Significantly exceeded. As of 2011, all poor households nationwide are registered in the Listahanan database. Of the 10.9 million households assessed, 5.2 million found to be poor. The national poverty rate in 2012 was 4.2 million families (19.7%).
Mostly achieved, but the exclusion error in the National Capital Region (NCR) remains a challenge. The new proxy means test model estimates are 19.3% inclusion error and 10.6% exclusion error in the NCR, and 6.8% exclusion error and 13.8% inclusion error outside the NCR.
Significantly exceeded. 25 national programs using Listahanan for selecting beneficiaries:
1. Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program (Conditional Cash Transfer Program)
2. Social Pension for Indigent Senior Citizens Program
3. Sustainable Livelihood Program
5. Philhealth Indigent Program
6. Rotavirus Vaccination and Catastrophic Benefit Package
7. Compack Program
8. War on Worms (WOW)
9. Expanded Student Grant-in-Aid Program
10. Rural Electrification Program
11. Socialized Housing Project
12. Special Program for the Employment of Students (SPES)
13. Child Labor Program
14. Livelihood Emergency Employment Program (LEEP)
15. Social Protection Floor
16. Government Internship Program
17. National Program for Municipal Fisherfolk Registration (FishR)
18. Targeted Actions to Reduce Poverty and Generate Economic Transformation (TARGET)
19. Food First Project
20. Special Training for Employment Program (STEP)
21. Sagana at Ligtas na Tubig Para sa Lahat (SalinTubig)
22. Grassroots Participatory Budgeting Process (GPBP)
23. National Greening Program
24. Responsible Parenthood/Family Planning Program
25. National Intensification of Household Electrification (NIHE) Project
Significantly exceeded. 100% of the 5.2 million poor households are eligible to receive PhilHealth benefits, and 85% (4.4 million) receive the CCT, so these households have access to at least 2 social protection programs.
Total poor households/families receiving cash grants (Sets 2 & 3): 634,680
Set 2 250,652
Set 3 383,828
% of women recipients (Sets 2 & 3) : 90.9%
Set 2 90%
Set 3 91.9%
Average of mothers in beneficiary households receiving cash grants regularly and on time 97.2%
Set 2 97.6%
Set 3 96.8%
Average households/families meeting education conditions regularly : 96.8%
Set 2 96.9%
Set 3 96.6%
Average households/families meeting health conditions regularly : 93%
Set 2 94%
Set 3 91.9%
Average grantees attend monthly family development sessions : 95.82%
Set 2: 96.14%
Set 3: 95.5%
DSWD further developing MapView and GIS-based applications to more effectively use and analyze such data.
Below is a list of available spatial datasets (local area maps):
- Listahanan (Target Households)
- Health Facilities
The following are not yet available:
- Preschools / Day Care Centers
- Payment Windows
GIS-based applications and MapView are presently used in analyzing, mapping, and displaying the datasets listed above.
(i) Central and local project management structures established. Achieved. National Project Management Office and 17 Regional Project Monitoring Offices established and fully functional.
Significantly exceeded, with 4,669 staff trained on gender sensitivity and 1,470 staff trained on IP sensitivity.
Ongoing satisfactory implementation.
Achieved with some delay, 10 MGAP pilots were completed by end 2014 (supported by TA 7587).
Achieved. Systems are in place for household information, registration, compliance verification, payments, beneficiary updates, and grievance redress.
Target exceeded. In 2014, 96% of the 69,744 resolved grievances were resolved within the prescribed time period.
The January 2015 to September 2015 GRS data has garnered a resolution rate of 63%.
A total of 70,962 complaints were recorded and encoded in the system. Out of the total number, 44,437 or 63% have already been resolved in time protocol (see Annex M) established per category of grievance.
On track with some delays. Spot checks A and B were completed in 2013, C and D were completed in 2014, and E and F are planned for fielding in 2015, with one final spot check G in 2016.
Ongoing engagement of the data collection firm