i | P a g e

ii

Socio-Economic Situation of Baras, June 2013 Published by Handicap International - Philippines Program under its project Rebuilding Economies after Typhoon Ketsana and Strengthening Baras Municipality Utilities for an Inclusive Local Development (REBUILD).

Cover Photo: Alinda Tilaon (middle), Economic Project Holder, 57 years old, single parent from Sitio Malalim, Brgy. San Juan, Baras, Rizal. Her livelihood preference is the enhancement of her food vending. Compilation done by REBUILD Project Mary Grace Baban Maria Conception Penetrante Kahlille Jolly Seranilla Ronald Genise Joecelyn Panlilio Shirley Ferrera Jezzalyn Casinao Racquel Buenaventura Ricky Bello With contributions from Satish Mishra Harisha Varatharajah

Diosdado Mendoza Gilbert Guevarra Edward Ello And partners Theresita Salome G. Lloren - Tahanang Walang Hagdanan Editing Florentina Urag Layout Jun Daryl Zamora © Handicap International - Philippines Program, 2013 This publication is the property of Handicap International. It has been produced with the financial assistance of the Swiss Solidarity. The views expressed herein should not be taken, in any way, to reflect the official opinion of the Swiss Solidarity. For more information and to download a copy of this publication please visit www.handicapinternational.ph.

iii

ABOUT HANDICAP INTERNATIONAL

Handicap International is an independent and impartial international aid organization

working in situations of poverty and exclusion, conflict and disaster. Working alongside

persons with disabilities and other vulnerable groups throughout the world, our action

and testimony are focused on responding to their essential needs, improving their

living conditions and promoting respect for their dignity and their fundamental rights.

With a network of eight national associations (USA, Belgium, Canada, France,

Germany, Luxembourg, Switzerland, and UK), Handicap International was founded in

1982 and a co-recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize in 1997 and the recipient of the

Hilton Humanitarian Prize in 2011. It has programs in 60 countries and acts in both

emergency and development situations.

Handicap International in the Philippines has been operational since 1985 and is

one of the key organizations in the disability sector in the country. It has a wide range

of complimentary projects which assists to promote inclusion of persons with

disabilities and their issues in development policies and actions, build capacities of

key local stakeholders and reduce the impact of natural disasters and conflicts.

Handicap International in the Philippines is committed to enhance persons with

disabilities access to services, promote their active participation and social inclusion,

developing partnerships at all levels, in the frame of the national and international

policies on disability.

Rebuilding Economies after Typhoon Ketsana and Strengthening Baras

Municipality Utilities for an Inclusive Local Development (REBUILD) is a three-

year inclusive livelihood and rights-based project with an objective to improve access

of persons with disabilities to different developmental (livelihood, social, etc.)

opportunities. To complement this effort, the project will build the capacity of local

stakeholders to enable them to implement programs and activities that are more

inclusive of persons with disabilities and other vulnerable groups. In addition, the

project will build capacity of Baras Disabled People’s Organization so that it becomes

a significant and active local development stakeholder that will promote and advance

the needs and rights of persons with disabilities in development initiatives. The project

aims to contribute in developing an inclusive society with equal opportunities for all.

iv

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

BFAR Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources

BFIPMCI Baras Farmers Irrigators Multi-Purpose Cooperative Inc.

BHW Barangay Health Workers

BNS Barangay Nutrition Scholars

CA Candidate Analysis

DOLE Department of Labor and Employment

DENR Department of Environment and Natural Resources

DPO Disabled People’s Organization

EPH Economic Project Holder

HI Handicap International

IDE Institute of Developing Economies

LDC Local Decision Committee

LPD Local Planning Diagnosis

MFI Micro Finance Institution

MSWDO Municipal Social Welfare and Development Office

NSCB National Statistical Coordination Board

PIDS Philippine Institute for Development Studies

PWD People with Disability

PSS Personalize Social Support

REBUILD Rebuilding Economies after Typhoon Ketsana and Strengthening Baras Municipality Utilities for an Inclusive Local Development

RHU Rural Health Unit

TBAs Traditional Birth Attendants

TESDA Technical, Education and Skills Development Authority

TWH Tahanang Walang Hagdanan

UNCRPD United Nations Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities

WHO World Health Organization

4 Ps Pantawid Pampamilyang Pilipino Program

v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Abbreviations --------------------------------------------------------------------------- iv

Glossary ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ vi

Background -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1

Demographic and Socio-Economic Context of Baras --------------------------------- 4

The Household Survey ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 7

Results of the Household Survey and Candidate Analysis --------------------------- 9

The Household Survey Population -------------------------------------------------------- 9

The Candidate Economic Project Holders ---------------------------------------------- 23

Summary of Key Findings -------------------------------------------------------------------- 40

Conclusions and Recommendations ------------------------------------------------------

REBUILD Livelihood Strategy

43

Annexes ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 56

The Household Survey Form ---------------------------------------------------------------- 56

The Candidate Analysis Form -------------------------------------------------------------- 62

vi

GLOSSARY

Disability Persons with disabilities include those who have long-

term physical, mental, intellectual or sensory

impairments which in interaction with various barriers

may hinder their full and effective participation in

society on an equal basis with others1’

Household A social unit consisting of one or two or more families

living in the same housing unit and having common

arrangements in the preparation and consumption of

food

Household inflow Total income from the household either from wage or

self-employment

Household expenditures Total expenses of the household on food, education,

utilities, etc.

.

1 United Nations Convention of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities

1

BACKGROUND

Baras is one of the smaller municipalities of the Province of Rizal due to smaller land

area compared to other municipalities in the province. It is bounded on the north by

the City of Antipolo and on the east by the Municipality of Tanay, which are far more

developed municipalities than Baras which has a small business sector. As such,

Baras is classified as a 4th class2 municipality with an annual internal budget from the

national government between US$ 594,000 and US$831,000. Based on their annual

investment plan, 20% of the total internal revenue allotment is allocated for the

development sector. However, this is not enough to provide for the needs of the

population. The limited budget allocation for the development sector has affected the

delivery of quality services to its constituents. Sectors such as persons with disabilities,

older persons and single women who head their families are the most affected. These

vulnerable persons are the most neglected and often lack access to education, health

and livelihood.

Compounding the problem of limited budget for social services is the high vulnerability

of the municipality to landslides. Rizal Province has been identified by the Department

of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) as one of the top 10 provinces that

are at risk to earthquake-induced shallow landslides3. Hence, it was not surprising that

the municipality was among those badly hit by tropical storm Ketsana in 2009. Many

families lost their homes and sources of income. The Municipal Agricultural Office

(MAO) reported losing Php13 million in livestock and infrastructure3. Among the

disadvantaged groups who suffered the most from the disaster were households

whose members include persons with disabilities, single female headed households

and households with older members. After the 2009 typhoons, Baras started to

recover but its vulnerability to natural disasters remains very high.

Currently, the local government of Baras has taken steps to respond to the needs of

the vulnerable sector in the municipality. They have allocated 0.5% of the 20% of the

Municipal Development Fund and 1% of the Internal Revenue Allotment of the funds

in the barangay to programs and services that will cater to the needs of senior citizens

and DPOs. For the year 2013, the municipal government has allotted US$10,230 to

provide assistance to 1,000 people with disabilities and another US$10,230 for 1,000

senior citizens. However, it is not clear what programs or activities will be implemented

to ensure that said budget is utilized to benefit persons with disabilities and senior

citizens. At the barangay level, there is lack of policies and procedures on how to utilize

these funds.

2 http://www.nscb.gov.ph/activestats/psgc/articles/con_income.asp 3 REBUILD Project Proposal, General Situation.

2

Needless to say, despite efforts to improve the situation of vulnerable persons in Baras

after the typhoon, the Local Government Unit (municipal and barangays),

policymakers and stakeholders still lack comprehensive programs to address the

economic, social and physical needs of the vulnerable groups in the municipality.

To address this gap, Handicap International - Philippines Program, with funding

support from Swiss Solidarity, implemented the REBUILD project. The project’s overall

objective is “to increase access of vulnerable populations in the municipality of Baras

to livelihood opportunities while capacitating local development stakeholders to make

programs and activities become more inclusive.” Specifically, the project intends to:

a. Consolidate the livelihood of the vulnerable families in Baras through the

mobilization and delivery of adequate social and livelihood supports.

b. Empower Baras Disabled People’s Organization to become a significant and

active local development stakeholder that will ensure that the needs and rights

of persons with disabilities are taken into account in development and disaster

risk management initiatives.

It is in this context that Handicap International - Philippines Program, through the

REBUILD project, conducted a household survey and candidate analysis of vulnerable

families. The candidate analysis is a selection process based on the project criteria

and those who become an EPH and validated by the Local Development Committee4

(LDC). The objectives of the household survey and candidate analysis are as follows:

To generate baseline information on the status and socio-economic conditions

of persons with disabilities and other vulnerable groups in Baras, such as older

persons and single women-headed households from the three focus

barangays of Baras namely, San Jose, San Juan and Pinugay

To identify practical strategies for quality project implementation focusing on

how to implement inclusive livelihood projects to different vulnerable persons

tailored according to their needs

To put together relevant information that will influence policy makers,

governments and service providers towards inclusion of people with disabilities

in local development initiatives and creation of livelihood opportunities for

persons with disabilities and other vulnerable groups

4 See annex LDC guidelines

3

Map No. 1. Map of the Project Area

Barangays San Jose, San Juan and Pinugay

Source: Office of the Municipal Planning and Development Coordinator, Baras Rizal

Barangay PINUGAY

Barangay SAN JOSE

Barangay SAN JUAN

4

1. DEMOGRAPHIC AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONTEXT OF BARAS

Geographical Description. Baras is a 4th class municipality of Rizal Province

located in the northern shore of Laguna de Bay, the largest inland body of water in

the Philippines. It is bounded on the north and east by the town of Tanay, on the

south by Laguna de Bay, and on the west by Morong Municipality. The town is

situated 51 kilometers southeast of Manila and can be reached by land from Manila.

Map No. 2. Map of Baras, Rizal

General Demography: Based on the 2010 census of the National Statistics Office,

Baras has a total population of 32,6095 or 4,971 households distributed in 10

barangays.

Source: 2010 Census, National Statistics Office

5 Municipal Profile of Baras 2010

Table 1. Population Distribution per Barangay

Barangays 2010 Census

Evangelista 3,955

Rizal (Poblacion) 3,306

San Jose 3,008

San Salvador 2,830

Santiago 3,599

Concepcion 1,317

San Juan 3,242

San Miguel 1,551

Mabini 2,405

Pinugay 7,396

Total 32,609

5

Health Situation. The rural health unit (RHU) of Baras is the municipality’s main health

care service provider. The RHU is composed of the municipal physician, nurses,

dentists, midwives, sanitary inspectors, trained birth attendants (TBAs) and barangay

health workers (BHWs). While the Local Government Unit of Baras has already

identified the need to augment its present number of municipal health workers to

further improve its delivery of health service to the local population, there remains a

lack of health professionals that will ensure access to health care services especially

for the marginalized and vulnerable groups. At present, there is only one municipal

physician servicing the entire population of Baras. The standard ratio is 1:1,000 or one

medical doctor for every 1,000 persons.

