Published by
REACH
Rural Economy Advancement through Cash-for-Work for Households Version 1.0
Imprint As a federally owned enterprise, we support the German Government in achieving its objectives in the field of international cooperation for sustainable development. Published by Deutsche Gesellschaft f端r Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH Registered offices Bonn and Eschborn, Germany T +49 228 44 60-0 (Bonn) T +49 61 96 79-0 (Eschborn) 2/F PDCP Building Rufino cor. Leviste Streets Salcedo Village, Makati Philippines T +63 2 892 9051 I: www.enrdph.org Responsible Dr. Walter Salzer Environment and Rural Development Program Program Director and Principal Advisor E: walter.salzer@giz.de Dr. Andreas Lange Chief Advisor and Local Governance Environment and Rural Development Program Email: andreas.lange@giz.de Source and Copyrights 息 2013 Deutsche Gesellschaft f端r Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH Authors Andreas Lange, Alexander U. Tabbada Editors Shaleh Antonio, Erlinda Dolatre Layout / Design Marifel T. Moyano Copyright on Photos The photos in this publication are owned by GIZ unless otherwise indicated on the photo. Maps The geographical maps are for information purposes only and do not constitute recognition under international law of boundaries and territories. GIZ does not guarantee in any way the current status, accuracy or completeness of the maps. All liability for any loss or damage arising directly or indirectly from their use is excluded. Printed and distributed by Deutsche Gesellschaft f端r Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH Place and date of publication Manila, Philippines April 2013 Disclaimer This document has been produced with the financial assistance of the European Commission. The views expressed herein should not be taken, in any way, to reflect the official opinion of the European Commission.
Contents Acronyms and abbreviations
4
Top reasons to use REACH
5
Summary
7
REACH The fight against hunger and poverty
9
Policy support and contributions
12
REACH goals and objectives Methods and tools Pillars for successful REACH Stakeholders’ roles
16 19 20 22
Overview of the four phases Phase 1. Program identification, institutional adaptation and guidelines formulation . Phase 2. Call for, review and approval of proposals Phase 3. Implementation and monitoring of projects Phase 4. Program review and closure
24 25 26 27 30
Emerging results and benefits
32
Lessons learned and success factors
38
Annexes Project costs
44
Comparison of average costs of labour-based rehabilitation or construction of rural infrastructures implemented by administration and by contract arrangement
45
CD-ROM contents • Cash-for-Work in Rural Development: A Guide for Local Government Units and Communities • Enhancement of Food Security in the Visayas (EFOS): Guidelines for the Food Security Fund • Cash-for-Work Video
3
Acronyms and abbreviations AFMA BFAR BSWM CfW CIS DA DoLE DSWD EFOS EU FA FMR GIZ ILO Kalahi- CIDDS LGU MoA NAPC NCI NGO NIA NRDMP PCA PCIC PhilMech PO REACH RTWG TFMT WFP
4
Agriculture and Fisheries Modernization Act Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources Bureau of Soil and Water Management Cash-for-Work Communal Irrigation System Department of Agriculture Department of Labor and Employment Department of Social Work and Development Enhancement of Food Security in the Visayas Project European Union Financing Agreement Farm-to-Market Road Deutsche Gesellschaft f端r Internationale Zusammenarbeit International Labour Organization Kapit-Bisig Laban sa Kahirapan- Comprehensive and Integrated Delivery of Social Services Local Government Unit Memorandum of Agreement National Anti-Poverty Commission National Convergence Initiative Non-government Organization National Irrigation Administration National Risk and Disaster Management Plan Philippine Coconut Authority Philippine Crop Insurance Corporation Philippine Center for Postharvest Development and Mechanization Peoples Organization Rural Economy Advancement through Cash-for-Work for Households Regional Technical Working Group Technical and Financial Monitoring Team Work and Financial Plan
Top reasons to use REACH REACH is a multi-benefit strategy that provides short-term employment opportunities for unskilled, poor and food-insecure households in labor-intensive projects such as construction or rehabilitation of rural infrastructures and environment and natural resource management initiatives. Entities and institutions aiming to contribute to or facilitate agriculture and rural development, sustainable and with wide-ranging benefits, are encouraged to consider using REACH in implementing projects for reasons such as the following:
1
REACH is an effective, financially efficient, gender-fair and transparent labor-based strategy to fight hunger and poverty in the short-and long-term, reduce the impacts of disasters and enhance adaptation to climate change.
2
REACH is a four-pronged approach to food security enhancement, poverty alleviation, disaster risk reduction and local empowerment. It provides immediate sources of income, supports agricultural production and environment management, and enables communities and households to participate in development activities.
3
REACH develops the capabilities of local governments to respond effectively to local needs with available internal and external resources. It promotes consultation, participation and counterpart funding, and develops the sense of ownership to development initiatives and outputs.
4
REACH creates and improves infrastructure facilities and other assets that contribute to the development and future income of the community as a whole. These assets generate additional benefits to poor households and communities and improve agricultural production and productivity
57
This knowledge product has been compiled in close cooperation with National Solid Waste Management Commission and is in line with DENR’s thrust to promote Solid Waste Management best practices to local governments and other stakeholders.
Summary Rural Economy Advancement through Cash-for-Work for Households (REACH) is a labour-based approach to implementation of rural infrastructure, environment and other agricultural and rural development projects. It was developed and tested together with the Department of AgricultureRegional Field Unit VIII under the Enhancement of Food Security in the Visayas (EFOS) Project between 2010 and 2012. Cash-for-Work is most appropriate when the use of heavy equipment is not needed or can be substituted with manual labour. Designed primarily for the unemployed and unskilled poor households and their communities, REACH offers the following advantages: • It utilizes local labour, particularly from poor and unskilled farm households, thus alleviating poverty and developing local skills for off-farm employment. • It gives the household options for the utilization of cash to respond to various needs and priorities. • It involves less cost per unit area of asset rehabilitated or established, thus creating savings and enabling the Local Government Unit to invest for more output. • Due to their involvement from needs identification to project implementation, local communities develop their sense of ownership, thus building their commitment to use rationally, safeguard, and maintain or expand the facility or asset. • Depending on the type, the constructed or rehabilitated asset contributes any or more of the following: increased food production and marketing, environmental protection and disaster risk reduction, and better delivery of basic services. • Investment (money) is retained in the locality, thus spurring and supporting economic activities. Cash-for-Work interventions provide short-and long-term economic and social benefits. Thus, it finds relevance in the country’s goal of eradicating hunger and poverty, which is also one of the Millennium Development Goals (MDG). It also supports the promotion of gender equality and empowerment of women by involving them in REACH processes and activities. With the active participation of local governments and communities in all project phases, national programs can be made more relevant and more responsive to local needs. The success of REACH is anchored on four pillars. First, the existence of a Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP) provides the needed development framework for priority development of the LGU. Second, clear project guidelines have to be in place in order to identify the right priorities, target groups and locations, as well as secure the ownership of the community. Third, functional and transparent Municipal Implementing Teams (MIT) take the responsibility to manage and implement the project on time and with quality. Fourth, the Regional Technical Working Group (TWG) and Technical and Financial Monitoring Team (TFMT), composed of members of the supporting agencies such as DA, BFAR, DENR and others, provide the technical backbone of each CfW intervention.
