Chapter 13

Social assistance and welfare, social safety nets, and social security are necessary to reduce vulnerabilities and to prevent the poor from falling below an acceptable standard of well-being. Interventions will enable them to attain a certain level of economic status, welfare and disposition so that they may participate in and benefit from the development process.]

To complement the regular antipoverty programs, the government is also committed to implement temporary but result-oriented measures that are meant to bring the poor and vulnerable back to the mainstream development process. These social protection interventions are of three types: social assistance and welfare, social security, and social safety nets. Social assistance or welfare programs are regular government programs that involve actual resource transfers to the poorest groups in order to prevent their economic dislocation arising from violence, illness, disability, old age, unemployment, resettlement and harvest failure. Social security, on the other hand, consists of social insurance programs that reduce the risks of the poor due to old age, work-related injury, illness and disability. Social safety nets are short-term bridging mechanisms to disadvantaged and vulnerable groups that are meant to protect them and strengthen their capacity to cope with the effects of economic dislocation, disasters and calamities, and structural adjustments.

Status of the Poor and Vulnerable Groups

The poor now save very little of their income, spend two-thirds of their money on food, rely more on public and private income transfers, and are less likely to belong to a cooperative or even a people’s organization. They receive public basic education but have less tertiary schooling. Figures from the National Statistics Office (NSO) show that poverty incidence is highest among those who did not finish elementary education (37.8%) and those who only finished grade six (30.8%).

Most of the poor are unable to visit a hospital, or benefit from government subsidy/programs on health, public housing, livelihood and credit (Table 13.3). Access to public infrastructure is also low in poor areas. A peculiar finding is the higher poverty incidence for the self-employed than the unemployed.

The urban-rural differential of poverty incidence can be seen as a reflection of the urban bias of development. Majority of the poor (47.4%) were in the rural areas; and a disproportionate number lived in the least developed regions — Bicol, Central Mindanao, and Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao (National Statistical Coordination Board, 1997). Two-thirds of them (67.8%) depended on agriculture for their incomes as lessees, tenants and small owner-cultivators. Yet, when compared to cities, poverty in the countryside declined at a much slower pace because growth was not sustained and unemployment remained high (Table 13.4).

However, urban poverty is also an issue that cannot be ignored. Urban poor households mostly live in slum and squatter settlements and, like their rural counterparts, have inadequate access to health, education and sanitation services. They have very little assets, mainly housing materials and some household implements. Majority of urban poor housing contained two or more households.

Government has started rationalizing public spending for social services and slowly began to exit from activities that are best implemented by the private sector. Inefficient or regressive spending and subsidies are being phased out and instead, markets are made to work better for poor people. These reforms have become significant in view of current initiatives to strengthen the linkage between planning and budgeting so that subsidies are efficiently channeled to the intended beneficiaries.

For the next three years, more effective targeting mechanisms will be developed so that priority human development services will directly go to the poor and marginalized sectors. With the rationalization of spending, the policy of earmarking funds in support of affirmative action policies will be revisited. Resources will be maximized, without altering the efficient distribution of resources. Ultimately, the challenge for government is to improve service delivery, fasttrack the pace of reforms, rationalize spending, and more conscientiously target interventions for the poor and vulnerable groups.

Propoor Policies, Programs and Projects

The recent years saw the implementation of policy reforms to improve service delivery and rationalize the role of government in the provision and financing of social services. Two main strategies were implemented to protect the poor and vulnerable groups: (a) affirmative action by setting minimum targets for women, senior citizens and persons with disabilities; and (b) assimilation of the vulnerable by expanding socioeconomic services and increasing their participation in economic, social and political activities.

As expected, government made gains in social welfare services by reaching more ultrapoor families than what were initially targeted in 1999 and 2000 (Table 13.5). This was due to the numerous programs implemented for disadvantaged and vulnerable groups.