Table 2. Baras Health Personnel, 2008-2009

Health Personnel 1998 1999 2008 Current

requirements Backlog

Doctors 1 1 1 2 -1

Nurses 1 1 1 2 -1

Medical Technologies 0 0 1 1 0

Dentist 1 1 1 1 0

Midwives 4 4 4 6 -2

Engineers/ Sanitary 1 1 1 2 -1

Active BHW 56 60 82 324 -242

Trained Birth Attendants 6 6 55

The problem is compounded by the inadequacy of health facilities. There is a relatively

high ratio of people served per rural health station. Access to these facilities is also

lacking with most of these facilities located at the center (Poblacion) of the municipality

which is hardly accessible to populations living in far-flung barangays (especially in

Pinugay which is 15 kilometers from Poblacion). As a result, there is a high mortality

rate for communicable but preventable diseases, with pneumonia leading the list of

causes of death at 80% and morbidity rate of 70% caused by cardiovascular disease

(CVD) (hypertension)6.

Education. Baras reported a low literacy rate attributed to the lack of schools and

education service personnel. Although the municipality has existing primary and

secondary schools, most of the youth, however, attend tertiary schools in neighboring

municipalities and in Manila. The inadequacy of funds has constrained the municipal

government from constructing additional school facilities and hiring teaching staff, as

well as in increasing scholarship grants to deserving students. The problem is not an

isolated experience, with most of the country’s public elementary schools having a

teacher-pupil ratio of 1:44, which is higher than the Department of Education’s

(DepEd) standard of 1: 40 teacher-pupil ratio.

6Socio-Economic Profile of Baras, Health Sector

6

Farming. Rice is the primary crop produced, taking up to 74% of cultivated land and

42% of total crop production7. Only a small portion of total rice production is harvested

in the uplands. The total area of irrigated rice fields is 210 hectares. Upland crop

production is more diverse than that of the lowland. It includes corn, root crops,

vegetables, fruit trees and legumes. Root crops (cassava, sweet potato and yam) are

the chief upland harvest. There are two dams serving as sources of water. However,

the two dams are not enough for rice field irrigations. Thus there is a need to have an

additional dam to support rice production in Baras. In addition to rice production

problems, the lack of good farm-to-market roads contributed to unstable prices of farm

produce.

Fishing. Its proximity to Laguna de Bay has made fishing the most common source

of income for the local population. According to the Bureau of Fishery and Aquatic

Resources (BFAR), the municipality has 587 hectares of fishing ground in Laguna de

Bay. Likewise, the municipal agriculturist said that there are no fish pen owners in

Baras. Instead, the fishermen rely on daily fishing for their livelihood. The fish products

are sold to local traders in the municipality, to neighboring towns and to Metro Manila.

Fish vendors in the barangay only sell to neighboring households and barangays.

Seven (7) barangays out of 10 barangays are considered to be suitable for fishing,

including Barangays Pinugay, San Juan and San Jose.

Livestock Raising. Swine is the most common backyard and commercial farm animal

being raised in the locality of Baras. Barangay Pinugay is most suited to swine raising

and, to a much lesser extent, cattle raising due to its vast tract of land fit for grazing

animals. Poultry is also raised in backyards but only for family consumption. The

municipality’s proximity to Metro Manila and its topography makes it ideal for

agribusiness with a focus on livestock raising. Swine and broiler make up the biggest

portion of the total estimated agribusiness sales value at 62% and 34% respectively8.

This is followed by chicken and quail egg production, which are comparatively much

smaller operations.

The economic opportunities discussed above are the current economic resources

within Baras. The discussion shows that Baras is a predominantly agricultural

municipality. Most of the populations engage in farming activities, and farm products

are available in the center of Baras.

Employment and Income. In a 2010 study of Baras conducted by the Far Eastern

University, it was reported that about 46.5 % of household heads and their working

age household members are employed, and a significant 36.5 % reported not being

employed9. This gives an indication of the employment and unemployment rates of

the population. Among those employed, 56.3 % are regular while 43.7% are

7 Socio-Economic Profile of Baras-Economic Section 8 Municipal Agriculture of Baras

7

contractual employees. About 50%-80% of its labor force is employed outside the

municipality. The same survey also showed that a significant percentage of

households in Baras or 34 % are earning monthly incomes of Php5,000 to Php10,000,

30% earn between Php1,000 to Php5,000 a month and 12% earn a monthly income

between Php10,001 to Php15,000. Compared against the 2012 Municipal Poverty

Threshold of Php8,50510 per household per month, it can be deduced that more than

60 % of households live below the poverty line. However, no data on how many are

engaged in self-employment activities.

Livelihood Opportunities for Vulnerable Households. Vegetable gardening is the

most common livelihood activity in the three barangays. Households sell their produce

for income. Daily wage employment is also available such as construction worker,

laundry, caretaker and laborer. Aside from this, there are other livelihood opportunities

in each of the three barangays depending on the individual interest, family support and

available resources. In Barangay San Juan, households are into goat raising, store

vending, and food vending (pastries and delicacies). In Barangay San Jose, fish and

vegetable vending, hog raising and food vending (bread, fried banana, salted shrimp

paste) are the common sources of income, while in Pinugay households are engaged

in store vending, bamboo selling, rag making and charcoal making. A member of the

household is usually responsible for managing the livelihood activity of the family.

2. THE HOUSEHOLD SURVEY

Three (3) pilot barangays namely, San Jose, San Juan and Pinugay, which served as

relocation sites for families displaced as a result of Typhoon Ketsana, were targeted

by the project survey. A two-level data gathering was conducted to determine the

families that can benefit from the project (they are also called Economic Project

Holders or EPH). First the household survey, and second the candidate analysis.

Determining the Vulnerable Household Survey Population through Household

Pooling

The REBUILD Project Team did the household survey to establish the general

situation of vulnerable households in the three barangays, and from the population of

vulnerable households, conduct a candidate analysis to identify the Economic Project

Holders. The EPH are those who will be supported in launching or expanding their

income generating project or in job placement. Crucial to the survey is the identification

of the pool of households that will compose the survey population. To facilitate this

process, the following steps were undertaken:

Conducting a Project Orientation to key stakeholders at the municipal and barangay

levels

8

Gathering data through the Municipal Social Welfare and Development Office

(MSWDO), particularly the list of people with disabilities in Baras.

Organizing a Disability Orientation for Barangay Health Workers (BHWs) and

Barangay Nutrition Scholars (BNS).

Listing of vulnerable households per target barangay through the BHWs and BNS.

Validating the list, and cross validating it using the MSWDO’s list of people with

disabilities in the municipality. But no validation was done for the other vulnerable

people, because the pool list provided was already pre-identified by the BHW and BNS.

Criteria used to identify the household survey population were the following:

Economically vulnerable, using the municipal poverty threshold as indicator

At least one of the household members is a person with disabilities

At least one household member is an older person

The household is headed by a single woman

Based on the above criteria, the Project Team identified the 386 households to

compose the pool of household survey population. A Household Survey Form 9 was

formulated, pre-tested and used to generate information on the households’ socio-

economic profile highlighting the household’s vulnerability based on the above and

providing basis for selection of households that fit the project’s eligibility criteria.

Candidate Analysis: Determining the Candidate Economic Project Holders

After profiling the 386 vulnerable households, the Project Team performed the

Candidate Analysis to identify the Candidate EPHs among the eligible households

using the Candidate Analysis (CA) Form.10 The CA tool derived more in-depth

information about the potential EPHs as well as on the preferred livelihood activities

of the candidates.

From the pool of 386 households, the Project Team selected 189 most vulnerable

households as Candidate Economic Project Holders based on the following criteria:

At least a member of the household is a person with disability or an older person (OP)

Headed by a single woman

Household income is equal to or below Php8,505.00

Has no existing loan from formal micro-finance institutions

Willing to participate in the project activities

A Local Decision Committee (LDC) composed of three (3) individuals helped identify and select the EPH candidates. Members of the LDC include the Chairperson of the Barangay Development Council’s Committee on Livelihood, a Barangay Health Worker and a REBUILD Local Facilitator. However, in the three focused barangays, additional members were selected by the current members to compose the LDC. This

9 Annex 1 10 Annex 2

9

ensured wider community participation in the selection process. The LDC was created to support the project in the selection and validation of EPHs. The LDC only validates the residency status of the EHP and their participation in every community activity.

At the beginning of the household survey, the local facilitators themselves conducted

the survey in Barangays San Juan and San Jose. The LDC and BHW of the respective

barangays assisted in locating the homes of the HH survey respondents.

In the case of Barangay Pinugay, two additional enumerators were hired to speed up

the household survey since Barangay Pinugay is the farthest and the target

households were generally scattered in the barangay. After the survey, an encoder

was also hired to ensure timely encoding of data from the field. Data were encoded in

the Excel database program developed by the REBUILD Livelihood Team under the

guidance of the Program Monitoring and Evaluation Officer. Data validation and quality

check were done by the Project Team in coordination with the Program Coordination

Unit.

3. RESULTS OF THE HOUSEHOLD SURVEY AND CANDIDATE ANALYSIS

The Household Survey Population

A total of 386 households were identified to compose the survey population. This

represents 8% of the 4,971 total number of households in Baras. Of this number, 51%

or 197 households are located in Barangay Pinugay, 25% or 96 households can be

found in Barangay San Juan and 24% or 93 are in Barangay San Jose.

25%

51%

24%

Figure 1. Household Survey Population

Brgy. San Juan

Brgy. Pinugay

Brgy. San Jose

10

Eligibility Assessment thru Vulnerability Classification. Based on the criteria

defined earlier, the households were classified according to the types of vulnerability.

Of the 386 households surveyed, 44% or 171 were households having a person with

disability as member, 165 or 43% were households with older persons as members

and 68 individuals or 18% belong to what can be classified as single female-headed

households.

Age and Sex Distribution. A total of 1,914 persons comprised the 386 surveyed

households with 795 out of 1,914 of working age. The population is almost evenly

distributed between the male and female wherein 50% are female and 50% are male.

Average number of members per household is five (5). Almost half or 45% of the

surveyed households are 18 years old and below.

Reproductive Age Group (15-44). Of the total number of women (959), 38% or 366

women belong to the reproductive age group (15-44 years old) or women who can still

bear children and therefore has the potential to contribute to the increase in population.

This has implication on the incidence of disability in the household survey population

if women are not properly educated on the effect of nutrition on the development of

the child.

Productive Age Group (15-60). A total of 986 individuals or 52% of the total

population of the survey population belong to the productive age group. People who

belong to this age group have the capacity to be gainfully employed.

44%

43%

18%

Figure 2. Vulnerability Classification of Households

HH with PWD

HH with OP

HH with SP

11

School Age Group. Meanwhile, 41% of the total survey population or 783 individuals

belong to the school age group 5-24 years old, meaning they are expected to be

attending school.

Status of Residency. Majority or 71% (274) of the households are formal settlers

while 29% (112) are informal settlers. Informal settlers owned the house but not

necessarily the lot where their houses stood, while formal settlers own both house and

lot.