7
“With the rehabilitated farm-to-market road, our farmers in the upland barangays have organized themselves to establish a communal garden for high value vegetables and cutflowers. This is apart from their individual farms. They bring their products to the municipal market thus prompting the LGU to construct additional 64 stalls to accommodate them. This is adding to our local revenue collection as our farmers pay tax for using the facilities.� Aniano Bacor III, Municipal Engineer, Inopacan, Leyte Province
8
REACH The fight against hunger and poverty
Background About half of the 88 million Filipinos live in the rural areas where agriculture is the primary and often the only source of income for poor households. Data from the National Statistical Coordination Board (NSCB, 2009) shows that there were more than 23 million Filipinos who were considered poor and below the annual per capita poverty threshold of PhP6,841. The poor represent 26.5% of the population and about 80% of them live in the rural areas. The declining productivity and profitability of farming and fishing, lack of non-farm activities, and limited or no skills at all outside of farming and fishing are some of the causes of rural poverty. This situation is aggravated by the lack of a national spatial planning system for allocating and regulating land use that could properly address conflicts over the use of lands resulting from population pressure and increasing resource scarcity. This greatly contributes to the country’s inability to sufficiently provide for the population’s food demand. Rural Economy Advancement through Cash-for-Work for Households (REACH) is a multi-benefit and four-pronged strategy for poverty reduction, food security enhancement, disaster risk reduction and local empowerment. The core of this strategy is the Cash-for-Work approach, which can be used as a stop-gap measure to alleviate living conditions and address lack of cash to buy basic necessities, especially after disaster, calamity or conflict. Cash-for-Work is not new in the Philippines. It has already been used by some national agencies, such as the Department of Social Work and Development (DSWD), in their programs. Earlier, it was used by disaster relief projects funded by the International Labour Organization (ILO). Most projects undertaken via Cash-for-Work involve construction of temporary structures in response to post-disaster or calamity needs. Beneficiaries are mostly Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs). In some countries, refugees or victims of conflicts are the targets of Cash-for-Work.
9
REACH and the fight against hunger and poverty
A
Although this measure has been observed to be effective in stimulating local economies as an effect of circulation of cash, the results and initial impacts of the EFOS Project indicate its wider potentials and longer benefits. EFOS was a short-term response to food insecurity linked to poverty. It was co-funded by the European Union’s Food Facility and the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ), and was implemented from January 2010 to December 2011. REACH is based on the experiences of the GIZ and the Department of Agriculture - Regional Field Unit VIII in the implementation of 24 Cash-for-Work, seven Productivity Enhancement (PE) and crop insurance projects in the provinces of Leyte and Southern Leyte. Other partners also included DENR-VIII, BFAR-VIII and the Philippine Crop Insurance Corporation (PCIC), which provided technical expertise, training, material and other forms of support. EFOS used REACH as a strategy mainly to provide cash income to poor and unskilled farm and fisher folk households primarily to cushion the effects of increased prices of food commodities. This was done through small-scale farm infrastructure and environment projects funded by EFOS and implemented by local governments and NGOs. Through need-based planning, counterparting, community participation, and regular monitoring and feedbacking, EFOS impacted on household income, food security, environment and local capacities. Within its two years of implementation, EFOS was able to bring cash income to 12,225 households who rendered unskilled labor and benefitted 34,958 households from created or rehabilitated assets or facilities.
10
REACH and the fight against hunger and poverty
B
A
The Leyte Provincial Freshwater Fish Hatchery in Brgy. Libongao in Kananga provided 580,000 free tilapia fingerlings to 1154 fishpond farmers in Leyte in the project’s first five months of operation. The facility now produces 800,000 fingerlings annually benefitting 1500 farmers.
B
Provision of certified seeds, organic fertilizer, crop insurance subsidy and technical training to 1,650 rice farmers in five municipalities of Southern Leyte has helped increase rice farm productivity both in the short and long term, and has raised the interest of farmers to adopt the use of organic fertilizer.
C
435 households fall in line to collect their weekly wage from rehabilitating a 6-km farm-to-market road in Brgy Poblacion to Brgy. Kagingkingan in Anahawan, Southern Leyte through cash-for-wok. The rehabilitated road has improved farmer’s access to marketing centers.
C
Projects provided with support were included in the priorities and investment plans of local governments and were ensured to be technically, financially, socially, environmentally and legally sound prior to approval. They also included sustaining mechanisms and strategies. The participation of the community in project development and implementation processes was another important element of REACH as a means of deterring conflict, promoting the participation of women and developing local capacities for agriculture and rural development. The EFOS experience shows that REACH is an effective, efficient and integrative strategy to income enhancement, food security, disaster risk reduction and local empowerment. It creates benefits both in the short and long terms. REACH was jointly developed with partners of the Environment and Rural Development Program. In achieving sustainable natural resource management through the ridge-to-reef planning in the country, REACH complements other GIZ-supported knowledge products namely: • Sustainable Integrated Management and Planning for Local Government Ecosystems (SIMPLE) • Management of Resources on Forestlands through Enhanced Sustainable Technologies (MOREFORESTs) • Sustainable Coastal Resources (SCoRe) for the Philippines • Local Flood Early Warning Systems (LFEWS) • Integrated Solid Waste Management Facility with Sanitary Landfill and Resource Recovery Technologies (Eco-Center) 11
REACH Policy support and contributions
Poverty reduction and empowerment of the poor and vulnerable as priority areas by the government Over the past two decades, the Philippine government identified poverty reduction as one of its top priorities. Recognizing the major role played by agriculture in generating incomes and employment in rural areas, the government emphasized the development of this sector as an essential part of any poverty reduction program. Republic Act 8435, also known as the Agriculture and Fisheries Modernization Act of 1997 (AFMA), supports the government’s poverty reduction program. Among others, it aims to enhance profits and incomes in the agriculture and fisheries sectors, particularly the small farmers and fisherfolks, by ensuring equitable access to assets, resources and services, ensure the accessibility, availability and stable supply of food at all times, and promote people empowerment by strengthening people’s organizations, cooperatives and NGOs, and by establishing and improving mechanisms and processes for their participation in government decision making and implementation. AFMA has special concerns on rural non-farm employment and women, among other sectors of society. Parallel to the AFMA is Republic Act 8425, or the Social Reform and Poverty Alleviation Act (1997). This Act promotes the adoption of a system of public spending that is targeted towards the poor, especially for members of disadvantaged groups such as farmer-peasants, artisanal fisher folks, indigenous peoples and cultural communities, urban poor and women. On 13 May 2011, the President of the Philippines, Pres. Benigno Simeon C. Aquino III, issued Executive Order (EO) No. 43, defining five areas of priority in the development of the country. One of the reiterated priorities is poverty reduction and empowerment of the poor and vulnerable. This EO directs all departments and agencies of the government to orient their programs towards the priority areas given available government resources.