Social assistance

The Lingap Para Sa Mahihirap (Caring for the Poor) Program was granted a P2.5 billion allocation from the national budget to deliver medical assistance, livelihood, socialized housing, potable water supply, food subsidy, and protective programs or services to the 100 poorest families in every city and province nationwide (Table 13.6). In 1999, the project reached 16,100 households in 644 barangays.

The Lingap Program, however, had several major weaknesses: (a) lack of program ownership by the LGUs which were not given adequate time to identify the 100 poorest families in their areas; (b) low targeting effectiveness and welfare impact which may be expected from a nationwide program that is spread over a wide area and to nonpoor beneficiaries; (c) lack of beneficiary consultation and monitoring; and (d) politicized process of beneficiary selection.

CIDSS produced favorable results during the last two years. It has reached 493,132 poorest families for the 1999-2000 period, which is 83 percent of the 593,834 target families. Moreover, the program extended its services not only to the 909 fifth and sixth class municipalities but also to the poor barangays in third and fourth class municipalities and urban poor communities.

Efforts to mainstream microfinance in the country produced good results. Providing credit to the poor through microfinance institutions has been an important component of the government’s poverty alleviation program. The government granted funds to NGOs engaged in microcredit with market on lending rates, and established a council of microfinance institutions composed mostly of private practitioners.

There were also several self-employment and livelihood assistance programs implemented by the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD), Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE), National Youth Commission (NYC) and People’s Credit and Finance Corporation (PCFC) for the youth, farmers, rural women and persons with disability (refer to Box 13.1 for the program for women). In 2000, the number of beneficiaries reached by self-employment and livelihood assistance was 50 percent above target. The benefits from microfinance – including those extended by private finance institutions and nongovernment organizations– can be estimated to be more than double that of PCFC’s.

In the last three years, reforms were undertaken through the National Credit Council (NCC) focusing on: (a) terminating inefficient subsidized credit programs; (b) creating a policy and regulatory environment for sustainable microfinance; and (c) setting performance standards for microfinance institutions in availing government funding. Still, there are challenges that should be addressed to further improve the present microfinance system, such as: (a) poor absorptive capacity of microfinance institutions (MFIs); (b) presence of the last few subsidized credit programs that unfairly compete with these MFIs; and (c) lack of emphasis on savings utilization to sustain the microcredit operations of these institutions.

The SEA-K capacitates people’s organizations to self-administer the provision of socialized credit through community organizing, training in microfinance development, and lending seed capital to its members. From 1999-2000, 42,022 individuals have benefited from the program. Around P53,946,511 million seed money was loaned to women scavengers, out-of-school youth, street children, persons with disability (PWDs), poor families, single parents, unemployed and senior citizens. However, the implementation of the SEA-K Program, being the only welfare-oriented government livelihood program, needs to be revisited to prepare beneficiaries to eventually avail of credit from existing microfinance institutions at market rates.

Two major laws on children’s concerns were also passed: (a) Republic Act (RA) 8980, or the Early Childhood Care and Development (ECCD) Act, which institutionalizes an ECCD program; and (b) RA 8972, or the Solo Parents Welfare Act of 2000, which provides government support for solo parents and their children.

The government also paid attention to the growing number of street children in the metropolitan areas. Covering 25 cities and seven urban municipalities nationwide, the National Program on Street Children provided various programs and services to about 90,000 street children. The Street and Urban Working Children Program was launched to enhance the effectiveness of interventions made by the national and local governments, and NGOs.

Despite these developments, child labor is still prevalent in the Philippines. The 1997 National Survey of Working Children revealed that one out of six children aged 5-17 years was engaged in child labor (16% of the total population in 1997). Many of them were boys (65%), unpaid family workers (60%), exposed to hazardous environment (60%), and not attending school (30%). Under the National Child Labor Program, several efforts were undertaken such as rescue operations and welfare services in the form of education, health and medical assistance, counseling, and livelihood. The Philippines also ratified the International Labor Organization (ILO) Convention 138 (Minimum Age Convention) and 182 (Prohibition and Immediate Elimination of the Worst Forms of Child Labor). While it is difficult to totally eliminate child labor, the immediate challenge is to eliminate the worst forms of child labor within a specified period of time.