45%

20%

12%

9%

12%

2%

Figure 3. Age Distribution of Survey Population

Children

Adults (19-34)

Adults (35-49)

Adults (50-59)

Adults (60-79)

Adults (80-94)

29%

71%

Figure 4. Tenurial Status of Households

Formal

Informal

12

Vulnerability Assessment according to Types of Impairment. From 386

households, 194 households have members who have some form of impairment. The

most common form of impairment is physical impairment comprising 50% or 112 of

the disabled household members. Physical impairments include fractured bones,

dislocated arms, legs, club foot, amputated arms and legs, paralysis resulting from

stroke, polio, cerebral palsy and epilepsy. This is followed by sensorial impairment at

37% or 83 household members. Sensorial impairments include visual, hearing, and

speech. Seven percent or 17 household members have intellectual and or cognitive

impairment. This includes household members who have autism and delayed learning

impairments. Others have mental-psycho-social impairments and multiple

impairments which comprise of 3%.

Causes of Impairment. Majority or 42% (79) of impairments experienced by the 194

households are congenital in origin. This implies the lack of knowledge of mothers on

the effect of proper nutrition on the development of healthy children.

A second major cause of impairment is sickness or chronic illnesses, specifically

severe asthma and diabetes at 35% (68 individuals), followed by impairment resulting

from accidents at 20% or 38 people, and impairment caused by occupational accident

at 3% (6) and depression at 1% (3).

39%

47%

8%

2%

4%

Figure 5. Households According to Types of Impairment

Sensorial Impairment

Physical Impairment

Intellectual Impairment

Mental Impairment

Multiple Impairment

13

Vulnerable persons’ ability to do daily activities. When asked about their capacity

to perform daily activities (e.g. eating, bathing, dressing, toileting, transferring or

walking and continence), 45% (75) of older persons and 29% (49) of persons with

disabilities expressed being independent and being able to do things on their own.

Sixteen percent (16%) of persons with disabilities (28) and 7% (11) of older persons

are totally dependent on others in doing their daily activities, while 14% (24) of persons

with disabilities and 12% (19) of older persons cannot do most of the daily activities

without assistance.

41%

35%

20%

3% 1%

Figure 6. Causes of Impairment

Congenital

Sickness

Accident

29%

16%14% 14%

27%

45%

7%

12%

8%

29%

Self-reliant Totally dependenton assistance

Cannot do MOSTdaily activities

without assistance

Cannot do SOMEdaily activities

without assistance

Don’t understand

the question

Figure 7. Vulnerable Person's Ability to Do Daily Activities

Person with Disability Older Person

14

The response of single woman-headed households was not considered because they

don’t have physical vulnerabilities similar to persons with disabilities and older

persons.

Vulnerable persons’ ability to engage in employment. Regarding their ability to

engage in employment, 44% or 30 out of 68 single persons who head their households

perceived themselves as having the ability to engage in employment. Hence only 13%

(9) of them are unable to find employment.

In the case of persons with disabilities, 33% (56) perceived themselves able to find a

job or be self-employed, although this does not translate into being actually employed,

as 25% (43) are unable to seek employment and 18% are unable to be self-employed

either.

Meanwhile, older persons have a rather bleaker situation compared to the others.

Although 25% (42) perceived themselves as having the ability to be employed or self-

employed, 35% (57) are unable to seek employment and 22% (36) are unable to

engage in self-employment.

33%

25%

18%

25%25%

35%

22%

18%

44%

13%

10%

32%

Employed/Self-Employed Unable to seekemployment

Not able to engage inself employment

Don’t understand the

question

Figure 8. Vulnerable Persons' Ability to Engage in Employment

Person with Disability Older Person Single Headed Women

15

Coping mechanisms of vulnerable household members in time of difficulties.

Asked further on how they cope with the challenges they are confronted with, 27%

would ask for guidance and support from relatives, friends and other people while 26%

would do something to keep themselves busy and productive. Acceptance and

positive outlook were also attitudes that 9% of the respondents try to cultivate within

themselves to be able to deal with their situation. To cope with their economic situation,

10% resort to financial budgeting to make both ends meet. About 4 % of the

respondents would make use of their assistive devices such as wheelchairs, hearing

aids and the like not only to cope with disasters but to make living easier for them.

27%

9%

4%

2%

26%

1%

1%

2%

10%

18%

Figure 9. Coping Mechanism of Vulnerable Household Members

Ask for guide andsupport from otherrelatives, friends andother peopleAcceptance and positiveoutlook

Financial budgeting andassistance

Use of assistive devices

Do something productive

Ask for medical advice

Others

16

Household Economic Situation

Income. Household survey results revealed that majority 76% or 295 of the 386

household surveyed earns an average monthly income of Php7,500 and below. This

means that 76% or 295 households live below the poverty line when compared with

2012 Municipal Poverty Threshold of Php8,50510 per household per month. The

household income earner members are those able members and under the working

age of 20-55 years old. However, in the graphs below, Php15,001 to Php30,000

incomes of the surveyed households are a bit big. These incomes come from other

sources such as monetary support from the relatives abroad and two or more

members of the family who are engaged in wage employment. Twenty-one (21)

households out of 386 have an income of Php15,001 to Php30,000.

Php 0-2,500

Php2,501-5,000

Php5,001-7,500

Php7,501-10,000

Php10,001-15,000

Php15,001-20,000

Php20,001-30,000

Brgy. San Jose 30% 22% 22% 14% 6% 5% 1%

Brgy. Pinugay 30% 21% 23% 14% 6% 4% 2%

Brgy. San Juan 41% 23% 20% 10% 2% 2% 2%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

Measu

rem

ents

Figure 10. Average Monthly Household Income

17

Sources of income. A total of 561 individuals are currently earning income for their

households. Forty-two percent (42%) or 238 of whom were women and 52% or 323

were men. Majority of the income come from wage employment with 393 or 70% of

the total number of individuals earning income for their households being daily wage

earners or wage employees such as construction workers, drivers, caregivers,

domestic helpers, salesladies, barangay tanods, factory workers, laundrywomen and

teachers. Next to wage employment, agriculture-based economic activities such as

farming and livestock raising, account for 13% of the source of income of the

households. Thirty-five (35) household members or 6% are engaged in buying and

selling of fruits and vegetables, fish vending and selling of balut, smoked fish and

pandesal. Some households are also into food vending, operating a small eatery or a

small variety store. Still others are into dressmaking, sewing and trimming. But,

generally, the main source of income from the three barangays is wage employment,

which is being augmented by self-employment through the operation of a small

business.

Table 3. Sources of Income of the Households

Sources of Income Brgy. Pinugay Brgy. San Jose Brgy. San Juan Grand

Total F M Total F M Total F M Total

Agriculture and Agri-business

10 35 45 4 12 16 2 12 14 75

Food Vending 9 0 9 0 2 2 3 0 3 14

Buy and Sell 7 5 12 4 5 9 10 4 14 35

Beauty and Wellness

5 0 5 1 0 1 2 3 5 11

Handicrafts 2 4 6 0 1 1 0 0 0 7

Store Vending 11 0 11 0 0 0 3 1 4 15

Garment and Tailoring

5 0 5 1 0 1 1 0 1 7

Wage Employment 91 108 199 33 66 99 33 62 95 393

Others 1 0 1 0 2 2 0 1 1 4

Total 141 152 293 43 88 131 54 83 137 561

18

Household Inflow. There is no significant difference between the household income

and the household inflow in the three barangays. Whatever income they get from other

sources did not have any impact on the household inflow. Household inflow is sourced

mainly from their wage employment.

Household Expenditures. In Barangay San Jose, majority or 33 (36%) out of 93

households reported a monthly household expenditure within the range of Php5,001-

Php7,000. Fifty-three (52) households or 26% of the 197 households in Barangay

Pinugay averaged about Php5,001-Php7,000 in its monthly expenditure while most

of the households in Barangay San Juan or 25 out of 97 households spend between

Php2,5001-Php7,000 to meet their basic needs.

Php 0-2,500

Php2,501-5,000

Php5,001-7,500

Php7,501-10,000

Php10,001-15,000

Php15,001-20,000

Php20,001-30,000

Brgy. San Jose 9% 5% 5% 3% 2% 1% 0%

Brgy. Pinugay 16% 11% 12% 7% 3% 2% 1%

Brgy. San Juan 10% 6% 5% 3% 1% 1% 1%

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

Measu

rem

ent

Figure 11. Average Monthly Household Inflow

19

Most of the households reported spending their income mostly on food, education and

health. Acquisition of physical assets and household utilities are considered also

important.

Php 0-2,500

Php2,501-5,000

Php5,001-7,500

Php7,501-10,000

Php10,001-15,000

Php15,001-20,000

Php20,001-50,000

Brgy. San Jose 15% 24% 35% 12% 9% 5%

Brgy. San Juan 5% 26% 27% 14% 17% 6% 5%

Brgy. Pinugay 23% 26% 22% 16% 10% 3%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

Measu

rem

ent

Figure 12. Average Monthly Household Expenditure

61%10%

9%

10%

10%

Figure 13. Breakdown of Expenditures of Households

Food

Health

Physical Assets

Education

Utilities

20

Coping Mechanisms of vulnerable households. To supplement the household

income, majority or 71% (271) seek help or assistance from their families, relatives

and friends. Seventeen percent (17%) or 65 households resort to operating a small

variety store to provide for the daily needs of the family. Households seldom approach

micro-finance institutions, money lenders and cooperatives because majority of the

selected household respondents do not have access to financing institutions or, even

if they had access to MFIs, they opt not to access their services because of exorbitant

interest and requirements. However, comparing the household income and the

household inflow, any assistance they may have sourced from their families and

friends do not have significant impact on the household inflow.

Most of the respondents or 49% (187) seek help or assistance from their families and

relatives purposely to buy food, while others cited health and education as their main

reasons.

CoopFamily/Relativ

es/FriendsMFI Money Lender None Sari2x

Brgy. San Jose 0% 14% 2% 0% 9% 6%

Brgy. Pinugay 0% 47% 0% 1% 1% 3%

Brgy. San Juan 0% 10% 2% 1% 4% 8%

Figure 14. Household Coping Mechanisms

21

Majority or 41% or 160 out of 386 surveyed household said that they seek assistance

from their families, friends and relatives for their food needs on a weekly basis while

18% do the same on a daily basis. This further indicates the insufficiency of their

current household income to provide for the daily needs of their families. Eleven

percent (11%) would approach their relatives and friends either once a month or twice

a month depending on the availability of the cash or non-cash support from their family,

relatives and friends.

Assistance needed by the households. When asked about the type of assistance

the household needs, 39% of the surveyed households indicated needing medical

assistance, 35% expressed the need for livelihood assistance while a significant

percentage or 14% (54 households) expressed needing assistance to meet their

basic needs including food.

DailySometimes

2x aweek

3x aweek

Weekly

Bi-Monthly

Monthly

Quarterly

Semi-Annualy

Annualy

None

Brgy. San Jose 6% 0% 0% 0% 6% 3% 3% 0% 4% 0% 2%

Brgy. Pinugay 6% 0% 0% 0% 25% 8% 8% 1% 1% 1% 1%

Brgy. San Juan 5% 0% 0% 0% 10% 1% 1% 1% 2% 0% 5%

Figure 15. How Often Household Seek Assistance

22

Support received by the households. When asked whether the household received

any assistance from other organizations, most of the households at 64% (249)

reported not receiving any support whether from public or private groups. Seventy-four

(74) households or 19% received financial assistance from the relatives and families

while 9% (34) received assistance for their basic needs.

