The Sendong/Washi Voucher
Experience
Implementation of cash voucher programming in Cagayan de Oro and Iligan City in Mindanao,
Philippines
(January –February 2012)
Cash Based ProgrammingDefinition:
Cash-based Programming (CBP) to address food insecurity/ hunger is an intervention with cash or
voucher, as opposed to “in-kind” based programming with objective to connect the food* insecure households with food* trader in order to fulfil their basic* needs.
(*) You can change food to
other need, but it has to be
specific
Basic Principle:
Cash Based Programming is to respond to problem of ‘access’ not ‘availability’, e.g. people can’t affordfood, where there is no shortage.
**Give people ‘purchasing power’, lets “the market” (traders) bring the goods/services to the people.
Voucher System vs Other ModesAreas of Comparison Traditional Goods
Handover
Voucher System Cash Handover
Systems
Canvass (supplier
selection)
Canvass and selection
of supplier
Canvass and
selection of
supplier/store
No need to canvass for
suppliers
Purchasing and
repacking
• Bulk Purchase and
Delivery of goods
to desired
warehouse or
place.
• Usually free
delivery. Direct
Payment after
billing.
• May incur losses
due to damages,
spoilage due to
handling and
storage.
• Need to repack the
goods to facilitate
distribution
• Need space for
• No need to
transfer goods
from supplier to
buyer’s
warehouse
• No losses and
spoilage
• No need for
warehouse
• No need to
transport goods
• No need to repack
goods
• No need to
purchase goods for
the people
• People can choose
what to buy with
their money
• People may abuse
their freedom of
choice and buy
goods
• No losses and
spoilage
• No need for
warehouse
• No need to
transport goods
• No need to repack
goods
Voucher System vs Other Modes
Areas of Comparison Traditional Goods
Handover
Voucher System Cash Handover
Systems
Distribution • Needs transport of
goods to
distribution site
(trucks)
• Needs space for
distribution
• High chances of
losses during
distribution
• More people
converge in one
place, may cause
traffic in the area,
high possibility of
accidents
• Easy to monitor as
the beneficiaries
are the actual
recipients
• Distribution within
store vicinity
• Have spaces for
people to converge
• Safer place for
people as the place
is usually designed
for a good number
of crowd
• Monitoring is
through
arrangements with
the store.
• Need for a secure
place for
distribution, if cold
cash
• More option on
distribution of cash
as channels are
available like smart
money, globe
wallet, Automatic
Teller machines,
etc.
• If through cash
channels, no
crowding, people
may get cash at
their own
convenience.
• Control is through
arrangements with
Voucher System vs Other Modes
Areas of Comparison Traditional Goods
Handover
Voucher System Cash Handover
Systems
People participation and
restoration of dignity
• People participation
in goods/needs
identification
• People share the
load by
volunteering/partici
pation in the
loading, repacking,
unloading and
distribution.
• People have to line
up for the goods as
they await for their
turn to receive them
as if close to beg
for it.
• People may have
freedom to choose
the goods as they
needed
• May prescribe
preferred goods to
ensure
appropriateness of
goods (no liquor
and cigarettes)
• Doesn’t have to line
up and receive
goods as they may
choose the goods
as if they are
buying it.
• People don’t have
to line up for the
hand over, thus
preserving their
dignity.
• Hard to monitor on
the spending and
appropriateness of
use of funds
• People participation
is more expressed
by their freedom to
choose the goods
they believe will
respond to their
needs
Voucher System vs Other Modes
Areas of Comparison Traditional Goods
Handover
Voucher System Cash Handover
Systems
Security Risks • High risk for
distribution of
food/goods as the
distribution team is
travelling with the
goods.
• Limited risk during
distribution of
vouchers as the
distribution may be
within the vicinity of
the store which is
usually have
several layers of
security measures.
• If distributing cold
cash, very high risk
for the safety of
distribution team.