12
REACH Policy support and contributions
REACH’s contributions to poverty alleviation, community empowerment and disaster risk reduction With EO No. 43, REACH fits well with the government’s AFMA and the Poverty Alleviation Act as it gives priority to the poorest of the poor, both men and women, migrants and Indigenous Peoples. • By enhancing their skills, REACH prepares them for both farm and non-farm employment, thus adding to the incomes of their households. • When used in agriculture and fisheries projects, REACH contributes to increased food production, thereby increasing availability and improving access of the poor. REACH can be adopted as a strategy in the comprehensive National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Plan (NRDMP) as embodied in R.A. 10121, also known as the Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act of 2010. • One of the aims of the NRDMP is to strengthen the capacity of the national government and the local governments, together with partner stakeholders, to build the disaster resilience of communities and to institutionalize arrangements and measures for reducing disaster risks, including projected climate risks, and enhancing disaster preparedness and response capabilities at all levels. Along with this objective, REACH can be used in the rehabilitation of critical watershed and mangrove areas, and in the construction of sea walls, drainage systems and road side ditches as protection for rural, coastal and urban communities. Another vital national policy statement that provides the general framework for supporting the design and implementation of the REACH approach is the Philippine Development Plan (PDP) 2011-2016. The PDP calls for the implementation of effective and responsive social protection programs. Chapter 8 of the PDP for example advocates as one of its priority strategies the establishment of safety nets, which includes the implementation of an emergency response income support program through employment creation in distressed areas. 13
REACH Goals and objectives • Methods and tools • Pillars for success • Stakeholders’ roles • Overview of phases
15
REACH Goals and objectives Taking the EFOS Project as the model, the goals of REACH are enhanced food security, improved household income, communities being resilient to disaster and climate change, and empowered local governments and communities. Specifically, REACH aims to increase agricultural productivity, provide cash income, and contribute to disaster risk reduction and to adaptation to climate change through watershed, agroforestry system, mangrove and sea wall development and rehabilitation. It also promotes participation in governance and development processes, especially of the poor and vulnerable sectors.
Enhanced food security Investing in rural infrastructures and interventions such as irrigation systems, farm-to-market roads, post-harvest facilities, freshwater fish hatcheries and other agriculture and fishery facilities, mangrove rehabilitation and agroforestry establishment in watershed areas contributes to the
REACH Goals and objectives
enhancement of food security. Specifically, these interventions contribute to increasing the quantity of food produced and its accessibility to the populace especially to the poor. It also contributes to the enhancement of food quality through the reduction of damages during transport.
Improved household income Using REACH as an approach in the implementation of food securityenhancing interventions opens the opportunity for poor and unskilled households to earn cash income as payment for labour rendered. Cash income increases their access to food and enables them to respond to other household priority needs. Investing part of the earnings in incomegenerating activities such as farming can provide for longer term of household income.
“Families in our barangays are already planting vegetables as we now have a good road. We can now bring our products to the market by motorcycles without damage. Last cropping season, I earned a gross income of PhP7,000 from my cucumber planted in just 40 sq. meters with only PhP300 as investment. Thanks for the cash-for-work project. My husband also earned money for working for the project� Elizabeth Toong, an upland farmer, Malitbog, Southern Leyte
17
REACH Goals and objectives
Communities being resilient to disaster and climate change Agricultural and fishery production areas and infrastructures need to be safeguarded from calamities and effects of climate change in order to sustain food production and reduce expenditures on rehabilitation. Some measures include watershed rehabilitation and agroforestry establishment, mangrove rehabilitation, drainage construction and sea wall establishment. Involving the poor communities and households in these measures by REACH contributes to their awareness and capacity building towards resiliency.
Empowered local governments and communities Low-income local governments may be constrained by limited resources to exercise their governance responsibilities and functions. One of the effects could be limited participation of communities in governance processes and activities. Providing local governments with external assistance will “pumpprime� them and, through REACH, enable them to involve communities in development undertakings.
18
REACH Methods and tools
For successful implementation, REACH uses the following methods and tools: Group processes, which include community consultation for needs assessment and project identification, participatory selection of participantbeneficiaries, and participatory and intergroup monitoring Transparency promotion, such as accessing the newly launched online Full Disclosure Policy Portal (FDPP) of the Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG) Use of existing resources, such as CLUP in ensuring that the proposed intervention or project sits well in the priorities and long-term plans of the local government, data on Minimum Basic Needs (MBN) in the selection of poor households, and People’s Organizations (e.g. Farmers Association, Irrigators Association) as partners in project implementation and monitoring Plans, such as the project’s Monitoring Plan, which indicates, among others, what, when and how to monitor and Work and Financial Plan, which presents the target outputs and the activities and financial resources needed to attain them in a scheduled manner. Both serve as a guide for the TFMT in assessing the progress of implementation and providing feedback and recommendations. Memorandum of Agreement (MoA), which basically defines the purpose of the project and the roles and responsibilities of the concerned parties. A Financing Agreement (FA) may be needed to detail the local counterpart and the external fund support, the schedule of releases and the responsibilities of the local government in managing the fund. Internal evaluation and audit, which include a mid-term project review, interim financial audit, and Client Satisfaction Survey, which include sustainability concerns External evaluation during and after project implementation, and external audit after implementation.