35%

5%

2%

39%

2%

0% 2%

0%14%

1%

Figure 16. Type of Assistance Needed in Three Barangays

Livelihood Assistance

Assistive Devices

Food, Basic Needs

Medical Assistance

Care and Guidance

Counselling

Educational Support

Housing

None

Therapy

19%

9%

2%

2%3%

1%

64%

Figure 17. Support received by the households

Financial Assistance

Basic Needs

Guidance and moralsupport

Medical Assistance

Others

Assistive Device

23

The Candidate Economic Project Holders

From the 386 vulnerable household surveyed, 189 household qualified to become

Individual Economic Project Holders of livelihood projects from the REBUILD Project.

The results of the Candidate Analysis done on the respondents representing the 189

households gave information on the profile of these individuals and their families and

the type of livelihood they are most interested to engage in.

Age and Sex Distribution. Mostly women or 68% (128) qualified as EPH while 32%

or 60 men qualified as EPH. Qualified EPHs are within the age range of 19 to 94 years

old. However, EPH livelihood interests are not only limited to them, but if the livelihood

venture needs support from the family members, one of them can take the lead in

managing it.

22%

24%

22%

31%

1%

Figure 18. Age Distribution of Economic Project Holders

Adults (19-24)

Adults (35-49)

Adults (50-59)

Adults (60-79)

Adults (80-94)

24

Educational attainment. Majority of the EPHs and their household members have

attained either a primary level (32%) or a secondary level (21%) of education. A

significant percentage reported not having any education at all: 19%. This already

limits their option for wage employment as most companies would require employees

to be at least high school graduates. Most of the target EPHs have reached only either

primary or secondary levels, or have no education at all.

5%

32%

9%21%

8%

0%

0%

5%

1%

19%

Figure 19. Level of Education of EPH Household Members

Preparatory

Primary Level

Elementary Level Graduate

Secondary level

Secondary Level Graduate

Voctec Graduate

Voctec Level

College Level

College Graduate

No Education

25

Basic Literacy. The target EPHs have working knowledge of the Filipino language in

terms of the 3Rs (reading, writing and arithmetic-computation). However, their

knowledge of the 3Rs becomes limited when the language used is Basic English. This

strengthens the literacy level of the target population as reflected in their level of

education, and have implications on the appropriate support to be given to them, as

well as the methodologies to be used when coaching. The “no knowledge” means no

theoretical knowledge or background about wage employment and “working

knowledge” means the EPH has practical knowledge on wage employment.

NoKnowledge

LimitedWorking

KnowledgeProficient

Reading 3.7 11.11 75.66 9.52

Writing 2.65 13.23 74.07 10.05

Speaking 2.12 5.82 79.89 12.17

Understanding 1.59 6.88 79.37 12.17

0102030405060708090

Figure 21. Basic Literacy of EPHs: Filipino Language

NoKnowledge

LimitedWorking

KnowledgeProficient

Reading 8.47 52.91 34.39 4.23

Writing 6.88 54.5 34.92 3.7

Speaking 12.17 65.61 19.58 2.65

Understanding 8.47 65.61 23.81 2.12

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Measu

rem

ent

Figure 20. Basic Literacy of EPHs: Basic English Language

26

Vulnerability. Of the 189 EPH respondents, 30% or 56 are older people, 24% or 46

are members of households with persons with disabilities, 22% or 42 are persons with

disabilities; 13% or 24 are single persons who head their families, 9% or 18 persons

who belong to households with older persons and 2% or three (3) EPHs are members

of households headed by single persons. However, on the data of types of impairment

from EPH, there’s no significant change of results from the household survey.

For persons with disabilities, 47% or 49 of the persons with disabilities have physical

impairment, 39% or 40 have sensorial impairment, 8% or 8 have cognitive impairment,

2% or 2 have mental impairment and 4% or 4 have multiple impairments.

22%

13%

30%

9%

24%

2%

Figure 22. Eligibility Assessment of Economic Project Holders

I am a PWD

I am a SP

I am an OP

I am member of HH with OP

I am member of HH with PWD

I am member of HH with SP

39%

47%

8%

2% 4%

Figure 23. Types of Impairment of EPH

SensorialImpairment

Physical Impairment

IntellectualImpairment

Mental Impairment

Multiple Impairment

27

The vulnerability of EPHs in terms of activities of daily living and engagement in

employment was not discussed because there’s no significant difference seen from

the results coming from the pool of 386 households.

Vulnerability of Persons with Disabilities and Employment. When asked about the

effect of their condition on their ability to engage in employment or self-employment,

35% or 34 of the persons with disabilities complained that they are unable to seek

employment and 19% or 18 are not able to engage in self-employment. Only 7% or 7

mentioned that they are capable of being employed/self-employed despite their

condition.

Vulnerability of Older Persons and Employment. For older persons, the same trend

can be observed. Only 8% or 6 of the 77 older persons interviewed perceived

themselves as having the capability to be employed or self-employed. More than half

or 56% (43) feel that their condition affects their ability to seek employment hence they

are unable to seek employment, while 21% or 16 of them believe that their condition

has affected their ability to engage even in self-employment. It should be mentioned

that persons with disabilities referred to in this section are actually people with

impairment hence these results.

7%

35%

19%

39%

Figure 24. Effect of Being a Person with Disabilities on One’s Ability to Engage in Employment/Self-Employment

Employed/Self-employed

Unable to seek employment

Not able to engage in self-employment

Don’t understand the question

28

Socio-Economic Profile of the Economic Project Holders

Income. The 189 EPHs belong to households with average monthly household

income of Php8,500 and below. They are considered as the poorest among the poor

households of Baras, considering that the 2012 Regional Poverty Threshold for Rizal

Province is Php8,50510 per household per month. From the above figure, 40% or 75

earn a monthly income of Php100-Php2,500, 24% or 46 earn a monthly income

between Php2,501-Php5,000, 27% or 51 of the EPHs have an average a monthly

income between Php 5,001 to Php7,500, and 9% or 17 of the respondents earn a

monthly income between Php7,501-Php8,500.

8%

56%

21%

15%

Figure 25. Effect of Being an Older Person on One’s Ability to Engage in Employment/Self-Employment

Employed/Self-employed

Unable to seekemployment

Not able to engage in self-employment

Don’t understand the question

40%

24%

27%

9%

Figure 26. Monthly Household Income of EPH

Php 100-2,500

Php 2,501-5,000

Php 5,001-7,500

Php 7,501-8,500

29

Employment. A total of 241 individuals are contributing to the monthly household

income of the EPH households. Of this number, 64% (154) are wage employees and

20% or 48 are earning income from agriculture-based economic activities. A smaller

percentage are into buy-and-sell, food vending, handicraft making, beauty and

wellness and operation of a small variety store.

Household Inflow. Reflecting the general profile of the surveyed population, most or

76% of the incomes contributing to the total household inflow of the EPH households

come from wage employment (unskilled labor, construction work, service industry),

which is not regular in nature. This main source of income, however, does not enable

the target population to go beyond the poverty threshold which is Php8,505. Other

inflow which is not mentioned is the support of relatives from the families.

Table 4. Sources of Income of EPHs

Sources of Income Pinugay San Jose San Juan Total %

Agriculture/Agri-business 30 9 9 48 20

Wage employment 101 30 23 154 64

Buy and sell 11 5 1 17 7

Food vending 7 2 9 4

Handicrafts 4 4 2

Beauty and wellness 2 2 1

Small variety store 6 1 7 3

Total 161 44 36 241 100

76%

10%

14%

Figure 27. Monthly Inflow of EPH Households

Wage Employment

Self-employment

Others

30

Household expenditures. As already noted earlier, the incomes of households are

mainly expended on food at 59%. Household income is not enough to cover other

expenses of the household. Only 8% and 10% of the household income is being used

for educational and health purposes, respectively. This also explains the low level of

education of target population, as well as their expressed needs for education, health

and acquisition of physical assets.

Social support needed by the EPH. When asked to identify the types of support

needed to address their difficulties, 27% of the EPHs identified health and medical

needs followed by social welfare need at 17% and adaptive and mobility aid at 9%.

Others identified the need for rehabilitation and special education. This accounts for

the expressed priority needs of the target population (i.e. people with disabilities and

older people) on health and medical services. Second to this is the need for financial

assistance to support the livelihood of vulnerable households. The assumption is that

these households will be able to cover the needs of its members aside from food if the

inflow is enough, and if they have access to other government programs such as social

protection services. A significant percentage (39%) did not identify specific social

support assistance they may need.

59%

8%

6%

10%

8%

0%8%

1%

Figure 28. Monthly Expenditure of EPH Households

Food

Education

Physical Assets

Health

Utilities

Leisure

Job related

Others

31

Assistance received by EPHs. Majority of the target population (55%) have not

receive any form of assistance from individuals, groups, organizations, agencies or

institutions. Assistance received from family, friends and relatives are either in the form

of cash or goods, but mainly used for buying or securing food. Assistance from

government includes social assistance such as the 4Ps.

30%

6%

0%6%

3%

55%

Figure 30.Assistance received by EPHs

from Various Groups

Family, Friends and Relatives

Government

Non-government Organization

Internationl Non-govermentOrganization

Social Pension

No Assistance Received

27%

17%

2%

9%

1%

5%

39%

Figure 29. Social Support Needed by the EPHs

Health and Medical

Social Welfare

Need Further Assessment

Adaptive and Mobility Aid

Rehabilitation

Others (Special Education,Jobfair,EducationalAssistance)

32

Types of social services provided to EPHs. Fourteen households or 50% referred to social services received health assistance, including medical assistance and fitting and provision of assistive devices. One was referred for an educational scholarship and 13 households or 46% were referred to social welfare agency for registration as senior citizen.

Livelihood skills. Majority or 78% (148) of the EPHs have skills in cooking and selling, as most of the EPHs are women. The remaining EPHs have skills related to manual labor such as carpentry (5% or 10), welding (1% or 1) and mechanic. Although agriculture is the major economic activity in Baras, only two (2) EPHs identified farming as their livelihood skill. Other skills identified by the EPHs are massage and landscape gardening.

50%

4%

46%

Figure 31. Social Services Provided to the EPHs

Health(MedicalandRehabilitation)

Educational

1%

5%

16%

44%

18%

0%

1%

1%1%

8%5%

Figure 31. Livelihood skills of EPHs

Farming

Carpentry

Cooking

Cooking and Selling

Selling

Welding

Landscaping/ Gardening

Massage

Mechanic

No Answer

None

33

Livelihood interest. Most of the EPHs or 63% (119) would like to explore self-

employment livelihood activities. From this category, 29% or 34 out of 119 EPHs

would like to start a livelihood activity and 85 EPHs would like to engage in start-up

livelihood activity. EPHs who would like to restart a livelihood activity are previously

engaged in the same livelihood activity but were forced to discontinue operation for

various reasons (i.e. capital was used for emergency situations or health concerns).