Women. Government continued to ensure that programs and projects financed by the national budget and official development assistance (ODA) appropriately integrate women and gender concerns. To promote Gender and Development within the bureaucracy, the National Commission on the Role of Filipino Women (NCRFW) continued to implement the Institutional Strengthening Project Phase II. This project aims to strengthen the capabilities of oversight, implementing, statistical, and subnational agencies in mainstreaming gender concerns in planning, policy formulation, program development and implementation, and monitoring and evaluation. There were also a number of programs that addressed violence against women (VAW) and women’s lack of economic empowerment: National Family Violence Prevention Program; and Productivity Skills and Capability Building Program.

Indigenous peoples (IPs). There are about 110 ethnolinguistic groups in the country and assistance to IPs remains inadequate. The government would have to provide economic opportunities to uplift majority of them from poverty. A comprehensive plan is currently being drafted to address the issues of IPs, and strengthen the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) as the main machinery for plan and program implementation.

Elderly. The Philippine Plan for Older Persons was adopted to ensure that the rights of older persons are upheld, their needs and concerns addressed, and their roles as active participants in nation-building are fully recognized.

Persons with disability (PWDs). Since 1999, a certain percentage of the national budget has been assigned for projects and facilities that will enhance the mobility, safety and welfare of persons with disability. To support this affirmative action, Administrative Order (AO) No. 101 was passed directing the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) and Commission on Higher Education (CHED) to provide architectural or structural features for PWDs in schools and other establishments. For 1999 and 2000, DPWH undertook construction of access facilities in 21 schools, 20 government buildings and seven state universities and colleges. The government also launched the Assistance Package for Disabled Persons Program.

Poor and disadvantaged families. Many Filipino families are unable to provide minimum basic needs to its members and are incapable of performing expected roles to maintain healthy and harmonious relationships. In view of their socioeconomic contribution to national development, the poor and disadvantaged families need to be empowered and their social functioning enhanced through: (a) access to assets and resources; (b) access to all forms of social protection interventions and services; and (c) improved opportunities for participation in critical decision making.

The DSWD exerted efforts to strengthen the family as the basic social institution. Through the Department’s programs and services including its flagship program, the CIDSS, it utilized the total family approach in addressing the needs of the poor and disadvantaged families which include victims of disasters and social conflicts.

Social security

The ILO Convention No. 102 identifies nine areas of contingencies for social security coverage — old age, death, disability, sickness, maternity benefits, employment-injury benefits, medical care, family allowances and unemployment benefits. The Philippines covers all these except for the last two.

The Social Security System (SSS), the Government Service Insurance System (GSIS), and the Philippine Health Insurance Corporation (PHIC) carry out the social security programs in the Philippines. The SSS provides social security protection to all private sector workers, the self-employed, and other voluntary members such as housewives and agricultural workers. The GSIS covers all government workers, except the armed forces. The PHIC administers the National Health Insurance Program (NHIP), which provides health insurance coverage and ensures access to health care services for the general public. All three security systems are contributory, although the PHIC has an indigent component as it provides free medical care for the poor.

Social security coverage increased by 5.8 percent, frsom 22.8 million in 1999 to 24.1 million in 2000 (Table 13.7). Workers with social security represented 78 percent of the total labor force in 2000. To enhance the quality of social protection in the country, the Presidential Retirement Income Commission (PRIC) is proposing reforms to sustain the financial viability of mandatory pension institutions and make pension plans and other forms of social security more affordable and work better for people.

Appropriate health care remains beyond the reach of indigents because it is costly and inaccessible. Inadequate health funding and inefficiency in program management especially at the local level aggravated the situation. In response to these concerns, the Philippine Health Insurance Commission (PhilHealth) continues to implement the Medicare Para sa Masa under the National Health Insurance Program. Likewise, the PhilHealth in partnership with LGUs subsidized the annual premium contributions of 550,000 indigent families in 2000.