19
Pillars of successful REACH
The success of REACH for agriculture and rural development is anchored on four pillars (Figure 1) , namely:
1
2
3
20
Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP), which, according to the Local Government Code of 1991, is an instrument that identifies the needs of the communities and translates them into achievable policies and plans, programs and projects. This pillar ensures the effective identification of projects that can respond to local needs and capacities. Likewise, it provides for a defined and available source of resources, especially financial, to implement identified projects. When a CLUP is still in the process, similar documents, such as development and annual investment plans, can be used as reference. Project guidelines that define the goal and objectives of REACH projects, the process of identifying projects to be implemented, the basic criteria and process of selecting participating poor households, and the roles and responsibilities of stakeholders even after project implementation. The guidelines have to be disseminated clearly, well understood and accepted by stakeholders, especially the community. This pillar enhances the awareness of stakeholders on the project, especially on their roles and responsibilities, thus building their commitment and sense of belongingness and ownership. A technical guidebook developed before the implementation of the EFOS Project and enhanced during implementation is available as part of the REACH knowledge product. Functional and transparent Municipal Implementing Team (MIT) led by the Local Chief Executive and composed of technical and administrative staff of the local government. It takes responsibility in managing project implementation and mobilizing human, financial and material resources of the local government. The MIT is tasked to ensure the timely and efficient implementation of the project’s Work and Financial Plan (WFP) and to serve as the link of the local government with external teams with stakes on the project. This pillar represents the commitment of the local government as a dependable partner in development.
Pillars of a successful REACH
Food security Poverty alleviation Disaster risk reduction Empowerment
1
2
3
4
Project Guidelines
Municipal Implementing Team
TWG / Technical & Financial Monitoring Team
Rural Economy Advancement through Cash-for-Work for Households (REACH)
Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP)
4
Regional Technical Working Group (TWG) and Technical and Financial Monitoring Team (TFMT) composed of technical and financial staff of the regional office/s of concerned NGA/s. The TWG is multi-sectoral. It represents the various areas of interventions (e.g., CIS, FMR, watershed, mangrove, fisheries, post-harvest, shoreline protection) and is tasked to review project proposals using approved guidelines and criteria, and recommend possible improvements. The TWG ensures that a project is technically sound, financially feasible and beneficial, socially and environmentally sound, gender-fair and conflict-sensitive. During the project implementation phase, the TWG is transformed into TFMT and tasked to regularly implement the physical and financial monitoring plan with the MIT based on the approved Work and Financial Plan (WFP). It is also the responsibility of the TFMT to provide feedback or recommendations immediately based on observations made. A separate Financial Monitoring Team (FMT) may be formed if deemed more effective. This pillar ensures the presence of external assistance to complement and strengthen local capabilities especially during critical points of project development and implementation.
Figure 1. The above figure illustrates how REACH is supported by the four pillars as it is used as a “bridge� for poor and unskilled households in attaining the goals of food security, poverty alleviation, disaster risk reduction and local empowerment.
21
REACH Stakeholders’ roles REACH is a triangulation of stakeholders composed of the local government, the lead and responsible implementer at the local level (the community), the active and participating beneficiary and partner and the national or donor agency (Figure 2). The synergy of the triangulation can be further increased by assistance provided by other organizations involved in rural development, international donors or NGOs. The roles of the stakeholders are indicated in Table 1.
Figure 2. Triangulation of the stakeholders and REACH’s multi-benefits
22
REACH Stakeholders’ roles
Table 1. Stakeholders’ roles Stakeholder National Agency or Program
Roles National agencies and commissions that use REACH in their programs include the Department of Agriculture and its bureaus and attached agencies, such as the Bureau of Soil and Water Management (BSWM), Philippine Center for Postharvest Development and Mechanization (PhilMech), Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR), Philippine Coconut Authority (PCA) and National Irrigation Administration (NIA), the DENR, the DSWD, and the NAPC. Other potential users include departments active in infrastructure construction and rehabilitation such as the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH), and the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) and others. 1. Use the REACH approach in implementing regular or special programs or projects through its regional offices 2. Tap and coordinate the projects and resources of relevant attached agencies and bureaus within its jurisdiction and mandate for their participation and support 3. Adapt and enhance units or committees at the national and regional levels that are tasked or involved in implementing selected projects for REACH 4. Establish partnership, complementation and coordination with other concerned agencies and commissions 5. When leading a multi-agency REACH project, lead the creation of an interagency committee to oversee overall implementation and approve or disapprove local government project proposals
Local Government Unit (local government)
1. Through community consultation, identify and prioritize the problems that need to be addressed through REACH together with the community 2. Prepare and submit a project proposal following approved guidelines 3. Facilitate the identification of beneficiaries of the project 4. Organize and support a Municipal Implementing Team, which will be responsible for the implementation of the approved project 5. Prepare financial and technical counterpart 6. Allocate funds for maintenance
Community
From project identification to implementation, the community, especially the target sectors, shall be involved in order to ensure relevance of the intervention to local needs. Their participation also develops their sense of ownership to the project even after completion. As one of the stakeholders, the community is encouraged to: 1. Participate in the identification of the project that can respond to the need or problem identified during community consultation 2. Participate in the formulation of guidelines and criteria to be used in the selection of beneficiaries and participants 3. Using agreed-upon guidelines and criteria, participate in the selection of beneficiaries or participants who will provide unskilled labor 4. Provide assistance to the MIT and to the TFMT 5. Provide maintenance support
Other Stakeholders
Other government agencies and local or international NGOs may also support and participate in REACH projects. They may also adopt the approach in implementing their own projects, national or local, especially those that are geared towards food security, poverty alleviation in the short and long term, climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction, and local empowerment. Their support may come in the form of project funds, technical and institutional or organizational assistance, materials, capacity building and others.