Some 53 EPHs would like to improve their existing small businesses through

additional capital. About 6% or 11 EPHs would like to be employed as wage earners,

while the remaining EPHs or 3% (6) were still undecided on what livelihood activity to

engage into.

28%

63%

6%3%

Figure 32. Livelihood Interest of EPHs

Self-employment(enhancement)

Self-employment (start-up)

Waged Employment

Undecided plans

34

Specific livelihood interest of EPHs. The particular livelihod interest of the EPHs

reflect their present livelihood skills and livelihood interest. Majority of the EPHs would

like to venture into eatery/food vending business (19%), buy-and-sell (20%) and small

variety store (29%), which more often are self-employed and would require skills in

selling and cooking. These are also the types of livelihood activities more associated

with women. Again, this accounts for the prevalence of women among the EPHs. Also,

such type of livelihood activities do not require a college degree and would only need

working knowledge of Filipino and Basic English to be able to manage the livelihood

activity particulalrly in simple bookkeeping and accounting.

10%

5%

19%

20%

29%

3%5%

1% 8%

Figure 33. Specific livelihood interest of the EPHs

Agriculture/Agri-business

Handicrafts

Eatery/Food Vending

Buy and Sell

Sari-sari store

Garments/Tailoring

Wage Employment

Beauty and Wellness

For follow-up/Initial plans

35

Capacity building needs of the EPHs. Majority or 49% of the EPH identified training

on savings mobilization as a priority. Once they start up an income generating project,

they would like to be able to save a portion of their earnings. The savings will be used

for the education of their children, to buy medicines and for emergency purposes such

as disasters. Next to training on savings mobilization is training on financial

management. This will help enhance their skills in managing their small-scale business

finances as well as their household finances. Business start-up training was also

identified since some of the EPHs already have existing small scale businesses.

However, they need technical inputs on how to manage their business more efficiently

and effectively. The rest of trainings are product development and training for

employment which is least identified.

49%

12%

3%

26%

1%4%

5%

Figure 34. Capacity Building Needs of the EPHs

Savings Mobilization Training

Business Start-up Training

Product Development Training

Financial managementtraining/Peer training

Need Further Assessment

Training employment

No Response

36

Assessment of Quality of Life

The term Quality of Life (QOL) refers to the general well-being of individuals, families

and societies. The term is used to measure the indicator # 3 of REBUILD Project

Specific Objective 1: 60% of the targeted beneficiaries express a better social

and economic situation in their communities.

The Quality of Life measurement in this project should not be confused with the concept

of standard of living which is based primarily on income. Instead, indicators of the quality

of life are classified as ECONOMIC, SOCIAL and PSYCHO-SOCIAL. Economic indicators

include household cash flow, health, education, physical assets and food. Social

indicators include participation, while self-confidence is used to measure the psycho-

social aspect of the quality of life. Respondents were made to rate their feelings of

satisfaction on the statements corresponding to the aspect of Economic, Social and

Psycho-social. Below are the sample questions answered by the respondents:

Economic Needs (Do you agree with the following statement: Household has

sufficient cash resources within the past year to cover expenses for…)

Category

Household cash flow (separate category)

Food

Health

Education

Physical Assets

Social Needs (Do you agree with the following statements?)

Category

I am able to participate in community activities

Psychosocial Needs (Do you agree with the following statements?)

Category

I have self-confidence

Their responses were scored according to the following:

1 - Highly satisfied

2 - Satisfied

3 - Dissatisfied

4 - Highly Dissatisfied

37

Quality of Life: ECONOMICS

The EPHs belonging to the three categories expressed dissatisfaction with the level

of their household income. They felt that their income is not sufficient to cover their

needs on health, education, physical assets and food, as all scores are above 2. This

is consistent with the finding that the income level of the EPH households is below the

poverty line. Comparing the results of QOL in ECONOMIC between the 42 EPH

households in the relocation sites (relocatees) and the 147 EPH households in the

host community (non-relocatees), although the scoring is relatively close for all cases,

respondents from host communities have higher ratings, which means they are more

dissatisfied than the relocatees (see Figure 36).

HH Cashflow Health EducationPhysicalAssets

Food

Person with Disability 2.95 2.9 2.18 3.01 2.6

Single Headed Women 2.93 2.85 2.37 3.04 2.59

Older Person 2.91 2.96 1.69 2.91 2.61

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

Measu

rem

ent

Figure 35. Quality of Life: ECONOMICS(per vulnerable household category)

HouseholdCash Flow

Health EducationPhysicalAssets

Food

Relocatees 2.81 2.79 2 2.64 2.48

Host Community 2.97 2.95 2.02 3.07 2.64

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

Measu

rem

ent

Figure 36. Quality of Life: ECONOMICS(relocatees versus non-relocatees)

38

Quality of Life: SOCIAL

Figure 37 shows that persons with disabilities and older persons are quite satisfied

with their social participation. The existing organization such as disabled people’s

organizations and senior citizens groups provide them venues to participate in

community activities. In addition, senior citizens organizations in the barangay level

are more organized compared with barangay DPOs; that’s why older persons got the

highest score. Meanwhile, single parents are slightly dissatisfied with their social life.

Single parents have no time to attend community activities because they are

preoccupied attending to the needs of their siblings. There is a slight difference in the

results of the relocatees and host community. The relocatees are not quite active in

community activities as compared to host community. This can be attributed to the fact

that relocatees are new in the community and are still adjusting to their new

environment, new neighborhood and are not yet familiar with the activities in the

community.

Participation

Person with Disability 2.01

Single Parent 2.19

Older Person 1.82

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

Measu

rem

ent

Figure 37. Quality of Life: SOCIAL(per vulnerable household category)

Participation in Community Activities

Relocatees 1.86

Host Community 1.99

1.75

1.8

1.85

1.9

1.95

2

Measu

rem

ent

Figure 38. Quality of life: SOCIAL(relocatees versus non-relocatees)

39

Quality of Life: PSYCHO-SOCIAL

The ratings in psycho-social aspects particularly in self-confidence of single women

who head their households are relatively very low compared to persons with

disabilities and older persons. Single women are emotionally vulnerable, with no

venue to express their feelings – not even in their own families. Culturally, single

women who head their households are not perceived positively in the Philippines,

since most rural communities are patriarchal in nature.

Comparing the relocatees and host communities, the relocatees have low self-

confidence compared with the host communities. This can be attributed to the fact that

relocatees are new to the area and they are still adjusting to the dynamics of the

communities.

1.62

1.55

1.75

1.45

1.5

1.55

1.6

1.65

1.7

1.75

1.8

Self-Confidence

Figure 39. Quality of Life: PSYCHO-SOCIAL

Person with Disability Older Person Single Headed Women

1.74

1.56

Relocatees Host Communities

Figure 40. Quality of Life: PSYCHO-SOCIAL(relocatees versus non-relocatees)

Self Confidence

40

4. SUMMARY OF KEY FINDINGS Household and EPH Characteristics. Generally, there is no significant difference in

the demographic characteristics of households surveyed and EPHs, based on the

information gathered. The results of the survey of the household survey population

provided the context and facilitated the identification and selection of target EPHs.

Comprising majority of the surveyed households, the EPHs are persons with

disabilities or households with persons with disabilities as members, followed by older

persons or households with older persons and single women-headed households.

Education. The lack of education is a contributing factor to limited income with

majority of the EPHs having reached primary level of education only. Their options for

employment are therefore limited. Nevertheless, existing skills of the target EPHs can

serve as resource to help improve the economic condition of the households. For

instance, majority of the EPHs have skills in cooking and selling, which also happens

to be the preferred economic activity. This reflects the mostly women qualified EPHs.

EPH Working Knowledge. Majority of the EPHs have working knowledge (reading,

writing, arithmetic) of the Filipino language while having a limited working knowledge

of the Basic English language. This reflects the educational attainment of the surveyed

population where the highest level of education achieved by the majority is primary

level. Nonetheless, this information can be used to determine the appropriate support

to be given to them, as well as the methodologies to be used when coaching.

Income and Inflow. Majority of the survey population of 386 households from the

three barangays in Baras earn an average monthly income below the municipal

poverty threshold of Php8,505 per month. Most of these households source their

income from wage employment outside of the municipality, which illustrates the limited

economic opportunities on wage employment within the municipality. Most of the

incomes contributing to the total household inflows of the target population come from

wage employment (unskilled labor, construction work, service industry), which is not

regular in nature. This main source of income, however, does not enable the target

population to go beyond the poverty threshold which is Php8,505.

The same profile is reflected in the target Economic Project Holders. The 189 EPHs

represent the poorest of the poor in Barangays Pinugay, San Jose and San Juan

whose income fall below the regional poverty threshold. The EPHs earn a monthly

household income of Php8,500 and below for a household with 5-7 members. This

means an EPH household only has a daily budget of at most Php283 (US$6.68) or

Php40-Php57(US$.94-1.35) per member. Hence, it is not surprising that most of them

would seek their relatives and friends for assistance even for their food needs.

Moreover, although there are 241 household members earning income for their

families, meaning there were at least 52 households with two members contributing to

the family income, their combined income is still not sufficient to meet the needs of the

41

households. Considering also that the minimum wage in Rizal Province is Php275 per

day for non-agricultural workers and Php215 per day for workers in the retail and

service establishments.

Existing skills and livelihood interests of EPHs. The existing skills of the target

EPHs can serve as resource to help improve the economic condition of the

households. For instance, majority of the EPHs have skills in cooking and selling,

which also happens to be the preferred economic activity. This reflects the mostly

women qualified EPHs. Most of the EPHs prefer to be self-employed and home-based,

particularly the women. Self-employed activities offer more opportunity to earn income

than wage employment especially since they may not be able to compete for limited

employment opportunities given their low level of education and nature of their skills

at present. Meanwhile, home-based economic activities will allow them to perform their

responsibilities at home especially in providing for the needs of the vulnerable

members of the household. Men, on the other hand, prefer wage employment.

Received assistance. Most of the EPHs reported not receiving any assistance from

any group whether public or private institutions. For those who have received

assistance especially from relatives and friends, this is mainly spent on food for the

family. Other forms of assistance received, if any, are for health and medical

assistance. However, it seems that these were not enough since households still

expressed the need for health and medical (rehabilitation) assistance as a priority

followed by financial support.

MAIN PROBLEMS OF THE SURVEYED POPULATION

Limited opportunities for wage employment. As per the municipal profile of Baras,

majority of its workers gain their employments outside the municipality.

Low educational level. Majority of the target population have only reached either

primary or secondary levels, or have no education at all. They would prefer self-

employment activities in order to gain control over the possibilities of earning income,

rather than explore the labor market with high competition with other individuals who

have higher educational backgrounds.

High age bracket. Majority of the target population’s age ranges from 41 to 60 years

old, which implies compounding effects of the individual’s vulnerability to the already

limited livelihood opportunities.

Women household heads. Most of the target population are women who head their

households, and are usually left to do productive works that are not remunerated. Self-

employment activities would provide them opportunity to earn income, while not

sacrificing their other responsibilities at home.