Some of the issues and concerns that affect the sustainability of these programs are: (a) budgetary constraints faced by LGUs in managing devolved health services; (b) poor delivery of medical services and supplies; (c) inability of indigent members to pay excess hospital bills when full coverage is not provided; and (d) high administrative cost in beneficiary selection. Policy gaps also caused implementation bottlenecks. For one, there is a big disparity in the contribution rates between third- and fourth-class municipalities. Premium schedules should also be adjusted to conform to the National Health Insurance Law (RA 7875). Insurance and members and dependents should be clearly defined so as not to exclude particular groups of people.

Programs established by government to mitigate the effects of the financial crisis on employment include: (a) the programs of the Public Employment Service Offices (PESOs) which assisted a total of 3,530 displaced workers who found new jobs and 895 displaced workers who were retrained; (b) the programs of the Employment Compensation Commission (ECC) which extended emergency loans costing P500 million to some 60,000 displaced workers; and (c) programs on enterprise development, welfare program for sugar workers and credit assistance to unemployed and displaced workers.

Reducing the vulnerability of the poor in times of crises is about protecting basic social services from budget cuts and having a ready and feasible system of time-bound social safety nets. More so, to address the shortfalls in outcomes and access, the quantity and quality of basic social services should be improved. Changes should be made in policy formulation, program design and service delivery. Institutions will work better for people if they improve their capacities and enjoin other stakeholders to partake in the responsibility. Government must be willing and capable of raising revenues and devoting a significant share of resources to social development.

Thus, the sector must continue providing preferential access to the poor, and vulnerable and disadvantaged groups; exert greater reliance on targeting mechanisms; and wherever possible, redistribute transfers to help the poor improve their welfare.

However, unintended beneficiaries also benefit from the NFA rice subsidy. To redirect the thrusts of the government to serve the majority of the disadvantaged sector of the society, the NFA developed new food subsidy programs. These programs are called the Targeted Rice Distribution Program (TRDP) to cater to the poorest sector of the community identified by the DSWD/LGUs, the Coconut Farmers Food Access Program (CFFAP) to cater to the coconut farmers, and the Focus Rice Distribution Program (FRDP) in areas not covered by the TRDP but are listed by the DSWD among the poorest of the poor. All the three programs have a target of 200,000 family-beneficiaries each for the year 2001. Also, the set-up of retail outlets for these programs called the Greater Market Access Tindahang Bayan Para sa Mamamayan provided additional job opportunities.

For the first semester of 2001, TRDP had served some 154,312 families distributing 100,180 bags of rice at P14.00/kilo in 1,440 TRDP outlets. CFFAP which started last April 2001 had served 272,324 families with a total of 92,914 bags of rice distributed in 2,968 outlets. In areas not served by the TRDP but are listed by DSWD among the poorest of the poor, some 4,759 FRDP sari-sari stores were accredited to ensure the availability of cheaper basic commodities like rice.

Targets

Table 13.8 and Table 13.9 present the targets for social assistance and social welfare programs and the targets for social security respectively.

Activities to attain social security include the followingy:

1. Improve benefits through an increased share of the NHIP to P60 billion of total national health expenditures by 2004; and

2. Enroll 3.8 million households nationwide under the Indigent Program of the NHIP.

Strategies

¨ Target geographic areas and population groups where social development needs are greatest;

¨ Strengthen collaboration and mobilize national government agencies, LGUs, NGOs, POs, cooperatives and other private organizations to coordinate delivery of targeted programs and resources through partnerships, joint venture and effective utilization of volunteer services;

¨ Enable LGUs to empower communities to address their minimum basic needs through the convergence approach with focus on the poor municipalities, disadvantaged, IP communities and urban poor communities; and

¨ Develop an effective monitoring and evaluation system that will assist the government and private organizations in assessing the impact of the convergence strategy and derive lessons from field implementation that will result in mid-term corrections to the strategy;

5. Improve the implementation of existing sectoral laws such as the Women in Development and Nation-Building Act, Accessibility Law, and Senior Citizens’ Act;

6. Implement an area management and development plan for IPs that will ensure that ancestral domains are conserved, protected and developed; and

7. Strengthen policy environment to facilitate the implementation of intervention for women, children and youth in especially difficult circumstances by legislating bills on juvenile justice administration, antitrafficking in Filipino women and minors, antiprostitution, antidomestic violence, and antichild labor.