23
REACH Overview of phases
REACH The four phases and steps The steps involved in the various phases of a REACH program are outlined below:
1 Project selection, institutional adaptation, and issuance of guidelines and mechanics
1
STEP
2
STEP
3
STEP
24
Identification of program or project (on-going or for implementation) for REACH Issuance of REACH implementation guidelines and mechanics specifically for availing local governments (template available) Adaptation of existing program / project units at the national and regional levels to the requirements of REACH
2
3
Call for proposals, review and approval
1 Information dissemination and
STEP
call for project proposals (or expressions of interest) from local governments (proposal templates available)
Implementation and monitoring of projects
1
Signing of agreements on approved projects
2
Community preparatory meeting
3
Downloading of funds and implementation of approved projects following approved guidelines
4
Monitoring, evaluation and internal audit (refer to toolkit)
STEP
STEP
STEP
Review, evaluation
approval 2 and / disapproval
STEP
of proposals (evaluation template available)
STEP
REACH Overview of phases
1 Program or project selection, institutional adaptation and formulation of implementing guidelines
4 Project review and closure
1 2 3
STEP
STEP
STEP
Client Satisfaction Survey External audit Project review and closure
The process starts with the identification of a national program or project where REACH can be adopted as an approach in implementing such action. It could be a regular or special program or project of the agency or commission. Implementing guidelines and mechanics specific to the REACH program have to be developed, and the process can be aided by successful and promising experiences. Some of such experiences are the disaster relief projects supported by the ILO, the Cash-for-Work program of the DSWD, and the EFOS Project of GIZ and DA. Existing divisions or units of the agency and its regional offices can be enhanced to adapt to the requirements of the REACH program, such as technical and administrative support and regular monitoring of implementation at the local government level. The REACH project may be a partnership of two or more agencies with complementary or similar goals and objectives. In such case, an interagency agreement may be needed.
25
REACH Overview of phases
2 Call for proposals, review and approval This phase brings the REACH approach to the target municipal levels through the agency’s regional offices. Information dissemination is conducted at the provincial level for potential participating municipal local governments. The information dissemination activity serves as a venue for call for project proposals. Categories Proposals can be generally categorized by type as follows: 1. Rural infrastructure establishment and rehabilitation – examples: CIS, FMR, on-farm water conservation systems (e.g., small farm reservoir, shallow tube well), potable water supply, composting facilities, post-harvest facilities 2. Natural resource management – examples: watershed rehabilitation, mangrove rehabilitation, shoreline protection, marine protected area enhancement Selection criteria Project proposals are evaluated based on the following criteria: 1. Eligibility of proponent local government
2. Eligibility of proposal
A
Income classification
A
Basis in selecting proposed project and project area (e.g., CLUP, AIP)
B
Ability to provide counterpart funds and manpower
B
Proposed direct and indirect beneficiaries
C
Experience in implementing similar projects
C
Criteria in identifying poor and unskilled workers
D
Capability to finish project on time
D
Measures to ensure participation of women
E
Technical soundness
F
Legal soundness
G
Maintenance/sustainability mechanisms
Project proposals from local governments are reviewed by the designated unit of the regional office which may be a Technical Working Group (TWG). The TWG recommends some improvements on the proposal and may even provide technical assistance to enhance it. Qualified proposals are forwarded to the appropriate committee for selection and eventual approval or disapproval.
26
REACH Overview of phases
3 Implementation and monitoring of projects Agreement Upon approval of a project, an agreement is formalized between the agency and the local government. This can be through a Memorandum of Agreement and/or with a Financing Agreement following an approved Work and Financial Plan (WFP) of the project. Timely downloading of funds based on the WFP is critical especially when implementation is affected by weather conditions and seasonality of labour. Community preparatory meeting As soon as the local government receives advance information on the approval of its proposed project, a meeting with the community can be organized even prior to the signing of agreements. This meeting promotes transparency of operations and empowers the community as participants in governance and development. Generally, the meeting aims to: 1. Inform the community of the details of the project, including its potential benefits 2. Reach an agreement on the criteria in selecting participants or beneficiaries, including women 3. Prepare a list of targeted beneficiaries 4. Collect inputs on work procedures, arrangements and payment 5. Discuss monitoring structure and possible tasks and responsibilities Targeting of households Even before the formalizing of the agreement, the local government can already conduct the process of targeting households to participate in the REACH project. Generally, as the projects are set up in varying contexts, a fixed set of criteria may not be specified as opted by the EFOS Project. Yet, it mandated that the target beneficiaries should come from low-income households in the proposed project’s influence area. Moreover, aspects such as gender sensitivity and equal opportunity should be considered while reaching a decision. The criteria for the selection of beneficiaries can be set up according to a community-based targeting system. Thus, the criteria and list of beneficiaries should be based on those suggested by the community during the consultation or preparatory meeting. This approach of involving the community actively into the beneficiary identification process is highly participatory. Overall, transparency of the selection process must be assured.
27
REACH Overview of phases
3
Implementation and monitoring of projects
Setting up of community labour systems Implementing a REACH project requires a hierarchical organizational structure. If the project implementation area is vast or requires different sites (e.g., along a road or spread along the shore or at different rice fields), the formation of working groups is advisable, with each composed of a maximum of 25 members. A group leader should be responsible for the monitoring of the attendance and work performance of the members. The group leader works under the direct supervision of a Site Supervisor. Under this type of arrangement, work can go simultaneously in several sites and overseen by an overall Area Supervisor, who is familiar with all the aspects of the project. An example of this type of structure is shown in the following diagram.
Area Supervisor Responsible for multiple activity sites
Site Supervisor Responsible for four work groups
Group Leader
Group Leader
Group Leader
Group Leader
Work Group Maximum = 25
Work Group Maximum = 25
Work Group Maximum = 25
Work Group Maximum = 25
To design and implement a REACH-based program or project, a local government is required to guarantee the deployment of a substantial number of personnel to ensure timely and effective project implementation. For fifth and sixth class municipalities where manpower and financial resources are limited and the number of poor and vulnerable households are significant, this could pose a major challenge. To address this concern, partner local government units under the EFOS Project had deployed some of thei technical staff to serve as overall and Site Supervisors. To manage works at the site, they secured the support and services of local or purok leaders who were given the task to manage and oversee the performance of workers.
28
REACH Overview of phases
3
Implementation and monitoring of projects
“Our participation in the rehabilitation of our watershed has developed our skills in agroforestry establishment. Now our association is being contracted by the Energy Development Corporation to plant fruit trees in the watersheds. This is through the Tree for Food Project of the Binhi Program of the Lopez Group of Companies. Our first contract involved 30 hectares and we were paid PhP198,000 for our labor. A second contract covering 20 hectares more is on-going. Our association is now earning money and we are investing it in other income-generating projects.� Uldarico Navarro, President, Mahawan Farmers Association, Kananga, Leyte Province
Monitoring of labor outputs and payment system A task-based system may be most appropriate for REACH projects wherein the participants receive their remuneration based on the achievement of agreed physical outputs using agreed productivity norms or work standards. This system works to the advantage of both the contracting parties as it guarantees the local government of the achievement of agreed deliverables on one hand, and maximizes income and time flexibility of the workers on the other. It is essential to note that wage payments be correct, timely and regular. The local government should ensure that mechanisms are put in place that guarantee the timely availability of project funds and the establishment of a consensus with the community regarding work standards and rates. In general, labour wages are paid every 15th and 30th day of the month. However, a departure from this arrangement may be considered subject to a consensus reached by the community and the local government. Prior to the issuance of wage payments, the site supervisors, tasked to oversee the operational supervision of the project, should maintain and regularly update the attendance record and payroll system as basis for the payment of wages. Project monitoring by the TFMT During this phase, the TWG changes its role from reviewing proposals to monitoring project implementation. At this point, it is transformed into a TFMT. The familiarity of the TWG on the details of the project makes monitoring easier by the now-TFMT. For purposes of helping the local government in managing project funds, regular financial monitoring may be done by the TFMT. This is apart from the regular auditing activities conducted by the Commission on Audit (COA). Additional information relevant to this phase can be found at the EFOS Cash-for-Work Implementation Manual developed by the GIZ-EnRD Program.