42

Persons with disabilities. In the target population, persons with disabilities are

present either as members of the households or as part of the EPHs. Persons with

disabilities are very interested to engage in self and wage employment. However,

there are no opportunities for the persons with disabilities to access any livelihoods,

because service providers and other stakeholders perceive them unable to manage

any livelihoods.

Older persons. Most of the target population in the household survey and the EPH

are older persons. They are very active in community activities particularly in the senior

citizen groups. However, their opportunities to having a livelihood are limited because

of notions that they are not able to manage their own livelihood. However, it is

important to review the livelihood interests they identified to be appropriate, viable and

sustainable.

43

CONCLUSION In view of the above findings, the Project Team has proposed the adoption of the following strategy: REBUILD Livelihood Strategy The REBUILD Project livelihood strategy emanates from the Twin Track approach adopted to pursue parallel objectives of empowerment of the project beneficiaries, as well as the promotion and advocacy for inclusive environment. The approach aims to simultaneously work for the capacity building of the beneficiaries, the EPH household and the Disabled People’s Organization (DPO)11, as well as work for the promotion of inclusive measures and operating systems of the local government, service providers and relevant stakeholders. The capacity building of the beneficiaries include focused interventions to help the EPH household establish a livelihood activity as a complementary source of income and support for appropriate referrals for specific needs of their household members. The DPO is identified as a beneficiary also, which would be capacitated to take up the interest of the persons with disabilities and vulnerable sector. When capacitated, the DPO is expected to serve as the rightful representative of the vulnerable sector, i.e. persons with disabilities, to the policy formulation and planning processes of the local government. In addition to this, the DPO shall promote and advocate for the right of persons with disabilities to work both at the municipal and barangay levels. Simultaneous to the initiatives for the project beneficiaries, will be the intervention to assist the municipal and barangay local government units to create an environment that provides access to the rights, services, and privileges of vulnerable populations, including persons with disabilities. This will be in the form of policy advocacy, systems promotions, and influencing project implementation and facilities designs to be disability inclusive. The end goal is to create a better socio-economic situation and participation of the target population (vulnerable households/families). Please see figure on the next page.

11 A DPO is defined as an organisation that is led and controlled by disabled people. Another definition suggests: “DPOs are representative organisations or groups of persons with disabilities, where persons with disabilities constitute a majority of the overall staff and board, and are well-represented in all levels of the organisation: HI Policy Paper, “Support to DPO.”

44

TWIN TRACK APPROACH

Better socio-economic situation and participation of the target population

EMPOWERMENT APROACH

Expected Result 1: 250 vulnerable families in Baras Expected result 2: Baras

DPO

INCLUSIVE SOCIETY

Expected Result 3: Baras local authorities and

service providers

45

Empowerment Approach

250 vulnerable families in Baras Empowerment Approach

Baras DPO Inclusive Society

Baras Local Authorities

and Service Providers

1. Identification 1.1 Household survey 1.2 Candidate analysis 1.3. Selection based on

the eligibility criteria (Local Decision Committee)

1. Baras Local Government Unit Municipal and Barangay Level 2. Social focus service providers 3. Livelihood service providers The A-IATAC approach is used:

Assessment: Initial

mapping of service providers

XX (number) of service providers will be chosen by the project to make them more disability inclusive. The project will support active mainstream and specialized service providers that are particularly relevant to the target beneficiaries (based on their needs) and that are willing to become more inclusive

Information (knowledge)

Awareness (attitudes)

Training (practices) –

focus on willing key stakeholders

Advocacy (policies)

Coaching (knowledge,

attitudes, practices and policies on a sustainable manner)

SOCIAL

ASSISTANCE

EPH and NON EPH through

referral network

2. Provision of appropriate livelihood intervention(s)

2.1. Development and validation livelihood interest:

a. Further in depth assessments (SEEDS + LF)

b. Resource mapping : economic profiling of the area ( SEEDS +LF)

c. Review and final validation of the job idea for self employment and wage employment ( HI , TWH, SEEDS)

2.2. Implementation of action plan * Depending on the needs

a. WAGED EMPLOYMENT Soft skills development * Technical skills development * Job seeking skills *

b. SELF EMPLOYMENT Soft skills development * Technical skills development *

o Vocational skills training o Peer training o Community based

training Business skills development *

o Formal o Informal

Access to CAPITAL FUNDING MECHANISM: depending on the socioeconomic profile of the EPH:

o In kind grant o In cash grant o Subsidized loan o Regular Loan

2.3. Monitoring and coaching (social + livelihood) - Frequency of visits per month: minimum of 1

– to maximum of 2 - Length of support: minimum of 6 months to

maximum of 12months depending on the HH situation, the type of business

- Managing money and record keeping - Overcome the challenges

3. EPH asset protection and resiliency o Savings mobilization o Enrollment to Philhealth o Develop household contingency plan

(link with barangay DRR contingency plan)

DPO as an active contributor in the development processes and governance in barangay and at municipal level 1. Building and development

internal organizational capacity

- Increase membership based - Organizational self-assessment

2. Support DPO to develop

action plan to advocate for policy change, inclusive access to quality services

- Mainstreaming of disability issues in annual investment plan and comprehensive land use plan (CLUP)

- Inclusion in local special bodies at municipal level

- Awareness to Service providers/stakeholders for inclusive services

REBUILD Project: Inclusive Local Development – Livelihood Focused Project

PERSONAL I Z ED SUPPORT

46

INCLUSIVE LOCAL DEVELOPMENT - LIVELIHOOD FOCUSED PROJECT The schema above presents the approaches under the project to improve the socio-economic situation and participation of the vulnerable population of Baras through the following:

Personalized Social Support Approach

It is based on the Handicap International Personalized Social Support (PSS) model.

The lack of information on existing services is one of the obstacles

that vulnerable persons with disabilities and other vulnerable population face. Still, even when persons receive information about services (for instance through field facilitators), this is usually not enough to improve their Quality of Life, particularly for those who are most vulnerable and are the main focus of our project.

For vulnerable populations, support services which are local and one-to-one are often needed to improve participation. Handicap International calls this approach to support services Personalized Social Support. PSS is based on a global analysis of a person’s life and aims to foster their empowerment by supporting them to develop their own interests and the resources to carry them out with clear objectives and a specific timeframe. The PSS model supports persons with disabilities and other vulnerable groups to:

1. Identify their strengths/weaknesses, their skills/areas to develop further and areas of interest to pursue; in our case, interest in livelihood.

2. Look at their life situation and determine what is disabling them, not only on

a physical level but on a social level too.

3. Choose and implement a personalized project; in our project, personalized livelihood project.

The PSS model differs from other forms of social work in that it is not only based on the person, but incorporates links with services and the environment surrounding the person (family, community, etc.).

For most persons with disabilities and other vulnerable populations in the context where Handicap International works, it is only through PSS that our project can commit to a measurable improvement in Quality of Life within the timeframe of a project.

47

Key components of a personalized support:

1. Relation component between the EPH/HH and the livelihood facilitator: "to be with",

that is the quality of the relationship (understanding and mutual respect) which will, to

a large extent, determine its success.

2. Change and movement towards a better situation:

The support is:

In front, to spur on, but not too much, because often people “run” behind the facilitators.

Side by side, to share, build together and negotiate.

Behind, to allow the person to make their own way, but also to support and “pick up” or “push” in the event of failure or fatigue.

3. Time component: Support has a beginning and an end that must be determined in

agreement with the person involved. It must comply with the intervention framework

(length of the program) but also the pace of the person in question. The goals to

achieve and their planning will help in organizing how time is used. Support must never

last too long, because it could become a sign of interdependence between the

livelihood facilitator and the person supported.

Access to Services/Directory of Service Providers

In relation to this, a directory of service providers for livelihood (i.e. MFIs, government and non-government initiatives to help the poor engage in livelihood activities, etc., for medical, for social programs and services to help the poor, etc.) has been developed to assist service providers, as well as the beneficiaries themselves, identify appropriate organizations and institutions that can be of help and assistance for specific needs of the EPH households, among others.

A. Empowerment of 250 vulnerable households / families of Baras Some 250 vulnerable households, considered as the poorest of the poor will be targeted for livelihood and social support to improve their living condition. The strategy includes the following major activities.

48

1. Identification of the most vulnerable population as project target beneficiaries or Economic Project Holders (EPHs). The aim of this activity was to determine who among the population are the most vulnerable households using the vulnerability and the eligibility criteria. This was undertaken through a household survey. The survey also aimed to determine the situation of the target barangays in relation to the livelihood opportunities existing locally. This includes the following steps:

1.1 Establishment of pool for candidate analysis – The vulnerability criteria was used in establishing a pool of candidates. The criteria include households that have a person with disability or an older person as member, and those households or families that are headed by women.

1.2 Household survey and candidate analyses – Candidates from the established pool was interviewed using a questionnaire to generate the socio-economic profile of the household.

1.3 Selection of EPHs based on eligibility criteria by the established Local Decision

Committee (LDCs) in each barangay. The eligibility criteria include the following: a) household income is equal to or less than Php8, 505.00 pesos ($ 193) a month; b) the household has no access to micro-finance institution facility during the last two (2) years; and c) the household is willing to participate in project activities. Selected households would become the livelihood beneficiaries called the Economic Project Holders (EPHs).

The EPH will be represented by a member of the household, who is qualified and is of working age as well, in managing the livelihood activity identified by the household. A total of 250 EPHs need to be identified and directly assisted in their livelihood by the project. This 250 EPHs were identified from the candidate analyses conducted using the results of the household survey.

The screening of candidates will be undertaken by the LDC. The LDC is composed of local leaders and service providers within the community who have good knowledge of the status of households, i.e. barangay officials, barangay health workers (BHWs), barangay nutrition scholars (BNSs), as well as the Livelihood Facilitators of the project. The assumption is that the members of the LDC would know best who are the poorest of the poor and those that need assistance in their community.

2. Provision of Appropriate Livelihood Intervention(s)

Interventions to be provided to EPH households will be based on: a) the interest of the member of the household who will undertake the livelihood opportunity; b) what the member is capable of doing and sustaining; c) viability and sustainability of the livelihood idea/interest. To arrive at this, the following steps will be undertaken:

49

2.1 Development and validation of livelihood interest – This step is aimed towards

determining the “soundness” or feasibility, as well as the profitability and sustainability, of the livelihood interest. Further specific activities involved under this step include the following. In-depth assessment of livelihood interest to be conducted by the Project

Team and technical partners; Resource mapping to assess community economic development,

interventions and available services and resources. This will be done through focus group discussion(s).

Review and validation of the business or job idea – This will be conducted internally by the project officers, partner staff and other stakeholders.

2.2 Implementation of Action Plan – The following action plan will be adopted

depending on the needs of the EPH, which can be either of the following:

Wage Employment. This is remuneration paid by an employer to an employee for a fixed task. The remuneration is based on amount paid at an hourly rate or easily measured reference, i.e. minimum wage per day / monthly salary. In the three barangays of the project, productive members of households are mostly wage workers / employees on contractual basis and paid weekly.

Self-employment. The validated livelihood plan will focus on either income generating activity (IGA) and/or some livelihood activity. IGAs are small-scale activities that may be the sole source of income or a supplement to another source, such as farming. The activities may be full-time, part-time and/or seasonal, and are usually based on traditional technologies, local materials and local markets. They are often in rural areas, and are normally part of the informal economy. The livelihood plan could be a start-up, re-start or enhancement of a business or some other productive activity.

