 years outdated,
has to date been unable to implement the reform. LGU politicians are very much
challenged in approving increases as it directly impacts their relationships with local
constituents. Passage of the bill for the Valuation Reform Act (VRA), would place this
responsibility under the national government through the DOF, thereby correctly casting
the LGU as the implementer rather than the decision maker.
3. Sustainability and Governance Lessons
Mainstreaming of projects into regular activities of government is crucial for
sustainability. The Project must be designed so that activities can be integrated into the
regular activities of the government with dedicated funding and staff after the project is
closed. This makes it difficult to, if not impossible for, government to integrate the project
once it is completed and to continue with the technical and managerial capacity required
to sustain what has been accomplished. Hired contractual staff paid for with project money
are not absorbed by the government because of lack of budget and also because their
salaries are way above standardized government salaries. Also, the government staff
trained or involved with the project go back to their original units unless a new unit is
created, which involves DBM approval and has an impact on the government’s fiscal
consolidation plan. This approach, in other words, almost guarantees non-sustainability.
Successful Approaches to Systematic Land Titling. The current approach to systematic
titling of rural lands has been proven effective. Experience (Bohol) has shown that targets
can be achieved provided adequate levels of resources are made available, and there is
commitment to follow procedures with strong management of operations. There are
opportunities for broadening the reach and further reducing the cost to national government
of titling through the following models: (i) LGU led initiatives as demonstrated through
the ISF experience (Bayawan); (ii) direct engagement with LGUs in funding the systematic
adjudication and titling process (Bohol); and(iii) cost sharing with LGUs (Bukidnon and
Bohol).
Partnership approaches are vital to LAM. Mass or nationwide land titling requires a
large amount of resources and expertise from implementers and as such is difficult to be
managed by national government alone. If the government desires to further accelerate its
completion, it will do well to develop partnership with local government units with
aggressive and development oriented leaders.
Broader reform of land administration and management recognizes that land-related law
and institutions are solidly within national agencies. However, LAMP II also recognized
the major beneficiary of an efficient system would be local government and therefore
explored such partnerships. The experience under LAMP II has shown that greater
efficiency is achieved in municipalities where LGUs are actively involved in titling. In
planning for the roll out therefore, it is important to consider the LGU commitment to
partner as a priority over the need to cover all the municipalities in the province with high
proportion of untitled parcels.
On management and implementation, a major lesson learned is that a partnership approach
is the way to go for future land reform projects. This means engaging sub-national
governments (provinces, municipalities, cities) as lead institutions, but partnering with
NGAs, academic institutions and the private sector in the effort. This approach of allowing
LGUs to successfully implement reform at their level will stimulate a rolling demand for
reforms and eventually create a local constituency for land administration. The ground
swell for more land administration reforms needs to start at local level, in other words.
Their widespread adoption at that level will build the platform for greater success at
national level. This approach means that the economic agent with the largest incentive for
attaining project objectives should be ‘in charge’ and that action has to concentrate on the
level where improved land administration services will be more pronounced and effective.
LGUs face different land administration issues and have different land administration
needs than do the national government and donors. The ISF has shown that a much more
modest goal of getting support to those LGUs that are able to clearly define and put their
own resources into meeting their land administration priorities works well. There should
be recognition that a demand-driven project, which emphasizes that local people and LGUs
have views that might well be different from those of the national government and donors,
is a more sensible approach. If this had been the case with LAMP II, there may not have
been such a heavy emphasis on land titling, which—in the end—was not the main issue for
LGUs
The demonstration effect of successful programs by LGUs will stimulate a rolling demand
for land administration reforms and eventually create a local constituency for reforms. The
widespread adoption of land administration reforms that have been motivated by earlier
successes could form the platform for a wider-based land administration reform effort at
the national level.
Related to the above, experience has shown that greater efficiency is achieved in
municipalities where LGUs are actively involved in titling. In planning for the roll out
therefore, it is important to consider the LGU commitment to partner as a priority over the
need to cover all the municipalities in the province with high proportion of untitled parcels.
Fiscal reform and decentralization are essential for good governance. LGUs’ neglect
of their mandate to ensure market-based, regular, and fair valuation cannot continuously
go unbridled. Perpetuating a faulty system is, in plain and simple terms, bad governance,
as issues in property valuation and taxation are key development issues. Even if the status
quo or lack of reforms offer convenience in some respects, it is unsustainable, and the
undesirable consequences will be systemically complex. It is in this context that puts the
good intentions of decentralization and devolution in jeopardy. Improving fiscal
governance is vital to make decentralization work so that LGUs can attain economic
viability and for them to enjoy genuine and meaningful local autonomy, as envisioned
under the LGC. Within the LAM program, property valuation and taxation reforms have
all the dimensions of good governance regime that contribute to improving public finance,
socio-economic development, fostering transparency and investor confidence, and
promoting a vibrant land market. The professionalization of appraisal practice, coupled
with the standards and new tools to ensure uniformity in valuation, is a good starting point
towards this objective. To attain significant results, rollout to more LGUs and replication
of successful solutions are necessary.
