Annex 4

SOMIS
Social Development Management Information System

[Background] [Workshop ] [Areas of Concern ] [Data Sources]

Annexes [1] [2] [3] [4]

Annex 4

DAY 2

SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM (SOMIS)
EDSA Shangri-LA Plaza, Pasig City
23 July 1999

Opened at 9.30 a.m. by Director Erlinda M. Capones
Recap by OIC AD Arlene Ruiz
Indicators

Core indicators were identified to gauge the country’s performance against regional and national targets. Indicators and targets as contained in the Medium-Term Philippine Development Plan (MTPDP)1999-2004, and the Country Paper of Dr. Celia Reyes and the paper of Dr. Paul Cheung were used as starting point for the discussion.
During the MC-IHDC Workshop held last December 1998, designations of focal agencies for each of the 11 major areas of concern were already done. This was also adopted during the workshop.

	Areas of Concern	Issues	Recommendations	Lead Agency

1.	Poverty Alleviation	Need for equity-laden considerations Difficulty of disaggregating data by rural/urban because of definition problem. The definition of urban and rural areas is currently being reviewed.	All identified indicators will be disaggregated by sex and geographical location	NAPC/NEDA
2.	Population			POPCOM
			Include the indicator on population growth rate, crude birth rate, and crude death rate
3.	Health	Some data on access to health services are not available on an annual basis With devolution, the move to monitor morbidity annually is a problem. This is also quite ambitious due to lack of resources. Data on access to primary health care is not available	Include Health Manpower as an indicator Annual estimates of IMR can be included (NSO) –alternative source of data would be the National Demographic and Health Survey Include breastfeeding as an indicator The need for proxy indicators Inclusion of iodine deficiency	DOH
4.	Education	Some indicators listed are vague (DECS) Reference of age groups in monitoring illiteracy rate Problems on the definition of youth since the different agencies has their own definition (NSCB) In the upgrading of educational system, the indicator budget allocation should be specified Disaggregation of budget allocation for education should also be included since some of these may only cover operational and construction costs and not for improvement in the quality education	Refine the indicators included Adult literacy should include 30 and above (based on NYC) Illiteracy should be monitored by age group Standardize definition (Jess Rola) Use existing national definition on youth In terms of quality of education should include student-teacher ratio and the achievement results Budget allocation for education at all levels should be included Validate with TESDA and CHED on the higher level indicators and the tech-voc indicators; the Plan targets will be adopted as the indicators	DECS, TESDA, CHED
5.	Employment	The indicators for number of microfinance clients served would be difficult to monitor since most of these are being implemented by NGOs System of generating data for microfinance services for NGOs is not yet in place Government role on MF vis a vis with the NGOs	Accreditation of NGOs could help in monitoring microfinance indicators The representative from PRRM will take note of this and will feedback this to the respective sectors APIS could be used as a source for credit access since this includes an indicator on access of households to credit facilities, however, data on sources of funds are not available Strengthen NGOs collaboration with GOs (NSCD) Utilization of data should be rationalized, data should not be gathered merely to comply with international commitments The number of beneficiaries to be provided self employment/ livelihood/ credit assistance as contained in the MTPDP targets will be included (DSWD, DOLE, PCFC, and NYC) Include the Social Watch Survey Results Employment targets in the Plan will be included as well as other data which are generated by the Labor Force Survey	DOLE
6.	Shelter		Adopt indicators in the Plan page 7,8,9	HUDCC
7.	Environment	The need to measure ratio of green space to citizens in urban areas	Refer to Page 53 (environment indicators) which includes the following: Ratio of green space to citizens Concentration levels of toxic Substances in the air Disaster Vulnerability Index Consult with the Philippine Council for Sustainable Development (PCSD) for the appropriate indicators

8.	Disaster	Improvement of indicators for disaster to show a more wholistic picture	Proportion of people affected by disasters Refer to Page 53 (indicators on disaster ) Natural disaster mitigation Proportion of urban centers with fire brigade Proportion of dwelling units Designed as earthquake resistant Proportion of disaster victims Provided with assistance Focus on indicators on number of families/communities trained for disaster preparedness rather than number of clients served Monitor disaster coordinating councils at the local level (DCC) and their functionality Include proportion of dwelling units designed as typhoon resistant Include proportion of those trained for disaster preparedness rather than number only
9.	Crime	Crime against women should be specified by the NCRFW	Existence of VAWC indicators (NCRFW) Include number of LGUs with facility for victims of VAWC

10.	Social Protection	Devolution of social services will pose as a problem in monitoring these indicators, e.g. LGU generated data Number of Homes for the Older Persons – not very relevant for the Philippines Inclusion of IPs concern Difficulty in gathering data for IPs	Quantify proportion of destitute older persons against those provided with assistance Community based facilities for Older Persons are different from the Homes available for destitute families Proportion of clients served should be emphasized rather than simply capturing number of clients served (but data on total destitute older persons are not available)	DSWD (this should include the LGUs)

11.	Family	Difficulty in gathering data on the number of husbands and wives who are separated	Separation data are available in Census results but may be under-reported Area of concern should include disparities (DECS) Adopted the indicators as proposed by Dr. Cheung on page 54	DSWD

Institutional Set-up and Linkages

NEDA will serve as the focal agency for SOMIS working with the following lead agencies: National Anti-Poverty Commission (NAPC) for poverty alleviation, Commission on Population (POPCOM) for population, Department of Health (DOH) for health, Department of Education, Culture and Sports (DECS), Technical Education, Skills and Development Authority (TESDA) and Commission on Higher Education (CHED) for education, Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) for employment, Housing and Urban Development Coordinating Council (HUDCC) for housing, Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) for environment, National Disaster Coordinating Council (NDCC) for disasters, Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG) for crime, Department of Social Welfare and Community Development (DSWD) for social protection and family, and Social Development Committee (SDC) for resource allocation for social development.

Technology

Since most of the agencies have internet facilities, the Chair requested the lead agencies to supply the data using the attached matrix and include this in their homepage. Target date for completion is on 15 August 1999.

OTHER ISSUES RAISED:

Lack or no budget allocation for monitoring sectoral perfornance > will be further discussed in the SDC-MCIHDC meetingEnhancing the role of the basic sectors of NAPC in relation to monitoring WSSD goals (DECS)
Lack of budget allocation to measure sector specific targets (DECS)
Need for a separate set of indicators for social integration > adopted the suggested indicators of Dr. Cheung on page 54 but data are only available by sex and not by ethnic origin