For the HH that would like to develop a wage employment project, the following elements could be provided under the REBUILD Project:

Soft skills development and peer support. These skills are beneficial for people’s overall interaction and participation in society, not just in relation to livelihood projects. This is to help them gain positive skills, confidence and self-esteem with the help of the peer support.

Technical skills development. This is aimed at enhancing particular technical knowledge and skills on a particular area and is assumed to increase opportunities for wage employment.

Job seeking skills development. This aims to increase employability of a beneficiary, i.e. EPH who is interested to work under wage employment. A step-by-step orientation on how to establish their goals, and creating resumes, developing their network and links, preparing for an interview and making good decisions are parts of this capacity building intervention.

50

For the HH that would like to develop their own livelihood activity, the following elements need to be developed:

Soft skills development. This aims to help them gain positive skills in engaging into business and build confidence and self-esteem.

Technical skills development. This will be provided through the conduct of enterprise, vocational, technical skills trainings by tapping into the government service facility, i.e. Technical Education and Service Development Administration (TESDA) and other similar educational agencies. In addition to this, peer training and community vocational training for farming activities will also be tapped.

Business skills development. This is aimed at developing the business acumen of an EPH basically to operate, manage and sustain a livelihood activity. This includes knowledge and skills development in the ability to calculate the profit generated, recordkeeping via cashbook, basic financial management, among others.

Access to capital may be provided through the following possible mechanisms:

In-kind grant. Given in goods, commodities or services rather than cash. A counterpart or a contribution will be required from the EPH before the implementation of the livelihood activity.

In-cash grant. Given in the form of cash. A counterpart or a contribution will be required from the EPH before the implementation of the livelihood activity.

Subsidized loan. No interest or any additional fees will be added to the capital provided. Moreover, this methodology ensures adaptability and flexibility of the loan services to the EPH’s needs and capacity to repay.

Regular loans.

NOTE The identified “ultra poor” EPH households do not have previous experience in livelihood activities, have no link with MFI services, are loan averse and have no capacity to repay. This subgroup will be referred to the poverty alleviation program of the government that provides subsidies and grants to support the households. Furthermore, the REBUIL Project will encourage other service providers to extend livelihood productive activities, e.g. vegetable and food production, income generating activities and saving mobilization initiatives to these households. The purpose is to provide this group with experience in undertaking livelihood activities that they can grow and enhance. The idea is to mainstream them and their activity by linking them to formal MFI facilities, so that they can have access to capital to enhance their undertaking. A critical assumption to this is that the ultra poor EPHs have developed their skills, gained experience, earned some income, and have saved a portion of said income to leverage against a loan.

51

2.3 Monitoring and Coaching

Depending on the needs, the EPH household / family members will be visited at least once a month, to do coaching and mentoring in relation to the implementation and status of livelihood activities, social support needs and in building the capacities of persons. Particular concerns that would be taken during these visits will be the status of the operation of the business, financial condition of the undertakings, and records keeping, among others.

3. Protecting the EPH Assets and Promoting Resiliency

General asset protection: This is a protection strategy that aims to prevent or mitigate asset dissipation of the households in case of abnormal circumstances, i.e. calamities and emergency situations. This could be in the form of the following:

3.1 Savings mobilization. A saving scheme will be implemented with every EPH. To facilitate the savings scheme, a service provider will be identified (for example EdM/SEED to provide the services of savings).

3.2 Enrollment of EPH to government health insurance, or PhilHealth. Philhealth is a health insurance program of the government that seeks to enroll every Filipinos under its coverage and provide them protection during times of medical and health needs, i.e. hospitalization. It is a common reality that many of the poor households in the country suffer economic setbacks when a member of the household, specially the head or the breadwinner, is stricken with illness and needs to be hospitalized. Economic resources are depleted and assets converted to cash to pay for hospitalization, medical services, and treatment regimen(s).

3.3 Develop household contingency plan (link with barangay DRR contingency plan)

B. Empowerment of Baras DPO

The project aims to strengthen the Baras Disabled People’s Organization, so that it successfully promotes and advocates for the rights and needs of persons with disabilities at the municipal and barangay levels. This is being co-implemented with Tahanang Walang Hagdanan (TWH)12 This will be

12 “Tahanang Walang Hagdanan,” literally translated as “House without Steps,” is a national NGO whose vision is to have a sustainable and economically viable social enterprise providing continuous holistic development to persons with disabilities and is an organization that adheres to the protection and rehabilitation of the environment.

52

undertaken through the following interventions.

1. Building and development of internal organization capacity (Organizational strengthening (self-assessment, specific trainings and coaching)

The REBUILD Project aims to support the DPO with tools and skills to become active in reformulating and implementing its action plan and undertaking resource mobilization activities. The project will support the capacity building of the DPO officers to strategically work for the recognition of the organization as partner in social development of the LGU. The project will also support the initiatives of the DPO to widen its membership base at the barangay levels, as well as equip its officers with appropriate capacities to implement their activities and advocacy promotions. The interventions will range from trainings, seminars, and job training, to monitoring visits, review meetings, exchange visits and individual coaching. In addition, the DPO will be capacitated specifically to advocate for persons with disabilities to be given opportunities to be productively engaged, either through employment or self-initiated productive undertaking, i.e. micro-business activities – buying and selling, repair and service provision, etc. Phases of organization development are as follows: a. Integration : community immersion b. Social investigation through interviews and focus group discussions c. Issue identification and analysis through organizational capacity

assessment, local participatory diagnosis, and awareness raising activities d. Strengthening and/or formation of the core group by reinforcement of the

eligibility of Baras DPO, capacity development trainings of Baras DPO officers (leadership, resource mobilization, networking and linkages), strengthening of internal rules and regulations, capacity development of peer educators (social and psychological aspect)

e. Mobilization and Implementation through identification and certification of persons with disabilities, development of persons with disabilities database, DPO membership recruitment, advocacy measures both at the barangay and municipal levels, and development of IEC materials, campaigns and forums

f. Coaching and mentoring by provision of support to barangay-based DPO g. Reflection and evaluation by strategizing based on gaps, shortfalls and

strength h. Formalization of community-based organizations (CBOs) through election

of barangay-based DPO officers and formation of peer educators.

2. Peer Support Development A peer support training to DPO will be conducted through Tahanang Walang Hagdanan. The peer support development will increase the DPO capacity to better understand their members’ needs and give appropriate personalized support to their members. Further, to mentor the process and progress of the

53

DPO peer support activities, a peer support facilitator of the project will be hired to ensure this activity. He/she will work closely with the Baras Federation of DPOs, Tahanang Walang Hagdanan and other service providers. 3. Support to DPO to develop an action plan to advocate for their rights, policy change and access to quality services

While the Local Government Code (LGC) contains clear provisions for the participation of grassroots organizations in local development planning, meaningful participation is rare. This situation is due notably to the still limited capacities of the DPO. This calls for capacity building activities which are as follows:

Identification of needs in advocacy Training on advocacy, coaching/support in conducting

advocacy promotions Training on local government system

The main objective is to include the DPO to be part of the local special bodies13 at the municipal level, specifically the Municipal Development Council, to bring forth the rights of persons with disabilities and be part of all development programs and activities – from planning to designing, monitoring, implementing and evaluating, in order to mainstream disability concerns in the municipal annual investment plan and comprehensive land use plan (CLUP)14.

3. Implementation of specific awareness campaign on human rights

The annual information campaigns will be set up in Baras to promote the following:

Rights of persons with disabilities and inclusive approach

Role of the representative organization

Project initiatives will target the general population through various media, posters, newspapers and sensitization sessions. The awareness campaign will collaborate with institutions and organizations such as the Department of Social Welfare and Development at municipal and provincial levels. The DPO will be part of the sensitization campaign and will receive adequate training on how to transfer the information. Its members will be capacitated to respond to enquiries on vulnerability and civic participation by concerned individuals and groups, being familiar with the communication tools and having improved their knowledge on disability.

13 Local special bodies created under Republic Act 7160 (local government code). The compositions of the local special bodies

are as follows: local development council, local school board, local health board and local peace in order. 14 CLUP is a five-year development plan developed by the Local Government Unit.... (cf. RA 7160 or the Local Government Code of the Philippines)

54

Tools will be adapted according to the specific needs of persons with disabilities which are as follows:

• IEC, media campaign, awareness events (i.e. during International Day of Persons with Disabilities)

Above mentioned intervention and activities are expected to result in the following:

• Increase of awareness level of DPO officers on their rights and role • Publication of accessible information, education and communication

(IEC) materials • Increase of participation of persons with disabilities in community

activities and other events

C. Promotion of Inclusive Society

A third major objective of the project is to make the capacities of Baras local authorities, service providers and other stakeholders better able to address the needs of persons with disabilities. The project is working particularly with the DPO. A significant number in the membership of the DPO are members who are also elderly and have disabilities. Identified children with disabilities are considered as members of the DPO. Elderly or senior citizens have their own organization under the senior citizens’ group. Many of the elderly people opt to join this group as this receives more, if not equal, privileges (with the persons with disabilities) and services from government programs, i.e. health insurance, social welfare insurance (where most of the members are retired workers and employees). Women-headed households are almost always targeted under the program under Gender and Development of the local government and other women’s groups. Thus, the DPO has been consciously taken as a more strategic target organization to represent the vulnerable groups under the project.

There are different types of services that together can form an inclusive system of services.

Mainstream services are regular services available in a community (education, health, housing, sports, transportation, and information) which are needed by the entire population, including persons with disabilities.

Specialized services are services that meet the specific needs of a person with disability (rehabilitation center, special housing, sheltered employment, early detection/intervention) which are needed to address sometimes the more complex and specific needs of persons with disabilities

55

Support services are services that assist a person to be able to participate in mainstream activities/services. The aim is to increase persons with disabilities’ self-determination and participation in the community. 15

Inclusive Contingency plan and Investment plan with the Local Government Unit of Baras

The approach to be undertaken to achieve this objective are as follows:

Assessment through initial mapping of social and livelihood service providers Identifying the service providers with mainstream services and

specialized services (if not inclusive) (stakeholders mapping/directory of services)

Six (6) service providers will be chosen by the project to make them more disability inclusive. The project will support active mainstream and specialized service providers that are particularly relevant to the target beneficiaries (based on their needs) and that are willing to become more inclusive

Information sharing to increase knowledge and create interest among service providers identified

Raising awareness among stakeholders to create consciousness on the issues confronting the persons with disabilities and their rights and needs to participate and be productive members of society, as well as engage the former as equal members of society. These include the livelihoods, municipal offices and human rights stakeholders based on the identified service providers

Training to improve practices of barangay and municipal staff

Carrying out advocacy work to change policies or to inform decisions on policymaking to service providers such as livelihoods and human rights stakeholders

Coaching to improve knowledge, attitudes, practices and policies targeting the whole organization including staff at different levels such as the barangays and municipal staff

15 SOURCE: Personalized social support: Thoughts, Methods and Tools in an Approach of Proximity Social Services

56

ANNEXES

REBUILD PROJECT

Household Rapid Survey

Form No. 1

Part A. Informed Consent

Date: _______________________________

HH Code: ___________________________

Interviewer: _________________________

Respondent/s’ Details:

Name of Respondent Age Civil

Status

Position in the

Household

Part B. Household Survey

1. Household General Information

1.1. List of Household Members

Name Position

in the HH Age Gender

Civil

Status

Highest

Educational

Attainment

Occupation/Business

(Primary Source of

Income) &

Employment Status

Monthly

Income(esti

mate in the

past 3

months)

We are conducting a Household Survey for gathering baseline information. Your voluntary

participation is requested so we may learn more about the condition of the community that will be

used as reference of the REBUILD Project. Our questionnaire will take approximately 10 to 15

minutes. The information will be treated with strict confidentiality. If you are willing to participate,

please sign this form as consent.