29
REACH Overview of phases
4 Program review and closure At the end of the project, the local government submits a report on accomplishments following a template. To determine the level of satisfaction of the stakeholders on a project, especially the poor household beneficiaries, a Client Satisfaction Survey (CSS) would be conducted by an independent body. The CSS tool used by the GIZ-Environment and Rural Development Program is an example of an instrument for this purpose. A pre-closure audit will help in the process of closing the books of the REACH program. The physical and financial accomplishments, including early impacts as indicated in reports and reflected by CSS results, serve as inputs to the planning of possible next steps after the program. The four phases of REACH are illustrated in Figure 3. The illustration suggests that REACH can be a continuing strategy, deriving lessons from previous programs or projects for further enhancement.
Figure 3. REACH can be a continuing strategy, deriving lessons from previous programs or projects for further enhancement.
30
REACH Emerging results • Lessons learned and success factors
31
REACH Emerging results and benefits After two years of implementation, the EFOS Project was able to achieve the following physical accomplishments through REACH:
The rehabilitation of seven communal irrigation systems in Saint Bernard, Southern Leyte has improved the water services in the area and provided cash income to 880 households. Farmers can now plant 2-3 times a year with a rice production increase of 20% per season.
• 64 km of farm-to-market roads rehabilitated • 51.6 km of road canals constructed • 272 lineal meters of road cross drains installed • 64 meters of sea wall constructed • 10,154 lineal meters of irrigation canals rehabilitated • 260 hectares of watersheds rehabilitated • 123 hectares of mangrove areas rehabilitated • 79 hectares of marine protected area enhanced • 1,049 hectares of Riceland irrigated by rehabilitated communal irrigation systems • 7,726 meters of urban waterways cleared • 1 small-scale and 1 large-scale composting facilities established • 18 cu. m of community drinking water reservoirs constructed and 12 cu. m rehabilitated • 600 meters of new domestic water pipes installed and 1,600 meters rehabilitated The various REACH projects implemented are also giving a wide range of additional economic, social and environmental benefits to participating households, communities and local governments.
Benefits to households and communities Aside from the immediate cash income received as payment for their labour, participating households will enjoy the following benefits: Skills enhancement. Skills in masonry, agroforestry, high value vegetables and cutflower production, and other works gained during participation in REACH are enabling poor farmers to participate as hired workers or contractors in projects of local governments, private contractors and national agencies. Others are using their acquired skills in their individual and communal farms. Their skills are also helping them to implement other similar projects of local governments and NGAs at ease. These skills were transferred by foremen who were hired by local governments and by trainers from DA and DENR. The following are some of the cases: a) Some of the participants in the rehabilitation of a farm-to-market road in Anahawan, Southern Leyte Province are now being hired by private contractors to do masonry works.
32
REACH Emerging results and benefits
b) In Inopacan, Leyte Province, the local government is also hiring some of the participants of the farm-to-market road rehabilitation project for its small infrastructure projects. c) A group of farmers led by Dan Balmes who participated in the rehabilitation of communal irrigation systems in St. Bernard, Southern Leyte, have been contracted by the Department of Labor and Employment (DoLE) for the rehabilitation of an irrigation system in the said municipality. d) The Mahawan Farmers Association in Kananga, Leyte Province, signed a contract in November 2011 with the Energy Development Corporation of the Lopez Group of Companies to establish fruit tree-based agroforestry systems in 50 hectares of the watersheds of the municipality. This became possible because the association members have been trained under the Cash-for-Work project. Thirty-five women members of the Mahawan Farmers Association, representing the same number of poor households, were hired by the Kananga local government under its Gender and Development Program from 28 November to 29 December 2012. Each received PhP150 per day for watershed rehabilitation and maintenance work. e) The experience of the communities of Hindang, Leyte Province, is resulting to the smooth implementation of the Kalahi-CIDDS Cash-for-Work project of the DSWD, which came after the EFOS Project.
Š Photo by Jacqueline Hernandez
Š Photo by Jacqueline Hernandez
Production increase. With rehabilitated FMRs, farmers are motivated to plant vegetables and other crops, and bring their products to the market with less cost and damage. These are evidenced by the planting of vegetables and other crops in areas where these were not traditionally planted at all. These observations are common along the rehabilitated roads in Malitbog and Anahawan in Southern Leyte Province, and in Inopacan, Leyte Province. In the uplands of Inopacan, woman-farmer Erlinda Baliong leads 22 other former REACH participants in their Communal Livelihood Project. They produce high value vegetables (e.g. tomatoes, bitter gourd and sweet pepper)
33
REACH Emerging results and benefits
and cutflowers (chrysanthemum, etc.) from their 2,500 sq.m. farm and supply the local market with an average of 2.5 metric tons of assorted vegetables and cutflowers every Friday. The group has contracted a jeepney to regularly transport their products. This shows how improved road networks help farmers to increase production and sales, while at the same time, cash income has improved. Rice production has increased by at least 25 percent with the rehabilitated communal irrigation systems. Members of the Irrigators Association of St. Bernard have reported an increase in their rice production from 80 to 115 cavans per hectare with their rehabilitated irrigation systems. In fact, three cropping seasons in a year is now possible for the members of the Calingatnan Farmers Association.