• If distributing
through other
channels like Cash
Distribution Agents
(CDAs) less risks
for the
organization’s staff.
Staffing and manpower • Manpower intensive
from start to end.
• Manpower intensive
during verification
of beneficiaries and
the distribution of
voucher..
• Manpower intensive
during verification
of beneficiaries.
Fast Facts on Sendong/ Washi
• Tropical Storm Sendong was the most destructive tropical
cyclone for 2011 in the Philippines in terms of dead casualties
which reached up to 1,268
• 131,618 families/698,882 persons were affected
in 866 barangays (villages) 60 municipalities and 9 cities
in 13 provinces
• Cagayan de Oro City in Misamis Oriental province and Iligan City in Lanao del
Norte province had the most casualties
Why vouchers were used in this case
• Vouchers were used to have a mechanism that will ensure that the
provision will support the needs of the families while allowing them to
choose the items they need. By using vouchers, we are able to limit the use
of the provision for purchase of necessary commodities family needs and
not for use in vices.
Why use a big supplier such as Robinsons or Gaisano?
• Less chance of price increases happen to big traders as they are usually
monitored by government agencies. Price increases in local markets are the
usual result of increasing demands and decreasing availability of supply
which is the usual impact of disaster to small local traders.
• Wide range of goods available that gives options for affected population to
choose what they need to purchase.
• Ability to supply the huge volume of supplies needed by the beneficiaries
• Local traders are not expected to be affected as commodities that are
usually chosen by beneficiaries are those that they cannot get on wet/local
markets (such as local produce).
Advantages (as experienced)
1. Transactions were easier. Payment for the goods were also arranged (billing system) which makes transaction easier and monitoring of expenses and purchases easier. Only the vouchers needed to be paid so this eliminated the need to transact with various suppliers, WV only had to transact with the store.
2. No need to look for a storage area or warehouse for stocks since WVDF was purchasing vouchers from the supermarket.
3. No need for repacking which allowed the organization to cut down on costs in administration and incidental expenses usually incurred in mobilizing people for repacking and rental of space for warehouse.
Advantages
4. More supportive of the intention of restoring the dignity of beneficiaries . Beneficiaries are given power to choose and take what they need from the store, at their own pace without waiting for somebody to hand it over to them.
• Beneficiaries don’t have to line up for their goods, instead they can go directly to the
store with their voucher and take their desired goods as they needed and pay it
through the cashier using their vouchers.
Advantages
5. Provides more liberty to beneficiaries to
choose items in accordance to their needs as
against the pre-packed relief goods which may contain some items that they may not need at the moment. This also eliminates the typical scenario in traditional relief goods distribution where beneficiaries end up selling goods they do not really need for whatever amount just so they can convert it to cash to buy what they actually need.
Advantages
6. BETTER SECURITY- The distribution of vouchers was done inside the store premises which provides for several layers of security. The presence of security personnel and the decency that is provided by the place limits the incidence of mobbing and facilitates orderliness. Logistically and security wise, the voucher system in the Typhoon Washi response was quite effective.
Challenges1. There were some misplaced vouchers (which were recovered
later). This was due to the idea that the vouchers were not money but mere cards or piece of paper. Some vouchers were carelessly placed in unsafe places and were not secured and accounted for by the accountable person.
2. Its being handy yet high value and very liquid ( it is almost as good cash),makes it more vulnerable to theft. It could easily be concealed and taken without being noticed.
3. As it is as handy as money, it can easily be passed on and used in other places where it would be difficult for the organization to trace. It is very susceptible for an “inside job” type of theft.
4. There is a need to prepare a very strict control system, this
must be followed –should be with accountable persons
identified and roles defined
Recommendation
CUSTOMIZED DESIGN FOR VOUCHER Considering the arrangements made with the
store and the intention where the vouchers will
be used, a customized design particular to the
project will be useful as it is easier to monitor
and control. The probability of the voucher being
used for some other purpose will be lessened.
Top Related