Thank you for your cooperation.

_________________________________

Signature over printed name of respondent

57

1.2. Household Address:

1.3. Status of Residency: Formal Informal

1.4. Type of Housing:

Owned, not mortgaged

Owned, mortgaged Monthly amortization: P ___________________

Rented Monthly rental: P ___________________

Rent free/Living with relatives/Care-taking

Others, please specify: _________________________

2. Eligibility

2.1. Vulnerability Classification (check the appropriate selection)

2.1.1. Do you have family member/s with disability/impairment? If yes, please answer table below:

Name of family member/s

with disability

Type of

impairment Classification

Cause/s of

disability

Full Partial

Full Partial

Full Partial

Full Partial

2.1.2. Do you have family members who are older persons?

Yes No

2.1.3. Is the head of household a single parent (woman)?

Yes No

House No. Lot No. Blk. No. Street Village Sitio/Purok

________, ________, _______, ___________________, __________________, ____________________,

Barangay Municipality Province

__________________, _________________________, ________________________________________

58

2.2. Vulnerability Assessment

2.2.1. Ability to perform roles and functions (to be answered by vulnerable members themselves)

2.2.2. Personal needs, adjustments and access to support services (to be answered by vulnerable

members)

Vulnerable

member

(refer to

legend of

list of HH

members)

Vulnerability

(i.e. PWD,

OP. Single

head

woman)

Does this

condition

affect

daily

activities?

What is the

MAJOR /or

Biggest

effect on

daily

activities (

see list)

Does this

condition

affect

ability to

work/enga

ge in self-

employme

nt

activities?

What is the

major

/biggest

effect on

employment

/self-

employment

(see list)

Does this

condition

affect ability

to deal with

calamities/

disasters

What is

the

major/bigg

est effect

of the

condition

in dealing

with

disaster

(see list)

Yes

No

Yes

No Yes

No

Yes

No

Yes

No Yes

No

Yes

No

Yes

No Yes

No

Yes

No

Yes

No Yes

No

Yes

No

Yes

No Yes

No

How do you cope

with the

challenges/difficulties

mentioned above?

What are the

types of support

needed to

address the

main

difficulties?

What are the types

of support that you

are currently

receiving? From

whom? Please

enumerate.

As PWD/ OP/ SP, are

you currently a member

of any organization? If

yes, please indicate.

How does this benefit

you as an individual?

1 1 1 1

2 2 2 2

3 3 3 3

59

2.2.3. What are the PRIMARY difficulties faced by the family due to having a member who is a PWD/

Older Person or being headed by a single parent? (to be answered by the family)

Economic

Social

Other

(write major/primary

difficulty. May be both)

Household expenses

Stigma

Expenses in caring for

vulnerable member

Exclusion from Services

Other economic related

Other social related

3. Household Economic Situation

3.1. Household Cash Flow (estimate for the past 12 months)

Outflow Description

Food

Health (including personal hygiene)

Physical Assets (including improvements)

Education

Utilities

Job related expenses

Leisure activities

Others

Total Outflow

Inflow Description

Waged employment

Self-employment

Others:

Total Inflow

Net Surplus/Shortage

60

3.2. Current Household Coping Mechanism

3.2.1. Source of Mitigating Measures

Family/ Relatives/ Friends Money Lender Sari-sari Store Gov’t Programs (4ps, etc.) NGO/ Private Sector Programs Cooperatives

MFIs/ GFIs Rural Banks Informal Savings and Credit Group Self-initiated Savings Others

3.2.2. Purpose of Mitigating Measures (most important)

Food Education Health (include personal hygiene) Others

3.2.3. Frequency of Mitigating Measures

Daily Weekly Bi-monthly Monthly

Quarterly Semi-annually Annually

4. External Support Accessed by Family

4.1. Are you receiving any assistance/support from other Organization?

Yes No

Name of Institutions ____________________________________________________________

Type of assistance/support ________________________________________________________

Date Started __________________________________________

How often are the assistance/ support?

______________________________________________________

Status of Project

Operating Temporary Closed Closed Others

61

Reasons/Remarks:

5. Potential Candidate

5.1. Potential Candidate Analysis Tool

Name Time

Willingness/Interest Counterpart Capacity/Gaps Yes No

Remarks/ Recommendations:

Recommended for candidate analysis Not recommended for candidate analysis

Remarks:

Reviewed by:

____________________________________

Signature over printed name of interviewer

__________________

Date

62

REBUILD PROJECT

Candidate Analysis

Form No. 2

Date: _______________________________

Reference Code: ______________________

Interviewer: __________________________

Part A. Candidate Background

1. Personal Information

Name: _________________________________________ Age: ______ Date of Birth: ________

Gender: ____________ Civil Status: ____________ Position in the Household:

__________________

Occupation: ______________ ____________________ Contact No.: ________________________

Address:

________________________________________________________________________________

2. Eligibility

2.1. What qualifies you to become a candidate EPH?

I am a person with disability (PWD) Disability: ______________________

I am an older person (OP)

I am a single parent (woman)

I am a member of a household with a PWD OP single parent head (woman)

Others, please specify __________________________________________________

3. Vulnerability (answer if candidate is PWD, OP or SP, otherwise proceed to 4)

3.1. Will your condition or situation as a PWD, OP or single parent affect your potential livelihood or

employment?

Yes No

If yes, how?

_____________________________________________________________________

If no, proceed to 4.

63

3.2. What type/s of support or assistance do you need (in relation to answer in 3.1 only) to be able

to start a livelihood activity/employment?

Personalized social support,

specify:________________________________________________

Remarks/Conclusion/Referral:

4. Candidate Literacy Information

4.1. Basic Language/Communication Skills

Filipino

Read Write Speak Understand

None Limited Working knowledge Proficient

None Limited Working knowledge Proficient

None Limited Working knowledge Proficient

None Limited Working knowledge Proficient

English

Read Write Speak Understand

None Limited Working knowledge Proficient

None Limited Working knowledge Proficient

None Limited Working knowledge Proficient

None Limited Working knowledge Proficient

4.2. Basic Arithmetic Skills

Counting Computation

None None

Limited Limited

Working knowledge Working knowledge

Proficient Proficient

64

5. Candidate Skills

5.1. Livelihood Skills

Cooking

Basic Electricity

Dressmaking

Driving

Selling

Food Processing

Basic Electronics

Others, please specify:

_________________________

Basic Plumbing

Mechanic

Massage

Bartending

Cosmetology/Hairdresser

House Painting

Masonry

Upholstery

Carpentry

Art Painting

Photography

Welding

Gardening/Landscaping

6. Trainings Attended

Type of Training Date Duration Certificates/Diploma/

License Obtained

7. Candidate Work Experience

7.1. Do you have experience/s in waged employment, either formal or informal? If yes, please provide

your work history below:

Description

Status of

Work/

Contract

Monthly

Income

Length of

Work Location

Reason/s for

leaving

7.2. Do you and/or your family have any prior experience in self-employment or running income

generating activities? If yes, please provide details below:

________________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________

65

7.3. Have you secured any social protection service/s in your previous employment/s? If yes, please

indicate:

Social security (SSS, GSIS)

Pag-IBIG Fund

PhilHealth

Medical Insurance Service Provider: ________________________

Life Insurance Service Provider: ________________________

Part B. Conceptualization of Livelihood Activity

8. Employment Preference

8.1. What kind of employment would you like to explore at present in order to generate income?

Nature Brief Description

Self-employment

Start-up

Enhancement

Waged employment

Uncertain at the moment, but

interested

Not interested

Please provide a justification for your answer:

8.2. What livelihood support do you think you need in order to succeed in this employment?

Financial, specify: _____________________________________________________________

Skills development, specify: _____________________________________________________

Others, specify: _______________________________________________________________

8.3. What type of support from your family or your community would help you to succeed more? Explain.

Monetary support

Material/physical support

Soft skills support

Mobility support

Counselling

Others: _______________________

66

8.4. What are you willing to do to secure a job or to be employed?

______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________

9. Family Involvement and Level of Motivation

9.1. What kind of support will the family provide to the candidate? Monetary support

Material/physical support

Soft skills support

Mobility support

Counselling

Others: ________________

9.2 In case of sickness or incapacitation of candidate, what will the family members do to

support the candidate? Why?

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

9.3. Will you allow the candidate to attend trainings (if necessary for the project?) Why?

Yes No Conditional

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

Part C. Quality of Life

10. Basic Needs Assessment

10.1. Economic Needs (Do you agree with the following statement: Household has sufficient cash

resources within the past year to cover expenses for…

Category Measure/Score

1 2 3 4

Household cash flow

(separate category) Strongly disagree Disagree Agree

Strongly

Agree

Food Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly

Agree

Health Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly

Agree

Education Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly

Agree

Physical Assets Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly

Agree

67

10.2. Social Needs (Do you agree with the following statements?)

Category Measure/Score

1 2 3 4

I am able to participate in

community activities

Strongly

disagree Disagree Agree

Strongly

Agree

I am satisfied/contented with my

life

Strongly

disagree Disagree Agree

Strongly

Agree

I have self-confidence Strongly

disagree Disagree Agree

Strongly

Agree

I feel that I belong to my

neighborhood and/or community

Strongly

disagree Disagree Agree

Strongly

Agree

Part D. Interviewer’s Note

11. Candidate Assessment

11.1. Facilitator’s recommendation

Qualified Not Qualified

Waged Employment

Self-Employment

For Training

Peer Training Community Vocational Training

Apprenticeship Vocational Training Center

For referral/social support

Social welfare Mental

Health and medical Rehabilitation

Others, please specify ____________________________________________

Notes/Remarks:

68

11.2. Documents to provide, if qualified:

Police Clearance Court Certificate

Barangay Clearance HOA Certificate

Certificate of Good Morale MSWD Certificate

Reviewed by:

___________________________________

Signature over Printed Name and Position

69

70

If you need further information or technical support, please contact:

Handicap International - Philippines Program 12D The Valero Tower, 122 Valero St.

(accessible entrance at 122 San Agustin St.) Salcedo Village, Makati City 1227

Tel: +63 (2) 812 6990, +63(0) 915 332 8690 Fax: +63 (2) 892 4583

mla-office@handicapinternational.ph

Project Site Office: Solem Building, 212 JP Rizal

Barangay Santiago Baras, Province of Rizal Tel: +63 (02) 234-5404

For more information and to download a copy of this publication please visit www.handicapinternational.ph