© Photo by Jacqueline Hernandez
Improvement of marketing. Motorcycles and other motorized vehicles are now transporting passengers and farm products where transport was possible only on foot or with farm animals and animal-drawn sleds. In Anahawan town, coconut farmer Bonifacio Escalaña, and father of REACH participant Tirso Escalaña, used to pay PhP50 for every sack of copra transported to the town proper by way of an animal-drawn sled. With motorcycles, he is now paying only PhP25 per sack. When selling big quantities, he just sends a text message from his cellular phone to the buyer, and soon, a truck arrives to get his produce. High school and college students in Barangay San Juan in Baybay City, Leyte Province, no longer walk their way to school for hours as the number of motorcycles and jeepneys has increased after the rehabilitation of their farm-to-market road. These motorized vehicles, including cargo trucks, are also transporting vegetables and copra to the local market. 34
“After the rehabilitation of our Communal Irrigation System, conflicts on the use of water even among relatives are already a thing of the past.” Demetrio Burlasa, President, Calingatnan Farmers Association, San Pedro, Albuera, Leyte Province
Reduction of conflicts. Conflicts among households arising from the use of limited water are now a thing of the past with the rehabilitated irrigation systems. Before the rehabilitation of their communal irrigation system, farmers in Sitio Calingatnan in Barangay San Pedro, Albuera, Leyte Province, have to find ways to access the very limited water from their system’s earth canals. This situation has been resulting to conflicts even among relatives as confirmed by the records of the local government. After rehabilitation, conflict on water no longer happens.
Protective cultivation has improved farm-household’s profitability through the production of high quality vegetables the whole year round through the Visayas State University’s (VSU) “techno-demonstration”
Income increase. The cash received by the households enabled them to buy food and other basic needs such as clothing, medicine and education. Some invested part of the income for seeds and fertilizer, and other incomegenerating endeavours. Ronald Caysido, one of the participants in the rehabilitation of a watershed in Babatngon, Leyte Province, combined his earnings from the REACH project and from the earlier CBFM project of GIZ-EnRD, and invested in a pedalled tricycle (or pedicab), which he is now operating for income. REACH household beneficiaries received an average of PhP2,700 each. As remarked by the President of a People’s Organization, the amount may be small, but to them, it was significant. 35
REACH Emerging results and benefits
Benefits to local governments 1. REACH is now used by local governments to implement small infra projects where use of heavy equipment is not needed, thereby reducing their cost per unit of output or increasing their output with a given budget, and providing more employment to community members. 2. Improved drainage systems in roads reduce maintenance cost as they prevent damage caused by water, for instance. In addition, barangays mobilize communities to conduct regular maintenance work due to their ownership of the project, so local governments are now able to allocate maintenance for other structures. 3. Rehabilitated structures that are directly linked to agricultural production and marketing like FMRs allow local governments to develop and implement short-and long-term agricultural development plans. 4. Local governments have developed their confidence in their capability and skill to design and implement REACH and other projects supported by NGAs and international donors. Like the experience of its communities, the local government of Hindang, Leyte Province, is implementing smoothly a Cash-for-Work Project of the DSWD. 5. With rehabilitated FMRs, the delivery of basic services by the local government and other government offices such as agricultural extension, health services and others has improved. In Javier, Leyte Province, the rehabilitated FMR facilitated the electrification of the inner barangays. 6. The marketing of more farm products as facilitated by improved roads is resulting to an increase in local tax collection. The local government of Inopacan, Leyte Province, is expanding its market facilities to accommodate the increasing agricultural products brought for sale especially from farms benefited by the REACH project. Farmers pay fees for their use, thus adding to local income. 7. Food security and investment programs of local governments are now linked to their land use plans, thus integrating them to their respective overall development plans. As done by the local government of Barugo, Leyte Province, their rice production program is linked to the development of post-harvest and marketing facilities, and to the rehabilitation of farm-tomarket roads.
Benefits to the community-at-large 1. The availability of and access to food have increased as a result of improved irrigation systems and farm-to-market roads. The rehabilitated roads are also enabling vendors of fish and other food items to reach remote communities. 2. Economic activities in the locality increased during and after REACH project implementation. Small stores opened and abandoned ones were re-opened. More grocery items were displayed for sale. 3. REACH-implemented watershed and mangrove rehabilitation and shoreline protection projects contribute to climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction. The participants in the watershed rehabilitation project in Babatngon are contributing to the National Greening Program. Using the skill they acquired in nursery management, they supply tree seedlings to the 36
REACH Emerging results and benefits
Program. The foot trail they developed through REACH is also helping the members of the Bantay Gubat (Forest Protection Team) in patrolling the watershed. The team was able to apprehend a number of timber poachers whose activities contribute to watershed degradation. The upland community in Kananga believes that there is an urgent need to return the vegetative cover of the Mahawan Watershed. In support of this need, their association is investing their income from contracts after the EFOS in rehabilitating coconut and abaca farms of households-inneed under special arrangements. During the Client Satisfaction Survey, which was conducted after EFOS Project implementation, participants from the various mangrove greenbelt establishment and rehabilitation projects indicated confidence that their communities and mangrove areas are now ensured of protection from disasters.
Š Photo by Jacqueline Hernandez
Coastal communities in Liloan, Southern Leyte, now sleep soundly even during high tides with the sea wall that they constructed through REACH. Before the structure, each of the barangays affected by high tides would report an average of PhP200,000 as cost of damages to coconuts and properties. According to the Municipal Engineer, the local government is no longer receiving similar reports. 4. Rehabilitated irrigation systems counterbalance floods and drought periods. The Municipal Engineer of St. Bernard, Southern Leyte, reported that their rehabilitated communal irrigation systems are contributing to the control of floods especially in agricultural areas. In Albuera town, limited water during dry periods can still supply efficiently the needs of the irrigated rice farms with the concreted distribution canals.
Benefits to NGAs and Programs 1. REACH serves as an avenue for NGAs to reach poor communities. For example, the DA, whose extension function was devolved to local governments, can bring its farm-to-market roads, small-scale irrigation, coconut farming system improvement, post-harvest facility assistance and other projects that can be implemented using unskilled community labour. 2. REACH provides a venue for NGAs for better assessment and understanding of the capabilities and the short-and long-term needs of local governments, which may be of help in national program planning.