The fundamental importance of cadastral data (mapping). A core end product of land
titling under LAMP II, and the current national cadastral surveying project (under DENR)
is a digital cadastral data base which can be utilized for a wide range of purposes which
include: tax mapping and revenue collection and the related activities of real property
valuation and taxation; business processing licensing and taxation; survey and titling;
social mapping and analysis, asset/infrastructure mapping, geo hazard mapping and land
use planning and management. Progress in the development of these applications has been
very encouraging particularly in the area of tax mapping and revenue generation. The
government’s One Nation One Map initiative, led by NAMRIA and launched in June 2013,
clearly articulates the fundamental importance of the cadastral data base in the country’s
national spatial data infrastructure strategy and that it should be nationally consistent and
provided on an authorities basis for all government agencies and other stakeholders to use.
Annex 10. List of Supporting Documents
Eleazar, F., Garcia, B., Guiang, E., Herrera, A., Isorena, L., Ravanera, R. and Serote, E.
(2013), Improving Land Sector Governance in the Philippines, Land Governance
Assessment Framework, August 2013, Manila.
Government of the Philippines, (2014) Second Phase Land Administration and
Management Project (LAMP2) Project Completion Report, July 29, 2014, Manila.
LEI (2010 a), Study on the Cost and Time to Issue and Secure Free Patent Titles under
LAMP II and DENR-CARP Funded Titling Procedures, Report E59, June 29, 2010,
Manila.
LEI (2010 b), Study on Market Values of Titles and Untitled Lands, Land Administration
and Management Project Phase 2, Report E58, June 2010, Manila.
LEI (2010 c), Land Administration and Management Project Phase 2, Technical
Assistance Team Activity Completion Report, Report E38, June 2010, Manila.
Llanto, G., Riddell, J. and Orbeta Jr., A. (2010), Land Administration and Management
Project - Phase 2 Independent Completion Report, AidWorks Initiative Number:
ING041, October 10, 2010, Barton.
Orient Integrated Development Consultants, Inc. – OIDC (2013), Second Land
Administration and Management Project: Development Impact Study – Final Report,
Bohol, Bukidnon, Leyte and Naga City, September 2013, Manila.
World Bank (2005-2014), Philippines - Land Administration and Management II Project,
Implementation Status and Results Reports 1-18, Washington, D.C.
World Bank (2012), Philippines - Land Administration and Management II, Project
Paper Restructuring (Vol. 1, 2), Report No. 66613, March 13, 2012, Washington,
D.C.
World Bank (2012), Philippines - Land Administration and Management II, Project
Paper Restructuring (Vol. 1, 2), Report No. 74136, Dec. 4, 2012, Washington, D.C.
World Bank (2011), Amendment to the Agreement for Loan 7298-PH Conformed
Agreement, May 4, 2011, Washington, D.C.
World Bank (2011), Philippines - Land Administration and Management II, Project
Paper Restructuring (Vol. 1, 2), Report No. 59689, March18, 2011, Washington,
D.C.
World Bank (2010), Philippines - Land Administration and Management II, Project
Restructuring Paper (Vol. 1, 2), Report No. 56767, Oct. 21, 2010, Washington, D.C.
World Bank (2005), Philippines - Land Administration and Management IILoan
Agreement, L7298-PH, Conformed Loan Agreement, June 30, 2005, Washington,
D.C.
World Bank (2005), Philippines - Land Administration and Management II, Project
Appraisal Document, Report No. 28273, May 4, 2005, Washington, D.C.