1. Support the capability building of microfinance institutions, especially the People’s Credit and Finance Corporation, in order to enhance their services, particularly the poor women and those in the informal sector so that 300,000 new borrowers particularly poor women, are targeted to benefit each year from the microfinance program;

2. Develop models for banking with the poor and promote savings utilization; and

3. Work for an appropriate regulatory framework for microfinance which can lead to, among others, the simplification of rules and processing requirements of credit facilities.

1. Improve access of low-income informal sector workers to social security through: (a) promoting awareness of the need for social protection; (b) extending SSS coverage to small employers and the self-employed; (c) developing alternative schemes for those outside the scope of SSS; (d) targeting those without capacity to self-finance their social protection; (e) developing alternative collection systems to encourage participation in the program; and (f) establishing special social protection schemes for certain industry groups;

2. Design/Operationalize provident fund schemes for OFWs that will ensure their protection upon retirement, disability, loss of job, among others, (e.g., the SSS Flexi-Fund which is a voluntary provident fund for OFWs that supplements the mandatory retirement program of the SSS);

3. Activate and strengthen community participation in implementing a national health insurance program to reduce health and nutrition risks of the poor, and improve the design of its component programs to enhance access of the poor to basic facilities in their community;

4. Adopt an integrated approach in the implementation of the National Health Insurance Program’s Indigent Program otherwise known as "Medicare para sa Masa", with the support of the DSWD, DOH, NAPC, DAR, Philippine Amusement and Gaming Corporation, Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office, DILG, DECS, among others;

6. Improve PhilHealth systems and procedures to enhance barangay information campaign, billing and collection, fraud control, marketing and program packaging, database administration, networking and negotiations.

1. Develop the capacity to institutionalize an early warning indicator system aimed at detecting the onset of socioeconomic disruptions which will provide sound basis in designing and implementing social safety net programs;

2. Improve access of the poorest households to subsidized rice, especially in the rural areas and Mindanao by mobilizing 1,000 rolling stores and accrediting sari-sari stores that offer subsidized rice, and review entitlement levels of rice supply to each household;

3. Improve the efficiency of rice subsidy programs by integrating them in targeted employment/public works schemes;

4. Improve the impact of targeted nutrition programs for school children in poor rural areas, and pregnant and lactating mothers;

5. Encourage private sector to provide emergency cost of living allowance to workers in times of economic crisis;

6. Ensure accessibility to public employment facilitation and marketing services by displaced workers especially those in the informal sector;

7. Improve design, targeting and implementation of labor-based infrastructure programs to generate more employment for displaced workers and job seekers; and

8. Strengthen the capacity of LGUs, NGOs and the community to improve preventive, emergency and rehabilitative assistance/services to cope with effects of disaster/calamities.

1. Review the current system of collection and analysis of poverty statistics, and rationalize or improve current indicator systems for monitoring poverty particularly at the local level;

2. Ensure participatory process in program targeting at the local level;

3. Provide statistical agencies with resources to regularly gather and analyze sex-disaggregated poverty data and its annual correlates, including those on the marginalized groups; and

4. Develop the database for monitoring the situation of the poor and vulnerable groups and harmonize this with the monitoring systems for social development interventions at the national and local levels.

[ Chapter 10 ] [ Chapter 11 ] [ Chapter 12 ] [ Chapter 13 ] [ Chapter 14 ] [ Chapter 15 ]