37
REACH Lessons learned and success factors
Cash-for-Work, which is the core of REACH, has been popularly used for post-calamity interventions. The EFOS Project experience shows that REACH can be used for poverty reduction, food security enhancement and disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation projects. As it responds to both short-and long-term goals, it also serves as a venue for partnerships and complementation of resources among agencies and institutions. A REACH project may be national, regional or local in scope. It can also be adopted by local governments for their own projects. The success of a REACH project, especially when implemented or supported by a national agency, depends on the following factors:
Community participation Involving the community in all phases of an intervention or undertaking is like planting the seed of success. The participation of the community starts even prior to the planning of a REACH intervention when the local government has been conducting community consultations as part of its planning processes when local development agenda are determined. Through consultations, communities participate in the identification of an intervention that can respond to their needs, especially, but not exclusively, of the present. It is also through consultations that they get involved in determining the criteria to be used in selecting cash-for-work participants and, in the selection process, applying the criteria prior to project implementation. Through their participation, transparency is promoted, and political influences and the so-called practice of “favouritism� are avoided. Community participation is also important during the implementation process. Unskilled labour provided by the poorer segment of the community is needed to accomplish manual work required. Community participation is thus essential during the planning, pre-implementation and implementation processes of REACH.
Relevance of intervention to local needs REACH is a response to a pre-identified need, especially those of the poorer segment of the community. Such need is reflected as one of the development
38
REACH Lessons learned and success factors
© Photo by Jacqueline Hernandez
“We are now ready to promote and support coconut-based multi-storey cropping with our rehabilitated farm-to-market roads. This enables us to cushion the effects of low prices, if any, on our commodities, like copra.” Johanes Alfafaro, Municipal Administrator, Javier, Leyte Province
agenda or priorities that an approved local development or investment plan is responding to. Proper needs identification and selection of appropriate intervention give relevance of the project to local needs, especially of the poorer segment of society. With CLUP or any similar document as guide, a REACH project that can respond to present and future needs can be identified easily.
Proper selection of participants and beneficiaries With limited scope and budget, a REACH project may not be able to accommodate all of the poor households in the community. An effective and transparent methodology and process of selection developed with and participated in by the community zeroes in to the most needy and unskilled household.
39
Transparency of operation During this age of vigilance and social networking, transparency of operation should be an aim especially when activities involve money and local political leadership. This is to ensure a smooth flow of funds, in particular and of the project in general. Community consultations, information dissemination and community involvement in project processes are some of the doors to transparency. EFOS experiences show that the use of big signboards that indicate physical and financial details of the project including contact numbers of “hotlines� was effective. Complaints and inquiries in text messages and calls were received through the hotlines.
Counterparting Although the low-income municipalities are the main targets of REACH, counterparting is a requirement. As this encourages local governments to utilize their financial, human and physical resources, this arrangement also develops the sense of ownership to the project and the asset that results from it, thus building up also the sense of responsibility to maintain and sustain it. The EFOS experience shows that a 90-10 cost sharing arrangement, where the local government contributes 10 percent of the total project cost, enabled 4th and 5th class municipalities to implement a project costing of up to PhP5 million. The local government counterpart is sourced from its approved Annual Investment Plan (AIP). 40
REACH Lessons learned and success factors
During project planning and implementation, local governments mobilize their existing Municipal Implementing Teams (MIT), which were organized and capacitated to implement other GIZEnRD projects. The MIT also serves as the contact point and counterpart of the Technical and Financial Monitoring Team (TFMT).
Regular monitoring with external support REACH projects are implemented over a short period of time, usually 6-8 months. Following a project’s Work and Financial Plan is therefore critical especially when avoiding the effects of bad weather, especially heavy rains. A monthly monitoring by the Technical and Financial Monitoring Team helps solve implementation problems as it provides immediate feedback or recommendation through the MIT. Follow-up visits are done especially when technical support is needed. Local governments have limited manpower resources to ensure successful implementation of their regular and special projects. Assisting them through regular monitoring cum timely feedback based on clear Project Work and Financial Plan helps in ensuring success. The lessons derived during and after the implementation of EFOS can be summed up in a diagram. REACH is a work in progress and is open for further improvements through experiences in actual implementation.
41
REACH Annexes
43
Annex 1:
Project costs
The development and implementation of an individual REACH Project involve the following estimated costs: Cost items
Item
Cost (PhP)
Source of fund
Preparatory Community consultation
Snacks/food
3,000
LGU
Pre-engineering/data collection and processing
Transportation, office supplies
5,000
LGU
Proposal development
Office supplies, transportation, communication
14,000
LGU
Sub-total
22,000
Implementation, monitoring and post-implementation Community meeting/orientation
Food, transportation
2,000
LGU
Technical and financial monitoring
Allowances, transportation
20,000
NGA
Internal financial audit
Transportation, office supplies
3,000
NGA
Client Satisfaction Survey
Transportation, office supplies, food
7,000
NGA
Sub-total
32,000 Cost of project
Materials, labor, others
(Dependent on the type of project)
Up to 4,000,000
NGA: 90%; LGU: 10%
(at least 60% for labour and up to 40% for materials)
Sub-total
TOTAL
4,000,000 4,054,000 NGA: 3,630,000 (90%) LGU: 424,000 (10%)
The cost depends on the type and scope of the project. Details of costs as reflected in Work and Financial Plans of selected projects funded by EFOS can be found in the Annex section of the CfW Manual. Average costs of various types of infrastructure projects are also reflected in the same section, including comparison with costs when implemented by a contractor.
44
Annex 2.
Comparison of average costs of labour-based rehabilitation or construction of rural infrastructures implemented by administration and by contract arrangement.
By Administration (REACH/EFOS 2010-2011) Project Cost per km (PhP)
Cost per l. Meter (PhP)
By Contract Cost per km (PhP)
Cost per l. Meter (PhP)
1. Rehabilitation of farm-to-market road a) Re-gravelling of road
680,000.00
680.00
848,000.00
848.00
2,866,039.00
2,866.04
5,109,000.00
5,109.00
2. Digging of drainage canal
555,147.00
555.15
1,960,000.00
1,960.00
3. Rehabilitation of communal irrigation system
45,000.00*
4.50**
80,000.00*
8.00**
7,815,000.00
7,815.00
8,125,000.00
8,125.00
b) Concrete paving of existing gravel road
4. Construction of seawall (shoreline protection)
* Cost per hectare ** Cost per sq.meter NOTE: All costs include project supervision, equipment utilization and pre-engineering activities.
45
Deutsche Gesellschaft f端r Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH Registered offices Bonn and Eschborn, Germany 2B PDCP Bank Center, V.A. Rufino corner L..P. Leviste Sts. Salcedo Village, Makati City, Philippines Contact Dr. Walter Salzer Program Director and Principal Advisor Environment and Rural Development Program Email: walter.salzer@giz.de Dr. Andreas Lange Chief Advisor and Local Governance Environment and Rural Development Program Email: andreas.lange@giz.de Tel. +63 2 892 9051 Fax +62 2 892 3374 www.enrdph.org