Annex 11. People Consulted as Part of the ICR Mission
Department of Finance
Salvador M. del Castillo, OIC-Executive Director, DoF - Bureau of Local Government
Finance (BLGF)
Jose Arnold Tan, Director, DoF – BLGF
Divina M. Corpuz, DoF – BLGF
Teresita Solomon, OIC – Deputy Director, National Tax Research Center
Niño Alvina, Project Management Specialist, DoF – BLGF
Andrito C. Mendoza, Development Management Officer, DoF – BLGF
Erwina Grace Morales, PM and ETL - BLGF
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Edwin Domingo, DENR Director, National Program Steering Committee
Ralph C. Pablo, Director, DENR – Land Management Bureau and LAMP II
Henry P. Pacis, National Coordinator and LAMP II Deputy Executive Director, DENR
– Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program and LAMP II
Alex Pascua, Chief of Staff and LAMP II Deputy Executive Director, DENR – Office
of the Undersecretary for Policy, Planning and Foreign-Assisted Projects / LAMP II
Warlito Quirimit, LAMS-NCD Head, DENR - LMB LAMS National Coordinating
Desk
Alicia Robles, Manager, DENR – LMB Center for Land Administration and
Management Philippines
Rolly Carbon, Project Officer, DENR – Foreign Assisted and Special Projects Office
Lorizel Montealegre, Project Development Officer / IEC Specialist, DENR – LMB
CLAMP and LAMP II
Evangeline Limyoco, Accountant III, DENR – Financial Management Service,
Accounting Division
Isidora Pontillas, Senior Administrative Officer, DENR – Financial Management
Service, Budget Division
Maybell Mangubos, Administrative Officer V, DENR – Financial Management
Service, Budget Division
Bohol Province
Glicerita Racho, Patent Coordinator, PENRO, BoholProvince
Jea Alei Saligan, Records Assistant, PENRO, BoholProvince
PENRO Nestor Canda , PENRO, BoholProvince
Wilfredo C. Lee, Regional Technical Director (Region 7), PENRO
Lemuel Pogos, Sangguniang Bayan/Municipal Environmentand Natural
ResourcesOfficer, PENRO
Rhudyl Marvin Ferniz, Land ManagementOfficer, PENRO
LucifenaB ardoquillo, LAMS Coordinator, PENRO
Maridel Salud, Administration Officer, PENRO Bohol
Leonides Abor,MPDC, PENRO
Lily M. Villones, GIS Operator, Provincial Environment and Natural Resources Office
(PENRO), BoholProvince
Edgardo P. Orig, Provincial Assessor, Bohol
Leoncio D. Evasco, Jr., Municipal Mayor, Maribojoc
Elpidio R. Palma, CENRO, Talibon
Carmencita P. Mar, OIC-LAMS Chief, CENRO Tagbilaran
Benjamin Torrefrancia, Assessor, Tagbilaran
Emilano Shomachs, Engr. III, PENRO Bohol
Eusalem Quiwag, OIC-CENRO
John Ochavillo, NPDC, Bohol
Florante Evasco, Sangguniang Bayan Councillor
Lily Villones, PENRO Staff
Melissa Bonganciso, ExecutiveAssistant, Garcia-Hernandez City
Rodrigo Galendez, Municipal Planning Development Coordinator, Garcia-Hernandez
City
Juliet Dajaros, Office Clerk, Garcia-Hernandez City
Desideria Sagujay, Municipal Assessor, Garcia-Hernandez City
Cebu Province
Jonas C. Cortes, Mayor, Mandaue City
Regal M. Oliva, Treasurer, Mandaue City
Avita C. Mendoza, City Assessor, Mandaue City
Diosdado P. Suico, SP Member, Mandaue City
Glenn Bertoge, SP Member, Mandaue City
Julia Ballesteros, City Treasurer’s Office, Mandaue City
Giovanni Madero, Legal Office, Mandaue City
James Abadia, City Administration, Mandaue City
Mary Therese S. Cho, Vice Mayor, City of Cordova
Nazario Sumaline, Jr., Municipal Assessor, City of Cordova
Joel Baguio, Municipal Assessor, City of Cordova
Ferdinand de Los Reyes, Municipal Assessor, City of Cordova
Winifredo Munez, Municipal Assessor, City of Cordova
Jose Duque A. Tumulak, Assessor, City of Cordova
Wirlbert Tañeca, BLGF Region 7
Xerxes Resuena, BLGF Region 7
Leyte Province
Leonardo R. Sibbaluca, Regional Executive Director, DENR, Region VIII, Tacloban
City
Ramon S. Unay, Regional Technical Director for Lands, DENR, Region VIII
Winston N. Solite, Chief Regional Surveys Division (former Deputy Project Manager
of PPIO1), DENR, Region VIII
Ranulfo Q. Arbiol, Provincial Environment and Natural Resources Office (PENRO) –
Leyte
Carlito Castañares, former Operations Chief, LAMP II-Provincial Project
Implementation Office (PPIO1)
Patrick A. Katada, former Systematic Adjudication Team (SAT) Leader, LAMP II -
PPIO 1
Emeterio Villanoza, LAMP II One Stop Shop (OSS) Manager
Annabel Tuyak, LAMS System Administrator, One-Stop-Shop (OSS)
Naga City
John G. Bongat, City Mayor
Ramon Albeus, City Assessor, Naga City
Gregoria Abonal-Boncodin, OIC City Treasurer, Naga City
Esteban. G. Abonal, City Councilor, Committee Chair on Ways & Means, Naga City
Beth Silava, Assistant Revenues District Officer, Bureau of Internal Revenues, RPO
65, Naga City
Johann De La Rosa, Naga City People’s Council (NCPC)
Other meetings
Nelson E. Pareño, Presidet, Phillipine Assossication of Assessing Officers (PAAO),
City Assessor, City of Iloilo
Cesar Luna, , University of the Philippines Open University
DFAT Staff
Erika Geronimo, Portfolio Manager, Development Corporation, Australian Embassy
John Alikpala, Portforlio Manager, Development Corporation, Australian Embassy
Joji Abot-Camelon, Program Officer, Development Corporation, Australian Embassy
LAMP II TA (LEI)
Floradema Eleazar, Planning and M&E
Brian S. Garcia, Innovation Support Fund
World Bank Staff
Keith Clifford Bell, TTL
Maria Theresa Quiñones, Co-TTL
Noel Sta. Ines, Senior ProcurementSpecialist
MAP